In-Law Trip

Can you guys tell me if I am crazy and/or overreacting? My in-laws want to take a "family vacation" - they are genuine about wanting to spend time together and will pick up the tab for the whole thing. We are trying for kid 2 so said Zika locations are not do-able for us. We also requested something that did not require insane travel for our 18 month old but no one else has kids so this isn't really landing. We already took him to the UK (8 hour flight) and California (6 hour flight) this year and I am really over long haul flights with a toddler (even though he was pretty OK on the flights). It's hard work, I dread it, it makes me wish the trip away, and it isn't fair to the kid. They want to go skiing in Montana which means: 10 hour flight with layover bc there is no direct AND me as the non-skier would essentially be watching the babe at the lodge for the entire trip. Also its for 4 days (including travel) so no time at all. I am not into it but am having the "no Zika" rule thrown in my face as the reason for a ski trip. I've suggested other fun locations (New Orleans, etc.) which have been soundly rejected. Guys I don't want to go. I do not want to go on this trip. My wife is adamant that it is a "family vacation" and all of us need to go, but I want to bail. It sounds horrible and I don't want to do it. Do I need to put on my grown up pants and just go? I appreciate a reality check. via /r/Parenting https://ift.tt/2TbTJlw