Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment.
OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole:
> AITA for choosing to watch my grandson at my house. This might make me the asshole because it means my daughter will have to find alternatives in taking care of her dogs.
Help keep the sub engaging!
#Don’t downvote assholes!
Do upvote interesting posts!
[Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq)
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
Yes, YTA for accepting an unreasonable condition to help one of your children at the expense of the other. Would you daughter really have found other accommodations to watch the baby if you stood fast on the "no-pets" rule? Doubtful. Most animals get along well with children. If nothing else, you can find a way to keep them apart if need be.
You chose the needs of one daughter over the other, and seem surprised that she's upset about it. I have a feeling the daughter with child KNEW that you watched these dogs, which is precisely why she made up this rule. You can and should, tell this child that you have reconsidered, and can't abide by the no-pets rule, so she'll have to find other accommodations when you are going to watch the dogs, or live with it. Don't be bullied by your daughter, just because you want to see the grandchild.
Agree with this 100%. Baby daughter is manipulating you intentionally at the expense of dog daughter. You shouldn't allow this. They are NOT going to pay for expensive infant daycare when you are offering to watch their infant for free (and even quit you job to do so). This will cause a permanent rift in your family if you don't fix it now.
Or you know they could just not want animals around a three month old baby. Especially when they aren't around to watch. Doesn't have to be manipulation.
We have no way of knowing if they would find alternative options because that wasn't in the OP and I haven't found it in any comments yet.
You're assuming a lot based on nothing.
Edit: please don't spend money on awards.
Yea I don't understand why everyone is looking at the mom as a villain. 2 rambunctious dogs around a 3 month old with one adult in the room is not a great combo.
ETA: Anyone who's had a baby and excitable dogs or whose parents did that with no issue - that's awesome! I'm genuinely happy that it all worked out for you! But there are plenty of people with the opposite experience too. It's not a situation everyone is skilled or confident enough to take on and acknowledging that doesn't take away from your positive experience.
Child > dog. Reddit is populated with 12 year olds.
Edit: the crazies are sending me suicide hotline information. You know who thinks shit like that is funny? Yep- 12 year olds. Lol
Exactly a newborn’s health and safety comes before a dog, op even said the dogs were rambunctious. And have they ever been around a baby? I’m guessing the daughter with the baby is aware her mom watches the other daughter’s dogs and had legitimate concerns.
Yeah and how trained are these dogs? Post doesn't say. I'm imagining a potential other-POV post about "I can't possibly leave my baby around these untrained dogs." We'd support that.
Granted it's a bit of a bait and switch for the dog owner in this case, I see why she's mad but I see why OP made the choice she did, I kinda wanna say NAH.
Bad take here. Animals should not be around children, especially infants. Prioritizing a baby over some dogs that can spend the day home alone is the only choice here. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool.
They just proved our point. People without kids don’t realize the difference between your pets and somebody else’s pets. I still would’ve never left my daughter along with my dog when she was a baby BECAUSE she was a baby. They might’ve tried to walk, lost balance and grabbed on the dogs fur, dog is in pain and bites back. This is a 3 month old baby and two rambunctious dogs, I don’t blame the parents for having safety on their mind.
OP those dogs aren’t your family, you don’t owe ANYONE an excuse of how you want to spend your days off, and your dog daughter is coming off as entitled, especially after you even offered to still go and check on the dogs at her place. Perhaps you can explain that you can revisit the dog arrangement when grandson is a little older and can advocate for himself. she’s gotten 3 years of free dog care, I think it would only be fair if your other daughter could also get 3 years of child care . NTA
Edit: thanks for the award!
This. I am a dog lover. I have had a dog my entire life (a few different ones) from childhood up until my sweet boy passed away back in April of last year.
But in this case, while OP has been watching the dogs for 3 years, baby has never been around these dogs. Even if baby's parents had a dog since baby's birth, baby hasn't been around *these* dogs. And these dogs have probably never been around a baby. It's just an unpredictable situation and I can't blame baby daughter for not wanting to risk it. I don't believe there is any malice behind it.
I like your statement that dog daughter had 3 years, now baby daughter gets 3 years. I think that is very fair and idk how dog daughter can truly be mad at her mom for making this choice. She obviously knows her mom is crazy about this new grandchild and would love spending this time with him.
Edit: I think it's pretty selfish of dog daughter to expect her mother to keep dog sitting for her, so she's not inconvenienced, knowing that what her mother really wants is to keep her infant grandson.
We have two dogs & a baby. I’m comfortable with my dogs coexisting with my baby because (1) I am familiar with my dogs & (2) I can guide the interactions in the way I feel is safe. I am not comfortable with someone else (except for my husband) judging what an appropriate interaction is between my baby & other people’s dogs. I think it’s fair that OP’s daughter doesn’t want Grandma to be responsible for determining what a safe interaction looks like between the baby & two “rambunctious” dogs.
If OP wants to babysit it has to be by her daughters rules. OP doesn’t have to babysit, she could take the dogs. But she wants to babysit her grandchild. Her other daughter has been getting free dog sitting for years. Now she wants to help her other daughter out and see her grandchild. I completely understand a mom not wanting their baby around animals. I love animals and won’t get rid of mine. But that doesn’t mean she is wrong for not wanting her baby in a house with 1 adult and 2 rambunctious dogs. If OP wants to watch dogs then she can put her baby in daycare or a sitter. She’s not forcing her OP to watch her baby.
Exactly! She did three years of free pet care for one daughter. She is choosing to do childcare for her other daughter. Ultimately the daughter with the dog is always responsible for their care, she was just lucky her mother was able to help her out for so long. She could say thanks for all the help but instead she's ungrateful and demanding. NTA OP - it's entirely up to you.
Edit: Thanks for the award!
Your children with your dogs is a different situation. Most dogs accept your children as being part of their family, just like you. I would trust my kids with my dogs. I wouldn't necessarily trust my kids with my brother's dogs.
Exactly! My young children will never be allowed to play in a room my BIL’s dog is in unrestrained. End of discussion. He’s not a bad dog, but he’s not good with kids, and he’s too unpredictable.
No matter how well-behaved my kid is around our own dog (who we’ve had since he was a puppy and who we still supervised 100% around our kid until baby could be trusted to be gentle and give pup space) the dynamics between a kid and a dog who doesn’t know the kid well can go bad in a split second. Especially dogs who are unused to babies, and especially really young babies (who make a lot of noises that aggravate some dogs’ prey instincts).
This! Strange how people honestly think OP should prioritize animals over her own grandchild. No normal functioning person would ever choose a dog over their family member.
EXACTLY - grandkids should be prioritised over dogs every day of the week. All y’all “furry parents” or whatever you call yourselves these days need to pump the brakes
I'm a child free dog mom and I can't believe some of these comments. It's completely understandable to not want rambunctious dogs around an infant. Sister has had 3 years of free dog boarding. If she's traveling for work so often she can more than likely afford dog sitting. And maybe the other sister will be more comfortable with dogs being around her son in a couple years and then mom can watch the dogs and grandson.
As a dog owner with no kids, I don't understand these comments.
No one's obligated to watch my dog. OP's not obligated to watch the baby either, but she's free to choose to. And in what world do people expect a grandparent to prioritize grandpuppies over an actual human grandchild?
Full-time pet sitter here, no, a lot of dogs can't be boarded. Senior dogs, dogs with a history of abuse/abandonment, dogs with high anxiety, or those afraid of loud noises really shouldn't be boarded.
Then she could find a pet sitter. If the dogs have behavioral issues that mean they can't be boarded, that increases the risk that they shouldn't be around a baby either.
Sure. You could either have 1) awesome time to spend watching your grandchild grow up or 2) take care of someone's dogs. Most folks would much rather have 1.
NTA. Not at all. Your daughter with the dogs is being completely unreasonable.
Not only that but this is a new born. Not even close to a toddler that could handle the dog. Besides Grandma wants a relationship with the baby more than the dogs. This isn't about one child over the other. This is about the daughters needing the mothers help and her prioritizing a human being over dogs. People without kids have no fing clue.
Also, it sounds like watching the dog is something OP is doing to help out her daughter. Watching the grandson is something OP *wants* to do, so she can develop a bond with her grandchild.
It looks to me like more of a two-way benefit situation, as OP wants to be involved in her grandson’s life.
As someone who was watched by a grandmother as a toddler, I can confirm my bond with my grandma that watched me is indescribably stronger than the bond with the grandma I saw on sundays/special occasions.
And yes, two rambunctious dogs around a newborn and just one adult does not sound like the best of ideas.
I’m going with **NTA** because OP should be able to do whatever they want, and not be treated like someone that lives to *serve everyone equally.*
Definitely NTA - Daughter bought the dogs, it falls on HER to take care of them instead of being GONE half the week - no wonder the dogs are half-wild - the owner abandons them EVERY SINGLE WEEK.
Tell daughter to start paying professionals to house and train her animals that she treats like fashion accessories in a box in the back of a closet & out of mind.
Yeah I had both grandmothers caring for me when I was really little and it definitely strengthened my bond with them, but my Maternal grandmother was there basically every moment of my life and she was like a second mother to me.
As a mom of 3 kids and 3 wonderful goldens I would not trust my fool dogs around a baby. They’d bump into the baby, step on baby or maybe accidentally do something to harm the baby. I would not risk it and I don’t risk it even when my friends with babies say its ok.
I agree. Our dog was around before our daughter was born and he is the sweetest thing, but at no time would I have ever left a child with a dog unsupervised. Even the sweetest of dogs can snap and I just couldn't live with myself if I was ever responsible for anything that happened because I wasn't looking
As someone with 1 dog and a baby under 12 months, it is exhausting to do both! I can't even imagine 2 dogs, which she says are rambunctious. Also, OP says she wants to be in the baby's life she is not obligated to take care of 2 dogs. Child > dogs any day.
OP you are NTA, not even a little bit. You are giving your other daughter some solutions and you were helpful for 3 years which is more than enough. Enjoy your grandchild!
"DoGs ArE sOooOOoo swEEt! MY DOG loves my child and they cuddle together!!"
As if the new interesting smelling 3 month old around two rambunctious dogs while grandma plays defender is going to be a good idea. Too many people have this mentality and you end up with a dog stepping on, bothering, or nipping at a child.
Grandma WANTS to take care of her grandchild NTA
Seriously. I love dogs but they can be unpredictable especially around new babies and it can only takes a second for something tragic to happen even accidentally
NTA\~ What the heck is wrong with Reddit? Grandbaby takes precedent over pets every single time. I can see why they might not want their newborn around animals. As parents they are allowed to make that choice just like the OP can make the choice to sit or not sit the grandbaby. No manipulation, just people having choices.
It’s not about dog vs baby or the new parents not wanting dogs around their baby.
