In-laws being pushy about visiting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

Agree OP. After we discussed having a little space my DH immediately caved and invited his parents to arrive the day after we got home. They wanted to "tour" our house and got miffed when I said they weren't welcome in our bedroom and bathroom. I had bras, maxipads, breast pads, nipple cream, sitz bath sitting out and I felt like having a little privacy should have been a no brainer. Of course, when my parents heard my ILs were here, they immediately invited themselves. Cue 4 days of grandparents sitting around expecting to be waited on, telling me I should rest and not clean up after them but, of course, not getting up to do it themselves. They would hold a sleeping baby for an hour and then expect me to rave about how "refreshed" I felt because they had just done me that huge favor. My FIL kept trying to serve me drinks (I was exhausted and breastfeeding) and then when I refused he kept saying how I had "no sense of occasion." No one would get up early or stay up late when the baby cried and the one time I asked my parents to drive and get diapers they complained for two hours after they returned because it was such a far drive (it was 15 minutes round trip).

I was overwhelmed and majorly pissed. But, DH finally understood and we set real limits from there on out. No one was invited back for Christmas (3 months later) and when our next child was born DH told his mom she could come for a weekend a few weeks after the baby was born. I told my mom she could come for a week after the birth if she was planning to help, otherwise she could come for a weekend as well. She came for a week and wasn't terribly helpful but at least understood I wasn't making her meals, etc.

If you think your family will suck like ours, then I support you and think it's totally reasonable. But I have friends whose moms/parents came and basically acted like post partum doulas. Cooking, cleaning, helping to get the baby on a routine, taking the baby for hours so the mom could get some sleep, stuff like that. I would have literally wept with gratitude if any of the grandparents had done those things for us, and they would have been welcome in our home immediately after birth. A baby can be very overwhelming, and if family is actually going to help you, you should accept it. But if they want to have a vacation at your house, then no.

THIS

Some people want "curated grandparent experiences" where they act like intruding into your space uninvited is their vacation.

If I have another child my mom can come because she did doula work. My in laws will have to wait a month and stay in a hotel because they expected to just hold a happy baby and hand it back when things got hard while doing nothing around the house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

But why won't you let them visit, stay in a hotel, and come by one day to see a newborn? Are you also going to deny this visit to your bestie, neighbors, anyone else you know?

Some in-laws would be HIGHLY offended at bring asked to stay at a hotel, and would try to insist on staying more than one day. Especially if they live far, they won’t want to spend a day traveling just to visit for one afternoon.

Maybe, but I bet those same inlaws would be even more offended by being told they can't see the baby for two months. If OP is prepared to enforce a "not for two months" boundary, she should be able to enforce a "just a few hours" boundary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

It is controlling for no reason. You will be fine. Everyone will be fine. Just let the grandparents see experience one of life's rare and precious events by seeing their newborn grandchild soon after it is born. They are not going to take the baby away from you. Being difficult now will not set up well for things between you guys later.

The grandparents are not "being pushy". They are just excited. Would you rather have the opposite?

I say all of this after having BTDT. I was a petty controlling b**** of a DIL for a while.

Fail to see how having boundaries = controlling b****. Also fail to see a huge distinction between two weeks and four weeks.

We have a good relationship generally. DH communicated that we would play it by ear, which is true. But they are chomping at the bit to see the baby within hours/days, which is a non-starter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DH and I decided that we want to wait 1-2 months after baby is born (next month) for visitors. His parents are being very pushy about wanting to see the baby very quickly after birth. How do we hold the boundary without creating a rift? In his family it’s very common for everyone to be in the hospital etc. I’m just annoyed at our wishes not being respected.

"Not respecting wishes" would be barging into your home uninvited and unannounced the first day the baby is home.

What your ILs are doing now is expressing their own wishes. You are really in for a hard time of it if you expect everyone around you to not express anything that is not in line with your parenting choices.

[Anonymous]

My mom and brother came when I was readmitted to the hospital when my baby was 5 days old and I couldn’t keep him there (I was very sick). Y thank goodness I was willing to let them come.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

Then why are you here? You asked how to set this boundary WITHOUT CAUSING A RIFT. Sorry, but you can’t. The responses here are telling you that.

Go ahead and keep them away for 4-8 weeks. I don’t care and neither does anyone here. BUT don’t come and post that your ILs are upset, miffed, or bothered by this.

Stop being nasty to OP. My mom didn’t meet my first born for 2 months because she wouldn’t get vaccinated and was fine with our boundaries. Once it was warm enough for an outside visit, they met and everything was fine. OP - it’s your kid, do what you want.

It’s so irritating when people post experiences that are completely different. First, your mom was fine with it. Second, she had an option to change it by getting vaccinated. It’s not the same at all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

It is controlling for no reason. You will be fine. Everyone will be fine. Just let the grandparents see experience one of life's rare and precious events by seeing their newborn grandchild soon after it is born. They are not going to take the baby away from you. Being difficult now will not set up well for things between you guys later.

The grandparents are not "being pushy". They are just excited. Would you rather have the opposite?

I say all of this after having BTDT. I was a petty controlling b**** of a DIL for a while.

Fail to see how having boundaries = controlling b****. Also fail to see a huge distinction between two weeks and four weeks.

We have a good relationship generally. DH communicated that we would play it by ear, which is true. But they are chomping at the bit to see the baby within hours/days, which is a non-starter.

They’re excited. Try to stop judging them for just a few minutes and see their excitement coming from a place of love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

It is controlling for no reason. You will be fine. Everyone will be fine. Just let the grandparents see experience one of life's rare and precious events by seeing their newborn grandchild soon after it is born. They are not going to take the baby away from you. Being difficult now will not set up well for things between you guys later.

The grandparents are not "being pushy". They are just excited. Would you rather have the opposite?

I say all of this after having BTDT. I was a petty controlling b**** of a DIL for a while.

Fail to see how having boundaries = controlling b****. Also fail to see a huge distinction between two weeks and four weeks.

We have a good relationship generally. DH communicated that we would play it by ear, which is true. But they are chomping at the bit to see the baby within hours/days, which is a non-starter.

One option is to do what we did: both sets of grandparents came to the hospital and waited (NOT in the birthing room). Then they got to come in and see our brand newborn for maybe 30 minutes or so. Then they left. We told them we wanted three weeks with just our new little family. Then they came back for a couple days sequentially and stayed in a hotel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

Then why are you here? You asked how to set this boundary WITHOUT CAUSING A RIFT. Sorry, but you can’t. The responses here are telling you that.

Go ahead and keep them away for 4-8 weeks. I don’t care and neither does anyone here. BUT don’t come and post that your ILs are upset, miffed, or bothered by this.

I guess this begs the question why grandparents would think their wants should come before the wants of new parents.

Because it's a boundary for no reason. I'd be pro OP if the parents were abusive. My cousin did this and it was too much. She had signs on her baby that she didn't allow anyone to touch him (a full term baby born in the summer before covid was a thing). Her mom pretty much lost her mind that she couldn't touch her grandchild for 6 months.

Also, are BOTH sets of parents being given this boundary or just inlaws?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH and I decided that we want to wait 1-2 months after baby is born (next month) for visitors. His parents are being very pushy about wanting to see the baby very quickly after birth. How do we hold the boundary without creating a rift? In his family it’s very common for everyone to be in the hospital etc. I’m just annoyed at our wishes not being respected.

"Not respecting wishes" would be barging into your home uninvited and unannounced the first day the baby is home.

What your ILs are doing now is expressing their own wishes. You are really in for a hard time of it if you expect everyone around you to not express anything that is not in line with your parenting choices.

Respecting our wishes would be saying “okay, we will see you when you’re ready!”

Not respecting our wishes looks like stating why our wishes are unacceptable to them, and insisting that we let them see the baby sooner because that’s what they want.

I could be ready to see them at two weeks, who knows, but it’s the lack of respect that makes me want to push it back further/dig my heels in. It’s a stressful enough time and being argumentative/dismissive about why we’ve established the timeline we have is not helping.

