Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    Dear Joyce,
    
       Sounds very complex. You seem to know best.
    
       Too bad we have to worry about gifts and reciprication, and
    just enjoy one another's company.  Didn't buy anyone anything,
    but was more concerned about how they felt and how much time
    was spent together. Spent one whole day playing with my son,
    enjoying his company; no one else did that with him.  I suspect
    that could be criticised by many people...   but not by my son.
    
       I would just be weary of telling someone not to do or buy 
    something for someone just because they didn't do something for
    for them.  You do things out of love less on commitment!

    I want to add that we did have a nice Christmas.  And although I
    appreciate the first two replies I think we are talking about something
    different then the spirit of Christmas.  A group of people (family)
    got together and decided how they would exchange gifts.  A committment
    was made and expectations entered.  
    
    And the daughter who is so generous enjoyed her giving and had a
    good holiday.
    
    We are also talking about traditions and rituals another subject
    discussed during 1987.  As a family we enjoy these things and it
    is best when the whole family shares the tradition.  
    
    I do feel if we handle this situation properly we can show my youngest
    son the enjoyment of family celebrations.  This is my hope.  If
    I cannot do that then I have to think of how we can modify our
    expectations so that we enjoy his company when he chooses to
    participate. 
    

    It sounds to me like you are trying to be responsible for the behaviors,
    expectations and outcomes of the entire family.  You can only be
    responsible for yourself.  Let others know what you want and don't try
    to push the river - it will flow on its own.
         
    Marty                                         

    I feel that you handled the situation properly. This, to me, is
    the only way that you can try and get a family member to see the
    light. Some folks don't ever read the sign that says 'two way
    traffic ahead'. You have to be prepared to handle the situation
    where he just gets POd and thinks the family is against him, 
    without realizing why.
    
    But it sure does burn ya when you think everyone agrees on the
    best way to do something, and someone doesn't follow through
    on the commitment.
    
    Bob Mc

    I think the psychologists diagram it like this:
      
                       |------------------------|
          U            |  X      x       x      |     T
                       |     x                X |             S
                  y    |            X           |
                       |                        |      W
                       |     Z           X      |
                       |________________________|
    
       Were such social animals aren't we?

                                                            
    Son or not, if he's old enough to be engaged, he's old enough to
    be responsible for his own life.  Let him be.
    
    There is a very simple way to modify expectations of your family
    members.  Don't have any.  If you don't expect something of someone, 
    you won't get disappointed.
    
    I don't think you have the right, even as a parent, to tell your
    other children, who are adults, how to behave toward another of your 
    children.  If and when they become tired of his behavior, they'll take 
    it upon themselves to say or do something about it.
    
    Sit back, relax, and don't get so tangled up in how your children
    relate to one another.

    
      I have to agree with .7. My family has had similar problems around
    three years ago. I have two brothers. They are both married and
    in their mid-twenties. My youngest brother is married to a real
    bitch. She didn't get along with my step-mother then and voiced
    her opinions. My brother, to try and keep peace in the family, no
    longer came around to visit any of our side. One year later, his
    daughter, (my dad's first grand-child) was born. It bothered my
    father alot that he hasn't even seen her. About a year-and-a-half
    later, my brother "straightened" out his wife, and they started
    to visit with our family again. Now, the problem is that my older
    brother hasn't forgiven my younger brother and his wife for all
    the pain that they have put everyone through. Both of them are 
    adults, (at least age-wise) and there is absolutely nothing that
    my dad or I will say to change the situation the way it is now.
    At least now my dad is happy to have his son and his new grand-
    daughter back into his life.
    
       Although it creates alot of problem during holidays, (Christmas,
    and Thanksgiving are the biggest problems) with the family getting
    together, you have to do what is best for YOU! Someday, maybe, these
    guys will grow up. But until then, we make the best of life.
     
    

    I tend to disagree with the last comment.  I feel very strongly
    that family is a good institution and the extended families that
    emerge during adulthood can be a source of strength and love.  In
    all aspects of life we need facilitators, managers, and even 
    moderators.
    
    If we are to operate as an extended family someone has to assume
    that role of mediator.  
    
    I think sometimes we give up on relationships because of an attitude
    that "they are responsible for their own life".  That is sad.
    
    There is a real difference between trying to manage someone's life
    as opposed to trying to create awareness and understanding.
    
    It is not possible to socialize with people outside your home without
    expectations.  None of us sits in our home and waits for someone
    to come and visit us.  We invite and when someone accepts the
    invitation we prepare for the visit.  If the person doesn't show
    we are disappointed and annoyed and we should tell them rather than
    let it fester and ruin the relationship.
    
    To each his own...our family has decided we want to be close and
    we want to get along...and at this moment there is a need for a
    facilitator.
    
    
    
    

    .8 snuck in while I was entering .9...I was referring to .7
    
    Sorry

    re: .9
    
    By becoming the "mediator", you are assuming responsibility for
    your whole family's life.  
    
    I learned a very valuable lesson, and I learned it the hard way.
    My intentions were good, but I made the problem worse.  Now, you
    are attempting to "help" and "make it right" (again, with good 
    intentions), but, believe me, you will only prolong the problem 
    by attempting to fix it.

    Correct me if my observation is wrong, but I hear you saying as 
    the parent, you feel it is your job, or your duty,  to "straighten
    out" your children.   In actuality, you are trying to "control"
    your children by expecting them to behave the way you want them to.
    
    Please do not misunderstand.  I am not saying that this is a 
    deliberate action on your part.  Most often, this kind of behavior
    is done on a subconscious level and the person isn't even aware
    of their attempts to *control*.  But...
    
    The first thing to remember is the *only* person you can control is 
    yourself; you cannot control the actions of other individuals.  The 
    second is, your children are going to do as they wish regardless of 
    what you say.  Attempting to control another person(s) and/or situ-
    ation only generates anger - on your end because your wishes aren't
    carried out, and on the other person(s) because someone is trying
    to control the way they live.
    
    So why burn yourself out trying to "straighten out" something that
    will take care of itself in time.  Relax, and enjoy your life today.
    Tomorrow is another day.
    
    
    

    Joyce,
    
      " The really great Matriarchs of history were seen but not heard."
         
    

        Personally, I think that setting up a grab like that is a very
        dangerous proposition. You've now set explicit expectations on
        the moentary values of all the Christmas gifts and someone is
        bound to violate the expectations. Either they will be "too
        good" and splurge more than one or they will slight the person
        that they are committed to buying the big present for.
        
        It puts too much concentration on the material aspects of
        Christmass and on the duties and obligataions--duties and
        obligations which may be extremely painful to live up to and
        which are to actions that excepting for the commitment would not
        be very important. Someone is bound to get bent out of shape. 
        
        Of course there are even worse Christmas tradtions--like the
        "New England swap" wherein taking desirable things away from
        others is made the focus of a Christmas tradition. 
        
        I think that Christmas has certain basic meanings and messages
        which should be respected by and nurtured by our traditions.
        Putting extrenal pressures and commitments on each other isn't
        in that set. The set should include the pure pleasure of being
        with and having fun with our families, on making each other
        happy by giving gifts and other things, by sharing our happiness
        with those who made it possible, through their presents, their
        presence, or their contribution to the over-all holiday (making
        the Christmas dinner or putting up the decorations). 
        
        I think that this situation was bound to lead to family
        tensions. This time mother was upset at the son's behavior. Next
        time the son may perform adequately, but at the expense of being
        totally miserable, or the overly thoughtful daughter may be seen
        as "too good to be true" and as "showing me up" by someone.
        
        I wouldn't set myself up that way.
        
        JimB. 

    Per Webster's; ma'tri-arch...    a woman who RULES her family or
    tribe. Need I say more?

	I have been referred to myself on several occasions as the
        matriarch of our family.  I kind of like the role I play and
        I wanted to define it or describe it, so I chose matriarch,
        thinking the word meant the oldest, most respected member of
        the family.
    
        Replies .12 and .14 made me seek out the dictionary...good old
        American Heritage (DEC issue).
    
        ma.tri.arch (ma tr ark) n.  A woman who rules a famil, clan,
        or group.
    
        pa.tri.arch (pa tre ark) n. 1.  The male leader of a family
        or tribe.  2. An ecclesiastical dignitary, esp. in Eastern
        churches.  3. A very old and venerable man; elder.
    
    Well they have a word for an old woman, and they have a word for
    a wise person...I just guess women can't be wise and old.
    
    

    do you know I fail to understand why people are getting on
    Joyce's case on this one...
    
    it was a mutual agreement by the whole family  that they
    would exchange gifts..the son *chose* to be a part of the
    gift exchange...i.e. everyone agree to give small gifts to
    most of the family members and buy one large gift for
    *one* family member...
    
    then the son reneged on the agreement he freely made and in
    so doing failed to give a gift to the one family member who
    gives most selflessly of her/him self..
    
    now as the person who is coodinating the Christmas get to gether
    
    (let us leave mother/matriarch etc out of it for a min) 
    
    why is it unfair of Joyce to try and figure out how to deal
    with this issue next year...
    
    perhaps some of the people responding to this note are too
    caught up in problems with controlling parents to see the other
    side????

    Just stumbled across this conference... then just stumbled across
    this note... and boy, do I relate to this type of problem.
    
    The trouble with notes is that it is not private, and while many people
    don't mind entering personal notes, I choose not to.

    So, without going into details and reasons, suffice it to say
    "I agree with your motives and actions, Joyce".
    
    The family IS VERY important.
    
    Cheers,							Steve

    Thank you to .16 and .17
    
    Not only is the family important it can be a lot of fun.  I am quite
    surprised at some of the replies to this note.  It seems that family
    is okay if there are no problems.  
    
    I wonder if my age makes me value it more...and perhaps if the same
    note had been entered in a conference where the median age is greater
    than 40 the note would have taken a different turn.
    
    BTW I wonder what the median age is of H_R contributors.

       Joyce, I think you hit it on the head.  Actually, you alluded to it
       elsewhere in a discussion of who should or shouldn't respond to
       notes when you suggested that experience can often be a better
       criterion than anything else. 
       
       And, implicitly, maybe you started to answer your own question. As
       people grow older, they tend to appreciate the value and importance
       of family to a greater degree -- they come to recognize that they
       can't take a family for granted, but have to work at keeping it
       together and viable.  (So -- would you mind waiting 15 or 20 years
       for your son to shape up?)
       
       As for seeking a different category of people answering, maybe you
       could ask this question (in this or some other conference) and
       request that replies be made only by people over 40.
       
       --Mr Topaz 

    re .0:
    
    I think you should examine the circumstances under which your son
    agreed to the present exchange.  You did not go into much detail there. 
    Perhaps he felt pressured into agreeing- it's hard to say without
    knowing more.  Depending on the circumstances of the agreement, it was
    probably reasonable to remind him of the commitment he made, and I
    would at least mention to him that if he does not intend to live up to
    his commitment he should consider this BEFORE he agrees to something
    for next year.  (On the other hand, if it was his idea, hire someone to
    beat the snot out of him.  :-) ) 
    
    As far as instructing your children how to handle or react to this
    situation, I believe you went way overboard.  They are grown adults,
    are they not?  They should be free to interpret your son's actions
    without your input.   You might also want to consider the potential
    result of your son becoming aware of what you told your other children.
    You could come across sounding awfully petty.
    
    Perhaps this is a good time for understanding rather than judgment and
    attempting to manipulate your other children's reactions.
    
    - M

        I certainly didn't mean to "get on Joyce's case", as I agree for
        the most part with her on issues of family and the like. 
        
        Her role as matriarch seems quite reasonable to me. In any
        family there are leaders and followers. The leaders are often
        parents of a number of the followers, but often it is a person
        in the middle generation who takes responsibility. So long as
        the structure is arrived at by mutual consent and recognition
        and not dictatorial whimsy it is quite a healthy thing. 
        
        Where I wanted to offer a different opinion from what she had
        said is that my tendancy is to attempt to avoid this sort of
        trouble rather than to fix it after the fact. It seemed to me
        (and still does) that the situation which the family decided
        upon was unwise in that it was very likely to run into one sort
        of trouble or another. My own way of handling this would be less
        forceful and confrontational than Joyce's in that I would avoid
        the situation.
        
        On the other hand, those who know and have worked with me can
        testify that I am not at all averse to being every bit as
        forceful and confrontational when the situation warrants. That I
        would do it differently in this particular case doesn't mean
        that I wouldn't take actions just as strong as Joyce's in a
        situation that I felt warranted it. Part of being a leader, be
        the position matriarch, patriarch, manager, president or project
        leader, is that one leads and shapes the behavior of those who
        follow, most often through persuasion, but at times through the
        use of power of one sort or another.
        
