Have paternal grans always been less involved with their grandchildren than maternal grans?

Oh, and I guess we tend not to hear so much about bad maternal MiLs on GN, because I would imagine that a very high percentage of posters are women, and not men, but I'm sure they're out there!

CafeAuLait

Nansnet, MILs are a mixed bag just as children and CIL are a mixed bag.

I think people tend to discuss the troublesome ones because those topics tend to come up and there's little to say about the good ones.

CafeAuLait, Exactly that! We tend to only hear about the bad ones (DiLs & MiLs), because the majority of DiLs & MiLs who do have good relationships (and there are many), don't need to broadcast the fact, and they don't need to vent, or ask for advice about a bad situation.

My mother in law was far more involved with my children than my own parents, and she was in my house whilst my second child was born. This involvement continued when we moved 100 miles away and they used to make the journey and stay with us two or three times a year.

My children have wonderful memories of their paternal grandparents and the fun they had with them.

Nansnet, MILs are a mixed bag just as children and CIL are a mixed bag.

I think people tend to discuss the troublesome ones because those topics tend to come up and there's little to say about the good ones.

Good post @ 12.57 Nansnet especially the second paragraph.

CafeAuLait

I suspect most MILs are just fine, nansnet. I wish mine had been my ally and friend.

I don't think I will ever fully recover from one of my births. Just as I don't understand what it is like to have a c-section or PPD, other women have never lived my experience. That doesn't mean they can't empathise, or at least try to, but they may never get it fully. That's okay as long as the MIL (or any other person) doesn't get upset at what a woman needs for her recovery because it doesn't fit with what she decided she was going to get as a grandma.

Personally, I'd rather be giving birth today than in my MIL's day. I feel I have more choice and more option of less medicalisation.

CafeAuLait, on those points, I have to agree. Most MiLs probably are fine, and the small minority who do make a fuss because they had preconceived ideas about grand parenting, and things haven't turned out as they'd expected, do need to take a step back.

It just seems that some people who don't get along with their MiL, or have had a bad experience with her, believe that all MiLs are the same, and should be treated with disdain. Those sentiments are seen frequently by the same few posters on GN, and it really doesn't give a fair view of the majority of good MiLs/grandmothers.

Met with DGD's other gran recently. She has many grandchildren, I have one. We are both over 30 minutes car journey away from DGD. Pulling together her relationship with DGD and mine -
She sees her in passing with other people much more than I do.
I have more one-to-one time with her.
I have more sleepovers

I suspect most MILs are just fine, nansnet. I wish mine had been my ally and friend.

I don't think I will ever fully recover from one of my births. Just as I don't understand what it is like to have a c-section or PPD, other women have never lived my experience. That doesn't mean they can't empathise, or at least try to, but they may never get it fully. That's okay as long as the MIL (or any other person) doesn't get upset at what a woman needs for her recovery because it doesn't fit with what she decided she was going to get as a grandma.

Personally, I'd rather be giving birth today than in my MIL's day. I feel I have more choice and more option of less medicalisation.

CafeAuLait

Nansnet: "the physical act of giving birth, recovering afterwards, and learning how to be a mother, is essentially the same!"

This is not true. For all the babies I had, not one experience was the same. Some were drastically different to the others.

CafeAuLait, now you're just splitting hairs. Of course, every birth is different, I was not trying to suggest that they are all the same. I, myself, had two completely different births, one very easy, the other horrendous, with several months of recovery. My reference to giving birth, the recovery, and becoming a mother, essentially being the same for women today as it was for our mothers, and grandmothers, was merely intended to point out that women have been giving birth forever, and it is not something new to young women today that women haven't experienced previously, whether it be an easy birth, or difficult. It has all been experienced by others.

It's a shame that you had inconsiderate in-laws, but people shouldn't believe that all in-laws are the same, just because they've had a bad experience with their own.

A bit like mother in laws, then?

Nansnet: "the physical act of giving birth, recovering afterwards, and learning how to be a mother, is essentially the same!"

This is not true. For all the babies I had, not one experience was the same. Some were drastically different to the others.

Part of my problem, Nansnet, was that being generous and trying to include the ILs only proved how little interest they had in me. They just wanted the baby. Having to make the effort to be an invisible outsider and just an annoyance when I wasn't invisible didn't help build a relationship. It just meant my interest in making the effort diminished until it died and I told DH he was the one responsible for all aspects of that relationship. My blame when he failed to step up. MILs need to be someone we want to make an effort with, especially when we're already making that effort.

My MIL doesn't know about my needs and experience just because she has given birth before. My birth experience was very different from hers.

MissAdventure

I don't know any grandparents that want to visit multiple times a week to snatch the baby.
I used to ask my daughter to leave if the baby was getting on my wick.

MissAdventure, neither do I! I don't know why some people seem to think that's how every paternal MiL behaves! I don't know any of my family, or friends, who behave in that way!

I don't think anyone here has suggested that fathers need the same comparable support as the mother after childbirth. That would be ridiculous! But some new fathers do actually want contact/support from their own family when navigating their new role of being a parent for the very first time. They would prefer talking to/taking advice from their own parents, in much the same way that most new mothers prefer the support of her own parents. Obviously, it's not the same support that the mother requires, but it's still important to the new father none the less, whom some people here seem to regard as surplus to requirements! So, in answer to the OP's question, absolutely yes, the son is worthy of his family's support at this momentous time.

I consider myself very lucky to have a close, loving family, who are willing to support each other in the right way, and who care about each others feelings. That does not mean that we push ourselves upon each other, or are inconsiderate to each others wants and needs, quite the contrary. I can't imagine what kind of families some people must have when women are treated like incubators, and in-laws thinking that they have an innate right to view someone else's genitals while they give birth. Certainly, no family member, friends, or acquaintances I've ever come across have shown any desire to act in that way!

It's very telling in the way that some people respond, that they have perhaps had bad experiences themselves. However, that does not mean that their bad experiences are the same for everyone. Many new parents (both sons & daughters), actually want to share the joy of their new baby with all of their family & friends, and wouldn't dream of not allowing either set of GPs to meet their new grandchild soon after birth, or to prevent them from visiting for a set amount of time. And, I'm not talking about 'having to entertain them'. Most GPs are sensible, and sensitive enough to know what's acceptable. And, meeting a new GC soon after birth isn't something we feel we need to do in order to have a close relationship with our grandchild, we are actually well aware of the fact that the child will never remember that first cuddle. It's simply something that, in my experience, new parents have always tended to allow, and indeed have been very eager, and proud, to do so. It's nothing to do with the way that grandparents think it will have any bearing on their future relationship with the child.

Someone mentioned that MiLs should make more of an effort to get along with their DiLs, in order to have a good relationship. But, surely, the same can be said for DiLs too? And, as I've previously said, pushing away your in-laws, and not allowing them to meet their new GC, isn't a great way towards having a good relationship in the future. It is a sure-fire way to cause hurt to your husband's parents, and totally unnecessary.

Some people seem very naive that they assume they know far more about childbirth and motherhood than most of the grandparents here on GN. Do they think we had our babies delivered by the stork, and didn't go through the trauma of childbirth, so we have no idea what it's like? And do they think we all had our very own Mary Poppins to take care of our children, and we have no idea what being a real mother involves? Seriously, we've been through it all, and whether you've only just had a baby, or you had a baby 20/30/40 years ago, or more, the physical act of giving birth, recovering afterwards, and learning how to be a mother, is essentially the same!

I don't know any grandparents that want to visit multiple times a week to snatch the baby.
I used to ask my daughter to leave if the baby was getting on my wick.

agree with Daisy79 and tellmey. well put.

Nansnet

We live a long way from our DS & DiL, as do the other GPs. When our first GC was due, DS & DiL asked how soon we were able to get there, as travel plans had to be made, and they wanted us there as soon as baby was born. They wanted us to be there because we've always had a close relationship with them both (we were not only interested in the baby, but our DiLs wellbeing too!). Our DiL is part of our family, and she has spent a lot of time with us, especially before they were married. We treat her like our own daughter.

It was our DSs first child, and our first GC, which was just as important to us as it was to the maternal GPs. I had no intention, or desire, to take the place of my DiLs mother, as I know from my own experience that daughters want their own mums in those early days. However, even though it was our DiL & DS who had wanted us to visit, it was her mother who made us feel that we had no right to travel to see them so soon. Had we not been specifically asked to do so by our DiL & DS, we most definitely would've waited. Her attitude towards us at the time was very hurtful, and it did not go unnoticed. Thankfully, things did sort themselves out soon afterwards, and, ongoing, we do have much the same involvement as the other GPs.

I just wanted to point out that it's not always the DiL who doesn't want the in-laws around. And I'm not referring to the day-to-day help that a DD wants from her own mum, that goes without saying. However, simply allowing the in-laws to visit at such a momentous time, when a new baby arrives, is far from asking too much. It is little wonder that some DiLs do not have a good relationship with their MiL, when they are made to feel like outcasts.

We see so many posts here where paternal GPs are feeling upset and left out at not being allowed to meet their GC for a couple of weeks, or longer. A little consideration for other people's feelings would actually go a very long way to building good, lasting family relationships. And, whatever some may say (I guess some people have had poor relationships themselves), grandparents can be a very important part of a child's life, and that relationship needs to be cherished, not pushed away. These days, a little kindness and consideration for others seems to be sadly lacking.

@Nansnet, being able to visit a new baby has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the relationship you can have with them later. Visiting a new baby and holding them does absolutely nothing for the baby whatsoever, it's not in the baby's best interest, it's not for the baby, it's for the adult who wants to hold a new baby. The only person that a newborn baby really needs is their mother. It is good for a new baby to bond with dad, too, but at the end of the day the baby quite literally doesn't even realize that it is no longer a part of its mother until several weeks or months into the baby's life.

Sure, it's nice to be able to hold your new grandchild- for YOU- but don't pretend that that is in any way relevant to the baby, for the baby's well being, or helpful to anyone at all. That is 100% for the adult who enjoys holding a new baby. Whether or not the baby got passed around like a hot potato and held by a bunch of people as a newborn has no effect on their relationships later and is in no way, shape, or form important for the well being of a newborn. THE ONLY relationships that are even remotely important for a newborn are the relationships it has with its parents, especially its mother. This is actual inarguable fact that we know to be true.

The fact that that doesn't mesh well with grandparents who want to come around multiple times a week to snatch the baby from mom, intrude on breastfeeding establishment, and sit there holding a new baby for however long is totally irrelevant to the facts of the matter. The facts say that a newborn baby is supposed to be held by and cared for by its mother to establish breastfeeding and a bonded relationship. The facts say that a newborn still believes itself to be a part if its mother, and that anyone outside of that immediate relationship with its parents is totally irrelevant until the baby is much older.

We live a long way from our DS & DiL, as do the other GPs. When our first GC was due, DS & DiL asked how soon we were able to get there, as travel plans had to be made, and they wanted us there as soon as baby was born. They wanted us to be there because we've always had a close relationship with them both (we were not only interested in the baby, but our DiLs wellbeing too!). Our DiL is part of our family, and she has spent a lot of time with us, especially before they were married. We treat her like our own daughter.

It was our DSs first child, and our first GC, which was just as important to us as it was to the maternal GPs. I had no intention, or desire, to take the place of my DiLs mother, as I know from my own experience that daughters want their own mums in those early days. However, even though it was our DiL & DS who had wanted us to visit, it was her mother who made us feel that we had no right to travel to see them so soon. Had we not been specifically asked to do so by our DiL & DS, we most definitely would've waited. Her attitude towards us at the time was very hurtful, and it did not go unnoticed. Thankfully, things did sort themselves out soon afterwards, and, ongoing, we do have much the same involvement as the other GPs.

I just wanted to point out that it's not always the DiL who doesn't want the in-laws around. And I'm not referring to the day-to-day help that a DD wants from her own mum, that goes without saying. However, simply allowing the in-laws to visit at such a momentous time, when a new baby arrives, is far from asking too much. It is little wonder that some DiLs do not have a good relationship with their MiL, when they are made to feel like outcasts.

We see so many posts here where paternal GPs are feeling upset and left out at not being allowed to meet their GC for a couple of weeks, or longer. A little consideration for other people's feelings would actually go a very long way to building good, lasting family relationships. And, whatever some may say (I guess some people have had poor relationships themselves), grandparents can be a very important part of a child's life, and that relationship needs to be cherished, not pushed away. These days, a little kindness and consideration for others seems to be sadly lacking.

My parents in law had as much if not more time with my children when they were small as my own parents (possibly more). My husband took them to his family every weekend and one day a week took me and them to my mum, as at the time I couldn’t drive and we lived in a remote location.
When my son’s daughter was born we drove a hour to see them and were just kept waiting outside another hour while the maternal grandparents had visiting time. I think if I’m honest that basically set the tone for our involvement or lack there of with his daughter. When his then partner left him not many months later our contact and his was very limited and hard won.
My daughter and her family now live us so obviously we get a lot of time to baby sit and support them. Her in laws, do more of the random days out when it suits them.

Certainly not in my own experience as a grandmother.If I give any details it will out me.
When my children were born my mother was conspicuous by her absence.My MIL, who lived a very short distance away came when she felt like it.I managed alright without both of them.
My maternal grandmother played a large part in my childhood I still think of her often. My mother and my paternal grandmother did not get on so I saw very little of her, but she always remembered us at Christmas and birthdays, she had about 17 grandchildren.

@theworriedwell- the father of the baby hasn’t just birthed a human being, so if you’re not interested in the person who just had a major medical procedure and is recovering from that then you can wait. That simple. It’s utterly laughable to think that a man whose partner has just given birth needs the same “support” as a woman who just gave birth to a baby.

@grannygranby- she likely wanted her own parents there as support for her… giving birth is about the mother, who is a medical patient. No one has any sort of innate right to view someone else’s genitals while they give birth. Birthing isn’t a spectacle sport and whether or not a grandparent is in the room during childbirth has no bearing on what kind of relationship they can have with the baby later on.

The father of the baby has not undergone a serious medical procedure. The support a woman needs postpartum is in no way even remotely comparable to a new father needing “support” from his parents. It is about the comfort of the woman who has a plate sized wound in her abdomen, is bleeding golf ball sized blood clots, and just gave birth to a human being.

The issue with the “maternal grandparent advantage” is 100% completely based on the expectations and reactions of the paternal grandparents. If your son is the one having a baby, but not the one pushing the baby out of his body and dealing with the emotional and physical aftermath of that, you should simply be prepared to not see the baby as often as the mother’s parents if she has a good relationship with them and wants their support. Postpartum is about the comfort and needs of the recovering mother, not the father. Yes, he is important, but if she doesn’t want people she doesn’t feel comfortable with in their house while SHE is recovering from a major medical procedure, that is her right.

It’s likely that having in laws over feels like entertaining guests to her, whereas having her own parents over is comfortable and reassuring for her. Her own parents are probably there for HER, to support and help HER.

Many new moms don’t feel comfortable saying things like “okay, you’ve held the baby long enough and I’d like them back now please” or “I’m really tired, I think it’s time for you to leave” to their MIL. Even if you think she should feel comfortable doing that, she probably doesn’t feel like she can be as open with you as her own parents and that is completely normal, reasonable, and okay.

There is a HUGE difference between having someone over who you aren’t 100% comfortable around, who expects to hold your baby while they’re there, and having your own mother there for YOU while you recover from childbirth.

I would imagine that deep down you already knew before posting this that a woman who has just given birth is in no way comparable even slightly as far as “needing support” to their partner who did not give birth.

As for things “evening out” postpartum, frankly, I think this is usually because the mother is usually the primary caregiver. Especially if she’s a stay at home mom, she will likely hang out with her own mother/parents because it’s something she enjoys doing. I am friends with my mom and really enjoy being around her. I see her way more often than my fiancé sees his parents, because I choose to be around her more often. When he’s off work he just wants to relax or spend time with us as a family, the expectation that he would need to spend his small amount of free time taking our kids to his parents every single week with his very limited time off is unreasonable. I’m sure in scenarios where the father is the primary caretaker it’s different, but it’s a fact that mothers are biologically wired to be the primary caretaker for their children and it is natural that she would take that role and look to her own mother for support in that role.

The issue really is that too many paternal grandparents seem to look at their grandchildren as a slice of pie that must be split just so, lest it be “unfair.” If you see and have a relationship with your grandchildren, the relationship they have with their other grandparents is both irrelevant and completely none of your business whatsoever. Worrying about that will only cause issues.

If more MILs actually put effort into a relationship with their DIL, instead of just expecting their DIL to somehow want to be around their MIL constantly for the sake of providing access to the children when the MIL takes no interest in the DIL as a person and individual, things might be different. But when someone seems to see you as the incubator that exists to give them grandkids and thinks that it should simply be even because it would make the paternal grandparents happy, why would the mother of those children want to spend her free time with you? And why is it her fault if the father of those children doesn’t want to use the free time he has to “make up for it?” It’s not a competition and yes, the dynamic is usually different because it is a stranger she has known for likely a few years, who probably doesn’t show much interest in her but only interest in her kids, versus her own parents.

There is a very big difference between being involved with grandchildren and pushing to “help” during the vulnerable postpartum stage. Until your son carries a baby, rips apart his body delivering them, and deals with the bloody recovery - no - I t’s not the same and doesn’t come down to being “worthy.”

That said, my husbands parents have been far more involved than my own parents since we passed that early postpartum stage. My MIL was vocally disappointed that I didn’t want her “help” postpartum, but as the person recovering from delivery, my husband thankfully agreed my needs came first. I’m someone who needed privacy to sit on the couch topless struggling to breastfeed and to not be embarrassed about my bloody panties soaking in the sink.

Every family is different. Please don’t make it a contest. Help that isn’t wanted or welcomed isn’t help. Quite simply, it’s up to the parents of the newborn and pressuring them will only leave you pushed further away.

I recommend googling the “Lemon Clot Essay” for perspective on this.

Our lovely DIL's parents are in a different country so whilst the GC were small we had a lot of input with them, now they are grown up holidays and family celebrations often happen abroad, it is just how it is. We see DD's children who are nearby. As has been said each family is different.

Our lovely DIL's parents are in a different country so whilst the GC were small we had a lot of input with them, now they are grown up holidays and family celebrations often happen abroad, it is just how it is. We see DD's children who are nearby. As has been said each family is different.