Annie's Mailbox: Grandparents and extended family

[cereta]

Dear Annie: I am the step-grandmother of a 7-year-old whom I consider my granddaughter. "Missy" does not have a relationship with her father (my husband's son), although we have been actively involved with her since she was an infant. Missy's mother subsequently had another child, now 3, with someone else.

We recently were informed that Missy cannot visit us on weekends without her little brother. According to their mother, he "cries all weekend when his big sister is gone."

My husband and I feel this woman is simply seeking a babysitter for the weekends.
We have resorted to elaborate reasons why we cannot have both kids, but I'm afraid we're running out of excuses. We have not seen Missy for weeks now, but my husband refuses to take the 3-year-old. What should we do? — Perplexed

Dear Perplexed: You may be right that Missy's mother is looking for free babysitting, but the price of saying no is rather steep. She seems perfectly willing to keep her away until you acquiesce, so you might reconsider and "adopt" the 3-year-old, as well. Missy might appreciate it. You also could try working out an arrangement that doesn't involve weekends, perhaps taking Missy out for ice cream on Wednesdays or picking her up from school. It wouldn't be the same, but at least you would remain in regular contact.

If there is any way to encourage your stepson to be more involved in his child's life, that would be a positive move. And also look into grandparents' rights in your state.

Comments

[cereta]

You know, I read entries like this, and I think of sitting at my oldest niece's First Communion, listening to her talk to my mom about helping about with my brother's daughter when my brother and his wife (both Marines) were deployed and my mom would have their daughter. My niece's father wasn't with my sister any more; in fact, my sister was marrying another man whose parents treated my niece very much like a granddaughter. But it was something his mom thought would be nice, letting my niece spend some time with her cousin.

I dunno. Maybe mom is looking for a free babysitter here, but so what? Maybe the little boy doesn't have loving grandparents in his life. Do you know what it's like at three - hell, at thirteen - to be completely ignored like that? I honestly don't get why on a granparent/aunt/uncle level, you can't open your heart to extra kids. It's one thing if you don't have access to them (I have a step-niece I've never met because her dad has sole custody), but if they're there, geez. He's a kid who needs love. Grandma here obviously isn't hung up on biology. What's her problem?

I suppose you could argue they're taking a risk getting invested in a child they have no legal right to, but as this letter demonstrates, they're already there. Not a lot of states have grandparents' visitation rights.

[amadi]

There is a practical consideration. Being grandparents, it's likely these folks are older, and a 3 year old is miles from a 7 year old in terms of physical effort. Some 3 year olds, especially boys, aren't even fully potty trained yet. It may be outside of the scope of their capability to take a toddler for an entire weekend, especially along with the older child.

There's also a manipulation issue here that needs to be examined. Letter writer says mom says the 3 year old cries all weekend when "Missy" is with her grandparents. But those weekends could be special weekends for mom and little brother to do their own thing, or when little brother goes to visit with his father (who I'm reading between lines to assume isn't around) or either set of his actual grandparents or other family members.

3 year olds do cry, in any case, when their routines are shaken up or when don't get their way. That's not necessarily a reason to give them whatever they want, or to make their whims the responsibility of a third party. It's mom's issue to deal with, not Missy's grandparents. They're not responsible for making Missy's mom's child's weekend better. Mom is responsible, having chosen to have a blended family, for teaching little brother that sometimes Missy will be with her grandma and grandpa (and hopefully in future, her daddy) sometimes and that's special time for her and he shouldn't be selfish and expect her to skip that time to be with him.

[maire]

I agree with the practical consideration bit, but Missy's mom has been pretty damn ensuring that her ex's dad gets to have a relationship with his granddaughter. This letter sounds really rather meanspirited to me.

[amadi]

Damn ensuring right up until she didn't get her way about them taking the kid they have no relationship with so she could get weekends off...

[cereta]

Well, they were able to take care of a 3-year-old 4 years ago. The letter doesn't mention anything about inability to take care of him, and while it's possible their health has shifted dramatically over four years, I'm skeptical. And three is not really a toddler. Demanding of time and energy, but they've managed that with Missy.

