Woman sparks debate after sharing reaction to brother’s request to bring dogs on vacation

A woman has sparked a debate about how she reacted when her brother said that he wouldn’t go on their family’s vacation without his dogs.

In the popular Reddit forum, “Am I The A**hole,”  u/Short-Reflection-423 detailed how her 27-year-old brother and his wife have two dogs and how she “never liked dogs.” But, she said that her brother and his wife have “forced their dogs down [their family’s] throat for years,” every time they’ve gone to their “vacation house.”

The woman then clarified that the vacation home used to belong to her grandmother, who passed away a year ago and “passed [the home] down on” to her granddaughter.

“So technically now it’s my house,” she wrote. “All of my siblings and my parents are still allowed to vacation in the house of course that won’t and will never change.”

Since she’s the legal owner of the home and mother to two children, she decided to tell her brother and his wife that while they’re welcome to the house, the dogs aren’t.

“I told them to leave the dogs in a pet hotel or with some relatives of his wife but they said this is not possible and they’ll just make sure to vacation elsewhere where their dogs are welcome as well,” the post continued. “I got mad at them for it and so did my parents and told them they’re ridiculous for valuing their f***in dogs over their vacation time with family.”

The couple “didn’t care,”  however. According to the original poster, her other siblings called her an “a**hole” for how she reacted. They told her that while she had a right to not want the dogs in the home, she should not “get mad at [their] brother and his wife for not being comfortable to visit … under these conditions.”

“They claimed our brother respected my conditions and I’m just mad he instead chose to vacation elsewhere instead of catering to me and vacationing in my house without his dogs,” she wrote.

As of 17 March, the post has more than 7,300 upvotes, with many readers defending the brother’s decision to vacation elsewhere.

“You can spend time with them some other way,” one wrote. “They want to vacation with their dogs. Would you go to their vacation house if they barred your children? Same principle.”

“[You’re the a**hole], for the simple fact, that you are mad that your brother wants to vacation with his dogs and since you won’t allow them on property he goes somewhere else,” another wrote. “You set the rules, he’s following them and you are mad about that.”

Other readers claimed that while the woman wasn’t in the wrong for setting rules, they still accused her of getting upset with her brother for not “catering” to her.

“I was almost at [not the a**hole]  then I read ‘instead of catering to me,’ a commenter said. “Expecting people to ‘cater’ to you just because you now own the home is a little egotistical.”

“[Not the a**hole] for setting your rules over your vacation home, but you’re [the a**hole] or expecting them to agree and still go where for them their whole family is not welcome,” another wrote. “Just because YOU don’t like dogs doesn’t mean that pet owners don’t consider their pets part of the family. You set your rules and they agreed to it by not going anymore, so now deal with it.”

The Independent has reached out to u/Short-Reflection-423 for comment.