T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
446.1 | Sleep easy... | VAXWRK::BSMITH | Brad Smith | Mon Dec 28 1987 07:08 | 5 |
| I thought the joy in giving is 'giving'?? You've given your son your 2� worth,
so stay out of it, otherwise he'll end up liking you less. What goes around
comes around, eventually he'll figure things out.
Brad.
|
446.2 | "Why should I , he never did anything for me!?" | PLANET::GIRARD | | Mon Dec 28 1987 07:11 | 14 |
| Dear Joyce,
Sounds very complex. You seem to know best.
Too bad we have to worry about gifts and reciprication, and
just enjoy one another's company. Didn't buy anyone anything,
but was more concerned about how they felt and how much time
was spent together. Spent one whole day playing with my son,
enjoying his company; no one else did that with him. I suspect
that could be criticised by many people... but not by my son.
I would just be weary of telling someone not to do or buy
something for someone just because they didn't do something for
for them. You do things out of love less on commitment!
|
446.3 | I hope this clarifies the situation | MARCIE::JLAMOTTE | days of whisper and pretend | Mon Dec 28 1987 07:57 | 19 |
| I want to add that we did have a nice Christmas. And although I
appreciate the first two replies I think we are talking about something
different then the spirit of Christmas. A group of people (family)
got together and decided how they would exchange gifts. A committment
was made and expectations entered.
And the daughter who is so generous enjoyed her giving and had a
good holiday.
We are also talking about traditions and rituals another subject
discussed during 1987. As a family we enjoy these things and it
is best when the whole family shares the tradition.
I do feel if we handle this situation properly we can show my youngest
son the enjoyment of family celebrations. This is my hope. If
I cannot do that then I have to think of how we can modify our
expectations so that we enjoy his company when he chooses to
participate.
|
446.4 | Don't Push the River | GUCCI::MHILL | No matter where you go, there you are | Mon Dec 28 1987 09:59 | 6 |
| It sounds to me like you are trying to be responsible for the behaviors,
expectations and outcomes of the entire family. You can only be
responsible for yourself. Let others know what you want and don't try
to push the river - it will flow on its own.
Marty
|
446.5 | | MPGS::MCCLURE | Why Me??? | Mon Dec 28 1987 12:30 | 12 |
| I feel that you handled the situation properly. This, to me, is
the only way that you can try and get a family member to see the
light. Some folks don't ever read the sign that says 'two way
traffic ahead'. You have to be prepared to handle the situation
where he just gets POd and thinks the family is against him,
without realizing why.
But it sure does burn ya when you think everyone agrees on the
best way to do something, and someone doesn't follow through
on the commitment.
Bob Mc
|
446.6 | If you want to play then play the way I want! | PLANET::GIRARD | | Mon Dec 28 1987 14:03 | 11 |
| I think the psychologists diagram it like this:
|------------------------|
U | X x x | T
| x X | S
y | X |
| | W
| Z X |
|________________________|
Were such social animals aren't we?
|
446.7 | My Two Cents Worth | ATPS::GREENHALGE | | Tue Dec 29 1987 11:29 | 16 |
|
Son or not, if he's old enough to be engaged, he's old enough to
be responsible for his own life. Let him be.
There is a very simple way to modify expectations of your family
members. Don't have any. If you don't expect something of someone,
you won't get disappointed.
I don't think you have the right, even as a parent, to tell your
other children, who are adults, how to behave toward another of your
children. If and when they become tired of his behavior, they'll take
it upon themselves to say or do something about it.
Sit back, relax, and don't get so tangled up in how your children
relate to one another.
|
446.8 | two cents more... | FROST::WHEEL | Master Card, Excite Me! | Tue Dec 29 1987 12:27 | 24 |
|
I have to agree with .7. My family has had similar problems around
three years ago. I have two brothers. They are both married and
in their mid-twenties. My youngest brother is married to a real
bitch. She didn't get along with my step-mother then and voiced
her opinions. My brother, to try and keep peace in the family, no
longer came around to visit any of our side. One year later, his
daughter, (my dad's first grand-child) was born. It bothered my
father alot that he hasn't even seen her. About a year-and-a-half
later, my brother "straightened" out his wife, and they started
to visit with our family again. Now, the problem is that my older
brother hasn't forgiven my younger brother and his wife for all
the pain that they have put everyone through. Both of them are
adults, (at least age-wise) and there is absolutely nothing that
my dad or I will say to change the situation the way it is now.
At least now my dad is happy to have his son and his new grand-
daughter back into his life.
Although it creates alot of problem during holidays, (Christmas,
and Thanksgiving are the biggest problems) with the family getting
together, you have to do what is best for YOU! Someday, maybe, these
guys will grow up. But until then, we make the best of life.
|
446.9 | Can't agree | MARCIE::JLAMOTTE | days of whisper and pretend | Tue Dec 29 1987 12:30 | 29 |
| I tend to disagree with the last comment. I feel very strongly
that family is a good institution and the extended families that
emerge during adulthood can be a source of strength and love. In
all aspects of life we need facilitators, managers, and even
moderators.
