258
submitted 1 week ago by lousyd@lemmy.sdf.org to c/news@lemmy.world

"But Rachel also has another hobby, one that makes her a bit different from the other moms in her Texas suburb—not that she talks about it with them. Once a month or so, after she and her husband put the kids to bed, Rachel texts her in-laws—who live just down the street—to make sure they’re home and available in the event of an emergency.

"And then, Rachel takes a generous dose of magic mushrooms, or sometimes MDMA, and—there’s really no other way to say this— spends the next several hours tripping balls."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] sazey@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

Why the pearl clutching over a child in the house? The person even goes as far as arranging possible cover from the in-laws. Even if they didn't, it is a child and not a ticking time bomb. Obvious idiots getting blind drunk or tripping balls into the next dimension aside, an experienced tripper in a safe environment (ie their home) would be able to handle themselves fine.

[-] HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Why don't they take the child to the in-laws? Waiting for an emergency is too late.

Even if they didn't, it is a child and not a ticking time bomb.

Children require and deserve a safe and predictable environment populated by responsible adults who can attend to their needs and adequately respond in an emergency.

[-] cows_are_underrated@feddit.org 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Quote from the Article:

"After she and her Husband put the kids to bed[...]"

Theres still a sober person in the house.

[-] HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's still not a great situation. The sober person ends up looking after the intoxicated person. In an emergency, the sober person has to end up trying to deal with both the intoxicated person and the kids.

And it's not good for kids to see their parents being intoxicated (which can happen if the kids wake up). Kids need to feel that their caretakers are capable of looking after them.

I really don't see why she couldn't send her kids to the in-laws once a month.

(I also don't see why she couldn't just decide to stay sober. I guess her life is just so miserable?)

[-] cows_are_underrated@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago

First of all, there are still the in laws if something really bad happens. Second, someone experienced with shrooms knows how to handle most stuff.

I also don't see why she couldn't just decide to stay sober. I guess her life is just so miserable?

Ask yourself, do you like doing stuff you enjoy? You like to read a good book? Watch a film or play some video games. Or go out and party. Its literally the same. If done responsibly there isn't really that much that can go wrong. Why not let people to things they enjoy.

[-] Dasus@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

and adequately respond in an emergency.

And being an experienced tripper myself, I'm sure they're still capable of adequately responding to their children's needs. A basic recreational dose of MDMA or LSD would enhance my evening and I wouldn't be fit to drive a car, but compared to having several drinks, not really impaired. If there was a genuine emergency emergency, I'd still be able to function. Like I could drive a car, but like with when being drunk, I wouldn't unless it was the only option. Which in this case, it wouldn't be, seeing as if they needed to drive, the in-laws are there ready for that.

What sort of an emergency do you expect they would be too impaired to handle?

[-] sazey@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Why keep the child out of eyesight at all in that case? Why stay in a house and not just camp in front of emergency department if one is so afraid of life happening?

this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
258 points (100.0% liked)

News

23276 readers
3539 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS