Originally Posted by Big Bag of Chips
Edit: And I certainly wouldn't go along with decisions I wasn't happy with, particularly concerning my children, just to be kept in the will!
Certainly not, but I never said anyone should.
I stuck my nose in because many were advocating a blunt "none of your business"
approach to the grandparents, and somehow laying down the law like this is considered "dispute resolution"
by some. It's not, it's insulting at the very least and depending upon the character and value system of the grandparents likely to result in a negative reaction - either now or in the future.
It may even be your way of pushing them away from involvement with your child, especially if there are other grandchildren. And TBH, that's not really their fault if they're more comfortable seeing another grandchild more because there they are allowed to express their opinions there.
So by all means be firm
, but don't be blunt
. There are better ways of letting them have your
Think we're moving from the OP's issue a bit though.
I think it's relevant to the OP, because rather than bluntly laying down the law, he and his partner may choose a more diplomatic way to do this. After all, he and his partner are only 23 and 24, so it's more than likely that they might want to keep the grandparents goodwill - and assistance.
Presuming no compromise solution, such as a double-barrelled name, concessions elsewhere could be made twoards the grandparents. Religion, a middle name, or let them play an active part in choosing the christening event. Even phrasing that this is how the OP and his partner have decided to name this child in a less confrontational fashion, but that they respect their views, would help.