From time to time I search the internet for some insight on how to deal with my son's decision to say goodbye to me.
I found an article about Stockholm syndrome and in reading it, there seemed to be so many parallels between my son and his future bride (she who must be obeyed), the most compelling part of the articled detailed that as a safety factor "trouble" had to be avoided by the person who is the partner of a controlling individual. "Trouble" takes on many forms, phone calls, visits, family members and loved ones etc.etc. who could be responsible for verbal or physical aggression from the controller.
The article goes on to say that we are more loyal to something that is difficult, uncomfortable and even humiliating. There is a great deal of investment in the relationship so it's difficult for people to walk away from a difficult situation. It says that it's the investment in the relationship that is difficult for people to walk away from.
Does this sound familiar to anyone?
I don't know your particular story, but that sounds like a lot of "Momma's Boy's" that I know. And definitely like my DH/MIL's relationship when we were dating... Until he moved out of the house that is. :-)
I definitely think that Stockholm Syndrome is a key element in most "abusive" relationships. It is demonstrated time and time again.
It's sure a name that we understand. That we have to see it in action is heartbreaking. Sending love...
Sounds exactly like my situation...
think it means it all boils down to controlling emotionally abusive people, and the truth is they can be any age, any sex and have any "title" - MIL or DIL or FIL DH or...forget it you get where I'm going. ::)
Quote from: tryingmybest on March 25, 2011, 09:57:48 AM
think it means it all boils down to controlling emotionally abusive people, and the truth is they can be any age, any sex and have any "title" - MIL or DIL or FIL DH or...forget it you get where I'm going. ::)
Where are you going???? LOL sorry, couldn't resist....
LOL, I think she just meant that the various titles under which one could be abusive would be infinite, right?
actually I meant I needed more coffee and was losing tracks of the abbreviations... ::) lt's tough getting old..
and anyone can be abusive....and dealing with them can be realllly stressful.
*sigh* I knew exactly what you meant, where you were going etc. I read it, thought it was funny because I am in a sleep-deprived goofy mood today so I thought I'd make a sarcastic joke, but alas, the "tone" app isn't available on this forum yet LOL
Wait...they have a tone app?
Wha's that?
isn't there an app for anything
Quotemore loyal to something that is difficult, uncomfortable and even humiliating.
In my case, I believe it was easier for son to be loyal to the $$$$ that she had. His step-father and I could NOT compete with her father's money so we were the ones that were given up on.
What I don't understand is what short circuits with the sons, that they don't see the disconnect? Don't feel it? My husband and I and his step-sister were the only ones dealing with my son's troubles/problems/issues. With alcohol, truancy, minor arrests, ER visits from drunken brawls he was in, his financial woes, etc., etc., etc.
I will be the first to say I enabled him to a point. He was a drunken mess while living with us. The dil never once had to live with THAT! But she sure dished out the mean when they first became engaged. I never called. Showed up uninvited. NEVER butted in like HER mother. HER sisters. HER friends. Not once. But as the wedding approached, she became even more callous, goaded on by her mother. As soon as the wedding was over I told my son how I felt and asked him what was going on. What did I, his sister, his stepdad, my entire family do to her and her family??? Bloop. Nothing. Got some reply about no more emails. Made a demand that I was to apologize to her and her family if we were to "get past this". (If I was so awful, my chance to get back was at the wedding or the reception, no? Or during the hoopla before, no? Not once did I say ONE WRONG THING. Ask why I was left out. NOT ONCE. I jumped thru every hoop and dodged every mean thing and still came into the reception hall smiling with my ex on my right (BRIDEY demanded it!! and the guy that paid for everything for her husband on my left=what a slap to my husband. But this is how it went down-my son HATED his dad before the big wedding day. HIS WORDS. Now he's on my right as we are announced as the grooms parents? Really? Who would do such a thing? Just to make it look so wonderful and sweet? It hurt my husband's feelings.)
