Thank you, Jodi Sue, for your kind words and understanding. I have been so disheartened by this thread's seemingly endless misinterpretation or mislabeling of my workplace (that we take pride in and obviously have invested a great deal of our lives in -- especially taking pride in creating a workplace that our current and former employees find rewarding, secure, and supportive), and you have given me hope that my communication skills are not as atrocious as I had feared, lol. Thank you, really, you've made my day. :)

I'd use a HEPA air filter cleaner thing (great for allergens, too, which can be an issue with birds in the house). There are nice ones for $100 or so on Amazon. Put it in the room with the birds and/or whatever room people occupy nearby. They are slightly noisy, which I like in bedrooms as they provide some white noise, but in living space, you might want it in a space where you aren't watching TV (or at least fairly far from where people sit to listen). Love HEPA room air cleaners. Huge help with allergens. I agree about plastics in the cage. Replace with metal and ceramic if you have plastics in there. Of course your birds should bathe regularly for their health.

I have read thousands of hours of material on vet hospital management and have done it successfully for over a decade. I assure you that this concept is not feasible for a very small hospital. But, if you are experienced in managing a very small vet hospital, and you can direct me to resources on this idea, I'd be delighted to read up on it. Yes, I choose not to do this, and I have explained my rationale ad infinitum.

Of course it is all about money. It is a job, which we do for money. If it weren't for the money, we (dh and I) wouldn't be working, for sure. That's why we look forward to retirement, and that's why we take vacations and schedule a reasonable work week in general, to allow for the fun stuff in life. I'm guessing that not many folks (just) work for fun. Most of us do it (mostly) for money. Certainly, I judge most of our work/life balance decisions in the light of money, since that is our motivator to work. We *also* honor what we feel is a moral imperative to treat others (especially our staff who depend on us for their incomes) fairly and with respect. Our thriving business allows us the honor of providing a good work environment and doing various other charitable things with clients, patients, etc. If our business doesn't thrive, not only does our personal income fall, but our ability to go the extra mile for staff, clients, patients, and charities also goes away. I *especially* agree with your statement that most people don't routinely take sick days off. This is true. This is why we are able to fully staff our business with people who don't routinely take sick days off. I wonder if you have ever managed a significant number of entry-level staff. If you have, then you have surely experienced that there are a small minority of people who will gleefully take advantage of their co-workers by calling off on the "good days" -- Mondays, the days around holidays, any day they feel like doing something else -- with no consideration of their co-workers. These are the "bad apples" that, as an employer, I have learned to protect my staff and my business from. Just like most employees won't steal from their employer, but a few will. Thus, we have to have safeguards to prevent employee theft. The cameras and inventory counts and computer tracked everything are inconvenient to everyone, but without them, for sure, we will be stolen from. We have had probably 50-100 employees in our 12 years of ownership, and I only know for sure of 2 who stole from us. That's pretty good odds. Nonetheless, the camera system went in after the Bad Apple #2 walked off with 1-2k in medications and the daily deposit security plan went in after Bad Apple #1 stole about 10k before we caught on. You have to have systems in place to prevent bad actors; otherwise you encourage and facilitate them. This all to say that, yep, most employees don't abuse sick leave, but a few will, and they can cause a lot of problems. My original advice to OP was intended to coach her in how she can teach her (new) boss (who may well have come from or be in the midst of managing a team with some bad apples) that she isn't a bad apple, but rather a great employee who happened to have a couple bad days within a couple months. I.e., the advice to show up puking (if demanded/expected) was a way to avoid being fired and to prove to her boss that her word was true. My expectation was that her supervisor, being a reasonable human being, would see this and that after that one unpleasant and stressful drive to work with a puke-bucket in hand, she'd never again face distrust regarding a call off. Similarly, the advice to get a DR note was to engender trust with the new supervisor. That is what *I* would advise my friend or kid to do in a situation like that. And, following that interaction, if the boss wanted her to keep working in between puking episodes and/or the OP faced recriminations or bad attitude . . . that, to me, would be a clear indication of a bad fit at that job, and I'd advise seeking a better fit ASAP. The only times we've required DR notes was when an employee was already on the verge of being fired for absenteeism. It isn't routine in our workplace, but, to me, it is a fair demand if an employee wants an "excused" absence from a scheduled shift. If the employee doesn't have an excused absence, then, in the vast majority of places in the US, the employer is within their rights to terminate the employee. If that's not what you want to happen, then you should do what you need to do to keep your job. And, if your job sucks, you will hopefully move on. I am well aware not many hourly employees get paid leave. We provide paid leave to our FT staff -- all of whom are compensated hourly except dh and I. Providing paid leave is part of being a good employer in my book, but it does cost money, as do other important benefits. One of the ways we afford to provide good benefits and good wages is by having a lean, top notch, high performing team. Businesses are about money. You can only charge clients so much, which means that there is a limited fund of money to spend on wages and benefits. You can spread it out further by paying less, offering fewer benefits, and/or mostly staffing with PT staff who are hungry for hours and money, so highly likely to accept last minute shift request to fill in for others. Or, you can hire a professional team, treat them well, and allow them to work FT for good compensation, and let them cover the needed hours. I'm not sure if you are intentionally misunderstanding the reality of a very small business by comparing it to a multi-doctor large practice or if you are confused about the size and scope of a very small business. A very small business that provides critical services does not have the same ability to absorb absenteeism as a business with more flexible output required (say, being an author of novels) nor the same ability as a very large business that could and would likely have a pool of "floaters" as well as more potential people to call in. Providing a critical service means you cannot, ethically, simply close up shop leaving patients or clients adrift. You have to do what needs to be done. Period. FWIW, dh worked in 7-8 vet practice for a year or two, and vets didn't call off there, either, and certainly not without arranging coverage (calling a colleague to cover for you and calling the boss ASAP). Even if you are a 10 doctor medical practice, the practice is generally fully scheduled at least several days out, and generally not all 10 are working each day. I've got friends who work in all sorts of medical fields, and I've never known any of them to routinely take days off. I've known doctors to work with a face mask if they might be contagious, in fact. Maybe this is cultural/social and varies by where you reside. For whatever reasons, obviously my experiences and expectations are very different from yours.

My husband could choose to take a sick day any time he wanted . . .as he's the boss . . but as replacement vets are not available on demand . . . besides frustrating and annoying clients that would have to be redirected to a neighboring practice, that would directly cost us about $3000 per day he took off, since all our expenses would continue (even if we unfairly demanded that our staff use their vacation/sick leave to get paid that day, their wages are only 20% of our expenses . . . the facilities costs are there whether or not they are used that day) . . . and since the vet is the only person who generates the income that supports the dozen staff members. . . If he *plans* a day off, it "only" costs us $400 or so, (essentially the after tax cost of hiring a relief vet at more like $500+/day) since he can usually hire a replacement vet if given enough notice . . . He took about 5 weeks off in the last year, and he works a 40 hr/5 day or so workweek, so it's not unhealthy or untenable. To him (and me), we'd rather use that money towards a week or more of real down time than nursing a head cold for a day in bed . . . He can work 40 hrs in a week and still recover from an illness after hours. Surely every one of us mothers here worked more than 40 hours in a week taking care of young children when we were sick, or even very seriously ill. Babies and toddlers don't give us sick days . . . and IME taking care of a brood of young kids was much more taxing and much longer hours than any paid job I've done. No sick days or any paid time off whatsoever, either, lol. No physicians, attorneys, or veterinarians I have known routinely take sick days. It's just not the way these sorts of professions work. Patients or clients need to be seen, and not showing up to see them is just not done. You only don't show up if you are in the hospital or dead, for the most part. One or two days every 5 years or so is typical IME -- an generally those days are when the person or a child or spouse is in the hospital with a life threatening emergency, or possibly a day off when someone in the immediate family dies. Colds, routine injuries, infections, etc are dealt with outside of working hours, IME. If you had a large enough business to have fill-in professionals, that could work in medicine, but still would not work for attorneys at all. Frankly, no executive level professionals I know routinely take sick days. It's just not done IME. If you are in a field where you can miss a day without it hurting anything, then that is AWESOME, and by all means utilize some sick days when appropriate. But, if your profession is one where you being out unexpectedly harms your clients, patients, co-workers, or business goals, then that's just not done, IME. In fact, in the legal field, I am confident that someone would be disciplined, fired and/or disbarred for calling off sick harming the interests of a client. Judges and courts don't give a rat's ass about your personal issues, and it would be a *very* rare emergency situation for an attorney to seek a delay in hearing or filing due dates due to an illness/etc. So rare that I've never heard of it growing up in an attorney's home.

It's just something I've learned as an employer that there is a wide range of normal. A family where my employee has a few kids and is the sole person available to stay home and/or take the kid to the DR is "normal" to need 5-10 days or more per year off unexpectedly. The same employee with a spouse or grandparents or a friend who can take care of the kids (at least much of the time) when sick would take much fewer day off. An employee with chronic uncontrolled migraines or a comparably disabling ailment would similarly need a lot of sick days. That same employee who has successfully found a medical management plan for her ailment will take many fewer days off. If you want to be employed in a critical role, you have to be able to have reliable sick child care and/or a healthy family. The lack of sick child care is a national problem, for sure. It sucks. I personally know plenty of physicians, veterinarians, and other professionals in critical roles. I've never known any of them to take more than 1-2 days max per year unexpectedly. Our employed vet has never taken a sick day, despite being a mom of 3 young kids. Dh has *never* taken an unplanned sick day in his 16 years in practice. He's gotten sick here and there, but he's always worked through it, and we work hard to keep him healthy. (We went so far as to pay for flu shots for any/all staff who'd get them back in the days when folks paid OOP for preventive medical care.) One of our interview questions is "How often do you expect to take off days unpredictably for sick days or other emergencies?" It is an enlightening question, and screens out a lot of potential hires who say things like, "Oh, maybe once a month or so. Not often!" vs "Pretty much never. I've got plans for my kids when they are sick, and I have only taken off sick for three days once in the last 5 years for a bad flu." You'd be amazed at how many generally healthy people think that calling off one a month for a day or two for a headache is normal. We have plenty of staff who have chronic health issues (migraines, etc.) and they've all managed to find good ways to manage their aliments sufficiently to be reliable employees. In the final interview, with my husband, they are generally asked a variation of this question again, and before hiring, we make it very clear that our hospital can't manage frequent (more than a couple per year) call offs while explaining our scheduling and paid time off policies. Our staff is a cohesive team, and they work together to cover needs for each other. What goes around comes around, and they understand that. They also understand the stress it puts on everyone when there are "too many" call offs, and they are the first to want to avoid or get rid of team members whose unreliability unreasonably put pressure on the rest of the team. They've also all witnessed owner/management commitment to our staff and willingness to go above and beyond for critical needs, so they understand that they are valued and respected. We *all* step up and make do when someone is really sick or has another emergency. No one is upset or not understanding when someone has an emergency. But, we've had enough bad hires over the years (management failures; we improved) who thought even 2-3 days a month or more of call offs was acceptable . . . that we ultimately instituted a very firm "first 6 months" probationary period where any call off in the first 6 months is carefully reviewed by management. This evolved because *every* hire (at least 6-10 over our first few years of ownership) who called off a day or two in the first month inevitably continued that pattern until they were finally fired or quit. Some of these people were technically skilled, but their unreliability made them a bad fit for our business. The fist half dozen times this happened to us, we would automatically treat these new-hire-call-offs as we do the rest of the team, unquestioning support and "get well soon" . . . but we eventually realized that, no, it wasn't a coincidence that the new hire just happened to have a virus, a migraine, and a family emergency all in the first 2 months of employment. It *always* continued and worsened. So, now, we treat any call off in the first 2 months as a reason for a sit down discussion with the employee, and repeated call offs in the first 6 months are generally reason for termination due to "bad fit" and "frequent call offs". Typically, we document written warnings including requiring DR note for subsequent call offs within a set time period. Most often, these employees fire themselves due to an unwillingness to limit their call offs to truly critical situations (i.e, they aren't sick enough to go to a DR or may not be sick at all). In our state, as in most US states, being sick isn't a legal excuse to miss work. We can and do fire for repeated "missed shifts" and so long as we have documented written warnings, etc, and there is no documented legal disability (which we have never had, but which would complicate but not prohibit our firing) these are considered justified firings and the employee is not eligible for unemployment coverage. BTDT, never lost an unemployment claim, because we treat people fairly and follow the law. Staff turnover is both expensive for us and very hard on morale, so we've learned to be cautious in hiring as well as quick to fire, as firing a new hire is much less painful for all than waiting 6 months or longer (which was what happened when we didn't pay extra attention to new hire call offs, as it'd take months to realize the pattern when we weren't being vigilant). Thus, the evolution of our cautious hiring and our aggressive "probationary period" policies on absenteeism. Our pay structure -- which allows staff to take paid time off for any reason (ahead of time for anything but emergency or sick leave) and to rollover time off for up to 2x their annual leave structure (so accumulating up to 6 - 10 paid weeks off depending on seniority), rewards them for reliability because they never lose paid time. Traditional sick leave that they use or lose rewards people for calling off sick. We also have flexible scheduling, which allows them to request preferred shifts and various days off so as to avoid the "sick" days for things that are not truly urgent, but could be planned ahead. Also, since our staff is well compensated and gets good benefits and a guaranteed ability to work 40 hr/wk, as well as OT if they are asked to cover an extra shift, etc, they have more financial flexibility than staff of a company that offers less compensation or has less ability to control their schedule. Since our staff is empowered to swap shifts and rearrange their scheduling as needed, they can also easily cover a sudden DR appointment for something non-that-day-critical (i.e., an injury or mild ailment that needs seen but can wait a day or two).

Maybe you could re-read my earlier posts if you are unclear as to what I was talking about. I advised OP on how to approach her boss about her 2 sick days. Her boss was new to her position, if you might recall, so was likely unfamiliar with OP's personal reliability. At this point, I think I've done my best to advise folks on how to approach their employers about their sick days and/or how to understand the perspective of the employer. I'll retire from this attempt and move on. Have a great day, all, and may we all be healthy! :)

Our employment situation is not unstable. FT'ers are guaranteed 40 hr/wk every week they want it. They have up to 5 (or more if paternity or maternity benefits are used) weeks paid off each year on any day/time/way they want to use it. They can take unpaid time off with little limitation. Each month, they can request days/part days off with or without using their paid leave time, and management schedules around their requests . . . Obviously, our team is not unstable. We have three team members who've been on our team for 8+ years -- one took two (paid) maternity leaves before quitting before her 3rd pregnancy (to stay home) and recently, after a 2 year break, rejoined our team working just 2 short shifts a week -- shifts than she knew were unpopular (Sat morning and a late midweek evening) but that also happened to work great for a mom . . . As I said above, our lead receptionist has been encouraged to write her own job schedule and description post-maternity leave after having a 100% supportive maternity experience (us readily accepting changes in return to work date and shift from FT to PT). I can't tell you the number of lay staff we've had who have tearfully thanked us both during and years after their employment for being so supportive and respectful. That lead receptionist and her husband have both nearly broken my heart with their gratitude for our flexibility and respect. I have team members who moved out of state 7-8 years ago and work for excellent practices but who still lament no longer working for us and with our team. The *reason* we can be such a stable employer is that we have such a great team. If the team wasn't stable, reliable, and responsible, we couldn't offer what we do to our staff. They each know this, and when those same team members are interviewing applicants for positions, they are the most fanatical about making sure they don't add any weak links to our strong chain. FWIW, I am *all for* paid family leave. In places where vets are guaranteed lengthy paid leave (Canada, etc), there develops a healthy pool of "relief" vets to cover maternity leaves for employers. Similarly, I would guess that if very generous paid leave were available, there would evolve better temp services for practices like ours .. . But, as it is, our (small WV) region does NOT have that sort of depth of skilled temp staff. Indeed, just to schedule dh's vacations or CE, we put a lot of time into booking a good relief vet, and we frequently have to schedule our vacations around the available vet time . . .

Yep, we've spent times over staffed, and there are some advantages. We let our team choose staffing levels, and they have experienced both ends of the spectrum. We aim for comfortably staffed, lol.

Sure, of course, a human hospital with 1000s of employees have floaters. A veterinary hospital (or tiny medical office) with 10-12 employees does not.

