WiseWomenUnite.com

A friend whose son just got married said she is reading "A Son Is a Son Till He Gets a Wife". Anyone heard of it, it's gotten blasted on Amazon. It deals with "gasp" difficult DIL's.

Great Title! Maybe we should write "A MIL Is A MIL Until You Push Her Off a Cliff!" Just kidding...LOL!

I didn't know there was a book out but the whole saying (which my former sister in law taught me) is

A son is a son until he has a wife, a daughter is a daughter for the rest of her life.

I'll check out the book, thanks for the head's up.

KG

(OK...so I have a warped sense of humor...)

I would love to read this, but I'm afraid DS/DIL would find it somehow and I'd be in BIG trouble!

Why is it getting bad reviews?  From DILs?

Naughty Pam has been contemplating putting my copy of "Toxic In Laws" on the book shelf anytime the in laws come over.  She's usually in the corner.

I checked out the reviews, they are pretty poor, overall.

LOL Luise!  It sounds like you're running on all 8 cylinders again!  ;D  :D  :D

They seem to be from DIL's., Surprise, surprise. I'd love to read a good" how to " book on how to navigate this process. 8). Luise I love your book title!

Quote from: Doe on November 14, 2011, 07:13:56 PM
LOL Luise!  It sounds like you're running on all 8 cylinders again!  ;D  :D  :D

Methinks she's cooking on 16.  Like a Bugati.

(http://www.automotoportal.com/media/images/vijesti/060711010.jpg)

Oh Luise...you were funny.....  Some dils may even ask for a magic wand for Christmas to make us disappear lol.....would be better than pushing us off the cliff.

Luise is back!

Love

Luise, as usual, you take the cake!

I heard about this book about a year ago and read it.  It is totally offensive.  If I were related to anyone with a mental illness and ran into this woman, I'd slap her silly.  She may indeed have a DIL from hell, but the complete lack of objectivity and total denial of her own contributions to the problem make her an unsympathetic character.  I finished reading the book convinced her editor or publisher must have hated her. 

She makes a big deal about using first name pseudonyms for DS and DIL, but writes under her own name.  It took me less than 5 min online to track down the son's name.  The DS and DIL may deserve the public rip on them, but what about the grandchildren?  There are 3 or 4 of them; can you imagine going to junior high or high school and everyone knowing your family's dirty laundry as told by grandma?

The author nearly had a miscarriage when she was pregnant with the DS.  35 years or so later, after the DS lashes out with something like, "You never loved me" the father reminds him "when you attempted to abort, your mother went on bedrest to save you." Those aren't exact quotes, but the phrase "attempted to abort" was used.  I know a miscarriage can be referred to as a spontaneous abortion" but it's not something the baby/fetus tries to do.  The baby is a victim, and here his parents are trying to blame him??!!!!  If the DS had grown up having this thrown in his face, I wouldn't be at all surprised he wanted to distance himself from his family.  I asked two doctors and an L/D nurse I know about that phrase; they all found it odd.

The author and her husband backed out of the wedding (tho they paid for the rehearsal dinner – author likes to emphasize their financial contributions).  DS and DIL did NOT uninvited them.  In fact, DS wrote/emailed his parents telling them they would be welcome.  Author admitted she and husband had backed themselves into a corner.  Did they jump at the chance to go?  No, the author complains that DS's letter/email was too remote and they didn't feel welcome.  Although she claims she would have walked on broken glass to get there (wedding in DC, author and husband spend summers in MI), they didn't go.  Instead on the morning of the wedding, they took a walk and buried a picture of the bride and groom to put the situation behind them.  Not a drama queen, is she?  She was also upset that the bride's mother didn't call them to encourage them to attend.  Why should the bride's mother be responsible for assuaging the groom's mother's pride?  Also, it wasn't just the groom's parents that didn't attend, but his brother didn't either.  No explanation given.  The author does admit she was a bit put off that DS and DIL didn't come to their 50th Anniversary that same summer. 

Shortly after DS and DIL started dating, DIL had to go out of town.  She had met his folks once.  When she comes back, DS meets her at the airport with flowers and a card from his parents.  The card says, "Please marry our son."  Wouldn't this put up big red flags about how healthy a relationship your BF had with his folks?  I mean really, they want him to marry someone he's known a few weeks?  They've met only once? 
The author claims she's upset that her grandchildren won't know anything about the rich family history on their father's side.  But then she complains that DIL sends one of DS's aunts (I believe author's sister, but could be sil) pictures of the children.  Supposedly DIL does this just to twist the knife into MIL.  Couldn't possibly be that DIL wants the children to have some connection to their paternal family or just happens to like the aunt
T
he author makes a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions.  When DIL and DS build a house, the author takes it as proof positive that DIL is controlling because she has a desk and bookshelves in DS's artist studio.  Hmmm, maybe he wanted his wife there?  Maybe it wasn't his studio so much as the adult workroom where their kids couldn't enter, so he had an art area and she had her work station?
There was a big confrontation between the author's husband, DS and DIL (I think the author was watching the grandchildren in the other room).  IT lasted something like 2 hours, but the only  details given was the DIL's ludicrous complaint about meals MIL prepared while DIL was pregnant.  Now, I find it hard to justify DIL's complaints if they actually were as the author related,  so there probably is a legitimate criticism there.  However, did they really spend 2-3 hours with DIL ranting about these meals?  I have to assume that there were other complaints/criticisms raised that the author decided to omit. So why did she omit them?  And in the entire book, the author can't quote her son saying anything like "Mary told me how awful you really are," or "Mary opened my eyes to your selfishness." If DIL is truly brainwashing DS, I imagine there would be something along those lines.   

