WIBTA if I told my fiances family I am not buying them a new tv?
A dad is furious after his fiancée’s family demanded he and his partner replace their TV—broken when their less-than-one-year-old daughter pulled on cords and toppled it during a visit. The in-laws had volunteered to babysit instead of daycare, but were distracted on phones and TV instead of supervising the crawling baby.
They even sent a video of her playing with the cords minutes before disaster. Now they’re expecting a new TV, but he’s ready to tell them no way—citing their negligence and how lucky they are the TV didn’t land on her. Reddit erupted in support.
‘WIBTA if I told my fiances family I am not buying them a new tv?’
The babysitting was at the family’s request:
The incident happened fast:
He’s drawing a hard line:
A lot of people commented that i seemed ok with it, and Im not. I just didn’t want to go off half cocked. I appreciate all of your advice and ideas for how to handle the situation, SIL will be on a short leash for a long time when it comes to baby jane.
Child supervision isn’t optional—especially with infants who explore everything by mouth and touch. Unsecured TVs and exposed cords are known hazards; thousands of kids are injured yearly by tipping furniture, and many cases prove fatal.
Negligence here is clear: volunteering to babysit means active watching, not passive phone-scrolling. Sending a video of the danger without intervening shows alarming detachment.
Parents aren’t financially liable for accidents caused by caregivers’ inattention. Demanding replacement flips responsibility turning their mistake into the parents’ burden. Safety comes first: limiting or supervising future visits protects the child. The TV request distracts from the real issue nearly preventable harm.
See what others had to share with OP:
Every single commenter called him firmly not the asshole, outraged at the negligence and audacity to demand a new TV while endangering a baby:
The overwhelming reaction focused on the life-threatening danger and called for severe consequences on babysitting privileges:
Many highlighted the absurdity of demanding payment after proven negligence:
A couple added references or humor:
![[Reddit User] − Judge Judy had a similar case. Young child damaged something while playing with friend at friend’s house. Friend’s mom sued. Judge Judy said “You should have been...](https://en.aubtu.biz/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/wp-editor-1766392411706-1.webp)
Not a single person thought he’d be the asshole—negligent babysitting that nearly injured (or worse) a baby doesn’t entitle anyone to a free upgrade. The focus should be child safety, not replacing their distraction device.
Unsecured TVs kill kids every year; this close call demands consequences like no more unsupervised visits. Would you pay up to keep peace, or shut down access entirely like most suggest? How do you handle family who prioritize stuff over safety? Drop your verdict below!