I’ve had a baby. The first few weeks suck and are disorienting and tiring and I don’t want anyone in my space. After three weeks the fog clears and it’s easier for me to have company etc. I do not want anyone - anyone - in my face for those first few weeks. I had no idea this was such a hot take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

Then why are you here? You asked how to set this boundary WITHOUT CAUSING A RIFT. Sorry, but you can’t. The responses here are telling you that.

Go ahead and keep them away for 4-8 weeks. I don’t care and neither does anyone here. BUT don’t come and post that your ILs are upset, miffed, or bothered by this.

I guess this begs the question why grandparents would think their wants should come before the wants of new parents.

Because it's a boundary for no reason. I'd be pro OP if the parents were abusive. My cousin did this and it was too much. She had signs on her baby that she didn't allow anyone to touch him (a full term baby born in the summer before covid was a thing). Her mom pretty much lost her mind that she couldn't touch her grandchild for 6 months.

Also, are BOTH sets of parents being given this boundary or just inlaws?

Everyone is being given this boundary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DH and I decided that we want to wait 1-2 months after baby is born (next month) for visitors. His parents are being very pushy about wanting to see the baby very quickly after birth. How do we hold the boundary without creating a rift? In his family it’s very common for everyone to be in the hospital etc. I’m just annoyed at our wishes not being respected.

Good for you. I have a few family members who are never honest about how sick they are when they want to visit. And when you are comfortable, don't let them kiss your baby. It sounds harsh, but so do NICU visits for RSV, noravirus and COVID.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

It is controlling for no reason. You will be fine. Everyone will be fine. Just let the grandparents see experience one of life's rare and precious events by seeing their newborn grandchild soon after it is born. They are not going to take the baby away from you. Being difficult now will not set up well for things between you guys later.

The grandparents are not "being pushy". They are just excited. Would you rather have the opposite?

I say all of this after having BTDT. I was a petty controlling b**** of a DIL for a while.

Fail to see how having boundaries = controlling b****. Also fail to see a huge distinction between two weeks and four weeks.

We have a good relationship generally. DH communicated that we would play it by ear, which is true. But they are chomping at the bit to see the baby within hours/days, which is a non-starter.

One option is to do what we did: both sets of grandparents came to the hospital and waited (NOT in the birthing room). Then they got to come in and see our brand newborn for maybe 30 minutes or so. Then they left. We told them we wanted three weeks with just our new little family. Then they came back for a couple days sequentially and stayed in a hotel.

OP here and this might be a good compromise. Thank you for the helpful feedback.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

Then why are you here? You asked how to set this boundary WITHOUT CAUSING A RIFT. Sorry, but you can’t. The responses here are telling you that.

Go ahead and keep them away for 4-8 weeks. I don’t care and neither does anyone here. BUT don’t come and post that your ILs are upset, miffed, or bothered by this.

I guess this begs the question why grandparents would think their wants should come before the wants of new parents.

Because it's a boundary for no reason. I'd be pro OP if the parents were abusive. My cousin did this and it was too much. She had signs on her baby that she didn't allow anyone to touch him (a full term baby born in the summer before covid was a thing). Her mom pretty much lost her mind that she couldn't touch her grandchild for 6 months.

Also, are BOTH sets of parents being given this boundary or just inlaws?

Who are you to tell OP that it’s a boundary for no reason? It’s OP’s kid, she (and her spouse) gets to set the rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here - what responses! I think asking 1-2 months is not unreasonable, given the massive adjustment we’ll be going through. The rules apply across the board. And for everyone saying “have a heart, let them come at 2-3 weeks” - a month is four weeks. Is it really that big of a difference?

I’ve read several articles advocating waiting at least a month before allowing strangers around. I’m not interested in being immediately post-partum, bleeding, leaking milk/breastfeeding etc with my in-laws around. At least not until I get the hang of it. Is this really cruel, ridiculous, and selfish? I just don’t get these responses.

It is not. Do what you want. My biggest regrets with my children were from being pressured into things I didn't want to do by shellfish family members. They'll be fine.