(362 words)

Time gives rise to contradictions. And it doesn’t matter what century it is, the nineteenth or the twenty-first. The problem of “fathers” and “sons” is eternal. The generational conflict persists in the 19th century, but has its own distinctive feature. What events gave rise to the “new” conflict?

May 20, 1859. Turgenev chose this date not by chance: the country was preparing to adopt a reform to abolish serfdom. The question of which “path” the country’s development would take after the reform worried many troubled minds. Opinions in society were divided: the fathers wanted to leave everything as before, the children wanted radical changes.

A prominent representative of the revolutionary-democratic camp (“children”) in the novel is Yevgeny Bazarov. He denies the very foundations of the existing world order, while offering nothing in return. He is not interested in what happens next. “First we need to clear the place,” the hero confidently declares. Bazarov is a pragmatist. He refers to “romanticism” in all its manifestations as “nonsense and rottenness.” Evgeniy Vasilyevich undergoes tests of love, and then death, from which he “comes out victorious”, admitting his mistake - the extreme radicalism of his views.

The fathers could not accept his point of view, since Eugene was too categorical and denied everything that formed the basis of the worldview of the older generation. However, this senile stubbornness and reluctance to understand new trends can be interpreted as a desire to slow down progress. The fathers have done nothing in their lifetime, have not helped the people in any way, but they want to prevent others from changing something.

The Kirsanov brothers represent the liberal nobility (“fathers”) in the novel. Nikolai Petrovich is afraid of losing his spiritual connection with his son. He tries to “keep up with the times” in order to warn Arkady from mistakes. However, Pavel Petrovich sharply rejects the changes. The inveterate serf owner values ​​the people for their obedience and does not want to free them. If Arkady's father himself is ready to recognize equality with the peasants by falling in love with a serf girl and marrying her, then his brother is indignant and denies the possibility of a misalliance.

Although fathers do not understand the need for change, they still carry a lot of useful experience with them. Their heritage cannot be abandoned, so the Bazarovs need to learn tact; this will not harm the future either. New people also do not yet understand the people and their needs, and have also done nothing, but they have a chance to correct the mistakes of the older generation. How can you do this if you don’t listen to him and don’t know him? Nothing. The author proves this to us by showing that the progressive Eugene is the double of the conservative Pavel Petrovich, who repeats his unfortunate fate, only making it even more tragic.

The problem of fathers and children can be called eternal. But it is especially aggravated at turning points in the development of society, when the older and younger generations become exponents of the ideas of two different eras. It is precisely this time in the history of Russia - the 60s of the 19th century - that is shown in I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons”. The conflict between fathers and children depicted in it goes far beyond family boundaries - it is social conflict the old nobility and aristocracy and the young revolutionary-democratic intelligentsia.

The problem of fathers and children is revealed in the novel in the relationship between the young nihilist Bazarov and the representative of the nobility Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, Bazarov with his parents, as well as through the example of relationships within the Kirsanov family.

Two generations are contrasted in the novel, even their external description. Evgeny Bazarov appears before us as rejected from outside world a man who is gloomy and at the same time possessing enormous inner strength and energy. Describing Bazarov, Turgenev focuses on his mind. The description of Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, on the contrary, consists mainly of external characteristics. Pavel Petrovich is an outwardly attractive man; he wears starched white shirts and patent leather ankle boots. A former socialite who had once made a splash in metropolitan society, he maintained his habits while living with his brother in the village. Pavel Petrovich is always impeccable and elegant.

Pavel Petrovich leads the life of a typical representative of an aristocratic society - he spends his time in idleness and idleness. In contrast, Bazarov brings real benefits to people and deals with specific problems. In my opinion, the problem of fathers and children is most deeply shown in the novel precisely in the relationship between these two heroes, despite the fact that they are not directly related. The conflict that arose between Bazarov and Kirsanov proves that the problem of fathers and sons in Turgenev’s novel is both a problem of two generations and a problem of the collision of two different socio-political camps.

These heroes of the novel occupy directly opposite positions in life. In the frequent disputes between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich, almost all the main issues were touched upon on which common democrats and liberals disagreed (about the ways of further development of the country, about materialism and idealism, about knowledge of science, understanding of art and about attitude towards the people). At the same time, Pavel Petrovich actively defends the old foundations, and Bazarov, on the contrary, advocates their destruction. And to Kirsanov’s reproach that you are destroying everything (“But you also need to build”), Bazarov replies that “first you need to clear the place.”

We also see a generational conflict in Bazarov’s relationship with his parents. The main character has very contradictory feelings towards them: on the one hand, he admits that he loves his parents, on the other, he despises the “stupid life of his fathers.” What alienates Bazarov from his parents is, first of all, his beliefs. If in Arkady we see superficial contempt for the older generation, caused more by the desire to imitate a friend, and not coming from within, then with Bazarov everything is different. This is his position in life.

With all this, we see that it was to the parents that their son Evgeniy was truly dear. The old Bazarovs love Evgeny very much, and this love softens their relationship with their son, the lack of mutual understanding. It is stronger than other feelings and lives even when main character dies.

As for the problem of fathers and children within the Kirsanov family, it seems to me that it is not deep. Arkady looks like his father. He has essentially the same values ​​- home, family, peace. He prefers such simple happiness to caring for the world's good. Arkady is only trying to imitate Bazarov, and this is precisely the reason for the discord within the Kirsanov family. The older generation of Kirsanovs doubts “the benefits of his influence on Arkady.” But Bazarov leaves Arkady’s life, and everything falls into place.

At the same time, he so fully reveals the life positions of the main characters of the novel, shows their positive and negative sides, that he gives the reader the opportunity to decide for himself who was right. It is not surprising that Turgenev’s contemporaries reacted sharply to the appearance of the work. The reactionary press accused the writer of currying favor with young people, while the democratic press accused the author of slandering the younger generation.

Sighs and indignations of the older generation about the decline of modern morals can be heard at any time. The problem of fathers and sons appeared long before the creation work of the same name. And it was not Bazarov who started this struggle - this is a normal stage of growth for any young man and the girls are on their way to adult life. The problem of fathers and sons has been described in literature for a very long time; remember the parable about prodigal son. And what about modern times?

Is it easier in a generation?

There is one strange pattern. For some reason, the relationship between grandparents and grandchildren is better than the relationship between children and parents. And it’s not even a matter of the density of contact, but because a grandmother or grandfather rarely needs to fight with their grandson for power. And their age-related infirmity makes their grandchildren’s attitude more cautious and reverent. A fact is a fact - people get along better in a generation than two adjacent ones.

Didn't divide... the world

Probably the fact is that old people avoid giving an unambiguous assessment of the surrounding reality; this is no longer “their world.” But parents claim to have a better understanding of what is happening. That is, the problem of fathers and children in our time is connected with the fact that parents arrogantly try to hold on to the elusive world and lock it into their own, often outdated, model, and children overestimate their analytical abilities and adaptation capabilities.

Ambiguity of the problem

How to find compromises? The older generation needs to learn flexibility, and the younger generation needs to learn self-criticism. Both make mistakes in understanding reality. And young people can misunderstand events, and elderly parents are sometimes surprised by the rapid development of technical means and new methods of work. By uniting, generations can do a lot if they do not simply try to devalue each other’s achievements.

The pain of distance

The problem of fathers and children will always be relevant, because these relationships are the closest on Earth, and the closer the interaction, the more painful the disagreements. People are forced to communicate at close range, and all misunderstandings hit hard on pain points. By the way, everyone knows each other’s pain points over many years of living together. And they take advantage of it. Therefore, you need to communicate carefully over a short distance and be more careful.

Have time to say

Many people realize how much parents mean only after there is no one to tell them about their love. Then the best things are remembered. Maybe you need to appreciate every day with your dad and mom, grumpy, quarrelsome, irritable, but such relatives? We will not be given other parents, and it is impossible to replace them. But it’s so easy these days to call mom or dad and say: “I love you.” And then many problems themselves will become irrelevant. And you will understand that the war against windmills and the struggle for freedom cannot give the happiness that every child feels near their parents while they are alive.

Far and near

Let's forget about quarrels with parents. We will fight for freedom without offense or psychological violence. Let's move away a little to become more mature. But we will always be ready to support the weakening hand of mom or dad. This is more important than principles. This is Love. The strongest on Earth.

In my practice, I often encounter problems of separation, the inability of other, in fact adult children, to get rid of dependence associated with their parents. I wanted to collect all the common “myths” in one text and try to help children look at them extremely soberly, and parents to try to understand their children.

Myth No. 1. “Parents gave life, and you owe them an enormous debt.”

The parents themselves wanted, they themselves decided and they themselves brought a new person into this world. They are therefore 100% responsible for the consequences of their choice.

Many of my clients, under the pressure of this myth, fall into the trap: on the one hand, life is truly a great gift for which it is worth being grateful. On the other hand, demands for gratitude from parents are sometimes so incompatible with the lives of the children themselves that the result is a protest against these demands, which is inevitably accompanied by a feeling of guilt. After all, you have to “pay the bills of gratitude for the gift of life all your life!”

And here I propose to think about the word “gift”.

Most parents say “we gave you life, we gave you a gift.” They didn’t sell it, didn’t enter into a contract for the provision of services, didn’t invest it to receive dividends, but gave it as a gift. That is, they gave it for nothing. Does the child owe anything for this? In fact, no.

And the harsh phrases of other protesting children in the spirit of “I didn’t ask you to give birth to me and I don’t owe you anything” - alas, the harsh truth.

Let's look at the situation from the parents' side. We have to admit that in fact, few of them are truly conscious of the decision to have a child. A lot of factors are involved in it: instinct itself, which is not always comprehended, constant pressure from society/relatives, which boils down to the fact that if you have not continued the family line, you cannot be considered full-fledged and accomplished, the need to be someone - truly loved (if there is an acute lack of love from a partner or family).

In general, it often turns out that the child is not the free choice of the parents, but a certain necessity, the need to assert oneself and/or compensate for something. And hence the requirements. After all, the child turns out to be important not in itself, but as a guarantor of the fulfillment of certain expectations that are placed on him.

Here are examples of the realities in which many parents of modern adult children lived: trying to keep a man as a child. If this fails, the mother often experiences unconscious disappointment in the child - he “did not fulfill his function,” and if the father stayed, then he often pours out his anger precisely on the “excuse” that forced him to stay in the family, although also rarely realizes this.

Or a woman, seeing no other way out, gave birth to a child “for herself,” and then suffers from the fact that he does not want to devote his entire life to her alone.

Or a marriage that the parents saved only “for the sake of the children,” and subsequently, being unable to live alone with each other, constantly keep their adult children close - so unconsciously both are trying to justify what they continued for the sake of a relationship that may no longer be necessary for them.

Or a man who was convinced that “raising a son” is his duty, and the man sincerely, it would seem, is waiting for offspring, and then suddenly realizes that all this does not arouse any interest in him, and he does not know how to communicate with own children.

Those who would like to make a career or live some other life in which early birth there was no place for children, they gave in under the pressure of mothers and fathers “make us happy with grandchildren!” And then they get annoyed with their children because they interfere with their lives... I could give examples for a long time.

The main thing is that most of these parents are not fully aware of their motives. And sometimes they sincerely believe that they demand reasonable things.

Returning to the topic of obligation, we again come up against the same motive: how? Small child can be held accountable for the expectations placed on him? How can he be responsible for the fact that his mother or father did not receive enough love?

Or because they simply didn’t think in a moment of passion about whether they needed a child at all? this moment? Or because one of the parents was afraid to seem like a failure to others, and therefore decided to give birth to a child?

Alas, the harsh truth is again that these are the problems of the parent himself. But not a child. And we have to admit that for whatever reasons the parent makes his choice, the choice remains the choice of the parent as an adult. The choice to give the gift of life rather than sign a contract for a life annuity.

There is also this nuance: parents are often afraid (consciously or not) that the child will have little control, that the parents themselves will not become an authority for him, and therefore the arguments “because I am your father/your mother, I brought you into this world , and that’s why you should listen to me” become an everyday reality.

As a result, authority is gained not through actions that could earn respect from the child, but through fear and pressure. Which is effective in its own way, but does not form a truly warm relationship between parent and child.

At the same time, I advise grown-up children to think about a simple thing: if parents gained the child’s authority like this, if they were afraid that they would not listen to them, how did things stand with their self-esteem in this case? Will a person become self-confident if he lives life to the fullest, happy and appreciative of himself, to put pressure on a child in order to “squeeze” out of him fear, feelings of guilt and debt? In my opinion, the answer is obvious.

And gratitude for life... It always exists in those families where parents brought a child into the world consciously, and from the very beginning they understood that they had come into the world. free man, which they can help develop, and then he will live his life and make his own choices. And the parents will live their lives.

