Tell Me About It: Inform 'oblivious' friends of their son's cruel behavior

Question:

My husband and I are good friends with a couple whose 10-year-old son appears to be a bully in training. This boy and our son were once good friends, but have thankfully drifted apart as the other boy grew meaner. I'm talking shoots-rabbits-in-his-backyard mean. Hitting-and-taunting mean.

This isn't just our opinion. Other parents have shared their thoughts with us about the boy. The problem: We still value the friendship of his parents, who are oblivious to their child's ways. Can we maintain a relationship with these people without tormenting our son?

Answer: The question is, can you maintain a relationship with these people while you remain part of the reason they're oblivious?

Granted, they may have heard plenty from their son's schools/camps/teams and simply chosen not to discuss his problems with friends. But given the serious consequences when an antisocial kid drifts into antisocial adulthood, there's a moral element to your silence. The boy's someday freshman roommate/girlfriend/cubemate will not see preserving your friendship as a legitimate priority here.

Plus: You are not uninformed bystanders jumping to conclusions about their kid; your son was on the receiving end of their son's cruelty. Please tell them what you know - as in, not what you've heard at the Little League water cooler. That includes the hitting and taunting you've witnessed, and any animal cruelty, a known predictor of serious crime (shooting rabbits can go either way - hunting or hurting).

Also note how it pains you to have this conversation with any parent, much less parents you value as friends.

If you lose your nerve, remember how much you rely on the cooperation of fellow parents. While it usually comes in palatable forms, no doubt there are times you've been grateful your peers risked offending you by butting in.

Q: A group of my best guy friends goes out to eat. The waitress brings us a round and accidentally spills a beer, drenching one of the guys. She apologizes and brings another drink. The waitress then brings the check, which had been credited a decent amount because of the spill, without removing specific items.

Fighting over payment ensues. Should the beer-drenched friend get a free pass? Or should he pay his share of the bill?

The guys who wanted to spread the discount argued that the victim was only a bystander; the victim's meal was not specifically removed from the check. The table's check was simply credited an amount of money.

The victim argued that he should be compensated, as he was the only one physically affected.

A: "Only a bystander"? When a beer lands in my lap, I feel I've graduated from spectator to participant in a spill.

So I can't see any arrangement that's fair except allowing the one wearing the beer to apply the credit to his meal. Any remaining credit after that can be divided evenly among the others.

That I came to this conclusion alone has me wondering what these friends do by day. Run charities that apply 90 percent of donations to "office expenses"?