Obligation and being Out of the FOG

[treesgrowslowly]

I think that in some cases, our MIL was a woman who never had a thought beyond "obligation".

Some of these ILs seem to be obsessed with a sense of obligation.

They believe we are obligated to accept them - no matter what, when really that is not how any healthy relationship works!

I bet mine felt certain, when she met me, that I was obliged to make do and to put up with whatever she wanted me to make do with.

I think that some of us have MILs who are baffled by us. Those of us who refuse to do things simply out of obligation.

The further I got myself Out of the FOG, the less and less I did out of pure obligation. Love and mutual concern are much better fuel for adult relationships..  but I think there are a lot of people who never realize this.

They admonish us - because we do not feel obligated to put up with them, follow them, enable them, agree with them blindly...

I think what might be right under the surface in a lot of cases is that they do not like that WE lack that toxic sense of obligation.

Trees

[Cat of the Canals]

Trees, you hit the nail on the head with my MIL. In her mind, life is nothing but a series of obligations. My husband has pointed this out to her, and her exact words were, "No, it's not an obligation! But you have to do it." 

We've come to understand that the "obligation drive" goes so deep with her that it's almost a form of currency in her mind. If she completes in an obligation, she believes this means she is entitled to receiving an obligation in return. Example: Since she takes care of her elderly in-laws, then "someone" will have to take care of her.

It also works in reverse. If someone shirks (in her mind) an obligation, some unrelated party is expected to make it up to her. Example: She complains that her brother has not visited her often enough, so my husband is expected to come visit in his place.

And you better believe she keeps track, almost as if she has an internal "checkbook" for obligations given and received.

[treesgrowslowly]

Cat of the Canals,

It's a really immature way of thinking that they are caught up in then. I mean, very very young (normally-developing) children sorta start to outgrow that stuff on their way to adolescence.

We're meant to grow up so that we learn that sharing doesn't just mean "only share with someone who can pay you back right away" sort of thing.

With a PD, they are usually stuck developmentally, and this sort of "tit for tat" way of living is all that probably makes sense to them.

It's also a sign they are stuck in black and white thinking - you are "good" if you followed the rule and "bad" if you didn't. (and who sets the rules? Either they did, or some institution that they follow). No one can win here when it comes to family relationships.

I had to figure this out when I sat with my own stuff for years and tried to work out why it would never work for me to keep going into situations with people who act like this. What you describe, is exhausting for the rest of us (in a family) - that scorecard in their head is constantly being pulled out so they can tell us how good or bad we have been. I mean, I'm in my midlife now - I'm way past some sort of scorecard of 'bad and good' based on one thing someone does for me or I do for them.  is right!

That whole mindset around obligation and FOG, I bet it is something they could work out in therapy but of course there are people who are very unlikely to ever ever get themselves to therapy, so they just stay stuck in their ways, no matter how old they get and no matter how many times 'life' tries to teach them something new they could learn if they wanted to. Like how to treat their adult children better...

I've also come to believe in the power of seeing the irony - the irony of when someone is waving their 'good book' at you and then telling you how to live your life - which I believe stands in contrast to many of the teachings from their own book!...Those who are truly practicing their own values (faith based or not) are not obsessed with changing others - they have learned how to focus on their own practice and growth within their own faith / values / practices that they are doing for themselves. They lead by example - not by telling people how obligated we are to follow them.

All I can say is, thank goodness for this site so we know we are not alone / crazy in wondering why these relationships didn't work the way we had hoped!

Don't feel badly for going GR with her during the last visit. I hope you don't - doesn't sound like you are. There was nothing wrong with how you behaved during her recent visit.

Trees

[bloomie]

trees and Cat - this is such a helpful discussion. I have been thinking a lot lately about how two people can look at the same thing so completely differently and how, possibly, that is at the root of continued disharmony and disfunction in my own in law family relationships. I realize it is not exactly that simple, but possible the initiating and ongoing narcissistic injury to certain family members by me began with a fundamental difference in what 'love' is and isn't for each of us.

Quid pro quo, tit for tat, obligation is the foundational tenet of relationships within my DH's family system. Period. That is how they 'do' relationships and how they believe others do relationships as well. There is zero ability to even consider another way of living as anything but inexplicable folly.

And that system is defined by them as love and also bestows upon them rights, sets family member's roles, and has rigid rules which only they can adjust if their behavior falls outside of those rules and roles - the rights NEVER change! The entire system must adhere to this paradigm if they are to be accepted, included and viewed as 'good' people and as someone who 'loves' others, is good, is kind. This is their world view as I have painfully come to understand it.

