MONEY MORAL DILEMMA. Should you continue to send birthday presents?

Former_MSE_Wendy

Here's this week's hypothetical situation for you to cogitate on:

Should you continue to send birthday presents?

Both you and your sister have 2 children each and you've always sent her kids a birthday card and a small present each year, yet for the last few years your sister has stopped sending anything to your children, even a card. She and her husband have never had a very high income, whereas you can comfortably afford to send yearly gifts. It's her daughters 13th birthday soon, what would you do?

Click reply to have your say

Previous MMDs:
Fannie contribute to Mae's council tax?
Would you ask for the tenner back?

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

DineshAdv

I would still send gifts. Even if she and her husband aren't a great aunt and uncle doesn't mean you should be a bad aunt/uncle.

Not having a high income isn't much of an excuse.

Thunderbird_2

Yes, I should. My love to my family is unconditional!

blueneon

I have this situtation with my sister!!! BUT I still give her girls pressies at birthdays n xmas, coz they are still my nieces and I dont give to receive.

buzwad

I don't think that a lower income couple who don't send cards and gifts are somehow "bad" relatives. The issue of how good the relationship is will be borne out in day to day life, not in annually sending an overpriced piece of paper through the post.

In my opinion, if they are not sending things, it may be awkward if I were to. If the reason behind it is that they can't afford to do this, then I don't think I'd want to embarass them when their kids' birthdays come around.

Martin didn't enlighten us on the rest of the family tree structure... if these are the _only_ two cousins (on one side at least) of my children, I think I'd make a bigger deal out of them than if I have many brothers and sisters and my children have many cousins. Personally (in real life), I have a LOT of cousins, so we tend to only send cards and gifts on the "big" birthdays or if we are with them at the time of their birthday.

Taffybiker

I would continue to send gifts but only for the next 3 years, until the child is 16. After that it would be "big" birthdays -18th, 21st etc.

fad1211

i would stop being a mug and probably give cards only and stop the gifts. At the end of the day, your little ones would like to receive something from there aunt/uncle. I dont give to receive, and if my kids were to only receive a card, I would continue to get them cards and gifts. But if they cannot even give a card, for whatever reason, it just goes to show you and your kids are not highly valued or even appreciated.

By looking at the above posts, seems as if i am the only one with these views, but hey thats my opinion.

Katyag

I agree with you fad1211, we are in a similar situation. It was our DS2's 1st birthday last month and DH's brother totally ignored it. He also didnt acknowledge him being born or his christening so we have said enough is enough we arent being taken for mugs anymore so his daughter wont be getting anything for her birthday from now on. Not sure about christmas yet.

We dont give to recieve but you feel taken for a total fool when you make an effort to look for a gift, wrap it, go to the post office to post it and they do nothing!

Kids get so much these days are they really likely to notice one less gift??

Sheepster

Depends on how well I know/get on with the kids, but I'd still send them if I could afford comfortably as it says. After all - it's not the kids fault their parents are self centred.

Dorrie

My two sisters and myself have already discussed giving presents. For Christmas we no longer give our nieces/nephews presents, partly because of the problems of exchanging gifts when we don't live near each other (resent paying the Post Office a fortune to send actual presents through the post where you ending paying more for postage than you do for the present - and that's if it arrives at all!), and also because the sister that lives closest to me has three sons and I have two sons and a daughter, and we ended up buying virtually the same thing for each other's children (usually chocolate selection packs) so we decided a couple of years ago to stop.

Birthdays, however, which are more personal, have continued, but only when the child in question actually acknowledges the gifts and says thank you! My eldest nephew is now 22 and niece is 21 - for the last few years I haven't sent my nephew a present, just a card, because he hasn't had the good manners to thank me! I know my (other) sister reminds him frequently, and I told her a few years back that as he had stopped saying thank you (and lets face it, how easy it is to send an email, which is all I was asking for) he would no longer get the present. My niece was 21 in June - and I actually visited them last week whilst she was there - and she has still not thanked me for the cheque I sent (which was cashed) - so she will no longer be getting any presents. I think that is fair enough. When we were growing up we had to write thank you notes virtually straight away and send them to relatives - it's just good manners.

So, although it deviates slightly from the question, and it doesn't state how old the children involved are, I would still only send a card in this instance - income has nothing to do with it!

englishmac

I would still send gifts. It is not the children's fault. I would possibly discuss it privately - they may not be aware of how you feel or how it looks. They could be in a dire financial situation and too proud to let anyone know. In my experience, it doesn't always have to be an expensive present but something chosen particularly for the individual. Kids don't understand the value of things; it is only if adults point out to them the high monetary value they take any notice.