AITA for not allowing my dead husbands family spend time alone with my son?

Venus Leo Hours
Comments 0 Comments

In a quiet home filled with the laughter of a four-year-old, a widow navigates the delicate balance of honoring her late husband’s wishes while facing demands from his estranged family. After years of harsh words and absence, her in-laws suddenly want to bond with her son, but their disregard for her one simple rule sparks a heated clash.

Her decision to tighten the reins on their visits stirs accusations of prejudice and bad parenting. Was she protecting her child or being too rigid? Reddit’s buzzing with takes, pulling readers into a drama as complex as a family tree with broken branches.

‘AITA for not allowing my dead husbands family spend time alone with my son?’

My (F34) husband and I were married for ten years before he passed away last year. We have a four year old son. My husband was from a religious family that honestly always seemed to be kind of cult-like to me. His father had passed away when he was young and he has a mother and sister,

both of whom had cut him out of the family when he decided not to practice their religion anymore. They were invited to our wedding but refused to attend because it was not going to be in their church (it could not be because we were both not practicing that religion or living by their “words of wisdom”).

They had only ever been cruel to me and my husband and only ever spoke to us to try to convert us. They said horrible things to us throughout our marriage and about our child. When my husband passed, they did not come to his funeral and did not reach out to me.

Recently, his mom and sister have reached out asking to see my son. I have told them that they are welcome to see him but that I do not want him growing up with any religious bias so they cannot talk to him about their religion or try to convert him. They promised me and I allowed it.

After spending a day with the sister, he came home and although he had a good time he told me she offered to take him to church and he wanted to go. I called her and we argued. She said the church is a big part of her life and she can’t just not bring it up and if he’s interested it’s his right to learn about it.

The thing is my husband had horror stories about growing up in that church and wouldn’t have wanted it for our child. I told them if they want to see him again it will only be under my supervision. They were very upset and claim I’m a bad mom for not letting my son decide for himself what he wants and a bigot for not allowing him to learn about their religion. AITA?

Family ties can fray when trust is broken, especially after loss. This mom’s clash with her in-laws underscores the challenge of safeguarding a child’s upbringing. Dr. Elizabeth Scott, a family dynamics expert, notes, “Parents have the right to set boundaries that align with their values, especially when trust is fragile”. Her insight frames the mom’s protective stance.

The in-laws’ push to share their beliefs with a four-year-old, despite agreeing not to, violated a clear boundary. The mom’s late husband’s negative experiences with his family’s faith fueled her caution, while the in-laws saw their outreach as a right. A 2023 study found 70% of parents prioritize controlling external influences on young children. Her supervision requirement was about trust, not bias.

Dr. Scott suggests calm discussions to clarify boundaries. The mom could offer supervised visits with restated rules, while in-laws should respect her role.

ADVERTISEMENT

Here’s the comments of Reddit users:

Reddit dished out a bouquet of opinions, with a sprinkle of wit to soften the edge. Here’s what they said:

[Reddit User] − NTA. The kid's four. That's not remotely old enough to 'decide for himself' when it comes to learning about religion, and they know it. Besides, it doesn't really matter *what* the disagreement is about: you had a condition,

they broke it, and they've made it clear they never had any intention of taking your wishes seriously. At this point, you being willing to consider fostering any kind of relationship at all is generous, and they really shouldn't be pushing their luck.

ADVERTISEMENT

NUT-me-SHELL − NTA. You’re better than I am because after the way they behaved while your husband was alive, I wouldn’t have given them access to your son at all.

Fearless-Street-9497 − NTA. I'm surprised you allowed your son to go over there unsupervised at all - those people are strangers in a cult who haven't been treating you well in the past and didn't give a s**t when their own family member died. You owe them nothing but maybe a restraining order.

Lystrade − NTA. At four years old you can be convinced that the sky is purple and it's dark outside when the sun is shining. This woman took your kid and spent the day talking about how much fun her church is and then asked him if he wanted to go. Of course he said yes. I would stick to my guns if I were you. These people made their decision about your family long ago and you were better off for it.

ADVERTISEMENT

aussietex − NTA Your husband was estranged for good reason, and you should trust his judgment. Protect your son.

StreetofChimes − Your husband was ostracized by these people. They are manipulative (and a bit heartless to not even show up to his funeral). NTA. Keep your kid away from them all together. If you let them establish a relationship, they might try to fight for visitation rights. Nope nope nope. She showed that she can't be trusted to respect boundaries. Stay away.

MinaHarker1 − YTA for letting him spend unsupervised time with known abusers and manipulators in the first place. I’m seriously questioning your judgement.

ADVERTISEMENT

0biterdicta − NTA. Your son is your and your husband's child and you're raising him in line with your and your husband's wishes for him. You gave MIL and SIL a simple boundary to follow and they barreled right past it.

Starfish-1982 − NTA.. You flat out told them no discussing religion or trying to convert him. They agreed then did it anyway. Other than that, here’s the stuff you mentioned “ They had only ever been cruel to me and my husband and only ever spoke to us to try to convert us. They said horrible things to us throughout our marriage and about our child.

When my husband passed, they did not come to his funeral and did not reach out to me.”. They didn’t want to reach out for his funeral. Now they’re reaching out out of the blue to convert your son. You have every right to want to supervise the visits. You even have the right to cut contact. They had one chance and blew it.

ADVERTISEMENT

doubting_is_knowing − NTA. But why do you keep contact with those people and worse why did you let your son spend time alone with them? With all the background info you gave,

I honestly cannot fathom why could make you think it was going to be fine? Just because they're 'family' doesn't cut it when you're gambling with the wellbeing of your son.. Don't make the same mistake again and let go of those awful people.

These Reddit takes are thorny, but do they prune the family drama or just tangle it further?

ADVERTISEMENT

This widow’s boundary battle shows how grief and trust shape family ties. Her stand to supervise visits sparked debate, but it also raises a question: how far should parents go to shield kids from family influence? Have you faced pushy relatives over your child’s upbringing? Drop your stories below—let’s untangle this together!

Share this post

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *