Child Caregivers

[livius drusus]

There's an article in the NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/health/23care.html?_r=2&ref=health) today about children who are the primary caregivers for parents and grandparents. It's a growing issue as the economy flails and people have to make do with less/no money and insurance.

In Britain and Australia, child caregivers are counted in the census and they have certain rights wrt patient care decisions and asking for aid. Not in the US, though, and there isn't much in the way of non-government support.

That's beginning to change, thankfully, but they face an uphill battle. There's a cultural block that keeps parents being cared for by their children from admitting it. They don't want to feel helpless or like they've abrogated their rights and responsibilities as a parent. They also don't want to run the danger that the child will be removed from the home.

Some of the stories the kids profiled in the article tell are harrowing.

At 11, Annmarie Lent said, she felt "depressed" and “under pressure.” Classmates taunted her, saying, “ ‘Your mom’s crippled.’ ”

Once, she said, when she was reluctant to attend school, her parents got the police to “bring me to school in handcuffs — in my Tinkerbell pajamas.”

Ultimately, she “got really aggressive,” her mother said. “She threw a cup and hit me in the head, then she smashed me across the face.”

Another time, Ms. Lent said, Annmarie “took my cane away and started punching me” and beat her mother with beads, yelling,“ ‘You took my life away from me,’ that it was all my fault for becoming disabled. I was screaming. I didn’t want to die at the hands of my 11-, almost 12-year-old.”

Three times, Ms. Lent said, she reluctantly had Annmarie arrested. Charged with assaulting a disabled person, Annmarie wrote, “Dear Mom, I’m so sorry for hitting you.” She spent time in detention, faced the possibility of foster care and was given a diagnosis of bipolar and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders.

Mother and daughter are doing better now, thankfully, but still, what a horrible situation all around.

[LadyShea]

That's just a powder keg. Children shouldn't be under that kind of pressure...but what can be done currently? We don't have much by way of resources here for professional caretakers.

[wildernesse]

I read that article, too. I just don't know what to think. There should be more support for people who need in-home care, period. In-home care is often less expensive than care in an institutionalized setting, so you would think that there would be a priority placed on in-home care for people who can safely live at home. I mean, it is really inexpensive with unpaid child labor, but even when taxpayers pick up the tab, in-home care is cheaper.

On a related note, I really, really wish that social workers who worked in child protective services had better PR or community outreach or something. (Not like they don't have enough to do.) There is a terrible fear of having your children taken away and having them turned over to strangers--and in many cases, because it involves your children, there is no way for people to step back and see the situation without emotional eyes. While I am sure there are cases where there has been an abuse of discretion, I really fear that more people don't report dangerous or troubling situations because they think that the first step is removing the children. And while most places don't have an excess of resources, there may be some that can help that family through whatever they are dealing with.

[tyciol]

The problem is a lot of parents are living reckless indulgent lifestyles. They don't take care of their health, they don't save money, yet they neglect their kids and abuse them into feeling they owe them for being born.

[JoeP]

The problem is a lot of parents are living reckless indulgent lifestyles. They don't take care of their health, they don't save money, yet they neglect their kids and abuse them into feeling they owe them for being born.

:stunned: Are you blaming disabled parents for being disabled? You might want to explain your post a bit more.

[LadyShea]

The problem is a lot of parents are living reckless indulgent lifestyles. They don't take care of their health, they don't save money, yet they neglect their kids and abuse them into feeling they owe them for being born.

Huh?

[livius drusus]

That's just a powder keg. Children shouldn't be under that kind of pressure...but what can be done currently? We don't have much by way of resources here for professional caretakers.
True that. Or for adults taking care of their relatives. I don't know what can be done, but recognizing their status in the same way they do in the UK and Australia would seem to be a good first step.

I read that article, too. I just don't know what to think. There should be more support for people who need in-home care, period. In-home care is often less expensive than care in an institutionalized setting, so you would think that there would be a priority placed on in-home care for people who can safely live at home. I mean, it is really inexpensive with unpaid child labor, but even when taxpayers pick up the tab, in-home care is cheaper.
Maybe the recession will help put this in higher relief. Families are already moving back in with each other because they can pool their resources -- money, homes, vehicles, child care, health care, food -- to cope with the stresses of life more efficiently as a team.

I notice the children profiled in the article were only children, or at least had no siblings/aunts/uncles/whatever living with them. It seems to me like they'd be in a much better position if they had an in-house support network of other family members.

On a related note, I really, really wish that social workers who worked in child protective services had better PR or community outreach or something. (Not like they don't have enough to do.) There is a terrible fear of having your children taken away and having them turned over to strangers--and in many cases, because it involves your children, there is no way for people to step back and see the situation without emotional eyes. While I am sure there are cases where there has been an abuse of discretion, I really fear that more people don't report dangerous or troubling situations because they think that the first step is removing the children. And while most places don't have an excess of resources, there may be some that can help that family through whatever they are dealing with.
That's a really good point. CPS in general seems to get horrible press. They make it in the news either when they've removed children from a home on unclear or questionable grounds, or more often, when they've allowed children to remain in an unsuitable situation which resulted in tragedy.

[Demimonde]

Being a caregiver takes a heavy toll on a relationship. Cargiving and Depression (http://www.caregiver.org/caregiver/jsp/content_node.jsp?nodeid=393)

The unbalanced nature of the relationship can be very difficult to manage, when one becomes ill. It is not uncommon for couples, who have a shared sense of responsibility that shifts to one, to divorce after a bout with illness. The pressure, the responsibility, the lack of control, the resentment; it is all very difficult to bear. The social stigma heaped on these individuals is severe as well, which gives the depression sufferer "evidences" for their lack of worth. It is a nasty cycle.

This is even more dire when there is a total role reversal, in the case of parent and child. Culturally, the parent is supposed to care for the child. Additionally, there is a feeling that children, (if they love their parent) should help them. However, children often lack the mental maturity to handle these emotions and responsibilities in a healthy way.

Many parents in that situation are facing a horrible sense of helplessness. They cannot control their health, they loose control of basic physical realities, they can't do the things that they are accustomed to, they often loose financial responsibility and are unable to work. Pride is a terrific barrier for any disabled person. To loose control over their children is even more painful. They aren't called "patients" without good reason.

I faced that situation. My father was diagnosed with cancer, my mother was deceased, and I was the only one that could help. His VA benefits did not cover home visits, nor would he have accepted it had it been offered. I battled with him over medication, diet, his smoking, his drinking, his treatment. In addition to the responsibilities I faced, I had to wrangle him to do what was best for him. It was overwhelming.

While I am proud having been able to help him, and to have had the time to build my relationship with him before he passed, there were low points. The greatest shame of my life was the week that I ran away.

I was having dinner with him, and he was critizing the meal I had prepared. I knew his medication affected his taste and I did my best to ignore it. But he wouldn't stop telling me every thing I had done wrong. I snapped. I shouted at him, horrible things, and ran out the door. I was so ashamed of the things I said, what I had done, I felt I couldn't go home. My brother cared for him that week, I went on a bender with my friends, but eventually my brother convinced me to come home.

In hindsight, it was a turning point for my Dad and me. He realized the pressure I was under. I realized that the criticism had more to do with the fact that he wished he could be in the kitchen, but he couldn't. He wanted to do the things I was doing for him. His statements were more about his pride than my lack of ability. He also recognized the fact that I would rather be young, carefree, and out with friends.

We both realized the sacrifices that needed to be made and we made them. Happy ending right? Not really. While our relationship was wonderful, I have battled with depression ever since. The initial depression started with his illness, was extreme during the grieving process, and I have been diagnosed with cyclical recurring major unipolar depression.

So what can we learn from my experience? I think that we would have benefited from outside help, home care. However, I do not think that my father would have allowed it. Help the mind and heart is what I reccomend. Give them access to mental health care which can give them the strength to do what must be done. Both parent and child.

It was 8 years after my father's death before I received therapy. My therapist was shocked that I hadn't ever had any before. I was among the uninsured, I still am actually. I received treatment through a university study. Mental health is woefully underprioritized by insurance companies and medicare. That is where the real help would come from.

liv
I notice the children profiled in the article were only children, or at least had no siblings/aunts/uncles/whatever living with them. It seems to me like they'd be in a much better position if they had an in-house support network of other family members.

I had such a network, and they failed me. Ideally, yes I whole heartedly aggree that is how it should be. However, sometimes they don't exist, or they are incapable.

ETA
wildernesse
On a related note, I really, really wish that social workers who worked in child protective services had better PR or community outreach or something. (Not like they don't have enough to do.) There is a terrible fear of having your children taken away and having them turned over to strangers--and in many cases, because it involves your children, there is no way for people to step back and see the situation without emotional eyes. While I am sure there are cases where there has been an abuse of discretion, I really fear that more people don't report dangerous or troubling situations because they think that the first step is removing the children. And while most places don't have an excess of resources, there may be some that can help that family through whatever they are dealing with.

Absolutely. I was in terror as a kid of CPS. As a child of a single father, I remember feeling instensly scrutinized but adults about my homelife. I would hide bruises at school, bruises that resulted from normal kid play and accidents, for fear of someone reporting it to the authorities. Our financial situation was tough as well. I remember once in fourth grade, after reading Dickens, I was convinced he would be thrown into "debtors prison!" :P It's funny now but scary back then.

[livius drusus]

Thank you for your excellent post, Demi. When I read the article I immediately thought of you, so I'm grateful you shared your experience as a young caretaker.

The unbalanced nature of the relationship can be very difficult to manage, when one becomes ill. It is not uncommon for couples, who have a shared sense of responsibility that shifts to one, to divorce after a bout with illness. The pressure, the responsibility, the lack of control, the resentment; it is all very difficult to bear. The social stigma heaped on these individuals is severe as well, which gives the depression sufferer "evidences" for their lack of worth. It is a nasty cycle.

This is even more dire when there is a total role reversal, in the case of parent and child. Culturally, the parent is supposed to care for the child. Additionally, there is a feeling that children, (if they love their parent) should help them. However, children often lack the mental maturity to handle these emotions and responsibilities in a healthy way.
I think that's very much in evidence in Annmarie, the child mentioned in the article who was mercilessly taunted at school for having a "cripple" for a mother and eventually became violent after caring for her mother since she was eleven years old.

Many parents in that situation are facing a horrible sense of helplessness. They cannot control their health, they loose control of basic physical realities, they can't do the things that they are accustomed to, they often loose financial responsibility and are unable to work. Pride is a terrific barrier for any disabled person. To loose control over their children is even more painful. They aren't called "patients" without good reason.
It's a horrible catch-22 because that pride which can cause so many emotional difficulties in the caregiver-patient relationship can also prevent people from seeking outside support, thereby compounding the already close to unbearable pressure on the caregiver.

I faced that situation. My father was diagnosed with cancer, my mother was deceased, and I was the only one that could help. His VA benefits did not cover home visits, nor would he have accepted it had it been offered. I battled with him over medication, diet, his smoking, his drinking, his treatment. In addition to the responsibilities I faced, I had to wrangle him to do what was best for him. It was overwhelming.

While I am proud having been able to help him, and to have had the time to build my relationship with him before he passed, there were low points. The greatest shame of my life was the week that I ran away.
You seem to understand him, yourself, the circumstances so well. It's saddening that this is still a source of shame for you. Removing yourself from a pressure cooker for a week seems to have been an entirely reasonable choice to me. In fact, for your health more regular vacations would have been very much in order.

We both realized the sacrifices that needed to be made and we made them. Happy ending right? Not really. While our relationship was wonderful, I have battled with depression ever since. The initial depression started with his illness, was extreme during the grieving process, and I have been diagnosed with cyclical recurring major unipolar depression.
Are there psychological approaches specially tailored for young caregivers? It seems to me the long term consequences you experienced are likely to be endemic, like a form of PTSD.

So what can we learn from my experience? I think that we would have benefited from outside help, home care. However, I do not think that my father would have allowed it. Help the mind and heart is what I reccomend. Give them access to mental health care which can give them the strength to do what must be done. Both parent and child.
Perhaps then from a social services perspective, some choices must be made for the patient and caregiver that the patient may not want. The situation sucks all around for everybody. An detached perspective may be necessary in some circumstances to ensure the best possible outcome.

It was 8 years after my father's death before I received therapy. My therapist was shocked that I hadn't ever had any before. I was among the uninsured, I still am actually. I received treatment through a university study. Mental health is woefully underprioritized by insurance companies and medicare. That is where the real help would come from.
Very, very true. My mother is a psychologist. She worked with the VA for some time and the veterans got very little in the way of reliable mental health, and this was before the Iraq war.

My old company used to offer telephone counseling in lieu of comprehensive mental health insurance. Needless to say, it was not comparable in quality.

liv
I notice the children profiled in the article were only children, or at least had no siblings/aunts/uncles/whatever living with them. It seems to me like they'd be in a much better position if they had an in-house support network of other family members.

I had such a network, and they failed me. Ideally, yes I whole heartedly aggree that is how it should be. However, sometimes they don't exist, or they are incapable.
Your father lived with his extended family? I meant in situ family, not the wider spread networks that are more common in modern living arrangements in the US. It's a lot harder to flee familial obligations when you share the same living space.

Thanks again, Demi. :thankee:

[tyciol]

The problem is a lot of parents are living reckless indulgent lifestyles. They don't take care of their health, they don't save money, yet they neglect their kids and abuse them into feeling they owe them for being born.

:stunned: Are you blaming disabled parents for being disabled? You might want to explain your post a bit more.Only those who become disabled as a result of their own idiocy. Furthermore 'disabled' gets thrown around a lot when many are just lazy, fat, or don't want to feel pain by moving around to do what needs to get done.

People who have kids after being disabled may have been raped, perhaps by another disabled person, in which case I blame others for not aborting the thing.

In cases like if someone is a fine parent and then gets a brain injury, we should find someone else to take care of the kids.

[livius drusus]

The OP refers to a specific article. It's not a polemic about the wages of parental sin. Perhaps you could try reading it.

[Master Taran]

The OP refers to a specific article. It's not a polemic about the wages of parental sin. Perhaps you could try reading it.Interesting concept. A troll taking the time to actually read something. :eek:

[tyciol]

I did read the article, and those children are being asked to do too much. My only conclusion is that they are being pressured to do things by guilt. Even if you break your leg, you can get your own damn pills, they're treating kids like maids, so it's no wonder the kids snap and attack them. That is child abuse, it is making them do things they don't want to do through emotional manipulation. They should also not be exposed to a lot of the horrid things they need to see without adequate preparation.

Would these people also make their kids change their diapers while they're in elementary school? That'd be sexual abuse, but I bet it happens, because these people are too cheap to buy a nurse or support worker.

[Dingfod]

Too cheap or too poor?

[JoeP]

The problem is a lot of parents are living reckless indulgent lifestyles. They don't take care of their health, they don't save money, yet they neglect their kids and abuse them into feeling they owe them for being born.

:stunned: Are you blaming disabled parents for being disabled? You might want to explain your post a bit more.Only those who become disabled as a result of their own idiocy. Furthermore 'disabled' gets thrown around a lot when many are just lazy, fat, or don't want to feel pain by moving around to do what needs to get done.

...

But you said "the problem is", yet the problem(s) you are talking about does not seem in any way related to the subject of the OP. Only to some other cases of child caregivers. Were you responding to the OP or to the thread title?

[livius drusus]

I did read the article, and those children are being asked to do too much. My only conclusion is that they are being pressured to do things by guilt. Even if you break your leg, you can get your own damn pills, they're treating kids like maids, so it's no wonder the kids snap and attack them. That is child abuse, it is making them do things they don't want to do through emotional manipulation. They should also not be exposed to a lot of the horrid things they need to see without adequate preparation.
The instances raised in the article are not about temporary conditions like broken legs or drunken benders, but long term disabilities (MS, dementia, diabetes, blindness) or even terminal illness (cancer).

I don't think you can assume it's emotional manipulation to ask your loved ones to care for you, even when the circumstances are so far from ideal. In fact, the article makes clear that many of these patients feel enormous guilt and shame themselves for having to rely on their children's help.

I'm not sure I see the point of projecting the most ugly, frivolous motives on these people. This is a complex situation that doesn't lend itself to facile sloganeering.

Would these people also make their kids change their diapers while they're in elementary school? That'd be sexual abuse, but I bet it happens, because these people are too cheap to buy a nurse or support worker.
Without major insurance or gobs of disposable income, home care is prohibitively expensive. It's just not an option for most people.

[LadyShea]

My friend's husband is dying of brain cancer. They have insurance, and own their own business (Real estate so don't know how that's going), still in home caregivers are out of their reach. Most insurances don't cover it.

[Stormlight]

The problem is a lot of parents are living reckless indulgent lifestyles. They don't take care of their health, they don't save money, yet they neglect their kids and abuse them into feeling they owe them for being born.

:stunned: Are you blaming disabled parents for being disabled? You might want to explain your post a bit more.Only those who become disabled as a result of their own idiocy. Furthermore 'disabled' gets thrown around a lot when many are just lazy, fat, or don't want to feel pain by moving around to do what needs to get done.

People who have kids after being disabled may have been raped, perhaps by another disabled person, in which case I blame others for not aborting the thing.

In cases like if someone is a fine parent and then gets a brain injury, we should find someone else to take care of the kids.

Well, aren't you a lovely person. :blank:

[Doctor X]

You will enjoy his Cloaca contributions. . . .

--J.D.

[Smilin]

The problem is a lot of parents are living reckless indulgent lifestyles. They don't take care of their health, they don't save money, yet they neglect their kids and abuse them into feeling they owe them for being born.


Oh really?

And there are some parents who have always been there for you, saved money, indulged their children, never been abusive yet stern with discipline who find themselves in a situation where they need someone to be there for them.

My Dad is currently suffering from pneumonia, is also a severe diabetic, can hardly walk much less shit, bathe himself, or simply walk from his chair to the kitchen table.

I'm just thankful you aren't a sibling. I'd have to give you a severe beating for your fucked up attitude.

[Doctor X]

Pay no attention, Shelli.

He has been playing the "take the contrary position" on a few topics to generate attention. He even tried . . . ba . . . bwa . . . bwa!HA! . . . to troll . . . BWA!HA!HA!HA! Sloberin'!

--J.D.

[Garnet]

Pay no attention, Shelli.

He has been playing the "take the contrary position" on a few topics to generate attention. He even tried . . . ba . . . bwa . . . bwa!HA! . . . to troll . . . BWA!HA!HA!HA! Sloberin'!

--J.D.


OK, that might be worth taking him off ignore.

Uh...no it isn't...but it is funny.

[Demimonde]

Thank you for your excellent post, Demi. When I read the article I immediately thought of you, so I'm grateful you shared your experience as a young caretaker.

pas de quoi


I think that's very much in evidence in Annmarie, the child mentioned in the article who was mercilessly taunted at school for having a "cripple" for a mother and eventually became violent after caring for her mother since she was eleven years old.

I'm sure that she was also suffering from the coming of age. At that age children begin to seek out their independance from their parents and build their identity. The responsibilities placed on their shoulders have such high stakes that the emotions are indeed a powder keg. In traditional households a preteen or teen may procrastinate on taking out the trash or mowing the lawn to pursue other interests. A child in Annmarie's situation, cannot.

There are two key facets when it comes to growing up, responsibility and independence. On the one hand a child caregiver is ahead of the curve in regards to responsibility. However, this is at the expense of their independence.

It's a horrible catch-22 because that pride which can cause so many emotional difficulties in the caregiver-patient relationship can also prevent people from seeking outside support, thereby compounding the already close to unbearable pressure on the caregiver.

Not just outside support, it can prevent them from allowing the caretaker to even do their job. My father was a very strong and willful individual. He hated having people do things for him. It made my part more difficult, and I was family. With the dynamic between parent and child, it was extremely difficult to say, "No," or disobey his instructions for his own good. In the article they outline a little girl who acts as the patient's conscience in Doctor visits.

You seem to understand him, yourself, the circumstances so well. It's saddening that this is still a source of shame for you. Removing yourself from a pressure cooker for a week seems to have been an entirely reasonable choice to me. In fact, for your health more regular vacations would have been very much in order.

It is still something that I am not proud of. The guilt comes and goes. You are probobly right that some more time to myself would have benefited me, but at the time I was so wrapped up in his needs that I neglected my own. This is common in all caregivers I suppose.

Are there psychological approaches specially tailored for young caregivers? It seems to me the long term consequences you experienced are likely to be endemic, like a form of PTSD.

None that I am aware of. The research in regards to adut caretakers is still relatively new. As for PTSD, my symptomology was very close to that. The did explore the possibility of that in my diagnosis. I did have some feelings which surrounded the date of his death. You see, he passed on September 11, 2001. The day the world turned upsidedown for my generation. The constant reminders in the news and in American life, extended my grief for years.

Perhaps then from a social services perspective, some choices must be made for the patient and caregiver that the patient may not want. The situation sucks all around for everybody. An detached perspective may be necessary in some circumstances to ensure the best possible outcome.

I don't know. I share my father's aversion for the social services. Just going on foodstamps was a nightmare of bureaucracy. I remember having to sit for hours with him, tubes still hanging from him, trying to get food for us. And food is a pretty simple commodity. I'm not sure that something as personal/individual as therapy could be provided by such a system.

In addition, even if they could have taken him and kept him in a hospice situation, he wouldn't have wanted that and neither would I. I do believe that the decision should remain with the family.

Very, very true. My mother is a psychologist. She worked with the VA for some time and the veterans got very little in the way of reliable mental health, and this was before the Iraq war.

The VA is a terrible mess. After having to live there for six weeks after my dad's surgery, I saw terrible things. People who would have benefited from just a little basic help ignored, or pushed over to a Chaplin.


Your father lived with his extended family? I meant in situ family, not the wider spread networks that are more common in modern living arrangements in the US. It's a lot harder to flee familial obligations when you share the same living space.

I see what you mean now. Actually, they weren't in the same house, (thank God they weren't, based on their actions.) but very close less than twenty minutes away. Though my grandmother and aunt live together, and my uncle and his wife lived next door.

On a related note though, I have often thought that the same emotional issues can arise from older children in a single parent household which must take care of their younger siblings. That is far more common I think, and yet isn't given as much attentions.

Both scenarios are as old as families themselves I suppose.

[tyciol]

But you said "the problem is", yet the problem(s) you are talking about does not seem in any way related to the subject of the OP. Only to some other cases of child caregivers. Were you responding to the OP or to the thread title?Not in ANY way related? I found the subject addressed to be a bit vague, so due to shitty comprehending abilities I may have gone 'slightly' off track... but ANY? I was addressing the conditions mentioned in the article, not merely going by the title or the snippet that was quoted in the first post.

Too cheap or too poor?Mostly cheap. Poor people can be cheap too. A lot of poor people waste money on vices to help cope with how poor they are. Lazy factors into people who don't spend time looking for ways to make money or find support to take the burden off their children.

The instances raised in the article are not about temporary conditions like broken legs or drunken benders, but long term disabilities (MS, dementia, diabetes, blindness) or even terminal illness (cancer).MS/dementia/blindness are things that can make you unfit parents. They should try to find someone more capable of raising their children. Without children to take care of them they might find an easier time finding support. As for diabetes/cancer they suck but they don't require having someone else to do everything for you. With diabetes, a child just might need to know how to administer an emergency insulin shot or something, beyond that the person can go shopping for themself. More like it's some obese type 2 diabetic who won't do shit. Furthermore, lots of diabetics live on their own without caregivers. They plan in advance on how to react in emergencies: so letting your children do stuff is not a requirement.

I don't think you can assume it's emotional manipulation to ask your loved ones to care for you, even when the circumstances are so far from ideal. In fact, the article makes clear that many of these patients feel enormous guilt and shame themselves for having to rely on their children's help.Not ENOUGH guilt or shame, otherwise they'd stop relying on their children's help. Lots of people feel guilt or shame for stuff, but they keep doing it. Lots of rapists or murderers feel guilt or shame, yet keep on destroying people's lives. Oddly enough, people who truly feel it deep down simply stop doing things that make them feel guilty or ashamed. People who just feel shallow guilt or shame just tend to EMBELLISH it (read: emo), greating further incentive for people to pity and take care of them.

