Vent-Explain my BIL to me please!

[rowbear]

You still think your way is the only way and the best way?

My point is that you CAN have a VERY strong bond without taking children away from their own personal lives and temporarily incorporating them into yours. Spending a week or more sleeping over is NOT necessary for building a strong relationship.

I am sure that you can have a very strong bond without taking children into your home. I am also sure you can have a stronger bond if you do. The child is in your custody for that period of time. You are a surrogate parent. The child relies on you for everything from food to providing comfort for a scraped knee. The longer the child is with you the more instances of surrogate parenting are required like correcting bad behavior, dealing with a frightening situation, or just answering questions about how things work. The child learns they can rely on you through good and bad. The more you have of both the stronger the bond.

Let's consider another example:

Grandparents A live close by. To help cut down on the cost of daycare they agree to take the child every day after school and keep them until the first parent gets home 3+ hours later. In addition, Grandparents A are around for ball games, general get-togethers, and holidays.

Grandparents B live 2 states away. They are loving grandparents and they make the trip to see the child 3-4 times a year and especially on holidays and birthdays. In addition, parents and child go to visit grandparents B at least 1 time a year themselves.

Do you really think grandparents B could possible have the same bond with the child as grandparents A who serve as surrogate parents and see the child practically nonstop?

More time = stronger bond. It really is a simple concept.

 

[Hollywoodhaha]

HAS op explained how old this child is and how this child might not want to go and that it might be as SIMPLE as that and all this other stuff might not even be a part of it???? The fact that the age was left out makes me wonder..... THE CHILD MIGHT JUST NOT WANT TO GO??? There are so many diferent senerios we all are just guessing really I think that is why the op is not comming back. We were not given any info to go by, no age no background so there is no way to tell why the BIL is hesitant.

she already said in another post that she wants to come.

 

[rowbear]

So are you saying If I spend a lot of time with a serial killer or a child raptist I will have a strong bond with them. That is a bunch of BS.

How do you get serial killer/child rapist from loving family? I guess you are going to extremes which is weak.

 

[Mom2Nick]

I am sure that you can have a very strong bond without taking children into your home. I am also sure you can have a stronger bond if you do. The child is in your custody for that period of time. You are a surrogate parent. The child relies on you for everything from food to providing comfort for a scraped knee. The longer the child is with you the more instances of surrogate parenting are required like correcting bad behavior, dealing with a frightening situation, or just answering questions about how things work. The child learns they can rely on you through good and bad. The more you have of both the stronger the bond.

Let's consider another example:

Grandparents A live close by. To help cut down on the cost of daycare they agree to take the child every day after school and keep them until the first parent gets home 3+ hours later. In addition, Grandparents A are around for ball games, general get-togethers, and holidays.

Grandparents B live 2 states away. They are loving grandparents and they make the trip to see the child 3-4 times a year and especially on holidays and birthdays. In addition, parents and child go to visit grandparents B at least 1 time a year themselves.

Do you really think grandparents B could possible have the same bond with the child as grandparents A who serve as surrogate parents and see the child practically nonstop?

More time = stronger bond. It really is a simple concept.

Once again - having week long sleepovers is not necessary to form a strong bond. You can give me every example you want in the book and twist it around all you like but we are talking about taking a child away from their life and into yours for weeks at a time. That is NOT the only way to form a strong bond with a child and I seriously doubt doing so makes a stronger bond unless that is literally the only time you are spending with this child to begin with and the alternative is no time with them at all...........

My last response to you will be this - I find it sad that you think the "only" way to "strongly" bond with nieces/nephews is to take them out of their life and into yours for days on end. You will never truly know a child until you have lived in THEIR life and that cannot be done with all these week long visits to YOUR home. I hope as your niece or nephew grows you realize the importance of truly getting to know who they are. It's so much more then knowing what they like to eat and putting band aids on boo boos.

 

[ginna74]

I just reread it and it there is no where she says that the child wants to go if infact she is old enough to agree to go or if she is a teen and doesn't want to go. There is no info period. Just that the BIL is hesitant to let the child go with no background We just don't know period...and now the op has gone and left us all to ponder all this info with no details...


The BIL possibly could not want the child to go because the SIL has dogs and the child is alergic....

the BIL maybe doesn't like the SIL neighbors....

MAYBE the child has extreme disabilities and doesn't trust the SIL can take care of the child....


WE HAVE NO INFO HERE... WE CAN DEBATE THIS ENDLESSLY.... now that the op is gone and well sense the internet is filled with wackos and wont give out info that would help out with what she is asking



op I am glad you are getting the child!!! The rest doesn't matter

 

[rowbear]

Once again - having week long sleepovers is not necessary to form a strong bond. You can give me every example you want in the book and twist it around all you like but we are talking about taking a child away from their life and into yours for weeks at a time. That is NOT the only way to form a strong bond with a child and I seriously doubt doing so makes a stronger bond unless that is literally the only time you are spending with this child to begin with and the alternative is no time with them at all...........