If we are to operate as an extended family someone has to assume
that role of mediator.
I think sometimes we give up on relationships because of an attitude
that "they are responsible for their own life". That is sad.
There is a real difference between trying to manage someone's life
as opposed to trying to create awareness and understanding.
It is not possible to socialize with people outside your home without
expectations. None of us sits in our home and waits for someone
to come and visit us. We invite and when someone accepts the
invitation we prepare for the visit. If the person doesn't show
we are disappointed and annoyed and we should tell them rather than
let it fester and ruin the relationship.
To each his own...our family has decided we want to be close and
we want to get along...and at this moment there is a need for a
facilitator.
|
446.10 | .9 refers to .7 | MARCIE::JLAMOTTE | days of whisper and pretend | Tue Dec 29 1987 12:34 | 3 |
| .8 snuck in while I was entering .9...I was referring to .7
Sorry
|
446.11 | Live Your Life Today | ATPS::GREENHALGE | Mouse | Tue Dec 29 1987 15:05 | 37 |
|
re: .9
By becoming the "mediator", you are assuming responsibility for
your whole family's life.
I learned a very valuable lesson, and I learned it the hard way.
My intentions were good, but I made the problem worse. Now, you
are attempting to "help" and "make it right" (again, with good
intentions), but, believe me, you will only prolong the problem
by attempting to fix it.
Correct me if my observation is wrong, but I hear you saying as
the parent, you feel it is your job, or your duty, to "straighten
out" your children. In actuality, you are trying to "control"
your children by expecting them to behave the way you want them to.
Please do not misunderstand. I am not saying that this is a
deliberate action on your part. Most often, this kind of behavior
is done on a subconscious level and the person isn't even aware
of their attempts to *control*. But...
The first thing to remember is the *only* person you can control is
yourself; you cannot control the actions of other individuals. The
second is, your children are going to do as they wish regardless of
what you say. Attempting to control another person(s) and/or situ-
ation only generates anger - on your end because your wishes aren't
carried out, and on the other person(s) because someone is trying
to control the way they live.
So why burn yourself out trying to "straighten out" something that
will take care of itself in time. Relax, and enjoy your life today.
Tomorrow is another day.
|
446.12 | Somebody (not so)Famous Said This | PLANET::GIRARD | | Wed Dec 30 1987 13:49 | 5 |
| Joyce,
" The really great Matriarchs of history were seen but not heard."
|
446.13 | Bound to lose | DSSDEV::BURROWS | Jim Burrows | Wed Dec 30 1987 17:47 | 36 |
| Personally, I think that setting up a grab like that is a very
dangerous proposition. You've now set explicit expectations on
the moentary values of all the Christmas gifts and someone is
bound to violate the expectations. Either they will be "too
good" and splurge more than one or they will slight the person
that they are committed to buying the big present for.
It puts too much concentration on the material aspects of
Christmass and on the duties and obligataions--duties and
obligations which may be extremely painful to live up to and
which are to actions that excepting for the commitment would not
be very important. Someone is bound to get bent out of shape.
Of course there are even worse Christmas tradtions--like the
"New England swap" wherein taking desirable things away from
others is made the focus of a Christmas tradition.
I think that Christmas has certain basic meanings and messages
which should be respected by and nurtured by our traditions.
Putting extrenal pressures and commitments on each other isn't
in that set. The set should include the pure pleasure of being
with and having fun with our families, on making each other
happy by giving gifts and other things, by sharing our happiness
with those who made it possible, through their presents, their
presence, or their contribution to the over-all holiday (making
the Christmas dinner or putting up the decorations).
I think that this situation was bound to lead to family
tensions. This time mother was upset at the son's behavior. Next
time the son may perform adequately, but at the expense of being
totally miserable, or the overly thoughtful daughter may be seen
as "too good to be true" and as "showing me up" by someone.
I wouldn't set myself up that way.
JimB.
|
446.14 | You can if you can. | SOLANA::OPERATOR | | Wed Dec 30 1987 17:52 | 2 |
| Per Webster's; ma'tri-arch... a woman who RULES her family or
tribe. Need I say more?
|
446.15 | I am not one of them and not one of those | MARCIE::JLAMOTTE | renewal and resolution | Wed Dec 30 1987 20:24 | 20 |
| I have been referred to myself on several occasions as the
matriarch of our family. I kind of like the role I play and
I wanted to define it or describe it, so I chose matriarch,
thinking the word meant the oldest, most respected member of
the family.
Replies .12 and .14 made me seek out the dictionary...good old
American Heritage (DEC issue).
ma.tri.arch (ma tr ark) n. A woman who rules a famil, clan,
or group.
pa.tri.arch (pa tre ark) n. 1. The male leader of a family
or tribe. 2. An ecclesiastical dignitary, esp. in Eastern
churches. 3. A very old and venerable man; elder.
Well they have a word for an old woman, and they have a word for
a wise person...I just guess women can't be wise and old.
|
446.16 | what is the next step??? | STUBBI::B_REINKE | where the sidewalk ends | Wed Dec 30 1987 23:23 | 23 |
| do you know I fail to understand why people are getting on
Joyce's case on this one...
it was a mutual agreement by the whole family that they
would exchange gifts..the son *chose* to be a part of the
gift exchange...i.e. everyone agree to give small gifts to
most of the family members and buy one large gift for
*one* family member...
then the son reneged on the agreement he freely made and in
so doing failed to give a gift to the one family member who
gives most selflessly of her/him self..
now as the person who is coodinating the Christmas get to gether
(let us leave mother/matriarch etc out of it for a min)
why is it unfair of Joyce to try and figure out how to deal
with this issue next year...
perhaps some of the people responding to this note are too
caught up in problems with controlling parents to see the other
side????
|
446.17 | ...and happy 1988 to all families ! | ESDV02::SOBOT | Steve Sobot, ESDC-II | Thu Dec 31 1987 07:12 | 12 |
| Just stumbled across this conference... then just stumbled across
this note... and boy, do I relate to this type of problem.
The trouble with notes is that it is not private, and while many people
don't mind entering personal notes, I choose not to.
So, without going into details and reasons, suffice it to say
"I agree with your motives and actions, Joyce".
The family IS VERY important.
Cheers, Steve
|
446.18 | Thanks | MARCIE::JLAMOTTE | renewal and resolution | Thu Dec 31 1987 08:01 | 11 |
| Thank you to .16 and .17
Not only is the family important it can be a lot of fun. I am quite
surprised at some of the replies to this note. It seems that family
is okay if there are no problems.
I wonder if my age makes me value it more...and perhaps if the same
note had been entered in a conference where the median age is greater
than 40 the note would have taken a different turn.
BTW I wonder what the median age is of H_R contributors.
|
446.19 | | CALLME::MR_TOPAZ | | Thu Dec 31 1987 08:57 | 17 |
| Joyce, I think you hit it on the head. Actually, you alluded to it
elsewhere in a discussion of who should or shouldn't respond to
notes when you suggested that experience can often be a better
criterion than anything else.
And, implicitly, maybe you started to answer your own question. As
people grow older, they tend to appreciate the value and importance
of family to a greater degree -- they come to recognize that they
can't take a family for granted, but have to work at keeping it
together and viable. (So -- would you mind waiting 15 or 20 years
for your son to shape up?)
As for seeking a different category of people answering, maybe you
could ask this question (in this or some other conference) and
request that replies be made only by people over 40.
--Mr Topaz
|
446.20 | | 2B::ZAHAREE | This buffer ain't big enough for the both of us! | Thu Dec 31 1987 10:37 | 23 |
| re .0:
I think you should examine the circumstances under which your son
agreed to the present exchange. You did not go into much detail there.
Perhaps he felt pressured into agreeing- it's hard to say without
knowing more. Depending on the circumstances of the agreement, it was
probably reasonable to remind him of the commitment he made, and I
would at least mention to him that if he does not intend to live up to
his commitment he should consider this BEFORE he agrees to something
for next year. (On the other hand, if it was his idea, hire someone to
beat the snot out of him. :-) )
As far as instructing your children how to handle or react to this
situation, I believe you went way overboard. They are grown adults,
are they not? They should be free to interpret your son's actions
without your input. You might also want to consider the potential
result of your son becoming aware of what you told your other children.
You could come across sounding awfully petty.
Perhaps this is a good time for understanding rather than judgment and
attempting to manipulate your other children's reactions.
- M
|
446.21 | Clarification | BRONS::BURROWS | Jim Burrows | Thu Dec 31 1987 17:31 | 32 |
| I certainly didn't mean to "get on Joyce's case", as I agree for
the most part with her on issues of family and the like.
Her role as matriarch seems quite reasonable to me. In any
family there are leaders and followers. The leaders are often
parents of a number of the followers, but often it is a person
in the middle generation who takes responsibility. So long as
the structure is arrived at by mutual consent and recognition
and not dictatorial whimsy it is quite a healthy thing.
Where I wanted to offer a different opinion from what she had
said is that my tendancy is to attempt to avoid this sort of
trouble rather than to fix it after the fact. It seemed to me
(and still does) that the situation which the family decided
upon was unwise in that it was very likely to run into one sort
of trouble or another. My own way of handling this would be less
forceful and confrontational than Joyce's in that I would avoid
the situation.
