Do you agree with this article about in-laws?

[Laurie4b]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/13/health/kerner-inlaws/index.html?hpt=hp_bn12

 

I am wondering if other people's experience backs up what this article says: if a man is close to his in-laws, it is good for the marriage (makes sense), but if a woman is close to her in-laws, it's bad for a marriage. :confused:

 

The first half of the proposition seems intuitive. It's the second part I'd like to hear your experiences about. Does anyone have a good marriage who is close to her in-laws? Has anyone had the experience of her closeness with her in-laws possibly being damaging to her marriage? I don't really understand that .

 

I hope that it is true that a woman can have closeness with her dh and her dh's parents, because I'm the mom of 4 boys.

 

Can we keep the discussion to the specific topic of closeness with in-laws , as opposed to being at war with in-laws? I know a lot of people have deep struggles with that, but I'm afraid the thread could totally get side-tracked if we get into difficult in-law stories. Thanks.

[Remudamom]

Well, I'm good with dh's family but I wouldn't say we are close. Dh is pretty close with my family. My dil treats me dearly and I think she is wonderful but they live across the states, so maybe I just don't have the opportunity to drive her nuts.

 

My sil is very close to my mom, closer than one of my sisters. Other sis is divorced and her inlaws took her side in the divorce and they are close still.

 

I think if you are a good mil you'll have a good dil. Or maybe you'll be blessed with a great dil anyhow, like I was!

 

I think the article is a good one and that the whole thing is pretty much correct. Mils do tend to interfere and dhs want their wive's loyalty (duh).

 

I try to stay very hands off with my married son and dil. I don't think they need me butting in. Of course, the fact that I think my dil is very nearly perfect has a lot to do with that.

[justamouse]

 

"Yet a tight relationship with the in-laws can also backfire for many women: Closeness may give a mother-in-law a greater sense of access and ability to cross boundaries and meddle, which can seem threatening, particularly if a woman feels that her in-laws are interfering with her identity as a wife and mother."

 

 

 

 

 

So just don't meddle?

 

 

 

 

 

I have a good marriage. I am not close to my MIL. That's not for lack of trying on my part. I'm happy with the way things are. I've tried and tried, and I don't feel guilty about not trying anymore.

 

 

 

 

I plan on being the best darned MIL I can be. I have high expectations of myself.

[Guest inoubliable]

The article made sense to me. DH and I have nothing to do with his parents, and barely speak to mine. We don't have an in-law problem. I have three boys, and my thoughts on reading that?

 

1) Hope her parents are nice, but ultimately I only care that *she* is good for him.

2) Sweet - the boys can go to *her* parents' for home cooked meals and holidays, because DH and I planning on doing some major traveling once the kiddos are out of the house.

and

3) My children's marriage is *their* marriage. My children's children are *their* children. As a future mother-in-law, I will be there to support my children and their spouses, give advice if they ask, and love them (and their spouse). I don't expect a "friendship" or to "gain a daughter".

[Harriet Vane]

This article is completely idiotic. It makes assumptions about people based on a hierarchy. I really don't see how a mil on one side is going to be more prone to unhealthy interfering than on the other just because a dil enjoys a close relationship.

 

People form relationships, choose actions and behavior, respect or disrespect boundaries based on their morals and their personality, period.

 

FWIW I have a very close relationship with my in-laws, and I treasure it.

[HelenNotOfTroy]

My ex-husband was close to my parents. My husband is not.

[BigMamaBird]

I'm close to my In Laws and we have a good marriage. I'm not attached at the hip, and I'm definitely closer to my family, but we get along well.

[MeghanL]

I am close to my in-laws. It has not hindered my marriage in any way. But, I also don't tell my in-laws everything, or complain about my husband to them or try to get them to gang up with me on changing him. My MIL does comment on my parenting and homeschooling decisions...but I don't take those personally. She just comments. I can either take it or leave it. She's a teacher so she's not thrilled with our decisions, but I'm secure enough to not let everything she says be a judgement or reflection on me. I'll just smile, put on a pensive face and we move on. My husband is also very close with my family. So, maybe it makes a difference if both spouses get along well with the in-laws?

