Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

to think it wouldnt kill my sister to stay with me for a week?

92 replies

fernie3 · 06/06/2010 23:18

My baby is due the first week of August and we have three older children. My dad will look after the three older ones while I am in labour (this is a shock in itself but that's another story). My last two have been a month early because of preeclampsia and I have been todl to expect this one to be induced early too which would put me at early July. My dad has recently found out that he has to go away on business for the first week of July so if the baby is born then I would have to go into hospital to have it alone while possibly not feeling too well as with my last baby.We really dont know anyone else who would look after the older ones.

My sister lives about 200 miles away and doesnt work, has no children and no reason that she cant come and stay for a week so she would be here IF I have the baby then (assuming I havent had it before then as I already have preeclampsia). I have travelled on the bus to see her before now so she knows I would be there in a flash for her.

She is refusing point blank to consider it. Am I being unreasonable to be upset with her?

OP posts:

compo · 07/06/2010 08:08

Why dint you look into a uni student to be a mothers help over the summer?
No point thinking about why your sister won't now, she's said no so now you and dh need to come up with other options

as an aside it could be that your sister can't have kids and would find it overwheming looking after all yours?
Massive assumption there but you never know

presario · 07/06/2010 08:16

I do not see what her sister not working has anything to do with her not babysitting kids and because she doesn't want to then her husband must be controlling, maybe she just doesn't want to and that is her choice. To many jumping to conclusions here.

MintHumbug · 07/06/2010 08:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Lulumaam · 07/06/2010 08:18

looking after 3 small children is a big ask, and before I'd had children, i would have been very cautious about that, throw in a 200 mile trip and the cost of that and it's a tough one

speak to local CMs, nurseries, nanny or baby sitting agencies

ask round all your friends

people will always pitch in if they can to help , but oyu have to ask

you sound like oyu feel she owes you.....

Lulumaam · 07/06/2010 08:19

yes, i also agree at least she has been upfront and said no, she's not ummed and ahhed about it and then left you in the lurch a week before the birth.

Cretaceous · 07/06/2010 08:30

It's a bit disappointing, and I sympathise, but I agree with those who say that at least she has been upfront.

I did think your sentence "no reason that she cant come and stay for a week" was a bit unreasonable. Why should she drop everything for your convenience? You're inviting her for your benefit, and not to see her .

I also wonder why she doesn't work, though.

Oenopod · 07/06/2010 08:34

A week is a big ask, you say she has looked after the children before so that shouldn't be the issue. But maybe having looked after your children in the past she has good reason to not to want to do it for a week. Parents see their DC through rose-tinted glasses. They could be a fucking nightmare to look after.

Even if she doesn't work, she may have many other committments over the course of a week.

And being away from home in a hectic 4-child household would be my idea of hell. I can barely stand to be around my sister with her kids. She changes into mummyzilla and her kids can do no wrong, when in fact they are spoilt little toe-rags who manipulate her beyond belief.

Disclaimer: I don't have children yet, and the longer I spend on mumsnet the less likely I am to have any.

asdx2 · 07/06/2010 08:49

I was also in your position so dh stayed at home with the older ones whilst I laboured and gave birth unaccompanied. Have to say it was the nicest birth I have had. Established a lovely relationship with midwife, no worries about the children and dh came later when dd was cleaned up and I had had a bath and we went home soon after.
No problems with him and dd bonding and would probably choose to do the same again tbh.

thesecondcoming · 07/06/2010 08:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

diddl · 07/06/2010 09:31

When a friend of mine had her third I looked after her two-7 & 2.

I found it really hard.

And it was only a couple of days.

And the weather was nice & we were able to get out!

mazzystartled · 07/06/2010 09:40

I can see why you'd be disappointed but it's better she says no than does it resentfully.

You will just have to consider your other options - people are usually happy to help and if you are being induced for PE at least you will have some notice. Could you hire a doula too - so if DH can't be there for the whole shebang you would have someone with you?

Buzzybb · 07/06/2010 09:49

I am sorry but to me it is a huge ask of your sis and I would not be happy to do it for any of mine for a whole week [a day is enough for me]
Is it as Lulumama said a financial reason? Are ye expecting her to pay her own travel expenses? Could you offer to pay those expenses?
Why do you need her for a whole week? Seriously I would never expect to be in labour/giving birth for that length of time 24/48 hrs should be the most you would need a person to mind the children then friends/a local babysitter should be able to help out.
Have you offered to pay your sis for her time? In my family Aunty babysitting [going out of an evening/day ] is free anything else working etc is paid for this stops people taking advantage of situations, If she is not working the cash my be what is stopping her entertaining young children can be expensive, icecream etc costs money she may not have.

sanielle · 07/06/2010 11:43

Do you have the money to hire professional help for a couple days? Maybe it would be better to have someone experienced with children looking after your other kids for you. You would probably find them a lot more helpful.

bearcrumble · 07/06/2010 11:53

Is it within the realms of possibility that she and her partner have been trying for a baby and haven't been successful? If that's the case then maybe it would be too upsetting for her to be caring for her neices/nephews while you have your fourth - it would leave a bitter taste in her mouth don't you think? (No fault of yours of course).

