Annie's Mailbox® by Kathy Mitchell and Marcy Sugar

Happy Friday all!

LW1: If this was a matter of your husband being tired, he wouldn't push you away. My money is on an affair or he's regretting the marriage. Since you have only been married about a year, I would consult an attorney about a possible annulment and then present him with an ultimatum: counseling/doctors office or end of marriage. You're lucky you found this out now before you invested too much time into this marriage.

LW2: Oh for corn's sakes! (to quote Fred Mertz from I Love Lucy). Talk about overreacting and making a mountain out of a mole hill! She took your kids to ICE CREAM not the local porn shop! Oh, ok, was it a slight lapse in judgement? Yes, she may have even broken a law because in my state, drivers under the age of 18 aren't allowed to have non family minors in the car with them. But that doesn't excuse you from flying off the handle, firing her, not paying her and making a big ole ruckus out of things.

My advice is for YOU to apologize for overreacting. Pay her and calmly tell her why you were upset. If you are calm, she'll likely apologize as well for her momentary lack of judgement. I would also arrange to have her babysit again for you as soon as possible to mend the bridge.

People make mistakes, especially young people learning the rules. Show this girl by example that you can be the bigger person. And for goodness sakes, learn to pick your battles moving forward. You've not only alienated her, but her parents. Not smart when they are neighbors.

LW3: THANK GOODNESS! A great idea. I wish more people would take that type of approach. I'm glad it all worked out for you. Well done.

Major overreacting LW2, and Annies. She didn't put those children "at risk!" She has a valid driver's license. Her sole error frankly was in telling the kids not to tell. That was the inappropriate part and would be what would prevent me from hiring her ever again. I suggest you apologize and pay the girl, and calm down.

Apart from keeping counselors employed, why in the world would LW1 need or want to see one? People in their fifties aren't infants. They don't need a counselor to help them sort through every detail of their lives. I seriously think the Annies, and similar columnists, have a quota to meet; they're required to refer letter writers to counselors "X" number of times a week, to keep their jobs.


My own advice would be to give her husband space for a while, and not pressure him. Talk to him (not a counselor) and tell him that she misses the closeness, and ask him to let her know. Ask if there's anything he wants to talk about. But make it clear there's no pressure. His behavioral change may be because of any of the things the Annies suggested, including the possibility that he is physically exhausted. Any job or career change can be stressful, and switching to a different shift is in itself hard on many people, particularly when they're older. It can throw their sleep cycle off and create numerous other problems. My basic advice would be, talk to your husband about what's going on, not a counselor.


LW2 --- please stop the dramatics. The sitter didn't endanger your kids. The Annies say she showed "terrible" judgement. I would say "questionable." What was her crime, exactly? She walked your kids over to another house (she didn't leave them alone in yours) then she drove them out for ice cream. Oh, the horror, the horror. And why exactly do you feel that she should apologize to your wife? What did your wife have to do with any of this? Pay the money you owe her, then stop being a jerk and leave her alone. And try not to spend the rest of your life stewing over this. Your kids survived the unspeakable horrors of a trip out to get ice cream.


LW3 --- good for you. You found a way to do what was necessary, and may have saved multiple lives by taking an unsafe driver off the road.

Apart from keeping counselors employed, why in the world would LW1 need or want to see one? People in their fifties aren't infants. They don't need a counselor to help them sort through every detail of their lives. I seriously think the Annies, and similar columnists, have a quota to meet; they're required to refer letter writers to counselors "X" number of times a week, to keep their jobs.


My own advice would be to give her husband space for a while, and not pressure him. Talk to him (not a counselor) and tell him that she misses the closeness, and ask him to let her know. Ask if there's anything he wants to talk about. But make it clear there's no pressure. His behavioral change may be because of any of the things the Annies suggested, including the possibility that he is physically exhausted. Any job or career change can be stressful, and switching to a different shift is in itself hard on many people, particularly when they're older. It can throw their sleep cycle off and create numerous other problems. My basic advice would be, talk to your husband about what's going on, not a counselor.


LW2 --- please stop the dramatics. The sitter didn't endanger your kids. The Annies say she showed "terrible" judgement. I would say "questionable." What was her crime, exactly? She walked your kids over to another house (she didn't leave them alone in yours) then she drove them out for ice cream. Oh, the horror, the horror. And why exactly do you feel that she should apologize to your wife? What did your wife have to do with any of this? Pay the money you owe her, then stop being a jerk and leave her alone. And try not to spend the rest of your life stewing over this. Your kids survived the unspeakable horrors of a trip out to get ice cream.


LW3 --- good for you. You found a way to do what was necessary, and may have saved multiple lives by taking an unsafe driver off the road.

LW2 - Many puzzling things here. Why didn't you pay the sitter when you returned from your evening out & before she went home? How could you have let 3 days go by, to say nothing of 6 months, without paying her the money you owe her? I agree that what she did was irresponsible & inexcusable. As for illegal - where I live, Illinois, there's a graduated licensing process, and it would be illegal for a brand new teenage driver to drive 3 unrelated children anywhere. However,your remedy is to never hire her again, not to stiff her or demand an apology 6 months later. Your comment that you're still in 'absolute shock' 6 months later makes me think you came down on this girl so hard her mom went into 'defensive' mode & feels like she has to protect her kid from you. I can see her point. If my child got a text from an adult male telling her to call him to "fix this mess already", I would tell him to back off & leave my kid alone. You may not understand the power relationship between an adult & a teenager, but no matter what my child had done, I would not have her getting together alone with an angry adult male, at least 10 years older than she is, to work anything out. Your best bet is to do what Annie said, which is pay the babysitter, and if you are lucky, she will give you that pound of flesh you so badly need, an apology. I agree she should have apologized, but she didn't. Most people would have found another babysitter and gotten over it long before now. It's hard to understand why you're so obsessed with this situation and this girl after so many months.

LW2 - Many puzzling things here. Why didn't you pay the sitter when you returned from your evening out & before she went home? How could you have let 3 days go by, to say nothing of 6 months, without paying her the money you owe her? I agree that what she did was irresponsible & inexcusable. As for illegal - where I live, Illinois, there's a graduated licensing process, and it would be illegal for a brand new teenage driver to drive 3 unrelated children anywhere. However,your remedy is to never hire her again, not to stiff her or demand an apology 6 months later. Your comment that you're still in 'absolute shock' 6 months later makes me think you came down on this girl so hard her mom went into 'defensive' mode & feels like she has to protect her kid from you. I can see her point. If my child got a text from an adult male telling her to call him to "fix this mess already", I would tell him to back off & leave my kid alone. You may not understand the power relationship between an adult & a teenager, but no matter what my child had done, I would not have her getting together alone with an angry adult male, at least 10 years older than she is, to work anything out. Your best bet is to do what Annie said, which is pay the babysitter, and if you are lucky, she will give you that pound of flesh you so badly need, an apology. I agree she should have apologized, but she didn't. Most people would have found another babysitter and gotten over it long before now. It's hard to understand why you're so obsessed with this situation and this girl after so many months.

In defense of Lw 2, it isn't the driving trip to get ice cream that bothers me it's the "don't tell yor parents" part. She should not be asking the kids to keep things from their parents. It sets up a bad example and a bad habit for the young kids.

Very good point, MT. Telling kids to keep a secret from parents could lead to a very dangerous situation (from predators especially), which is why most children are taught from an early age to always tell their parents immediately.

That said, I am bemused (like Kai archie) as to why LW didn't pay the sitter that evening for her services. He didn't know about the car ride until three days later! Maybe they had an agreement to pay at the end of the month (for multiple scheduled baby-sitting duties), but if that is the case, why is it this one evening that he owes her for?

