More specifically....so there is the immediate family.....then the kids (Johnny, suzie and bessie) go off and get married into another family. So johnny and suzie and bessie marry....and they suddenly all have inlaws- one set of inlaws per sibling. So, my question is: do the limits of love exist between the extended famies? Should the inlaws of suzie and the inlaws of johhny consider themselves family?
2006-12-03 11:15:39 · 5 answers · asked by spidy 2 in Family & Relationships ➔ Family
I hop;e it's clear that Johnny and Bessie are siblings....they don't marry each other...my question was a little confusing there
2006-12-03 11:34:17 · update #1
I feel there is never enough family for any one. If you have in-laws that want to consider themselves as family ; and they are people that you like, and that fit in with the original family ; and they don't go around gossiping about the family, bad stuff that is, then why not? The more people that we can have in our family that loves us, is good to us, supports us, and really wants us as family, then why not? There should be no limitations to "who is family" as long as they are decent and good folks. You don't even have to be related to some people, for them to feel like family to you. I had a family that was not related to me, blood wise, but I felt like they were my Mom and Dad, as they were more functional then my own. And what about these kids that are adopted, or just end up in someone's house and feel like that house is "family?" So what difference does it make if they are "blood related or not"? I'd feel honored if someone wanted me to be a part of their family, even though I have my own; or if someone wanted to be a part of my family, whether they were blood related or not.
2006-12-03 20:08:28 · answer #1 · answered by Ikeg 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It really depends on the in-laws. I've seen those who despise each other, those that all but live with each other, and every shade inbetween.
A few years back I would have thrown in a proximately factor, but I now know of somebody's in-laws and particularly parents who stay at each others' houses, the fathers often going on longish fishing trips, etc. and they're about 1500 miles apart.
I also know of a family where the in-laws like each other a great deal, but another child's spouse being snarky about having them invited to anything. So, despite them being about 20 miles apart, the snarky person not one of eithers' children, they don't get together because of that stressor popping up.
2006-12-03 19:39:20 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Really, in-laws are relatives only of those married into the family. If you get along with the families of your sisters, sure, share the love. If not, or if you don't know them, it would be pretty hard to consider them family. If you are worried about holiday gifts and know your family's in-laws will all be there consider a nice card and generic gift. All the best to you!
2006-12-03 19:24:51 · answer #3 · answered by Me, Thrice-Baked 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Spidy...good question. I don't know my sister's in-laws - so I wouldn't consider them family. But, if we did know eachother, I still have no obligation to them, and I think most people will agree.
2006-12-03 19:22:06 · answer #4 · answered by Amy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no
2006-12-03 19:22:23 · answer #5 · answered by goldensparkler61 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