"Fairness"

[justducky]

My enabling and possibly covert N mother has always had an odd sense of fairness. It didn't apply to uPD father. He was a bully, so she appeased him. But she wanted things to be fair with enSis and me. For example, when enSis and I were kids we'd have Barbie fashion shows. We'd divide the small collection of clothes we had for our two Barbies and put on a show for enMom, who we wanted to judge. There would be a winner.

enMom flat-out refused to declare a winner. It was always a tie. Now that I think about it, she didn't engage with us much about it. Were I in her shoes I'd have alternated who won the fashion show and talks about which articles of doll clothes worked with others. I'd invite discussion. Maybe encourage enSis and me to make new clothes. All enMom did was quietly watch the show, declare it a tie, and leave.

Her odd notion of fairness continued as enSis and I grew up. She liked to apply it to money. If she gave enSis money, she'd tell me that she had and give me the same amount, and visa versa. We're talking small amounts on infrequent basis.

uPD father was miserly and highly anxious about money, so it was always a point of conflict. By the time I was a teenager I was well aware that money was used to control. I felt like I had to listen to uPD father's abuse on the phone because he and enMom were pay for college. I'd started setting limits because I was a two-hour drive away, but still put up with more than I should have.

In my senior year of college my sister was a freshman. My parents told me that I needed to take out student loans and pay for my senior year. I was fine with that; I'd known it was coming. It also meant that they were no longer paying for tuition, and I'd worked part-time and summers for years so I could pay my other modest expenses. So finally I was free to hang up the phone when uPD father started his bulls**t. It was scary but glorious!

enSis stayed physically and emotionally close with our parents during and after college. She married a man with many similarities to uPD father. Not as bad, I don't think, but he's following in his father's dysfunctional footsteps. When they started having financial issues, they went to enMom for money. That ramped up the "fairness" thing: all sorts of drama around making sure that I got the same amounts they did, or why if they couldn't afford to give me the same amount.

I didn't want their money because 1) I didn't need it,  2) There were strings attached, and 3) For crying out loud, would you please listen to me and respect my wishes?!?

When I started ripping up checks, enMom started sending cash. It was absurd. I'd moved far away and was further lowering contact, but I was caught up in the "money wars" for longer than I care to admit. Eventually I learned to drop the rope.

Have any of you experienced similar PD notions about fairness? I have some ideas about what was driving it and what it really meant, but I'd like to hear your thoughts.

[Danden]

Well, my experience is that "fairness" is just a ruse.  It is meant to be a way to appear they are doing something good, i.e., being fair.  Actually, they do have a preference between their children, they just don't want to admit it.  If they admitted it, it means they are not the "good" parent they aspire to be known as.  Growing up, my mother always talked about how it was important for her to be fair in matters of money, how her two daughters were equal to her.  Then when I was an adult, after my father died, she disinherited me, working together with my sister, and without my knowledge.  Eventually I found out about it, because I am always on high alert and suspicious in regards to their words and actions.  I have a highly honed sense of who they are and what things mean, which is not apparent to the average person.  So i figured it out.  But that is what they did.  Even today, almost ten years later, she has tried to have me acknowledge that "it was just a misunderstanding, lets let it go".  As if I were responsible somehow for this and I should take some responsibility in it.  She is very self-centered, I don't think she even knows what real fairness is.

[justducky]

Well, my experience is that "fairness" is just a ruse.  It is meant to be a way to appear they are doing something good, i.e., being fair.

That could very well be part of it for enMom.

Growing up, my mother always talked about how it was important for her to be fair in matters of money, how her two daughters were equal to her.  Then when I was an adult, after my father died, she disinherited me, working together with my sister, and without my knowledge.  Eventually I found out about it, because I am always on high alert and suspicious in regards to their words and actions.

