Who should concede in this family conflict? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Life] >> Relationships



Message

covenant2 -> Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 11:51:45 AM)

Six individuals are unwavering in their decisions here. Progress to family conflict is at a standstill. Here is the situation. Opinions welcomed.

THE FAMILY: The family consists of us, the parents and our married son and his wife - all in a conflict that began with our son and his wife. All are Christians.
THE COUNSELORS: Both are Christian counselors.

THE SITUATION: We have been in the middle of a conflict with our son and his wife for 2 years. We live 700 miles from them. In January we drove down to a meeting that all parties agreed to attend for counseling intervention. Great progress had been made while at the same time new issues surfaced and some old ones remained unresolved. The families both agreed that another meeting would be a good idea to further deal with remaining issues that were still on the table. The counselors agreed. The parents returned home and communication between the two families continued to improve as long as those residual issues were not discussed.

In March the 2 families aproached the counselors to schedule a time for the second session to further address the residual issues. A time was set for mid-April. We again drove the 700 miles for the meeting. When we arrived the counselor notified us by phone that our son's wife, that was primarily responsible for the conflict should to begin with, not be there and gave 3 differing reasons for her decision not to have her present. The parents had insistited from the beginning that the daughter-in-law attend any intervention because events had occurred where the wrong conclusions were drawn and false accusations resulted on her part. Until the actions of our daughter-in-law occurred our relationship with both of them was excellent. We were quite upset with the counselor(s) and expressed our feelings for not informing us of the change until after we had arrived because all parties had agreed upon it as a group meeting. For the first time in almost two years progress had only been made at the first meeting because all four of us were present. We felt it was critical that all four again be present in hopes that it would be the last meeting and that we would once again be a peaceful family. However, the counselor(s) supported each other in the decision and held firm. No legitimate reasons for the change was given.

The three differing reasons for the unexpected change were first that the Daughter-In-Law "might suddenly get angry and say something out of line." Then, the second reason provided was that the counselor was concerned that one of us "might say something and make things worse." (Isn't it the primary job of the intervener/counselor's to prevent that from happening?) Then the third reason that surfaced was that the counselor9s) thought that we needed some "bonding time" with our son. Yet, the counselor was aware of 9 days" of bonding time" that had been set aside by both our son and his wife during the visit.

The parents would not attend the session since it was useless without the primary initiator present to continue in discussions. Our son became upset with us for not attending even though we explained the importance of it and ignored our concerns anyway. The counselors remained unwavering. We left at the end of 7 days without being able to visit with our son and his family. All progress has come to a standstill - if not completely reversed at this time.

Where did things go wrong here and what would you think should happen for progress to resume?



csl7037 -> RE: Who should concede? (4/26/2008 6:10:00 PM)

To be perfectly honest, none of that makes any sense. And a grown adult going to therapy with his (?) parents because they don't like his wife, if I'm following this story at all, is just weird.



agapetos -> RE: Who should concede? (4/26/2008 6:36:43 PM)

I am too...

The parent seem to want to be setting the rules here...

They insist that the child's spouse be at any meetings.
They hold the child's spouse responsible for the conflict.
They don't see that a legitimate reason has been given for the child's spouse absence from the counselling sessions (despite the fact the counsellors argree this was they right thing to do).
They don't listen to their child when the child gets upset.

It's not necessarily a case of conceding.

Why couldn't the parents expressed their feelings about the child's spouse being absent and requested that further sessions include this person, or that they be informed before travelling the 700 miles the person wouldn't be there and then carry on with the session?

Why did they take their feelings out on their child by refusing to stay and have some bonding time with their child?



covenant2 -> RE: Who should concede? (4/26/2008 6:37:46 PM)

quote:

because they don't like his wife,


Let's get this straight up front- our daughter-in-law has a temper problem. We want a good relationship with her and our son. Why is it always the parents? Are daughter-in-laws always angels?



covenant2 -> RE: Who should concede? (4/26/2008 6:44:05 PM)

quote:

The parent seem to want to be setting the rules here...


I do hope you read the edited version above. It is not a matter of "the parents setting the rules." Progress ONLY occurred when the daughter-in-law attended so that we could deal with those misconceptions and accusations directly. As a result, hugs, laughter, apologies and tears all resulted. No progress had been made for 18 months without her direct involvment.



agapetos -> RE: Who should concede? (4/26/2008 7:09:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: covenant2

quote:

because they don't like his wife,


Let's get this straight up front- our daughter-in-law has a temper problem. We want a good relationship with her and our son. Why is it always the parents? Are daughter-in-laws always angels?