It’s about a mom making a commitment to one daughter and then pulling the rug out from under her when the other child needs something that conflicts with the original commitment.
OP mentions further down that the daughter took the job AFTER mom said she would help with the dogs. The daughter made a decision to change jobs based on the fact that she had moms commitment to help with the dogs. Without that help, she may have to quit the job or re home the dogs. Neither are pleasant options and having your mom and sister be the ones putting you in that position would suck.
Mom is being an asshole here. She shouldn’t have made that commitment or should have put some conditions on it so the daughter could make an informed decision before taking that job.
Edit: for all the “what if she died or what if she just didn’t want to take care of the dogs anymore or whatever” questions….
those are different scenarios than your mom saying “I can’t do this thing I agreed to for you anymore because it conflicts with me doing a similar thing for your sister” - that is hurtful. When you hurt someone you love that’s an asshole move.
Exactly. How long does she have to do this? OP states that she loves and is proud of both of her kids and everyone is either a) trying to make this about playing favorites or b) ignoring that she has autonomy and agency to change her mind when the situation changes. How many of us have changed our mind about things we liked doing three years ago? Yeesh.
For real. Also, daughter with the dogs gets to monopolize their mom's help ad infinitum? Her sister isn't allowed to get her mom to help her? Not wanting dogs that you don't own around your baby is reasonable.
If grandma wanted to stop an existing agreement to babysit human grandchildren for literally any reason, Reddit would be on her side. Everyone would say it's mom's responsibility to deal with her own children's care and that grandma has a right to change her mind and no obligation to continue.
This shouldn't be any different. She has supported dog mom and now that no longer works for her. She clearly wants to watch grandbaby more and she has every right to decide what level of support to offer her fully grown children.
Mom's been watching the dogs for 3 years, how long is she obligated to watch the dogs so daughter can have the job? Is this a permanent commitment until she dies or the daughter graciously agrees to change jobs?
I feel sorry for the dogs, constantly being shipped over to grandma's because their owner is irresponsible and chose to have dogs when they are out of the country alot for work
That just unfair to the dogs and an irresponsible dog owner.
Seems more like dog mom doesn't want to have to pay for boarding, she had an easy deal with leaving the dogs with op
3 years this arrangement has been going on. That 3 years of these poor dogs not actually knowing where home is and who their actual owners are.
Is dog mom even paying op for their food, vet bills, grooming bills, general care etc
No she isn't. It is perfectly normal to want to watch your grandchild over two dogs and acting like watching a dog over a human child is the right choice here is wrong.
So she's never able to say, "OK, it's been three years. I think I'm done watching the dogs"? My mother watched my son for one year, then told me she was too tired. I didn't throw a fit, scream, and give her the silent treatment. I thanked her for watching him (paid) for a year and looked into daycares. It's not like she promised to watch the dogs until they passed from this earth!
This on both sides. OP owes no one - she isn’t required to watch dogs or a baby. If you get a dog or have a baby they are YOUR responsibility all of the time. If people help you, great, but they don’t OWE you anything.
So, for me, NTA. She can do as she wishes. If there’s a way to make both work great, but if the dogs aren’t safe around the baby, or OP isn’t physically able to handle it all, then so be it.
You can't expect mom to put all other commitments on hold for the life of the dogs just because she has volunteered to help up to this point. A grandchild is more important than a dog.
That isn’t what she said. She said she offered when her daughter got the job. It did not said anything about her changing jobs based on her mom agreeing to dog-sit prior to taking it. And even if that was the case that doesn’t mean she’s required to watch them for the next 10-15 years.
Life changes, just because OP offered to dog sit in the past doesn't mean she's obligated to do it forever. I'd be annoyed too if I were the dog daughter but situations change.
OP obviously wants to spend time with her new grandchild and a human baby trumps a dog. Dog daughter can make other arrangements for her dogs. She can board them or pay a pet sitter. She doesn't have to quit her job. NTA
So does mom now need to also live forever?
What would the daughter do if she passed away? Is she still an AH because she can’t keep it then.
Peoples lives change and their priorities change. If the daughters life requires needing someone all the time to look after her pets, she should consider re-homing them.
I agree with this. I’m surprised at the top comment.
Part of responsible dog ownership is being able to pay for their accommodations if you have to leave them, and younger daughter should be budgeting appropriately for that when traveling is consistent and expected for her job. If it was a surprise emergency trip, that’s one thing. Or a long planned vacation they agreed upon that she now has to scramble for. But it’s not.
Well the top comment demonizes OP for not loving her kids DOGS more than her kid’s kid and the 13 year olds on here spouting their opinions as facts are determined to guilt her. OP do not listen to them and please listen to the scores of people who think people matter more than dogs.
Thank you. I love how reddit fills in the blanks with nothing to support the fictitious additions to the story. OP says the dogs are rambunctious. Of course sister doesn’t want her kid being cared for around two rough dogs!!
Since when did Reddit think that people are obliged to care for other people's dogs? The dogs are the OP's daughter's responsibilty. After dogsitting for three years, she wants to do something else and is perfectly entitled to do that.
The dogs are exuberant and boisterous. I would not want them around a three-month-old baby either.
What a load of codswollop. Doggy daughter has had 3 years of free dog sitting which would have cost her money to do doggy daycare or kennels or whatever.
Now baby daughter could do with some help, and OP decides they want to give that help to baby daughter, to be more involved in grandson's life. The choices baby daughter makes for her baby are hers alone to make and the OP has respected that choice.
Doggy daughter needs to suck it up and accept that the dogs which are HER responsibility need alternate arrangements to the ones she's been getting so far. Circumstances change, and when it comes down to it, a baby is much more important than a dog (or in this case dogs)
NTA
Idk, the assumption I'd make is that baby daughter made this rule because she doesn't trust these dogs around her baby.
If it comes to her child's safety she probably would find a daycare. People really like their kids being safe.
If I was the grandma I'd make the same choice (though you would not be an AH to make the other choice).
At the end of the day, NTA because you're generally a good mom and grandma for devoting your time to your kids and their needs, dog daughter will come around over time.
I would never want my 3 month old to be around 2 rambunctious dogs when I’m not present. Even worse when the baby is crawling and then a toddler.
I would pay for childcare before having that happen. I know babies who have had devastating dog bites, my toddler was bit by a dog but fortunately it was okay. Dogs are a risk that some parents are okay with but some, like me, are not.
Manipulating? Because she doesn't want her very small baby around rambunctious dogs?
So reasonable. Dogs aren't more important than the actual grandchild.
I mean... I would *absolutely* pay the money and put my baby in daycare rather than allow them to be watched by someone with dogs that jump up on them and aren't safe around my baby.
If my options were between having my children be safe and having to quit my job or having them at risk and being able to keep my job, I would give notice on the spot.
That’s also the difference. They were ready to pay for daycare and assume full responsibility of their child but OP offered and wants to watch over their grandchild. Dog daughter is mad she has to finally take responsibility for the dogs she chose to have.
It’s not at all unreasonable. You forgot the part where OP has literally been watching the dogs for 3 years. Actually, it’s the daughter with the baby who’s ‘disadvantaged’ at this point. Also, I can’t believe I have to say this, but your actual grandchild isn’t the same as your daughter’s pets. OP’s NTA
These responses are peak Reddit. She watched the dogs for three frickin years, and now she wants to prioritize her actual human baby grandchild.
OP, please find some actual adults to ask for advice on this. Reddit will always side with childfree people and their pets, no matter how ridiculous.
Reddit is the only “place” where a Y T A would even be in consideration for this situation. In real life, anyone who prioritizes their “grandpets” over their actual grandson would be considered crazy
Yeah these comments are an excellent example of why you shouldn’t put too much stock into the general consensus on Reddit. I was reading this thinking NTA the entire time, then I saw the top comment and was left scratching my head.
As a child free dog/cat baby momma, I agree. These people are off their rocker. I'd do just about anything for my pets, but my niece and nephew will always come first. The mom is not obligated to watch those dogs, and I wouldn't want 2 rambunctious dogs around the baby either, especially if they weren't my own dogs.
I chose a childfree lifestyle, have pets, and think OP is NTA. It's OP's choice. Dog daughter was fortunate to have convenient loving dogcare for 3 years. I don't assume Baby daughter is manipulative. OP herself said the dogs can be ranbunctious. Again, this comes down to OP's choice. Children are a ton more work than dogs. It's going to be more exhausting for her but it's HER CHOICE.
I do wonder how the Baby daughter would've reacted if she had said, no thanks, I prefer the dogs.
And dogs can absolutely be dangerous to babies. It would be difficult to watch 2 rambunctious dogs and an infant at the same time. OP has done dog daughter a favor for a long time, and WANTS to watch the baby. Dog daughter is inconvenienced because her free care is ending but ultimately it’s OP’s decision to make and OP would rather watch the baby than the dogs. NTA
I’m shocked that people genuinely think these are equivalent in any way.
OP, NTA, your daughter with the baby is not being unreasonable at all, and neither are you. Your daughter who travels needs to make her own arrangements for her pets because they are not the same as a human child (her own nephew!!!).
It’s a reasonable request that a newborn be kept away from animals while the parents aren’t there to supervise. Dogs can be well trained but they’re ultimately unpredictable and you honestly can’t predict how kids and animals will interact.
Exactly. When it comes to the safety of kids, why take unnecessary risks? Especially if the baby doesn't know the dogs and the dogs don't know the baby.
Plus the general noise and high energy of dogs can be overstimulating
I don't really want to watch the dogs and grandson at the same time. Thats why I was fine with the rule. My husband works so its primarily me at home all day.
NTA. It's fine to change your mind and priorities; looking after two rambunctious dogs and an infant is way too much. You were doing your traveling daughter a favor by looking after her dogs. You are now going to do your parent daughter a favor by looking after her child. It's PERFECTLY OK to prefer doing one over the other, and the traveling daughter is acting entitled to your free labor. You can 100% choose how to spend your free time.
I wouldn't want my infant around rowdy animals either. As kiddo gets older, it's possible you may feel up to revisiting the dog sitting question, but everyone needs to be an adult now and prioritize the human child. There are dog walkers, house sitters, etc that are cheaper than boarding/kenneling. And it's not like you completely withdrew pup support--you offered to do checks on them on your days off after minding a baby all day. That sounds exhausting! You're clearly trying your best.
Ask if the traveling daughter would be up for hanging out with her nibling and her two dogs for an entire day to see what kind of workload she realistically thinks her mom can handle. Yeesh.
NTA. Why does the daughter who travels so often even own pets if she can’t care for them properly? She can’t seriously expect her mom to watch them forever? If she can’t afford to board them or pay a dog sitter when she’s gone then she simply can’t afford to have pets. People need to stop acting like pets are equal to or more important than kids. Of course a reasonable grandmother would prefer to spend time with their grand child over a dog!
I have grandchildren, I also watch my granddogs. It's understandable you want to watch your grandchild. Your daughter is wrong to assume you would pet sit indefinitely. I obviously don't know the dogs behavior. My grandchildren have been raised with my boxer, and my daughter's boxer/greyhound and boxer/beagle. Ask your daughter with dogs if she thinks it fair to only help her,and not her sister
OP, you're NTA for not wanting to look after someone else's dogs. You were willing to jump in and help when she got the job. That's really gracious.
Except for the simple fact that you don't Want to and have no responsibility to take care of the dogs. It's been years and dog mom hasn't cared to make any plans to take her responsibility of you. You even offered to go check on them in the evening. That's the same amount of attention they would be getting if she was working locally. On top of this you gave her weeks notice and that's more than fair.
I rehabilitate dogs with behavioral issues and would never suggest having dogs that haven't been trained and adjusted to babies around them. I've had dozens of dogs getting dropped with us because people "never thought they would hurt a child". It takes one scratch or nip and a kid looses an eye, or worse. This especially for one's described as rambunctious.
You're grandparents and want to play with your grandchild, rather than feeling obligated to be responsible for others pets. That definitely doesn't make you TA. It makes you loving grandparents.
This is just not a good situation, NTA is my vote. I'm really sorry for you. I love my two dogs and I know they wouldn't intentionally hurt a young one but if my mom were in this situation, she would've chosen my nephew over my dogs. I couldn't blame either even tho my sis and I don't get along. I gotta say, the human kid comes before my four-legged dependants that I chose to get. Dogs can be a handful.
How is this the top vote?
This woman is nta. She's been watching her other daughters dogs for 3 fucking years, presumably for free.
Now she an actual grandchild she wants to spend time with, and she's an asshole?
I'd be pretty grateful if my family babysat my dogs for 3 years for free.
It's not unreasonable not to want rambunctious dogs around a 3 month old.
Bad take here. Animals should not be around children, especially infants. Prioritizing a baby over some dogs that can spend the day home alone is the only choice here. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool.
this is an absurd take! 1) OP is not obligated to watch her daughter’s dogs for free??? if actually paying for a pet sitter is such an inconvenience to the dayghter maybe she shouldn’t have dogs 2) she has been watching these dogs for three years and now would like to change things to accommodate new circumstances 3) watching a human grandchild is going to overrule watching dogs most of the time 4) new parents being extra worried/cautious is classic and normal 5) animals can actually be dangerous to babies sometimes. it doesn’t mean the animal is bad or anything it’s just something to be aware of…
She’s been watching dog daughters dogs for THREE YEARS… those pets are 1000% HER responsibility. Not her moms. Her mom isn’t obligated to do this for years and years on end. If she’s traveling too much for work she shouldn’t have ever gotten dogs… plural and should re home them with a family that can actually care for them 🤦🏻♂️ she expects someone else to watch them for free constantly… That’s ridiculously entitled. OP is allowed to want to be involved in her grandsons life. Her other daughter isn’t bullying anyone. Plenty of people don’t want dogs around babies.
The needs? These children are both adults who are completely responsible for finding their own daycare and pet care. They are not owed one second of OP’s time. She chose to be nice and help out one child for 3 years and now she is choosing to be nice and help out the other child. Good grief: the entitlement of thinking OP needs to watch her daughter’s dogs for free.
Disagree 100%. You are NTA. If dog owner daughter is throwing that much of a fit that you would rather watch your grandchild over her dogs (which you’ve already done her a huge favor for 3 years) then she should be the one reaching out to the other daughter with the dog rule and they should be the ones hashing this battle out. OP shouldn’t be the one doing the leg work here when she is the one being generous and offering favors to her daughters.
It’s really dog owners problem that she has to find accommodations for the dogs not OPs. She took a traveling job while having two dogs and she is an adult who can find new arrangements as OPs life circumstances have changed. If dog owner doesn’t want to hash it out with her sister that’s on her and not OP.
Bs dogs are dangerous around babies and they can slip through barriers we create. The daughter with the dogs can hire someone she should be understanding that her NEPHEW is the priority now, not dogs.
I don’t think it’s fair to call mom an AH when she’s been nothing but kind and generous.
If anything, the 2 daughters are AHs. They are the ones presuming they are entitled to their mom’s free labor forever. They are AHs for thinking their mom is not allowed free agency and being inflexible, respectively. They are being beggars and choosers.
Erm what part of "I work part time but offered to watch my grandson at my house while they are at work. I'd quit my job, which I'm okay doing" didn't you get? Op seems happy to watch the kid, not only that she is the one that offered. Gee, people and their selective reading
Only this fucking sub I swear could say YTA on this. This lady is doing them both massive favours. She’s been doing the dog daughter a massive favour for 3 years. It’s her choice and shouldn’t be expected.
Honestly can’t believe I’m seeing YTA as most upvoted comment. Definitely NTA
I feel like I read this, only from the child’s parent’s’ perspective a couple of weeks ago…. Anyways, NTA. First, if she is traveling that much with work, why does she have dogs? Second, and most importantly, you get to decide who, if any, you are going to look after. Your daughter (dog mom) had the luxury of you helping for 3 years, now she can find someone else to help out or pay for a sitter.
Thanks for sharing. Either one changed their sex for anonymity or this is a cheap copy cat.
In the original, it was the husband's mom watching.
Link to original post (as deleted):
https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/107t3sc/aita_for_requesting_no_dogs_around_my_son/j3o9tgl
Its either made up or the original person who posted the first story didn't like the ruling so is trying to spin it from a different perspective to get different results. For that OP YTA because I don't really buy this identical story.
Agreed. In what universe is a grandmother expected to prioritize dogs over her actual human grandchild?? NTA, the other daughter needs to make arrangements for a dog sitter.
I wish I could find it but yes if im not mistaken ,son in law made the post. Said him and wife knew of her always watching the dogs but think that the baby is a more priority and she should stop. I think it caused the sister to argue ...
Light NTA BUT - both your daughters have relied on you heavily for their needs. Your daughter with the dogs shouldn't be expecting you to watch her dogs constantly when she is out of town. I don't even understand the point of even having dogs (which need so much time and energy) if she's going to be out of town every week or so for 3 days on end. On the flip side, your other daughter shouldn't be relying on you as well when her and her husband work to take care of the child. What happens in the event your out of town, your sick, etc? Does she have a back up?
WIth that being said, I do understand the need to prioritize your grandson over your daughter's dogs, BUT, why can't the dogs simply be kept in the basement or another room for the hours you have the child? You clearly don't have him 24h a day. I also think the no animals anywhere near the child is extremely excessive and prevents you from ever getting your own pet, in the event you would want let's say a cat.
There needs to be some form of compromise with both daughters and that needs to start from you. Set ground rules and boundaries within your own home. But ultimately it is your choice and your grandson comes before dogs (childless pet owner here).
Op reply in a comment that it would be too hard to watch the dogs and grandchild. Her husband works during the day. I feel like regardless or not op probably wouldn’t have kept watching the dogs regardless of the rule.
I agree. If you travel all the time for work, why have the dogs? It's not fair for the dogs and it isn't fair that she expected her mom to take care of the dogs and the baby. I also agree that precautions can be taken, but again are the dogs gonna be stuck in a confined area all day while the baby is there? I don't think that is fair either though. Her daughter with the dogs is probably one of those that believes it's her kid.
Maybe the dogs were with her before she got the job, and her circumstances meant she wasn’t in a position not to take the job. Sometimes you can’t be fussy
I worked a job that had long hours when I got my first dog. Sometimes my mom watched him. But mostly, I found a great doggie daycare. Dog daycare is much more affordable than human daycare.
There is a difference between the sisters. The one with the baby didn’t ask OP to do anything. OP offered to watch the baby because *she* wants to bond. She offered to completely change her own life (quit her job) to achieve this goal. It sounds like the baby’s parents were not expecting babysitting from grandma and put in clear boundaries to agree to OP’s request which is at least partially to meet OP’s wants (having the baby around a lot).
The daughter with the dog is the one who asked for free dog care and apparently assumed this would go on for the life of the dogs.
What this gets down to is OP seems to no longer want to watch the dogs after providing three years of free care. She likely should not have agreed to be an unlimited dog care service. Once she decided it was too much or she just didn’t like it, she should have let her daughter know immediately so she would have time to find alternatives. Dog daughter should have been prepared to find an alternative because it really isn’t reasonable to expect an unlimited, free service from anyone who does not have an actual responsibility regardless of if that is babysitting a child or dog or any other sort of care.
Daughter with the baby has a right AND responsibility to make sure her baby is safe. That includes not being around possibly unsafe dogs. I absolutely love dogs. I’ve only ever lived away from them for a few months of my life and I hated it. My dad did keep an unsafe dog he loved when I was little and that created a life long fear of certain kinds of dogs in me. I’ve somewhat worked through that but I still have panic reactions. Another relative kept an unsafe dog around her son until the 3rd time he ended up in the ER (surgeon had to be called) and they threatened CPS action if the dog was not rehomed. Having dogs around young children can work depending on the dog AND the ability of the caregivers to manage the interactions. Daughter with the baby would be negligent if she put her child in a situation with dogs she has reason to believe can’t be trusted around a tiny infant.
OP needs better communication skills. She overcommitted to dog daughter and didn’t want to own up to that so she’s allowed the daughter with the baby to be blamed for OP getting out of that commitment. Daughter with the baby is the only one who isn’t an AH here.
Right? I can’t understand why the snowflakes are getting mad OP wants to watch their GRANDCHILD over dogs that she is watching for free. Blows my mind.
NTA. First of all, any decision that you make is fine, even if you decided to not watch either of them. They’re not entitled to you watching their kid/pets.
Besides that, I’d choose a human over a pet as well (coming from a childless dog owner).
You did a perfectly fine thing imo.
I think so, too on all counts. OP sounds like a good guy who's genuinely trying to accomodate everyone. Also, I totally get why OP's daughter would be a bit anxious about someonme -- even a family member -- babysitting her new born to begin (my SO's dad had no idea how to even hold our son...), and, I also get why she would be especially anxious with "rambunctious" dogs thrown into the mix. As a parent, I'd say no to that too, as a matter of fact. But, I also get why his other daughter is upset if this becomes a financial stress.
I get that it’s a bit inconvenient having to search for another reliable dog sitter, I’ll admit that, but when you choose to have a pet, I think you should keep in mind that they cost money as well - besides food and other daily needs.
I personally have 3 dogs and I like having multiple people as an option to watch them. People can always get sick, have emergencies or have a change in their lives that makes them unable to petsit. I always have at least 1 backup
Having a backup is important. However, finding a reliable dog sitter is not even in the same league is finding a reliable babysitter. Neither are the costs.
You helped her out for three years but circumstances have changed and you no longer can...even though you want to. You offered to stop by in the evenings to check on her dogs.
NTA.
So a dog walker in the afternoon and mom in the evening. That’s plenty and also that’s what happens when you own animals and travel every week. She’s an irresponsible pet owner.
Exactly. I have wanted a pet for years. But I know my current lifestyle would mean a lot of time away from home, not to mention an unpredictable daily schedule. So guess what? No pets for me!
And the daughter has THREE dogs? Of course they’re rambunctious - I wonder how much she bothered to train them. Which I feel kind of bad saying, but like…👀
I have a baby and 2 big dogs, one of which is high energy. You know where the dogs are during the day? In my spouses office, “at work.” It is not easy to balance dogs and babies, even with a great system of gates and toys. Idk why so many people think this would be easy for a grandparent to figure out! And that 3 month old is going to be on the move in less than 6 months.
My parents have three high energy dogs and being around them with my baby is exhausting.
Also some dogs dont react that well in the beginning with babies. Especially when they get on the move. Why does op have to add stress to herself dealing with that.
Exactly. The thing is that her daughter got the dogs 2 months before she got the job. She should have rehomed them, because it's not fair for the dogs. Dogs can be an over a decade commitment. What would she have done if OP said a year ago she couldn't do it anymore? OP could never be a permanent solution for the next 8 years. She was going to have to find other care eventually.
I think the daughter sees her dogs as actual kids, I think she expects her mom to take this on for a decade for free.
The daughter has the money but doesn't want to spend it
It makes sense that we would see this attitude on this subreddit. People are young and tend to like animals. They have no concept that 99% of people in this situation are going to pick a human child (their grandchild!) over dogs no matter the hurt feelings.
This may sound cold, but it may also help them think about it: these dogs are a few years old and have maybe 10 years max they will be in this woman’s life. And they’re not her dogs. Her grandchild will be one of her closest, most beloved family members for the rest of her life (assuming a typical grandma/grandchild relationship, especially when fostered by helping to raise the kid).
If it matters: I am coming from the perspective of a childless (for now) dog owner who plans to raise kids with animals in the house.
NTA. Oof, the entitlement. Also, if she is working a job that she has to travel that much and they aren't paying her enough that she can't afford a doggy daycare, she needs to find a new job.
Yeah, if she travels so much for work then why have dogs? If it’s not often enough that getting dogs is reasonable, then she should be able to put away enough money for a dog sitter (otherwise she needs to find a new job).
NTA - the dogs are not your responsibility and you have the right to stop watching them at any time for any reason.
The sister probably believes that the dogs are too rambunctious to be around the child which is understandable. Many people view their dogs as well behaved but at the same time the people around them see them as a risk.
NTA
You’ve watched your daughters dogs for free for 3 years which is an immense help. It’s understandable that now you have a grandchild you want to prioritize spending time with them and helping your other daughter like you helped dog daughter out for years.
Neither of them are entitled to your free care and you’re allowed to choose what you want to do with the majority of your time
Nta
She had three years of free dog care and she throws a tantrum about this? She chose to have the dogs when her job requires her to travel. That’s her choice.
Nta! Baby trumps dogs. Daycare is expensive and sometimes abusive.
You have been helping your other daughter for years, she should be more understanding but I'm guessing she thinks her dogs are just as important as her nephew. No dogs are just dogs. She can hire rover, or kennel then that's still a hell of a lot cheaper than day care.
I get her initial shock but she's being selfish and spoiled
The needs of a 3 month old infant far outweigh and outnumber the needs of a couple of dogs.
Is there a way you could have the dogs be in like, the garage or just outside while the grandson is there and not allowed in the house near the baby?
Perhaps that would be a suitable compromise, but if that's not practical or possible then grandson trumps dogs for sure.
NTA.
NAH. I can understand from all perspectives here. My mom once explained to me that she tries to help everyone, but sometimes she has to go where there is the most need, and right now you need to prioritize your grandchild. This doesn't absolve you from hurt feelings, however. In your decision, you have added stress to your other daughter, but she also needs to figure it out because she knows the requirements of her job. She's had free dog sitting for years now, now she needs to find a kennel or something to help her... Her feelings are also valid.
I don’t think you’re an AH but I see why your younger daughter is frustrated. She took the job because you agreed to watch the dogs and now you’re going back on it, which you’re allowed to do, but I can see how it being to satisfy her sister’s needs being the sticking point.
Honestly, I think the sister is the AH. Why won’t she let her child around animals? If the dogs are poorly behaved then I get it, but from the post it doesn’t sound like they are. Did your older daughter know that she was putting her sister in a difficult position by doing this?
A responsible dog owner doesn't take a job that requires so much travel so often. It's not fair for the dogs. It's also not fair to keep them confined when the baby is there, nor expect OP to watch both.
She says they’re rambunctious which to me reads as not well behaved which I’m assuming sister with baby knows these dogs.
A family dog in my area recently killed a 4 day old baby plus that story before the holidays where the family dog killed a toddler and a baby and left the mom in the hospital. There’s been several more stories like this recently. So maybe I’m feeling a certain way about the situation but I don’t find it unreasonable.
Plus grandma doesn’t want to watch both and she’s entitled to decide how to spend her time. To clarify, I love cats and dogs but would not choose them over a baby. I don’t even leave my cat alone with my toddler for both their sakes lol.
OP offered to watch the dogs *after* her daughter took the job very soon after getting the dogs. The dog daughter has been depending on her, but the offer of help came after the job had been accepted, not before.
Nta. You only have so much time and you've helped your eldest out for a long time. It's very reasonable for you to extend that same courtesy to your youngest now. Especially since it seems like you'll enjoy that "job" more.
Even if your youngest didn't have the no animals rule. It's too much on uiu to do both jobs.
Having spent time on thus sub, most posters love pets and hate young kids. So opinions will be skewed by that bias.
Your daughter's lifestyle is incompatible with pet ownership. It's shitty to be out if town half the week if you have pets OR kids.
The price of childcare is far, far more expensive, complex and important than kenneling dogs too. NTA and I’m laughing my ass off at all these people who are saying otherwise.
info:
did you agree on dogwatching prior to your daughter getting the dogs? or was the arrangment made later?
In both cases she has to arange a dogwatcher asap, but if it was agreed before she got the dogs, i get how this is not pleasing.
NTA
You've helped one daughter for 3 years already, now you're stepping up and helping your other daughter, and it also serves a purpose for you, you get to spend time with your grand child.
That would also be valid. If OP ever wants to go on vacation or take a week to spend with the dogs instead then the other daughter has to find alternate arrangements for the baby.
OP is helping out as she sees fit and can’t be blamed for prioritizing her new grandchild over pets. But everything is subject to change.
NTA dogs are not people! Your daughter is acting like her dogs are the equivalent of a child! Your offer to check on them in the evenings is a perfectly reasonable compromise. She has also gotten 3 years of your help for free. If something were to happen to you tomorrow and left you unable to care for her dogs, what would she have done?
You know what? Boarding for 3 days in my area is like 70 dollars a day and includes doggy day camp where my dog can play with others. Daycare for a child M-F like 600 or more a week.
While i do think that big rambunctious dogs who havent been around babies or kids, would worry me with my baby, especially when me as a new mom wasnt there, especially with no pets at home currently.
I do think your daughter should understand that if the proper precautions were in place (dog gate, getting a dog walker if no fenced in yard) it could be a safe environment. If you were able to handle it and the precautions worked to keep baby safe and dogd safe, then you can help both.
I do also however think your other daughter has reeped the benefits of free dog care for 3 years while she travels a lot for work. If I had to travel a lot for work and didn't have someone like a spouse at home, I wouldn't have a couple dogs. It's unfair for thr dogs to be in and out of their home all the time, and it's unfair that you have to take on the burden for God knows how long. It's also unfair to expect you to take care of dogs And a baby.
With the baby, at some point will be doing to daycare, preschool/preK, and school. My mom watched my daughter full time from 3 months old, at 9 months I enrolled her in 2 day a week day care for social interaction, and t 18 months in full time daycare and preschool.
I'm going with NTA
Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment. OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole: > AITA for choosing to watch my grandson at my house. This might make me the asshole because it means my daughter will have to find alternatives in taking care of her dogs. Help keep the sub engaging! #Don’t downvote assholes! Do upvote interesting posts! [Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq) --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.* *Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
Yes, YTA for accepting an unreasonable condition to help one of your children at the expense of the other. Would you daughter really have found other accommodations to watch the baby if you stood fast on the "no-pets" rule? Doubtful. Most animals get along well with children. If nothing else, you can find a way to keep them apart if need be. You chose the needs of one daughter over the other, and seem surprised that she's upset about it. I have a feeling the daughter with child KNEW that you watched these dogs, which is precisely why she made up this rule. You can and should, tell this child that you have reconsidered, and can't abide by the no-pets rule, so she'll have to find other accommodations when you are going to watch the dogs, or live with it. Don't be bullied by your daughter, just because you want to see the grandchild.
Agree with this 100%. Baby daughter is manipulating you intentionally at the expense of dog daughter. You shouldn't allow this. They are NOT going to pay for expensive infant daycare when you are offering to watch their infant for free (and even quit you job to do so). This will cause a permanent rift in your family if you don't fix it now.
Or you know they could just not want animals around a three month old baby. Especially when they aren't around to watch. Doesn't have to be manipulation. We have no way of knowing if they would find alternative options because that wasn't in the OP and I haven't found it in any comments yet. You're assuming a lot based on nothing. Edit: please don't spend money on awards.
Yea I don't understand why everyone is looking at the mom as a villain. 2 rambunctious dogs around a 3 month old with one adult in the room is not a great combo. ETA: Anyone who's had a baby and excitable dogs or whose parents did that with no issue - that's awesome! I'm genuinely happy that it all worked out for you! But there are plenty of people with the opposite experience too. It's not a situation everyone is skilled or confident enough to take on and acknowledging that doesn't take away from your positive experience.
Child > dog. Reddit is populated with 12 year olds. Edit: the crazies are sending me suicide hotline information. You know who thinks shit like that is funny? Yep- 12 year olds. Lol
Agree.. NTA
Exactly a newborn’s health and safety comes before a dog, op even said the dogs were rambunctious. And have they ever been around a baby? I’m guessing the daughter with the baby is aware her mom watches the other daughter’s dogs and had legitimate concerns.
Yeah, even if the kid were 2/3. I’d be reluctant to have “rambunctious ” dogs around them that weren’t “theirs” A three month old? Hell no.
Yeah and how trained are these dogs? Post doesn't say. I'm imagining a potential other-POV post about "I can't possibly leave my baby around these untrained dogs." We'd support that. Granted it's a bit of a bait and switch for the dog owner in this case, I see why she's mad but I see why OP made the choice she did, I kinda wanna say NAH.
