My mother is an idiot

Post Reply New Topic

It's not about how many kids you end up having, but about how mature one ends up being.

1) it is good that you, according to a previous thread, were capable of successfully raising a family at that age. Some people are not. And again, if you go through and read the OP's previous posts, you will see that they all hint to valid issues that would explain WHY he may need to still be at home at the age of 26.

2) Yes, you own your house and everything in it. No one is contesting you, and if you choose to require your children to leave at the magical age of 18, irregardless of any problems they may have that would prevent success, that is your right, but a fair number of people on this forum don't agree with that stance.

3) Even in healthy, completely perfect children there are differences in rates of maturity. Some children may be better suited to leave home at 14, and make it on their own (very rare, but still possible), while others may not be ready until their mid 30s (again not as common but still happens). Now many of these otherwise perfect children may well be capable of getting and holding a fast food job or 4 to pay the bills if they were forced out on their own by such mentality, but the truth is many of those who are forced to suffer such probably would have gone on to be MUCH more successful had they the opportunity to mature at THEIR natural rate (specific to each individual), get a decent education, learn more about the world than they can in an extremely controlled environment, etc.

4) Just because the government says you can be prosecuted as an adult at the age of 18, or you can vote at the age of 18, does not make you a responsible adult. and not everyone has the instinctive drive to succeed in adverse conditions. It doesn't mean they should be abandoned to starve or suffer.

5)Yes, the parent has specific rights, and yes, even the OP needs to learn to respect that in the home of his parents, but the OP needs all the real support he can get and while "grow up" is good advise for anyone, some people need extra tending to be able to "grow up".

There are other issues at play here. Not every live at home adult is a "lazy s.o.b."

As a single man, I left home at 16, held two jobs and finished high school a year early, enlisting in the military at 17. Success, right?

As a married man I had to move in with my in-laws twice. The first time to regroup after losing job, house, everything. The 2nd to take care of a sick in-law after the other one passed away. It was not my house and it was not mine to make the rules in either case, as we lived there rent free both times, and our offers to pay utilities, etc. were rejected. Granted I did more than enough work around the place, as did my wife, to more than pay for our stay, but it was still not our house. The in-laws could have been real controlling had they chose, and in some cases they were, but they at least tried to understand the stress we were faced with when forced to accept their offer. Does this now mean I am a failure?

There are all sorts of reasons necessitating accepting help where it is offered, even if it is less than ideal. No two individuals are alike, etc. etc. etc.

What's wrong with watching Rugby? Whatever they do in their room is their business. Same as what they watch on their computer. I am glad mine weren't that controlling when I became an adult.

What does the OP's situation got to do with being Bipolar?

Well, perhaps you should feel that you were lucky enough to be able to work, and get work, and find a spouse, and actually be able to afford somewhere to live. Not saying it was easy for you. But some people, especially on WP, would find that really tough.

How it's 'supposed' to work, according to your worldview, isn't necessarily how it does work. I just hope you never hit your own children with a bat, which has happened to OP.

Actually, you signed up to look after your children, whether normal or disabled. Some children are disabled, which means they often end up living at home with their parents [or they have wealthy parents who can buy them a place to live]. A disabled child never asked to be born, and it's the responsibility of the parent to look after and protect them if they're unable to do it -- well, morally.

Though people are often lucky nowadays in that their disabled children can be taken off their hands and thrown into "reasonable" care.

OP: if you're over the age that the media in question is restricted to, then it's reasonable for your parents to let you watch it, no matter if you live with them. That's just fair.

go through and read all of the op's post, previous threads, etc. paying close attention to date and times originally posted, the OP's length of attention to a single thread he started, the op's propensity for posts of various "moods", etc.

It's not just this single post, its the OP's posting history and tendencies. This is why I suggest the OP to talk to his doctor about secondary issues.

Some put their disabled children in group homes. Not that I am against it. If a family does it it, their choice and some others choose to have their kids at home with them and continue caring for them which is also their choice.

If I'm paying for the room, then I get a say in what goes on. If I don't want that rubbish in my household, which I am sacrificing money for, then why should I have to put up with it because someone with an entitlement complex who thinks just because I gave birth to them means I have to give them whatever they want? You live by the rules of the person who owns the house, or you live elsewhere. Same rules my parents had for me, and I respected that.

But how you put up with it if they are watching it in their room? You aren't going to hear it or see it on TV.

I could dictate what car my son can drive, what clothes he can wear, what boxers he can have, what books he can read, what games he can't play and anything I am interested in and like he can do and anything I am not interested in and don't like he isn't allowed to do. He has to be like me and do my interests and not do his own and he can't watch Lord of the Rings because I am not into those movies and books so therefore h cannot read them or watch the movies. He must watch the first three Harry Potter movies, no other HP movies, and he must only play Mario and Kirby, no Sims or Grand Theft Auto or other games I am not into. This is how ridiculous it is. It's not the same as not allowing smoking in your home or near your house or not wanting messes around and wanting them to pick up after themselves or not wanting them to bring strange people over or wanting the water wiped off the floor and sink staying cleaned after each use.

Last edited by League_Girl on 02 Dec 2013, 5:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

And if your kid wants to watch Rugby but you don't want to pay for the sports package, he can pay for it himself. Same goes for using heat and AC, if they want it on so they can stay cool and warm and be comfortable in your home, they can pay for part of the electric bill and gas bill themselves while my husband and I pay for what we usually pay for that time of year while our kids pay the rest because they want heat and AC. If they want Gamefly or Netflix or want more games every month or more DVDs, they can pay for the rest while my husband and I continue paying the same amount like we used to before we upgraded it. If they don't have money to pay for it, then it's fair to say no to it and fair to say what DVDs they cannot rent from Netflix or Gamefly because you are paying for it, not them and you want to use it for your DVDs and games you want to play, it's also fair to say what they can't watch on cable because you will not pay for the sports package. It would also be fair if they have to wear coats and jackets and dress warm in their own house or be hot in their own home because I will not pay more for AC and heat. If they have money, they can pay for those extra things.

again, this type of argument does not take into account potential cultural or religious differences, and is a very narrow minded, intolerant view.

If it is of one culture for a parent to dictate these things while the child is at home, it is not the place, nor the right, nor the responsibility, etc. for someone from a "western culture" to go in and try to change this.

And if the child chooses to espouse a different culture, then when s/he is of age it is his/her right to move out, but it is not his or her right to force the culture change on his/her parents.

If someone's religious beliefs cause them to believe that the airing of such shows inside the house will invite unwanted "spirits", "demons", "bad karma", etc. into the home, then even if the child chooses to forsake the parent's faith, it is still that child's responsibility to respect his/her parents' faith while living in that home.

If s/he wants to change faiths and does not want to be inconvenienced by his/her parents old faith, then s/he can move out, but s/he has no right nor privilege nor freedom to disrespect the parents' beliefs. whether those beliefs are right, wrong, accurate, inaccurate, true, false, all is irrelevant. The parents pay for the housing, they have the religious belief, the child should either respect them or move out.

And if the child has issues that makes it difficult or impossible for him/her to function outside of his/her home and causes him/her to need the help of his/her parents in that fashion, then s/he needs to accept the inconvenience of putting up with rules that s/he doesn't like.

Note "rules that they don't like".

"Reasonable" would be the yardstick one would use here.

Watching a show that he's old enough to, and what would be seen as "reasonable" in his country? That's fine. It's not hurting anyone.

Now, if he was complaining that he wasn't allowed to smoke weed in his bedroom, then that's a different matter, and it wouldn't be "reasonable" for him to (though with saying that, there could be arguments made for being able to do such in his room, especially if he's prescribed it by a doctor).

Just because someone owns the place doesn't take anything from their responsibility they have to their children, and parents "should" be fair. Not complete dictators. If they're not prepared for the possibility of having to look after their adult child, then they shouldn't have had them (though again, people can foist their disabled children off to the government nowadays -- which if the parents aren't disabled themselves, is kinda really sad).

This may sound a bit weird, but try talking to your aunt and/or uncle. There's a good chance that they will be less biased, more understanding, and calmer when talking with you. I have a controlling mother too - the kind that tells you that everyone is going to pick on you for one thing. but in reality she's the only one who ever brings it up over and over again.

Hang in there.

Maybe try the TOR project if you're a good with computers and your mom is tracking your browsing history and such.

Funny you say that because I saw the irony in your post after what you had written. They are also pushing their culture and differences onto you and telling you to change it and I also think it's narrow mined to have others live the way you want them to live like not watch certain shows or do certain things because of your own religion or whatever excuses you put.

And like it has been pointed out, IT IS THEIR HOME!! !! !! ! Their home=their rules, their culture. Narrow minded or not, a persons home is their castle, and they should be allowed to do whatever they want in their own home. If that means dictator-like rules, like I said, the door is that way.