Troubled neighborhood *family*

Chris wrote:

I don't feel it necessary to "cut" anything with you Rosalie. I don't
owe you any explanation whatsoever.

I was saying that it doesn't cut it with this group, as many others
have told you. Not just with me.

And saying you don't have a whole lot of time doesn't
cut it. No-one with little children has time, but most of them manage
to write in paragraphs.

interested in getting some thoughts on the issue, but then as I kept
going, I realized I may not be able to adequately convey a three-year
history as quickly as I'd like - got to rambling, admittedly.

You would think so, but that is not the case. The mosquitoes are worse
this year, despite it being dry, than they ever have been in full-on
summer. If you want an explanation, you'll have to consult some
specialists though.


Now that it is getting colder (north of the tropics), mosquitoes
shouldn't be so much of a problem.

I've just had enough of this child requiring so much of MY time and
attention. I made progress with another child, who happens to be one
of the 3 boys I speak about, but after 3 years, it is just not going
to make a difference with this other child. Yes, based on my
experiences with his mother, which have never been negative, I am able

You say the experiences with his mother have never been negative and
then you give a whole list of negative interactions. I'd like to know
what you consider WOULD be negative.

I've given a long list of feelings that if displayed to her or her
child would be considered negative, but since they are not, they are
not interactions.

I do not believe that you can have negative feelings and thoughts
about a person even if you do not verbalize those feelings or thoughts
without the person knowing. You'd have to be an excellent actress,
and even then, someone may be able to discern what you really thing.
Having the feelings be perceived by this woman WOULD be an
interaction.

And I wonder whether she might not be deliberately in a passive
aggressive kind of way reacting to your disdain of her by doing
nothing to make her child behave.

to assess that inadequate parenting is a big part of the situation,
and yes, I am tired of having to answer to her, cater to her
child(ren), etc. Each of her 3 children has multiple "labels"
pertaining to why they cannot function in a group of peers. It is time
for her to tell her son that he cannot play with the other children
unless he can play nicely. Enough is enough.

I don't see that as happening. And it doesn't really sound like an
effective strategy either.

That's fine. She may not tell him what he needs to be told, but I have
no problems doing so any longer. If she wants to spend her time
appropriately supervising during his participation, then she should
feel free, but as it is, I do not feel it necessary that I be required
to ensure that her child plays by the rules, despite them being cited
in the past to him. Nor do I feel it is any longer appropriate to
force children to play with a child they definitely no longer want to
try to play with.

That wasn't what I meant. I meant that his mother or ANYONE telling
him that he has to 'play nicely' isn't going to be effective in making
him play nicely. If he really can't help his behavior (like
Tourettes or something), then it is just going to build the
frustration level up to a boiling over point more quickly, which will
make it LESS likely that he will 'play nice'. And if he can help it,
then he may get sneaky and destroy things or vandalize them when no
one is around to stop him.

The thing is - you have to consider whether the actions will get the
result that you want. This requires a certain amount of empathy
(which I sense a lack of on your part).

On Sep 26, 11:31?am, Nan wrote:
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 06:55:03 -0700, Chris
wrote:

On Sep 26, 2:06?am, toypup wrote:
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:05:06 -0700, Chris wrote:
Chris's
problem is apparently that she doesn't want to tell her son that he
can either play nicely with all the neighborhood children or he can
come in and play by himself.

Well Rosalie, you are a little off, as I don't have a problem. I
probably should not have tried to cram that into a short post when I
was short on time.

I don't think the problem is the length of your posts. You just don't use
paragraphs. Is there a reason you don't use paragraphs?

It's faster. Is this a grammar/style/punctuation board in cognito?

It may be faster for you to write, but you're less likely to get good
responses.

I tried to read your post and make sense of it, but I didn't have the
time to try and parse what you were trying to say so I didn't respond.

My suggestion is you'll get much more accurate responses if you try
to make your posts easier to read.

Hitting the 'enter' key doesn't take much time to do.

Nan

No, it does not. However, organizing that whole mess into an
appropriate paragraph structure would have. There is no difference
otherwise reading sentence after sentence. Not trying to be snarky,
just decided upon hitting enter that it was quite alright with me to
take that chance at that moment. lol.

