Abby 6-18

[edogxxx]

DEAR ABBY: My parents are approaching their 80s, and I'd like to recommend to seniors that a cherished gift to their children and grandchildren would be a journal or family history book written by them describing their childhood memories and early married years. So many funny stories and historical markers of an earlier time -- before computers and fax machines -- will be lost if they're not shared.

Children and grandchildren can be given the chance to see through your eyes and your memories what their aunts, uncles and grandparents were like, and you can laugh together at the silly things that happened when you were young.

The family history can be passed from one generation to the next, and I cannot think of a more special gift.-- CHARLENE IN CAMARILLO, CALIF.

DEAR CHARLENE: That's a splendid idea. However, I would urge children and grandchildren to not wait for the family history, but to interview their parents and grandparents now, with pencil in hand. Better yet, if possible, use a video recorder.

DEAR ABBY: I have a good friend who is married to an abrasive, negative woman. She never has anything nice to say about anyone or anything.

I value this friend and would like to continue our friendship, but I don't want his wife's negative energy around my family. Should I explain that he and his children are welcome in our home, but his wife is not? Or should I arrange to see him only when I know his wife is occupied elsewhere?-- S.K. OUT WEST

DEAR S.K.: What a sad situation. Your friend's wife's behavior indicates that she's an unhappy and troubled woman. As a couple, they probably need all the friends they can get.

To tell this man that you want to protect your family from his wife's "negative energy" could end the friendship, so I don't recommend it. Seeing him when his wife is otherwise occupied would be far more diplomatic.

DEAR ABBY: I'm a fairly intelligent 45-year-old woman. After being single for four years, I began dating a man my age with whom I share many interests. Early on, we had a few fights -- possibly because we were both hurt in our previous relationships and were having a hard time adjusting to and trusting a new person.

Things have settled down now. Most of our time is spent together even though we live an hour apart, and we're considered a couple by our friends. I enjoy the time we spend together, but I keep remembering our early fights and I worry about repeats. I think because of our pasts we'll date for a long time before either of us considers moving in or making serious commitments.

My question is, how can you know if you're on the right path?-- A LITTLE SKITTISH IN CANADA

DEAR SKITTISH: The right path usually isn't a short sprint. You're on it when you realize how many common interests you have and how much you enjoy each other's company (which you do). You're on the right path when you can be open and honest with each other and work out differences without quarreling. And you're right: It can take some time to get there, but there's nothing wrong with that.

[PEllen]

L2 Seeing a man when you know his wife is unavailable will be fine if the LW is a man.I have a number of girlfriend who I see without their husbands.

If LW is a woman that will cause another sort of negative energy

L3 should listen to her friends for comments about whether she seems to choose the same kind of man to date every time. That would be an external clue whether the current guy is likely to repeat her past partner's conduct. It is insightful to see the possibility of repeating a mistake and being wary of it.

[RedheadwGlasses]

L1: and be sure it has a very tiny font.

L2: "I don't want his wife's negative energy around my family"? Is this new age for "she's a B and I don't know how to deal with a B in my own home"? Call her on her shit. Teach your kids by example, not by banning people from your home.

L3: "Early on, we had a few fights -- possibly because we were both hurt in our previous relationships and were having a hard time adjusting to and trusting a new person." Sounds b oth of you needed more time to get over those "past hurts" (barf) and grow up.

[Saluki Rod]

L2: Jeez quit being such a milquetoast and speak up! Doormats ask these kind of questions!

L3: Until you have a fight and recover from it, you're not a true couple. Sad that so many people don't get that. Take your time and don't be so anxious to permanently commit.

[Mister Tonka]

LW1: Did you have a friggin question?

Lw2: Just do guy stuff. YOu might probably end up havingto tell him anyway why you on't do whole family stuff with him anymore. Just be honest and non-confrontational and make sure you stress that you value HIS friendship.

LW3: "I keep remembering our early fights and I worry about repeats."
Are you deluded into thinking fights are not normal?

"I think because of our pasts we'll date for a long time before either of us considers moving in or making serious commitments."
And? Seems smart to me.

"how can you know if you're on the right path?"
What does that even mean?

[Mister Tonka]

RedheadwGlasses wrote:

Call her on her shit. Teach your kids by example, not by banning people from your home.

Your way escalates the situation. Then it puts the friend in a position of having to either defend his wife or publicly gang up on her. That's a scene I'd much rather just avoid.

[RedheadwGlasses]

Mister Tonka wrote:

<quoted text>Your way escalates the situation. Then it puts the friend in a position of having to either defend his wife or publicly gang up on her. That's a scene I'd much rather just avoid.

A response doesn't have to = hostile confrontation. "Actually, we really enjoy the kids' teachers. It's a very good school." "We've found the service at that restaurant to be impeccable, you must have gone on an off night." etc.

[Mister Tonka]

RedheadwGlasses wrote:

<quoted text>
A response doesn't have to = hostile confrontation. "Actually, we really enjoy the kids' teachers. It's a very good school." "We've found the service at that restaurant to be impeccable, you must have gone on an off night." etc.

I guess it all depends on the degree of her negativity. Personally, if there is someone who I can't stand being around, I try to NOT be around them as much as possible.

[j_m_w]

I feel apathetic about all these letters today. Maybe because it's Monday, maybe because I got a jury duty summons in the mail over the weekend, maybe because they just suck.
;)

[RACE]

1 Seems so wonderful right? Then how come we keep reading letters from peeps that find these old diaries and wonder if they should pass them along because they are filled with horrid stories from the past and it will forever tarnish the memories of these people?

2 Make a game out of it. Every time she says something mean, you say something nice. It will drive her nuts.

3 If you are 45 and writing Amby, you are not "Fairly intelligent" In fact, you're not even close.

[Sublime1]

LW2: Just do stuff without her

LW3: If most of your time is spent together and things are going fine, I dunno why you are worrying so much about the past.

[squishymama]

I'm with jmw today, except for the summons. I haven't gotten one in years.

[j_m_w]

squishymama wrote:

I'm with jmw today, except for the summons. I haven't gotten one in years.

I hadn't either, in about 8 years. The last - and only - time I got one I was picked for a jury right off the bat, so it wasn't boring like everyone always says. But I hated my then-job so it was like a cool vacation, and I like my job now and am much more mission-critical so it'll suck if I end up having to go back day after day. Because I'll have to come to work when court lets out to keep up.

[squishymama]

j_m_w wrote:

<quoted text>
I hadn't either, in about 8 years. The last - and only - time I got one I was picked for a jury right off the bat, so it wasn't boring like everyone always says. But I hated my then-job so it was like a cool vacation, and I like my job now and am much more mission-critical so it'll suck if I end up having to go back day after day. Because I'll have to come to work when court lets out to keep up.

Isn't work one of the hardships you can claim?

I don't really know, and I wouldn't try to get out of it anyway. I think I would enjoy the change of pace. I work with a woman who was on a grand jury; every Wednesday for like a year and a half. Sounded really interesting, and being a civil servant, we are not penalized for that kind of thing.

[j_m_w]

squishymama wrote:

<quoted text>
Isn't work one of the hardships you can claim?
I don't really know, and I wouldn't try to get out of it anyway. I think I would enjoy the change of pace. I work with a woman who was on a grand jury; every Wednesday for like a year and a half. Sounded really interesting, and being a civil servant, we are not penalized for that kind of thing.

Not just work in general; it would have to be a certain type of job, or I'd have to have a kid under age 6 also, or something. One of our VPs was on a jury last year and he just came to work after court each day, and worked during breaks as much as possible. That's what I'll do. It is what it is <mimishrug>.

[NWmoon]

j_m_w wrote:

<quoted text>
Not just work in general; it would have to be a certain type of job, or I'd have to have a kid under age 6 also, or something. One of our VPs was on a jury last year and he just came to work after court each day, and worked during breaks as much as possible. That's what I'll do. It is what it is <mimishrug>.

If it will cause you a hardship, or your employer they'll let you off, here. I get 5 an hour now for my care of D, but if they had to find a replacement, it would be more than twice as much. Their hardship.
When I was my mom's only care, they let me off until after she'd died. My own hardship.
When I have gotten an exemption I've always gotten another letter within the year. Perhaps they're more picky about who they'll let off where you are.

[Mimi Seattle]

I SO want to be on a jury. I've only been called once,(The OJ Simpson trial btw) and was way disappointed when I had to be excused because of a back injury.

I wasn't actually selected, just in the pool of "potential" jurors. <shrug> In retrospect of course it would have sucked being all sequestered for, what like the 5 years it took them to get done? LOL Still...

Guess that's why I come here. So I can judge other people.:D

[j_m_w]

NWmoon wrote:

<quoted text>If it will cause you a hardship, or your employer they'll let you off, here. I get 5 an hour now for my care of D, but if they had to find a replacement, it would be more than twice as much. Their hardship.
When I was my mom's only care, they let me off until after she'd died. My own hardship.
When I have gotten an exemption I've always gotten another letter within the year. Perhaps they're more picky about who they'll let off where you are.

I guess I'll have to see how they define "hardship." Like I said, our VP had to serve last year but I don't know how hard he tried to get out of it.

Overall, I'm not opposed to serving at all. I just don't want to be in court all day and at work all evening, but we'll see.

The jury I was on 8 years ago was really interesting and heart-wrenching: a rape and robbery case. It felt good to be part of the justice system.

[NWmoon]

j_m_w wrote:

<quoted text>
I guess I'll have to see how they define "hardship." Like I said, our VP had to serve last year but I don't know how hard he tried to get out of it.
Overall, I'm not opposed to serving at all. I just don't want to be in court all day and at work all evening, but we'll see.
The jury I was on 8 years ago was really interesting and heart-wrenching: a rape and robbery case. It felt good to be part of the justice system.

I can't imagine your VP would have suffered a hardship by not serving. Anyone with VP as a title would be making enough they could take a few days to serve.
The case I served on was civil and boring. Thankfully it was also short. My agoraphobia had me in a state for days after, and I spent the breaks huddled in a corner of the ladies' room. But I got through it, now I don't have to for a long time.

[RedheadwGlasses]

I don't agree with having people serve jury duty a second time when there are many others who have never required to serve at all. Make everyone do it once before having someone serve a second time.