I wonder what has caused your dil's temper problems? There are many things that could have an effect on her mood ~ and there are many things that she could do to help understand and learn how to control it (I don't know if she is or not). I wonder if she's doing anything to look into things with a therapist on a 1-2-1 basis? And it may well be something that she felt she didn't want disclosing to her PIL hence the reason why you didn't get a legitimate reason of her non-appearance.

If she is, then right now, what you should be doing is supporting her. Yes, it was unfortuante that you made that long trip to spend time with your son and dil and have another counselling session to have it cancelled. But that doesn't mean you couldn't have had a session with the counsellors and your son does it? Or have spent time with your son?

If she is looking at her issues, she may have suddenly got to a point (and it can happen FAST) when she couldn't deal with looking at something else (perhaps issues that would resurface in the counselling session you were going to be attending)? Or perhaps she was in a very sensitive place and felt that she would say the wrong thing and felt that it was better to avoid going to the session rather than attend and inflame the situation?

DIL's are not always angels ~ but then neither are PIL's.

quote:

I do hope you read the edited version above. It is not a matter of "the parents setting the rules." Progress ONLY occurred when the daughter-in-law attended so that we could deal with those misconceptions and accusations directly. As a result, hugs, laughter, apologies and tears all resulted. No progress had been made for 18 months without her direct involvment.
Given the time that you edited your post and I made my first post, it's unlikely (just over a minute elapsed between your edit and my post). I'm not even sure what edit you made, however, I did pick up that this was going to be the last session and wonder if it was that?

Did it have to be the last session? I am aware that you travelled a long way for this session but did that mean it had to be the last session?

I feel really sorry for your son. He obviously loves his parents and his wife and is probably being torn in two because of this situation. I really would look at your hearts and see if it's worth you forgiving the last session and seeing if you can't get together again ~ and find some way of getting some assurance that all parties will show up.



preserved -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 7:36:42 PM)

whew...just reading this post made me confused...Why are you having to drive 700 miles for counseling? If your son is still married to his wife that you are having problems with...Do you really see any major changing after having to drve 700 miles? Sounds like maybe the son and his wife should be in couseling instead of all in the family...



covenant2 -> RE: Who should concede? (4/26/2008 7:57:06 PM)

quote:

I wonder what has caused your dil's temper problems?

I don't know the answer to that. I'm not a psychologist. However, the cause is not point - the incident siimply happened because of her temper.

quote:

But that doesn't mean you couldn't have had a session with the counsellors and your son does it?

Because she was the primary factor in the cause of the conflict that would be like baking a cake without the eggs.

quote:

Or perhaps she was in a very sensitive place and felt that she would say the wrong thing and felt that it was better to avoid going to the session rather than attend

She had every intention of attending - it was the counselor that changed the plans suddenly and without legitimate reasons and told her not to attend against what we had all decided and agreed upon at the previous session. To us, the reasons simply didn't make sense. However, because of it, of course she thought it was a great idea but it did nothing to help the family deal with the conflict for a peaceful resolution.

quote:

DIL's are not always angels ~ but then neither are PIL's.

You are absolutely correct and that is why you should at least trust that in order for me to get helpful advice I have to lay out a truthful and honest evaluation of the situation - otherwise the advice is useless.

quote:

I did pick up that this was going to be the last session and wonder if it was that?

We had great hopes that it would be the last session. We had all agreed that we wanted this resolved but there was enough leftovers that at least one more session needed to be held. It wasn't. We drove 700 down and 700 back at a cost of about $1,000 for nothing - the counselors, in our opinion, gave no consideration for us.



covenant2 -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 8:03:02 PM)

quote:

whew...just reading this post made me confused...Why are you having to drive 700 miles for counseling?

We chose to drive the 700 miles back and forth the first time, at a costly expense to us, because we love our son and his wife in spite of the present conflict. Because it did produce positive results we chose to drive down again with anticipation that one more session would be sufficient.



agapetos -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 8:07:07 PM)

quote:

it was the counselor that changed the plans suddenly and without legitimate reasons and told her not to attend against what we had all decided and agreed upon at the previous session.
It was the counsellor? Then you need to be finding yourselves counsellors that don't mess you around like this.

I'm sorry, but you not spending time with your son and possibly your dil on this visit was not your dil's fault ~ it was the counsellors. Please don't hold it against her.



csl7037 -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 8:51:59 PM)

If these were two counsellors you had chosen and were paying to work with you that you liked up to this point, it might've been at least worth sticking around for the session you'd travelled so far for before just getting miffed and bailing.

