In-laws vent!

blondie1975

[They took him on their boat. I was a bit miffed as they don't have a life-jacket for him. For some strange reason he hates boats, so screamed his head off!]

I'm not sure I'd be happy about this either!

Brighton_belle

pinkshoes wrote: »

They took him on their boat. I was a bit miffed as they don't have a life-jacket for him.

This is really slack practice and you are right to not be happy, speaking as an experienced sailor.

KxMx

I see some of the " sweet ol' Granny and Gramps can do no harm" brigade are out in force!

VikkiiKawaii

blondie1975 wrote: »

[They took him on their boat. I was a bit miffed as they don't have a life-jacket for him. For some strange reason he hates boats, so screamed his head off!]

I would DEFINITELY mention that next time they must put a lifejacket on him. I wouldn't be miffed, I would be furious. That's SO dangerous!!

dibuzz

The first time my inlaws took my son out they broke his pram and insisted it was already broken. Even when I showed them the photo I had taken of him sat in it just before they picked him up they still wouldn't admit they had done it.
They also gave him chocolate months before I wanted him to have it.
The worst though was when they had my 4 month old daughter for a few hours when we moved house. She wouldn't take a bottle so I told them what time to come to the new house but they kept her 2 hours longer and we didn't have a phone so couldn't get in touch.
She was screaming when they brought her back and after 6 hours of not feeding her, the second I tried she choked, left go and my milk just sprayed around the room, I think we all got a bit! It's funny now but at the time I was furious.

ognum

you are right no excuse for not having a lifejacket that is rediculous!

ognum

KxMx wrote: »

I see some of the " sweet ol' Granny and Gramps can do no harm" brigade are out in force!

I think you are probably writing about me, actually it wouldn't matter if it was Granny and Gramps it could be anyone looking after the child, I think the OP over exaggerated the problems because she was cross they hadn't done exactly what she wanted.

however I do think taking a child one boat without a life jacket is NOT acceptable from anyone.

daska

pinkshoes wrote: »

They took him on their boat. I was a bit miffed as they don't have a life-jacket for him. For some strange reason he hates boats, so screamed his head off!

"A bit miffed."?

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Granny and Grandad wouldn't take anyone on their boat without a LJ, adult, child or baby. Simply doesn't happen. Not EVER!!!!!

tryingtocutback

You say they had "previously said they had no life jacket for him" - did you actually check whether they had one this time? Perhaps you could buy him one for future trips?

I must say that your posts do come across as if you were a bit ungrateful but perhaps thats just your frustration.

I'm glad that he is okay.

OrkneyStar

I sympathise OP, sounds like they are not really thinking about your sons needs very much. I do agree though that you should maybe just say no, especially if he quite likes where he is child-minded, likes the routine etc. Perhaps the grandparents need to spend some time with you and DS and see how often you change/check his nappy, what he likes to eat etc.
My mum lives 300 miles away, so I did give her room to do as she felt best, that said she would change his nappy if needed, not feed him loads of crap (although I did let her give him a few 'treats'), play with him, and generally put him first when she had him. Now he is 5 I let her spoil him a bit, but I know she always looks out for his welfare in that.