Reply to Who’s wrong: in laws and dogs edition

Forum Index » Family Relationships

Reply to "Who’s wrong: in laws and dogs edition "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]NO DOGS. The uncle is doing a heavy lift and should not be further burdened. He deserves a break. I am so effing sick with dog owners who think they should never have to board their disgusting animals.[/quote]

Disagree. If taking the dogs is the way that the caregivers get a break, and no one is seriously allergic, the dogs go. But, dog owners are 100% responsible for cleaning up to the condition before the dogs got there. Or the dogs don't come again.

You can't get pissed when people help (regardless of how unfair the situation is) but you don't like the help offered. You'll be cutting off your nose to spite your face. [/quote]

And insisting that your dogs travel with you *into someone else’s home* is also controlling. This is her leverage to get out of any responsibility, which she’s doing nicely. He deserves a break, and to put down boundaries int he home AP that he is tasked with minding. The control /terrorize behaviour is “I won’t fairly meet my responsibilities unless you accommodate my dogs”. [/quote]

THIS RIGHT HERE. The uncle is also in charge of cleaning the house the vast majority of the time, and I don’t begrudge him not wanting to deal with the extra vacuuming, possible carpet cleaning from accidents, scratches on the floors, stench, and anything else the dogs may cause. I just had my aunt’s dog with me for a few days, and while I love that dog, there is a ton of extra vacuuming involved, the dog had a nervous accident I had to clean up (and I mean it was right after I took her on a 30-minute walk, so no, it wasn’t from lack of outside opportunity), and I had to open the windows for a few days to fully get rid of the dog smell.

The person who puts in beyond the lion’s share of work in this scenario is the one whose preferences should be observed.

Full. Stop.[/quote]

So now he has no help. Or he makes a young mother with a toddler leave her family for Thanksgiving and still only gets one week off. This is what being right gets him. [/quote]

*he* does not. The person who is obsessing over not having her precious  fur kids does. He’s already doing the heavy lifting, and the people who cannot help ATAH.

This is the constant game played by people who have no intention to help… “I would help if only I could (insert something not really of consequence)”. Then it looks Leig the original person, who is already offering 24/7 sacrifice, is unreasonable.

[b]so, let’s make this clear: the person who is arranging their lives to care for someone else ALL THE TIME gets the choice over the person who can’t board their dogs for 2 weeks (and is thus making a working parent of a toddler feel guilty).[/b] All this is designed to make uncle or whoever he is look awful, when his boundaries are actually quite reasonable. This is all crappy family dynamics 101. Add in the whole gossip component and you’ve got a perfect storm.

Bet you $1 when the will comes out and it’s tilted towards uncle,  that everyone will suddenly jump to attention,though.[/quote]

A lovely moral position. In reality, regardless of who you all feel is in the right, he doesn't get to demand it the way he prefers. He can take the help with the dog or not and stay home. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics