In-laws- Vent!!

[bookgirl]

Oh wow, when was that? This is the info I was given in August of this year. I personally didn't see a problem with 1 stop, but I accepted their policy. We were trying to get my neice and nephew down in early Dec but the only time that worked had one stop and SW said nope.

Third week of August of 08. I was flabbergasted. I mean she was pretty well behaved but talked constantly and the guy who ended up sitting with her (it was a full flight and he was the last person on) was pretty much on amusment duty the whole time. I could not believe some body would put thier kid on a flight that long. About 45 min Cali to Vegas, 2:15 to OKC then 45 min to Dallas. I'm not even sure that was her last stop.

 

[Mr. & Mrs. Smith]

I don't think she "needs" to do anything that she doesn't want to do.

When I said "disagreement" I meant "fighting". I am curious about how much of a problem this is with her husband. Lots of times my husband and I didn't agree but one felt more strongly than the other so one would defer to the other. I don't think either of us got taken advantage of , it's just that if he felt more strongly about something than I did, I'd go along with him.

I didn't mean she "needs" to listen to me or else. I was just giving my opinion and advice on what she should do.

I think it's clear that this has been a problem for the OP and her DH. She said that it's put a strain on an otherwise healthy marriage. To me, that's an indication that it's a big deal.

 

[mjkacmom]

Actually that's not true. I flew out of Vegas with a young girl, maybe 8, she had boarded in Cali. Stoped in Vegas, then OKC, then was going on to Dallas. She didn't have to change planes but she had 3 stops.


As for the OP, if it was a straight flight, and the child was mature I think 11 might be an okay age, but you know your child. She might not be mature enough to fly alone even on a direct flight. I would however decide on an age and tell the family that until she is that age you won't consider solo flights.

When dd flew airtran at 11, I didn't have to pay for a flight attendant to help her out if needed, but did anyway, just in case. Their policy is 5 and up on a non-stop, 8 and up for changing planes. I wasn't concerned with someone babysitting her on the flight, but to help her out if things didn't go as planned.

 

[bookgirl]

She's not clairvoyante. How is she supposed to see into the future and know when her daughter will be ready?

Don't make them any promises. Just try to keep a smile on your face and be nice. Try not to make too much a big deal out of it. Tell them "some day" and just be firm. It's your decision, yours and your husbands. Are you and your husband having a disagreement about this?

"some day" is probably going to be too open ended for these inlaws, but saying "we are uncomfortable with it now and will think about it once she is 15" is a date that will give them some peace, and if at 15 she is still too young then they can up it.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

I'd have a HUGE problem with them asking in front of my kids. My own mother does that sometimes, but because she's my mother - I can tear into her. Not so easy with the inlaws. My kids haven't stayed there simply because I don't trust them.

I could have written every word. I think one of the biggest problems with ILs is that they do things differently (whereas, in most cases, with one's own parents, you do many things the same because that's how you were raised), and that it's not so easy to speak up to them.

I think that it's reasonable to assume that by a certain age, she would be comfortable with letting her child travel alone. She probably has a sense now of when that might be.

I kind of disagree. If you establish an age now that you think is a reasonable age to allow certain activities, then you are going to be held to it by others, whether or not that age proves to be appropriate or not.

My ILs are nice people, but I was always torn about my kids spending time alone with them because they just had different ideas about how to handle things, and my MIL is sweet but ditzy as heck. I often wondered how her kids all survived to adulthood. They did some things that made me question their judgement, like give just-turned-2 yr old DD a cup full of whole grapes AND let her run around the yard eating them. When DH told them when we picked her up that that very day at day care they had sent a note home that they would NOT allow any children to eat whole grapes (so cut them, or they'd send them back home), MIL said she never heard of such a thing, and FIL rolled his eyes at us, like we were being overprotective. The clincher was years later when our kids slept over, and we found out later that ILs had dropped the kids off with their older (teens) male cousins, when their parents were out of town...these cousins were NOT people I would choose to leave my kids with. DH, who hates confrontation, as do I, did speak up this time...we left our kids with them, we expect them to care for our children, not hand them off to others. And MIL did so many other ditzy things, I was just too nervous having my kids stay there (and they're 12 miles away).

My sister made some bad judgements with regard to my kids too and I wouldn't send them to stay with her either. However, when she was 14, I sent middle DD (she flew alone) to spend 3 weeks in Florida with my niece, helping out with her 4 kids. It all depends...

 

[disneymyway]

Well, I guess none of my relatives read here so I'll go out on a limb and say that this very thing happened in our family and we all survived. Funny thing, it was my husband's family that was mad at us for not letting our daughter go and it was my husband who felt strongly that she shouldn't. Actually, I think I would have let her go. But he seemed to really feel that she shouldn't and we just had a good way of working together on those kinds of decisions. We never fought, we always tried to see each others' point of view.

My daughter saw my inlaws plenty, but they wanted her all to themselves. They really tried to wear us down but we stood firmly together. We tried not to make too much of it. We just said, "Someday" and that "someday" came when my daughter was in high school.

We all get along great and in the grand scheme of things this was no big deal because we played it down and didn't want it to be a big deal.

 

[Mr. & Mrs. Smith]

I kind of disagree. If you establish an age now that you think is a reasonable age to allow certain activities, then you are going to be held to it by others, whether or not that age proves to be appropriate or not.

But you could pick an age when you know for sure that it would be ok. I mean, if you wouldn't send your 16 year old, I don't care how immature you felt she was, I would think that was very overprotective. Nobody can "hold you to it". It's not like they can take legal action because you made a promise. You can always change your mind but it would be a nice gesture to at least offer something.

 

[Wishing on a star]

I don't think you are being selfish or overprotective at all. I agree with you 120%.

Stand firm and believe in your gut.

AND - I honestly think it sounds like the in-laws are being the insensitive and selfish ones. Why would they want to put a child into a situation that could make her miserable - aka - the cat? Why would they mention this in front of the child before even talking to you?

In my opinion that is cruel and manipulative.

Hang tough Mom - you are doing the right thing

I totally agree with this post...
100%

I have been there - done that...
I know how it feels!

(I am posting as a mom who would NOT feel comfortable leaving my son in my MIL's care... and a mother who has an allergic child, while MIL has FIVE cats, who are allowed to sleep in the beds in the spare bedrooms... and she is not likely to put forth the effort to wash and replace the bedding before guest either... So for me the answer is not only just 'no', but "NO
WAY, NO HOW".)

If the grandparents/inlaws want to see thier grandchildren/neices&nephews, then they can come to visit us, or we can go to visit them.

Why do people think that they have some kind of 'right' to our children.
It is always for their own purposes and their own 'agenda'.

OP, you are the mom, it is your call...

I hate so much to see that this is coming between you and your DH...
That is the second biggest issue here.
Inlaws should NEVER NEVER NEVER come between a husband and wife.
You should be united, as one.

I have posted this countless times before, and now is the perfect time to post again... There are usually no inlaw problems... only marriage problems.

I always say that each spouse should be the one to deal with/communicate with their own parents on these sensitive issues... But, in this case, your child and your role as a parent have to come first...

Tell DH that he has 48 hours to speak with his family regarding these visits or you will simply have to pick up the phone and tell them a very firm 'NO" yourself.

I am so sorry... it sounds like you and your husband have to come to some terms/agreement here.

If he wants your child to fly out to see grandma, then he can man up and do what it takes by taking some time off from work and flying her out there himself.

 

[Wishing on a star]

But you could pick an age when you know for sure that it would be ok. I mean, if you wouldn't send your 16 year old, I don't care how immature you felt she was, I would think that was very overprotective. Nobody can "hold you to it". It's not like they can take legal action because you made a promise. You can always change your mind but it would be a nice gesture to at least offer something.

I very firmly disagree...
I would make NO promises...
NONE whatsoever.

