If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#511
|
|||
|
|||
playdates for 4yo
In ,
Rosalie B. wrote: * bus-riding-rules from our local district over the summer, and it was * explicit and emphatic in the section covering which kids can ride which * buses - THERE IS NO BUS-CHANGING ALLOWED! If you are signed up for Bus 42, * you ride that bus, or no bus, end of story. * *What about the kids that are in care before and after school and would *have to ride another bus? Surely there is some way to deal with that. Presumably they would sign up for the appropriate bus! I guess maybe you mean, what if after-care arrangements change mid-year? Well, I guess either the parents will have to make some kind of personal transportation arrangements, or perhaps there is an official process by which one can apply to be transferred from Bus 42 on M/W/F PM to bus 36 on M/W/F PM, or whatever the appropriate change would be. But you can't just choose on a given day which bus you are going to ride. You have to be on the driver's list of riders, which comes from the central office. You have to sign up in advance. I do not believe, btw, that the school district is obligated to provide bus service to random non-residential places that the parents might prefer their children to go after school! I know there ARE some buses that go from the elementary school to various aftercare programs, though. h. -- Hillary Israeli, VMD Lafayette Hill/PA/USA/Earth "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is too dark to read." --Groucho Marx |
#512
|
|||
|
|||
playdates for 4yo
How do you make sure that the parents stay home during the party? Call
them later in the evening? Or ask them when you meet them and take their word on it? Banty With the Halloween party she went to, the mom was there when I dropped her off and she was there when I picked her up. With this particular child, she has not given me any reason yet to distrust her. So I am going to unless there is a problem. As for the sleepover, the invitation said it was given by the parents, they were there when I dropped her off. I did question her when she got home because of this post, but I cannot imagine a parent would throw a sleepover for 12 kids and then not be there. It might happen, but not at this point. Parents are such an integral part of the kids lives right now, that I can't imagine any of them at this age trying to give a party without the parents permission. -- Sue (mom to three girls) |
#513
|
|||
|
|||
playdates for 4yo
"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
I think that many people feel that way, and that's fine. It just wasn't that way in my family when I was in middle/high school and it's not really the way I want to go with my family now. It wasn't that way when I was growing up. I tended to do a lot of lying as to what I was doing. I don't think my mom believed me, but at the same time, she never did follow up with what I was doing or going. It is definitely different with my kids, but at the same time at this point, I am not feeling like I need to know every detail. There will come a time that I will have to know more details though. There's a fine line to tread, as kids do need to become more independent, but I just feel that the need to be aware of friends and their families increases during this time period rather than lessening. Yep, I totally agree and so far have not had a problem. Fortunately, our situation is such that it's possible for me to maintain that sort of awareness without being too much of a PITA. It hasn't for us either. -- Sue (mom to three girls) |
#514
|
|||
|
|||
playdates for 4yo
"Catherine Woodgold" wrote in message
... "P. Tierney" ) writes: It's about putting things in perspective. You can CYA by stating that you are only speaking the "truth" when stating risks, and since *anything* is a risk, you are technically correct. But when one focusing on one risk to the exclusion of all else, then one is painting an inaccurate view of reality, to coin a phrase. Let's just say we disagree. I don't think making true statements Technically true only because you've qualified it well, much like the example someone else gave, something like "Pakistan might invade us with nuclear weapons soon" is also technically true. paints an "inaccurate view of reality". The evening news is filled with true stories, but the make a certain statement by what the choose to include, and moreso, what they choose to exclude. For decades, people have wrongly thought that the crime rate has been steadily rising and that it's much higher than it is, and much of that is related to the fact that news reports crime to a greater degree, and with greater sensation, than other stories. Context isn't given (how it relates to the big picture), but the stories are still completely true. Yet, by focusing on those stories above all else, an inaccurate view of reality has been painting, intentionally or not, for those that watch the news everyday. That what they have reported on is all true doesn't change that. That last sentence of mine may be the only sentence of mine in any of my posts that you actually disagree with. :-) There were others, but oh well. Water under the bridge. P. Tierney |
#515
|
|||
|
|||
playdates for 4yo
bizby40 wrote:
"hedgehog42" wrote in message oups.com... Hillary Israeli wrote: My kids are still pre-bus-age, but I downloaded the pdf file about bus-riding-rules from our local district over the summer, and it was explicit and emphatic in the section covering which kids can ride which buses - THERE IS NO BUS-CHANGING ALLOWED! If you are signed up for Bus 42, you ride that bus, or no bus, end of story. Having sat through innumerable transportation committee meetings, I'd bet that this refers primarily to families wanting the kid to ride the bus home on T TH when an adult is home; for the kid to ride to a sitter's house on MWF, when that adult works late; and for the kid to ride a third bus to Scout meeting at a leader's house on the second W of every month. I think even that would be allowed at our school. I don't know if anyone has taken it to that kind of extreme, but we do have kids that ride the bus home some days and go to afterschool on others. And we have kids that stay with grandma some days, and go home on other days. I know on the odd day that I or DH is at home, DD is able to ride the school bus to her home stop instead of taking the school bus to her after-care without a note from us. She's in elementary school. Jeanne |
#516
|
|||
|
|||
playdates for 4yo
Sue wrote:
"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message On the other hand, even with my older kids (now 8 and 10), I wouldn't allow them to just ride the bus home to visit a home and a parent I'd never met. If it was a first visit, I would at least drop them off and say hi to the other parent, even if I didn't stay (and I might stay, if the other parent looked like they were looking for company). I'm curious as to what some of you would handle this situation. Allison (13 yrs) is in middle school, rides the bus, and has made friends in school that I have never laid eyes on much less know their parents. She is invited to a sleepover tonight at one friends house. I don't know that parents. I am curious as what you would do. Would you let her go? There was another situation where the mom and dad were divorced, but the dad hosted a sleepover and they went skating. I can bet, with some of the attitudes towards menx, that most of you wouldn't have let your daughter go and spend the night. It turned out fine though and Allison had a wonderful time. The dad even sprung for a limosine to take the girls skating. It certainly was something new for us, but I did feel in my heart that it be okay and it was. DD isn't 13 yet so this is totally hypothetical. DD has been going to sleepovers since she was 3 years old (and many parents thought I was nuts but she always enjoyed them). Of course at that age, I knew and trusted the parents but only as the parents of DD's friend (in other words, they were not necessarily close friends of mine or DH). At 13, I would probably want to at least know the parents and child before letting DD sleep over. And to confirm that they are indeed happy to have DD over. I don't think I would care if the friend lives with her dad, the gender of the custodial parent isn't a factor so much as whether or not I trust them. I don't know if boys have sleepovers (do they?) but if gender is an issue then would that mean my son would never been able to stay at a friend's house whose divorced mother has custody (not an uncommon circumstance)? I may be overprotective but we spent a year with renters next door where the single mom did NOT sleep at home at night. So, her 16 or 17 year old son and 13 or 14 year old daughter were often without a grown-up at home. Needless to say, they were not necessarily alone. Jeanne |
#517
|
|||
|
|||
playdates for 4yo
In article ,
Banty wrote: In article , Sue says... When she was younger, I did that. Now that she is in middle school and has different types of friends, I guess I don't feel a need to do that or there is really little opportunity to have every friend over. With her in middle school, there has not been many opportunities to volunteer for things. I have not went on a field trip yet, but I do plan to this year. I think the whole meeting parents and friends before they are allowed to do things together kind of drops off, even though we still need to be vigilant on making sure parents are home during parties, which so far we have not had a problem with that. How do you make sure that the parents stay home during the party? Call them later in the evening? Or ask them when you meet them and take their word on it? Banty I had to take the parents' word for it. If I had reason to suspect the parents' weren't reliable, I sometimes DID stop by or check very late or very early. Not a perfect system -- but I wasn't willing to tell my kids that just because we had to move and I didn't know anyone, THEY had to strictly curtail their social lives. -- Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care |
#518
|
|||
|
|||
playdates for 4yo
Catherine Woodgold wrote:
Ericka Kammerer ) writes: Catherine Woodgold wrote: I remain unconvinced of your claim that "to claim that there will always be suspicion of married people who have opposite sex friends ... until and unless society stops valuing marital fidelity is absolutely a red herring." Please note that I'm not making such a claim myself; it was someone else who said something like that. However, your collection of statements above, although it contains a bunch of true statements, doesn't strike me as an effective argument in favour of your claim. This is a pretty simple logic problem. I say X (forbidding this sort of contact) is not a prerequisite for Y (a society or individual valuing marital fidelity). If you would like to refute that claim, then you must argue that Y is impossible without X. If you would like to make that argument, go ahead. No, thank you, I'll have to decline your invitation to refute that claim, because I happen to agree with it. :-) I never said otherwise. I disagree with you about something else (see above). Then I think you'll have to explain what you're disagreeing with. To recap: Tai said: Marital fidelity is an important component of their relationship for many if not most married people and I don't believe it is healthy for a society to ignore that. I said that I think equating married people socializing with members of the opposite sex (e.g. "ignoring that") with a lack of marital fidelity is a red herring (i.e., a distraction from the main issue), primarily because it is not true that the two need be related. Also, no one in this thread (as far as I can tell) has argued that marital fidelity is unimportant, or that society is, or should be, unsupportive of it. The only argument has been whether socializing with opposite sex friends is appropriate in the context under discussion. To say it a different way, just because someone socializes with members of the opposite sex doesn't mean that they aren't interested in marital fidelity. Society could "ignore that" and still be supportive of and respectful of marital fidelity. Conflating the two indicates a particular perspective on what is necessary and desirable for society to do in order to support marriage, and I do not agree with that perspective. Now, would you care to clarify your disagreement with the above arguments? Best wishes, Ericka |
#519
|
|||
|
|||
playdates for 4yo
"Clisby" wrote in message link.net... Tai wrote: Let's look at this in a slightly different way. Sometimes I go away for a few days during the school holidays with a friend and her children - to the beach, that sort of thing. We'll usually stay in a two to three bedroom unit, cottage or apartment and (it's changed as the children have aged) the girls now go in one room, the boys in another and the adults will share a twin bedded room. How many married men and women in this newsgroup would do that with a friend of the opposite sex? Let's assume the friends are heterosexual, unrelated by blood and their respective spouses aren't joining them. I suspect far fewer than the people who would be quite happy to have their male friendly acquaintance visit with them when only their little, napping children are there. I would, for one. This wouldn't even begin to rise to the level of a big deal to me. Clisby This would not even enter my brain. I'm not even certain what premise would yield being concerned about this. I'm such a hottie, he won't be able to resist me? Men can't control themselves when it comes to sex, and that's all they think about? I don't get it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What are your playdates like? (OT, long, just thinking aloud) | toypup | General | 17 | August 14th 05 03:36 PM |
Should I "just get over it"? How | bizby40 | General | 364 | February 4th 05 12:45 AM |