Uncomfortable hospitality (updated throughout/most recent page 8)

[doodlemor]

I'm afraid I'm still going against the flow a bit here. If someone was going to spend $4000 of MY money I'd want to know. I don't think that FIL's right to surprise his wife outweighs MIL's right to not have a whole heap of her money spent without her consent or even knowledge.

Failing that FIL should be told very bluntly "I don't think MIL will like this. This is a lot of money. Do you have a plan to pay this off or will you leave it to her? Leave it to her? That's not really a present then is it?"  He's going to have to come down from the clouds anyway. Why not do it before he is taken down by a worried and possibly angry wife?

I also agree with this.

Frankly, I think that FIL is a fatuous jerk, and that spending this kind of money without MIL's knowledge or consent may just end the marriage that has already had rocky times.  Where is the common sense here? 

I'm extremely concerned also for OP and her DH.  I'm sure that they are going to be hit up for a huge sum to pay for the party.  If they are not expected to pay on the actual night, then I suspect that a few months down the road they are going to hear that the credit card needs to be paid, the gas/power is going to be turned off, or they can't meet the mortgage/taxes and so forth.

Even if they actually stayed home and avoided the party, IMO they will be asked for funds on an emergency basis at some point to pay for this folly. 

I strongly feel that MIL should be told ASAP, before this foolish man actually starts inviting people.

[DavidH]

I'm not sure why we have decided that FIL will hit them up for money since he doesn't have the history of doing that.  The fact that BIL and SIL hit them up for money shouldn't implicate FIL in that behavior any more that it would suggest that the OP and her husband are prone to hitting others up for money. 

I get the point that his spending the money without consulting his wife bothers people, but we aren't part of their marrage. It's hard for me to believe that after 45 years of marriage he doesn't have some idea of how she might react.  It seems pretty presumptuous to have another conversation with him about the cost after he has told them how he intends to pay for it.

It's rude to delve into others finances, it's more rude to repeatedly inquire about the same situation after getting an answer. 

I think the OP's solution of go and give MIL money later is fine.  I'd still present the money as a gift rather than covering their dinner costs, since one says I reject your hospitality and the other says generous gift.

[Danika]

I strongly feel that MIL should be told ASAP, before this foolish man actually starts inviting people.

I agree, too. And I'm usually a very MYOB kind of person. In OP's DH's shoes, I'd say to my mother "hypothetically, let's say you were going to have a huge anniversary party that cost a lot of money, would you want to know about it if someone were going to surprise you with one using your joint bank account and credit cards?" and I'd go from there. If she said yes, then I'd say "then, you better talk to dad."

[Mikayla]

I'm afraid I'm still going against the flow a bit here. If someone was going to spend $4000 of MY money I'd want to know. I don't think that FIL's right to surprise his wife outweighs MIL's right to not have a whole heap of her money spent without her consent or even knowledge.

Failing that FIL should be told very bluntly "I don't think MIL will like this. This is a lot of money. Do you have a plan to pay this off or will you leave it to her? Leave it to her? That's not really a present then is it?"  He's going to have to come down from the clouds anyway. Why not do it before he is taken down by a worried and possibly angry wife?

Since everyone has posted after this agreeing with you, I guess it's me going against the grain by disagreeing 

It still boils down to a relationship issue between MIL and FIL.  After 45 years of marriage, I'm sure they've had all sorts of private dynamics and battles, many of which probably related to money.  And any argument that MIL deserves to know can be countered by an argument that FIL deserves to plan. 

I agree with PPs that he sounds a little exuberant about these celebrations, but again, I see this as an issue between him and MIL.

I do like the idea of giving a cash gift enclosed in a card, as long as it's a reasonable amount for an anniversary, and not an attempt to held fund the event.

[bah12]

I'm afraid I'm still going against the flow a bit here. If someone was going to spend $4000 of MY money I'd want to know. I don't think that FIL's right to surprise his wife outweighs MIL's right to not have a whole heap of her money spent without her consent or even knowledge.