On the other hand, those who know and have worked with me can
testify that I am not at all averse to being every bit as
forceful and confrontational when the situation warrants. That I
would do it differently in this particular case doesn't mean
that I wouldn't take actions just as strong as Joyce's in a
situation that I felt warranted it. Part of being a leader, be
the position matriarch, patriarch, manager, president or project
leader, is that one leads and shapes the behavior of those who
follow, most often through persuasion, but at times through the
use of power of one sort or another.
JimB.
|
446.22 | Nothing beats 'suitability' ... price is nothing. | BETA::EARLY | Bob_the_Hiker | Mon Jan 04 1988 12:52 | 45 |
| re:.0,
Joyce, I agree that if <anyone> makes a commitment, and if you were
the one who got people to agree, then its logical for you to speak
WITH the 'offender' and find out what happened. Why didn't they
follow through.
I agree that "matriarch" is often interpreted as a "self anointed
ruler" (like my mother would LIKE to be). But good rulers are like
good laws: They are there fro the common good, because the group
in question agrees they should be there. And I agree that (to use
good management principles) that the enforcement of such should
be completely non-invasive or non-threatening.
I think that your siblings should work out their own "rightness
policy" (to look at the 'moving' example).
Expectations and Hopes. Boy, thats a real Pandoras Box for feelings.
Something I've tried to teach my friends is this:
"We can HOPE that people will act in certain manner; but we should
EXPECT them to be the way they are.".
Don't confuse what you HOPE of a situation to what is EXPECTED as
a minimum requirement.
Gifts: Another Pandoras Box. Gifts, I think, should always be a
"outward manifestation of an inward feeling". I gave up years ago
trying to "match" the cost of gifts, as I have found that the most
appreciated gift (for whatever the occasion) is always the one which
is "just right" for the intended recipient. For a mother, it might
be a mothers ring or a boat cruise; for a child it might be a game
or a special item of clothing; for a parent it might be a handmade
ornament or a handmade card.
I think, when we first look at the price tag before we consider
the need; we are already spending too much.
caveat:
"course there's not enough room to explain EVERYthing fully.
Bob+3
|
446.23 | my .02 | SQM::AITEL | Every little breeze.... | Wed Jan 06 1988 18:17 | 11 |
| I have been on the receiving end of "family togetherness" things
where I've been called on the phone by my older sister, told that
"we" are doing this wonderful thing, and told that my portion of
the cost was $xxx.xx. It is possible that, although you may
have been a bit less adamant than my sister can be, your son felt
required to participate. After all, if he didn't, where was his
Christmas/family spirit? Even if you and the rest of the family
did not state this, it may have been implied. I agree with Jim
and stay clear of this sort of thing.
--Louise
|
446.24 | Tell it like it is. | REGENT::MERRILL | Glyph it up! | Wed Feb 03 1988 10:47 | 11 |
| This is easy to say when it's not my family: the son probably does
feel "required" to participate, yet by not participating he has
proved that he did not HAVE to. Tell him that. Make it clear that
he knows he has a choice even if the others did not "ask" him.
We always have choices, but we blow it by our subconscious feelings
which come out contrarian.
Rick
Merrill
|
446.25 | I know I know!!! | NEXUS::MOCKALIS | | Fri Mar 18 1988 01:41 | 36 |
| This note really hit home for me. I think we are not only speaking
here of commitment, but of consideration too. I can certainly under
stand the way you feel with this situation. Our family had a similar
situation a few years ago. Heres the scenario: A year in advance
the christmas family gathering was planned. A gathering in our
family is rare in itself as my parents are in Connecticut, my brother,
wife and 2 kids in North Carolina and myself in Colorado. The plans
were made a year in advance to see each other at mom and dad's house
for christmas. At the last minute my sister inlaw says they can't
make it to CT because they neglected to make arrangements for someone
to animal sit for their 4 dogs and 2 cats. She wanted to bring
the whole crew with them but that was out of the question as mom
is allergic. I even tried to make arrangements with old friends
of mine who have a farm in CT to board them, but my sister inlaw
said she couldn't impose on someone like that. I finally asked
her how she could impose on my parents by expecting them to take
in a whole household full of animals. So they ended up going to
her parents house for christmas. We were not happy, any of us.
But the point was some simple consideration for others. They either
should not have made the commitment in the first place, especially
knowing that plane reservations, vacation time,etc had to be made
or they should have got it together in the first place. All this
to try and be with the people you care for during a special time.
The meaning of christmas, I'm sad to say, was altered for our family
that year, just a bit. It was an issue of commitment, consideration
and common courtesy or the lack there of.
I understand your situation. The only thing I knew to do was try
and let my opinion be know as tactfully as possible (not easy) and
to try and make it a good christmas despite the not so nice
circumstances.
And, for the record, I am under 40.
|