![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Some letters from Good Question
Last week
This week
1. Dear Prudence,
Three months ago, the woman who was having an affair with my husband died suddenly from an accident. I found out about the affair only two days after her funeral. I thought she was simply a co-worker and I was wondering why my husband was so disturbed and emotional. He quit his job, saying it was too traumatic to go to work. She was in the early weeks of pregnancy when she died and my husband doesn’t know whether he or her husband was the father. So, on top of everything, he’s also grieving for a baby which may or may not have been his. I find it extremely difficult to be emotionally supportive when he wakes up at 3 A.M. crying and trembling—yet I don’t have the heart to yell at him like I want to. He says she’s dead, so there’s no reason for me to feel jealous or threatened, and asks for my understanding as he grieves. We’ve barely talked these last weeks because I don’t know how to respond to my husband when he cries and says he misses her and wishes she were here, then also how much he loves me and that he never intended to leave me. I asked him to visit a marriage therapist together and he said he’s “not ready” to work on our marriage, and thinks he needs to see a grief therapist instead. Do I need to give him time to mourn the loss of his mistress? Or should I demand he focus on our marriage?
You cannot impose a schedule on someone else’s grief. So I think you should let your husband fully experience his—alone. If you are being asked to be an understanding source of solace while he mourns the loss of his mistress, a woman who was possibly the mother of his child, then that is an emotional burden that’s simply outside the bounds of what one spouse can ask of another. He’s told you flat out he can’t work on his marriage because he’s too torn up about the death of the woman he loved. So I think you should tell him to move out while you each figure out what you want out of your marriage and life. In addition, I hope he is independently wealthy, or has fantastically in-demand professional skills, because quitting his job over her death indicates he’s gone off the deep end. I can’t imagine how he’s going to explain that departure to potential employers. Of course you’re reeling over these events, so if he won’t see a counselor with you, consider going alone. And you’ve left us all wondering: Does the grieving widower have any idea what his wife was up to?
—Emily Yoffee
Link one
***
2. In December, my son attended a religious retreat away from home. When some of the high school boys were in a room alone with girls, the boys got overexcited, turned off the lights and yelled “Tickle fight!” One of the girls was touched on the shoulder, but nothing remotely sexual happened. The adviser to the group has barred the boys involved from the next retreat. But I think it’s important for them to attend and discuss what happened rather than suffer an exclusionary punishment. Excluding the boys will only make things worse for the girl: Everyone knows she is the reason the boys won’t be there. I think it would be better to have the girl explain to the boys (with adult support) why their behavior was wrong. But I can’t convince the adviser. Thoughts?
DAD
I think your love for your son is impeding your judgment. When children are at home, their parents are the arbiters of appropriate discipline. But when they go off with youth groups, for instance, those organizations assume responsibility for the welfare of all attendees. My first job was as a teacher at a Swiss boarding school. And chaperoning mixed groups of teenagers overnight was the worst: I was often the lone adult charged with preventing a dozen wily students from drinking, having sex or sneaking off at night.
So, if the retreat organizer has decided to exclude the boys who made trouble on the last trip to send a strong message about inappropriate behavior (or because of limited resources for supervision), I find that reasonable. And I disagree with much of your position: You fail to acknowledge that the episode may have been frightening for some girls, even if nothing sexual happened. You are incorrect in stating that the girl is “the reason” for the boys’ punishment; the boys’ behavior is. And no girl is responsible for explaining to teenage boys why unwanted touching is wrong. That is your job!
It sounds as if you have already made your pitch to the organization and it was rejected. So, rather than clinging to a minimizing “boys will be boys” argument, I suggest that you sit your son down to discuss the contours of appropriate behavior and the seriousness of unwanted touching.
Link two
****
3. A friend takes his new dog with him wherever he goes. My building has a strict no-pets policy. A neighbor was asked to leave once the landlord discovered her cat. Therefore, I do not want the dog coming over to visit. My friend told me that if the dog is not welcome, then he is not welcome. I don’t want to hurt his feelings, but I feel he’s being irrational. What is the best way to deal with this?
