Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not always the same dynamic. My brother's wife definitely prevents my parents from having much of a relationship with their kids. They live 20 minutes apart and see each other maybe 4 times a year. And there's no way to prove this online, but my parents are easy and pleasant to be around. I routinely call them to fly across the country to babysit for me for weeks and they do it, including dishes, yard work, etc. My SIL just doesn't want to facilitate a relationship for reasons unknown and my brother is passive and conflict-averse to the point of being practically dead. Obviously that's on him, but if he were steering the ship my parents would definitely get their wish to babysit now and then or get together more than once a quarter.

I'll repeat again that's ultimately still a son/brother problem because he is the one choosing not to speak up and say anything to change the situation. Him being a passive person doesn't give you guys a pass to push the blame off to the DIL/SIL he is an adult with his own agency and he is choosing to be passive and not speak up. That shows if he really wanted a relationship with you guys he would make it happen. He is not a child who has to listen to mom and dad. You guys with these responses are completely missing the OP's point.

His responsibility for his passivity does not absolve her of the responsibility for her agency and actions. The two things can coexist. And my parents tried for a long time to facilitate a relationship through my brother (which is what people are supposed to do! go through their own relative) and she acted like they were trying to go behind her back or usurp her ability to control her family calendar. This isn't my direct problem - we don't bother trying to have a relationship since it's such a one way street and are cordial but have no meaningful connection. But I feel bad for my parents, who would like to have a relationship with their grandkids who live in the same city and barely know them through no fault of their own. I'm generally pro-DIL, but to pretend that the dynamic is always such that they are above reproach is absurd.

She is above reproach because if your brother wanted to truly have a relationship with you guys he is a grown man and wouldn't allow his wife to stop that. It isn't her responsibility to be loyal to you guys or to ensure that the family relationship is continued. Also you never know even if wife wasn't around who is to say your brother would choose to have a relationship with you guys? There could be other factors going on in his mind that you don't know about.

It just boggles my mind that people blame the 3rd party instead of their actual relative the one who owes them the loyalty not the in law who doesn't owe them jack shit. Then again this is the same story old as time where it's easier to blame the outsider the non blood relative that you didn't grow up with then to admit it might be your family member that you grow up with that doesn't want the relationship or has the flaws.

Yeah, that's not what's happening here. Nobody thinks my brother is blameless, and as I said I don't have a meaningful relationship with either of them because it's not worth my time. We text a couple of times a year and they'll come over for an hour when we're visiting my parents. I imagine as we get older all of that will gradually cease and our kids won't know each other at all, which will have been their choice. But in this case she does, in fact, actively obstruct get togethers - that is a choice that she is making. Nobody is asking her to be responsible for the relationship between my parents and her kids, just not to go out of her way to say no to every request that comes through my brother. And of course your ILs owe you some loyalty - they are still family even if not by birth. Grandparents have no rights, nor should they, but to actively prevent a relationship between grandkids and grandparents for no reason is not normal or kind.

Ok but again your brother is ultimately the one deciding to go along with his wife's decision to not have a relationship with you guys. He isn't speaking up and saying no honey I want to see my family. A grown man should be able to speak up for himself and that's a brother problem if he can't do that not a SIL problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not always the same dynamic. My brother's wife definitely prevents my parents from having much of a relationship with their kids. They live 20 minutes apart and see each other maybe 4 times a year. And there's no way to prove this online, but my parents are easy and pleasant to be around. I routinely call them to fly across the country to babysit for me for weeks and they do it, including dishes, yard work, etc. My SIL just doesn't want to facilitate a relationship for reasons unknown and my brother is passive and conflict-averse to the point of being practically dead. Obviously that's on him, but if he were steering the ship my parents would definitely get their wish to babysit now and then or get together more than once a quarter.

I'll repeat again that's ultimately still a son/brother problem because he is the one choosing not to speak up and say anything to change the situation. Him being a passive person doesn't give you guys a pass to push the blame off to the DIL/SIL he is an adult with his own agency and he is choosing to be passive and not speak up. That shows if he really wanted a relationship with you guys he would make it happen. He is not a child who has to listen to mom and dad. You guys with these responses are completely missing the OP's point.

His responsibility for his passivity does not absolve her of the responsibility for her agency and actions. The two things can coexist. And my parents tried for a long time to facilitate a relationship through my brother (which is what people are supposed to do! go through their own relative) and she acted like they were trying to go behind her back or usurp her ability to control her family calendar. This isn't my direct problem - we don't bother trying to have a relationship since it's such a one way street and are cordial but have no meaningful connection. But I feel bad for my parents, who would like to have a relationship with their grandkids who live in the same city and barely know them through no fault of their own. I'm generally pro-DIL, but to pretend that the dynamic is always such that they are above reproach is absurd.