Maybe she stopped working temporarily to have IVF?

ASecretLemonadeDrinker · 07/06/2010 11:59

I don't think YABU. Of course she is entitled not to help, but I would be pretty peeved TBH. Fair enough the children may not have grade A perfect care, but they are just children, not some sort of specialist animal. I would do this without batting an eyelid for anyone - sister, friend, neighbour...

Original poster

fernie3 · 07/06/2010 12:10

I am going to try and find someone we could hire to help, I dont want her to look after then for the whole week just the few hours I am actually in labour. The reason we asked her for a week is just that she would not travel on her own and we would either have to pick her up or her fiancee would have to bring her which can only be done on the weekend.

I dont think she is trying for a baby she is only 22 and only left university last year. I dont think she has really considered it too much yet.

OP posts:

ginnybag · 07/06/2010 12:18

Hang on, why can't she travel on her own?

Is your sister a nervous type - because, if so, you may have your answer right there.

This is a young woman with little experience of tough situations who is nervy enough to be worried about travelling alone. I suspect she might be imagining all sorts of nightmare scenarios involving oh-dark-thirty and three frightened kids and you in labour with blood and whatever being rushed away...

How much of the reality have you explained to her? And, in fact, how close is that likely to be... because, if that is a possibility, you are asking one heck of a lot and she's probably scared stiff and has been pushed into saying no for her own good.

Out of interest, could the kids go to her? Or could the fiancee come as well.

Original poster

fernie3 · 07/06/2010 12:23

She lived with us when I had my first baby 6 years ago but obviously we didnt have any other children around then. She has never been the nervous type (this is a girl I had to search half the country for after she "went on tour" with some tiny band in a van and then got all her things stolen and left behind!) BUT now I would say she is more nervous than she has been,it never occured to me that she may be afraid of coming maybe this is something I need to talk to her about. Her fiancee probably wouldnt come.

OP posts:

Cretaceous · 07/06/2010 12:25

Not having a job might also have dented her confidence. At 22, I'd never have been able to look after 3 children that weren't mine.

expatinscotland · 07/06/2010 12:28

YABU.

Before I had kids myself, I wouldn't have been able to cope with three kids for a week at all, much less on my own for any length of time.

Honestly, my idea of hell then was a bunch of little kids.

I had my third on my own. DH had to look after the other two. There was no one to help and we could not afford to hire help.

I knew that when we decided to try for another baby.

It's too much to ask, I would think, of your sister.

expatinscotland · 07/06/2010 12:30

She told you no, fernie. That's it. Move on and put other arrangements in place. I'd be seriously hacked off if I told my sister, 'Sorry, but no,' and she continued to bring it up and pressure me.

It didn't occur to you she'd be afraid to spend an entire week with three little kids and be left alone with them?

ASecretLemonadeDrinker · 07/06/2010 12:36

Expat - it's not a week alone with the kids - it's staying for the week the dad is away incase OP goes into labour/needs inducing so they sister may not have to actually look after the kids at all. She may or may not have some real reason, but if not TBH I think it's abit shitty for her not to help. I am 24 with no.3 due in 2 weeks. At 22, even if you have no experience, it surely cannot be too hard to toss the kids some jaffa cakes every once in a while and shove on some DVDs? As I said, they won't obviously be having perfect childcare and be learning French and the violin, but you have to be pretty dim or lazy not to be able to somewhat look after a few kids for, what, maybe 24 hours? This obviously isn't the case if she has some real, genuine reason.

oiteach · 07/06/2010 12:39

If your sister lives about 200 miles away and you only want her there for your labour and she needs to get the bus to get there, how would she manage to get there in time?

Buses take fecking ages over that distance, she would have to drop everything and try to get the first bus she could.

YABU. Too much to ask. She is 22, doesn't have kids of her own, has said no already and you don't really want her there to share in the joy of a new child, you just want a babysitter for your labour. There are other options available.
Why should she be obliged to do this because she is your sister? Practically it is a poo idea anyway.

expatinscotland · 07/06/2010 12:40

I know that, ASecret. That is why, if you read my post, it reads: 'Before I had kids myself, I wouldn't have been able to cope with three kids for a week at all, much less on my own for any length of time.'

I didn't like little kids back then.

Really didn't.

Wouldn't have known a thing about them, and didn't care.

I was pretty selfish and immature at 22. Maybe she is.

It's not nice, but it's not a crime.

She said no, no means no.

Put other arrangements into place.

oiteach · 07/06/2010 12:41

It's the OP's dad that is going away, not the op's husband.

Flip

1 2 3 4