3rd letter from my in laws!!!! omfg!!!

[inmyshoos]

For anyone who might remember my previous posts from my fil I wanted to share the 3rd which arrived today!!! I think i might explode if i dont share it with someone!!

Dear shoos and dhofshoos,
I wrote to you on 10/2/2015 asking you to detail what you consider the problems are between the four of us; and again on the 25/3/2015 asking you both if you wished to be involved in a number of family events that will be happening this year, and also asking you to consider allowing the dc to be included in these family occasions. To date i have received no reply.
Therefore not having received the courtesy of replies to my letters, I can only assume that you both wish to sever all ties with us.
However our door will remain open, but, remember, the longer the door remains open the colder the house becomes.
There are no winners in this situation, only losers. There are losses in the short term and lisses in the long term.
I hope this finds you both well and that your futures are secure.
Regards fil/dad
P.s we will be passing through your area on return from a holiday on the 20th may if you would like to meet us for something to eat?
Pps Give the dc our love.

OMG please someone hit me with a stick! I don't know if i want to laugh or cry!!!

I also say ignore The letters and make arrangements to be out on the 20th.
The door open/cold house comment was odd, why say that if you were reaching out an olive branch. You would just say the door is always open surely?

balia

OP I agree with Holly about making sure you are out on the 20th just in case they decide to 'pop in' and catch you unawares.

Maybe the next letter will be 'The house is chilly now so we have pushed the door to. However the cat flap is unlocked should you wish to crawl back.'

I agree holly

But this letter isn't trying to build bridges, but make veiled passive aggressive threats.

'The colder the house will get' says to me that they 'expect' this letter to be answered or there will be repercussions if not.

lowry

I would ask mil again about her comment re no contact, challenge her on it.

It's fairly obvious what happened, though, isn't it?

MIL used "well in that case we had better not see each other" as a piece of theatre, assuming that the OP and her husband would immediately see the error of their ways. They didn't, so she was a bit stuck. She clearly hasn't told her husband that because it makes her look a bit of an idiot so has presumably spun some line about OP being hard work, difficult, leading son astray, cutting them off for no reason, etc. FIL, whom one suspects would not score highly on tests for emotional intelligence, thinks he's got to defend poor misunderstood MIL from nasty irrational DIL and son. MIL won't admit that she's been an idiot, and by the sounds of it doesn't do apology. Impasse.

The MIL could, presumably, break the logjam at any point by phoning or writing to the OP and her husband, showing some insight about the discussion which culminated in her saying they should go non-contact (new readers should recall that the non-contact was the MIL's idea, not the OP and her husband's). If the MIL wrote in reasonably conciliatory terms, I think the OP would have to be very hard-hearted to not at least give her a fair hearing. Instead, the MIL won't be honest with her son and daughter-in-law and won't be honest with her husband, so the current situation ensues. If the OP's family actually wanted to see their epistolatory relatives it would be different, but they aren't particularly bothered.

The OP's MIL is probably over on gransnet now, hunning and loving on the unhinged "cut out of their lives" threads which just leave you thinking, "Christ, if I had relatives like that, I'd have cut them out of my life a lot sooner".

If it were writing a letter trying to reconcile , I would write thinsg like :

" Your dad and I are so sorry about what has happened between us . We really want to make things right - can we please meet up and talk about this ? We'll be in your town on 20th may and woudl love to take you both out for a meal .

We don't want this to go on any longer - we miss you and the grandchildren , you are a big part of our lives . We were so looking forward to the children being at Emmas wedding and grannys 80th in the summer .

I understand you feel I have favoured their cousins , and perhaps I have seen them more as they live nearer. But I never meant to upset you or hurt you and I'm truly sorry if I have . How can we sort this out ? "

Instead we have

1. Bizarre and inappropriate formality - All this " I refer to my letter of 14th inst. " , " courtesy of a reply "

2 . Threats :

" assume you both wish to sever all ties "
" the colder the house becomes "
" no winners , only losers "
" losses in the short and long term "
" hope that your futures are secure"

That's five threats in one short letter - not very conciliatory .

1. Not One expression of warmth, love , missing them or the children . They don't even use words like son, grandchildren - no sense of belonging or family

1. No expression of regret for the situation , or any apology or taking responsibility for what has happened .

5 . The only thing they seem to care about is the children being involved in a Family event . Which suggests they care more about appearances and their own image

1. Who signs letters to their children " regards " ??? I write " kind regards " to my lawyer and acountant !!!!

It sounds like someone complaining about the service they have received in a shop , rather than a loving parent , desperately sad at the breakdown of their relationship with their much loved family .

Attila

I think the behaviour is a bit of fuckwittage fairly common in many families. So the other gc are favoured, so what? So MIL favours SIL, so what? If you are a mature, well-adjusted adult, favouritism is not difficult to deal with.

The OP has written about her ILs over a period because she was told not to reply and so they keep emailing! If she'd just made a firm reply and made it clear she wouldn't take any shit, this would have sorted a long time ago.

The OP had the don't give me any of this shit conversation with MIL. That precipitated the NC instruction from MIL. It seems to be a common reaction when they're called out on their behaviour. As if that'll teach the errant child to get back in the box.

The only thing they seem to care about is the children being involved in a Family event . Which suggests they care more about appearances and their own image.

