Woman Refuses To Let Mother-In-Law Sleep In Her Bed, MIL Lashes Out, Drama Ensues

When a woman's mother-in-law requested to sleep in the couple's bed, drama ensued. The woman refused the request, presenting other options like the guest room, couch, and air mattress. Both her husband and mother-in-law disagreed, leading to an argument between the woman and her mother-in-law.

After the woman refused to give in, the mother-in-law cried and left for a hotel in the middle of the night. Now, the husband and her in-laws criticize the woman for disrespecting her mother-in-law. Was she really in the wrong?

That is the question that needs to be answered. Let's hear what people have to say about this thread.

The section comment provides advice for the OP to get a divorce for the respect of both him and his partner. Most of the replies, however, advise the OP to set boundaries rather than resort to a dramatic step such as divorce. Most replies also agree that NTA and that the MIL is pushing boundaries that should not be tolerated.

NTA (not the a**hole). MIL's unexpected arrival and request to sleep in OP's bed is deemed as an intrusion and a power play from her. Replies agree that MIL has ulterior motives such as snooping and sabotaging OP's birth control.

The commenter was right in saying that the MIL's request was creepy and that the husband was acting like a mamma's boy. Replies highlighted that this type of demand is unexpected and inappropriate, calling it emotional incest. Definitely NTA.

NTA. MIL is in an emotionally abusive relationship with DH and OP is standing strong to put boundaries in place. Replies to the comment emphasize the importance of setting boundaries and standing up for oneself.

NTA but OP finds it strange that her husband also went to the hotel. MIL wanted to sleep in OP's room and even lock the door. Replies discuss a possible future divorce.

The commentator says OP is NTA, finding it strange that the MIL would want to sleep in the married couple's bed when there is a perfectly good guest bedroom. It can be seen as her trying to assert her authority as the main woman in her husband's life. Replies highlighted the lack of respect for the OP and suggest that the husband needs to stand up for her or else the OP should leave. 🤔

The commenter suggests that the woman's husband hasn't broken away from his mother yet and that this may be a life-long problem. The response agrees with the sentiment, suggesting that the woman must either get used to it or get gone quickly.

The commenter expressed that NTA and the husband was the a-hole in this situation. There was a need to set boundaries, and the husband should have respected them and chosen his wife every time.

NTA - The woman's bedroom is her own personal space and it should not be shared with her mother-in-law. Her husband's 'it's my room too' statement was wrong and it seems like a power play.

The family is also berating her, which is unacceptable, she needs to think hard about if this is what she wants for her future as her husband is putting his mother first. Replies agree that this sets a dangerous precedent for future visits, as the mother-in-law is only a guest in her house.

The commenter suggests that the OP asks her husband if his mum would give up his bedroom for them if they visited her home. It's determined to be NTA, and the couple is advised to set boundaries to prevent increasingly demanding behavior from the mother-in-law.

The replies suggest that the couple can not have a healthy relationship until boundaries are established, with one suggesting the OP ask her husband if her dad asked for the same thing, would he give up his side of the bed for him?

Commenter deemed the original poster (OP) 'Not the A**hole' (NTA) for not allowing the mother-in-law (MIL) to stay in their bed. MIL was accused of trying to take over the OP's space and going through their personal belongings.

OP's husband is seen letting down his partner by not standing up to his mother. Commenter stated that MIL won't change and encouraged OP to speak to their husband about the issue.

The comment suggests divorcing to find a partner without maternal issues.

The comment suggested that NTA (not the a**hole) and offered a possible solution to the issue by respectfully reminding the husband that the bedroom was 'our bedroom' and that he should not agree to something the commenter was uncomfortable with.

The reply proposed an alternate solution by suggesting that the MIL and the commenter should sleep in the master bedroom while the husband slept in the guest room.

The commenter states that the OP is not the a**hole and suggests reading the r/JUSTNOMIL subreddit. A reply thanks the commenter for the suggestion.

The comment states that the mother-in-law should have been given a guest room instead of being allowed to sleep in the couple's bed and that the husband should have taken the sofa if his wife refused. A reply suggested running to the hotel with their mommy.

The woman is NTA in this situation as her husband and MIL are the ones with the problem. In response to the comment, a reply expresses shock at why the MIL and husband did not sleep in the guest bedroom.

The original commenter was shocked that the mother-in-law demanded to sleep in her daughter-in-law's bed and quite bluntly suggested that the daughter-in-law should start stashing money away as the relationship could likely end in divorce.

In one of the replies, it was suggested that the mother-in-law wanted access to the bedroom to snoop around and access private things while the couple was asleep and unaware.

The original poster questioned why the mother-in-law felt the need to lock the bedroom door for comfort. In response, the guest was informed that it is something the mother-in-law is used to and wondered if the guest room lacks a lock, which is why the mother-in-law refused to sleep there.

The comment acknowledges that the original poster (OP) is not the a**hole (NTA) for not letting her mother-in-law (MIL) sleep in her bed. It suggests that this could be the beginning of future boundary stomping if her husband doesn't have a spine. It also warns OP not to get pregnant until the situation is sorted out.

The comment asks if the MIL has a back problem, but the reply reveals that there was a guest bedroom available, with only one issue: it had no lock. MIL used this fact as her reason to not sleep in the guest bedroom, leading to drama ensuing.

The comment states that the wife is NTA, as her husband should never agree to something uncomfortable like having the mother-in-law sleep in the same bed without talking to his wife first. The comment also states that the guest room is for guests and the master bedroom is for the people who pay the bills and that the wife is right for standing her ground.

The commenter was firm in deciding that the MIL's behavior was wrong and unacceptable as unexpected guests are unusually invited and should not be demanding exclusive use of a bedroom.

The respondent believes MIL's demand of wanting to sleep in her grown, married son's bed instead is wild, and they find it creepy a-f.

The commenter praised the original poster for laying down the rules and said that her husband and mother-in-law were a-holes and should remember that the original poster comes first now.

The commenter shares that the OP's husband is a momma's boy and will always side with his mother and questions if this is the life the OP desires.

The commenter declared the OP NTA (not the a**hole) for refusing to let her MIL sleep in her bed and for refusing to lock the door of her bedroom. The commenter praised the OP for standing up to her MIL's power move. They also suggested that the husband owes the OP an apology.

The commenter expressed their opinion that the mother-in-law was out of line for not sleeping in the guest room and for letting the host know that she was going to lock the door.

The comment takes a stand on the mother-in-law's actions and suggests that the husband is an enabler of them.

The mother-in-law (MIL) is the a**hole for wanting to sleep in her son's bed when he's a married man. The commenter suggests that the husband is a mama's boy, and the couple needs to have a serious talk.

The commenter declares that they are Not The A-hole (NTA). They believe that the original poster (OP) offered reasonable choices to the mother-in-law (MIL) and that it was the MIL who threw a fit when she was not respected. Lastly, the commenter notices that the OP's husband is too closely knotted to his mother's apron strings.

The comment labels the OP as NTA (not the a**hole) and suggests that the MIL is a narcissist. It reflects that the MIL has been trying to establish control and dominance over the family, especially her son. The comment suggests that it is important to fight back early on before the MIL gains more power in the family dynamic.

The comment states that it would have been better to have a conversation with the husband in order to explain why the mother-in-law should not sleep in their room. It acknowledges that the husband needs to be aware that he is now married and he cannot as easily run to his mother.

The commentator says NTA, suggesting that the woman was in her full rights to refuse her mother-in-law's request to sleep in her bedroom given that the mother-in-law was a guest.

The commenter praised the original poster (OP) for standing up for their own boundaries in the face of a difficult mother-in-law and suggested that the OP should also address their partner's (DH) role in the conflict.

A comment suggests that it's weird for a MIL to demand she sleeps in her bed while visiting her. The comment declares that the woman is *NTA* (not the a**hole) in the situation.

The commenter declares the OP is Not The A-hole in this situation and believes the mother-in-law was out of line for requesting to sleep in the bed. The commenter also shares their concerns about the mother-in-law being a snoop and having to change sheets twice.

NTA, a commenter says there were other options for her and no reason for her to sleep in the bed.

The commenter shared a Biblical verse that emphasizes that a man should leave his parents behind and become one with his wife.

The comment has labeled the OP NTA, indicating that the original poster was not at fault. The replies discussed why the mother-in-law shouldn't have been allowed to sleep in the original poster's bed and how she was likely using manipulation tactics in order to get her way.

The commenter thinks the original poster is not the a**hole for refusing to let her mother-in-law sleep in her bed and offering her the guest room instead.

The commentator declares the OP is NTA (not the a**hole) and advises the original poster to not have children with the husband until he puts boundaries with his mother and family or else the poster's life will be a living hell.

The commenter warned the woman to not have children with the man, as it will make her life hell since he has already demonstrated disrespect to her.

A commenter remarks that some of the posts on the AITA (Am I The A**hole) subreddit are extremely bizarre, citing the current post as an example.

The commenter feels NTA (not the a**hole) towards the original poster; they feel their husband should have had their back in the situation and that the MIL is wack, and both parties are out of line. The commenter insists the original poster is 100% in the right and suggests setting boundaries with her husband and their family.

The commenter suggests that the woman should set boundaries with her mother-in-law, reminding her husband to have her call before visiting and to not stay overnight unless it is an emergency situation. No a-hole here!