maam, this is a FUNERAL 👀r/AITA 1 800 Drama Podcast
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 сен 2024
- 1 800 Drama Episode 15 is live! In this week's r/AITA deep dive, we discuss overstepping family boundaries, in-laws, telling your partner everything, helping a stranger, and going no contact with a parent… 👀 Grab a cuppa and let’s go fishing 🎣
wanna be a member? grab a backstage pass! www.youtube.co...
HEY LET'S BE INTERNET FRIENDS:
Instagram @sherbetlemon007
Twitter @sherbetlemon007
TikTok @sherbetlemon007
Twitch @shaabaandjamie
Our site: shaabaandjamie . c o m
Jamie's channel: @jammidodger
Our gaming channel: @shaabaandjamie
Be kind and have a great day (:
No socials: Beige flag. I'm more interested in why. The reasons are the red and green flags.
Yes, this!
Yeah, I have LinkedIn and use reddit for animal pics, but don't use others. I still have a Facebook and Instagram from early uni days, but I haven't opened them in a decade. Does that count?
I agree. I don’t think it’s a plus or minus in itself but the reason why is interesting to better know the person.
I have a linkedin, tumblr, twitter, reddit, facebook, and instagram but I've only been using linkedin lately to look for a job, decided it might be better to just not log into especially facebook and twitter on my new phone (if I do use facebook, it's cause someone tagged me in something so I just open it in a web browser), and I haven't actually used instagram in forever. Tumblr I'll probably eventually log into for memes and maybe reddit too.
Much agreed. My reason’s simple. I have social media accounts… i just don’t use them very often at all. For a lot of reasons. Overwhelm is a big one. Too much is going on in my day to day, I don’t have the spoons to handle the rest of the world’s problems on top of mine. I don’t want to be completely unaware… so, I am grateful for my support network, talking about relevant news & keeping me informed. Also youtube, occasionally tiktok
There was a teenager that got stuck in a baby swing and her circulation was cut off for over an hour while the fire department tried to get her out, they could barely cut it because it was so tight.
An adult convincing a child to get in one of those is so bad, grown ups are supposed to protect kids, not hurt them.
It really happens and it is not a joke
ive gotten stuck in one of those as a teen. luckily i was skinny enough that two friends pulling on my upper body allowed me to get out. seriously scary stuff tho.
I just have to say that Shaaba's reaction to the person mentioning they are worried about getting sued if they help the kid on the swing is incredibly british. Like so much so I laughed. I know that here in Canada I wouldn't get in trouble for helping someone, we have what we commonly call the good samaritan law. But in the US? That's genuinely a very serious concern. I have heard of EMTs being sued for broken ribs after they helped rescue people or did CPR. I think some states now have that law but legitimately it's a concern.
There are good samaritan laws in the US, but who/what exactly is covered depends on the state.
this is exactly what i was thinking. im an american and while we also have the good Samaritan law people get sued for things all the time. being sued is a valid worry here
ya, jamie said the same thing though, like not specifically shabas reaction, I was very shocked when I found out the us dont have a good samaratin law, it seems so basic but they dont
@@Hampster999 depends on the state
@@rainbowdiamond9944 ya but like as a blanket rule
i remember the first story and it drives me a little crazy that they didn't go through the comments because op admits in the comments that a few occasions of these meetings were to ask for money for these emergencies from their children, which they would just give without even consulting their partners first. like it's one thing to just discuss something, but the fact that they're just having all the family go behind partners' backs for money like that is so wrong
It’s not necessarily going behind the partner’s back for money. A lot of couples have separate bank accounts too so the partner doesn’t have a say about that money. Or if the children do have a shared account with their partner, it is on them to consult said partner before lending money. It could just be that the parents are uncomfortable to have to ask for money and prefer the in-laws not to be involved.
Also tbh even if my family didn’t want me to tell my partner something, if I think he needs to know about (will affect him, our relationship or our lives), I’d tell him anyway.
@@s.a.4358 That's what I've been thinking too. Like there are some things a Person doesn't want to say infront of their in-laws but are okay to tell their siblings and parents. Like depending on how close I am with them, sure maybe I would want certain In-laws there but I would def. know that I want my siblings there.
Asking for money or maybe housing or similar things is a vulnerability not everyone wants to show in front of acquaintances(which the in-laws might be). The family can then talk about it and think of different ways to help the person. However of course if it would then effect the partner of the helping family member they would need to know sooome of the story. However I can totally understand not wanting to tell them everything but just have a circle of trusted people around you to help you navigate the situation. Is a code word necessary for that? Maybe not, but they have one ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@@Renesmechen This exactly. It’s not even about the in-laws not being allowed to know, but more that some things are uncomfortable to talk about even to close people. Sometimes you know they know, but it’s understood that neither person will make it obvious they know. I know a lot of stuff about my partner’s friends but I won’t just tell them “so I heard you lost your job. That sucks for you” or “heard you got dumpt man!”
@@s.a.4358 I hear you, but in these cases surely it wouldnt be a drop everything and come right now situation? In the cases of needing money you could just call you family members individually and explain. No need for all of them to drop everything, leave their work or family time or whatever to go over to their parents house, the whole time terrified that somebody is dying or whatever?
@@eline6731 yes that’s definitely true. The whole code word in case of a major emergency thing is very dramatic. Even in the case mentioned with one of the children / the sister getting a divorce, yes that is a major thing, but it is not an emergency that warrants to drop everything and come over immediately because every hour counts.
The 12 year old boy stuck in the swing, THAT could be an emergency where The Family might need to come over right away to help.
When children go no contact with their parents, the parents so often blow up the situation and make it completely dramatic, but because the no contact was the "trigger" everyone blames the kid when its entirely the parents fault.
Re Stuck in Swing: Without a doubt, they needed emergency services.
An average 12 year old weighs around 90 lbs(40 kg), a heavyset 12 year old could weigh 120 lbs(55 kg) or more. Just from that standpoint alone, it might not be possible for OP to help free him from the seat.
The kid would need to be lifted high enough that the chain of the swing goes slack, and the seat would then need to be pulled down his legs.
If he were stuck, as in his legs were unable to be removed from the leg holes, he would need to be cut out of the swing seat. If this situation were true, any time wasted trying to pull him out without having emergency services on the way increases the chances that his legs will die from lack of blood circulation.
Ignoring them was kinda rude. At least say, "Sorry, I don't think I can help you"
My younger brother got himself stuck in a baby swing at 12, we flipped him and the seat upside down (we were kids and kids are dumb sometimes) but gravity, us pulling the swing up, and a bottle of water got him out after about 10-15 mins, it was funny, but we would have grabbed the car knife (for picnics) to cut him free if that failed. Mum thought we were just playing until we told her he got stuck and showed his leg-circles.
Because we live in the age of frivolous lawsuits, my thought was also that if they tried to help and made it worse, op might even get sued for their trouble
I think what made it objectively rude, was that OP walked away without even saying anything. Agree with Jamie's badge and stance fully, and your point stands too: OP defenifely should have at least said they couldn't help.
3:07 The Stonewall Inn Riots started towards the end of June 1969. Nothing to do with weather lol
That's true but they continued into July too
if I'm not mistaken they brought up weather because in the UK June is generally still miserable and rainy, so their pride stuff gets pushed back into July for the nicer weather
@@blak4831same with Aus, most of our stuff is spread out between November to March depending on the state
On the first story: The only time i can imagine the code word being necessary is if some of the family members are in potentially dangerous situations where they need to call for help without alerting a abusive person. I really think they whole keeping inlaws out should be a case to case basis with each individual instead of if their an inlaw or not
That scenario would make sense.
I also thought that maybe someone in this family has a completely insufferable spouse that nobody wants in any of these situations, so they've come up with this no in-laws rule as a get around rather than singling out just the one 😂 Could of course also be a violent one.. Although you'd think that "The Family" would take care of a threatening spouse quietly and efficiently rather than just invent a code word, so maybe just otherwise an extra difficult individual.
@@durabelleyou make it sound like they're going to murder the theoretical annoying in-law lmfao
I believe EVERY relationship (romantic, family, friendship, etc) should have an emergency, "this situation sucks, we need to leave now," code phrase. Explain and clarify as soon as it's safe to do so, but it's important to have a subtle and instant "out" option.