The author doesn't use just their own experiences, but relates other DIL from hell stories.  Her husband is a clergyman and is privy to a lot of family complaints.  However, the author doesn't track down the other side of the stories.  There is always another side.  We see here how there can be multiple interpretations of the same actions. 

If you can get this book at your library and want to read it for free, I'd say go for it, but don't waste money on it.  It exemplifies the  type of narrow-minded, self-pitying, my-DS-is-a-victim-of-a-vicious-DIL thinking that gives MILs a bad name.

Got it...

Thanks for the review. Boy, you never know, do you?

http://thecelebritycafe.com/reviews/son-son-till-he-gets-wife-anne-kathryn-killinger-05-03-2011(//)

Another review of the book, boy it shows the difference in perspectives doesn't it?

My curiosity got the better of me. I ordered it off Amazon, I had a gift card  ;), after I read it, I'll post a review strictly from the MIL perspective.

My MIL lives by this book.  Not being snarky, it's just a fact.  She keeps it conveniently displayed on her coffee table every time I come over...coincidence?  Lol

Ouch she must be a piece of work to deal with.  ::)

 My apologies, but can't resist.  I love beating a dead horse, and this is right up my alley.  Just because I post doesn't mean you have to read it.  Just ignore this and the next fifty or so posts I make about this book.  I shamefacedly admit I couldn't find the book at the library, so I shelled out the 12 bucks to purchase online.  I have more than gotten my money's worth by discussing this with friends. And now the fun continues.  Hey, I've got a cold and nothing else to do.  At least, nothing I want to do.

I read the review tryingmybest posted about and obviously I disagree.  I don't doubt the author is feeling much pain.  And I reiterate that she could be totally right: her DIL may be a controlling monster who set out to rip DS away from his family.  I just don't think the author has in any way proven her case and in some instances weakened her premise. 

I cry BS on any claim that the author tried to maintain her DS and DIL's privacy by "hiding" their identities with false first names.  If this had been written before the internet age, I might give her a pass.  But this was published in 2010.  Anyone who googled the author's name or her husband's would quickly find an interview of her husband talking about being alienated from their son and giving his first name.  The author didn't even bother to change some details like where they lived, family size, occupations.  Taken on its own, this book comes across to me as the author definitely not forgiving her son and deliberately putting their identities out there to punish them.  Did she consider what her grandchildren would think if they read it?  Never mind the teasing they might get from classmates who read the book (Does your mom really control your dad through sex?), but I can't imagine them wanting anything to do with a grandmother who aired her grievances so publicly and without giving DS and DIL a chance to refute the accusations.  Any hope of a reconciliation or forming a relationship with the grandkids went out the window when this went to press. 

I don't see the author taking any responsibility for her own contributions to the alienation.  I mean, I consider myself the one exception to the rule that no one's totally innocent in these matters, so she can't be.  Boycotting your son's wedding isn't a little matter.  It's not that the author and her husband were uninvited.  Purportedly, DS and DIL asked DH to perform the wedding (he's a clergyman), so he wrote a service and sent it to them. After no reaction, DH asked for their thoughts.  DH received a letter from DS saying the service was too impersonal and they would find someone less biased to do the service and DH would be relieved so he could be with his wife during the ceremony.  You may think DS was out of line for "firing" his dad, but he did provide a face-saving way for the author and DH to attend and explain why DH wasn't doing the ceremony.  (I also wonder why an experienced clergyman would write out a whole wedding service without consulting the bride and groom on what type of service they wanted.  If DH had been a renowned tailor and whipped up a wedding gown for DIL that she didn't like, would we criticize her for finding a different dress?)

I understand author and DH being upset, angry, hurt, but, I don't think the insult was so great to warrant a boycott.  Then, DS sends them a letter saying they'd always be welcome to come to the wedding.  A friend told author and husband to go to the wedding or they'd always regret it.  They were warned, but  author and husband stuck to their guns because they didn't feel welcome.  Hmmmm, if not being comfortable around your ILs is a valid reason for not coming to family events, the author has just justified every DIL who spends holidays with her FOO instead of ILs.  Live by the sword, die by the sword, so's to speak. 

One thing to note in this, we never hear the DILs side.  Even when the author reports on what DS said DIL felt or said, it's hearsay.  For all we know, DIL was fine with the ceremony FIL put together and it was DS alone who found the service not to his liking.  It wouldn't be the first time a DS let his wife take the blame for his own jabs at his family. 

More to come.  I promise.  Or threaten.  Take your pick.

Aren't all books like that though?  Written from the Author's perspective I mean.  Even an autobiography is from your own perspectives?  I could write a book right now about my marriage and divorce, and although I could tell you things I did wrong, it would mostly be about the transgressions my Ex did.  If he wrote a book about our marriage and divorce, it would be totally different and his side, probably harping on all my transgressions to him.

I bet the DIL in this book could write her own, and it would be totally different, because it would be her perspective.

This is no way, shape or form saying the author in this book isn't the worst MIL ever, just my take on books in general.

Full disclosure: I haven't read the book and have no immediate plans to.

My perspective is that of a mom who has experienced shunning by DIL and the gradual morphing of DS into DIL's FOO at the expense of ours. DIL admits I've done nothing wrong, she just doesn't like us or deem us worthy.

Yes, it happens. There are DILs with agendas, just as there are MILs with agendas. The difference is that as DILs we can choose to jump in or not. As MILs we have to deal with whomever DS chooses. Why my DIL still wanted to marry a man whose FOO was so unacceptable to her she felt shunning was justified is beyond me, unless she had an agenda to separate him from us from the beginning.

How the author chose to handle her pain may be the issue with the book, but I have a feeling most customers don't realize, or don't want to admit, this kind of treatment by DILs is impossible. Oh, it's very real in my case.

Great Title! Maybe we should write "A MIL Is A MIL Until You Push Her Off a Cliff!" Just kidding...LOL!


Just read this Louise- gave me a good laugh for the day!

A little off topic of the book but similar premise -- I sometimes wonder what the other sides perspective is.  I know my MILs, heard it enough the past couple years ;)  But it would be interesting to get a peek into the other party's perspective sometimes.  Just my random thought of the day

We have this book, our marriage therapist suggested that we read it to understand how my MIL feels/thinks since we've cut her off. When I read it, I laughed because this MIL is absolutely out of her mind in every way imaginable. When my husband read it, he was horrified and disgusted.

This author and her family (her DH and non-estranged son) bring the words enmeshment & co-dependent to a whole new level thats never been reached before, no wonder why this one son got out when he did! I would have too.

At one point in the book she compared her sons estrangement to "divorce". Moms/sons dont "divorce" MARRIED COUPLES DO, that was a red flag for me. The way she described her relationship with her son (prior to estrangement) was not healthy, it was quite creepy actually.

Also she mentioned BRIBING the adult child and his/her spouse with money, gifts, trips etc. to GAIN TIME WITH THE GKs if need be. Thats another red flag.

This book was so jam packed with guilt trips & maniplulation tactics, we thought we were reading a "how to" book.

At NO time in this book did SHE take any blame for the off the wall stunts she pulled. She placed all of that right at her DILs feet. I have to say if your a DIL who has ever had problems (major or minor) with your MIL you'll pick up real quick on all of her "offenses" that helped her get cut off. They almost pop off the page while reading. One thing is for sure, she did not like boundaries.

If you need a good laugh, this is a good book. If your looking for a "how-to" get cut off from my child & spouse for life book, this is it!

Welcome mysterygirl :)

Please read the Forum Agreement and WWU History (first two threads highlighted in pink) in the category Open Me First.  We ask all new members to do this, nothing wrong with your post.

Thanks for your perspective on the book.  This book is getting to be quite the topic on the board, now I'm about to order it LOL.

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. 

I'm to blame when this book hits the NY Times bestsellers list.  But I am enjoying myself.

I don't want to say the author overreacts, but how else do you explain their Easter dinner snafu?  Author, DH, DS and DIL had plans to have Easter dinner together around noon.  (This was before the wedding and before author and DH excused themselves from such.)  A few days before Easter, DS emails to ask if they could push dinner to 4 PM because DIL wanted to do brunch with her brother.  Didn't say he demanded or told them it was 4 or nothing.  Just that they'd like to make that change.  Now, if the author had said no and then DS and DIL canx'd on them, I'd side with the author.  You shouldn't cancel plans just because something better (to you) comes along.  But they didn't get that chance.  The author emails back that they should just have dinner another time because obviously DS and DIL were very busy that day.  Huh?
I don't find anything rude about DS asking to change the time.  If DIL already had plans with her family and DS wanted to squeeze in his family, wouldn't we have thought DIL was being a snotty snot if she wouldn't even TRY to include both families?  I really can't blame DIL down the line spending all holidays with her family if this was the reaction to a mere request to alter times.  (Again, if DS had said they weren't coming unless the time changed or after receiving a No to his request cancelled, I'd side with the author.)  It's a once-bitten-twice-shy situation. 

And then there's the rehearsal dinner slideshow.  DIL tells them her brother is putting together a slideshow of her family pictures to show at the rehearsal dinner.  The author characterizes this as "being mugged by experts."  Again, huh?  Maybe she mentioned the slideshow as an indirect way of telling them to send their family photos to her brother so DS's family would be included.  Maybe DS had nixed including his family photos in slideshows. Not everyone likes their baby pics et al on public display.  Maybe DIL mentioned her brother's slideshow as a hint for someone in DS's family to step up and do the same.  Or just maybe, DS had given photos of his family to be included and DIL assumed the author and DH knew this, so she was just mentioning the pictures they were unfamiliar with.  If the author wanted her side included, she could have just made up a slideshow herself – or delegated the job – since she (author) was the hostess of the rehearsal dinner.  For someone who had been to hundreds of weddings, she seemed somewhat ignorant of a common rehearsal dinner entertainment.  Since author and DH boycotted the rehearsal dinner with the wedding, we'll never know what pictures were included.

And then there's the "plaintive words" her husband wrote to her son – before the wedding but after it was decided they wouldn't be there:

We rarely seem to have an hour that isn't shadowed by thoughts of what has happened.  We'll probably always wonder why you decided to push the wagon over the cliff and not look down to see if anybody was hurt.

Who pushed what?  The author and husband CHOSE not to go to the wedding.  Their DS followed their decision up with a note – maybe formal, but still there – telling them they were still welcome.  The author decided to CANCELL Easter dinner instead of trying to accommodate the time change (she didn't give a reason why the time couldn't change except her husband had never had Easter dinner at 4 PM and wouldn't want to start now) or just decline their request and see what had happened.  This just reinforces my incredulity about how blinded the author is to her own active role in the estrangement.

Wow, I am trying to be open minded about this thread but it seems to me this is why DIL and MIL have problems: They both are "right fighters" like Dr. Phil refers to them.  I love most of the threads here and learn a lot but this really seems like a lot of flaming to me and not much healing...and over a book?  I have to smile.  When women get riled up we are like hornets!!   ::)

I don't suppose if it is over a book there's much harm. A perspective is a perspective is a perspective is a perspective. First we make it up. Then we believe it. Then we are at the effect of it.  ;D ;D ;D

I'm sorry the MIL author has written in such a style that her point has become a joke. It's a real issue, but she's not handled the presentation well. She's done those of us with legitimate issues with our DILs a real disservice, apparently. I'm sad about this; I was hoping for a book that would be enlightening for all, especially regarding the MIL point of view.

The woman is at least clever~~who was it that said, when it comes to sales, "any publicity is good publicity?"  So now I have to get it from the library just to check it out...(maybe send a copy it anonymously to my DIL)...hehehe evil laugh....I really would never do that, I no longer give her any kind of presents.  But I do love her dearly because she is the mom of the grandchildren I never see.  Oh, I better get some coffee I am quite a hornet this morning. :o :o :o

I know there are mean, nasty, controlling, manipulative, lying DILs.  It does happen.  It happens among the MIL population, the SIL/FIL/BIL/SIL population, too.  It happens in any grouping of people, whether the grouping is by relationship, nationality, profession, religion, ethnicity, politics, eye color, etc.  I think we all agree that there are horrible people walking on this earth and some of us are unfortunate enough to have to interact with them in some way. 

There are also people we may want to label horrible in some way, but the reality is, they are just different from us.  They have different values, priorities, perspectives or whatever.  I've often pointed out that different communication styles can result in us making moral judgments on one another. 

For all we know the author's DIL is one of those really horrible people, but the examples the author gives of how DIL is controlling, etc. are weak at best.  I've previously pointed out that just because DIL has an office nook in DS art studio doesn't necessarily she is trying to intrude and control every aspect of DS life.  I think my own ILs would go into anaphylactic shock if you told them not to grocery shop together (slight exaggeration).  Do they shop together because one is controlling and dominating or because they kinda like each other and want to spend time together?  Either interpretation could be correct (I'm going with #2, but you don't have to take my word for it).  I'd bet dollars to donuts that I could examine everyone's life and pick and choose some incidents and come up with a rather convincing – on paper – argument that you are all controlling, dominating, rude, etc.  It's all about the spin.

When DIL and DS met she was living in a condo and he was living in a house.  At first they were going to sell her condo and live in his house.  They ended up selling his house and living in her condo.  There could be a whole bevy of financial reasons why it made more sense to sell his house rather than her condo.  Or DIL wouldn't be the first second wife not comfortable living in the same house her DH shared with his first wife. 

"Monica (the pseudonym for the DIL) belonged to a broken family of lapsed Catholics.  Perhaps she taught our son to think of his father, a highly respected Protestant minister, as representing some kind of sinister faith that takes advantages of its adherents."  Nothing to back up this supposition.  No examples of anti-protestant activity on DIL's part.  Just a slap in the face to the 1 billion Catholics on Earth.  I thought Catholic-Protestant relations had evolved past the Spanish Inquisition. 

DIL enrolled their oldest daughter  (9 months)in a Gymboree class and (viciously?) invited the author and DH to come watch.  "It was clear that Monica was already programming her daughter's life in a big way.  She had also enrolled her in a swimming class."  If the author thinks a Gymboree class and baby swim class constitutes an over-involved mother over-scheduling her progeny, she (author) needs to interact with modern young mothers more.  It may seem like a lot compared to when the author was raising her kids, but that's nothing by today's standards.  I think Gymboree and swim class are head and shoulders above plopping your kids in front of a TV!

