Recently, a woman took to the popular Reddit forum to share an incident that happened to her 6-month-old daughter, involving her husband's family. It all revolved around the matter of "piercing the baby's ears" but eventually became a conflict that was difficult to resolve.
The woman explained that in the local culture where her husband's family lived, piercing a baby's ears was not uncommon.
Mother-in-law asked daughter-in-law to pierce her grandchild's ears when the baby was just a few days old - Illustration photo.
She wrote: "My mother-in-law started 'harassing' me about getting my daughter's ears pierced when she was just a few days old. I made it clear that I would not do it and that I would wait until she was old enough, if she wanted I would do it."
Yet, despite the woman's refusal, her mother-in-law took matters into her own hands. While babysitting her granddaughter, she pierced the child's ears without her son and daughter-in-law's knowledge - and consent.
"When I found out, I almost went into a rage," the woman said. "My daughter was crying in pain, and I actually took her to the doctor for advice on whether to take the earrings out. Our family doctor quickly took them out because she was clearly in discomfort."
Illustration photo.
The woman then decided that none of her husband's family members - except her sister-in-law, who sided with her - would be allowed to be alone with the baby "forever" (or at least until she reached her teens).
"I'm worried that my mother-in-law will do the same thing again. She has completely lost my trust. I also told her that if it happens again, I will call the police," she said.
The woman's husband also sided with her but he didn't think it was as big a deal as she made it out to be.
She questioned forum members about whether she was being unreasonable for refusing to let her in-laws take care of her daughter.
The response she received was overwhelmingly supportive from Reddit members. One comment, which garnered more than 1,600 upvotes, read: "Your mother-in-law has shown that she wants to put her own wishes ahead of her son and daughter-in-law. It makes sense that your in-laws should not be alone with their granddaughter until she is old enough to fend for herself (i.e., pre-teens).
That said, if you had a good relationship with your in-laws before, I think you should make some plans to work things out and rebuild trust. But that needs to be communicated to your husband's family and he needs to monitor them."
One person replied to the comment: "Her in-laws should be the ones working to rebuild trust, not her. Forget rebuilding trust, I'm going to press charges against them for assault!"
However, other members said that there were other people at fault. After all, how could the person who did the piercing let this happen?
"I personally would find out where my in-laws did the ear piercing. I would report them for doing it without the parents' consent, and then report the matter to any relevant authorities. It's not okay to pierce a baby's ears without the parents' consent," one person commented.
Another person shared that she went to a shopping mall with her children and grandchildren to get one of the children’s ears pierced. The piercer refused because he did not have a birth certificate to prove legal guardianship.
Source: She Knows
Source
Comment (0)