ECHURCH-USA Archives

The Electronic Church

ECHURCH-USA@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Echurch-USA The Electronic Church <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Kathy Du Bois <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 1 Aug 2005 08:23:30 -0400
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Reply-To:
Echurch-USA The Electronic Church <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (95 lines)
Hey Brad,
         I agree with you completely.  I don't feel one bit guilty
for the invasion of privacy.  I've been tapping his phone calls for
about nine months now and we were monitering his instant messaging
until the program got a glitch in it.  Greg thinks that it was a
deamon.  GRIN!  Anyway, we're not going to bother doing anything
about it until we get back in case it messes up again.  I've
explained the reason that we feel a need to moniter and I keep saying
to him, when he complains, "I wish that the need for this had never
arrived, but since you insist on acting out instead of repenting, I
am doing nothing wrong.  I am protecting the others in the house."
         The latest now is that he has taken up smoking again because
his girl friend is too weak to quit.  Tomorrow, during our session,
we are informing him that he has lost the privalege of the basement
room which gives him access to the outside without going through the
house.  When we get back from vacation, he will move upstairs and we
will move Matt down.  He will be furious, but too bad.  It's either
that or we talk to his probation officer about finding another place
now.  Hope his little cancer  sticks are worth it.
         By the way Bradly, I've told you before, its Kathleen, not
Kathryn!  Tsk, Tsk!  GRIN!
Kathy


At 12:52 AM 7/30/2005, you wrote:
>Kathy,
>
>Isn't that something? He  breaks the house rules, and yet he  is the one
>getting angry. We had a situation or need to search our sons room/car once
>based off some info we were approached on, thankfully that was only a
>short time of curiosity which  scared the heck out of him. Anyway, I felt
>the need to search was not an invasion of privacy as there was an illegal
>action and therefore right to privacy was forfeited by him. I explained
>this to him as well, and expressed disappointment that he put me in a such
>a position and that trust was broken. I've always stressed the need for
>trust among family members, as what else is the relationship worth without
>it. Over the years times it has been broken but not without a deeper sense
>of loss than the deed , lie, or whatever itself. I know that has been
>severely abused by Chris, but perhaps that can be a part of your
>explanation to him for what it is worth to him. This happened twice and I
>had no guilt or problem searching. It was for his safety and  proper
>addressing of the issue. No matter the age, anyone living in my home and
>performs a illegal act has voluntarily forfeited their rights to privacy.
>Perhaps this disclosure is best. After all if he asked you out right, what
>other choice did you have? Lie to him and say no, and expect him then to
>tell you the truth? No matter how he suspected the phone tap, you did
>right by your answer. Oh, one more tip Katherine , never, never, never and
>I mean never call your child by their full name lol, they know trouble is
>up and it sets them off immediately. Praying for a peaceful and enjoyable
>vacation. Do not let Chris rob you of that.
>
>Brad
>
>on 05:22 PM 7/29/2005, Kathy Du Bois said:
>Well guys,
>          Thank you for the advice.  My inttention was to follow the wisdom
>offered
>here and wait to talk to the therapist.  Unfortunately, it didn't work out
>that way.  Chris came in this morning as I was reading my email.  I don't
>know if he saw anything, but he asked me point blank if I had heard
>anything interesting on the phone lately.  I paused for a moment and then
>decided that honesty is the best policy so I said, "yes."  He asked me
>what
>and I said, "I love you very much christopher."  Then he started getting
>angry.  I think that he thought that I was dodging his question, but I got
>up  and asked him to come with me to talk to Greg.  When we got into my
>bedroom, I told Greg that Chris had asked me straight out if I had heard
>anything interesting and Greg agreed with me that we should just tell the
>truth.  We asked to see Chris's wrists.  At first he resisted, but he
>finally took the bandage off.  It is four small cuts.  We talked to him
>about the point that this isn't the way to handle frustration or
>disappointment and we asked him to talk to his therapist about this next
>week.  He said that he would, but of course, we'll still be giving the
>therapist the heads up as well.    What a time to go on vacation!!
>          Chris is  angry at the invasion of privacy.  I understand this,
>but we
>have also tried to explain that we believe that we must do some monitering
>for safety reasons.  If he would repent and start making smarter
>decisions,
>we wouldn't have to do this, but as long as we are responsible for him, we
>want to know what he won't tell us.
>          93 days and he turns 18.  This next Tuesday, we are going to
>review a
>contract with him, with the help of a court ordered  family counselor
>concerning what we expect if he is to remain here, especially after he
>turns 18.  I rather doubt, at this point, however, that he will.  Where he
>will go, I don't know, but our family can't keep going through this
>craziness.
>          I know that, from my messages, you guys probably have a hard time
>figuring
>out whether life is better or worse for our family.  Well, every day is
>different.  Sometimes its okay and sometimes, like today, it is worse, but
>it sure isn't a picnic.
>Kathy

ATOM RSS1 RSS2