Just when you thought it was safe to read this thread…
If you had a child with autism, would you blame them for not being affectionate? Would you deem them uncaring and selfish because they didn’t talk to you? Of course not. It may be frustrating and painful, but the situation is out of the child’s control. What would you think of a DIL who complained about a MIL being rude, hateful, a liar, manipulating, etc., but it turned out the MIL had Alzheimer’s or dementia or some other mental illness responsible for the hurtful behavior? You’d want to slap that DIL and tell her to grow up, right? Well, I wish this author would show as much compassion for mentally ill DILs.
I can understand the pain and frustration of dealing with a DIL with mental illness and the worry and concern you’d have for your son and gc’s living with her. You might even have to distance or entirely remove yourself from the situation for your own mental health. However, I think the mental illness would preclude the DIL, no matter how outrageous and hurtful the behavior, from being categorized as a Toxic DIL.
The author relays the story of Paulo and Maggie. Maggie is from a dysfunctional home and Paulo and his folks initially wanted to rescue Maggie yet they soon realized she was “a complex, anguished, mentally ill person who would never escape from the way of her parents.” Maggie is controlling, abusive, runs up debt. I’m not arguing that her behavior was anything else. Paulo becomes cutoff from his parents. Sometimes the dad wants to “threaten them both with dismemberment {with an axe} for their heinous crimes against the family.” Ok, probably a little bit of hyperbole employed to show how frustrated and hurt the parents were, so I’ll excuse the dismemberment imagery, but Maggie is admittedly mentally ill! She cannot be guilty of “heinous crimes” – heinous behavior, maybe, but not crimes. And doing what you need to to help your mentally ill spouse, shouldn’t be characterized as a crime! (unless, of course it is an actual crime – I don’t justify stealing, murder, vandalism, etc. to help out your ill spouse, but cutting out your relatives, if that’s what it takes for some reason, then so be it.)
“On top of all this, Maggie would occasionally overdose on pills in what appeared to be a fake suicide attempt.” I thought we had gotten past, in 2010, characterizing suicide attempts as ploys for attention. Every suicide attempt should be thought of as serious. Paulo does divorce Maggie but they stay entangled to a degree. “Then, a few months after the divorce, Paulo received the most stunning news he had ever had. Maggie had been found dead in her apartment [OD].” Since the poor woman eventually succeeded in ending her life, I think we can safely assume her earlier attempts were not fake. I can’t say that with absolute certainty, of course, but I say give the dead woman the benefit of the doubt not to mention a little pity and compassion.
Then there’s Jeff and Katie. “A psychiatrist told Jeff that Katie has something called Borderline Personality Disorder…people who never bonded with their mothers…learn to fabricate new personalities… very artful liars…often homosexuals [WHY was this tidbit included or relevant? Way to insult the homosexual community!!!].. and alcoholics and drug addicts…frequent and inappropriate displays of anger.” I do feel sorry for a spouse and ILs on the receiving end of a BPD’s behavior, but isn’t the BPD person herself the bigger victim? She can’t get away from herself. But no, “Jeff had got himself into a terrible situation, and by getting himself into it, he had got his folks into it, too.” Nice job marginalizing the mentally ill, because they aren’t marginalized enough in our society.
I do find it ironic that elsewhere in the book the author speculates that her son and DIL might be BPD themselves. Accepting the unscientific cause of the illness above (never bonded with mom), this means the author is admitting she may not have bonded with her son. So just maybe some of the alienation can be laid at her feet?
The author references a report published by the British Psychological Society’s London Conference of 1999 which identifies the three most frequent reasons for DILs not liking their MILs. Then she goes on to say, “As I have studied the subject of MILs and DILS, I have concluded that the list of reasons they don’t get along better is much longer and more complicated than might be indicated by the British Psychological Society’s report.” Yes, she has certainly done some very objective, large-scale, completely unbiased studies. After all, she’s been “a concert pianist, a college professor a Parisian model, and the wife of a widely known clergyman.” Her insights are simply bound to be more accurate than a bunch of British Psychologists.
