Grandma Says “Real Daughter Comes First,” Mom Says Babysitting Is Over

When grandparents step in to help, their involvement is often seen as a gift rather than a responsibility. But when help comes with conditions, the line between support and harm can become blurry.

After combining families through marriage, one woman hoped to create a stable and respectful environment for two young girls still learning to coexist.

What she noticed during childcare hours raised concerns about favoritism and the message it was sending.

At first glance, the OP’s decision to restrict their mother’s babysitting privileges until she treated both children equally might seem strict.

But this isn’t a trivial household squabble, it touches on something deeply studied in family psychology: the effects of perceived favoritism on sibling relationships and emotional well-being.

Research consistently shows that unequal treatment by caregivers can have profound effects on how children relate to one another.

A foundational finding in family studies is that perceived parental favoritism correlates with poorer sibling relationship quality, regardless of which sibling is favored.

One long-standing study on adult children found that when family members sense favoritism during caregiving situations, it can lead to increased tension, conflict, and lowered closeness between siblings.

That pattern appears in childhood as well, where unequal attention or privileges can fuel rivalry and resentment.

Importantly, these dynamics don’t just affect sibling relations at the moment, they can shape long-term bonds and mental health outcomes.

According to a pediatric overview on parental favoritism, up to 40 % of children report experiences of favoritism that contribute to feelings of loneliness, insecurity, or rivalry, and even small, everyday behaviors (like extra praise or pocket money for one child) can create lasting emotional scars if not addressed.

Studies also point out that when children perceive differential treatment, whether intentional or not, they may develop increased hostility, competition, or emotional withdrawal from siblings.

Research published in The Journal of Social and Personal Relationships found that when parents unintentionally differentiate in how they interact with children, siblings’ externalizing behavior and relational difficulties increase, likely because children interpret unequal treatment as a sign that they matter less.

This body of evidence aligns with equity theory in social psychology, which proposes that people assess relationships based on whether benefits and costs are perceived as fair.

In the context of siblings, disparities in parental attention or privileges, even small ones, often lead to feelings of under-benefit (resentment, envy) or over-benefit (guilt, entitlement), both of which correlate with poorer relationship quality.

In the OP’s situation, their mother’s behavior, extra attention and pocket money for Sam but not Nat, taking Sam’s side in play, and responding to misbehavior with permissiveness, can easily be read by the children as a form of favoritism, regardless of intent.

That uneven treatment has documented effects not just on sibling relations in the moment but on children’s self-esteem and social learning over time.

Clinically, favoritism isn’t just about unequal material rewards. It’s about messages children receive about their worth and place within the family.

Psychological research shows that when one child feels consistently advantaged or disadvantaged compared to a sibling, both children tend to experience less emotional closeness and more rivalry.

That pattern holds true across cultures and developmental stages.

The OP’s requirement that both children be treated equitably isn’t unreasonable. Establishing clear behavioral expectations is part of responsible caregiving.

Professional advice often emphasizes that children learn social norms and fairness through models of equal treatment, and setting consistent standards is one way families reinforce this learning.

Communication and support: It’s one thing to identify a problem; it’s another to address it with empathy.

Discussing observed behaviors with the grandmother, clearly outlining why equal treatment matters for both girls’ emotional development, and inviting her to participate in activities that promote bonding between Sam and Nat might be constructive next steps.

At its core, this story isn’t about distrust or punishment. It’s about protecting children’s relational development at a formative stage, and the OP’s decision reflects research-supported concerns that preferential treatment, even unintentional, can harm sibling bonds and children’s sense of fairness.

By prioritizing consistency and equality, the OP is aligning caregiving with well-supported psychological principles that promote healthier relationships and emotional security for both children.

Here’s the feedback from the Reddit community:

These commenters were deeply concerned about the psychological damage of favoritism.

This group shared stories of growing up as the “less-favored” child and described how deeply it hurt, even when no overt abuse occurred.

This commenter offered a powerful personal story about adoption, blood ties, and belonging.

These Redditors focused on parenting responsibility.

Several commenters explicitly praised OP’s role as a stepmom, calling her advocacy for Nat “incredibly impactful.”

These users took a more cautious stance.

This isn’t really about babysitting. It’s about the kind of household culture being quietly taught when adults aren’t careful.

The Redditor didn’t ban Grandma out of spite; she drew a boundary to protect both girls from an uneven power dynamic that could harden into resentment.

Was paying for a sitter the right call to keep things fair, or should blood ties carry more weight here? How would you handle a grandparent who refuses to treat children equally? Share your thoughts below.