An Open Letter to My Three Step-Sons, The Truth Hurts.

page: 8
22
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   
When I first read this letter, it pissed me off. It then dawned on me when he wrote this, maybe he was really upset after (yet another it sounds like) bad situation occurred. Not sure.

Typically, the family dynamics that would turn out 3 drug addicted kids leads me to think the mother is/was partly responsible for how she raised the boys. That is a hard one to look at from your or her perspective, but it must be done. Is your wife often the "victim"? It sounds like you are the one in control and she is a constant mess with her sons giving the reason for her to act this way along with being genetically prone to addiction.




posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by GmoS719

Originally posted by Xaphan

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
I have watched you all use your mother completely up. 26 yr old, you have not called or talked to your mother in two years. Calls. e-mails, text, handwritten letters. You have zero response. Why? Is there nothing left for you to take away? Decided when the college money ran out you would just dissapear? What did you find someone else to use and abuse? Well 26yr old, the jig is up. We know about dropping out & we know about the rageing Crystal Meth addiction you have. What a damn waste of potential.

Take it easy stepdad. I don't need college now. I got a really good job with this guy named Walter White. The pay is good, the work is usually pretty steady, and I don't have to pay for the meth anymore. I've got it all under control, for the most part.




So does your mother and sister..

That show blows.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Halle goddamm luyea bro. And I'm an athiest. Power to yer elbow. Keep caring and there is hope.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ErgoTheConclusion

Originally posted by Hr2burn
I think the whole Y generation on are pretty much lazy and think they are entitled to everything.

Look... really think about this attitude.

Do those who stare at the "gen Y" and say "how awful and lazy you all are!" think that they all just appeared here on this planet as a sperm and egg with the intent of being lazy and entitled?

WHERE/WHO did they get these ideas from? Who made it so they COULD continue to be lazy and entitled and still make it through life? Who set the example for them to mimic?

If an entire generation turns out "bad" by their early 20's... do you think it's that generation or the generation that raised that generation that is honestly going to have been the biggest responsibility for setting and sustaining that path?

The truth is GenY is going to be amazing by the time they are grandparents because they are already having to learn to undo the impact of the "Boomers and their kids" who wanted nothing more than to make it "better for their kids so they won't have to suffer like they did". Another way to put that is "so they don't have to learn like they did."

Well guess what... we did it. We made a world where kids don't have to try, kids can have everything they want, and there aren't any real demands on them to get them. Not as a whole. So now we have kids who don't want to try and want everything they want now. Because that's what we gave them. What else should we expect? That's exactly the society WE made and gave to THEM.

We are a product of our choices, time ("genX" here), *and* parents as much as they are a product of theirs.

A generation doesn't spontaneously reject their parents teaching from birth and set a new path. They continue the path their parents have already started long ago and make their own changes along the way if they can. But they don't get to start really making their changes to the society path itself until well into adulthood and usually only once the previous generation has ceased dominating the tone.
edit on 2-2-2013 by ErgoTheConclusion because: (no reason given)


I don't think it's the parents, I think it is the TV influences that generation has been fed.....APPALLING!!!

I am so disgusted by the lack of morals on every level. Their shows traumatize me! lol

My son is only aloud to watch things like the muppet show, Brady Bunch, and Gilligans Island. The most modern thing I will allow is zoboomafoo!

The shows theses days are all a bunch of spoiled disrespectful back talking horrid kids.

We have no cable and only download things that teach respect and morals.

I blame tv and pop culture, not the parents, though maybe they should have cut off the cable and selected more wholesome programming??



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:55 AM
link   
reply to post by openyourmind1262
 


That was a bueatiful and painfully honest O.P. If I was there with you I would beat some sence into those kids myself... It's such a shame when things get this bad. That this action is necessary. At some point everyone involved has to move on... And you are. You've done a very hard thing and a line must be drawn in the sand at some point. This point. I only hope and pray that you children learn and grow as well.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:16 AM
link   



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by GmoS719
How dare you condemn someone because of a drug addiction?
Doesn't it tell you something that they are ALL addicts?
I bet your wife (the mother) had a lot to do with it, she was a drug abuser after all.
Children can't raise themselves you know.
You say you tried to be the father they never had?
This is real fatherly of you and is a testament to how hard you tried.
edit on 1-2-2013 by GmoS719 because: (no reason given)


Who are you to judge someone in the OP's position? Have you ever tried to deal with drug addicted people who only care about their next high? Have you ever had to deal with a relative who will lie, steal, cheat, and do whatever they have to do to you in order to continue their drug habit?

