Stepping in to do the cooking

[BatCity]

I'm putting this under Life in General instead of Family, since even though this was my husband, it's more of a general question.

The question is, how egregious of an etiquette faux pas is it to step in and finish someone's cooking without their permission?

Here's the background:  DH usually does the cooking, but he had a late meeting so I did the cooking. I made risotto, the real kind that is pretty labor intensive.  DH came home when I was almost done and was clearly engrossed in what I was doing.  He asked me if I had put mushrooms in the risotto.  I told him I hadn't.

After I was done and was working on the rest of dinner, DH chopped up some mushrooms and added them to the risotto.  I was LIVID.

[Winterlight]

Very rude. Ask first. Always. "Honey, shall I chop the mushrooms and toss them in?" takes five seconds.

[onyonryngs]

I think "livid" would be an overreaction.  It really does sound like he may have just misunderstood that you hadn't put the mushrooms in yet, rather than you weren't going to put mushrooms in.  He probably thought he was helping. 

[MariaE]

I think "livid" would be an overreaction.  It really does sound like he may have just misunderstood that you hadn't put the mushrooms in yet, rather than you weren't going to put mushrooms in.  He probably thought he was helping.

Agree with this. Doesn't sound like he was usurping you as much as that he thought he was helping you.

[Judah]

I usually do the cooking in our house, but DH is responsible for dinner on the nights when I work my second job. It would be disrespectful of his efforts if I stepped in and "fixed" a meal he was cooking.  And I'd be pretty ticked off if he did it to me.

[Outdoor Girl]

Since I don't care for mushrooms, 'livid' would pretty much describe my reaction.  If the OP had intended to put them in but hadn't got around to it yet, 'livid' would be an overreaction.  But if she hadn't intended to put them in at all?  'Livid' works.

Regardless of the situation, I think the OP should have a discussion with her not so DH (at the moment) and let him know that she'd appreciate it if he would ask what he can do to help, rather than presuming to know what the OP wants.

[Zilla]

 DH came home when I was almost done and was clearly engrossed in what I was doing.  He asked me if I had put mushrooms in the risotto.  I told him I hadn't.

After I was done and was working on the rest of dinner, DH chopped up some mushrooms and added them to the risotto.  I was LIVID.

 
Were you not intending to put mushrooms in the risotto?  If you weren't, why didn't you tell your husband that you are not going to put mushrooms in it when he asked?  I would have thought by him asking he was offering to help and he did.  That's how it works in my house.  And didn't you see him chopping them? 
 
 
 
 

[BeagleMommy]

Slightly rude.  Nothing egregious (unless done regularly), but I would have wanted him to ask before adding an ingredient.

[Judah]

Were you not intending to put mushrooms in the risotto? If you weren't, why didn't you tell your husband that you are not going to put mushrooms in it when he asked? I would have thought by him asking he was offering to help and he did.  That's how it works in my house.  And didn't you see him chopping them?

I hadn't considered the possibility that the OP had intended to use mushrooms. I was going under the assumption that the DH added an ingredient the OP wasn't going to use.  If she was intending to use mushrooms and just hadn't gotten to them yet, that changes things.  He should still have asked if she needed his help, but he was just helping.

As to the bolded, he didn't ask if she was going to put mushrooms in; he asked if she had put mushrooms in. She answered the question she was asked.

He asked me if I had put mushrooms in the risotto.  I told him I hadn't.

[cicero]

I think "livid" would be an overreaction.  It really does sound like he may have just misunderstood that you hadn't put the mushrooms in yet, rather than you weren't going to put mushrooms in.  He probably thought he was helping.

That was my initial reaction.

especially since you say that he usually cooks and he was held up at work so you stepped in. i would see this more as him "coming home and taking over *his* job" rather than "faux pas"

I don't think *this* woudl make me livid.

[Zilla]

Were you not intending to put mushrooms in the risotto? If you weren't, why didn't you tell your husband that you are not going to put mushrooms in it when he asked? I would have thought by him asking he was offering to help and he did.  That's how it works in my house.  And didn't you see him chopping them?

I hadn't considered the possibility that the OP had intended to use mushrooms. I was going under the assumption that the DH added an ingredient the OP wasn't going to use.  If she was intending to use mushrooms and just hadn't gotten to them yet, that changes things.  He should still have asked if she needed his help, but he was just helping.

As to the bolded, he didn't ask if she was going to put mushrooms in; he asked if she had put mushrooms in. She answered the question she was asked.

He asked me if I had put mushrooms in the risotto.  I told him I hadn't.

Right so he would have asked, "Did you put mushrooms in?"  And she said no.  Then he set about getting it.  If she hadn't intended in putting in mushrooms, wouldn't she have said, "I am not going to this time." or "Nope, no mushrooms tonight."  Or something clearer.  Truly this sounds like a miscommunication where no was one clear or wrong.  And definitely would not get livid over it.

[kakack]

We've had discussions about this before.  One does not "help" by adding ingredients after the cook is finished.  I totally understand the OP's reaction.  If he wanted mushrooms, he could have added mushrooms after the risotto had been served.

in our house, you DON'T.ADD.WATER.TO.THE.GRAVY.

[auntmeegs]

Were you not intending to put mushrooms in the risotto? If you weren't, why didn't you tell your husband that you are not going to put mushrooms in it when he asked? I would have thought by him asking he was offering to help and he did.  That's how it works in my house.  And didn't you see him chopping them?

I hadn't considered the possibility that the OP had intended to use mushrooms. I was going under the assumption that the DH added an ingredient the OP wasn't going to use.  If she was intending to use mushrooms and just hadn't gotten to them yet, that changes things.  He should still have asked if she needed his help, but he was just helping.

As to the bolded, he didn't ask if she was going to put mushrooms in; he asked if she had put mushrooms in. She answered the question she was asked.

He asked me if I had put mushrooms in the risotto.  I told him I hadn't.

And here I read it as she was going to put the mushrooms in but just hadn't yet and the her DH beat her to is and I'm wondering to myself why the OP is so livid about this.  Funny how people can read the same exact thing and interpret it in such different ways.
So, OP, which was it?

[Surianne]

Were you not intending to put mushrooms in the risotto? If you weren't, why didn't you tell your husband that you are not going to put mushrooms in it when he asked? I would have thought by him asking he was offering to help and he did.  That's how it works in my house.  And didn't you see him chopping them?

I hadn't considered the possibility that the OP had intended to use mushrooms. I was going under the assumption that the DH added an ingredient the OP wasn't going to use.  If she was intending to use mushrooms and just hadn't gotten to them yet, that changes things.  He should still have asked if she needed his help, but he was just helping.

As to the bolded, he didn't ask if she was going to put mushrooms in; he asked if she had put mushrooms in. She answered the question she was asked.

He asked me if I had put mushrooms in the risotto.  I told him I hadn't.

Right so he would have asked, "Did you put mushrooms in?"  And she said no.  Then he set about getting it.  If she hadn't intended in putting in mushrooms, wouldn't she have said, "I am not going to this time." or "Nope, no mushrooms tonight."  Or something clearer.  Truly this sounds like a miscommunication where no was one clear or wrong.  And definitely would not get livid over it.

I agree.  Unless there's more to the story, I don't see anything to get angry about here. 

[Aeris]

Livid seems like an overreaction.

Do you despise mushrooms, and he knows that? Are you allergic to them? Has this been an issue before, such that he should have known based on the past that this would upset you? If so, I can see being irritated, but not 'livid'.

But if he legitimately thought mushrooms were on the agenda for adding to the risotto, and you just hadn't gotten to them yet, I can't see even being that annoyed.