Failing that FIL should be told very bluntly "I don't think MIL will like this. This is a lot of money. Do you have a plan to pay this off or will you leave it to her? Leave it to her? That's not really a present then is it?"  He's going to have to come down from the clouds anyway. Why not do it before he is taken down by a worried and possibly angry wife?

Since everyone has posted after this agreeing with you, I guess it's me going against the grain by disagreeing 

It still boils down to a relationship issue between MIL and FIL.  After 45 years of marriage, I'm sure they've had all sorts of private dynamics and battles, many of which probably related to money.  And any argument that MIL deserves to know can be countered by an argument that FIL deserves to plan. 

I agree with PPs that he sounds a little exuberant about these celebrations, but again, I see this as an issue between him and MIL.

I do like the idea of giving a cash gift enclosed in a card, as long as it's a reasonable amount for an anniversary, and not an attempt to held fund the event.

This is where I sit.  Sure, I might be upset if my DH spent more money than I was comfortable with without consulting me first.  But, I can trust that he won't.  I don't need my family to make sure this doesn't happen.  Even if I didn't trust him, I don't need my family to make sure he owns up to his half of the relationship.  This couple has been married for 45 years. How they spend money, how they communicate their plans to spend money, and how anniverssary surprises go down are their issue to deal with.  Either they've already spent some time in the last 45 years working through these issues, or FIL is outwardly disrespectful and MIL has chosen to deal with it.  Whatever the case is, it's their business.  If he does something that makes her mad, then he does something to make her mad.  That's his choice (smart or not) and her reaction to that choice is hers.  I would be more angry at my children/family/friends deciding they know better than I do how my finances should work, then I ever would at my DH for spending a bit too much trying to throw us an anniversary party. 

[LifeOnPluto]

I'm afraid I'm still going against the flow a bit here. If someone was going to spend $4000 of MY money I'd want to know. I don't think that FIL's right to surprise his wife outweighs MIL's right to not have a whole heap of her money spent without her consent or even knowledge.

Failing that FIL should be told very bluntly "I don't think MIL will like this. This is a lot of money. Do you have a plan to pay this off or will you leave it to her? Leave it to her? That's not really a present then is it?"  He's going to have to come down from the clouds anyway. Why not do it before he is taken down by a worried and possibly angry wife?

Honestly, this is how I feel too.  It isn't clear whether or not FIL may have a separate account of just "his" money from which he intends to pay for this.  If so, I think it's his business and everyone else should probably stay out of it. 

But if she has been the primary contributor to their mutual/joint funds, then I too am very uncomfortable that this whole thing is being planned without her knowledge, much less her consent.

I agree with this too. If FIL is paying with his own money, fine. If he's using their joint accounts, that's not ok. The MIL will be the one shouldering at least some of the financial burden afterwards.

OP, you and your DH know your MIL best. If you believe she'd be more upset about FIL blowing thousands on the party than she would about the surprise being ruined, I'd definitely tell her.

[bah12]

I'm afraid I'm still going against the flow a bit here. If someone was going to spend $4000 of MY money I'd want to know. I don't think that FIL's right to surprise his wife outweighs MIL's right to not have a whole heap of her money spent without her consent or even knowledge.

Failing that FIL should be told very bluntly "I don't think MIL will like this. This is a lot of money. Do you have a plan to pay this off or will you leave it to her? Leave it to her? That's not really a present then is it?"  He's going to have to come down from the clouds anyway. Why not do it before he is taken down by a worried and possibly angry wife?

Honestly, this is how I feel too.  It isn't clear whether or not FIL may have a separate account of just "his" money from which he intends to pay for this.  If so, I think it's his business and everyone else should probably stay out of it. 

But if she has been the primary contributor to their mutual/joint funds, then I too am very uncomfortable that this whole thing is being planned without her knowledge, much less her consent.

I agree with this too. If FIL is paying with his own money, fine. If he's using their joint accounts, that's not ok. The MIL will be the one shouldering at least some of the financial burden afterwards.

OP, you and your DH know your MIL best. If you believe she'd be more upset about FIL blowing thousands on the party than she would about the surprise being ruined, I'd definitely tell her.

Actually, FIL knows MIL best.  And whether they have separate or joint accounts, the one thing that is clear that it's not the OP and DH's money, nor their business.

[gramma dishes]

Actually, FIL knows MIL best.  And whether they have separate or joint accounts, the one thing that is clear that it's not the OP and DH's money, nor their business.

True, but things like this often end badly with (in this case) parents possibly having a fight which effectively concludes their marriage or causes extreme financial hardship further down the road causing others to have to get involved whether that was their intention or not.  When the time comes that MIL and/or FIL has to request 'bailout' money, then it does indeed become "their business".

Or MIL might be furious that her children knew about this fiasco and did nothing to stop it.  She may see it as them contributing to the jeopardizing of her financial future when they could have prevented it from happening.  If family members stop speaking to each other and harboring resentments, that also directly affects others besides MIL and FIL and again, when it does, then it becomes "their business".

[LeveeWoman]

Actually, FIL knows MIL best.  And whether they have separate or joint accounts, the one thing that is clear that it's not the OP and DH's money, nor their business.

True, but things like this often end badly with (in this case) parents possibly having a fight which effectively concludes their marriage or causes extreme financial hardship further down the road causing others to have to get involved whether that was their intention or not.  When the time comes that MIL and/or FIL has to request 'bailout' money, then it does indeed become "their business".

Or MIL might be furious that her children knew about this fiasco and did nothing to stop it.  She may see it as them contributing to the jeopardizing of her financial future when they could have prevented it from happening.  If family members stop speaking to each other and harboring resentments, that also directly affects others besides MIL and FIL and again, when it does, then it becomes "their business".

And this would not be the first time tignduff and her husband had to pony up money for a party, as she posted about in No. 28.

[gramma dishes]

Hmmm ... LeveeWoman's comment made me think of something.   

Is there any chance at all that FIL remembers the fancy party the SIL gave for them (that the OP and her husband had to "finish" paying off)?   And maybe - probably even - he doesn't know that the SIL had to have considerable financial "help" to pull that off?   

Is there a possibility that his attitude is "Well, my daughter had this huge party for us just a few years ago and she was able to pay for the whole thing, so if my daughter can do it, I can certainly do it too!  I don't want to be shown up by my daughter!  I'll do what she did but even bigger and better and fancier and more expensive!"

[LeveeWoman]

Hmmm ... LeveeWoman's comment made me think of something.   

Is there any chance at all that FIL remembers the fancy party the SIL gave for them (that the OP and her husband had to "finish" paying off)?   And maybe - probably even - he doesn't know that the SIL had to have considerable financial "help" to pull that off?   

Is there a possibility that his attitude is "Well, my daughter had this huge party for us just a few years ago and she was able to pay for the whole thing, so if my daughter can do it, I can certainly do it too!  I don't want to be shown up by my daughter!  I'll do what she did but even bigger and better and fancier and more expensive!"

That's one reason I said I'd leave my checkbook, debit card, credit cards and cash at home the night of the shindig.

[POF]

Actually, FIL knows MIL best.  And whether they have separate or joint accounts, the one thing that is clear that it's not the OP and DH's money, nor their business.

True, but things like this often end badly with (in this case) parents possibly having a fight which effectively concludes their marriage or causes extreme financial hardship further down the road causing others to have to get involved whether that was their intention or not.  When the time comes that MIL and/or FIL has to request 'bailout' money, then it does indeed become "their business".

Or MIL might be furious that her children knew about this fiasco and did nothing to stop it.  She may see it as them contributing to the jeopardizing of her financial future when they could have prevented it from happening.  If family members stop speaking to each other and harboring resentments, that also directly affects others besides MIL and FIL and again, when it does, then it becomes "their business".

Agreeing with you here.  If yu are most likely going to be hit up for help, if you have to listen to your MIL be concerned about your future... then they are making your business.

Its one thing if the FIL has a reutation for managing money or is he a spendthrift.  Sounds like the latter -  I would tell them .

[QueenfaninCA]

True, but things like this often end badly with (in this case) parents possibly having a fight which effectively concludes their marriage or causes extreme financial hardship further down the road causing others to have to get involved whether that was their intention or not.  When the time comes that MIL and/or FIL has to request 'bailout' money, then it does indeed become "their business".

Or MIL might be furious that her children knew about this fiasco and did nothing to stop it.  She may see it as them contributing to the jeopardizing of her financial future when they could have prevented it from happening.  If family members stop speaking to each other and harboring resentments, that also directly affects others besides MIL and FIL and again, when it does, then it becomes "their business".

POD.

[Danika]

Is there any chance at all that FIL remembers the fancy party the SIL gave for them (that the OP and her husband had to "finish" paying off)?   And maybe - probably even - he doesn't know that the SIL had to have considerable financial "help" to pull that off?   

Is there a possibility that his attitude is "Well, my daughter had this huge party for us just a few years ago and she was able to pay for the whole thing, so if my daughter can do it, I can certainly do it too!  I don't want to be shown up by my daughter!  I'll do what she did but even bigger and better and fancier and more expensive!"

I was thinking something similar, but I was thinking more like SIL probably told FIL "oh, don't worry about money. Tignduff and brother are willing to contribute. They'll help."

In my father's family, for some reason, people got the impression that my father had a lot of money. He is very frugal and cheap and so he was never drowing in debt like the others, but he was living paycheck to paycheck. But for some reason, there's a misconception that he has money. And this was my grandmother's sentiment "Oh, I can give money I don't have to other grandchildren because my son will pay for my retirement." Which was false, because he had neither the desire nor the money to bail her out and pay for all of her debts. But for some reason, she thought she was entitled.

[bah12]

Actually, FIL knows MIL best.  And whether they have separate or joint accounts, the one thing that is clear that it's not the OP and DH's money, nor their business.

True, but things like this often end badly with (in this case) parents possibly having a fight which effectively concludes their marriage or causes extreme financial hardship further down the road causing others to have to get involved whether that was their intention or not.  When the time comes that MIL and/or FIL has to request 'bailout' money, then it does indeed become "their business".

Or MIL might be furious that her children knew about this fiasco and did nothing to stop it.  She may see it as them contributing to the jeopardizing of her financial future when they could have prevented it from happening.  If family members stop speaking to each other and harboring resentments, that also directly affects others besides MIL and FIL and again, when it does, then it becomes "their business".

And this would not be the first time tignduff and her husband had to pony up money for a party, as she posted about in No. 28.

I'm having a very hard time with any justification that there is a reason (outside of safety, maybe a cheating situation, or something that will bankrupt (catastrophic consequences)) that makes it ok for anyone to butt into someone else's financial situation and marriage.  Yes this is an expensive party, per the OPs and maybe even FIL/MIL's standards.  Maybe the party is even getting out of hand.  But to decide that anyone would have a right above FIL to go behind his back and tattle to his wife, effectively ruining any surprise he has for her, because for some reason they know better than him how she will react is beyond me.  This is their marriage.   And it's their finances.  If the OP is really so concerned that he's making a huge mistake, then they can bring it up with him (though I think that's overstepping too).  But if he doesn't want to talk about it, or doesn't want to accept their warnings, then that's on him. 

So, how ironic is it that the OP may justify going behind FIL's back and inserting herself into his business to avoid this impending divorce that a surprise party would may or may not result in, and cause an even bigger rift. Not only the potential to cause MIL and FIL to have an epic fight before they even get to their anniversary, but the even greater liklihood of hurting her and her DH's relationship with one or both of his parents. 

If they are going to fight, let them fight.  If something like a credit card bill is going to push them to divorce after 45 years of dealing with these same issues (who hasn't after even just 2 years?), then they divorce.  It's their relationship.  The OP may not like them to break up, but it's not her job to intercept all these possible fights to protect them against it. She's not "relationship Woman", here to save the day before you even know there's a problem.

 
And, I said this before and I'll say it again.  Just because SIL/BIL asked the OP for money before, doesn't mean that FIL is planning to or going to this time.  By that logic, who's to say that the OP and her DH aren't planning to pull the same stunt themselves?  Afterall, they are all part of the same family and that makes the history relevent, right?