Ask Amy: Family braces for a high holiday

[cereta]

Dear Amy: As my home state prepares to legalize recreational marijuana, I feel as if a lot of us are unsure of what to expect in certain social or familial situations.

As a middle-aged adult who saw both harmless pot smoking in college alongside plenty of truly frightening problems with marijuana and other substances, I am not a big proponent of using drugs for recreation.

In our family, we have an out-of-state close relative who is a daily user of marijuana, and from what we see on social media posts, he appears to be using from the moment he wakes up, to right before falling asleep -- seven days a week.

In his mid-20s, he is unemployed, lives at home, and relies on his parents to purchase his drugs (legal in his home state.)

When he visits relatives in states where recreational use is not legal, he insists on bringing his drugs and being allowed to smoke and consume them in our homes, or he threatens violence.

His parents do nothing to stop this behavior and appear to be detached from the issue, while clearly enabling his use of drugs.

We don't want to tell his family they are not welcome on major holidays, nor do we want to further exclude an adult child who appears to have mental health issues on top of problems with drugs. Nor do we want our young children (or our homes or ourselves) exposed to constant drug use during a multiple-day visit.

What is a good (and healthy) way to approach this and other holidays where this is always an issue?

-- Worried Relative

Dear Worried: Many people don't allow smoking of any kind inside their house, so that is one boundary you can easily establish.

If marijuana is still illegal in your state, then you should not allow it in your home or on your property.

Your younger relative is a daily user; his threat of violence if he can't use is an indication of his substance use disorder/addiction (and/or other mental health issues, which apparently are not being addressed).

You should convey to these family members: "Marijuana use is illegal in our state. We don't allow drug use or any smoking in our home. We are looking forward to seeing all of you, and we are giving you a heads up about what our boundaries are. Please respond and let us know that you understand."

Aside from the smoking issue, do not overly police this family member, or try to discern if he is high. If he threatens violence or is otherwise disruptive, you will have to ask him to leave your home; and, yes, his parents will have to face yet another consequence of their co-dependency.

I hope you can also urge his parents in the strongest possible terms to get help (for themselves). Nar-anon Family Group meetings or online support (nar-anon.org) could be a supportive and non-judgmental eye-opener for them.

Comments

[cereta]

Hoo, boy. It seems to me that there are separate issues, here, and none of them really come down to whether or not you are a "proponent" of drug use.

1. The legality of marijuana is very weird, as it's legal in some states, but still illegal on the federal level. It's becoming legal in a few days in my state, but we still won't be able to allow anyone to smoke it in our house, or even have them step out onto the porch to smoke, because spouse is a federal employee. He's subject to random drug testing, both pee and hair, so he can't risk even a contact high.

2. As Amy notes, many (I'm guessing most) people don't allow tobacco smoking in their homes. I don't think I've been to a gathering where people smoked inside in over 25 years, and I don't know anyone who thinks, "If you need to smoke, please step outside" is unreasonable.

3. If you have a relative who threatens violence over anything, it is completely reasonable to say that person in unwelcome in your home. Never mind your children being exposed to drug use; they are being exposed to threats of physical violence in the one place they should feel safest. It is not your job to accommodate that behavior, no matter what it springs from

[redbird]

Yeah. Even if the letter writer was in Canada (where cannabis is now legal, much more straightforwardly), that wouldn't change the key point, which is your (3).

If LW was considering taking the rest of this advice, they should also figure out ahead of time whether they would call the police if this relative threatened them, their children, or other guests. Given my current view of the police, I would choose not to invite this guy and his family over taking the chance of having to call the police and say "my cousin is threatening us if we don't let him smoke here," even though my local police wouldn't care about the marijuana.

"No smoking in the house" is something you can say to a non-threatening relative who doesn't like standing outside in the cold to smoke; that's also someone I would tell "hey, no smoking in the house, if you want to get high while you're here, bring edibles or a tincture."

[frenzy]

Im curious as to if this person is actually using medical weed and is angry when this teetotaler tries to take away their medicine because of their biases. although i doubt amy could have any kind of nuance with medical weed etiquette either tbh.

[neotoma]

The actual threat should make him disinvited, full stop. If he's unwell enough that he can't control his actions, then he's not well enough to visit you; if he's well enough to control his actions and choose to be violent, he should not be allowed to visit you.

This is the real problem for the LW, not whether or not their relative smokes all the time -- their relative is offering violence to them if they try to put on expectations on guest behavior at all.

[melannen]

..Yeah, this doesn't need anything but the "threatens violence" to become "disinvite him now". Drugs at that point are a side issue.

It is possible that there are some kind of disability issues that make this something to accommodate - i.e., I know some ASD people with severe communication difficulties, or some schizophrenic people who can't always control what they mutter - who might threaten violence in circumstances where they wouldn't get disinvited forever - and that kind of continual substance use is reasonably likely to be an attempt to self-medicate.

But even if that's the case, he or his parents need to be doing *something* about this other than just letting him have pot if he's going to ask to be accommodated. It might be just "try to get him diagnosed and explain to relatives the pot is medicinal", but *something*.

And also, there are plenty of people with those kinds of disabilities (and/or addictions) who manage to *not* threaten violence when thwarted.

[cimorene]

Maybe, but wouldn't it just make more sense to say 'fuck you' if an aunt wanted you to go off the meds you needed at her house, and just... not visit her at all? Even if the truth was that it's medical and the LW's story has been twisted to portray as a threat what was actually a joke or a hypothetical or something like that, wouldn't keeping their medication be more important? And why would they be that invested in visiting the aunt anyway if she was being a huge asshole about it?

[adrian_turtle]

I really, really, doubt the LW would have mentioned "recreational" if the relative was talking about medical. If the LW doesn't care about the distinction, they would just say "marijuana." If the relative brings it to a state where it isn't legal, they still risk prosecution. In some places, there's a risk of prosecution, eviction, loss of child custody, just for having somebody smoke marijuana in your home. You might say it's a very low risk, or it's an acceptable risk. But I don't think anyone can say that for somebody else.

I'm speaking as a person who used prescribed narcotics for chronic pain. I used them around the clock, for years. (I found a new combination of fabulously expensive meds that works, and no longer need the opiods. But I'm very grateful that I had them when I did.) I brought prescription labels when I traveled, and had the good luck and white privilege to avoid legal trouble. But if somebody had said they didn't want narcotics in their home...first I'd argue that the childproof prescription bottle in my bag wasn't as scary as they might think. Then if I couldn't change their mind, I'd stay home. FFS, I wouldn't threaten violence!

[minoanmiss]

Yes, this. I think this letter buried the lede, as it were.

[cereta]

If the relative in question were using gummies or something similar that he kept in childproof containers, out of sight, I would wonder about this, but the letter specifically says, "smoke." And specifically "in our homes." Medical or not, there's a pretty hard line there between "taking medication" and "taking medication in a way that leaves the smell of a quasi-legal substance in the home and risks the substance being detected in others."

[frenzy]

Im assuming (well, I did a TON of assuming here, but i'm mostly just thinking out loud lol ) that by smoking, it is actually a vaporizer where like the smoke is odorless, etc. Most of my pals still say "smoke" but its technially vaping and no one could know it was happening if it was done in a garage, basement, etc.

at any rate, taking LW at their word, it may be easier to just approach this with the parents. If theyre lucky their kid might not even want to go for the holidays anyway.

[jadelennox]

And I think the letter buried the lede because of the LW's biases. They saw "both harmless pot smoking in college alongside plenty of truly frightening problems with marijuana and other substances" -- their violent relative's potential for violence aside, pot is almost never "truly frightening". It can cause or exacerbate myriad problems, but unless you discover that the person who is behind the wheel of the car you're in is currently baked, none of those problems are likely to be frightening. Is the fright from the "other substances", or is the LW painting with a broad brush, or something else?

(ETA: Note that LW never raises problems with the other major legal substance, alcohol, which frequently does cause terrifying situations, and which is ubiquitous in most of society. Does LW allow drinking in their home?)

On top of that, LW is judgey as shit: "In his mid-20s, he is unemployed, lives at home, and relies on his parents to purchase his drugs (legal in his home state.)" That's an appropriate thing to gripe about at home, but has nothing to do with,this letter. Potential for violence, insistence on smoking in a non-smoker's home, insistence on breaking local law in front of their hosts' young children, and insistence on drug use (legal or otherwise) in front of their hosts' young children are all more than enough. So bringing up this judgey crap makes me wonder if the LW is less bothered by the other things, and in fact is mostly just an asshole.

I mean. They should still disinvite if this is true. But there's no heroes in this letter.

[jadelennox]

Amy's advice is terrible, though:

"If marijuana is still illegal in your state, then you should not allow it in your home or on your property."

Look, that's both dickish and not helpful. Dickish, because that's not Amy's business. And not helpful, because LW has just said pot's going to be legalized there shortly. If LW draws a line in the sand at legality, then LW is going to have to defend the continued lack of an invitation after legalization. The problem for LW is not legality, clearly; it's everything else. Don't use legality as your argument unless the change in the law will make you fine with their attendance! Which it clearly won't!

[minoanmiss]

You are aboslutely right. I think I'm too used to 1) judgy people and 2) Amy giving bad advice, since I didn't comment on either of these.

[redbird]

I agree that this isn't something he should be threatening violence over; on the other hand, your list of things that are (if it's not the null set) is shorter than a lot of people's.