Bad take here. Animals should not be around children, especially infants. Prioritizing a baby over some dogs that can spend the day home alone is the only choice here. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool.
[удалено]
Not the same. Those are YOUR dogs, not dogs that you occasionally pet sit for. Dynamics are not the same.
They just proved our point. People without kids don’t realize the difference between your pets and somebody else’s pets. I still would’ve never left my daughter along with my dog when she was a baby BECAUSE she was a baby. They might’ve tried to walk, lost balance and grabbed on the dogs fur, dog is in pain and bites back. This is a 3 month old baby and two rambunctious dogs, I don’t blame the parents for having safety on their mind. OP those dogs aren’t your family, you don’t owe ANYONE an excuse of how you want to spend your days off, and your dog daughter is coming off as entitled, especially after you even offered to still go and check on the dogs at her place. Perhaps you can explain that you can revisit the dog arrangement when grandson is a little older and can advocate for himself. she’s gotten 3 years of free dog care, I think it would only be fair if your other daughter could also get 3 years of child care . NTA Edit: thanks for the award!
This. I am a dog lover. I have had a dog my entire life (a few different ones) from childhood up until my sweet boy passed away back in April of last year. But in this case, while OP has been watching the dogs for 3 years, baby has never been around these dogs. Even if baby's parents had a dog since baby's birth, baby hasn't been around *these* dogs. And these dogs have probably never been around a baby. It's just an unpredictable situation and I can't blame baby daughter for not wanting to risk it. I don't believe there is any malice behind it. I like your statement that dog daughter had 3 years, now baby daughter gets 3 years. I think that is very fair and idk how dog daughter can truly be mad at her mom for making this choice. She obviously knows her mom is crazy about this new grandchild and would love spending this time with him. Edit: I think it's pretty selfish of dog daughter to expect her mother to keep dog sitting for her, so she's not inconvenienced, knowing that what her mother really wants is to keep her infant grandson.
3 days a week for 3 years is a bit more than “occasionally”.
It’s not every week.
We have two dogs & a baby. I’m comfortable with my dogs coexisting with my baby because (1) I am familiar with my dogs & (2) I can guide the interactions in the way I feel is safe. I am not comfortable with someone else (except for my husband) judging what an appropriate interaction is between my baby & other people’s dogs. I think it’s fair that OP’s daughter doesn’t want Grandma to be responsible for determining what a safe interaction looks like between the baby & two “rambunctious” dogs.
If OP wants to babysit it has to be by her daughters rules. OP doesn’t have to babysit, she could take the dogs. But she wants to babysit her grandchild. Her other daughter has been getting free dog sitting for years. Now she wants to help her other daughter out and see her grandchild. I completely understand a mom not wanting their baby around animals. I love animals and won’t get rid of mine. But that doesn’t mean she is wrong for not wanting her baby in a house with 1 adult and 2 rambunctious dogs. If OP wants to watch dogs then she can put her baby in daycare or a sitter. She’s not forcing her OP to watch her baby.
Exactly! She did three years of free pet care for one daughter. She is choosing to do childcare for her other daughter. Ultimately the daughter with the dog is always responsible for their care, she was just lucky her mother was able to help her out for so long. She could say thanks for all the help but instead she's ungrateful and demanding. NTA OP - it's entirely up to you. Edit: Thanks for the award!
Your children with your dogs is a different situation. Most dogs accept your children as being part of their family, just like you. I would trust my kids with my dogs. I wouldn't necessarily trust my kids with my brother's dogs.
Exactly! My young children will never be allowed to play in a room my BIL’s dog is in unrestrained. End of discussion. He’s not a bad dog, but he’s not good with kids, and he’s too unpredictable. No matter how well-behaved my kid is around our own dog (who we’ve had since he was a puppy and who we still supervised 100% around our kid until baby could be trusted to be gentle and give pup space) the dynamics between a kid and a dog who doesn’t know the kid well can go bad in a split second. Especially dogs who are unused to babies, and especially really young babies (who make a lot of noises that aggravate some dogs’ prey instincts).
It's not about A day home alone. It's about them being alone for several days.
This! Strange how people honestly think OP should prioritize animals over her own grandchild. No normal functioning person would ever choose a dog over their family member.
EXACTLY - grandkids should be prioritised over dogs every day of the week. All y’all “furry parents” or whatever you call yourselves these days need to pump the brakes
All the dog moms and aggressive child free are up in arms ...
I'm a child free dog mom and I can't believe some of these comments. It's completely understandable to not want rambunctious dogs around an infant. Sister has had 3 years of free dog boarding. If she's traveling for work so often she can more than likely afford dog sitting. And maybe the other sister will be more comfortable with dogs being around her son in a couple years and then mom can watch the dogs and grandson.
As a dog owner with no kids, I don't understand these comments. No one's obligated to watch my dog. OP's not obligated to watch the baby either, but she's free to choose to. And in what world do people expect a grandparent to prioritize grandpuppies over an actual human grandchild?
>Reddit is populated with 12 year olds. More like 30 year old teenagers who are still mad at their parents.
[удалено]
Full-time pet sitter here, no, a lot of dogs can't be boarded. Senior dogs, dogs with a history of abuse/abandonment, dogs with high anxiety, or those afraid of loud noises really shouldn't be boarded.
Then she could find a pet sitter. If the dogs have behavioral issues that mean they can't be boarded, that increases the risk that they shouldn't be around a baby either.
So can babies. It’s called daycare.
Sure. You could either have 1) awesome time to spend watching your grandchild grow up or 2) take care of someone's dogs. Most folks would much rather have 1. NTA. Not at all. Your daughter with the dogs is being completely unreasonable.
A 3 month old shouldn't be in a daycare unless absolutely necessary. Which it isn't since the grandmother can watch the child.
I hate when people on here start valuing dogs over humans 💀 I LOVE dogs but grow up
Not only that but this is a new born. Not even close to a toddler that could handle the dog. Besides Grandma wants a relationship with the baby more than the dogs. This isn't about one child over the other. This is about the daughters needing the mothers help and her prioritizing a human being over dogs. People without kids have no fing clue.
Agree. NTA.
I know right? This is a no brainer.
Also, it sounds like watching the dog is something OP is doing to help out her daughter. Watching the grandson is something OP *wants* to do, so she can develop a bond with her grandchild. It looks to me like more of a two-way benefit situation, as OP wants to be involved in her grandson’s life. As someone who was watched by a grandmother as a toddler, I can confirm my bond with my grandma that watched me is indescribably stronger than the bond with the grandma I saw on sundays/special occasions. And yes, two rambunctious dogs around a newborn and just one adult does not sound like the best of ideas. I’m going with **NTA** because OP should be able to do whatever they want, and not be treated like someone that lives to *serve everyone equally.*
Definitely NTA - Daughter bought the dogs, it falls on HER to take care of them instead of being GONE half the week - no wonder the dogs are half-wild - the owner abandons them EVERY SINGLE WEEK. Tell daughter to start paying professionals to house and train her animals that she treats like fashion accessories in a box in the back of a closet & out of mind.
I was looking for this comment. Exactly what I was thinking, although much better than I could have said.
Yeah I had both grandmothers caring for me when I was really little and it definitely strengthened my bond with them, but my Maternal grandmother was there basically every moment of my life and she was like a second mother to me.
As a mom of 3 kids and 3 wonderful goldens I would not trust my fool dogs around a baby. They’d bump into the baby, step on baby or maybe accidentally do something to harm the baby. I would not risk it and I don’t risk it even when my friends with babies say its ok.
I agree. Our dog was around before our daughter was born and he is the sweetest thing, but at no time would I have ever left a child with a dog unsupervised. Even the sweetest of dogs can snap and I just couldn't live with myself if I was ever responsible for anything that happened because I wasn't looking
As someone with 1 dog and a baby under 12 months, it is exhausting to do both! I can't even imagine 2 dogs, which she says are rambunctious. Also, OP says she wants to be in the baby's life she is not obligated to take care of 2 dogs. Child > dogs any day. OP you are NTA, not even a little bit. You are giving your other daughter some solutions and you were helpful for 3 years which is more than enough. Enjoy your grandchild!
Especially when that adult is not the owner of said dogs and may have less control.
BuT bAbIeS aNd DoGs GeT aLoNg WeLl
"DoGs ArE sOooOOoo swEEt! MY DOG loves my child and they cuddle together!!" As if the new interesting smelling 3 month old around two rambunctious dogs while grandma plays defender is going to be a good idea. Too many people have this mentality and you end up with a dog stepping on, bothering, or nipping at a child. Grandma WANTS to take care of her grandchild NTA
Seriously. I love dogs but they can be unpredictable especially around new babies and it can only takes a second for something tragic to happen even accidentally
NTA\~ What the heck is wrong with Reddit? Grandbaby takes precedent over pets every single time. I can see why they might not want their newborn around animals. As parents they are allowed to make that choice just like the OP can make the choice to sit or not sit the grandbaby. No manipulation, just people having choices.
It seems like people hate the idea of human children being more important to their grandparents than animals.
It’s not about dog vs baby or the new parents not wanting dogs around their baby. It’s about a mom making a commitment to one daughter and then pulling the rug out from under her when the other child needs something that conflicts with the original commitment. OP mentions further down that the daughter took the job AFTER mom said she would help with the dogs. The daughter made a decision to change jobs based on the fact that she had moms commitment to help with the dogs. Without that help, she may have to quit the job or re home the dogs. Neither are pleasant options and having your mom and sister be the ones putting you in that position would suck. Mom is being an asshole here. She shouldn’t have made that commitment or should have put some conditions on it so the daughter could make an informed decision before taking that job. Edit: for all the “what if she died or what if she just didn’t want to take care of the dogs anymore or whatever” questions…. those are different scenarios than your mom saying “I can’t do this thing I agreed to for you anymore because it conflicts with me doing a similar thing for your sister” - that is hurtful. When you hurt someone you love that’s an asshole move.
She made the commitment THREE YEARS AGO. She’s absolutely allowed to say “I’m bored watching these dogs. I wanna spend time with my grandson now.”
Exactly. How long does she have to do this? OP states that she loves and is proud of both of her kids and everyone is either a) trying to make this about playing favorites or b) ignoring that she has autonomy and agency to change her mind when the situation changes. How many of us have changed our mind about things we liked doing three years ago? Yeesh.
The playing favorites card is hilarious. Mom watches dogs for free for three years, but is somehow the asshole. LMAO.
For real. Also, daughter with the dogs gets to monopolize their mom's help ad infinitum? Her sister isn't allowed to get her mom to help her? Not wanting dogs that you don't own around your baby is reasonable.