I'm not sure I see the point of projecting the most ugly, frivolous motives on these people. This is a complex situation that doesn't lend itself to facile sloganeering.To be fair, I think these motives are predominantly subconscious, because a lot of people are in denial about it.

Without major insurance or gobs of disposable income, home care is prohibitively expensive. It's just not an option for most people.Then people shouldn't have children if they don't have the adequate insurance or disposable income to be independant and let them live their own life. Being a ward of the state would be better, I don't care how much spiel there is about the awfulness of foster homes, at least they don't make you take care of a dependant.

My friend's husband is dying of brain cancer. They have insurance, and own their own business (Real estate so don't know how that's going), still in home caregivers are out of their reach. Most insurances don't cover it.That's unfortunate. A wife taking care of a husband is a different issue though. These are adults who consented to be with each other and promised to take care of each other for better or worse. Children are a totally separate issue, they don't consent to being born or being taken care of by a parent, they must do so for survival.

Well, aren't you a lovely person. :blank:Yes, thank you. I look out for the welfare of kids and not just parental possessiveness of their 'property'.

You will enjoy his Cloaca contributions.I certainly enjoy yours :)

there are some parents who have always been there for you, saved money, indulged their children, never been abusive yet stern with discipline who find themselves in a situation where they need someone to be there for them.

My Dad is currently suffering from pneumonia, is also a severe diabetic, can hardly walk much less shit, bathe himself, or simply walk from his chair to the kitchen table.

I'm just thankful you aren't a sibling. I'd have to give you a severe beating for your fucked up attitude.Needing someone to be there for you is perfectly fine. If you have saved enough money, you can afford to pay people to do that. Furthermore, if you are living independantly as an adult and choose to go take care of a parent, that is a separate issue. There's no problem with that. It's different when someone is still completing their education and is a dependant, and is a position where they are guilted into doing things. Your situation sounds like you're doing it out of appreciation for their being a good parent. It sounds like a more voluntary arrangement, so I am not criticizing it. I might do the same if I had a dad like yours.

[Demimonde]

I cannot help but notice, you responded to everyone in this thread with the exception of myself.

Care to explain to me, how "cheap," and "unfit," my father was? Or perhaps you wouldn't mind comparing him to a rapist or murderer again?

You strike me as a person with very little real world experience. If you are lucky enough to be a part of a truly loving relationship, and have to face the responsibilities which come from loving another person more than yourself, then I imagine that you will see the world from a different perspective.

In the meantime, refrain from making snap judgements about people in situations which are beyond your depth.

[Doctor X]

In the meantime, refrain from making snap judgements about people in situations which are beyond your depth.

That would be "all of them."

--J.D.

[Roland98]

Interesting article. It reflects a lot of my experiences growing up. My mom was diagnosed with MS when I was 6, and was in a wheelchair by the time I was 10. Dad worked in a factory and worked third shift, so he would help mom during the day while we were at school and then sleep second shift, so I took care of the house, mom, and my younger brother and sister. I had to give injections, learn how to help her get on/off of the commode (which was in the living room by the time I was about 12, as she could no longer get to the bathroom). It sucked and made us all grow up too fast, and yes, having a home caregiver would have been nice, but on a single income with 3 kids, it wasn't happening.

My teachers didn't know until late in high school. My mom kind of gave up on everything once she was permanently in the wheel chair, and I didn't realize until high school that some of my friends thought my mother was dead because they'd never seen her (I wouldn't allow anyone to come over to my house because of the commode, and on top of that, my parents are both hoarders, so the house was always hugely cluttered).

The programs they have for these kids sound good, but so much more needs to be done. I went to a rural school with few resources--what are the odds that something like this program will ever help kids in that situation?

[Dingfod]

tyciol: That was probably the single most stupid post I've seen in quite a while. What planet are you from?

[Qingdai]

I also had brief periods of taking care of my mother (catatonia and schizophrenic episodes), which has certainly colored my relationship with her now.
I was angry at her for being so in need, oddly not mad with my father, who for some time didn't realize what was going on.
On the other hand, I can recognize crazy from a mile away and am far more competent than many of my peers.
I, too, was in a rural area, not many services there at all. I was also too old for a babysitter. Now that the state psychiatric hospital system has been gutted, I imagine many more people are stuck with an unstable parent/partner.
I can't fully imagine how it would have been with a chronic or terminal parent.

[rigorist]

The problem is a lot of parents are living reckless indulgent lifestyles. They don't take care of their health, they don't save money, yet they neglect their kids and abuse them into feeling they owe them for being born.

:stunned: Are you blaming disabled parents for being disabled? You might want to explain your post a bit more.Only those who become disabled as a result of their own idiocy. Furthermore 'disabled' gets thrown around a lot when many are just lazy, fat, or don't want to feel pain by moving around to do what needs to get done.

People who have kids after being disabled may have been raped, perhaps by another disabled person, in which case I blame others for not aborting the thing.

In cases like if someone is a fine parent and then gets a brain injury, we should find someone else to take care of the kids.

Fuck you.

That is all.

[tyciol]

I cannot help but notice, you responded to everyone in this thread with the exception of myself.Your posts are very big (the biggest), my ability to focus is limited, but I'll make an effort.

Having just read it now, rather than quote it all: it touches upon 'pride' being a big problem. 'Unfit' in the sense of disparaging you as a caregiver. I understand this is due to pride and frustration: it doesn't excuse that, it is a momentary failure at parenting. I can understand feeling shame at snapping, but doing so in response to being verbally berated is much more understandable to me than a person berating their child over their cooking to begin with.

The shame you feel is probably rooted in feeling bad for not quickly forgiving his outburst and coming back, yet there is a cognitive distortion of feeling shame at doing something which is similarly forgivable (much more easily forgivable I think).

I don't like parents who support this idea that children should feel obligated to care for their parents. This is something they should choose if they like out of appreciation.

Care to explain to me, how "cheap," and "unfit," my father was? Or perhaps you wouldn't mind comparing him to a rapist or murderer again?I did not make direct personal comparisons. My analogies were mainly targeted at the part of the article quoted in the OP, the mother who was cognitive enough to call the police to arrest her daughter, who was obviously not wishing to take care of her since it drove her to violence.