My last response to you will be this - I find it sad that you think the "only" way to "strongly" bond with nieces/nephews is to take them out of their life and into yours for days on end. You will never truly know a child until you have lived in THEIR life and that cannot be done with all these week long visits to YOUR home. I hope as your niece or nephew grows you realize the importance of truly getting to know who they are. It's so much more then knowing what they like to eat and putting band aids on boo boos.

All you do is nibble around the edges trying to make a point that I have agreed with you TWICE now at least. It is possible to form a strong bond without extended stays. I think that makes 3 times.

What you cannot refute is that the more time you have a person in your life the stronger the bond becomes. And this is not MY way this is OUR way. Our family does this. And it is a good choice for family who live 2 states away. If we only get him for an occasional weekend it is not nearly enough time. His parents have chosen that we will be strong influences in his life and we are happy to go along for the ride. We are extremely close depsite the distance so we must be doing something right.

Shoot there may come a time when he gets even older he spends an entire month with us... woohoo!

 

[Hollywoodhaha]

Sigh ..

why must yall keep doing this?

Different parenting methods, different opinions, etc..

Just quit fighting, please!

 

[ginna74]

yes there is noooooooooooooooooo reason to have all this over a question of why would a bil be hesitant to let a niece come stay for a couple of weeks.... with no background.. no age no nothing.... no idea as to what in the heck was going on

but the kicker is he did say yes eventually...

and that is that...

and the op has left for all to bicker...

 

[rowbear]

yes there is noooooooooooooooooo reason to have all this over a question of why would a bil be hesitant to let a niece come stay for a couple of weeks.... with no background.. no age no nothing.... no idea as to what in the heck was going on

but the kicker is he did say yes eventually...

and that is that...

and the op has left for all to bicker...

Them is fighting words!

 

[ginna74]

in related news I have a son hanging on the chair I am sitting on and am dern sad the day camp thing fell through.....

 

[ginna74]

Them is fighting words!

 

[rowbear]

in related news I have a son hanging on the chair I am sitting on and am dern sad the day camp thing fell through.....

Send him off to a relative for a few weeks. That'll cure him.

 

[ginna74]

well my 11 year old son would LOVE to go to most of my inlaws houses lol not all of them but most of them. (oops did I say too much lol?)

 

[lillygator]

Sigh ..

why must yall keep doing this?

Different parenting methods, different opinions, etc..

Just quit fighting, please!

I think because rowbear refuses to accept any other way is valid except hers/his....

 

[Wishing on a star]

I believe that anybody who 'insist' that they should have that kind of 100% complete, unfettered, custody and control, of somebody else's child for that length of time (ex. send 'em up to me....) has some questionable motives... wanting to place their own stamp on an impressionable child.... somebody else's child.

A person can have a most wonderful relationship with neices/nephews/grandchildren without making these kinds of demands.

I find no basis for rowbears assumptions.

My child HAS a parent (two parents! Me and DH)
I find no basis for the assumption that a child needs any other 'surrogate' parent. In fact, I find it insulting and troubling. Is it good for a child to have loving aunts/grandparents/etc... of course. But the assertion that there should be any 'surrogate' parent needed...

I don't need anybody to assume that that they have the right to usurp my role as a parent.
Nobody else has the right to decide that what THEY want regarding my child.
Nobody has the right to make any demand or decision about what is best for my child.
And, that, actually, is the basis of what this whole thread is about.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

I believe that anybody who 'insist' that they should have that kind of 100% complete, unfettered, custody and control, of somebody else's child for that length of time (ex. send 'em up to me....) has some questionable motives... wanting to place their own stamp on an impressionable child.... somebody else's child.

A person can have a most wonderful relationship with neices/nephews/grandchildren without making these kinds of demands.

I find no basis for rowbears assumptions.

My child HAS a parent (two parents! Me and DH)
I find no basis for the assumption that a child needs any other 'surrogate' parent. In fact, I find it insulting and troubling. Is it good for a child to have loving aunts/grandparents/etc... of course. But the assertion that there should be any 'surrogate' parent needed...

I don't need anybody to assume that that they have the right to usurp my role as a parent.
Nobody else has the right to decide that what THEY want regarding my child.
Nobody has the right to make any demand or decision about what is best for my child.
And, that, actually, is the basis of what this whole thread is about.

I have to say that I agree with this. I don't care if you visit once a month, once a week or if my child visits you every weekend. Nobody is going to be my child's "surrogate" parent. We are their parents. The end. You might be a nice aunt or uncle etc. but you will never be any type of parent to them. Sorry but that is the way it is.

 

[mjkacmom]

I believe that anybody who 'insist' that they should have that kind of 100% complete, unfettered, custody and control, of somebody else's child for that length of time (ex. send 'em up to me....) has some questionable motives... wanting to place their own stamp on an impressionable child.... somebody else's child.

A person can have a most wonderful relationship with neices/nephews/grandchildren without making these kinds of demands.

I find no basis for rowbears assumptions.

My child HAS a parent (two parents! Me and DH)
I find no basis for the assumption that a child needs any other 'surrogate' parent. In fact, I find it insulting and troubling. Is it good for a child to have loving aunts/grandparents/etc... of course. But the assertion that there should be any 'surrogate' parent needed...

I don't need anybody to assume that that they have the right to usurp my role as a parent.
Nobody else has the right to decide that what THEY want regarding my child.
Nobody has the right to make any demand or decision about what is best for my child.
And, that, actually, is the basis of what this whole thread is about.

I'm sorry, but surrogate parent?! Insisting?! Demanding?! The OP's sister died (do you have a good relationship with a sister - I'm guessing not), and she wants her niece to visit, and from this information alone, you assume the OP wants to be a surrogate parent?

 

[lacrosse_lady72]

Maybe DN doesn't want to stay so long. That is how I was when I was a kid, maybe one night would be OK but anything other than that- I wanted to go home.

I was actually in that situation where my Aunt and Uncle wanted to take me for a week (they lived about 15 miles away) but I didn't want to go that long... I asked my mom to give an excuse as to why I couldn't go for that long because I didn't want to. They thought I did but I didn't. And I do love them but I just didn't want to leave home.

 

[Lionqueen2]

I am sure that you can have a very strong bond without taking children into your home. I am also sure you can have a stronger bond if you do. The child is in your custody for that period of time. You are a surrogate parent. The child relies on you for everything from food to providing comfort for a scraped knee. The longer the child is with you the more instances of surrogate parenting are required like correcting bad behavior, dealing with a frightening situation, or just answering questions about how things work. The child learns they can rely on you through good and bad. The more you have of both the stronger the bond.

Let's consider another example:

Grandparents A live close by. To help cut down on the cost of daycare they agree to take the child every day after school and keep them until the first parent gets home 3+ hours later. In addition, Grandparents A are around for ball games, general get-togethers, and holidays.

Grandparents B live 2 states away. They are loving grandparents and they make the trip to see the child 3-4 times a year and especially on holidays and birthdays. In addition, parents and child go to visit grandparents B at least 1 time a year themselves.

Do you really think grandparents B could possible have the same bond with the child as grandparents A who serve as surrogate parents and see the child practically nonstop?

More time = stronger bond. It really is a simple concept.

This scenerio brought a smile to my face. We had a situation in our family exactly as you described the A and B grandparents. Set B lived a several states away, but visited several times during the year and were visited by the grandkids at least once a year. The B set of GPs were so much fun that, although their time with grandkids was limited, the grandkids had a better bond with them.
The A set of grandparents saw the grandkids regularly, but they were older in acting, not age, and didn't relate as well to the grandkids. Set A took care of the kids more often, but they were more settled in their ways, while set B was active and fun.
The grandkids loved both sets of grandparents, but in this case quantity of time didn't necessarily mean better bonding.

 

[Nancyg56]

I believe that anybody who 'insist' that they should have that kind of 100% complete, unfettered, custody and control, of somebody else's child for that length of time (ex. send 'em up to me....) has some questionable motives... wanting to place their own stamp on an impressionable child.... somebody else's child.

A person can have a most wonderful relationship with neices/nephews/grandchildren without making these kinds of demands.

I find no basis for rowbears assumptions.

My child HAS a parent (two parents! Me and DH)
I find no basis for the assumption that a child needs any other 'surrogate' parent. In fact, I find it insulting and troubling. Is it good for a child to have loving aunts/grandparents/etc... of course. But the assertion that there should be any 'surrogate' parent needed...

I don't need anybody to assume that that they have the right to usurp my role as a parent.
Nobody else has the right to decide that what THEY want regarding my child.
Nobody has the right to make any demand or decision about what is best for my child.
And, that, actually, is the basis of what this whole thread is about.

I think that an aunt who is perhaps losing touch with her deceased sister's child pressing for a visit is a far cry from insisting an unfettered access to that child. I saw no reason to believe that the OP wanted to be a surrogate parent nor did I see any attempt to usurp parental authority. I did see a woman who loves a child and is trying to foster a relationship that without her sister alive will most probably die. That is all.That is actually what this thread is about.

I honestly do not believe that you understand how easy to is to erase a relationship with someone when that person has no blood ties with you is. Compare that with trying to maintain a relationship with blood relation when you no longer have the tie that binds alive.

Take the "I am in control of my child, period." out of this for just one moment. Look at your own family and ask yourself if you lost your brother and sister and your IL has a new relationship. You and you IL are not friends, you really do not like each other yet you are not a "bad" person. Let's assume you are not an addict, you don't smoke, drink or have any other offensive habits that may threaten a child's well being. You want to have a relationship with your niece and your IL won't say yes, won't say no. Really and truely would like you to melt away so that he or she can have a new life with a new family, taking your sibling's child along. "So sad, too bad for you and the kid. Better for me and my new family, we really don't want outlaws."

Would you just fade away? I would hope not.