ByElizabeth Hours Updated
Comments 269 Comments

Thursday’s Workwear Report: Skyrise Pleated Ankle Straight-Leg Pants

This post may contain affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

A woman wearing a white top and black trouser pants with black pointed flats

Our daily workwear reports suggest one piece of work-appropriate attire in a range of prices.

I’ve recently become a huge fan of the Wit & Wisdom ‘Ab’Solution denim line. They’re not quite as constricting as some of my Spanx pants but still have a bit of hold that my 40-year-old self appreciates.

I haven’t tried any of the non-denim items, but these straight-leg ankle pants look like a great option. Pleated waists can be controversial, but I think the pleating on these is subtle enough that it would work for me. As an added bonus, they come in petite lengths, so I won’t need to add to my “bring to the tailor” pile. 

The pants are $78 at Nordstrom and come in sizes 0-16 and 0P-16P. These similar pants from the brand are available in 14W-24W.

As of 2025, workwear brands with built-in shapewear that we know of include Spanx, Yummie, White House Black Market, Honeylove, NYDJ, and Gravitas. (You can also try brands like ShapeLLX, Popilush, TA3, and SheWaisted, but know your office — bodycon dresses or slip dresses (with spaghetti straps) are not appropriate for most offices.)

For pants with “tummy control” panels, check out NYDJ, Lyssè, Wit & Wisdom, Briggs, as well as Amazon sellers Rekucci and Slim-Sation. For denim, check out Lee's Sculpting line of pants and Levi's Totally Shaping line. Tuckernuck's compression knit pants are also among their bestsellers!

Sales of note for 5/27/25:

269 Comments

  1. Ankle pants are the bane of my existence. I get the look they’re going for but my legs are long so they just look oddly short.

    Is there supposed to be a gap between the pant and your shoe? Do you wear socks?

    Actually came here to ask if anyone had recs for full length sweat pants.

    1. The pictured cut looks a little off to my eye. I would prefer them an inch or two longer to be an intentional ‘ankle’ look. Plus the straight leg looks kind of abruptly chopped off; I like a wide leg or very slight flare instead for better contrast with the foot/shoe.

      No socks, this is a warm weather look.

      2. I feel like these pants demand flats or in winter, a very chunky boot and fat visible socks (sort of what I think of a Scandi look). But I agree that this is a weird length. I’m 5-4 and ankle pants are perfect for me for not needing to hem to wear with flats (and are ankle-length vs ankle-revealing, as these are). I feel like crop flares run shorter and can be a little too woo; loose leg for the win for me.

        1. See I’m 5’4″ too but I know I have a short torso and longer legs. So they have at least (if not more) ankle than is showing on the model in the picture

    2. I don’t like them either, except for ease. BECAUSE it looks so off, on purpose, I can genuinely just not care.

    3. They look fine on some people, but I hate the look of them on me. Very much the “floodwaters are rising!!” kind of look on me

    4. As someone who is also tall (and had unintentional ankle pants throughout childhood when I couldn’t find pants that were long enough), it’s also hard for me to intentionally wear these styles. I do find it requires the right combo of length (hitting right at the ankle bone) and shoe (narrower, ideally with a pointed or almond toe) to feel like I can pull this off. A slight taper at the ankle also makes the length feel more intentional.

    5. I’m short and I hate them too. Idk how it is possible that full length pants are always like 6” too long but ankle pants are always above my ankles. Shouldn’t they be full length for me??

      The proportions are off on me too. It makes my legs and torso look like they’re the same length, especially if I’m wearing flats, and especially now that I’m pregnant and carrying low.

      1. Also short, and I often buy wide leg or flared ankle pants in the Tall height to get the perfect floor-skimming length with flats :)

      2. I am short with short legs so cropped pants are often full length on me. Great tip about buying them in Tall sizes to make sure!

        Also sometimes I will wear actual crops (in petite sizes) because I feel like what the heck, I’m short anyway so if they make me look short, who cares?

    6. I’m 5’4’’ and I love them. Somehow showing my ankle balances me out and takes visual weight off. I’m slowly learning that a lot of fabric is just overwhelming on me, especially as pant silhouettes get more voluminous that crop is really helpful. Have you tried gap for sweats?

      1. Same here. I love pants that are cropped right at the ankle bone. I also prefer bracelet sleeves over full-length sleeves, and will usually push up or cuff long sleeves. I look ridiculous in oversized styles or anything with a lot of fabric. I am 5’6″ with a small frame and a straight figure.

        That said, these pants are awful. The pleats and poofiness and the length that’s too short on the model all add up to frump city.

    7. I love my Athleta full length comfy pants. I have sweats, wide leg, and jogger. I buy used.

    8. My favorite sweats are tall-length joggers from Old Navy, bought during covid and still going strong. I have a 31″ inseam and the tall version is normal on me, not too long. The regular length was too short – the cuffs kept getting stuck halfway up my calves any time I would sit down.

    9. I’m also a short person fan of cropped pants/jeans but when they actually come to my ankles. These venture to the capri pant territory which is a big no for me too.

  2. Stating the obvious, I know, but when did Gayle King cross into that category of being completely out of touch with reality? I grew to like her when I worked from home during Covid and watched her in the mornings. I thought she was pretty genuine. Watching her defend the space debacle over the last few days has been a painful realization that she, too, has drunk the Koolaid. Ah well, good thing I’m back to the grind and no longer can watch morning TV.

    1. Idk but I added Blue Origin as ‘do not suggest’ words to my Insta explore page. All of them need to stop digging a bigger hole.

      1. Wait, this is a thing!?!? mind = blown. About to go update some insta preferences… Thank you for the extremely useful tip!

        1. Word choice, I think it’s marking as “not interested” within content preferences, but you can initiate from within the content you don’t like by tapping the three dots on the post in question.

    2. And The Space Gal who I used to think was fine mildly too cutesy science content is full on calling these women astronauts which is absurd.

      2. The FAA stopped awarding astronaut pins to space tourists in 2021, which makes me happy.

    3. I like Gayle King but I was disappointed when I saw that Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez were at her birthday party last year.

      1. I saw that too but had given her a pass b/c it was a surprise party arranged by Oprah, and inviting them was very on-brand for Oprah. But you are right- shoulda known then.

    4. Is it a debacle? It reads more to me like rich people seeking novel experiences. I don’t hate it as long as I don’t have to pay for it. I don’t find it any grosser than McMansions or vacation every spring break.

        1. To me it’s on par with this kind of space travel—an unnecessary waste of resources seeking novelty and “making memories” but ultimately none of my business.

          1. If you can’t see the difference between going to space for ten minutes and calling yourself an astronaut and a normal vacation, perhaps work on that!

          2. The resources are entirely different scale. That’s like equating throwing out a candy wrapper to dumping industrial waste.

          3. But that’s none of your business either. I’m ok w it. I don’t consider it a debacle. It’s just celebrities doing what they do. Similar to your annoying neighbor posting their highlights on Facebook when you know the reality is a bit different.

          4. It’s not so much the wasting resources that bothers me (although I agree it’s on a vastly different scale than a normal vacation), it’s the describing themselves as astronauts and acting like they were contributing to society instead of just taking a very expensive vacation. It’s like going on a luxury cruise to Greenland and acting like you went on a polar expedition.

