Happy Thanksgiving, Canadians!
Alice writes:
"Fall and the Holiday season are approaching. I've agreed to spend Christmas with my husband's family this year a few states away. We'll be bringing our two-year-old and three-month-old daughters. I've only been to my in-laws once before, two years ago with an infant. You can imagine my surprise when on Christmas morning, as we all sat around in our PJ's, there was a knock at the door and my mother-in-law sold a bag of weed to the visitor.
I knew that my in-laws are frequent smokers (several times a day, every day) but I didn't realize just how much traffic there was in and out of the house for the purpose of acquiring marijuana. My husband (who is ironically in law enforcement) ignores the entire issue. Thankfully asking them not to smoke (cigarettes or pot) in the same room as the babies is not an issue as they at least go outside or to another part of the house.
In preparation of our visit, I've made two requests to my husband. I have asked that we get a hotel room and that there are no transactions while I am in the house with the kids. My husband has agreed to the hotel but I'm quite sure he has not mentioned the embargo to my mother in law.
To me this seems like a no-brainer. However, this is an incredibly sensitive topic in my household. These are my husband's parents and he wants them to share our daughter's lives as much as I want my parents too. I have approached this topic gently in the past and I've also approached it very poorly in anger. I need suggestions on how to set boundaries and how to explain to my husband why I will never feel comfortable leave the children alone with his parents."
This is actually my first pot-related question. (I'm kind of surprised someone hasn't asked me about smoking while nursing, but who knows.) However, this is not my first in-law-related question, and they all seem to fit the same pattern: Why do they do these freaky things, and how can I get them not to do them around my children for the few days we visit them?
Why do they do these freaky things? Well, I guess pot is better that crystal meth, no? Aside from the fact that the smoke is bad for your lungs the pot itself is not unhealthy*. The impaired judgment, illegality, and inertia are the bad things about it. I guess once you get really into that slacker lifestyle, and can make money selling it, it's just hard to give that up to go legit. Even if it means you're spending a lot of time high.
How can you get them not to do it while we're there? It sounds to me like your solutions are perfect. The hotel makes sense to keep your kids safe and you from blowing a gasket, plus then they can continue their business without having to shut down for the entire time you're there. But they certainly shouldn't be dealing pot while your kids are there.
As for convincing your husband that you don't want your kids exposed to pot-smoking, I think you're going to have to emphasize the impairment issue. Basically, would he leave the kids around people who were drunk all day? It's the same thing. Would he want the kids in an house full of strangers coming in and out to buy alcohol? (The strangers in and out creeps me right out and makes my "Danger Will Robinson!" sense go off strongly.)
Whatever compartmentalizing he's doing between knowing what he does about drug houses from his law enforcement work and loving his parents, he needs to really look at this objectively. I'm not sure how you can help him break through the "my parents love us and don't want to hurt us" barrier to see that, regardless of their intentions, they're exposing your kids to real danger, whether from unknown people or just from impaired judgment.
Do you think it would help to ask your husband what he's going to tell your 2-year-old when she asks (and she will ask, if not this year then next year) what her grandparents are doing, who those strange people are, what that funny smell is, and why her grandparents are so loopy and eat so many pretzels? It would also help if you emphasize that you like his parents and want them to know their grandchildren, but you have to protect the kids first, so you can't just leave them with his parents, and his parents need to show some kind of good judgment in ceasing with the dealing for a few hours when they're with their grandchildren.
Any suggestions for Alice? I guess I'm not sure exactly what to say if her husband can't let himself connect with the idea that his parents are endangering his kids.
* Despite what Nancy Reagan told us, they really can't prove that the THC does anything bad to anyone. Negative effects of pot are from the smoke. Having said that, I have no desire to do it anymore, but it was interesting while it lasted.
This post also had my "Danger!" antenna alerted. Obviously, I don't know any of the parties involved and only go by my interpretation of the information you posted, Alice. This is my take:
You are in a delicate role where you are trying to balance your instincts to protect your kids, and also to not hurt your husband. My big question is why aren't you and your husband on the same page in regard to him backing up your "danger!" instincts?
IMHO, your inlaws are addicts (a word I'm guessing your husband may have a problem with - otherwise why the difference of opinion of what "safe" is?) If they were drinking alcohol every day, I'd consider using the same word. My experience with addicts is that the addiction comes first, and everyone and everything else comes second. = not safe.
