The Antithesis of the TIGER MOM?

[Heather in Neverland]

Since the tiger mom thread was so much fun let's talk about this one!

 

http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/parenting/the-opposite-of-a-tiger-mother-leaving-your-children-behind-2460982/

[Renee in NC]

Ummm, yeah. I had a mother like that, except I was 2 when she decided she didn't want to be a mom. In her defense, she was just 18 when she left (right after high school graduation.) I didn't see her again for almost 4 years, then it was once a year until I was 12. I think it gets *worse* from there, so I won't go into it. Believe it or not, we do have an okay relationship now that I am grown, but it is mostly superficial.

 

She may want to believe her sons are "fine", but I bet they aren't near as good as she wants to convince herself they are.

[KristinaBreece]

I was going to wait & see what other people said before I commented. I changed my mind. I think every mother has (or will have), at one point, have that fantasy of being free & unattached again. But I certainly don't think I could ever act on it.

[FaithManor]

My ex-sil would be the poster parent for this. Her response to anything that requires her to lift a finger is, "I shouldn't have to." She raises children like feral cats.

 

Of the three boys, two will turn out okay because though they left their dad's house for the fun, no rules, no supervision, no expectations, no standards house, they decided by 18 that they wanted to do something besides serve their mother...who does work for a living, but when at home, reclines on the couch and screams at them to cook her dinner, clean her room, go grocery shopping, fill her car with gas, yada, yada....she runs them like rented mules. She doesn't go to ANY school functions and she has repeatedly encouraged them to drop out of school.

 

She's real piece of work.

 

If any of the boys had inherited her nature, I shudder what to think would become of them. She has four brothers and everyone of them ended up as felons and deadbeat dads.

 

So, no...she hasn't run...she hasn't physically abandoned them. But, she has done everything but that and her presence in their lives is a huge negative. It would have been much better had she just left and not looked back.

 

Faith

Edited March 5, 2011 by FaithManor
left something out

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

I read this earlier and it made me cringe. Did someone force her to become pregnant? If not, then be responsible for your actions people! :glare: This is my same problem with people who want to have sex, but not deal with the natural consequences of it.

[JessReplanted]

I have to be honest - the article made me so angry that I had to stop reading it. It is so sad, and she is just selfish. Her kids may seem 'fine' now, but they are not, and they are going to have to deal with abandonment issues for the rest of their lives.

[Mama Anna]

She may want to believe her sons are "fine", but I bet they aren't near as good as she wants to convince herself they are.

 

:iagree:

 

I can't fully express my total disagreement with the wisdom or rightness of what these women have decided to do. I just begin getting all emotional, so I'll simply go on record as disagreeing with them.

 

Mama Anna

[mommymilkies]

I have to be honest - the article made me so angry that I had to stop reading it. It is so sad, and she is just selfish. Her kids may seem 'fine' now, but they are not, and they are going to have to deal with abandonment issues for the rest of their lives.

 

"After a lengthy custody battle and two years of joint custody, she realized that her ex-husband (a pilot with an erratic schedule) wasn't going to change, and her situation wasn't going to change, unless she decided to change things for herself. "I realized that by being so nurturing, I was in some ways keeping my children from growing to their potential," she says. "We talked about it for months and we prepared together, not really knowing what being 3,000 miles apart might look like or feel like. ""

 

Ah, so you were a good mother and the only other choice is to move 3,000 miles away from your children. :001_huh:

 

Or this gem:

 

""I have been a mother since I was 20," she points out. "I did not have the life a normal 20 year old would have. While I don't regret that, I knew that I now have the opportunity to reconnect with who I might have been then, but with all the tools and skill sets I have learned through motherhood. I have the unique opportunity most women don't get to have, of being able to truly create the life I wish to have, do something in the world that makes a difference, and model this kind of independence for my children.""

 

I became a mother at 17. I don't see age as being relevant. I know many older parents who have done this same thing and complaining that they lost their best years to having kids. Maybe that's something you should have thought about beforehand?Somehow, abandoning my children and rarely talking on Skype just is not the sort of "independence" that I see as healthy. There are thousands, if not millions, of us abandoned children out there who can tell you all about that one. This disgusts me.

