New Mom Says Her Mother-in-Law Wants To Take the Baby for an Overnight Before She’s Comfortable

A new mom said she was alarmed after her mother-in-law wanted to take her 5-week-old baby away from her for an entire day, even though the newborn was exclusively breastfed, had never been away from his mother, and did not take a bottle.

The 30-year-old woman shared the situation on Reddit, explaining that she had given birth five weeks earlier and lived long distance from her in-laws. Her mother-in-law was coming into town to meet the baby, but instead of simply visiting with the family, she wanted to take the newborn “all over town” by herself for the entire day.

The poster said that was not possible for several reasons.

First, the baby was exclusively breastfed. He did not take a bottle. When offered one, he would only eat for a few seconds before screaming and looking for the breast. He had also never been away from his mother and became worked up when she left the room for more than a few minutes.

The mother said she did not see that as strange or unhealthy. In her view, a 5-week-old baby being attached to his mother, especially while exclusively breastfeeding, was completely normal.

But her mother-in-law and partner did not agree.

According to the poster, her mother-in-law had repeatedly told her partner that he needed to make the mother put the baby on a bottle so she could take him. The mother-in-law also allegedly said the poster did not know what was best for the baby, even though this was the mother’s third child and the mother-in-law’s first grandchild.

The baby’s father also pressured her. The poster said he told her he would not be with someone who kept his baby from his mother and acted so selfishly.

That comment left the poster shaken. From her perspective, she was not keeping the baby from anyone. She had offered to let the mother-in-law spend as much time with the baby as she wanted, as long as they were all in the same place. She said she would not interfere unless the baby needed to eat or became too upset.

But she would not let the newborn leave with the mother-in-law alone.

The poster brought the situation to Reddit in a post titled “AITAH for telling my MIL she can’t take her grandson for an entire day by herself?”: https://www.reddit.com/r/AITAH/comments/1l2g39e/aitah_for_telling_my_mil_she_cant_take_her/

The details made the request feel even more unsettling. The mother-in-law was unfamiliar with the area. She had not told the poster where her hotel was, where she planned to take the baby, what she planned to do, or how long the day would actually last. The only clear part was that she wanted the baby without the mother present.

The poster said the whole situation gave her alarm bells and red flags.

She later edited the post to say her answer was an absolute no. Her mother-in-law would not be allowed to take the baby anywhere.

In another update, the poster shared more context that made the situation more serious. Her partner and his mother were from a Caribbean country, and there were cultural differences and a language barrier. The poster said she had only met her mother-in-law in person once before, years earlier, and had not seen the warning signs until late in pregnancy.

She also said her partner had repeatedly said during the pregnancy that he wanted the baby born in his home country instead of in the United States, where they lived. She said that was not feasible and made that clear.

He had also talked about wanting to take the baby back to his home country someday so the child could learn the language and culture. The poster said she feared her partner and mother-in-law were plotting something behind her back, but because she had been called controlling, manipulative, dramatic, and selfish so many times, she was starting to doubt herself.

That is what made the post so tense. The issue was not simply a grandmother asking for a little time with a baby. It was a brand-new mother being pressured to hand over a 5-week-old newborn who could not feed without her, to someone who had not shared where she would be going and who specifically wanted the mother excluded.

The poster said the visit eventually happened without a major incident, but it was extremely stressful. She did not allow the newborn out of her sight for even a moment. She refused to offer a bottle, and the baby remained exclusively breastfed.

She also said the visit revealed that the bigger problem was her partner. The mother-in-law was pushy, but the partner was worse. By the time she updated the post, she said she and the baby were separated from him and safe with her family. She had also contacted a lawyer to make sure she was protected.

The conflict ended up showing her something painful. The person who should have been protecting her postpartum recovery and his newborn’s needs had instead pressured her to override her instincts for his mother’s wants.

Commenters strongly supported the mother and told her not to let the baby leave her sight.

Many said a 5-week-old exclusively breastfed newborn should not be taken away from his mother for an entire day, especially by someone the baby barely knew. Several commenters pointed out that the baby’s food source, comfort, and routine were all tied to the mother at that age.

Others were deeply concerned by the mother-in-law’s lack of details. The fact that she had not said where she was staying, where she wanted to take the baby, or what she planned to do made many commenters suspicious. They said a grandparent who cannot clearly explain the plan should not be trusted with a newborn alone.

A major theme in the comments was the partner’s behavior. Commenters said the mother-in-law was not the only issue. The partner was pressuring the mother, calling her selfish, and threatening the relationship because she would not hand over a vulnerable infant.

Several people urged the poster to take legal precautions, especially after she added the international context. Commenters warned her to secure documents, talk to a lawyer, and make sure the baby could not be taken out of the country without her consent.

Others focused on health and safety. They said a baby that young may not have full vaccine protection yet and should not be taken “all over town” by a visiting relative, especially through unfamiliar places.

A few commenters said grandparents can absolutely bond with a baby while the mother is present. There was no reason the mother-in-law needed alone time, much less an entire day, with a newborn who could not feed without his mother.

The strongest advice was simple: trust the alarm bells. The poster did not need to prove that something dangerous would happen before saying no. The baby was too young, the request was too extreme, and the pressure from her partner made the situation even more serious.

By the end of the discussion, the mother’s boundary looked less like overprotectiveness and more like basic protection. She said no, kept the baby with her, and later made sure she and her child were safe.