So...say your kid went to Texas and was caught with 2 oz of weed...

Parent Cafe
101

It’s not the “self supporting” that defines his responsibilities for himself. It’s the age and the stage, assuming he is not disabled in some diagnosed way.

One of the hardest lessons (and I know I’m not the only one to go through this,) is when you acknowledge that fixing for them- or reminding, suggesting, researching, pressing- doesn’t help them mature. Sometimes, the only way for them to grow is for them to take responsibility for their own mistakes. (Not just the events of the arrest, but the decisions and actions- or lack- since then. His own choices.)

Unfortunately, unlike much of the younger parenting, we can’t spare them, they have to experience this themsleves, to own it.

GloriaVaughn, I had to have some background check to work with “kids” - grad students.

102

I mentioned self-supporting because these parents might need to support their son if he can’t get employment because of a drug conviction. If my mother or my spouse or my child were dealing with an issue, the negative resolution of which could place financial burdens on me, I would advise any of them to get a lawyer and work out the best resolution possible.

103

I’m noticing a bit of a pattern with OP and the daughter. These kids are not advocating for themselves. They are accepting the word of someone in authority unquestioned. It’s a problem with a lot of young people these days—they don’t want to make waves, or the don’t know how to question authority, or they simply can’t be bothered. If OP’s son wants to work in education, pleading guilty may close that door to him. The daughter is willing to forego her summer salary without question. We need to do a better job of teaching our kids to advocate for themselves.

104

Let’s start by not always advocating for them, particularly when they are over 21

105

Agree @roycroftmom, just pointing this out. It reaches a point where we as parents have to let them live their own lives and deal with the consequences. But where to draw the line? If we recognize that they are making a decision at 24 that will have long term ramifications, do we step in? What about at age 21? 17? Hard to say but at some point we need to let them sink or swim.

Really, it needs to begin when they are much, much younger so they learn early on the skills needed to advocate and not let mom or dad fix things.

106

The longer you wait, the harder it gets. Enabling that kind of dependency is not helpful to anyone.

107

Can we stick with legal advice for the situation at hand instead of the drift toward offering the OP parenting advice? I don’t think that is what she asked for. I know it is well meaning or possibly worth discussing the benefits of teaching young adults advocacy earlier (perhaps a new thread?) but I’m sure she is stressed enough without hearing those critiques which aren’t helpful in the short run.

This kind of situation could actually happen to a lot of our kids.

“It’s a problem with a lot of young people these days—they don’t want to make waves, or the don’t know how to question authority, or they simply can’t be bothered.”

Funny how at the same time, people like to complain when young people legally demonstrate for their rights and beliefs…

108

Understood, doschicos. The advice is that he man in question should thank his mom for all the research she has done for him, and he should follow up with the attorney of his choice. Mom makes no phone calls to anyone, but hands the phone to the defendant. He can follow up and initiate any further research.Mom can express a preference to be included in this decision making and can make her future financial support of this man contingent upon such inclusion if she so wishes, with potential consequences to the relationship as may occur.

109

And yes, my kid is one of those leading the protests for student rights. Proud of her for self advocacy in high school.

110

Again, there is a difference between being potentially disqualified from some employment vs. "“can’t get employment” at all.

I practiced law for roughly 20 years, largely in the field of criminal defense, and my adult clients with misdemeanor convictions on their records had jobs. There are all sorts of jobs that don’t require background checks, or if they do, would not consider a misdemeanor conviction for possession of a small amount of marijuana as significant.

And yes, it is true, that there are definitely some types of employment where it would be a barrier – and that is something that the son should be made aware of and explore.

But here are some problems with buying into the “never” framing:

1-- It is an argument that is likely to backfire because the son probably knows people who have similar conviction records and who have jobs. So its just likely to further convince the son that the mom’s concerns are overblown, and reinforce the avoidance pattern.

2- At least for some young people, it provides excuses down the line that are self-reinforcing. It creates a why bother mindset – not going to get a job anyway, so why bother applying?

  1. It may turn out that there is nothing that can be done to avoid the conviction in any case. I do think that in this case there will probably be reasonable alternatives if the son is willing to comply with requirements for diversion or deferred adjudication -- but the point is that if he is hearing from his parents that his life will be ruined if he gets convicted of this low-level misdemeanor, it is likely to only create greater anxiety and avoidance-type behavior.

Things happen in the lives of adults that impact their futures – what they can do, what they can’t do. Sometimes it is problems with the law; sometimes it is other life or health problems. Maybe a person develops health problems that make career goals impossible. Maybe another person messes up and gets fired from a job, and their negative employment history stands in the way of getting other employment in the same field.

So yes, this is serious enough to warrant getting good legal advice, from a lawyer who is knowledgeable about local practices in Waco.

But no, this is not life-destroying. A conviction will impact some of the choices the son may have in the future, at least near-term. (Generally employment background checks for misdemeanors don’t go back more than about 7 years). And he should be aware of the ways that it might impact choices. But it isn’t going to prevent the son from moving forward with his life.

111

I agree that this likely won’t be life destroying. Also agree, and that is what I am encouraging, that getting good legal advice is very important.

112

I said, take responsibility for their mistakes, but remembered it was worded to me this way: that we have to let them learn from their own mistakes.

Of course, the issue her son is dealing with is a tough one to learn on.