Also real nice of you to blame the OP's wife, the children's mother, and claim she was an addict as well. I must have missed that part of the OP. What I saw only mentions a drug addicted biological father.

For the OP: Good for you! Cut them off. The fact is, people only change when they want to change and when it comes to drugs, as sad as it is, bad things have to happen before a person decides to change. It is known as hitting "rock bottom" and drug addicts have to hit that bottom before they are ever willing to change. Enabling the addict does no good for you, the family, or the addict.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by derekg
Typically, the family dynamics that would turn out 3 drug addicted kids leads me to think the mother is/was partly responsible for how she raised the boys. That is a hard one to look at from your or her perspective, but it must be done. Is your wife often the "victim"? It sounds like you are the one in control and she is a constant mess with her sons giving the reason for her to act this way along with being genetically prone to addiction.


I love how people love to blame the parents. Allow me to tell you a story.....

My Mother did not drink. There was never alcohol in our home. She did not smoke, she did not do drugs of any kind.

My Father was not a big drinker. Did not smoke. Did not do drugs either.

Yet at the age of 12, I started smoking. By 14 I was drinking. By 15 I was smoking weed. By 16 I was doing coc aine, acid, and meth. By 17 I tried heroin.

Wanna guess who's fault this all was?

MINE!!!!

The problem with people and society in general is we always feel like we need to blame someone else for everything that happens when the truth is, I made poor choices. I made bad decisions. I create my own reality and situation by making those poor choices. The fault lies with ME and with ME alone.

I am reminded of a quote from Ronald Reagan who said, "We must reject the idea that every time a law is broken, society is guilt rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his own actions."



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Its because people who don't have children think they're like toys, or possessions completely influenced by parents instead of free will individuals, with souls who are here to improve like everyone else and make their own willful choices, often causing pain and suffering to those around them.

Most of the judgements come from people who have never raised kids, never taught kids, and really don't know much about life. But in order to make life make sense, they like to cast wrong judgments and put things in little slots so they can rest easy.
edit on 3-2-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


I don't believe that. The OP said himself he helped his wife through Narcotics anonymous.
His wife was an addict.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by mellisamouse
 


Yeah becuase there were so many morals back.. when? 1800's? Opium, whiskey, killin' and whorehouses.. then again there probably were more morals because those things were legal.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by openyourmind1262
 
Ummm.....I just wanted to say that...you can borrow from my strength if you need to (as I may one day need to borrow from yours)...I know how hard it must have been to even place this in the forum. I wanted to let you know that many, many of us care and our thoughts and well wishes are with you and yours. I know how much you and your wife pray and wish that your sons were different, that you ask yourselves why and where did we go wrong? Ultimately, though, as you've stated, there comes a time when you have to let it go. We can read into that you and your wife still love these boys (I called them boys because of their childish actions according to your OP) and that you always will. If I may, I would call you friend and tell you that your not alone and that this ATS community does care. Your our neighbor...here...even though we bloviate and opine after our own fashions, you are more than...well come...and I personally thank you for the opportunity to state as much....Be well my friend...

YouSir



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Some of you are so interesting. You want to put everything 100% on the kids and 0% on the parents, while then accusing others of "passing the blame" and all refusing to answer the question of why so many (most?) parents are willing to claim influence when things go well but turn a blind eye when they go poor and say "well they got there entirely on their own".

