Adopt Parents

2024 Author: Harry Day | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 15:43

Kolmanovsky Alexander Eduardovich

There are a lot of things that cause, well, let's put it mildly, children's discomfort in relations with their parents. These are attempts to impose something that a person does not like. It happens, on the contrary, a lack of attention and interest on the part of the parents, as it seems to the children. Misunderstanding is very common. And very often there is a mismatch of interests, that is, parents want one thing, but a person believes that it is harmful for him, and he needs something completely different. What is the reason for this discomfort that we children experience so often with our parents? Are there any common reasons for this phenomenon? And to what extent is the reason in the parent, to what extent - in the child?

- This phenomenon is truly universal. Almost all adults experience some kind of discomfort in communicating with their parents and suffer from it. There is no need to talk about someone else's fault, the word “guilt” is not appropriate at all. But if we talk about a causal relationship, then of course, the responsibility for this trouble lies with the parents. This discomfort is laid in childhood, when parents communicated with us, with children, in one way or another edifying, at least somewhat reluctant …

Is the problem in the form of communication or in some kind of internal wrong attitude of the parents to the child and to themselves?

- In the internal. The external form of communication is only a consequence of the internal relationship. Therefore, if the form is incorrect, then the internal attitude is distorted.

What is the essence of the distortion?

- Every living person has a fear for himself. This is a normal feeling, very important from an adaptive point of view. But, besides this, there is also fear for another - for a child, for a neighbor, for a relative, for a friend, for a husband, for a wife. These are two very different feelings, they are experienced in different ways and expressed in different ways.

Fear for oneself is felt and externally expressed in the form of protest, irritation, aggression. And fear for another is felt and externally expressed in the form of sympathy.

Imagine a difficult person with low self-acceptance, insecure, little realized. This person will inevitably have a very strong fear for himself, which will be expressed, as already mentioned, in the form of increased irritability, criticality, and consumerism. He will have an irresistible need to "pull the blanket over himself." Now let's imagine that such a person has a child. The new parent develops, of course, fear for the child, that is, sympathy for the child. But fear for oneself does not disappear and does not diminish by itself. (It can only diminish with very special efforts and a certain amount of luck.) Therefore, when such a parent is confronted with some kind of ill-being of his child - bad behavior, frivolity, irresponsibility, even soreness - both feelings, both fears, instantly develop in him. And the more the parent is psychologically dysfunctional, the more the fear for oneself is expressed, that is, in the external form - irritation, protest, edification. This is where the traditional phrases “Who gave you permission? What are you just thinking about? How long can you repeat the same thing? " etc. All these protest forms, intonations, vocabulary betray parental fear for themselves, although fear for the child is declared.

He himself thinks that he is worried about the child …

- Yes of course. And children instantly notice this substitution, regardless of their age and psychological qualifications. They, of course, do not explain this to themselves in such complex and clever words as we are now, of course, but they feel that they are treated badly, that their parents are afraid not for them, but “against” them. Because of this, such a child, in turn, becomes insecure, a dysfunctional person, continuing this many-thousand-year chain, becoming another link in it …

A child who has been loaded with this from childhood feels not completely accepted, not completely correct. And with this he lives on all his life. This feeling does not change in any way - only the passport age changes. The feeling that "I am bad, wrong, and if something happens, I am subject to condemnation and punishment" - this is the lack of self-acceptance - it does not go anywhere by itself.

Again, there is no one's fault here - this is evident from our description - none of us chose our fear for ourselves. The strength of this fear is determined in each of us by our childhood history, the history of our parent-child relationships.

So, when some psychologists tell children that “in fact, parents want what is good for you, you just don’t understand”, the children are still right when they say that we know better how it really is, what they want us - good or bad. That is, the understanding of children is usually correct, right?

- Quite right. Therefore, the appeals remain helpless: "Well, these are your parents, well, understand how they love you, well, you must forgive them." In fact, this is also true, all parents (within the clinical norm) love their children. The only question is how much they love. And this really manifests itself only in a situation of some kind of collision, contradiction of interests, conflict. And here the children see that the parent's fear for himself is greater than the fear for me, for the child.

What are the consequences of such unhealthy relationships with parents for us, already adult children?

- The "ill health" of these relations seriously worsens our psychological state. This is imperceptible to our ordinary eyes, but it is very noticeable to the psychologist. The human psyche is so arranged that discomfort in relations with parents undermines our self-confidence, our success, the ability to distinguish our own subtle inner experiences.

And that's why.

It's a shame when our “problem” parent made life difficult for us children. We were scolded, not allowed to go to bed when we wanted to, to come home when we wanted, to listen to the music we wanted, and to wear whatever jeans we wanted. This is all unpleasant. But the biggest damage that this troubled parent could do to a child is that he was turning the child against himself with all these troubles.

And this is the most destructive for the further life trajectory of a person. The need to please the parent, the need to win his favor, to have a comfortable relationship with him, is the most basic, the most fundamental need of the psyche. This is, in fact, the first "relational", social need of the psyche, which generally develops in consciousness. The need is "pre-cultural", one might say, zoological. If the cub does not follow the parent, it will be devoured by a leopard in the bushes. This is a question of the survival of the species.

And a person remains the child of his parent all his life, at any age. Therefore, if a child of any age - at least four, at least forty-four - remains some kind of protest against his parents, he develops an insurmountable internal contradiction, a "collision", he becomes a very dysfunctional person.

In what form this distress manifests itself in each of us - it is no longer so important. One becomes irritated, aggressive, the other cynical, the third vulnerable … It depends on the psychotype, psychophysical constitution of each of us.

Therefore, if we do not try to "heal" these relations, we will remain psychologically not quite safe people. Moreover, we will almost inevitably treat our own children with the same wrongness from which we suffer on the part of our parents.

Can I somehow illustrate this?

- A parent says to his adult daughter: "When you finally get married, how much you can fool around, so you will live your whole life in old maidens!" - and so on, says something inappropriate, unpleasant. An adult daughter, naturally, snaps at this: "Stop it, I forbade you to talk about it, your tediousness only makes it worse."Even in this micro-dialogue, we already see the protest, irritated reaction formed in this adult daughter to what seems to her to be wrong. In exactly this way, she will continue to react to what seems wrong to her in her children, or in her men, or even in her girlfriends.

What to do? After all, we depend on our parents and cannot fix them, rid them of their fears and complexes?

- To find the answer to this eternal question: "What to do?", Let's ask an intermediate question: why do parents treat us like this? Why are they so superficial, edifying, so formally apply some common common truths to me, regardless of my subtle circumstances and feelings? If you really ask this question - not in the form of a rhetorical exclamation: "Well, why are they like that?" - then the answer, it seems, will not be very difficult to find. Moreover, we have already formulated it.

Parents did not choose their own fear and the methods of upbringing that followed from it. It was not they who formed it, just as our protest against them was not formed by us. They had their own parents, their childhood, and it was from there that they were released into life with this inner trouble.

And what is the right attitude to them then?

Just as we would like to be treated in moments of our fear - our irritation, our unkindness - in moments when someone turned to us, and we snapped at him. If we were to say to someone, "Why the hell are you bothering with inappropriate questions?" - how would we like the person to react to this? In the most ideal case?

Obviously, we would like the reaction of our partners - wives, husbands, friends - to be sympathetic, to be treated with understanding. They would not have responded with blow for blow, but would have said: "Oh, forgive me, somehow, maybe I didn't think at the right time." Each of us understands: if I snapped at someone or didn’t come to help someone, or abused someone - well, it means that it worked out for me, it means that I was somehow uncomfortable. I'm not bad, I feel bad. And this is not some sly self-justification - this is a correct understanding of cause-and-effect relationships. It's just easier to understand this about yourself than about others, because you see your spiritual kitchen from the inside, but you don't see someone else's. The whole trick is to be able to project this understanding, this vision onto all other "kitchens", onto other people - they are arranged in the same way. In particular, our parents' kitchens. This formula - "they are not bad, but they feel bad" - must be fully applied to them. If you really take this into your head about your parents, the internal state and external relations change very much, the very trajectory of life changes.