          5. I’m with 10:19, I don’t care if that’s how right people want to spend their money, and in fact I totally get wanting to pay for that experience. But they are not “astronauts” (who usually have impressive scientific and/or test pilot backgrounds even before they start the actual training) and I object to the narrative that this is some great achievement for women in space or an inspiration for girls. Girls are smart enough to know the difference between women achieving in STEM and celebrities who paid their way into a joyride. And yes, Gayle, I would describe men as taking a ride, too. Bezos is also not an astronaut.

          7. I kind of see what you’re saying- it’s the attitude of the people doing it. I lived in the south for many years in a very materialistic neighborhood where the standard vacation rotation was Rosemary Beach/Disney/ski. And if you didn’t do those 3 things annually, and if you didn’t have plans for Spring Break then you were basically treated like an outcast and pauper. I know it’s hard for people to imagine if you haven’t experienced it, but it was just a judgy place. So if you mean that space travel has become a sort of materialistic status symbol as spring break travel has for some, then yes, I put them in the same category though at different price points.

          8. “It’s like going on a luxury cruise to Greenland and acting like you went on a polar expedition.”

            I take it you’ve never met anyone who has taken a cruise to Antarctica, because this is how 100% of them act, haha.

          9. Ha I do know someone who has been to Antarctica but she did not have a good time and doesn’t brag about it at all! It was like pulling teeth to get her to show me pics of fluffball penguins.
            I can see how some people are insufferable that way though. My parents went on a cruise on Windstar which is a cruise line that calls it ships “yachts” and for years afterwards they talked about their “yacht trip.” Like guys no it’s a fancy cruise ship, not a yacht. When you say you went to the Mediterranean on a yacht people think you spend $200k not $10k.

        1. I don’t think we really have a middle class anymore. I think we’re holding onto the idea of a middle class for some weird cultural reason. Like if you’re rich it’s bad to say you’re rich because that’s stuck up and look at all the super rich people who are much richer than you! And if you’re poor you don’t want to admit that society has fked you and you’re worse off than you grew up.

          To me, it is not a normal middle class thing to go on vacation for every spring break, that’s a rich people thing, especially if it involves expensive hobbies like skiing. I sat on the couch and watched Nickelodeon for spring break as a kid. I grew up in a 3 BR/2BA SFH on less than an acre, in a rural/suburban area, went to catholic school, there was enough money for sports and food but we never traveled abroad unless you count the Canadian side of Niagara Falls – solidly middle class lifestyle. Others would call me upper middle class now, I guess — I have more than one TV, a 4 BR/2BA house, travel abroad most years, have been to a spa, go to concerts whenever I want, eat out weekly. We call that upper middle class but really… it’s rich, there just isn’t much of a middle anymore.

          1. I think this may be true on the coasts, but I live in the non-Chicago Midwest – trust me, there’s an actual middle class here. They’re not skiing in Gstaad (or even Utah) every spring break, sure, but they’re staying in a cabin in a state park, driving to a nearby amusement park, visiting Grandma, etc. It really doesn’t cost that much money to take a modest driving vacation within the US, and in fact if you have 3-4 kids (which many do) a road trip can be cheaper than enrolling them all in camp. Kids aren’t allowed to stay home unsupervised anymore. I agree that many people who call themselves “upper middle class” are actually rich, but where I live the teachers, factory workers, law enforcement, etc. form an actual middle class with mid-high five figure household incomes.

          2. 100% agree. Traveling for spring break is not the average American experience. It is very much a rich people thing.

          3. Is it rich? This is interesting to me because I’m fortunate but I don’t feel rich. I’d need even more stability (for example, so much money I can fully fund some college educations & never run out of dough in retirement even with astronomical medical expenses) to feel actually rich. I do however, like you, have more than I did growing up … which is rare as far as class mobility goes. I agree though that there is a huge class divide (not sure how to define this, perhaps between poverty and the next level up).

          4. I agree with this, though had never quite thought about it. And let’s be honest most people around here seem to travel every spring break and take other vacations…if you can cash flow that, you’re rich. A lot of people will insist they are “middle class” because they live in expensive areas or whatever, but if you look at the objective numbers for the top 25% and top 10%, it’s shockingly low. The median wealth (not income) in the US is less than $200K.

            I think you are right that the “‘middle class” as conceived in the 20th century no longer exists

          5. It depends what you mean by traveling, though. Maybe my family was rich (we were definitely middle to upper-middle class by 80-90’s standards) but we often traveled for spring break, and I don’t think it was uncommon. It was just via car and to visit family, go camping or explore a Midwestern city, not to a beach or a ski resort.

            I do think there is still a middle class outside of major metro areas, but I would agree there’s generally a missing middle in cities, especially big coastal cities. Also, rich, middle class and poor are mindsets combined with income, to me. My family has a high HHI, but also high expenses due to kids and cost of living, so we don’t really live like we’re rich. We save, we have a practical <2000sqft 3/2 house on <.25 acre, we take modest vacations a couple times a year. Those are all luxuries that are not as common as they used to be, but we still budget and I don't feel like we're rich.

          6. People at my work take off the whole spring break timeframe and it’s wild to me. My parents couldn’t afford to take a full week off this way. My sister and I watched a lot of TV and read a lot of books.

            My SO and I do international travel every other year and have a healthy combined income. Spring break trips every year boggle my mind.

          7. But most people taking off the week for spring break aren’t doing an international trip, at least not where I live. Driving trips are far more common. I agree if you’re vacationing internationally every year you’re rich but there are other kinds of vacations. Spring break camp for kids is really expensive too, and if you have several kids a road trip can definitely be the cheaper option.

          8. I think the commenter at 10:59 nailed it. I grew up in the non-Chicago Midwest and still have family there that I visit frequently. There is absolutely a middle class. I’m not intending this as an insult to anyone, just an observation from reading here and interacting with my DC-area friends and neighbors and Atlanta/NYC/LA/San Fran-based colleagues: Professionals in big cities seem to forget frequently that the US is a *huge* country. Money and influence is certainly concentrated in a few places, but obviously not everyone in flyover country is poor and ignorant.

      3. OP here- I used the term debacle more to describe what came after than the actual trip. Had they said “hey we are super rich and connected and just took the most expensive joyride in history” it would be one thing. But the self-congratulatory “we are just doing this for women/we are astronauts breaking barriers”, followed by the doubling down once they got the well-deserved flack – that is the debacle. For some reason, I am oddly fascinated by PR disasters. My work involves being advised by PR and crisis communication firms fairly often, and so when it goes so spectacularly wrong, I can’t not look.

        1. Gotcha. Yes, to all of what you said. I think these people are out of touch, generally. This was not the tipping point for my point of view though.

        2. Completely agree with all this. She should just own that she misread the room instead of pushing back so hard.

        3. 100%. Not everything done by a woman, or even a group of them, is an Achievement For Women.

      4. I get that they aren’t test pilots, but TBH, the astronauts aren’t flying. Even during the shuttle days, one person helped land the plane with a LOT of help from ground control. Ground control never leaves the ground and they do so much of the work. If we sent them up on a fun trip, it might help their science part or just be fun, but I think I can see how it’s a very blurry line and how the ground people at NASA were once kids who got excited by science, likely from something they saw on TV. Butterfly effect for the greater good is where I stand. I get fascinated by flight every time I go to the airport, so there is a part of this that maybe keeps me as a modern-day Victorian Gentlewoman Scientist (of the sort you get as Lady Detectives on Brit Box shows).