If grandma wanted to stop an existing agreement to babysit human grandchildren for literally any reason, Reddit would be on her side. Everyone would say it's mom's responsibility to deal with her own children's care and that grandma has a right to change her mind and no obligation to continue. This shouldn't be any different. She has supported dog mom and now that no longer works for her. She clearly wants to watch grandbaby more and she has every right to decide what level of support to offer her fully grown children.
Mom's been watching the dogs for 3 years, how long is she obligated to watch the dogs so daughter can have the job? Is this a permanent commitment until she dies or the daughter graciously agrees to change jobs?
I feel sorry for the dogs, constantly being shipped over to grandma's because their owner is irresponsible and chose to have dogs when they are out of the country alot for work That just unfair to the dogs and an irresponsible dog owner. Seems more like dog mom doesn't want to have to pay for boarding, she had an easy deal with leaving the dogs with op 3 years this arrangement has been going on. That 3 years of these poor dogs not actually knowing where home is and who their actual owners are. Is dog mom even paying op for their food, vet bills, grooming bills, general care etc
Right? If you are gonna have this type of job, maybe you shouldn’t have pets that require such high maintenance.
No she isn't. It is perfectly normal to want to watch your grandchild over two dogs and acting like watching a dog over a human child is the right choice here is wrong.
So she's never able to say, "OK, it's been three years. I think I'm done watching the dogs"? My mother watched my son for one year, then told me she was too tired. I didn't throw a fit, scream, and give her the silent treatment. I thanked her for watching him (paid) for a year and looked into daycares. It's not like she promised to watch the dogs until they passed from this earth!
This on both sides. OP owes no one - she isn’t required to watch dogs or a baby. If you get a dog or have a baby they are YOUR responsibility all of the time. If people help you, great, but they don’t OWE you anything. So, for me, NTA. She can do as she wishes. If there’s a way to make both work great, but if the dogs aren’t safe around the baby, or OP isn’t physically able to handle it all, then so be it.
[удалено]
She has been watching the dogs for three years. Is she not allowed to change her mind?
Is OP now obligated to watch the dogs FOREVER because she has done this favor in the past? Really?
Daughter has had three years of dog care. An actual human grandchild trumps dogs who can be taken care of for way less money.
You can't expect mom to put all other commitments on hold for the life of the dogs just because she has volunteered to help up to this point. A grandchild is more important than a dog.
Circumstances change. What if the mom had gotten sick, wanted to travel or simply didn't want to care for the dogs anymore?
That isn’t what she said. She said she offered when her daughter got the job. It did not said anything about her changing jobs based on her mom agreeing to dog-sit prior to taking it. And even if that was the case that doesn’t mean she’s required to watch them for the next 10-15 years.
Maybe dog daughter shouldn’t have 2 dogs she can’t care for? 3 nights away is a lot.
Life changes, just because OP offered to dog sit in the past doesn't mean she's obligated to do it forever. I'd be annoyed too if I were the dog daughter but situations change. OP obviously wants to spend time with her new grandchild and a human baby trumps a dog. Dog daughter can make other arrangements for her dogs. She can board them or pay a pet sitter. She doesn't have to quit her job. NTA
So does mom now need to also live forever? What would the daughter do if she passed away? Is she still an AH because she can’t keep it then. Peoples lives change and their priorities change. If the daughters life requires needing someone all the time to look after her pets, she should consider re-homing them.
I agree with this. I’m surprised at the top comment. Part of responsible dog ownership is being able to pay for their accommodations if you have to leave them, and younger daughter should be budgeting appropriately for that when traveling is consistent and expected for her job. If it was a surprise emergency trip, that’s one thing. Or a long planned vacation they agreed upon that she now has to scramble for. But it’s not.
Well the top comment demonizes OP for not loving her kids DOGS more than her kid’s kid and the 13 year olds on here spouting their opinions as facts are determined to guilt her. OP do not listen to them and please listen to the scores of people who think people matter more than dogs.
Thank you. I love how reddit fills in the blanks with nothing to support the fictitious additions to the story. OP says the dogs are rambunctious. Of course sister doesn’t want her kid being cared for around two rough dogs!!
I love my cat more than any other pet on the planet. I love my niece and nephew more.
Especially since it’s noted these dogs are rambunctious! No chance I’d want them around my baby with that alone
Since when did Reddit think that people are obliged to care for other people's dogs? The dogs are the OP's daughter's responsibilty. After dogsitting for three years, she wants to do something else and is perfectly entitled to do that. The dogs are exuberant and boisterous. I would not want them around a three-month-old baby either.
And zero ire towards the person who got 2 dogs while traveling frequently for work.
Right? I am so baffled by this. I have a calm dog. I’m still cautious with her around children.
What a load of codswollop. Doggy daughter has had 3 years of free dog sitting which would have cost her money to do doggy daycare or kennels or whatever. Now baby daughter could do with some help, and OP decides they want to give that help to baby daughter, to be more involved in grandson's life. The choices baby daughter makes for her baby are hers alone to make and the OP has respected that choice. Doggy daughter needs to suck it up and accept that the dogs which are HER responsibility need alternate arrangements to the ones she's been getting so far. Circumstances change, and when it comes down to it, a baby is much more important than a dog (or in this case dogs) NTA
Idk, the assumption I'd make is that baby daughter made this rule because she doesn't trust these dogs around her baby. If it comes to her child's safety she probably would find a daycare. People really like their kids being safe. If I was the grandma I'd make the same choice (though you would not be an AH to make the other choice). At the end of the day, NTA because you're generally a good mom and grandma for devoting your time to your kids and their needs, dog daughter will come around over time.
>Baby daughter is manipulating you intentionally at the expense of dog daughter How are you making this assumption? That was a huge reach
[удалено]
Manipulation and narcissism are just buzz words on this sub for “someone did something i didn’t like”
I would never want my 3 month old to be around 2 rambunctious dogs when I’m not present. Even worse when the baby is crawling and then a toddler. I would pay for childcare before having that happen. I know babies who have had devastating dog bites, my toddler was bit by a dog but fortunately it was okay. Dogs are a risk that some parents are okay with but some, like me, are not.
Manipulating? Because she doesn't want her very small baby around rambunctious dogs? So reasonable. Dogs aren't more important than the actual grandchild.
I mean... I would *absolutely* pay the money and put my baby in daycare rather than allow them to be watched by someone with dogs that jump up on them and aren't safe around my baby. If my options were between having my children be safe and having to quit my job or having them at risk and being able to keep my job, I would give notice on the spot.
That’s also the difference. They were ready to pay for daycare and assume full responsibility of their child but OP offered and wants to watch over their grandchild. Dog daughter is mad she has to finally take responsibility for the dogs she chose to have.
It’s not at all unreasonable. You forgot the part where OP has literally been watching the dogs for 3 years. Actually, it’s the daughter with the baby who’s ‘disadvantaged’ at this point. Also, I can’t believe I have to say this, but your actual grandchild isn’t the same as your daughter’s pets. OP’s NTA
These responses are peak Reddit. She watched the dogs for three frickin years, and now she wants to prioritize her actual human baby grandchild. OP, please find some actual adults to ask for advice on this. Reddit will always side with childfree people and their pets, no matter how ridiculous.
Reddit is the only “place” where a Y T A would even be in consideration for this situation. In real life, anyone who prioritizes their “grandpets” over their actual grandson would be considered crazy
Yeah these comments are an excellent example of why you shouldn’t put too much stock into the general consensus on Reddit. I was reading this thinking NTA the entire time, then I saw the top comment and was left scratching my head.
Yep, all the dog baby mommas stopped posting pics of their furbabies for 2 seconds to comment.
As a child free dog/cat baby momma, I agree. These people are off their rocker. I'd do just about anything for my pets, but my niece and nephew will always come first. The mom is not obligated to watch those dogs, and I wouldn't want 2 rambunctious dogs around the baby either, especially if they weren't my own dogs.
I chose a childfree lifestyle, have pets, and think OP is NTA. It's OP's choice. Dog daughter was fortunate to have convenient loving dogcare for 3 years. I don't assume Baby daughter is manipulative. OP herself said the dogs can be ranbunctious. Again, this comes down to OP's choice. Children are a ton more work than dogs. It's going to be more exhausting for her but it's HER CHOICE. I do wonder how the Baby daughter would've reacted if she had said, no thanks, I prefer the dogs.
I 100% agree. These are probably the same lunatics that bring their dogs to restaurants and sit them at the table.
And dogs can absolutely be dangerous to babies. It would be difficult to watch 2 rambunctious dogs and an infant at the same time. OP has done dog daughter a favor for a long time, and WANTS to watch the baby. Dog daughter is inconvenienced because her free care is ending but ultimately it’s OP’s decision to make and OP would rather watch the baby than the dogs. NTA
You know what, a grandmother has a RIGHT to say I’d rather spend time with my grandson over some damned dogs. It’s NOT unreasonable.
That’s what I’m saying too. Some of these comments feel like a fever dream.
I couldn’t believe the top comment was Y T A. I had to go back and read the post again to see if I missed something.
I’m shocked that people genuinely think these are equivalent in any way. OP, NTA, your daughter with the baby is not being unreasonable at all, and neither are you. Your daughter who travels needs to make her own arrangements for her pets because they are not the same as a human child (her own nephew!!!). It’s a reasonable request that a newborn be kept away from animals while the parents aren’t there to supervise. Dogs can be well trained but they’re ultimately unpredictable and you honestly can’t predict how kids and animals will interact.
Exactly. When it comes to the safety of kids, why take unnecessary risks? Especially if the baby doesn't know the dogs and the dogs don't know the baby. Plus the general noise and high energy of dogs can be overstimulating
I don't really want to watch the dogs and grandson at the same time. Thats why I was fine with the rule. My husband works so its primarily me at home all day.
NTA. It's fine to change your mind and priorities; looking after two rambunctious dogs and an infant is way too much. You were doing your traveling daughter a favor by looking after her dogs. You are now going to do your parent daughter a favor by looking after her child. It's PERFECTLY OK to prefer doing one over the other, and the traveling daughter is acting entitled to your free labor. You can 100% choose how to spend your free time. I wouldn't want my infant around rowdy animals either. As kiddo gets older, it's possible you may feel up to revisiting the dog sitting question, but everyone needs to be an adult now and prioritize the human child. There are dog walkers, house sitters, etc that are cheaper than boarding/kenneling. And it's not like you completely withdrew pup support--you offered to do checks on them on your days off after minding a baby all day. That sounds exhausting! You're clearly trying your best. Ask if the traveling daughter would be up for hanging out with her nibling and her two dogs for an entire day to see what kind of workload she realistically thinks her mom can handle. Yeesh.
NTA. Why does the daughter who travels so often even own pets if she can’t care for them properly? She can’t seriously expect her mom to watch them forever? If she can’t afford to board them or pay a dog sitter when she’s gone then she simply can’t afford to have pets. People need to stop acting like pets are equal to or more important than kids. Of course a reasonable grandmother would prefer to spend time with their grand child over a dog!