How is it to "really take it into your head"?

- You need to start behaving towards them, based on this formula. That is, to behave in relation to them in the same way as we behave in relation to a person who is “clearly” bad, who has it written on his face, about whom this understanding does not need to be “completed” with difficulty. The way we deal with a frightened child, with an upset friend who is in trouble. We support, help, take care of such people. This is how you should behave towards your parents.

If you want to really improve your relationship with your parents, you have to do not some kind of auto-training or meditation, but you need to change something in behavioral, gestural terms, in actions. The psyche is secondary to activity. The structure of the psyche is determined by the structure of activity. We need to start looking after them, we need to start patronizing them, we need to start to delve into them. We need to talk to them about what is the most pleasant thing to talk about to any person in the world - about himself.

In psychology, this whole complex of measures is called "adopting a parent."

Who came up with this term?

- It was invented and introduced into use by psychologist Natalya Kolmanovskaya.

There is such a word "infantilism" - this is when an adult remains not fully mature, remains a little child in a bad sense of the word. The difference between real maturity and infantilism is determined, first of all, in relations with parents. For an infantile child, a parent is something that makes me feel good or bad. And for a mature person, a parent is something that can be good or bad from me.

An infantile person in a conversation with a parent is more focused on his own feelings, on his fear: will there be something unpleasant now? Will they tell me something edifying? Ask about something inappropriate?

A mature person habitually focuses on his parents. Imagines what he or she is afraid of, what he wants, from what self-doubt he suffers, how can I give them this confidence. Asks more than speaks out. Asks how the day went, did the parent manage to have lunch, was it smoked, who called him (her), what they watched on TV. Realistically imagines their experiences during daylight hours. And not only during the day, but also during their life. How it was in childhood, how it was with the parents, how they were punished - they were not punished, what happened to the money, what were the first sexual impressions.

And, besides, and even more important than that, to delve into and support them at the material and organizational level. Life does not consist of psychology, but, figuratively speaking, of potatoes. In order to assess who relates how to whom, it is necessary to "turn off the sound", remove comments and look only at the picture - who is peeling the potatoes for whom. It is necessary to support them financially. To impose expenses on them, which they, embarrassedly, avoid. To know what delicacy they love, and at least for a penny, but once a month to buy this delicacy. Bring to see a movie that everyone watched, but they didn't even hear. And so on, and so on … It is at this level that the main interaction develops.

And then what changes? If an adult child - our reader - has been engaged in such efforts for a long time (there is no need to build illusions, these are very inertial things, it takes many months), it becomes unnatural for the parent to communicate with this adult child, still superficially, edifying, formal or detached. He begins to look at this adult child with a question in his eyes, he begins to reckon with him more.

But this is a secondary result - both in terms of time and importance. And much more important, and which is developing much faster, is this. When you invest in someone for a long time - at least even in your parent - you begin to perceive him not even with your mind, but with feelings, really as an object of your care, as an unloved child for whom you are trying to fill this deficit. And then all this parental negativity, all parental ostracism ceases to be perceived by your psyche at your own expense. Even in hindsight, even in retrospect. And the person becomes very "brighter", the person begins to feel more confident and fulfilled. Begins to fear for himself less.

When I talked about overcoming infantility with other psychologists, I was often told about such a term as "separation" from parents, that is, separation from them. It is clear that, one way or another, the problem of emotional dependence on parents, on parental opinion, needs to be addressed. "Separation" is a kind of simple interruption of this dependence. And your method sounds somehow more humane - "parental adoption." Are these really some different paths, or is it just the same thing under a different name?

- These are completely different paths - not to say diametrically opposite. Separation is always something artificial. A person is invited at some point to make a speculative decision that I am cutting off something alive, important in my relationship with my parents. In addition, the supporters of this separation, as a rule, do not specify, do not specify its scope. In some cases, they say that it is enough to move to another apartment and live on their own money (while the nature of the psychological interaction is not commented on). In other cases, they say: "We must break off with them altogether and terminate all relations." It remains unclear how it is more correct, how to make this choice, how much it is necessary to separate and break away from the parents.

It seems to me that separation is just a tribute to our protest feelings, when the parents are completely "fed up", and there is no desire and strength to interact with them. But this is an internal problem, from which it is impossible to get away with some external steps. Yes, moving to a separate apartment is probably good, but not in order to forget about the problem, but in order to make it easier to deal with it.

Unfortunately, when the parents are very problematic, the temptation to separate can be very strong. And if a person succumbs to this temptation, gives weakness, breaks with them, or moves away from them, - well, he is not to blame, it means that he really didn’t have enough strength. It means that he feels so bad from them. The trouble is that he will still have to pay for all this negativity. He learns this separation as a life lesson: this is how to deal with people who are unpleasant, wrong. We must move away from them. And then a person, when faced with uncomfortable partners in life, does not try to somehow substantively correct, change this discomfort, but tries to get away from it by such organizational measures. Unfortunately, this "skill", this lesson will apply to the most intimate relationships of our hero - love, parent-child. Therefore, the recommendation of "separation" is not close to me.

I'll try to argue with that. You are talking more about material separation - that is, to leave, to stop communicating. But separation, as I understand it, is not only material, but also financial, and most importantly, emotional. That is, you can live in one apartment and, nevertheless, be separated. It seems to me that your method is the only possible way of emotional separation. Because if you don’t do as you say, then you don’t separate, in fact

- I don't really understand what emotional separation means?

Well, you say that a child depends on the opinion of his parents - and this sometimes translates into pressure on him for him. And say that you need to stop depending on it, make it so that, on the contrary, the parent is dependent on you. Does this promote separation?

- Let's clarify the terminology. All living people in the world depend on the opinions of others. This is inevitable, this in itself is normal. The degree of this dependence is abnormal - when a person is very acutely dependent on how he is treated. And it is clear that this acuteness is directly related to inner confidence or self-doubt. The more a person is not sure of himself, the more he is dependent on who looks at him how, what they think of him, what they say and how they will comment on his actions and circumstances. In this sense, it is correct to get rid of excessive sensitivity, from dependence on someone else's opinion. But this is not the specificity of our child-parental problems. When we talk about this specificity, then first of all we need to get rid of not in general the dependence on the parental opinion about me - we need to get rid of the suffering that is caused to me by their unpleasant manner of communicating with me.

This is exactly what we are talking about. This is the subject of complaints from a huge number of people who turn to a psychologist: "You know, I have very difficult parents." Very often the same circumstance comes up in connection with completely different appeals, when a person says that he has a problem with children, or with love relationships, or with work. In the vast majority of cases, the root of all these troubles - when it is possible to trace their origin - is discomfort in relations with parents. Perhaps what I am describing can be called emotional separation, but for me this is some kind of terminological violence against this construction: it seems to me that we should talk specifically about the adoption of parents. This is not the only correct term. You can talk about real friendship with them instead. But not in the banal, empty sense of the word: "Let's be friends!"

What if, in the light of our discussion with you, we consider a specific situation that I witnessed? One of my acquaintances got married, but my mother did not accept her husband. Mom was the only parent - I don't remember what happened to dad there. She did not accept her daughter's husband and cursed very cruelly, so he was forced to live separately from his wife in a hostel. And all this was against the background of the fact that her mother's health had deteriorated sharply, she became bedridden and, accordingly, required care, and therefore the young woman could not leave her mother and live with her husband. As you know, mothers who do not want to part with their children often have health problems at the “right” moment. And some psychologists advise: “Don't pay attention to this, then her health will improve,” that is, you leave. It's like a separation position - to leave mom and live with her husband. But she stayed with her, lived with her for three years, suffered terribly, drank antidepressants, because it was terribly hard for her, because her mother continued to swear wildly. Although her husband was absent, she still badly reviled her daughter. All this was very difficult, but when she died, her daughter's conscience in front of her mother was clear. Do you think she chose the right path?

- A very good storyline for comments. In my opinion, the main choice here was not between leaving for my husband, on the one hand, and the former life with my mother, on the other, but on a completely different plane. Namely: how to relate to my mother's hysterical fear and protest.

One option is to treat the mother with a counter protest, even staying with her: "snap" at her, quarrel, prove her wrong.

Second … how else can you treat this all that came from your mother? How would we like people to relate to our suffering - no matter how aggressively expressed? Obviously, we would like to be treated with sympathy and understanding. This is how this unfortunate woman should have treated her mother. It would seem to me right for her to still move to her husband, without fear of any scandal, no "atomic explosion". And within the framework of this disposition, I do my best to console my mother: “Mommy, I understand that something repels you in my husband, something scares you. You must tell me, you open my eyes, your opinion is very important to me. " And to say all this is not technical, but meaningful, because my mother's opinion is really important. Maybe you really don't notice something, and it is valuable for her to open her eyes. And then any mother's comments to meet meaningfully. Let's say the mother grumbles: "He will drown you and leave you, he will knock you over and run away, he will use your living space." Each of these positions should be commented on as you, an adult daughter, see her. But, again, this comment can be voiced both protesting and sympathetically. You can say: "Don't you dare talk like that about my loved one!" This would be a protest response - and it would take root in our heroine the same protest reactions towards all her other partners in life. Or you can say: “Mom, well, yes, I understand that this happens, I understand that you are afraid for me and for me it is very valuable, you are the only person who supports me. But look - we have such and such a relationship. This is how we spend our time, this is how we communicate. Look, do you really see such a danger in this? " - "Yes, I see, it's you, you blind fool, you don't notice anything!" - "Mom, it's good that you suggested, I will follow, I will pay attention to these dangers." “By the time you pay attention, it will be too late! Throw it away immediately! " - “Mom, I can’t just leave my beloved. Well, imagine that you love someone, and they tell you - leave him! Even if they speak convincingly, isn't it easy? " The purpose of such a conversation is not to overpersuade the mother, but to hold on to such a non-aggressive intonation, the intonation of a real discussion, friendly towards the mother. And then, from conversation to conversation, from week to week, the tension will inevitably subside - both from my mother's side, and, most importantly, from “ours”! And this would be a guarantee that she will also communicate with her other problematic relatives and get along with them successfully.

Why do you think it would calm your mother?

- Because behind any mom's scandal, as well as any scandal and shout in general, there is always a request: "Show that you reckon with me." And if we show that yes, we reckon with you, show for a long time, not one or two evenings, but six months, - this request is satisfied. Mom, maybe, continues to say something like that, but in a different tone, a dialogue is already possible.

That is, the goal should not be to change the position of the parents, but to change their own position

- Quite right.

If we continue the topic of moms, there is such a well-known problem - "mama's son". That is, a child who grew up with his mother, the mother does not want to part with him, the mother considers him her man, the mother herself does not want the existence of another man. And then this boy, when he becomes an adult, starts having problems with girls, with women. And if he marries, then mother again begins to interfere with the young family in every possible way. Are there any peculiarities in the recommendations for this young man, in contrast to what we said before, in order to still become a real man, and not a "mama's boy"?

- The real load-bearing beam, so to speak, of this structure is not just the mother's affection for her son - not that at all - but her need to dominate. This is a mother who decided for the child herself all the way. And clung, desperately clung to her dominant position.

And again we ask ourselves a question - why is it like that? In what state should a person be in order for him to heighten the need to emphasize his importance? Obviously, when he strongly doubts that he on his own, without these forceful external manifestations, will be able to gain attention, respect, wait to be reckoned with. Behind such authoritarianism, imperiousness is simply fear. Fear that if I offer you something in an intonation that really leaves you free to choose, you will use this freedom not in my favor. If I tell you softly, without pressure: "Well, what is more pleasant for you today - there, go to a party or watch a movie with me?" - what if you really leave me, what if I'm something not very significant for you?

This is very scary for those mothers who, in childhood, felt not fully accepted, were disliked. Hence their deep self-doubt, fear of their worthlessness. Therefore, in no case do they allow such an opportunity, they say: "There is nothing, nothing to go there, today you will stay at home." There is such an anecdote. Mom shouts through the window to the walking child: "Seryozha, go home!" He says: "What, am I cold?" - "No, you want to eat!" This is what a "mama's boy" is: this is a child on whom the mother imposes her authority.

And here lies the reasons for the lack of masculinity of the child. You asked how this person can become truly courageous. In order for our recommendation to be meaningful, it must be said what masculinity is. And masculinity is, first of all, responsibility. Femininity is unconditional acceptance. “To whom is a thief, to whom is a robber - and a mother’s dear son” - there is such a wonderful Russian proverb, which, in my opinion, perfectly illustrates real femininity. And, of course, such mothers never have a son as a robber. And masculinity is responsibility: "I am a man - I answer."A responsible man does not shout: "Who allowed the child to take my papers from the table?" He understands that since he left the papers on the table in the room where the child is, it is his own responsibility.

Why does she often remain underdeveloped in us men? Where does irresponsibility come from?

There is an important hint: the main negative feeling in humans (as, in fact, in animals) is fear. And all other negative feelings - anger, envy, jealousy, loneliness, and so on, and so on - are different derivatives of fear. Therefore, if you see that something is wrong with a person, first of all, look for what he is afraid of.

What can a man be afraid of, avoiding responsibility, shifting it onto others? Seemingly afraid of failure. In fact, he is not afraid of failure, but the reaction of loved ones to this failure. If in childhood he had been accustomed to the fact that in case of failure he would be told: “Poor fellow, how unlucky you are, let me help you,” then failure would not be terrible for him. But from childhood he got used to completely different comments. To those who have already sounded with us today: “What were you just thinking about? Who gave you permission? Why did you disassemble this ballpoint pen? Who will collect? Did she interfere with you? And since then, the child is afraid to take any initiative.

One person - now he has the status of more or less an oligarch - told me a story from his childhood. How he, at about nine years old, dismantled a TV set by cogs - and then it was a dead Soviet time, it was a very great value - and could not assemble it. Nobody said a word to him, they didn't even squint at him somehow reproachfully. And at fourteen he was already working in a television studio, and at forty-four, when we had this dialogue with him, he was more than an accomplished person.

Let's go back to "mama's son". How can he get out of this unpleasant shadow, live his life and become, in particular, self-confident, that is, a courageous person? On the same basis: to understand that behind my mother’s authoritarianism or mother’s, philistinely speaking, egoism with which she so desperately clings to me, already an adult son, is her fear, her self-doubt. He must first of all turn to face her, and not try to tear himself away from her with all his might. It is necessary to dispel her fear, to show that he himself is glad to stay with her on the New Year, although there are other tasty suggestions. But not just stay and, drumming your fingers on the table, watch TV all night - but make her a real holiday. If she sees his concentration on her more than once every three hundred and sixty-five days, and, if possible, several times a day, she will cease to be afraid of his "separation". The mother will cease to be afraid of some other life of her son, realizing that this life does not threaten their relationship.

If, on the contrary, he rushes and tries to break this umbilical cord - well, go to another apartment and not tell his mother either the address or the phone number, or find himself a wife who will put a tough barrier between mother and son - this is quite possible to succeed, but after all, his inner fear, his inner self-doubt will not go away from this, but will only worsen. And to the new wife, who in such a manipulative way can alienate her son from his mother, then this whistling boomerang will return.