Holy moley! I'm so sorry this happened, but am glad that you figured it out and see them for who they are. 

enMom and enSis did something along those lines after uPD father died and everything went to hell. My parents' modest house was paid off, and they had a small nest egg. If uPD father had allowed money to be spent to keep the house in good repair it would have been smaller, but that wasn't my concern.

enMom claimed to want help fixing up the house. enSis and I worked together to help; I visited a few times. Before long enMom's foot-dragging and covert sabotage became apparent. I backed off. enSis didn't and was angry when I didn't go along with her plans.

Long story short: after sporadic, weird phone calls and emails with enMom, other stuff I'm omitting, and reading between the lines, I looked up the property records on the county website. enMom had sold the house to enSis for $10 while keeping lifetime rights to live there. enSis, BIL, and their daughter moved in.

enMom told me about them moving in like it was a deep, dark secret. I said, "Okay, it's your house. Do as you like."

No one ever told me about the legal stuff. Technically it's none of my business. I never brought it up. I just wish it wasn't all so weird and fraught with emotion.

[Andeza]

DH's parents were always oddly emphatic that the inheritance after they die will be split between him and his sister equally. There was always huge emphasis on "equally." I always found the focus on it to be a little weird. We're NC now, so... Ha! Probably not getting a dime. But life is quiet and there's no crying MIL on the phone trying to talk us into moving back or harping on how horrible the place we live is. Peace of mind is priceless.

It's possible the emphasis on "equal" arose from issues in prior generations around siblings fighting for parents' money. It was a real Histrionic show-stopper, that's for sure!

But my belief is in line with Danden. I think they get up on their high-horse and declare "Equal!!!" for the all the world to hear so everybody will pat them on the back and tell them that's such a nice thing to do! When in reality, unless one of your kids is a complete and total deadbeat or addict (in which case giving them their inheritance becomes enabling the behavior that could well destroy them, but trusts can be designed around that to hold the funds in case of recovery and reform), inheritances should always be split equal and it shouldn't even need to be mentioned. It should be a no-brainer. We have two kids, they'll be equal beneficiaries when they turn 18, along with any other kids might have. It'll be set up in the policies and the will (need to do that will thing asap).

So equal is just praise/attention seeking to pwPDs. Sad.

[moglow]

Well, my experience is that "fairness" is just a ruse.  It is meant to be a way to appear they are doing something good, i.e., being fair.  Actually, they do have a preference between their children, they just don't want to admit it.  If they admitted it, it means they are not the "good" parent they aspire to be known as. 

I don't have this particular experience, but my gut says the same. "Fairness" is all in the eyes of the beholder, ya know? For you, her insistence on fairness would have implied that everything is equal and above board - until it wasn't. It's not even about the money or lack of same, but the behind the scenes maneuvering while the insistence on offering you money on the surface.
Andeza mentioned inheritance and I'll admit that crossed my mind too. Yes, it's her money and [was] home to do with as she will, and I'd be willing to bet she continues to pay most of the household bills, insurance etc. My random question is: what if mom requires further care that can't be provided in the home? Who's expected to foot that bill? Will you as the elder then be expected to pay the lions share?

My "fairness" story: mommie dearest landed herself in some debt after her husb passed. Money's never been her strongpoint and she just spends until the money chains break off then desperately seeks an exit strategy. Suddenly she decided it was best to move back to hometown and bought into a house my brother owned [carefully glossing over and omitting any mention of her financial situation]. All good, right? Wrong. They shared the home until she realized she wasn't queen of the palace while he paid all the bills, and she made life there such a hell he wasn't left with much choice but leave. They agreed that she'd pay him the matching amount from original buy-in, rather than go through appraisal and possible substantial property value increase. She stopped having any repairs made on the house, spent herself into oblivion on credit cards and would occasionally remortgage the house to pay down her credit cards. While she kept spending on everything but the house. Yeah.

Years later a major storm does substantial damage in her area and brother wrangles a repair settlement for her, manages to talk her into paying off the mortgage. She doesn't get roof repaired [no leaks of which I'm aware but I'm sure it needs replacing] - which means the house now won't pass inspection and she can't get another mortgage. BUT she then decides it's not "fair" to add her house to his trust, because "the others"/us would be cut out. [Never mind that if she has "an incident" requiring care, she/we'll now be forced to sell that house to finance her care ...]

Um mother. You basically stole his house right out from under him. Sign the damn house back over to him and take your lifetime lease - we all have our own and would never dream of living there or forcing him to sell it. But noooooooooo.

My suggestion to him, once she passes away all her treasures are moved out to massive bonfire. She's spent years buying all manner of worthless mass produced crap that no one wants, but keeps talking about her "collections" and we need to decide what we want. Nah, I'm good thanks. 

[justducky]

Thanks to everyone for your replies, comments, and advice!

Mo, your mother is something else. What a stunt she pulled with your brother's house! I'm so sorry that all of that went down like that. Thank goodness you and your brother see her for who she is and set boundaries accordingly.

Yes, it's her money and [was] home to do with as she will, and I'd be willing to bet she continues to pay most of the household bills, insurance etc.

I think this is the case as well. I'd given enSis the benefit of the doubt for a while. My husband has seen situations like this play out elsewhere. From day one he warned that it was likely that enSis and BIL were mostly using enMom for the house and her money under the pretext of "taking care of Mom."  There are some indications that enMom pays for a lot.  They kept trying to suck me back in with triangulation and woe-is-me phone calls and emails.

Despite being scolded for "dumping Mom on her" by enSis, I continued to lower contact, so I don't know everything that's gone on there. I do know that enSis has worked full-time for all of her marriage with BIL. After getting laid off from a good job several years ago, BIL has been a househusband. My husband thinks really poorly of that. I'm ambivalent; it could be okay. However, BIL's father was effectively a drunk who only worked during tax season. His mother enabled the dysfunction. My sister and BIL seem to be following that pattern... but I honestly don't know for sure.

My random question is: what if mom requires further care that can't be provided in the home? Who's expected to foot that bill? Will you as the elder then be expected to pay the lions share?

I had a panic over exactly this within a year after uPD father dying. I got legal advice to be sure that I wouldn't be on the hook. I'm safe. enSis can expect whatever she likes; she's not getting a dime from me for enMom's care. In all likelihood enSis is running through enMom's nest egg. Neither of them is my responsibility.

[treesgrowslowly]

Hi Justducky,

You've already gotten some excellent responses and thoughts so I'll just chime in with something I learned about reframing childhood experiences with my N parents.

When I have memories of how they behaved towards us, and how confusing it all was, I've come to believe that in a lot of cases, one, or some of the following probably would explain it. So what are some possible explanations for your mother's approach to 'fairness'?

1. could be avoidance. Not wanting to declare the winner of your Barbie fashion show could have been a way to avoid engaging you both. Being able to say "its a tie" and get up and leave, sorta leaves her kids to continue playing without her involvement. This is just pure guessing on my part.

2. could be projection. We can't know what things our own parents experienced as children. Sometimes we might have clues, as to why certain concepts upset them as adults. But often we have no idea where their behaviours and ideas come from. They could be triggered into flashbacks from things they experienced with their parents or caregivers, and we might never know if that is what was behind their approach with us. If they were treated unfairly as a child, it could drive them to act a certain way. Or if their parent did x, then they do x too, assuming that is how you parent.

3. could be emotional immaturity / arrested development. In small children, around age 5 or 6 or 7, the concept of fairness becomes really important. This is the age who notices if a sibling gets more chocolate chips on her cookie! etc etc... So sometimes our own parents, they were emotionally stunted, and so they may still have a childlike or naive understanding of certain concepts. Their own children will 'mature' past them which causes confusion, since we expect our parents to be capable of more sophisticated, abstract thinking than we are, especially when we are young. But a lot of us might have parents whose understanding of things like 'fairness' or 'sharing' are stuck at the younger ages, for various reasons.

This is all pure speculation. I have found that these 3 possible factors could explain a lot of the loopy behaviours I saw as a child. It helps me to feel less "gaslit" by my memories, to know that as a child I had no idea why they were like this, but as an adult I have some plausible reasons for it all. I think this search for meaning does give us some relief as we heal. Good for you for reflecting on this.

