In a recent discussion about family dynamics and expectations, one parent received considerable support for their decision not to frequently travel to visit their adult daughter, who now lives across the country. The consensus was clear: the parent was not at fault (NTA). Many commenters speculated that the daughter might be experiencing a degree of buyer’s remorse about her move. The excitement of starting a new chapter in a different city, filled with career opportunities, seems to have given way to the reality of adult responsibilities and the challenges of raising a child far from family support.
Some observed that the daughter’s current feelings might stem from jealousy over the close relationship between the grandchild and the nearby grandparents. The presence of grandparents can offer invaluable support, which the daughter now misses out on due to her geographical choice. While the daughter and her family genuinely enjoy their city life and have established careers that wouldn’t easily transfer, it was suggested that if she truly desired more frequent visits, she should consider covering the cost of travel herself.
Critics argued that the daughter’s expectations were unrealistic, given the financial constraints of modern travel and the fact that she chose to live far away. They highlighted that if the daughter wanted more visits, it would be reasonable for her to contribute to the travel expenses, rather than assuming that the parent could afford frequent flights. The situation underscores the broader issue of balancing familial obligations with personal and financial limitations, especially when geographical distances come into play.
