"Ungrateful Children" Or Empty Nest Syndrome

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

It is difficult to pull people out of the pit of the past, there is not always a need for this, but more and more often in the offices of psychologists of all "confessions" - from gestaltists to psychoanalysts - there are adult children sitting in parental nests, tightly tied to the anchor chain of duty

Anyone who believes that there is no reason to be sad about it has never been weighed down by a filial or childish duty that has nothing to do with gratitude. Gratitude is initially an ambiguous thing, because if you wait for it, then this is not gratitude, but a specific commodity exchange, which means that the value of such gratitude is reduced to zero. But people most often prefer commodity exchange, without even thinking about how easily and naturally they agree to it. But this exchange was not agreed upon by both parties, since one of the parties is a child who was certainly not asked before birth if he was ready to bring this notorious glass of water to his parent on his deathbed

Of course, any parent secretly dreams of being surrounded by successful children in old age, who, at the first call, sigh, wave of their hand, are ready to be grateful, pleasing, and helpful. Yes, not everyone can treat a child like a guest in the house: grow up and let go. But, thank God, the world for the most part consists of quite adequate, matured, independent people.

And yet the cost of the issue is high enough to start a conversation about duty to parents and the neuroses associated with it.

To begin with, a little about the history of the issue. If you try to study a traditional family 200-300 years ago, it turns out that the price of a child's life was so low that having a child "for yourself" was simply a vital necessity. In addition, the institution of pension was practically absent, and the most reliable "pension" in old age (and it came much earlier than the current retirement age) were children, of whom there were seven in the family in the shops, for reliability. In general, we must pay tribute to the traditional way of life - the responsibilities between the children were completely distributed. These role traditions are reflected in the fairy tales of almost all peoples of the world: "The eldest was smart, the middle son was so and so, the youngest was a fool." That is, it so happened that the eldest son (or the smartest one) could be outside the family, make a career, go "into the people", the middle one and everyone who follows him - as the card will fall, but one of the offspring, as a rule, is the youngest, stayed in his father's house. Oddly enough, it was often by definition the most "stupid", but also the most affectionate and flexible child, such a child should not have sought to make a career, run away from the parental home, since initially he could not cope without parents either. It was he who was the "pension" to the parents. His tasks were subsequently to look after them, to be with them, to take care, if necessary - to get them and their daily bread. Bread, which literally could be arable land and a vegetable garden at the hut or a shop and workshop at the parent's house. If he marries, his wife was obliged to share this fate. With a high birth rate, it was not difficult to choose, and even early infant mortality did not break this way too much.

With the advent of pension as a separate institution, everything has changed significantly. By the way, sociologists often explain the drop in the birth rate in Europe precisely by the presence of a pension, because what is the point of raising and feeding a person, so that later they can let go and not receive dividends in the form of care and quality care. Such care in civilized countries can simply be bought for money. And raising children is not an easy job. In our country, where the quality of pensions does not meet expectations and does not cover costs, the situation remains the same, although the number of children in families over the past 100 years has decreased significantly.

With the fall in the birth rate, everything began to look different. The value of the child, who now has to cope with all the tasks - to be both outside and within the family, to leave, but have time to take care of - has grown to the limit of neurotic dependence in the parents. The fear of being in old age without that notorious glass of water became so intrusive that parents in panic began to look for the most reliable ways to introduce children into inverse dependence and they came up with a name for this - "gratitude", although in fact it is a deeply tender feeling of guilt.

The parent "works" on this feeling of guilt long and hard. To begin with, it is better to nurture it in yourself, because otherwise there will be nothing to share. Mothers who have decided to raise a child themselves, so to speak "for themselves", are especially zealous. The formula for "keeping a husband" or for "removing a man from another family" also works. But even if it is not possible to keep a man as a child, then the trouble-free mantra "I raised you alone, did everything for you, lived only for you" and the additional mantra "all men are bastards" automatically turns on, which gives a special areola of suffering to the appearance of a woman. Is there any doubt that this is all so long and persistently broadcast to the child that he is simply obliged to feel guilty for his inappropriate birth and the only way he can redeem this guilt is only with filial (daughter) love, devotion and around-the-clock presence somewhere nearby …

