Bitter sister in law

lostinrates

catkins wrote: »

When did we decide every couple would be allowed 2 children? Even this number is not going to help this overpopulated country/planet is it?

I feel ''two'' because while it doesn't seek to cure the problem it doesn't add more people...i.e. it replaces the two that created them with two more...so it doesn't exacerbate the overall problem either. I can see why people would want more than one child/pregnancy. If we could have children we would choose only to have one.

ceridwen

lostinrates wrote: »

I feel ''two'' because while it doesn't seek to cure the problem it doesn't add more people...i.e. it replaces the two that created them with two more...so it doesn't exacerbate the overall problem either. I can see why people would want more than one child/pregnancy. If we could have children we would choose only to have one.

..and of course people having 0 or 1 children are helping to bring the population count down. So to anyone who wants my "spare" 2 children I didnt have - sorry - thats "not available"...I've put that towards reducing the population ...:)

FATBALLZ

catkins wrote: »

When did we decide every couple would be allowed 2 children? Even this number is not going to help this overpopulated country/planet is it?

It would; the population would gradually decrease due to people who chose to have less than 2, those who couldn't have 2 kids for medical reasons, and people who died before getting chance to reproduce.

ceridwen wrote: »

I tend to think there are two ways of thinking:
- basically rationally
- basically emotionally

I'd definitely fall into the rational camp, however it doesn't appear rational at all to take out frustration at this issue and at the choices made by a pair of adults on a child who had no say in the matter.

Overpopulation is something that needs to be campaigned upon on a political level, rather than families getting nasty with each other on a personal level.

paulsad

Take no notice she is being a silly, spiteful cow.
Sorry but thats just my opinion.
Congratulations just don't name the baby after her!

ceridwen

I honestly don't think SIL is being "nasty" about this. I really do think that she is in a dilemma here - as to how to relate to the person concerned (ie O.P.) WITHOUT seeming in any way to "condone" something that she doesnt agree with.

An analogous situation might be, for instance, where a loving parent has had a child who has grown to adulthood and then turned into a druggie. That parent is STILL a loving parent and still loves their child BUT cannot condone the drugtaking. I am just SO glad I am not in that situation either - because I would really struggle (as I'm sure parents in that situation must...) with the dilemma of "How the heck do I make it plain to my druggie child that I still love them - BUT I do NOT approve of the drugtaking?". That is another awkward situation that a lot of people must wonder how on earth to deal with.....as in you want the child to feel cared for/you still want a relationship with them - but then there's that drugtaking to consider...

It IS a very very difficult situation for those of us who know/care about overpopulation as to how the heck to cope when someone close to us announces they are about to have child no. 3, 4, whatever....

EDIT: It really is a subject that needs covering in modern-day etiquette books. I DO have several modern-day ones and they simply do not have ANYTHING whatsoever about what to do in these circumstances. They say how to deal with people having partners instead of spouses (including if they are the same sex - instead of the opposite sex), they say what to do about answering mobile phones whilst in company. BUT the authors simply have not given any indication whatsoever as to what to do in these circumstances...

lostinrates

FATBALLZ wrote: »

Overpopulation is something that needs to be campaigned upon on a political level, rather than families getting nasty with each other on a personal level.

Absolutely. I agree with this. I also really want to reiterate that t is possible to feel very strongly about this but love people and children.

DogsBody

milliebear00001 wrote: »

<snip> That little bit is what makes my blood boil. The word 'condoning' suggests approval. They don't give a flying fig whether or not you 'condone' their choice. <snip>

If 'they' don't give a flying fig, what on earth is all this thread about? Taking what has been said about the SIL as posted, the OP knew that this would be her response to the announcement of child number 3 - but it's nothing really to do with the SIL is it? If that is her opinion, yay her, noone else has to share it, but by the same token, the SIL doesn't have to share everyone else's opinion either. I do think the SIL would be wrong to single out the third child though, and there's no need to be actually rude about it either

When folk tell me of their impending new arrivals, my response tends to be a polite version of 'jolly good, I don't care/I'm not interested'. If others do not 'condone' my opinion, well, jolly good, I don't care.

OP, if your SIL's position has been consistent through the ten years you have known her, her reaction shouldn't have come as a surprise to you Just roll your eyes and say 'thanks, grumpy'. You don't need her approval, do you?

jackieglasgow

Ceridwen it is nothing like having a child who has become a druggie. If someone has done something you don't agree with, which is not in any way directly harming your physical or emotional wellbeing, except to upset your own sense of right and wrong, then you (not you personally, I mean you in an "everyman" sense) have no right to comment. If a person has been raised correctly and has good manners then they should know that if you cannot say anything nice, you should say nothing at all. The OP and her husband do not verbally attack their family member for her political views, or give her a hard time for not having children, which is what they believe to be the right way to live, and she should show them the same courtesy, its not about the rights and wrongs of the opinion, its about her absolute lack of manners, and actually also a complete lack of humanity, despite her protestations otherwise!

Alittlesad

ceridwen wrote: »

It IS a very very difficult situation for those of us who know/care about overpopulation as to how the heck to cope when someone close to us announces they are about to have child no. 3, 4, whatever....

...

Plenty of other people on this thread feel strongly about overpopulation but they don't feel that my SIL is justified, as you do. Neither do they agree with your feelings towards your sibling's children.:(

Alittlesad

DogsBody wrote: »

If 'they' don't give a flying fig, what on earth is all this thread about? Taking what has been said about the SIL as posted, the OP knew that this would be her response to the announcement of child number 3 - but it's nothing really to do with the SIL is it? If that is her opinion, yay her, noone else has to share it, but by the same token, the SIL doesn't have to share everyone else's opinion either. I do think the SIL would be wrong to single out the third child though, and there's no need to be actually rude about it either

When folk tell me of their impending new arrivals, my response tends to be a polite version of 'jolly good, I don't care/I'm not interested'. If others do not 'condone' my opinion, well, jolly good, I don't care.

OP, if your SIL's position has been consistent through the ten years you have known her, her reaction shouldn't have come as a surprise to you Just roll your eyes and say 'thanks, grumpy'. You don't need her approval, do you?

I started this thread to see how other people would react. I don't want to cause a family rift and don't want my husband or inlaws to be hurt.