Sneaking purchases...

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sneaking purchases...
1291
Thu, 03-25-2004 - 11:10am

I was reading another board about sneaking purchases past their husband's. I know I use to sneak before we started doing our finances together. I would actually come home during lunch to get the mail or unload packages. I was pitiful. Even now, I will bring things in the house and wince thinking how upset Devin would be with me.


So, have you ever hid purchases or not told your DH the whole picture of your finances? We use to horrible fights about finances. I would do the weekly budget and e-mail him it. We would discuss it and everything was fine. Then, he would tell me two days later that he was doing a marathon that cost $75.00. I had to actually ask him before we did the budget-Do you have any marathons? Do you need shoes? Do you have any equipment you need? Can you tell I

"I do not want to be a princess! I want to be myself"

Mallory (age 3)

      &nbs

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 6:39pm
Guess what, though!<<>> my next door neighbor whose children are 11, 8 and 7mos, just told me the other night where she was reading putting babies on their backs is deforming their heads. i am one who is totally against putting a baby on their back. i understand the sids thing, but it was caused by the baby having the blankets, or sheets to close to their nose and mouth, and they were not getting enough oxygen as opposed to breathing in the exhaled air. i also know it is not necessary to "bundle up" a baby while they are sleeping for warmth. the cool air is much more conducive for babie's sleep. am i making sense? if i had put my dd on her back, she would have choked to death for sure, as she spit up constantly. i cringe everytime i hear someone swear by putting a baby on their backs, because i think of my dd and how it would have been disasterous.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 6:41pm
oh, h&i, you know we were moms of babies, back in the olden days. LOL. this chick is something else!!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 6:42pm
Of course I expected it. I sought it out in DCPs with the children they had already.

I looked for DCPs who had a warm, loving relationship with the kids they cared for...not in the words they spoke, in the body language....and not so much in the DCP's body language, but rather, in the body language of the children they cared for. When I interviewed DCPs, I did so at least once while they had their kids there. I looked for kids who sought the DCPs physical "protection" in the presence of strangers (like kids who looked to the DCP for cues as to how to react to the presence of a stranger, or kids who would approach the DCP and touch or otherwise physically seek her comfort and guidance.) I looked for a DCP who displayed unconscious, natural signs of affection herself, such as reaching out to touch a child who was approaching, even if her vocal attention remained on me.

It's pretty easy to find good, loving DCPs, if you look at the children she watches. Children in a loving, secure environment will demonstrate that love and security in the same way they demonstrate it when Mom or Dad is around. They expect the DCP to give them cues as to how to react (whether to laugh or cry when they fall, whether to be safe or cautious around a stranger). They seek physical contact from the DCP. They aren't hesitant to approach the DCP or indifferent to her. Yeah, you'll find the occasional super confident kid who doesn't react too strongly to strangers, but by and large it's easy to tell if a DCP really loves her kids by the way those kids behave towards her in the presence of a stranger.

And yes, I not only expected my DCP to love my child, it was pretty much a requirement. When it came time to choose among several good, qualified candidates, I ultimately chose the one that John seemed to like and bond with best.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 6:44pm
Yup, me too! hey, what about when the kids are working??? then what? are they wohk's? or are we sahm's while the kids work. oh, gosh, i just dont know......ROFLMAO....
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 6:46pm
I so respect your insight and wisdom!! you ROCK linda!!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 6:53pm
Frankly, I find your dimissal of the role of teachers in your life to something barely above mall janitor to be pretty sad. Sadder still would be to find the gift of someone's love (and we *are* still talking about the parental/mentor kind of love, not sexual) as "grody" and something to be uncomfortable about, let alone to dismiss and reject.

Says a lot, frankly, and not about pumpkinangel.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-29-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 7:14pm
DARN! No one told me i wasn't supposed to have it all at the same time. you mean i have been doing it "wrong" for 12.5 years????

ROFLOL! TOO FUNNY!

eileen

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 7:34pm
Barring "yanking the kid by the arm", i dont find any of the other discipline techniques "abusive". i agree they can *get* abusive if not controlled, but generally speaking they are not. and frankly, imo, time out is a joke.

Question for you. How exactly do you discipline?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 8:25pm
Well, yes, let's talk about "ugly", shall we, since you've declared yourself the Politeness Police.

How about when funsahm declared that she KNEW that a WOHM isn't as devoted to her own kids as a sahm is. Where were you and your Politeness Police tights then?

How about when funsahm declared WOHMs are destroying their relationship with their kids? Where were you and your defense against "ugly" then? Hmmm?

Cuz I'd really like to know how you can claim to only want "productive discussion" when you remain silent and hidden while a SAHM launches all those ugly bombs but suddenly you're Fairness Personified if WOHM have the audacity to respond to those accusations.

Whatever.

Avatar for laurenmom2boys
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Fri, 04-02-2004 - 8:49pm
Oh, you're a riot! LOL! I never said my last lines were original, but maybe they're lines you should take to heart. If you've been around for any length of time, you'd understand where I'm coming from.

As for the rest of our post, let's see if we can wrap any kind of meaning around it. Here we go:

<> Maybe perhaps to see where you're being hypocritical with other posters in accusing them of something funsahm is guilty of doing herself. But if you dont read them, then you can feign ignorance as to what she is posting. Quite convenient for you.

<> Fair game? Honey, this is a debate board. Try to wrap your mind around that. If you're going to defend someone, try defending someone who hasn't pulled the same crap you're accusing others of, okay? Actually, I think you're the "silly" one. But I'm sure you really don't care about what I think. But that's okay. I really don't think much of your biased opinions.

<> Nope, I don't. You're the one who said you were unloved by your teachers and thought that love for them was "grody to the max." And you've said you can't understand how other adults can love other kids.

<> Oh, please. Get a grip. You're defending someone who is as guilty of doing what you're so against.

<> Sounds like you're a little hypocritical to me.

Pages