The people that you think are judging the OP and trying to absolve the kids are misunderstanding what is being expressed. We (especially Santa and I) have been emphasizing through our own personal experiences with this (I'm 10 years "farther ahead" in the same process relative to OP for example) that it is ALWAYS a more complex dynamic that involves all the key players and healing involves all the key players being willing to look hard at themselves, especially things that went on a couple of decades ago they might have long since forgotten or never realized were a big deal to the kid because the kid never felt safe bringing it up.

Is it "this man's fault"? Of course not and nothing like that has been suggested. But to suggest the kids got there all by themselves is childish, short sighted, and horrifically damaging to any parent/child relationship preventing any opportunity for repairing the relationship.

It's a shared responsibility. Yes it's TV. Yes it's their peers. Yes it's their teachers. Yes it's pop stars... but YOU had the child and YOU are tasked with by your own choice to be the one responsible for the sort of path and tone they take initially. It doesn't mean you claim responsibility for all their choices and mistakes but that you don't just point at them and say "You got there all by yourself... entirely... nobody else was an influence (especially when you were too young to understand)... you're just a bad person".

It's fascinating that nobody will reply to the questions about why so many parents are more than happy for their role in the child's development when it goes well (you personally may be an exception but you're lying if you don't see that as a pervasive attitude in this culture). This culture wants to claim credit for the good they produce in coordination with someone else, but don't want to look into how they may have played a part in coordinating things "getting this bad".

Those who don't let the junkies in your family get arrested *early* and "protect" them from facing the consequences of their actions until YOU are sick of them... are a HUGE part of the problem.

I wouldn't come in here and invest my heart and soul into this if it wasn't as important to me as the OP is to the OP. It's more important than any conspiracy, philosophy, or metaphysics that I usually seek to discuss here.

You are of course free to reject the perspectives being offered.
edit on 3-2-2013 by ErgoTheConclusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ErgoTheConclusion
Some of you are so interesting. You want to put everything 100% on the kids and 0% on the parents, while then accusing others of "passing the blame" and all refusing to answer the question of why parents are willing to claim influence when things go well but turn a blind eye when they go poor and say "well they got there entirely on their own".

The people that you think are judging the OP and trying to absolve the kids are misunderstanding what is being expressed. We (especially Santa and I) have been emphasizing through our own personal experiences with this (I'm 10 years "farther ahead" in the same process relative to OP for example) that it is ALWAYS a more complex dynamic that involves all the key players and healing involves all the key players being willing to look hard at themselves, especially things that went on a couple of decades ago they might have long since forgotten or never realized were a big deal to the kid because the kid never felt safe bringing it up.

Is it "this man's fault"? Of course not and nothing like that has been suggested. But to suggest the kids got there all by themselves is childish, short sighted, and horrifically damaging to any parent/child relationship preventing any opportunity for repairing the relationship.

It's a shared responsibility. Yes it's TV. Yes it's their peers. Yes it's their teachers. Yes it's pop stars... but YOU had the child and YOU are tasked with by your own choice to be the one responsible for the sort of path and tone they take initially. It doesn't mean you claim responsibility for all their choices and mistakes but that you don't just point at them and say "You got there all by yourself... entirely... nobody else was an influence (especially when you were too young to understand)... you're just a bad person".

It's fascinating that nobody will reply to the questions about why parents are more than happy for their role in the child's development when it goes well (you personally may be an exception but you're lying if you don't see that as a pervasive attitude in this culture). This culture wants to claim credit for the good they produce in coordination with someone else, but don't want to look into how they may have played a part in coordinating things "getting this bad".

Those who don't let the junkies in your family get arrested *early* and "protect" them from facing the consequences of their actions until YOU are sick of them... are a HUGE part of the problem.

I wouldn't come in here and invest my heart and soul into this if it wasn't as important to me as the OP is to the OP. It's more important than any conspiracy, philosophy, or metaphysics that I usually seek to discuss here. You are of course free to reject the perspectives being offered.
edit on 3-2-2013 by ErgoTheConclusion because: (no reason given)


Should parents take credit if thier children turn out well? In my opinion no, ultimately it is the choices made that credit should be given for, to the people that make the choices thier children. The parents may have been a good influence, but an influence does not a choice make.

Should parents take the blame if the children turn out badly? In my opinion no, it is the choices made that blame should be assigned for, to the people making choices thier children. The parents may have been a bad influence, but an influence does not a choice make.

Parents may have been a good influence or a bad influence, but the bottom line is that when teens hit adolescence and are capable of independent thought thier choices are thier own. These were not 10 or 12 year old boys but grown men, they made thier choices so they should accept the outcome of the choices they have made whether the outcomes are good or bad. Placing blame for your actions elsewhere is nothing but a cowardly out. Almost all people have good and bad influences in thier lives, the choices they make are thiers to make, not anyone elses.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkphoenix77
Should parents take credit if thier children turn out well? In my opinion no, ultimately it is the choices made that credit should be given for, to the people that make the choices thier children. The parents may have been a good influence, but an influence does not a choice make.

Should parents take the blame if the children turn out badly? In my opinion no, it is the choices made that blame should be assigned for, to the people making choices thier children. The parents may have been a bad influence, but an influence does not a choice make.

Thank you for the response.

Now working with that stance... regardless of if this is how it "should" be (just as kids "should" make smart choices), do you feel that our culture currently does or does not embody more of the parents claiming influence when things go well, and denying influence when they go poor? I choose the word influence... not credit... on purpose. What impact do you think this general attitude of parents towards kids might there be?

Is it worth considering that MANY parents today are little more than children themselves who never actually learned how to parent because they were overly protected by their boomer children parents who were overprotected by their boomer parents who's parents were shocked to near insanity by the 1-2 punch of Great Depression and World War 2?


Originally posted by Darkphoenix77
Parents may have been a good influence or a bad influence, but the bottom line is that when teens hit adolescence and are capable of independent thought thier choices are thier own. These were not 10 or 12 year old boys but grown men, they made thier choices so they should accept the outcome of the choices they have made whether the outcomes are good or bad. Placing blame for your actions elsewhere is nothing but a cowardly out. Almost all people have good and bad influences in thier lives, the choices they make are thiers to make, not anyone elses.

Absolutely agreed that no parent should take responsibility for a CHOICE a child makes.

However, if a child needs to discuss their feelings of pain, or rejection, never good enough, never there... there too much, overbearing... uncaring... whatever it was they experienced as that 10 year old boy or girl who didn't understand what was happening... should the parent say "NO! NONE of that mattered or influenced you... you made all your choices yourself"?

Well here is my reply: Parents... you are children of someone else too. YOU or your partner made the choices you made when that child was 10 years old that *your* parents would disapprove of. YOU know the truth... not the polished version you choose to post in public but all the little nitty gritty daily things that went on between you two. So just as that kid MUST accept responsibility for their *choices* you must accept the responsibility for YOUR choices which *influenced* that other person in their most critical stages of development. Usually without even realizing it. When you dig in you find the things that kids latched onto are often things the parents never even realized the kids noticed or had an opinion about.

Furthermore... by taking responsibility for your part it means being honest about your *enabling* aspect. I mean it when I say that people who protect "screw ups" until THEY are tired rather than letting the person just "screw up" and learn from it... simply don't recognize their part of the dynamic and don't recognize how they helped pave the road to make it *easier* for "things to get this bad".

It's not saying you put the dope in them. It's about admitting what role you have played in the dance of their lives and not being unwilling to look honestly at how those things you said or did or didn't do when that kid was 7 years old impacted them in ways THEY couldn't understand at the time and won't understand until they can finally untangle themselves from all the messes that came about later in life in conjunction with the confusion or misdirection or pain they experienced at 7.

Or it's about saying "I want no part in this" and actually ceasing to be a part... not a passive aggressive radiator of disappointment... and leaving them to TRULY "get over it" on their own for better or worse.

However the easiest and always most effective thing to do is keep it simple and be an ear if needed but cease enabling/fixing. Being an ear doesn't mean you have to agree with them.
edit on 3-2-2013 by ErgoTheConclusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal

Yet at the age of 12, I started smoking. By 14 I was drinking. By 15 I was smoking weed. By 16 I was doing coc aine, acid, and meth. By 17 I tried heroin.



