Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Baby ill from friend's toddler

212 replies

Biscuit94 · 26/12/2025 22:39

Hi all,

I have a 5 month old baby. Just over a week before Christmas my friend said she was up for Christmas and asked if she could pop round. She showed up on my doorstep with her toddler coughing and spluttering everywhere. I was surprised and thought maybe it was just a lingering cough, but she cheerily announced that he was always ill from nursery these days and walked straight in.

I understand that my baby is going to get ill and be exposed to all kinds of stuff, but why the hell would you do it just before Christmas?

Anyway, I came down with the cold a couple of days later, followed by my DH and then my poor baby girl on Christmas Eve. I thought she had gotten away with it as I am breastfeeding and thought maybe she had antibodies from me, but the poor little thing has been coughing and sneezing, struggling to sleep from the congestion and having more watery poos than normal :(. Absolutely gutted for her and even worse that it is over Christmas. Making sure to feed often, use Calpol and saline spray/a baby vapour rub. She slept on my DH for 5 hours last night and then me for another 5 as she is so uncomfortable lying flat in her bassinet.

I am so angry upset at my friend for not bothering to give me a heads-up/postpone/leave her toddler with his grandparents who she is staying with.

AIBU?

OP posts:
NuffSaidSam · 28/12/2025 14:04

Biscuit94 · 28/12/2025 13:07

I can be annoyed and upset at somebody without "holding such negative views". I can say I wouldn't do something without feeling " morally superior". That's you extrapolating...

You can be annoyed at someone's mistake without being negative, but that's not the choice you've made. You've described it as thoughtless, inconsiderate, it 'reeks of selfishness', that she lacks common courtesy etc.

You've then said over and over again that it's something you would never, ever do.

So, yes, for anyone with a basic level of reading comprehension you've been very negative about your friend whilst claiming moral superiority for yourself.

If it were me I'd move away from being that person. But I can see we will never agree so I wish you well, hope your baby is better soon.

stichguru · 28/12/2025 14:21

To be honest I think once you enter the nursery phase and then school, you just get into the endless cycle of little colds that aren't enough to keep the kid off for and you become a bit blasé about it. Not saying that it's right to spread it to other people, but some kids would be contained with a bit of snotty-ness for like one week out of 3 in nursery/reception! You just stop seeing it as a problem. (Not to mention that once they are in school, you'd be investigated if they had that much time off.)

pastaandpesto · 28/12/2025 14:26

I'm really shocked that so many people would visit someone in their home when they are knowingly ill, or with an unwell child.

I would always, always give a host a heads up if anyone in our family has a cold before we visit them, and all our friends and family do the same. I thought it was basic good manners?

Usually the response would be, no problem at all, come along anyway - clearly it is impossible to avoid ever being ill without severely restricting your life. But sometimes people have a particular reason for wanting to stay healthy - a special occasion, travel plans, upcoming visit to a vulnerable relative, feeling particularly exhausted and in need of rest etc etc and it is unbelievably rude to not give someone an opportunity to make their own decision.

Biscuit94 · 28/12/2025 14:43

NuffSaidSam · 28/12/2025 14:04

You can be annoyed at someone's mistake without being negative, but that's not the choice you've made. You've described it as thoughtless, inconsiderate, it 'reeks of selfishness', that she lacks common courtesy etc.

You've then said over and over again that it's something you would never, ever do.

So, yes, for anyone with a basic level of reading comprehension you've been very negative about your friend whilst claiming moral superiority for yourself.

If it were me I'd move away from being that person. But I can see we will never agree so I wish you well, hope your baby is better soon.

Sigh. People can do selfish things without being awful people. Just because I wouldn't do it doesn't mean I think I'm morally superior. Use nuance and stop putting words in my mouth. I've never said "she is an awful selfish person" and that "I'm better than her because I wouldn't do this." Anyway, looks like you won't accept I don't think like this. Things aren't black and white. A lot of people here seem to think they are though. To be clear, I think she did something selfish that I wouldn't do.

