At just 19, she carries the weight of past chaos and broken trust, haunted by the memories of forced nights spent wrangling her unruly triplet cousins. The scars of those wild hours—shattered belongings and shattered patience—still linger, fueling her resolve to protect herself from a repeat of that nightmare. Yet, beneath her firm boundaries lies a deep, unspoken love for those children, the “miracle babies” her family holds dear.
Now, confronted again with a desperate plea from her aunt and uncle, she stands at a crossroads between obligation and self-respect. The stakes have changed—her price set not just in dollars but in the value of her peace of mind. This is more than a babysitting job; it’s a test of her strength, her limits, and the complex ties that bind family together.
AITA for telling my aunt and uncle I would only babysit for them if they pay me $200 a night
As renowned developmental psychologist Dr. Haim Ginott explains, “Emotional means of dealing with children create emotional children.” While this quote directly addresses the cousins’ behavior, it highlights a broader dynamic: when adults fail to set and enforce necessary boundaries (especially regarding compensation and property damage), they model for children that their emotional needs and destructive actions supersede respect and fairness.
The OP’s refusal to babysit for free or cheap after a negative experience where their personal property was damaged and unpaid for is a strong demonstration of necessary boundary setting. The aunt and uncle’s reaction—labeling the OP an “asshole” and appealing to familial obligation—is a common tactic used to manipulate compliance when personal boundaries interfere with the manipulator’s needs. The OP’s past babysitting was exploitative, as the children’s poor behavior resulted in property damage for which the parents refused liability or compensation. Demanding $200 is a direct, albeit high, attempt to monetize a service that was previously forced and damaging. The mother’s support validates the OP’s adult autonomy in this transaction.
The OP’s actions were entirely appropriate in asserting financial and personal boundaries. For future situations, a more constructive recommendation would be to communicate boundaries earlier and more clearly, perhaps stating, “Due to the past incidents involving property damage, I am only available to babysit if a rate of $X is agreed upon beforehand, with a damage deposit collected upon arrival.” This shifts the interaction from an emotional refusal to a professional service negotiation.
AFTER THIS STORY DROPPED, REDDIT WENT INTO MELTDOWN MODE – CHECK OUT WHAT PEOPLE SAID.
The original poster (OP) is facing a conflict between their past negative experience with babysitting their demanding cousins and their family’s expectation that they provide free or inexpensive childcare due to kinship ties. The OP has established a clear boundary based on past financial loss and poor treatment, while the aunt and uncle are attempting to enforce obligation over compensation.
Is the OP justified in setting a high monetary condition for babysitting, effectively refusing the service unless properly compensated, or should the familial relationship override the need for payment and respect for past negative experiences?