        1. I think to OP’s point though, this would be like all of us claiming to have done something for women or aviation because we were a passenger on a plane. Every astronaut isn’t a pilot, but the vast majority do have relevant scientific careers which is why they are selected. This is a rich people experience and we shouldn’t really cover it as anything but that. Honestly, it shouldn’t be covered at all outside celebrity press.

  3. Between the WSJ article about Musk building a “legion” of children and the NYT casually mentioning Zuckerberg’s Hawaii bunker – do you ever worry that the very very rich know something we don’t?

    gift links
    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/17/realestate/mark-zuckerberg-washington-dc-mansion.html?unlocked_article_code=1.AU8.l0Mk.U9ddzZrbti8j&smid=url-share

    https://www.wsj.com/politics/elon-musk-children-mothers-ashley-st-clair-grimes-dc7ba05c?st=BVTVyv&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

        2. Agree with this. They have the money and they’re bored.

          I read the NYT article you’re referring to; I really don’t like many things about Zuck but I will say I like his taste in real estate. If I had all the money I’d also want those properties.

    2. No, they know exactly what we all know, which is that their actions are making the world a worse and less stable place for everyone. They’re just stupid enough to think that their money can buy them out of the consequences.

    3. The Guardian had an article about end times fascism recently that spoke to this. I will link to it in a reply.

        1. Thanks for sharing. The end of the world *as we know it* is probably closer than we think.

          I don’t know what the future holds but I’ve been vigilant the last few months in getting my life in order. Best case scenario I’m just paranoid and as a bonus my life is now in order.

        2. Ugh. I know denial isn’t the answer but I couldn’t finish this. It’s terrifying.

      1. Don’t kid yourself. This time IS different and we need to all come together to fight back. There’s a national day of protest tomorrow. Between the blatant violation of court orders and deportations of those authorized to be in the U.S. and the suppression of academic freedom at universities, we have a lot to fight.

    5. No. I once worked with upper middle class people who had underground bunkers because they were preppers. It’s more like they’re weird people whose weird obsessions are presented as legitimate because they have money.

    6. Musk is a freak who would benefit from talk therapy about his about childhood. He’s good at getting startups off the ground in emerging tech, but he thinks he’s a genius. I think he has the same impulses as the quiverful type families who have 20 kids.

      On the flip side, oligarchs know what they’re doing in the world and that it comes with general risk. Kings had food tasters, etc.

      3. Other grounds for revoking tax-exempt status is an organization conducts too many political or commercial activities. Which, if we’re actually assessing the political activities portion, I’d like them to look at some mega-churches.

        1. A lot of churches that people are likely sympathetic do that also though — “souls to the polls”, etc.

          1. You can do voter turnout stuff without endorsing one side or the other, though. Neutral political activities are ok. They just can’t advocate for candidates or legislation.

          2. Churches DO advocate for one side though, they just try and sidestep it by saying BS like vote to save babies.

          3. Not all churches. My church is apolitical but also it’s very liberal… because it’s actually following Jesus’ teaching so of course it’s pro immigrant, pro LGBTQ, pro female, etc.

            The church doesnt officially advocate for the Dems and Tucker Carlson is unfortunately a member, but otherwise it’s quite progressive

          4. Oh I know a lot do, that’s why I think they should lose tax exempt status. I’m just saying not every political activity runs afoul of IRS guidelines and some churches are fine. But someone needs to take a real hard look at most of those prosperity gospel megachurches.

    2. The thing that grinds my gears is I have wanted a reform of non-profit tax regs for a long time – just, you know, one that is actually aimed at reform, not silencing political dissent. The first time a politician really considers it, I have to be on the side of the guys with $50 billion!

      1. Same. I totally think Harvard (and many other universities with such massive investment portfolios) should lose their non-profit status. But not for this reason and not in this way.

      2. It’s infuriating isn’t it? I find myself saying “…no not like that” a lot these days.

      3. Presumably at some point he’ll do the same to some giant hospital chain with the temerity to keep offering vaccines, who’s CEO is a bazillionaire and who’s lawyers seek wage garnishment against 30% of their patients while burying info on financial aid in font size 5, and I will be Very Conflicted

        1. I’d rather have a big case on this nonsense than have bankruptcy courts fix this piecemeal on an individual basis.

      4. Yup. Infuriating.

        Also, the question poses a false choice. This administration heeds to no law, regulation, or precedent in taking action. Break stuff, justify the breaking, fix it – kind of, claim victory.

        1. I don’t think you know how actual real churches work, as opposed to megachurches.

          1. I do know how churches work many relatives of mine are in leadership positions, and they still should get a pass on taxes for their “beliefs”.

          3. The tax break is not about “beliefs.” It’s about providing a public service. Legitimate churches (not evangelical churches and/or megachurches) actually do provide a public service and are much less ideological and political than a lot of other nonprofits that do some pretty despicable things. Conservative think tanks and crisis pregnancy centers come to mind.

            I think people would keep giving their (mostly quite modest) contributions to our church even if the individual income tax deduction were repealed, partly because they value the church and partly because many are not rich enough to be itemizing deductions. But I don’t know how we could continue to operate if we had to pay corporate income taxes. Our budget is just so tiny for the amount of programming we put on and our staff is already ridiculously underpaid.

          5. It’s not about any “sky daddy.” If you take away tax exemptions simply because churches are religious groups, you are engaging in religious discrimination and holding religious groups to a different standard than other nonprofits. I would favor taking away tax exemptions from any organization that engages in political activity, and I’d define political activity very broadly to catch most think tanks and social service orgs. Most actual legitimate churches are much less political than these orgs are, on purpose.

      4. +1

        Also, a family friend is a pastor for a small, rural church that does NOT have tax-exempt status and even though I am not a believer I have more respect for that congregation than I do for the many others who abuse their tax-exempt status while fleecing their attendees financially.

        1. IDK how a small rural church doesn’t have a tax exemption other than from not filing the paperwork (which is easy for a small church). Or are you saying they don’t qualify for one or haven’t bothered to get one or lost theirs?

    5. It’s a bit crazy to me that Harvard, with all of its money, still needs to be a big feeder at the federal trough as part of its business model. I feel like there is a business case on this that someone needs to write and I’d actually read it.

        1. Don’t undergrad humanities students subsidize all of the STEM any college does? Like a history classroom costs nothing.

          1. There is the teaching side, which I know very little about. But on the research side, STEM departments bring in their own funding by constantly writing grant proposals to NIH, NSF and other funders. The value proposition is that by pushing out topical funding opportunities, the funder, which is often the government, can direct that research is undertaken in areas that benefit national priorities (curing cancer or what have you).

          3. My understanding is that on the teaching side, only SLACs have real science professors teaching undergraduates. Everywhere else, it is a TA and you may get some real language barriers and other things that get in the way of kids learning. Teaching is an art. Not all science people have it and a lot seem to be irritated by the idea of teaching, let alone teaching undergrads, let alone teaching the sort of 101/201 courses that random undergrads often take.