OP posts:
dottiedodah · 28/12/2025 14:43

I think she was thoughtless and inconsiderate.Mine are older now ,but I remember being horrified, at my friends "kind" invitation to have DD over (About a year or so) to catch Chicken Pox! I wouldnt visit elderly relatives with a cold now

FurForksSake · 28/12/2025 14:47

I think a big part of the divide is the definition of “ill”. Toddlers can have a bit of a cough long after the cold has gone. A child with a raging temperature and in the throes of being ill should of course be kept home. A bit of a sniffle and a cough after the temperature and illness has passed is the phase when lots of parents will happily carry on. To them the child is no longer ill but maybe still coughing a little. You can be contagious before you are symptomatic and then at the peak of the cold you are most contagious.

My son got chicken pox at his first birthday and ended up in hospital. No children at his party or nursery had outward symptoms, there was nothing to avoid.

It sucks when the kids are ill, but there are two sides.

NuffSaidSam · 28/12/2025 14:50

Biscuit94 · 28/12/2025 14:43

Sigh. People can do selfish things without being awful people. Just because I wouldn't do it doesn't mean I think I'm morally superior. Use nuance and stop putting words in my mouth. I've never said "she is an awful selfish person" and that "I'm better than her because I wouldn't do this." Anyway, looks like you won't accept I don't think like this. Things aren't black and white. A lot of people here seem to think they are though. To be clear, I think she did something selfish that I wouldn't do.

I'm not making any comment on how you think. I've got no idea how your mind works. I'm commenting on what you've said. I can see the words you've used. As can everyone else. If you think the things you've said and the language you've used doesn't really represent what you think then that's something for you to look at. None of us can judge you on your thoughts, only your words.

Biscuit94 · 28/12/2025 14:56

NuffSaidSam · 28/12/2025 14:50

I'm not making any comment on how you think. I've got no idea how your mind works. I'm commenting on what you've said. I can see the words you've used. As can everyone else. If you think the things you've said and the language you've used doesn't really represent what you think then that's something for you to look at. None of us can judge you on your thoughts, only your words.

And again my words have said this specific thing was selfish and that I wouldn't do it. No more or less. Full stop.

OP posts:
Charlottespider · 28/12/2025 15:44

That specific thing is selfish, inconsiderate etc etc. Giving someone the choice whether they still want you to visit if you’re ill is baseline consideration. Calling ahead in that situation is a really low bar of consideration.

I had a parent drop a kid at a party…after telling me earlier they couldn’t come because the kid had been vomiting all night. It was an awkward conversation and I felt a shit having to have it, but the alternative was being a shit to the other guests and families by allowing him to stay. In the same way I wouldn’t understand why someone who would expect another to call ahead if unwell wouldn’t offer the same courtesy in return, I don’t understand why those whose FOMO is so overpowering that they can’t offer the same courtesy to others and make them ill instead so they miss out.

muggart · 28/12/2025 16:03

ThreeSixtyTwo · 28/12/2025 12:47

England parents have a kind of Stockholm syndrome when it comes to germs and illnesses.

The practical necessity to use childcare and overzealous pressure for school attendance mean that someone ill being at school/nursery is a norm, not an exception. Which leads to people getting used to it and fabricating positive relationships to the germs, to allow themselves to forget about how bad idea it really is.
And anyone questioning it is effectively questioning their own parenting, so it is important to immediately shut them down with a few phrases.

Even if you will join this later, it still doesn't excuse bringing ill children to visit a baby.

This is funny but also spot on.

I recently moved to portugal and here it is normal to cancel if you are unwell rather than infecting others. As much as I love england, thoughtless germ spreading is one cultural quirk that i am happy to leave behind.

coconutchocolatecream · 28/12/2025 16:09

I'm not immunocompromised, no newborn or high-risk pregnancy, etc, but I'd still be mightily annoyed at a friend who tried to barge into my home with an obviously contagious illness, including a cold. It's no fun, and it's not necessary. Yes, we all get colds, but when I can avoid one, I'm happy to do so. Unless it's your last chance to visit someone moving abroad, I think they should just let it wait for another time. I'd let her know (subtly) that your baby caught the cold, and next time she tries to share the germs, tell her you're sorry, but you can't risk it after last time. She may be offended or annoyed. Oh well.

ThreeSixtyTwo · 28/12/2025 16:30

Biscuit94 · 28/12/2025 13:16

This seems to make complete sense.

In the end, it's logical. Ability to protect (meaning decrease the risks) yourself and your family from germs and illnesses is a form of luxury. It is available for a small family of stay at home parent and preschool children when the other parent works from flexible location (home-office), for some professions, for some pensioners, for people who have time and money to actively make health conscious and even shielding choices. Everyone else is more or less doomed.

If you have to put children to a nursery, even if you can afford to keep your child away when ill or during recovery, you kind of lost this game, because others can't or won't do the same, and the very young children don't really develop that much of the immunity, so will catch things over and over.

Some kind of private mini setting/specialiaed childminder might work better, but it would require very clear rules, and only children from families which can keep them home to be allowed to attend this group.

Some people are just angry that you want to protect your child when they couldn't protect their's - take those whose older child put the younger to the hospitals and they had to shrug and accept it as "life", they are effectively voicing that your 5months old isn't more precious than their's.

Still, it is selfish to ignore the fact, that you are in the position to lower the risks for your child now and take the choice from you. But maybe it isn't just a thoughless selfishness, maybe it is active avoidance of thinking about the risks as risks.
It's sad to think about baby's health as luxurious item, but it would explain why parents trying to prevent illness by not meeting openly ill children or keep their child a day or two from school to shield them before holiday get so much hate here.

TJk86 · 28/12/2025 16:43

ThreeSixtyTwo · 28/12/2025 16:30

In the end, it's logical. Ability to protect (meaning decrease the risks) yourself and your family from germs and illnesses is a form of luxury. It is available for a small family of stay at home parent and preschool children when the other parent works from flexible location (home-office), for some professions, for some pensioners, for people who have time and money to actively make health conscious and even shielding choices. Everyone else is more or less doomed.

If you have to put children to a nursery, even if you can afford to keep your child away when ill or during recovery, you kind of lost this game, because others can't or won't do the same, and the very young children don't really develop that much of the immunity, so will catch things over and over.

Some kind of private mini setting/specialiaed childminder might work better, but it would require very clear rules, and only children from families which can keep them home to be allowed to attend this group.

Some people are just angry that you want to protect your child when they couldn't protect their's - take those whose older child put the younger to the hospitals and they had to shrug and accept it as "life", they are effectively voicing that your 5months old isn't more precious than their's.

Still, it is selfish to ignore the fact, that you are in the position to lower the risks for your child now and take the choice from you. But maybe it isn't just a thoughless selfishness, maybe it is active avoidance of thinking about the risks as risks.
It's sad to think about baby's health as luxurious item, but it would explain why parents trying to prevent illness by not meeting openly ill children or keep their child a day or two from school to shield them before holiday get so much hate here.

I’ve not thought about it like that but it makes sense. People thinking if I can’t keep my child healthy I want yours to be constantly ill too. And I’ll tell myself it’s good for them while I’m at it.

Biscuit94 · 28/12/2025 17:12

ThreeSixtyTwo · 28/12/2025 16:30

In the end, it's logical. Ability to protect (meaning decrease the risks) yourself and your family from germs and illnesses is a form of luxury. It is available for a small family of stay at home parent and preschool children when the other parent works from flexible location (home-office), for some professions, for some pensioners, for people who have time and money to actively make health conscious and even shielding choices. Everyone else is more or less doomed.

If you have to put children to a nursery, even if you can afford to keep your child away when ill or during recovery, you kind of lost this game, because others can't or won't do the same, and the very young children don't really develop that much of the immunity, so will catch things over and over.

Some kind of private mini setting/specialiaed childminder might work better, but it would require very clear rules, and only children from families which can keep them home to be allowed to attend this group.

Some people are just angry that you want to protect your child when they couldn't protect their's - take those whose older child put the younger to the hospitals and they had to shrug and accept it as "life", they are effectively voicing that your 5months old isn't more precious than their's.

Still, it is selfish to ignore the fact, that you are in the position to lower the risks for your child now and take the choice from you. But maybe it isn't just a thoughless selfishness, maybe it is active avoidance of thinking about the risks as risks.
It's sad to think about baby's health as luxurious item, but it would explain why parents trying to prevent illness by not meeting openly ill children or keep their child a day or two from school to shield them before holiday get so much hate here.

I think you're bang on and you've really nailed how I thought about the comment from the mum whose newborn ended up in hospital! Many people aren't reacting to this rationally, my baby getting ill and me wanting to reduce risk is so emotionally loaded for others and they're trying to transpose it onto their own lives and things that have been unavoidable for them that they therefore think should be unavoidable for all.