Frankly, your son married her, not you. It's his relationship with her that's important, not yours. It is terribly unfair to your son to put him in the middle between you and her. And if there's any chance your issues with her may cause any kind of undue tension between the two of them, you should back off immediately. My MIL drives me a little batty, and I'm sure I do the same to her. But that's one thing I've always had to appreciate about her is that she respects boundaries and our marriage very very well.

I've just never heard of a married couple going into counselling with the parents. There may be a lot more to it, I don't know. But the counsellors really might've had something important to discuss with you without her. It's not like she refused to come because she was being pig-headed. So I don't even know why you're asking who should concede? Do you need to go to counselling with the two counsellors now?



covenant2 -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 9:06:30 PM)

quote:

Frankly, your son married her, not you. It's his relationship with her that's important, not yours.

When a child gets married, the relationship with his parents does not end - his obligations change. Of course his relationship with his wife is important!

Perhaps you don't know what family relationships mean?
quote:

I've just never heard of a married couple going into counselling with the parents.

What is the difference? What difference does it make if it is parents or anyone else that someone is in conflict with. They were church counselors and they weren't getting paid for it. They do it as a ministry to Christians in conflict. However, we definately do believe that really messed up on this one.



csl7037 -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 9:59:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: covenant2
However, we definately do believe that really messed up on this one.


Who messed up?



covenant2 -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 10:14:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: csl7037
Who messed up?

The counselors. We all agreed to a group meeting - including the counselor. To have let us drive 700 miles and spend $1,000 only to omit the most important person from the process without informing us beforehand so that we could decide on whether or not the trip would be worth making was highly inappropriate and unwarranted.



dradynsmom -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 10:52:32 PM)

THis whole thing has me really confused. My mil and i do not get along. Basically never have and i don't know why. She lives 4 1/2 hrs away and after her blowing up at me one to many times over stupid things i had had enough. I said some stuff that i probably shouldn't have and she did too. We haven't talk about it since that day and don't really talk at all. But they don't hold that against my dh or my kids. Its not fair for them to be punished for our actions.

Also can i ask just what ur dil did that has started this whole thing?



Memaw. -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/26/2008 11:30:32 PM)

OK, let me see if I have this right.

Something happened and your daughter in law made some accusations and for the past two years there has been conflict in your family due to this.

You all 4 went to 2 counselors and made some headway, and another appointment was scheduled.
The counselors decided it would be best for your daughter in law not to attend this second meeting yet didn't inform you until you had made the trip.

You left angry.

Am I caught up to speed?


Why didn't you go ahead with the counseling session?
I know your reasoning was because you believe your daughter in law is the instigator in this and you feel she needs to be there, but there could have been some real good come from it even without her being there.

Seems as though you want to be in control of the whole situation, saying who has to be there or you won't attend.

IMO for progress to resume, you as the parents should take your hands off the reigns and allow your son and daughter in law to make some of their own choices and decisions.



Wild-Rose -> RE: Who should concede? (4/27/2008 7:45:36 AM)

quote:

quote:

I wonder what has caused your dil's temper problems?


I don't know the answer to that. I'm not a psychologist. However, the cause is not point - the incident siimply happened because of her temper.


You ought to ask your daughter-in-law this question. Find ought why she is angry to start with. You think it's not the point, but it very well may be the piont to her.



GregandJenny -> RE: Who should concede? (4/27/2008 8:55:40 AM)

quote:

When a child gets married, the relationship with his parents does not end - his obligations change. Of course his relationship with his wife is important!


The relationship does not end but it does change and many times in a big way. I live 3 blocks from my mother and have always been really close to my mother. When I got married many of those things that I used to do with mom my wife and I did. Many of those things I used to have to put up with my mom, I no longer did because I didn't rely on her the same way. My relationship now with my mother looks different then when i was 13 or even when I was 20 because I am married. My mother has absolutely no say in my house hold, she has absolutely no say in my marriage. If I feel she has or does push those boundaries my loyalty is now to my household not hers.

I said all that to say this, realize your relationship with your son my change and that you cannot force a relationship with your DIL just because she is your DIL. The bible says to leave and cleave and maybe that is what your son is doing.

GH



buckifn -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/27/2008 9:17:06 AM)

When a man and a woman choose marriage they are to LEAVE their parent's and become as ONE. I think that is pretty self explanatory. I would in no wise EVER agree to such a situation as you describe. It sounds like parent's who cannot let go. Loving your son or daughter includes loving their spouse too. and accepting them...faults and all.



covenant2 -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/27/2008 9:52:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Memaw.

