How often do you see local gc

I don't agree with using children as some sort of prize for 'good behaviour'.

I agree, it's dreadful, isn't it MissA

Of course, your DC have one quarter of the genes of your and your OH's parents. And, of course, a DC could turn out to be just like a grandparent.
That could come back to bite you one day too.

posted before I finished

Inherited traits.
Just wonderful!

I would advise you to seek help too, Diktat
You obviously have a lot to work through with a therapist. As I am assuming you are in America there must be plenty to choose from.

I don't think keeping GC away from a toxic person is using the children as pawns or as a "reward" for good behaviour.

Rather it's choosing not to allow your children around someone who is toxic.

If you're allowing your children around another adult, you're conveying to your children that this is a "safe" person.

Now, I do agree that "toxic" isn't necessarily a firmly drawn line, but there definitely are some behaviours I won't tolerate:

guilt trips
manipulative behaviour
undermining the parents
attempting to go behind the parents' backs (e.g. telling a child that they can stay overnight at yours without making sure it's okay with the parents first)
having "secrets" with a child and not telling the parents (note: a surprise, such as a planned birthday present for a parent, isn't a "secret")
buying big gifts without checking with parents first or buying toys the GP knows the parent doesn't allow the child to have

That kind of thing. If children see it as a "me and GP against the parent" thing, the GP is teaching the child that it's okay to not listen to your parents or to go behind their backs. That's not okay.

In those cases limiting the child's contact with the GP isn't a bad thing.

he uses guilt all the time. To the point where my husband questions whether or not he was a good grandson to mils mother ( and he WAS! We called and took her for trips, often on our own and sometimes after one of her guilt laced calls). He was a good grandson and her constantly in his ear about gmil makes him question in after she recently passed. That is an awful thing to do.

Your husband can't change her behaviours but he can change how he reacts to those behaviours! Just as you can change how you react Diktat if you want to. But as I said previously you appear to have a strategy with your MIL that you are happy with, so I'm still not entirely sure why you are telling us all about it and asking how often we see our GC!! Our experiences are just not relevant to yours are they!!

I am sceptical of this instant vilification of anybody you don’t get on with as “toxic”.
Based on what I have read, there are some “toxic” writers of posts around.
Life is not as black and white as some (maybe younger) mums seem to think. A few more decades of life have taught many of us to recognise that nobody is perfect and there are frequently two sides to any argument.
Live and let live ?

A RELATIONSHIP can be "toxic" without either involved parties being evil to the core.

Children will grow up to accept the type of relationships that they have seen modelled within the family. There is merit in not showing children that you accept relationships that make you unhappy, or else they may accept unhappy relationships in their own life later on.

Sometimes cycles need to be broken so that children can grow up with healthy expectations from relationships.

MawBroon

Personally, I don't think a failure to get on with someone would be toxic. Then again, due to my personality, I tend to get on okay with most people. But I could see how, for example, if you had two people with very dominant personalities it could be difficult.

I would define "toxic" more as things such as passive-aggressive behaviour, outright aggressive behaviour, attempting to "parent" an adult child/CIL, that type of thing.

Those kinds of behaviours are not acceptable. I think in this case it's reasonable to say in the moment, "I am bothered by your behaviour and would like it to stop." If the person refuses, then you change the subject or, if the behaviour continues or is more serious, you leave.

There is merit in not showing children that you accept relationships that make you unhappy, or else they may accept unhappy relationships in their own life later on

Not sure that necessarily follows notanan.
Children need to learn to form their own judgements as they mature and also recognise how to get on with people, to accommodate without sacrificing their integrity and to negotiate relationships.
One of the worrying things about the “snowflake” nature of young adults who need to be assured of “safe spaces” in universities in an intellectual sense, who need to be “warned” about literature containing challenging ideas or who cannot cope with the notion of un PC language in a historical context is that they have been denied this opportunity to analyse and evaluate. They have been sheltered to the point where they cannot cope with ideas outside their own experience.
Little children will emulate their parents and if Mummy and Daddy regard granny/grandpa as “toxic” it is inevitable that the child will not develop a relationship itself.
I am not talking about violent or abusive grandparents , just a MIL/FIL that somebody doesn’t get on with.
Maybe there are other family members who are similarly seen as “toxic”, maybe neighbours - it is not an enormous step to see how that could extend further to ethnic groups.
How will a child ever learn tolerance if they do not witness it?
I am frankly appalled st this tendency in the younger generation.

I think there is also merit in teaching children that everybody is different, not everyone will fit into their way of thinking, or agree with everyone else, and that's all ok, because we're all individuals.
A lot of people who have had less than perfect family relationships say that it taught them very well how not to be.

How will a child ever learn tolerance if they do not witness it?
They won't learn it by seeing their parents worn down by persistent intolerance etc from others without standing up for themselves!

A lot of people who have had less than perfect family relationships say that it taught them very well how not to be.
Yet pretty much all of social science says the opposite, that witnessing bad relationships normalise it and increase the risks of children taking chaos from childhood into their adult relationships.

I think there is also merit in teaching children that everybody is different, not everyone will fit into their way of thinking, or agree with everyone else, and that's all ok, because we're all individuals.

Quite. Which is why when people persistently demonstrate the opposite of those, behaviours it is important that children don't see their parent accept & normalise it.

How will a child ever learn tolerance if they do not witness it?

They won't learn it by witnessing intollerance and witnessing other family members acting like its fine/normal

MawBroon social science says you have it all backwards:

Children who have a safe stable home & witness healthy relationships within their own families grow to be MORE resilient in adult life, not less

Whereas children who witness chaotic relationships in the home more often go on to struggle with adult relationships and also are more likely to struggle in general with adult life.

If you think people who think that family homes should be safe respectful spaces are snowflakes, well then the world needs more snowflakes!

Just because someone is related to someone doesn't mean they should get indefinite get out of gaol free cards for behaviours that wouldn't be accepted by friends/colleagues etc.

Being family doesnt give you carte blanche. Family members have limits too. There is only so many times one can forgive & forget before deciding to step off the carousel (unless their confidence has been worn too low to do so)

Some people think that no matter how badly a person behaves, they should always be welcomed back into the fold just because they're family. But once kids are involved often chances run out, seeing a bad relationship through kids eyes can catalyse putting an end to it if you don't want your kids to grow up accepting bad treatment from others.

I don't necessarily think keeping half of the family away for such toxic behaviour as throwing a surprise party is all that healthy and stable.
Still, everyone has their own opinions on the subject.

notanan Mawbroon did not say people who think family homes should be safe respectful places are snowflakes! I have no idea why you wold have read her post as saying that.

Social Science certainly does evidence that children who have a safe stable home and witness healthy relationships grow to be more relationships. Truly healthy relationships include the constructive and healthy negotiation of misunderstandings, disagreements, differences of opinion that are all part of truly healthy relationships!

I am not saying that relationships should continue to exist just because it is family members ....but that children witnessing negotiation and kindness and understanding within NORMAL family relationships is all part of developing resilience as they grow up.

I am not suggesting that some of the more extreme behaviours described on this thread are normal family behaviours ...don't want any misunderstanding there ...but sometimes with some things described I think demonstrating a little more kindness and understanding would be ok, and a positive observation for children as they develop

...grow to be more resilient!!!

But you cannot make OTHERS demonstrate kindness and understanding around your children. You cant change other people. All you can do is decide whether or not their exposure to such behaviours should be limited.

All you can control is your own reactions, boundaries and limits.

Turning the other cheek indefinitely is not healthy relationship modeling, nor is trying to change/fix a person who is unpleasant to you. Those set a very dangerous precedent for kids future relationshios

Thank you madgran I am sorry if I did not express myself clearly.
I was talking about university students who seem to need to be sheltered from intellectual rigour, from hearing views which may vary dramatically from their own and from forming their own opinions .
Even needing warnings that some literature like Shakespeare tragedies may include gratuitous violence or (as in Othello or the Merchant of Venice) racist or anti-Semitic references.
I thought I was clear, but apparently not.

notanan I made the same statement about not being able to change others behaviours further up the thread!!

I made a point of saying in my last post that I was not referring to more extreme behaviours (which clearly do not demonstrate kindness etc!).....I said that a little more kindness and understanding could be demonstrated for some of the less extreme (possibly misguided but not deliberately cruel or vindictive or controlling or whatever) behaviours etc that have been described. I also made a point of saying that I was referring to NORMAL family relationships! Your comments appear to never be considering those but just the extremes. I'm not sure why?

Mawbroon your comments seemed quite clear to me