The inlaws could take very single 'hem and haw', every single, comment, every single promise.. and remember it and use it verbatim to hold the poor mothers feet over the flaming fire.... In fact, I would almost bet on it. (not to mention the OP's husband)

This is not just about age...
I know that in my case (as mentioned above) there are many other issues involved.

The OP has no obligation to deliver up her children if she is not comfortable with it.. not at any age.

Of course, if the relationships are wonderful and the grandparents are trusted and beloved by all... then that is great!!! But, that is not always the case.

PS: by 16 years of age, I can see my son having his own life, his own friends, and never ending obligations, school, activities, organizations, friends, girlfriends.... Something tells me that many 16 year olds might not be just begging to skip everything and take off out of town/state to grandma's.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

I didn't mean she "needs" to listen to me or else. I was just giving my opinion and advice on what she should do.

I think it's clear that this has been a problem for the OP and her DH. She said that it's put a strain on an otherwise healthy marriage. To me, that's an indication that it's a big deal.

The strain is not whether or not she lets the kid go (which I would not btw), the strain is the dh's family putting pressure on her when it is clear that she is not comfortable with the situation. They should have some respect for her and back off. Then there would be no issue. She has made it clear that she would not be happy with her child visiting alone. That should have been the end of it. Badgering her dh and her kids is bullying. Plain and simple.

 

[Mr. & Mrs. Smith]

OP, you are the mom, it is your call...

And this is the part that I don't agree with. When did the mother become the more important parent? (OP, I'm not saying that this is how you see yourself. I'm simply responding to some of the assertions to this effect on this thread.) Why is the mother's say more important than the father's say? I don't get that at all. Clearly, this couple is divided and needs to come up with a solution that works for both of them. I don't think it's fair for one parent to have vito power over the other's parenting decisions.

That is really the only problem I have with the OP's situation as she has explained it. I can honestly understand where she is coming from but I can understand where her DH is coming from also.

 

[cheermom1]

I still say that if the grandparents aren't willing to either a. fly up to fly back with her or b. let the parents fly her down there then go on their marry way like the op stated then they don;t really want to see her they just want to keep stiring the pot :

 

[Wishing on a star]

The strain is not whether or not she lets the kid go (which I would not btw), the strain is the dh's family putting pressure on her when it is clear that she is not comfortable with the situation. They should have some respect for her and back off. Then there would be no issue. She has made it clear that she would not be happy with her child visiting alone. That should have been the end of it. Badgering her dh and her kids is bullying. Plain and simple.

Yes, the above sums it up...

The DH should man-up and take care of this situation...

It is obvious that the OP and her DH do not quite agree in this situation.
But, child(ren) are one area where a husband and wife should ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS be a united front.

Sure, the husband is the father, and his views count.... But, he is not the 'most important parent' either... When it comes to something that either parent clearly has very strong reservations and just cannot be comfortable with, it must be the other parent who compromises.
Both parents have the right to establish a boundary or two.

The OP and her husband have some real communicating to do here.

Like I just said, if the DH wants his daughter to spend time at grandma's, then he should simply get on the plane and take her there.

 

[cheermom1]

Yes, the above sums it up...

The DH should man-up and take care of this situation...

It is obvious that the OP and her DH do not quite agree in this situation.
But, child(ren) are one area where a husband and wife should ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS be a united front.

Sure, the husband is the father, and his views count.... But, when it comes to something that either parent clearly has very strong reservations and just cannot be comfortable with, it must be the other parent who compromises. And, both parents have the right to establish a boundary or two.

The OP and her husband have some real communicating to do here.

Like I just said, if the DH wants his daughter to spend time at grandma's, then he should simply get on the plane and take her there.

I get what your saying really i do however the op stated taht they told the il that they would fly her down there and they would go on their marry way but the il said NO!!! so why would it matter if only the dad took her opposed to both?

 

[Mouse House Mama]

I am willing to bet they don't really care if the child visits or not. They sound like they just want to be in control.

 

[rbuzzotta]

How frustrating!

