A new mother has prohibited her mother-in-law from spending any time by herself with her children after she failed her wishes and left her feeling violated. The mother explained that she had encountered some ‘cultural differences’ with her husband’s family in the past. She usually tries to remain unbothered by it unless and until it comes to her two children.
When she gave birth to her daughter, who was three months old now, she said the argument on her ear-piercing came into being and her husband’s family said that it was in their culture for the girls to get their ears pierced just when they were born.
The mother was against it. She said that he was not okay with the idea because she wanted to wait until her daughter was old enough to decide it for herself, rather than making the decision for her.
She took social media to write that every time her mother-in-law got on her nerves (pretty much from the time she was post-labor and she came to pay her a visit at the hospital) she used to tell her this reason. Her husband agreed with her wish.
The mother thought that the matter had been settled and recently left her baby with her mother-in-law while she went to take care of some business. She continued that her mother-in-law kept them out a bit later and when she came back, she saw her daughter had pierced ears.
She told her that she asked her sister-in-law (husband’s sister) to do them. She had done them for all the babies in the family and it was just like a tradition.
She was very angry and felt so disturbed. She took her kids and asked her mother-in-law to leave her place. Her husband was equally mad and they fought outside for quite a bit before she left.
The mother has now banned her mother-in-law from meeting her children alone. She also told that her husband was hemming and hawing about the decision, while his family has been left infuriated by the ban.
She asked the people on Reddit that if he had gone too far. To that one person replied that they are her children, not her mother-in-law’s. If she couldn’t respect the decision her husband and she took, then she was not suitable to babysit.
A second wrote that it was absolutely not okay for her to interfere. It was not like ‘oh she painted your kid’s nails and that washes off. It was a huge deal to put holes in the baby’s ear. A third person added that the mother-in-law went behind her back even when she clearly said that she was not up for it. If she could not be trusted with such simple instructions then she should not be allowed to watch her children.