Trees

[square]

My take on option 3 is that it's the difference between a very young concept of fair (equal in every way every time) versus a more mature concept of being equitable (varying needs are met in ways that are fair in complex ways, where love and concern are equal but resources are not always distributed equally at all times and scores are not keenly kept).

[Cat of the Canals]

PDmom's sense of fairness when we were children seemed to skew toward always making sure things were "fair" for my younger brother and not so much the other way around, which makes sense because she was the youngest in her family, and apparently her older sister was the GC. It wasn't necessarily that I always got shafted, but she definitely always looked at the "fairness" discussions from my brother's POV.

[justducky]

Thank you all for your insightful, thought-provoking replies. I'd hoped to write another reply this morning, but life is getting in the way. Things should settle down in a day or two.

Keep on keepin' on, my friends. 

[Liketheducks]

Justducky......Shaking my head and giggling to myself.   There is a clear reason why we have picked similar names.      My mom did it with me and my siblings.   But, those gifts always had strings attached.    Cutting those strings was such an uplifting experience for me.    Fairness wasn't REALLY fair in my family.    I haven't received or given financial assistance in decades.   And, now, my siblings and I have found a much more peaceful place....while also having financial autonomy.   

  Life simply ISN'T fair.   And, narcs have a penchant for such black and white thinking, I'm not completely surprised when I see it coming.   

[sunshine702]

Fairness.  Yeah I recall 3 weird issues with that.

Narc mom talks endlessly about how fairly the will is going to be divided.  Honestly I don't care.  That is the crux.  I am. It keeping score constantly SHE is.  And it is often used as a carrot or stick based on behavior for her circus.

Growing up one Christmas she went on and on that each of us got an equal amount of gifts.  Again we were busing playing Legos and hadn't noticed exactly.

One time I did notice was my very first example of GC special.  We both broke a lampshade.  The plastic part cracked falling down then we both picked at the pieces.  He was maybe 2 and I was 6.  I got paddled and he received nothing.  I talked about how unfair that was  and I KNEW it. We BOTH broke the lamp.   She would not punish him.

[feralcat]

I had a 'discussion' with unPdM yesterday morning. It was interesting, in that we actually verbalised how we both viewed me. I felt irritable but objective, she quite dispassionate but trying to make excuses for everything. As usual. No apologies. I didn't learn anything I hadn't already guessed at. She was probably a bit taken off guard.
She told me I wasn't a wanted child, and that she had 'neglected' me. What a surprise (not). Couldn't 'remember' any of the other stuff (emotional, verbal abuse, threats of violence etc etc). Admitted to a complete lack of support.

Anyway ...... it transpires that a MAJOR gripe for her is that I'm the only child (of seven, I'm 66!) who wouldn't accept a share of a compensation claim she won . Out of all of our discussion , this was her main beef ! Ps I don't accept money from her full stop. I told her that money isn't love, and that I won't accept anything with strings attached. She hates that.

She's always pushed the 'all my kids are equal' bit. Bullshit. It's just a publicity stunt. For others to see, including 'family'. Whereas in the background she's doling money out to those she favours/wants to control/grovel for a handout. Ooh look, I love ALL my kids  Sooo much. (Then she tells me about it, to show me what I'm missing ?)

In the past I've said I never thought my family would fight over money, but nowadays they also see money as proof of love. One of them recently said to me' I don't want people to say I'm financially abusing mum'. Well, that's exaggerated, people can think what they want ....and you can't control the narrative Sis. (She's not abusing her. It's a transaction)

SO glad to have broken free of the Borg. Almost looking forward to see what happens when she dies . She's 89.
The Money Tree will have stopped producing. Her , and her late husbands, pensions will pass on with her. The house she lives in will revert to her second husbands children.
I think that then the barely concealed money fuelled gripes will bubble up to the surface. There may be words. I'll watch.