          4. That’s not exactly true- undergraduate tuition probably isn’t paying a lot for research labs. But it is generally the case at most research universities that outside research funding doesn’t cover the cost of doing research. They need money to build the labs in the first place and even the overhead costs don’t entirely cover the costs of doing research because administrative costs (the A in F&A) are capped but have increased over time with increasing compliance requirements (this is what DOGE should be addressing, instead of the BS they’re actually doing). This money largely comes from state funds (at public schools) or the endowment and some small part might come from tuition, as both the sciences and the humanities are essential parts of a modern university curriculum.

          5. Not undergrad, but law school tuition certainly subsidizes other parts of the university.

          6. Anonymous at 11:52, you’re incorrect about scientists teaching. I took intro Bio at an Ivy from a future Nobel prize winner and I didn’t take a single class taught by a grad student in my entire four years there, though I did greatly benefit from spending time with them in lab sections and in the labs I worked in. I did my PhD at a UC where STEM classes for majors were almost always taught by professors. Some classes for nonmajors were taught by graduate teaching associates, and the occasional majors class when a professor was on sabbatical or medical leave, but this was fairly rare. All the STEM faculty I know teach undergrads and many are excellent teachers.

            I won’t deny that teaching isn’t always a priority at research universities, but this certainly isn’t specific to STEM and has nothing to do with scientists being bad teachers and everything to do what’s rewarded and what’s not. Most (though not all) research universities have decided that they don’t particularly care whether their faculty are good teachers (which takes a lot of time and is hard to quantify) and will only promote those who bring in a lot of money and publish a lot of papers. Any logical person in this position allocates their time accordingly, and it does come at a cost to student learning, but with also with the benefits of access to faculty at the top of their fields and the resources of a large research university. I’d certainly like to see some incentives for better teaching at research universities, but in general, I think there are pluses and minuses to both SLACs and research universities and lying about them doesn’t serve anyone.

        2. Except that pharma and tech companies do it and make money vs being a cost center with an endowment and humanities majors chipping in.

          1. most breakthroughs rely on high-risk exploratory academic research, for example mRNA vaccines or Crispr gene editing, non fogging glasses coatings, the Internet. Industry brings it from basic proof of concept to marketable product, but you need both sides.

      2. This is like saying it’s crazy that the government “gives” money to big companies like Boeing or Lockheed Martin. It awards research money to Harvard and thousands of other universities through a highly competitive process (<20% funding rates) because we’ve determined it’s in the public interest to fund scientific research and it’s more efficient to do it partially at universities (which also train future scientists and engineers) than solely at government institutions or private companies.

          1. Yeah, I thought about that after giving that example. That’s exactly why funding research at universities is actually a much more efficient way of spending money than the alternatives. For better or worse, most research at universities gets done by students and postdocs working long hours for very low wages that can be easily exploited by their advisors. That aspect of it is obviously not great, and it’s gotten somewhat better in recent years, but it’s undeniable that you get a huge amount of work done for not a lot of money and the federal research funding system has been considered a huge driver of economic growth and progress in this country since WW2. There are a lot of things I’d like to see improved, but it’s incredibly shortsighted to tear it apart.

          2. Academia is the last refuge of serfdom. IDK how you expect people who are overworked and paid a pittance to do adult things like live independently, get married, have kids, afford a car, afford daycare, etc. They are basically serfs? Indentured servants? At least the STEM ones may be able to get a job. For humanities ones, maybe you can be an adjunct at 4-5 community colleges and cobble together a life?

        2. If it’s government funded, Harvard (or whomever) shouldn’t get the patent (or should only get a ratable slice).

          1. Even if Harvard (or whomever) does get the patent, the gov’t has the right under the Bayh-Dole act to a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to use the invention. They rarely, if ever, exercise this right but it exists. What is really gross is not that Harvard gets license fees (which are typically shared with the inventor and/or reinvested in research), but that Pfizer gets to charge the same government billions of dollars for pharmaceuticals that the government paid to discover or develop.

  5. How would you style the Boss Fadrid dress for a business/business casual office? I have a bad habit of buying very summery and very wintery items and nothing in between, and this in navy looks like it would be a nice dress for transitional weather in the spring and fall.

    2. pointy toe flats or heels, tall boots. i’d skip ankle boots, i thought those were out? but you could do that thing where you put a sweater on top of it and just wear the dress as a skirt if you want to.

  6. I got a great deal on a pair of slim suit pants (Reiss Haisley) that coordinate with a blazer I already own. They are too long on me and bunch around the ankle (they don’t drape over shoes like wide legged pant would). What is the most current length for alteration? As long as possible without creating break or ankle?

    1. Depends on how slim. If they are very slim, a la “cigare–e” pants (trying to avoid mod), hem at the ankle bone. If they are just straight, probably longer without a break, maybe just skimming the foot.

    2. I think the length on the Bloomingdale’s product page is a hair too short; the ModeSens version better. Would wear only with heels or maybe very elegant pointed toe flats. I find straight leg + flats to often go really blocky.

  7. tldr: Does any one have tips or strategies to stop saying things that leave you feeling like you put your foot in your mouth?

    Recently, I find myself regretting things I say after the fact. Usually it’s little phrases that I barely even notice myself saying but later I realize may have been inappropriate. I guess the theme is probably trying to add humor but unintentionally being mean or rude? I would really like to stop, and it seems easy to say “just stop saying things you might regret” but even though I’ve noticed it and want to stop, I find myself still making little slips without realizing. Not sure if that makes sense but hoping others have been through the same thing and been able to change the way they speak or maybe become more mindful about what they say before they say it.

    1. I’m like this too. For me its usually being too honest rather than mean. Like I told a coworker what I thought of his politics. He deserved it (and it worked) but y’know, probs best not said in a work context.

      Sort of shutting up in general so that I am more conscious of what I’m saying has helped. Also not feeling like I’m obligated to fill space – silence is okay. Rambling on is where I tend to get in trouble.

      1. It sounds like you’re suggesting that there’s actually nothing amiss with what was said, but OP is just overthinking it.

        That’s an entirely different problem from actually putting one’s foot in one’s mouth, which is a real thing that can happen.

        1. To be fair, it’s a combination of both overthinking but also some genuine missteps that people have reacted to that make me more prone to overthinking.

    3. A lot of people think I’m hilarious, and not in a mean way. I’ve had random strangers in the supermarket tell me that I should do stand-up comedy.

      Nonetheless, I learned that I’m not actually all that funny. What I mean: when it comes to someone’s sensitive subjects, their feelings, getting personal with strangers, etc., humour often goes over quite badly.

      Foot in mouth tends to happen when you’re struggling for something to say, and in reality, you don’t need to say anything special.

      1. Yeah, just keep your mouth shut. Clamp those lips together and let the moment pass. It’s hard as heck but worth the effort.

          1. I’m the Anon at 11:11 am and I completely agree with both of you. “No one is that funny” is what I was trying to drive at.

            Corollary: when someone is suffering, nothing you say can make the situation better. Don’t bother trying to show someone the silver lining. Just say that you are sorry to hear that, your heart breaks for them, let me know if there is anything I can do to help.

            No one is so adept of language that their magical words can put an amazing new spin on the tragedy. Don’t try.

      2. +1. I’ve been told I’m funny. But I don’t try to be funny in mixed company or when I need to make a good impression, even that means I come across as bland.

    4. Yes, I got treated for my anxiety. Everyone says dumb stuff now and then. It turns out that not everyone lies awake for hours at 3 am kicking themselves for their thoughtless comments. I didn’t know I didn’t have to live that way.

      Most people will not hold it against you or, frankly, even notice or remember if you say something a little off. Those who will are usually determined to be critical no matter what; and chances are good they’re criticizing you about comments you’re not even worried about that they’ve somehow twisted into meaning something completely different from what you said. There’s nothing you can do about those types of people, so don’t worry about them.

      1. I read through your comments: if you say something that hurts someone’s feelings, you apologize and don’t make excuses. Sometimes we hit the wrong note. It’s ok. Just don’t double down on it like a jerk, say sorry and move on.

        1. This. You can shoot them a text, say you said something to them that may have come out wrong and it’s been bugging you, and that you’re sorry.

      2. I somewhat agree. My caveat is that I’ve run across people who just let anything fly out of their mouths, and will double and triple down when the person they are speaking to is obviously uncomfortable.

        Lack of social awareness is a Thing.

    5. I recently finished the audiobook How to Be Yourself, by Ellen Hendriksen. She discusses the idea of letting yourself just be average when interacting with others, rather than holding yourself to a standard of perfection. Not trying to be perfect frees you up to be normal, and average is a much easier target to hit.

      Not sure if this will help you, but hearing that articulated stuck with me so I thought I would share it.

    6. i feel like this all the time and hate myself after the fact. i’ve reminded myself that i don’t have to speak when i’m in a new “group” (and that i really shouldn’t drink)

    7. I’ve learned to speak more slowly. For me, those things slip out when I’m in good mood and feeling especially chatty, and so I tend to get excited and talk quickly and make cracks that pop in my head without a chance to evaluate them. So instead, I force myself to take a deep breath, push my shoulders down away from my ears, and proceed calmly instead of amped up.

  8. Posted previously about how my dad’s company shut down and my sister is getting married this summer. Some new deadlines came in and the boss asked of any of us would be willing to work overtime. (Definitely not the norm in our company) I’ve currently negotiated an 85% of full time schedule to handle my caregiving responsibilities on top of my job. Debating whether it’s a bad idea to get extra childcare and put in a ton of hours at work next month and get the bump in perception and use the money for my sister’s wedding? I don’t want to jeopardize my reduced schedule because working full time at this season of my life is not sustainable, but I could do it for a month.

      1. Yes – I can’t even imagine expecting my retired parents and sister to make sacrifices to pay for a wedding! This is your sister’s problem to solve.

      2. 100% Do not do it. Not your problem. People adjust there wedding size to what they can afford all the time.

    2. I missed the previous posts so I must be missing key context, but I can’t imagine working a whole bunch of overtime to fund my sister’s wedding. But at the same time I can’t imagine funding my sister’s wedding at all.

      1. This. I get a bad feeling about stepping up when it feels like I’m the only one doing it.

      2. +1. This is the kind of thing that you make big sacrifices for, you think it’s a meaningful gesture that demonstrates how much you love her…and she doesn’t appreciate it the way you expect. I can already picture your disappointment when she doesn’t continually acknowledge how hard you worked to fund her wedding. Please don’t put yourself in this position.

        1. ^this. As my mom and her sister still make comments about one pitching in for the others wedding over 40 years ago.

    3. Yes it is. Your sister is a big girl who will figure her wedding out. Get a grip.

      1. This. Your sister can scale back her wedding. Or your sister can elope or go to city hall. Or your sister or her fiance can get another job to pay for the wedding. What you’re proposing is absurd IMO.

    4. How are your sister and her intended planning to earn extra money for their wedding, or to cut ‘nice to haves’ to lower the budget? I’d start there rather than stretching yourself too thin for this…

    5. Why do you have to pay for her wedding? If they can’t afford a wedding, they can elope or go to City Hall.

    6. You would be better served spending that money on therapy to work through your sense of obligation and self sacrifice.

      1. I guess additional context could be that the wedding is this summer – it’s a cultural/religious norm for short engagements, as well as the bride’s parents paying. So the planning is pretty intense, but the weddings are generally much more modest than is common in the US. But even a modest wedding is a huge stretch for my parents and sister, while I could pay for half of it with a month of overtime.

        1. I mean that is all fine and good that it is a cultural norm for the bride’s parents to pay, but your parents are essentially in an emergency situation and cannot pay. As Cat said, sometimes life throws you curve balls, so you’re forced to adjust.

          I am shocked that your sister is not insisting on scaling back the wedding. She would rather your parents use their meager retirement savings to fund it? That is truly insane to me. You do not need a big wedding to have a happy or successful marriage.

          1. Right? Is your sister even ready to get married if she insists on having a big expensive wedding that no one can afford to pay for??

          2. She wanted to rent a $2k venue and have some snacks catered. Dress has already been bought. She has been considering cancelling the wedding altogether, but I know she would rather have one. My entire family is currently very close to the poverty line, and we were under it for most of my growing up years. It’s hardly a very fancy expensive wedding.

          3. I mean, regardless of scale or level of fancy, it makes zero sense to have a party that you cannot afford. Go to city hall now and forget the $2k venue.

          4. Sacrificing financial security in an attempt to satisfy cultural or religious norms is not a great way to adult.

            OP, are you sure this isn’t your way of trying to make sure their life choices fit your own ideals? You say you are trying to even the playing field, be a kind elder sister, make sure they get the support your parents can’t give, etc., but it also sounds like you might be embarrassed that they aren’t going to live up to your own preconceived social standards.

          5. I don’t understand how people living close to the poverty line could ever afford a $2K venue. At that income level you serve finger sandwiches in the church gym or in your backyard. Which is literally the wedding reception some of my family and friends have had even at somewhat higher income levels.

          6. If you’re doing all this to give your sister $2k, I actually would work the overtime for that. It seems important to you and she doesn’t seem like an entitled person wanting a six figure wedding.

    8. I mean, I do definitely have a touch of elder sister martyr complex, but also if I don’t do it my parents will be paying for it out of their meager retirement savings or my sister doesn’t get a wedding/has to have a very different wedding than she had already started planning. I don’t like either of these options and I’m in a position to help, so why wouldn’t I? I make so much more than anyone else in my family, I can put in a month where I don’t have time to clean my house to take a bunch of stress of their shoulders. Mostly just wondering about the optics of working overtime for a month then going back to the reduced schedule.

      1. Uhh your sister doesn’t get a super fancy expensive wedding just because she’s already started planning it. And the world will still turn if she has to cut back. Your parents need to examine their financial priorities.

      2. If your parents pay for it out of their retirement savings, you’re still a safety net for them going forward. Maybe that amounts to the same thing.

      3. To answer the question you asked, it sounds like your boss has asked people to step up, right? So it seems like it could be a win-win.

        1. Agree with this. Also noting – this is for the parent’s benefit more than the sisters. I get that.

      4. Ok, limiting this to just the job part.

        The risk I see is that you negotiated a reduced schedule, and now show them that you CAN work a full (actually more than full) one if needed. Whether that means your boss will be looking for excuses to have you work more or not is something we can’t guess from afar.

