Mum blasts 'monster-in-law' who secretly tried to pierce toddler’s ears

Photo: iStock
Photo: iStock 

Grandparents who go against the wishes of their adult children and their partners are often a topic of heated conversation. Who was wrong and who was right is thrashed out on message boards all over the world.

There is possibly no person more maligned than the dreaded interfering mother-in-law and one mum has taken to Reddit to vent her fury about hers going behind her back to pierce her toddler's ears.

Things were far from harmonious before she pulled a swifty on her daughter-in-law.

She writes, "We live about eight hours away from her, see her once a year and speak maybe once a month." She goes on to say her husband "knows exactly what kind of person she is" and "harbours no delusions" about her.

Having just given birth to their third daughter, the OP writes that MIL wants to check in so she can gloat on social media.

"MIL naturally wanted to come down so she could take three pictures of the baby for Facebook to show what a good Nana she is before hitting the bar."

She continues, "One of the comments she made was about how none of our girls have their ears pierced, which I pretty much ignored. It's something she's been complaining about for years, but we usually just tell her that when they're old enough to ask for it, then we'll do it."

On the second day of the visit, the eldest daughter wnt to daycare and the OP's sister-in-law suggested that she and her mother take her middle daughter for a walk to give her some time alone with her newborn.

She qualified allowing it writing, "I trust SIL and so happily bundled up my second daughter and curled up on the couch to nurse the baby and catch up on some trashy tv."


On their return, she asked how things went.

"MIL casually said it was nice and she bought some cute hair things for the girls. SIL shot me a look that clearly said something was off."

"The moment we got a second alone, SIL tells me she took DD into a jewellery store and tried to get them to pierce her ears. SIL shut it down and said loudly, "you're not her mother, you don't get to do that without [the parent's] permission!"

After being told that the consent form can only be signed by a parent or legal guardian, MIL got mad at the shop manager, arguing that she was the toddler's guardian since the mother was not there.

The OP is caught between a rock and a hard place at this point.

"This is so far over the line I have no idea how to handle this," she wrote.

"They are here for two more days and I'm at a loss on how to handle this. At this point, I'm ready to cut her out completely. DH is equally horrified, though neither of us is sure how to confront the issue without throwing SIL under the bus (they live close to each other and SIL has to deal with the crazy a lot more than I do)."

The story doesn't end with people giving their advice on the thread. It turns out that the OP made contact with the store owner to verify the story and it was exactly as the SIL described it. It also turns out the manager is a tenant of the OP's and the OP is giving her half price rent for December.

In an update, the OP posted that her husband dealt with his mother, banishing her from the home - and their lives - for good.

"DH told her to pack her things, she's no longer welcome in our house or our lives. As we speak he is driving her to a hotel, checking her in and BIL and SIL will pick her up on their way out of town."

"MIL started screaming and crying about how ungrateful he was and how we are only thinking of ourselves."

She continued, "Thank you to everyone who took the time to offer advice or sympathy, you really helped me put this in perspective. If there's no benefits to keeping someone in your life, it's time to say goodbye."

One supportive poster wrote, "This is such an unfortunate situation... however, the outcome of this situation should be applauded."

"Keep that husband! He's AWESOME!" wrote another.