In-laws taken advantage of
bliss@ok.bc.ca
DEAR ANNIE: I love my in-laws to pieces, but it bothers me they are too nice. No one who lives in their household pays for anything.
When my husband and I lived with them, we always helped out, but now that we’ve moved on, my in-laws are having a hard time paying the bills. But they won’t ask any of their kids to fork over.
My brother-in-law’s girlfriend lives in the house, and they have a daughter together. Right now, my brother-in-law is in jail, and the mother barely cares for her daughter. Either my in-laws do it, or my husband and I take over her care.
The girlfriend often leaves the house with no notice, sometimes in the middle of the night, and never bothers to feed her little girl. She has no job and has two kids by other fathers whom she also doesn’t take care of. When we criticize this, she threatens to take her daughter away.
I’m getting tired of this. We love this child. Can the mother really take her away? I hate that she is using my in-laws and blackmailing them this way. I think she is using drugs, but I’m not sure because she’s rarely around. I want to call Child Protective Services, but my in-laws say absolutely not. What should I do?
DEAR CONCERNED: Would your in-laws (or you) petition for custody of this child? When Child Protective Services investigates (reporting can be done anonymously) and finds cause to remove the child from the home, the best placement is often with other relatives. This could turn out to be you.
We cannot promise the mother won’t run off with the girl, although she seems more likely to run off alone. Please discuss this possibility with your husband and his parents. We hope they are willing to take the necessary steps to ensure this child’s future.
DEAR ANNIE: Here is an idea for those who have been bothered by people who “over contribute” or dominate the conversation.
When we know there will be such a person at a get-together, we appoint one person to be the designated listener. This person directs the talkative person away from the group and focuses on him or her, listening attentively and encouraging them to continue talking. The rest of the group can then have a reasonably interactive conversation.
I have been the listener on a few occasions and realize some folks can’t help themselves. They must talk continuously, giving no thought to whether or not their conversation is interesting to anyone else. Distracting them away from the group makes the evening tolerable.
DEAR LISTENER: We like the idea of a designated listener, the way someone is a designated driver. As long as you alternate positions and everyone is agreeable when it comes to taking a turn, this is an effective and kind way to include those who need to be at such gatherings but can make the events difficult to endure.
DEAR ANNIE: In response to “Wedding Jitters,” I have another reason to get a prenuptial agreement for those marrying later in life. Greedy heirs.
My brother’s mother-in-law remarried in her 60s. Soon after, she became incapacitated with a brain tumour, and her spouse suffered severe health issues and entered a nursing home. His children immediately started demanding things, claiming she had “abandoned” him.
All the lawyer did was shrug and tell them to hope she died first, but she didn’t. His son and daughter were given half of all their assets, including those she had clearly kept separate from the joint holdings. My sister-in-law had to give them a car and remortgage the house. Their lawyer said domestic disputes of this type are a hopeless nightmare.