[Impish]

I can see how wife and mom having a close relationship could be unnerving to the dh/son.

 

But, I have no clue how normal, healthy inlaw relationships work.

[Meriwether]

Dh has a great relationship with my parents. We are struggling with his right now. I think it is entirely how our parents interact with us, though. When I ask my mom for advice with the kids I get such gems as, "They're your kids; you've got to know." She meant that I know their personalities, their histories, and the goals I have for them. We can't go an hour with my in-laws without them trying to influence/change/override our parenting. Sometimes I think women tend to do things around the house and with the kids more like their moms. They can naturally spend time at either home more comfortably. Spending time at the inlaws or having them at my home seems to be a constant "That's not how I do that." I think good relationships are good wherever you find them. I think either set of inlaws could help or hurt a marriage. I hope to have a good relationship with my DIL's someday. I hope to be like my parents - as involved as they allow us to be but respecting their space. When my Dh, SIL or BIL did something that my parents weren't thrilled about, they just said things like, "You've got your own lives to live. Your first duty is to your spouse. We love you."

[NavyMommy]

Interesting. In my family both of those are false and DH and I have a wonderful marriage. My dad and DH will play golf on occasion so they get along, but they're not close in any way. I am very close to my dad though (he raised me after my mother passed away when I was young, so it's different then most father / daughter relationships since he was our only parent). My MIL and I are also super close. I talk to her on the phone 2-3 times a week probably, we email, and now that we live closer we are spending holidays and weekends with one another occasionally. I even lived with them on an off a bit when DH was deployed last year.

 

That being said my MIL is careful to not meddle and aside from one argument we had when DH and I were first married we don't argue either so DH isn't forced to choose sides. Especially since I lost my mom at such a young age I really treasure my relationship with my MIL.

[*Lulu*]

 

 

 

FWIW, I think in-laws on either side have the potential to overstep boundaries. If someone has one of those personalities in their family it isn't going to magically disappear just because they are sitting on the bride's side of the chapel.

[Word Nerd]

I just skimmed the article, and what stood out to me was the part about not setting clear boundaries. I think that's the real issue here—not that these women are closer to their in-laws.

[Mom0012]

"On one hand, a woman may be more likely to form a bond with a man's parents when she wants to change something about him or get him to agree with her about an aspect of child-rearing -- essentially, trying to get his parents on her "side."

 

I find this ridiculous and offensive. Men form relationships with their inlaws because they enjoy the thought of gaining a new family and women form relationships just to gang up on their husbands? Come on!

 

Lisa

[LostSurprise]

This is not true in my experience.

 

I'm not saying it couldn't be true for someone but it depends on too many variables which I don't see as universal (women have bad boundaries, MILs always meddle, men have good boundaries, men don't meddle, love means bonding w/ the other family).

 

I'm closer to my in-laws than dh is to my parents. I don't see dh's distance with them as a lack of love for me, nor has MIL ever attempted to meddle.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I just skimmed the article, and what stood out to me was the part about not setting clear boundaries. I think that's the real issue here—not that these women are closer to their in-laws.

 

Not having good boundaries doesn't make you closer to someone in a healthy way.

[Parrothead]

I have no idea. Dh's mom and I are not close. But we are not at war. She has her life and I have mine. We do get along when we are together. Same with dh and my parents. They get along but aren't close.

 

I think what helps us is that we are so far away from family. Dh and I have to depend on each other, and family isn't close enough to meddle.

[Laurie4b]

"On one hand, a woman may be more likely to form a bond with a man's parents when she wants to change something about him or get him to agree with her about an aspect of child-rearing -- essentially, trying to get his parents on her "side."

 

I find this ridiculous and offensive. Men form relationships with their inlaws because they enjoy the thought of gaining a new family and women form relationships just to gang up on their husbands? Come on!

 

Lisa

 

Yeah, that was confusing to me. I don't define "close" as meddling or no boundaries---and that was not how it was defined for the men. It was like they used two different definitions of "close": close as in "emotionally connected, loving" for the males and "close" as in "emeshed, no boundaries, meddling" for the women.