That poor dog. I’m sure if it could talk, it would say, “Dude! Can I get some privacy once in a while to just chill out and groom myself? I know I’m a highly social pack-dwelling animal and all that, but even a dog needs some ‘me time.’ Don’t you have any human friends?” And then your friend would have to confess that, in fact, his social life has been dropping off these days. And the dog would ask why, and your friend would explain that it was because he insists on bringing the dog everywhere, and the dog would say, “Are you insane? You can’t invade and dominate another human’s territory like that! That would be like me eating a bone in another dog’s bed. Respect the sanctity of others’ space, dude. I can’t believe I had to tell you that. Sheesh.” And the dog would be right, because dogs have a better natural sense of etiquette than humans do.
Sadly, however, they cannot talk. Which means that they cannot share their wisdom with us, and also that it’s up to you to stand up for yourself.
Tell your friend that you can’t risk getting evicted so that he can have his dog with him, period. This is not a judgment on his lifestyle or priorities or a valuation of your friendship. It is simply a practical matter. You’ll socialize at his house or the dog park from now on. As long as you are calm and nonconfrontational about it, you shouldn’t have to worry about hurting his feelings. If he truly expects you to risk trouble with your landlord so that he can have his dog with him, he is not the friend you thought he was.
Link three
****
4. DEAR MISS MANNERS: My husband recently passed, and I sent thank-you notes to everyone who gave a monetary gift or sent flowers.
Are thank-you notes required to those who attended the wake services? I heard that a friend of a friend was offended at not receiving a thank-you.
GENTLE READER: Really? Someone thought that attending your husband's wake was a favor to you?
Miss Manners does not want to discourage letters of thanks, which are in short supply. If hosts want to write to thank their guests, she is not going to discourage them. But unlike the ordinary obligation of guests to thank their hosts, it is not necessary.
Any such expectation is particularly ugly in connection with funerary services, where the purpose is to show respect for the deceased and offer comfort to the bereaved.
Link four
****
5. Dear Pay Dirt,
My dad passed away last year and my mom is in delicate health. My dad invested well and there is enough to keep her comfortable even if she lives to 102. We don’t have a close relationship but my brother is unreliable, at best, so when she asked me to be the executor of the will I agreed.
But now that I know more about the will, I’m horrified. The will leaves a little to charity, a little to their church, and a very very little (like $100) to my brother’s young kids, and a dollar to my brother. The bulk of the estate is left to me, my family, and my children. But outside the will, my mom has verbally told me and left written instructions asking me to pay out half of “my” inheritance to my brother under the table within six months of receiving it. He apparently owes considerable child support and both my brother and my mom are convinced this will avoid garnishment. I didn’t react on the phone call with them because I was so stunned. I’m starting to question whether she’s of sound mind.
Not only is this illegal and unethical it’s also something I wouldn’t even know how to do. The cleanest thing I can think of is to give half of the inheritance to my brother, legally and with transparency. He will be subject to taxes and anything else. I assume he will be furious and that our relationship will not recover. It might seem simple on paper but I’m heartbroken by this, and worried about losing any remaining connection to my extended family.
I have no idea how to have this conversation with my mom or brother, or if I even should. My mom has always doted on my brother, and her jealous treatment of his now ex-wife seemed like a major driver in their divorce. She’s never done anything like this before, though, , and I’m worried it’s a combination of previous feelings and new cognitive problems. How do I even start here?
—Unwilling Inheritor
Dear Unwilling,
It’s understandable that you want to honor your mom’s wishes, but I think your instincts are right. Her request to give half your inheritance to your brother “under the table” to avoid child support is both illegal and unethical. As executor of the will, your job is to follow the law, and hiding assets could lead to serious legal consequences.
The best course of action? Keep everything transparent. If your brother needs financial help after your mom has passed, you can give him money, but it should be done through the proper channels —subject to taxes and whatever legal obligations exist. Given the situation here, it’s wise to consult an estate lawyer to help you make sure everything is handled correctly.
Of course, there’s also the family dynamic issue. Have an honest conversation with your mom, explain to her that you’re uncomfortable with her request because of the legal risks involved. You could suggest that she work with a lawyer to find a way to manage her estate without violating the law (or putting you in the middle of it!).
I also hear your concern about your mom’s cognitive health. If you’re worried that your mom may not be of sound mind, it could be time to consult a neutral third party —someone who is unbiased, objective, and not directly involved in the family dynamics. This might be a geriatric care manager, a Certified Financial Planner, or an attorney specializing in elder law or estate planning. These professionals can help your mom make informed decisions and ensure that the estate planning is done legally. Some elder law firms specialize in helping families with this kind of decision-making. You might also ask for recommendations from local support groups or even your family doctor.
If your brother reacts poorly to any of this, remind him of your boundaries and tell him you feel uncomfortable with the request. This is a tough situation, but doing the right thing—legally and ethically—is ultimately in everyone’s best interest.
—Kristin
Link five
****
6. DEAR ABBY: I've been married a long time. My in-laws have been a problem during my entire marriage. I've had serious health issues and a lot of surgeries over the past 10 years. My cancer came back, and I had to have colon surgery just to name one.
Most recently, I had hand surgery. When my in-laws found out, they couldn't stop laughing at me. When one of them saw me again, she laughed and asked, "Any more planned?" I didn't answer; I just walked away. I want to cut them out of my life. My husband is not supportive. Am I wrong? -- RECOVERING IN INDIANA
DEAR RECOVERING: Your in-laws have a sarcastic sense of humor and no empathy. I can't blame you for wanting to protect yourself, especially since your husband is unwilling to protect you from his family's hurtful reaction. Avoiding people who hurt you is healthy, and you would not be wrong to do it. If you want to take a step back, do so.
Link six
This week
1. Dear Prudence,
Three months ago, the woman who was having an affair with my husband died suddenly from an accident. I found out about the affair only two days after her funeral. I thought she was simply a co-worker and I was wondering why my husband was so disturbed and emotional. He quit his job, saying it was too traumatic to go to work. She was in the early weeks of pregnancy when she died and my husband doesn’t know whether he or her husband was the father. So, on top of everything, he’s also grieving for a baby which may or may not have been his. I find it extremely difficult to be emotionally supportive when he wakes up at 3 A.M. crying and trembling—yet I don’t have the heart to yell at him like I want to. He says she’s dead, so there’s no reason for me to feel jealous or threatened, and asks for my understanding as he grieves. We’ve barely talked these last weeks because I don’t know how to respond to my husband when he cries and says he misses her and wishes she were here, then also how much he loves me and that he never intended to leave me. I asked him to visit a marriage therapist together and he said he’s “not ready” to work on our marriage, and thinks he needs to see a grief therapist instead. Do I need to give him time to mourn the loss of his mistress? Or should I demand he focus on our marriage?
You cannot impose a schedule on someone else’s grief. So I think you should let your husband fully experience his—alone. If you are being asked to be an understanding source of solace while he mourns the loss of his mistress, a woman who was possibly the mother of his child, then that is an emotional burden that’s simply outside the bounds of what one spouse can ask of another. He’s told you flat out he can’t work on his marriage because he’s too torn up about the death of the woman he loved. So I think you should tell him to move out while you each figure out what you want out of your marriage and life. In addition, I hope he is independently wealthy, or has fantastically in-demand professional skills, because quitting his job over her death indicates he’s gone off the deep end. I can’t imagine how he’s going to explain that departure to potential employers. Of course you’re reeling over these events, so if he won’t see a counselor with you, consider going alone. And you’ve left us all wondering: Does the grieving widower have any idea what his wife was up to?
—Emily Yoffee
Link one
2. In December, my son attended a religious retreat away from home. When some of the high school boys were in a room alone with girls, the boys got overexcited, turned off the lights and yelled “Tickle fight!” One of the girls was touched on the shoulder, but nothing remotely sexual happened. The adviser to the group has barred the boys involved from the next retreat. But I think it’s important for them to attend and discuss what happened rather than suffer an exclusionary punishment. Excluding the boys will only make things worse for the girl: Everyone knows she is the reason the boys won’t be there. I think it would be better to have the girl explain to the boys (with adult support) why their behavior was wrong. But I can’t convince the adviser. Thoughts?
DAD
I think your love for your son is impeding your judgment. When children are at home, their parents are the arbiters of appropriate discipline. But when they go off with youth groups, for instance, those organizations assume responsibility for the welfare of all attendees. My first job was as a teacher at a Swiss boarding school. And chaperoning mixed groups of teenagers overnight was the worst: I was often the lone adult charged with preventing a dozen wily students from drinking, having sex or sneaking off at night.
So, if the retreat organizer has decided to exclude the boys who made trouble on the last trip to send a strong message about inappropriate behavior (or because of limited resources for supervision), I find that reasonable. And I disagree with much of your position: You fail to acknowledge that the episode may have been frightening for some girls, even if nothing sexual happened. You are incorrect in stating that the girl is “the reason” for the boys’ punishment; the boys’ behavior is. And no girl is responsible for explaining to teenage boys why unwanted touching is wrong. That is your job!