It takes about 6 mos full time experience in OUR hospital for a lay person to be trained up to snuff to be a "veterinary nurse" or "tech" in our practice. It takes a similar length of training for a receptionist to be able to handle the front desk alone. We are a tiny hospital. If we were a large corporate chain, we could have floaters assigned to fill in shift at a range of hospitals. Plenty of practices are run that way. For very different reasons, we choose to be locally owned and operated by the owner/lead vet. We aren't a book store or a Walmart. We rely on skilled people and can't abide by errors due to the life and death nature of our work place. If we chose to staff with mostly unskilled people, we could do that, but it's require us having a 2nd FT vet to do the skilled tasks we rely on our lay staff for (combination of licensed techs, who are in short supply, and on-the-job trained nurses). Plenty of practices do that -- hire more vets and fewer lay staff (and pay the few lay staff peanuts). Mistakes in our profession means that patients, clients, or staff can be injured or killed. Thus, you need highly trained staff (in sufficient numbers) to keep everyone safe. Staff injury is a serious issue in vet med, and poorly trained co-workers and to blame for the vast majority of staff injuries. Injuries can be small or devastating. We've owned our business 12 years, and we haven't ever had to close due to illness. On a handful of occasions, maybe 1x/yr, we've had to reduce scheduling density to accommodate limited staffing. That generally has happened when a number of events co-incide (sudden illness or family emergency in multiple staff +/- a maternity leave +/- sudden quit or firing of a team member). When that sort of chaos occurs, managers tweak scheduling on the fly and/or we run late, meaning all team members work through lunch and/or stay well past scheduled end of day. This is not ideal, but, again, it is the reality of working in a medical field, as any medical personnel would agree. Our staff is happy; clients are happy; patients are well cared for; owners -- us -- are happy. Maybe part of why we don't have frequent mass illness events is that we pay well enough and offer enough benefits that our staff can afford medical care. Similarly, they can easily arrange time off for DR visits due to our very flexible scheduling system. If we were a Walmart or Vetsmart, our staff would be more PT, more poorly compensated, less likely to have a scheduler who was deeply committed to making our staff's work schedule good for each individual . . . Also, we have built trusting relationships with our team so that they know they can and should stay home when they are truly sick and contagious. I was not complaining about our staff situation or seeking advice on changing it. I was explaining why in certain sorts of businesses, like ours, cannot tolerate frequent call offs. It's totally fine to seek a job where you can regularly call off. If you have a medical condition or a family situation that means you'll need unpredictable and frequent days off, then certainly, you should seek that sort of employer.

pale gums can make the vet worry about bleeding. I'd call the vet just to touch base.

Our business could not survive if folks took many weeks worth of days off each year without advance planning/notice. If we had to add a person each shift, that means we'd increase our staffing cost substantially, likely resulting in us having to reduce wages/benefits across the board. We can and happily do work with staff who have needs for time off that we can plan for . . . My head receptionist's baby turned 7 months today, and we let her set her own schedule for coming back at whatever amount she wanted . . . Her desires changed over the months (like I thought they would --her first baby) . . . and instead of coming back FT at 12 weeks, she has decided to stay PT . . . and I've encouraged her every step of the way since she first told us she was pregnant. Family first; work can be worked out. What we can't work around is unpredictable call-offs. If you are the size of Walmart, sure, you can have extra staff on hand. . . But, as a small vet hospital who is fully staffed at 1 dr + 4-5 support staff (with non-overlapping duties and not all interchangeable). . . adding spare staff is not only expensive but really messes up the work flow. What happens if someone calls off without a sub is that the remaining team members are slammed and stressed when someone calls off without getting another replacement team member to cover. There is only so much we can do to slow work flow if the day's surgeries and appointments are already fully booked when someone no-shows. If we know ahead of time that we'll be short, we can (and do) reduce the case load for the day, but if it's the last minute, we have little we can do to slow the case load. We have great staff. They don't call off a lot. We bundle all their paid time off (much more than our competitors) so that those who don't get sick can take more vacations. . . Works well for everyone. Our staff get paid time off from day 1, starting at 10 days the first year, ramping up each years, and our staff (2 of them) who've been there 10 years get 5 weeks paid off . . . we give extra paid time for maternity and paternity leave . . . and we've never said no to a good employee who wanted unpaid leave . . . we encourage and facilitate lengthy maternity leaves, too. Our staff love us. One of the reasons they love working at our business is because we make sure their team mates are as responsible and excellent as they are . . . In fact, our staff does all the hiring process until a final interview before hiring with my husband (the owner/vet) . . . and believe me, our staff is vigilant to make sure they hire people who are not prone to calling off a lot, because it is them, the staff, who pay the price when someone is off. One of the reasons we are less able to absorb call-offs is because unlike most small business vets, we staff with all FT'ers except for students/etc who need/want PT. When we bought the hospital, it was mostly minimum wage college students staffing the practice. We transitioned to FT staff who get benefits, stay for years, and are paid fairly . . . We are committed to being a great employer. I think the longevity of our staff is a testament to our success in doing that. If we had all those PT'ers not getting the hours they want, we'd have a pool of willing availablle subs .. . . but with much fewer staff, nearly all FT (or otherwise in school during the hours they aren't working), there aren't many folks to ask to cover a shift. . . It's just not easy. We have X # of hours of shifts available each week, so if we over-hire, WE are fine, but then our staff ends up not getting the hours they'd like. Our team chooses to work the way we do. I think it's a pretty good deal. We always get staff input on deciding how heavily to staff, and our staff is in charge of the scheduling, too, so they are in control of their destiny. I intended to be helpful with my post(s), trying to suggest some ideas that could help the OP resolve her problem and avoid future problems. I understand that someone;s job is vital to them, and I intended to offer some perspective from the employer that could help her understand and "work" the system to her benefit.

My guess is that your boss doesn't really believe/trust that you are sick when you call off. It's probably not personal towards you, but just based on a bigger problem in the team and/or just because she doesn't know you yet. I am guessing this since she is relatively new to her position, so I'm assuming she doesn't know you well. In our small business, we similarly ask staff to find coverage if they are able to do so. But, if they let us know that they can't get coverage (either they tried and failed or they are too sick to make the contacts), then we handle it. That said, we are also entitled to fire people who can't make their shifts, regardless of the reason. We aren't a sort of business that can easily absorb frequent call offs. If we have someone calling off sick frequently (say more than a few times a year, except in a time-limited situation such as a particularly eventful pregnancy or injury, etc. that we can expect will end and not be a long term issue), we can't have them on staff, because it is too hard on the rest of the team as well as our clients and patients. We make this clear at interviews and at hiring, in hope that most folks who are prone to frequent call offs will chose not to accept a job with us. One thing, though, if someone shows up for work and is puking or similar, we send them home. Immediately. We'd prefer they call off, but if they show up, we send them home. They are no good to us, and we don't want the illness to spread, either. Similarly, if they're so ill they are functioning poorly, we'll send them home. Now, just like frequent call offs, frequent show-up-sicks won't last long, either, because it is just too hard on the hospital. So, IMHO, if I were you, I'd suggest doing what you did (trying to get coverage, trying to call off), but if you can't get coverage, and your boss insists you need to come, then go. If they see you there, trying, but sick, they'll hopefully send you home AND believe you next time you try to call off. In general, IME, businesses are within their rights to fire you for not showing up as scheduled, regardless of the reason you are not showing up. There are a few exceptions (documented legal disability, etc.) but very few. Even a blizzard isn't a legal excuse not to show up . . . BUT, most employers are reasonable and won't fire you for a "good excuse" that they believe. Trick is to make sure they believe you. When we've had staff that had overly frequent call offs for "sick" but were otherwise good employees, we've given them written warnings about their job being in jeopardy and required/requested a doctor note for any future call offs in the next 6 months (or similar time frame). Usually, these staff fire themselves because they aren't really "sick" every other Monday -- just hung over or dealing with interpersonal drama . . . I'd suggest asking your boss for a quick meeting when you get back to work, and express your apologies that you couldn't find coverage and were too sick puking to come in when you couldn't get coverage. Express that you're sorry about the rest of the team being short staffed. Then, if you get sick in the next 3-6 months and are going to need to call off, definitely go get a DR note even if they haven't asked for it, and do your very best to get coverage . . . ((((hugs)))) and I hope you feel better!