[Jean in Newcastle]

 

Yeah, that was confusing to me. I don't define "close" as meddling or no boundaries---and that was not how it was defined for the men. It was like they used two different definitions of "close": close as in "emotionally connected, loving" for the males and "close" as in "emeshed, no boundaries, meddling" for the women.

 

You nailed it!

[elegantlion]

Bah. I'm close to my MIL (Father deceased before I was in the picture). Dh is closer to my parents, but location is part of that. We have different relationship dynamics and that is more due to personality and parenting styles than in-law/not in-law.

 

I don't call MIL up to chat, but I have a distinct relationship with her outside of her status as my MIL.

[I.Dup.]

The article made sense to me. DH and I have nothing to do with his parents, and barely speak to mine. We don't have an in-law problem. I have three boys, and my thoughts on reading that?

 

1) Hope her parents are nice, but ultimately I only care that *she* is good for him.

2) Sweet - the boys can go to *her* parents' for home cooked meals and holidays, because DH and I planning on doing some major traveling once the kiddos are out of the house.

and

3) My children's marriage is *their* marriage. My children's children are *their* children. As a future mother-in-law, I will be there to support my children and their spouses, give advice if they ask, and love them (and their spouse). I don't expect a "friendship" or to "gain a daughter".

 

I like your attitude. I hope to be able to separate myself in this way, I think it's healthy. My kids are still so young but I can see myself being able to allow them to be independent.

 

My MIL is not the type to meddle or tell anyone what to do. She is also a very hard woman, tends to be angry so you have to somewhat tip-toe around her. But we have always been reasonably close. We aren't besties or anything, lol, but we love and support each other.

 

My dh is close to my parents because my parents were a major form of support at the beginning of our marriage. We were young, I was pregnant, so we did depend on family support for a few years. That definitely helped us to all be closer.

[LMV]

Most of this article I think is kind of silly.

 

We had been married for less than two years when my dad died so he and my husband didn't have as much time together. There was a lot of mutual respect in their relationship though. My mom and my husband have become close over the years. I would have a hard time with a spouse who couldn't treat my mom with respect and kindness but I also believe that relationships can't be forced so if they hadn't connected the way they have I think it would be fine.

 

At this point I would say that my MIL and I are close, she has very strong relationships with all of our kids, and our marriage gets stronger with each passing year. I will also say that I truly believe she has always been on our side and wanted the best for her son and our family it just took awhile for her to figure out how she best supported us. It really wasn't a boundary issue as much as an issue that grief is hard and everyone processes it differently. When our daughter died we had a hard time supporting each other and I think to some extent my MIL got caught in the middle of that. She was also grieving herself for a granddaughter she had loved and I couldn't always handle that either. My husband and I finally managed to grieve together and now we're solid in a way we never realized we weren't before. In many ways life has been challenging over the past five years but we're now much better at supporting and communicating and we truly believe that we can get through anything together.

[fairfarmhand]

I think generalizations are stupid. I believe that the personalities of the people in the relationships have more to do with it than anything. Some people can maintain closeness without sticking their noses where it doesn't belong. Others need the distance to keep the boundaries in place.

[LMV]

"On one hand, a woman may be more likely to form a bond with a man's parents when she wants to change something about him or get him to agree with her about an aspect of child-rearing -- essentially, trying to get his parents on her "side."

 

I find this ridiculous and offensive. Men form relationships with their inlaws because they enjoy the thought of gaining a new family and women form relationships just to gang up on their husbands? Come on!

 

Lisa

 

Yes! Actually maybe I should revise my original post and just state that the entire article was kind of silly.

[Janie Grace]

I agree with the "silly article" diagnosis. I think CNN thought, "hmmm, holiday time; we need a light-hearted but deep-sounding family dynamics article" and they found someone to write one. In-law and marital dynamics vary wildly based on personalities, personal histories, circumstances and a million other factors.

 

I do think it was funny that the writer mentioned a man feeling less hassled at his in-laws' house. That is NOT the case for my dh. My mom is, um... intense.

[Zebra]

 

But, I have no clue how normal, healthy inlaw relationships work.

 

 

Me either.

