Family Issue causing upset

elvis86

newcook wrote: »

The OP knows that they don’t want to be around her because of their fertility issues but still wants to push the subject. Im sure that OP didn’t want to be around pregnant people when she had issues. You only have to take a look at the ‘trying to conceive’ thread that many women find it extremely difficult to visit family and friends who are pregnant/just given birth/have a toddler.

So, what you and several others are inferring, is that the OP is the villain of the piece, because she has managed to have a child and is upset when someone she was previously friendly with suddenly begins to blank her?

Right, yeah, throw away the key...:cool:

newcook wrote: »

It may even be that SIL doesn’t even realize just how much she is hurting OP – as far as SIL is probably concerned, she knows there are going to be posts on FB about baby kicking, moving, scan pictures etc or even that OP has signed up to the app that does a week by week progress report in the newsfeed so has removed herself from the situation of seeing it by deleting OP.

This is so interesting. So, whilst it's assumed by some that the OP is a baby-obsessed dullard who clogs up her Facebook and any conversation with self-indulgent baby talk and a flagrant disregard for the struggles and feelings of others; the SIL with fertility issues is assumed to be an innocent party to whom the hurtful consequences of her innocent intentions haven't occured? She has no idea that anyone might be hurt by her using Facebook to make the statement that she doesn't want to be friends with them any more?

I'm interested, does infertility result in sainthood? Or do only good people find themselves unable to conceive?:cool:

lostinrates

elvis86 wrote: »

So, what you and several others are inferring, is that the OP is the villain of the piece, because she has managed to have a child and is upset when someone she was previously friendly with suddenly begins to blank her?

Right, yeah, throw away the key...:cool:



This is so interesting. So, whilst it's assumed by some that the OP is a baby-obsessed dullard who clogs up her Facebook and any conversation with self-indulgent baby talk and a flagrant disregard for the struggles and feelings of others; the SIL with fertility issues is assumed to be an innocent party to whom the hurtful consequences of her innocent intentions haven't occured? She has no idea that anyone might be hurt by her using Facebook to make the statement that she doesn't want to be friends with them any more?

I'm interested, does infertility result in sainthood? Or do only good people find themselves unable to conceive?:cool:

My opinion is it is probably six of one and half a dozen of the other.

Op talks of having reached suicide point in the past, and is clearly very upset about this. She has also, by her own admission, been a little insenstive in phasing here. My guess is she is a normal person with faults and strong points, as are her in laws.

For all we know its not just her her in laws are stwpping back from.

Also, i am interested and in agree with your points about self obcession and rudeness, but you do seem to be somewhat 'insensitive' in making those points. I have seen before you saying somethiong like its being honest and straight from the hip. While others have interpreted it as rudeness. Perhaps in others etes the in laws have been non confrontational but also are being similarly frank without wanting to cause issue with op?

Its difficult when people handle things differently. I like a good discussion to clear the air, my in laws think its horrifically aggressive whilst i find their attitudes passive aggressive. Stepping away non combativley, which if i were a face book user i might have done just like ops in laws, but i don 't use it, has worked reasonably well for us. If op is emotional like me the 'honesty' of a discussion might be untenable to her in laws and they might feel it is more likely to be damaging long term

newcook

elvis86 wrote: »

So, what you and several others are inferring, is that the OP is the villain of the piece, because she has managed to have a child and is upset when someone she was previously friendly with suddenly begins to blank her?

Right, yeah, throw away the key...:cool:

Im not saying she is the villain but OP knows full well why she has been ‘unfriended’ – though it seems to me that they were only fb friends because they were inlaws. It doesn’t seem that they socialized all the time (even before OP had children) apart from at family gatherings.

elvis86 wrote: »

I'm interested, does infertility result in sainthood? Or do only good people find themselves unable to conceive?:cool:

I have no idea! Does being inlaws mean that you have to be friends with someone?!?!


It may even be as simple that the OP’s SIL has nothing in common with her apart from they share the same surname.

red_devil

Dunroamin wrote: »

She may want to be friendly with BIL wife but that doesn't mean that BIL's wife wants to be friendly with her! And, after all, they are not related in any way.

Their husbands are brothers why wouldnt they want to be friendly. Seems a bit off. Its a poor show in my opinion. However i dont think i have anything more to add. I just feel as im getting embroiled in someones problems that i dont even know getting abit heavy and I dont think we randoms will solve it anyway. I am sure most of us have family problems of some sort.:(


I do think that families think they can treat you how they like and you will always be there. I think people are crafty they treat their family in a way they wouldnt dare to treat their friends. Just my thoughts.

