What are the effects of hiding the death of a relative for a decade?

[Libertarian Prepper]

On my path of self-knowledge, a few days ago I uncovered yet another sordid episode in my childhood, so I thought I would share. When I was about 4 years old, my grandfather (mother's side) died. Rather than tell me where my grandfather had disappeared to, my parents lied to me and told me that "he moved to America".

 

Then, as the years went on and there was no contact, I must have begun freaking out. My mother told me that "he must have lost contact" or things along those lines. I probably felt pretty abandoned (I don't really remember exactly how I felt).

 

When I was about 12-14, I used the internet to try and find my grandfather. I used genealogy websites and websites for finding lost people to look for him, and of course his name never came up. When I told my mother that I was looking for him and couldn't find him, as best I recall she frowned or was upset in some way and said, "Oh, I thought you knew he was dead."

 

This shocked me. "He was dead?!" Apparently they had been tending to his grave once a year all that time, and would always lie and tell me they were going somewhere else. Once I knew the truth, the next time she offered for me to come, but I think I declined and just stood on the stairs after they left.

 

I repressed these memories until just a few days ago, and it's really angering me that my parents would lie in such a fundamental way for an entire decade. Perhaps they didn't want me to feel sad about his death, but this is terrible parenting and I don't think there are any justifications for making me feel abandoned. I haven't confronted my mother about this yet as she gaslights every memory I have. She twists things and either says they happened a different way, or never happened at all...

 

Should I confront her? What kind of effects (I'm thinking feelings of abandonment and maybe a misunderstanding of the significance of death) does such a lie have? Does anyone else have similar experiences?

[Wuzzums]

I don't think they lied to you so as to spare you sadness, even if that's what they probably tell themselves also. They lied because they didn't want to deal with your sadness too. It may be hard to explain death to a child, but it's a lot easier on the parents not to bother explaining anything at all... and to pretend you just knew it all along.

[dsayers]

I can understand not telling a 4 yr old about death. Not saying they were right, just that I could understand. I don't think outright lying is the way to do it. Then of course as you persist with it as you get older, the need for the whole truth becomes that much more important. Once you're old enough to use the internet, it kind of goes without saying that "age appropriate" would be just about all-encompassing. The way your mother just blurted it out is like using words to stab somebody. It wasn't very considerate at all.

 

I'm sorry you felt abandoned as a result of this keeping the truth from you. I cannot relate directly. The first death I experienced, I was already 14. It was my father's mother, the gentlest family member I had. He picked my sister and I up (they were divorced) and drove down the road to park and talk. He told us what happened. We only saw her about once a week, so it didn't hurt as much as it could've. Well that and the fact that I was abused into suppressing my emotions anyway. As somebody who was raised Christian, I remember also getting angry that she died because I saw it as an act of cruelty by somebody that supposedly had the power to look over me.

 

I can't offer any meaningful advice as far as whether to confront your mother or not. It sounds as if there's not really any potential of her taking you seriously, which would only add to your pain. I would say that if you do, do let her know that you felt abandonment. Ask her at what age she would say a person's feeling of abandonment trumps being protected by a grown up concept such as death. In fact, I hope this thread sparks a discussion on that because I can't help but think that understanding that death is a part of life would be beneficial for emotional growth. Maybe not at 4, but you get the idea. I think it would also help a child understand a parent's concern for situations that can be physically harmful if the child understands that permanence is a very real possibility.

[alexqr1]

I don't think they lied to you so as to spare you sadness, even if that's what they probably tell themselves also. They lied because they didn't want to deal with your sadness too.

Well that is quite a statement. We do not know that and I think it is irresponsible to jump to those conclusions.I have a problem with the FDR community constantly confusing wrongdoing by parents with bad intentions by the parents.In this case, maybe the parents were really worried about LP's feelings as a 4 year old and so they lied. The action is clearly incorrect in more than one level, but how do we go from that to saying they acted in self interest disregarding that of the child?

[Libertarian Prepper]

I don't think they lied to you so as to spare you sadness, even if that's what they probably tell themselves also. They lied because they didn't want to deal with your sadness too. It may be hard to explain death to a child, but it's a lot easier on the parents not to bother explaining anything at all... and to pretend you just knew it all along.