It sounds as if you have already made your pitch to the organization and it was rejected. So, rather than clinging to a minimizing “boys will be boys” argument, I suggest that you sit your son down to discuss the contours of appropriate behavior and the seriousness of unwanted touching.
Link two
3. A friend takes his new dog with him wherever he goes. My building has a strict no-pets policy. A neighbor was asked to leave once the landlord discovered her cat. Therefore, I do not want the dog coming over to visit. My friend told me that if the dog is not welcome, then he is not welcome. I don’t want to hurt his feelings, but I feel he’s being irrational. What is the best way to deal with this?
That poor dog. I’m sure if it could talk, it would say, “Dude! Can I get some privacy once in a while to just chill out and groom myself? I know I’m a highly social pack-dwelling animal and all that, but even a dog needs some ‘me time.’ Don’t you have any human friends?” And then your friend would have to confess that, in fact, his social life has been dropping off these days. And the dog would ask why, and your friend would explain that it was because he insists on bringing the dog everywhere, and the dog would say, “Are you insane? You can’t invade and dominate another human’s territory like that! That would be like me eating a bone in another dog’s bed. Respect the sanctity of others’ space, dude. I can’t believe I had to tell you that. Sheesh.” And the dog would be right, because dogs have a better natural sense of etiquette than humans do.
Sadly, however, they cannot talk. Which means that they cannot share their wisdom with us, and also that it’s up to you to stand up for yourself.
Tell your friend that you can’t risk getting evicted so that he can have his dog with him, period. This is not a judgment on his lifestyle or priorities or a valuation of your friendship. It is simply a practical matter. You’ll socialize at his house or the dog park from now on. As long as you are calm and nonconfrontational about it, you shouldn’t have to worry about hurting his feelings. If he truly expects you to risk trouble with your landlord so that he can have his dog with him, he is not the friend you thought he was.
Link three
4. DEAR MISS MANNERS: My husband recently passed, and I sent thank-you notes to everyone who gave a monetary gift or sent flowers.
Are thank-you notes required to those who attended the wake services? I heard that a friend of a friend was offended at not receiving a thank-you.
GENTLE READER: Really? Someone thought that attending your husband's wake was a favor to you?
Miss Manners does not want to discourage letters of thanks, which are in short supply. If hosts want to write to thank their guests, she is not going to discourage them. But unlike the ordinary obligation of guests to thank their hosts, it is not necessary.
Any such expectation is particularly ugly in connection with funerary services, where the purpose is to show respect for the deceased and offer comfort to the bereaved.
Link four
5. Dear Pay Dirt,
My dad passed away last year and my mom is in delicate health. My dad invested well and there is enough to keep her comfortable even if she lives to 102. We don’t have a close relationship but my brother is unreliable, at best, so when she asked me to be the executor of the will I agreed.
But now that I know more about the will, I’m horrified. The will leaves a little to charity, a little to their church, and a very very little (like $100) to my brother’s young kids, and a dollar to my brother. The bulk of the estate is left to me, my family, and my children. But outside the will, my mom has verbally told me and left written instructions asking me to pay out half of “my” inheritance to my brother under the table within six months of receiving it. He apparently owes considerable child support and both my brother and my mom are convinced this will avoid garnishment. I didn’t react on the phone call with them because I was so stunned. I’m starting to question whether she’s of sound mind.
Not only is this illegal and unethical it’s also something I wouldn’t even know how to do. The cleanest thing I can think of is to give half of the inheritance to my brother, legally and with transparency. He will be subject to taxes and anything else. I assume he will be furious and that our relationship will not recover. It might seem simple on paper but I’m heartbroken by this, and worried about losing any remaining connection to my extended family.
I have no idea how to have this conversation with my mom or brother, or if I even should. My mom has always doted on my brother, and her jealous treatment of his now ex-wife seemed like a major driver in their divorce. She’s never done anything like this before, though, , and I’m worried it’s a combination of previous feelings and new cognitive problems. How do I even start here?
—Unwilling Inheritor
Dear Unwilling,
It’s understandable that you want to honor your mom’s wishes, but I think your instincts are right. Her request to give half your inheritance to your brother “under the table” to avoid child support is both illegal and unethical. As executor of the will, your job is to follow the law, and hiding assets could lead to serious legal consequences.
The best course of action? Keep everything transparent. If your brother needs financial help after your mom has passed, you can give him money, but it should be done through the proper channels —subject to taxes and whatever legal obligations exist. Given the situation here, it’s wise to consult an estate lawyer to help you make sure everything is handled correctly.
Of course, there’s also the family dynamic issue. Have an honest conversation with your mom, explain to her that you’re uncomfortable with her request because of the legal risks involved. You could suggest that she work with a lawyer to find a way to manage her estate without violating the law (or putting you in the middle of it!).
I also hear your concern about your mom’s cognitive health. If you’re worried that your mom may not be of sound mind, it could be time to consult a neutral third party —someone who is unbiased, objective, and not directly involved in the family dynamics. This might be a geriatric care manager, a Certified Financial Planner, or an attorney specializing in elder law or estate planning. These professionals can help your mom make informed decisions and ensure that the estate planning is done legally. Some elder law firms specialize in helping families with this kind of decision-making. You might also ask for recommendations from local support groups or even your family doctor.
If your brother reacts poorly to any of this, remind him of your boundaries and tell him you feel uncomfortable with the request. This is a tough situation, but doing the right thing—legally and ethically—is ultimately in everyone’s best interest.
—Kristin
Link five
6. DEAR ABBY: I've been married a long time. My in-laws have been a problem during my entire marriage. I've had serious health issues and a lot of surgeries over the past 10 years. My cancer came back, and I had to have colon surgery just to name one.
Most recently, I had hand surgery. When my in-laws found out, they couldn't stop laughing at me. When one of them saw me again, she laughed and asked, "Any more planned?" I didn't answer; I just walked away. I want to cut them out of my life. My husband is not supportive. Am I wrong? -- RECOVERING IN INDIANA
DEAR RECOVERING: Your in-laws have a sarcastic sense of humor and no empathy. I can't blame you for wanting to protect yourself, especially since your husband is unwilling to protect you from his family's hurtful reaction. Avoiding people who hurt you is healthy, and you would not be wrong to do it. If you want to take a step back, do so.
Link six
no subject
2. Wow, LW2 is way out of line.
3. Wow, Friend3 is way out of line.
4. Wow, LW4's friend who wants thank you notes for attending a wake is way out of line.
5. Wow, Mom and Brother are way out of line.
6. Wow, Inlaws are way out of line - and so is Husband!
And that's a wrap, guys! Everybody is way out of line!
no subject
(And on no 2 I am hmmm, is there an Unreliable Narrator somewhere in the room? minimising exactly what went down.)
no subject
It's also not just about what ACTUALLY HAPPENED
but what the people in the room HAD A CREDIBLE FEAR COULD HAVE HAPPENED. Until the lights came back on, they had reason to be genuinely fearful.
Even if no breasts/bottoms/genitals were touched without consent, it would have been a credible scenario for the girls in letter 2 to have feared that that was going to happen.
And while experiencing a situation where there is a genuinely credible fear of sexual assault is not the same as actually experiencing sexual assault, it's not nothing, either.
no subject
Like, even if we put aside the risk of sexual assault, physical injury is still on the table. Most likely mild, but I doubt the organization wants to handle that, nor do they want to handle consensual sexual activity. All this would be the case even if, geez, this wasn’t a religiously affiliated outing.
no subject
no subject
I imagine the parent who wrote this letter would say something like "but that's completely different, I would completely REVERSE my entire viewpoint if a girl had ACTUALLY been touched inappropriately I would not minimize it, I would not blame and shame the girls for being the reason the boys are excluded." .... And they probably even believe that.
But actually, I think they would double down on all these same arguments even harder. "It was an accident. He thought he was grabbing her shoulder. It was just silly horseplay. The camp is encouraging these girls to think of themselves as victims, *I* want to protect them by explaining that actually nothing happened to be upset about. The camp is siding with the girls when my boy said he didn't do anything, this is unfair and exclusionary," & so on.
It *is* very telling that this parent refuses to even let the thought cross their mind that something might have happened that no girl in the room wants to speak up about.
no subject
2 filled me with rage and #5 refilled me.
3 is interesting in that an actual adult human thinks another adult human should risk eviction so that the first adult human can refrain from ever spending time apart from their dog and in fact called their friendship into question over the second adult human's desire to not be evicted. I hope that friend is at least willing to help LW move, but I suspect that might be inconvenient for the dog.
Why are people.
no subject
(Except Brother, if LW gives money to the children he owes support.)
no subject
Oh, I do not miss Emily Yoffe as Dear Prudence. She makes two good points - You cannot impose a schedule on someone else’s grief and the LW's husband asking her for emotional support over his affair is indeed an unreasonable emotional burden.
But her recommendation to throw him out, leaving him grieving, unemployed and homeless! Since the LW has been trying to support him, I can't see her being comfortable with that.
Both the LW and her husband need separate support - somewhere to express their feelings and work out what they want to do next. The LW's husband is right that marriage counselling is probably not the right thing yet but grief counselling for him and individual counselling for her would be a good start.
no subject
But, otherwise, I agree that individual counseling is definitely the way to go.
no subject
On the one occasion, I wrote to a problem page, the advice was wrong but in a way that clarified the question for me.
no subject
no subject
no subject
First, the caveat that I'm often too charitable to people based on what's *definitely* known, before noticing what's *almost certainly* likely the case but wasn't stated anywhere...
1. Husband needs to grieve -- whether fair or not, he can't really focus on something else right now. LW deserves to have husband address the questions about their marriage, but probably can't be now. (unless one of them is certain it's over). It's not remotely reasonable to expect LW to be able to support husband about things right now, she needs space from his emotions.
But that reply. Yeah, it might well be that the marriage isn't recoverable. But Columnist couldn't say that with a bit of compassion instead of snark? Doesn't LW need to clearly think, if she asks husband to move out, is that basically the groundwork for permanent separation or does she genuinely want to try again after a break.
"I hope he is independently wealthy"? Well, maybe he is. I agree it's likely that LW might be supporting the household, that's an extremely common gendered pattern to fall into. But shouldn't columnist ask if LW has a job, if she's financially secure, or if she's financially dependant on husband before advising her to tell him to move out? Or ask if they have children? Those would both make having him move out be much less of a trivial prospect.
3. Hey, maybe friend-with-dog is just a jerk, or maybe the dog is functioning as an emotional support without him acknowledging it. That doesn't make his behaviour any more appropriate, but it might make his oevrreaction more understandable.
Either way, I agree the same response is appropriate. The dog isn't allowed in the building, so sadly dog and friend *aren't* welcome there, as a factual matter, whether LW likes it or not. Maybe that's overkill for an occasional visit, we don't know, but we've no reason to doubt LW.
The one thing I might change is to emphasise the suggestion that if LW *wants* to see friend, to try actively suggest meeting somewhere else. (It's not specified if LW suggested this and friend refused, or it hadn't come up.) If friend isn't interested in anything except being able to come to LW's apartment, then well yes, friend isn't interested in being in LW's life, and LW has to move on.
5. Ugh, that's all awful. At first I wasn't clear if this was Father's will, or Mother's. Or a joint will, or something else expressing Father's preferences as well as Mother's? I think it must be mother's but I'm not sure.
They don't raise whether there's any *reason* to dodge child support. Is it at an unreasonable level that's not helping the children? Or (it sounds likely) does he just want to cheat his children out of support?
I *hope* that talking to mother about how all this is legally risky, perhaps with a lawyer, will lead to her giving up the idea. But if she insists, then anything is going to be really difficult :(
6. Jesus Fucking Christ. "Mocking someone for having cancer" is like a parody of something so small-minded no-one would seriously do it.
"A sarcastic sense of humor and no empathy" seems to really, really understate the nigh-universal societal consensus that making fun of people for discovering they have a fatal disease (or a different serious disease) is bad.
I guess they didn't exactly mean it like that? But I would generally just keep any time or energy far away from being involved with the "Ha ha, look at LW, she's dying" crowd. And if husband or anyone wants to change that, they can try to make it look inviting, but it doesn't seem likely to succeed.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I mention it because the friend's language would absolutely fit a service animal situation and many LWs would go out of their way to clarify if it isn't a service animal, y'know?
no subject
no subject
(My point was more that one possible read of the situation is the LW "doesn't want to risk it" and so is personally refusing to let the friend bring the dog even if the dog would or rightly should be an exception. It's speculation, certainly, but I do think it's a possible interpretation.)
no subject
no subject
Smile and nod to them, wait and see - it could end up being a moot point, your mom's alive and healthy, she could outlive your brother, or she could end up having to spend it all on end-of-life care. But if things to shake out like you're all predicting, take your half and put the other half in a trust for his kids. It's win-win, they get their inheritance and he still has to pay his goddamn child support himself.