Where there is no pressure, rigid demands, intimidation or manipulation, children naturally express gratitude for the gift of life. Because they want to. Just like their parents really wanted to help them grow up. For the sake of the children themselves, and not for the sake of their expectations.

Myth No. 2 “We invested so much in you, we wasted time on you!...”

Moreover, if the parents really love the child, all this is done naturally, as a matter of course. However, in reality, very often parents present this to their already growing children as a feat. Why?

Yes, because in the process of raising a child, parents imposed restrictions on themselves. Which they either did not know about in advance (again, the same factor of an unconscious attitude towards childbirth), or they believed that these restrictions were something that should then “pay off” with similar restrictions on children in favor of their parents.

But such a contract is a blind contract. Because the child sometimes doesn’t even know about any restrictions. It seems to him that all this is being done for him out of love and voluntarily. And when he is then confronted with the fact of having to “pay the bills,” his love for his parents begins to fade away. This is often difficult for a child to admit to himself, and all this is accompanied by a feeling of latent guilt and attempts to evoke an emotional attitude towards his parents, which turns out worse and worse, because it is difficult to love by force.

And as a result, a feeling is born that in fact the relationship with parents is not a relationship of love, but a relationship of duty. Neither the parent nor the child receives the warmth they both desire and gradually become disillusioned with their family relationships. But they continue the policy of mutual manipulation either until the end, or until one of them begins to seriously understand the psychological background of what is happening.

Let's also look at what parents take credit for.

Have you developed it? Did you take them to sections, clubs, and spend money on it? Did they take into account the wishes of the child themselves or fulfill their own unfulfilled desires?

Did you teach us how to live and share your experience? Did this experience make the child happy? Has the child achieved anything using the parent's model?

Did the attitudes that were instilled in the child help him to successfully occupy his niche in society and become successful, or at least take this path? Did the parents' family model have a positive impact on the child's personal life?

In fact, many years of practice show that there are many insecure people around who were constantly criticized, reprimanded, compared in someone else’s favor, but were never shown how to do it, how to do it right. Or trying to teach, they constantly humiliated.

And a person often leaves his parental family to meet the big world with a feeling of inner fear, inferiority and the feeling that everyone around him is better, more worthy and more talented than him.

But practice also shows something else: when a child was given a chance to learn, supported in his mistakes, helped to correct and rethink them, helped to take some steps in Big world, taking into account the desires and choices of the child himself (even if it seems wrong to the parents), then such children grow up with a natural sense of gratitude and responsibility.

And if the parents did not forget about themselves, then they do not have the feeling of “a life wasted on the child,” and, accordingly, there is nothing to complain about.

A latent resentment towards your child for not “repaying the costs” arises only where the investment of effort and time in the child was not completely voluntary.

But parents themselves should think: maybe they should have thought about themselves in some way? Or is it not too late to think now? So as not to make your own offspring an eternal debtor. Moreover, he cannot always return to the parent the time that the parent himself did not dare to spend on himself.

Of course, in other periods, all the time is really spent on children, not leaving spouses much time for each other. But the outcome of this action depends on the mood of the spouses themselves. If the time was spent voluntarily, then the “dividend” has already been received in the form of creative impulses, interest, delight, joy, excitement associated with the achievements and development of children.

Perhaps such parents themselves develop together with their children. And in the end, they don’t have the resentment “I spent so much time on you, and you...!”

If, during the process of the child’s growth, the parent did not have much joy and pleasure from the time spent with him, then the parent is unconsciously offended by the time that the child “took” from him.

But the parent does not admit to himself that he would actually like to spend it on something else. And as compensation for the insult, he wants the child to repay him with something. This is how this figure of speech arises.

But, unfortunately, here again there are unequal positions: the parent himself took this step, giving birth to children, but the child is faced with the fact that now he must spend as much time on the parent as the latter wants. If the parent had a choice, the child does not. At least as long as the child is under pressure from authority and feels obliged to fulfill all the whims of his parents.

Often all the time is spent on children because parents no longer have any meaning in life. It doesn't matter whether there are two parents or one. If there is one, then the child is often the only meaning in life, and sometimes it comes to the point that the mother wants to see her child as focused on her as she was focused on him.

And if there are two parents, then perhaps they have lost feelings for each other, perhaps they do not want to seriously engage in their relationship, believing that they are already “fulfilling important mission».

But children grow up and go off to their own lives (if we talk about the norm), and parents remain with each other. And the problem of parents who did not want to deal with their relationships and their personal lives is that children, even having matured and having the need to build something of their own, continue to remain for parents either the “glue” of their falling apart marriage, or the meaning for a single parent.

But a child is not an attribute, not a function. He did not choose his parent to be his own child and should not similarly make up for lost time. And it cannot be either “glue” or meaning. He exists on his own, in his own life and with his own free choice.

Myth No. 3 “I know what’s best, I wish you well - live up to my expectations!”

And for some reason, it is often in relationships with children that you are least likely to see adjustments in expectations and the search for compromises, although in relationships with spouses people are at least forced, if not to try to understand, then at least to take into account the interests of their spouse.

But children often have a different attitude - “you must”: live by such and such principles, choose such and such a profession, get married, please us with grandchildren, achieve financial well-being etc. and so on.

I'm not talking now about those moments that parents are forced to demand from their child in order to keep him safe - to put on a hat in the cold or not to run on the roadway.

I'm talking about what does not threaten the child's safety and can be his free choice - what to do, how to spend free time, what hobbies to have, who to date, when to get married, etc.

But the habit of demanding to wear a hat in the cold smoothly turns into a requirement to choose the profession of a lawyer, “because you will never earn your bread by singing.” This is no longer a security requirement. And often it is nominated to a child who is either on the threshold of his 18th birthday, or has even crossed it. And the requirement is put forward as if the child is 5 years old.

If you think about it, even at 5 years old a child has and should have a choice - eat porridge or cottage cheese, put on a green or white sweater, go for a walk in the park or playground, ride on a swing or carousel. But parents often neglect this opportunity.

It is often easier and faster for them to put the first sweater they come across on a child than to ask him what he wants (this only takes a few seconds!) And as a result, we get a huge number of people who do not know how to make choices, who are terrified of mistakes, who all their lives they depend on “circumstances” of various kinds, they shift responsibility to anyone for their life...

Because there was always someone above them who said “do this” or “you must” or “you still can’t know anything about life, but I”...

It is not true. A child can know the main thing about himself - what he wants. Yes, parents are sometimes forced (and should) limit his wishes where this intersects with safety requirements.

But now we are mainly talking about almost adult children who know that smoking is harmful, and you shouldn’t walk around in the cold without a hat. They already know a lot of things and can gain their own experience, relying on their still present “I want”.

However, it is at the moment of growing up that children receive the most criticism and disapproval. Why? Yes, because it becomes finally clear that they did not grow up the way their parents wanted them to be.

If you think about it, parental demands are often unfounded. A father who demands brilliant results from his son in sports or career and criticizes any failure has long since rested with a can of beer on the couch and has achieved nothing special in his business.

A mother who criticizes her daughter’s appearance and her taste in men has long since stopped taking care of herself and paying attention to herself, and besides, personal life She's had a limp since she was young. There are many examples of this kind.

The parents’ argument is often this: “we couldn’t, so let our children…” - and this is called a sincere wish for happiness. Although this has nothing to do with the choice of children. Moreover, if parents did not fulfill their dreams and were unable to achieve something, then they have no moral right to criticize the child.

Most often, such parents still have time ahead to realize themselves, achieve something, and become simply happy. But they don’t set themselves the task of achieving anything. They demand this from children. Because they themselves were afraid to live to the fullest, they were afraid of their desires, mistakes, that I would look stupid and become the subject of ridicule.

The result is an escape from life and the transference of one’s desires to children. After all, children can then be criticized for failure, but they themselves remain “ideal” and still “know what is best.”

There are also a number of parents who have actually achieved something, have become successful, but no less harshly demand and criticize their children. Their argument most often is: “I can and you should - you have someone from whom you can learn.”

But here’s what I noticed while observing such “perfect parents” - they are most often internally very unhappy. Although they “have everything,” sometimes they themselves do not even understand where this emotional emptiness comes from. Often it comes from the inability to consciously experience feelings and express them, often from a lack of warmth, from internal fear and constant distrust of the world, from a feeling of struggle and lack of real support.

And social achievements can be present, of course. But think about it: will a happy person harshly criticize someone and demand something? Will a person impose a life strategy if he himself is comfortable in his choice, and this choice is made consciously? What if he made it himself?

A simple conclusion suggests itself here:

If the parent made his choice himself, then he will perfectly understand the cost of his mistakes and their necessity. And it will also be clearly understood that the experience of one person cannot be completely projected onto another. Because it different people. And there is no universal life strategy. This means that it will easily give the child the right to choice, error and his own experience.

But if a person did not choose himself, but lived according to the principle of “must”, “should”, “accepted”, then he will broadcast the same thing to the child. There is an underlying motive to this. If the parent himself was afraid of condemnation from society, relatives and the environment, then all his emphasis will be shifted to how the same contingent of people will perceive his children.

And the needs of the child himself literally melt away before this onslaught of fear: “I, the parent, will be judged for the child’s behavior!” And he will be “tainted”, for example, by the fact that his son is gay, and his daughter is still not married at 30, or one of the children does not go to work at 9, but lives a creative and free life, and at the same time does not die of hunger (oddly enough).

There are even more subtle motives here. If a life strategy is chosen not out of love and true desire, but out of fear, and something within a person is suppressed and not realized, then the envy factor can come into play. Unconscious most often. But this does not change the essence.

If the father wanted to hitchhike around the country in his youth, but having become a victim of his parents’ manipulation, he did not dare to do what he wanted, but went to work in a factory. From point of view public opinion- right choice. But the thorn about what was not done remains. Because then family, children, status - and it’s too late to hitchhike. But the desire remained a youthful dream.

And when his own son packs a backpack and talks about his desire to leave, unconscious envy pushes his father to put tough obstacles in his way. History either repeats itself down to the last detail, or the son finds the strength to leave. And then the relationship is severed for a long time, which not all children are capable of.

Parents, outraged by their children's behavior, are surprised that their children are “so different from them.” But in reality, they are being dishonest here. Rarely does a child grow up in a family with completely different guidelines. This also happens, but much less often.

The same problems, shortcomings, complexes, difficulties continue from generation to generation. It’s just that parents often don’t want to admit that they see their own shortcomings and shortcomings in their children. I want to be better myself and know how to be better. Although the opposite is declared: “so that children surpass their parents.”

Myth No. 4 “A parent is a special person, he will never leave you or betray you.”

First of all, parents are those whose reflection we are, the baggage and material from which we cut our lives. And that's really all. But the ability to “not abandon or betray” is most often the choice of the parent himself. Which is not always clear-cut.

I often heard the following stories from my clients: “I was bullied at school, but no one supported me,” “I fell in unrequited love for the first time, but my parents just laughed at me,” “I was fired from my first job, but my dad said, that it was my own fault,” “I felt like an ugly girl and was waiting for help, but my mother said that with such an appearance I would never get married normally.”

You can continue endlessly. It is not within the competence of a psychologist to judge whether this can be considered a betrayal. But we can say that the parents did not provide the children with the support they hoped for. And with their criticism and neglect they only intensified the negative feelings of the children.

Meanwhile, sometimes other people - teachers, friends, some just strangers - provided this support. I do not at all want to say that a person’s family is, first of all, enemies, although Christ in the Gospel was not afraid to express himself this way, but I am not a theologian, and I will not speculate on what Christ meant in these words.

I just want to say that this support is expected from parents above all. And only then from everyone else. And often they don’t get it from their parents. This is a fact that is worth recognizing if this has happened in your family.

And look at things soberly - if you are faced with neglect, humiliation and reluctance to say again kind word- this is not called “special treatment”. This is in fact no different from the relationship of any other people who may laugh at us, humiliate us or reject us.

And you should not live in captivity of such an illusion: if you have not been supported since childhood, most likely, the attitude towards you will continue to be the same. Unless you make a conscious effort to build some other forms of communication with your parents. But there is a nuance here.

If the parents have taught the child that they really support him, then he will most likely do the same naturally. And if you haven’t taught it, then it’s not very logical to demand support for yourself.

And the child can only himself, of his own free will, invest energy in conveying to his parents the possibility of some other attitude towards each other. But a child, if he was not supported, has every right not to do so in response. And this is again the harsh truth.

I remember the client's story, who got married, as she admitted, hoped to quickly “escape” from her parents; the marriage, as often happens in such cases, did not work out. A girl with a child asked her parents if she could live with them while she served the rest of her maternity leave and found a job. Her parents told her “of course, you are our daughter, our blood.” And then the girl’s life turned into hell.

Because every day they reminded her what a failure she was, they reproached her for helping to take care of the child, although she did not ask for it and managed it herself, they made it clear that they were tired of the cries of the baby, who became more and more restless every day .

As soon as the opportunity arose to go to work, the girl immediately left her parents for rented housing, hired a nanny, and underwent therapy with me for a year and a half. For the first six months, at almost every session, she cried, repeating that she did not feel love for her parents, and at the same time she felt enormous guilt...

And it took six months to work with this guilt alone. And another year to stop depending on the opinions of your parents, to prove something to them, to try to live up to their expectations and stop forcing yourself to love them, and also to help the girl stop feeling like the last loser and at least somehow see has its own virtues and strengths. Can all this be called parental love and acts of good intentions? The readers decide the path.

Parents often use the following argument: “if I don’t tell him/her, it will be worse if strangers tell.” What will be terrible if strangers say? Perhaps they will do it more correctly, if only because they are bound by social conventions? Or will they not see what their parents see at all?

After all, the parents themselves forget: their opinion about the child is their private opinion, and not the objective truth, which they often try to pass off this opinion as. And to the child, due to emotional dependence on the parent, this “truth” seems enormous and emotionally significant.

And sometimes you think: it would be better if strangers said this, because their opinion would not hurt so painfully and would not be accepted so unconditionally.

Myth No. 5 “Being offended by your parents is a sin!”

The deity of parents is not clearly good or evil. For a child, it always contains elements of goodness, because the child has shelter, food, clothing and at least minimal development opportunities just because he has parents, or people replacing them - the child still needs a parental deity.

But there is an amazing paradox: children grow up, but for many, parents continue to remain gods. And sometimes this is not even realized. Although, in theory, an adult can and should choose his own gods, or do without them altogether. And, it would seem, they choose - Christ or Allah, Buddha or the Principle of Tao, science or some other worldview system. But parents remain much more powerful gods for many.

What's behind this? Fear. Not conscious, not meaningful, primal fear. And not the child himself, but first of all the parent.

Remember the story of Saturn and Jupiter. Saturn devoured his newborn children because he was afraid that one of them would take his throne and deprive him of power over the world. And in the end, one of them, the especially agile and lucky Jupiter, managed to survive, and what did he do? Of course, he overthrew his father and took the throne.

It is this kind of fear that forces parents to raise their children in fear - lest they overthrow them, deprive them of power, significance, attractiveness, devalue their achievements with their even greater achievements, would not be able to afford what the parents wanted to experience, but were afraid.

The essence is approximately the same. “You will become bigger and better than me, and this will destroy me, and my life will no longer have meaning.” This very deep motive often guides the unconscious impulses of parents to continue to remain gods for their children.

What are the consequences of overthrowing your parents? Nothing. There is no terrible punishment for this. Moreover, if you put your parents' feet on sinful ground, you will do them a good deed. How?

One lyrical digression. It may seem to many that in this article I am acting as a “lawyer” for growing and matured children, and as a “prosecutor” for parents. So, with the answer to the question “how” I want to balance the situation, because in reality I understand well the motives of both.

If you take your parents away from their pedestal, you will see that they are just ordinary people. With their stupidities, weaknesses, shortcomings, mistakes, that they are imperfect and cannot become them. And then you will stop demanding from them that they be like gods - forgiving, loving, always faithful, kind and tolerant. Your parents are not gods.

And if you are ready to take your right not to be in debt, not to meet expectations, not to fulfill demands, not to succumb to manipulation, then give your parents the right to be who they are and who they were.

Yes, it would be nice if they always gave you support. And they weren’t criticized on every occasion. And they wouldn’t compare with others. It would be nice. But they shouldn't have. They owed you only in terms of safety and life support, and they did it as best they could, and loved them as best they could. Do not demand forgiveness and understanding from them in return.

Don't demand that they get rid of biosocial reflexes overnight. Don't demand that they become open-minded in a matter of days. If you take your freedom, give them their freedom to be like that - wrong, demanding, despotic...

The formula for freedom is simple. They have the right to want. You have the right to refuse. They have the right to be offended and react to you in any way they want. And you have the right to respond to their reaction as you see fit or not to respond at all. And this does not mean all-out war. Conflicts are inevitable on the issue of separation.

But if you take your parents off the pedestal and begin to understand their human motives, then it will be easier for you to deal with yourself and your grievances, rather than trying to prove to your parents that they were wrong. Yes, you have the right to be offended by your parents. But this is your story, and it’s up to you to deal with it personally.

Epilogue

Therefore, many people perceived children as a certain necessity, but there was sometimes very little awareness in these acts of childbirth. And a parent who doesn’t think about why he needs a child ends up just mindlessly repeating the parent’s model: “first our parents use us and demand something from us, and then we demand something from our children and use them - that’s how everyone lives and that’s how it should be.” ".

Therefore, parents rarely asked themselves the question of what they really want. And that’s why we missed out on a lot in life. And then they experience fear, envy and jealousy towards their children. Accept it for what it is.

If you are reading this article, you already definitely have a choice in which model to live in. And perhaps, if you are an adult child, then it is you who, having dealt with your grievances against your parents, honestly recognizing these traumas, working through them, can subsequently teach your parents unconditional acceptance and sincere love. And if not, then you can let them go and not demand anything more.

If you are a parent who is tired of conflicts with children and feels disrespected by them, then try to understand that this child’s behavior tells you about your own shortcomings. Which you can still compensate for - start fulfilling your desires, live for yourself, and learn to consult with children as adults, respect their choice, and then they will respond to you with sincere warmth and understanding.

Everyone, whether parent or child, can recognize simple thing: another person is another person. And regardless of age, everyone has their own path, their own choice and their own right to make mistakes. And as adults, we can all only voluntarily give something to each other. But what is given insincerely and under pressure - is this a genuine gift of love?

Fritz Perls came up with this formula, which is often called the “Gestalt prayer”:

“I am I, and You are You.
I am busy with my business, and you are busy with yours.
I'm not in this world for that
to meet your expectations,
and you are not there to match mine.
If we met and got along, that's great.
If not, there is nothing to help.”

This applies to parents and children equally.

Tags: Child-parent relationships , Separation from parents ,

Socrates noticed that today's youth love only luxury. Her distinguishing feature- bad manners. She despises authority and willingly argues with her parents. Yes and everyone famous Turgenev in his novel “Fathers and Sons” he raised a problem that remains relevant not only now, but also, as we see, since Socratic times.

The problem of fathers and children

There is nothing sadder than the abyss of misunderstanding that has formed between a parent and his child. At a certain point in the life of a little man, a period comes when his views and vision of the world run counter to his father’s views. As a result, both authority and authority towards the parent are lost. It is possible that the child begins to feel hatred and hostility towards them. As a result, anyone becomes the teacher of his life, but not the people who gave him life.

Fathers and sons: the cause of the generational problem

The most important primary source of various misunderstandings and conflicts is the time gap between two generations. This misunderstanding arises between individuals with age differences. These problematic nuances can continue not only throughout the difficult teenage period, but throughout life. Based on this, psychologists divide them into age stages. And regardless of this, the problem of the relationship between fathers and children is the latter’s desire for freedom.

Popular:

Organs of flowering plants Presentation on the topic of plant organs

Presentation on environmental pollution Presentation on environmental pollution Biology quiz presentation for a biology lesson (8th grade) on the topic Biology riddles Presentation on the topic of the chemical composition of water Presentation of the unique properties of water chemistry Salads with red beets

New

How to restore the menstrual cycle after childbirth:

• How to prepare raspberries for the winter: we share the best recipes for jams, compotes and freezing
• Russian breakfast: millet porridge with milk and pumpkin
• A simple recipe for shanezhki with step-by-step photos How to bake homemade shanezhki from cottage cheese
• Beet salads: delicious recipes with photos
• How to cook cutlets with eggs inside
• Cake shou “Saint-Tropez French cake shou recipe
• How and for how long to cook squid so that it is not tough and tasteless
• Dietary potato casserole with minced meat for children
• Simoron rituals for buying an apartment
• What does tiramisu cake look like?

Buckwheat porridge recipes On water so that it turns out crumbly and very tasty? This question is of particular interest to those who like to consume such lean and healthy...	Affirmations for material well-being In this article we will look at two main areas of affirmations for financial success, good luck and prosperity. The first direction of money affirmations...	Oatmeal with milk, how to cook oatmeal with pumpkin (recipe) When the topic of oatmeal comes up, many of us sigh with sadness and hopelessness. Meanwhile, it is well known that this is a traditional food of the English...	Education and formation of conditioned reflexes “Nervous system” - The midbrain is well developed. The improvement of the nervous system also affected the development of sense organs. Nervous system of fish...

Family. Rest. Healthy eating. Relationship

RSS