 

Sometimes people think that the reason their IL relationships work is because THEY work so hard at it and are so forgiving....and what I have seen is, crazy people are impossible to have a relationship with, no matter how hard you try. Both sides need to have a healthy respect for boundaries and when you don't have that it doesn't matter which set of in-laws it is, IMHO.

[jujsky]

I agree with the article. DH and my mom get along really well. I don't get along with his parents. We have one of the strongest marriages of anyone we know. My mom got along well with her MIL, my dad didn't get along well with his MIL. They divorced. I'm sure there's anecdotal evidence for both sides of the argument. The article does state people with these relationships are MORE likely to divorce -- not that they will for certain -- so I think it's important to keep that in mind as well.

[gardenmom5]

No, I don't agree with it.

 

I know a number of women who have/had the same or better relationships with their mil's than their own mothers - and they have good marriages

 

My sil got along with her ex-mil better than with her mother/my mil. she's divorced. . . . (my mil is insane)

 

oh - I've another friend had a great relationship with her ex-mil until she died. her ex-mil even treated her dd with her NEW dh as if she were her own granddaughter.

[Laurie4b]

I think generalizations are stupid. I believe that the personalities of the people in the relationships have more to do with it than anything. Some people can maintain closeness without sticking their noses where it doesn't belong. Others need the distance to keep the boundaries in place.

 

 

Thanks. I didn't get this before. I was confused because to me, being close doesn't mean sticking your nose where it doesn't belong--it's just liking one another, being able to talk, enjoying each other's company, respecting one another.. I was trying to figure out how that increased the chance of divorce!

[gardenmom5]

 

Thanks. I didn't get this before. I was confused because to me, being close doesn't mean sticking your nose where it doesn't belong--it's just liking one another, being able to talk, enjoying each other's company, respecting one another.. I was trying to figure out how that increased the chance of divorce!

I absolutely do NOT equate "being close" with "sticking your nose where it doesn't belong". (doing the latter tends to destroy the former) if the article is representing it that way - the article is misrepresenting reality.

[Audrey]

http://www.cnn.com/2...tml?hpt=hp_bn12

 

I am wondering if other people's experience backs up what this article says: if a man is close to his in-laws, it is good for the marriage (makes sense), but if a woman is close to her in-laws, it's bad for a marriage. :confused:

 

The first half of the proposition seems intuitive. It's the second part I'd like to hear your experiences about. Does anyone have a good marriage who is close to her in-laws? Has anyone had the experience of her closeness with her in-laws possibly being damaging to her marriage? I don't really understand that .

 

I hope that it is true that a woman can have closeness with her dh and her dh's parents, because I'm the mom of 4 boys.

 

Can we keep the discussion to the specific topic of closeness with in-laws , as opposed to being at war with in-laws? I know a lot of people have deep struggles with that, but I'm afraid the thread could totally get side-tracked if we get into difficult in-law stories. Thanks.

 

 

I was very close to my dh's mother. It was like a having a second mom (my own having passed away several years prior). I feel like she was a wonderful gift in my life, and I don't think that relationship hurt my marriage in any way.

 

I don't think I'm nearly as close to my fil and his (second) wife, but we are on friendly terms most of the time. Sometimes, it's been a bit bumpy, but then you do have to draw your boundaries clearly. Since then, it's been mutually respectful. We understand each other better, even if we aren't the chumiest of pals. My dh is the only one of the 7 kids who ever visits or does anything for them, so that may count for something, too.

 

I wonder about how closeness to the woman's in-laws could be damaging? I suppose if the mil and fil aren't respectful of their son's personal boundaries and if they are spilling all kinds of history and stories to the dil, then yes, that could be damaging if she feels her dh was hiding this stuff. It could also be damaging if, in the close relationship, the dil uses the mil/fil as a place to dump her personal marriage issues.

 

I think if common sense and a healthy dose of discretion are applied to the relationship, then it would be fine, and maybe even a very good thing. Certainly, when spouses are adversarial with their in-laws that never turns out well. I'd say the chances for a happy marriage are much better with the close relationship with in-laws. At least, I'd take those odds over duking it out.

 

ETA: I don't know how it works with dh being close to his in-laws. My mother passed away several years before I met dh. My father lived 1000 miles away and passed away only a few years after we married, so I just don't have that experience.