OP posts:
TheNinkyNonkyIsATardis · 28/12/2025 17:33

ThreeSixtyTwo · 28/12/2025 12:47

England parents have a kind of Stockholm syndrome when it comes to germs and illnesses.

The practical necessity to use childcare and overzealous pressure for school attendance mean that someone ill being at school/nursery is a norm, not an exception. Which leads to people getting used to it and fabricating positive relationships to the germs, to allow themselves to forget about how bad idea it really is.
And anyone questioning it is effectively questioning their own parenting, so it is important to immediately shut them down with a few phrases.

Even if you will join this later, it still doesn't excuse bringing ill children to visit a baby.

Yes, I've definitely had some weird reaction, even when I've done something as basic as keep my toddler off his classes because he's got a bit of a cold and want him well for a busy week ahead.

But it also shows up in selfish behaviour of people who have nothing to worry about with work.

He had a virus the other week, and was still low at the weekend. MIL wanted to take him out, and even though he fell asleep at 10.30am, she was stridently announcing that it would all be fine, she had the pram.

You wouldn't make a knackered adult leave the house (although I guess some people would tbf).

tonightceilaimgoingtobe · 28/12/2025 18:08

TheNinkyNonkyIsATardis · 28/12/2025 17:33

Yes, I've definitely had some weird reaction, even when I've done something as basic as keep my toddler off his classes because he's got a bit of a cold and want him well for a busy week ahead.

But it also shows up in selfish behaviour of people who have nothing to worry about with work.

He had a virus the other week, and was still low at the weekend. MIL wanted to take him out, and even though he fell asleep at 10.30am, she was stridently announcing that it would all be fine, she had the pram.

You wouldn't make a knackered adult leave the house (although I guess some people would tbf).

If I can sleep in a pram and not have to walk I would go to work

Charlottespider · 28/12/2025 19:04

I don’t think it’s so much of an ‘if my kid has to be ill all the time, why shouldn’t yours’, but more a ‘that’s the way it has to be’ (even though it isn’t). We tolerate (or have to tolerate) things in schools that many other countries don’t e.g. hfm or still don’t include chickenpox in routine vaccinations, years behind other countries. We tell people to wash their hands and ignore things like ventilation and air filters or staying at home when knowingly contagious. People say things like ‘I’d never go out if I had to wait for toddler to not have a virus’ - really? Is that hyperbolic or is your toddler really ill that much and how is an ill toddler mixing with other ill toddlers going to be helpful to them? There’s the ‘you could get ill anywhere’ as though there’s no difference between accidentally walking through dog poo and someone deliberately trampling it through your home. There’s ’some things are contagious before symptoms show’ as though there’s no point unless you can totally eradicate all risk. Some people act as though others are saying they never expect any illness, rather than others saying they don’t want others illnesses forced upon them. There are places that do force illnesses on people - schools for example (I personally think that’s wrong, especially with more serious viruses that regularly harm children). Just because that approach is adopted in some schools and some workplaces (whether you agree with it or not), doesn’t mean you should force your illness on someone in their own home.

There’s a woman near me who runs small tutoring groups. She has a lung condition. She offered an online alternative if anyone had respiratory symptoms on the day. She’s changed to completely online only as it was too much of a risk to her health and income as people were still turning up ill.

Lottie6712 · 28/12/2025 19:57

Biscuit94 · 26/12/2025 23:27

I'm actually a bit surprised by the amount of people who think IBU by wanting a heads up before a sick child turns up at my house when I have a baby? I did ask the question though and I guess people seem to think it is acceptable, so I know I'm going to have to have clear boundaries in future 🤷🏼‍♀️. For me it was an obvious no and not something I would ever do!

I don't think you're being unreasonable, but I think it is surprisingly easy to forget to mention in advance as (unless they're really, really ill), you're just ploughing on with life as normal. I have one at school and one at nursery and the colds are relentless. I have sometimes just remembered before I'm about to leave and mentioned it to the person I'm visiting, but I think it was rude of her not to double check it was ok to come in with ill toddler if it hadn't occurred to her till that point to mention!