"In the months before Richard and Monica's marriage, he told us he didn't have time to see us until after the wedding.  When we did see them, she always said when it was time to go.  He was always as closely governed as a prisoner in a cell, and his time was never his to spend as he might have wished." Again, nothing to back this up.  Just because she's the one to say "time to leave" doesn't mean she set the departure time.  Maybe they agreed beforehand on a time and she's a better clock-watcher.  Or maybe he asked her to get them out of there by a certain hour, because he doesn't know how to disentangle from his folks.  If they rarely see the couple, the author can't factually claim DS's time was never his own.  Maybe he was doing exactly what he wanted – not being with his parents.  He wouldn't be the first DS whose interest in time with his FOO is dramatically BELOW what his FOO imagines and the DIL gets the blame. 

Hey, I just posted this on my FB the other day, and I think it applies here too:

Once you hate someone, everything they do is offensive.  "Look at her over there, eating her crackers like she owns the place!"

I can't comment on the book because I haven't read it, but I really don't like when people place 100% of the blame for the deterioration of a relationship on one person.  (Except for you Pen, your DIL has shown her colours.)  I acknowledge that I am responsible for 50% of the relationship I have with my MIL.  I'm working on that 50%, and it's hard, because she doesn't seem to be working on her 50%, but I'm reminded that I'm doing it not because she is nice, but because *I* am.

Quote from: herbalescapes on November 17, 2011, 12:53:15 PM
I don't find anything rude about DS asking to change the time.  If DIL already had plans with her family and DS wanted to squeeze in his family, wouldn't we have thought DIL was being a snotty snot if she wouldn't even TRY to include both families?  I really can't blame DIL down the line spending all holidays with her family if this was the reaction to a mere request to alter times.  (Again, if DS had said they weren't coming unless the time changed or after receiving a No to his request cancelled, I'd side with the author.)  It's a once-bitten-twice-shy situation.

I agree with Pen, that MIL might have some legitimate gripes, but her presentation does stink.  I haven't read it, but reading your takes on it, I will throw my two cents in.  I am seeing problems on both sides. 

In this example, I think MIL handled it badly, but I do see it as rude on DS's part.  If DS/DIL had agreed to prior plans and a time, and waited just a few days before to try to change it, I can see where MIL was hurt because of the reason and felt like she was being placed after DIL's family.  Why didn't they ask DIL's brother to change the time?  Why is it that DS's family was the one to have to adapt?  Maybe MIL had other plans already later in the day is why she said what she did, out of frustration and anger?  I'm just throwing it out there because we have no idea.  They may have asked DIL's DB first and he couldn't change.  I don't know.  I will tell you this.  I am flexible as a willow tree when it comes to my family.  My family is also very flexible, so it was us that ALWAYS had to change times or premade plans to work around DIL's family.  We did it and I'm sure that OS knew how flexible and compromising we all are, so didn't think anything about asking us all the time.  The inside track on me is that although I would do it because I thought it was the right thing to do, and to be able to see them, at the same time, it does make you feel like you are second-rate after awhile, because it would be nice, if just once, DIL asked her family to compromise.  And then when we would change times to help them, it usually made it where they only had an hour for our event, and still left 4-5 hours for DIL's event.

Was I grateful that they fit us in for an hour?  Sure.  I'd rather see them for an hour than not at all.  Is it still hard on our feelings to know we had to constantly change our plans in order to see them for that hour, but no change was required on DIL's side of the family?  Yes.  It does hurt.

So I will say that I can see, in the example you gave on this one, where MIL was finding it rude and hurtful, because I am taking it from the other side.  We have no idea all the things that went into that.  Was it DS wanting it, was it DS relaying what DIL wanted, was it both their ideas?  We have not idea because this MIL is just giving her side.  She definately sounds like she doesn't handle things well at all, but I can see some underlying hurt going on in on both sides and I would see this as rude.  I just wouldn't have made a big deal out of it, because we are used to it.

And yes, I'm seriously thinking about ordering this now....Lol.  Now I am really curious.  Not because I have DIL problems, but because I read "Toxic Inlaws" about how bad MIL's can be, and it was interesting to read that side of the coin, and I felt the same way about it that this seems to be.  There was some good info and insight in there, but you had to read between the author's perspectives to see some of it.  The rest of it, I didn't agree with, with my situation now, but boy was it right about my Ex MIL.  I would bet a gazillion dollars though, that my DIL would read it and say it was spot on about me.  Why?  Because this sentence can be taken two different ways, dependant on how an individual wants to see it.

This is the sentence:

Last night I shot an elephant in my pajamas.

Some will see the elephant was wearing my pajamas, some will see I was.  Perspectives.

Yes, Pooh, perspectives.  I won't read this book bc if I start reading one-sided stories, let alone books, about mean ole dils or mean ole mils,  I start obsessing over my own dil and things she has said, how ds doesn't see this and that, how dh doesn't want to obsess with me!  lol!, etc.  Better to let a lot of it go if possible.

It sounds like one of these books where a dil who isn't thrilled with her own mil would be totally defending the dil in this book.  And where a mil who isn't thrilled with everything her dil does and says would say, "Right on, sister!"

Makes me think of unsubstantiated biographies can say whatever about someone w/o any verification...... like Herbal has said, in defense of the dil, we don't know the whole story.  The mil could be totally misconstruing everything; or she could be partially or totally right; who knows?

It sounds bitter and overly critical of the dil, according to the reviews given here.  Yet many mils can read even the reviews and say, yep, been there, had this and that happen to me, etc.  So much hurt has occurred, so many misunderstandings, such different personalities, it's understandable how some people would agree with the author's words and others be totally incensed.  There are mils and dils who are unreasonable and downright mean, some w/o even knowing it; and then there's the rest!

So not gonna go read this book; would be too aggravating and blood pressure rising, one way or another.

Luise said it.  Pooh said it.  It's all a matter of perspective.  Love the elephant analogy!

I'm just weird like that justanoldgrandma.   ;D  When the Harry Potter books came out, I had no desire to read them, because it's not my kind of books I usually enjoy.  After all the controversary came out surrounding them, from some religious communities (including my own), yeah...it made me want to read them!  Lol.  I wanted to see what all the hoopla was about and I ended up loving them, own all of them and have seen all the movies now probably 2-3 times each!

I didn't see anything wrong with them...because ummm....yep, they are fiction!  They were entertaining to me.  Could I see where there was another perspective involving the religious communities?  Yes, but I made up my own mind.  My perspective.

I love 101 dalmations too, but I really don't think that dalmations can talk!  Hmm...maybe they can and I'm just not listening...

And herbal, I'm loving what you are writing and hearing your thoughts on this book.  You always have very interesting thought processes that I truly enjoy.

I'm in agreement with those who feel that accepting another invitation and asking the first host to change their plans is rude. I'm tired of being at the mercy of DIL's FOO's holiday schedule. It's very inconvenient for us what with transporting DDD, etc. and after all the cleaning and cooking we get to see DS/DIL for an hour; DIL's FOO gets them all day.

I want to confess that I am not reading the comments in between my posts.  So if someone is telling me "Enough already!"  I am circumventing your input to me. 

Just how well do we know our own kids?  We all like to think we do, but I'm sure most of us have run into the parent who thinks little Susie or Johnnie is the cat's whiskers when in reality little Susie or Johnnie is the brattiest, most obnoxious, rude, bullying little twerp.  Sometimes our kids don't share our views on how we get along.  Have you ever known a parent who thinks they have a close, confiding relationship with their kids, but the kids are out doing drugs, crimes, getting pregnant, etc. while the parent remains blissfully unaware?

The author tries to portray her son as a victim of the controlling, toxic DIL, but the input the author provides about her DS, makes me wonder how well she actually knows him.  She seems to sugar coat his (to me) obnoxious personality.  My apologies to the real son; I've never met him and even if his mother's characterizations of his childhood/adolescence aren't totally off the mark, none of us wants to be judged as adults by the way we were as teens. 

"For a year or two, we kept theorizing that either Richard was having a nervous breakdown or had a tumor on his brain that was compelling him to behave in complete opposition to his original character.  He had been such a wise, good-natured person before he met Monica.  He had loved us with all the appropriate fealty of a son who had been well treated and much loved all of his life."
Yet, the author provides these contrasting images of her son:

"He was sometimes a challenge as a youngster, to his teachers and to us as well, but both his teachers and we knew he was worth it."  Did the teachers actually say that?  What do they really think? What were the "challenges" he gave?

"he was a terror on the playing field and didn't like to be beaten at anything.  Whenever we engaged in a family game of Monopoly, he invariable ended up overheating, so that his face turned red, and he would eventually get so mad...that he cried and went away angry."

"He broke more than one tennis racket when he played with his dad...(dad) usually managed to eke out a victory by being calm and resourceful.  Richard often complained afterward about his dad's dinky little drop shots."

As a preschooler, Richard lived in Paris with his folks.  Though he picked up French he refused to speak it.  The author describes this as being independent.  Richard's explanation was, "I'm not French and I not speak French."  To me, that's an ugly American in diapers.  It's rude not to use the local language if you are able.  This was a moment the parents could have taught some manners, respect, humility.  Instead, they are proud of his "independence."  If they didn't expect him to make an effort as a preschooler, why do they expect him to do anything he doesn't want as an adult?

Richard comes off as a spoiled, selfish, obnoxious, self-centered twerp.  He certainly doesn't seem a likely victim of mind control which the author's husband thinks is the explanation.  "Monica has stolen our son's mind and is driving it over the cliff as surely as if she were behind the wheel of an 18 wheeler.  He may be right. We know she majored in psychology in college, but doubt if she is even conscious of the techniques she is using.  It probably comes naturally to the descendent of a big business tycoon like her grandfather.  She instinctively knows which buttons to push in our son's psyche to get him to be her robot for life. "

I'm not sure if psychology majors, business tycoons or descendants of business tycoons should be the most insulted by that last quote.