You strike me as a person with very little real world experience. If you are lucky enough to be a part of a truly loving relationship, and have to face the responsibilities which come from loving another person more than yourself, then I imagine that you will see the world from a different perspective. In the meantime, refrain from making snap judgements about people in situations which are beyond your depth.I am not making judgements about specific people. You are right about the lack of real experience and love. The daughter in the post did not seem that way to me because she hated her mother.

I was angry at her for being so in need, oddly not mad with my father, who for some time didn't realize what was going on.Why is it odd to not be angry at your father?
tyciol: That was probably the single most stupid post I've seen in quite a while. What planet are you from?Neptune.
Fuck you. That is all.What a useless post.

[Doctor X]

tyciol: That was probably the single most stupid post I've seen in quite a while.

Give him time . . . he will "surpass" it.

What planet are you from?

He is from Planet FAIL.

I believe the B52s have a song about it.

--J.D.

[Sock Puppet]

One of these days I'm going to write an article about forum fauna -- not just trolls; that's been done to death. I have to come up with a name for the ones who first mouth off about shit they know nothing about, and then when called on it, go into a spiralling flail-mode rather than just admit, "Whoops, I fucked up." I think I'm going to make it a subcategory of Narcissism Spectrum Disorder, a term that I don't think is in the DSM-IV, but it damned well should be.

[Stormlight]

my ability to focus is limited

That's not the only thing that's limited.

[Smilin]

Stupid is as stupid does.....

[JoeP]

Ro!

[Demimonde]

Roland98 and Qingdai, it sounds as though you both had to bear responsibilities similar to my own. I can empathize. Thanks for sharing your perspective.

I did not make direct personal comparisons. My analogies were mainly targeted at the part of the article quoted in the OP, the mother who was cognitive enough to call the police to arrest her daughter, who was obviously not wishing to take care of her since it drove her to violence.

You may have not intended to make a direct comparison, however that is exactly what you did. Sweeping statements about individuals are not only usually short sighted in their scope, but often competley miss the mark, as often they focus on a small extreme rather than the overall perspective. As you stated prior:

Lots of people feel guilt or shame for stuff, but they keep doing it. Lots of rapists or murderers feel guilt or shame, yet keep on destroying people's lives. Oddly enough, people who truly feel it deep down simply stop doing things that make them feel guilty or ashamed. People who just feel shallow guilt or shame just tend to EMBELLISH it (read: emo), greating further incentive for people to pity and take care of them.

This is a truly bizarre interpretation of human behavior. People often feel intense grief or shame about things that are beyond their control. "Truly" feeling an emotion has nothing to do with behavior.

My father had no control over his illness. He felt emmense guilt and shame about it. As far as this goes:

Then people shouldn't have children if they don't have the adequate insurance or disposable income to be independant and let them live their own life.

Life is not so simple. In many cases people have children when they are in school, only to become financially independant later in life. Many times the reverse can be true as well. Families can loose benefits due to lay offs, market changes, natural disaster; the world is not so facile.

In my father's case, my mother was diagnosed with cancer. It financially bankrupted him trying to pay for the medical costs. After her death he was faced with the option of continuing his career, (which entailed extensive traveling,) and allowing his kids to be raised by strangers, or giving up his career to be a "full time parent, part time worker" as he often put it.


I don't like parents who support this idea that children should feel obligated to care for their parents. This is something they should choose if they like out of appreciation.

I do not believe that any one is arguing that the children are obligated to take care of their parents, but that it is the only viable option in these cases. Where there is no other possibility for help, it falls onto the children's shoulders.

No one is arguing that this is right, merely that it is.

Having just read it now, rather than quote it all: it touches upon 'pride' being a big problem. 'Unfit' in the sense of disparaging you as a caregiver.
emphasis added

I do not think that this is what you intended to write. I was unfit as a caregiver? In what way?

I understand this is due to pride and frustration: it doesn't excuse that, it is a momentary failure at parenting.

:giggle:

In the real human world, lifetimes are made up of momentary failures followed by momentary sucesses. To be a parent is to be in a constant flux: "momentary failures at parenting" followed by momentary sucesses at parenting. Such is life.

Here's what always bugs me about many of the arguments against "unfit parents." This argument is often used against disabled parents, gay couples, single parents, etc.

There is this conception of the Ideal Parents[tm], an afluent man and woman in a stable relationship which provide perfect guidance and opportunity for their children. I do not believe that these idols exist or have ever existed, outside of fiction. No parents are perfect. Every family requires sarifices across the board for the benefit of the family unit. This concept is more often embodied in other cultures where the group is considered more important than the individual. It is a difficult concept in the West where the individual is emphasized.

Couples sacrifice for each other. Parents sacrifice for their kids, and vice versa. Siblings sacrifice for each other.

My father sacrificed a career for us. After my mother died, his social calender consisted of exactly two nights out a year, Super Bowl Sunday and Texas/OU game in the fall. That was it. He never bought anything new for himself, always gave to us first. He never remarried as he worried about the negative effects a reconstituted family would have on us.

I sacrificed getting my first car, so my brother could attend his first semester of college. He sacrificed his social life later by taking a second job so that I could go to school later. These are the sacrifices that we choose to make, because it benefits the people we love.

When my Dad fell sick, I didn't go to college so that I could stay by his side. Was I obligated to? Not exactly. I was compelled to out of my love for him.

I can understand feeling shame at snapping, but doing so in response to being verbally berated is much more understandable to me than a person berating their child over their cooking to begin with.

Again it's not so easy as that. My description was a short one. In truth, he was critical, but as he had taught me to cook over my lifetime and we had enjoyed cooking together, I'm sure he was trying to be constructive. That was his intent. It was shaded with his frustration that he couldn't be in the kitchen to guide me anymore.

My response to him was proportional to my feelings about the larger situation we were in. It was not proportional to his comments. I said horrific things to him. It had more to due with my anger over him dying than it did with his attitude or actions. It was honest, but not really fair.

The shame you feel is probably rooted in feeling bad for not quickly forgiving his outburst and coming back, yet there is a cognitive distortion of feeling shame at doing something which is similarly forgivable (much more easily forgivable I think).

Thanks for the diagnosis. Really, even with hours of therapy by professionals no one has ever attempted to explain to me what I was/am feeling for me. That's my job, not yours, and is beyond presumptuous.

I am not making judgements about specific people.

As stated above, that might not be your intent, however these scenerios are not hypotheticals. They are real people and you are judging them. Specifically, they are real people who might be present. I urge you to consider this when responding in forums such as this.

You are right about the lack of real experience and love.

I feel that you are very young. I know that early on when I posted in forums such as these, I had a tendency toward sweeping generalizations of people. That was my worldview as I lacked experience. My generalizations tended more toward the Pollyanna end of the spectrum, and the inherent good of people rather than the bad.

This was as equally inaccurate a viewpoint for me to take as the other extreme.

The daughter in the post did not seem that way to me because she hated her mother.

You are correct, and I never stated anything to the contrary. I did not hate my father when I lashed out at him. I loved him, very, very, much. In fact it was the pain of loosing him, the pain of feeling abandoned, having to stare down the same cancer that took my mother in my only remaining parent, terror of facing the adult world without his guidance, anger at the entire world for my own personal slice of hell that I was living while so many others have it so much easier, all of these emotions were at play inside me and many more. I'm sure that girl had some of those as well as many other emotions individual to her and her relationship.

I would not dare to presume to know her heart, nor the heart of the mother who witnessed her daughter in such a state and was powerless to intercede.

I can see my own reflection in my fathers eyes, and remember his pain and try to understand.

[tyciol]

You may have not intended to make a direct comparison, however that is exactly what you did. Sweeping statements about individuals are not only usually short sighted in their scope, but often competley miss the mark, as often they focus on a small extreme rather than the overall perspective.I made neither a sweeping statement nor a direct statement, it was a statement about a kind of situation. One that does not include the type you're talking about.

People often feel intense grief or shame about things that are beyond their control. "Truly" feeling an emotion has nothing to do with behavior. My father had no control over his illness. He felt emmense guilt and shame about it.I said 'truly deep down' not merely truly. People who feel an emotion on the surface feel it truly, but it doesn't penetrate deeply enough to change their actions. This DOES have something to do with behaviour, because emotions that strongly affect people change their behaviour. People may not be able to control an illness, but they can control how they react to having it. Guilt/shame would be moreso about relying on others for help, however if that is great enough then it will lead them to reject that help. Considering that this is what your father was almost trying to do in his own way through rudeness, it is further evidence that my analogy was not fully applicable to your situation, because possibly this seemed the best way to give you a break, because if he didn't offend you then if he asked you might not take a break?

Life is not so simple. In many cases people have children when they are in school, only to become financially independant later in life. Many times the reverse can be true as well. Families can loose benefits due to lay offs, market changes, natural disaster; the world is not so facile.Thanks for the update. You are listing turnaround exceptions though: as trends go, if you are educated with money in the bank prior to having children, there is a greater likelyhood you will continue to be as they grow up, as opposed to an exceptional supermom who manages to juggle parenting/schooling/work simultaneously. These inspiring exceptions don't invalidate trends.

In my father's case, my mother was diagnosed with cancer. It financially bankrupted him trying to pay for the medical costs. After her death he was faced with the option of continuing his career, (which entailed extensive traveling,) and allowing his kids to be raised by strangers, or giving up his career to be a "full time parent, part time worker" as he often put it.Sounds like a tough choice. Being raised by strangers isn't the end of the world though, people always think they'll do a better job than strangers, it's hard to tell though.

I do not believe that any one is arguing that the children are obligated to take care of their parents, but that it is the only viable option in these cases. Where there is no other possibility for help, it falls onto the children's shoulders.I disagree, there are always other viable options. Childless people are somehow taken care of, so why can't these people use those same options? Why should parents get special caregivers just for procreating whereas nonprocreators do not? Is that in a child's best interest?

No one is arguing that this is right, merely that it is.Nobody has said it 'isn't'. I believe the article is true: these cases happen. The question is the morality of it. Arguing whether something 'is' seems to get offtopic. I think we're both guilty of arguing strawmen here. I simply figured people thought this is the way it should be... it is, but I don't think it needs to be.

I do not think that this is what you intended to write. I was unfit as a caregiver? In what way?I am not sure what I intended to write or what I meant to direct it at, to be honest... possibly I meant the parent's role as caregiver? I apologize for losing track.

In the real human world, lifetimes are made up of momentary failures followed by momentary sucesses. To be a parent is to be in a constant flux: "momentary failures at parenting" followed by momentary sucesses at parenting. Such is life.True. Outbursts like yelling are forgivable. Becoming a dependant and accepting a child's help before they have established themself is a constant flux of failure. Not applicable to your case because you sound like you chose to return to give care after establishing independance.

Here's what always bugs me about many of the arguments against "unfit parents." This argument is often used against disabled parents, gay couples, single parents, etc.I have nothing against these groups so long as they can make up for what they are potentially lacking in (piggy back rides, masculine/feminine rolemodel, multiple mentorships).

There is this conception of the Ideal Parents[tm], an afluent man and woman in a stable relationship which provide perfect guidance and opportunity for their children. I do not believe that these idols exist or have ever existed, outside of fiction. No parents are perfect. Every family requires sarifices across the board for the benefit of the family unit. This concept is more often embodied in other cultures where the group is considered more important than the individual. It is a difficult concept in the West where the individual is emphasized.This is not my conception. Rather than 'ideal' I'd say 'better' or 'more fit' or something. I don't believe in the concept of perfection so I can't visualize a perfect parent, but I do visualize many potential traits that would be good.

What I do disagree with is this 'families require sacrifices' thing. Cultural embodiment doesn't make something right. To me, the priority should be the wellbeing of a child, not mutual sacrifice for a family unit. This is because children don't consent to joining a family, whereas parents forcefully create one. The cause is in their hands so they should be the ones to bear responsibility.

Couples sacrifice for each other. Parents sacrifice for their kids, and vice versa. Siblings sacrifice for each other.Couples choose to be together, parents choose to be parents. Children may sacrifice for their parents or each other, that doesn't mean they should, that should be optional.

