agonyaunt | (no subject)

Dear Care and Feeding,

My in-laws are raising their three grandchildren after a family tragedy. My husband and I live close by, and while we happily don’t have or want children of our own, we do often take on the kids to give my husband’s parents a break. This cuts into what little free time we have, given our work responsibilities, but it has to be done.

My own sisters live nearby, and often complain about how my husband and I never stop to “hang out” with their own children. So they, too, can get a “break.” They are both married, but their husbands are the type to refer to “babysitting” their own kids.

I have repeatedly told them the situations are different, and it isn’t a matter of me favoring my in-laws. They still refuse to get it, and the complaints have become like a broken record. Last time, I told one of my sisters that if she needs to get her hair and nails done, her husband can give up his weekend golf game and take care of his own damned kids. She called me a selfish sister and a horrible aunt. I am getting tired of this.

I love my sisters and their kids. I have enough on my plate. How do I get through to them?

–No Free Time

Dear No Free,

While I understand your frustration, you almost certainly didn’t improve your situation with your comment to your sister. Even though you’re right, and their husbands suck! I guarantee you that she told your other sister about it immediately, and it is now exhibit 43 in their case that you’re a bad aunt.

I don’t think you’re a bad aunt. But I’m curious why you seem to be so dead-set against ever taking solo time with your nieces and nephews. Sometimes that’s a thing that aunts and uncles do because the parents need a break, but sometimes that’s just a thing you do because it’s a pleasant way to build a relationship with young people who, you hope, will be part of your life for a long time. I understand that you’re loath to reward your sisters when they’ve been so totally annoying, but what’s stopping you from taking those kids out for a burger every couple of months? Pitch an outing that’s convenient (and even fun!) for you. If your sisters make some remark about how you’re finally helping out, just say “yep!,” move on, and feel smug about taking the high road.

As for their hectoring about your in-laws: I recommend you simply stop telling your sisters when you’re taking the kids off your in-laws’ hands. What business is it of theirs? It is very, very apparent to any observer that your in-laws have a different situation than your sisters do—which is why not only your sisters, but you, should stop conflating these two separate caregiving opportunities. Instead, look at your interests and your desires to be close to all these different kids, and then see if, even as column A gets a lot of your attention, you might have a little room in your life for column B as well.

—Dan

Link

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

What LW does not understand is that she cannot get through to her sisters. The next time they accuse her of being a bad aunt or of not caring she should just say "Yes, that's right" because nothing, absolutely nothing, takes the wind out of the sails of a good tirade like the other person agreeing that they're terrible. (If it doesn't work, welp, time to hang up the phone.)

What the columnist clearly does not understand is that LW doesn't particularly want to watch Husband's niblings either. If she did then they'd be the ones raising these kids instead of the grandparents. This is clearly Husband's priority and Husband made the push here to do this because these are his relatives, and good for him! But if he didn't care, LW wouldn't either. That much is abundantly clear to me from this letter, which skips over the part where most people would say "It's difficult but satisfying" or some other pro-child platitude.

I don't love that this response spends twice as long suggesting that maybe she really IS selfish or wrong to not provide free babysitting for her ableist, selfish sisters even though they continue insulting her and acting entitled to her time and effort when her other babysitting is none of their business. I'm detecting a lot of pro-caregiving and not-ungendered bias here, like he thinks it's all just a misunderstanding caused by butthurt because LW doesn't realize that actually she should have been saying yes to regular free babysitting for her own good, or something.

Sure, at least he acknowledges it's not their business, and stopping the information flow might somewhat stop the issue (not necessarily if they live geographically close by and use Facebook or have other interconnections, however).

Mmmhm. If the sisters weren't awful *I* might suggest that LW could arrange to take Sister's kids concurrently with Husband's Niblings on the occasional outing or sleepover - but fuck it, the sisters are terrible and also, LW clearly doesn't want to do this anyway.

Yeah same. But, like, we both like kids! Maybe LW would if she got to know them, of course, but it sounds like she isn't really a kid person.

Edited (Autocorrect) 2024-08-04 18:28 (UTC)

“It has to be done” is the statement of someone who is resigned to a necessary chore, not someone who is enjoying something. LW also mentions that they happily don’t want children, and while plenty of childfree folks enjoy spending time with the kids in their lives, plenty would also prefer not to spend time in settings where they become directly responsible for children. (As in, they’re happy to chat with the kids at a family get-together or spend time at a party, but would prefer not to take the kids out solo as a babysitter. As a parent myself who doesn’t want to take responsibility for other people’s kids, I 100% sympathize.) Why should LW have to take on more free childcare when they are already overburdened with what they’re doing now and not enjoying it?

* Gender isn’t specified in the letter, though we know it’s almost certainly a woman or AFAB nonbinary person, because people don’t tend to press men for childcare.

LW says that her sisters call her a terrible aunt and a bad sister. I kinda think that if this was a bit of transphobia LW would most likely have either automatically translated that to the correct terms or have added "also, my sisters are transphobic" or at least have indicated at the start what the deal is and the correct pronouns.

Oh, you’re right! I missed that somehow. (It’s been a day, LOL.)

Very sexist assumptions here from Dan, who wastes no time on wondering why the children's fathers aren't taking time out from their busy schedules to get to know them better.

+1 It sounds like LW accepts supporting her in-laws as a duty in their difficult situation, she doesn't actually complain about that at all - acknowledging a downside but saying it is a necessity is not a complaint. The assumption that she should ALSO be available to provide free babysitting because her brother-in-laws can't be arsed to parent their own children is a load of sexist tripe. Even framing it as getting to know them better is sexist. Their dads apparently don't have to!

While I understand your frustration, you almost certainly didn’t improve your situation with your comment to your sister.

Except LW is right, Dan, these sisters have husbands who are not pulling their fair share of the childcare load. The sisters certainly should not be trying to dump their husbands' childcare duties onto LW, when it's clear LW has assumed responsibility for husband's niblings only out of family obligation.

The columnist also doesn't suggest that her two sisters, and their husbands, trade off babysitting, which would give everyone a break every few weeks, and let them get to know their niblings better.

They're not the sisters' niblings, they're the niblings-in-law.

I was thinking that sister A and husband could watch sister B's kids, then the following week the B's watch sister A's kids. Not that they step in to help the LW's in-laws.

Oh, I see. That makes more sense, but there's no point in the columnist saying it - the sisters aren't the ones asking for advice!