Woman Calls Out Sister for Refusing to Babysit Her 4 Kids for Free, Despite Initially Agreeing to Pay Her for the Evening

A woman has turned to Reddit’s AITA subreddit to ask whether she’s in the wrong for refusing to provide free childcare for her sister’s children.

In her post, the original poster (OP) said her sister, referred to as “R,” is 33 and has five kids — four boys and one girl — between the ages of 5 and 15. R asked OP and her partner to watch four of the kids so she could have a night out with her husband.

According to OP, her sister initially offered £120 for the 24-hour babysitting job. OP agreed, with one condition: that she be paid before picking the kids up. R agreed and said she’d send the money the day before.

However, when that day came, R messaged to say she could no longer afford to pay and therefore didn’t need them to babysit anymore. OP replied that it was fine and thanked her for the update.

Later, though, R messaged again asking if OP and her partner could still babysit — but this time for free. OP declined, explaining that she simply couldn’t afford to look after four children for 24 hours without being compensated.

OP wrote that she and her partner have babysat the kids before and noticed a very real financial impact whenever they did. Their utility usage went up, and they didn’t have enough groceries to feed six people instead of two without spending extra. Any money they received for babysitting, she said, largely went right back into food and increased electricity costs for the children.

After OP said no to doing it for free, her sister became upset. R argued that OP should help because they’re family, claimed that £120 was an unreasonable amount to charge, and warned that she would “remember this” the next time OP needed a favor. OP suggested her sister look into the rates for a professional babysitter and then reconsider whether £120 was really too much for 24 hours of childcare.

In an edit to her post, OP added more context. She explained that she couldn’t simply watch the kids at her sister’s house, because R planned to keep partying there once she and her husband got home from their night out. OP also clarified that the eldest child can’t be asked to watch their siblings because the teen is legally blind.

She ended her post by asking whether she was wrong for refusing to watch her sister’s kids without pay.

Many commenters sided firmly with OP, saying she was not in the wrong. One person pointed out that if OP babysat for free, she’d effectively be paying out of her own pocket to look after the children, since her household budget and utilities are planned for two people, not six.

Another commenter emphasized that having several children comes with significant ongoing costs, including the price of childcare — especially for a full day and night. They added that if R wants to go out, party, and “let loose,” she should make sure her finances can cover childcare first. Several users also praised OP for insisting on upfront payment in the first place, calling it a smart boundary to set.