Hello!

44 Comments

A sneaky mother-in-law is conspiring to get her granddaughter’s ear’s pierced, despite the baby’s mum being against the idea.

So now the concerned mum has put her foot down, no longer allowing her mother-in-law unsupervised access to the 10-month-old.

“Since she was born my MIL has been on at me asking me when I’m going to have her ears pierced. My daughter will not be having her ears pierced until she asks for it (so definitely not yet when she can’t even speak). She says it’s hypocritical of me considering all the piercings I have (several piercings on both ears, plus my nose), but my own mother wouldn’t let me even get my earlobes pierced until I was 10.”

The 31-year-old mum says her mother-in-law allowed her own daughters to have their ears pierced when ‘they were tiny’, claiming it’s better to do it when they won’t remember it. The mum’s husband supports whatever decision she makes, particularly because she’s the one who’ll have to clean and care for the piercings.

‘My family thinks I’m overreacting’

But since laying down the law, the mum says her sneaky mother-in-law has been looking for ways to get the baby’s ears pierced, without her permission.

“So a few weeks ago, MIL was looking after the baby for us because I was going with my husband to his uncle’s funeral. As I was coming down the stairs I hear MIL talking to my daughter about how ‘they’re going to go out shopping and get her some pretty earrings’. I went into the room and told her in no uncertain terms that that would not be happening, and if I can’t trust her to respect my decisions about my own daughter I would find someone else to look after her (I managed to get my sister to watch her).

“MIL keeps trying to arrange to have her for a few hours, she even tried to offer to have her overnight so my husband and I can go out. I refused, I told MIL she could come and visit her, but I no longer trusted her not to get her ears pierced behind my back, so she would be seeing her supervised.”

But now the baby ban has caused a rift, with the mum’s husband and sisters-in-law saying she’s overreacting. And it’s left the mum wondering if she’s done the right thing.

What do you think the mum should do? Let us know in the comments below.

We may get commissions for purchases made using links in this post. Learn more.
  • These inlaws sound awful. They really should be respectful of your parenting decisions.

    Reply

  • No. You’re standing up for your daughter’s bodily autonomy. Continue doing this. Forever.

    Reply

  • Nope If you don’t take a stand you’ll lose control over so much. I’ve seen this happen before and it can get so nasty

    Reply

  • MIL is never left alone with the baby if she can’t be trusted!

    Reply

  • No way my mil will have any impact in things like that.

    Reply

  • I am.a mum who is in the same situation with mother in law who thinks she can do whatever and if I say no she tries to go behind my back to her son but in my case he does she her doing it, I say stick to your own parenting and ways if you sa u no than it’s no, my mum had mine done when I was 6mths old I personally think it’s wrong id wait I have 2 daughters one who asked when she was 7 and we did them but she had alot of trouble and my youngest daughter who is coming up 11 asked for hers to be pierces for Christmas which we did and no troubles so far, both my girls asked I never forced them it was their choice when they were ready.

    Reply

  • Stick to your guns. This is your daughter and your MIL needs to back off about the earrings. If your SIL are against you then don’t have anything to do with them either. Depending on your MIL you could tell her that when she has her nipples pierced (and you get to see it being done for yourself) then say you’ll think about getting your daughters ears pierced. That may at least stop her from pestering you. It’s not like she gave birth to your daughter

    Reply

  • I can’t believe anyone would think it’s acceptable to sneak around behind a parents back and get their ears pierced. You can’t leave your baby with anyone you don’t trust.

    Reply

  • NOPE! NOPE! and just NOPE! it is your little girl and your Mother-in-Law has no rights what-so-ever to get her grand daughters ears pierced – Hands off and let your Daughter-in-law and Son decide if they ever want to get their daughters ears pierced!

    Reply

  • It’s her child – should be the decision for the parents to make together. MIL should stay out of it.

    Reply

  • Slight difference between buying earrings and getting them pierced. But trust is a big thing here, and if you can’t trust the person with your child, don’t do it!
    On a side note am I the only one wondering why the MIL wasn’t going to her own brother’s/husband’s brother’s funeral? Seems a bit weird to me, unless there’s more of a family rift there that’s not mentioned!

    Reply

  • NO! NO! NO! People need to learn boundaries. It is absolutely not OK for your MIL to do that unless you have asked, organised, or are in agreeance. Absolutely NOT.

    Reply

  • 100% not over reacting. It’s her daughter so her choice, Mil needs to respect that. Over time I would allow her to babysit again with strict consequences if mil went and done it

    Reply

  • Not overreacting at all. I would not want my baby’s ears to be pierced, and people should respect how you wish to raise your own kid, be it about feeding, piercing, clothing, schooling whatever.

    Reply

  • I know if I was in this position I too would be mad ! The mother in law has no say in what you choose to do and what not to with your own child

    Reply

Post a comment
Add a photo
Your MoM account


Lost your password?

Enter your email and a password below to post your comment and join MoM:

You May Like

Loading…

Looks like this may be blocked by your browser or content filtering.

↥ Back to top

Thanks For Your Star Rating!

Would you like to add a written rating or just a star rating?

Write A Rating Just A Star Rating
Join