Sounds like you were hanging with the wrong crowd from the time you were 12. This woman I knew who had 2 sons that got into trouble -- they were also hanging out with the wrong crowd. Their mother wasn't doing anything about it. When the 12-yr old son went to live with his father, the father laid down the law big-time. He told the son, "you won't go to the bathroom without my permission". If the father didn't like someone that the boy was hanging out with, that person was banned. The father made it his business to know every step his son took, and who he was hanging with. The father used tough love, and it took a huge amount of his time and effort, but by the time the son was 14, he wasn't getting into trouble anymore.

The parents CAN make a difference, when the kid is young enough. If you don't start to get involved until the kid is 17/18 yrs old, it gets a lot harder.



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Destinyone
 


I don't believe that. The OP said himself he helped his wife through Narcotics anonymous.
His wife was an addict.
Ummm...Vic, your wrong on this one, go back and re-read the OP. Have you ever heard of Al-Anon, or Al-Ateen They're alcoholics anonymous meetings for the...family... of the alcoholic, for the spouse and children. The meetings are so that the family can gain a better understanding of what the struggles are in alcoholism and fellowship with other families that are experiencing the same thing. That is what the OP was speaking about, Narc-Anon, not about...her...being an addict.

YouSir



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by YouSir
Ummm...Vic, your wrong on this one, go back and re-read the OP. Have you ever heard of Al-Anon, or Al-Ateen They're alcoholics anonymous meetings for the...family... of the alcoholic, for the spouse and children. The meetings are so that the family can gain a better understanding of what the struggles are in alcoholism and fellowship with other families that are experiencing the same thing. That is what the OP was speaking about, Narc-Anon, not about...her...being an addict.

Ok... so I find this a fascinating side discussion in this thread. Here is what happened:

OP made a mistake.

We've been "arguing" about it ever since. This is a perfect example of the typical "human" fight cycle. So let's try to dissect it.

OP wrote "Narc-a Non" when they meant "Nar-Anon".

Then people who have actually attended Narcotics Anonymous meetings (myself included) know that "nar-anon" is one thing, and tend to (for better or worse) hear "narc-anon" as "Narcotics Anonymous". Others came in and FALSLY asserted that "narc-anon" meant "nar-anon" but without showing they were aware that the OP was getting the name wrong and thus were perpetuating an easily understood confusion. No... instead we have to "prove someone else wrong".

This easy confusion is emphasized by the very existence of this page: narcanon.net which exists entirely to differentiate "narcotics anonymous" from "Narconon". It emphasizes there is no such "thing" as "Narc-Anon".

This is not to absolve those who read the OP and misunderstood... but it is to elucidate all the different thought threads that most people "arguing" with each other are failing to see and work with. Go back and read the OP and contemplate the different ways it can be read in that part. Understand why someone might feel motivated to reply the way they did. Then understand why someone might want to argue back.

Narc-Anon doesn't exist. OP made a mistake. We're all paying the price for it because we won't just admit the OP made a mistake and start ALL operating under the understanding of what the OP *meant* not what they *said*.

So we instead waste time and energy arguing when a simple google search should clear up both why 1) the people who responded to the OP didn't get a clear picture of what OP meant and 2) why people feel "good" about themselves for "validating" the supposed "Narc-Anon is for family of users" concept despite it itself being a false statement and an entire page devoted to clearing up abbreviation confusion with similar organizations.

There is no reason to continue to debate this. OP clearly meant "Nar-Anon" but made a mistake. Others have chosen instead to subject everyone to a useless "argument". I am a part of this, I do not deny. My aim is to provide reason to cease this unproductive aspect of the conversation.
edit on 3-2-2013 by ErgoTheConclusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
I have to confess I honestly feel this is one of the most "important" threads on ATS.
edit on 3-2-2013 by ErgoTheConclusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2013 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Drugs never have been, and never will be the problem. The problem is the person picking them up and maybe, why they do. But that would take personal responsibility which this entire human race seems to have forgotten.



new topics
top topics
 
22
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join