AITA for telling my family that my child free “extra time” is mine to use not theirs?

Shirley Stafford Hours
Comments 0 Comments

In a cozy suburban home, tension simmers like a kettle left too long on the stove. A 40-year-old woman, savoring the freedom of her child-free life, finds herself cornered by family expectations. Her sister and parents plead for her to step up as a guardian—one for her sister’s two young kids, another for her autistic brother in a group home. Their insistence stings, branding her selfish for daring to prioritize her own path.

The clash feels like a tug-of-war, with her family pulling at her carefully set boundaries. Readers can’t help but wonder: is she wrong to guard her time fiercely, or is her family overstepping by demanding she fill a role she never signed up for? This story unravels the messy knots of obligation, choice, and the weight of saying “no” to those closest to you.

‘AITA for telling my family that my child free “extra time” is mine to use not theirs?’

I (40f) am child free by choice and have two siblings, a severely nonverbal autistic brother (38m) who lives in a group home, and a younger (28f) sister who has two young kids. Not only did my sister want me to be guardian of her kids should something happen to her.

ADVERTISEMENT

And her husband (he's an only child), but my parents also want me to be legal guardian (he would still love and be cared for in the group home, I'd just have to be his advocate, make medical decisions and be in charge of his affairs) I've told both no.

They both refused to take my 'no' as final, calling me selfish, that because I have no kids I should be able to. I snapped at both of them and said 'my choice to be child free was so I didn't have to be a parent, it was NOT so I could be a safety net/backup plan for other people's kids!'. We are all not speaking now, AITA?

Family dynamics can feel like navigating a minefield, especially when boundaries clash with expectations. This woman’s refusal to be a guardian highlights a deeper issue: the assumption that child-free individuals owe their time to others. According to Dr. Ellen Walker, a clinical psychologist, “People often project their own values onto others, assuming child-free individuals have ‘extra’ time to spare” . Her words ring true here, as the family seems to view the woman’s choice as a resource to tap.

The woman’s stance is clear—she chose a child-free life to avoid parenting, not to become a safety net. Her family’s pushiness, though, stems from fear: what happens to their dependents if no one steps up? This tension reflects a broader societal issue, where 15% of child-free adults report feeling pressured to take on family caregiving roles .

ADVERTISEMENT

Dr. Walker’s insight suggests open communication could ease this rift. Instead of shaming her, the family might explore legal or professional guardianship options for the brother, or discuss contingency plans with extended relatives for the kids. The woman, in turn, could clarify her limits while offering emotional support.

For readers facing similar pressures, setting boundaries doesn’t mean cutting ties. Consider calmly reiterating your stance and suggesting alternatives, like connecting with a family lawyer.

Here’s what Redditors had to say:

Reddit’s hot takes are in, and they’re as spicy as a summer barbecue! Here’s what the community had to say:

ADVERTISEMENT

c3dt − NTA. Respect for making the choice. Everyone feels so pressured to have kids.

HoneyBadgerMarmalade − NTA. It's disturbing that they want to try and push you to be the backup when you've said no. I'm an only child, no family except my kid. No chance in Hell will my kid go to someone that ever even suggested they don't want her.

ADVERTISEMENT

TheDuchess5939 − NTA. They're being presumptuous and disrespectful of your choices.

ijustneedtolurk − NTA. You have chosen your life and your boundaries and communicated your limits to your family. They need to back off and make other arrangements for the care of their dependents instead of assuming they can bully you into accepting a s**t ton of responsibility you never asked for nor want.

ADVERTISEMENT

It's ridiculous how extended family believe they can belittle and shame single/child free family members for being single/child free and then also demand you flip the imaginary 'maternal instinct' switch on for them because it's the most convenient option *for everyone else.*

The special needs sibling should already have an emergency plan, and several contingency strategies for his ongoing care up until the end of his life. That's just providing basic needs for a life-long dependent. If your parents think using a sibling as a backup plan is their safety net, then they need to speak to a financial.

ADVERTISEMENT

And legal advisor and find a suitable guardian for him instead. Your sister is also being selfish and short-sighted because you have also made it abundantly clear you want nothing to do with even the remote possibility of the responsibility of taking on her two kids.

It's really gross to me that your entire family seems to have boiled you down from an independent person with her own goals and desires to basically a free lifetime-backup nanny just because you happen to be blood-related.

ADVERTISEMENT

General_Relative2838 − NAH. No one should be forced to take on the responsibility of someone else's child. However, as a parent, as we think about our mortality, we worry about what would happen to our children should something happen to us. No one wants their children to end up in foster care if we should die.

It sounds like your sister and your parents don't have a lot of other choices, so that they may be worried about a hypothetical future. I don't know if there is anyone to be an advocate for your brother or care for your niece and nephew. So, I can understand your family's concern. On the other hand, it's unfair to ask you to commit to something you are not prepared to do.

ADVERTISEMENT

packrat386 − I suppose I'll buck the trend and say YTA. In the case of your sister you would become the guardian of her two young kids if she died. You don't plan on having kids, so this would be a pretty severe inconvenience to you. I'm guessing however that your sister and her husband don't plan on dying young either.

This is a situation that would be at the very least an incredible inconvenience for everybody involved. It sounds like they don't have another available person that they would trust as a guardian, and you are her blood relation. Family is one of the oldest safety-nets, and aside from I guess being pushy about guardianship it doesn't sound like they've done anything to alienate you or push you out.

ADVERTISEMENT

In the case of your brother your insistence seems even more cold-hearted. He is severely disabled, but he is not a child and you wouldn't be responsible for caring for him directly anyway. Your parents aren't asking you to care for him, just to be an advocate for him and make decisions that are in his best interest.

They have this trust in you presumably because they hope you love your family and would have their best interests at heart. You don't want to be their safety-net because it would be inconvenient for you. Who exactly would it be convenient for? It's not like just because someone is already a parent, it'd be trivial for them to invite two now orphaned children into their lives.

ADVERTISEMENT

It's hard to imagine being your brothers advocate would be a convenience to _anybody_. They're asking you to shoulder that inconvenient responsibility (which is again, mostly hypothetical unless you think they have a death wish) out of respect for the love and connection you feel as their daughter or their sister.

You're obviously not under any legal obligation to help your family. Everyone involved here is adults, and if you want to just cut them off then of course you're _allowed_ to. But you have to wonder what it actually means to you to be a part of their family if you don't have any interest in being responsible in the event that something bad happens.

AMadManWithAPlan − NAH. I think you're totally valid to refuse both cases of guardianship. If that's the boundary you wanna set then there's nothing wrong with that. It *is* selfish, but its your life and your time, and you're allowed to be selfish with it. They aren't your kids, nor your responsibility.

But I also think your parents and your sister are valid to be upset that you are not willing to take care of your brother/her kids should the worst happen. It's not as if they're asking you to do anything Now, it's more of a 'just in case everyone else dies' kind of thing. And seeing as how this means the kids/your brother would no longer be looked after by family (presumably) - yeah, that can be upsetting.

ADVERTISEMENT

AlbatrossSenior7107 − INFO I completely understand the not wanting to take IN kids. But, why can't you advocate for your brother? How much would that really impact your life to make sure his bills are paid and he's happy? Do you ever visit him? I'm just curious what it is that would make that so life altering?

MashedSpider − NTA, both potential guardianships at once is a lot

ADVERTISEMENT

photosbeersandteach − NTA. It sucks that they wouldn’t accept your first “no.”

These opinions light up Reddit, but do they hold water in real life? Some cheer her boundary-setting; others question her family loyalty. What’s the truth behind the upvotes?

ADVERTISEMENT

This tale of family friction leaves us pondering: where’s the line between duty and personal choice? The woman’s bold stand sparks a debate about what it means to be family. Should child-free individuals be expected to step up, or is it fair to say “no” and mean it? Share your thoughts in the comments—what would you do if your family leaned on you like this? Let’s keep the conversation going!

Share this post
ADVERTISEMENT

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

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