        JimB. 
        

    re:.0,
    
    Joyce, I agree that if <anyone> makes a commitment, and if you were
    the one who got people to agree, then its logical for you to speak
    WITH the 'offender' and find out what happened. Why didn't they
    follow through.
    
    I agree that "matriarch" is often interpreted as a "self anointed
    ruler" (like my mother would LIKE to be). But good rulers are like
    good laws: They are there fro the common good, because the group
    in question agrees they should be there. And I agree that (to use
    good management principles) that the enforcement of such should
    be completely non-invasive or non-threatening.
    
    I think that your siblings should work out their own "rightness
    policy" (to look at the 'moving' example).
    
    Expectations and Hopes. Boy, thats a real Pandoras Box for feelings.
    
    Something I've tried to teach my friends is this:
    "We can HOPE that people will act in certain manner; but we should
    EXPECT them to be the way they are.".
    
    Don't confuse what you HOPE of a situation to what is EXPECTED as
    a minimum requirement.
    
    
    Gifts: Another Pandoras Box. Gifts, I think, should always be a
    "outward manifestation of an inward feeling". I gave up years ago
    trying to "match" the cost of gifts, as I have found that the most
    appreciated gift (for whatever the occasion) is always the one which
    is "just right" for the intended recipient. For a mother, it might
    be a mothers ring or a boat cruise; for a child it might be a game
    or a special item of clothing; for a  parent it might be a handmade
    ornament or a handmade card.
    
    I think, when we first look at the price tag before we consider
    the need; we are already spending too much.
    
    caveat:
    "course there's not enough room to explain EVERYthing fully.
    
	Bob+3
        
    

    I have been on the receiving end of "family togetherness" things
    where I've been called on the phone by my older sister, told that
    "we" are doing this wonderful thing, and told that my portion of
    the cost was $xxx.xx.  It is possible that, although you may
    have been a bit less adamant than my sister can be, your son felt
    required to participate.  After all, if he didn't, where was his
    Christmas/family spirit?  Even if you and the rest of the family
    did not state this, it may have been implied.  I agree with Jim
    and stay clear of this sort of thing.

    --Louise

    This is easy to say when it's not my family: the son probably does
    feel "required" to participate, yet by not participating he has
    proved that he did not HAVE to.  Tell him that. Make it clear that
    he knows he has a choice even if the others did not "ask" him.
    
    We always have choices, but we blow it by our subconscious feelings
    which come out contrarian.

    	Rick
    	Merrill
    

    This note really hit home for me.  I think we are not only speaking
    here of commitment, but of consideration too.  I can certainly under
    stand the way you feel with this situation.  Our family had a similar
    

    situation a few years ago.  Heres the scenario:  A year in advance
    the christmas family gathering was planned.  A gathering in our
    family is rare in itself as my parents are in Connecticut, my brother,
    wife and 2 kids in North Carolina and myself in Colorado.  The plans
    were made a year in advance to see each other at mom and dad's house
    for christmas.  At the last minute my sister inlaw says they can't
    make it to CT because they neglected to make arrangements for someone
    to animal sit for their 4 dogs and 2 cats.  She wanted to bring
    the whole crew with them but that was out of the question as mom
    is allergic.  I even tried to make arrangements with old friends
    of mine who have a farm in CT to board them, but my sister inlaw
    said she couldn't impose on someone like that.  I finally asked
    her how she could impose on my parents by expecting them to take
    in a whole household full of animals.  So they ended up going to
    her parents house for christmas.  We were not happy, any of us.
    But the point was some simple consideration for others.  They either
    should not have made the commitment in the first place, especially
    knowing that plane reservations, vacation time,etc had to be made
    or they should have got it together in the first place.  All this
    to try and be with the people you care for during a special time.
    The meaning of christmas, I'm sad to say, was altered for our family
    that year, just a bit.  It was an issue of commitment, consideration
    and common courtesy or the lack there of.  
    
    I understand your situation.  The only thing I knew to do was try
    and let my opinion be know as tactfully as possible (not easy) and
    to try and make it a good christmas despite the not so nice
    circumstances.
    
    And, for the record, I am under 40.