nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Visitors want us to remove the cat and dog while they are staying with us

Karen91

The sister of my OH is visiting us from abroad in 2 months with her husband and baby they will be staying for a week with us. My OH told me that she has requested that we remove the animals while they stay with us for the safety of her baby.

The cat and dog are both house pets the cat is never allowed out unless on a lead because we live near a busy road and the dog only goes out to relieve herself and comes straight back in. So basically we would have to board them for the week while they are here, my parents might be able to take the dog but the cat would have to be boarded for sure as mother is not a fan of cats.

I am rather insulted about it and I am tempted to tell her find alternative accomodation, would it be unreasonable of me to do so?

Some opinions on the matter would be greatly appreciated!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Wtf

borderlinemeath

Karen91 wrote: »

My two were never boarded so I am sure they would be very stressed in kennels they have only ever been cared for in a family enviornment. I am currently minding my friends Newfoundland he was boarded last time she went away and he did not cope well at all, I know others who board their dogs all the time and they are fine it all depends on the animal but I know my two would not be happy in kennels.

There is more drama as the MIL has now made her feelings known and wants us to pay for her to go to Germany that particular week so she can see her grandson this does not surprise me though because the woman is a drama queen! We of course refused to pay!
I never thought two little animals could cause somebody to behave so drastic.

:eek:

She wants you to pay for her trip??
You could partly excuse your SIL for being hormonal and a first time parent but there's no excuse for the MIL, the bloody cheek of her!

DBB

Karen, are you sure you're not asleep and dreaming of a plot for Coronation Street or something?
:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

Miaireland

Karen91 wrote: »

My two were never boarded so I am sure they would be very stressed in kennels they have only ever been cared for in a family enviornment. I am currently minding my friends Newfoundland he was boarded last time she went away and he did not cope well at all, I know others who board their dogs all the time and they are fine it all depends on the animal but I know my two would not be happy in kennels.

There is more drama as the MIL has now made her feelings known and wants us to pay for her to go to Germany that particular week so she can see her grandson this does not surprise me though because the woman is a drama queen! We of course refused to pay!
I never thought two little animals could cause somebody to behave so drastic.

We we all know now where your sister in law gets her sense of entitlement from!

Well done to you and your partner for standing firm.

Tell your mother-in-law if she doesn't like it to put them up in her house and that ye are not discussing the matter again.

I actually feel sorry for the little baby in all this, he is stuck with them for a Mother and Grandmother.

Alicat

I am lost for words. Absolutely lost for words.

Hooked

I'm getting married in a few months, and if either my future MIL or SIL acted like that, they'd be told where to go. And without biting my tongue.

Both my brothers have kids. My fiancées sister and brother each have 2. Whenever they visit, or if we go camping (with my OHs family), our two kids (yes, they're DOGS) are not removed from any scenario involving the kids.

If calling to the house, expect the dogs to be loose. If camping, they'll be tethered - to stop them roaming the campsite. But you'd best keep an eye on your children - as I'm busy being responsible for my 2 dogs.

I detest people making demands like this. Thank Christ our families aren't like the OP's. They'd get some shock if they tried this on with me!

NSAman

Zapperzy wrote: »

Sorry to hear about your dog. But can I ask was he really 18 stone? That's 114kg :eek: What breed was he? :eek: I think the largest dog I'v ever seen was about 70kg and that was a bullmastiff x great dane I believe :eek:

Tranceypoo wrote: »

Did you type that correctly, you had a dog that weighed 18 stone? Are you sure he was a dog?!!:eek:

Oppps sorry he wasn't 18 stone he was 16 stone (glasses not on when typing) and a St. Bernard. he basically took over the whole kitchen when he lay down. A huge baby, loved his hugs and was a massive personality (as if he wasn't massive enough). If he didn't want to do something man nor beast would make him. Luckily he had a gentle and loving nature, loved kids, he best mate was a crow in the back garden who used to spend all day everyday with him. The other dogs left him alone, he never really interacted with them apart from at dinner time, they all had their boundaries.

Bringing him in the car was hysterical, this massive head hanging out the window people stopping and staring and the drool just running the whole length of the car at the back.

Miss him terribly. If anyone said I had to board him in kennels over a kid... sorry that kid would be at a hotel rather than in my home.

davidfitz22

Miaireland wrote: »

The child will get exposed to more germs and illness on the plane over than from any animal.

That's mypoint. If anything it would be good for the childs immune system to be around these animals

Tranceypoo

NSAman wrote: »

Oppps sorry he wasn't 18 stone he was 16 stone (glasses not on when typing) and a St. Bernard. he basically took over the whole kitchen when he lay down. A huge baby, loved his hugs and was a massive personality (as if he wasn't massive enough). If he didn't want to do something man nor beast would make him. Luckily he had a gentle and loving nature, loved kids, he best mate was a crow in the back garden who used to spend all day everyday with him. The other dogs left him alone, he never really interacted with them apart from at dinner time, they all had their boundaries.

Bringing him in the car was hysterical, this massive head hanging out the window people stopping and staring and the drool just running the whole length of the car at the back.

Miss him terribly. If anyone said I had to board him in kennels over a kid... sorry that kid would be at a hotel rather than in my home.

Ahh, he sounds like a real character, very unique and a total pet, love that his best friend was a crow!! 16 stone is still pretty big though!!

ABajaninCork

Oh man. I dipped out of this as I thought the issue had been put to bed. How wrong can a girl be???

Your MiL now wants YOU to pay for her to visit Germany, OP? Did I read that right?? Clearly, she's been on the old falling down juice if she thought that was going to fly! :eek: I wouldn't even bother to grace such a ridiculous request with a response.

Sorry, but your in-laws are just plumb crazy, and well done to the pair of you for not taking this bollox. Why can't the SiL stay with the MiL? They sound like a lovely pair...

Ken.

ABajaninCork wrote: »

Oh man. I dipped out of this as I thought the issue had been put to bed. How wrong can a girl be???

Your MiL now wants YOU to pay for her to visit Germany, OP? Did I read that right?? Clearly, she's been on the old falling down juice if she thought that was going to fly! :eek: I wouldn't even bother to grace such a ridiculous request with a response.

Sorry, but your in-laws are just plumb crazy, and well done to the pair of you for not taking this bollox. Why can't the SiL stay with the MiL? They sound like a lovely pair...

Karen mentioned already they can't stay with the mother in law cause the father in law and husband of sister in law don't see eye to eye. It was suggested that Karen take in the father in law for the week but I'd advise against that cause he might not want to go home.

[Deleted User]

After Hours is here...

ABajaninCork

ken wrote: »

Karen mentioned already they can't stay with the mother in law cause the father in law and husband of sister in law don't see eye to eye. It was suggested that Karen take in the father in law for the week but I'd advise against that cause he might not want to go home.

Yes I know. I was being sarcastic...

muddypaws

I don't have any advice, but just wanted to say, this thread is fast taking over from 'the wedding thread' as my favourite boards reading at the moment.

The Masculinist

Karen91 wrote: »

My OH contacted me telling me that he was in touch with his sister, it did not go over well at all. Her reply was her child was not going breathing the same air as any disease carrying animal! She gave him a huge lecture on the cheek of him to put two disgusting animals before his nephew bla bla bla so apparently they are going cancelling the whole trip because she got totally hysterical about the whole thing. No reasoning at all. She seems to think she has more right to our house than the animals. She will not stay in a hotel to accomodate an animal so they are not coming at all.

She refused to pay for the boarding costs because its not her problem we have pets.

All I can say is I am shocked and so is my OH but he said if she wants it that way let her off she, she will get over it on time.

As I suggested previously, a bit of compromise could have avoided this situation. Is this really worth the headache and potential family strain? She is still your OH's sister...

strandroad

The Masculinist wrote: »

As I suggested previously, a bit of compromise could have avoided this situation. Is this really worth the headache and potential family strain? She is still your OH's sister...

What kind of compromise would the SIL agree to? She wanted it her way only. A compromise would be to guarantee separate rooms for baby and pets, no crossing paths, but it would not be enough.

shruikan2553

The Masculinist wrote: »

As I suggested previously, a bit of compromise could have avoided this situation. Is this really worth the headache and potential family strain? She is still your OH's sister...

The OP was told her pets, her problem, they were to be gone.

For a compromise both need to be willing.

ABajaninCork

The Masculinist wrote: »

As I suggested previously, a bit of compromise could have avoided this situation. Is this really worth the headache and potential family strain? She is still your OH's sister...

Works both ways. Clearly, you missed the part where the outlaw wanted the OP and her partner to pay ALL of the costs of boarding, so that her ickle darling didn't have to breathe the same air as the filthy animals...

So I'm guessing Mum doesn't take the baby out at all. She'll see loads of 'filthy animals' her travels...

New Mum is clearly paranoid. It's not the OP's home she needs. It's a doctor. And I'm completely serious.

The Masculinist

New mothers tend to be over protective of their children. In many instances this can result in them engaging in what would appear to be irrational or unreasonable behaviour. By putting your animals in either kennels or outdoor housing for one bloody week you could have avoided all of this heartache and kept the peace. Instead you have potentially turned a good deal of your OH's family against you. While I admire that the OP stuck to her guns, the situation is still a lose lose for everyone involved. Indeed, I also believe that people here are being a bit flippant by calling the OH's sister all sorts of names. Like none of us have never overreacted about anything.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Why would you have to tolerate and enable anyone's irrational and neurotic behaviour in your own home?

[Deleted User]

The Masculinist wrote: »

New mothers tend to be over protective of their children. In many instances this can result in them engaging in what would appear to be irrational or unreasonable behaviour. By putting your animals in either kennels or outdoor housing for one bloody week you could have avoided all of this heartache and kept the peace. Instead you have potentially turned a good deal of your OH's family against you. While I admire that the OP stuck to her guns, the situation is still a lose lose for everyone involved. Indeed, I also believe that people here are being a bit flippant by calling the OH's sister all sorts of names. Like none of us have never overreacted about anything.

Stop talking nonsense. If the OP had some sort of guard dog who hates guests I'd understand the concern but she doesn't so the over-dramatic family members need to be called up on it. End of.

ABajaninCork

The Masculinist wrote: »

New mothers tend to be over protective of their children. In many instances this can result in them engaging in what would appear to be irrational or unreasonable behaviour. By putting your animals in either kennels or outdoor housing for one bloody week you could have avoided all of this heartache and kept the peace. Instead you have potentially turned a good deal of your OH's family against you. While I admire that the OP stuck to her guns, the situation is still a lose lose for everyone involved. Indeed, I also believe that people here are being a bit flippant by calling the OH's sister all sorts of names. Like none of us have never overreacted about anything.

You're joking, aren't you? The SiL stayed there previously and found no problem - albeit sans baby. And you might recall SHE started the nastiness by calling the animals filthy. She also sees no problem in placing these demands on the OP and her partner and expecting them to PAY to board the animals, never mind the fact they've never been boarded before

If someone came to my home as a guest, and expected me to put out my dog to accommodate them, whilst insulting him and my home is going to be told where to get off. In plain Anglo-Saxon English, so there can be no doubt.

borderlinemeath

The Masculinist wrote: »

New mothers tend to be over protective of their children. In many instances this can result in them engaging in what would appear to be irrational or unreasonable behaviour. By putting your animals in either kennels or outdoor housing for one bloody week you could have avoided all of this heartache and kept the peace. Instead you have potentially turned a good deal of your OH's family against you. While I admire that the OP stuck to her guns, the situation is still a lose lose for everyone involved. Indeed, I also believe that people here are being a bit flippant by calling the OH's sister all sorts of names. Like none of us have never overreacted about anything.

Assuming the SIL is irrational due to being a new parent etc..(and I worked in nursery retail and met MANY irrational and irritable new parents) what is your excuse for the MIL?? Pay for her trip to keep the peace??

There's compromising to keep the peace, and there's being a complete walkover to let others take advantage. Money seems to be the root of the problem here, the SIL won't pay for a hotel, the MIL wants her trip paid for. There's a huge sense of entitlement here, and the OP is dead right to stand her ground. If she gives in then for EVERY visit thereafter she'll be expected to board her pets, at her cost!! Just to acquiesce to the SIL stringent requirements. Not a chance in hell should she back down or have given in.

makeandcreate

Karen91 wrote: »

The sister of my OH is visiting us from abroad in 2 months with her husband and baby they will be staying for a week with us. My OH told me that she has requested that we remove the animals while they stay with us for the safety of her baby.

The cat and dog are both house pets the cat is never allowed out unless on a lead because we live near a busy road and the dog only goes out to relieve herself and comes straight back in. So basically we would have to board them for the week while they are here, my parents might be able to take the dog but the cat would have to be boarded for sure as mother is not a fan of cats.

I am rather insulted about it and I am tempted to tell her find alternative accomodation, would it be unreasonable of me to do so?

Some opinions on the matter would be greatly appreciated!

It wouldn't be unreasonable. This is your home and your family. Alternatively, give them the estimates of keeping your pets in a suitable home for the week.

If they had a child that had a fear of a dog etc I might be more understanding but in this instance no. Otherwise, comply now and will you be expected to do this again at a future date?
I love dogs - my mother doesn't. It has been like that since I was 9 and brought home a stray pup. I left home at 16 and never moved back - but last month I got an English Bull Terrier and her answer was "Well, what the hell did you do that for because he won't stay here". Or to that affect.
The answer - well neither will we.
But she doesn't mean it - really. If it means missing her grandkids and me then she'll give in.
Is she just one of those really controlling people that if you give an inch to will take a mile? What are her exact concerns? I know I was convinced the cat was going to suffocate my first born as I didn't like cats and only had one as we lived on a farm. Meanwhile the dog (boxer) slept in her room.

[Deleted User]

The Masculinist wrote: »

New mothers tend to be over protective of their children. In many instances this can result in them engaging in what would appear to be irrational or unreasonable behaviour. By putting your animals in either kennels or outdoor housing for one bloody week you could have avoided all of this heartache and kept the peace. Instead you have potentially turned a good deal of your OH's family against you. While I admire that the OP stuck to her guns, the situation is still a lose lose for everyone involved. Indeed, I also believe that people here are being a bit flippant by calling the OH's sister all sorts of names. Like none of us have never overreacted about anything.

Are you for Real????? The SIL caused all this hassle, not the OP. Why should she uproot her animals to satisfy one nutty Mother ?

I am a Mother but also an animal lover and would NEVER expect anyone to boot their animals out if I was bringing my 'precious darling' to visit.

blackbird 49

Whatever happens at the end of the day is your business but personally I would never have any animals in my house, I have gone to people's homes that have animals and the first thing is the horrible smell and hairs, they say cats are clean but I find them disgusting. I myself would not be to happy to stay with someone who had animals in the house.

tommy100

seriously, what are people coming to these days. these are animals, a CAT ON A LEASH, these animals should not be imprisoned in homes. as for her request, let animals oitside during day, and leave them in utility at night. (im guessing the dog and cat have beds or else sleep in yer beds). at the end of the day, the baby is more important that the cat and dog. can't believe you are putting your nephew niece third to your pets???????

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

The nephew doesn't live in the house. The nephew has his own parents to look after him and keep him safe. It's his parents responsibly to have him stay somewhere suitable.

J Mysterio

ken wrote: »

crotch goblin.

Àaaaaaah. I almost died! Thanks so much :pac:

The Masculinist

tommy100 wrote: »

seriously, what are people coming to these days. these are animals, a CAT ON A LEASH, these animals should not be imprisoned in homes. as for her request, let animals oitside during day, and leave them in utility at night. (im guessing the dog and cat have beds or else sleep in yer beds). at the end of the day, the baby is more important that the cat and dog. can't believe you are putting your nephew niece third to your pets???????

Well said!