Banty wrote:


On the other hand, a mother of other problem boys right next to me (the very
neighbor I went with to talk to the parents of the disturbed boy), after a rough
start with her early on after I moved in, I found we could actually talk and
work things out. Even though her older two boys, the ones close to my son's
age, both have diagnoses. So, it can be worth trying. People can surprise one,
sometimes in a good way, sometimes in a bad way.

It will be more often the good way if you aren't approaching them with
an "I'm right and you are wrong" attitude, as you found out.

The other way to think of it is, what is the permanence of the situation. That
can affect what you do. Are you in the neighborhood long term? If not, then
biting the bullet for awhile and arranging activities for your kids outside the
neighborhood to get around this may be the thing to do, until you move.
(Rosalie recommended this, but one thing you need to know is that she was a Navy
wife who always lived off the military bases, so this was more feasible for
her.)

A small correction - It was my mother who did this and she was NOT
military. My dad was an assistant professor at a university. My
children did have lots of activities, but this was not to get them
away from toxic neighbors.

Similarly, is the family in question there on a permanent basis? You might not
know really (I wouldn't pry), but you can surmise some temporary situations
sometimes, like if they're renting a house while the homeowner waits for a
better market to sell.

If the situation is temporary, then avoiding the situation completely is
probably the way to go. If it's more permanent, you'll still need to avoid the
situation as a large part of your coping strategy, but you'll need to do it so
as not to alienate people and in a way more sustainable for you then if it is
short term.

IME, a lot of times these things take care of themselves - at least as far as
your having to deal with it (though often in sad ways for the problem kids or
people). The very root problems (what I call "the D's" - drugs, debt, divorce,
dissipation, depression or other disease..) that are the base cause of the
problems you're having, eventually uproot the people in question and they go
elsewhere.

Sometimes things have to get worse to get better. The second summer after we
started the 'safe house' strategy, the boy in question was indirectly involved
(as in, hes was the "caser") in a robbery of the house next to the house of the
family that was letting play with their boys. They finally banned the kid from
playing with their kids, and we didnt' see him around the neighborhood any more.

Five years later, at nineteen, he died by way of head on collision with a SUV
containing a family taking their new baby on the way home from the hospital :-(

Banty

"Chookie" wrote in message
news:ehrebeniuk-EE31C6.22335526092007@news...
In article . com,
Chris wrote:

these 3 boys, including my 1 son, do NOT want to play with this boy. I
have to admit that it is just too much trouble. [...] I
guess I'm wondering.......at what point is it acceptable to be *the*
one to ultimately make the call and possibly hurt this troubled
child's feelings -- for things that I don't really think he is 100% to
blame for -- by stating flat out that he should no longer come around
here.

I think it is really OTT to ring a kid up to say that you never ever want
to
see them again. "Possibly hurt this troubled child's feelings", eh?
POSSIBLY? (And if he hangs himself afterwards...?) Aside from being OTT
unkind, it's not actually helping him at all.




What does OTT mean?

You did not mention the ages of any of the children. I'm wondering if
*your*
son is really old enough to play with so little supervision atm. If a
child
is a pain, the rest of the kids tell him to get lost, and if he doesn't,
they
retreat somewhere that he cannot follow them (like your house). If your
DS
and his mates can't work this out, keep them closer to home.



I agree with this. I missed the bit about phoning and telling him to get
lost permanently.

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

http://chookiesbackyard.blogspot.com/

"Stephanie" wrote in message
. ..

"Chookie" wrote in message
news:ehrebeniuk-EE31C6.22335526092007@news...
In article . com,
Chris wrote:

these 3 boys, including my 1 son, do NOT want to play with this boy. I
have to admit that it is just too much trouble. [...] I
guess I'm wondering.......at what point is it acceptable to be *the*
one to ultimately make the call and possibly hurt this troubled
child's feelings -- for things that I don't really think he is 100% to
blame for -- by stating flat out that he should no longer come around
here.

I think it is really OTT to ring a kid up to say that you never ever want
to
see them again. "Possibly hurt this troubled child's feelings", eh?
POSSIBLY? (And if he hangs himself afterwards...?) Aside from being OTT
unkind, it's not actually helping him at all.




What does OTT mean?

Over the Top.
Debbie

In article , Stephanie says...