Edited June 22, 2013 by mommymilkies

[Stacy in NJ]

then I don't think the situation is any more damaging then when a father leaves and a mother retains custody. No doubt, these women are selfish with no sense of a greater duty to family, but they're no worse than some men. That said, as a mother I'm horrified.

[Terabith]

Well, I read the article, and I don't think it was nearly as bad as it sounds in the headlines. She didn't give up being a mom. She gave up having full custody.

 

She was a very involved, attachment parenting mother for ten years. She did not abandon her kids. When she got divorced, she simply did not become the full time custodial parent. She says they are fine, but then, when she is with the kids, she is able to be fully present. She said, "In my part-time motherhood, I get concentrated blocks of time when I can be that 1950s mother we idealize who was waiting in an apron with fresh cookies when we got off the school bus and wasn't too busy for anything we needed until we went to bed. I go to every parent-teacher conference; I am there for performances and baseball games."

 

That is not a choice I would make, but I dont' think that is abandonment at all.

 

Three years ago, she moved 3,000 miles away and stays in touch via long distance. That is more like abandonment, but she is still a part of their lives, and she still visits them. Moreover, both the reason she moved 3,000 miles away and the reason she has less contact with them than she likes is because (according to her journal at Literary Mama is because her ex-husband had made things very very difficult, both during their marriage and during the period of joint custody.

 

I think the title is polarizing, and that the truth is more complex than is easily conveyed in a headline.

 

ETA: This post explains a bit about why she did what she did. http://www.literarymama.com/columns/motherhoodfromafar/archives/2008/countdown.html

Edited March 5, 2011 by Terabith

[FO4UR]

Why would she want to compare herself to dead-beat dads, as if it makes it better b/c she can claim gender equality?:confused:

 

She leaves her kids b/c she wants "1950's mother type moments?" I can't even form coherent words to describe my thoughts and feelings...

[Renee in NC]

then I don't think the situation is any more damaging then when a father leaves and a mother retains custody. No doubt, these women are selfish with no sense of a greater duty to family, but they're no worse than some men. That said, as a mother I'm horrified.

 

I'll agree, but I feel the same way about a father who leaves and abandons his children. I went through a tremendous amount of guilt when we left ds in NC 18 months ago. It was his choice - one we gave him at 16yo. However, I felt an incredible guilt that still rises sometimes now.

 

ETA: I can't imagine doing it because I wanted to - I didn't have many other choices!

Edited March 5, 2011 by Renee in FL

[Terabith]

She didn't leave in order to have 1950's moments. She was surprised by that result. She had tried to take them with her, but the court forced her back. Reading her journal, it sounds like it was a brutally hard thing she did. But, I've never been in that situation. And she is still in constant communication with her kids. I don't know. I don't know if they feel abandoned. Her son says things are better now, that their lives are more settled. They are emotionally connected to their mother, but their lives aren't constantly being physically disrupted. Their father sounds like a piece of work, but their uncle lives with them and is the main caregiver.

 

I don't know. She seems to feel a lot of guilt; I don't think this was easy for her. I just hate to judge by a headline.

[Sara R]

I don't see this as the antithesis of the Tiger Mom. The opposite of Tiger Mom would be a radical unschooler, right? Still a hands-on involved mom, but without the intense focus on goals that characterizes Tiger Mom. By giving up full-time custody of her children by choice, this "Hiroshima Mom" seems to taking herself out of the "mom" category. I mean, mom generally is understood to be a full-time kind of thing.

 

I thought you were going to post "Why I Don't Force My Kids to Say 'Please'...or Walk on Schedule" by Mayim Bialik (and the clever response from Mompetition).

[cjbeach]

I agree with all of the points made, but I also think some people are just not cut out for parenting.

I had a neighbor who (before we met) couldn't wait to get pregnant. She read tons and tons of pregnancy books. Then she had the baby and her world fell apart. She just simply found she should never have had a child.

She admitted that she is a selfish person and did not like that so much of her time was consumed by her child, she couldn't handle the child and relied heavily on others. She was annoyed about the money the child cost buy simultaneously spent oodles on her (the best clothes, toys, etc). It was all for "show." The child became her real-life Barbie doll. The parents had decided at her birth the dd was going to go to all of the "best" schools and become a doctor. At the least an engineer. I once went to a Xmas cookie exchange at her home and to watch the 15 min of mother-child interaction before the father whisked her out to movies was comical. The mother turned into Mother of the Year in front of family (in front of me, the neighbor who had to take the daughter in so many, many times when the mother simply couldn't handle her). If the father went out of town her family had to come in town to stay with her to watch the child. Oh I could go on....

For the father, the dd was the sun, the moon, and the stars. I'm not sure if he was overcompensating for the mother OR the mother was withdrawling her affection for the child out of jealousy (due to the father's outpouring into the child).

I secretly used to think the family would be better off if the mother left.

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

I thought you were going to post "Why I Don't Force My Kids to Say 'Please'...or Walk on Schedule" by Mayim Bialik

 

:blink: :glare:

 

(and the clever response from Mompetition).

 

:smilielol5::lol:

[Anne in CA]

I really hope that these women are not counting on a book deal like "Tiger Mom", because, unlike "Tiger Mom", they are not unusual in our culture. They are selfish and lazy, which is pretty common in custodial parents and noncustodial parents alike.

 

These women did have the courage to walk away from the children they didn't intend to parent full time and leave them with someone who presumably wanted to parent them full time. IMO this is better than having full custody of kids that you park in front of the TV and encourage them to spend all their time at their friends houses. I know some of these women. They would rather die than pay for a piano lesson, or an after school activity. They just don't want to pay child support. So I have a small :glare: amount of respect for them.

[Renee in NC]

I really hope that these women are not counting on a book deal like "Tiger Mom", because, unlike "Tiger Mom", they are not unusual in our culture. They are selfish and lazy, which is pretty common in custodial parents and noncustodial parents alike.

 

These women did have the courage to walk away from the children they didn't intend to parent full time and leave them with someone who presumably wanted to parent them full time. IMO this is better than having full custody of kids that you park in front of the TV and encourage them to spend all their time at their friends houses. I know some of these women. They would rather die than pay for a piano lesson, or an after school activity. They just don't want to pay child support. So I have a small :glare: amount of respect for them.

 

You do have a point there that I hadn't considered. I know that my mother wouldn't have been a good mother to me full-time. It just isn't in her nature. So, yes, I guess I can see the other side - I probably was better off with my Dad and his family.

[justamouse]

Ohh this is such a steamer.

 

But it shines a light on a glaring double standard: When a man chooses not to be a full-time parent, it's acceptable—or, at least, accepted. But when a woman decides to do so, it's abandonment.

We accept that men leave their parental duties? I disagree. We deal with it, we do what is needed, but I don't think it's ever accepted.

 

Sometimes I think a woman does lose herself in her roles as mother and wife. I think the pendulum can swing in the other direction and they think the only way to save themselves is to leave. They become martyrs to motherhood-which isn't healthy no matter how we praise them for it. But this woman didn't even seek balance. She just dropped the responsibility completely. I don't know. It's so far from what I can imagine.

Edited March 5, 2011 by justamouse

[GWOB]

I thought you were going to post "Why I Don't Force My Kids to Say 'Please'...or Walk on Schedule" by Mayim Bialik (and the clever response from Mompetition).

 

My life will be forever enriched from reading the response. :lol:

[katilac]

I don't think the mother always needs to be the custodial parent; I don't fault her for that. But she herself calls her ex-husband disconnected, abusive, controlling, and then thinks it's a good idea to give him custody and move far, far away? That, I cannot imagine.

[mom2denj]

I was going to wait & see what other people said before I commented. I changed my mind. I think every mother has (or will have), at one point, have that fantasy of being free & unattached again. But I certainly don't think I could ever act on it.

I can honestly say that I have never ever had that feeling. My kids are 18, 17, 14 & 4. I think I am the opposite. I always want to be with mine. I think this stems from my mom never being around. :sad: She was a single mom who worked full time and went out on weekends. I grew up with babysitters.

 

I saw this lady on the today show and I just do not get it!!! She did say that she knew she never wanted kids and then she had them. They are her, as well as the father's, responsibility at that point! No matter how she justifies it, she gave up on them. Those poor boys!

[Mommy22alyns]

I thought you were going to post "Why I Don't Force My Kids to Say 'Please'...or Walk on Schedule" by Mayim Bialik (and the clever response from Mompetition).

 

 

Ooh, thanks for the link to the response! :lol:

[Laurie4b]

I saw this lady on the today show and I just do not get it!!! She did say that she knew she never wanted kids and then she had them. [/b]. Those poor boys!

 

nice thing to have your mom say on national tv.

[ColoradoMom]

I have to say I like the Tiger Mom better. A LOT better. I have never thought about leaving my kids behind so I cannot relate to this at all. In fact, when I was doing my PhD in grad school I was told that if I stayed in the program I would pretty much never see my kids.

 

I left the program the next day and finished grad school somewhere else.

[eternalknot]

Well, I read the article, and I don't think it was nearly as bad as it sounds in the headlines. She didn't give up being a mom. She gave up having full custody.

 

{snip}

 

That is not a choice I would make, but I dont' think that is abandonment at all.

 

 

 

:iagree:

[Miss Sherry]

I was going to wait & see what other people said before I commented. I changed my mind. I think every mother has (or will have), at one point, have that fantasy of being free & unattached again. But I certainly don't think I could ever act on it.

I'm not so sure that every mother has or will have the fantasy of being free and unattached again. The closest I have come to having that fantasy was thinking how great it would be to go spend just one night alone in a motel to get some uninterrupted sleep and then come home rested. That was in the days when my children were young and keeping me up at night and my dh was having some issues with his prostate that were also keeping us up at night. But wanting to be completely unattached from my children ? No.

[amy g.]

I really liked Blossom's article and did not like the parody. Then again, I did write a paper titled, " Force Flowers, Not Children" and my one year old does latch on and off fifteen times a night.

 

Modeling good behavior is the ONLY thing that has worked for Miss Bossy.I may have to change her name since she has gone from monster toddler to delightful, generous preschooler.

[Ibbygirl]

She may want to believe her sons are "fine", but I bet they aren't near as good as she wants to convince herself they are.

 

:iagree::iagree:

 

I read this in the comments section after the article and thought the poster was spot on.

 

"All you are giving your child is an IDEAL. You don't give them a relationship with the real you, you pretend to be this Mother person with a capitol M and a special attitude. The rest of your life you are the real you, but when you interface with your kids you become Mother.

 

No emotional intimacy

 

No emotional connection

 

No vulnerability

 

How is a child going to grow up and make real connections to other people when they were never allowed to make a connection to their mother? They will think that the appropriate way to treat other people is to play a role. It's unhealthy."

[Mary in VA]

I was going to wait & see what other people said before I commented. I changed my mind. I think every mother has (or will have), at one point, have that fantasy of being free & unattached again. But I certainly don't think I could ever act on it.

 

Nope, never had that fantasy and my kids are 20 and 16, so I'm at the tail end of being a full-time mom. But then I got married at 29 and had my first dd at 32. I was more than ready to stay at home with my baby :001_smile: And the grass has NEVER been greener somewhere else in my mind. I know I currently have the best job I have ever had and am sorry it will be ending shortly.

 

Mary

[LibraryLover]

Oh. This just makes my heart hurt.

 

So many needs.

[Crissy]

I think every mother has (or will have), at one point, have that fantasy of being free & unattached again.

 

If you mean dreaming about they day that they are independent and successful in their adult lives, I agree. I do think about the days when my boys will be on their own and how different my life will be.

 

If you mean leaving it all behind to be free and unattached, I disagree. Not every mother dreams of that.

[silliness7]

She may want to believe her sons are "fine", but I bet they aren't near as good as she wants to convince herself they are.

 

AMEN to that! Keep telling yourself everything's fine, honey. I think she's too full of herself to see straight. And what's with the 1950's mom thing. It's like she wants to be the *perfect* mom but she can't because nobody is perfect. So she left, and now her children can't see that she's not June Cleaver. She can just act like her on the occasional visit. That's not mothering.

 

The article said:

"When a man chooses not to be a full-time parent, it's acceptable—or, at least, accepted. But when a woman decides to do so, it's abandonment."

 

This is not true. My dh's dad divorced his mom and moved out of state when he was 9. My dh visited his dad a couple of summers. My dh calls it abandonment, plain and simple. He is still working through a lot of cr&p as a result of this. It is wrong to say that if men can get away with leaving their children then women should be able to too because it is a lie. Men don't get away with it and I'm sure my dh isn't the only broken man to attest to that. Gimme a break!

 

I really feel badly for the kids in the article.

[Ibbygirl]

I thought you were going to post "Why I Don't Force My Kids to Say 'Please'...or Walk on Schedule" by Mayim Bialik (and the clever response from Mompetition).

 

The response article was hilarious!! :lol::lol:

 

I loved these....

 

"My kids are fine. You may not think so, but you are wrong. Confused yet? You are still wrong."

 

"Who needs guidance? Stepping in to intervene and teach my kid the joys of sharing will only lead to further parenting later on. "

 

"Polite is for fancy schmancy society and it's more important that a child's ego does not get bruised because you force a "thank you" when handing him a strip of organic soy jerky. My husband and I practice "please" and "thank you", and we hope that in time, perhaps by middle school our children will copy us exactly without being forced to do so. When I want my husband to help out with the dishes, asking, "Would you please mind terribly getting up off your ass and cleaning up this mess, thank you" we are modeling manners."

 

"I have heard through my homing pigeons that there are people out their that force children to conform to society or start on the path to adulthood. What they don't realize is that they are laying a path for future foundational independence. "

[Ibbygirl]

 

I really feel badly for the kids in the article.

 

:iagree::iagree: Me too. Why is it that the children always suffer for the sins of the parents? :( :crying:

[Matryoshka]

Well, I read the article, and I don't think it was nearly as bad as it sounds in the headlines. She didn't give up being a mom. She gave up having full custody.

 

She was a very involved, attachment parenting mother for ten years. She did not abandon her kids. When she got divorced, she simply did not become the full time custodial parent. She says they are fine, but then, when she is with the kids, she is able to be fully present. She said, "In my part-time motherhood, I get concentrated blocks of time when I can be that 1950s mother we idealize who was waiting in an apron with fresh cookies when we got off the school bus and wasn't too busy for anything we needed until we went to bed. I go to every parent-teacher conference; I am there for performances and baseball games."

 

No, those are two different people mentioned in the article that you're mixing into one. The author of the Hiroshima book, Rahna Reiko Rizzuto, left her children when her oldest kid was around 6yo. She was never an attachment-parenting Waldorf mom, and honestly it doesn't sound like she was ever into the mom thing (her preschool-aged kids come visit her in Japan and she realizes she "didn't want to be a full-time mom anymore"). But she is the one who plays at being a 1950's mom and goes to their baseball games.

 

The ex-attachment parenting mom who now lives 3,000 miles away from her kids is Talyaa Liera, author of Literary Mama and now a spiritual adviser (!). She left when her kids were much older and one was already out of the house. She sounds like she burnt-out. She says by being "too nurturing" she wasn't allowing her kids to reach their full potential. But I'm still not getting why she had to move 3000 miles away, leaving them with another parent that's barely there (a pilot), to be able to back off that. :confused:

[Peela]

I feel sorry for her that she doesn't enjoy motherhood as much as she could.

I feel sorry for her that her life is such that being with her kids appears to get between her and what she loves to do, and she chose her career. Many women manage to find a better way to balance both than moving so far away from their kids.

But it takes all types and it isn't as extreme as the title said. I feel sorry for the 7yo but the others might well be able to cope ok.

What's better- that she stay and resent it or she go and is able to be totally present when she has them?

I feel sorry for her that she didn't want to even be a mum- and sorry for her kids if they ever, ever hear that- but I don't think she is evil or the worst mother out there. Plenty of mothers behave much worse yet stay physically close to their children. Plenty are abusive because they feel trapped and dont know how to meet their own needs while doing the intense job of mothering.

Given healthy community and support, I think most kids could survive such a situation fairly intact. Considering the epidemic of fatherless children out there I cant see that it is much worse- especially since she was there for the first, most important years.

I feel she is probably in some denial about the impact on her children and also about her own need to do what she wants...but in the big scheme of things....it doesn't upset me much.

My aunt told her daughters than now they were grown up she wanted her life back and she wasnt available for babysitting or much at all. When my uncle died, she became very self centred and still is. I wonder if she could have perhaps balanced her own needs more while she had her daughters still at home, so that she wouldn't feel so much resentment and need to push them away now? I know they are hurt by her attitude and they are adults.

People do what they do.

[Ibbygirl]

What's better- that she stay and resent it or she go and is able to be totally present when she has them?

 

You see, that was the thing for me with the article. She wasn't totally present when she was with them, she was role playing. The kids don't really ever get to see their "real" mother.

[happi duck]

There was a custody 'battle'. Mom wasn't interested in custody. Does this mean the dad wasn't either?

 

I know moms that aren't cut out to stay at home but they don't leave!

[Mad Jenny Flint]

I find this woman despicable. With a capital spicable.

[Dmmetler]

What's frustrating to me is that I have a friend who made the mistake of leaving for a few days to decide whether to stay in her marriage (after discovering her husband was in the middle of what apparently had been multiple affairs), at the encouragement of her husband.

 

When she got back, her husband had sued for divorce and sole custody of their daughter, touting his wife's abandonment. For the next four months, she saw her daughter exactly twice, both in public situations, because her husband wouldn't let her see her child-but in court, this was played as "see, she doesn't care". She was raked over the coals in court. The fact that she'd stayed home to care for her daughter (who was born prematurely and has an immune system deficiency) was seen as being "lazy" and "unmotivated", not a caring mother. The fact that she had chosen not to send the child to preschool was seen as being uninterested in the child's education, when actually she had been VERY involved in making sure her daughter had early learning opportunities, and her reasoning for not doing preschool was based around her child's health.

 

She currently has the typical "joint legal custody, but not physical custody" visitation schedule-one night a week and every other weekend, plus a few weeks over school holidays. She's the parent who is there for every school event. She has a work-from-home schedule which would let her be there after school for her daughter. And meanwhile, her daughter is in the after school program from 6:00 am to 6:00 PM except for the days she's with mom, because darling "I'm a good daddy" insisted on having full custody, and won't even let his ex-wife BABYSIT her own child after school. But he doesn't seem to mind her caring for her daughter when the girl is sick-which is happening frequently, since being in school/daycare is very, very hard on a child with her medical needs, and dad isn't being particularly careful with diet or supplements, both of which were helping to keep the child healthy when mom still lived at home.

 

Reading about a mom who just chose to walk away, and claims that "she's a better mom because of it" makes me mad.

[Mejane]

Sometimes I think a woman does lose herself in her roles as mother and wife. I think the pendulum can swing in the other direction and they think the only way to save themselves is to leave.

 

This. I could never imagine leaving either, but I can see a woman with poor coping skills doing it. No one prepares you for how hard motherhood is. Some women are not cut out for the sacrifice required; unfortunately, they don't realize that until the deed is done.

[Kim in Appalachia]

I read this article this morning, and I am in shock that the writer tried to paint the woman in a positive light. But I guess since she is an academic and successful, it is seen as ok and even good that she abandoned her kids. If she were poor, or abandoned them for a drug habit or something less respectable, she would be vilified. I guess it's good that she didn't drown them or in some other way physically harm them. Those kids will most likely never really respect her.

[TheApprentice]

Anger was my first response, then sorrow for her children, because they did not choose her for their mother. She wanted to be a mother "4" TIMES.

 

Speaks for volumes for the "ME" society in which we live.:thumbdown:

[Heather in WI]

I saw this lady on the today show and I just do not get it!!! She did say that she knew she never wanted kids and then she had them.

 

I saw her on The Today Show, too, and she came across very unsympathetically. Her whole thing was how she realized in Japan that she had "lost herself" and that she had never really wanted to be a mother. I think some people are confusing the women in the article; it is about two different women. The first mom didn't have any issues with the dad (at least what she stated on tv). In fact, she thanked her former husband for encouraging her to go to Japan.

 

"How do any of us decide to leave the people we love?"

This gets me. Love is not some wishy-washy feeling. It is action. Do I love doing 3 loads of laundry every day, changing diapers, potty training, wiping noses, or reading the same inane book one hundred times? Not really. But, this is love. Love is being patient, kind, and gentle when I feel frazzled and burnt out. I know this time will soon pass. I know I'm raising human beings and everything I do right now is affecting the man that my boys will become. I certainly don't want to raise men that believe it's ok to walk away from their families to pursue their own goals or to find themselves!!!

 

Sara R, oh my gosh! I was :lol: after reading the Mompetition response!!! Thanks for the giggle!

[Ester Maria]

Sometimes, for some people, to leave some situations in which they don't feel good is the least of all possible evils. It's still an evil, of course. But life with continuous resentment, self-hate projected onto her own family members in some way, bitterness, "searching herself" and feeling hopeless in that she's lost and is living a life she doesn't want, and a whole lot of confusing and negative feelings thrown in the mix, would maybe be significantly worse. She might have exploded in some really bad way, too, like many of those "calm family people" for whom all is shiny and good on the outside that one day just commit something horrible. Especially if she already has a slightly "unnatural" lack of empathy, for example. Maybe it really was for the best, knowing herself, her impulses and ways of thinking, to leave.

 

This way, by opting to distance herself, she maybe did make a bad choice, but a one that is ultimately the least bad of all. I don't think we can really know what happens in other people's heads and hearts. It's a choice I could never make, but I can imagine it being legitimate in many situations, even if, of course, with many very real and very sad side-effects... which ultimately make the kids suffer.

But kids suffering from a lack of a serious emotional connection to their mother is still a whole lot better than kids dead, kids abused, kids breathing the atmosphere of resentment and "you destroyed my life" at home, etc. In many ways, kids might be better off with her present less and she might be better off and with a clearer "head" outside of the world in which she felt entrapped.

 

I'm not "excusing" her - but in some cases, it maybe is for the best. In some cases, even the "best" option is a very sad one. :(

[FaithManor]

I do agree with Ester Maria. As I said in my earlier post, my ex-sil is such a horrible, horrible mother and so emotionally abusive to her children, plus resentful of the fact that they were ever born, that she has done far, far more damage to them by remaining than if she had walked away and never looked back. Her two eldest, now adults, have even said this to her! Of course, they didn't realize that when they chose to leave their dad in their teens and go to mom's so they could live without rules and expectations. Unfortunately, there has been a tremendous hurt created in their lives that they must now overcome.

 

Truly, they would have been better off if she had fled and in such a way that it was not an option for them to run to her home when they didn't like their father's rules.

 

Faith

[Heather in WI]

Well, you're absolutely right, Ester Maria and Faith.

 

I suppose if the alternative is Andrea Yates or terrible emotional abuse, then it probably is better if the mom walks away.

 

These two particular moms bug me though. They seem to be really selfish, and are presenting their choices as valid for anyone who feels unfulfilled. One even calls herself a "spiritual advisor". Did you see her website? :tongue_smilie:

[GWOB]

Sometimes, for some people, to leave some situations in which they don't feel good is the least of all possible evils. It's still an evil, of course. But life with continuous resentment, self-hate projected onto her own family members in some way, bitterness, "searching herself" and feeling hopeless in that she's lost and is living a life she doesn't want, and a whole lot of confusing and negative feelings thrown in the mix, would maybe be significantly worse. She might have exploded in some really bad way, too, like many of those "calm family people" for whom all is shiny and good on the outside that one day just commit something horrible. Especially if she already has a slightly "unnatural" lack of empathy, for example. Maybe it really was for the best, knowing herself, her impulses and ways of thinking, to leave.

 

This way, by opting to distance herself, she maybe did make a bad choice, but a one that is ultimately the least bad of all. I don't think we can really know what happens in other people's heads and hearts. It's a choice I could never make, but I can imagine it being legitimate in many situations, even if, of course, with many very real and very sad side-effects... which ultimately make the kids suffer.

