I too found it a minor issue to take a child home over. I may have thought less of it if today things were fine, as you might chalk that up to dad being in a bad mood, behavior issues with his own kids (so that this was a penalty for "all involved"), or something else. The fact that he sent the kid home the next day when he went over is something I'd note as being more significant for sure.

@threetimes - Yeah, I think we're both on the exact same page.

"Have your son make a formal apology to your neighbor." - It seems premature to be recommending this. First the facts need to be determined. Then maybe an apology is in order, if the child was actually in the wrong. Otherwise forcing an apology does more harm than good.

I'm with aroth on this. I see no indication that OP's child did anything wrong. An apology is only called for if the laughing was at another child and came across as ridiculing/embarrassing/humiliating them, but this doesn't seem to be the case. Rather it seems to be the case that the "adult" doesn't know how to respect children.

@aroth - If you see apologies as social tools as well as moral ones, you can appreciate that the apology is for the ability to be on speaking terms with the neighbor and to be able to play with the neighborhood kids. If the child did nothing wrong, it's a tactical move. If the child did do something wrong - which most likely he did, but the neighbor reacted disproportionately - it's both a tactical move and good practice for owning our actions and their consequences. To not apologize simply hurts the child socially. I would not force a child to apologize if they did nothing wrong. I would...

Let the child choose what to do in that situation after discussing the options. If you have never apologized to someone in a position of power (your boss, say) even though you believe believe you did nothing wrong, you must be brave indeed (and often unemployed.)

Indeed, if the child did nothing wrong, which seems likely, you need to explain to the child that the option of apology is a tactical one to deal with manchildren, and that it's up to them whether they want to take this option or not.

I see both points here as valid, as long as anongoodnurse's is clearly that the choice of whether to apologize belongs entirely to the child. I think the big thing we're in agreement on is that the important part of answering OP's question is how to convey to the child that you stand with and support them, and are trying to help them find the best way to achieve what they want rather than siding with someone who was at best overreacting and unfair to them.

@aroth - If the child did nothing wrong, we discuss the pros and cons, and the kid decides. Your approach may be the moral high ground, but imagine how the kid feels being unable to play with the kids across the street. The lesson isn't "Stand up to a bully at all costs," the lesson is, "These are your options, and you have power over your own actions." Raise your children in an ideal world; I prefer working in the real world, where there is give and take (not just take) in every social construct. I also stated the child needed support as well. All of what I've said matters (to me.)

Fair enough, as long as the apology is conditional upon either 1) the child actually having done something wrong, or 2) the child agreeing with making a 'show' apology for tactical reasons. Though you may be overstating the neighbor's influence somewhat. The neighbor may control access to their kid, but I doubt they can influence anything beyond that. A neighborhood is a lot bigger than one house and the house next to it, and it's never a bad time for making some new friends.

@aroth I think it's worth pointing out that different houses and cultures have different rules for what counts as respectful behavior. You may find out that he didn't violate any of your rules for respect, but he may have violated the neighbor's rules.It may be easy for you to dismiss them as objectively incorrect, but I don't think this needs to be a true/false or right/wrong characterization, and in fact forcing that on a child may not be the best solution. You seem ok with calling it a "tactical" apology, but it may in fact be a real apology where nothing was done wrong that isn't tactical.

@aroth for instance, recognizing that their expectations are different than the child's parents, it'd be perfectly fine to apologize for being disrespectful even if according to their own value system they weren't. This recognizes the differences in culture, that everyone has subjective experiences, and that hurt, offense, and harm can happen even when one is operating within what they believe to be a respectful manner. This isn't a bad lesson for the children, and asking them to consider apologizing for something they did, even if it wasn't wrong shows a respectful level of empathy.

At the moment the other adult has the power. An apology neutralises some of that, hopefully allowing a level discussion. Using the discussion as a basis, the OP can then decide if they want their child to continue to associate with the adult and the adult's children, putting the power in the OP's court.

Great answer, missing one part: time. Time will heal "the catastrophic wounds of disrespect" suffered by the adult. Then the kids will play together. Give it less than 2 weeks.

What a great answer!