Something happened and your daughter in law made some accusations and for the past two years there has been conflict....

You all 4 went to 2 counselors and made some headway, and another appointment was scheduled.
The counselors decided it would be best for your daughter in law not to attend this second meeting yet didn't inform you until you had made the trip.


Perhaps it can best be answered by the conversations that took place between all parties involved concerning the intended group meeting arrangements that occurred about 1 month before we made the trip down for it. Only personal names have been omitted.

To the counselor 1 month prior to the meeting an email was sent that said: "We believe that there are “unresolved residue” leftovers from the events that occurred 18 months ago. This was absolutely clear when we met as a group. As long as those misconceptions remain (with our DIL), our time with our grandchildren and our daughter-in-laws time with us will be with reluctance, restrained and very limited. I truly do not believe that is a good thing.

We plan on being there around the 3rd week in April and really would like to meet as a group as we had discussed the last time if that is still ok with you. I think there are definately unresolved issues that need to be discussed."

That was followed up by an email to both our son and the counselor on the same day: "I chatted with our son this morning about the timing of our April trip to Virginia and we talked about being able to meet together again to further iron out some residual things. They both prefer to have us come down the week of the 21st so if it is possible to fit us in sometime then please let me know because she will have to check with her Mom for baby-sitting too."

In her email she confimed it; "just let me know what works best for all of you"

Our son's email response to both the counselor and us was; "I will request Friday 04/18 off from work and like (Betty and I) talked about tonight the meeting with (the counselor) would be better for a lunch time instead of the evenings."

I think this should make it clear that everybody was on the same page and no one had a problem with the arrangements nor with our son's wife being present for the purpose of discussion of those unresolved issues that were still on the table.

One last thing about the last two posters....I've seen tangents occur quite often on forums and the last two are such. We do NOT interfere with their marriage. If anything we consciously avoid it. If our son comes to us with something we will say to him that he needs to discuss it with his wife. Thank you, but I don't need a lecture on "cleaving."

Secondly, it is not a matter of controlling - it is a matter of having a very sincere desire to have this ugliness go away so we can be a family again. In our opinion, the counselors decision to change it without prior notce and after having spent over a $1,000 in expenses for the whole trip did nothing to bring us together - instead it devided us once again.



GregandJenny -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/27/2008 10:02:40 AM)

quote:

In our opinion, the counselors decision to change it without prior notice and after having spent over a $1,000 in expenses for the whole trip did nothing to bring us together - instead it devided us once again.


You need to get new counsellors, because they are interfering in the process and 2, what situation got you guys to this point. Why can't you guys work it out?

G



covenant2 -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/27/2008 10:08:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GregandJenny

You need to get new counsellors, because they are interfering in the process and 2, what situation got you guys to this point. Why can't you guys work it out?


If I really believed that a detailed explanation would help I would lay it out here but I've seen too many sidetracks and detours happen when excess information is given. I will only say that I am being truthful when I say that the accusations that occurred almost 2 years ago were the same false accusations that were brought up at the one group meeting that we had but those accusations were not discussed at that time - other things were. That was tabled for the next meeting.



GregandJenny -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/27/2008 10:13:37 AM)

quote:

Where did things go wrong here and what would you think should happen for progress to resume?


I think things went wrong when the counselor(s) decided that they were going to meddle in the situation rather than counsel the situation.

for progress to resume you are going to have to get new counselors and possible start over again if everyone is willing to do that.

At the beginning of your original post you said that there are 6 individuals wavering in their decisions when really only four people should be making decisions. I believe your counselors have over stepped their professional boundaries.

G



Memaw. -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/27/2008 10:20:54 AM)

Regarding the accusations.

Maybe I am reading too much into it and assuming the accusations were directed at you and or your spouse?

Are they of such magnitude that you can not forgive and let go for the sake of the relationship?

I think maybe (possibly?) the daughter in law didn't want to come to the session because she is feeling (conviction/guilt) over the accusation?

Offer the hand of forgiveness and see what happens.



agapetos -> RE: Who should concede in this family conflict? (4/27/2008 10:22:03 AM)

I am going to repeat what I said earlier and say that you need to not blame your son and dil for the actions of the therapist.

I will also add that you need to speak (either on the phone or written) with the counsellors about this event to express your concerns of their treatment of you. I believe written would be better because the response will be written and there's less opportunity to say 'Well x said this' only for x to say they didn't.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI