Annie's Mailbox® by Kathy Mitchell and Marcy Sugar

LW1 - it is the nature of 4 year olds to pitch when they don't get their own way. Then it is up to the adults to take a firm stand on whatever the kid is disagreeing about - bedtime, time to pick up toys, whatever - and enforce the rules. This implies you have rules and routines, and that the kid & the adults know what they are. You and your bf could talk to the mom about what the rules and routines are at her house, and if they are reasonable, make them the rules & routines at your house, too. It is commendable that you want to help this child, but if your bf isn't interested in helping his son by enforcing reasonable behavior, it's time for you to take a hike. Parents have a lot of reasons for not enforcing discipline including not wanting to be the bad guy & sometimes just laziness, but they are not doing their kids or themselves any favors by taking what looks like the easy way out. If your bf can't grow up & do the hard work of parenting, you'd be better off finding an adult to share your life with.
LW2 - it depends on what the food was, because some food - uncooked vegetables, bread, butter, cakes & other desserts, for example - doesn't need to be refrigerated. Assuming that no one who ate the rest got sick, then obviously, it was fine to eat it. Since you weren't eating, I don't know why you cared that people had to wait to eat. I myself have never been at a funeral luncheon where it was either feasible or desirable for a guest to tell the servers to dump everything they had prepared so the guest could run to the store or order up something else from a nearby restaurant, but maybe that happens a lot in the anniverse.

LW1 - If you can't get your boyfriend to go to parenting classes with you and to agree on some house rules that WILL be followed, you should RUN, NOT WALK, out of that relationship. If you don't, your life will be a living hell of constant stress and frustration over the disagreeing styles of how this child should be parented. You aren't even the step-parent, because you aren't married, so you really have no power and even after marriage, your power is limited. So if this makes you crazy now it will drive you insane over time and the frustration of it will most definetly make you wish you hadn't signed up for this. Trust me, I've been there.

LW2- WTF? Food doesn't spoil after being left out in serving dishes for a couple hours. It would have been sitting out for a few hours during the party anyway, or did you expect people to serve themselves from the refrigerator or oven? Sheesh.

* * * * PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT * * * *

LW3 refers to the first letter on 22 March 2013.

LW1: I have to agree with Shasta and Annie's, although I don't have firsthand experience here. If there's anything I've learned from Annie's Mailbox, it's that if parent and step-parent aren't on the same page, their lives will become an increasing disaster. And what's up with the boyfriend leaving his 20-year-old girlfriend to basically parent his kid alot? Even a baby sitter gets to make clear and firm rules, and she would be paid.

LW2: And I agree with Lucy. But need more info than "the food". Was it egg salad with mayo, sitting outside in the sunlight? Or was it crackers and cheese, cookies and cakes, indoors in a cool room? I'm inclined to think closer to the latter, since the LW declines to state. I have a friend who can't shop at my grocery store, because he is sure the milk would spoil on the 30-40 minute drive back to his house. There's nothing you can do with these people but smile and nod.

Today is a Bank Holiday in the United Kingdom, in honour of May Day. I have prepared home made scones with clotted cream and jam, for all members of the She-Woman Man-Haters Club. Sticks to be used only for Morris Dancing, though!

LW1 - It's always important for both parents to be on the same page when it comes to discipline. I'm sure Mikey, like all children, will try to get away with whatever they can and will test each parent to see how far they can push it before there are consequences. Obviously, the father doesn't want to discipline Mikey because he doesn't see him often and doesn't want to be the "bad guy", but that's not in Mikey's best interest.
.
It's unfair of the father to leave most of the discipline to the LW, and then apparently change the rules when he's home. If she can't get him to work with her, AND Mikey's mother, and agree on the way things should be handled with Mikey, then it's time for the LW to cut her losses and get out of the relationship. It will only get more confrontational as Mikey gets older, and since she's not his biological parent, she won't win.

Re: Miss Pasko
Count me in on the celebration - especially with all the comments that will be flying on LW1. The scones sound delicious!

LW2 - I agree with everyone who said that it depends entirely upon the type of food we're talking about here. Usually, unless it's a mayonnaise-based food like potato salad or macaroni salad, if it's set out on a serving table in a home with a moderately cool temperature, it won't spoil in a couple of hours. Also, I've never been to a post-funeral luncheon where the guests started "partying" before the family was present. Everything at this point should be for the family's comfort and benefit, not an event for the guests to have a good time. If the LW didn't want to eat the food, then that's fine, but I think he/she is being a little obsessive about it. Also, I would think that the food which might spoil if left out for a long period of time would be put out about the same time the family arrived, and that some of the guests would offer to get a plate for them, and the guests certainly shouldn't be complaining that the family took too long lingering at the funeral home, for whatever reason.

LW1: Please don't let this situation slide much any longer. If you are planning a life with this man, then the two of you need to be able to make these decisions together -- and especially if you plan on having kids of your own with him. It's particularly unfair for him to expect you to take on the bulk of the time with this boy but not help you in creating a solid discipline plan for him.

You need to have a heart-to-heart with your boyfriend, let him know exactly how serious this situation is, especially how difficult it's becoming for you to deal with this behavior more often than he does.
And if your boyfriend doesn't take the talk seriously, if he doesn't want to go to parenting classes or adjust what is happening at home, doesn't want to change anything, then you need to think long and hard about whether you want to stay in a relationship with this man.

LW2: If the event was professionally catered, the food was probably fine, although I can understand your reluctance. But it still would have been improper to eat before the family arrived. (And the person who told you about the food might have been exaggerating, too).

LW3: Agreed, no child should "expect" an inheritance, and parents should spend their money as they choose. But... there is the added issue of parents who treat one child very different from another. That can cause natural resentments that parents should consider, and consider carefully, before they provide a lot of financial support for one child but do not reciprocate with the other. It's not always quite so black and white as you suggest.

Miss Pasko, scones today? Excellent! Sounds delicious *and* fattening, so count me in!

LW1 - Echoing what everyone else here said...if you disagree with his parenting and are having problems dealing with his son, then you need to think about this relationship. If you want to marry this man, then you two need to need to be able to agree on the big things. His son is acting like a typical 4 year old but the fact that he's letting him get away with it is not good. Spoiled children grow up to be adult monsters. I've seen plenty of them! I agree that you should have a talk with your boyfriend about this and then decide if you can live with that or not.

LW1- I'm with those that say a parenting class is needed. I think it is harder for a father to discipline children when they only see them part time and before anyone says I'm being sexist, I say it's harder for a father because usually they don't have the kids as much as the mother (not always, but usually). I know my hubby spoiled his kids a little because of that exact reason. He only saw them about 30% of the time and didn't want anything ruining his time with them. He didn't spoil them to an extreme and they matured into great young adults.

LW2- I also would like to know what kinds of food was there because most things will not spoil in a couple of hours and duh, why wouldn't you wait for the family to arrive before eating?

Miss Pasko- I want some of those goodies. Hubby and I are going on vacation in a couple of weeks and I need to get fatter than I already am so that I can blame it on my husband because (thanks to PB) we all know MEN, they're the blame for everything.

Kids running loose are at best an annoyance to others. I have had some child come up to my table in a restaurant and poke his fingers in my food, and another charge me with steak knives.I see them running around grocery stores, opening food and drinking bleach! At worst they can endanger themselves by running out the door into the street or be picked up by a pervert. If any of these things happen while in LW1's care, guess who would be held responsible? My little boy was such an escape artist that I finally had to put him on a harness and leash...something I had sworn I would never do!
As young as she is she can find a better partner for herself. One without a divorce already behind him and a child to raise.

I have a friend who can't shop at my grocery store, because he is sure the milk would spoil on the 30-40 minute drive back to his house.
***********
He could shop at your grocery store if he put the milk and other perishables inside an inexpensive cooler -- the foam ones they sell at Walgreen's for $3.

It's a good idea in summer (or anywhere it's warm all year) anyway, given how fast the inside of a parked car will heat up on a hot day and the length of time it can take for the air conditioner to cool the cabin back down.

OFF TOPIC (kind of) - I don't know if anyone else saw this and/or posted it because sometimes posts take so long to show up but Cheryl Lavin's 1st letter is titled “I'm Fat, but You're Ugly and I Can Diet”. I have to admit that I thought of Vizzini (aka Princess Bride) when I read the title.

I agree with the Annies that a parenting course is in order, and not just so LW and boyfriend learn how to discipline. It's also crucial for them to have an understanding of how not to set a kid up for failure.

Yes, kids need to learn to behave in public places, absolutely. But there are far too many parents who never stop to ask themselves whether what they're expecting from their kid is realistic, developmentally.

Adults who expect a 4 YO to sit quietly and amuse himself while they examine various TV sets and talk with sales people about the various merits and hash out where they'll put it and if this one is affordable are setting a kid up to fail. 4 YOs have short attention spans and they can't read; they are going to want to run around when they get bored. You need to anticipate that and prepare for it.

That may mean leaving the kid with Grandma or another sitter for the X amount of hours this errand takes; it may mean one of you takes the kid out of the store for a few minutes when he's getting antsy, it may mean showing him a new game on your iPad; it may mean telling him up front that this trip will last X amount of time and after that you go to the park or swimming or the zoo if he can help you by staying right next to you and playing with the connect the dots or maze puzzle book you brought him.

It does NOT mean expecting that he will sit quietly watching Sponge Bob Squarepants and ESPN on the flickering screens in the display for however long it takes you to make a decision.

L3: I've heard an interpretation of the parable of the prodigal son, the story of a younger son who fritters away the inheritance while the older son stays home but gets very angry at their father's joy when the son returns, is actually about two lost sons.
The older son just doesn't realize how good he has it living an honest life, and that is reward enough.

Invite him to come with you to parenting classes???? Argh! Annie, she is NOT this kid's PARENT. She is simply the barely adult girl daddy likes to hump. An almost COMPLETE STRANGER who wants to SMACK someone else's toddler, even in public. And you're good with that? Why do people think that just because they're sleeping with someone they suddenly have a moral parental right to the person's kids? Even non-custodial kids?
Not only does she not like this kid and talks like a potential abuser (women are far more likely to abuse kids than men are, especially those not their own) but she is too immature and inexperienced with children (esp male children) to realize that it is almost physically and emotionally impossible for a four-year-old boy to stand quietly during the long, tedious process of buying a TV and that the ADULTS should have taken preventive steps to deal with what would ultimately happen. They actually LOSE the kid (meaning they were irresponsible and more interested in the TV than him--you never take your eyes off a four-year-old in a store) but she actually thinks that once she found him, the way she should have been allowed to deal with it was to SMACK him in front of everybody in the store. Yes, I'm sure the child's mother would love it when her child was picked up by the CAS before being returned home to her.
Then she reveals that she is actually being left alone with this child. Can you imagine what she would do to him in private, considering what she wanted to do to him in the store?
Yes, both she and Dad need parenting classes, but not because she should be using any skills she learns with this boy. She is not his mother or stepmother, and chances are she won't even be Dad's girlfreind two years from now. She needs to get out of this poor kid's life and go find someone who does not have kids.

Re: sarah stravinska

I will never forget the time I was in the post office - in a long line - and there were two children running amok! Their mother was in line and just kept saying over and over again, "John and Jane, stop it! Stop it!" I don't know why she bothered to even speak because they didn't even look at her when she said their names. She never got out of line to grab them and keep them by her, which my mother would've done.

And then it happened - CRASH!!! They ran into one of the displays and it went crashing down...the contents were everywhere! The kids got scared and ran to their mother's side. That's when one of the employees from behind the counter yelled, "I saw who did that! You two and your mother better clean that up right now!" She then glared at the mother and said, "And nobody will wait on you until that is cleaned up properly!" The woman turned 6 shades of red, got out of line and started picking it up. Everyone else in line started whispering, "Thank God!" and "You go, girlI"

LW1--Some variation of this letter could be written my millions of people! "When he doesn't get his way, he throws a fit." And that's precisely why 'Mikey' always gets his way. By age four, most kids know exactly what buttons to push and how to work the system in their favor. To deny Mikey and then allow him to fly into a rage, pounding his fists on the floor, kicking and screaming until he sobs himself into a stupor would be deemed "abusive" by onlookers and probably result in a cell phone video of the event going viral on YouTube. To smack the child on the behind, god forbid, to bring him to his senses is tantamount to water boarding by today's society of child worshipers and would most assuredly result in a visit from CPS. Sorry honey but you're stuck and here's why. Your boyfriend doesn't see his son very often so he's going to give the boy whatever he wishes in order to maintain his "good guy" reputation. You of course have no power to instill discipline or boundaries because to do so will be perceived as a direct attack by the boy's mother. Meanwhile little Mikey will soon grow into a self-entitled douche bag who won't be able to function in the real world and just might end up living with you while loafing about and not contributing a thing until he's well into his thirties. Your husband won't be able to say no. Let that little vision sink in for a few minutes. My advice is to find a new boyfriend who doesn't have any kids. Good luck!

LW2--"We felt that the food could be spoiled." It really depends on the food. Potentially hazardous food (eggs, milk, meat, chicken, fish, etc.) should not be unrefrigerated for more than 2 hours. Butter and margarine and many condiments will be OK for a longer period of time. 'Fat Tom', a mnemonic device used by the National Restaurant Association, helps you remember what makes a bacteria-friendly environment and how to avoid creating one.

F is for Food: Bacteria need food to grow. They specifically feed on protein and carbohydrates, so things like roast beef and mashed potatoes are tasty, tasty to them. (But things like dry salami and bread aren't.

A is for Acidity: Acidic ingredients are a natural preservative because bacteria really don't do well in pH lower than 4.6. So that means that foods high in acid aren't really bacteria bait.

T is for Temperature: The inartfully named “Temperature Danger Zone” is the range in which bacteria flourish, and it's 41є F – 140є F (5є C to 60є C). For storage, keep your food either below or above these temperatures.

T is for Time: The one really strict objective measure you can go by is time outside of the fridge (time in the car on the way to a potluck counts!) The official line is four hours; after four hours, if certain illness-causing bacteria have colonized your food, they may have bred to the point of making the food unsafe to eat.

O is for Oxygen: Most bacteria that will make you hate your digestive system need oxygen to survive. So foods that are vacuum packed, properly canned, or even completely submerged in oil, for instance, are greatly protected. The exception to this rule are so called anaerobic bacteria which thrive in oxygen-free environments.

M is for Moisture: Bacteria need moisture to survive, specifically water. Drying food is one of the oldest forms of food preservation we have. So properly dried and cured foods are fine almost any time.

There you have it! Remember Fat Tom and you're good to go.

I'm with Sarah Stravinska in that Children running amuck has always been my pet peeve... especially in restaurants. Many years ago I was a waitress and this by far was the most annoying thing. Now, when hubby and I go to a restaurant and the server tries to sit us near kids, I will ask to be sat somewhere else because I find that parents (for the most part but not always) completely ignore their brats while they whale away or misbehave. Airplanes and grocery stores are also where I see kids being uncontrollable. Planes, it's a little understandable because kids get restless and flying often hurts their ears but there is no excuse when your kids are misbehaving in a restaurant or grocery store.

I was a single parent most of my girls lives as hubby and I met when the kids were 14 through 19 and I can't even count the digits on both hands and feet how many times someone approached me to say how well my kids behaved in a public place but especially in a restaurant. My girls knew if they misbehaved that I would end the meal at the earliest convenience and take something they really liked away from them for one week. I never had to really say anything to my girls because if they even started to act up, I would give them a look and they knew what the look meant.

LW1: If you can't handle the boy's unruly behavior and the father wants to be his "friend" rather than a father, then yes, I agree that the LW should break it off with her current honey.

That all said, yes, this time I do agree with hedgehog about 4-year-old children being expected to behave when they'd rather be anywhere but going along for the ride while the folks run their errands. I'd say the same is true for a lot of (slightly) older children ... those who are made to go shopping with their (primarily) mothers while dad has to work and no babysitter available. Children would rather run around in the arcade or at Chuck E. Cheese's rather than help mom pick out a new blouse to crowd her already full closet of dresses, blouses and slacks she knows she'll never wear. (Or in this case, help pick out a TV.)

The best thing to have done here would have been to pick out the TV on a weekend when he didn't have the boy, but hindsight's 20/20, right? But it happened, and now you're stuck with the memory of what happened. I'll agree -- a good parenting class is in order.

For the situation as it was, I like hedgehog's suggestions. I'd still recommend going on a weekend when no kids are along, however.

LW2: Chris, I'm impressed with your knowledge. Seriously -- I think this is execellent advice.

That said, "Fat Tom" is only as good as the person who is catering the event. I sure hope the people who were staffing this funeral luncheon knew what they were doing (caterers will), and it wasn't the church ladies who may or may not necessarily have this knowledge.

To the situation at hand: If you're not sure about the food, then you've done the right thing by not eating it. Better safe than sorry. An aside – I will say if the wait is taking longer than expected, given that you always wait for the family to arrive and go through the line first, perhaps leaving out a snack at the table (e.g., mixed nuts or M&Ms) might not be a bad idea, to tide any appetites.

LW3: Agree with Mike H – this isn't a case of "oh, gee, I didn't get any inheritance" per se ... the original LW was miffed that his sister – one who was shown to be irresponsible and unworthy of a big windfall – got everything while he, the hard worker, got comparably little to nothing.

@Jane- I completely disagree with you. She is not just someone who Daddy likes to hump. She is with the child often while the father works which means she is like a step parent. Nowhere does she say she wants to smack the kid... she says if she behaved like this, her mother would have smacked her behind (not so uncommon back in the day).

@Michelle #19- I love it!!! Priceless actually!!!

I absolutely love the reaction I've gotten from the fatties on here.

But a 500-pound cow who satirizes about being a 500-pound cow is still a 500-pound cow.

Dance puppets! Dance!

It is hilarious that the fat females on this board are criticizing LW1's boyfriend, but when a male LW wrote in a month or two ago and criticized his girlfriend/wife's children, he was told by the commenters to mind his business and that they weren't his kids.

Funny how that works.

Re LW#1------
The Annies say "you must remember that it is perfectly normal for four-year-old boys to run around in a store and not listen."
.
Wrong-----it is perfectly normal for them to TRY to run around in a store and not listen when they are being called. And that point is where the adult who is responsible for them while they are in the store needs to step in and reinforce the fact that s/he is the adult, and they are the child, who does not get to determine whether he listens to an adult telling him not to do something. At least that's how it should be, for those adults who have not given all control to their children.
.
Ideally this would be done by this boy's dad, since he is the actual parent. But he has declined, maybe because of guilt at not having much time with his son, and maybe because he just thinks it's fine if his kid misbehaves in public and bothers others.
.
In any case, LW, you have a real problem here if you're the one getting stuck with taking care of Mikey but are not allowed to discipline. As other posters have said, if you can't get your boyfriend to listen to you, your options are to put up with this for the next 14 years, at least, or to run like crazy. I'd be getting on my running shoes at this point.
.
There is much disagreement about whether it's good or bad to give a misbehaving child a swat on the behind. As a child, I have very few memories of ever getting swatted for anything, BECAUSE the swats happened when I was old enough to know what I was getting swatted for, and act accordingly next time, but still young enough that my mom could catch, and correct, my misbehavior early, hence no need for it when I got a bit older. So I don't have any memory of it, though I know it happened. Got no scars, physical or otherwise, and I never felt intimidated or ill-treated, just knew that I was expected to behave and that there were consequences.
.
Like training a kitten not to jump up on the table----------the idea is, you yell 'no' and swat him off of there when he's small, and by the time he's a bit older you won't need the swat------just the word 'no' will do it. Eventually you won't even need to say no, because he's associating getting on the table with being swatted. I can't imagine anyone saying to let your pet run wild in a public place because it's 'natural for him to want to do so".

LW1: Parenting classes? good grief, why not just ask your life coach?

The LW doesn't say, but unless her and her bf are living together I think she needs to button her lip. She hasn't said that the boy is doing anything that every other four-year-old doesn't do. She sounds rather harsh to me.

sarah stravinska wrote:
"As young as she is she can find a better partner for herself. One without a divorce already behind him and a child to raise."

Typical. You know next to nothing about the guy, but you're telling her to find someone else.

I wonder if you'd be so unforgiven if it was a single mom we were discussing.

Somehow, I doubt it.

What is this, stupid letter day??

LW1 - There are so many things wrong with your letter. I don't even know where to start. You're not married to this guy, you're 20 and living with him, criticizing his parenting, and well... it all just seems disorganized.

You need to think some serious thoughts about your future with your boyfriend. Are you in it for the long haul? Are you both doing right by the kid by living together at this point? I am not old fashioned, but I also don't think that kids should be subjected to revolving door "step girlfriends".

First, you need to take a big step back and stop being a pain about parenting, then you and your boyfriend need to take some couples counseling and parenting classes together. Get on the same page together (and preferably with the kid's mother too). You may both have to make concessions, but if you can find a middle ground you can both parent much more effectively.

If you cannot do that with him, it might time to move out because you will not have an easy life with this guy and his kid if you can't agree on parenting. You will probably be at least 34 by the time the kid is out on his own.

LW2 -

Do you hear yourself? Did you actually re-read your letter before you sent it and think "yes. yes, this is good. I want to complain about funeral food"?! Oh my god! It is a FUNERAL. If you don't want to eat the food, then fine. If you can't wait half an hour for the family of the decease to show up, maybe you need to be carrying some almonds with you.

And, I'm curious, did anyone get food poisoning from the food being out "a couple hours"? What were you expecting to happen to it in that time?

BTW, how do you manage to keep your head from exploding when you have a long meal? Like at Thanksgiving when people are still gnawing on the turkey a couple hours after sitting down?

@jennylee, exactly -- the LW is stuck with (a) having the child more often than the biodad and (b) not really being allowed by the biodad to set appropriate limits or rein in behavior that should be reined in. Unfortunately she's so young and (apparently) so hung up on the guy that she hasn't been able to stand up for herself more successfully in this issue. And THAT certainly bodes ill for their future relationship.

@MIss Pasko, I'm still feeling peckish -- any scones left? Oh, and remember -- MEN. They really ARE to blame for everything!

Re LW#3-------
Thank you for writing in to let us all know, for the zillionth time, that there is no LEGAL requirement for a parent to leave his money to his children equally. Now perhaps you can write again explaining to us that water is wet, and ice is cold.
.
Answering someone's complaint about how the unfairness makes them feel with a totally unrelated response about the LEGALITY of it is worse than no response at all. How many times would someone have to state it before letter-writers like you get that we KNOW what the law is--------we are just commenting on how unfair, MORALLY, it is to differentiate with no good reason, or to reward bad behavior and punish good behavior.
.
You say "his reward was their guidance in teaching him what was right." Yes, that is an important thing-------but perhaps he could have BOTH? Do you think that handing out money is a good reward for IRRESPONSIBLE behavior? I'm curious as to what that teaches the irresponsible sibling, if the intent here is to improve your kids' character.
.
I have a strong urge to take a piece of two-by-four and say, over and over to you, accompanied by a whop in the head each time, "We're not talking about the LAW here, we're talking about what is morally right and decent." Maybe it's like the old saying about trying to get a mule's attention. Wish I could test it out.

Re: @Gerhardt #28
"LW1: Parenting classes? good grief, why not just ask your life coach?"

LOL ... thanks for the chuckle this morning! I couldn't agree more, the odds of this 20-year-old girlfriend and her boyfriend attending parenting classes together are slim to none and the Annie's advice borders on absurd.

Re: L2
I'm assuming this funeral was for a man, so it's his fault the food was left out because if he wouldn't have gone and died there wouldn't have even been a funeral in the first place!

@Miss Pasko - a scone sounds lovely....yum!

Let's all argue the proper pronunciation of "scone"!

MS Princess Bride....I'm guessing you are a man because you are so rude and clueless when it comes to women.

Re: red

On Princess Bride's driver's license it says: "Sex: T". For Troll.

Trust *you*, Zoe! I knew this would come up. Of course, it is pronounced to rhyme with SWAN, as in : The swan put prawns upon the scone, whereupon it yawned and set off for San Juan.

Mike H, I've been baking all day just to keep up with demand. Haven't you had enough, already? Oh, go on! As it's you.

LW1 -
"That's normal. Let him be."
There goes the crux of the problem here. Your boyfriend may not have been raised this way, but HE (not just his ex) is raising his child this way because he feels guilty.

Stark differences in parenting are one of the important causes for relationship break-ups, especially when they involve step-children. In the midst of a heated argument, it is EXTREMELY easy for the bio parent to yell in exasperation to MYOB, and that this child is his, not yours, making you feel like an unpaid house servant.

First, you have to have a frank heart-to-heart with him and either get on the same page, or start reviewing your options - once the pattern of how he relates with his children is established for whatever reason, it is highly likely that he'll be the exact same when you start having children of your own with him, if only for the sake of treating all kids the same. And yes, it IS perfectly normal for a four year-old to throw a fit to get his way, that doesn't mean it should be tolerated and catered to. Unless you want your future children to grow up to be trolls under the bridge, you have some serious discussing with lover-boy to do.

Now for the immediate problem... When you say "letting us have him", I assume you are living with the man. I see nothing wrong with taking the rein of discipline yourself (as long as you don't get physical), since this is also your home and you are the primary care-giver. The boy, young as he is, is perfectly capable or learning that there is one set of rules for when he is at home with his mother, and another set of rules for when he is at his second home with his father and you.

If lover-boy actually countermands your parenting, undermines and generally sabotages you, then you really do have a problem, and not with the boy. It would be unreasonable for him to dump the kid on you and then demand that you do it HIS way. Indeed you are not an unpaid house servant.

Yes, parenting classes. It sure looks like lover-boy here is not exactly oozing maturity, if he allows his guilt feelings to colour his parenting. And I'm sure you could use pointers as well. If you cannot get him to get on the same page with you about this, you would do best to move on, because this will always be a point of severe contention, with the children involved learning early on how to play the two of you against each other.

LW2 -
I am SO tired of this paranoia about food. Unless it's fresh-milk-based or raw meat and the temperature is 90 degrees, food (especially cooked food) will NOT waste if left at room temperature for a coupla hours. It won't be the freshest, so yes, it should have been kept in the cold, but it will certainly be edible. Did anyone get sick? Well, there you go.

LW3 -
"The idea that parents are obligated to leave an inheritance and reward their children is repugnant."
Yes it is, but parents OUGHT to be obligated to treat all their children fairly. Favouritism also is repugnant.

"His reward was their guidance in teaching him what was right."
Ah, but here we come to the crux of the problem here. If they want to cater to the useless floozie while neglecting the good child, it IS their money indeed, but what they're doing with it is rewarding bad behaviour. That's NOT teaching "what's right".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

@Steve C #5
"Was it egg salad with mayo, sitting outside in the sunlight? "
Egg salad involves boiled eggs, which will not spoil that fast even in the sun, and commercial mayo is so full of preservatives these days that it could actually be left on the countertop. It tastes better cold, that's all. Choose another example. ;-D

@Miss Pasko #6
Ooooh, English scones with all the trimmings? Oink, oink, I'm in.

@Kitty #8
"Especially with all the comments that will be flying on LW1."
I'll make the popcorn. Tons of it. With butter.

@Jane #18
And because she is not the birth mother, she gets no say in the matter, even though she's the one saddled with him most of the time? My God. Apparently, as far as you're concerned she IS nothing but an unpaid house servant indeed - on top of the resident free whore, as you so kindly made very clear.

Re: Michelle #19
Michelle, your story about the bratty kids in the post office reminded me of something I saw happen in a women's restroom once that I thought was hilarious.
.
A woman had come in with a friend, and with a child (boy) that looked to be about 5 or 6. There was a long line, and while she was chatting with her friend, ignoring her kid, he was amusing himself by crawling along the floor peeking under the doors of the occupied stalls.
.
We all kind of stared at him, but nobody was brave enough to say anything------and then this big booming female voice came out from one of the stalls, and she said, "I don't know who owns that kid, but you better get him away from here, because next time I see his face under this door I'm going to kick it."
.
Woman turned bright red, grabbed her kid, and she and her friend left. One of the neatest things I ever saw.

@ Miss Pasko
Please keep baking. I'm not fat, and I feel left out of PB's tirades, so I need to get fat to fit in :) (Of course, it's my father's fault I'm not fat - I take after him physically and he wasn't fat either.) MEN - they're to blame for EVERYTHING!

Re: Miss Pasko #38
Miss Pasko, Mike ate my scone and now there's none left for me!!!! Please tell him to stop being such a pig.

MEN!!!!!!

Re: red #36
He IS a man... and unwittingly admitted it one day by stating "I'm too much of a gentleman". A man indeed, but not so genteel.

@Miss Pasko #38
Both the Oxford and the Webster state it can also rhyme with "drone", and that both are correct. ;-D

I see NO suggestion that today's - or other days' - posters are fat. Back off a bit, huh?

JustBecause, I had a tee shirt with your quote blazoned across its front; someone stole it from me because the liked it so much. :)

The suggestion to get "rules" information from the boy's mother was a good one - but it should be the Father that gets that info; the girl friend should Not ask for it; that could only potentially lead to further problems. Once the child sees that he's not getting off because he's with Dad, it may improve. if not, then, the suggestion to withhold privileges or treasured items is definitely in line. I recently saw a store manager call police and detain a mother who shook her child for running around in a store.

@Vizzini- hahahaha, you're actually the puppet and all of us fatties are the puppet masters. We say "jump" and you say "how high"? You see my dear PB, we want to get you riled up and it works and by the way... I'm 5'6" and 135 lbs so in no way am I fat. I imagine at least half of the women on here are in the proper BMI range.

Re: JustBecause

Actually, you're the marionette in this case. You replied, not only defending your weight, but actually telling us all your actual weight and height. PB said "fat" and you said "no I'm not, see my weight and height!"

(And as far as Americans go, over 2/3 are overweight or obese so statistically speaking, PB is probably right).

I don't mean to be harsh but stop. taking. the bait!

@Graham072442- I remember when those shirts were very popular... gosh, I think it was probably 20 years ago.

@jennylee, I need the extra scones because I can still fit into an auditorium seat without making the grandma sitting near me uncomfortable!

And with dancing and puppet shows, it seems like the She-Woman Man-Haters Club just gets more fun by the day!

@Zoe, if 2/3 of Americans are overweight or obese, you know what causes that, right? MEN. Because they ARE to blame for EVERYTHING!

JustBecause, sorry, but you are wrong. This woman is NOT his stepmother (to say so is an insult to real stepmothers), any more than anyone who babysits a child occasionally or a daycare worker would be considered a child's parent or stepparent. She is his father's girlfriend, period. They are not married, and in fact, it doesn't even say they are living together, or that she sees this child for more than a day or so a week. (From her age, she cannot have even known the child that long, either.) Your comment that she says "her mother would have smacked her behind (not so uncommon back in the day)" is ridiculous. Do the math--the girl is 20, not 50! She was born around 1993 and would have been a similar age to this kid just before the new Millenium, long, long, LONG after people began questioning spanking as an effective form of discipline and it became unacceptable to most people to smack a child in public. And why would she even bring the subject up unless she does, in fact, consider this to be an effective way to cope with the child's misbehavior? BTW, several years ago in Canada, a man spanked his daughter in a mall parking lot after she intentionally slammed the car door on her brother's hand. He was arrested and did time in prison for it. So my remark that this brainless girl could actually cause the Dad to lose custody if she smacks the kid in public is not out of the realm of possibility.
.
Lise, "And because she is not the birth mother, she gets no say in the matter..." Of course she has a say in the matter Lise. She can say, "I don't like the way you discipline your kid, so I'm outta here." But what she cannot say is, "Because I'm having sex with you, I should get an equal say as you and your wife on how your child is raised." You, too, seem to have some belief that just because this girl has been having sex with this guy, she is somehow elevated to the same status as "birth mother" or "stepmother" when she is simply a girlfriend, and not even a long-term one at that. And who says she is saddled with the kid "most of the time"? Nowhere does it say that. In fact, it is stated that the boy stays with his father for "only a short while". The person who has him most of the time is his birth mother. Then for the short time he is at his father's house, a part of that time, she is babysitting him. Let's not pretend that we're talking for more than 5 or 10 yours a week here. And as for your comment "on top of the resident free whore, as you so kindly made very clear", sorry, but those are your words, not mine. I don't even think they're living together, myself, but if they are and you think that makes her a resident free whore, well, good for you.

To LW1--Run. Your boyfriend runs from responsibility. That's why he is divorced.He wants to be his child's friend not his Dad. He either agrees to parenting class pronto or You don't babysit.
LW3-You have no further obligation to your parents.Your sister needs to provide ALL care when they are old. No your parents owe you nothing but that gate swings both ways.As a sibling who always got less and a brother who was in the same boat we don't feel the need to visit as often or assume the responsibility for our parents welfare.This isn't vindictive it is simply the same fairness they gave us.We both are scrupulous about treating all of our children fairly.My husband was on the receiving end of less and his relationship with his brother is forever tainted.None of these adults is handicapped so there is no excuse for unfairness.Walk away and spend your time and energy on the people who matter.

Re: Jane

While I don't entirely agree with you, your supposition that LW1 spends "a day a week" with the kid is incorrect. Although it is not spelled out for us, it is pretty clear from her letter than she and her boyfriend live together, and that she watches the kid while the boyfriend is at work:

"Lately, Mikey's mother has been letting us have the child more often because she has to go out of state on business.But my boyfriend often is at work when Mikey is here, which means I am the one who deals with this behavior."

Now, I do not think that she is watching him 7 hours a day, 5 days a week, but it is evident that she spends more than an hour or two. If the boyfriend is enjoying the perks of having his girlfriend watch his kid while he's working (rather than pay a sitter or daycare), he must also acknowledge that she will have her own parenting methods and expectations. And the expectation is reasonable, in their heads at least, that this arrangement is going to last "forever" (as in, they expect to stay together as a couple, so better get started figuring out this parenting thing) That does not mean he has to cater to them, but both of them have to have a serious discussion about parenting.

Re: Jane

Also, you are simplifying and exaggerating the example of the man who spanked his daughter after she closed the car door on her brother's hand. By his own words he was making a grand statement, a big issue out of this spanking to teach her a lesson. He pulled down her pants and underpants, put her on the hood of the car and spanked her "very hard" four to eight times.

Someone called 911 because an angry man was repeatedly spanking "very hard" a bare-bottomed 5-year-old girl in the middle of a parking lot.

And he didn't "do time in prison". He spent a night in jail while his wife raised $300 bail, and was found not guilty. (There is a difference between jail and prison, by the way).

So yeah... probably not a good idea to severely mutilate a true story to make your point, what with the internet and all.

For the girlfriend, unless there is a ring on your finger you are not the parent, you follow their rules even if you disagree with them. I know this is hard. I have a slew of nieces and nephews that I love, but their parents don't raise them the way I would. I set firm boundaries based on age early on. They don't say no to "babies" and allow them to be babies until a few months before they start kindergarten. Then they start using the same rules as the big kids. I don't like it, but hey, they are NOT my kids. And you know what, after 13 years they are all basically goog kids. None of them get into trouble at school. They don't fight much. They are kind kids. They may be rather mediocre, but so what. The point is just because at age 4 they let him run a little wild doesn't mean at 14 he'll be a delinquent. They will have to buckle down once he starts school. He will want to go to bed earlier because he will wake up early. He will have to follow the rules or get into trouble at school.
I do agree that if you are unable to step back and support Dad's parenting you should go find another man to be with.

Just an FYI about Mayo, as most people assume it causes food poisoning. Mayo is very acidic and bacteria does not easily grow in it. This is a myth that has been perpetuated for a long time. Just for reference, I am a microbiologist and this was one of the first things my Food Microbiology taught us.

I don't think the father should expect his gfriend to babysit. That's his child. If he is working on the weekend, he needs to work out a different visitation arrangement. Since he doesn't get this, gfriend should just move on. In fact, I'm going to risk it with you BTLers and say she should not live with someone she is not married to.

LW 2 Food won't spoil in 2 hours, but bacteria will grow in many foods left at room temperature for 2 hours. Most likely the lunch had some type of meat product. People will get sick from food poisoning a couple days later. I got sick from food poisoning after a funeral lunch from the lemonade. The people who did not drink any of it were fine, everyone who did got very sick. Two people had to be hospitalized.

It takes a couple days for food poisoning to show up after you eat the tainted food. You may not realize what caused it unless you talk to other people who were there.

Re: locake

Sure, people can get food poisoning from anything. My husband got sick from salad at an Indian buffet (looked and smelled the same coming out the next day - as he was driving... I agreed to clean the car only if I could tell this story to everyone). But you can't live your life all "oh no this food has been out for two hours I will probably die if I eat it!"

I'll eat pretty much anything unless it smells funny or looks moldy. Haven't had food poisoning yet. And if I ever I do, well, I hear it's a pretty quick way to shed 2-3 pounds ;) (which we all need to do, being a bunch of fatties!)

Re: locake, Actually food poisoning take place very rapidly. 2 to 6 hours after eating. If it happens several days later...it was not the lemonade that you drank at the funeral. Man-O-Man, I can't believe I survived childhood nor adulthood. We ate everything that was left out of the refrigerator, especially on holidays. Food was always left out during Christmas and Thanksgiving, to be munched on all day. Maybe we just had iron stomachs.

Miss Pasko, The scones and jam may be left out at room temperature all day, but please keep the clotted cream in the refrigerator. Unless you want to let it grow bacteria then we can feed it to PB.

Penny, #58
Yes it was the lemonade that made us all sick. It was later recalled. It was 2 days later when people got sick. The thinner people get sick first, then the heavier ones later.

Re: locake
Do you remember what the actual bacterium was called? I find it odd as well, as most food poisoning I know of acts quickly. I am not doubting you, just curious.

I Googled "food poisoning" and it says it generally takes 4 to 36 hours for the symptoms to show up, but it can take up to 72 hours. There are many different toxins that can cause it. If you ever get food poisoning you will be careful about eating food left at room temperature for hours. The ladies at the church prepared the food, not professional caterers.

Thanks to Chris for your very informative information. Re Penny- When I was living at home, my grandma left our food out for hours, because she believed that if you 'chilled your stomach' you would get sick. I guess I was used to eating food that was off, because I never got sick. However, after moving away and coming home to visit, her food made me and my hubby sick. Go figure.
I sometimes eat little or nothing at gatherings where food is left out, often in the back yard on a hot day, for hours before it is cooked, or consumed. I have relatives who do this, so I eat a little something before I go, and then I eat only what is safe or what has been handled properly. Also, when I bring a dish, if they don't plan to serve it right away, I make sure it is refrigerated or kept hot. I don't want anyone getting sick on what I brought!
Re locake- was the lemonade commercially prepared? Sometimes the contamination takes place at the factory, and it doesn't matter if it was kept cold.
Re LW1- If your boyfriend won't go to classes, you could get a good book on raising a kid with limits, and share the high points with him, in a tactful way. If he doesn't go for that, run, fast. It won't get better.

Zoe, so because I accidentally said he spent time in "prison" instead of spent time in "jail" you're saying I "exaggerated and simplified" and "severely mutilate a true story to make your point"? SEVERELY MUTILATED?? Seriously? Baloney! Every word I said except for the jail/prison is completely accurate and true. I think you're the one who is exaggerating and simplifying my comment.
.
JustBecause said that "back in the day" it wasn't unusual for people to smack their children in public. I said the LW is only 20 so "back in the day" was hardly in the era where public spanking was still widely accepted and legal, and used this example because it happened back in the early 1990s, EXACTLY the time JustBecause was referring to as a time when spanking was socially acceptable, and the man DID lose temporary custody of his daughter for spanking her and was charged and yes, was taken to jail. So it was not as socially acceptable as JustBecause thinks, even back then. And sorry, I think 4-8 smacks with an open palm on a bare bottom is well within what many parents who use corporal punishment would deem acceptable for slamming a two0year-olds hand in the car.
.
My point to JustBecause was that if that could happen to a FATHER for spanking his daughter in a mall 20 YEARS ago, imagine what could happen TODAY when someone who is not even the child's parent or step-parent started smacking a child at a mall? Remember whether the severity of the punishment is appropriate or not isn't the point--it only takes one bystander to call 9-1-1 to set the ball in motion for charges, loss of custody and going to JAIL. Remember it was the WITNESS who found the scene disturbing and over-the-top--what is and isn't acceptable is pretty subjective.
.
If I "severely mutilated" this story simply because I didn't provide all the details of the 1990s spanking, which were irrelevant to the point I was making, then surely you have also mutilated the story by not providing the final verdict, whether the couple stayed married, if the daught needed therapy, whether the boy required medical care, and the color of the judge's eyes when it went to court.
.
And since you're such a great Internet guru, why don't you go and look up all the other stories about parents who have been charged with assault for spanking their kids? There are dozens. Better yet, why not look up what happens to women who smack their boyfriend's kid in public?

Re: Jane

Yes, the words you use are important, and words mean things. Your telling of the story painted a picture of a man who spanked his daughter in a parking lot, was arrested, tried and convicted (this is what a prison is for - convicted people with a sentence of serve) and spent time in a prison. The phrase "did time in prison" is not accidental and was either chosen for drama, or because you think that "a day in jail" is actually the same thing as "doing time in prison". In which I case I apologize for assuming that it was used dramatically and not ignorantly.

The reality is an angry man who spanked a bare-bottomed 5 year old child "very hard" on the back of a car, was arrested and released the next day and found not guilty. He has custody of his children. I do not think that JustBecause was advocating THAT kind of reaction, of course I could be wrong and maybe that's exactly what JustBecause is suggestion the LW do.

"then surely you have also mutilated the story by not providing the final verdict, whether the couple stayed married, if the daught needed therapy, whether the boy required medical care, and the color of the judge's eyes when it went to court."

Mutilating is not the same thing as omitting. Whether the couple stayed married doesn't have anything to do with the cause and effect of bare-bottomed spanking (versus what most would call a "swat). Whether the daughter needed therapy is only relevant if we are discussing whether it is ethical to use physical punishment. Whether the boy required medical care is only relevant if you believe in pain caused = pain received is appropriate punishment. I suppose that the colour of the judge's eyes only matters if you believe that eye colours dictates how likely a judge is to convict or not.

Haha, my internet skills are limited to stepping in when people present the facts incorrectly or omit information relevant to the point. I am more motivated by the prospect of arguing with someone than googling articles to make a point I don't really care that much about.

It's not even that I disagree with you about not spanking children in public, but if you're going to use a real life example to make your point, don't dramatize it because it calls everything you say into question. If you don't remember the facts, it takes only a moment to ask yourself "is this accurate?" and look it up.

By the way, does anyone know where Nanchan is? I haven't seen her post in a while.

LW1 -- I am assuming that you are, in fact, living with your boyfriend, and it sounds like he is occasionally relying on you to babysit when he cannot be home with his boy. As such, while you are not technically the boy's stepmother, that is the role you are basically in at this time. Your BF has to get over the, "I don't get to see him that often, so I want every moment to be a perfect, shining moment so he loves his daddy." This is extremely common among non-custodial parents. I like the suggestions that have been given related to him talking with the child's mother about what sort rules she uses in her house so that there can be at least some attempt at consistency between the two households. I also like the suggestion of you and BF going to parenting classes and/or couples/family counseling. The problem is, with all due respect, I don't see any of those things happening. Here's why:

1) Few divorces are amicable enough that the parents are capable of co-parenting well together. Usually, the best you can hope for is that both parents are decent parents to begin with, so the fact that they aren't necessarily working to be on the same page isn't too big of a deal. I'm not saying that no divorced couples are capable of this -- obviously some are. But I don't think that is super common.

2) Most people in their early 20s are just starting out in their adult lives and don't have much in the way of financial resources. They're still in the very early stages of their careers, and laying that kind of groundwork often means a lot of overtime, putting work first, etc. So, not a lot of financial resources PLUS a lot of time being eaten up by work makes it very difficult to put together the time and money for counseling, parenting classes, etc. Again, not impossible, and the fact that he isn't the custodial parent should mean he has at least more time than if he had the child full-time.

So, while I think the advice you are getting is good, I think it's highly unlikely that any of it is going to be taken, since most of it requires effort on the part of someone who didn't write in -- your BF. Therefore, I think the best advice to you is to do some soul-searching about whether this relationship is really one you expect to last a lifetime, whether you are prepared to be a step-mother and whether Mikey is someone you would want to co-parent with. Even though I suspect the primary reason he lets the child do whatever he wants has to do with the typical guilt a non-custodial parent feels, it is also possible that this simply is the way he parents. Moreover, even if he has a child with you and you two stay together, there is a possibility that he'll be willing to parents the child(ren) you two have together one way (because he'll be a custodial parent) but will have a totally different standard for his son by his previous marriage, which is going to set you all up for even more fun and frolic in the future. So, if you and he are unwilling/unable to get into couple's/family counseling and/or parenting class, I think you need to consider all of the above and then make a decision about whether you should stay in this relationship or not.

LW2 -- should the food have been refrigerated and/or kept in an oven? Well, yes, probably. Do you really think that was the primary thing on the minds of the bereaved? Yeah, me neither. If you're not sure about the food, you don't eat it. Problem solved. Here's what you don't do: sit in judgment of the bereaved. I'm assuming you didn't go to the funeral to be fed, you went there to pay your respects to the dead and to show support for the surviving loved ones. I need your life, because if my biggest problem requiring advice was to know whether or not it was proper people to be told to wait for the bereaved family before eating, I'd say my life would be pretty darn golden. Please get over yourself.

LW3 -- here's the thing, I don't disagree with you that legally a person can do whatever s/he wants with his/her estate. Of course, with any luck, you also understand that what is "legal" isn't necessarily what is "right" or what is "ethical" or what is fair. In most cases, what is "legal" is basically the lowest common denominator on the scale of right and wrong. It is perfectly legal for me to say asinine things about how fat the Annies and the women at the BTL are, but that hardly makes it the smart, sane, thoughtful thing to do. It just means I have a right to make an @$$ of myself. So, yes, parents can do what they want with their money. That is totally their right. And children should not be "counting on" or expecting an inheritance (not everyone who dies has much to leave to their kids -- my parents got nothing from their parents, not because my grandparents didn't love their children but because they had nothing to give them). But a parent who wants to do right by his or her children and has assets to distribute to them should take great care when deciding how to divide those assets up, and it would behoove them to treat all of their children equally so as not to create hard feelings among the children. It's not the law, and nor do I think such a law should exist. But thoughtful people recognize that what is "legal" isn't necessarily what is "right."

Re: Jane
She's done a coupla hit-and-runs here, so she still reads. One of them mentioned the LW posting at Wowowow, so evidently she reads there also - I don't know if she posts, I don't have time to go to Wowowow. She occasionally posts on Yahoo - I wouldn't know how much, since the comments run in the several hundreds and I only take the time to read one page of them.

And btw, can someome explain to me the difference between jail and prison?

@Jane addendum:
The LW posting on Dear Margo at Wowowow
She occasionally posts on Dear Abby Yahoo

@ Jane Re: #66

Thank the gods! Let sleeping dogs lie....please!

@Zoe#46- point taken

@Zoe & Jane #65- for the record I was not advocating that kind of reaction and I'm ot trying to argue with you JANE but plenty of people still swatted their kids on the behind 20 years ago... Not beat, not spanked them so hard on the bare behind so much that the police had to be called. Parents definitely spank less than they did 20 years ago but mostly out of fear of being arrested and labeled a child abuser.

@Lisa - you are wise beyond your years. I love how you addressed all LW's.

@Lise -- I'm not an expert on jail versus prison and have no personal experience, but my understanding is that "jail" is typically a municipal or county lock-up used temporarily while a person awaits arraignment (or, where I live, it's called "first appearance). It would not be unusual, for example, for someone charged for public intoxication, underage drinking, etc., to "spend the night in jail" -- either to sober up prior to arraignment or simply waiting for arraignment. "Prison" is where you go once you've actually been convicted of a crime. It is often a much higher-security facility with far greater population and is typically designed for longer-term stays than most "jails."

@JustBecause -- many thanks! Not sure I'm all that wise -- more like a stopped clock that still manages to be correct at least twice a day!

Re: Lise Brouillette #71
Lisa is basically correct in her Post #75, but jail sentences are also given for shorter term sentences and also for misdameanor convictions (as opposed to felonies), which usually result in sentences of a year or less. Jails in the US are run by the city or county in which the offense occurs, while the prisons are run by the state (there are also Federal prisons for crimes crossing state jurisdictions or for crimes against the government or for crmes which come under federal laws .. kidnaping, etc.) This is the condensed response, but give you the basics :)

DISCLAIMER:
I apologize for the bad spelling and grammar in my Post #77. I was in a hurry and didn't check before posting.

Re: Kitty & Lisa
Thanks for the clarification. "Prison" comes fromt the French "prison" and means the same thing, but is often used for "jail" as well, although there are alternatives.

But a parent who wants to do right by his or her children and has assets to distribute to them should take great care when deciding how to divide those assets up, and it would behoove them to treat all of their children equally so as not to create hard feelings among the children.
**************
Indubitably. Although, as we know, parents are but human and living long doesn't necessarily make them wiser.

There are mistakes, some fairly serious, I think, that my mother and father made in raising me. I have, however, found it incredibly liberating to recognize that this has way more to do with them and how they were raised...and other circumstances in their lives at the time, than it did me or any intent to hurt me. And that recognizing and forgiving their shortcomings made it easier for me to appreciate the many, many good and right things they did in raising me (which on the whole, outweighed the bad)...and to feel sorry that they weren't able to break free of some of the habits and shortsightedness that would have allowed them more enjoyment of their senior years.

And I kinda hope that my kids will come to that same realization when someday they look back on all the mistakes I made and continue to make.

Re: MT

A ring on the finger is not a requirement to be a step-parent. I lived with my now husband for 4 years before we got married. He was an equal parent to my daughter and he was called daddy. Many people live together as if they're husband and wife without a piece of paper all the time. To make such a family work, both people have to be equal parents.

It's perfectly normal for a 4 year old BRAT to run around a store and not listen. I certainly didn't allow my son to run around screaming in public, but that's because I started to teach him how to behave when he began to walk at 9 months, not 4 years old. If you want a well-behaved kid, you have to start when they're young. And yes, I slapped his little hand on occasion, and spanked him a few times. But by the time he was three, I could take him to anyone's house, and have him behave himself. I wish I had a nickel for every person who commented on how polite my son is. I have no idea where people get the idea that it's ok and cute for their little monsters to run amok, breaking things and disturbing others. It's gotten to the point where I get take out food instead of eating in restaurants.

Sounds to me like the "father" isn't worth the trouble - I say ditch him, LW. When you're ready, have a kid of your own that you can call the shots on discipline-wise. Keeping the sperm donor around is optional, of course. And remember, no matter what, it's the guy's fault.

@Chris - great post! And I like most of your posts, even the ones I don't agree with. Keep telling it like it is.

@ Michelle - hilarious story - love it!

@ Miss Pasko - I think I might bake scones on my next day off.

@Krystyne, well put. I'd been trying to put my finger on my disagreement with Jane's stance on this issue, and I think you said it nicely.

People create families in all sorts of ways. It's not just who you are biologically related to or legally married to. I know my friends are "my family of choice", and in lots of places gay couples like Ike and I don't even have the option of getting legally married... but they are still a family.

The LW seems to be operating as a de facto stepmother anyway, even if her relationship with the biodad is relatively young. She *might* be in this child's life for a very long time.

Re: Princess Bride I would be just as unforgiving of a lousy mother. A brat is a brat no matter which parent is raising it.

Re: Michelle #19
"Everyone else in line started whispering, "Thank God!" and "You go, girlI"
Why were they whispering? A woman alone with two brats, what EXACTLY were they afraid of? My God, but people are cowards. And cretins - a woman using food stamps, THAT they have no problem glaring at and uttering snide remarks to, but one who is clearly dead wrong, and all they can do is "whisper"? If every parent giving up on their parental responsibility was publicly shamed, not just surrounded with "whispers", there would be less of them. The employee who rightfully put her foot down should have gotten a round of applause. What a bunch of wimps. I hadn't had breakfast yet - now I'm nauseated. Yrrrch.

@Sarah Stravinska #84
Don't bother. It doesn't matter how many times we round in on a woman (like I just did), all he can see are the times when we round in on a man, regardless of circumstances, regardless of whether he really is dead wrong. And he will repeat the same thing over and over and over like a broken record: "Men! They're to blame for everything"! It's like an obsession. Must be because he himself IS "to blame for everything"...

Be nice, Lise Brouillette.

I pay your salary so you can sit at home and dish out advice and criticize men.

