Background:
My younger sister, Suzanne, has two daughters. Hannah, the oldest, has been the one most focused on, and the one Suzanne has the most intense reactions to. Emily, 30, and Suzanne take daily walks together and have an easy supportive relationship. Emily works full time as a physical therapist. Hannah is in graduate school. Though she attended Harvard as a freshman and has a master’s from University of Chicago (in a family of state school graduates), she has not been employed for more than brief part-time jobs. She lives in parental home.
I have observed that Emily is more guarded with me than Hannah is, and I think that is related to her loyalty to her mother. She takes sides with her mother when Suzanne has conflict with Emily’s dad. She has also sided with Suzanne when Suzanne has had difficulty dealing with Hannah. Suzanne and Emily deny side-taking.
I had long been aware of these factors and had considered how I might approach Suzanne and her daughters, to put them together and self out. On an emotional level, Suzanne represents my mother, who died in 2016. I saw an opening after Suzanne sent me the following message.
March 1 – 3, 2021 Exchange
Suzanne: Thanks for this. I’m reminded of how Bowen theory related to Margulis’ theories of interacting and relating eukaryotic cells. We are all so interconnected, physically, emotionally, and perhaps on some other planes or dimensions that we don’t yet understand. During Spanish class we were asked “who is the most interesting person that you know?” It was you.
Love
Suzanne
Me: Hmmm . . . The thing is, that’s not my thing. Maybe you can make Hannah into an interesting person . . .
Suzanne: So you were mad because you thought I was putting pressure on you to be interesting. Wow. That’s so mature. I guess you’ve really overcome your family challenges.
And BTW what a shit hole thing to do, bringing up the younger generation in a negative way. I tried to think of a nicer way to say this, but I’m at a loss.
Me: Where in the world did you get the idea that I’m mad at you?!
I do want to revise my comment, though, to maybe you and Emily can make Hannah into an interesting person. Just adding Emily, though Emily has probably already been added, some years ago . . .
Just trying to be helpful to all,
Laurie
Suzanne: I over reacted and allowed a deflection. That was my error.
I reacted to “make Hannah an interesting person” because I know our family has issues and I don’t want to “make” either of my kids anything. I guess I was also reading into it that you were saying that the challenges we face as a family are because I was trying to make my kids into something. I don’t know if that’s true. I thought at the time that I was just trying to help my kids have opportunities. Knowing who their mother and father are, I never intended my kids to go to elite schools for example.
Was I pushing them to excel? Maybe the answer is yes and that makes me react to your comments. Interestingly, at the time, I remember trying to talk the kids into stopping some of their activities, but it was weird, they just never wanted to cut back. I guess I should have made some decisions for them. And that gets into the coparenting between George and me. George seemed to resist any edicts from above, I think because his father was domineering. I think that’s why there may be what is for me an unexpected reaction when I give my opinion about something to George. There is a resistance to being told something. That’s another story I’m working on.
So that was my first reaction, resisting you saying that I was trying to make my kids something. And then, adding Emily in, ass somehow my ally in trying to make Hannah something, seemed to be implying that I was using one kid against another. I found that hurtful. I love both my kids. They are very different and seem to want different things from me. I walk regularly with with one, with the other I offer and receive hugs. One wants more time from me, the other appears to guard her time, both for practical reasons to get stuff done and perhaps for alone time. I enjoy joking and laughing with both. Their sense of humor seems to improve daily. I defend both. I don’t engage in negative talk with anyone about either of them. As you know you’ve been helpful with some of this.
So I’ve been honest about my thinking. Can I ask the same from you? Why did you bring up Hannah, and then Emily in our conversation?
Did you think I would react positively to the idea of “making” Hannah something or to working with Emily to “make” Hannah something?
Are you sure it wasn’t sarcasm?
“Sarcasm refers to the use of words that mean the opposite of what you really want to say, especially in order to insult someone, or to show irritation, or just to be funny. Most often, sarcasm is biting, and intended to cause pain.”
Still love you, but it ain’t easy.