 

That makes sense to me. It might indeed be that they didn't want to deal with my feelings and then probably deceived themselves into thinking I already knew. That's sad :/

 

dsayers, thanks for your post. You're right about the issue of permanence. Maybe it would also help the child value their life more? Although maybe that's a bit of a heavy lesson for a 4 year-old. Either way though I think that for a family member that always lived in the house with me, 4 years is definitely old enough to know that they didn't just disappear and then not care enough to call even once in 10 years.

 

Oh and I would also be interested in a discussion of when it becomes appropriate to tell the kid the truth about death, and whether euphemisms like "passed away" are appropriate (I don't think they are).

Well that is quite a statement. We do not know that and I think it is irresponsible to jump to those conclusions.I have a problem with the FDR community constantly confusing wrongdoing by parents with bad intentions by the parents.In this case, maybe the parents were really worried about LP's feelings as a 4 year old and so they lied. The action is clearly incorrect in more than one level, but how do we go from that to saying they acted in self interest disregarding that of the child?

The sad thing is I'll never be able to find out the truth of their intentions because they won't take responsibility for anything they've done. My dad has said, in a kind of nebulous way, that of course everyone makes mistakes, but once I cite specific things he always goes on the defensive and begins justifying his actions. Both of my parents also pretend stuff never happened that I clearly remember (like my father trying to hit me and being stopped by my mother).

[dsayers]

whether euphemisms like "passed away" are appropriate (I don't think they are).

 

In the presence of somebody who is grieving a fresh loss, I don't take issue with whatever they need to help ease their pain. Otherwise, I totally agree with you. Than again, I am a stickler for precise language.

[Wuzzums]

Well that is quite a statement. We do not know that and I think it is irresponsible to jump to those conclusions.I have a problem with the FDR community constantly confusing wrongdoing by parents with bad intentions by the parents.In this case, maybe the parents were really worried about LP's feelings as a 4 year old and so they lied. The action is clearly incorrect in more than one level, but how do we go from that to saying they acted in self interest disregarding that of the child?

 

The sadness of the child comes from not having a grandfather anymore. What should it matter if he's dead or left forever? It's the same thing in the eyes of such a young child, which I don't think knows the difference regardless. All he knows is that grandpa is gone, and that doesn't change whatever the parents may decide to tell the child. Wrongdoing and bad intentions might not be so different in this case.

 

So we've got option a) tell the child his grandfather is dead, deal with the aftermath of the child missing grandpa; and option b) tell the child his grandfather left forever, deal with the aftermath of the child missing grandpa. I don't see how lying helps when the outcome is the same.

[dsayers]

The latter avoids mortality, which likely isn't age appropriate for a 4 year old.

[JamesP]

Well that is quite a statement. We do not know that and I think it is irresponsible to jump to those conclusions.I have a problem with the FDR community constantly confusing wrongdoing by parents with bad intentions by the parents.In this case, maybe the parents were really worried about LP's feelings as a 4 year old and so they lied. The action is clearly incorrect in more than one level, but how do we go from that to saying they acted in self interest disregarding that of the child?

 

Because you don't keep secrets like that from people that you care about.  You especially don't toss out information you've been withholding like a bad salad.  And finally, if they did eventually act in LP's self-interest on this matter, he wouldn't be here, asking for help.

 

There are ways to communicate to a young child about death, and there are plenty of resources out there to help, ranging from books to counselors.  They avoided all of those things, and prevented LP from being able to grieve for his grandfather.

 

Even if we accept that intent matters, I don't think there's a lot of room here for good intentions.

[alexqr1]

The sadness of the child comes from not having a grandfather anymore. What should it matter if he's dead or left forever? It's the same thing in the eyes of such a young child, which I don't think knows the difference regardless. All he knows is that grandpa is gone, and that doesn't change whatever the parents may decide to tell the child. Wrongdoing and bad intentions might not be so different in this case. So we've got option a) tell the child his grandfather is dead, deal with the aftermath of the child missing grandpa; and option b) tell the child his grandfather left forever, deal with the aftermath of the child missing grandpa. I don't see how lying helps when the outcome is the same.

I never claimed that lying was right, in fact, is specifically said it was wrong in more than one level. My issue is with automatically assuming the intentions of the parents were to disregard the well-being of the son, which may or may not have been the case.I'm 100% with you on the fact that the action taken was wrong.

Because you don't keep secrets like that from people that you care about.  You especially don't toss out information you've been withholding like a bad salad.  And finally, if they did eventually act in LP's self-interest on this matter, he wouldn't be here, asking for help. There are ways to communicate to a young child about death, and there are plenty of resources out there to help, ranging from books to counselors.  They avoided all of those things, and prevented LP from being able to grieve for his grandfather. Even if we accept that intent matters, I don't think there's a lot of room here for good intentions.

Sorry, are you saying that any action parents take or mistakes they make towards the child imply ill intentions towards their kid?Is it not possible that a parent can make a mistake that harms the child and then because of the incapacity of the parent to deal with his or her own issues then he or she is not capable of dealing with the mistake that was made?I know there are ways to communicate a death to a child, that is not my point. As I stated before, lying was wrong.

[Libertarian Prepper]

Sorry, are you saying that any action parents take or mistakes they make towards the child imply ill intentions towards their kid?Is it not possible that a parent can make a mistake that harms the child and then because of the incapacity of the parent to deal with his or her own issues then he or she is not capable of dealing with the mistake that was made?I know there are ways to communicate a death to a child, that is not my point. As I stated before, lying was wrong.

 

This is an interesting issue. With regards to such major mistakes, I think that the answer is not always a yes, but most of the time it is. Let me explain:

 

If my parents really had good intentions that went beyond vacuous statements like "Well of course we always loved you!", they would have actually studied for becoming good parents. When dealing with a serious issue like the death of a relative, if I were in their place I would read books, ask this question of other virtuous parents I knew, and maybe even talked to a counselor.

 

The fact that they just lied to me is a pretty good indication that they never went through this process, which means I seriously doubt their intentions.

 

It's like in Stef's video "But they did the best they could" - if I have the intention of becoming a great parent, I'm going to work my ass off to resolve my issues and prepare to be a good parent years before I would even consider being ready for kids. My parents never went through that stage. I've talked to them about it too. I told my mother (who is a professional Pianist and Piano teacher) - if you had a concert to prepare for, how much time would you need to spend learning the piano? "Years" she said. Then I asked her how much time she spent preparing to become a parent, and she admitted that it was none. Of course she immediately began to justify things with "Well we were well-intentioned and always had lots of love."

 

I told her that being a well-intentioned piano player doesn't make you any better at playing. All it can do is give you the motivation to prepare better.

 

Finally, someone truly well-intentioned, who has the interests of the child ahead of theirs, would admit to a mistake, accept responsibility, apologize, and promise never to do something like that again. So far with every memory I've confronted my parents with they just began defending themselves or outright gaslighting me. Not exactly signs of "good intentions".

 

If I'm wrong here, please correct me.

 

Edit: Another thought occurred to me - anybody who has an enormous amount of unresolved issues that dictate their decision-making process has no idea what their real intentions even are. If something like 95% of someone's decisions are made subconsciously and without serious reflection and analysis, then they have about as much control over and understanding of their intentions as a drunk person has. This is why self-knowledge is so tremendously important.

[alexqr1]

I do not claim to know what your parents were thinking, it is easy to see they were wrong and you have all the right to question them about it and hold them responsible for their actions.

 

It is good to know if you want to be a good parent you would read and inform yourself. Some people are so absorbed by their issues that they don't even see the necessity to do it. Does it mean they are right? No.

 

If you think your parents did not have good intentions then who am I to question that and say you are wrong. I would tend to believe you because you are in a way better position than me to judge. I am not talking specifically of your case, but rather, you cannot jump to quick conclusions and just assume that because a parent acted in detriment to the child, then the parent did not have good intentions.

I know having good intentions do not justify actions, if a parent acts in detriment to the child then the parent is 100% responsible, I am not arguing otherwise.

 

Good intentions can lead to wrong actions, that is true for parenthood as it is for everything else.

[Libertarian Prepper]

I do not claim to know what your parents were thinking, it is easy to see they were wrong and you have all the right to question them about it and hold them responsible for their actions.It is good to know if you want to be a good parent you would read and inform yourself. Some people are so absorbed by their issues that they don't even see the necessity to do it. Does it mean they are right? No.If you think your parents did not have good intentions then who am I to question that and say you are wrong. I would tend to believe you because you are in a way better position than me to judge. I am not talking specifically of your case, but rather, you cannot jump to quick conclusions and just assume that because a parent acted in detriment to the child, then the parent did not have good intentions.I know having good intentions do not justify actions, if a parent acts in detriment to the child then the parent is 100% responsible, I am not arguing otherwise.Good intentions can lead to wrong actions, that is true for parenthood as it is for everything else.

I get what you're saying and I agree - mistakes don't necessarily entail bad intentions.