Did you mention to your DD that there is a cat in SIL's house, and she's gt all sick if not medicated? Would that take some of the sting out of you having to be the bad guy? [I.e., she wouldn't have a good time there, anyway]

I guess I am lucky in that I have a SIL who pretty much does not communicate with me much anymore, after she repeatedly stirred up trouble between my DH and his parents.

I, to am luckyy to have a SIL who does not communicate with me, DH or my 3 DD's anymore!!! She only says hi to us when someone outside the family is around. My girls do not like her at all and I am so greatful they see her for who she is and want nothing to do with her.

As for the OP..........I would be nervous with my DD flying alone. I understand the child will be ticketed and accompanied at all times, but to travel and stay at a home where she is highly allergic to a cat would seriously concern me. That alone would concern me more than flying alone~~

Good luck and I do hope DH supports you on this.

 

[Mr. & Mrs. Smith]

Sure, the husband is the father, and his views count.... But, he is not the 'most important parent' either... When it comes to something that either parent clearly has very strong reservations and just cannot be comfortable with, it must be the other parent who compromises.
Both parents have the right to establish a boundary or two.

In principle I agree with what you are saying but think about how this sometimes fails in practice.

I have met my share of overprotective parents - both mothers and fathers. Some who are quite unreasonable with the boundaries they set around their children. So, what to do you do in a situation like that? What if one parent always has strong reservations and is uncomfortable with letting their child do just about anything? Does that mean that the other parent has to always be the one to compromise? Is encouraging such overprotective parenting always in the child's best interest?

I prefer the old 50/50 model, where parents make decisions together. That almost always involves both parents compromising a little. I realize that it's never quite equal but isn't it worth striving for that at least?

 

[Mouse House Mama]

In principle I agree with what you are saying but think about how this sometimes fails in practice.

I have met my share of overprotective parents - both mothers and fathers. Some who are quite unreasonable with the boundaries they set around their children. So, what to do you do in a situation like that? What if one parent always has strong reservations and is uncomfortable with letting their child do just about anything? Does that mean that the other parent has to always be the one to compromise? Is encouraging such overprotective parenting always in the child's best interest?

I prefer the old 50/50 model, where parents make decisions together. That almost always involves both parents compromising a little. I realize that it's never quite equal but isn't it worth striving for that at least?

Do you have children? I am guessing no. I'm not trying to be rude but everyone has their perfect theories about raising a child until said child is actually here. Then all that flies out the window. Sure, 50/50 is wonderful, but that isn't always possible. I also don't think that not allowing you 11 year old to fly to someone's home that would make her sick is being overprotective. It is being smart.
I am not attacking you as I get what you are saying but it doesn't always work as you say.

 

[Wishing on a star]

OP...
Once again, from somebody who has been in your shoes...

Take heart!!!
You are in the right...
Stand your ground!!!

(PS: As the parent of a special needs child... I have a really thick flamesuit with all the parent-bashers who love to use terms like 'overprotective' and 'helicopter', etc... it is all like water off a duck's back!!! )

Tell your husband that this is simply one boundary that you will have to defend... If he wants dd to see inlaws, then he can take her... If inlaws just want your dd all alone, then there is an inappropriate agenda involved...... HUGE RED FLAGS!!!!

I hope you get this all worked out.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Do you have children? I am guessing no. I'm not trying to be rude but everyone has their perfect theories about raising a child until said child is actually here. Then all that flies out the window. Sure, 50/50 is wonderful, but that isn't always possible. I also don't think that not allowing you 11 year old to fly to someone's home that would make her sick is being overprotective. It is being smart.
I am not attacking you as I get what you are saying but it doesn't always work as you say.

OMG!!!!!



Perfect post!!!!

I was gonna bow out with my last post above, but when I saw yours, I just had to chime back in....

'practice', 'theory', 'model', '50/50', etc...

I was just rolling my eyes...
but now I am laughing so hard I can't breathe!!!


I need one of those Tshirts that used to be around that said "Because I"M the mama!!!"

well, I have got to go start some supper...
Ta, ta!!!