Uncomfortable with FIL's gift to my child

[bah12]

OP, I'm curious...how would you handle this kind of gift if it was given without your input?  In other words, if you had no idea what the present was and she opened it and it was an ipad, would you take it from her, limit it's use, share it with her, or something else?

I still say that your FIL asked for your input and he does need to respect your wishes (regardless of agreement on it), but as far as your concerns go with her having the ipad, does her getting it anyway change how you have her use it?  Would you still have her use it the way you'd prefer for her to use it (with a conversation/explanation to your child) or do you consider that once it's given to her, it's hers, and your stuck with her having/using something you'd prefer she didn't?

[LilacGirl1983]

I am wading into this a bit late with my thoughts    I wouldn't be comfortable with a gift that expensive for my daughter. Plus it doesn't even really seem to be a gift. To me it seems like here I don't need this anymore..what to do with it? I know give it to the niece. I might be a little SS but I find hand me down gifts a little demeaning unless its something the person wants (ie value to the person) It seems like an easy way to get rid of things you don't want. And the fact he is disregarding what the parent wants. The 3 year old won't care if its an Ipad 2 or a leapster but I can tell you that the leapster probably will last longer since its meant for children. I think the uncle needs to go with what the parents want and find someone else who would want his left over goods.

[TurtleDove]

I think the uncle needs to go with what the parents want and find someone else who would want his left over goods.

As I understand it, though, the parent wants the "leftover goods" for herself!  The problem isn't that she doesn't want her DD to use an ipad.  It's that she doesn't want her DD to use an ipad that is nicer than hers, and that to me is strange, especially becuase as the parent she gets to make the rules (at least in my house).  I would imagine the FIL is just as confused as I am about the motivation behind the OP's discomfort.  I still don't get it.

[Lynn2000]

To me, the iPad is kind of a red herring. I see the situation as, FIL wanted to give something specific to his granddaughter, so he went to the parents to ask first, which is good. The parents and FIL came to an agreement about what FIL would give and how he would give it. It was a compromise, not the parents' first choice and not FIL's either, but it was what they agreed to.

Now FIL is making noises about changing that agreement, and going ahead with his first choice plan. To me that's not polite. He should abide by the agreement he made with the parents. He can politely ask to make a new agreement but has to accept that 'no' might be the answer. And I guess, since he's the one giving something, he can decide to completely back out, and not give anything at all, though this would be flaky barring extenuating circumstances.

But it seems to me like he agreed to something with the parents, and now is turning around and saying he's going to do what he wanted in the first place instead. And I don't necessarily think it has to be malicious or controlling, he may not realize that this part of the agreement was important to the parents--he might think of it as a mere detail (though they explained otherwise).

I think someone should be able to politely say to him, "Oh, FIL, I thought we agreed that would be a family gift for all of us, and that it would NOT be wrapped or given directly to DD. Have you changed your mind about that? You can just keep the iPad in that case, if you prefer."

[Eden]

Don't you think a lot of the etiquette issues in this are in the details of exactly how the conversation with the grandfather went?

For example, "We're not comfortable with DD having an ipad of her own. If you'd like to gift it to the family, that would be fine. Otherwise, thank you, but please choose a different gift." is polite, but straightforward. If, after hearing that, Grandpa still went ahead with the plan to give it to DD, then he's overstepping.
But, "That would be fine, but how about if it's a family gift?" sort of communicates that the OP is okay with the gift in general and what the OP viewed as a compromise or agreement, Grandpa viewed as a green light and gifting it to the family is merely a suggestion.

Whether or not he's far out of the bounds of etiquette seems to hinge on how clear the initial communication was. Either way, it sounds like the OP decided to let DD open the ipad so she's chosen her path which is very much within the bounds of etiquette.

[bah12]

I would only see the ipad as a red herring if the issue the OP presented was "we refused a gift for our DD and FIL wants to give it to her anyway, how do we politely tell him 'no thanks'?"