Herbal, I love hearing your perspectives on this book.
Out of curiosity, since you have read the book, do we know that the author's invitation was actually given first?
By this, what I am trying to ask is: do we know that DS didn't just at first accept the author's invitation and upon relaying the message to his wife discover that she already had plans of going to her FOO, who may or may not have already cemented that schedule to accommodate others in their family? There seem to be so many possibilities and too little fact-based information provided.
I believe I have stated before, on another thread, sometimes (many times) DS will, in the hopes of possibly sparing his mother's feelings, essentially pass blame of a decision made onto his DW.
Perspectives are an interesting and sometimes deadly thing (we all have a right to our own perspectives), and in my opinion, ought to be taken into account along with one's comfort levels.
Perhaps if MILs and DILs who may be having issues truly understood each others' comfort levels there may be less conflict.
For example (not related to the book): if DILs FOO is conservative and they have created and recognize strict parental boundaries and this is how their family unit runs and everyone enjoys it as such; while DS' FOO is very liberal and now that he is an adult they would rather cut the parental boundaries and be  more of friends to their son and this is how their family unit runs and everyone enjoys it as so - but what if by chance DS' FOO says or does something that for them would be normal, but for DIL the statement or action may be crossing that parental boundary that she finds to be the norm; she may then become uncomfortable and perhaps quiet and reserved which she then may be labeled as standoffish or cold. And in turn DIL may now view  her ILs in a different light, and thus issues may arise.
IMHO, knowing others' comfort level, recognizing them, and taking action to compromise to meet at a position where everyone is at ease just shows that you care and you want the other party to be involved. But, this is my opinion and relates to my own situation.

The analogy that I love (I got it from my dad) is: "I'm so low I could crawl under a snake with a silk hat on!" What do you see?

Hey, Pen, I gotta say I still don't like not seeing the kids for Christmas bc of FOO's plans but it will never change.  But I would hate doing all the work you are doing for just a short while.....

Ok, I could try looking up abbreviations again but can't find 'em....... only one I can't imagine or even google is:  DDD

Dear darling daughter?  Darn darn daughter?  (I know you don't mean my last guess!)

I made this one up, lol. DDD = dear disabled daughter. There are times when it explains things like why transportation is an issue, or why my DD is devastated when she can't spend time with her DB.

Sorry for the confusion!

I too am not ready for this book,but enjoy the discourse, Must have been in one of the links or comments on amazon where "The Narcissistic Family" is recommended. One comment said if you read the first page & it sounds familiar,buy it.  So I chose a used copy & am eagerly awaiting delivery. But I'm still enjoying the insights. Being so low I could,in a silk top hat, crawl under a snake.  Socially unfit, I often don't even garner positive results from posting, even. Really I know we all belong & have a place & purpose. I'm very,very grateful to each & everyone of you. Thanks so much for site. This seems a doable goal to do what I can.

I feel I don't have to read the book  now. Whew..I like brain-candy mysteries. You got it, Faith. Just a crack in the door. Comfort will come. Read when you don't feel like posting. We have all been there and return there every once in a while. Sending love...

Oh, Pen, not being on here for a long period of time, I don't know people's history, and didn't know you have a disabled daughter; didn't mean to be disrespectful; am sure you have a lot on your plate with the medical and transportation and all other issues......

Still waiting for Amazon to deliver the book, and no I'm not the author.  ;D Seriously I bought it to get the MIL side of the story, support the sisterhood you know but if one of the reviews is correct, it will be hard to support this MIL much. The DIL signing GC up for swimming lessons was " mind control".... Seriously?

JAOG, no worries. I didn't find anything disrespectful in anything you'd posted  :-*

Well I got the book and am reading it. I can identify with her anger, but she made some massive mistakes acting out of that anger. I'll actually review the book, once I'm done but I need to thank WW and especially Luise for bringing us all together, because there but for the grace of God and the guidance of you women...... ;)

When you write about anger, I think of the observation that it only damages the one who is angry.

I am a fdil, and my fMIL really dislikes me, so I *gasp* blamed my self and bought the book to see how I could improve the relationship. (b/c yes ladies, many of use want a relationship with our MIL's)
First, the woman who wrote it refused to attend her son's wedding b/c the DIL didnt want to use FIL as the pastor.
Secondly, she literally blames the DIL for everything, never being introspective or even attempting to acknowledge that she has any role in the very negative relationship.
This woman is so mean. I cried so hard just thinking about how that poor DIL must feel. Honestly, the woman took away some of the joy and togetherness a bride should experiance on her wedding day by making the wedding all about her feelings.
All in all, a very frustrating book.

Hey S&FFDIL-

We MILs remind each other that we were whole "before" and we can be whole again.  I want to catch you before you disintegrate and encourage you to not let your MIL take away who you are. 

Whether you know it or not, you're in a position of mighty power and she's in a position of potentially losing her son's attention.  Just be strong and kind. Don't fear her - maybe take a look to see if she really just needs some pity or sympathy for not being able to gracefully transition in to her crone phase.

I had cut myself off from this thread and now y'all wanna open up this can of worms again?  Ya brought it on yerselfs, so I have no pity.

I have come to a conclusion about the real problem in this mil/dil situation.  The author admits she was intimidated by her own MIL.  She mentions several times that it's only natural that a DIL be be in awe of her more sophisticated, accomplished MIL.  Really?  I don't know of any DIL jealous of a MIL because the MIL is more accomplished.  I know a few who are jealous because they think their DHs haven't cut the apron strings and feel DH spends more time/attention on his mother than his wife.  Especially with people getting married at a later age, chances are the DIL is just as well if not more educated than her MIL and already established in a career.  With 2d, 3d, etc. marriages, the DIL is just that much more accomplished and MIL that much less an authority figure.  And DILs tend to have an attribute overvalued (unfortunately)in our superficial society: youth. 