It doesn't matter if you've participated in this in the past or not. Your current #1 priority is to your kids. Why would on earth would your husband allow his wife and children to be exposed to illegal activity, stoned and possibly dangerous people (who in the heck are the people who can't take Christmas day off? More addicts. How do you know these people aren't carrying loaded guns to their drug buy?)
I would think that if there was ever a drug sting while your family was visiting, you would ALL be hauled off in cuffs and your kids would be PC'd while the police sorted things out.
I rarely disagree with Moxie, but this time I do. My husband and I have 3 people in our lives who have all used pot, at least a few times a week, for a prolonged period of time. (Think 20 years give or take.) Although none of them currently use anymore (to my knowledge) they are ALL falling to pieces, have extremely irrational/unsafe behavior and their relationships are falling apart, or have been completely destroyed. I believe the studies that say prolonged use is related to psychosis. Google psychosis marijuana.
Posted by: Me | October 08, 2007 at 08:18 AM
I'm with Moxie in that I don't believe using the pot in and of itself is dangerous. I also know a group of people that use every day and also go to work every day. In the US, the dangers of law enforcement are real, and who knows who the people coming to buy are all about. Not only could all the adults be arrested and the kids be taken away, I wonder if the law-enforcement father could lose his job for standing by without doing anything. However, I vaguely thought Canada had a nonenforcement policy re marijuana, but I'm not sure if that's true.
Regardless, I would not go. I would invite the in-laws to my home for Christmas and whatever, institute a policy of no smoking in the house, and not leave the kids alone with them. In other words, I would allow the in-laws access to my kids, but not allow my kids access to the in-laws business.
Posted by: Raia | October 08, 2007 at 08:54 AM
When there is a bust and children are in the home, they are almost always taken into protective custody while things are sorted out. It doesn't matter if you just stopped by or if you're living there, the kids are in danger of being handed to total strangers, and you'll have the exciting task of trying to get them BACK. If nothing else, a connection with law enforcement should at least tell your hubby that!
It sounds like his parents are more important to him than his children if he's willing to place them in that sort of environment, even for a short time.
It's up to you to keep them safe.
I say to invite the inlaws to your hotel/motel to visit, go out to dinner, and let them leave their drug activities at home.
Posted by: Ami | October 08, 2007 at 08:56 AM
And I thought I had in-problems! I agree with all of you; I wouldn't want my minor children of any age exposed to this situation, especially the dealing with strangers. The hotel is an excellent idea. If they won't agree to stop dealing and smoking in front of the children, I would take Ami's suggestion and invite the inlaws to your hotel, perhaps schedule some fun activity where smoking of any kind is prohibited. Few of my friends and relatives smoke cigarettes, and I was comfortable asking the smokers to go to the backyard.
Posted by: Mary Jo Koch | October 08, 2007 at 09:33 AM
Yes, this is a very dangerous situation for kids. You don't want your kids put into foster care and have to go before a judge to get them back.
My sympathies to the tension this is causing in your marriage.
Posted by: carmie | October 08, 2007 at 09:51 AM
I think I would have to go the "What if they were busted while we were there" route. With a husband in law enforcement, he likely knows that if you are there, and your children, you can not plausibly deny knowing what was happening, and what the repercussions would be for your family. It's not a moral judgment on his parents (ohh that is a bad route), but rather a practical, physical fact. If he is unable/unwilling to talk to his parents about it, discuss it with him first, and let him know that you will discuss it with them. And then? Take a deep breath, let them know how important they are to you and your children, and let them know your boundaries. If it gets emotional, let them know you will call back when you feel more able to discuss the issue, or they are welcome to discuss it with their son. Your responsibility is to your children, and if they can not see where they are putting them at risk, than perhaps they should visit you (with no smoking!) next holidays.
For what it's worth, my sister's inlaws have the same operation going on, and when the kids are around, one of the grandparents goes out and does deliveries. Merry Christmas, hohoho.
Posted by: Ivory | October 08, 2007 at 10:07 AM
Perhaps you could point out what it might do to your husband's career if there were a bust while he was in the house?
Posted by: bryanna | October 08, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Nothing new to add, just support for what has already been said. I have no problem with pot smoking (I'm Canadian and it's not even entirely illegal here). BUT my thoughts were 100% on: What if there is a bust while your children are there??? I would NEVER leave my kids alone in that house for that reason alone.
