PP from above here.

These IL'S aren't likely to make any changes based on OP's request. It seems they enjoy being in control or are just clueless. I wouldn't make much of an issue of it. Stay home with the baby and say that you will join them when the baby can manage on their schedule. Maybe her dh will clue in, maybe he won't.

"The baby can't keep your schedule right now. It's simpler to stay home and do our own thing."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. Good to know I'm the unreasonable one. God I hate being an inlaw

You are unreasonable. In your house then you may ask guests if they want to get up at 7 as so they can have the extraordinarily unparalleled pleasure of having breakfast with you and your kid. Such Joy watching an infant eat! In my house, however, you do not get to tell me that I will be on your schedule. Get up and feed your kid and shut up about other people getting up when they feel like getting up. Personally, if I were your MIL, I would pay for a hotel for you.

The op isn't asking the in laws to switch their schedule. Hence why she's always eating alone. She's venting that they are annoyed that she doesn't wait 2 hours after her baby wakes up to feed him!

I would see this as a unique experience that will change as baby gets older. For now--enjoy the quiet time while they're out and watch Netflix or read a good book.

Wrong - reread the ops post. She explicitly asks - is it unreasonable of them to ask them to eat breakfast at eight, lunch at noon, and dinner at five.

NP who wants to clarify ... OP asks if it is unreasonable but OP shows no willingness to be flexible. OP also shows no willingness to compromise. It sounds like this is one or two days out of a year. OP could try to be gracious but it doesn't sound like she wants to try.

OP's inlaws are the ones not being "gracious" -- they're the ones planning dinner after bedtime every night! OP would be fine with brunch at 11, which is totally reasonable. Read the entire post -- these inlaws have always insisted on setting the schedule.

So OP should stay home. Tell them she will join them again when their schedule works.

Here's what: if OP "should stay home," then baby should stay home, too. So no grandbaby visits for you, ILs. Want to whine about it? Take it up with the SON YOU RAISED, and be more flexible.

Yes, that would be part of staying home. If seeing their grandchild matters they may make some changes without OP saying much.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So they eat all their meals out? And you want to eat out but are stuck at home with a sleeping child? Will your baby not sleep in the car seat? It is not realistic to expect them to change their schedule on account of a baby. How about you and your DH swap duties, you go for brunch one day, he stays home, and he goes out for dinner, the next day you go out for dinner, and he stays home with the baby.

Not the OP, but I would not want to go out to eat with my ILs while my husband stayed home. I would try to push for one meal to be more baby-friendly. See if they can't move brunch later, and then see if you can't be more flexible on dinnertime.

Also, not everybody is like you. While my FIL can be a nightmare, he can also be a great guy and him and I love going out to eat, just us. More so than my DH likes to go with him. DH does not care for his Dad's rigidity in having this and that food at this exact time, and both FIL and I love, love food and I don't mind FIL's demands. As I am from Europe, he loved introducing me to some restaurants in his home town that he loves, he loved introducing me to Vietnamese food he used to eat while a marine overseas. I love it. This is something that we share and enjoy doing together.
OP's post sounds like she would enjoy it too without her DH. She is their DIL and that doesn't mean they wouldn't enjoy her company without their son. I am also aware that FIL loves spending time with his son, one on one, and even when kids were young and difficult, I made sure that they could have that time without me being Ms. Scrooge. I bet you if OP sent her DH with the baby and she stays home while they are visiting, her DH would have no problem taking the baby and the car seat to a restaurant and handling some crankiness, or he might even just hand the baby to his mom and say, here is the cranky baby because you have to eat at 11.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So they eat all their meals out? And you want to eat out but are stuck at home with a sleeping child? Will your baby not sleep in the car seat? It is not realistic to expect them to change their schedule on account of a baby. How about you and your DH swap duties, you go for brunch one day, he stays home, and he goes out for dinner, the next day you go out for dinner, and he stays home with the baby.

Not the OP, but I would not want to go out to eat with my ILs while my husband stayed home. I would try to push for one meal to be more baby-friendly. See if they can't move brunch later, and then see if you can't be more flexible on dinnertime.

Flexibility is a give and take, and who is to say baby won't fall asleep on the ride to the restaurant even if it is not nap time? Quite frankly, the fact that OP and you think that babies can't have a little change in routine and life is telling. OP states that her baby is the one with the schedule, not her. That is fine, but if that baby truly has the exact schedule, won't that baby sleep in the car seat in the restaurant too? Isn't that what baby schedule means, that this baby will sleep at this exact time, no matter where and what is happening? This is OP's inflexibility showing, not her baby's. This is very common in new mothers, everything is a life and death and must be done just so. I bet you with the second child, she will learn to loosen up. Also, having a bit cranky baby for a few days never killed the baby or the mom. OP wants to go out and eat, OP should adjust. Never before were elderly made to endure baby and mommy schedules before recent decades. OP should think of it in same terms her ILS are thinking, they are inflexible and she is inflexible, the things is that elderly had their flexibility and accommodating their ILS and parents and now it is her turn, and she doesn't know this yet, but she will learn to be more flexible until she is elderly and becomes just like her ILS. And her baby will go back to the schedule when they are back home. And if ILS are also paying, OP should suck it up.

Anonymous wrote:So they eat all their meals out? And you want to eat out but are stuck at home with a sleeping child? Will your baby not sleep in the car seat? It is not realistic to expect them to change their schedule on account of a baby. How about you and your DH swap duties, you go for brunch one day, he stays home, and he goes out for dinner, the next day you go out for dinner, and he stays home with the baby.

Not the OP, but I would not want to go out to eat with my ILs while my husband stayed home. I would try to push for one meal to be more baby-friendly. See if they can't move brunch later, and then see if you can't be more flexible on dinnertime.

So they eat all their meals out? And you want to eat out but are stuck at home with a sleeping child? Will your baby not sleep in the car seat? It is not realistic to expect them to change their schedule on account of a baby. How about you and your DH swap duties, you go for brunch one day, he stays home, and he goes out for dinner, the next day you go out for dinner, and he stays home with the baby.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. Good to know I'm the unreasonable one. God I hate being an inlaw

You are unreasonable. In your house then you may ask guests if they want to get up at 7 as so they can have the extraordinarily unparalleled pleasure of having breakfast with you and your kid. Such Joy watching an infant eat! In my house, however, you do not get to tell me that I will be on your schedule. Get up and feed your kid and shut up about other people getting up when they feel like getting up. Personally, if I were your MIL, I would pay for a hotel for you.

The op isn't asking the in laws to switch their schedule. Hence why she's always eating alone. She's venting that they are annoyed that she doesn't wait 2 hours after her baby wakes up to feed him!

I would see this as a unique experience that will change as baby gets older. For now--enjoy the quiet time while they're out and watch Netflix or read a good book.

Wrong - reread the ops post. She explicitly asks - is it unreasonable of them to ask them to eat breakfast at eight, lunch at noon, and dinner at five.

NP who wants to clarify ... OP asks if it is unreasonable but OP shows no willingness to be flexible. OP also shows no willingness to compromise. It sounds like this is one or two days out of a year. OP could try to be gracious but it doesn't sound like she wants to try.

OP's inlaws are the ones not being "gracious" -- they're the ones planning dinner after bedtime every night! OP would be fine with brunch at 11, which is totally reasonable. Read the entire post -- these inlaws have always insisted on setting the schedule.

So OP should stay home. Tell them she will join them again when their schedule works.

Here's what: if OP "should stay home," then baby should stay home, too. So no grandbaby visits for you, ILs. Want to whine about it? Take it up with the SON YOU RAISED, and be more flexible.

No way. I'd send my husband and the baby, and stay home and chill out by myself. I bet if her husband is the one dealing with a cranky baby at a restaurant, or sitting at home while everyone else goes out to eat, he'll do something to fix the problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. Good to know I'm the unreasonable one. God I hate being an inlaw

You are unreasonable. In your house then you may ask guests if they want to get up at 7 as so they can have the extraordinarily unparalleled pleasure of having breakfast with you and your kid. Such Joy watching an infant eat! In my house, however, you do not get to tell me that I will be on your schedule. Get up and feed your kid and shut up about other people getting up when they feel like getting up. Personally, if I were your MIL, I would pay for a hotel for you.

The op isn't asking the in laws to switch their schedule. Hence why she's always eating alone. She's venting that they are annoyed that she doesn't wait 2 hours after her baby wakes up to feed him!

I would see this as a unique experience that will change as baby gets older. For now--enjoy the quiet time while they're out and watch Netflix or read a good book.

Wrong - reread the ops post. She explicitly asks - is it unreasonable of them to ask them to eat breakfast at eight, lunch at noon, and dinner at five.

NP who wants to clarify ... OP asks if it is unreasonable but OP shows no willingness to be flexible. OP also shows no willingness to compromise. It sounds like this is one or two days out of a year. OP could try to be gracious but it doesn't sound like she wants to try.

OP's inlaws are the ones not being "gracious" -- they're the ones planning dinner after bedtime every night! OP would be fine with brunch at 11, which is totally reasonable. Read the entire post -- these inlaws have always insisted on setting the schedule.

So OP should stay home. Tell them she will join them again when their schedule works.

Here's what: if OP "should stay home," then baby should stay home, too. So no grandbaby visits for you, ILs. Want to whine about it? Take it up with the SON YOU RAISED, and be more flexible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. Good to know I'm the unreasonable one. God I hate being an inlaw

You are unreasonable. In your house then you may ask guests if they want to get up at 7 as so they can have the extraordinarily unparalleled pleasure of having breakfast with you and your kid. Such Joy watching an infant eat! In my house, however, you do not get to tell me that I will be on your schedule. Get up and feed your kid and shut up about other people getting up when they feel like getting up. Personally, if I were your MIL, I would pay for a hotel for you.

The op isn't asking the in laws to switch their schedule. Hence why she's always eating alone. She's venting that they are annoyed that she doesn't wait 2 hours after her baby wakes up to feed him!

I would see this as a unique experience that will change as baby gets older. For now--enjoy the quiet time while they're out and watch Netflix or read a good book.

Wrong - reread the ops post. She explicitly asks - is it unreasonable of them to ask them to eat breakfast at eight, lunch at noon, and dinner at five.

NP who wants to clarify ... OP asks if it is unreasonable but OP shows no willingness to be flexible. OP also shows no willingness to compromise. It sounds like this is one or two days out of a year. OP could try to be gracious but it doesn't sound like she wants to try.

OP's inlaws are the ones not being "gracious" -- they're the ones planning dinner after bedtime every night! OP would be fine with brunch at 11, which is totally reasonable. Read the entire post -- these inlaws have always insisted on setting the schedule.

So OP should stay home. Tell them she will join them again when their schedule works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. Good to know I'm the unreasonable one. God I hate being an inlaw

You are unreasonable. In your house then you may ask guests if they want to get up at 7 as so they can have the extraordinarily unparalleled pleasure of having breakfast with you and your kid. Such Joy watching an infant eat! In my house, however, you do not get to tell me that I will be on your schedule. Get up and feed your kid and shut up about other people getting up when they feel like getting up. Personally, if I were your MIL, I would pay for a hotel for you.

The op isn't asking the in laws to switch their schedule. Hence why she's always eating alone. She's venting that they are annoyed that she doesn't wait 2 hours after her baby wakes up to feed him!

I would see this as a unique experience that will change as baby gets older. For now--enjoy the quiet time while they're out and watch Netflix or read a good book.

Wrong - reread the ops post. She explicitly asks - is it unreasonable of them to ask them to eat breakfast at eight, lunch at noon, and dinner at five.

NP who wants to clarify ... OP asks if it is unreasonable but OP shows no willingness to be flexible. OP also shows no willingness to compromise. It sounds like this is one or two days out of a year. OP could try to be gracious but it doesn't sound like she wants to try.

OP's inlaws are the ones not being "gracious" -- they're the ones planning dinner after bedtime every night! OP would be fine with brunch at 11, which is totally reasonable. Read the entire post -- these inlaws have always insisted on setting the schedule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op here. Good to know I'm the unreasonable one. God I hate being an inlaw

You are unreasonable. In your house then you may ask guests if they want to get up at 7 as so they can have the extraordinarily unparalleled pleasure of having breakfast with you and your kid. Such Joy watching an infant eat! In my house, however, you do not get to tell me that I will be on your schedule. Get up and feed your kid and shut up about other people getting up when they feel like getting up. Personally, if I were your MIL, I would pay for a hotel for you.

The op isn't asking the in laws to switch their schedule. Hence why she's always eating alone. She's venting that they are annoyed that she doesn't wait 2 hours after her baby wakes up to feed him!

I would see this as a unique experience that will change as baby gets older. For now--enjoy the quiet time while they're out and watch Netflix or read a good book.

Wrong - reread the ops post. She explicitly asks - is it unreasonable of them to ask them to eat breakfast at eight, lunch at noon, and dinner at five.

NP who wants to clarify ... OP asks if it is unreasonable but OP shows no willingness to be flexible. OP also shows no willingness to compromise. It sounds like this is one or two days out of a year. OP could try to be gracious but it doesn't sound like she wants to try.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I'm in the minority but maybe you should adjust your baby. That's what I do when I'm on vacation and we have family all over the world.

That's not how you teach your kid, from the start, that he's the center of the universes, and his quirks take precedence over everyone else's especially the elderly.

There's an art form to raising white babies.

LOL! Thanks PP, I needed a good laugh today (signed, white mom of a white boy who is trying to do better than raise a snowflake).

Oh come on. So now in order to combat white supremacy, we can't let our baby's sleep and eat on a regular schedule? Guess what - an infant just knows he's hungry or tired. He doesn't know why or attach any kind of self-reflection to it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe I'm in the minority but maybe you should adjust your baby. That's what I do when I'm on vacation and we have family all over the world.

That's not how you teach your kid, from the start, that he's the center of the universes, and his quirks take precedence over everyone else's especially the elderly.

There's an art form to raising white babies.

LOL! Thanks PP, I needed a good laugh today (signed, white mom of a white boy who is trying to do better than raise a snowflake).

Anonymous wrote:You don't adjust someone else's schedule. As PP said babies are portable. If yours isn't then maybe you need to stay home.

Sounds like you and your IL's are all a little ridiculous.

not all babies are "portable" past the newborn stage. After 2-3 months my baby wouldn't have napped long in a restaurant. Anyone who expects an infant to wake up at 9, have brunch at 11, and dinner at 7, is just dumb.

You don't adjust someone else's schedule. As PP said babies are portable. If yours isn't then maybe you need to stay home.

Sounds like you and your IL's are all a little ridiculous.