        Now, seeing your follow-ups, the dollars at play here? Your sister or her fiancé can pick up a part-time job to cover that themselves! Why go to all this trouble for like $1500?

        1. Yes, also what if just have you work at 100% and therefore not actually pay you overtime?

      5. Did I miss why the bride / couple aren’t working OT to fund their wedding ?

      6. For optics, just tell your boss that you’d like to make extra income to help with a one-off family situation. Many frontline managers can be very understanding. If your boss is difficult, how hard would it be to make a few thousand dollars with the overtime versus picking up a real side job (dog/house sitting, etc)?

    9. I think it would be very weird to work overtime right after negotiating a reduced schedule, and it would undermine future efforts to hold time boundaries.

      1. +1- if you asked for a reduced schedule and then work overtime, you won’t get a reduced schedule again. + if your kid or their caretaker get sick, what will you do?

    10. Nope absolutely not. Maybe there is cultural subtext I am missing here, but I have never seen anyone contribute money to their sibling’s wedding (apart from a regular gift). Work overtime if you want, but keep the money. Your sister and your fiance need to figure out their own lives (and I chimed in on the previous post about my smallish daytime wedding. Did we want a huge evening party? Hypothetically yes, but our small wedding was wonderful in every way, and a good way to discuss the kind of choices we wanted to make as adults starting our lives together).

    11. Why on earth are you paying for your sister’s wedding? Especially when you seem to understand that OT is going to get in the way of your caregiving responsibilities in the short term, and potentially in the long term? Why?

      1. Because making my sister give up her wedding plans to try and protect my parent’s retirement funds when I could help feels wrong.

        2. Why do your parents need to pay for it?? Your sister and her fiance are responsible for the costs.

        3. You are not MAKING anyone do anything. Everyone involved is an adult. Your parents can choose to use their retirement savings or not. Your sister can choose to change her plans for the wedding or her plans for financing it or not. The only thing you control is YOUR choices.

        4. Nope. Your sister has ideas for her wedding that she cannot fund. Who are you protecting your parents’ retirement funds from? Your sister. I’m sorry, but not funding her wedding is not making her give up her plans.

          Seeing your updates and that this dollar amount is fairly modest, I can see a universe where you fund this wedding as a gift to her if you could easily afford it. But it doesn’t seem like you can easily afford it, because of the risk to your work schedule and impact to your childcare responsibilities. None of us can say whether doing OT for a month will impact your ability to work a reduced schedule going forward at your work place, but it could be used as “evidence” that you don’t actually need this schedule. It’s a risk.

        5. You are operating under the assumption that your sister is entitled to a wedding that she doesn’t pay for.

        6. Then your parents turn around and give her a down payment on a house with their retirement funds instead. Do not subsidize anything. Your sister sounds very spoiled TBH.

        7. This is not your problem to solve! Your family may have other financial problems you might want to help them solve but this wedding is not it!!

      2. If I remember, it’s because she received a gift from her parents that her sister won’t really be able to receive. OP, I think it’s wonderful that you are considering trying to even this out.

        1. Thank you. I don’t think therapy is warranted for someone who is financially stable trying to help their family members that are not with a wedding, and all the comments otherwise were eroding my faith in humanity.

          1. Girl it’s because you’d be putting yourself under extreme stress – when no one else involved, including the couple, seems to be? – for something that is a nice-to-have. None of us are telling you that supporting family is per se dumb!

          2. Everyone is mentioning therapy because you are expressing outsized feelings of responsibility for other people’s happiness. That is not a healthy trait to be proud of and lauded for. Rather, it is instead quite dysfunctional and damaging.

          3. I completely understand why your sister is disappointed and you feel guilty that you’re the only sibling who got a gift. But this situation doesn’t need to be “fixed.” A big wedding isn’t required for a happy marriage and fond memories. If you have money to burn that’s one thing but you’re talking about taking on extra work and upending your children’s lives to scrape together the money. Meanwhile your sister who’s the actual bride isn’t taking on a second job…because she thinks it’s an unreasonable sacrifice for a party. That’s why people are suggesting therapy: this level of guilt and martydom is unhealthy.

          4. Oh, thanks for calling out the “guilt that you’re the only sibling that got a gift” I didn’t realize that’s a part of my feeling like I have an obligation to help, but you’re absolutely right.

          5. This last comment is very insightful, got me more insight than half the therapists I’ve seen. I didn’t realize how much the “only one to get a gift” was fueling my feeling of obligation here.

          6. But are you are not financially stable if you need to work all this OT to give your sister money!!!

    12. What’s happening to your sister and parents is unfortunate, for sure, but I would not put my own work situation at risk to fund a wedding. There are lots of ways to have a wedding, I’m sorry. And I’m saying this as someone who is close to her siblings.

    13. Your hourly rate must be very high if it will pay for extra child care and leave enough left over to pay for a wedding.

    14. I would be making these decisions in collaboration with my husband. We have joint finances and child care and work schedules affect both of us.

    15. While I normally agree that the better move is to scale back the wedding, and also normally believe that the sunk cost fallacy is a fallacy, I have a few questions.

      1. How much is the total cost of this wedding? Be very clear-eyed here: include everything.

      2. How much has already been paid for?

      3. If deposits have been put down, how much is refundable and how much more would it cost?

      4. How much would you earn after taxes if you took the overtime?

      Just as a practical matter, a $2k venue plus “snacks” sounds like a wedding that is more about Instagram than about the guests. How many people? Location? Seems like if you’re spending $2k, you’re better off renting out a restaurant and giving everyone a nice meal.

      Also, I cannot recommend brunch weddings enough.

      1. If the cultural norm demands a wedding reception (as opposed to a city hall wedding or an elopement) and a short engagement, it seems like the kind of culture where a church fellowship hall reception would also be much more common than a venue with a $2,000 facility fee.

        1. Coming here to say I love this comment! Also, as a fellow oldest sister – as much I totally understand your feelings of guilt and responsibility, I feel that making the decision to potentially jeopardize your work situation you have carefully crafted to benefit your children is not a responsible move. Particularly since it is for the tenuous benefit of an adult sibling and parents who do indeed have other choices/options.

        3. Haha :)
          Team Brunch Wedding forever. I loved ours. The food was amazing, we had a rocking dance floor (lots of Jewish and Indian guests who will dance stone cold sober) and it was very affordable, all things considered. We still get compliments on it nearly 20 years later.

        4. I’m the one who suggested a brunch wedding. Currently getting divorced, and my second wedding will also be a brunch wedding. :)

          It’s cheaper.
          Non drinkers don’t feel weird.
          Drinkers love mimosas and cocktails at 1 pm.
          So easy for vegetarians, gluten free, picky eaters to all find food.
          Cheaper but feels more luxe than normal wedding dinners.

    16. It’s hard to tell from your post, but assuming you’re in the US, I would confirm that you’d actually be paid overtime (time and a half). Are you nonexempt and paid an hourly rate? You’d have to work more than 40 hours a week to be paid overtime. Sounds like you’ll add a lot of stress to your life (and childcare costs) and probably be only paid for 40 hours a week (100% schedule) but at your regular hourly rate, not overtime. I wouldn’t do it. This could absolutely jeopardize your 85% arrangement going forward. And if you’re salaried, I’d confirm that you’d actually be paid anything more than your current salary for the month where you plan to work more hours than usual. I also see no reason why two adults getting married can’t figure out how to fund their own wedding without family support, especially when there is a job loss in the family.