Posted by: Sarah | October 08, 2007 at 10:30 AM
I was going to bring up the "what if they get busted while you're visiting?" question too. PC for the kids, husband will most likely lose his job. Gah!
I say, safety first.
Posted by: liz | October 08, 2007 at 10:32 AM
hmm . . . I think the chances of them getting busted while you're there are really slim, and I think that if you were to try and use that argument you would going to get a lot of eye-rolling as as response. I think if it were me, I would try a more straight-forward tact, like saying that 'the kids see a lot more than they let on, and I'm not comfortable with them being exposed to this lifestyle, with them accepting the grandparents being high all the time and lots of people coming in and out as normal.' -- although grandma could be drinking and selling Mary*Kay and have a similar lifestyle, so maybe that wouldn't work . . . maybe just "Call my a ninny if you must, but it makes me uncomfortable and I just can't have my kids witnessing me condoning this."
Posted by: Meira | October 08, 2007 at 11:25 AM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/26/BAOMSE4OV.DTL
A Bay Area man was recently murdered during a home invasion robbery where the robbers were intent on getting the pot / money in the house. It's not clear if the victim was dealing or growing, or if someone else who lived there was, but he's dead regardless.
Pot smokers who differentiate their chronic smoking from chronic drinking drive me up a tree. Unfortunately I am married to one.
Posted by: Anonforthisone | October 08, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Just popping in to say I agree with the comment on pot and psychosis.
Also, if your in-laws weren't your inlaws and were, say, your neighbors, would you ask them to babysit, knowing about the pot issues? Probably not. Same applies to anyone, relative or no. When the kiddos get older it'll be confusing to them- why is it ok for grandpa to smoke grass but I can't kind of thing.
Posted by: Jessica | October 08, 2007 at 11:59 AM
I think Raia's onto something. My family drives me nuts (for different reasons), and I work around a lot of problems by doing as much hosting as I can, so that I'm in my space where it's easier to convince people to follow our household rules. Also, I've noticed that people just tend to behave better when they're in someone else's space. Insisting on being the hostess whenever at all practical has helped me sidestep a lot of this stuff.
And to a certain extent, in certain situations, if something makes you uncomfortable to the point of feeling fear for your kids, then that's enough of a reason right there for your husband to help you out in an argument/discussion. Don't you think? I mean, you can't play that card every day, but this seems like a special situation. I have a very relaxed attitude towards pot, but not so much towards toddlers witnessing drug deals.
Posted by: mollyball | October 08, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Oh Alice, I totally understand. While we do not have children yet, I do have a sometimes pot smoking all the time alcoholic mother-in-law and a husband in law enforcement. He chooses to look the other way now, but we have dicussed the fact that there will NEVER be a time when our children will be at her house when there is pot there, and they will never be left alone with her, EVER. End of story.
I'm sorry your hubby doesn't get that his kids come first, then the parents. They cannot control an environment, they are little. They cannot get up and leave when things get dogdy, nor can they determine when that time comes. It is up to you and your hubby to do that for them, and it should be first on his list. I would be honest with him on how you feel and invite them to your house, or hotel so YOU can control the situation.
It doens't matter that it's "just pot" - my hubby has seen horrible things happen for much much less.
Posted by: Nessa | October 08, 2007 at 01:09 PM
Hmmm... I wonder if the pot/psychosis correlation is not that THC leads to psychosis, but that some people who are struggling with mental illness can self-medicate with pot, for a while.
And I've been meaning to write in with a nursing & pot question! A few years ago, at a college class reunion, a nursing mother of a newborn smoked a joint, cheerfully explaining that she could just pump and dump. (It was the first time that I'd heard that term!)
I've wondered about that ever since. I mean, unlike alcohol and certain medications, does anyone know exactly how long it takes for THC to get out of your system? Does anyone know how much pot gets into breast milk? Was this woman being safe or was she deluding herself?
Posted by: Anon | October 08, 2007 at 01:42 PM
I gave this some more thought and had another idea about it. I'm assuming that the husband, for some reason, doesn't think it's an unsafe environment. And I agree that the risk of a raid is actually pretty small. So even if it weren't unsafe, isn't there something to be said for not allowing your kids to see that it's ok to flout the law just because you can get away with it?
I think that this might be an argument that the law enforcement husband could understand. At some point, these kids are going to either have an idea of what's going on, or they will be able to look back when older and speculate. Maybe ask questions about it, and how will dad respond to those questions?
Posted by: Raia | October 08, 2007 at 01:45 PM
Anon, I think traces of THC stay in the blood for up to 30 days, so it is not really comparable to alcohol, which leave the blood system at a rate of an hour or two per unit. How long THC lingers in breastmilk I don't know... You might get an honest answer from Dr. Jack Newman, M.D., Canadian breastfeeding guru and dispeller of popular breastfeeding myths (drjacknewman.com).
Posted by: response to anon above | October 08, 2007 at 02:38 PM
isn't it crazy how different you view things now that you're a parent? yeesh. 10 years ago i would have joked around that maybe your inlaws could invite me over for christmas dinner (har, har), or adopt me, but now...
well, it seems like you live in the US, and even the most liberal states aren't too thrilled with parents who knowingly (or unknowingly- thank you governor rockefeller) have their children in an environment that puts them in danger. drugs (even pot) are a BFD in the courts, especially family court, and at least in our state, we have something called "mandatory minimums." what is your husband going to do, go in front of a judge under oath and say "well, it's my own parents, so i just figured it was no big deal" or lie and say he didn't know? or ask you to go to jail for this? believe me, just cause it's grandma and grandpa helping out their friends or whatever, the sentence you all could be facing and the loss of your kids is one of those things that i would never be willing to take the risk on. i mean, pot is something that any professional that deals with kids (teachers, therapists, doctors, etc.) are mandated to report if they have suspicion of parental/guardian use. it's serious, in the legal sense. i know they're his parents, but maybe that is the angle you go from with your husband.
i'm not sure why folks think the chance of a raid (or even just a cop checking things out) is slim- these people have that much traffic coming in and out of their home everyday? the neighbors know and the police probably do as well. and just cause it's pot doesn't mean that it's all hippy-dippy and mellow and cool. there are plenty of not-cool people who smoke, and can get just as violent over money. not everyone is chill when they are high.
if it were me, (and that makes me laugh, cause my inlaws couldn't be anymore anti-drug if they tried), i would host the holidays at my house, and suggest a few local hotels that they could stay in for their trip. they could be around my kids as long as i was there, but not use in my house or around my kids. it would be hard but i'd be willing to let them think i was a paranoid PITA to keep my kids safe.
and i say this as someone who doesn't really think pot is bad, but like other "adult-only" things, there is a time and place for. for me, the big issue is the fact that they deal, and even if i think the use and sale of marijuana should be legalized, since it isn't, i wouldn't put my kids at risk. sigh. what a not-good place for you to be in. i'm sorry and best of luck to you, alice. let us know how it goes.
Posted by: pnuts mama | October 08, 2007 at 02:47 PM
Concerning pot and breast milk: If I recall from my reading on breastfeeding, there really isn't much research around the pot issue. If I recall, Jack Newman recommends a mother not smoke the reefer while breastfeeding, but basically says that single or occasional use wouldn't put the baby at risk for long term effects.
You cannot compare the amount of a drug in the blood stream to the amount in breast milk, it isn't the same thing. Anything is the blood stream would be even less of an amount in breast milk. For instance, if you have a .08 blood alcohol level; your breast milk has significantly less alcohol than .08.
It's not something I would encourage, but I would be far more concerned about other toxins babies are exposed to in their toys, home, etc.
As for the inlaws:
Your job is to protect and teach your children. If you tolerate the inlaws dealing while you are there, you are neither protecting your children from all kinds of possible dangers (busts, strangers) and you are teaching them that such behavior is ok. That's going to be hard to argue with when you have a 13 year old you just busted with a joint.
Posted by: Nicole | October 08, 2007 at 03:29 PM
I agree that the inlaws or husband would roll their eyes (or could act out in a more hostile manner) at the suggestion of a raid. As I said before, with addictions, the drug comes first and foremost - everything else comes in second place. Any way that you suddenly "stop going along with status quo" would be a threat to them, and not met with understanding.
Which is why I suggested you keep the idea of al-anon in your back pocket. Don't fall into being an enabler or trapped into any guilt trips (we love our grandchildren - our grandchildren love us - don't worry nothing will happen you're over reacting and being ridiculous!) You are completely 100% within your rights to make a judgement call with your kids. Period.
I hope this isn't too personal, but I'm curious - does your husband use at all?
Posted by: Me | October 08, 2007 at 03:29 PM
I just wanted to pop in and say that I totally support your decision to keep your kids safe. You are obviously a smart, loving Mom who wants the best for her family. If you can not host the holiday, I think a hotel is a great idea. I think illegal drugs are illegal drugs in the sense that pot does not operate in a vaccum. Some people who come to the door are probably doing other drugs or other stuff that you do not want to be around. When you operate in a system that forces you to go underground, you tend to attract the dregs, if you know what I mean. My biggest issue is the strangers. I would think maaaaaybe the inlaws can get behind the strangers and children gig more than they would get behind any other argument. I am glad you are thinking about it this early though, good for you for getting a plan together.
Posted by: jbeeky | October 08, 2007 at 04:46 PM
How about this: invite your in-laws to your house for the holidays and specify no smoking up while they are under your roof? This way they are on your turf and you can set the rules, plus you know your kids are safe in your home. (Or have them stay in a hotel near your house. If they can't last a few days without their weed they can do their smoking in the hotel!)
Posted by: heather | October 08, 2007 at 08:34 PM
FWIW, I remember being five years old when my biological father took me along for a drug deal. Lemme tell you, a five year old can pick up on A LOT-- and I was very anxious about the whole thing. Kids can sense sketchy situations and it makes them nervous. (Also, FWIW, my bio-dad was out of my life shortly after that, which I consider to be a good thing... I'm working on a PhD, my half-siblings who lived with him are working on staying out of jail. Who you're exposed to as a kid DOES matter.)
Personally, I think pot should be legalized, but the fact that it's not means that dealing is necessarily a shady, risky proposition. I don't know why in-laws are so damn stubborn (my FIL still refuses to wear a seatbelt and my MIL is ready to start force feeding my seven month old chocolate cake) but there are some things that fall into the category of 'annoying eccentricities' and others that are 'dangerous and intolerable blind spots'. Granny smoking the occasional spliff might make her a bit kooky, but dealing out of the house puts visitors in a dangerous, illegal and awkward position. When you think about it, it's really just rude to require your guests to be an accessory to a crime (which, given our draconian drug laws is how you would be viewed). Moreover, your in-laws insistence on exposing your kids to repeated illegal behavior undermines your authority as a parent to exert some control over what your children are exposed to.
Hmmm, here's an idea. What if you frame it in terms of "not working" while you're there. Call them "workaholics" or whatever, but say you'd prefer if they could spend some QT with the kids without constantly being pulled away by "work". Wonder if that would get you further than "we might all get busted"?
In-laws will make you nuts. Good luck and if you figure something out, let us know!
Posted by: Jess | October 08, 2007 at 09:18 PM
Not only will the two year old start asking difficult questions soon, but you never know how much of what she sees will be reported back to her school teachers/classmates. I suspect this becomes an issue around age 3. They really turn into such little parrots and sponges.
Posted by: Cathy | October 08, 2007 at 09:46 PM
http://www.kellymom.com/health/lifestyle/marijuana.html
Some info here and several links...
Posted by: another response to anon from above | October 08, 2007 at 10:52 PM
I think my biggest problem wouldn't be a safety issue (although I don't think I'd ask them to "look after the kids" ever), it would be the legality issue. I wouldn't feel comfortable with my kids seeing their grandparents breaking the law over something more than say, speeding while driving.
Now your kids are very tiny... if I was under a lot of pressure to drop it, I probably would until the kids are a little older (like 4 or 5) and then I would make it clear that my problem is the dealing in front of the kids.
That's just me and where my comfort zone lies. You're going to have to decide what hill you want to die on... and be honest with your husband about what and how much it is bothering you.
Posted by: wookie | October 09, 2007 at 08:56 AM
On the THC in breastmilk issue, I looked at Medications in Mother's Milk last night, and cannabis is an L5 drug (= No No No No No!), basically for the reasons outlined in the Kellymom article - high concentration in breastmilk, stored in fatty tissues for a long time.
Posted by: flea | October 09, 2007 at 09:37 AM
Forget the "bad influence" thing for a minute, forget the fact that in one year, your 2 year old will start telling teachers EVERYTHING that goes on in the house (they even make up stuff that sounds incriminating...trust me on this!)...
Aren't you totally caught up on the fact that if there was a bust, your kids would be hauled away to foster care and you'd have to fight to get your OWN KIDS back?
I don't care if it's a 1% chance...that would freak me right the fuck out. Once your kids are in the system, it's damn hard to get them back...and the "system" is then a part of your life for a long time afterwards.
Do not mess with this situation. Tell your husband you don't want your kids hauled off. Put up with the rolled eyes and be a bitch. These are your babies. Keep out of the inlaws house. If you see a deal, leave immediately.
Posted by: colicmommy | October 09, 2007 at 11:42 AM
I've thought about this and read the comments twice. I have to respectfully disagree with Moxie's statement that THC doesn't do anything "bad" to you.
Having seriously dated, and lived with, an habitual pot smoker (up to 5x/day, would smoke on exam days because it "made him perform better," unable to function unless he smoked up, etc), I think this is just untrue. Smoking pot made him lethargic and apathetic, and it affected not only his personality and short/long term memory, but also his intelligence. He went from being a good student to one who was barely passing his college classes.
When we lived together, I told him no drugs in the house because I was in law school and wasn't willing to be an "accessory" to his crime. He couldn't even do that. When someone is addicted to pot, as with any other substance, that substance comes first. It sounds like the poster's in-laws are addicted to pot, and I certainly wouldn't trust my child with someone who has the problems that my ex had/has, nor any other of the common issues that pot smokers have.
I 100% equate pot smoking with drinking. I personally wouldn't care if it was legalized because alcohol is quite dangerous, too, and it's still legal. But someone who smokes up once a week should be compared with someone who drinks once a week. Similarly, if someone couldn't start their day without a drink, we'd call them alcoholic. If they can't start their day without a joint, then they're an addict. Would you leave your kid with an alcoholic? Probably not (and I am speaking from an odd place here, because my mother and father were/are both alcoholics and I battle with how to deal with my dad and kids every day).
From my perspective, I would just refuse to go over to your in-laws'. I guess that's pretty reactionary, but if they are selling while you're there, then you ARE an accessory. Your kids WILL be taken from you and put with CPS/DYFS/whatever your state uses. Then you'll have to explain to CPS why you let your kids be a party to drug selling. I'm sorry your husband can't see the forest for the trees. He's an adult, he makes his own choices... you make the choices for yourself, and I guess your kids too.
Posted by: Ariella | October 09, 2007 at 11:45 AM
I wanted to comment on the alcohol blood level vs breastmilk thing, because this is a common misconception.
What passes into breastmilk is not 1:1 necessarily with what is in bloodstream. It can be significantly less, or more than what is in bloodstream, because the transfer is an active process - some things are transferred to the mammary glands preferentially (that is, if there's a compound in the blood that passes the gland, it WILL be picked up), and some things tend to not get passed easily (chemical transfer of some drugs/compounds is low, again, there's a cellular or chemical/carrier/bond process involved), some are transferred osmoticially (the volume is equal in blood and milk), and so forth.
Any lipid-bonding chemical is always a risk issue, things that are stored in fatty tissue transfer at 1:1, but the level of fat in the milk is higher than the level of fat in the blood... so it might be 1:1 for the LIPID values, but the lipid value in the blood is low by comparison. This is also why there's so much concern about the body burden of toxic chemicals in humans.
There's no easy answer, though I trust the Medicines in Human Milk answer - if it is stored in fatty tissue, it is an issue in breastmilk. And while I tend to think that there are different profiles for reactions (long and short term, by rate of consumption, etc.), there is definitely a difference in cellular activity when pot is used, even if you just look at sperm motility and activity. I've seen all sorts go by in my life... and IMHO, if they cannot control it for the sake of a family visit, then they're the ones who are out of control. But I agree that it is not easy to get that through without it sounding like a personal judgement and way too snooty and high-handed, etc. I'd stick with the 'hey, maybe I'm a prude, but I'm not comfortable with the degree of risk - the likelihood might be really low, but the severity of risk is far too high for my comfort.' plus the 'I'd like to teach them to live within the law, there's plenty of time for them to discover that there are people who don't, and don't for their own reasons, some good and valid, others not... for now, I'd like to stick with playing by the rules, thanks.'
Good luck. I, too, read the comments twice and had to think about this.
Posted by: hedra | October 09, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Longtime lurker, but I wanted to weigh in on this one. As harsh as it sounds, I suggest arranging to have your in-laws busted before your visit. If it doesn't result in their quitting the business, it may at least alert your husband to the possibility of their being busted at another time -- perhaps when his children are there.
Posted by: Nicole | October 09, 2007 at 06:58 PM
Reading through these comments, it seems obvious that there is something seriously wrong with the laws in this country...the idea that kids from families no more imperfect than the very loving and nurturing one that I grew up in can be "taken away" is just horrific.
My dad has struggled with his mental health his entire life, and he has hinted that he was high (on pot) for most my childhood, although I never once saw him smoking. I didn't have the slightest clue any of that was going on until he told me about it when I was 13 or 14. Which, btw, did not make me run out and start smoking pot myself...at that age I was able to understand that the adults in my life weren't perfect and that I could learn from both their strengths and weaknesses. And frankly, watching someone use a drug as a coping mechanism for their own personal demons does not make it look particularly appealing. (Thank you to the person who pointed out that it may be that people with mental health problems seek out pot, rather than pot causing the mental health problems...that's definitely been my experience).
Anyways, everyone's situation is different. I have no experience with the dealing aspect, or with Alice's in-laws as individuals...but my kids are going to get to know their grandfather, and I wouldn't let fear of any idiotic law override my own judgement that that's what's best for them.
Posted by: anon | October 09, 2007 at 07:14 PM
The guy who lives across the street from us deals....and we all know it and watch our kids extra carefully when out on the street. He's had one bust in the past (a few years ago) and we're waiting for the next one. People are going in and out at all times of the day and night. It's obvious and there's not a "slim" chance it will happen again. It WILL happen again. We would report him ourselves except we have no visual evidence of the activities - just the evidence of the traffic in and out.
And I would not take the risk with my children. I.Would.Not. Having worked with students who were "in the system" it takes a long time, a lot of man hours, a lot of evidence gathering, a lot of hoops to jump through, documents to be filed by multiple people whose number one priority is NOT getting your kids back to you.....and we're not even talking about what kind of "home" your children would be sent to live in while you dealt with all this bullshit. And not just a new home with new people, but new neighborhoods, new schools.....new everything very different from what they know now, and not all nurturing or safe. I might sound like I'm over-reacting....but I've seen it firsthand, and wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. It's hell for everyone involved. All because your husband refuses to see that his parents are putting THEIR son, you and your children at risk? Is it worth it? Really?
Posted by: Julie | October 09, 2007 at 10:43 PM
anon, i read what you wrote, and i get what you're saying, but i think for most of the people who responded, the issue is less about the fact that gramma and grampa smoke, and more about the fact that they deal, and what could happen to anyone's children if caught in a situation like that.
local, state and federal laws tend to be quite clear in reference to "possession" (small amts for personal use= misdemeanor)and "possession with intention to sell" (larger amts= felony) and whether or not we think those laws are just or not, they exist, and we deal with that reality when we make our decisions. i understood what you meant about your dad, and i don't think anyone here suggested cutting off a relationship between alice's inlaws and their grandkids, just arranging places and times for them to be together in a safer place. to use the worst terms possible, they are drug dealers, and courts don't look to kindly on kids being in that environment, for any length of time.
in ny state, even with recent 'reforms' of laws that have been on the books for decades, literally hundreds if not thousands of families have been torn apart over children being found in a home that had drugs in it (or on the parent/guardians person or car)- parents sent to jail for YEARS as accomplices or co-conspirators- even women/mothers who claimed no knowledge/participation. i think most of the folks who responded are coming from the perspective of keeping our children out of harms way, especially when you knowingly are entering into someone's home and witnessing a crime, and a crime that is taken pretty seriously in most states- dealing vs. just using.
whether we think pot should be legal or not, is harmless or not, the laws are just or not, is really irrelevant in the context of the question of what to do in this situation. the grandparents can do whatever they want, as consenting adults, and be willing to pay the price for their actions if something goes down. if i decide to smoke pot (or do anything illegal for that matter) i do it with reasonable knowledge that there could be serious consequences for my actions, even losing my kid. but to lose your kids for *any* length of time over something that could easily be avoided- that is, what i think most of the people here were advising against.