Re: Princess Bride
You don't pay my "salary". I paid into it for years and years all by my poor self, and actually still do. And criticising you doesn't mean criticising men. It takes more than a dick between your legs to make a man, otherwise any unfixed mangy dog would qualify.

LW1: I've been where you are. When my husband and I first dated and got married, they would not listen to me. And since he tended to work weekends or tended to be distracted when he was home, I found myself looking after them most of the time. I found that he and his parents would undermine me quite a bit. There were a few times early in our relationship where we almost didn't make it. He felt that I didn't like his kids and I felt that I was sharing a house with people who disrespected me. At one point, I had a long talk with him about how I loved him and his kids, but I couldn't handle it anymore. Either we needed to set some guidelines or we needed to not get married. At the same point, though, I had to learn what battles to fight and what to leave. There were times it was an uphill battle. Twelve years later, the kids have grown into awesome people. My stepson is attending community college and my stepson is going to a state university in the fall.

LW2: If the letter writer is reading this, just scroll up and find the first response from Chris.
So LW1: The first thing you have to realize is that the world of a stepparent is not an easy one even under the best of circumstances. That kid will always come first, as he should. And your boyfriend does not want to be the bad guy: whether it be from guilt over the divorce or their small time together. No matter what you say or do, this probably isn't going to change. You can tell your boyfriend that you'll stop babysitting if he's not going to back you up, but realize that will likely lead to the breakup of your relationship. So you have to ask yourself... are you ready for this? Because if you marry him, it's probably going to get worse before it gets better. And it may take a few years for the two of you to get on the same rhythm.

What the heck happened to my post? Crazy!

Re: Lise Brouillette

I do pay your salary. See, I have paid into social services for my entire adult life, but unlike you, I have too much pride to be on welfare. I've gone through difficult times, but I've always preferred to work any job I could instead of being a social parasite.

You're a typical entitled Quebecer. -- you feel that you shouldn't have to pay your own way through life. You always have an excuse. Everything is always someone's fault, from your work situation to your childhood to your marriage.

Don't like paying tuition (even if it is the lowest in the country)? Start whining and protest, interrupting the lives and routines of the working class.

Too lazy to work? That's OK. Just get on welfare and know that their will be no pressure from the government to force you to work.

I was hardly shocked by your revelation that you are/were a separatist.

Lise, you could explain the situation until you are blue in the face, and the sad little troll won't get it -- because he's not interested in understanding, he's not interested in truth, he's not interested in fairness or compassion, he's only interested in uninformed malicious personal attacks and stirring up trouble for his own sick sad amusement.

He's long ago shred any possible credibility with his continuous distortions of facts, ignoring whole swaths of posts, his boring repetitive nonsense, and his frequent nasty misogynistic personal attacks on women in general, and you and the Annies specifically. Someone who has to resort to calling other posters "fat" is obviously someone with the mentality of a child, not a mature adult.

He's the classic internet troll. Nothing he says can be taken seriously. He's a joke, and should be treated as such, or ignored completely.

OMG Mike, you are AWESOME. Talk about SHUT DOWN!!! If you weren't gay, I would ask you to marry me.

Re: Mike H

I agree with Mike H. My generalizations about the women on here are wrong and malicious.

But the generalizations made on here daily regarding men are factual, sensible and absolutely not driven by bitterness.

Glad we cleared that up, Princess. Because certainly you wouldn't be attempting anything as ridiculous as making false apples-to-oranges comparisons about completely different kinds of generalizations with completely different motivations, would you? Naaah, because you'd realize all of us would see right through such silliness.

Hopefully you'll play nicer from now on, but if not, well... some people enjoy parrots for pets, because they are amused by simple beasts that simply repeat the same nonsense phrases over and over again. I suppose if you do decide to continue your trollish nonsense in the future, you can become our mascot, our little parrot.

And you can sit in your little corner in your birdcage while we enjoy donuts and more entertaining and rational discussion that is less vindictive and doesn't include personal attacks and vendettas against people we've never met in real life.

Oh, Mike.

My ridiculous generalizations are a reaction to the absurd assumptions that are made here each and every day. The Annies and their (gargantuan) girls have such a disgustingly clear double standard towards men that I've decided to throw it right back at them. I don't expect them to change their conceited, bigoted ways, but that's OK – it still gives me pleasure to point out the two-facedness each chance I get.

You might not notice it because you're friends with the girls but it is there. Heck, even some of the females have mentioned that the hypocrisy exists.

Oh, Princess.

You only maintain the fiction that there is some huge double standard because you consistently and egregiously ignore any and ALL posts by women here that don't fit your bias. This has been pointed out to you again and again, but you refuse to see it -- because you'd rather falsely believe that you (and all men) are victims of these "biased women" rather than acknowledge that there are a wide varieties of opinions, and every single woman commenter here has taken the "man's side" of a LW on more than one occasion.

When you consistently cherry-pick your data, Princess, it's easy to feel like you're in the right, but it becomes super-obvious that you're not. Especially when you stick your head in the sand *every* *single* *time* this huge hole in your logic is pointed out.

Furthermore, one of the other flawed ways in which you attempt to stake claim to the "truth" of your theory is to compare responses to previous letters where gender roles are reversed. And frequently, when we go back to peruse such evidence, we find that the situations weren't as identical as you'd originally claimed -- but that also doesn't matter to you, because facts or truth or rationality don't matter -- anything that doesn't fit your pathological fantasy about anti-male bias is tossed out. Ignored. Princess pretends it doesn't exist, because it doesn't fit the angry pathetic little storyline that Princess has created for himself.

And that's why you're a troll, and that's why you aren't credible. Because it's impossible to have a rational conversation with someone who self-selects which posts he pays attention to, and ignore the ones that don't fit his fantasy. And who also distorts comparisons to try to bolster his argument.

And you know, sometimes -- SOMETIMES, not anywhere near the frequency you claim -- but SOMETIMES, there does seem to be a little bias. But that's also been explained to you ad infinitum. The Annies are women, they experience life as women, the advice they give is from a woman's perspective. Their audience is primarily female. So, yes, there are times when they understand a woman's side of a problem better than a man's. That's just obvious and natural. But it's nowhere near as endemic as you claim it to be, and it's nowhere near as harmful either. It is certainly not such a terrible crime as to deserve your obsessive and distorted campaign here, nor does it at all justify the mean-spirited and juvenile insults you hurl. That's childish and stupid, frankly. If there were any legitimacy to your argument (which

Lastly, the final flaw in your constant campaign here is that there are times when it absolutely completely *reasonable* for the advice to be different for women than for men. Boys and girls are different, still, and although we've made wonderful strides as a society, the experience of men and women in our culture is still *different*. So there are times when it would actually be inappropriate, even bad, to give the same advice to a woman than to a man, depending on the situation.

It gives you pleasure to point out all the hypocrisy except your own. And frankly, your hatred of women in general, and your obsessive vendetta against specific women here, negates any actual legitimacy your point might have.

However bad you think this double-standard is, your own behavior has been far, far worse. And your arguments are completely intellectually bankrupt, given how many posts you have to ignore just to be able to get on that faux soapbox and make your claims.

You're a fraud, through and through.

(Sorry for the weird absence, missing line above should read: "If there were any legitimacy to your argument (which would be more legitimate if you didn't make it so all-encompassing and extreme) your sophomoric repetition of fat-jokes would still erode that legitimacy. People who have rational points to make don't resort to such hateful language. It's only when your argument is weak that the ad hominem attacks begin."

Mike wrote " And frankly, your hatred of women in general, and your obsessive vendetta against specific women here, negates any actual legitimacy your point might have" and "You're a fraud, through and through" VERY well said Mike!!!

Booyah Vizzini- now scamper off you little buzzard!