silly childish in laws

[sphinxster]

I've posted about this previously: in laws "devastated" and ignoring us because dh and I gave ds my surname as well as his/theirs.
DS is now 4 months old and they're still giving us the silent treatment. DH messages them updates about ds and sends photos. They've recently decided they want to Skype once a week to see ds (we live overseas). So once a week we have these awful silent Skype sessions where they won't acknowledge dh ( I don't get involved).
Talking to dh today that I really didn't like it and how long was he going to allow it. He says he doesn't want to stop them seeing their grandchild and wants to be the bigger person. I think they're the ones that are stopping themselves from seeing their grandchild and they should only be allowed to see him if they are willing to show some respect to his parents/us.
I'm really pissed off about their behaviour and even though he's too young to know what's going on, I don't want him exposed to this ridiculous behaviour.
WWYD? AIBU?

It may not be important to you or the OP, but it is to some people, and belittling their beliefs or opinions does not make for good family relationships. Just because you dont think names are important, doesnt mean they arent to a LOT of people.

Its no skin off my back. But if you post on an internet forum, then you will get opinions that dont agree with your own. Doesnt mean they are invalid.

If I have to start explaining to you why its important to have the father's surname, then I am afraid that all of you have spectacularly missed a major point of what names are all about.

By all means go NC with your dc's grandparents. He is only 4 months old, do you really think this is the only issue that will arise in his life?

Stitch
**
If your dh has given his child your name on purpose then he has committed a very big no-no. **
**
Why is it a no/no? And ds is our child.*
*
It can take a long time to get over it, yet the grandparents are trying their best to do so for the sake of their grandchild.

Are they?

The OP needs to understand and appreciate that what seems like nothing to her,

It actually means a lot to me that our ds has both of our surnames.

Why is it important for a child to have only the father's surname?

And what about their belittlement of my opinions and beliefs?

The ILs behaviour, which appears to be manipulative and controlling, and in which OP's husband has been thoroughly trained, hence the FOG, has been symbolised/crystalised by the surname nonsense. (Nonsense on their part not OP's). I agree with Across.

If I have to start explaining to you why its important to have the father's surname, then I am afraid that all of you have spectacularly missed a major point of what names are all about.

Go on - please enlighten us all about why it is so important for a child to have the father's surname. Bearing in mind that the child DOES have the father's surname [as well as the mother's].

sits in hope of genuine enlightenment

Me too, Doreen
**

sphinxter. I dont know you, or your inlaws. But I have some life experience, and within it, I have noticed that to some people, names are super duper important. Its vital that the children have the name of the father. I am not saying I agree with that, but its just the way some people function. It seems that your in laws are within this category, and therefore, it wouldnt hurt you to try and make some compromises and at least try to understand their pov, in order to facilitate a relationship of some sort for your dc.

Getting a lot of random people on the internet to agree with your pov doesnt mean you are correct, or that its the right thing to do for your family.

Oh stitch, please do explain to me why it's important for a child to have the father's surname. I'm truly interested in why you think it's more important than the parents choosing the surname that they want the child to have, in this case a hyphenated surname. Like, you know, the Royal Family? Do you think that HM should have dropped 'Windsor' and adopted 'Mountbatten' as her last name?

THE OP'S SON DOES HAVE HIS FATHER'S NAME!

We won't compromise on our son's name.

I believe it's vital that our child has both of our surnames. And as I'm the primary care giver, I will be the one doing the flights, the doctors appointments, the school run, etc and life will be much smoother with him having both his parents names.

It doesn't matter who agrees with us, this IS the right decision for our family.

You're right stitch - names are important. It would appear that it is important that sphinxster's little one is given both his parents' names. The fact that OP's ILs are kicking up a stink (with a big back story and some pretty awful controlling behaviours) about little one having mum's name alongside dad's, hints at something more than it being a cultural etc thing.
What compromises would you suggest?

STITCH !!! For goodness' sake! The baby does have the father's fucking surname! What are you playing at with your ridiculous and pig-ignorant posts? the GPs are showing a disgusting lack of love and respect for their own son here, as well as for their grandchild and daughter in law, does that not matter?

But they haven't really explained their point of view, they've just sulked and given their son the silent treatment. What kind of relationship are the ops in laws trying to facilitate here? One where their son and daughter in law stay obedient at all times.

Huh?!

I'm failing to understand your POV stitch.....

The OP's son has both parents surnames

It's not actually that uncommon, my DN has both my brothers and his partners surnames.

Apologies to everyone else for the shouting and swearing, but these people who comment on a thread purely to make trouble just do my head in!

I got a bit lost at super duper important.

Can you explain how the OP could make compromises here, because I'm struggling to see it? Hyphenating BOTH names is unacceptable to PiL. How could they compromise as opposed to giving in? This would be not giving in following reasoned discussion with actual reasons and debate btw, but giving in to really appalling behaviour and emotional blackmail and proving that it works to get them to do what they're told? Do you not feel that this incident might be symptomatic of a walloping great problem with the entire relationship?

Do you feel that OP and her dh should just suck the PiL's behaviour up quietly despite how it makes them feel? And that the dh's attempts to discuss, negotiate and ask to share POVs have been somehow inadequate so far and that's why PiL are justified in behaving like this?

Still no wiser as to why it's vital a child should only have their father's name.

Love a good swear, me.

sphixter. your family isn't just the nuclear unit of you, dh and your dc. The grandparents are an important part of the family, and you are calling them childish and silly.

Is that really the best way for a family to function? How are you going to feel when your the mother of your ds's children belittles your opinions and values in the way you are currently doing? Will it make for good family dynamics?

To everyone else, I am just offering an opinion on what i have seen of life and families, not my personal opinion on names.