Argh Inlaws - am I being ungrateful??

sulphate

duchy wrote: »

This definitely seems to be a MIL issue.
Not seeing many Mum of the Mother posts-which is kind of interesting.

I can understand this. I don't always see eye to eye with either my mum or my MIL. The difference between the two is that I can have a frank conversation with my mum and feel comfortable enough arguing/discussing an issue because our relationship is not going to be strained by it. My MIL I obviously have a much more superficial relationship with and if she says or does something I disagree with, I don't always feel comfortable addressing the issue right away with her. I expect many people feel the same way and that's why they turn to forums first.

thorsoak

It seems to be par for the course on this board to categorise all mothers in law as she-devils!

My daughters in law (and my son in law) are all wonderful and, hopefully, don't think I'm too much of a she-devil .......;-)

Maybe its because we are always honest with each other.

sulphate

thorsoak wrote: »

No, I didn't say that you were the bad guy - but you are the one painting your inlaws as the baddies!

Do you not appreciate that they will not always be around, that they may want to store up memories for your LO too? That they want to have fun with him as well as watching him sleep? You have, hopefully, a long lifetime to enjoy your little one - they have a shorter time with him - and you begrudge them that. The one day on their boat could be remembered by your LO for far longer than a play date.

I don't see how the OP is "begrudging" her in laws a relationship with her son at all, she was trying to keep them happy whilst juggling other things. I think it's important for both parents and grandparents to be flexible and willing to accommodate the other to an extent when looking after a child is involved. OP has already done this by agreeing for grandparents to look after her son to enable them to spend time together, but it sounds like the grandparents aren't keeping their side of the bargain.

FBaby

Once again a dramatic outlook from some posters on an issue that is really inconsequential in the scheme of things. Yes OP should be grateful for the help she gets, yes she had a right to be annoyed when they were not home for her to pick her son as planned and yes it isn't worth making a big deal out of it when the solution is hour OP put it don't let them have him when she has made plans that require him being back at a specific time.

sulphate

thorsoak wrote: »

It seems to be par for the course on this board to categorise all mothers in law as she-devils!

My daughters in law (and my son in law) are all wonderful and, hopefully, don't think I'm too much of a she-devil .......;-)

Maybe its because we are always honest with each other.

? I believe the OP mentioned her in laws and didn't make specific mention of her MIL.

millysg1

thorsoak wrote: »

No, I didn't say that you were the bad guy - but you are the one painting your inlaws as the baddies!

Do you not appreciate that they will not always be around, that they may want to store up memories for your LO too? That they want to have fun with him as well as watching him sleep? You have, hopefully, a long lifetime to enjoy your little one - they have a shorter time with him - and you begrudge them that. The one day on their boat could be remembered by your LO for far longer than a play date.

So that means it ok to have the kid for as long they want and be dammed about all other plans previously made. She did let them have him so they could create memories but they still should of at least asked if they could have him to 5 and not just go off and keep him for as long as they wanted and tell the OP when it was too late. Its not like the OP didn't want the in laws to have him at all just to stick to pre agreed plans. Isnt that what we expect from everyone, friends and family and is what is called being polite?

duchy

thorsoak wrote: »

It seems to be par for the course on this board to categorise all mothers in law as she-devils!

My daughters in law (and my son in law) are all wonderful and, hopefully, don't think I'm too much of a she-devil .......;-)

Maybe its because we are always honest with each other.

Like telling her she makes you feel like the hired help ?

Sorry but I think the attacks on the OP are uncalled for.
She doesn't ask the grandparents to babysit whilst she works he's at nursery and they deliberately and knowingly sabotaged her plans for the day- simply because they wanted to.
That is just plain rude and inconsiderate.
I wonder had she rolled up an hour earlier than arranged and took him home if they would have thought that was OK- surely it's the same thing?

Mojisola

pinkshoes wrote: »

I was happy to take DS with me to hospital. He is a good boy and would have been very excited at the ambulances and the bus ride! I was then going to take him to his favourite museum afterwards, then meet up with a friend at 3pm.

I was then dropping him off at 5pm at the in-laws, as agreed a week before, although i was not dependent on them. DS could have come with me to school, and DH would have picked him up after work.

They insisted on taking him out in the day and knew my afternoon plans.

How did they do this? Why didn't you just tell them that you'd got the day planned and would see them at 5pm, as arranged?

System

I was happy to take DS with me to hospital. He is a good boy and would have been very excited at the ambulances and the bus ride! I was then going to take him to his favourite museum afterwards, then meet up with a friend at 3pm.

That isn't what you said earlier. you said the wait would have been boring....

My in-laws wanted to look after DS. As much as he would have loved the bus ride (parking at the hospital is hideous!), the waiting would have been boring for him, so thought it was a good idea.

Make your mind up.

duchy

It really doesn't matter though.
The parent and the grandparents made an arrangement - which the grandparents changed without the courtesy of checking this was OK with the mother.

It isn't the fact they did something else with him -it's the fact they went ahead and did it and didn't even ring the mother until they were on the boat so too late if she said it wasn't convenient.

Had this been a NRP rather than a grandparent I suspect some of the responses would be different but the principle is the same.