Do such difficulties happen most often with a single mother? Because she has no other support in life, right?

“Not at all, not necessarily. Such relationships are often found in complete families. You rightly said about the absence of support, but we are talking about the absence of an internal support, not an external one. Such an authoritarian mother, she also crushes her husband, if she has one, in the same way. And still she does not find real satisfaction in this, because the husband, like the son, reckons with her not so much out of an internal need as out of fear.

Are there any peculiarities in the relationship of a daughter with such a mother? Unlike the relationship with her son - after all, she has no goal of becoming courageous?

- There is no fundamental difference, in the sense that a child of any gender - if he does not adopt, does not adopt this mother - is doomed to be a very dysfunctional person, uncomfortable for his neighbors. It's just that the forms of this trouble will be different. The boy will be irresponsible, infantile, and the girl will most likely be more hysterical and irritable. But, one way or another, both will have the main problem - this is self-doubt.

Let's talk about pleasant things. What will be the fruits of this “adoption of parents” over a considerable period of time? What is the bottom line? What will be the reward?

- It will get very warm inside. A sense of real resilience, self-confidence will develop. Not external self-confidence, but that feeling that allows you to freely open the door to a room where twenty strangers are sitting and doing an important job, and it is easy to ask: "Excuse me, is Ivan Mikhailovich not here?" A feeling that allows - if you are one of these twenty - to be the first to say: "Friends, maybe we'll open the window, but it's stuffy?"

Well, in a relationship with a husband, wife, with the opposite sex, probably everything will get better?

- Yes, of course, because the job of truly accepting your problem parent is exactly what all our partners expect from us. If we are talking about an adult woman, then the work of unconditional acceptance of her dad is the same work that her own husband unconditionally expects from her. Having mastered this skill in a relationship with her father, she will easily then behave in the same way with her man. If she cannot master this with her father, then the man will be difficult for her.

I would also like to sort out such a private situation when parents do not accept your chosen one, groom, bride. There is a traditional concept of "parental blessing". Great importance is attached to whether the parents accept your chosen one. It is believed that if they accept, then this is a guarantee of future happiness. But often they do not accept, and it seems that you know better who suits you. Here's how to be in such a situation? It happens that they do not accept it after they got married there and begin their own opposition after the fact

- Prevention would be optimal here, which would make it possible to avoid this situation. Therefore, it is necessary to start adopting your parents as early as possible, before such problems arise. If, before meeting with this chosen one, to whom the parents will not know how they will react, for some considerable time you became close to your parents, managed to make friends with them, then they will show their concern about your choice much more tolerantly, so that it will be possible to discuss it with them painlessly.

But life is life, and if it took us by surprise, and we did not take care of our parents in time, but lived spontaneously, tried to fend off them, and then such a violent collision developed that they categorically do not accept this person, - in this situation it is difficult to give an unambiguous advice. Sometimes it is right to hide this relationship, or even freeze it, and start getting closer to your parents. Sometimes it is necessary to legalize the relationship anyway, openly support it, and at the same time deal with the parents, console them, again get closer to them. But as we can see, in all cases the same thing must be done - to calm the parental inflammation, to treat it. Otherwise, you will inevitably "get infected" yourself.

But it happens that parents really see something so bad in this chosen one, which in fact is

- It happens. And so it is important that we have the opportunity to take advantage of what they see. But for this opportunity, again, one must first change the intonation of the dialogue. While our parents are shouting at us: "You fool, how do you not understand ?!"

What would you like to add at the end on this topic?

- It is very important to understand that all these efforts to adopt parents, for their comfort, for their well-being, should be done not because we, adult children, are obliged to do this. We definitely don't have to. No one in the world has the right to accuse us of inattention to our parents, of neglect. If we neglect it, it means that we simply do not have the strength to be more attentive to them. You just need to tell yourself exactly how you should behave in your own, literally "selfish", but correctly understood interests. These efforts should be made not for the parents, but for oneself. You should only do this because it will be better for you.