Anonymous wrote:It's not always the same dynamic. My brother's wife definitely prevents my parents from having much of a relationship with their kids. They live 20 minutes apart and see each other maybe 4 times a year. And there's no way to prove this online, but my parents are easy and pleasant to be around. I routinely call them to fly across the country to babysit for me for weeks and they do it, including dishes, yard work, etc. My SIL just doesn't want to facilitate a relationship for reasons unknown and my brother is passive and conflict-averse to the point of being practically dead. Obviously that's on him, but if he were steering the ship my parents would definitely get their wish to babysit now and then or get together more than once a quarter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My MIL called me today to hassle me about something related to my kids.

My husband was, at that very moment, AT HER HOUSE.

I wouldn’t have answered.

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you in 90% of cases but sometimes it is the DIL/SIL who is actively trying to reduce contact or family vacation time. Like the son/brother will be on the phone and she’ll pull him away for something trivial (which is okay if it’s occasional, but not if it’s constant). Or the son/brother wants to visit, but she’s “in charge” of the social and vacation calendar and there’s no room to see the ILs. Again this is not common but it is true for some families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not always the same dynamic. My brother's wife definitely prevents my parents from having much of a relationship with their kids. They live 20 minutes apart and see each other maybe 4 times a year. And there's no way to prove this online, but my parents are easy and pleasant to be around. I routinely call them to fly across the country to babysit for me for weeks and they do it, including dishes, yard work, etc. My SIL just doesn't want to facilitate a relationship for reasons unknown and my brother is passive and conflict-averse to the point of being practically dead. Obviously that's on him, but if he were steering the ship my parents would definitely get their wish to babysit now and then or get together more than once a quarter.

I'll repeat again that's ultimately still a son/brother problem because he is the one choosing not to speak up and say anything to change the situation. Him being a passive person doesn't give you guys a pass to push the blame off to the DIL/SIL he is an adult with his own agency and he is choosing to be passive and not speak up. That shows if he really wanted a relationship with you guys he would make it happen. He is not a child who has to listen to mom and dad. You guys with these responses are completely missing the OP's point.

His responsibility for his passivity does not absolve her of the responsibility for her agency and actions. The two things can coexist. And my parents tried for a long time to facilitate a relationship through my brother (which is what people are supposed to do! go through their own relative) and she acted like they were trying to go behind her back or usurp her ability to control her family calendar. This isn't my direct problem - we don't bother trying to have a relationship since it's such a one way street and are cordial but have no meaningful connection. But I feel bad for my parents, who would like to have a relationship with their grandkids who live in the same city and barely know them through no fault of their own. I'm generally pro-DIL, but to pretend that the dynamic is always such that they are above reproach is absurd.

She is above reproach because if your brother wanted to truly have a relationship with you guys he is a grown man and wouldn't allow his wife to stop that. It isn't her responsibility to be loyal to you guys or to ensure that the family relationship is continued. Also you never know even if wife wasn't around who is to say your brother would choose to have a relationship with you guys? There could be other factors going on in his mind that you don't know about.

It just boggles my mind that people blame the 3rd party instead of their actual relative the one who owes them the loyalty not the in law who doesn't owe them jack shit. Then again this is the same story old as time where it's easier to blame the outsider the non blood relative that you didn't grow up with then to admit it might be your family member that you grow up with that doesn't want the relationship or has the flaws.

Yeah, that's not what's happening here. Nobody thinks my brother is blameless, and as I said I don't have a meaningful relationship with either of them because it's not worth my time. We text a couple of times a year and they'll come over for an hour when we're visiting my parents. I imagine as we get older all of that will gradually cease and our kids won't know each other at all, which will have been their choice. But in this case she does, in fact, actively obstruct get togethers - that is a choice that she is making. Nobody is asking her to be responsible for the relationship between my parents and her kids, just not to go out of her way to say no to every request that comes through my brother. And of course your ILs owe you some loyalty - they are still family even if not by birth. Grandparents have no rights, nor should they, but to actively prevent a relationship between grandkids and grandparents for no reason is not normal or kind.

Anonymous wrote:So, not all SIL's are your brother's wife. I just have to point this out as someone who has posted about my SIL and gotten the feedback that I should be talking to my brother. Since my SIL is my husband's sister, that's not really the solution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My MIL called me today to hassle me about something related to my kids.

My husband was, at that very moment, AT HER HOUSE.

I wouldn’t have answered.

I didn’t know why she was calling or that he was there, at that moment.

Still I never answer my MIL. I’m not mean, just don’t see a reason to engage unnecessarily.

You aren’t the judge of if you’re mean. That’s for others to decide.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not always the same dynamic. My brother's wife definitely prevents my parents from having much of a relationship with their kids. They live 20 minutes apart and see each other maybe 4 times a year. And there's no way to prove this online, but my parents are easy and pleasant to be around. I routinely call them to fly across the country to babysit for me for weeks and they do it, including dishes, yard work, etc. My SIL just doesn't want to facilitate a relationship for reasons unknown and my brother is passive and conflict-averse to the point of being practically dead. Obviously that's on him, but if he were steering the ship my parents would definitely get their wish to babysit now and then or get together more than once a quarter.

I'll repeat again that's ultimately still a son/brother problem because he is the one choosing not to speak up and say anything to change the situation. Him being a passive person doesn't give you guys a pass to push the blame off to the DIL/SIL he is an adult with his own agency and he is choosing to be passive and not speak up. That shows if he really wanted a relationship with you guys he would make it happen. He is not a child who has to listen to mom and dad. You guys with these responses are completely missing the OP's point.

His responsibility for his passivity does not absolve her of the responsibility for her agency and actions. The two things can coexist. And my parents tried for a long time to facilitate a relationship through my brother (which is what people are supposed to do! go through their own relative) and she acted like they were trying to go behind her back or usurp her ability to control her family calendar. This isn't my direct problem - we don't bother trying to have a relationship since it's such a one way street and are cordial but have no meaningful connection. But I feel bad for my parents, who would like to have a relationship with their grandkids who live in the same city and barely know them through no fault of their own. I'm generally pro-DIL, but to pretend that the dynamic is always such that they are above reproach is absurd.

She is above reproach because if your brother wanted to truly have a relationship with you guys he is a grown man and wouldn't allow his wife to stop that. It isn't her responsibility to be loyal to you guys or to ensure that the family relationship is continued. Also you never know even if wife wasn't around who is to say your brother would choose to have a relationship with you guys? There could be other factors going on in his mind that you don't know about.

It just boggles my mind that people blame the 3rd party instead of their actual relative the one who owes them the loyalty not the in law who doesn't owe them jack shit. Then again this is the same story old as time where it's easier to blame the outsider the non blood relative that you didn't grow up with then to admit it might be your family member that you grow up with that doesn't want the relationship or has the flaws.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My MIL called me today to hassle me about something related to my kids.

My husband was, at that very moment, AT HER HOUSE.

I wouldn’t have answered.

I didn’t know why she was calling or that he was there, at that moment.

Still I never answer my MIL. I’m not mean, just don’t see a reason to engage unnecessarily.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not always the same dynamic. My brother's wife definitely prevents my parents from having much of a relationship with their kids. They live 20 minutes apart and see each other maybe 4 times a year. And there's no way to prove this online, but my parents are easy and pleasant to be around. I routinely call them to fly across the country to babysit for me for weeks and they do it, including dishes, yard work, etc. My SIL just doesn't want to facilitate a relationship for reasons unknown and my brother is passive and conflict-averse to the point of being practically dead. Obviously that's on him, but if he were steering the ship my parents would definitely get their wish to babysit now and then or get together more than once a quarter.

I'll repeat again that's ultimately still a son/brother problem because he is the one choosing not to speak up and say anything to change the situation. Him being a passive person doesn't give you guys a pass to push the blame off to the DIL/SIL he is an adult with his own agency and he is choosing to be passive and not speak up. That shows if he really wanted a relationship with you guys he would make it happen. He is not a child who has to listen to mom and dad. You guys with these responses are completely missing the OP's point.

His responsibility for his passivity does not absolve her of the responsibility for her agency and actions. The two things can coexist. And my parents tried for a long time to facilitate a relationship through my brother (which is what people are supposed to do! go through their own relative) and she acted like they were trying to go behind her back or usurp her ability to control her family calendar. This isn't my direct problem - we don't bother trying to have a relationship since it's such a one way street and are cordial but have no meaningful connection. But I feel bad for my parents, who would like to have a relationship with their grandkids who live in the same city and barely know them through no fault of their own. I'm generally pro-DIL, but to pretend that the dynamic is always such that they are above reproach is absurd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My MIL called me today to hassle me about something related to my kids.

My husband was, at that very moment, AT HER HOUSE.

I wouldn’t have answered.

I didn’t know why she was calling or that he was there, at that moment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not always the same dynamic. My brother's wife definitely prevents my parents from having much of a relationship with their kids. They live 20 minutes apart and see each other maybe 4 times a year. And there's no way to prove this online, but my parents are easy and pleasant to be around. I routinely call them to fly across the country to babysit for me for weeks and they do it, including dishes, yard work, etc. My SIL just doesn't want to facilitate a relationship for reasons unknown and my brother is passive and conflict-averse to the point of being practically dead. Obviously that's on him, but if he were steering the ship my parents would definitely get their wish to babysit now and then or get together more than once a quarter.

I'll repeat again that's ultimately still a son/brother problem because he is the one choosing not to speak up and say anything to change the situation. Him being a passive person doesn't give you guys a pass to push the blame off to the DIL/SIL he is an adult with his own agency and he is choosing to be passive and not speak up. That shows if he really wanted a relationship with you guys he would make it happen. He is not a child who has to listen to mom and dad. You guys with these responses are completely missing the OP's point.

Anonymous wrote:It's not always the same dynamic. My brother's wife definitely prevents my parents from having much of a relationship with their kids. They live 20 minutes apart and see each other maybe 4 times a year. And there's no way to prove this online, but my parents are easy and pleasant to be around. I routinely call them to fly across the country to babysit for me for weeks and they do it, including dishes, yard work, etc. My SIL just doesn't want to facilitate a relationship for reasons unknown and my brother is passive and conflict-averse to the point of being practically dead. Obviously that's on him, but if he were steering the ship my parents would definitely get their wish to babysit now and then or get together more than once a quarter.