No Contact by DIL's?

Many DiL's have a terrible time with the MiL's and vice versa. In my case my MiL was very, very jealous! Having read some of the threads here and elsewhere, it would seem that those MiL's who get on with DiL's have a good healthy relationship with them AND their son. And by healthy I mean that she not jealous that he has chosen another woman to marry, yes, he does have sex with his new wife (I say this because my MiL put us in separate beds after we had been married 3 months!) he is now grown up and is not a little boy any longer, he can make decisions for himself because he is now an adult (he chose DiL as a wife!) and she will be the mother of your grandchildren.

I loved my mil by my first husband more than my mum. In fact when I left him I went with the children to stay with her for 7 weeks, she was wonderful. After we were divorced we still kept in touch and my 2nd husband and myself were always included in any family events, which were many, even with my ex husband present. She was like a mum to me. My own mother, she was controlling or tried to be, would find fault with anything not done her way and in the end I just had no time for her and I always swore I would never ever be like her.

grannygranby - I don’t know why you think ageing women lose power is either true or relevant.
What power do women seek?
What is missing when we age?
I just don’t understand this.

I do think though that our relationship with our grandchildren is through our adult children and the people they love.
If we love our own children we should try to see the good in the people they have chosen. I think if more grandparents did that, life would be simpler. Too many grandparents seem to want to by-pass the parents (maybe to re-live the parenting days?).

I can only remember me and my MIl having one cross word but she is a silent sulking type and I avoid conflict. It has worked well

Strange to think that a son has no way to contact mum, if he desires. Who are the sons without phones, internet, post?

It is not necessarily about having no way to contact Norah. It is about being in a relationship where maybe an AC has to choose because of the needs/demands of their partner. Its easy to think they should just stand up for themselves. But coercive relationships are VERY complicated!!

OP, you seem to assume that all MILs are lovely, hard-done-by.
have you actually read how some of them behave.
it is irrelevant that this is GN.
that sounds akin to jingoism; my country right or wrong.
most people don't think like that anymore.

It’s just people. Some are awful, nasty, spiteful, jealous, controlling etc. Some of these people are women and therefore MIL’s and DIL’s. Some get their comeuppance eventually and thoroughly deserve it!

True tickingbird. Its unfair to generalise.

I've always maintained 'it takes two to tango', and we need to work together or sometimes make concessions when it comes to being MILs or grandparents.

My relationship with DIL has had its ups and downs, especially when they separated for a while. But I always maintained that the relationship issues were between them, and I was there to support in any way I could. She did indeed cut off contact through social media temporarily, when it was my son she was angry with. Over the years the relationship has gotten much better and I hold her dearly and hope it is returned.

I've always maintained 'it takes two to tango', and we need to work together or sometimes make concessions when it comes to being MILs or grandparents.

True. But if it takes two to tango then both parties have to be willing/want to tango!

In relationships all parties need to make concessions if they want the relationship to work, not just MILs or grandparents

I think it's the time we live in. Families used to be close and you'd keep the peace with your ils because they are your dh parents, simple as that.
Different if the dh agrees with nc obviously.
I'm like this with mine, there are times I could have kicked up a fuss, but I walk away.

Our DIL’s are lovely, but we estranged from both sets of parents eventually. It was the only way to keep our sanity.

Madgran77

*Strange to think that a son has no way to contact mum, if he desires. Who are the sons without phones, internet, post?*

It is not necessarily about having no way to contact Norah. It is about being in a relationship where maybe an AC has to choose because of the needs/demands of their partner. Its easy to think they should just stand up for themselves. But coercive relationships are VERY complicated!!

There’s a lot more to coercive relationships than a son not contacting his mother, though.

Coercive control is a criminal offence, akin to physical domestic abuse. It’s a police matter, and nothing whatsoever to do with a DIL making her husband chose between her and his mother. That alone, does not qualify as a coercive relationship.

The targeted individual would be isolated from everyone - friends, family, work colleagues - not just their mum.

They can be deprived of sleep, food, medical assistance and money.

They would be regularly humiliated, degraded and dehumanised. Physical abuse is also common.

I don’t think it’s helpful to suggest a coercive relationship as a reason for a son not contacting his mother because coercive relationships are extremely serious given the real, imminent danger the victim. It is also more common for men to be perpetrators of coercive control, not women. 97% of all prosecutions for coercive control were men. 95% of victims were women.

Ah, I meant to say given the real, imminent danger the victim is in

I am well aware of what coercive control is and that it is a criminal offence, akin to domestic physical abuse

My point in response to a comment about "having a phone" was that it is too simplistic to suggest that a son (or daughter) can just contact their family if they want to.

I deliberately did not say "coercive control"! I said "coercive relationships" ...there are many shades and levels of coerciveness within a relationship and that CAN be a reason why contact is lost with family. It CAN be because of the problems that arise in the relationship if contact is made with family, for whatever reason. It CAN be because of the neediness/personality/lack of confidence or whatever of a partner. It CAN be because the wider family or members within it behave inappropriately/badly/over step boundaries. It CAN be for so many reasons including coerciveness.

It definitely can be a lot more than someone having a phone and "choosing" not to use it!!

I deliberately did not say "coercive control"! I said "coercive relationships"...there are many shades and levels of coerciveness within a relationship

That’s just semantics though Madgran. Coercive control and a coercive relationship is the exact same thing.

A man who doesn’t contact his mother to avoid an argument is not being coerced. That is a man choosing what he perceives to be easiest for him. He still has a choice.

A coercive relationship involves serious abuse beyond the possibility of an argument. I think it would be better to acknowledge that the son is choosing not to upset his wife, rather than calling it a coercive relationship, because it just isn’t. Yes it’s unfortunate, but ultimately, that’s on him.

It is also incredibly uncommon for a man to be a victim of coercive control by a woman. Not unheard of, of course, but uncommon nonetheless.

I therefore don’t think it’s helpful to throw it out there as a reason why a son may not be contacting his mother, when there are other, more likely reasons for this to be the case.

Some men just can't be bothered and are happy to have sporadic contact.

Some women make the effort and see her family weekly or whatever with or without the man.

The women then get the blame from the men's side of the family as her side are 'favored' and so on.

The women then doesn't want to make any effect because they haven't been very nice to her or about her.

It can be as simple as that.

I did not say "coercive control"! That was the phrase you said! I said "Coercive relationship" which is not the same thing...as I said previously there are levels and shades of coerciveness in relationships!!

Yes it is uncommon for a coercive control to be proved legislatively with a man as the victim. That was not what I was talking about,

I accept that you feel my use of the words "coerciveness in a relationship" and "coercive relationship" were inappropriate. I do not agree. So be it! I really don't want to derail the thread.

Early in my marriage, one of the first things that happened was that we were woken early in the morning by my PIL who had decided to come over and do some home maintenance for us. I thought this was weird as we were supposed to be grown ups who could do our own home maintenance and they had just decided to come and do this. We hadn't said anything about it being needed or wanted. I could let that go. In the course of doing the maintenance, FIL put his tools all over the one nice piece of furniture I had. We had very little when we first got married so I was proud of this one nice item I had. I was enjoying making a nice home and looking after it well. When FIL was done my one nice piece of furniture was scratched beyond repair. The bathroom I'd deep cleaned that morning was covered in mud. It might be a silly thing but I felt so disappointed that something I was proud of had been destroyed and felt upset that he thought it was okay to leave my bathroom like that, especially since I'd just cleaned it. I let that go too. This is the earliest example I can think of that illustrates how I experienced my ILs - people who would bulldoze all over my home and family, not care about my values and I was supposed to be grateful for it. That was the smallest tip of a very big iceberg. When she started doing it to my children, I stood up and said no. She probably wonders why after ten years I stopped contacting her.

I'd just like to point out that difficult/annoying/controlling women can also be the mother of the wife too. It's not only the mothers of sons who can be difficult to deal with. The reason we hear DiLs complaining about their MiL, and vice versa, is probably because most people who frequent Gransnet & Mumsnet are women. Men don't tend to bother airing their grievances online so much about their difficult/annoying MiLs, and mostly try to keep the peace with their wives, which is how it should be. Just think of all the barbed comments over the years made by male comedians about their MiLs. They weren't made for no reason.

Thankfully, I have a lovely DiL, who I get on very well with. And my husband & I count her parents as good friends/family. However, my son's MiL has, in the past, been known to be controlling/opinionated/bossy and, on occasion, poking her nose in where it's not wanted. DiL, being the sweet person she is, isn't very strong when it comes to dealing with her mother, and would rather not cause any upset. DS, not wanting to cause any rift, bites his tongue in order to keep the peace, and to keep his wife happy. And I, being a paternal GP, do my best to keep a good relationship going with all concerned. It's not been all plain sailing, and there has been the odd issue over the years, but we've dealt with things like the mature adults we are, and we all now have a mutual respect for each other.

Like tickingbird says, ... It’s just people. Some are awful, nasty, spiteful, jealous, controlling etc. Some of these people are women and therefore MIL’s and DIL’s.

Let's remember that 50% of all MiLs are the mothers of daughters, but that does not mean they are all perfect, and the other 50% who are the mothers of sons aren't all bad.

Nansnet, I think it's easier to deal with an overstepping mother when it's your own. This, coupled with women often being left to be the social secretaries, is maybe why it's more likely to be MILs who end up with no communication. If the MIL is making the life of the social secretary difficult and she can't sort it, there isn't the same interest in maintaining that connection.

Let's remember that 50% of all MiLs are the mothers of daughters, but that does not mean they are all perfect, and the other 50% who are the mothers of sons aren't all bad.

I agree but I'm not sure anyone is suggesting any particular group is "all bad"!

However, I do think there can be a tendency to make assumptions about groups or causes of problems or solutions to problems based on own experiences, which I suppose is understandable

I try not to make assumptions Madgran and will call out anyone who does be it MIL group or DIL group. In the end, we all know our own situation, from our own POV.

What does make me scratch my head is that almost all MILs have also been DILs and you'd think there would have been some learning in that where it is the MIL being difficult.

Some great posts Madgran.

A once loving son/daughter who was in regular contact with his/her parents and is no longer in contact at all, maybe displaying signs that they are involved with a coercive controlling partner.

It is of course ridiculous to blame the AC's partner if the AC has never been one for making an effort to keep in touch and visit in person.

Before our estrangement, we'd noticed that our ES was no longer in contact with friends he'd had since primary school. Their social circle was very much orientated around his wife's friends. Yet another indication of the controlling nature of their relationship.