Family and Host Obligations
Some relatives had a kerfuffle this week over the question of family versus host obligations.
We have a relative who lives in a retirement home and has health issues. Another relative issued an invitation to attend an opera downtown. The question then became, whose moral obligation is it to make the plan work?
The one issuing the invitation feels it's up to the relative's children, pointing out that if the invitee had been my mom, one of her children would have made sure she got to go.
On the other hand, my mom would rather have died than have any of her children "guilted" into helping her attend an opera. She was determined never to impose on her children as she herself felt imposed on, caring for an invalid mother.
I consider it the obligation of a host issuing an invitation to a shut-in to make all necessary arrangements, rather than expecting someone else to do so without first getting enthusiastic agreement.
This is particularly true where trust between the one issuing the invitation and those nominated to do the work is in short supply.
When I was in sixth grade and taking square dance lessons, my parents offered a ride to a girl in the neighborhood who was also attending the class. Arriving at her house, I was sent to her door to ring the bell and escort her to the car, even though I would have been happy just to honk from the drive.
To me, that illustrates two aspects of the current issue:
1) the invitation included all steps necessary, and
2) the one expected to get out of the car, walk to the door and ring the bell would have appreciated being consulted.
With this incident as prelude, the family reunion may truly be a blast this year, and unfortunately I don't mean that in a good way. Such an outcome truly would have saddened my mom, who wanted her children to remain close, and knew that takes work when we are so diverse.
The Middlewife points out two less obvious questions in the current situation:
1) Is the relative capable of going downtown in a limo unassisted, and who decides that?
2) If not, how do you preserve hope?
Update:
As suggested above, the key thing lacking, in my opinion was enthusiastic agreement from those nominated to do the work. That's a key point made by Willard Harley in his marriage book "Love Busters". He calls it the Policy of Joint Agreement, and describes it this way: "Never do anything without an enthusiastic agreement..." Whenever that is lacking, a decision to proceed anyway makes what Harley calls withdrawals from the love bank, which he defines as "The way our emotions keep track of the way people treat us." He describes the result this way: "...most people who make us unhappy don't have an opportunity to withdraw as many love units as they might, because once their account is negative, we try to avoid them. That's why we usually don't dislike very many people -- we 'close their account' before things get that bad. ... Uncles, aunts, cousins, and other members of your extended family can be avoided, at least for most of the year."
Update2: The invitee ended up in the hospital the day of the event, thereby rendering the kerfuffle moot. Prayers would be welcome now, as they were even in the ICU for a while yesterday.
Update3: Good news! Our relative has improved in health enough to leave the hospital. Thanks for the prayers!
Leave a comment