But kids suffering from a lack of a serious emotional connection to their mother is still a whole lot better than kids dead, kids abused, kids breathing the atmosphere of resentment and "you destroyed my life" at home, etc. In many ways, kids might be better off with her present less and she might be better off and with a clearer "head" outside of the world in which she felt entrapped.

 

I'm not "excusing" her - but in some cases, it maybe is for the best. In some cases, even the "best" option is a very sad one. :(

 

:iagree: I was raised by a mom who just wasn't ready to be a mom. I cannot even begin to explain all the issues that has caused me. Sure, the children of these two women will almost certainly have to deal with resentment and maybe even abandonment, but it could be much worse. I don't agree with the choices of these women at all. I really dislike the glorification of their choices in this article. However, they could have caused much more grief and anguish by staying.

[melissel]

I read this in the comments section after the article and thought the poster was spot on.

 

"All you are giving your child is an IDEAL. You don't give them a relationship with the real you, you pretend to be this Mother person with a capitol M and a special attitude. The rest of your life you are the real you, but when you interface with your kids you become Mother.

 

No emotional intimacy

 

No emotional connection

 

No vulnerability

 

How is a child going to grow up and make real connections to other people when they were never allowed to make a connection to their mother? They will think that the appropriate way to treat other people is to play a role. It's unhealthy."

 

I'm confused, why does it have to be a role she's playing? Sometimes I put on an apron and bake cookies and have 1950s mom moments with my kids, and that's definitely not my everyday persona--but sometimes it happens that I'm feeling traditional, and sometimes I'm feeling like taking them driving in the car with all the windows open, singing pop songs. It doesn't mean I'm not actually enjoying the activities or feeling love and connection through them. I can identify with the feelings of having more connection to give my kids when I'm not burnt out from whatever else burns me out. I don't think it's necessarily a falsehood that she's giving them, and I don't think we'd say that a non-custodial father was giving his kids no emotional intimacy, no emotional connection, and no vulnerability when he's interacting with his kids during his custodial time. I think we have a lot of stepmoms on the board who would take issue with saying something like that.

 

 

Sometimes, for some people, to leave some situations in which they don't feel good is the least of all possible evils. It's still an evil, of course. But life with continuous resentment, self-hate projected onto her own family members in some way, bitterness, "searching herself" and feeling hopeless in that she's lost and is living a life she doesn't want, and a whole lot of confusing and negative feelings thrown in the mix, would maybe be significantly worse. She might have exploded in some really bad way, too, like many of those "calm family people" for whom all is shiny and good on the outside that one day just commit something horrible. Especially if she already has a slightly "unnatural" lack of empathy, for example. Maybe it really was for the best, knowing herself, her impulses and ways of thinking, to leave.

 

This way, by opting to distance herself, she maybe did make a bad choice, but a one that is ultimately the least bad of all. I don't think we can really know what happens in other people's heads and hearts. It's a choice I could never make, but I can imagine it being legitimate in many situations, even if, of course, with many very real and very sad side-effects... which ultimately make the kids suffer.

But kids suffering from a lack of a serious emotional connection to their mother is still a whole lot better than kids dead, kids abused, kids breathing the atmosphere of resentment and "you destroyed my life" at home, etc. In many ways, kids might be better off with her present less and she might be better off and with a clearer "head" outside of the world in which she felt entrapped.

 

I'm not "excusing" her - but in some cases, it maybe is for the best. In some cases, even the "best" option is a very sad one. :(

 

:iagree: I've read Rahna Reiko Rizzuto's story before, and while I don't understand her thinking and could never do what she's done, I think FAR more damage could be done by a mother like this staying in the home and traditional family structure. Has anyone read the research on how maternal depression affects children? How about maternal rage? It's definitely not the ideal scenario, but as Faith also pointed out, the children growing up with a mother who just really, really, very badly wants to be somewhere else are not benefiting at all from having her home with them. IMO, true selfishness would be keeping those children with you and "playing happy families" for the sake of appearances rather than doing what's hardest but better for everyone, knowing the hits you're going to take in society and culture and court.