Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyway, this is a spin-off of another recent thread, but it's also something that's pretty commonly said. The premise, of course, is that all parents make mistakes, but children, when they grow up, should just realize and accept that their parents were only human, and forgive them for their shortcomings because they were "doing the best they could."
So can all/most parental shortcomings be dismissed in that way? Workaholic parents, clinically depressed parents, parents who play favorites with kids, parents who are so spent on working three jobs that they just can't be bothered at the end of the day to engage with the kids? Where is the line between "giving all you can, but just not having much left to give" vs. "being selfish and not trying hard enough"? (Not sure I'm wording this very well...)
Parents are human - and I hope one day my own kids look back on their childhood and realize that I tried my darndest to be a good parent to them. BUT I don't see other categories of people being given that same sort of leeway. "Oh, she was an awful friend, but she was just doing the best that she could, so I kept her in my life regardless." "My employee made huge mistakes that cost my company tons of money... but hey, that was the best he could do, so I didn't fire him!" etc.
(Of course there's always going to be the criminal outliers, like child molesters or nutjobs who torture their kids or whatever... but I suppose even with that you could argue that those people must have had mental illness to begin with, and that WAS the best job they could do - awful as it was.)
Of course not. If every parent even did the minimal required to house, feed, educate, and nurture their children, then we wouldn't need CPS. Unfortunately, many do the "least" they can, not the best. And some don't even manage that.
Are you equating an 18 yr commitment to employers/employees and friends? They are worlds apart. There are no legal requirements for friends, and not many for employers.
But, a lot of parents think they are doing their best, whether or not society and their children agree.
That's what I'm getting at, though. Let's say there's a mother who provides said bare minimum to her kids. Let's even say she never wanted the child to begin with. Heck, let's go one step further and say she did drugs during her pregnancy, or smoke, or drank. People (rightly) frown on that and say she should put her child first. But where is the line between that mother not giving a darn, vs. not being able to control her impulses because she's an addict? Perhaps simply not aborting the child (or on the contrary, aborting it) is "the best she could do".
Or let's say a single father has such limited social support, inner resources, education, money, etc. that simply keeping their child alive, fed, and housed is the best they can do.
At what point do kids have the right to say their parents did NOT do their best?
(BTW I do agree with you, Mattie. I do, 100%. But a lot of times I hear that adult children should let the hurts from their childhood go because, well, their parents were human. I'm struggling with this now with issues with my mother - from my point of view, she did more harm than good for a good chunk of my life. But she does have mental health issues she struggles with, which could be a mitigating factor. My husband's mother by ANY standard did not put him even close to first - she hung out with bad people, brought drugs around him, exposed him to crime, etc. Yet he can forgive her because he views it as that she did the best *for her* given her circumstances. It seems to have brought HIM peace and he's able to forgive his mother - whereas I'm not at that place yet with my own mother.)
That's what I'm getting at, though. Let's say there's a mother who provides said bare minimum to her kids. Let's even say she never wanted the child to begin with. Heck, let's go one step further and say she did drugs during her pregnancy, or smoke, or drank. People (rightly) frown on that and say she should put her child first. But where is the line between that mother not giving a darn, vs. not being able to control her impulses because she's an addict? Perhaps simply not aborting the child (or on the contrary, aborting it) is "the best she could do".
Or let's say a single father has such limited social support, inner resources, education, money, etc. that simply keeping their child alive, fed, and housed is the best they can do.
At what point do kids have the right to say their parents did NOT do their best?
(BTW I do agree with you, Mattie. I do, 100%. But a lot of times I hear that adult children should let the hurts from their childhood go because, well, their parents were human. I'm struggling with this now with issues with my mother - from my point of view, she did more harm than good for a good chunk of my life. But she does have mental health issues she struggles with, which could be a mitigating factor. My husband's mother by ANY standard did not put him even close to first - she hung out with bad people, brought drugs around him, exposed him to crime, etc. Yet he can forgive her because he views it as that she did the best *for her* given her circumstances. It seems to have brought HIM peace and he's able to forgive his mother - whereas I'm not at that place yet with my own mother.)
Ok, I see where you are coming from. In your first scenario, that mother is not doing the best they can do. They are putting their own demons ahead of their child's needs. The best they could do in that case might just be to surrender the child to the state. While that is not likely to be the best from the child's point of view, it may realistically be so.
The single father is different. Housed, fed, alive, might be exactly the best he can offer, if he does all those for the benefit of the child.
I think your husband has the right idea. I don't really understand the point of holding onto old hurts, because they keep us from moving forward as adults.
Obviously they do not or there would be no need for the Department of Child Welfare because of abuse and neglect to children.
To play devil's advocate, a lot of the cases they deal with could be explained away. (If one wanted to do such a thing, which, I don't...)
A father who is very stressed out with xyz issues comes home and loses it and whacks his kids around. Clearcut abuse, and the children should be rehomed to a safer situation, because their parents' best was not safe enough to meet minimum standards. But said father had mental illness - soooo....
Or else, say, a single mother can't afford to buy her kids food and clothes, or get them to a doctor. There's a reason they investigate poor people more often than middle and upper class ones. They really shouldn't remove kids from loving parents because of poverty factors, but they do, and honestly it's hard to criticize them. The kids need certain things, and maybe due to illness or just bad luck, the parents can't hack life.
Plus people who are in poverty take stress out on their kids more because they have more stress to begin with. It's harder to maintain composure with your kids acting up when you're worrying about where you'll sleep the next night. A well-off couple might just shake their heads and take a deep breath when their toddler throws a tantrum, because they have the inner resources to deal with it. A more stressed out, potentially mentally ill mother might beat the child, not because they necessarily love it less, but because they can't deal with that frustration.
My mother said she did the best she knew to do. I suppose she did, but I think she could have checked into it more to broaden her knowledge. I'm not sure she would have changed her mind on some of what she believed.
Yet when I think about learning more, I know that's what I did and I thought I was an excellent mother. Later on I realized otherwise and wish I'd known so much more. At the time, I couldn't see the forest for the trees.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