Suzanne
Dear Suzanne,
Iris Murdoch wrote a book called, The Nice and the Good. The implication is that they are not the same. In my experience, it is easy to be nice, and hard to be good.
That said, you seem to believe that using your kids is wrong, and that most parents don’t do it. Thus you feel insulted by the idea.
Laurie
Suzanne: You haven’t answered my question. Why did you bring up Hannah, and then Emily, in our conversation?
It happened after I shared the answer I gave in Spanish class to name the most interesting person I know personally. I was in a position that I had to name someone. I get that my answer hit a nerve, and I am not denying your right to react. (Obviously, I’m not a stranger to reacting)
But my question above remains. If it wasn’t to be clever or sarcastic, what were your emails? Why bring up the Youngers? What was the point? Isn’t that something we agree on, not to involve the younger generation?
Me: No, you did not hit a nerve, and yes, I did have a reason to bring up your daughters. (She made no reply to that.)
Dear Suzanne,
I am not at all angry at you! And you didn’t do or say anything wrong. I certainly have no intention to hurt you, or to be sarcastic. However you and Emily want to manage your relationship to Hannah is fine with me. All of you are lovely people, and I want only the best for you.
I wonder where you get these ideas that I am trying to hurt you. I’m interested in what goes on in your mind.
Talk soon,
Love,
Laurie
Suzanne: I don’t know Laurie, somehow this is falling flat. I shared real feelings and I’m getting back … well it just doesn’t sound real. You’ve been a tremendous help to me in the past, and I’m sure you probably will be again. Right now I feel like you’re hiding behind your trees. Where’s the Laurie gone to?
Hi Suzanne,
I want to be the Laurie you want me to be. Just tell me what to say,
Laurie
PAUSE OF A FEW DAYS
Suzanne: You talked recently about your work to document Bowen’s sessions and how you considered it a contribution to the field. You said you were leaving out the sessions with you even though they were the most interesting. BTW that was your phrasing, the most interesting. Anyway, I wondered why you would leave it out when names can be changed to protect privacy. And maybe you could wait to publish until you’re ready.
I hope Mike’s birthday went well. Maybe it was a send off to Colorado also. Exciting.
Suzanne
Thank you, Suzanne,
Something seems to have changed in you this morning.
Yes, we had a nice evening with Mike. One of the topics was Cuomo’s troubles. Though John has female admirers, he draws a strict line. I think Mike will be like that, too.
Thanks for your messages for Mike, which I will pass on to him.
Love,
Laurie
April 2021:
Me: By the way, are you still sensitive about making Hannah into an interesting person?
Suzanne: As to your last comment… you are hilarious. And such a big sister. Funny.
Thank you Laurie. I have heard you present many times on differentiating a self in one’s own family. I think you have always been clear but I am hearing this more clearly than I ever have. Perhaps it is the challenges in my own family that has allowed me to focus a little more on the process and hear the distant drumbeat. I am so grateful for the work you continue to present.
Laurie,
This touches a nerve for me. Among my eight grandchildren, there are some doing better than others as measured by academic and career achievement. Among my six children, and on my part, there is concern about the ones who aren’t making the grade as defined by the conventional markers. My daughter and son-in-law, parents of the three children who are more in the anxious focus position, have been open in talking with me and their siblings about the concerns. The response has support and encouragement all around. Several are reading Mike Kerr’s recent book. Bowen therapists have been consulted. Expectations are being adjusted. Adults trying to put less pressure on the kids, more openness to letting each find their own way.
Reading your exchange with your sister, I think you are on to a way of
working on a different level. It is the part of what Bowen taught and what he described in his own-family work that I have never understood.
Something to do with strategies and reversals, guided by keen awareness of emotional process. I appreciate the chance to learn from you.
Laurie,
I’m not sure what you might think is clumsy in this?
Like the example Bowen provided in the Anonymous paper, it can seem like the protagonist is a bit of a smart ass.
What doesn’t show is the courage it takes to maintain a way of going when a family member decides to call a pattern out as you do.
I learn from the way you don’t give in to Suzanne’s understandable distress and confusion as to whether you are criticizing her or to explain what you are doing. Yet she let’s you be and goes forth. Laura