I think it is really OTT to ring a kid up to say that you never ever want
to
see them again. "Possibly hurt this troubled child's feelings", eh?
POSSIBLY? (And if he hangs himself afterwards...?) Aside from being OTT
unkind, it's not actually helping him at all.




What does OTT mean?

Over the top.

Banty

"Chris" wrote in message
oups.com...
It's faster. Is this a grammar/style/punctuation board in cognito?


No, but faster doesn't make for good communication.

JennP.

In article , Banty says...

In article . com, Barbara
says...

On Sep 26, 10:00 am, Banty wrote:
In article .com, Chris
says...



Based on the principal of the situation, no excuse was necessary. I
weighed the situation and consulted with a few other neighbors, who
also agreed that I owed her nothing. The people closest to me were
well aware of how long it took me to set up and arrange my sale, and
we also had it the weekend after, after having donated the remaining
first batch and filling up the tables a second time. I advertised for
my own sale, so it was not necessary for me to contribute to
advertising for their sale. Either way, advertising drawing attention
to our neighborhood had been accomplished.

I still don't get quite what was going on. There was a neighborhood sale, and
you had yours just the weekend after? If so what's the 'first batch' and
'second time'? If your sale is separate, of course you needn't have paid for
advertising for the neighborhood sale. But I would have waited at least a
couple of months to have my sale. It's kinda 'in their face' to up and have
your sale the very next weekend. It's strictly within your rights, but it's a
bit miffing.

As I read it, the neighborhood had a sale, which they advertised.
Anyone who wanted to join the sale paid part of the expenses. I'm not
clear if it was in a central location or at various people's homes.
She decided to have HER sale the same day (not the next week, although
she had a 2d sale the next week as well). Presumably, she benefited
from the increased traffic in the area of people going to the
neighborhood sale. When she was asked to pay part of the costs --
since her sale was the same day as the neighborhood sale, and since
she benefited from their work -- she refused.

Ooo - if it's the same day, yes, she's freeloading on the neighborhood sale,
however she may have separately put out ads or whatever.


Had I been a part of the larger sale, I too would have been upset by
her piggybacking on our work and on our investment in advertising.

Yeah. (I'm still not clear on that that's the case, though.)

I re-read the O.P. - yes, she did her garage sale the same day! Yikes.

Chris - this is the kind of thing where you need to step out of yourself a bit
and look at it from the other side. You have all those reasons that you forgot,
and didnt' want to move the day, but truly, when you say the notice going around
you needed to have thought about if you could join, and if the answer would be
'no' you'll need to have planned not to get in the way of your neighbor's plans.
Even by appearance if not by intent.

You continued with the yard sale even you *must have* seen the ads and signs and
other preparations for the neighborhood sale. And did not join even then. At
the *very* least you could for the sake of good will paid up for the work that
they did, that benefitted you.

It's somewhat along the lines of your resistance to the idea that you need to
construct your posts so that they are understandable. Folks are saying "please
do", and you're saying "whatever, I just breeze in breeze out, whaddizzit a
grammar group".

Ya gotta cooperate with the world a bit.

Banty

No, it does not. However, organizing that whole mess into an
appropriate paragraph structure would have. There is no difference
otherwise reading sentence after sentence. Not trying to be snarky,
just decided upon hitting enter that it was quite alright with me to
take that chance at that moment. lol.

even hitting return after very sentence makes it easier to read, long
blocks of text just aren't easy to read, regardless of structure. I'm
guilty myself of the long paragraph thing, but I'd rather take the time
to go back and make reasonable paragraphs than have people completely
misunderstand me, or ignore me, which is what tends to happen if you
post a long block of text.

Anne

On Sep 26, 10:24 am, Chris wrote:

It is funny you mention suicide. I frequently tell my children what
name-calling and hurtful words and actions can do to a person, albeit
without graphic details. I frequently tell them that all it takes is a
smile to sometimes change the life of someone in need. I've already
shared that I tell them that name-calling, even out of pure
frustration, is never acceptable - that it is always wrong and always
very hurtful - and by doing so, you have stooped to a very low level.
It doesn't mean that it will never happen though.

I understand your thinking, but it may be too idealistic. Consider
something a little stronger. If some kid, unprovoked, hits or shoves
your son, is it always wrong for him to hit or shove back? On the
verbal level, if someone insults you and you have a strong rejoinder,
that can shut them up.