I tried to figure out how to do that but never could.

IME, I've had two close people in my life with whom I had long-term-falling outs. With a once-best-friend . . . After "reconnecting", we've been in regular touch, and I care for her and her kid, but I simply don't feel like I used to. I grieved for the 4 years she was out of my life . . . And in the 15 years since . . . I am, I think, utterly immune to it. She's been a bit dramatic and disappeared fro 6-12 months a couple times . . . and, meh, no biggie. I'm just not emotionally vested. This has allowed me to be in relationship but not care that much when things go south. I care for *her* but not so much for our relationship. I have a family member with a similar trajectory . . . That relationship is closer since it is close family, but, in both cases, the years apart during which I grieved and processed gave me a lot of perspective and distance and ability to deal with them now without much risk to my well being. I am MUCH more immune to being hurt by them, and when the inevitable dramatic disappearances and reappearances occur, they get to me much less than you'd imagine. Like if the BIG drama was 100 pain, then the subsequent ones were all under 10. If you don't think that's the case for you, then I'd steer clear of her . . . But if you feel pretty immune, then it may be OK to reconnect a little. It'll never be the same, for sure, IME.

I don't know the etiquette/norms these days, but I think it is certainly reasonable to have a budget in mind. I think that if the # in your mind is much less than would pay for the weddings your kids have attended in your extended family/etc network, then it's probably smart to start talking early about priorities, the waste of those pricey parties, the beauty of a simple wedding . . . I also think it's extra nice if you are offering a # with few strings attached. I probably wouldn't offer it to "spend however you like" because I'd hate to see a large sum frittered away . . . But I might offer a set amount towards wedding/travel/house downpayment . . . I took the "talk early and often" approach to financing the kids' college. . . They know what we can offer, and it's never been a surprise. I'd take a similar approach to weddings . . . Dh and I got married on our own dime in the Caribbean, and it was awesome. His family and mine gave modest cash gifts to us that financed the wedding for the most part, but that's because all we had to pay for were 2 flights, a nice hotel for a week, and a very cheap "wedding package" (the resorts discount them steeply to attract weddings). I've told our kids that I hope they do a beach wedding too. I'd be delighted to drop major $$ to fly the kids and their partners and kids to some great island and rent some nice house(s) . . . such a better way to spend 20-50k+ than one night of rubbery chicken. For now, though, since we don't know we'll have that much to offer, we suggest renting a nice house or two on our family-favorite FL beach. :) I've been to 5 great weddings. Mine, cheap, fabulously fun (about 25 relatives came and we had a blast), as above. :) Then one was over the top fancy (would have been 150-200k in the US, but it was in Argentina after their economy collapsed, so was more like 25k, but all the groom's family and friends had to fly there, lol). Then one was cheap tasty Tex-Mex at a ranch (real ranch) in TX, that belonged to friends' of the couple. They had friends playing music all night, the food was tasty and fun, and the bride's grandpa, at his own church, married them . . . It was fabulous and meaningful and I think under 2k. Then my brother's recent marriage which was maybe 10-20k which is cheap by the standards where they live and the salary he earns . . . a small group (40ish) of close friends and family and a nice catered meal, reggae band, all at a nice VRBO on the beach in SoCal. They did things that meant things to them (drum circle, on the sand), looked fantastic, had great photos . . . Really, it was spectacular, but simple in the scheme of things. Then there was one about 20 years ago that was traditional catered type wedding but it was hosted in the bride's family's property. It was an ordinary (nice) suburban home, but they spent months planting flowers and then had a big white tent and caterers and dancing. It was delightful. We have a huge yard and huge house, so maybe we could do that. All the other typical hotel-ballroom or even fancy-outdoor-venue commercial-type weddings . . . meh. I'm happy for the couple, of course, and the MARRIAGE is what matters, but the parties are nothing special. I'd *much* prefer a backyard or natural setting wedding on the cheap . . .

All I can say is that IME kids get more expensive as they get older. The only way we've survived it is that we had our babies when we were relatively poor (grad students, newly employed), so over the years, our earning power has gone up along with the expenses. If our earning power hadn't gone up, we'd have had to say "sorry, but no" many, many, many times. We still say that, of course, but if we didn't make more than we did when the kids were little, we'd be in trouble. (((hugs)))

We've frequently rented a beach house for a month in the fall. So, we've very often had guests join us for a weekend to up to a week at a time. In our experience, I generally handle stocking the house with eats since we're there so long. Guests always offer to buy groceries and generally take the family out for a NICE dinner out (as in, 150-200 for 6-8 people). Here are some tips to get people thinking the right way . . . Tell them, in advance: "I've got dinners planned for the week(end) for most meals, but why don't you take charge of 1 (or 2 if it's a week) dinner(s). There are nice places to take us all out, or you can bring something frozen or made ahead, or groceries to cook. The house is pretty well stocked with cookware." "We do casual breakfasts and lunches . . . I've got most of our regular cereals and stuff, but why don't you bring a few cereals or muffins or whatever you like for breakfast, and a pile of fruit. We don't drink coffee, so bring whatever you like for that!" "Since we'll be together for 5 nights, let's each plan to take care of shopping and cooking for 2, and then we can either go out or just order pizza for the fifth dinner. "Here's some stuff you should bring: + Beach towels + a couple packs of toilet paper and paper towels + any special foods or drinks you want to have + your own toiletries + loads of sunscreen + fixings for 2 dinners + a few boxes of cereals or muffins or bagels or whatever + fixings for some lunches and snack foods" And, FWIW, having BTDT on the hosting end, when we are the guests, I always bring paper products along with loads of food . . . and I always insist on doing any grocery or liquor store runs if anything needs to be picked up . . .. and I always insist on taking everyone out to at least one nice meal. Those little costs (paper products, sunscreen, and of course food) really add up! Just be assertive and clear. Thankfully, our guests over the years have generally had good guest manners. :)

Roomba 800 series is awesome. Pricey, and I've had to replace a $60 charger at just over a year of (very hard) use, but I still love it. Love how it does it's work mostly without my interference, and how it gets under couches and beds so well. The Shark Navigator has also been very reliable for us for carpeted areas. Not as good for smooth floors, and we've gotten rid of all the carpet in the house, so I don't use it much any more.

I'd charge about half of whatever a cheap 1BR (or studio) apartment rents for in your area. I wouldn't share food. I'd designate a drawer (or large tupperware) for his stuff, and tell him that if he has something too big for that, mark it with duct tape and his name, so no one will eat it. Similarly, designate a cabinet or area of your pantry that is "his" and that your family will stay out of. If you invite him to share an occasional meal with you, I'd suggest to him that he contribute $5 (or whatever you approximate an average meal to cost in ingredients, in my house $5 would be plenty and we eat pricey foods) and designate a "meal jar" in the kitchen where he can toss in his $. If he only expects to eat with you rarely (say once a week or less), I'd not even worry about it. A summer intern may well have odd hours, like to eat out, live off ramen, etc. Some kids would eat cheap, and sharing food would be fine. Or you'll get a kid like my teen who is accustomed to "bottomless pantry" and is a big eater and could easily eat $100/wk in food. Really. Don't risk that.

I don't even like to shop for stuff I can afford, want, and need. I hate shopping. I stress out about every detail. I want to spend 10 hours shopping for a $200 faucet, but life is too short and there is too much stuff to buy, so I never feel like I can give the decisions all the critical attention I should. I enjoy accompanying OTHERs on their shopping journeys, but dread shopping for stuff where I am the decision maker. Maybe I'm just tired out. Maybe in a year or two when I've truly recovered from a very chaotic few years, then I'll have enough energy to expend it needlessly shopping. For now, I'm grateful for Amazon, where I can find what serves my purpose in 3 minutes or less.

I dunno . .. I've been married almost 21 years, and honestly, he gets more perfect every year. Sometimes it is true. :)

dh's education. dh's business. homes and land.

I thought I'd start a thread for folks to suggest curriculum, books, or other resources for to help our children become financially literate. I ask that folks include an age/grade range along with the resource and a bit of a description/review. Thanks!!!!