In Laws Childcare

[Floery]

Im going back to work in 3 months time. My family live away, so they can’t have our son, and my Husbands parents have their first grandson (their daughters son) 3 days a week.
We have asked for childcare when I go back expecting them to offer us the same and they’ve offered us one day a week as the other one is there three.
Is it usual to offer the first grandchild one thing, and the second grandchild something else? Does it have any bearing on whether it’s your sons or daughters child?
We feel it it is desperately unfair but we’re not really sure where to go with it to be honest. Any advice appreciated.

You dont have to not offer lots to the first, you just have to explain it will be adjusted if there are other gc in the mix. I wouldn’t be unfair like that, but if it helps it is often a daughter thing as opposed to an eldest thing. At least it is with my mil! I also wouldn’t offEr regular childcare, so a day a week seems pretty good!

And what are you doing for them?

All of you happy to take take take but what are you giving?

Can not belive how entitled some people can be.

For people who say the GP’s committed to first grandchild so unlucky for OP, how does that fit with childcare from family being something you should not rely on or expect? I still say share the available time for childcare GP’s want to offer and sort yourself out the rest of the time, and be mindful GP’s can withdraw offer at any point.

But OP I would probably try to let it go and be grateful you get a day. Will likely only end up in family drama/upset and that’s not want you want for your kids relationship with their GPs.

Maybe they think it unfair that they are the grandparents expected to do all the childcare because your parents are abroad, and your BILs parents are not doing it.

My Mum did loads of childcare for my brothers kids and none for mine: I live further away, and she was older by the time my Dc were born.

C’est la vie.

Actually rather a lot before you assume I do nothing - thank you x

We're grandparents and retired. We're happy to look after the children but just because we're retired doesn't mean we have no life. It means we can do things without to much planning, mid week break - fine let's go, fancy a day out, why not. Both daughters know we'll help out (and we love having dgc) but we're not their child minders. We will of course jump in if there is a real problem, we wouldn't see them stuck.

So just saying grand parents may well have their own lives to live.

Your sense of entitlement is truly shocking.

OP, do you feel any resentment to your PIL over this? Do you think they should be doing more for you.?

They probably regret agreeing to any childcare arrangements and didn’t think doing it for multiple grandchildren for years on end.

But couldn't you have worked it out that as they were already committed, they wouldn't be able to help you? If it was me I don't think I'd have even asked, especially as an in law.

They're retired for gods sake having worked all their lives! It's up to them what they so with their time. They have maybe 25-30 years to live. Let them live and enjoy it without putting pressure on and causing an issue. You must have factored nursery fees into your family planning surely?

OP I suggest you ask MN to delete this thread.

The reason why you don't see threads on this is because every few months one appears, the OP gets reminded that they shouldn't expect free childcare from grandparents (or other relatives) and the OP gets the by then multiple page thread deleted.

Looking at it from my own perspective, I think my mum would struggle having both my DS and DN at the same time. They both require a lot of attention and DS is so used to having nana to himself that he does become quite clingy when he sees her cuddling DN, and I'd feel bad putting that on to my mum to manage.

As it happens, we're the ones who have more support from mum. She has DS 1.5 days and then only has one other day free, on which she has DN. When DN was born, mum said she already had a pre-existing commitment with DS on a Thursday/Friday morning, but my DB was welcome to utilise her support on Wednesdays if she'd like.

I don't think they are being unreasonable, they're just honouring a pre-existing commitment they have already made and probably don't want to take two DC on at once. Saying they will during pregnancy, then seeing the reality of managing two children at once is different, I suppose.

I think you’re forgetting about the fact that 1 child is hard but 2 young children at what I assume are being looked after by grandparents who are over 50 years old is very difficult!

We don’t know the daughters circumstances and they could be very different from yours but more likely they said yes to the daughter and they just can’t cope with 2

You are very lucky to have an offer of one day a week (so is daughter) and I don’t know anyone who gets weekly childcare from the grandparents.

I personally wouldn’t expect grandparents to look after grandchildren on a regular basis and i do think it’s kind of wrong to even ask.

Op I actually understand why you are upset.

Fair would be to say to DD sorry but I need to reduce the days I can offer and do 1 or 2 days each. I'd also assume the other DGC is edging towards nursery age.

However maybe they feel 3 full days is too much and not want to commit to that again.

Or maybe they are favouring their DD over DS which is more common than you'd think.

Where you go for here, double check they are happy to do the 1 day and be grateful.

Some of these comments are harsh. I get not expecting free childcare- but if the other grandchild gets 3 days a week and you only get 1 that does seem unfair.

I'd be annoyed but Tbh that wouldn't happen in our families, all the grandparents are really good about making sure everyone gets the same. They'd never offer 3 days to one and 1 day to another, regardless of whether it's for their son or daughter. Still there's nothing you can do if that's who they are 💐

Your entitlement is astonishing, what then happens I'd you have another child? Poor people I bet they wish they didn't commit to one.

As it happens, we're the ones who have more support from mum. She has DS 1.5 days and then only has one other day free, on which she has DN. When DN was born, mum said she already had a pre-existing commitment with DS on a Thursday/Friday morning, but my DB was welcome to utilise her support on Wednesdays if she'd like.
I would never be like this. If Joe and Sarah have one child, Sam, who does various activities, and then they have Kelly, they don’t say to Kelly Sam does activities Saturday morning, Sunday afternoon and 3 evenings a week and we have to honour those so I know you’ve asked about ballet, football, piano, gymnastics and tennis but none of them fit into the rest of the time so no activities for you, unless you want to find something you can do on a Tuesday. What every single parent does is say I have to give my 2nd child the same options, they aren’t a second class citizen who only ever gets leftovers. If you knew parents who did that you’d be hugely and rightly judgy - why shouldn’t people judge grandparents the same?

Would be interesting to see what's offered if sil has another.

I do understand you feeling envious that they do 3 days for SIL.

But I don’t think that translates as it being unreasonable that they can’t now do the same for you.

How do your household salary levels compare?

How do your household salary levels compare?

Salary levels really shouldn't enter the equation, unless there is something obvious like a single mum, or something you treat your children equally.

I wonder if GPS are more likely to do childcare for their daughters? Just a thought. Women know that most of the childcare, housework etc still falls to women even though they are expected to go to work and therefore they want to support their daughters. They expect their sons PIL will do their childcare/offer support. It's a shame because they should expect more of men generally but we know this is very very slow to change.

Additionally peoples circumstances change and/or they can't cope with more children/more days. They offered 3 days, difficult to stop doing that once it's established.

Fair would be to say to DD sorry but I need to reduce the days I can offer and do 1 or 2 days each. I'd also assume the other DGC is edging towards nursery age.
How’s that fair on the DC, who’s used to their three days with the grandparents, or the SIL, who’s been promised three days childcare and suddenly had it removed?

I think the thing here is to recognise that there is no fair solution, not for OP, not for the SIL. Sometimes life isn’t fair! My older brother got loads of help from my parents – big lengthy visits in the first couple of years, contributions to child ISAs, loads of summer holiday childcare saving them £ and hassle. I had kids seven years later, when only one parent remained – who was seven years older, and not as financially secure. I can’t expect the same help in cash or practical terms because it’s not there to give: that’s just life. And in this case, the childcare help from the in-laws is not there to give, because they’re already committed, and older than when they first promised help: that’s just life.

It's a shame that they told you they would while you were pregnant and now won't. In my experience lots of grandparents do noticibly favour their daughter's children, then act confused as to why their daughter in law isn't making more of an effort to include them.

I don't see why the grandparents can't change their commitment to their daughter and reduce the number of days they look after their first GC? After all, it's not like their daughter is entitled to using her parents for childcare for as long as she wants, is she? Or is it just the OP who's behaving like an entitled brat by thinking her PIL will offer childcare.

OP it's understandable that you're annoyed. They are treating their children very unfairly, and that's a separate issue to whether grandparents should offer childcare or not. If they are willing to do a certain number of days, those days should be distributed fairly among their GC. And if that means taking away a day from one GC, then so be it (after all, by the usual MN logic, no one is entitled to free childcare! SIL should put her child in nursery, just like the OP is being told on here!)
And potential future GC (who may never be born) are irrelevant to the current situation.