My father sacrificed a career for us. After my mother died, his social calender consisted of exactly two nights out a year, Super Bowl Sunday and Texas/OU game in the fall. That was it. He never bought anything new for himself, always gave to us first. He never remarried as he worried about the negative effects a reconstituted family would have on us.This is not selfless: parenting is its own reward. You get the happiness of having your children around you and the satisfaction of seeing their happy times, their hopes, and feeling pride due to what you put into helping them grow (last part is like gardening). Furthermore, if he didn't, he'd suffer from curiosity about what was happening to you or how some other couple might be raising his progeny. Basically, he didn't only sacrifice it for you, but also for his own emotional needs.

I sacrificed getting my first car, so my brother could attend his first semester of college. He sacrificed his social life later by taking a second job so that I could go to school later. These are the sacrifices that we choose to make, because it benefits the people we love.That's cool: you chose to make them. You do it out of love. Your brother doesn't 'need' college, but you wanted something better so you gave it to him, and vice versa. This is different from pressuring a child into caring for you instead of socializing like they should be, like with the girl in the example that I was responding to.

When my Dad fell sick, I didn't go to college so that I could stay by his side. Was I obligated to? Not exactly. I was compelled to out of my love for him.Thanks for the story: I wasn't arguing otherwise.

In truth, he was critical, but as he had taught me to cook over my lifetime and we had enjoyed cooking together, I'm sure he was trying to be constructive. That was his intent. It was shaded with his frustration that he couldn't be in the kitchen to guide me anymore.Okay I can see the context better now, I had misinterpreted due to lacking this information.

Thanks for the diagnosis. Really, even with hours of therapy by professionals no one has ever attempted to explain to me what I was/am feeling for me. That's my job, not yours, and is beyond presumptuous.What's next when you go beyond presumptuous? Anyway I had put in 'probably' (not "you feel X") so that means I'm just stating a surface opinion based on what I know. Now that I know more, I don't think that anymore. That's all people can really do, evaluate things ongoing as they learn more.

these scenerios are not hypotheticals. They are real people and you are judging them. Specifically, they are real people who might be present. I urge you to consider this when responding in forums such as this.Hypothetical scenarios are hypothetical. It's a method of generalizing about what I think are common problems and things which might receive pity that shouldn't. That doesn't mean my statement applies to any situation which might fit under the example, especially when there are disclaimers in the scenario which except them.

You are right about the lack of real experience and love.

I feel that you are very young.Youth is not the issue, lots of old men don't have bonds with people, lots of young men do. Bringing age into emotional expressions is immaterial.

I know that early on when I posted in forums such as these, I had a tendency toward sweeping generalizations of people. That was my worldview as I lacked experience. My generalizations tended more toward the Pollyanna end of the spectrum, and the inherent good of people rather than the bad.Making a stereotyping expression means I am talking about trends, there is a difference between that and generalizing a group, which I did not do, because I did not speak in an absolute. You need to make absolute statements to generalize.

I would not dare to presume to know her heart, nor the heart of the mother who witnessed her daughter in such a state and was powerless to intercede.I don't presume to know her heart, I am making an evaluation: when you punch the shit out of someone, you are filled with hate. Is it 'hate from the bottom of the heart'? Irrelevant question: 'heart' is just an expression, hate is an emotion and like all motions it ebbs and swells and is not permanent. Even hate of a moment is valid to me, it doesn't come from a void, it's based on ongoing disatisfaction manifested.

[Dingfod]

:tealdeer:

[ms_ann_thrope]

To me, the priority should be the wellbeing of a child, not mutual sacrifice for a family unit. This is because children don't consent to joining a family, whereas parents forcefully create one. The cause is in their hands so they should be the ones to bear responsibility.Awesome, the "I didn't ask to be born!" argument. :unemo:

[tyciol]

The statement is correct. People have ownership over things they create, but currently our society doesn't let people take ownership over people they create.

[ms_ann_thrope]

You should seriously consider moving to Sovereign's island. Seems that you would like it there.

[Petra]

With people getting older and older before they have kids, I can see this becoming quite epidemic. :(

[Qingdai]

Hey, I resemble that remark.
:oldlady:

[Sock Puppet]

Me too. But it has advantages, as well, such as being able to tell my own kid to get off my lawn.

[Crumb]

:chuckle:

[Demimonde]

As this thread was bumped, I gave it another glance. I realized something about my old Pollyanna days.

Back then I was always reaching out to the stupid inarticulate posters to try to bring them to enlightenment. Kinda like Anne Sullivan in The Miracle Worker

"W-A-T-E-R, water, it has a name! ....W-A-T-E-R!"

"Wah... Wah... WAAAAH!"

Now I realize that I don't come to forums to persuade people's minds, but to enrich my own.

[yguy]

People often feel intense grief or shame about things that are beyond their control. "Truly" feeling an emotion has nothing to do with behavior.

My father had no control over his illness. He felt immense guilt and shame about it.I'm sure he did, but not for good reason - which means he felt it for bad reason.

[Demimonde]

:whoosh:

Not at all what we were talking about. Freakin' weird observation considering all the material contained in this thread.

BTW no this does not mean that I am interested in having a conversation with you.

[yguy]

:whoosh:You have certainly missed my point, if only through lack of interest.Not at all what we were talking about. To be sure, I've never felt any obligation to stick to the thread topic. AFAIK, that's not unusual for :ff:ers.Freakin' weird observation considering all the material contained in this thread. Having skipped most of that, I can't very well comment on its "weirdness" WRT the rest of the thread. All I know is, it's a true statement.BTW no this does not mean that I am interested in having a conversation with you.Not my concern at the moment. If you are, you'll respond. If not, you won't. <shrug>

[Demimonde]

Okay, so you skipped most of this thread. Makes sense. Perhaps if you read any of it you may understand why I am uninterested in discussing my deceased father's emotional states or their foundations with you.

I assure you, bumping a thread filled with painful personal material and zeroing in on one stranger's comment is freakin' weird.

Fuck your haughy tone, as well as your "true statement."

Say it with me now "W-A-T..." Oh wait I said I wasn't going to do that anymore.

<<ignore>>