I think the author expected her DIL to be somewhat cowed by the author's accomplishments (college professor, concert pianist, lived in France, Parisian model, etc.) just as the author was by her own MIL, and when DIL was unimpressed, MIL was hurt and embarrassed.  She (author) then possibly questioned the value of her own accomplishments and tried to bring down DIL.  When you feel less than someone else, you have two options to bring equality: raise yourself up or bring the other person down.  I think MIL decided on the latter.

The DIL here could be a quite intimidating figure in her own right.  Here's a woman who has money and could live the life of leisure, but chooses to work with autistic children - which can be rewarding, but is very frustrating.  Having money, DIL could easily have nicer clothes, jewelry and homes.  Although the author is well-travelled, chances are the DIL is even more so.  Many DILs might be impressed with a MIL who had  lived in France, but this DIL might own a chateau there.  IF (I'm making these details up for argument's sake) the author does feel belittled by DIL's superior wealth, it must be all that much more uncomfortable being a clergyman's wife. 

I wonder if the author and her husband ever sought professional counseling to deal with their estrangement.  As a clergyman, author's husband should be especially aware of the value of an outside, objective opinion.  The only mention of them having counseling was when they were on vacation and recognized a well-known counselor.  The husband leans over at breakfast and tries to solicit some free advice.  The author says her husband got only a few sentences - a few sentences! - out when the well-known counselor says "It's your DIL."  What kind of counselor passes judgement based on a few sentences?  For the counselor's sake , I'll assume he wanted to enjoy his vacation and was trying to nip the conversation in the bud by saying what they wanted to hear.  The well-known counselor's wife was there and tells them they (counselor and wife) have problems with their own DIL.  So much for objectivity.

I think it's been said on other threads that there's a saying out there that 85% of people go to counseling knowing they are right and wanting to find out how to fix the other person.  The purpose of counseling is to make the person realize that s/he can't control the other person, and figure out how to change their own behavior/attitude to make the situation more bearable.  We've discussed how you can't change someone else a multitude of times.  I never saw anywhere in this book the author accepting that AS and DIL are adults and have every right to make their own decisions, and she and her husband need to own up to their own contributions to the problem.  DIL may be Satan personified, but I could find only a handful of examples of DIL's behavior being actually rude, and never so egregious that would justify a MIL writing such a book.

Hope y'all are having a nice day.

Having a great day! Wondering how many people are being helped by this awful women's book. She didn't even profit off me,cause you all have reviewed so well. As I posted earlier it was the start of my journey to healing from the narsisstic foo. My fleas with my AS & DIL,came from there. Thanks to WW, I let them live their live in their way and should be on my own with my dear old dogs in a few weeks =)  Thanks a million, sorry I hijacked the thread. Bet ya didn't see this coming, =)

herbalescapes, now I'm even more curious about that book! 

A few things stood out to me in your review and got me thinking (whoa nelly, watch out now!)  Anyway, everyone has rude behavior at one time or another.  Some more so than others.  But it's even worse to point out another persons rudeness and I assume the author wrote this book with her real name?  Not a good move.

I wonder how she felt writing the book would actually fix anything in her relationship.  And then I wonder perhaps that was never her goal, she doesn't want a relationship -- she wants to be right.  And doesn't that seem to be one of the core issues we all have here with the difficult person in our lives?  We're frustrated (or at least I am) that you try and try, do this and that for a good or at least civil relationship and it just never works b/c the other side doesn't want it too! 

This book sounds like a peak into the mind of one of those people who don't want a relationship, they want to be right.

Well since I started this thread I may as well pop in. I did buy and read the book. A lot of it was well, more then a little confusing. The author admitted many DIL's are wonderful but then went on to chronicle horror stories, including her own. :o
Her son was supposedly wonderful until he met and married his wife and then turned into this weak willed destroyed shell of the person he used to be. Well he and his wife have stayed together and had four children, seem to doing well and have a relationship with everyone else in DH family... So something is clearly off. The author and her husband refused to attend the wedding because the son and his fiancee changed their minds about having his father ( a minister ) marry them. they said they would not come to the wedding and then sat there expecting to be begged to change their minds. When that didn't happen on the day of the wedding they went to the beach and symbolically burned and buried something, I think it was the wedding invitation, I kind of zoned out because that just freaked me out a bit.
I'm sure there were some issues that needed to be dealt with, I'm sure we've all dealt with them, but wow this was really so over the top, and the author seemed to really blame women being too strong as the cause of all problems. Sad...

Not having read the book, and not likely too, I can only say that as bad or slanted as the book may be, it does bring to light the fact that some DILs can be difficult. Up to now the stereotype was of the Monster-In-Law, whether she was the DD's mom or the DS's. At the time my DS married I'd never heard of a mean DIL, just the innumerable old jokes about awful MILs (& I was determined not to be one.) Many MILs who were dealing with rejecting/rude DILs felt very confused & alone. However, it doesn't sound as if the author is doing us any favors.

 Agree completely watch any episode of Bridezilla, many of us have real issues, because there are real problems...wish the book had been better...:-(