Posted by: pnuts mama | October 10, 2007 at 01:30 AM
Coming to this one late.
I've read all the comments and I have to agree... the fear of a bust, however remote, would scare the bejeezus out of me. I think I'd approach it from that standpoint. I don't think there's morally anything wrong with pot smoking (nor do I think it should be illegal), but IF something happened while the kids were with them (even with you in the house), your kids WILL be taken away--even if it's just for a short time while the authorities sort out your lack of a role. And I don't know about you, but the thought of my children being in custody without me for even 5 minutes (let alone hours or longer) turns my stomach. Just picture their scared little faces as they are carried away from you.
Uh-uh. No way, no how would I take that chance.
Posted by: Amy | October 10, 2007 at 12:28 PM
pnuts mama...
I realize my situation is very different. Like I said, I never once saw my dad smoking. That was an agreement that he and my mom made very early on, and he's stuck to it. I would be furious if he didn't show the same consideration to my children.
I was just really struck by the comment you made about teachers and doctors legally being required to report parents they suspect of using pot...and by some of the very strong reactions against pot I am hearing here from people who might have that kind of authority. The idea that one of my teachers might have decided to have me put in foster care because my dad wasn't perfect (and not in one of the government sanctioned ways like alcohol or cigarettes) seems really wrong. I've actually never really gotten on board with the whole "legalize marijuana" thing, because I don't think it's a good thing, but you may have just changed my mind.
Posted by: anon | October 10, 2007 at 01:51 PM
Doctors and teachers are "mandated reporters" they MUST report if they suspect child abuse. In many states (if not all), knowingly exposing children to illegal activity is considered abuse.
Posted by: liz | October 10, 2007 at 05:21 PM
Anon, while I can appreciate what you're saying, I don't necessarily think that it is such a scary idea that "the authorities" can at the very least question, or take kids away for being around drug users or dealing.
In the interest of full disclosure, I will be the first to admit that I don't like drug use, I don't think it's totally harmless or should be legalized, and for many, many people I think pot is a "doorway" drug to other more serious drugs. Call me a prude, or puritan, whatever. I *am* willing to believe that there are people out there who just use pot, and nothing else. And those people might be harmless, just trying to go about life.
But who is to say that a child involved in such a situation is linked to something "harmless" vs. more dangerous, without an investigation? What would clue in a doctor or teacher in the first place, unless they sensed something was "off?" I think it's difficult for the legal system to differentiate between those "harmless" people, and other people who are dealing drugs to kids. Or not just pot. Or combine dealing with other crimes. Or people who get so intoxicated that they can't take care of their kids, or leave the drugs around for the kids to injest. And on and on.
I completely believe your account of growing up - I have no reason to question or doubt what you're saying. It seems unique on many levels, least of all your maturity level at such a young age. I was not able to see my parents as imperfect humans just doing the best that they could until I was well into my college years. Your parents were able to be responsible to keep you safe, and obviously rear you into a very intelligent stable grownup - and none of the people around them yourself included had any idea about the reality of what was going on. I'm willing to bet your parents did a much better job than some other parents who never ingested a drug in their life!
But not all children of drug users are so lucky, and if their parents aren't doing the job... what's so bad about the prospect of their teacher catching on and sending up a flag for help?
Posted by: Me | October 10, 2007 at 06:48 PM
A number of studies show that THC provides medical benefits for cancer and AIDS patients by increasing appetite and decreasing nausea.
Posted by: buy cigarettes | December 20, 2011 at 01:52 AM
Since 1st October 2007 it is illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone under 18 years of age – this includes cigarettes, cigars, roll-your-own and pipe tobacco as well as cigarette rolling papers. Selling any of these products to someone under 18 years of age could result in a fine of £2,500.
Posted by: vapor cigarettes | April 14, 2012 at 08:31 AM
the cultural dfrfeiences between the east and west, and questioned notions of smoking being a mainly adult activity. Adult smokers are the societal norm, so I wanted to isolate the viewer's focus upon the issue of smoking itself. I felt that children smoking would have a surreal impact upon the viewer and compel them to truly see the acts of smoking rather than making assumptions about the person doing the act от авторката.
Posted by: Patel | May 15, 2012 at 07:10 PM