Between Ruth, Upsi and Alice Miller

by Quercus


Personally, I've had a rough weekend. The NFriend I mentioned in the preceding two posts made the most selfish of all potential selfish decisions, and then claimed that she did this out of love for others. It wasn't as much what she did, but how she justified it that disgusted me to a new level. How easily she attempted to corral my support and encourage her in her self-appointed role of 'innocent victim'.

'Innocent' and 'victim', my foot! Neither is she innocent, nor in any sense is she the victim! Responsibility and accountability are pillars of the community, of our society. And yet there are so many people who will gladly excuse themselves from both, while heaping extra portions unjustly onto others.

C'est la vie, I suppose.

I wanted to highlight two recent posts in the ACoN universe, because between them the entirety of my dysfunctional childhood can be easily summarized.

*

Ruth of We Are One wrote "The Child is Not the Behaviour". Ruth, in typical courageous fashion, gives examples of when her behaviour missed the mark, and explains the fallout and mistaken beliefs that stemmed from those incidents in her childhood.

The post is clear, concise (I should learn from Ruth here!) and crystallizes the salient issue easily in the title. I won't dissect it further, but I will insist that you follow the link above and give it a read.

This is the first thing that was 'wrong' in my childhood and formative years - every misstep was taken as a direct reflection of my character. When I acted selfishly, as all children do until they learn differently, I was cast as a "bad person", a devil, a sadist that wanted to hurt my mother and break her heart. It wasn't that I desperately coveted a particular toy advertised shamelessly to me on network television and threw a fit to express my intense displeasure at being deprived of the joy that the girl in the ad had with her My Little Pony with the intention of making my mother to feel inadequate - it was because I really wanted the toy.

Children are simple. They are, in every sense of the word, innocent. They are learning as they go, and though they do have some resilience, they are vulnerable in a way that no adult is. Children need to be treated and corrected gently, carefully and deliberately, with full-disclosure and honesty. Parents must take the time and effort to properly explain everything. Children can say, "But why?" a million times in a row, and they will. But it is in the best interests of the child to keep answering those questions as long as you possibly can and to the best of your abilities, no matter how 'put out' you as a parent are. You gave birth to children - you signed up for a role in which there are awesome responsibilities.  You're the adult; the burden is yours (as is the joy received when you've done your job right!). Natural consequences of parenting exist, both good and bad. What you reap is what you've sown.

*

Upsi of You Don't Have to Dance for Them responded to yet another 'anonymous angry parent' comment in the post "Light of Your Life", and in the post she once again drives home the inescapable truth (a la Alice Miller) that children are NEVER to be made responsible for the emotional well-being of a parent (or adult in general). Never. Ever.

Emotionally unhealthy parents who are cowardly (and yes, I will state this boldly) do not seek therapy or attempt to dismantle an emotional siege-works carried over from the previous generation - they do not break the cycle.

As to why they choose not to is anyone's guess and speculation. I have speculated long and hard as to why my NM couldn't (wouldn't?) treat me differently to how she was treated. No good has come from my rumination on why she's done what she's done, and there have been other posts and articles suggesting that to do so is unhealthy for the ACoN (continues the cycle of enmeshment - "What is my NParent thinking? What's happening for them? How can I influence this?"). Getting out of their heads seems part-and-parcel with getting them out of yours (individuation!).

It is evident from the comment discussed in "Light of Your Life" that the commenting mother must not agree with the premise that the child shall be indemnified in regards to the mother's emotions. This mother, and I would argue all Narcissistic Mothers (and probably fathers, too), feel that the child is liable for all insults against her. That the child should be shamed for hurting the feelings (or for not improving the feelings) of the mother.

It is my pet premise that NM's attribute adult motives to babies and children. Too often have I heard an NM say, "She's just doing that to upset me!", or "She knows I love that dress, so she threw up on it on purpose!", or "She's trying to steal away the attention of my boyfriend!" (I've heard that one very recently!).

I believe that because the Narcissist is unable/unwilling to accept that a child is not their emotional equal, they then fall into the trap of expecting the child to defer to the preferences of the parent. The trouble of course is that the child requires 100% of the relationship's available emotional support - there's no quid pro quo here, no give and take! And the further trouble is that the child is simplistic - it is inexperienced, unwise and possesses no real knowledge of how to support an emotionally handicapped adult. Even if the child did have the capacity to support an emotionally handicapped parent, the child would have to put aside their own growth and individuation to do so, a cost far too high for any child to pay (ask an ACoN!).

A child is an enormous responsibility by default. It is not their fault that they are born wholly dependent and require everything the parent has and then some - it is simply the way we humans come about. Patience, love, knowledge - they are insatiable in their desire for these things. Children are by nature highly demanding. It is not intentional - there is no thought or ulterior motive. They just "are".

*

The late Alice Miller is someone every ACoN should be familiar with. Practically an angel in human form, this eminent psychologist explored child abuse and its far reaching effects. Her book, "The Drama of the Gifted Child" is one I would never hestitate to recommend to an ACoN. I find it a bit deep, and I have had to revisit parts and reread the volume (this lady had an incredible mind - my mind can't take in this book in one go!). But it's a short book, and a profound one. "Gifted" doesn't refer to personal success, academic achievement or athletic triumph but to those who have "who have survived an abusive childhood thanks to an ability to adapt even to unspeakable cruelty by becoming numb... Without this 'gift' offered us by nature, we would not have survived."

Alice Miller conducted thorough and proper research into the effects of corporeal punishment and child abuse in general, and has written many articles (published on her webpage) expanding her findings into greater arenas (the world community at large, for instance).

Dr. Miller was an advocate for ACoNs and children of abuse everywhere. She challenged society's prevailing beliefs on spankings, and she rigorously examined the lasting effects of childhood abuse. There is a brief bio of Alice Miller here. She ferociously denounced the current psychoanalysis paradigm as being "in the old tradition of blaming the child and protecting the parents", and even went 'rogue', so to speak, renouncing her ties to the IPA. Her passion for the protection of children, and for "breaking the cycle of abuse" is her lasting legacy. She is truly someone every ACoN should familiarize themselves with. In her article, "We Can Identify the Causes of our Sufferings", she writes (my emphases in bold font):

"Almost all of us have corporal punishment inflicted on us in our formative years. But the fear and anger such punishment brings with it remain unconscious for a very long time. Children have no choice but suppress their fear and anger, as otherwise they could not sustain their love for their parents, and that love is crucially necessary for their survival. But these emotions, though suppressed, remain stored away in our bodies, and in adulthood they can cause symptoms of varying severity. We may suffer from bouts of depression, attacks of panic fear, or violent reactions towards our children without identifying the true causes of our despair, our fear, or our rage. If we were aware of those causes, it would prevent us from falling ill, because then we would realize that our fathers and mothers no longer have any power over us and can no longer beat us."

I think that Dr. Miller's approach of blaming the parents and not the child is a fair, just and kind tactic. It is fair because one hundred percent of the responsibility lies with the adult, the parent; a child cannot be made to carry the burden of a grown adult. It is just because if the parent abuses the child, it is completely and utterly the fault of the parent. And it is kind (and perhaps 'fair' applies here, too) because the child, in turn, will one day become a parent. If the child does not break the cycle, then they too will be to blame.

Unfortunate? Yes. Unfair on a cosmic level? Perhaps... or perhaps it's so just that we humans shrink from it and cry foul. Hypocrisy exists everywhere humans do, and I for one feel it's quite elegant that the victim has the opportunity to become an abuser. What better test of character is there?

*

Ruth's post and Upsi's post, coming so close together, made me realise that I had reached a new milestone on my ACoN journey; I know very well and very clearly what went wrong where in my childhood. Why I am the way that I am. Why the relationship between my parents and I is what it is.

There are two important bottom-lines here, for me:

1. All children are innocent. All children make mistakes as they learn. All children are impossibly vulnerable and fragile and must be cradled and nurtured in every respect. They must not be labelled or punished because of 'who they are', but rather have their behaviours corrected with transparency and honesty. Parents must rise to this incredible challenge, else risk (in their words) "abandonment" later in life as the child realises that their parent was (and often is) more detrimental than beneficial. Parents reap what they sow.
2. Children are not emotional equals. An adult must not expect an 'undeveloped person' to carry an emotional burden on their behalf, to any extent. Children do not possess the capacity to support the feelings of an emotionally crippled adult, though they (tragically) do possess the willingness to help. Children are exploited grievously by cowardly adults who, rather than take on the risks of self-examination, dump their own loads onto a framework far too fragile to carry such a burden.

And there's one more point I'd like to make, as risky as it might be - most of us are given the gift to have children of our own. It is here that we put our money where our mouths are: if we were abused by our own self-absorbed parents, here is our opportunity to show how it should've gone down, not how it did. We are given the ultimate blessing - the opportunity to rewrite history, in a way. To pass on a new legacy, and to, quite literally, make the world a better place by raising a healthy, happy child to carry on the next generation.

What I'd like to say to my NFriend, but likely won't (at least not right now), is this - if you do not break the cycle, or die trying, you have no right to continue to whinge on about your own mistreatment. Your argument becomes a moot point the moment you engage in the behaviour that so grievously maimed you.

This may make me exceedingly unpopular, but I'm going to say it all the same: you cease to be a victim of childhood abuse when you have in turn abused a child. You have, in essence, waived any right to sympathy the moment you became what you profess to hate.

I've got no room in my life for hypocrites like these. As my friend injures her child, my sympathy, my support for my friend fades. I now hold her 100% accountable, as she holds her mother 100% accountable for her own mistreatment. Short of enrolling in therapy and making amends of epic proportions, and I mean completely turning her life around purely for the sake of her child, I cannot bring myself to feel any empathy for her situation.

We had the very same situation, my friend and I. Maybe it had nothing to do with me that I was able to swear to break the cycle (and am taking steps to do so) and everything to do with Divine Intervention. This is probable - I see no difference in potential in me versus my friend. But I do know that I am unable and unwilling to view her circumstances with sympathy; she is repeating her cycle of abuse on her own child, and yet continuing to claim to be a victim.

It is a tragedy. And it may not be completely my friend's fault (maybe she is actually missing part of her brain, who knows?). But I know that I can't consciously defend her position any longer. And I am starting to extrapolate this to my own NM, too. For too long have I blamed my evil NGrandfather for abusing her, and in turn for her abusing me. This is what my EF and NM would have me believe. The truth is that they waived their right to plead innocent the moment they started to abuse me and my siblings.

If you have children, you should be held 100% accountable for them. You reap what you sow. And if you can't handle this, stock up on condoms and find something else to sink your love into, for posterity's sake.