Mom is getting blocked by both kids, not listening. Even giving advice they can reject is a funky way some kids think they’re growing. A rebellion of sorts. So it helps to back off.

About an attorney. Right, she can’t engage one for the son or control much. But I would have called one to ask what the usual outcome is, fish for some idea. If I learned an OOS kid is usually dismissed, that’s different than the other extreme, a lengthy time in jail.

113

OP. As tough as it may feel your son is a young man, not a kid.

He could have children of his own. Completed a few tours of duty or asked to fly a fighter jet by that age. Voted in four or five elections and started a company or two.

So all you can do is give good advice. Definitely a moms prerogative to stay involved in that way. Calling a lawyer and asking for hypothetical outcomes is a fools mission imho. It Is like a chance me thread on cc. But with the professional liability.

I would strongly urge him to contact and meet with a local attorney. It would be the best money he could spend. I would encourage him to act like an adult and not hide from the process. It will not make it go away.

Best of luck. It will be ok and hopefully he will take your advice.

And please have your d demand her money for the work. It’s not negotiable. If they didn’t offer the job for whatever reason that’s one thing. If she worked she is owed the money. It is very cut and dry. And no one is calling honeland security to report the part time high school coach background check issue.

If she was working and they decided to let her go because of it that’s one thing. But they still owe you for work completed prior to the termination even in that example.

Is sounds outrageous that they would be so small minded and poorly informed. It’s an employment matter. They can’t and would not talk about it outside of her and HR. Simple as that frankly.

114

@privatebanker Will see both of them tomorrow. We’ll see how it goes.

Homeland Security ran the background check. That is probably why something from 8 years ago came to light. I assume their reach is more thorough. I would hope, anyhow!

115

@CTScoutmom I believe it is the same situation-that she was hired as a contractor. Pay happens in one lump sum at the end of the season. It was actually a middle school team, not high school.

I agree with you that it crosses in to a gray area as far as job classification. Long ago, I spent some time working on fair labor standards job classifying for a large bank. I think we have reached a point of VERY gray when it comes to internships. They have become an expected step in the employment process for in the current generation and many employers exploit the demand by offering unpaid positions. If interns are doing work necessary to carry out the mission of an employer, they are obligated to be paying the worker. But shhhh. We don’t want to open that can of worms.

116

@lookingforward @rosered55 One drawback to letting them fail when it relates to being self supporting from an employment perspective is that we get stuck picking up the slack when a family member/offspring is in a tight spot. We are financially comfortable and our kids have been fortunate to not feel hunger or discomfort. We draw a distinction between wants and needs, but they know they are not going to go hungry or be homeless. I really don’t want to get stuck in that downward spiral.

117

@calmom Thanks for the insight that a pot conviction should not be permanently debilitating. I’m definitely sensitive this week as daughter’s background check/pay situation also came to light. Ironically, my anxiety is because I DON"T want him to be dependent on us. I WANT him to keep moving forward. So I may be over parenting in my hope that he successfully launches.

I will try to get thoughts in order before seeing him tomorrow so I am deliberate rather than fear driven in my responses. He has asked me to help him draft a statement to the court. Hopefully he will be able to take in some of the information and advice that has been shared here.

118

He shouldn’t be writing statements without legal advice. So maybe the fact that he asked for help with that can be an opportunity for you to convince him to work with a lawyer. All sorts of pitfalls in “a statement” — especially when he doesn’t know anything about the particular judge.

Also, he shouldn’t be pleading guilty without being informed in advance what the sentence, or possible sentence, will be. If he’s thinking that there is something he can say to the judge that will make it more likely for the judge to go easy on him or give him a break… he’s on the wrong track.

119

The problem with him writing a statement without legal advice is that the law is not about common sense and considering the situation, it’s about the letter of he law. He could inadvertently cause himself issues with an honest statement. You don’t want him to say too much.

120

OP may not have taught her kids how to advocate for themselves, and maybe because there were no occasions for her to do so. What she is doing now is to SHOW her son how to advocate for himself, by giving him guidance and showing him that he doesn’t need to take everything that’s dished out to him. How is her son supposed to know by getting a good lawyer to assist may get him out of this? Hopefully the lawyer would tell him in the future not to consent to search and not to always believe cops are good guys (my kids were taught of that very early on because of my personal experience). I am all for people need to take responsibilities and live their consequences, but there are some consequences that are too big and you can’t do over. I see it over and over again on CC where parents on this forum like to tell others that students should be responsible for the whole college process, and when the result is not optimal there is no do over.

D1 was caught speeding on a highway when she was 17. She was 20 miles over, which would have meant many points on her license. I could have said you just have to live with the consequences, but it would have meant much higher insurance rate for me. I told her if she got any points then she wouldn’t be able to drive. I wasn’t quite sure what she was going to do, but I would have hired a lawyer to get those points taken care of. I was surprised when she hired a lawyer on her own to go to the court with her. The lawyer negotiated to have higher fine and no points for her. I found out later that the lawyer was a friend’s father and was a partner at some firm. He did it all for free. D1 had to pay a high fine. She learned to advocate for herself and she never received a speeding ticket in the future.

OP - do what you need to do. I wouldn’t pay too much attention to all of those advice about having your son live with the consequences, the price is too high. More likely your son is not ready to fight it because he is too lazy and is too young to understand the implication.