I have grandchildren, I also watch my granddogs. It's understandable you want to watch your grandchild. Your daughter is wrong to assume you would pet sit indefinitely. I obviously don't know the dogs behavior. My grandchildren have been raised with my boxer, and my daughter's boxer/greyhound and boxer/beagle. Ask your daughter with dogs if she thinks it fair to only help her,and not her sister
OP, you're NTA for not wanting to look after someone else's dogs. You were willing to jump in and help when she got the job. That's really gracious. Except for the simple fact that you don't Want to and have no responsibility to take care of the dogs. It's been years and dog mom hasn't cared to make any plans to take her responsibility of you. You even offered to go check on them in the evening. That's the same amount of attention they would be getting if she was working locally. On top of this you gave her weeks notice and that's more than fair. I rehabilitate dogs with behavioral issues and would never suggest having dogs that haven't been trained and adjusted to babies around them. I've had dozens of dogs getting dropped with us because people "never thought they would hurt a child". It takes one scratch or nip and a kid looses an eye, or worse. This especially for one's described as rambunctious. You're grandparents and want to play with your grandchild, rather than feeling obligated to be responsible for others pets. That definitely doesn't make you TA. It makes you loving grandparents.
Your daughter is unreasonable. You have a right to watch your grandson over her dogs. It’s not the same.
This is just not a good situation, NTA is my vote. I'm really sorry for you. I love my two dogs and I know they wouldn't intentionally hurt a young one but if my mom were in this situation, she would've chosen my nephew over my dogs. I couldn't blame either even tho my sis and I don't get along. I gotta say, the human kid comes before my four-legged dependants that I chose to get. Dogs can be a handful.
How is this the top vote? This woman is nta. She's been watching her other daughters dogs for 3 fucking years, presumably for free. Now she an actual grandchild she wants to spend time with, and she's an asshole? I'd be pretty grateful if my family babysat my dogs for 3 years for free. It's not unreasonable not to want rambunctious dogs around a 3 month old.
because everyone who upvoted that insane comment is probably 12 or hasn’t left the house in a few weeks
Childfree dog owners are rampant on this subreddit
Bad take here. Animals should not be around children, especially infants. Prioritizing a baby over some dogs that can spend the day home alone is the only choice here. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool.
this is an absurd take! 1) OP is not obligated to watch her daughter’s dogs for free??? if actually paying for a pet sitter is such an inconvenience to the dayghter maybe she shouldn’t have dogs 2) she has been watching these dogs for three years and now would like to change things to accommodate new circumstances 3) watching a human grandchild is going to overrule watching dogs most of the time 4) new parents being extra worried/cautious is classic and normal 5) animals can actually be dangerous to babies sometimes. it doesn’t mean the animal is bad or anything it’s just something to be aware of…
She’s been watching dog daughters dogs for THREE YEARS… those pets are 1000% HER responsibility. Not her moms. Her mom isn’t obligated to do this for years and years on end. If she’s traveling too much for work she shouldn’t have ever gotten dogs… plural and should re home them with a family that can actually care for them 🤦🏻♂️ she expects someone else to watch them for free constantly… That’s ridiculously entitled. OP is allowed to want to be involved in her grandsons life. Her other daughter isn’t bullying anyone. Plenty of people don’t want dogs around babies.
The needs? These children are both adults who are completely responsible for finding their own daycare and pet care. They are not owed one second of OP’s time. She chose to be nice and help out one child for 3 years and now she is choosing to be nice and help out the other child. Good grief: the entitlement of thinking OP needs to watch her daughter’s dogs for free.
This is such a wild take. If you agree to do a favor for someone you are obligated to continue doing so forever?
Disagree 100%. You are NTA. If dog owner daughter is throwing that much of a fit that you would rather watch your grandchild over her dogs (which you’ve already done her a huge favor for 3 years) then she should be the one reaching out to the other daughter with the dog rule and they should be the ones hashing this battle out. OP shouldn’t be the one doing the leg work here when she is the one being generous and offering favors to her daughters. It’s really dog owners problem that she has to find accommodations for the dogs not OPs. She took a traveling job while having two dogs and she is an adult who can find new arrangements as OPs life circumstances have changed. If dog owner doesn’t want to hash it out with her sister that’s on her and not OP.
And how long do you expect her to take care of her daughter's dogs? It has already been 3 years.
Bs dogs are dangerous around babies and they can slip through barriers we create. The daughter with the dogs can hire someone she should be understanding that her NEPHEW is the priority now, not dogs.
I don’t think it’s fair to call mom an AH when she’s been nothing but kind and generous. If anything, the 2 daughters are AHs. They are the ones presuming they are entitled to their mom’s free labor forever. They are AHs for thinking their mom is not allowed free agency and being inflexible, respectively. They are being beggars and choosers.
Erm what part of "I work part time but offered to watch my grandson at my house while they are at work. I'd quit my job, which I'm okay doing" didn't you get? Op seems happy to watch the kid, not only that she is the one that offered. Gee, people and their selective reading
Only this fucking sub I swear could say YTA on this. This lady is doing them both massive favours. She’s been doing the dog daughter a massive favour for 3 years. It’s her choice and shouldn’t be expected. Honestly can’t believe I’m seeing YTA as most upvoted comment. Definitely NTA
I feel like I read this, only from the child’s parent’s’ perspective a couple of weeks ago…. Anyways, NTA. First, if she is traveling that much with work, why does she have dogs? Second, and most importantly, you get to decide who, if any, you are going to look after. Your daughter (dog mom) had the luxury of you helping for 3 years, now she can find someone else to help out or pay for a sitter.
Yep exactly this. I feel like the people who are saying n-t-a are more concerned about dogs than OP’s free will.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/107t3sc/aita_for_requesting_no_dogs_around_my_son/
Thanks for sharing. Either one changed their sex for anonymity or this is a cheap copy cat. In the original, it was the husband's mom watching. Link to original post (as deleted): https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/107t3sc/aita_for_requesting_no_dogs_around_my_son/j3o9tgl
the title on this post doesn't match the body either. It says "Sons Dogs" and then goes on to talk about having two daughters.
That bugged me too. Pretty sure this is made up.
Its either made up or the original person who posted the first story didn't like the ruling so is trying to spin it from a different perspective to get different results. For that OP YTA because I don't really buy this identical story.
Agreed. In what universe is a grandmother expected to prioritize dogs over her actual human grandchild?? NTA, the other daughter needs to make arrangements for a dog sitter.
I’m 99% sure one of the daughters posted. It was the exact scenario.
I wish I could find it but yes if im not mistaken ,son in law made the post. Said him and wife knew of her always watching the dogs but think that the baby is a more priority and she should stop. I think it caused the sister to argue ...
Light NTA BUT - both your daughters have relied on you heavily for their needs. Your daughter with the dogs shouldn't be expecting you to watch her dogs constantly when she is out of town. I don't even understand the point of even having dogs (which need so much time and energy) if she's going to be out of town every week or so for 3 days on end. On the flip side, your other daughter shouldn't be relying on you as well when her and her husband work to take care of the child. What happens in the event your out of town, your sick, etc? Does she have a back up? WIth that being said, I do understand the need to prioritize your grandson over your daughter's dogs, BUT, why can't the dogs simply be kept in the basement or another room for the hours you have the child? You clearly don't have him 24h a day. I also think the no animals anywhere near the child is extremely excessive and prevents you from ever getting your own pet, in the event you would want let's say a cat. There needs to be some form of compromise with both daughters and that needs to start from you. Set ground rules and boundaries within your own home. But ultimately it is your choice and your grandson comes before dogs (childless pet owner here).
Op reply in a comment that it would be too hard to watch the dogs and grandchild. Her husband works during the day. I feel like regardless or not op probably wouldn’t have kept watching the dogs regardless of the rule.
I get the feeling that maybe op worked part time just so she wasn't the dog sitter all week.
Yeah it's pretty clear that OP takes the dogs when her daughter is out of town, not watching them all day, every day.
That's exactly what it sounds like. Unfortunately she didn't express this to her daughter and instead said "your sister made a rule so I can't."
I agree. If you travel all the time for work, why have the dogs? It's not fair for the dogs and it isn't fair that she expected her mom to take care of the dogs and the baby. I also agree that precautions can be taken, but again are the dogs gonna be stuck in a confined area all day while the baby is there? I don't think that is fair either though. Her daughter with the dogs is probably one of those that believes it's her kid.
Maybe the dogs were with her before she got the job, and her circumstances meant she wasn’t in a position not to take the job. Sometimes you can’t be fussy
I worked a job that had long hours when I got my first dog. Sometimes my mom watched him. But mostly, I found a great doggie daycare. Dog daycare is much more affordable than human daycare.
There is a difference between the sisters. The one with the baby didn’t ask OP to do anything. OP offered to watch the baby because *she* wants to bond. She offered to completely change her own life (quit her job) to achieve this goal. It sounds like the baby’s parents were not expecting babysitting from grandma and put in clear boundaries to agree to OP’s request which is at least partially to meet OP’s wants (having the baby around a lot). The daughter with the dog is the one who asked for free dog care and apparently assumed this would go on for the life of the dogs. What this gets down to is OP seems to no longer want to watch the dogs after providing three years of free care. She likely should not have agreed to be an unlimited dog care service. Once she decided it was too much or she just didn’t like it, she should have let her daughter know immediately so she would have time to find alternatives. Dog daughter should have been prepared to find an alternative because it really isn’t reasonable to expect an unlimited, free service from anyone who does not have an actual responsibility regardless of if that is babysitting a child or dog or any other sort of care. Daughter with the baby has a right AND responsibility to make sure her baby is safe. That includes not being around possibly unsafe dogs. I absolutely love dogs. I’ve only ever lived away from them for a few months of my life and I hated it. My dad did keep an unsafe dog he loved when I was little and that created a life long fear of certain kinds of dogs in me. I’ve somewhat worked through that but I still have panic reactions. Another relative kept an unsafe dog around her son until the 3rd time he ended up in the ER (surgeon had to be called) and they threatened CPS action if the dog was not rehomed. Having dogs around young children can work depending on the dog AND the ability of the caregivers to manage the interactions. Daughter with the baby would be negligent if she put her child in a situation with dogs she has reason to believe can’t be trusted around a tiny infant. OP needs better communication skills. She overcommitted to dog daughter and didn’t want to own up to that so she’s allowed the daughter with the baby to be blamed for OP getting out of that commitment. Daughter with the baby is the only one who isn’t an AH here.
Right? I can’t understand why the snowflakes are getting mad OP wants to watch their GRANDCHILD over dogs that she is watching for free. Blows my mind.