It happens that at first, the appearance of a saving child really unites parents in an impulse to grow and educate. But there is also a pitfall here. It turns out that, having no other unifying principles, except for the child, the spouses are so afraid of losing this common denominator that they also do not let the grown child go, because without him such a family has nothing in common. This phenomenon is called the empty nest syndrome, when, after the adult children leave their home, the parental family breaks up. In fact, this always happens in families where marriage was originally a misalliance, where husband and wife are people from families with completely different levels of intellectual development and material wealth, with different traditions, views on life and leisure. And the ultimate task in such a family is to leave the child young, domesticated, weak and submissive, so that in this form he can become a guarantee that the old age of the parents will not be lonely.

Such families find themselves in a psychologist's office, as a rule, not of their own free will. Usually they are "led by the hand" by concerned relatives, acquaintances, and friends. This whole alignment is clearly visible to a reasonable person from the outside, but from the inside such a relationship for everyone looks like reverent love for parents, which, well, cannot be censured by society, but rather is an object of envy: "What a caring son Petrovna has - everything is with my mother, all to the house, all to the house! And my idiot got married and forgot his way home! Ungrateful!"

What allows you to keep a child who has grown up, but has not left his father's house, near him?

Helplessness. From early childhood, the child is consistently instilled that he cannot do anything and achieve himself, that he is helpless, is not needed by anyone except his parents, and in general he will not be able to cope with his life on his own. Everything, from tying shoelaces to choosing a profession, will be better done for him by his parents, and his task is to obey the will of those who know what is best for him. Favorite parental fun - exaggeration of the danger of the world around and exaggeration of socialization problems.

If, even in adolescence, the child did not manage to rebel, go through his path of initiation and eat a hard umbilical cord, then further the chances of independence will be less and less. There have also been overgrown “teenagers” in my practice, but such a belated rebellion is akin to “chickenpox” at the age of 30: it is difficult and with consequences, and the rebellion looks very unattractive - although eccentric adults reach social heights, but not too often.

Guilt. Guilt is the cornerstone of any "mama's son" regardless of gender. Guilt is directed in different ways. For example, guilt for their inappropriateness, morbidity, clumsy, stupidity and, as a result, inconvenience to parents by their existence, appearance, illness. But there is also guilt for the fact that the parents themselves get sick and suffer, while instilling in the baby that, they say, if it were not for him, then life would have turned out differently. There are so many children in the psychologists' offices who take on the unbearable burden of responsibility for parental divorces and unsuccessful destinies!

Fear. Scaring a child is as easy as shelling pears. And manage the frightened as you want: if you want - still frighten, if you want - protect and become a hero-savior. Then there will be no price for you as a parent. And after all, this can go on forever, only have time to change fears like clothes, according to age and the appropriateness of psychological defenses. Total fear, as a rule, suppresses the intellect, which means that the child will stop thinking and will not find a way out of this impasse. Let him be afraid, for example, that his mother will leave, die, give him to an orphanage … Where is he going from his mother like that? The arsenal of funds can be expanded, but these three whales will be quite enough to maintain confidence in the parents that a glass of water at the end of their life is provided for them. Here you should, apparently, tell you how to cope with this and what to do to avoid such life scenarios. But, believe me, I have no ready-made recipes. For any separation, strength is needed - both for the parents and the child. Alas, the child is initially not given to understand that separation is his personal task, and how he will cope with it, and will predetermine his ability to personal happiness.

We will love our parents at a distance and will come to our father's house in moments of joy to share it, and in moments of sorrow to share it. We will be close, but not together, because together is for a different relationship. We will forget all insults, scandals and misunderstandings. We will be proud of them, and they will be proud of us. We will. But not together. Let your children be happy in their own way, dear parents, even if it seems to you that this is not at all the happiness that happiness.

Yes, I really want to believe that our children will be grateful to us for the life, care and love given to them. But the processes take place in time, and time just gives us the understanding that we can pass this baton of love and gratitude only further, to our children, and not return it back. Otherwise, humanity would have perished long ago. And if we are capable of treating parents and their old age with respect, it is solely because we have children who do not owe us anything.