I was blindsided. I would be the first one to apologize for what I did wrong. I believe I asked him, too. He said Nothing. (Because their wasn't anything that I did to her and her family! He was reacting to HER) grrrrr
To her I am the evil one. Crazy. Pathetic. She-DIL-had this to say:
family
it has been 4 years and i don't think i will ever understand in laws...maybe just the mentally ill ones!!! Really, who doesn't talk to their own child in 4 years???? I just don't get it...I have talked to dozens of mothers and EVERY single one of them said they would do whatever they could to fix things with their child v/s not talking to them!!! Just is mind blowing. Bipolar may be the bigger issue...I am not sure...I just don't get it!!! Thank God my family is so wonderful and supporting. I don't know what I would do with out my mom in my life!!Or this little gem:
Thursday, September 04, 2008
the disappointment continues
It just makes me sick to my stomache that my hubby's mother (if thats what you call her) could just walk past her granddaughter, pretend that she didn't see her and keep walking with her head down. She should be ashamed of herself. Her granddaughter is an innocent child. What a sad and pathetic life to have and lead...thank God her son doesn't take after her!!!!!!!!!!
Oh and there are more! For all the world to read. Thank God her family is so wonderful and supporting. Really? Her dad has money that she and her husband want real bad. Her father had my son with the HUGE plasma big screen tv. And more!!
I should be ashamed of MYSELF? If she noticed me why didn't SHE say something? But I should be ashamed of myself. My granddaughter is an innocent child. What did I do? I was supposed to go all weak in the knees? Beg for forgiveness? What about HER? She has done NO wrong. If anyone is bi-polar it is this poor pathetic woman. And her mother.
I am glad I am out of the toxic pool with them. No more ulcers. No more GERD. No more IBS!!! How did that happen? I don't care anymore what those people do. She can slam me all she wants on the internet. She/he they can blame me for everything. But why would I want anything to do with people so engrossed in themselves they never cared to find why I was hurting over all the mean she and her mother/sisters doled out?
Stop and ask yourself. "Is it worth the pain?" If our sons can lop us out their lives so quickly and not look back--Take a deep breath and lop them out too. Really. Save yourselves.
I loved my son with my heart and soul and never once gave up on him. He was a drunken mess. I was the only one that cared. She wasn't there!! In all the moments of unhappiness for him, I was there. His father was a drunk, too. Promising him the moon and the stars to only beat the poor kid in a drunken rage. I got him away from all that. And now, I am the bad one and the bio-dad is great! Idontneedit.Hurtstoomuchtogoback!!
Shame on them all! But if the junk hits the fan and she has had enough he better never stop foot on my property. I have disowned him and will call the police. (He can go live with HER mom. :)
Many of us step put of pain. We leave much behind but we take our dignity with us. Sending love...
I feel your pain Happy, and I agree at this point of your life you need to take care of you.
Quote from: HappyDays09 on March 26, 2011, 08:04:55 AM
Quotemore loyal to something that is difficult, uncomfortable and even humiliating.
I loved my son with my heart and soul and never once gave up on him. He was a drunken mess. I was the only one that cared. She wasn't there!! In all the moments of unhappiness for him, I was there. His father was a drunk, too. Promising him the moon and the stars to only beat the poor kid in a drunken rage. I got him away from all that. And now, I am the bad one and the bio-dad is great! Idontneedit.Hurtstoomuchtogoback!!
Shame on them all! But if the junk hits the fan and she has had enough he better never stop foot on my property. I have disowned him and will call the police. (He can go live with HER mom. :)
Al Anon can help, they understand that just because other people have scapegoated you to be the "bad" one, doesn't make it so. My son had that type of experience with his bio-dad and is still seeking his approval (and probably will till his grave, he's just as stubborn as his dad). I suspect that my son indirectly blames me for the cruelty his father subjected him to.
Whatever, he's into his 30's and I'm getting older and I'm not letting him or his father (indirectly via my son) negatively impact my health and life any longer.
Recently someone told me "Do you know how you got to where you are today from where you came from?", his answer was "Your attitude". I wouldn't waste a minute reading any more nonsense written by others. They aren't writing the script of your life, you are. There may have been chapters that weren't "written" the way you expected but how they are written going forward is only up to you. The good people of Al Anon can help you ease some of the pain, they have been there too, as I have.
Never heard of the Stockholm Syndrome, why Stockholm because the winter is so long there?
The post by Happy was truly heartbreaking. I do feel for you. hope that you can walk away from this damaging situation and realise that you have done your utmost for your son. It must be galling to think that you have primed him to be able to have a relationship with someone so hostile against you. We have to accept our fate, however cruel it seems to be. We must have hope in the future and pray that our Grandchildren will discover us and then we will be victorious!
(While FB can be a good happy meeting place, it also has its downside because we get to know what people say about ourselves that in the past we did not. I chose my friends carefully and would never have a member of my immediate family.)
I do agree with Louise, that it is important to for us keep our dignity intact even in the face of failure, and that is entirely up to each of us individually. The problem is while we perceive ourselves as acting dignified; other people take this as an opportunity 'to walk right over us'.
Each day I write down one thing which has been particularly joyful. It can be small, it may be totally earth-shaking. When I'm down, I read about all the things that have been happening to me which were good and I'm grateful for them. :)
HappyDays, you have the right attitude. It is painful and uncalled for that we get put in that mode, but it is necessary for our own well-being. I look at my OS as I would look at a friend in my life. Would I accept the same behavior from a friend? No, so just because he is my son, I will not accept the behavior from him. It's his choice how he is behaving, and it is my choice on how to react to his behavior. I choose living.
Just had a look on Wikipedia for Stockholm Syndrome, amazing phenomenon but I know that I displayed some of these behavior patterns myself - mind you in a very weak form but nevertheless. The urge to please regardless of how I was treated falls into this category I think.
We live and learn.
Actually, DH, Mr. Psychologist calls the Stockholm Syndrome BS. I will ask him again tonight because it has been a while since we talked about it so my memory my not be accurate. Essentially, there isn't any research to back it up its existence. It is just a phrase coined to try to explain why hostages sympathize with their captors, specifically a captive situation in Stockholm in which the captives tried to intervene on their captor's behalf. And it was thrown around a lot when that heiress was kidnapped in the 60s(?) and became part of the captor's movement. Patty Hearse, that was her name.
There is, however research about loyalty and attachment. The harder we have to work at something the more attached we are to it. This is why hazing was allowed for so long. If you go willingly through horrible humiliation in order to be a member of something it must be something amazing and totally worth it, right? People who experience hazing or are forced to jump through impossible hoops to become a member are more loyal to an institution than those who do not. And this works for relationships, too. Someone who has been married for 15 years and has children with their spouse is less likely to leave when cheated on than those who have been together a relatively short time or have no children with the spouse.
I will try to find the research if anyone is interested.
I think that while Stockholm Syndome may not be an appropriate term for someone who willingly commits to a marriage and makes some investment at first, it is probably very accurate in describing situations where someone has no choice but to commit to survival. After all, decisions often don't really count once we made them, it's the commitment after the fact that mostly determines whether a decision is good or bad. I think there are a lot of people out there that are very committed to having a successful marriage, and thus they will put up with controlling behavior. Then, on the extreme end, are spouses afraid to leave because they fear they will be killed or injured; I believe Stockholm Syndrome describes their level of commitment to those that abuse them, because these people have gone into survival mode.
I can think of two women held captive for a few decades in Vienna, Austria, who regarded their captors, despite the despicable things their captors had done, with love and affection, and were even defensive of the assault and violence they received. The only way they would have survived any situation like that is to reconcile what was happening to them and side with their captors. I think it is pretty ill conceived that they would have survived otherwise. Jaycee Dugard also comes to mind; her own personal diary, kept hidden from her captor says that she would never, ever leave him, and she wishes he would understand that; she developed an attachment simply b/c she had no other choice. Considering what she went through, it took a lot of real changes in her to start identifying with him and not the outside world.
Psychology is a soft science, and while I'm no Psychologist myself, I think that there is probably much debate about this subject. It's probably a 50/50 thing, much like Global Warming among scientists or stock price predictions among Economic experts.
Quote from: Pooh on April 06, 2011, 06:41:24 AM
Would I accept the same behavior from a friend? No, so just because he is my son, I will not accept the behavior from him. It's his choice how he is behaving, and it is my choice on how to react to his behavior. I choose living.
One of the many reasons I love you, Pooh!!! :)
And holli, I agree with you- there's debate in psychology just as there is debate about everything else. It's subject to opinion. One psychologist might think it's BS and the other might be completely convinced because of their personal experience with clients. It's all based on interpretation. Personally, I think Stockholm Syndrome makes too much sense to be made up. But again...just opinion here.
A. Psychology is not a "soft" science. DH is a cognitive psychologist. He studies the brain. He can tell you more about the brain than any medical doctor. The science he does is hard. I have a Biology minor and I can tell that the biology studies I read were less stringent than the psychology studies because psychology does not want to be considered "soft" science. Their criteria for publication is very much more stringent that for biology. I was embarrassed at the studies I read. As an undergrad, the studies I did in psychology were more complex.
B. Your assertion that the Stockholm Syndrome is real despite the many studies that show it to be false is exactly why Psychology is considered to be "soft." These sorts of things get press, and become "real" before the science can get caught up and so become entrenched in the way we thing about things and accepted as "truth" despite the very good science that proves it to be false. For instance, learning styles is a false construct. People have a tendency to learn in preferred ways, however, it is better to teach them in different ways so they become able to learn in multiple ways, because the real world doesn't draw someone a picture because their learning style is visual, or so the rigorous research has proven, however, learning styles has become entrenched and people believe it, so they are resistant to the idea that it is BS and harmful to teach to someone's "learning style."
Another bit of "soft" science for you, it has been proven in study after study that children who have graduated from the DARE program are more likely to do drugs, yet any suggestion to drop the program is met with anger and hostility. The DARE program is harmful to our kids, yet we insist on keeping it despite many other programs that have been proven effective. Why? Because psychology is a "soft" science and easily dismissed.
I suggest you educate yourself before making such judgements.
I see then. Thanks for clearing that up.
I never said I was a doctor. Maybe I failed to mention that my B.S. is in Psychology. So, I do believe I did educate myself. Still working on it actually. I've been in school for 27 years, thanks; and I plan to be pursuing a couple more degrees after this. So, thanks, I do plan on continuing to educate myself. Maybe I'll have to pick a more prestigious school or a more expensive education before my education meets your standards, but I'm just some young mother, with a full time job and a full time school schedule, trying to make ends meet while educating myself with my own out of pocket money, so I apologize if I am never able to achieve what clearly are very high expectations for an education.
Most of my professors, with doctorates in Psychology, referred to their own study as "soft" meaning malleable and changing, and although observed, not always able to be graphed quantitatively. I didn't say "pseudo." There's a big difference between those two words.
I'm looking at a few peer reviewed articles that discuss actual positive correlations between the level of "friendly" encounters a hostage has with their captor and the feelings of attachment one has towards their captor. It also seems that there is evidence that the more "in control" a hostage perceives the captor to be, the more likely they are to garner feelings of attachment. I could research this further, but I'd rather write my term paper, on the PSYCHOLOGICAL impact bureaucracy has on a group of subordinates. Gotta keep getting edumacated. I
I will also add that I spent 1 year in law school, so if it is one thing I know how to research, it's evidence. I'm quite adept at authenticating and verifying sources.
So I'm not reading fluff.
Well, then, maybe you should actually do the research before stating an opinion. When you get to grad school, you will learn that this is necessary. I notice you don't mention those articles are about the Stockholm Syndrome. Maybe they are about cognitive dissonance instead. Frankly I hope that whatever "edumacation" you get is much better than you have demonstrated. "Soft" science indeed. Obviously you have not taken Experimental, or Physiological, or Learning and Memory, or Stats yet. You need better Profs. who appreciate the rigorous requirements for publication even in secondary journals. Reproducibility is necessary for publications in journals that are not even close to primary. Cognitive Psychologists are the scientists of this profession and they are not "soft" about their research. The people who practice it may be "soft" and not current with the research, but the scientists and what they publish are not "soft". As I said, they are more rigorous than many of the biology research because of this erroneous attitude that psychology is "soft." They are very careful about what they claim and how they interpret it. I have taken experimental in both biology and psychology and I learned much more about experimental design and the scientific approach from the psychology class than I did the biology class. There were actually written standards for the psychology research I did rather than general approbation or disapproval in the biology class. If you label psychology "soft" then you must also consider that the rest of science must be "soft." Seriously, after reading psychology research and biology research in comparable journals, i was embarrassed by the lack of standards in the biology research.
See...you stated your opinion on Stockholm Syndrome without citing any references, so I kept it at that level. I wasn't willing to up the ante.
I'm also a year into my grad school program, with a 4.0....and I guess 2 years in if you count my law credits.
Now, yes, I certainly did state an opinion as did you. That is what this site is...none of us are experts here. I've taken ALL of those classes you've mentioned, and actually have an A.S. in Actuarial Science, so I'm quite familiar with Stats.
Go on, keep nullifying the hard work I've put towards my education. It is perfectly okay to disagree with one another without making it personal. To be honest, I'm not even sure if I disagree with you. All I said was there is evidence out there to support both theories, and one simple database search has proven that for me.
I didn't make it personal when I said psychology was soft. There are many women on this site with no college degree, and I hold them in higher esteem than I do some of the Ivy League grads I know. Education isn't everything, and it isn't always necessary.
Whoa, Justus! We can write without being unkind, condescending or pompus. No "shoulds," please. When in doubt use "I statements"...they seldome sting like "you statements can."
My Web-site...my call.
Didn't realize we were in the presence of such an esteemed, superior being. My bad.
What? I agree that I am all of that ( ;D) but it was Justus I was addressing. Openly to make my point.
LOL, Luise I wasn't talking about you, silly! I was talking to justus, who knows nothing about me, my background, or my education. Nor did she know about holli's when she made her little remarks.
Well, just so you know I am really incredibly superior! LOL!
There are many women on this site with no college degree, and I hold them in higher esteem than I do some of the Ivy League grads I know. Education isn't everything, and it isn't always necessary.
[/quote]
Holliberri, I do agree with you completely. It is vital to be humble and hold everybody in high esteem whatever their level of education. We can learn so much from each other. If I had my time over again I think I would have another baby rather than the doctorate that took such a lot of energy to finish. I now consider it to be just a piece of useless paper in the big scheme of things. The knowledge I acquired then, didn't help me when dealing with current family issues.
I think it is bad for academics to take themselves too seriously and loose contact with the real world as many of them do. This is unfortunate because it gives the profession a bad name and alienates it from the general public. IMO all science is 'soft' science because what's right today can be proved wrong tomorrow. The world is not flat, but people died for this belief way back!
Good on you to do all this studying. Education does contribute to gaining more insights into mechanisms of living but it should be undertaken in a modest frame of mind.
Though this is not directly related to MIL, DIL issues addressed on this site, I think it is relevant because we get an idea of different mindsets. All good too!
Well anyway I have some idea what the Stockholm Syndrome is and how the name came about. Arghhh, I got the info from Wikipedia - shame :)
Personally I don't really care if Mr. Psychologist refers to Stockholm Syndrome as BS or not.. and I'm not talking about his (betrayed spouses) syndrome. The horrific situation that victims such as Jaycee Dugard age 11, who was kidnapped, raped, and forced to live in a backyard shed for more then 18 years. Elizabeth Smart age 14, also kidnapped and raped repeatedly while her family was being threatened if she did not comply. Elisabeth Fritzl held captive for 9 years by her father who repeatedly impregnated her. Two of these victims had several opportunities as perceived by the general public to have escaped, or attempted to seek aid but they did not... These girls did what they had to do in order to survive. While I did not see mention of brainwashing as one of the tools used against these girls, it was very much a part of their every day existence.
For a moment I was curious as to why Mr. Psychologist believes that these girls stayed with their kidnappers, but then I decided that I really rather not know his opinion especially when it's translated through someone else.
Quote from: chelmsford36 on April 06, 2011, 11:12:13 PM
Good on you to do all this studying. Education does contribute to gaining more insights into mechanisms of living but it should be undertaken in a modest frame of mind.
It's was unfortunate that Holli's education was even questioned by another poster, or that she needed to defend her years of hard work. I will say that to the best of my knowledge Holli has never spoken through her husband's degree, or through anyone's Ivy League education as others have done.
Luise.. you are just to funny sometimes :)
Quote from: luise.volta on April 06, 2011, 09:00:14 PM
Well, just so you know I am really incredibly superior! LOL!
She's on a roll now, OW... :) :) :) The only thing I know is that the older I get, the more shades of gray I discover~ Or is that grey? You see what I mean?
No pieces of paper can make up for personal experiences , and no amount of letters after her name could make her
a nicer , wiser person . That's our Luise ...... :)
Laurie, I hope you understood what I was trying to say in my post. I only wanted to stress how important it is to stay modest whatever letters one has behind your name - and I also agree that ultimately they don't make one a better person. If I should have said the wrong thing - unwittingly - then I'm sorry. I just feel so strongly about people who think they are better because they have a university degree.
Meanwhile best wishes from me to all of you, WW.
Well, I think we just about covered this, right? As you all know, I don't have a degree. I don't think it's a minus or a plus. There are many roads to wisdom and to my way of thinking, any road that doesn't have compassion as its base is to be pitied because it is the well-traveled road of the ego. (That's an old saying I just made up.) All "authorities", Mr. Psychologist included, are only that until someone smarter comes along...and "she" usually does.
I believe in Santa Claus because I choose to. There is no science to back me up but it fits my mindset. I also believe in miracles, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy and a higher power.
If higher education equates to belittling others opinions and thinking I am better than someone else, I'll stay stupid.
My DH is involved with DARE and I'll just leave it at that..........
Ok Luise....now we've covered it!
Amen...