^^, this. In fact, Stacey has it pretty much spot on.

Twinkle any act of engagement would do nothing except encourage the PILs to say "Oh you've misunderstood us! We would never!" and then go on treating THEIR SON and his family like pieces of shit forevermore.

Don't know how anyone can interpret these letters as attempts at reconciliation. They are attempts to get OP and her DH to sit down with them and be ripped apart and told how awful they are before being "allowed" back into the family. It's all about control.

BTW can I give a to name changed for use of the word " epistolatory" ?

No they haven't had this conversation. OP had a conversation with MIL who said she didn't really know her son as he left home a long time ago, and she found it easier to get on with SIL. PIL obviously prefer that side of the family, so what?

People not liking you isn't the end of the world, it doesn't have to be this big drama.

Unfortunately Twinklestein, for such people like FIL a reply is precisely what he wants. He knows he has them then, its hit home. Also his behaviour to date goes far beyond the realms of basic familial malcontent. Emotionally healthy families discuss problems openly and without recourse to only blaming the other side. They listen to others again without blame and accept responsibility for their actions. None of that has happened here.

His behaviour is appalling (he reminds me of the master with OP and her family being the serfs) and no-one should have to tolerate this at all.

I would take issue with your opinion that favouritism is not difficult to deal with; this is often stated by those who again come from families who are thankfully emotionally healthy. In such emotionally healthy family units, this type of behaviour simply does not occur.

I do not think that many fundamentally decent people have any real idea how dysfunctional families behave.

Also OP tried to talk to MIL before calmly but firmly and such a stance got the "think its best if there is no contact" from her to the OP.

None of the ILs actions unfortunately are of any real surprise to me at all and I would certainly expect FIL to write again or visit on the 20th.
There is no olive branch again here in FILs letter; just more concern for maintaining their own image. He desperately wants the control of them back.

So the other gc are favoured, so what? So MIL favours SIL, so what? If you are a mature, well-adjusted adult, favouritism is not difficult to deal with.

Well, that depends very much on how bad it is. And insinuating that an inability to deal with it signals shortcomings in the target of it is unpleasant. I don't think any of us MN readers can fairly say 'So what?' based on the short summary the OP has given on her threads. We can't know the full reality and how it has felt for her and her family.

People not liking you isn't the end of the world, it doesn't have to be this big drama.

Preeeeeety sure one's parents/PIL are different from just "people" in one's life.

That email doesn't sound like from someone who is planning on a lovely meet up. It's not a patch up attempt where they talk about 'the longer the door remains open the colder the house becomes'. If I wanted to patch up with a close relative, I would say whenever you are ready, we will be there for you.

Also, hope your future is secure is threatening. They are showing their colours in this email itself.

In my personal experience, letters are sent because the sender has no real desire to fix the problem, but they want to look as though they do. So they pop a letter in the post box. No face to face, no phone call. No instant resolution. But the ability to say they tried to fix things because they are so reasonable.

If they truly wanted to fix this then they would get into their car and they would drive to their sons door and they would apologise, profusely and genuinely. They would then listen to the issues and take them on board, while admitting to their own part in it. None of that has happened here.

I agree with Atilla, and also the suggestion that these letters are a veiled threat to remove the inheritance.

For those who havent been following: of course the letter sounds reasonable.

That's the script this particular sort of abuser follows. They walk all over you, do all sorts of damage behind closed doors, but in public, or in writing, they are irreproachably correct. And ever so clueless about what you are on about. Op and her dh have tried discussion in the past, only to have their every statement and view denied or twisted round into OP/dh having misinterpreted the situation be abuse they like to be victims.

They have decided to reduce contact to pretty nil, but FIL is determined to have the last word. Hence the 3 letters which read as if written by a law student rather than a loving parent trying to mend fences they know are broken.

I am sure OP and DH won't fall for it. They need to stop reading

Ah Twinkle you're missing the point. Most people do indeed rise above twattish behaviour from ILs right up until it starts adversely impacting their dc. Now I couldn't give a shiney shite what FIL thinks of me but I will not have him take it out on our dc.
And my impression of the op's chat with her mil was that it was frank but neither of us was there.

'Emotionally healthy' families are actually fairly rare, most families are varying degrees of dysfunctionality, who may or may not have much in common, or even like each other.

Assuming that I have no experience of favouritism is rather ironic in the circumstances. I've no wish to make this about me so - very briefly - my mother, who was really not mentally well when I was a teenager, always massively favoured my sister, I was very much the black sheep. My father's mother massively favoured her eldest children, and left them the majority of her estate when she died. His brother didn't speak to him for about 15 years for reasons I can't even remember.

The point is it really doesn't matter.

The fuckwittage the OP describes is not abnormal.

This is just like all the women who come on here and say no one would believe their H beat them because they are completely charming to the outside world.

The letter looks reasonable and like an olive branch until you find the history.

Do not respond.

Exactly, magoria. I read that letter and I think "master manipulator."

The fuckwittage the OP describes is not abnormal.

Just because something is common does not mean it is acceptable. We are all entitled to have a bottom line, and to decide where that line lies. Just because you do not agree with the level of hurt that the OP and her DH have experienced does not mean they are overreacting.