POPPYOSCAR

red_devil wrote: »

Their husbands are brothers why wouldnt they want to be friendly. Seems a bit off. Its a poor show in my opinion. However i dont think i have anything more to add. I just feel as im getting embroiled in someones problems that i dont even know getting abit heavy and I dont think we randoms will solve it anyway. I am sure most of us have family problems of some sort.:(


I do think that families think they can treat you how they like and you will always be there. I think people are crafty they treat their family in a way they wouldnt dare to treat their friends. Just my thoughts.

Oh how right you are!!!!!

Dunroamin

newcook wrote: »

It may even be as simple that the OP’s SIL has nothing in common with her apart from they share the same surname.

Just to nit pick - she isn't the OP's SIL, she's the wife of her BIL which isn't the same thing.

Dunroamin

red_devil wrote: »

Their husbands are brothers why wouldnt they want to be friendly. Seems a bit off. .

But why should they want to be friendly with each other, just because they're married to brothers? Polite yes - friendly not necessarily.

lostinrates

red_devil wrote: »

Their husbands are brothers why wouldnt they want to be friendly. Seems a bit off. Its a poor show in my opinion. However i dont think i have anything more to add. I just feel as im getting embroiled in someones problems that i dont even know getting abit heavy and I dont think we randoms will solve it anyway. I am sure most of us have family problems of some sort.:(


I do think that families think they can treat you how they like and you will always be there. I think people are crafty they treat their family in a way they wouldnt dare to treat their friends. Just my thoughts.

Of course its better to be friendly, (and best to be loving and forgiving and inclusive) but when thats not possible, absence of antagonism and distance rather than rift or chasm is, imo, better.

euronorris

newcook wrote: »

Im not saying she is the villain but OP knows full well why she has been ‘unfriended’ – though it seems to me that they were only fb friends because they were inlaws. It doesn’t seem that they socialized all the time (even before OP had children) apart from at family gatherings.

Why do you assume this? The OP hasn't told us anything about their relationship before babies/fertility issues.

And I know that infertility, or fertility issues, is a very emotive subject and causes a LOT of heartache. BUT, I do not think that this gives anyone the right to completely cut contact with someone (unless, of course, said person is being very, very insensitive about it themselves). To step back, sure. To cut contact completely, and without explanation (sorry, but that explanation should have been given before the defriending, and directly to the OP, not through the BIL IMO), is not just selfish, it's rude and exceptionally hurtful. It's almost as if that person is trying to hurt and punish the other, for having what they want.

IF there was a friendship before children and fertility issues, then why has the SIL not at least maintained basic contact. To offer some support to the OP who has recently suffered a huge loss, and also needs support and understanding? Are her problems deemed more important?

I do also think that it is unreasonable and unhealthy to cut contact with those who have children/are pregnant. I can understand the desire to do it, but ultimately it is not going to fix anything, and I can imagine that it only heightens those hurt feelings when they accidentally bump into someone with kids or who is pregnant.

And it seems that this behaviour only happens in respect of fertility issues, because I don't see people who have been paralysed, or lost a limb, or lost a loved one, suddenly start cutting out people from their live who are not paralysed/have all limbs/haven't lost a loved one. I genuinely wonder why that is?

GobbledyGook

Facebook can sometimes feel like the devil when you are in a bad place.

When I was going through IVF and all our fertility issues before we had children I really, really had to brace myself to see my cousin. It wasn't just about the fact that she had children, but it was that we were very alike. In her more than anybody in the whole world I could see what I was missing. I could see my/our grandparents with her child and knew I'd likely never see my child with the people who brought me up. My husband struggled even more because my cousin and I are quite similar looking and he could see what I'd be like with our child.

When I was going to see her, despite her being the person I'm closest too in the world, I had to steel myself for days beforehand. I still loved her and wanted my relationship with her, but it tore me apart inside. It is only because we have no other family so if I lost her I'd have none that I forced myself to do it.

I was lucky though. There was no facebook and we lived quite a distance apart. I could steel myself to visit her on the weekend and then I could not think about it on days that it was too hard. If I wasn't up to reading her email I could wait until the evening or next morning when I was ready.

To deal with it every day would have been too hard. Also to not know when a photo or comment was going to pop up would have just been too hard to deal with.

It's sad that they are finding it simply too hard to play a part in their nephew's life, but they are making an effort to at least keep the brothers relationship going. That is more than some would/could do. Eventually there will come a point where that may not be enough, but whilst he is a baby and you are pregnant and have a new baby it may simply be too hard for them.

It's much better to quietly remove yourself from someone's Facebook and avoid any confrontation than to cause rows and dramas imo, which I've seen happen in situations like that before and it's not nice for anyone.