@@GamerSisters That just may have been intentional.. we're talking about The Family after all 😆
Yeah---I think Jamie and Shaaba were imagining it as "every time we need to have a meeting, we use this code word and make it the hugest deal ever" whereas I imagined it more as "regular meetings/information are regular, if something REALLY intense and/or personal happens that's what the code word is for". They kept saying "oh unless it's really personal in which case specify and I'll keep the secret" and, like, yeah dude, I think that's what the code word is: the specification. It's a "this isn't just a meeting, this is "I NEED MY FAMILY RIGHT NOW IMMEDIATELY CODE RED"". If people didn't care about in-laws hearing something, they probably just wouldn't use that code word for that conversation.
I don't really understand the instinct to go straight to your family in the first place---I've just never been like that---but I really don't think it's a huge deal if people want a more insular group to talk through their problems. It's not a matter of exclusion, it's just what is comfortable.
Concerning the funeral story: I am German "half" Jewish (my father is Jewish, but traditionally a child is only considered Jewish when the mother is... Which mine is not). Jewish families tend to be very conservative and the whole 'you have to honour your parents and elders even if they treat you like shit' rethoric is sadly very common. My father has been very psychologically abusive (love bombing and then degrading, gaslighting, trying to isolate us from our social circles... the whole narcistic behavior) with me and my younger sister and my younger brother (I am the eldest, F 37, my sister, 29, and our little "half" brother 12, and his mother, have all gone 'no conntact' over the years). Yet my uncle (his elder brother - their parents/our grandparents already passed) and his family try to make us forgive him, reconnect with him and try to guilt trip us. BECAUSE WE ARE FAMILY! I and my siblings hate this so much! Just because we are family does not mean we have to endure shitty, abusive behavior! Just because you are our parent we do not owe YOU SHIT! Sorry for the rant, but I hate this manipulative and harmful rethoric!
I am entirely wiht you there. If a parson has decided to not talk to a parent it's their choice and they are in their right. I don't talk to my father anymore for similar reasons, I will sometimes see him at weddings or funerals and be polite for the sake of my siblings and other family members. When he remarried his new wife really wanted to talk to me so again, politeness. It took about 20 seconds before it turned to 'but he loves you and he's FAMILY you can't just never talk to him again'. Yes maam. I can. I have. I will. I hate it so much when people try to claim family as an end all be all. And it's funny how it's always on the child to forget and forgive and never on the adult to make ommence.
I totally hear you and agree with you. If a relationship isn't benefiting you in any way and is only causing harm, the only option is to cut that relationship out of your life, and no one should tell you otherwise.
On a side note regarding Jewish conservative families, I totally understand that too. I also come from a very large Jewish family that, in addition to being conservative is also very religious. My mother is one of twelve children with a father who is very strict and doesn't really show affection. Growing up I remember being terrified that I'd piss him off because every small thing, for example shaking the table, could have him angrily screaming. BUT all of his children are still in contact with him despite having to grow up with that because of the stigma around cutting people off. However, interestingly, ten of my mother's siblings moved out of the country and, by extension, spend a lot less time with him, which I think really says something. My mother and one brother, who is the one sibling who stands up to my grandfather, are the only ones who live near my grandparents, and when I went to visit my family abroad a lot of them, including my mother's siblings, would talk about what a nervous and tense person my grandfather is, which is something that I can never talk to my mother about because it triggers her, so that was really cathartic for me... but also they would only ever do that behind his back and could never actually have a conversation about it because of how the family lacks so much communication and a willingness to listen and improve relationships.
With the playground story: I was a Para (worked with special education students, in this case, High-schoolers) and we had a field trip where we ended up at a local park. Our kids were on this climbing thing and a bus of younger kids also came to the park and we had to remind our kids that they need to be extra aware and careful since smaller kids were joining. It turned into a beautiful moment of our kids helping and being protective of the smaller kids. Just gotta remind them.
I had a similar experience. Years ago I was at a travelling fair (still adult) & jumping on the bouncy castle with some 10-12yos. We had a blast but were careful to take turns & give each other space to do our jumps. After a few minutes the fair staff took their toddler to play on the bouncy castle with us, & we each took turns showing the toddler how to bounce. Everybody had fun, & everybody was safe!!!
Sounds like the first rule of that first family is not to talk about “The Family”
to me, that story rly gives rich family dynasty, but maybe i’ve just watched too many kdramas lol
Yeah. My family includes all sides of my family. I don’t have a partner, but my mom considers my dad’s family her family and vice versa. Sure, family you grew up with as a child will often feel closer than family you met in adulthood through a partner, but I wouldn’t have divided things by blood. In fact a large chunk of my family is step family (lots of step cousins) and yet they are no different to my blood cousins.
Green flag, I only have RUclips and I think my mental health is better for it
so sincerely same (i do “have” insta and basically all of it but only so that i can contribute to the follower count of like artists, no app on my phone i only ever open it on safari or chrome or whatever)
I also only use RUclips but I often watch it excessively, I was shocked when I checked my watch time a couple of weeks ago and it was like 96 hours in a week. Tbf I also play RUclips overnight to help me fall asleep and it's playing almost always no matter what I'm doing, but unfortunately since my mental and physical health is so bad rn for the majority of those 90+ hours I'm actively watching RUclips. I think it's become an addiction for me but it's honestly better listening to an AITA podcast than my thoughts lol.
But cutting out social media has helped in some areas, like my confidence is not as low as it was when I was watching pretty girls everywhere, and I don't don't experience such strong anxiety and fomo like when I was watching other people's perfect lives while being unable to get out of my bed, but I've also isolated myself even more so...
Anyways, I just wanted to point out that although I don't use social media, which is considered a healthy thing, I still managed to develop an addiction to my phone and to a "less addictive" app, so I guess no one's safe?
Same. I've never seen the appeal of Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter.
@@MayaMickaMicak omg I feel this so much, I use RUclips all the time to block out my thoughts, I have PTSD because someone attacked me for wearing a dress. What I was trying to say isn't that my mental health is good or that I'm not addicted to RUclips, just that it's not quite as bad as other platforms
@@mirandarensberger6919 so true! Those apps are so boring
I seriously enjoyed the "serious biscuit" discussion. As an American, i have no idea what you're talking about. They all sound like Hobbit names to me. lol
British 'biscuit" = American "cookie". So the debate was about which type/brand of cookie was more serious.
I vote for madeleines. 😂
I loved “that’s not a serious biscuit” “I didn’t say it was a serious biscuit I said it was you.” I giggled… I love the banter
A digestive is a kind of basic no frill biscuit / cookie. You can get them with a chocolate coating, which are then chocolate digestives. I won’t judge their seriousness, but it’s a basic biscuit without chocolate chips, fancy shortbread making, or anything like that - just a standard basic thing.
I do think hobbits would enjoy a digestive for sure!!
If my husband was sick and an extended family member called to complain about feeling left out, i might be rude too.
Idk I feel like if someone has the response OP did, you're asking for an argument, you can't say that and expect it to blow over well. I think everyone was the problem, like the son said, she could have said it nicer, but it also was absolutely not the time for DIL to bring their feelings into it, it was a bit tone-deaf
Insane to open RUclips without knowing what you're going to watch and see "1 minute ago".
Answers the question of what to watch though. 😁
For the one about the kid stuck in the swing I would point out that trying to deadlift a heavyset 10-12 year old isn’t physically easy, let alone one that is stuck. That sounds like something that could seriously injure your back if you tried it. Just another point to consider, because honestly I don’t know if I would be too keen to help either, though I wouldn’t have walked away like she did.
When my mom got cancer she told me and my sister alone, she wanted it to not be a bigger deal then it had to be. Had nothing to with her feelings towards my sister and my partners.
I would be mad if any of them would make it about them in that situation.
It's not weird to us.
For the “is it a red flag to not have social media” to me it’s more about the why than the presence or absence. Usually the people who are red flaggy about it tend to make it loud and clear, especially if they start it out by complaining about others and their use of it (which usually implies they have some experience “othering” people and their habits). When it’s about the self and their own well being, it feels less red flaggy to me since they’re not complaining about how the rest of the world interacts with them, but how they are personally affected by it and are choosing to step away from that. While I agree trying to stay involved with what’s going on is important, prioritizing your health is also important and I can’t blame someone for choosing to do that.
Even when i did use social media more, i wasn't really "involved" to be honest 😅
My SOME was often full of news stories, especially horrible ones, 5 minute crafts and those kinds of things, or family and friends posts no matter the post..
I wish i could use Instagram as an artist, its super inspiring, but i just never open it, and when i do i just "doom scroll" so i dont get much out of it 😅
I must say i dont care what other people do on their platforms, but i just dont want to bother with mine and i did really doom scroll a lot it was really bad for my mental health :/
There are some that I won’t get involved with because it feels like they’re geared toward teenagers. Like, tik tok for example seems like a young person platform. So, I don’t have it. I occasionally see tik toks from friends and coworkers, and I’m happy to watch those with them I just don’t care enough about the platform to have my own. Nothing against it or anyone that enjoys it I just don’t feel the need to have an account
@@forestgrump4723 That is entirely fair and valid! I personally find having constant access to short form content incredibly distracting, so any attempts I've made to use any platforms for that purpose (TikTok, RUclips shorts, etc) was incredibly short lived. That being said, I'm definitely not opposed to watching the silly videos my friends send me, or using it as a conduit to help my little brother understand media literacy (he'll get all up in arms over some unbelievable video he found, and I'll end up having to show him how jumpcuts work and how the language used is intended to provoke the same type of reaction he's giving to generate more clicks ;v;)
@@forestgrump4723 That is fair and valid! I find shortform content rather distracting (Tiktok, RUclips shorts, what have you) so I tend to stray away from that altogether ;v; I'll watch stuff that my friends send or use it to teach my little brother media literacy, but that's about it haha (also, it seems RUclips whisked away the comment I wrote earlier today saying about the same thing, so hopefully this doesn't end up being a double post. Gotta love media platforms having botched functionality! lol)
In regards to the stuck kid here is my thoughts. 1. The swing clearly states that it is intended for an infants only. 2. Katie knew that and put that child endanger. 3. The OP put her toddler first. Play stupid games win stupid prizes
Except OP didn't put the toddler first because it wasn't necessary. The choice wasn't "do I help my own kid or the other kid", because OP's toddler wasn't in need of help. Had OP rushed off to the ER with toddler instead of helping swing-boy, nobody would say they're the Drama, but "I'm vaguely annoyed, which I haven't even expressed, so now I won't help you" isn't putting her toddler first.
OP's toddler wasn't in need of help but most certainly was in need of supervision. I definitely can't keep my two year-old out of my sight to help someone else in a public open space. I get why the not saying a word is somewhat asshole-y, but I would have chosen not to help either in this situation.
No, this another human being, you help the out of their stupid prizes because your a decent person
Unfortunately in the US, you could be sued if someone gets hurt or is in someway harmed if someone who is not emergency services attempts any rescue (for example if you break someone's ribs while performing Heimlich if you aren't certified to do so). So in the swing story it would be a valid reason to not get involved if you know you aren't capable of helping. But still a firm YTA because at the very least you can stay to be comforting AND provide useful information to paramedics when they arrive. Also EMT=Emergency Medical Transport/Technician aka paramedic services.
While it doesn't seem to be a blanket law in all states, the Good Samaritan Law is a thing. It protects those acting in emergency situations, especially when administering first aid.
FWIW the child swing comment was my first thought too... In America you never know what's going to happen when you interact with a stranger, it's sadly quite reasonable to avoid touching a kid to avoid legal issues. Filming it is way weirder. I would have said "sorry, I have an injured back so I can't help physically" and maybe verbally explain how I would try to get him out for his guardian to do. And honestly, play stupid games, win stupid prizes... The kid wasn't in danger and lessons were likely learned
Regarding the family secret meetings. If my sister showed up with her husband I'd be LIVID. WE do NOT get along and I wouldn't participate in ANYTHING if he might be involved. (Happy ending: divorced! And my sister is THRIVING.)
I wouldn’t red flag people who aren’t on social media, you do you. What I red flag is the people who act like they’re superior to everyone else because ‘they haven’t been sucked into using social media’ or blame social media for problems we have today
I think there is a nuanced discussion to be had about this. You probably mean people who go "social media is evil and everything about it is bad", but when we move away from the extreme end of that spectrum, I don't think people pointing out how social media has influenced society is a red flag - clearly, it and the internet more largely have affected global life and society, as you would expect with such a revolutionary change, and not all of it has been for the better.
For the social media question, I'm only on youtube and discord now. I'm prone to addiction to this kind of stuff and don't have the self control to prevent myself from constant brain dead doomscrolling. This is much healthier for me.
I think the reasons why they have no social media is definitely more important than the presence or absence in general. You don't use social media because it stresses you out, but you kept your facebook because your brother always prefers to message you that way and send pictures of your new niece? Green flag. You have all the social media accounts ever and are super dependent on how your posts perform to feel valid in life? Very, very big red flag.
Great on you for realising this is the best thing for your own wellbeing and taking the steps that are best for you. Green flag and brownie points.
I got my knee sick in a chair when I was 4 or so. The babysitter called the fire department and someone wasn't informed of the nature of the emergency so they came running in looking everywhere for a fire. Eventually things calmed and they knocked my knee out with a rubber mallet... the 80's were something special.
When I was a kid, our fire department had to come a couple times to get a kid unstuck 😂
July is actually Disability Pride month! Though as a former organiser of local LGBTI+ Prides, the Pride in the capital tends to be the last weekend in June, with local towns and non-capital cities (and now some villages!) holding their Pride festivals on every weekend from May to the ennd of September.
Also, I decided to call my parents by their names when I was 6 or 7. (I'm nearly 47 now!)
My sibling’s partner is British, and when he’s around, our whole family speaks English, since we can all do that to varying degrees, and since he doesn’t speak our native language. My mom, however, is not that comfortable with speaking English and often, because the rest of us are more fluent, the conversation is too fast-paced for her. This is why she sometimes wants to see just her kids without the in-laws, since obviously she wouldn’t just leave the one in-law not speaking our language uninvited. I can see that in a very emotionally charged situation she would very much appreciate the opportunity to communicate in her native language though.
I think that the child in a swing story is a definite everyone sucks here, but not because of her not helping them. I've seen enough fail compilations to know that those things usually need to be cut open for the person to get unstuck. However, she clearly saw where this was going to end up and said NOTHING. If she had spoken up (just like she should have about the issue she saw with them "trampling" her two year old) and said "hey, that isn't a good idea, if you get stuck you will need to call 911 to get you out", I would have been fine with her walking away after. But clearly she was the only real, responsible adult and should have acted like one when in this situation. If they were still dumb enough to do it then as long as they could call for help, you are free to go. But not saying anything, stewing over having to share a public park with other kids and then just walking away after they asked for help was absolutely the wrong call.
So true! If OP never said anything to them the whole time, then from the other group's POV it could easily feel like "this drama mom sat there judging us while her toddler ran around under our feet, then when we asked for help with the swing situation she grabbed her kid and left without a word."
right?! thank you for saying this, it bothered me that no one mentioned it in the video. walking away is fine, especially since trying to help in these kinds of situations while not being trained could even make the situation worse, best thing OP could've done once the kid was stuck is call 911/tell them to call 911. but just watching stupid adult getting a kid into dangerous situation and doing nothing? now _that's_ drama behaviour.
I guess, but can you imagine the abuse she would likely have received?
She was not the only adult though, Katie was an adult and responsible for those children. Even worse, their responsible adult encouraged the child to get into that swing. Not saying that OP was right to walk away, but I don’t think it was OP’s responsibility to warn them about the swing.
@@s.a.4358 I feel like it's a little unfair to say OP is obligated to help with a situation that another adult created.
About no social media: some folks cant have it due to stalkers. And just because you can't find a person's social media doesnt mean it doesn't exist they may just not trust you with that info (beige flag, could be a cheater but could just have stalkers).
Or neither. I just don't want to have social media (other than RUclips). I'm not a cheater, but also have never had stalkers. Sometimes, there doesn't have to be an extreme reason
For the first story I completely have sympathy for not wanting to share some things with siblings partners. I am not close with my sister boyfriend, and do not necessarily love him all that much, there are a million things that I would hate to talk about with him present, good and bad. That doesn’t mean that he isn’t a part of the family or that he wouldn’t be invited to general family gatherings.
For the first story. It's not like the in-laws won't be involved, it's just that the initial news is being shared with the immediate family and they will share the news (if appropriate) with the spouses. It makes for less turmoil for the person who called the meeting, not having to deal with everyone's input, just parents and siblings.
For the funeral, I feel bad for OP, sounds like her mom is a narcissist, where everything is about them.
Agree on the first story. I don’t find it crazy to have a ‘core family’ only rule for these emergencies. I’d not be offended if my partner and his family had such an arrangement because I also don’t think I need to be involved in every family business. If I need to know, my partner - or any other person who wish to - will tell me what I need to know in as much details as they think are necessary or not.
Also I think it's helpful to have a protocol for calling a family only meeting. If you're going through some shit the last thing you want to deal with is disinviting inlaws by name. If it's less serious then just don't call the family meeting.
@@alex_blue5802 this! Especially if the family is large with several siblings and in-laws and it need to be “ok for Ben to come but I don’t really want Gertrude there, Freddy is okay if he’s not interrupting all the time” etc. And there will be the inevitable discussion of how long people need to be together to be included, long terms partners that are not married versus married couples who have been together less long, etc. Let it be okay not to include everyone all yeh time.
For the first story, I imagine there are some difficult in-laws they are hoping to avoid. Keeping it a code-word and siblings only would avoid accidental revelations to the problem in-laws and allows for the fine ones to be brought in when safe. Jamie and Shaaba seem to be very close with their in-law families. Many families aren't or can't be that close, and having that quick summons without having to negotiate who comes and who doesn't each time would help in those situations.
Yeah, I agree. I think Jamie and Shaaba are having a little difficulty with imagining a situation where people aren't that close to their SILs. It's looking through a very specific, very lucky lens, that involves having known the other's family since the teen years. It's nice, but it's also not a good lens for situations where there's an implication that some people don't feel comfortable with a person that has married into the family.
Yeah i agree. They did seem very focused on a situation where the in laws get along with the rest of the family.@@phoenixyfriend
I agree with your point, but I don't think what they're saying is wrong either. Based on how the post is worded, it seems like the family structure is one where the in-laws aren't included at all, which is strange because they have married into the family. It gives "if you're not blood-related, then you don't count" vibes, which is problematic in its own right. If OP was trying to avoid certain relatives in particular, it's strange to me that it wasn't mentioned, aka "there are a couple of in-laws that are disagreeable, so I've made it a rule that in-laws aren't allowed to emergency meetings." DIL did give an example of being someone who isn't reading the room and thinking only of herself, but I do side with Jamie and Shaaba about the situation being strange based on how OP has structured the post.
@@Rikrobat Yeah but if you have a big enough family to have multiple in-laws, showing preferential treatment could make things WORSE that just saying "I only want to tell my kids'
@@phoenixyfriend - I wasn’t suggesting that they show preferential treatment. I’m saying the issue is more how OP has chosen to present the situation, where it sounds like all in-laws are excluded because they are in-laws, not because they are trying to avoid drama because some are a problem.
On the last story - I feel like sometimes it's important to remember there can be different answers to the questions "am I the asshole for doing this?" and "Am I making the most strategically ideal choice to meet my personal goals?" So like, OP is absolutely not the drama for cutting her mom off. But it might *strategically* benefit her to make a different choice (or it may not!) depending on what her top goals are. If her top goals are to make her other family members feel supported, and those same family members express a desire for her to reconcile, then maybe at least tepid reconciliation is a more strategic choice. However, if it's a greater priority to assert her boundaries with her mom or to just not want to associate with someone who deeply hurt her, then the strategic choice remains dissociating from her mom. But neither of those choices would make her the drama or anything approaching it, it's all just a question of what OP most wants and which choice is going to get as close to it as possible.
I do wonder if OP is afraid of expressing more "selfish" reasons for wanting to cut her mom off, but if that's the case I hope she realizes that it's also ok to just not want to associate with someone who is rude and callous to her, even if it's only for her own sake. It sounds like OP's family, even the ones she has good relationships with, are maybe the sort who place "family cohesion" above all and look down on taking care of oneself, and I'm not completely disregarding that type of value system but you are also your own family and you deserve to protect yourself, too.
No social media here, just RUclips, and honestly between news apps and texting I'm good😅 As a millennial I've lived through the rise of every social media platform and never once been tempted to join...as someone who is Aro/Ace with ASD I don't feel the need to virtually socialize 🙅🏻♀️
good for you to be honest, i grew up obsessively using social media from a young age and it def had negative impacts, so now i decided to be off it for a while
@@AstronomicalJelly more and more studies are showing how prolonged extensive use of social media has a severe negative impact on mental health in adults but especially children...I didn't get a cellphone until I started driving myself to school and honestly it made a HUGE difference 😅 all my bullying happened face to face, I can't even imagine how much more extreme things would have been had the social media of today been around back then😖 social media is wonderful tool of information, entertainment, and finding one's community...but it's always a tool of dangerous misinformation, rampant bullying, and extremist cultivation😬 as with all things it's important to set boundaries and understand the complexities that go with it before use...I applaud your current break from it, it'll help you gain perspective and better knowledge of how to proceed with it going forward
3:06 june was pride month because of the stonewall riots which happened the end of June of 1969. This kicked off the international pride movement, and Marsha P Johnson as well as Sylvia Rivera, Miss Griffin and Stormé, all main figures of stonewall, pushed for equal rights all through June. To honour them, June ended up pride month. But July is also disability pride month, and where I live, we also have pride festivities in August.
Edit: july is disability pride month to honour a law that passed to protect disabilities, and provide us with discrimination protection in the workforce as well as inclusion in society in 1990 on July 26th (if i remember correctly).
I get two whole month!
July is also queer wrath month ❤ (yes based on a meme of top text bottom text overlaid atop a sephiroth picture.)
@@Lucifersfursonait's not really a thing though, is it? I have seen disability rights advocates point out that this decision, if you can call it that, tramples over the visibility of Disability pride month. Of course in the best of worlds both could co-exist, but there's no argument to be made that the people calling for July to be LGBTQ wrath month generally know about disability pride. Disability pride needs more visibility, and if something like "pride month 2.0" became popular, it would become completely ignored.
June started as Pride Month because of the Stonewall Riots. I think it may still be kind of June-exclusive in the States because of that. I love the idea of Pride all summer, though!
July is disability pride month, so pride is at least most of the summer 🤭
Random, but a guy in my hometown who walks around with his cat on a leash (and sometimes on his (bald) head) took his daughter to the park and she pushed the cat in the infant swing. Most patient cat I've ever seen.
@38:33 You two don't live in the US, so y'all think it's silly. But no, it is totally a thing here that people can be sued if they are helping someone and the person/child gets injured or says they did something inappropriate. My brother was sued because his son's friend tripped and sprained his ankle at their house. So like yes, that is a concern and something we have to think about over here unfortunately. If the situation is sever, such as a car accident or attack or something, people will often step in anyway. But for simple stuff like being stuck in a swing, I can totally see someone opting to walk away in fear of being sued or other issues arising. We wish it wasn't this way, because it shouldn't be. But that's the reality here in the states. You can be sued for stupid things and so that's constantly in the back of our minds in situations like this. P.S. being accused of molesting him if she touched him wrong may seem over the top as well, but this is the country where a 4 year old boy is on the sex offenders list for grabbing his preschool teacher's boob -_-'
No one is obligated to keep connection with their family just because they brought them into this world because they didn't decide to be born! People are their own people. Just gotta find our places in this world 🌎
I'm sorry Jamie but I 100% disagree with your advice on the last one. I'm not saying it's your intention, but often people who have cut contact with family (myself included) are heavily pressured to reach out 'just to explain why'. I understand where the advice comes from, but I think that like Shaaba said it's a very naive view. Cutting contact with family is a lot emotionally and reaching out to the people that have caused the hurt makes you vulnerable, especially if you're still very angry or in cases like this where the support network is not being the most supportive. It opens the door to manipulation and I would imagine it's part of the reason that it takes something like 7 attempts to leave an abusive relationship (I haven't double checked that figure). If it's what OP needs to do, that is their right, obviously, but advising it can be harmful. I mean no offence to you and agree with everything else you said, I just think it's worth pointing out the harm that this advice can have from someone who's had it given to them before.
Once more an awesome episode Shaaba and Jamie.
For the kids stuck in the swing: I think it's kind to help strangers, but I don't think you owe your help to a stranger unless it's a life or death situation. As someone who often put others before herself to my own detriment, I'm learning that it's okay to leave people to deal with their own situations. If OP didn't have the emotional bandwidth to stay and help, I think that's fine because the kid will be fine even without her.
I couldn't have said better, totally agree
Others have commented how severe things can become when a kid is stuck in a swing, so it might actually not be fine. HOWEVER, I fully agree with you and am struggling with putting others before me as well...
At the end of the day, the people involved can call emergency services. It's not as if the fate of this kid is now in OPs hands because they happened to be there. Helping certainly is the morally much nicer thing to do, but if you personally feel incapable of helping for whatever reason then.. it's probably for the better not to help. Could be that you try and fail, because you were too tired or something..
So sometimes it's actually better for everyone involved that you call emergency services, instead of getting involved yourself.
I don't think the issue is OP choosing not to get involved, it's the reason she gave: I was pissed at them and ignored their pleas for help. That's the ahole behaviour. OP could have expressed she couldn't help, but she said nothing. The "I wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire" attitude is where I think the issue lies.
@@Rikrobat that's the thing, it's not she couldn't help, she didn't want to... and that should be fine, she shouldn't be expected to help people if she doesn't want to especially when who needs help has just pissed her off that much.
we don't have to be nice to people that weren't nice to us in order to not be an ahole (and really the situation was not that serious to the point where it was a moral obligation or something)
@@moonyjuliI would like to pin "we don't have to be nice to people who were not nice to us to avoid being an ahole" to the top of every aitd podcast comment section.
For the swing story: it’s so incredibly dependent on details we haven’t been given.
As a parent: How was OP’s child behaving at that moment, and how does he behave in general? Did OP’s child have an easy way to keep him safe, like a tethered harness or stroller? Could OP tell that OP’s child was getting dangerously tired or hungry or hot/cold and would have a tantrum, a meltdown, or get ill from any of these conditions?
If I were OP, it’s possible I couldn’t have helped any more than just making sure I took my about-to-become-the-drama toddler out of the equation so I wasn’t adding to the misery of the situation. If it was me exactly as I was when my first child was two, it would have been me pregnant, undiagnosed with multiple chronic illnesses, with severe all-day morning sickness that never stopped. My husband had eye surgery at that time, we were poor enough to qualify for, need, and receive government assistance in the US, and our child had only recently been switched to glasses from contacts that he needed due to the removal of his congenital cataracts. He, like both his parents, was not yet diagnosed with the ADHD and autism all three of us have, and our sensory needs were constantly clashing.
Given what I had just witnessed, I would not have been able to trust Katie or the older kids who weren’t mine to watch my two year old, who was incredibly fast, volatile, and absolutely unconcerned with his own safety even among the ranks of two year olds, so my attention would be split at all times. My medical conditions wouldn’t have allowed me to lift or pull, or bend over. My phone was ancient and the battery had gone bad, so iffy on if I could have called Emergency Services or would be shooting myself in the foot as I depend on my phone for navigation even in areas I was familiar with. I had no energy left emotionally or mentally due to our circumstances. And I probably would have been cross that the other kids weren’t being careful around my kid, annoyed at the caregiver for not paying attention and for encouraging behavior that was unsafe (and absolutely against playground rules and the height/age/weight restrictions generally printed very visibly somewhere on the infant swing), and angry that their actions would likely result in the loss of that swing for everyone for a significant amount of time.
If I wasn’t at the absolute end of my rope and my child wasn’t about to explode or be ill, I might have said “I’m sorry, I’m not able to help you right now.”
I would have felt unhappy with myself for not helping, and rationalized that I could/should have done something, but truthfully, I couldn’t have without having it be an unbearable cost in resources to myself and likely my family. If I’d have pushed myself for that, it would have been possibly at the cost of being able to drive safely, to make safe decisions, to take adequate care of my child. I would not have truly been able to assist, and I would have had a good chance of making their or my own situation worse.
So in that situation, I absolutely would have been NTA for not helping.
But if OP was having a normal day, no long term stressors, had good health, time, energy, a super chill toddler whose needs had all been met recently and a comfy stroller to sit in where he would be safely restrained and occupied, a fully charged phone, and OP was not helping with the express purpose in OP’s mind of punishing Katie and Co. for their earlier actions by withholding any help, than OP would be a monstrous AH.
I don’t recall if OP said anything about how many other people were at the park, either. If there were other people or likely to be other people soon, OP was less of an AH, even if there could be some bystander effect going on. If there was absolutely nobody else around, the area was isolated and rural, and Katie showed no evidence of having a way to call for help, OP would have been so incredibly in the wrong and possibly even have been on the wrong side of local law depending on OP’s profession and what laws exist there. Certainly OP would be on the wrong side of many communities’ social contract/unwritten societal rules.
Ethically everything depends on the resources and the actual danger of the situation to all of the people involved.
The first comment to the second story feels crazy, but I also just read in the news about a case where someone in a zoo had crabbed a child's hand when they were reaching out into a peacock enclosure and the parents got so mad that the police had been called. People can be crazy, so I would be hesitant to get involved, if there wasn't an immediate emergency.
For the second story, I used to work with kids and I had a student who got stuck in one of those swings, Jamie is correct you call the fire department to get them out.
First story: I find this type of rigid family dynamic so confusing, because technically the parents are in-laws too. It would kind of feel like if, in the case of the husband's surgery, the wife and their kids were to be excluded by the husband's family because "well, you're just the in-laws" in the eyes of his parents and siblings (if they have them). The idea of the "main/blood" family immediately gets muddled when the siblings start having children of their own, because then they would become the new "main" family themselves. Then do they suddenly treat their siblings and parents as lesser than because they're not part of their new main family unit?
It also just feels like a lot of unnecessary distance when you're implying people's spouses are so far removed from the family structure that they're automatically excluded from every important event/urgency, particularly when it's understood that they're going to be told what's happening anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if they did treat the partners as outsiders to the family in other scenarios as well. But, in that case it would be better for the daughter-in-law to leave, rather than demanding to be invited.
I'd love if you guys would react and discuss Bluey episodes! It would be interesting to see your individual perspectives on parenting.
Okay.
1st Story: I think the blanket ban on in laws is a good idea. Why? Because it ensures these meetings will ALWAYS be a safe space. No matter who is brought into the family. Even if a sibling brings in someone you aren't comfortable around. A ban like these makes sure you don't have to exclude a specific in-law or explain why this particular time no in-laws are around....
I see your point.... But what if a certain family member (no in-law,but like a sibling) would make this a less safe space for you? For example if they themselves are the reason y you called that meeting or they always belittle your problems ect? I see it more like they said: it should be decided on a case-to-case basis. Because banning in-laws doesn't make the meeting automatically a safe place.
But i appreciate your view point, and if it works for the family then that's good. I just wanted to give my two cents to what you said. Idk. Still good for you to see it as such a good thing ^^
@@jonny_piratefox I think this is why it's so different for every family dynamic. If the nuclear family has issues amongst the siblings they probably wouldn't have all agreed to the set up from the get go.
Will it really ALWAYS be safe though?? It's not like blood relatives have never ever done anything wrong. It can absolutely be that the emergency was caused by one particular family member. Personally, if I had an emergency, I'd want my dad to know, my stepmother, and both of my siblings in-law, but not my one biological sibling. I'm not comfortable sharing personal things with her- our relationship has grown too distant from hurt and secrets and things happening behind backs. Ditto with my biological mother; I wouldn't want her involved AT ALL. Limiting emergency meetings to no in-laws doesn't necessarily make it safe.
Similarly, if something happened to my mother-in-law, I'd be really hurt if they called my husband to an emergency meeting and specifically said I was not welcome to be there too. The piece of paper we have and the rings on our fingers means I'm supposed to be part of their family. Like Shaaba was saying, it should be a case-by-case basis for sure.
I disagree. Shaaba is right, it should be a case-by-case.
For instance; what if it's the sibling who is the abuser, and the in-law is the one who needs help? This complete ban on in-laws brings the hostile into the emergency, and leaves the one who needs help out.
And at what point does the in-law become truly part of The Family? Because at some point, the mother & father of this particular family were the "in-law" to their spouse's Family.
It's stupid and has "outsider = bad" vibes. Treating the sibling's spouses as "other" is a very bad idea. Especially as their children (assuming some of them eventually do) turn into adults... do the spouses then finally become part of The Family? Or are they still left out, but the adult children are now let in? Assuming the traditional gets passed down, as the years go by.
I think people are a bit too hung up on the code word, when the real issue is that can the family have emergency meetings without their in-laws present. Just because they have a code word for situations for family-only, it doesn't mean they have to use it in every emergency or any other situation. If someone wants the in-laws present, they can invite them. If someone doesn't want one of the siblings present, they can invite everyone else. If they want to have a simple way to invite only the original nuclear family, why is that a problem.
Obviously OP and the husband only wanted their kids present, when sharing their bad news and I think it's completely up to them, who they tell first. The DIL is trying to set a rule that she needs to be always invited, but she doesn't get to make the decision, who other people tell their news about.
I only started on social media when I was using it to announce new art sales and the like. Now I just get on when I'm bored.😂
I was eating chocolate digestives while watching this video, got proper jumpscared tbh
Is that like an oreo?
@@hannahgrapes1554 nah it’s just a plain biscuit with chocolate on top. it’s great!
Both of you are just chaos persevering. Also, love ‘Red Flag-Green Flag’ segments.
On the note of kids calling their parents by first names I’m a vocal coach a student of mine switches between calling her moms (lesbian moms not bonus family just to specify) by their first names or mom and she told me she sometimes even mixes up their names. I also have a unique family my parents split before I was born and my bio dad’s current gf is just called her name by my brother and I.
The emergency family meeting thing reminds me of how Phil, Gloria and Cam in Modern Family had an emergency meeting, and said they were all going out for orange juice😂 lol i commented before shaaba mentioned it, whoops
I am a very off-line person for a number of personal reasons (other than RUclips), and I find that I end up with a lot of information regarding news and other important info from the people I surround myself with IRL. I even pick up internet slang that way lol. I'll also often seek out information about specific news or issues from a small handful of people on social media combined with news sites and RUclips. It's just what works for me and I find that I stay more engaged that way. I prefer longer form and slower moving things, and I struggle with the lack of context that makes timelines timelines.
In the child swing story, OP should have at least stayed to comfort the child if there was nothing else they could have done, imagine how freaked out he and his siblings must have been. When I was 10, I would have panicked just getting something stuck on my FINGER, getting my ENTIRE BODY stuck in one of those swings would have been horrible. None of what happened was on the kids, they were being oblivious, essentially unattended, 10-12 year olds. If they don't have anybody telling them how to act around small children, then there's no way for them to know. Katie and OP are 100% in the wrong, and somebody should get all the kids involved an ice cream (or at least OP's kid and the one who got tricked into the swing)
Were they unattended? I thought they were with an adult.
They were not unattended though, Katie (an adult) was supposed to watch them. But instead of that she actually got the 12 year old in a bad situation.
The “essentially unattended” was in reference to when they were just playing, where technically an adult (Katie) was present, but was implied to not really be watching them, or was at least not making any effort to intervene
The comment about them being essentially unattended didn’t have anything to do with the swing incident part of the post
I too tired a child swing when i was younger.. I am super small and thin, so we thought it woukd be fun to see if i fit..
Took us 20 minutes and me having to twist in the most uncomfortable ways to get out.. I got out though.
Also don't make other kids watch your kids.
I have a lot of people who have no socials and stay informed through in person groups, radio, podcasts, and following individuals who they trust over time in more direct ways- like individual websites or substacks. Directly following different news sources, podcasts, and youtube, is actually a good way to keep informed without using socials. And despite fb being a lot of boomers , fb was used a lot in organizing protests from 2015-2021. So weirdly enough, neither fb only nor no socials is a red flag here. Twitter only might be a red flag for me.
It sucks for Pride Month in Australia. As June is the middle of winter here and places like where I am - Melbourne - are pouring rain and freezing cold. So no one wants to go out and have fun for Pride.
I tried to get a friend to come to any Pride event for the month of June or July and they were like "Nah. Did the march last year and can't be bothered leaving the house as it's too cold."
So, this Pride month, I just sat in my house and had a lovely time having cups of tea and biscuits with my friend (who also happens to be apart of the community) just chatting for hours and enjoying each other's company.
We do have summer Pride events but they're in the middle of the country/bush like 3 to 4 hours away out of Melbourne/The City and there are no trees but just flat baked earth on farmland. It may be fun when you're younger but the dehydration is real.
Melbourne does pretty fun midsumma events
@llynxfyremusic yeah I know but most of them are out in the very far dry arid country with little to no shade as usually done on farm land.
There are some cool ones but they can be hard to get to. Especially if you're disabled like myself.
@@everogersdownunder1242??? I've been to midsumma events and they were in the city?
@@llynxfyremusic I've not been able to find any for the upcoming year yet. I've also access issues as explained above
@@llynxfyremusicyeah there are always so many in the city, or were (many have been cancelled due to the rise in hate/threats), but over the last decade plus there were usually heaps from Jan to Feb & sometimes to March
For the first story: I grew up with three siblings and our family of six was always very close. We were/are also quite close with any partner of my siblings and myself. However there will always be a core family structure where the partners are excluded. If my sister called for a meeting with the core family i wouldn't take my boyfriend with me and he wouldn't feel entiteled to it. I find the entitlement of the daughter in law astonishing tbh. It's not for her to decide if she gets invited to any happy or sad or scary event.
Yeah, as much as I like my sibling’s boyfriend, I still want some time alone with my family (I’m the eldest and aroace and our two younger siblings don’t have partners, at least not ones to my knowledge). I recently turned 20, and honestly got quite annoyed he was there - I wanted a quiet moment with my family. I couldn’t imagine dragging in-laws into every single situation. And it’s not like they aren’t going to learn what the meeting was about afterwards. People are going to talk about stuff unless agreeing to keep topics confidential.
However, OP’s text still had an air of entitlement, so I think both OP and the DIL are TAHs. OP for not giving good enough context and general bad vibe in my opinion and DIL for her entitlement.
Completely agree. I’d never be offended if my partner’s family wanted to only discuss something with him or only meet up with him. It’s not even about me not being allowed to know, but it can feel more comfortable talking about some things only with family. Even if they know he will tell me after, that’s still different than them talking about it in front of me (and even if I know, I don’t need to making it obvious to them that I know, if it’s a sensitive topic to them).
@@Acidfrog475 Yeah i agree. Both sides sucked in this situation and could be treating each other with more kindness
I love their little old couple bickering over what’s a serious biscuit lmao from the “oh. Go away.” To the “I didn’t says they were a serious biscuit, I says they were you, so…..neh.”
Sad thing, in the usa the adult can be held legally responsible for hurt child. Sucks but true.
We generally involve people but the in-laws were not ideal in general when my brother was in a medicated coma after multiple seizures on his birthday that resulted in discovering a brain tumor. I have 5 siblings, and most of us already have a ton of anxiety. At the time most of us weren't married, but now we are to those partners. My husband drove me there, but after he left and went to check on my mom's dogs, he stress vomited in her driveway. My sister's husband was quiet and fine. My youngest brother's wife was being a real brat, commenting on how we should be reacting and how my older brother wasn't emoting (he kept breaking down crying), my mom and I didn't cry in front of people enough because we tend to shut down, and make sure others are handling ok. "Well that's how she copes " OK, if she's going to be awful to everyone else to feel better, I don't much want to interact with her.
The idea that i would drop everything im doing immediately because my sibling is getting a divorce is ludicrus. Thst shit can wait till i get off work.
The third story, your explanation of 'keeping the peace' makes perfect sense to me Shaaba. Sometimes going LC is easier because you can keep those ties to the people you want to and minimise someone linked to them. I'm in the situation where there are people in the system that I love deeply and want to be part of their lives, but that means I need contact with people I would not choose to. It sucks. It shouldn't be the case, but you need to make the decision for yourself, there isn't an easy or right answer.
About the first story, even though there were some dramatic elements to it (using emergency code names etc.) I completely get the need for excluding the in-laws in some scenarios. A lot of my thoughts on dating are influenced by me spending most of my adultlife single (got into my first and current relationship at 28) and really prioritising and nourishing my other relationships. I never wanted to be the type of person who brings their partner everywhere with them and wanted to maintain my relationships just between me and my other people with of course sometimes adding my partner into the mix.
With this in mind I do see how sometimes it's needed to process things just with the people you have a primary relationship with, not secondary through them being a partner to your friend or family member. Even though it seems harsh I do think that this cut and dry approach of always excluding in-laws from these meetings is better that a case-by-case approach since that can cause feelings of unfairness and arguing both within the siblings/parents and in-laws. Where I think the case by case approach comes in is how much each family member tells about these meetings to their spouse. This I don't think should have a blanket rule of leaving the "gritty" stuff out.
i feel like the reason we feel weird when we hear someone doesnt have social media is because its a trope in media (maybe irl too, idk) for stalkers/creeps/serial killers to not have social media. like Joe, in the tv show You. So when you hear “no social media” you associate that with something dodgy. like what are they hiding?
I don't know where the swing story happened, but if it was in the states then the fear of a lawsuit or something similar is a valid concern. People here are sue happy. I can understand if you guys came to that conclusion because it's not like that in the UK, but think it was a bit rude to say that it's an unreasonable concern and that it's a "wouldn't let someone in their bunker" attitude. That being said, she should have offered to at least call emergency services. To touch the child or get directly involved would be a risk.
I agree with this. In the states if she had helped and the child got hurt the parent may try to sue. Good Samaritan law would probably protect her but she would have costs dealing with the court date . She should have offerred to cal ABSOLUTELY this. She also has a 2 year old to look after. They tend to be quick little things and get into all sorts of things quickly. A simple offer t o call the parents(if she had a cell phone, I know most do but not everyone will) should have been done. If she didn't feel like helping due to liable of lawsuit or injury to herself, For refrence my 12 year old niece is close to 100lbs.
We moved 300 miles away when we got married, our parents are only about half an hour from each other and meet up without us, know each other's medical history/where spare keys are/who to contact... we are just all family
I was no contact with my mom for years. Eventually, however, it became stressful on my other family relationships and making them more difficult to deal with. I eventually "reconnected" with my mom, but I made it clear that wasn't going to be a close relationship, just the birthdays and Christmas. Honestly, it has worked out way better instead of no contact. It has lessened the strain with my sisters and aunts, and my mom knows I'm not just "being dramatic" when I tell her what my boundaries are.
First story, especially the inclusion/exclusion thing really makes me think of Must Love Dogs, where the family unit just converges so solidly whenever there is an emergency that the in-law/relative lines aren't even there (Except for one S.I.L. who is just done with the main character's drama and politely absents herself). It's a weird film, but quite wholesome in many ways. Even if Stockard Channing should never be trapped into a polycule against her will.
Shaaba your hair is looking really nice!
For the first story, I don't have a problem with the codeword and just being immediate family. I think it makes sense. You just want to share with your parents and your siblings, when things are at their most raw etc. Maybe thye don't want to cry or be angry in front of people who aren't their spouse.
And it's not like the spouse isn't being told at all, they will be told, they just aren't there. I don't understand why Jamie and Shaaba are so confused by it, but they do acknowledge this might just be from their perspective, which is awesome.
I think the DIL is the Drama. OP is dealing with her husband needing major surgery, she's probably stressed and upset and possibly grieving. You can't demand an invitation, and OP was clear. She didn't insult her DIL, she just she wasn't responsible for her feelings (true) and she doesn't need to be effin' invited to everything (also true). She could have been ruder.
I think part of the issue is that OP's explanation makes it sound like the in-laws are often not included, enough that they need a codeword for the situation rather than just saying "I need to speak with just my kids" or whatever. And if that's the case, is this a family where in-laws are never truly welcomed into the family because they aren't blood related? That's the impression I got and seems to be how Shaaba and Jamie read it as well. You mentioned in-laws could be informed later, but I'm not sure that was made clear in the post, hence the interpretation that in-laws are being left out of the loop entirely.
DIL is definitely the drama for insisting to be invited like this is a regular family party and not a serious meeting to discuss something. However, OP's way of speaking gave me hostile and exclusionary vibes, so I'm not sold on her not also being drama.
@@Rikrobat Wasn't it said that the code word was only used once before when one of the children was getting a divorce and also that the in-laws were filled in later, but leaving out the gritty details (to which Shaaba and Jamie commented that they would absolutely share all the details anyways).
But the DIL absolutely is the biggest drama, because it isn't her decision who other people share their news with. I was thinking that one thing that is often said on this channel is, that it's no-one else's decision when, how or to whom someone comes out to. Why should a serious diagnoses be any different. I didn't get exclusionary vibes, but I'm so private person myself that I might not notice.
About the first family`s code word, I kind of understand, me and my family live far away from each other, so the main communication is phone or messenger, we have rule instead of a code word: you can all anybody any time, as you never know what they are doing. If the person is busy and can`t take general calls, declines the call, if it`s something urgent, you need answer right away, or something serious happened you call a second time right away. Then the person you called knows they need to take the call. This way both parties know, it`s an urgent matter, and unless it really needs to be a longer call, you quickly get to the point...
With the kid stuck in a baby swing, I'd (hopefully think to) call 911, and also look for a bucket (put it upside down) or something like that he could stand on while we try to wiggle the swing off. At least it would lessen the pressure on his legs until the paramedics arrived. I'm only bothering to say this in case it helps someone, as It seems to be a not uncommon occurrence. One of my kids (around that age, if I recall) got briefly stuck in a baby swing. They managed to get out with not that much help, but it could have been serious if they'd been chunkier or shorter.
If OP had helped Katie and the kid got hurt, they could have been really nasty about it. She could have tried but if it was too hard, then call 911
My husband and I have a code word that to us means "Things have gone sideways and I need help ten minutes ago" with the context based on how the word is slotted into conversation. My security company has a different code word that must be given every time I call off a response. Give the wrong one and the response is escalated. That said, my sister in law called a family meeting when my mother in law had a stroke and specifically excluded me. My DH flat out said that if I was not invited then he would not be there either because I am family for better or worse. I was allowed to go with him but was relegated to sitting in the living room with my MIL while her adult children discussed her future behind closed doors. It was quite insensitive to the poor woman and also to me since it robbed us both of our agency as part of the family. MIL is gone now and despite our issues, I miss her. Yes there are times to exclude specific people from a family meeting, but a blanket ban of non blood relatives is never a good answer.
I'm thinking about putting my little one in daycare for a few hours, maybe twice a week. I've been with him every single day of his life. I think the longest we've been apart is like 3 hours. People like Katie make me VERY nervous about leaving him unattended by me.
We had a "swings of the century" style swingset at my elementary (picture a circular set of bigger baby swings that would be pulled around by a big kid while all the little kids (up to 6/7 year olds) were basically flung out wide by centrifugal force. It was amazing. They took it away after a couple of incidents (one of the bigger little kids got stuck and firemen had to help him out, and I got flung out of my seat at full force and knocked out. They probably should have taken me to the hospital, but this was late 80s early 90s, so that was less of a consideration). They actually redid most of the park, taking it from a wicked fun place to a mediocre super safe place. They even took away the tire swing!
for code words, the color scale is always best; regarding the kid in the swing though, if it was in the US...im not touching that kid ppl are too sue happy. If it was like life and death maybe if i had the know how. but otherwise...im not risking it honestly (hahaa i made this edit before the comments...that was not me in the comments btw lol) funnything i used to live in England and i would help there; Having worked in customer service for so long in the US, ppl look for any reason to be an ass
That first family must have a lot of drama. Makes me wonder a little how much of it's real.
Gotta say--- You and Jaimie both just make the cutest facial expressions in the intro!
For the swing-OP... Omg, I would have offered to help, especially if I think that the other "adult" is not doing a great job. But I as a person have no problem addressing, helping or teaching other peoples kids. It takes a village and why not be a part of that village? Why let an adult get to you so you don't help a child in need? The child is not to blame.
And as you said, they might just need no be reassured. I think I would ask "Are you the parent? No? Ok, then can you call your parents to come here? Do you want me to call them? Or should I go get them for you?" I would def try and help the best I could to not have to call 911.
I'm child free and have neighbors with kiddos. One of them got their finger stuck and was crying. I waited for about 15 seconds and then ran over to help cuz I figured his parents maybe were washing dishes or something and couldn't hear. Couple seconds after I got him unstuck he was still crying and thankfully his mum came SPRINTING out of the house and everything was a okay. He got a nasty blood blister but other than that just he was just a tad scared and embarrassed. I just can't imagine a time I would be so angry at some random child I wouldn't help if possible.
I have no social media, apart from RUclips (which I personally don't really count as a social platform, especially since it's relatively anonymous), and Tumblr (which is even more anonymous). My reasoning for this is twofold; one, because facebook/twitter/insta/whatever else people use, tend to be really bad for people with the kinds of addictive personalities that run in my family. Two, because I have a no contact abusive parent who WILL use any means at her disposal to find me, and WILL show up at my house. She has already hired a private detective to track me down. I'm not going to make her job easier.
There is no code word, but often my in laws just want to sit down with their two sons to talk and that's fine (example, when FIL got sick and would need rides to appointments). They know their sons will fill in us DILs with what we need to know. I wanna say with my grandparents and their parents...it depends? I don't think I recall either of my parents being at "important" convos their parents in law needed to have with just their kids.
General disinterest in social media is a bright green flag for me, but maybe I’m biased because I don’t have much online presence either. I also make a distinction here between accounts for oversharing your personal life or getting wrapped up in useless social discourse, vs. sharing hobbies and entertainment.
The Family's emergency code word setup doesn't just exclude in-laws, it also includes blood family by default. The whole thing feels very controlling to me. Some women might not want to discuss the gritty details of a divorce with their brother. These situations really need to be decided on a case by case basis.
With the park story, I will say as an informative note: You guys mentioned a lot that OP could and should have told the kids to be more mindful of her two year old. Redirecting other people's children is not something that is socially acceptable everywhere. Some communities are fine with the "It takes a village." philosophy, but in areas that are less community oriented, if an adult that is not a child's parent or caretaker asks a child to stop doing something or even to please just be careful, it can lead to a dangerous situation. A lot of parents / caregivers get really mad about that kind of thing because mama / papa bear mode turns on and it's not a stranger's business to correct or even speak directly to their child / charge. (A precaution against kidnapping/child predation.) I've personally seen things escalate to violence over someone feeling entitled to parent someone else's child in an area where that's a big no no. That being said, I do think that OP could have approached the caretaker and asked that she have the kids in her care to please be mindful of the smaller child as a 2 year old could easily be hurt by the older children.
I can definitely see why the lack of social media is a red flag. A lot of cheaters pretend not to have social media. And it is pretty uncommon. I do think that it works as a red flag because red flags don't inherently mean something is bad it just means you should pay attention to it. Almost any 'red flag' has a context where it's not bad.
Many of us spent the majority of our lives, without cell phones, much less social media. Don't look add it so much as a revocation but rather continuation of the behavior they've always had.
Pride originally started as the anniversary of the Stonewall riots which started just after midnight on June 28th and was later expanded into a month.
I would venture to say the code word had to be something in the event that you had to leave a message for someone at work. It also may have been meant to exclude the parents siblings, and just include the parents and children. There's also the question of where do you draw the line. You could have one couple that's been together for 10 years but just choose not to get married another one that eloped on their second date, it's an immediate family situation and like I used to tell my daughter when she was growing up "you can have an opinion that doesn't mean you get a vote". The children in this may have deciding medical opinions about the situation at hand, but that doesn't mean that the opinions of spouses will steer what happens. Frankly the daughter-in-law should have been aware of this whole scenario before she ever married into the family.
Swing mom, ESH. Seriously, how hard is it to say "sorry I have to go", or "we're running late.". You're right, they were jerks, but don't snub them. And as a parent of only one child, I can say that it's very easy to find other kids jerks. Your development as a parent directly correlates to where your child is. Your child is two, you're dealing with two, a 10-year old is so far out of your wheelhouse. To be fair, America is a very litigious and spiteful place. Being afraid of getting sued for helping is a very real thing here in the US.
Funeral mom is an AH, there's no way of just called being polite and calling her the drama. And kudos to op for being a good person and a good niece. Casper her. And after hearing what the rest of the family did, it's easy to see where she got it from.
I never sad it was a serious biscuit I said it was you 😂😂😂😂😂 you two so remind me of me and my hubby and it's so heartwarming to see 🥹 we celebrate our 10 year anniversary a week on Friday 🥹
That intro was possibly the most entertaining combination of out of context bits yet
I can't believe the bounciness of those curls! Beautiful! Also, I misheard Jamie and thought it was Bother-In-Law, but the shoe fits on some people.
Story 1: I can absolutely see scenarios in which a code word would be helpful to tell distressing news a single time to close family without having to face others on sensitive issues. Going through a divorce that is messy -- I would not want to want my siblings' spouses there as I'm discussing the dissolution of the marriage. If they get details later, whatever. I don't want to relay them directly but may not want to go through this four times to tell everyone, you know? The code word may be a bit weird for some people, but I'm assuming it's come about for a reason within that family. OP could have been a bit nicer, but DIL is out of line.
The only social media i'm on is youtube (and on occasion browse reddit). I don't see a need for anything else and never really have. I think the last major social media I had was all the way back in the myspace days. Once that died I never bothered to move on to anything else.🤷♀
Heavily disagree on the second one. Maybe this is one of those "I live in the USA" kinda issues, but I will NOT be touching anyone else's children. EVER. There are just too many ways it can be turned around on me. I took a course in CPR, I want to help, I like making people happy- but there are laws protecting me if I'm performing CPR trying to help and end up hurting someone. The laws about children are all very much against me. If he gets hurt, I can be sued. If he feels uncomfortable with me touching him, I can be sued. If Katie just decides she doesn't like me (or the child's actual parents do), I can be sued. So- hell no. It'd be one thing if he was literally in a life-or-death situation, but stuck in a swing? Nah. It was rude not to at least say something, tell Katie that you're calling emergency services to help, but absolutely not OP's problem or obligation, and it's probably a good policy to just never touch anyone else's kids period.
for the first story, even if there's no issues between any of the in laws and the family, not all people are close enough with their in laws to get all the deatails. Using the example of the father needed a surgery, I would understand if one of my in laws didn't want to tell me why they needed surgery. Sure, they would tell me that they were getting A surgery and proably the general location, but I don't think it's that weird to not want all you children in laws to know why. Then again I grew up in a family where I wouldn't expect my parents to always want to share those details either. I am a very privite person in general and I can understand if someone else feels that way too
The swing one really makes me upset. You dont even need to call 911. Just flip the swing upsidedown. I literally did this too and i had my mom turn it upsidedown and i got out and i was also a heavy set kid
29:56 that “cute family moment” was actually them being a menace because the kid was obviously too big.
For the social media question I only have RUclips, discord and Reddit (Reddit is for the Lols not the news). Not because it’s addictive or anything, or because I am a snob, quite the opposite I wish I could maintain a stable social media presence. I just find trying to update each day and checking it to be absolutely exhausting.