Biscuit94 · 28/12/2025 20:02

Charlottespider · 28/12/2025 19:04

I don’t think it’s so much of an ‘if my kid has to be ill all the time, why shouldn’t yours’, but more a ‘that’s the way it has to be’ (even though it isn’t). We tolerate (or have to tolerate) things in schools that many other countries don’t e.g. hfm or still don’t include chickenpox in routine vaccinations, years behind other countries. We tell people to wash their hands and ignore things like ventilation and air filters or staying at home when knowingly contagious. People say things like ‘I’d never go out if I had to wait for toddler to not have a virus’ - really? Is that hyperbolic or is your toddler really ill that much and how is an ill toddler mixing with other ill toddlers going to be helpful to them? There’s the ‘you could get ill anywhere’ as though there’s no difference between accidentally walking through dog poo and someone deliberately trampling it through your home. There’s ’some things are contagious before symptoms show’ as though there’s no point unless you can totally eradicate all risk. Some people act as though others are saying they never expect any illness, rather than others saying they don’t want others illnesses forced upon them. There are places that do force illnesses on people - schools for example (I personally think that’s wrong, especially with more serious viruses that regularly harm children). Just because that approach is adopted in some schools and some workplaces (whether you agree with it or not), doesn’t mean you should force your illness on someone in their own home.

There’s a woman near me who runs small tutoring groups. She has a lung condition. She offered an online alternative if anyone had respiratory symptoms on the day. She’s changed to completely online only as it was too much of a risk to her health and income as people were still turning up ill.

This is really nice true and you explain it so well. I feel like this thread has turned into black and white i.e they're going to get ill stop being so ridiculous trying to prevent it take absolutely no measures or you're being precious !! 🥴🥴

OP posts:
TJk86 · 28/12/2025 20:16

Charlottespider · 28/12/2025 19:04

I don’t think it’s so much of an ‘if my kid has to be ill all the time, why shouldn’t yours’, but more a ‘that’s the way it has to be’ (even though it isn’t). We tolerate (or have to tolerate) things in schools that many other countries don’t e.g. hfm or still don’t include chickenpox in routine vaccinations, years behind other countries. We tell people to wash their hands and ignore things like ventilation and air filters or staying at home when knowingly contagious. People say things like ‘I’d never go out if I had to wait for toddler to not have a virus’ - really? Is that hyperbolic or is your toddler really ill that much and how is an ill toddler mixing with other ill toddlers going to be helpful to them? There’s the ‘you could get ill anywhere’ as though there’s no difference between accidentally walking through dog poo and someone deliberately trampling it through your home. There’s ’some things are contagious before symptoms show’ as though there’s no point unless you can totally eradicate all risk. Some people act as though others are saying they never expect any illness, rather than others saying they don’t want others illnesses forced upon them. There are places that do force illnesses on people - schools for example (I personally think that’s wrong, especially with more serious viruses that regularly harm children). Just because that approach is adopted in some schools and some workplaces (whether you agree with it or not), doesn’t mean you should force your illness on someone in their own home.

There’s a woman near me who runs small tutoring groups. She has a lung condition. She offered an online alternative if anyone had respiratory symptoms on the day. She’s changed to completely online only as it was too much of a risk to her health and income as people were still turning up ill.

100%! Good summary of the usual phrases those sort of parents use as well!

Charlottespider · 28/12/2025 22:01

Also, some people seem to brush everything off as a cold. If you have cold symptoms right now, it is much more likely that it’s NOT the common cold.

Biscuit94 · 28/12/2025 22:20

So we've ended up in the hospital tonight as she is struggling with breathing/feeding. Thanks very much to all those who insisted I "get a grip" that is "just a cold" and given she is 5 months old it wouldn't be an issue 🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️

OP posts:
MrsSkylerWhite · 28/12/2025 23:39

Biscuit94 · 28/12/2025 22:20

So we've ended up in the hospital tonight as she is struggling with breathing/feeding. Thanks very much to all those who insisted I "get a grip" that is "just a cold" and given she is 5 months old it wouldn't be an issue 🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️

Oh love, so sorry. She’s in the best place X

Charlottespider · 28/12/2025 23:52

Sorry @Biscuit94. Hope she gets the help she needs and is better soon.

therealdeal9 · 29/12/2025 00:16

I hope she is better soon.

I remember taking toddler DC to emergency earlier in the year when her breathing became erratic. The doctors were wonderful and with some medication she was home within a few hours and fine the next day.