Pregnancy is an intensely personal experience, especially for couples who spent years believing it would never happen. For this woman and her husband, the news of a long awaited baby after nearly a decade of infertility was not just joyful, it was sacred. That is why repeated boundary violations by a mother in law on social media felt less like excitement and more like theft of a once in a lifetime moment.
This situation is not really about Facebook posts. It is about privacy, consent, and the growing tension between older generations and modern expectations around digital boundaries. When excitement turns into entitlement, the question becomes whether protecting your peace makes you cruel or simply responsible.
Here’s The Original Post:
Infertility affects roughly 15 percent of couples worldwide, according to the World Health Organization. For women over 40, spontaneous pregnancy is even rarer. That context matters.
After years of medical disappointment, this pregnancy carried emotional weight far beyond a typical announcement. Research published in Human Reproduction shows that women who conceive after long term infertility experience significantly higher anxiety around pregnancy outcomes and privacy, particularly in the final trimester.
Despite this, the mother in law repeatedly posted sensitive information online without permission. These were not vague updates. She shared the baby’s gender, full name, and later the pregnancy timeline, allowing strangers to comment on a woman’s body and medical status.
According to a 2023 Pew Research Center survey, 81 percent of adults believe they have little control over how personal data is shared once it appears online. That loss of control is exactly what the poster was reacting to.
What makes this situation worse is not a single mistake, but a pattern. Five posts. Three removals demanded. Multiple polite explanations. No direct responses. Instead, the mother in law framed the issue as her right to share her life, even though the content centered on someone else’s body, medical information, and child.
Family psychologists consistently stress that intent does not cancel impact. Dr. Harriet Lerner, a well known clinical psychologist and author, explains that phrases like “that’s just how I am” are often used to avoid accountability rather than express innocence. Excitement does not override consent.
Social media sharing around pregnancy is a growing source of conflict. A study in the Journal of Family Issues found that more than 60 percent of new parents have experienced boundary violations from relatives posting baby related content online without permission.
Among those parents, trust was significantly damaged when relatives minimized concerns or reframed them as overreactions.
The husband’s role here is complicated. On one hand, he verbally supports his wife and agrees to enforce boundaries. On the other, he downplays the severity by calling the posts “not a big deal” and attributing his mother’s behavior to excitement.
Marriage and family therapists often warn that minimizing boundary violations can unintentionally enable them. When consequences are inconsistent, behavior rarely changes.
This is why many Reddit commenters emphasized an information diet. Boundaries without follow through are simply requests. Once information is shared, control is lost. That reality becomes especially critical during labor and delivery. Medical privacy laws exist for a reason. Birth is not a spectator event. It is a medical procedure.
There is also the issue of digital permanence. Once a child’s photo appears online, parents lose control over where it travels.
The American Academy of Pediatrics has repeatedly warned about sharenting, noting that by age five, many children already have hundreds of images of themselves online without consent. These images can be downloaded, reshared, or misused in ways parents never intended.
Blocking the mother in law was not an impulsive punishment. It was a protective pause. Psychologists often recommend temporary no contact periods when boundaries are repeatedly violated, especially during vulnerable life stages like late pregnancy.
This allows space for emotions to settle and makes it clear that actions have consequences.
Guilt is a common reaction, especially for women socialized to prioritize harmony over self protection. But guilt does not automatically mean wrongdoing. It often signals that someone else is uncomfortable with a boundary they benefited from violating.
These are the responses from Reddit users:
Social media has blurred the lines between excitement and entitlement, especially when it comes to pregnancy and grandchildren.
Should relatives have consequences when they ignore clear boundaries, or is blocking them too extreme.
Where should the line be drawn between family joy and personal privacy. Share your thoughts below.
So is this woman wrong for blocking her mother in law and considering a no contact period until after birth. Based on research, expert insight, and the overwhelming response from other parents, the answer is no.
Boundaries are not punishments. They are conditions for continued access. If someone repeatedly ignores them, access naturally decreases. Protecting your child’s privacy is not cruelty. It is parenting.
The clearest lesson here is consistency. If the boundary is real, it must be enforced. If consequences disappear the moment guilt sets in, the behavior will return. This is not about Facebook. It is about respect.
Sometimes the healthiest choice is not permanent distance, but firm clarity. The baby deserves a calm mother. And the mother deserves peace.
