Skip to main content
What am I supposed to do? This situation comes up infrequently but often enough to make me feel like a failure. One child does something. Okay, it is not a good thing. Let’s say it’s five dollars missing. Stolen, we presume. Worse, it’s taken from a sibling. So we have this situation. One angry-eyed teenager, convinced that Nothing Will Be Done about his missing money, and three innocent-looking siblings, all managing to look very very sympathetic about their sibling’s plight.

Unless someone confesses, it is unlikely that I will track down the guilty party. I don’t have surveillance footage or exploding ink pellets (or whatever the current technology is). I refuse to play that old elementary school teacher game: “okay, we’ll just all be grounded until the guilty person admits what they did.” I will not punish the innocent. And yet I still have the angry-eyed boy, waiting for his justice. Waiting for his five dollars, actually.

This time, I can solve at least one problem. I take him aside, “reimburse” him for his loss.

“What, you’re not going to do anything about him?” This is the worst part of the problem. He assumes that one particular sibling is the guilty party. On the face of it, it really isn’t an illogical thought. That child has had some struggles with impulse control over the years. Luckily I have answers (and I still have my fingers on the five-dollar bill, which forces angry-eyed boy to listen.) We don’t judge someone, in this family, on their past. We don’t judge them on their tendencies. Today is a new day. We trust. We go on.

Angry-eyed boy settles down. Turns out he had a long day at school. He’s more tired than angry.

I’m pretty tired myself.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

This was in the mail: Life’s Too Short To Clean Your Own House. A lovely brochure, featuring a lovely couple, with two lovely blond children, sitting in a lovely family room. The dad is reading a book with one of the daughters. The mom is laughing over a laptop with the other daughter. A pretty picture. Short answer portion of the quiz: 1. Why did the advertising folks choose to put two girls in the picture instead of a girl and a boy? 2. Why did they choose to have the mom pose with the laptop? 3. Who cleans the housecleaners’ houses? Bonus question: are the perky college students pictured on the inside of the brochure real housecleaners or just models?
I have to confess something. I enjoy reading Anne Lamott. Okay, okay, I know that makes me more touchy-feely than I usually admit. She is very lovey. She talks about mystical things. She freely admits to praying (although she uses the F-word frequently in her books about “faith”. I like this in a person.) She talks about breathing. She is very real, and I admire this. She talks about her parents and her son with a mix of love and frustration and grumpiness. She admits, in public, in her writing, to sometimes being angry, sometimes disliking her loved ones, to having to work very hard to forgive them. I like to think I’m like her in a lot of ways, but I don’t share this ability. I can’t easily look at someone I love, look them in the eyes, and say “I’m really angry with you.” “I am mad.” “That was a bad thing you did. To me.” Instead, I’m the sort that says, “Oh, gosh, I’m sure you didn’t mean to run over my dog. It’s okay. I was meaning to get rid of that old thing soo...
Censorship update : According to Em's civics assignment: " Inappropriate news topics will not be accepted. If you are unsure of what is considered appropriate, please consult your teacher or your parents." (The assignment sheet printed that sentence in bold type.) Her entire summary: Source : Washingtonpost.com Headline : House Defeats Gay Marriage Amendment Main Idea : Debating whether or not gay marriages should be banned Summary : People in the House of Representatives debate about banning gay marriage, and it turns out they won't be. :) (Penciled smiley.) Connection : This connects to civics because it has to do with making laws and debating which are big parts of the government. Now, besides the fact that this is a danged sketchy summary and I'd like to throttle her for that, the only opinion she offers is the little smiley. She is brief and matter-of-fact. Practically boring! If anything, the article that she summarized is even ...