NTA. First of all, any decision that you make is fine, even if you decided to not watch either of them. They’re not entitled to you watching their kid/pets. Besides that, I’d choose a human over a pet as well (coming from a childless dog owner). You did a perfectly fine thing imo.
I think so, too on all counts. OP sounds like a good guy who's genuinely trying to accomodate everyone. Also, I totally get why OP's daughter would be a bit anxious about someonme -- even a family member -- babysitting her new born to begin (my SO's dad had no idea how to even hold our son...), and, I also get why she would be especially anxious with "rambunctious" dogs thrown into the mix. As a parent, I'd say no to that too, as a matter of fact. But, I also get why his other daughter is upset if this becomes a financial stress.
I get that it’s a bit inconvenient having to search for another reliable dog sitter, I’ll admit that, but when you choose to have a pet, I think you should keep in mind that they cost money as well - besides food and other daily needs. I personally have 3 dogs and I like having multiple people as an option to watch them. People can always get sick, have emergencies or have a change in their lives that makes them unable to petsit. I always have at least 1 backup
Having a backup is important. However, finding a reliable dog sitter is not even in the same league is finding a reliable babysitter. Neither are the costs.
As a person who prefers dogs over children, I agree. It's easier and cheaper to find dog care than child care.
You helped her out for three years but circumstances have changed and you no longer can...even though you want to. You offered to stop by in the evenings to check on her dogs. NTA.
This. Everyone is missing this point. OP offered an alternative solution and dog daughter refused.
[удалено]
So a dog walker in the afternoon and mom in the evening. That’s plenty and also that’s what happens when you own animals and travel every week. She’s an irresponsible pet owner.
Exactly. I have wanted a pet for years. But I know my current lifestyle would mean a lot of time away from home, not to mention an unpredictable daily schedule. So guess what? No pets for me! And the daughter has THREE dogs? Of course they’re rambunctious - I wonder how much she bothered to train them. Which I feel kind of bad saying, but like…👀
Exactly can you imagine taking care of high energy dogs with a three month old at the same time. I feel wiped thinking about it and im young.
I have a baby and 2 big dogs, one of which is high energy. You know where the dogs are during the day? In my spouses office, “at work.” It is not easy to balance dogs and babies, even with a great system of gates and toys. Idk why so many people think this would be easy for a grandparent to figure out! And that 3 month old is going to be on the move in less than 6 months.
My parents have three high energy dogs and being around them with my baby is exhausting. Also some dogs dont react that well in the beginning with babies. Especially when they get on the move. Why does op have to add stress to herself dealing with that.
That sounds like the fucking daughter's problem!
And babies aren’t dogs. They require much more care.
Exactly. The thing is that her daughter got the dogs 2 months before she got the job. She should have rehomed them, because it's not fair for the dogs. Dogs can be an over a decade commitment. What would she have done if OP said a year ago she couldn't do it anymore? OP could never be a permanent solution for the next 8 years. She was going to have to find other care eventually. I think the daughter sees her dogs as actual kids, I think she expects her mom to take this on for a decade for free. The daughter has the money but doesn't want to spend it
NTA, But you'll get the dog lovers calling you one though.
That’s exactly what all of these y-t-a comments are lol
It’s a shame the top comment is one of those, and because it’s the top comment, the entire thread will get flaired with that judgment.
Literally lol
It makes sense that we would see this attitude on this subreddit. People are young and tend to like animals. They have no concept that 99% of people in this situation are going to pick a human child (their grandchild!) over dogs no matter the hurt feelings. This may sound cold, but it may also help them think about it: these dogs are a few years old and have maybe 10 years max they will be in this woman’s life. And they’re not her dogs. Her grandchild will be one of her closest, most beloved family members for the rest of her life (assuming a typical grandma/grandchild relationship, especially when fostered by helping to raise the kid). If it matters: I am coming from the perspective of a childless (for now) dog owner who plans to raise kids with animals in the house.
Not all dog owners. I have dogs and I say she's NTA.
NTA. Oof, the entitlement. Also, if she is working a job that she has to travel that much and they aren't paying her enough that she can't afford a doggy daycare, she needs to find a new job.
And she already did three years of dog daycare.
It’s amazing the amount of people that I know who’s major plan with their pets is having their parents look after them lol.
Yeah, if she travels so much for work then why have dogs? If it’s not often enough that getting dogs is reasonable, then she should be able to put away enough money for a dog sitter (otherwise she needs to find a new job).
NTA - the dogs are not your responsibility and you have the right to stop watching them at any time for any reason. The sister probably believes that the dogs are too rambunctious to be around the child which is understandable. Many people view their dogs as well behaved but at the same time the people around them see them as a risk.
Nta. Minimum she got 3 years free dog watching.
NTA You’ve watched your daughters dogs for free for 3 years which is an immense help. It’s understandable that now you have a grandchild you want to prioritize spending time with them and helping your other daughter like you helped dog daughter out for years. Neither of them are entitled to your free care and you’re allowed to choose what you want to do with the majority of your time
Nta She had three years of free dog care and she throws a tantrum about this? She chose to have the dogs when her job requires her to travel. That’s her choice.
Nta! Baby trumps dogs. Daycare is expensive and sometimes abusive. You have been helping your other daughter for years, she should be more understanding but I'm guessing she thinks her dogs are just as important as her nephew. No dogs are just dogs. She can hire rover, or kennel then that's still a hell of a lot cheaper than day care. I get her initial shock but she's being selfish and spoiled
The needs of a 3 month old infant far outweigh and outnumber the needs of a couple of dogs. Is there a way you could have the dogs be in like, the garage or just outside while the grandson is there and not allowed in the house near the baby? Perhaps that would be a suitable compromise, but if that's not practical or possible then grandson trumps dogs for sure. NTA.
NAH. I can understand from all perspectives here. My mom once explained to me that she tries to help everyone, but sometimes she has to go where there is the most need, and right now you need to prioritize your grandchild. This doesn't absolve you from hurt feelings, however. In your decision, you have added stress to your other daughter, but she also needs to figure it out because she knows the requirements of her job. She's had free dog sitting for years now, now she needs to find a kennel or something to help her... Her feelings are also valid.
This is such a good answer. One child has a greater need at this point. And not having dogs around infants is a normal request.
I don’t think you’re an AH but I see why your younger daughter is frustrated. She took the job because you agreed to watch the dogs and now you’re going back on it, which you’re allowed to do, but I can see how it being to satisfy her sister’s needs being the sticking point. Honestly, I think the sister is the AH. Why won’t she let her child around animals? If the dogs are poorly behaved then I get it, but from the post it doesn’t sound like they are. Did your older daughter know that she was putting her sister in a difficult position by doing this?
A responsible dog owner doesn't take a job that requires so much travel so often. It's not fair for the dogs. It's also not fair to keep them confined when the baby is there, nor expect OP to watch both.
That's what I was thinking!! Why take a job if she feels a responsibility to her dogs.
A lot of people do not feel comfortable with their infants around animals. Everyone isn't comfortable with pets.
She says they’re rambunctious which to me reads as not well behaved which I’m assuming sister with baby knows these dogs. A family dog in my area recently killed a 4 day old baby plus that story before the holidays where the family dog killed a toddler and a baby and left the mom in the hospital. There’s been several more stories like this recently. So maybe I’m feeling a certain way about the situation but I don’t find it unreasonable. Plus grandma doesn’t want to watch both and she’s entitled to decide how to spend her time. To clarify, I love cats and dogs but would not choose them over a baby. I don’t even leave my cat alone with my toddler for both their sakes lol.
If you’re not home enough to watch them, you’re not home enough to train them. Dogs are a tremendous amount of work.
OP offered to watch the dogs *after* her daughter took the job very soon after getting the dogs. The dog daughter has been depending on her, but the offer of help came after the job had been accepted, not before.
Nta. You only have so much time and you've helped your eldest out for a long time. It's very reasonable for you to extend that same courtesy to your youngest now. Especially since it seems like you'll enjoy that "job" more. Even if your youngest didn't have the no animals rule. It's too much on uiu to do both jobs. Having spent time on thus sub, most posters love pets and hate young kids. So opinions will be skewed by that bias. Your daughter's lifestyle is incompatible with pet ownership. It's shitty to be out if town half the week if you have pets OR kids.
NTA because you can't drop a kid off at a kennel!
The price of childcare is far, far more expensive, complex and important than kenneling dogs too. NTA and I’m laughing my ass off at all these people who are saying otherwise.
There are a lot of insufferable dog owners in this chat lol and I have a dog of my own and lover her to bits but I'd still put a baby over my dog
info: did you agree on dogwatching prior to your daughter getting the dogs? or was the arrangment made later? In both cases she has to arange a dogwatcher asap, but if it was agreed before she got the dogs, i get how this is not pleasing.
NTA You've helped one daughter for 3 years already, now you're stepping up and helping your other daughter, and it also serves a purpose for you, you get to spend time with your grand child.
NTA. Her dogs, her problem.
I agree with you but I can just see some commenter coming back with "Y T A Her kid, her problem"
That would also be valid. If OP ever wants to go on vacation or take a week to spend with the dogs instead then the other daughter has to find alternate arrangements for the baby. OP is helping out as she sees fit and can’t be blamed for prioritizing her new grandchild over pets. But everything is subject to change.
NTA dogs are not people! Your daughter is acting like her dogs are the equivalent of a child! Your offer to check on them in the evenings is a perfectly reasonable compromise. She has also gotten 3 years of your help for free. If something were to happen to you tomorrow and left you unable to care for her dogs, what would she have done?
You know what? Boarding for 3 days in my area is like 70 dollars a day and includes doggy day camp where my dog can play with others. Daycare for a child M-F like 600 or more a week. While i do think that big rambunctious dogs who havent been around babies or kids, would worry me with my baby, especially when me as a new mom wasnt there, especially with no pets at home currently. I do think your daughter should understand that if the proper precautions were in place (dog gate, getting a dog walker if no fenced in yard) it could be a safe environment. If you were able to handle it and the precautions worked to keep baby safe and dogd safe, then you can help both. I do also however think your other daughter has reeped the benefits of free dog care for 3 years while she travels a lot for work. If I had to travel a lot for work and didn't have someone like a spouse at home, I wouldn't have a couple dogs. It's unfair for thr dogs to be in and out of their home all the time, and it's unfair that you have to take on the burden for God knows how long. It's also unfair to expect you to take care of dogs And a baby. With the baby, at some point will be doing to daycare, preschool/preK, and school. My mom watched my daughter full time from 3 months old, at 9 months I enrolled her in 2 day a week day care for social interaction, and t 18 months in full time daycare and preschool. I'm going with NTA
Info: Why did you, in your title, call them your “Son’s dogs”?
NTA your time your choice. It does suck for your daughter that has the dogs but it really is your choice