But she is specifically asking if her stance/concerns on the ipad are unreasonable...and while some of her concerns are based on the extravagance of the gift (even if used) and spoiling her child, others have simply to do with the fact that this ipad is better than hers and she'd rather it be a family gift where the real benefit would be to her and her DH (her words).  And honestly, I think it's fair to answer those questions and tell her that to some, it does seem a bit unreasonable.  All her concerns can be mitigated through parental controls.  But her real concern does seem to be that if her DD opens the gift, she'll consider it solely "hers" and therefore the OP does not have the ability to use it solely for herself.  She obviously has no issue with her DD using an ipad as she already allows her to play with one regularly.  She also has no issue with her FIL spending $100 on a LeapPad, where giving her his old ipad would cost him almost nothing.  So, I don't think the $ issue is valid (especially considering that most 3 year olds that I know, don't know the differenct in monetary value between an ipad and a LeapPad anyway).

To me, this thread is very much about the specific gift.  And like I said, I do think that the FIL should respect their wishes regardless of what they are when it comes to gifting thier child. But if I'm going to be asked about how reasonable I think they are being with the specific gift, I'm going to be honest about it and I do think that the OP is being slightly unreasonable about her daughter having "her own" ipad...or at least on why she doesn't want her to have her own.  (If the FIL's ipad belonged to the family, she said her DD would use her ipad solely...doesn't that make it "her ipad"?  If she has no issue with giving her DD her used ipad, then why is different for her FIL to give her his old ipad?)   

[Take2]

I really think the OP's concerns, at least as I understand them, about the 3 year old "owning" the ipad can be addressed with setting rules as her parent.  A 3 year old is different from an adult in terms of ownership, and even different from a 6 year old or 10 year old.

I still disagree. My 12yo stepson has quite a few video games. He cannot play them when his grades are bad or before he finishes his homework...but my bio kids also cannot use them without asking or when he isn't here. He owns things outright, but there are rules for their use based on his safety and well-being. My 6yo DD owns a LeapPad, but can only take it in the car with special permission and can't use it after bedtime...but her baby brother and other kids can't borrow it without asking. The fundamental way that OP plans to use this ipad is NOT as DD's that she will agree to share, but rather exactly the way I use MY ipad, letting my kids borrow it at will within the confines of their screentime limitations and behavior. I think it would be unfair to tell a child this item belongs to her and then treat it like it belongs to the parents. My children both knew the distinction at 3, and even if this particular child doesn't get it yet, the goal should be to teach her and guide her to the next level of understanding. 

[TurtleDove]

I still disagree. My 12yo stepson has quite a few video games. He cannot play them when his grades are bad or before he finishes his homework...but my bio kids also cannot use them without asking or when he isn't here. He owns things outright, but there are rules for their use based on his safety and well-being. My 6yo DD owns a LeapPad, but can only take it in the car with special permission and can't use it after bedtime...but her baby brother and other kids can't borrow it without asking. The fundamental way that OP plans to use this ipad is NOT as DD's that she will agree to share, but rather exactly the way I use MY ipad, letting my kids borrow it at will within the confines of their screentime limitations and behavior. I think it would be unfair to tell a child this item belongs to her and then treat it like it belongs to the parents. My children both knew the distinction at 3, and even if this particular child doesn't get it yet, the goal should be to teach her and guide her to the next level of understanding.

I guess I am not following why the OP cannot simply explain the use of the ipad, as the OP wants it, to her DD.  I didn't see an answer to my question about whether the FIL forbade the OP or her DH from using the ipad because he wanted to give it to the DD.  That would be really really odd to me, as I am pretty sure I more fully articulated above (basically, because the DD could not possibly be able to use the ipad totally on her own).  Re the bolded, I don't understand why the DD cannot be taught that for this item, she gets to use it in the ways her parents tell her she can.  As several PPs mentioned, lots of kids "own" various objects but have different rules attached to these objects depending on lots of factors. 

Also, as a PP pointed out, the OP seems to be fine with the DD "owning" and exclusively using the inferior ipad. Just not the nicer one.  It's not about the OP not wanting her DD to have an ipad.  To answer the initial question in the OP, yes, I think that is unreasonable.

