Woman Is 'So Done' with Mother-in-Law After 'Constant Boundary Stomping': 'It Began When I Got Pregnant'
A woman says her mother-in-law "ruined" her relationship with her — and it began when she got pregnant.
In a post shared to Reddit, she writes: "I used to love spending time with her. It was like having a bonus mom. We would hang out, grab coffee, call or text each day. Nowadays, I just feel annoyed when her number pops up or when she comes over."
"It began when I got pregnant. Surprise, surprise. It started with her buying us furniture for the baby, despite me clearly asking her to postpone the purchases for just a few days until I've had time to review the items, like we had always done in the past," she continues.
But the mother-in-law bought the items behind her back and made her feel guilty for not wanting them.
"She also tried convincing us she spent a week researching it all, for her dear grandson deserves only the best," she adds. "It was only a few months later when we told her parts of it were missing that she admitted she never even saw the furniture prior to blindly purchasing it at the store because it was on discount."
Once her son was born, she adds, "a year of constant boundary stomping" began.
"She constantly gives unsolicited advice. She thinks her way of doing things must be the only correct way, as if nothing has changed in the past 30 years since she had a baby," she writes. "If I dare to point out certain things have changed, she gets offended and defensive, like I insulted her parenting choices by not blindly following her word."
Th situation escalated when her mother-in-law went behind her back and tried to sign up her son to a childcare facility without consulting her or her husband.
While the mother-in-law apologized, she later brushed off the situation, and now the woman writes that she is "so done."
Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories.
Others on Reddit are weighing in on the situation, with many urging the woman to take a step back from her mother-in-law.
"I can't believe anyone would be that mental to send private documents and sign a grandchild up for childcare. Firstly why does she have access. Secondly, doesn't the school check who's the legal guardians. That's pure insanity. I hope you withdrew the fake application," writes one commenter.
Adds another: "You need to have a serious conversation with [your husband] and make it clear that under no circumstances should his mom be around the baby until she changes her behavior or agrees to respect your boundaries. You can't control her, but you can control how you respond and it starts with drawing a hard line."
Read the original article on People
Solve the daily Crossword
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mother-in-Law Says Grandmas 'Can Do What They Want.' Mom Says She Won't Be Babysitting Anymore
After repeatedly ignoring basic rules with her newborn, one woman says her mother-in-law is no longer welcomed to babysitNEED TO KNOW A mom set clear rules for her newborn, but her mother-in-law had other ideas A simple request turned into a months-long power struggle Now, she's drawing a line, and not everyone in the family agreesA woman looks to the Reddit community for advice following a tense fallout with her mother-in-law over a series of ignored boundaries with her newborn daughter. In a heartfelt post titled 'AITA for not allowing my MIL to babysit anymore?' she shares the details of a situation that has left her feeling disrespected and unheard. 'From the moment my baby was born, I was very clear about the basic boundaries I had with the baby,' the new mom writes. Her requests were simple: no kissing, wash hands before touching the baby and ask before taking the baby from her arms. She describes how she and her husband were living with his mother shortly after their baby girl was born, hoping for some extra support. But instead of feeling supported, she says, her boundaries were crossed 'within the first week after the baby was born.' Despite clearly explaining her expectations, she says her mother-in-law refused to listen. 'She responded with 'I'm the grandma and grandmas can do what they want,' ' the mom reveals, adding that this attitude only continued. She notes that she and her husband both spoke to his mother multiple times, attempting to reinforce the importance of their rules. But instead of improving, the situation escalated as her MIL 'completely disregarded our rules and continued to [ignore] them.' In addition to boundary violations, she says her mother-in-law started referring to the baby in a way that made her deeply uncomfortable. 'She also began to call our child 'her child,' ' she writes, explaining that her MIL would reach for the baby, saying, 'Give me my child.' These moments were not taken lightly by the new mom, who says the behavior 'made me very uncomfortable.' She also shares that each time she and her husband addressed the issue, it 'would continue to become defensive and start big arguments.' Feeling overwhelmed and increasingly isolated, the couple decided to make a major change. 'After our baby turned 2 months old, we moved out of state due to my husband's military assignment,' she explains. But the space didn't end the tension. Soon after the move, her MIL began making plans to visit and babysit, which led to the mom putting her foot down. 'I've told her and my husband that I don't feel comfortable with her babysitting anymore,' she says. Her reasoning was clear: 'Until she can respect the rules and boundaries I've had in place and until she can respect me as a mother, I no longer want her in my home.' Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. The Reddit post ends with a direct question to the community: 'So, AITA for saying these things?' And the comments come pouring in with strong support for her stance. One commenter writes, 'This is just a sign of much worse to come,' warning her not to let her mother-in-law take away precious memories from this time in her life. 'Don't let her rob you of what's supposed to be happy times that you'll never get back.' Another user echoes the sentiment and applauds her strength in taking a stand. 'Not overreacting,' they say. 'I think it's good you are setting these boundaries now.' Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Woman's Friends Needed a Place to Stay. She Gave Them 1 Month, and Now They're Pushing Back
A woman offers two friends a place to stay while they search for housing but sets a one-month limit due to past issuesNEED TO KNOW A woman offers two friends temporary housing, but limits their stay to just one month The friends react with resentment, despite having no clear plan for housing themselves Tensions rise as past issues come to light, and now the poster is wondering if she's wrong for asserting her boundariesA woman seeks advice from the Reddit community following a difficult situation involving two longtime friends who may be overstaying their welcome. After living in a European country for four years, she finds herself navigating the delicate balance between offering help and protecting her own space. Her friends, a couple who moved from their home country to pursue master's degrees, are at risk of becoming temporarily homeless. 'They told me they would have nowhere to go,' she writes in her post, recalling how they reached out just 10 days before their student dorm contract was due to expire. Wanting to help, she offers them a place to stay but draws a firm boundary. 'I offered they could stay with me but only for 1 month,' she shares, explaining that her apartment has a small layout and that she values her home as a quiet space. It quickly becomes clear that the couple isn't entirely comfortable with the boundary. 'They seemed a bit resentful,' she says. 'They said there was no need for me to write this in detail upfront and that they were already planning to stay just a few weeks.' But she isn't convinced, especially given their history of letting things 'drag out.' Her concern is rooted in experience — she previously hosted them for just over a week and says things quickly became stressful. 'By day 3 I was stressed,' she writes, describing how the couple would smoke weed daily and spend hours watching TV while she tried to work remotely. The male friend, in particular, seemed unmotivated and unstable. 'He used to drink 3 cans of high alcohol beer every day for months,' she shares. She also brings up a moment that stuck with her — when he avoided giving a school presentation by lying to his professor. 'He told his professor he was back in his home country so he could do it online,' she explains, adding that more recently, he delayed a job interview by two weeks after experiencing a panic attack. To her, these aren't isolated incidents but signs of a bigger problem. 'There is a pattern of poor planning,' she says, pointing out how the couple came to the country without securing housing ahead of time. The girlfriend, too, has put her in uncomfortable positions. 'She once asked to register at mine just on paper which could have caused me legal trouble,' the woman writes, expressing how deeply it bothered her. And when the male friend did manage to find a job delivering food, she says he deliberately avoided taking orders. 'He chose to hang out in low demand areas so he wouldn't get orders and still collected pay until he was fired,' she shares. Given all this, she feels her one-month offer is more than fair. 'I feel like I've been clear and reasonable,' she says. Beyond offering temporary shelter, she's also willing to store their belongings afterward if needed. What's more, she emphasizes that the couple has other options. 'They also have other friends in the city and the girlfriend's brother lives an hour away so it's not like they would be on the street,' she explains. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Despite her generosity, she still fears they may try to extend their stay past the agreed limit. 'I am not willing to compromise my mental health and home environment,' she writes. When her friends accuse her of being too strict, she sees it differently. 'I see this as me setting healthy boundaries,' she explains, knowing that her well-being depends on it. In the comment section, readers rally behind her. 'Only someone who planned on taking advantage of you for a long period would have a problem with this,' one commenter writes, firmly siding with the poster. Another reader even raises legal concerns. 'In the states someone can establish tenancy rights after 30 days,' they warn. 'If things go south you'll have to evict them.' Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
How We Avoided World War III
The dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima 80 years ago this week is something to commemorate but not celebrate. It was also the beginning of a new era: the Atomic Age. Growing up in the latter stages of the Cold War, my generation didn't live with the sense of menace and the Bert the Turtle duck-and-cover drills baby boomers endured. But both cohorts were blessed by the absence of a large-scale war, conventional or nuclear, between the US and the Soviet Union. Which brings up an 80-year-old question: Did the development of atomic weapons keep the peace during the Cold War? And if so, what accounts for this paradoxical result? The simple answer is the unsatisfying one: It's complicated.
