AITA for not wanting to give my baby to my MIL?

Welcome back to another edition of "Am I the A**hole?" where we dive deep into the messy, complicated world of interpersonal relationships. Today's story involves a new mother, her precious baby, and a mother-in-law who seems to have a very specific vision for how things should be. These family dynamics, especially after a new arrival, can be incredibly delicate, and often, intentions can be misunderstood, leading to massive friction.

Our OP finds herself in a common, yet profoundly challenging, situation. The protective instincts of a new parent are powerful, and when those instincts clash with the expectations or perceived demands of a grandparent, fireworks can ensue. We're going to explore whether OP is justified in setting firm boundaries with her mother-in-law, or if she's being overly sensitive. It's a classic tale of new parenthood versus the 'helpful' family.

"AITA for not wanting to give my baby to my MIL?"

This situation highlights a common, yet often painful, conflict between new parents and well-meaning (or not-so-well-meaning) grandparents. On one hand, the protective instincts of a new mother are incredibly powerful and entirely natural. OP has every right to dictate who holds her baby, for how long, and where her baby sleeps, especially at a tender three months old when routines and feeding schedules are crucial.

The mother-in-law's desire to bond with her grandchild is understandable, but her approach appears to be highly problematic. Demanding to hold the baby, dismissing the mother's feeding schedule, and pushing for overnight stays for an exclusively breastfed infant demonstrates a significant lack of respect for OP's role as a mother and her choices. Guilt-tripping and attempting to undermine parental decisions are never acceptable.

Mark's role in this is also crucial. While he supported OP's decision, his comment about her being "a bit harsh" suggests he might be caught in the middle or potentially hasn't fully grasped the emotional toll such demands take on a new mother. It's important for spouses to present a united front, especially when boundaries are being established with extended family, to ensure both parents feel supported.

Ultimately, setting clear boundaries, even if uncomfortable, is essential for the long-term health of family relationships. While delivery can always be refined, the core message that OP delivered was necessary. Her priority is her child's well-being and her own comfort as a new mother. No one should make her feel guilty for asserting those fundamental rights.

The Internet Weighs In: Was OP Justified in Her Stance?

The comments section on this one exploded, and as expected, the vast majority of our readers were firmly in OP's corner. Many shared their own similar experiences with overbearing in-laws, emphasizing the sanctity of a new mother's bond and her right to make decisions for her infant. The consensus was clear: "Your baby, your rules" resonated deeply with parents who have faced similar battles over boundaries.

Several users specifically called out the husband's reaction, suggesting that while he supported the decision, his desire for a "softer" approach might be indicative of a deeper issue where he needs to step up more directly in protecting his wife and child from his mother's demands. It's a reminder that both partners must be aligned and firm when facing family pressure.

In conclusion, OP is overwhelmingly NTA in this scenario. Her instincts as a new mother are paramount, and her decision to keep her three-month-old, exclusively breastfed baby with her, especially overnight, is entirely reasonable and healthy. While clear communication is always ideal, sometimes firmness is necessary when boundaries are repeatedly crossed. This story serves as a crucial reminder for new parents to prioritize their family's well-being and for extended family to respect the primary role of the parents.