LW3 - I'm glad your threat worked to keep your mother off the road, but if you had to follow through on it I doubt it would have worked very well. In most states, it is very difficult to have yourself appointed guardian of another adult (as it should be, for obvious reasons). In our state (Virginia) you would have to have the testimony of one or more physicians who are familiar with your mother that she was mentally incompetent and unable to handle her own affairs. After that, a guardian ad litem would be appointed to protect your mother's interests. This is an independent attorney who interviews all parties at length and submits a report and recommendation to the court before a guardian can be appointed. If the court finds that your mother is mentally competent and simply was being stubborn and using very poor judgment about driving, no guardianship would take place.

Having said that, I repeat that I'm pleased that in this case the threat alone was sufficient to keep a dangerous driver off the roadways.

OK folks, for those of you who think the parents of the children are overreacting. I would have to agree with you BUT in their defense, if anyone drove my children anywhere for anything without permission I would probably flip out too. There are so many dangers on the road, no matter how good a driver someone is, there is always, ALWAYS a moronic driver on the road who still texts, or uses the computer (i've seen it), or puts on their makeup (seen that too), reading the paper (or any document), or doing something that takes their eyes and mind off the road. The list is endless. I drive a school bus and have almost been hit by these idiots more than once. Mom and Dad should be able to expect their childrens sitter to stay home. In MD, young drivers cannot legally have a non-related minor in the car anyhow. Now, how the parents handled it after the fact? They should have presented a united front and gone down the street to speak with the girl and her mother personally, right away. Clearing the air and forgiving a juvenile mistake properly is the best way to teach the girl that life is full of choices and when you make the wrong one, its possible to get a second chance. They way it was handled, no wonder the girls mom was mad. If I were her, I probably would have been too. I was a teenage sitter, and the parents of children who entrust the safety of their kids to a teen are already going out on a limb of faith. And yes, when the sitter does something stupid (like take the kids for a ride in the car without permission), the protective parent thing goes into overdrive. Same as the mom of the sitter (like I said, overdrive). Everyone needs a calm head and face-to-face apologies should come from all sides. Then have her sit again with the promise of no more car trips.

LW3 BRAVO!!!!!!

LW1: Several possibilities here: tired from new shift, affair, second thoughts about a new marriage, some other recent physical problem he's afraid to go to the doctor about (remember that men are much more likely than women to pretend physical problems don't exist rather than making that doctor's appointment).

But, as always, you won't know which one, or which course of action to take, without better communication. Set aside some time on the weekend, when you are both awake, and ask him, again. Let him know how serious this is, how threatening it is to your marriage, and just ask what is going on and why things have changed so abruptly. How unsettling this is to you, and doesn't he want you to feel wanted, loved? You know him better than we do, so you'll know how to approach the conversation, but don't let him wiggle out of it. If he still absolutely refuses to talk, then let him know you'll be going to a counselor, with or without him, to ponder the future of your marriage. Hopefully that last bit will prod him to letting you know what's really going on, but if not... if at the end of it all he still keeps you in the dark... then you must prepare yourself to end the marriage.

LW2: I think the LW overreacted but I also think some commenters are overreacting about the overreaction. The LW's children were taken somewhere they were not authorized to go, without the parents' knowledge or permission, and then encouraged to lie about it. That *is* a problem, and could have set up even worse problems -- how would anyone react if the sitter got into a car accident? Or if one of the children wandered away or was kidnapped from the ice cream place? It's one thing to keep an eye on children in their own home; it's another to keep track of two children in a possibly busy public place like an ice cream restaurant. So the sitter was using poor judgement and put the children at additional, unnecessary, unauthorized risk, and the mother probably came home and immediately went into "worst case scenario" mode.

If you hire a sitter to watch your kids at home, then that's where you expect your kids and the sitter to be. Period.

Hopefully this can be expressed to the sitter (and her mother!) a little more calmly, but I would pay the sitter, give her one more opportunity to apologize, but then find a new sitter and let this go.

LW3: Well done.

LW1 - This is not a case of, "I'm too tired." I've known plenty of men who would never let a job interfere with sex, especially with a new spouse. He's either having an affair, has regretted the marriage, is gay or something else. I wouldn't even bother with the counseling. I would seriously just end it. I don't see anything changing.

LW2 - I guess I'm in the minority because I would've flipped, too. When I was a teenage babysitter, I never took the kids out without permission first. And the fact that she said, "Don't tell your mother" shows that she knows that she did something wrong. That being said, when I found out, I would've gone over to her house and asked to speak to her and would've asked her about it. If she seemed honestly sorry, I would've forgiven her. I would trust my gut, however, on whether or not I'd ask her to babysit again.

But I do think it's odd that she never paid the girl. She definitly should've paid her and still should.

Count me in as someone who is baffled by the comments that LW is overreacting. The sitter knew it was wrong because she asked the kids not to tell. When is that ever appropriate? Don't tell I was smoking, don't tell me friends came over, don't tell someone is touching you. Encouraging kids to not tell sets them up for a lot of problems. LW understands that. However I am clueless as to why she was not paid that day or even anytime during the next 3 days til child told parent about the *don't tell situation*.

take two-while i'm glad the third letter writer was able to get an unsafe driver off the road, i am appalled at how this was accomplished. is that how he plans on treating his mother for the rest of her life...'if i don't agree with your decision, i'm going to take over your life'? my way or the highway? if mom gives in to him, then he has already every argument. the only thing lacking is the official court sanctioned guardianship. if he were my child, i would disown him.

LW 2: The sitter is still a child, herself. I'm not saying that being upset isn't justified, because it is, but, you can't expect a teenager to have an adult world view. And that's no excuse for not paying the sitter in a timely manner. The fact of the matter is that no one was injured and the teen provided a service for you.

Many states have laws that require someone under 18 to have someone over 21 with them while driving for a reason. Teen drivers are still new drivers, whether or not they have their driver's license verses having their permit.

There's also no need to call the teen up and fire her. All that does is antagonize her and your neiborgh. You just sit her down, pay her for the last time she worked for you, explain that you don't want her or any sitter taking your kids out of the house/ neiborghood/ whatever your limit is and why. You thank her for all the times she has babysat for you. Then you find a new sitter quietly, without any dramatics, next time.

Wow, with all the letters regarding middle-aged women not having sex, I don't think I've ever seen the Annies suggest that the reason might be that the wife is having an affair--yet if the husband doesn't want sex, that must be one of the possible reasons? Why didn't they suggest the man might be going trhough menopause? P.S. Annies, many people who are having affairs still have sex with their spouses too. It's not an either/or situation.

LW2: I would NEVER let my children ride in a car with a 17 year-old driver. Licensed, sure, but the girl doesn't have nearly enough experience for me to risk my kids' lives. Ask PPCLPS why young female drivers have the second-highest auto insurance rates. (second only to young male drivers)
Hell no, the girl wouldn't get paid, and I wouldn't care about mending fences with the parents after that either.

LW #2: Like so many people who write in, am I getting the full story? You said you fired her after finding out about the clandestine mission three days later. I am really disoriented why you had not paid the girl her money even then and you never explained it. Next, you said you fired the girl. I BELIEVE the way you fired the girl initiated a defense mechanism from her mother. Mothers will always defend their kids, even serial killers by the way. Since you knew these people so well, why didn't you just walk over and talk to both the girl and the mother together? You KNEW you all were GOOD friends. Getting fired "over the phone" in my mind has lots of implications and probably was a little over the top in your anger.

Did the girl deserve "firing"? Yes. But as a boss reminded me long ago, "when a person leaves the company after they are fired in a bad way, they are a walking advertisement against you. Fire them when you are both in a good mood and let them go in as positive way as possible". Then, everyone wins.

Some things to consider next time.

p.s. I have fired lots of people in my business career.

PLEASE: How do I get to your website of fun and liberal/conservative ideology?? Can't seem to find it.
But then, I am a computer idiot.
Please send me the site link to skimmel666@comcast.net (the 666's represent my B-day, so don't
go worrying about Satan. I do not worship Satan. I worship satin. ;) )

LW1: How can you say that "he refuses to talk about it" and "he says he loves you"? Any man who really loves his woman would talk about anything that upsets her, out of love and concern. The problem could be any of the suggested reasons, including an uneasiness of dealing with male menopause. You need to get him to talk, explaining to him that if he loves you, he will care enough about you to talk about something so important to you.
If he won't you may need to suggest joint counseling, or a seperation, to get him to see you mean business.

I've never commented before, but I had to take the time to comment today. LW1, please sit down and talk with your husband. My own husband works third shift, and has for the past year. In the beginning, it was very difficult for us, as the schedules have completely "shifted". With less time to spend together, it means less feelings of closeness, and can result in a pretty serious divide.

We found that simple acts of kindness to let the other know we were thinking of each other - notes left on the pillow, a piece of chocolate on a fresh towel for the bath, etc; made the difference for us. Some people's bodies don't "reset" to a new shift time, and it's not a normal feeling of tiredness, and it takes some understanding to come to grips with that. Sometimes, it's not so much about being tired, it's the feelings of loneliness that working a difference shift can bring. It's so important to look out for him, and continue to stand by his side. If it was bedroom fun before, you'll be able to get there - just have patience. Good luck!

LW1-
I can understand the possible exhaustion, but what's with the pushing away? Sex is one thing, affection is another. Nothing more than a hug doesn't do much in that department.

No, there isn't much you can do if he himself adamantly refuses to do anything address this. But apart from the lack of sex, which is a frustration to you of course, there is the much bigger issue of his totally ignoring your needs and wants, and taking unilateral decisions as if you didn't matter.

You have to decide whether you want to live the rest of your life with little more than a roommate with someone who obviously doesn't care how you feel. If the conclusion is no, THEN you can present him with an ultimatum, making it bluntly clear that it's not just about sex. Depending on the true reason for his lack of interest (I doubt there's only tiredness involved here), there is a small chance that the serious threat of losing you will spur him into action, but don't count on it. Do NOT give him an ultimatum unless you're fully prepared to follow through, because you most probably will have to.

P.S.: Good thing this is happening befofe you had a couple of children, and extricating yourself would be at a much higher cost, both for him and for yourself.

P.P.S.: Isn't it interesting that in this case, the Annies call this "unacceptable", but if the tables were turned, they would say that she's going through menopause, that her indifference is perfectly normal and that he should just suck it up?

LW2-
Granted that the girl didn't ask permission, but she took them for ice cream, for Pete's sake, not to a strip bar. She didn't take them 50 miles out of town. She wasn't driving without a license, or under the influence, and there is no mention anywhere that she was speeding or otherwise driving recklessly. Frankly, she didn't do much wrong, really, and no, I don't see her putting the kids at risk here, solely because she put them in a car for a couple of blocks. Her biggest mistake as far as I can see, was to tell the kids not to tell their parents, wich made it look like a lot bigger deal than it really is.

For you to fire her over this was vastly overreacting and I can't blame her mother for being upset. And yes, you owe her the money for that evening, what could you be thinking? Sure, you had a right to be annoyed because she didn't ask permission, but a Pinatubo explosion because she took them for ice cream was so way over the top that her mother is perfectly right not to want her daughter alone wih you - given your lack of control and sense of proportion, God knows what else you're capable of. And you've been steaming for how long over this? YOU owe her an apology.

P.S.: You just lost a very convenient and perfectly good sitter over your rotten temper. Brilliant result. Happy?

@Cathy ARmacost
Yes, there is always the moronic driver texting (etc etc etc) while driving, but that driver can just as well plow into pedestrians on the sidewalk as into another car. Would the LW have gone off the deep end if she had WALKED the kids to the ice cream parlour? They're not infants and toddlers for her to (possibly) have too much to handle on her own doing that, and I don't see that taking them for ice cream is a crime in itself.

LW3-
CLAP-CLAP-CLAP-CLAP-CLAP-CLAP!

@Kitty
Someone who can't see obviously can't drive - this should be a no-brainer. I don't know if that would have been a winning argument in this case, but if I were the sitting judge, it would seem to me that someone legally blind who yet adamantly refuses to give up driving would be a point in proving mental incompetence.

LW2: While I wouldn't be happy that the babysitter took my kids somewhere without my permission (and told them not to tell), I don't understand why you didn't pay the kid, when you didn't find out about it until 3 days later. Also, did you bother to tell the parents of the kid that slept over that he/she would be staying with a sitter and not you? Personally, if I'm sending my kid to a friend's house for a sleepover, I expect the parents to be there. I wouldn't be happy about that either.

As for the second letter, this is not a small matter.

The sitter had JUST gotten her license, was 17, there are legal restrictions, as already pointed out. There were the two kids, PLUS another child, a friend of the kids, somebody else's child that this father was responsible for that night, read the letter again.

So she walks them over to their house, puts them in the car, drives them to a local ice cream store-now how far was that? A few blocks or a few miles? Doesn't really matter, that girl broke the law (the restrictions) and then said, don't tell your parents. Major, major bad judgment.

I think this father reacted quite properly; the sitter's mother is the one acting like it was nothing. And about her getting paid for that night, someone else pointed out that maybe she was paid monthly, but why does that matter? She did a lousy job sitting that night and I wouldn't pay her a cent. She does owe an apology.

I'm with the dad on this one.

LW1 and LW2 - Look at the time line. LW1, your man is having an affair with LW2's 17 year old baby sitter. Your husband works at an ice crean store, right?
LW3 - Raising parents is not easy.

Oh, Rick, you silly thing, you.

I'd actually like to know what Lolley thinks about these letters today.

@ Lise
Your comment about someone who doesn't want to give up driving being mentally incompetent is one reason you're (thankfully) not a judge. I agree she shouldn't be driving, but according to your theory anyone who does something in any way dangerous to herself or others should be declared incompetent. I hope you never find yourself in that situation.

@Lise, the babysitter was hired to watch the kids *at home*. At the very least, she broke the contract she had with the parents, so I disagree with you -- the parents have every right to be angry and to fire her. I think the way they did it was over the top, but to suggest *they* need to apologize a bridge too far.

And the fact is that the babysitter KNEW she was doing wrong, or else she wouldn't have told the kids to not tell the parents. Indefensible, irresponsible behavior on the sitter's part.

@Rick, I think LW3's elderly mother was driving LW1's husband to the ice cream store for the affair with LW2's baby sitter. But then LW3 made her give up her license, and now LW1's husband has to walk to his hook ups, which *exhausts* him, so now his wife suspects something is up. Q.E.D.

RE LW2:
Add me to the small list of those who side with the father. this does not sit well with me - even if the sitter had the purest of intentions you never know. Has anyone thought of the affect this could have on the children? A trusted person, asks them to lie to their parents about doing something 'fun'. What will she ask them to lie about next time? this is often how child molestors groom their victims. I'm not saying that this girl is a threat, but children this young are easily impressionable. I know that everyone has a different parenting philosophy but if I am paying someone to babysit my children in my home - that is what I expect to have happen. Grandma and Grandpa taking the kids out is another story. But a 17 year old who legally should not be driving minors in the first place - that is wrong. And asking the kids to lie is worse. I don't know why she wasn't paid (I pay my sitters when I return home) but I would have paid her and three days later when I found out what happened I would have informed her and her parents of my disappointment and let them know that we wouldn't use her again.

@ Mike H -- hear, hear to the notion that perhaps the BTL is overreacting to LW2's overreaction

@Shannon & Patrick Turner -- Bravo! You are both exactly right on! The only problem is, both of you are telling LW2 how he should have handled it in the moment, which, unfortunately, is long past. So you are totally right about he should have handled it in the first place, but you're not addressing what should be done now.

