AITAH for telling my MIL she can’t take her grandson for an entire day by herself?
I (f/30) had a baby 5 weeks ago and live long distance from my in-laws. My mother-in-law (MIL) is planning to visit next week to meet the baby and has requested to take him out for an entire day without me present.
The main issue is that the baby is exclusively b***stfed and currently refuses a bottle, only wanting to feed directly from me. He is also very attached and gets upset when I leave him for more than a few minutes.
Because of these factors, I feel it is too soon for him to be separated from me for a whole day, leading my in-laws to accuse me of being selfish and trying to keep the baby away from his grandmother. I am now questioning if my protective stance is unreasonable.
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Get the latest stories delivered to your inbox.
The original poster (OP) is facing significant conflict regarding the care and boundaries for her five-week-old, exclusively b***stfed infant during the grandmother's first visit.
The OP feels she is acting to protect her child's es**blished feeding and attachment needs, while her partner and MIL interpret this as selfish control, demanding a full day alone with the baby despite the infant's documented distress when separated.
The core debate centers on balancing the new grandmother's desire for bonding time against the very specific, non-negotiable physical and emotional needs of a five-week-old infant.
Is the OP justified in refusing the request for a full day separation based on feeding and attachment needs, or is she unfairly prioritizing her boundaries over the partner's desire for his mother to bond with the child?
Internet Users Didn’t Hold Back:
Support, sarcasm, and strong words — the replies covered it all. This one definitely got people talking.