Working just to avoid being home with in-laws

And on how she will be treating her in-laws :-D. If all this expectation of giving PIL company,driving them around,cooking for them will end up making her bitter and resentful its better to choose the lesser evil and take up the job.

 

yup she is right... i had a friend who desperately took a job just to get out of home.. she took a job that paid 9 bucks per hour... her brain stays healthy otherwise she will go :spin:drowning listening to her MIL all day long..

i also agree with this:

in my friend's case, she already knew her MIL will drive her crazy if she stayed home all day

 

You know this may be mean, but I can't stand my own parents if they stayed at home with me all day long, so there's no question of not taking a job.

"So, would I like to get rid of my in laws at 12$ an hour for a few hours a day?
Hell yes! You don't have to pay me at all"

 

I don't think she is doing anything wrong. If she is thinking or wanting to do this it means that she needs that time out from them. There is no ? about the way in-laws treat her. Because if she got along SO well with them then she would be looking forward to it & not looking to take a job. also the in-laws could be nice but when you live in a nuclear set up most of the time you get use to it & when in-laws come for 6+ months its not easy to adjust. Whatever you say your independance is replaced by more work/responsibilty .

When parents decide to come to US I always wonder how it works for them if son & dil are working & they are stuck at home with no company. In my opinion its better to stay in India where you have neighbours, relatives to chat with. It must be very difficult to leave everything & come to your kids who are super busy in their lives.

 

Oh and there are LOTS of women in India who work not really because they need money but because they would rather be out then in the house all day doing the house work. I know some personally who have told me that .

 

You are right that it can be passive aggressive. However, the whole problem in the first place is because she does not want her in-laws to live with them, but feels like she has no choice in the matter. Hence, she's taking the passive aggressive approach in her attempt to keep peace in the family.

By comparison, in most white American families, this wouldn't even be an issue... because the wife would have no problem telling her husband that she is not okay with her in-laws moving in with them. End of discussion. But with Indian women, they feel they have to grin and bear the situation, thus they often resort to passive aggressive tactics because they cannot assert what it is that they really want. Thus the in-law's continual presence and domination is the real issue for her, not whether she is working or not.

My husband and I went through a lot of discussion (arguments) on the issue of his parents' staying with us previously. It was the most troublesome discussion we've had until now... one that threatened to break our relationship. He wanted them to stay with us for 6 months (as that was the longest the visitor's visa would be valid for). I took the American approach and said 3 weeks (which did not go over well with him). We compromised on 1.5 month (to save ourselves from splitting up over the issue). I don't know what will ultimately happen down the road, as we are both strong-headed, and this compromise is difficult for both of us. But I suppose ultimately I won't be in this situation of having to decide whether to work to avoid in-laws, as this issue has already been discussed between us. In actuality, I will be okay with his parents or my parents living with us in old age, as I am completely fine with them staying with us after they are unable to care for themselves.... though I have hardly discussed things with him, as he will get too excited, and I don't want to make any such commitments yet. (He has no problems living with my parents either, as he has mentioned to me several times that it is okay if my folks live with us.) But at this age (as they are still in 50s) I don't want them staying with us long-term as I want to be the queen of my home and not be dominated by in-laws (despite the fact that his parents are very sweet natured with me, and non-dominating). I have seen too many Indian DIL's dominated by their in-laws and I refuse to be a statistic.

Many of you may think I am 'bad' or 'selfish' to have a different mindset than the majority of Indians here. But I grew up in a different culture, and your and my views are equally valid. As a married woman, I feel like I have a right to be the queen of my home and not feel apologetic for it.

 

You are spot on there. Super like your post. The right behaviour to practice is the assertive behaviour. And if the wife is not comfortable with the idea of her ILs living with them, the right behavioural action for her would be to tell her DH her thoughts and the son could then tell his parents politely that it's time for them to leave. In our culture, however, this is never going to work, the only thing that can help the DIL is the passive aggressive behavior.

 

1) I would do the same if my parents come and stay with me permanently only because of their attitude.
2) Its always better to stay away and live peacefully instead of bearing inlaws mind games.

DIl need not compromising with anyone just for the sake of entertaining their parents.I have seen my grandparents telling too much when their DIL goes out atleast for some time. Stay at home DIL is dangerous.

 

I think if a woman is capable and otherwise circumstances give her an aoppurtunity to work, she should go for it and i dont think husband would have any reason to stop her decision.

It should be left to the sole decision of the wife whether to work or stay back at home. However, as much as she has to right to stay back, even her PIL's also has the right to stay with their son, not matter whether they are old or not.

The only default base rule should be, both the PIL and DIL should put in their best efforts to co exist peacefully.

If guys parents wants to come and stay with their son to spend some time with grandchildren or son/DIL, and DIL has problem with that...it is the wife's problem whether she will leave the house to do job or she will leave the relationship itself. Not husband or PIL.

 

When people take up a job for reasons other than doing that job and loving that job, they end up into a lot of friction with themselves/ spouse/ child/ employer.

The lady will be filled with more resentment and anger against the inlaws whose presence is driving her out of the house for a job which she feels doesn't pay her or eats up her time which otherwise could have been given to kids and herself. She'll be dragging herself to the job with negativity and will invite more of it at work as well.

It also happens the same way with few people who have affluent background and high earning husband and feel that there's no need for them to work. They work to justify their education and some social status.... rather than a real aim of bringing results at workplace.

To find peace she'll have to take up the job as it is to bear the fruits, rather than an escape route.
Regarding the questions that have come up for you:
1. Some kids are super comfortable with their parents & reverse, either party will go to any extent to accomodate each other and such parties cannot generally gel up with anyone (esp inlaws) cos they've over extended their flexibility to few blood relatives and not left with any for others..... also no one else can accomodate them to that level.

2. if roles are reversed, she's super comfortable with her parents and her husband won't count for her at all... in fact the husband will be an intruder if he stays home. I would assume in such case they'll give 6$ to the husband to stay out of the house so that the loving parents can cuddle and spend time with their child.