[Take2]

Yes, she can explain to the child that this ipad, while it technically belongs to the child, will be treated as though it belongs to the family. And certainly the 3yo will not be able to over-ride that decision, so it will work to do so. But the reason that wouldn't work in my house, at least, is that we don't make rules or decisions that contradict the grand scheme of right and wrong as we understand it. To have a possession presented to a child as hers and then take superior claim to it whenever I feel like it does not match my grand scheme of right and wrong. I COULD make all manner of rules that my kids would have to follow. Like all Reese's PB cups that enter the house immediately become Mommy's property. And I could enforce that rule and everyone would move on with their lives. But in my mind, rules enforced by me should model fairness and consistency and teach my child that her parents only make rules to protect her safety and well-being.

Look at it this way. Say I work for a company and that company has a car that the boss uses, and sometimes lends to me to use for work purposes. The company buys a new car, and the boss tells me that this nicer car is MY new company car. Except, she actually uses the car herself every day. I frequently go to get the car for a business errand and find that she has plans for it and I can't use it. She basically acts as though the car belongs to her. That would be rude. And yet, if she had stated at the beginning that both cars are company cars and she has first dibs on both as the boss and anyone else can use them as circumstances allow, there would be no problem. Certainly, she has the RIGHT to handle it however she chooses, but the first way isn't very nice.

[TurtleDove]

My point is that the OP does not have to tell the DD it is "her exclusive" iPad just because the FIL wrapped it up for her to open. My DD likes to open presents - when she opens a gift for Mama she doesn't think it's hers and Mama has no say over it.

Also, the OP is fine with the DD "owning" the inferior iPad. I just cannot reconcile these things as reasonable.

[wolfie]

I think the uncle needs to go with what the parents want and find someone else who would want his left over goods.

As I understand it, though, the parent wants the "leftover goods" for herself!  The problem isn't that she doesn't want her DD to use an ipad.  It's that she doesn't want her DD to use an ipad that is nicer than hers, and that to me is strange, especially becuase as the parent she gets to make the rules (at least in my house).  I would imagine the FIL is just as confused as I am about the motivation behind the OP's discomfort.  I still don't get it.

The OP has posted that she would prefer that the iPad doesn't get given to her family at all, not that she only wants the iPad for herself.

[NyaChan]

If I'm not mistaken, she also said that she is not comfortable with her child owning an ipad at all.

[wolfie]

My point is that the OP does not have to tell the DD it is "her exclusive" iPad just because the FIL wrapped it up for her to open. My DD likes to open presents - when she opens a gift for Mama she doesn't think it's hers and Mama has no say over it.

Also, the OP is fine with the DD "owning" the inferior iPad. I just cannot reconcile these things as reasonable.

There is a big difference between opening a gift when you know it is really for someone else and opening a gift that has been given to you with the explanation that it is yours and then having someone else swoop in and say no it's not.

Also the OP has stated she doesn't want her DD owning any iPad.

[JenJay]

My point is that the OP does not have to tell the DD it is "her exclusive" iPad just because the FIL wrapped it up for her to open. My DD likes to open presents - when she opens a gift for Mama she doesn't think it's hers and Mama has no say over it.

Also, the OP is fine with the DD "owning" the inferior iPad. I just cannot reconcile these things as reasonable.

Actually she's said repeatedly that she's okay with DD playing with an iPad but not owning one. She's also said repeatedly that she doesn't care if DD plays with the new iPad. The only issue is whether or not OP and her DH should insist Grandpa make the distinction, when letting DD open the wrapped iPad, that it belongs to the family and not DD.

[Bexx27]

My point is that the OP does not have to tell the DD it is "her exclusive" iPad just because the FIL wrapped it up for her to open. My DD likes to open presents - when she opens a gift for Mama she doesn't think it's hers and Mama has no say over it.

Also, the OP is fine with the DD "owning" the inferior iPad. I just cannot reconcile these things as reasonable.

TD, at this point I can only assume you are intentionally mischaracterizing my position, as I've said many time throughout the thread that this is not the case. I don't want the newer ipad for myself and I don't want DD owning ANY ipad. Please either read my posts or stop responding.

FTR, I was not thinking that DD would never use the ipad2; she might have some apps that would work better on it. I was thinking that we would all share both ipads.