bil "calling child abuse y we don't give ds a pacifier&

Log in / Sign Up

List of Forums + New Post Recipe Box Usergroups Following My Posts Bookmarks

Private Messages Advanced Search Rules New User Guide FAQ Advertise Contact Us

Forum -> Parenting our children -> Infants

Bil "calling child abuse y we don't give ds a pacifier&

Previous 1 2 3 4 Next

View latest: 24h 48h 72h

Mirabelle

Thu, May 27 2010, 9:33 am

Lordy!
My big girl was the pacifier queen (we are still trying to get rid of it totally embarrassed

)

My twins hate totally NO interest in pacifiers. To be totally honest with you, I am thrilled by this because it means I won't need to go through all the "paci fairy" narishkeit with them down the road.

Now that I think about it, I do get a lot of comments at shul as to why my twins don't take pacifiers...what, I was supposed to force it on them?

I am sorry that you BIL doesn't understand that sometimes babies cry.

life'sgreat

Thu, May 27 2010, 10:41 am

imaima wrote:

amother wrote:

we hardly ever use a pacifier. the baby is not interested in it. we take care of him without the use of a pacifier.
we do have pacifiers but use them rarely.

my in-laws wanted to see the baby so my dh dropped him off at mil/fil house.
a few minutes later I get several phone calls and text messages from dh's divorced brother.
he's angry why we don't give our baby a pacifier.
his latest text message: "I'm calling child abuse, y don't you give him a pacifier"

what do you think of this?
WWYD?

he also hung up on me both times he called- he said what he wanted to say, and if I tried to say anything, he either repeated himself or hung up on me.
after the two text messages he sent me, my inbox is full so for now he can't send more.
I called my in laws to check if everything is ok, and I heard him yelling in the background that he's calling child abuse because there is no pacifier....(like what he wrote in the text message) and then the phone was hung up on me.

I think they all were just overwhelmed by baby screaming. YOU should have gone to pick him up right away

You seem to have missed the fact that she doesn't have a car.

louche

Thu, May 27 2010, 12:24 pm

There's no agency called "child abuse", and if your bil had called Child Welfare or the SPCC with his preposterous claim, they would have laughed him halfway into next month.

bluebird

Thu, May 27 2010, 12:38 pm

OP, what do your FIL and MIL think of all of this? What else was going on while your BIL was having his tantrum?

chaylizi

Thu, May 27 2010, 12:54 pm

Raizle wrote:

chaylizi wrote:

amother wrote:

my husband is working now. we don't have a car, but he rented one temporarily for work.
my in laws wanted to see the baby, so my husband dropped off the baby there for an hour or two while he goes to a customer and works and then he will pick up the baby and bring him back home.
I am home.
in the meantime, I can't reach my husband because his cellphone died and he called me from a number and said I can call him at that number but when I called it I got a company and couldn't reach him. I didn't know what extension to dial and the customer service rep didn't know who I wanted.
my hubby has the car and car seat. I am at home and would be fine wth the baby but my in laws constantly want to see the baby and since dh had a car tonight, he took the baby there for an hour or two till he finishes working.
now I got another text message from my bil saying "sorry I found the pacifier he is sleeping good"
I called my mil and apparently they actually finally decided to look in the diaper bag and there was a pacifier there. I guess they assumed it wasn't there because they've seen that we don't usually use it. I had told them that I wasn't sure whether it's there and they could check. anyway, the baby didn't want it. so my bil said that it's too small. yeah right.
anyway, my dh just called now while I was typing this. he finished working and he is going now to pick up the baby and bring him home.

I think there is a certain time that should be too late for having your baby out. 1 am is time for the baby to be in his own sleeping area. Next time they ask for him at night, I think you should say no.

She didn't say what time it was. Could have been middle of the day.
Remember, not everyone lives in the same time zone.

and I doubt her husband would be going to see a customer in the middle of the night

Amother posted at 11:52 pm last night:

Quote:

he also said that the baby is crying and he's trying to sleep so the baby's crying is not letting him sleep. by the way, this is going on right now.

Hashem_Yaazor

Thu, May 27 2010, 2:00 pm

(CL, the timestamp is based on your time settings, not the poster's settings...)

chaylizi

Thu, May 27 2010, 2:29 pm

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

(CL, the timestamp is based on your time settings, not the poster's settings...)

Thanks for the reality check. Oops. (but then why would her BIL be so cantankerous about his sleep?)

imaima

Thu, May 27 2010, 3:02 pm

chaylizi wrote:

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

(CL, the timestamp is based on your time settings, not the poster's settings...)

Thanks for the reality check. Oops. (but then why would her BIL be so cantankerous about his sleep?)

this explains why he is divorced..

life'sgreat

Thu, May 27 2010, 5:05 pm

imaima wrote:

chaylizi wrote:

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

(CL, the timestamp is based on your time settings, not the poster's settings...)

Thanks for the reality check. Oops. (but then why would her BIL be so cantankerous about his sleep?)

this explains why he is divorced..

Woot! We got it!

Merrymom

Thu, May 27 2010, 10:11 pm

I think the BIL is irrelevant to the bigger picture here. A mother should never leave a baby that isn't old enough to be soothed to sleep by someone else. So if you are a working mother but your baby hasn't learned to take a bottle yet or your baby hates pacifiers and will only be soothed by you then you don't leave the baby until the baby is ready.