@nanchan & Lise B -- both of you note that the kids were taken for ice cream, not to a porn shop or strip bar. I'd say you (and others who piled on the dad) are missing the point, since the point isn't WHERE the kids were taken. The point is that she took the kids ANYWHERE without permission from the kids' parents (and, frankly, I'm betting she didn't have her own parents' permission to use the car, since her parents were out with the parents of the kids she was babysitting), and then she told the kids not tell on her. I agree that the LW didn't handle this well, but I cannot blame him for being upset. The fact that the kids were taken somewhere innocent doesn't mean the kids weren't put at risk (of course, the fact is, every time ANYONE gets in a car, you're taking a risk -- but there's a big difference between Mom and Dad taking that risk and a brand-new teen-age driver taking that risk). And it's not as though she took them there because she thought, "gee, wouldn't it be nice if I got the kids some ice cream?" -- instead, she thought, "babysitting these kids is boring, I'd much rather be hanging out with my friends, why don't I just hop on over to the ice cream shop where my friend is working?" That also means that once she got the ice cream store, she was probably far more involved in gossiping with her friend than watching the kids -- potentially saying stuff that shouldn't be said in front of kids and potentially not noticing if the kids were getting into any sort of trouble. And we don't know how far the ice cream place is -- but that's ALSO not the point -- is there anyone out there who hasn't heard the old saw (that I believe is a real statistic) that the majority of car accidents happen close to home. So, sure, all's well that ends well, and yes, teens will be teens -- but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be reprimanded (calmly and appropriately -- which clearly isn't the way the LW did it) when they do something wrong.

LW2 -- As Patrick and Shannon have pointed out, while you are not in the least bit wrong for having been upset and for "firing" the babysitter, you did not handle this at all well. If you had handled yourself calmly and spoken with the teenager IN FRONT OF THE MOTHER (so teen can't make any claims about what you did or said), this all could have been wrapped up quickly and without any mess. And if after that you still didn't feel like she could be trusted, you don't "fire" her -- you simply don't hire again. As to what you do, now... Personally, I'd just leave it alone and find a new babysitter. But, if you really want to try to make things right because these are friends and neighbors, you sit down with the girl's parents, you apologize for overreacting but explain why you were so upset. As others have noted, the mom probably would have been just as fired up as you were about what the daughter did if you hadn't put her into defensive mom mode when you "attacked" her child (trust me, that's how she sees it). But frankly, as this has now been festering for six months, I seriously doubt you're going to be able to mend fences, which is why I'd just leave it alone and find a new sitter.

@sarah morrow -- if I'm remembering correctly, you once were a counselor yourself, so I'm a little surprised by what you had to say about LW1. Just because someone is in his/her 50s doesn't mean they have all the answers and couldn't benefit from counseling. Still, I agree that the person she needs to talk with is her husband. Only problem is, clearly she has attempted to talk with him about it, or else she wouldn't already know that he says he feels unwell but won't see a doctor and also refuses to see a counselor.

@Mike H -- you're batting 1000 today. LW1 should try one last time to talk with her husband, and needs to make sure she chooses the moment well -- a time when they are both rested and not pressed for time, as you suggested. And then she also has to be prepared to realize this marriage isn't going to work out, depending on how that goes.

@Jane (#16) -- I laughed out loud at your post! And in all seriousness, you are right about the Annies' double standard about why a middle-aged or older man stops having sex (affair) and why a middle-aged (or older) woman stops having sex (menopause). For all that it made me laugh, yours was a very insightful, interesting observation. I have to admit that I would consider "affair" for a man faster than I would for a woman, partly because of my own gender bias and partly because the statistics suggest men are more likely to cheat than are women (but hey, those cheating men have to have someone with whom to cheat, right?).

Rick, you always make me smile! Thanks for wrapping this all up so neatly.

Lisa, your statistics are wrong. Women have "progressed" in the last 30 years or so and now cheat as much, if not more than men do.
LW2 - I'm in dad's corner.

Why is every comment addressed to LW? Is this a secret code? :)

About your response to Upstate N.Y. Dad:
You are way too easy in your response---this is very serious. I bet the parents would NOT have given permission.
A very similar thing happened about 20 years ago where I live. The driver was a 16-year-old babysitter who drove three kids to get ice cream in the daytime on a clear, sunny afternoon. On the way home, she turned left in front of another car at a traffic light. She suffered serious injuries, and one of the little kids was killed outright, and another died a few days later. Both families were and are devastated.
At age 16 the driver is too new, and the responsibility is way too big.

Re: Kitty

I think you are missing my point, which is that if her judgment is so impaired that she cannot see the correlation between blindness and the unability to drive, then something is seriously wrong with her thinking process. Thankfully, it was not the case with the mother of LW3 - who did what she had to do to "drive" the point home.

I never said that "anyone who does something in any way dangerous to herself or others" - should automatically be declared mentally incompetent (nor even that it should be the only criterion considered by the judge). Definetly the person at risk ought to be reasoned with first, which is what the LW did. You're jumping to conclusions here, and putting them in my mouth.

@Mike H
Of course the teenager did something wrong, which is why I said that the LW had a right to be upset about her not asking permission - and telling the kids not to say anything to the parents. That was definitely wrong. What I disagree with is him blowing his top like an exploding volcano, making a federal case out of it even months after the fact, and making it look like she committed a crime against humanity.

So he doesn't want her to babysit for him anymore. Fine. Let it go already, and leave the kid alone. And yes, pay her for the evening. She did watch the kids, and well enough that nothing happened. AND treated them to free ice cream, that was either on the house or that she paid for herself.

@Lisa
Of course "the point is that she took the kids ANYWHERE without permission from the kids' parents", and this is what he had a right to be upset about- and telling the kids keep keep mum about it. But nevertheless, where she took the kids and why, how far or close it was, how prudently/recklessly she was driving, are all factors that determine the amount of risk involved, and therefore the gravity of the offense.

And yes, it would be made worse if she doesn't have a legal right to have underage people in the car she's driving, but we don't know whether or not she did and, even if it existed, she may have been unaware of the restriction herself. Laws vary depending on the state and province.

Victoria had the right of it on how it should have been handled back then. What should be done NOW is pay the girl for the evening she DID work, apologise for blowing his top AND obsessing about this still months after the fact, and find a new sitter. I agree with you that with him making a federal case out of this for the last six months is likely to make any fence non-mendable.

As for your scenario about her driving the family car without permission, taking the kids for ice cream for the wrong reasons and paying more attention to her friends than to the kids... I hope we can both agree that this is pure conjecture. After all, they had been using this girl on a regular basis for a very long time witn no complaints until this.

Considering that the true risk really was minimal and that nothing bad happened, this should have been handled the way Victoria suggested and she should have been given a second chance. I'm sure all she needed was to have it explained calmy why what she did was wrong - teens sometimes do stupid things, they don't always think things through and their education is not finished yet - that's why they're not considered adults yet: the front temporal lobe has not finished maturing.

'Tis said it takes a village to raise a child. This man lost a golden opportunity for a valuable teaching moment - considering nothing bad happened. As it is now, he lost both a convenient, good sitter (as teenagers do) and a good neighbour. I would be curious to hear what his wife thinks of his temper.

(Lisa (post 30), I don't read Lise's posts anymore, so I can't speak for her, but in my own defense, I had a similar situation to the LW's and here's how I handled it (which is what I based my post on)

Situation: Neighborhood teenager was watching my daughter (then age 7) at my home while I was at work. I never specifically said "Don't take her out of my house!" and I doubt the LW did either there is NO indication in the letter that he did. The babysitter (age 16) took my daughter to the lake (within walking distance) without my knowledge or consent. Later that night, my daughter told me she had gone to the lake. I was appalled because 1) at that point my daughter was not a strong swimmer and 2) the babysitter hadn't told me.

What I did:

1) the first thing I did, and I have had to learn this lesson the hard way, was to realize that my gut first reaction of panic and anger would get nothing accomplished. First of all, my daughter was the one telling me this information. Had I freaked out and gotten all panicky about it, I would have worried her. Worse, she could have thought I was angry with HER. That was not the case. I wanted my daughter to continue to trust me, she did or she wouldn't have told me what she had done. So, when she told me what had happened, I remained calm and assured her I wasn't angry at her (which is what the LW should have done, no indication either way in the letter), and decided to handle the babysitter myself,

2. The second thing I did was really think the whole thing through. Questions I asked myself: Had the babysitter ever let me down in the past or was this a one time thing? Answer, She had always been reliable and this was something new. What was my daughter's relationship to the babysitter? Answer: they were like sisters. Was the babysitter really aware that I would get as upset as I did? Not likely.

3. After thinking it through, I contacted the parents first and told them my concerns. They backed me up and we decided to have a meeting with the babysitter to explain what went wrong. Needless to say, she was petrified at having this kind of meeting and knew something was up. After all (as in the LW's case) the babysitter was not much more than a child herself. We wanted to TEACH her. Her parents and I TOGETHER addressed the issue head on. The babysitter looked like she was about ready to cry and apologized.

4. The parents and I had decided before the meeting that we didn't want this incident to break the relationship, so we arranged for her to babysit my daughter the next day. Why? To show that even though she had made an error in judgement, we are all human and that we have to learn from our mistakes and move on.

Result: She never took my child out of the house again while babysitting. the parents and I became closer as a result of working together to TEACH instead of PUNISH and we have all remained friends. I ran into the babysitter a few months ago and she ran up to me and hugged me and told me she missed me (we've since moved away from that neighborhood).

What the LW has done is counterproductive. He needs to calm down and apologize for freaking out. You're right in one way, it doesn't matter where the kids were taken, but that doesn't excuse his actions. He's probably flipped out his own kids too. How likely do you think his kid is going to be to tell her dad the truth knowing he's going to flip out and go all ballistic on people that that kid probably likes a LOT?

Re: Marg

LW stands for Letter Writer. And, while we're at it - BTL mean Below The Line, as in, commentary section below the main body of the letters and their respective responses.

There are many acronyms used on the net. You can usually find its meaning right away by Googling it as is.

Re LW#2 (Sorry if I show up with 2 posts regarding this, my first one just went bye-bye)-----
The babysitter took the kids out in a car without permission from the parents.
She took them to an ice-cream parlor to see her friends (NOT to buy them ice cream) when she was supposed to be watching them in their home. She didn't ask permission to do this. (And by the way, she didn't have to be on her way to a porn shop for an accident to happen, the destination doesn't matter. Perfectly innocent trips end up in accidents with inexperienced drivers at the wheel.) Destination is irrelevant.
And then she tops it all off by asking the kids to lie to their parents.
HELL YES, she should have been fired.
The only thing the LW should have done differently was, obviously, to pay her; and he should have had the discussion with her as to why he was firing her WITH A PARENT PRESENT, since she is a minor.
This could be a valuable learning experience for this 17-year-old, if she pays attention. When she gets a 'real' job someday, her parents will not be there to run interference for her if she does something her 'boss' didn't authorize and then asks others to lie so she won't be found out. The real world doesn't work that way, and now she knows there are consequences. Or at least she would if Mommy wasn't sticking her nose in to defend her actions.

Re: Lise Brouillette Thank you! I was thinking it must be something simple, but the old brain failed me on this one. Thanks again.

Re: Mike H
LW doesn't say anything about her being hired to watch the kids "at home". For all we know, she has always walked the kids to the park, ice cream place, whatever. She shoulld NOT have driven them anywhere without permission, but if LW didn't address this when she got her license, he certainly should have. Failure on both sides there.
Why didn't he pay her? MAYBE she got paid monthly and that's why they didn't pay her when they got home. Unlikely though, for a casual sitter. It's much easier to just pay as you go and not keep track of how many hours she was there for the month. And regardless of the driving issue, she watched the children that night, which is what they hired her to do...she should be paid. And she should be paid extra, since there was an extra child that night.
Speaking of the extra child, did his/her parents know that he was going to be left with a teenager unknown to them? If I were them, I would not be happy that I entrusted my child with someone who dumped him with a teenager (apparently an irresponsible one at that) unknown to me.
I think there is a good lesson here for both of them...she did something she clearly knew was not a good idea (or she wouldn't have told the kids to keep it a secret) and she lost her job. He blew up and fired her...and lost the babysitter, and a friendship, they clearly value. If not, they wouldn't be trying to "fix this mess already".
They both made mistakes, and now they are both dealing with the consequences. Now they need to move on.

@Lise
I have no desire to start an argument here, but I think it's you who missed MY point. I wasn't stating that I disagreed with the LW's threat to her mother, or that the mother should be allowed to continue to drive after having been declared legally blind. What I said was that the daughter would probably have had difficulty in following through with her threat based upon that one instance of total lack of judgment on her mother's part. You implied that the mother's behavior could be a factor in having her declared incompetent, but I'm saying that it would have to be coupled with MANY other things before a guardianship would be granted. It is not an easy process to achieve.
In any event, the daughter's goal WAS achieved and everyone is better off for that having occurred, and I don't think we're in any disagreement on this.

@nanchan -- not that you need any kudos from me, but it sounds like you handled the situation exactly the right way (and in a manner similar to the one I suggested -- calmly talk with the girl with the parent present -- you engaged the parents first and then you all talked with the girl as a united front, which is even better). I already agree with you and others that LW handled this poorly. I felt like the whole "it's not like she took them to XXX" sounded a little too close to the mother of the babysitter's "it's not like it was illegal" -- which completely misses the real point. But I understand that you weren't simply saying, "gee, LW, get a grip, this wasn't a problem." You were saying, "sure, this was a problem, but you screwed up by overreacting and just made it worse."

@Lise -- basically, same as what I just said to nanchan. I think we're basically in agreement, since what Victoria suggested is similar to what I suggested -- calmly talk with the girl with the parent present. As I said to nanchan, I just felt like the whole porn shop/strip club bit sort of muddied the waters. You are right that the destination would factor in -- obviously, if the destination HAD been a strip club or even just somewhere it would be easier for the kids to get in trouble than an innocent ice cream shop, it would definitely have been worse, and perhaps the LW's reaction would have been more understandable. Ironically enough, even if the sitter had taken them somewhere totally inappropriate, I still think the approach should have been the same: calmly talk with the girl with a parent present.

@oveta -- we've come a long way, baby -- fabulous!

Re: Marg

Glossary:

LW: Letter Writer
BTL: Below the line (as in the comment section)
FWIW: for what it's worth
WRT; With regards to

I'm sure the creative BTL's will come up with more soon. Hope this helps!

@shirley, it seems pretty clear in context that taking the kids out of the home was completely outside of the agreement, and even the babysitter knew it -- that's why she wanted it kept secret.

Lisa: thank you for a respectful reply.

One point I made in my last post but noone is addressing was that I think the LW has really hurt his relationship with his CHILDREN. These kids told their parents something that caused a huge deal in their young world. The father freaking out on who they thought was a trusted caregiver... they will likely start to keep more secrets from their parents than they already are.... and when and if the real scary stuff happens (teen pregnancy, drug abuse etc) the LW has proven to his children that he can't handle a situation calmly.

Bigger damage here than the relationship with the neighbors. It's his relationship to his children. Way to go teaching coping skills, Dad!

Re: Mike H

Many other scenarios could happen here.

1. the babysitter was told not to use the car.
2. The babysitter's friends at the ice cream parlor were people who she didn't want her parents to know she was seeing.
3. The LW hates ice cream (possible! Some people don't want their kids to eat sugar)
4. The babysitter's parents had told the babysitter that the LW was paranoid about things and even though they were ok with her taking the kids to a different place, didn't want the LW to know. (ok, lame, but possible)
5. The Kids were lying and the babysitter never told them not to tell.
6. the kids, after finding out that the babysitter's friend worked at an ice cream parlor, begged her to take them even though they knew they shouldn't go.

List goes on, Mike.

Re: Mike H

Many other scenarios could happen here.

1. the babysitter was told not to use the car.
2. The babysitter's friends at the ice cream parlor were people who she didn't want her parents to know she was seeing.
3. The LW hates ice cream (possible! Some people don't want their kids to eat sugar)
4. The babysitter's parents had told the babysitter that the LW was paranoid about things and even though they were ok with her taking the kids to a different place, didn't want the LW to know. (ok, lame, but possible)
5. The Kids were lying and the babysitter never told them not to tell.
6. the kids, after finding out that the babysitter's friend worked at an ice cream parlor, begged her to take them even though they knew they shouldn't go.

List goes on, Mike.

nanchan:

Oh, that's a big leap. We don't know that this dad explodes about everything. I don't explode about everything, but once in a while, I do. Could be what happened, could be I'm worn down physically or sick that day, but normally I keep a good grip on my temper.

I think he was more alarmed about what could have happened (accident) than anything else. And trying to cover it up. That's not good under any circumstance.

I still think the sitter's mom should have done a lot better; I know parents are ready to defend their kids, but I've learned that if my kids do something wrong, to acknowledge it and not minimize it. I don't feel they can do no wrong.

@nanchan -- regarding the LW's relationship with his own kids...I do think you raise a legitimate point there. It definitely depends on a lot of information we don't have -- did he overreact in front of his kids (which is likely, but we don't know), is this typical of the LW, etc. But regardless of all of that, it's very likely those kids are going to think twice before they tell dad about anything they think he might be unhappy about, and that's no good.

@jar8818 -- totally agree that the sitter's mom's response (as reported by the LW) is jaw-dropping. Even if no one ever explicitly said "you are not to take the kids out," I'm sure it was assumed by everyone, including the sitter and her mother, that it was not appropriate to take the kids out without permission. And even if the LW was overreacting, the mother's response shouldn't have been, "but she didn't break any laws," the response should have been, "I understand why you're upset, and I agree this was inappropriate. Please leave disciplining my child to me." Had the mom made it clear to the LW that she shared his concern (just not his way of dealing with it), that likely would have nipped at least some portion of this brouhaha in the bud.

@jar8818, part 2 -- forgot to add that I seriously doubt the LW has given us a totally accurate account of what he said (and how he said it) to both the sitter and the sitter's mother, and I also seriously doubt that the LW has given us a totally accurate account of how the mother responded.

Re: nanchan Thank you; it's so simple I couldn't see the forest for the trees, lol.

Re: jar8818

Which one of the MULTIPLE scenarios is a "huge leap".... maybe you should focus on the POINT which is that it's not as simple as Mike was trying to make it.

Have a lovely afternoon!

I was referring to your post #48, and I wrote my comment at the same time as you were writing your post #49 apparently.

@nanchan, still pretty clear that the babysitter was out of line, and the *most* likely scenario, given the description in the letter, is that the removal of the kids from the house in the first place was the main issue.

Regardless, the babysitter was wrong the moment she did something the parents shouldn't be told about.

It's incredibly unlikely that the parents would have overreacted if the babysitter DID have permission to take the kids out of the house in the first place.

Occam's razor, here.

I don't know why it is being assumed that the father flipped out? this is what he said:
"Three days later, our 9-year-old accidentally spilled the beans. I called the sitter and fired her, and then I told her mother what had happened. Her only response was, "Well, it wasn't illegal." We haven't spoken since. Two weeks ago, I texted the sitter and told her to call me so we could fix this mess already.
I hoped she would apologize to my wife, even though she has not admitted she did anything wrong. Instead, her mother texted me back and told me to leave her daughter alone. She then reminded me that I never paid the girl for sitting that night. I am still in absolute shock. Any advice? — Upstate N.Y. Dad"
Other than not paying the sitter immediately, I don't think he was wrong. If he was upset, he was within his right, but he doesn't say he flipped out and it's weird that that is what most are taking away from this.
His kids and their friend likely went along with the secrecy because it was exciting for them to go somewhere with their 17year old sitter. Or it's quite possible that they didn't want to go and felt that they had to go along with ther person who was in charge of them. We don't know, but we do know that she used poor judgement by leaving and them asking them to lie. That seems like a perfectly good reason not to use her again. She clearly lacks the judgement to be held responsible for young children as she still behaves like one himself.
I think it a stretch to assume that the father has damaged his relationship with his children and that they will keep hiding things from him. The job of a parent is to protect your children, teach them right from wrong, clothe & feed them, and to provide them with tools that will help them become responsible adults. You also need to be comfortable being the 'bad guy' by setting rules that they are too young to see the benefit in. Anything could have happened and all involved are lucky that nothing did. This father was absolutely within his right to be upset and the kids are absolutely within their right to be upset with his reaction as are the sitter and her mother. But that doesn't mean that they get to break the rules or hide things because dad might get upset. This is a life lesson that we have all learned in one way or another - we have to take responsibility for our actions. The sitter lost a job and money and the kids probably lost some trust from their dad OR they didn't want to go and .
I don't understand why most people feel that the father was out of line for doing his job of protecting his children and setting boundaries that he is within his right to set.

Re: victoria

Probably because he used the term "firing" her. That sets up a tone of exaggeration right there - there is no contract, no legal obligation as she is not an official employee. All he had to do was not use her again, no explanation even needed. Granted that this was a "close'" neigbour, but the explanation would have been needed to be forwarded only if the girl or the mother asked. Of course, the best way to handle the situation would have been to do what you said.

For him to pick up the phone and "fire" her does come across as way over the top. Anf, after six months, this should have been water under the bridge a long time ago, and yet he's still at it (more over the top behaviour), which would explain the mother telling him to leave her daughter alone. AND, he didn't even pay her. This is what we're reacting to.

Lise:
ah! Didn't even think of it that way. Thanks for the pointing that (very obvious) angle out!

LW1--If Annie's Mailbox is any indication, there are a helluva lot of couples out there not having sex. Maybe they should start a side spouse swap web site where they hookup up the spouses that DO want sex with each other! Good grief. But I digress... "If he's not willing to discuss this further, it's hard to know what to do or think." Absolutely. Communication is the key here and it seems as though your husband has shut that door. My guess is that his new work schedule has thrown off his equilibrium a bit which can affect all areas of ones life. Your once rich sex life is one of the casualties. Your husband is probably embarrassed which is why he refuses to see his doctor or even discuss the matter. This of course leaves you in limbo, frustrated and exasperated. Your choices are pretty clear. First, give your husband some time to adjust to his new work schedule and see if his libido gradually returns. In the interim, don't push the issue. If things don't improve, then sit your husband down for a heart to heart and explain how important intimacy is to the integrity of your marriage and urge your husband to attend couples counseling with you. Also request that he see his doctor for a full medical workup. If he doesn't comply, then I urge you to go to counseling alone for guidance on how best to proceed.

LW2--First and foremost I think you grossly overreacted. So your babysitter drove the children to the local ice cream parlor. Big deal! Her mother is right, it isn't illegal. Unless you made it crystal clear to the babysitter in advance that she was not to leave with the children under any circumstances then her actions fall into what I would consider a gray area. Even though I do concede that her instructions to the children not to mention the little field trip make me think she may have known you wouldn't have approved. Regardless, she is a 17 year old and perhaps her head wasn't in the right place even if her heart was. Instead of blowing your top and then escalating the ugliness by involving the girl's mother, you should have issued a sharp rebuke, laid down some firm ground rules for the future and then let it go. Instead you lost a good babysitter for which you owe payment whether you like it or not!

@victoria -- I agree that the LW had every right to be displeased to discover what the babysitter had done, and I agree that he had every right to tell the sitter about his displeasure and find a new sitter going forward. Although the LW doesn't say that he "flipped out," I wouldn't expect him to do so. Most folks writing in to an advice columnist tend to paint themselves in the best light possible, and even if they are up front about their own failings, the fact is we're only getting one side of the story here. It is, of course, possible that the LW was perfectly calm and appropriate in all of his dealings with the sitter and her mother -- but then you sort of have to wonder why there's even still a "mess" to "fix" six months later.

And while it's certainly possible that the sitter's mother really and truly saw nothing wrong with her daughter's actions and her only response was "well, it wasn't illegal," I would suggest what is more likely is that LW was NOT calm, said things he shouldn't have said in a way they shouldn't have been said (shouted accusations come to mind), that put the mother's back up and put her in full "defending my child" mode. Either the sitter's mom is completely off her rocker, or the LW was aggressive/rude/shouting, etc. when he dealt with the sitter and her mother (seems more likely to me -- who hasn't flown off the handle when they thought someone put their children at risk?).

You, I, nanchan and others have all outlined how this should have been handled -- LW should have calmly spoken with the sitter and her mother TOGETHER, calmly explained his disappointment and then, depending on past history and how the sitter responded, he could decide to give her another chance, or he could quietly find another sitter and simply never ask the neighbor's daughter to babysit again. When he says he "fired" her, that was a bit of a red flag for me and suggested that he angrily gave her what for. And again, that this situation is STILL unresolved six months later I think also speaks volumes. I mean, really? Just hire a another sitter in the future and move on already!

The father wasn't out of line for protecting his children and setting boundaries -- it's the WAY he (probably) did it that is the problem. He could just as easily have protected his children and set boundaries by simply not hiring the girl to babysit for his children again. But protecting his children clearly wasn't the ONLY goal he had in mind -- he also wanted to lash out in some fashion because he was understandably angry.

What is really a shame, to me, is that if this had been handled properly, it could have been a teachable moment both for his own kids and for that babysitter. It may be a stretch that he has done actual damage to his relationship with his children -- that really depends on how he handled himself in front of them. But if he immediately got angry, his kids could easily have felt like that anger was directed at them, even though he wasn't. If it's one minor incident and it all just fades away, it's unlikely to do any lasting damage. But the fact that it's six months later, and he's still trying to figure out how to deal with this isn't exactly a good sign. Obviously, what complicates this is that these are neighbors, so they potentially see each other often, and the fact that they are not speaking to one another indicates that there's a lot of tension there. Kids pick up on that, unspoken or not. If the kids wrongly believe that THEY are the cause for that tension, that CAN do damage. Again, I'm not saying that is definitely the case here.

@Lise B -- you summed it up (the "firing" being over the top) way more succinctly than I did!

@victoria -- had I seen the exchange between you and Lise B while I was busily typing my overlong missive to you, I wouldn't have bothered, so sorry if it felt like I was piling on!

I'm still curious as to what the LW expected the babysitter to do to "fix this mess."

I had to stop using a babysitter when I discovered 900 calls on the phone bill, but I still paid him for his time. Even the worst employee in the world, when fired, will be given his/her last paycheck and possibly even severance.

Withholding payment from a teenaged girl like this is inexcusable. It's not up to the LW to punish her--that's not his job. Not using her services anymore is the only recourse he has.

If a grown man had demanded something like this from my teenaged daughter, I'd have told him to leave her alone, too.

Re: Joannakathryn

He probably expected her to crawl on her belly and grovel.

Frankly, if he had handled this right, the girl would have learned boundaries, the LW would still have a babysitter right next door and he and the neighbour would still be friends. As it stands now, even though the girl made a very stupid, teenagery mistake, it's still him who made such a mess of it. Ironical, since he's the one who's supposed to be the adult.

@Joannakathryn -- it sounds like what would "fix" this for the LW would be:

1) an apology from the sitter (which, for some reason he wants directed to his wife, as opposed to both of them)
2) for the neighbors to all be on good terms (or at least on speaking terms) again.

But it is rather odd that he's trying to handle this by texting a 17-year-old. If he, as a grown man, hasn't figure out how to resolve this in six months of teeth-gnashing, I don't know why he'd think a 17-year-old girl could. The problem has long since gone beyond being between him and the babysitter -- obviously, any resolution has to include all of the big boys and girls (i.e. the parents on both sides).

@Lisa - no worries - I didn't feel like you were piling on. I rarely comment, but I read often and feel I am fairly acquainted with everyone! :)

On the babysitter thing, I have a problem with those who say the babysitter didn't do anything that was SO wrong, because the parents never EXPLICITLY said "no taking the kids out". If parents were to write out, explicitly, everything that was and wasn't permitted, then babysitters would need agents and lawyers to negotiate. Common sense says parents have to spell out the rules that vary from house to house (bedtimes, how much or late TV is allowed), but not the obvious stuff (no taking the kids away from home, no taking the kids to places you want to go just to hang out with your friends, and definitely no telling the kids to lie to us).

I can see it now, kid gets hurt skydiving off the roof in plain view of the sitter, and the posters here say, "well, the parents never said no skydiving, so I let them".

Someone pays you to babysit their kids at their home, the presumption is the kids stay home. Period. The motivation being a need to see your friends at the ice cream place, and counselling the kids to lie about it, those two factors just push it WAY over the top.

And a final note: what's with this "a mother will always side with her kids" crap? Most mothers I know, thankfully, will tell their kids when they've stepped out of line. Isn't that part of mothering?

@Jpp

"I have a problem with those who say the babysitter didn't do anything that was SO wrong, because the parents never EXPLICITLY said "no taking the kids out""

Then you evidently have a problem with me. I would agree with you save for the fact that we're referring to a 17 year-old teenage girl, not a hired Nanny. Teenagers don't always operate logically and with common sense hence why they're not considered legal adults. While the babysitter may be responsible, she's little more than a child herself and requires guidance. In this case, the LW erred in not EXPLICITLY stating (among a long list of rules that you and I might consider common sense...) "No field trips!", "No friends dropping by...", "No leaving the kids unattended...", etc. As a parent yourself, I would think you would consider something like this obvious when dealing with a teenager.

Re: Chris

Bravo! Well put!

Reading your post, I was reminded of a situation the other day with my daughter (I think I wrote about it here, but will again). When we bought the Christmas ham, she was with me at the store and I asked the butcher if the ham would last five days in the refrigerator. He said yes, I bought the ham. When we got home, I told my daughter to put the ham in the refrigerator downstairs. Now, the fridge downstairs is where I usually store our frozen stuff (I tend to cook big once a week, freeze stuff and then we eat off that all week since our schedules are off). She went downstairs and I didn't think about it at all. And then came Christmas morning and I asked her to get the ham. She brought up a ten pound completely frozen solid ham.

After seeing my face (!), she spent a few minutes researching how to thaw out a fully frozen 10 lb. ham, we determined that it wouldn't happen that day. We made quiche for dinner, the ham was thawed the next day and we got on with life.

Lesson learned? BE SPECIFIC. Especially with teenagers. I don't think any teenager is going to take a kid skydiving But many teens would think to take a kid to a park during the day, or to ice cream (as in this instance), or even to a movie or to the grocery store. If you don't want them to leave the house BE SPECIFIC.

@jpp, actually, in your favor, we don't know that the parents *didn't* have exactly that rule, and that's in large part why the parents flipped out.

Also, when the father wanted to "fix this mess", I think what people are missing is that "we became close to one set of neighbors"... what's happened seems to be that the LW and his wife's understandable unhappiness with the babysitter's actions, and the babysitter's mother's nonchalance about their concern, has led to an estrangement between the once-friendly neighbors.

So "let's fix this mess" sounds like an attempt to talk through the issues to repair the friendship.

What upsets me about this is the babysitter took the 2 charges, the overnight guest--all minors--and WALKED THEM TO HER PARENTS HOUSE for the car and put them in what would be the family car. Did she have total permission at any time to use the car? Even tho the 4 parents were together at the same event, one of them had a cell phone and the sitter could have called or text for permission.
The parents of the sitter would be SOOOOO libel and also would have had to know that she took the car. As a new driver (and it has been posted previously) you are restricted according to the laws that have been changing in view of the accident rates of young drivers. And rightfully so.
Put it this way, if it had never been done or allowed before, you don't do it on a whim off the top of your head. That does not show responsibile action.
This being said, it should not have been left unresolved for the time frame it was. And to say FIRED the babysitter--I would have preferred it to be NOT USED AGAIN. She was not exclusive NOR a nanny for the family. They did not pay her benefits, SS/taxes, etc. So they were not her employer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I spent many nights babysitting as I was growing up. IF we were to go somewhere, our feet did the walking AND WITH PERMISSION. If an issue arose, I had absolute numbers to be reached. THAT my mother always insisted from the family. (Never forget one time that the neighbor's car blew up--and I don't mean engine-- out in front of the house--I was so rattled I could not remember the emergency number to call --was not 911 at that time.)
I have also employed sitters for my children with specific details laid out. My sons all were in high demand as sitters when they reached age 14. They all had their certified babysitting classes in, their CPR and 1 aid. Again, permission for anything was asked. If something came up, my kids would call me for information. One time we had a tornadic epispode in a Tstorm. The parents were far enough away they could not get back in time. And my kids are all skywarn trained too, so they called me and ran the game plan by and went into safety areas of the basement.
Lastly, I was a licensed daycare for many years, and all the Ts to cross and Is to dot meant everything had an order and game plan. And car travelling meant a legal sign off from the parents.
As it stands, I hope the gal got things worked out. As listed above accidents happen. My niece--a new driver by a couple months had taken a good friend out to eat for her birthday. Several cars went as the 1 teen driver, 1 teen rider law. On the way home--in fact about 30 minutes after we had come from the same town--my niece hit a rumble strip on the edge of the road, startled her, over corrected, and rolled the SUV. The friend was thrown out and killed. A 30 min trip.
It has been 4 years, and it still is very difficult on her in dealing with the issue. It also backs up why the laws are there to protect the kids.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Another incident--this was Dec 24, a car with a 15 yr old driver with learner's permit, was driving his family through a semi busy area on the way to family for Christmas. He blew a 4 way stop light on a busy highway. He killed one and severely maimed another in the same car. The wife did not go with the car where her husband was killed. She was PG and due in a month. She would have been killed, as it was the rider who died and she would have been riding in back also.
They are still sorting charges out, but you can bet laws will be changed because of it. The driver with permit was from the next state where you get it at age 14. Always has been that age, but you drove with a parent until you got your legal license at 16. I grew up in that state. Had mine at 14.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So this issue with the babysitter is more than a small detail. It also included a car, no permission by either set of parents and the potential for something to happen, that simply could have been out of her control--
Some things don't get do-overs.

Doesn't the fact that the sitter told the kids to lie prove my point--that even teenagers (or at least this teenager) know it's wrong to do what she did? Else, why did she encourage the subterfuge?

17 is old enough to drive a car, almost old enough to vote, marry, etc etc. It's not 12. (if she were 18, we wouldn't be having this debate. Is the intelligence supposed to fall down from the heavens in one fell swoop on the eve of the 18th birthday?)

Re: Jpp
"I can see it now, kid gets hurt skydiving off the roof in plain view of the sitter, and the posters here say, "well, the parents never said no skydiving, so I let them"."

I think there is a bit of a difference between a tame little ride of a coupla blocks to the ice cream parlour and skydiving off the roof, and for you to suggest that it's all the same to us is quite insulting.

And as for following such stringent rules, keep in mind she was also saddled with a visiting kid who was sleeping over - I wonder if the parents of THAT kid left specific instructions as to who was to be with him at all times? Doesn't look like the parents of the kids she was babysitting were such striingent about "rules" themselves. It may be that the informality of the situation led the teenager to think that she could take liberties.

She may have told them not to tell for all kinds of reasons - that is no proof she "knew" she was not supposed to do that. And for that matter, we don't even know for sure that she told them that - kids are quite capable of making things like that up for reasons of their own, as you'll know well enough if you have kids in the house. The LW certainly didn't check, he was too busy going ballistic.

And, while we're at it, we don't even know what his WIFE thinks of this. The only mention of her is when he states he wants the sitter to apologize to HER, no mention whatsoever of what she really think, which I think is quite eloquent. Could it possibly be that her position is not quite as drastic?

@Jpp
"if she were 18, we wouldn't be having this debate."
Yes, we would. Eighteen still has the word teen in it, most of them have precious little sense for all that they can legally marry and move out of the house - which is why most of them don't. The front lobe regulating impulse and the perception of consequence doesn't finish maturing until the mid-twenties.

Re: Jpp

Oh ok. You win. Feel better now?

Re numchucks

Huh?

The lady who posts 10,000 words multiple times a day insulting every living thing on the planet gets sarcastically snarky when someone dares to disagree with her not once, but twice.

FOAD along with the other career posters. Get lives.

Jpp: no need to get nasty. Put the glass down and go to bed. You're obviously not in your right mind. Sleep well!

Oh, nanchan, that's not necessary, it's really not. You may not realize it, but you're actually proving jpp right when you post stuff like that.

Re: Mike H
Nope...he was upset about her driving them somewhere. Otherwise, he would not have commented on the fact that she just got her license.

LW1: Boston Beauty? LOL Let me guess this is your way of saying the problem is definitely not you because you're beautiful. Awesome. Isn't it great that people marry people they can't have intimate conversations with? You people are too old to be this immature. If he won't talk to you - kick him out.

LW2: Once again the Annies advice is incredibly stupid. I have no idea why they consistently advise that people in the wrong should be rewarded for bad behavior. They must be real crappy to those unfortunate to be in their lives. Its the only thing that makes sense. The mother and daughter have shown they have serious character issues. You should be grateful you discovered it before anything really bad happened. The best thing you could do right now is make sure other people know about what happened so no one else is stupid enough to hire her. Can you imagine how bad you'll feel if this idiot ends up killing somebody's kids because she's too busy trying to have fun with her friends? Don't enable her with your silence.

I would have fired the sitter too. No one drives my kids without permission, and teens don't drive them period. It was kidnapping, to be brutally and legally honest. She should let it go and move on, with an older and more responsible person watching her kids. I never could figure out why parents source out childcare to the cheapest provider. They wouldn't treat their car like that. They wouldn't hire a roofer like that. But their most precious responsibility? Oh, let another kid watch them!

LW2: As a parent, I completely agree with the father for being upset. What gaul the babysitter had to put the kids at risk. She obvioulsy knew she was in the wrong by asking the kids not to tell the parents. When I hire a caregiver, I expect their #1 responsibility is to keep my kids safe. I have a 17-year old driver and though she is a very responsible and well-behaved kid, I would not let her drive anyone else's kids.....inexpereinced driving is a huge risk. When I was a teen sitter and when my kids had sitters, I think it was always a stated and understood rule that they do not leave the neighborhood for any reason unless okayed by me..... I'm sure she had a cell phone number for the parents she could have called to ask permission. The bigger picture, however.....absolutely the sitter should still have been paid (although I certainly wouldn't have tipped) and sitting down with the sitter and her parents when they took her home to discuss how he felt and why would have been appropriate. One can not expect a 17 year old to cope with such a confrontation without a parent present.... Yes, the mother had the right to get involved to protect the child but it should have been to invite the Dad to their house (safer enviornment) to discuss. If it were a babysitter/family I would not have future contact with, I would let it go but as these are neighbors, it would be best to diffuse any residual tension..... I doubt that sitter ever wants to go back anyways. I once had a family "counsel" me because I had played "MASH" with their daughter..this was the 80's..MASH was the little pen and paper game to decide who you woould marry and if you would live in a Mansion, Apartment, Shack, or House. They were strong Christians and went on and on at me about how fortune telling was a sin. They made me so uncomfortable that the next time they called I apologized and said I was too busy to babysit for the rest of the year so they found someone else.