I, too, am reading between the lines to assume the little boy is probably not suffering a surfeit of love and attention from his father's family. If he is, then fine, Missy deserves her alone time with her grandparents. But if he's not, then it's frankly mean-spirited of the husband to draw such a hard line. They can have some times with just Missy, but would it be such a hard thing to open their hearts to another child? Especially when Step-grandma has already been able to open her heart to a child not her biological grandchild?

[amadi]

They were able to take care of one 3 year old several years ago, but two kids is considerably more work. And the ratio of self-sufficiency to capacity to break stuff is highly skewed in a 3 year old. I had one visiting my house earlier this week; his mother and 12 year old sister were here too and by the time they were gone I found myself exhausted thanks to his antics.

In any case, I'm not sure why it's mean-spirited to say "you know, we don't have an obligation to this boy or a bond with him either" and to act accordingly. Opening one's heart is a different proposition than opening one's home, one's energy stores and one's pocketbook.

That their son's babymama's second babydaddy and his kin seem to be absent is sad, but that still doesn't make little brother their problem.

[cereta]

That their son's babymama's second babydaddy and his kin seem to be absent is sad, but that still doesn't make little brother their problem.

I guess that right there is the attitude I can't wrap my head around: that the kid is a "problem" instead of someone to enjoy and love. I could see reluctance to engage on a parenting level, but as grandparents, or aunts, or uncles? It doesn't sound like these two are overwhelmed with loving family, either, frankly, or that husband's son is likely to suddenly provide them with a passel of grandkids. No one asking them to raise him. They're asking him to take him once in a while.

And for what they get back for that? Man, that's a steal.

[recessional]

This sounds like the tip of a festering family-resentment iceberg, and like something that's only partly about what it's supposedly about. What on earth is the mother getting out of this? It takes a lot of cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face to ruin your free babysitting for ONE kid after it's been made clear that you can't get it for two, even if we're attributing to her the worst of motives. I've certainly met people that spiteful, but if so, that points to a lot of, well, potential toxicity in the relationship between grandparents and mother, and this is reinforced for me by the fact that the grandmother refers to the mother as "this woman" - that's a pretty nasty-loaded way to refer to the mother of your grandchild.

Which makes me wonder WHY Missy has no contact with her bio-dad, and what extra tensions are going on there, and what family conflict there was about Missy's mom having another kid at all. And if such issues exist, who's doing more or less to maintain them.

It just feels like this is the battle-ground issue where all the OTHER issues/resentments/whatever of this family have come to the surface.

[zaracat]

I know this is a very old thread, but I'm new here and slowly working my way through the posts and this one really stood out to me.

Nobody seems to be taking Missy's mother at her word when she says that the little brother is completely miserable when separated from his big sister on weekends. From what the letter says, this is a recent thing.

Maybe this is a situation of the mother trying to get free babysitting. Or maybe there's some additional stress in the kids' lives at the moment that's making them more clingy, and the mother is simply acting in her kids' best interests by keeping them together on weekends. Of course, no-one will ever know unless they ask. It bothers me that the LW and her husband seem to have jumped straight to assuming the worst motive for the mother and to talking about who owes what to whom and inventing "elaborate reasons" (ie lies) to avoid hosting the brother, without there being any mention of openly discussing their concerns with Missy's mother with the aim of coming up with an *actual solution*.

I get that the grandparents don't "owe" Missy's brother anything, and that for many reasons they may not be able to manage two children, but the fact that they're so focused on what THEY want out of this situation and what the children might want or need doesn't even rate a mention leaves me feeling a bit uncomfortable. As does the sign-off "perplexed" - it has a bit of that vibe of estranged parents and grandparents on internet forums who "just don't understand why" they're in that position.

Eh, maybe that's a stretch and I'm just projecting, but this whole letter seems ever so slightly off, like there's a lot more to the story and they're not really asking for advice so much as validation.

[minoanmiss]

Heh, I was looking through Agonyaunt for a couple of posts, and found your comment, and think you are absolutely right.