The BIL is unimportant, there's a reason why he's a divorced BIL it seems.

amother

Fri, May 28 2010, 1:07 am

Merrymom wrote:

he is able to be soothed to sleep by someone else.
babysitters are able to soothe him to sleep during the daytime, all the time.
he has been taking bottles from other people since he was born.
when he is near his mother, he likes to be breastfed.
but when his mother is not around, he takes bottles and he can be soothed to sleep.
all babies cry sometimes.

Hashem_Yaazor

Fri, May 28 2010, 9:44 am

imaima wrote:

chaylizi wrote:

Hashem_Yaazor wrote:

(CL, the timestamp is based on your time settings, not the poster's settings...)

Thanks for the reality check. Oops. (but then why would her BIL be so cantankerous about his sleep?)

this explains why he is divorced..

My thoughts when I read the OP. But I was too chicken to say it.

louche

Fri, May 28 2010, 10:45 am

Merrymom wrote:

A mother should never leave a baby that isn't old enough to be soothed to sleep by someone else. So if you are a working mother but your baby hasn't learned to take a bottle yet or your baby hates pacifiers and will only be soothed by you then you don't leave the baby until the baby is ready.

.

How understanding. How sympathetic. How realistic.
Following your reasoning to its logical conclusion, it's better for a mother to lose her job and her family to starve because she has a clingy baby.

And if a mother has a job that directly affects others, to heck with those others, right? Sorry, Mr. Rubinstein, we'll have to reschedule your cardiac angioplasty because your surgeon's baby won't take a paci. Sorry, tenth grade girls, the class trip is postponed--again--because your teacher's baby is fussy.
Sorry, Mrs. Merrymom, but your homebirth is cancelled and you'll have to go to a hospital because your midwife's baby isn't ready for her to leave.

Right.

Isramom8

Fri, May 28 2010, 11:14 am

"Child Abuse" or whatever their correct name is might be required to look into the situation and you'd have pain and suffering, even if you are let off the hook without even supervision or house arrest. I say keep your kids away from anyone who makes these threats, espeacially if they are unstable.

Barbara

Fri, May 28 2010, 11:32 am

Isramom8 wrote:

My guess is that every child welfare agency has the ability to mark frivolous calls as unfounded.

*My SIL left her baby with my parents, the baby is crying and won't take a pacifier. Its abuse that the baby won't take a paci and let me sleep* is almost certainly in that category.

BIL may well be seriously unbalanced, and if so could fabricate a story. Not much OP can do about that no matter what.

speciwoman

Fri, May 28 2010, 11:54 am

I would be more concerned about someone so ridiculous doing something dangerous to the baby. G-d forbid he shook the baby to make him stop crying.

It also sounds like he could have just been making sarcastic comments that weren't actually serious in nature.

louche

Fri, May 28 2010, 11:57 am

speciwoman wrote:

I would be more concerned about someone so ridiculous doing something dangerous to the baby. G-d forbid he shook the baby to make him stop crying.

.

good point. the bil sounds like a real piece of work.

Merrymom

Fri, May 28 2010, 12:21 pm

louche wrote:

Merrymom wrote:

Two things:
1- The OP had no dire need to leave her baby, her in-laws wanted to see the baby. Why she couldn't come with her baby or why the in-laws couldn't come to her was never explained.
2-Yes, you don't leave a shrieking baby. I did that once with my first assuming if she got hungry enough she'd take a bottle. It didn't work out that way. When my SILs are planning to go back to work they start getting the baby accustomed to taking a bottle from the very begining. As for why a baby can't come with when you go to most places is something I never understood. A friend of mine is always asking me to watch her baby so she can go shopping with her DH. I don't understand that mentality considering that when my children were newborns they went everywhere with us from shopping to elegant restaurants. When they're that small they're very portable. Obviously this wouldn't work in a job situation but as I said earlier, one prepares for that. You don't just assume that everything will be fine.

amother

Fri, May 28 2010, 12:31 pm

I called my mil to wish her a good shabbos. I mentioned to her that the baby should never be left with bil.
I told her that maybe the baby was crying more because he was scared off by bil's yelling.
she said, "oh, bil has been around a lot of babies, and he spent time with the baby, and he's used to babies always having a pacifier. and he says the pacifier is too small and meant for a newborn."
she said this to me when I called her at the end of that night, too.
she also said that she hasn't seen me in so long- three weeks! is that really such a long time not to see a dil?
she has sent me emails in the past "oy vey! I haven't seen the baby in two weeks!" or " I haven't seen the baby in an entire week!"
she constantly wants to see the baby. when she sees him once a week, then she wants to see him twice a week.
when she sees me or comes to my house, she and fil can be very critical and emotionally abusive.
on the other hand, when baby is at their house, now their son is back home (he had been oot for a while).
they have their own opinions on how to take care of the baby, and often disregard what we say.
they can get very argumentative, manipulative, but then they make it sound like we're disrespecting them when we try to implement boundaries.

amother

Fri, May 28 2010, 12:35 pm

Merrymom wrote:

louche wrote:

Merrymom wrote:

as I've said before, the baby takes bottles every day for the past 6 months, and is used to being around other people!
and he was not shrieking when my dh dropped him off.
mil and fil are emotionally abusive to me but they are loving to the baby.

Page 2 of 4

Previous 1 2 3 4 Next