    17. Work wise I would be nervous that you won’t be able to go back down to 85%. I would only do it if it was completely set in stone that it was only for a certain number of days and a certain amount of hours.

      Situation-wise, I’m from a similar family. I would absolutely give the money if I had it as a nice gift. However since you don’t have it I wouldn’t kill yourself try to get it.

    18. I think you are putting way more importance on your sister’s wedding (a want) and way too little emphasis on your dad’s loss of job and parents loss of income (a need). Unless this is a cultural thing that I can’t relate too, your priorities between needs and wants are skewed. A big wedding is a want. A reliable income is a need, or rather a necessity.

      Is your anxiety about your sister’s want contributing to your parents stress? Don’t do that. Maybe YOU can give them a bigger than normal wedding gift or help fund the honeymoon? Weddings are extremely expensive parties that are ephemeral when compared with a marriage.

    19. Two things: if you pay for childcare to work more, how much extra money are you actually bringing in?

      Reading through your comments, you are clearly reducing your family relationships to transactions. Don’t do this. It will never even out. Someone is always going to need something that is more than what someone else gets. Your sister and her fiancé need to set a budget. What still needs to be paid? If it’s $2000, ask HIS parents for the money. They can make it a loan if that’s the issue. People are telling you to stop fixating on everyone’s perceptions here and adjust to the current reality. No one worth inviting to their wedding is going to itemize what everything cost and make a note of who paid for what.

      Your sister is an adult who wants more than she can currently afford. There are creative solutions that include things like delaying the reception, changing the kind of food, having dessert only. If you’re talking true small town church hall wedding with no alcohol, go to Costco and bulk buy a bunch of appetizers and make punch, tea, lemonade, and coffee and call it a day. Buy a sheet cake with a small round to cut. Decorate with wildflowers.

  9. Is there a way to style pencil skirts that looks 2025? Or at least not 2010? I’m wearing one today but definitely not feeling confident in it.

    2. Pencil skirts are a classic, so I would style it as such. Neutral colors are more modern than, say, colorful versions of The Skirt circa 2010.

      How would it look on you with a lady jacket/sweater? I’m too heavy so I always need something more sleek up top when I wear a pencil skirt, like a one button blazer or the jardigan.

      2. I saw a woman yesterday at target in a light oatmeal colored pencil skirt with a matching sweater and similarly colored pointy toe pumps. She looked so classic and sophisticated.

        1. That sounds nice. A well done, mono-chromatic / column of color look is easy chic.

    4. They’re classic. Keep your hair, jewelry, and makeup (if you wear it) feeling current and you’ll be fine. I wear mine with short-sleeved sweaters or silk tops and pumps.

    5. What shoes in 2025 though? Flats don’t seem perfect (maybe a pointy flat if you had to). Heels don’t seem very 2025 if high, but maybe a lower heel? There has to be a good shoe out there somewhere. I hate kitten heels with a passion and slingbacks are a clacky nuisance that just rub blisters all over my feet.

      1. If it’s still cold enough, tall boots. Otherwise, Mary Jane ballet flats seem to be having a moment. I hate Mary Janes personally so I’d stick with pointy flats.

      2. Just whatever flat shoes you usually wear. I have a total aversion to boots with dresses/skirt without tights, but it’s a thing other people do and like

    6. How about with a long trench? Also the skirts themselves seem to be longer than the knee-skimming length of The Skirt.

    7. I keep saying that pencil skirts are coming back. What I’ve seen that I like is a pencil skirt that hits between just below the knee to the upper calf worn with something looser on top, with emphasis on the waist. So a boxy sweater cropped to waist length, possibly with a partial tuck in front to show a belt. Or a drapey, blousey top tucked in. Low heel shoes, could be block heel or kitten heel or boots.

    8. A lot of 2025 styles suck—sloppy, unflattering on many body types, etc. If pencil skirts make you feel good, they are classics and I’d just wear the shit out of them. If you’re not liking how it looks on you, that’s okay! But no one’s going to be like “oh, pencil skirts, how gauche.”

  10. How to make a hallway less echo-y? I have hardwood floors and nothing much in the hallway other than ceiling bo ob lights (that I hate but DH wants to keep). I don’t want a runner because our kittens love to attack rugs; at best a runner will become something I’m constantly straightening and at worst it’s a tripping hazard, especially at night. I could print some nice vacation photos (landscapes, taken with a real camera) on canvas. Would that cut down on the echo? Will something that sticks off the wall feel obtrusive in the space? The hallway is narrowish; house was built in 1960, it’s a normal width for a 1960s house.

    1. Grasscloth wallpaper?

      I don’t love the picture idea. They need to be decently large not to look dinky on the wall, but you’ll never be able to stand far enough away from them to really look. Plus if you’re walking with an armload of something (laundry basket?) bumping is a real issue.

      1. I don’t necessarily agree with this. We have a huge (like, 4′ x 6′) framed poster on a hallway wall and I think it looks great — maybe because it’s a very simple graphic design. (We had a normal-sized poster blown up at Kinko’s and got the frame at Michael’s.)

      2. I have a small rug I got on a trip to Turkey hanging in my hallway as art, so I endorse this approach. I had a store that specialized in oriental rugs sew a leather strip on the bag so I can thread it through a rod for hanging.

    3. You need soft surfaces to cut down on echoes. So framed photos won’t help; but fabric wall hangings might. Speaking from experience, it is possible to get a runner that stays mostly in place, even with aggressive cats – you just need a thick, heavy rug and a good rug pad and/or double sided tape. And avoid looped pile as they will destroy that. Cut pile hides all of the clawing.

      1. To clarify – I’d print the photos on canvas and hang them like that, not behind glass and not framed.

        The kittens are almost a year old and have decided that rugs are their favorite toys. They’re strong enough to get a paw underneath even my heavy 10×13 antique oriental rug with heavy duty mat and flip over a corner. In fact I like they like the heavier rugs more because those rugs fight back. Then they scooch themselves along the entire side of the rug while laying on their side, until they get near furniture and then claw their way underneath the furniture on their backs, then launch themselves into zoomies chasing each other around the house. It’s cute. And a little terrifying.

    4. Are there doors along the hall that can be opened? My childhood home had a long hallway with echoes when certain doors were closed, but the echoes didn’t happen when those does were open.

      My parents did eventually carpet that hallway and it did away with the echoes altogether. It certainly wasn’t as pretty as the hardwood but it was more practical for them.

    5. how long is the hallway? you could possibly do a partial carpet with Flor tiles, which you can cut to fit. we’ve used them under our current kitchen table and they’ve held up incredibly well. but no kitten attacks. but they have a lot of different piles, ones of them might work.

  11. Is anyone else here the mom of a child/young adult with more profound autism/autism coupled with intellectual disability? My son is a young adult now and we still struggle with some of the more basic things. I’m having a rough day and am looking for support, encouragement, wisdom, anything really!

    2. My former neighbor is. The kid has a profound sense of direction and rides his bike all over our city in a way that my kids could never. He may not pass the learner’s permit test to drive. They moved to where they could build an ADU in their yard so that he could live with them as an adult as independently as possible, but they imagine that he will always be with them even as the other kids leave.

    3. Oh I hear you. My elder two are both on the spectrum. This week is so hard. I’m very thankful I’m not also dealing with intellectual disability but the transition to spring break has not been smooth and next week will be the transition to school so it’s not like I’m getting a break anytime soon.

      You have all my sympathy and hugs. I don’t have words of wisdom because this is hard. It’s relentless and exhausting. My only advice is to document as best you can and move to a state with lots of help. There is nothing wrong with putting your adult child in a home before it’s absolutely necessary. It’s going to take your child so long to transition so might as well start now.

      I plan to start transitioning my children out of my home when I’m 55. I need to maintain my health and it will take them 10 years to transition.

    4. do you mean because of RFK Jr’s comments? asshat. even more annoyingly, i saw Thomas McKean on facebook – who has been a great voice of reason against the #actuallyautistic movement as he is autistic and was involved in a lot of early advocacy – anyway he was saying that he hadn’t heard RFK’s comments but he thought it would go down the “regular lines,” with #actuallyautistic people being outraged and ignoring the existence of profound autism. a lot of people chimed in to comment that no, RFK Jr’s comments were disgusting regardless of where you fall on that continuum.

      (my kid was originally ASD 3, I guess (“severe autism requiring substantial support”) but that was when he was 3 and not really speaking, so i don’t know what he would be now. above average intelligence depending on what test you give him, but still high support needs because of behavior stuff.)

        1. the argument isn’t that ASD 1 doesn’t exist, it’s that it is such a different diagnosis than ASD3 that people who are ASD1 should not be considered default advocates for those people. ASD1 folks, on social media, often shut down parents and caregivers because they’re not “actually autistic.”

          1. There are high support needs advocates who are also tired of caregivers speaking for them, especially when they remember what it was like to be nonverbal.

          2. Caregivers need support as well. It’s enormously draining both physically and mentally to provide care in challenging areas like incontinence care and self-harming prevention for years after years only to be told your experiences are invalid and minimizing safety concerns. Caregivers of children and adults with all disabilities need so much more support than we provide as a society.

          3. Absolutely caregivers need support. But the idea that people who need incontinence care and who self-harm never speak for themselves isn’t right either.

          4. It’s not a binary.

            There are many people who cannot speak or communicate. Their caregivers had a valid role in relating their experiences. And of course a person who can communicate their views should have those views treated with respect regardless of other behaviors. Both voices are valid.

    5. It can be really hard. Is there any professional support you can avail of? Like respite home care or a day program for your child? If you have a partner, take vacations even if you have to take solo vacations. The burden of not caregiver for a week a couple times a year can be a significant help.

      My 20 something cousin (ASD 3) has an in law style apartment in my aunt and uncle’s home. He’s unable to care for himself so they cannot leave him alone but they do get occasional respite breaks with home care workers and take alternating solo vacations after a number of years of attempting family vacations that were too stressful for him.

      My older cousin with ASD 1 with some intellectual delay (modified high school program) lives in a basement apartment at his parents house but it able to drive and hold down a job at the local autism association and participates in social programs there. He will move into an apartment in his sister’s house when his parents pass.

    6. Two: a 23 year old with major behavioral difficulties, and a 20 year old who is nonverbal. It sucks. No solution. I enjoy the parts of my life that I can.

      1. Thank you, all, but especially mom of two above. For the others, it has nothing to do with the RFK stuff – – just a really tough morning with behavioral difficulties. Husband is extremely helpful and in theory we live in a good area with lots of supports but it’s hard to avail ourselves of them due to his unique sensitivities and behaviors.

        1. Been there. My husband and I often laugh about how my son will have some major behavioral event and we’re left vibrating with stress for literally days and he’s back to his baseline within 10 minutes. Parenting a kid like this can be extremely lonely because they all have unique sensitivities and behaviors so it’s really hard to find a “match” for friends for any of those involved.

          Big hugs.

  12. Is it really true that if one parent works from home and the other works from the office, both done at 5 pm, in a divorce proceedings the court may consider that as a factor against the parent who works from the office?

    Like, I can’t accept a new job in the office if I may file for a divorce soon? This will count against me? Custody is my primary concern.

    1. I don’t think it’s as simple as that. And this is a question you should be asking your lawyer.

    3. Talk to an attorney who deals with divorces and custody issues in your county, and basically no one else. In my state, my understanding is that custody is defaulted to 50/50 unless there is abuse or agreements between the parents for something else.

      1. Same. But also really, really second the advice of talking to an attorney.

        Just curious, where did you hear this?

        1. I’m in Missouri. A couple of years ago, there was a state statute that created a rebuttable presumption that 50/50 joint custody is in the best interests of the child. I am not a family law attorney, so I don’t know how that works out in practice.

    4. Custody is presumed joint legal and all people really argue about is who has primary physical custody (but is shared, not exclusive).

    5. Talk. To. A. Lawyer.

      This is so situation dependent and jurisdiction dependent.

      Please please please stop taking “legal” advice from word of mouth.

    6. I can only share my experience.

      If you are worried about the safety of your children with their father I would advise you to hold off on divorce until your child(ren) are self sufficient. The family courts are now giving 50/50 custody as default in terms of legal and if the father asks for it, they will give 50/50 time (ie week on week off). My experience in two separate jurisdictions (one very red state and one very blue state) was that I needed a slew of evidence and a custody evaluation which is damning to get something different to this if the father seeks equal time with the children.

      My ex husband is the worst nightmare you can imagine. Multiple CPS cases which proved his parenting to be an issue and yet he still asks for and gets to have the children every other week. The children are all in therapy. I had to attend parenting classes with him ‘to help him learn how to parent’ despite him already parenting for 10 years, also I had to pay half despite the fact no issue was found with my parenting. I earn less than him and do 90% of the parenting.

      When we were married he spent about 2-3 hours a week with them in total. All of a sudden we are getting divorced and he has a need to ‘fight for his rights’. If only he fought for our marriage as hard as he fights for his rights post divorce we would have been happily married. Alas, the divorce has been tough, incredibly expensive but worth it on every level.

      As others have said, go get a consult from a hyper local family lawyer and do your research on the process. Learn about the process from start to finish. The library has the books by Nolo which explain the process in detail. Get cost estimates for legal expenses, double it. Get a really good therapist. Figure out your new budget as if you are divorced.

      I don’t regret getting divorced at all and I think waiting for my youngest being able to survive/ fend for themselves was the right decision.

  13. In preparation for the upcoming holiday weekend…looking for a nice-ish way to say “that’s none of your business” to a nosey family member who will inevitably ask about some health issues I am going through. Of course I could just tell her that flat out, but inspiration is always welcome :) TIA!

      2. I like that. And would probably add “let’s talk about something more interesting; we are too young to sit around talking about our health and doctor’s appointments!”

    3. If you go to church – “oh we’ve had enough organ recitals today” is one that an aunt of mine used to great laughter!

    4. I always just say that it’s just the same old, same old (which is also true, the joys of a chronic illness- it doesn’t get better!)

Comments are closed.