Enter me... who views familial relationships - all relationships, very differently. I have no context for a mil who literally keeps a calendar of any and all 'kindnesses' (as defined by her, mind you!) she has offered and received each day and has them dating back decades.  And you had better believe she refers back to it when she believes she is owed something and someone shirked.

I've also come to believe in the power of seeing the irony - the irony of when someone is waving their 'good book' at you and then telling you how to live your life - which I believe stands in contrast to many of the teachings from their own book!...Those who are truly practicing their own values (faith based or not) are not obsessed with changing others - they have learned how to focus on their own practice and growth within their own faith / values / practices that they are doing for themselves. They lead by example - not by telling people how obligated we are to follow them.

All I can say is, thank goodness for this site so we know we are not alone / crazy in wondering why these relationships didn't work the way we had hoped!

I have had The Good Book waved and thumped in my face more often than I would care to try and count. It is The Book that I base my life upon and for a long, long time I was paralyzed by the shaming using my precious faith when I refused to participate in the quid pro quo as I got healthier and stronger. I refused to give over to an elder who was spiritually and emotionally bullying me who viewed it as her right, her role, to deal with "HER" family breaking the rules. 

It also works in reverse. If someone shirks (in her mind) an obligation, some unrelated party is expected to make it up to her. Example: She complains that her brother has not visited her often enough, so my husband is expected to come visit in his place.

Yes! This is so similar to my in laws. Often a scene - either sobbing and days of depression, fist pounding rage that settles into an eventual discard and ongoing ruin of the reputation of the person who 'shirked' their obligation.  And then holding those empty hands up for someone else to fill. Someone close to them who is obligated...

[treesgrowslowly]

Hi Bloomie,

I am so sorry you've been through the ringer on this one too. There is no real space for us in these sorts of outdated family systems. What you describe makes it so clear that you were ready for something much healthier than this!!

Like you said, they can't imagine doing things any other way.

I am reading a book right now that says that the opposite of obligation is love. So that sorta hit me.

What you describe does lead to a lot of pain in my view too. Having to adhere to this paradigm creates a lot of confusion and FOG over time I think.

It can look like 'accountability' but it's really the opposite. It's a system that lets certain people get away with treating others poorly. Even those who conform are probably never really happy - because having to do things out of obligation will lead to resentment over time. It's just not sustainable to live one's life as a series of obligations or expectations that others 'owe' them something.

I have come to realize that there is no emotional freedom from within that paradigm.

Trees

[Pepin]

I am reading a book right now that says that the opposite of obligation is love. So that sorta hit me.

DH's hands were tied through obligation to his mother and the term obligation is one that he used to describe his relationship to her: he was obligated to care for her, it was his filial duty. 

His relationship to her was based on codependency and not love.

While he did not ever use the word "love", I believe that he thinks both obligation and love are of the same when it comes to the relationship with his mother. 

When I look at my marriage, I don't see obligation and love held on the same line when it comes to DH's behavior.  He's done a lot of things that stray from obligation and to me feels like indifference.

Quid pro quo, tit for tat, obligation is the foundational tenet of relationships within my DH's family system. Period. That is how they 'do' relationships and how they believe others do relationships as well. There is zero ability to even consider another way of living as anything but inexplicable folly.

It also works in reverse. If someone shirks (in her mind) an obligation, some unrelated party is expected to make it up to her. Example: She complains that her brother has not visited her often enough, so my husband is expected to come visit in his place.

YES YES and YES

I do for you and you do for me.  The foundation of their relationship. 

It never occurred to me that DH visited his mother so frequently to make up for the lack of visits from his other siblings -- and this makes sense.  The siblings that did not visit were scolded - which if only CN MIL could see it - meant that these siblings would withdraw even further.  These siblings showed up on their terms and CN MIL was forced to take what she could get when they visited.  DH on the other hand was her constant supply.  He was near by, reliable and in good standing.  The more she asked of him, the less he became my DH.  She was strengthening their emotional marriage while mine to DH was starting to crack.  And when I started dropping dealing with CN MIL's behavior towards DH, she deteriorated quickly and DH was left swinging the air trying to keep everything in order. 

I realized during my marriage that I had no obligation to CN MIL when I stepped Out of the FOG.  And this made DH uncomfortable.  He felt that I didn't "love" her.  It is true.  I did not love her because she demanded obligation and I felt that that was mean.