You're in the Columnists - Amy Dickinson section

Ask Amy: Address family betrayal directly

By Amy Dickinson

Wednesday, Mar. 20, 2013 | 12:00 AM

tool name

close
tool goes here
0 comments

Dear Amy: My husband Stefan's large family is tightly knit. They aggressively attempt to spend every celebratory occasion with us. We don't mind sometimes, but avoiding their constant intrusions was a major reason we moved to another state.

Last holiday, we spent half the day traveling to celebrate with my in-laws and were shocked to find they had invited Stefan's ex-friend, Gerald. Gerald was always trouble, and after one too many debacles, Stefan ended their friendship.

The ambush upset Stefan for several reasons, including being forced to reject Gerald again. Stefan's family thinks we were unkind and unappreciative. I take issue with them derailing our holiday.

Stefan's family wants to spend the next holiday together, of course. He is still angry but feels his only choice is to put this behind him (unaddressed). I feel that since my in-laws can't understand why we feel betrayed and besieged, why travel to see them? Any advice?

-- No trespassing please

Dear Trespassing: You two are seething over this intrusion (understandably), and yet you are not willing to share your honest reaction with these family members. He wants to sweep it under the rug, and you want to avoid them. You can't expect these relatives to understand your feeling of betrayal unless you at least attempt to describe it to them.

If avoiding your in-laws is on the table, can't you decide to address this issue directly and then act based on how they handle the issue?

You both have an opportunity to try to retrain his family and simply try harder to teach them how to treat you. Moving far away doesn't help much as long as they can continue to yank your chain from a distance.

Dear Amy: Have the guidelines for connecting by telephone changed in recent years? I'm not yet a fogy, being part of the sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll generation, but I was taught that a caller should always identify oneself first.

This "rule" seems to have been turned on its head. Instead of, "RING" "Hello?" "Hello. This is the cable company. May I speak to Tim, please?" the universal dialogue seems to be: "RING" "Hello?" "Hello, is Tim there?"-- Tim

Dear Tim: The rules may not have changed, but telephoning behavior certainly has. Although we may still teach our children to identify themselves when placing a call to a house phone (remember those?), there are sometimes legitimate reasons not to identify oneself unless asked.


askamy@tribune.com or Ask Amy, Chicago Tribune, TT500, 435 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60611.

Similar stories:

  • Ask Amy: Dad's business schemes embarrass daughter

  • Ask Amy: Dad should stand up for his blended family

  • Husband tries to broker peace

  • Ask Amy: Parents rule own roost on drinking

  • Ask Amy: Forbidden love looks attractive

The Bee's story-comment system is provided by Disqus. To read more about it, see our Disqus FAQ page. If you post comments, please be respectful of other readers. Your comments may be removed and you may be blocked from commenting if you violate our terms of service. Comments flagged by the system as potentially abusive will not appear until approved by a moderator.

more videos »
Visit our video index