You are not my therapist, but could you play one on the internet?
October 31, 2016 5:06 PM Subscribe
An event occurred in my family when I was a teenager which I recently brought up with the family members involved. This created a second issue, and I have been trying to understand the reasons, meanings and ramifications of both the original and more recent events.
Scene: 1980s - Eldest sibling borrows parent's car. Takes middle sibling for a drive to visit some friends. Eldest sibling instructs middle sibling to knock on the door. When there is no answer, but before waiting for middle sibling to return to the car, eldest sibling reverses out of the driveway, hitting the passenger door that middle sibling had left open on a gatepost; wrecking the door and damaging the car frame. Upon returning home, eldest sibling blames middle sibling for the accident and demands that middle sibling get a weekend job to pay for the repairs. Parent concurs. Middle sibling gets a part-time job and gives most of their pay for the next six months to the parent for the cost of the car door.
Scene: 2016 - Now both adults, middle sibling questions eldest sibling on a number of eldest sibling's behaviours, including the car door incident. Middle sibling also asks parent about the car door incident in person. The parent's response is immediate: "It didn't do you any harm!". Middle sibling is rendered speechless and wonders at how and why the incident was so close in the parent's mind to give such an immediate response to an event from decades ago. Middle sibling evaluates the likelihood that eldest sibling is sharing middle sibling's letters with the parent.
For middle sibling, the parent's response was a turning point, a final straw, a granting of permission to no longer hope for understanding and reconciliation. In that way it was a good thing. But now middle sibling is confused as to actual psychological elements at play including:
1) the reasons middle sibling agreed to the instructions back when they were a teen; why they didn't just refuse;
2) the reasons middle sibling found the 2016 response by parent to be the final straw, amongst many potential final straws.
Notes on 1): The original event took place 18m-2yrs after the deaths of parent (M) and second-eldest sibling (M). The family at the time of the event consisted of: parent (F), eldest sibling (M), middle sibling (F), youngest sibling (F).
Notes on 2): Middle sibling finds writing in the third person to be a useful way of distancing their collection of ill-defined emotions from other issues surrounding the events. Forgive me if it bothers you but it helps me get at the nub of what I want from this Ask: a range of conceptual perceptions I can sift through to see which seem to fit with what I already understand.
Question: If this was a story, how would you explain the motivations and behaviours of the characters involved?
Scene: 1980s - Eldest sibling borrows parent's car. Takes middle sibling for a drive to visit some friends. Eldest sibling instructs middle sibling to knock on the door. When there is no answer, but before waiting for middle sibling to return to the car, eldest sibling reverses out of the driveway, hitting the passenger door that middle sibling had left open on a gatepost; wrecking the door and damaging the car frame. Upon returning home, eldest sibling blames middle sibling for the accident and demands that middle sibling get a weekend job to pay for the repairs. Parent concurs. Middle sibling gets a part-time job and gives most of their pay for the next six months to the parent for the cost of the car door.
Scene: 2016 - Now both adults, middle sibling questions eldest sibling on a number of eldest sibling's behaviours, including the car door incident. Middle sibling also asks parent about the car door incident in person. The parent's response is immediate: "It didn't do you any harm!". Middle sibling is rendered speechless and wonders at how and why the incident was so close in the parent's mind to give such an immediate response to an event from decades ago. Middle sibling evaluates the likelihood that eldest sibling is sharing middle sibling's letters with the parent.
For middle sibling, the parent's response was a turning point, a final straw, a granting of permission to no longer hope for understanding and reconciliation. In that way it was a good thing. But now middle sibling is confused as to actual psychological elements at play including:
1) the reasons middle sibling agreed to the instructions back when they were a teen; why they didn't just refuse;
2) the reasons middle sibling found the 2016 response by parent to be the final straw, amongst many potential final straws.
Notes on 1): The original event took place 18m-2yrs after the deaths of parent (M) and second-eldest sibling (M). The family at the time of the event consisted of: parent (F), eldest sibling (M), middle sibling (F), youngest sibling (F).
Notes on 2): Middle sibling finds writing in the third person to be a useful way of distancing their collection of ill-defined emotions from other issues surrounding the events. Forgive me if it bothers you but it helps me get at the nub of what I want from this Ask: a range of conceptual perceptions I can sift through to see which seem to fit with what I already understand.
Question: If this was a story, how would you explain the motivations and behaviours of the characters involved?
There's obviously much more going on here than strangers can really address. But if I were writing a story, and assuming that all the characters are loving and rational (which you hint isn't the case) maybe the parent didn't have the emotional bandwidth to adjudicate on a situation they didn't witness. Maybe they weren't in a healthy place to make a fairer decision like having the two of you split the cost or saying the driver is responsible for the car at all times. You need to have a certain quota of your own needs met before you can meet others needs, and they may have just not been there the way you needed.
posted by bleep at 5:23 PM on October 31, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by bleep at 5:23 PM on October 31, 2016 [3 favorites]
It's not that complicated.
Eldest sibling blamed middle sibling because that's something big siblings do. They probably knew deep down that the car door accident was their fault, and they felt angry and stupid about it, so lashed out by blaming younger sibling for leaving the car door open.
Parent believed elder sibling and ok'd the part time job plan, probably also reasoning that a part time job is a good thing for a teenager to have anyway, it teaches responsibility, work ethic etc. Very possibly too, elder sibling was a bullying kind of person who it would have been harder for parent to stand up to.
Middle sibling did what parent said because that's a standard family dynamic. Kids trust their parents and they generally have to do what they say.
Parent was doing the best she could in extremely trying life circumstances, and is, now, annoyed and hurt at having accusations of bad parenting flung at her about this after 20+ years.
posted by fingersandtoes at 5:24 PM on October 31, 2016 [43 favorites]
Eldest sibling blamed middle sibling because that's something big siblings do. They probably knew deep down that the car door accident was their fault, and they felt angry and stupid about it, so lashed out by blaming younger sibling for leaving the car door open.
Parent believed elder sibling and ok'd the part time job plan, probably also reasoning that a part time job is a good thing for a teenager to have anyway, it teaches responsibility, work ethic etc. Very possibly too, elder sibling was a bullying kind of person who it would have been harder for parent to stand up to.
Middle sibling did what parent said because that's a standard family dynamic. Kids trust their parents and they generally have to do what they say.
Parent was doing the best she could in extremely trying life circumstances, and is, now, annoyed and hurt at having accusations of bad parenting flung at her about this after 20+ years.
posted by fingersandtoes at 5:24 PM on October 31, 2016 [43 favorites]
One explanation: parent took the path of least resistance; eldest came up with a plan to solve the problem and middle didn't object too hard. Problem solved and she didn't put too much thought into it; she wasn't there when it happened after all.
Middle agreed because it was easier than arguing and/or perhaps was used to taking on blame to avoid conflict/ additional family drama.
The Last Straw feeling is not because of this event; it's a psychological excuse for making the decision.
posted by metasarah at 5:26 PM on October 31, 2016 [3 favorites]
Middle agreed because it was easier than arguing and/or perhaps was used to taking on blame to avoid conflict/ additional family drama.
The Last Straw feeling is not because of this event; it's a psychological excuse for making the decision.
posted by metasarah at 5:26 PM on October 31, 2016 [3 favorites]
My guess is that what was going on was that the whole family was struggling at the time to deal with pretty overwhelming trauma and loss, and maybe some of them have never really dealt with it fully and it's coming to a head now. Is it possible that middle child was trying to be a perfect, obedient, compliant daughter to shield her mother from difficulty or try in some irrational way to make up for her mother's loss? I think that's a pretty common pattern for oldest daughters in traumatized families, and it would be normal to feel resentful of family members who maybe never acknowledged the effort.
Honestly, I don't think you need an internet therapist. I think you need a real therapist. You dealt with really heavy shit as a kid, and it's normal for feelings about that to reemerge years later. I think it would be helpful to have someone to help you process that.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:32 PM on October 31, 2016 [11 favorites]
Honestly, I don't think you need an internet therapist. I think you need a real therapist. You dealt with really heavy shit as a kid, and it's normal for feelings about that to reemerge years later. I think it would be helpful to have someone to help you process that.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:32 PM on October 31, 2016 [11 favorites]
I don't think "just move on" is helpful. Sure, that might be what some people view as healthy, but letting things go isn't that easy, especially when you had to keep dealing with people who have treated you unfairly and have never acknowledged it. I can certainly relate to those feelings.
In this case, there's not really enough detail or context to make any useful guesses as to what is going on in the other players' minds. Was your sibling sharing your letters with your mother? Was there something (say, concerning tone or information) in these letters that might make that a reasonable course of action, or was the sibling betraying a trust? Or is this unfounded? Maybe your mother actually felt guilty or uncertain about her decision in that incident, and that is why it came so readily to mind. These are things we can't know, but questions you may consider.
As far as the basic facts, it certainly sounds unfair. The sibling was driving, they are responsible for their own carelessness, they were in charge of the car doesn't matter if you closed the door. The fact that they decided to drive away before you were back in the car and then blame it on you just seems callous to me.
Your mother's response - that it didn't hurt you any, makes me think she might have some inkling of how unfair this was and how it's bothered you. I think she might be receptive to you having a conversation about how it did obviously affect you and have more of an affect than she may have ever anticipated because it has clearly bothered you and stayed in your consciousness all these years. Maybe approach from the angle that you aren't trying to blame her now, but you want her to understand how it felt to you at the time, and how it still makes you feel, and you want to understand her thought process at the time.
posted by catatethebird at 5:32 PM on October 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
In this case, there's not really enough detail or context to make any useful guesses as to what is going on in the other players' minds. Was your sibling sharing your letters with your mother? Was there something (say, concerning tone or information) in these letters that might make that a reasonable course of action, or was the sibling betraying a trust? Or is this unfounded? Maybe your mother actually felt guilty or uncertain about her decision in that incident, and that is why it came so readily to mind. These are things we can't know, but questions you may consider.
As far as the basic facts, it certainly sounds unfair. The sibling was driving, they are responsible for their own carelessness, they were in charge of the car doesn't matter if you closed the door. The fact that they decided to drive away before you were back in the car and then blame it on you just seems callous to me.
Your mother's response - that it didn't hurt you any, makes me think she might have some inkling of how unfair this was and how it's bothered you. I think she might be receptive to you having a conversation about how it did obviously affect you and have more of an affect than she may have ever anticipated because it has clearly bothered you and stayed in your consciousness all these years. Maybe approach from the angle that you aren't trying to blame her now, but you want her to understand how it felt to you at the time, and how it still makes you feel, and you want to understand her thought process at the time.
posted by catatethebird at 5:32 PM on October 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
Again, speculation, just food for thought as you move forward.
Why did middle sibling agree to pay for the door? Probably because that's what parent said to do and kids frequently go along with it. Maybe middle sibling was trying to keep the peace, either as a matter of habit or because of the recent trauma. Maybe they felt too unsafe to push back, perhaps not consciously afraid of any specific repercussions, but more unsure because of recent events (or possibly a longer term family dynamic).
Why was this the final straw? Maybe there's another stressor, or maybe the opposite: middle sibling is actually in a good place and feels safe enough to stand up for themselves. Maybe middle sibling always hoped the parent knew in retrospect it was a crappy thing to do but they weren't thinking straight, but hearing that crappy thing minimized ruined that hope in middle siblings mind (although the defensive reaction could indicate they do feel guilty, just won't admit to it now).
Eldest sibling and parent messed up, parent more so than sibling (kids are dumb). Although if eldest sibling can't acknowledge it years later they may be a bit immature still.
Parent was also under stress, and may have not really been thinking clearly. Or parent plays favorites. Hard to say from a distance. It's possible approaching at a later date could prove fruitful, or just be disappointing.
People make mistakes. Some people can admit to it and apologize, some need to be confronted then allowed to process, and some never admit fault. It's hard to know from the scenario which of these applies. But middle sibling should feel free to take time and think about the mentioned faults that they are currently dealing with and how that will impact their interactions in the future.
posted by ghost phoneme at 5:39 PM on October 31, 2016 [3 favorites]
Why did middle sibling agree to pay for the door? Probably because that's what parent said to do and kids frequently go along with it. Maybe middle sibling was trying to keep the peace, either as a matter of habit or because of the recent trauma. Maybe they felt too unsafe to push back, perhaps not consciously afraid of any specific repercussions, but more unsure because of recent events (or possibly a longer term family dynamic).
Why was this the final straw? Maybe there's another stressor, or maybe the opposite: middle sibling is actually in a good place and feels safe enough to stand up for themselves. Maybe middle sibling always hoped the parent knew in retrospect it was a crappy thing to do but they weren't thinking straight, but hearing that crappy thing minimized ruined that hope in middle siblings mind (although the defensive reaction could indicate they do feel guilty, just won't admit to it now).
Eldest sibling and parent messed up, parent more so than sibling (kids are dumb). Although if eldest sibling can't acknowledge it years later they may be a bit immature still.
Parent was also under stress, and may have not really been thinking clearly. Or parent plays favorites. Hard to say from a distance. It's possible approaching at a later date could prove fruitful, or just be disappointing.
People make mistakes. Some people can admit to it and apologize, some need to be confronted then allowed to process, and some never admit fault. It's hard to know from the scenario which of these applies. But middle sibling should feel free to take time and think about the mentioned faults that they are currently dealing with and how that will impact their interactions in the future.
posted by ghost phoneme at 5:39 PM on October 31, 2016 [3 favorites]
I think you were protecting yourself and your mother.
posted by bq at 5:57 PM on October 31, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by bq at 5:57 PM on October 31, 2016 [1 favorite]
Middle sibling is rendered speechless and wonders at how and why the incident was so close in the parent's mind to give such an immediate response to an event from decades ago. Middle sibling evaluates the likelihood that eldest sibling is sharing middle sibling's letters with the parent.
Something is up in the family dynamics that makes this seem like a piece of detective work to middle sibling instead of both obvious and unremarkable. probably something so deep-rooted and pervasive that it doesn't occur to them to spell it out even though they probably do consciously know about it.
I hate people talking about me as much as anyone I have ever heard of, but family members talk to other family members about each other. They just do. even though I do hate this and love privacy, running to your parent to tell them about the thing other sibling said to you is completely normal even in functional families. (My dysfunctional family is made up of half secret-keepers and half gossips, and a secret-keeper gets a message to another secret-keeper by telling a gossip something in confidence and making them promise not to tell the third party, which you know they will go and do anyway. It works better than you'd think.)
Unless they promised they would keep it a secret, and even then I'd take it about as seriously as someone promising not to tell their spouse something (that is, pretend to believe them for form's sake, but don't really.) Unless older and middle sibling both agreed that parent was abusive, on top of an explicit promise not to share information, I would find it completely expected and unremarkable that parent and older sibling had already talked about it by the time middle sibling brought it up with parent.
If middle sibling is like me in hating people discussing their business behind their back, that's maybe a reason this was the last straw. but there are probably other reasons too.
posted by queenofbithynia at 5:58 PM on October 31, 2016 [7 favorites]
Something is up in the family dynamics that makes this seem like a piece of detective work to middle sibling instead of both obvious and unremarkable. probably something so deep-rooted and pervasive that it doesn't occur to them to spell it out even though they probably do consciously know about it.
I hate people talking about me as much as anyone I have ever heard of, but family members talk to other family members about each other. They just do. even though I do hate this and love privacy, running to your parent to tell them about the thing other sibling said to you is completely normal even in functional families. (My dysfunctional family is made up of half secret-keepers and half gossips, and a secret-keeper gets a message to another secret-keeper by telling a gossip something in confidence and making them promise not to tell the third party, which you know they will go and do anyway. It works better than you'd think.)
Unless they promised they would keep it a secret, and even then I'd take it about as seriously as someone promising not to tell their spouse something (that is, pretend to believe them for form's sake, but don't really.) Unless older and middle sibling both agreed that parent was abusive, on top of an explicit promise not to share information, I would find it completely expected and unremarkable that parent and older sibling had already talked about it by the time middle sibling brought it up with parent.
If middle sibling is like me in hating people discussing their business behind their back, that's maybe a reason this was the last straw. but there are probably other reasons too.
posted by queenofbithynia at 5:58 PM on October 31, 2016 [7 favorites]
1) the reasons middle sibling agreed to the instructions back when they were a teen; why they didn't just refuse;
As bq above points out, you were probably protecting both your mom and yourself. As a teenager, you were at least partially dependent on her and your older sibling for your emotional, physical, and financial security. Going along to get along can be valuable survival skill in such situations.
As for why this was the last straw: you don't say much about your current relationship with your family, but if this example was typical of the way they treat you, it could be that you have finally gotten to the point in life where you can consciously recognize that you are no longer dependant and vulnerable. You no longer have to put up with poor treatment to survive, and are free to thrive instead.
posted by rpfields at 6:15 PM on October 31, 2016 [5 favorites]
As bq above points out, you were probably protecting both your mom and yourself. As a teenager, you were at least partially dependent on her and your older sibling for your emotional, physical, and financial security. Going along to get along can be valuable survival skill in such situations.
As for why this was the last straw: you don't say much about your current relationship with your family, but if this example was typical of the way they treat you, it could be that you have finally gotten to the point in life where you can consciously recognize that you are no longer dependant and vulnerable. You no longer have to put up with poor treatment to survive, and are free to thrive instead.
posted by rpfields at 6:15 PM on October 31, 2016 [5 favorites]
Middle sibling deserves compassion for her younger self. With trauma at a young age, no one is fully capable of making wise decisions 100% of the time. That said, I just want to hug the little middle child. It sounds like she needed it.
As for why now -- perhaps this is the final straw and it seems there have been a few. That's not unusual. It's okay either way. It seems middle sibling wants to heal and healing with others is what we desire. Sadly, it rarely occurs with those we expect. This eldest sibling has had to heal family wounds without her family. There was no magic wand. Instead, she allowed supportive friends and professionals to help her when it was time to move away from that past. Maybe it's this female's time too.
Sending healing vibes to the adult middle sibling as she tends to the wounds of the her younger self.
posted by Lil Bit of Pepper at 6:45 PM on October 31, 2016 [4 favorites]
As for why now -- perhaps this is the final straw and it seems there have been a few. That's not unusual. It's okay either way. It seems middle sibling wants to heal and healing with others is what we desire. Sadly, it rarely occurs with those we expect. This eldest sibling has had to heal family wounds without her family. There was no magic wand. Instead, she allowed supportive friends and professionals to help her when it was time to move away from that past. Maybe it's this female's time too.
Sending healing vibes to the adult middle sibling as she tends to the wounds of the her younger self.
posted by Lil Bit of Pepper at 6:45 PM on October 31, 2016 [4 favorites]
Here's my take.
First I wonder if the father and sibling who died did so in a car. If so, the accident with the door was probably super re-traumatizing and blaming the passenger might have been a proxy for not blaming the dad. (Wild leap I know but you asked for fiction.)
Even so...I would read the original incident as understandable kid responses to an accident, more so given the really tough time for this family. The deaths would have made everyone so aware of a lack of control over life or death and then some people (elder sibling) would respond by shifting responsibility to others and some (middle) to themselves. Why did mum not probe deeply? Well, lots of reasons but I am guessing this wasn't just due to being overwhelmed with loss and responsibility but also might be part of an avoidant person. Eldest sibling, the default "second adult" in the face of loss (also the chauffeur!) had a solution so the mum took it.
The middle child was probably either stuck dumb at the unfairness of it (I am not joking; this is my response to injustice towards me although I'm good at stepping up for others) or sensed that mum was just on that easy road and the emotional price of knocking her off it wasn't worth it.
For the present day I feel like I have more questions than answers. Why is now the time to confront the elder sibling? What prompted that? Is the elder sibling standing in for the unfairness of the losses in the family as a whole? For not being like the lost sibling? Why is family chatter seen as ganging up - is there more history?
What also strikes me here is that there were profoundly unjust losses in this family and now it seems a bit like the middle sibling is seeking a redress of this one injustice. It sounds to me like the middle sibling may be struggling with - and I say this with deep compassion - the truth that life is often seriously unfair, and just wants mum and older sibling to acknowledge that. It's very hard.
posted by warriorqueen at 7:11 PM on October 31, 2016 [7 favorites]
First I wonder if the father and sibling who died did so in a car. If so, the accident with the door was probably super re-traumatizing and blaming the passenger might have been a proxy for not blaming the dad. (Wild leap I know but you asked for fiction.)
Even so...I would read the original incident as understandable kid responses to an accident, more so given the really tough time for this family. The deaths would have made everyone so aware of a lack of control over life or death and then some people (elder sibling) would respond by shifting responsibility to others and some (middle) to themselves. Why did mum not probe deeply? Well, lots of reasons but I am guessing this wasn't just due to being overwhelmed with loss and responsibility but also might be part of an avoidant person. Eldest sibling, the default "second adult" in the face of loss (also the chauffeur!) had a solution so the mum took it.
The middle child was probably either stuck dumb at the unfairness of it (I am not joking; this is my response to injustice towards me although I'm good at stepping up for others) or sensed that mum was just on that easy road and the emotional price of knocking her off it wasn't worth it.
For the present day I feel like I have more questions than answers. Why is now the time to confront the elder sibling? What prompted that? Is the elder sibling standing in for the unfairness of the losses in the family as a whole? For not being like the lost sibling? Why is family chatter seen as ganging up - is there more history?
What also strikes me here is that there were profoundly unjust losses in this family and now it seems a bit like the middle sibling is seeking a redress of this one injustice. It sounds to me like the middle sibling may be struggling with - and I say this with deep compassion - the truth that life is often seriously unfair, and just wants mum and older sibling to acknowledge that. It's very hard.
posted by warriorqueen at 7:11 PM on October 31, 2016 [7 favorites]
If this is one example of a larger pattern of similar behavior, I'd suspect there could be a dollop of narcissism going on. One child is often picked as the golden child who can do no wrong and the other, the scapegoat who is always at fault. The scapegoat usually becomes a people pleaser to try to appease their parent, who will never give them the love and nurturing that they desperately crave. Hence accepting the rather messed up part-time job suggestion.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 7:22 PM on October 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 7:22 PM on October 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
Without middle sibling shouldering the blame and getting that job, how would the car repair have been paid for? Since this was the mother's car, and the oldest sibling had borrowed it, were they a one-car family? Given the costs of two funerals, and likely the loss of the main wage-earner with the father's death, was this family in more dire economic straits than was acknowledged at the time? Perhaps the incident came so readily to the mother's mind because she still feels some shame over that period, and the "it didn't do you any harm!" was the balm for her wounds, not the middle sibling's.
It still doesn't make it right, this is just another possible angle.
posted by furtive_jackanapes at 7:36 PM on October 31, 2016 [4 favorites]
It still doesn't make it right, this is just another possible angle.
posted by furtive_jackanapes at 7:36 PM on October 31, 2016 [4 favorites]
There's serious gender and age stuff here, too. Eldest son loses his father and his younger brother, and is left alone with his mom and two (much?) younger sisters. You don't give ages, nor any details about the event. But your mother might've felt really bad for your brother being left "alone" with you females like that. He might've become extra precious to her as the only male to remain.
She might've also felt like your brother was the only one left out of a certain part of the family. For awhile there, before you were born, it was just her, your dad, and your two eldest brothers), and so she might have felt particularly clingy about him in a "thank God one person from that group wasn't killed as well" way.
If your pain was consistently overlooked because your mom felt terrible for your brother, if your mom clearly was more grateful for his survival than for yours and your sisters', that would really feel terrible. This event could be the last straw because being unfairly punished to spare your brother might crystallize a whole amorphous emotional dynamic that was really painful. And having your mom again deny that any of this hurt you could feel like the last straw. It clearly DID do you harm (which isn't to blame her for her behavior back then; she was probably just trying to hang in there; but denying your experience like that is another level of adding insult to injury).
If you want to communicate about this with her, I'm sure it's very freighted for you both. It would likely take a bunch of therapy to be able to unpack it, name what's going on, and then work on how to explain it such that she might be able to understand. Only you can say if it's worth it.
posted by salvia at 8:08 PM on October 31, 2016 [1 favorite]
She might've also felt like your brother was the only one left out of a certain part of the family. For awhile there, before you were born, it was just her, your dad, and your two eldest brothers), and so she might have felt particularly clingy about him in a "thank God one person from that group wasn't killed as well" way.
If your pain was consistently overlooked because your mom felt terrible for your brother, if your mom clearly was more grateful for his survival than for yours and your sisters', that would really feel terrible. This event could be the last straw because being unfairly punished to spare your brother might crystallize a whole amorphous emotional dynamic that was really painful. And having your mom again deny that any of this hurt you could feel like the last straw. It clearly DID do you harm (which isn't to blame her for her behavior back then; she was probably just trying to hang in there; but denying your experience like that is another level of adding insult to injury).
If you want to communicate about this with her, I'm sure it's very freighted for you both. It would likely take a bunch of therapy to be able to unpack it, name what's going on, and then work on how to explain it such that she might be able to understand. Only you can say if it's worth it.
posted by salvia at 8:08 PM on October 31, 2016 [1 favorite]
Middle sibling might have been protective of mother, might have taken the path of least resistance for world peace purposes - after all, family had already been through enough trauma. So middle sibling stifles and bipasses any normal teenage rebellion for the sake of all involved.
Fast forward years later, middle sibling no longer has so much pressure to Do All Things To Keep The Peace and lets guard down. Subconscious mind starts working and adding 2 and 2. Results are mind blowingly unfair. Middle sibling suddenly feels cheated and sees that although she acted towards her family in the most ethical way possible to her, she might not have gotten the same ethical (fair) treatment in return. Middle sibling has every right to feel angry and hurt. Middle sibling should allow herself to process this emotion. Negative emotions can be put on the back burner for later, but they must be felt and dealt with eventually, in some way or another.
Why was parent so quick to respond? Because she never forgot that incident and figured out much sooner that it was unfair. How did she cope with that? By convincing herself that it did middle sibling no harm. Tá-da! Issue resolved.
Why was this the final straw? No way for the reader to know in this short story. We have to trust the author that there has been much, much more that has happened beyond incident 1 and 2.
For the readers, are either of these incidents proof that all family ties need to be severed? Not with information given. But that doesn't mean middle sibling doesn't have every right to be upset and every right to take some time off to process these emotions. The story hints that there are many more issues with these characters.
The whole story screams lack of self-compassion for middle sibling. Middle sibling has a history of putting family first and therefore has not learned to put self first. And should. Instead of resenting the responsible adults and older siblings in the story, continues to blame and resent self, thereby continuing lifelong pattern of inadvertent self detriment for other family members' well-being. Middle sibling has not yet accepted she, too, did what she could, used whatever tools she had (not many considering age and level of trauma), to cope with a difficult situation.
That being said, there are things middle child can do to stop the cycle, such as reading books* and therapy.
* "Drama of The Gifted Child", often recommended here, comes to mind. I haven't read it yet, but "Self-Compassion" by K Neff seems good, and anything by Brene Brown.
posted by Neekee at 8:19 PM on October 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
Fast forward years later, middle sibling no longer has so much pressure to Do All Things To Keep The Peace and lets guard down. Subconscious mind starts working and adding 2 and 2. Results are mind blowingly unfair. Middle sibling suddenly feels cheated and sees that although she acted towards her family in the most ethical way possible to her, she might not have gotten the same ethical (fair) treatment in return. Middle sibling has every right to feel angry and hurt. Middle sibling should allow herself to process this emotion. Negative emotions can be put on the back burner for later, but they must be felt and dealt with eventually, in some way or another.
Why was parent so quick to respond? Because she never forgot that incident and figured out much sooner that it was unfair. How did she cope with that? By convincing herself that it did middle sibling no harm. Tá-da! Issue resolved.
Why was this the final straw? No way for the reader to know in this short story. We have to trust the author that there has been much, much more that has happened beyond incident 1 and 2.
For the readers, are either of these incidents proof that all family ties need to be severed? Not with information given. But that doesn't mean middle sibling doesn't have every right to be upset and every right to take some time off to process these emotions. The story hints that there are many more issues with these characters.
The whole story screams lack of self-compassion for middle sibling. Middle sibling has a history of putting family first and therefore has not learned to put self first. And should. Instead of resenting the responsible adults and older siblings in the story, continues to blame and resent self, thereby continuing lifelong pattern of inadvertent self detriment for other family members' well-being. Middle sibling has not yet accepted she, too, did what she could, used whatever tools she had (not many considering age and level of trauma), to cope with a difficult situation.
That being said, there are things middle child can do to stop the cycle, such as reading books* and therapy.
* "Drama of The Gifted Child", often recommended here, comes to mind. I haven't read it yet, but "Self-Compassion" by K Neff seems good, and anything by Brene Brown.
posted by Neekee at 8:19 PM on October 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
Middle sibling also asks parent about the car door incident in person. The parent's response is immediate: "It didn't do you any harm!". Middle sibling is rendered speechless and wonders at how and why the incident was so close in the parent's mind to give such an immediate response to an event from decades ago
Another and much simpler possibility: this is a parent who doesn't remember these events the same way you do or was thinking of a different event, or was mixing up one event with another punishment, or can't remember much at all from back then and doesn't want to admit or discuss that. Either because she's elderly (having teens in the 80s = a parent in her 60s at the youngest to nearly 90 at the oldest? if my math is right) or because the several years following her husband and son's deaths are blurred in memory.
My mom's husband (my dad) died when I was very young, decades ago, and when someone recently referred to "the years when your mom was so depressed" I didn't know what or when they were talking about. Some parents try to project a facade of parental competence post-tragedy in the belief that their children should be shielded from worry about the surviving parent. unfortunately it doesn't protect them from worry, only from certainty. and it makes imperfect parental decisions seem inexplicable and sinister if you don't see the misery and struggle interfering with their judgment, because they hide it from you. this can foster an obsession with knowing 'the real story' or the truth about minor details that other people don't see the importance of, or a consuming, continuing interest in/uncertainty about other people's motivations. that at least is what it brought out in me.
posted by queenofbithynia at 10:05 PM on October 31, 2016 [6 favorites]
Another and much simpler possibility: this is a parent who doesn't remember these events the same way you do or was thinking of a different event, or was mixing up one event with another punishment, or can't remember much at all from back then and doesn't want to admit or discuss that. Either because she's elderly (having teens in the 80s = a parent in her 60s at the youngest to nearly 90 at the oldest? if my math is right) or because the several years following her husband and son's deaths are blurred in memory.
My mom's husband (my dad) died when I was very young, decades ago, and when someone recently referred to "the years when your mom was so depressed" I didn't know what or when they were talking about. Some parents try to project a facade of parental competence post-tragedy in the belief that their children should be shielded from worry about the surviving parent. unfortunately it doesn't protect them from worry, only from certainty. and it makes imperfect parental decisions seem inexplicable and sinister if you don't see the misery and struggle interfering with their judgment, because they hide it from you. this can foster an obsession with knowing 'the real story' or the truth about minor details that other people don't see the importance of, or a consuming, continuing interest in/uncertainty about other people's motivations. that at least is what it brought out in me.
posted by queenofbithynia at 10:05 PM on October 31, 2016 [6 favorites]
In a similar situation I became the defacto co-parent, my words given the weight of an actual adult. In this case with gender roles at play the brother was literally "the man of the house" and the mother may have unconsciously deferred to him. The mom likely has tons of guilt from that time as to how she handled, well, basically everything, and has likely turned this and many other scenarios over in her head for years. My mother semi-regularly asks for reassurance that we worked well as a family, that she was a good parent, etc, and at this point I just roll with it, she doesn't push after I agree, because she knows there is pushback available, but we have a nice relationship now I don't want to jeopardize for "justice" for the past.
posted by Iteki at 12:28 AM on November 1, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Iteki at 12:28 AM on November 1, 2016 [2 favorites]
Older sibling is a jerk. Mom co-signed older siblings bullshit. Middle sibling, in shock and awe, and likely used to getting run over by older sibling, and Mom co-signing it, used to it to the point that it's just the default, and so middle sibling went along.
Now, years later, middle sibling is waking up, copping to what she's known all these years -- and what all concerned in this little scenario have known all these years -- which is that middle sibling got hosed. Middle sibling now wants redress, or at the very least acknowledgment that "Yep, we sure did hose you there." but middle sibling is the only one with anything to gain by rocking the boat, and older sibling and Mom aren't going to roll over easily, if at all, and will gaslight middle sibling for the rest of her days if middle sibling continues to seek fair treatment.
~~~~~
Why, yes, I did come from a messy family, similar in its way to this one! Why yes, it's true -- they'd rather I'd have gotten hit by a bus than shed any light onto what happened inside those walls....
posted by dancestoblue at 1:59 AM on November 1, 2016 [8 favorites]
Now, years later, middle sibling is waking up, copping to what she's known all these years -- and what all concerned in this little scenario have known all these years -- which is that middle sibling got hosed. Middle sibling now wants redress, or at the very least acknowledgment that "Yep, we sure did hose you there." but middle sibling is the only one with anything to gain by rocking the boat, and older sibling and Mom aren't going to roll over easily, if at all, and will gaslight middle sibling for the rest of her days if middle sibling continues to seek fair treatment.
~~~~~
Why, yes, I did come from a messy family, similar in its way to this one! Why yes, it's true -- they'd rather I'd have gotten hit by a bus than shed any light onto what happened inside those walls....
posted by dancestoblue at 1:59 AM on November 1, 2016 [8 favorites]
If middle sibling is female, and eldest sibling is male, and the sole parental authority was female at the time, it could also be systemic sexism at play. I find it hard to define, but its the expectation that the oldest male somehow is deserving of more respect and/or reverence than the females in the family, and that the female parent will often yield and be much more forgiving of transgressions caused by the eldest male, and much harsher on the female siblings.
This is especially the case when you have the male parent die, such as in my family-- and if there are cultural gender roles at play (again in my family) and where the male parent was really the patriarch/in charge of the family.
Essentially, my Dad also died when I was a teen, my older brothers took on his 'role' and my mother often yielded to them both because of our culture, so if there is a similar dynamic at play, that may explain things. It was never an overt thing, it was always a subconscious kind of thing.
The reason that middle-sibling may be bothered now is because they now have the emotional maturity to see it for what it is. Moreover, if these kind of things were a constant dynamic at play (mother always yielding to the 'man of the house') it can create resentment. For me, it made me feel like I was responsible for things that were not my fault or responsibility, such as cooking or cleaning or making my brothers lunch when they were perfectly capable of doing it for themselves, and I also had my own things to do.
Essentially, systemic sexism in a family unit is usually in a series of microagressions in the family that have continued over a prolonged period of time. Because you're in that system, at first, you don't notice it. It's the norm. In fact, you don't really notice the dynamic until you're out of that system. It could be that the middle-sibling, with hindsight, has realized that she's been put upon a lot, that the punishment wasn't fair. It's the final straw, because they are now seeing a lot of the past in a different light. And because being in that system for a female often feels like being scapegoated a lot and lose-lose.
As for accepting unfair terms at the time? It's again possibly the sexism at play-- the female was subconsciously taught to defer and did. I think what makes it so tricky is that its not a conscious thing, and its very hard to define and realize its happening. Its a lot like the revelation regarding the emotional labor thread-- and you'll find that in these kind of families, the emotional labor burden by the females is massive, and generally is expected. My mother got mad at my SIL once because 'she didn't remind my brother of her (my mom's) birthday' Yes. Really.
Basically what Iteki said (although I began writing this before I browsed the comments). Anyway thats just one way to interpret it.
posted by Dimes at 8:56 AM on November 1, 2016 [2 favorites]
This is especially the case when you have the male parent die, such as in my family-- and if there are cultural gender roles at play (again in my family) and where the male parent was really the patriarch/in charge of the family.
Essentially, my Dad also died when I was a teen, my older brothers took on his 'role' and my mother often yielded to them both because of our culture, so if there is a similar dynamic at play, that may explain things. It was never an overt thing, it was always a subconscious kind of thing.
The reason that middle-sibling may be bothered now is because they now have the emotional maturity to see it for what it is. Moreover, if these kind of things were a constant dynamic at play (mother always yielding to the 'man of the house') it can create resentment. For me, it made me feel like I was responsible for things that were not my fault or responsibility, such as cooking or cleaning or making my brothers lunch when they were perfectly capable of doing it for themselves, and I also had my own things to do.
Essentially, systemic sexism in a family unit is usually in a series of microagressions in the family that have continued over a prolonged period of time. Because you're in that system, at first, you don't notice it. It's the norm. In fact, you don't really notice the dynamic until you're out of that system. It could be that the middle-sibling, with hindsight, has realized that she's been put upon a lot, that the punishment wasn't fair. It's the final straw, because they are now seeing a lot of the past in a different light. And because being in that system for a female often feels like being scapegoated a lot and lose-lose.
As for accepting unfair terms at the time? It's again possibly the sexism at play-- the female was subconsciously taught to defer and did. I think what makes it so tricky is that its not a conscious thing, and its very hard to define and realize its happening. Its a lot like the revelation regarding the emotional labor thread-- and you'll find that in these kind of families, the emotional labor burden by the females is massive, and generally is expected. My mother got mad at my SIL once because 'she didn't remind my brother of her (my mom's) birthday' Yes. Really.
Basically what Iteki said (although I began writing this before I browsed the comments). Anyway thats just one way to interpret it.
posted by Dimes at 8:56 AM on November 1, 2016 [2 favorites]
But now middle sibling is confused as to actual psychological elements at play including:
1) the reasons middle sibling agreed to the instructions back when they were a teen; why they didn't just refuse;
2) the reasons middle sibling found the 2016 response by parent to be the final straw, amongst many potential final straws.
1) Because you do, because there is no clear reason to refuse at the time. When stuff goes south, you wonder about it later, but at the time you did the obvious thing.
2) Well, for me, coming from an abusive home, denial has always been more maddening, long-term, than actual abuse. I suspect it's pretty common in families that the abuser is regarded as a force of nature, sort of, and their jerky behavior is taken as a given while the people who protect them are seen as having chosen sides between them and you.
Also, that "It didn't do you/me any harm" is standard when talking about abuse.
The word "abuse" may not seem right to you in your situation; if you want, call it your sibling taking advantage, or similar. The dynamic of denial is the main thing, to me.
posted by BibiRose at 9:11 AM on November 1, 2016
1) the reasons middle sibling agreed to the instructions back when they were a teen; why they didn't just refuse;
2) the reasons middle sibling found the 2016 response by parent to be the final straw, amongst many potential final straws.
1) Because you do, because there is no clear reason to refuse at the time. When stuff goes south, you wonder about it later, but at the time you did the obvious thing.
2) Well, for me, coming from an abusive home, denial has always been more maddening, long-term, than actual abuse. I suspect it's pretty common in families that the abuser is regarded as a force of nature, sort of, and their jerky behavior is taken as a given while the people who protect them are seen as having chosen sides between them and you.
Also, that "It didn't do you/me any harm" is standard when talking about abuse.
The word "abuse" may not seem right to you in your situation; if you want, call it your sibling taking advantage, or similar. The dynamic of denial is the main thing, to me.
posted by BibiRose at 9:11 AM on November 1, 2016
The death of a partner when there are young children or the death of a child or the death of a parent or sibling before you are an adult are some of the most seismic, devastating losses one can suffer. And your family suffered all of those in every direction.
I would be astounded if, only a couple of years later, your mom had her a-game parenting back going on. I would be amazed if you kids weren't all kinds of grieving and emotionally messed up still. I would be stunned if family dynamics had become anything like "normal" (either compared to before the losses or compared to other families).
So essentially I think that your brother blamed you for the door because he was fucked up and cruel, and your mom went along with it because she was fucked up and checked out, and you went along with it then because you were fucked up and beaten down. And she says "it never harmed you" because SHE KNOWS it was a poorly handled situation but she is in her comfy groove, and has come to terms however she's gonna, and can't cope with deconstructing everything that has happened and facing it all over. And it's the final straw for you because you realise that the recovery, such as it is, from the seismic event of your dad and brother's deaths, isn't real unless you DO face up to how fucked up you all were back then. And the "it never harmed you" response tells you that that's how it's going to be there, you need to move on without your mom's revision of events because she's incapable. And the incapacity is real to you now, so you can do it, you can relinquish the hope of your idea of/need for genuine healing with her.
Your family suffered basically two of the worst situations a family can suffer. Short of coming down the mountain and finding the village washed away, not many worse things could have happened. It is amazing you all survived, and I mean just survived. That you are moving towards genuine healing after suffering those events and the aftermath (which in terms of some dynamics has been "ever since") is truly remarkable. I wish you the absolute best of luck.
posted by intergalacticvelvet at 4:10 PM on November 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
I would be astounded if, only a couple of years later, your mom had her a-game parenting back going on. I would be amazed if you kids weren't all kinds of grieving and emotionally messed up still. I would be stunned if family dynamics had become anything like "normal" (either compared to before the losses or compared to other families).
So essentially I think that your brother blamed you for the door because he was fucked up and cruel, and your mom went along with it because she was fucked up and checked out, and you went along with it then because you were fucked up and beaten down. And she says "it never harmed you" because SHE KNOWS it was a poorly handled situation but she is in her comfy groove, and has come to terms however she's gonna, and can't cope with deconstructing everything that has happened and facing it all over. And it's the final straw for you because you realise that the recovery, such as it is, from the seismic event of your dad and brother's deaths, isn't real unless you DO face up to how fucked up you all were back then. And the "it never harmed you" response tells you that that's how it's going to be there, you need to move on without your mom's revision of events because she's incapable. And the incapacity is real to you now, so you can do it, you can relinquish the hope of your idea of/need for genuine healing with her.
Your family suffered basically two of the worst situations a family can suffer. Short of coming down the mountain and finding the village washed away, not many worse things could have happened. It is amazing you all survived, and I mean just survived. That you are moving towards genuine healing after suffering those events and the aftermath (which in terms of some dynamics has been "ever since") is truly remarkable. I wish you the absolute best of luck.
posted by intergalacticvelvet at 4:10 PM on November 2, 2016 [4 favorites]
« Older toilet plunger goes "inside out" - cannot plunge... | I feel like I am losing my friend, need advice on... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
We can't really know the motivations of the actors, unfortunately. Too many variables, too much time passed, so much unknown. I will say that I hope middle sibling finds some peace and a family that may not be "blood" but that treats her better than all this.
posted by sockermom at 5:12 PM on October 31, 2016 [12 favorites]