Someone I care about in my family is suffering from back problems. Severe pain deters him from getting about, as usual. Because of his status in the family, all members are wrangling about what their part should be. This has caused me much reflection.
Families are places of identity, comfort, pain, and even, disconnect, at times. But, family bonds go beyond normal boundaries of choice. Without an ability to choose one's family of origin, the child is bound to be formed without his conscious choice and coming to terms with his own values, until a lot later in life.
The relationships in families are important ones to develop, as they are historical and personal. But, so often in families, there is a lack of communication and appreciation of differences, which is often the case in any relationship.
Today, while talking with this person and inquiring about his condition, I encouraged him to puruse his own course, as I believe that it is important for him to maintain his dignity, especially when his dignity is being physically challenged. It is important for there to be equal respect and honor concerning his "voice". It is de-meaning and de-morallizing to not have a voice about one's life in the first place, not to mention the struggle to grapple with the "what ifs". So, my suggestion to the family is to listen carefully in the midst of great concern, to listen for his voice. Ask questions about his wishes and honor them, as this will speak to him of our love and value of him as a person, in his own right.
Perhaps, because of my upbringing, it is very important to me that there be equal representation. Everyone in the family is important and valued, but different. These differences are to be applauded, challenged, and compromised or negotiated. We will many times disagree, but the important thing is to express our love and honor, as we all want to do.
Tonight, my family will meet, but I will not be there. A nephew, who is a physician, will ask, talk and listen and hopefully be able to come to some decisions about what are the wishes and desires of this important person in our lives. I wish I could be there. I will be in spirit. And my aunt made sure that my voice was heard, as she called to inform me. I appreciate that and her.
My personal reflection on this event has made it obvious that we will all see different moral imperatives. Wouldn't it be a shame if each one of us insisted that their view was the absolute moral imperative? Wouldn't that express the epitome of moral insensitivity and ethical impropriety? And how would that express what each of us desires most to do? Wouldn't it defeat the ultimate purpose we have about this important person, to be honored and cherished? I think so.
Showing posts with label family relationships. Show all posts
Showing posts with label family relationships. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
I Used to Like Sociology
My "first love" was psychology, but since my family was fundamentalists, they didn't want me to major in psychology. (They really didn't want me to go to college, but become a dental hygenist.) So, right out of high school, I chose to major in English. But, later chose to major in Sociology.
Since I married before finishing college, I was going to transfer to the new college shortly after moving and finish my degree. But, out of state tuition was prohibitive, so we decided to wait the year to establish residency and a lower tuition bill. But, an uplanned pregnancy changed the plans of my life for the next 13 years. I was too busy raising my family and establishing a "home".
As my husband changed vocations and tuition was underwritten by his institution, he encouraged me to finish my degree. But, the institution did not have a major in Sociology, only Social Work. I couldn't see myself committing to the socialistic view of welfare (at least that was the way I understood social work). And I still can't. I am too much of an individualist.
I used to like Sociology, as I used to be "enamored with family". But, family, and organizational structures as a whole leave a lot to be desired, when one comes to understand that these structures do not "care" about the individual, only their agenda, or goals. This is not as it should be in families, but all too often the conservative have a "right way" of teaching that they can't see the child themself. Or the more liberalized are too concerned for their career to be bothered with "such nonsense" of child-rearing to consider the needs of the child. (I know that I am overly sterotyping "cultures", but just to make my point...).
And then, there is the "culture" of "evil", which is "inhabiting" a organizational structuring that doesn't "see" the parts for the whole. This is the culture of "social death", and "isolation". The individual's own life is consumed and assumed by the organizational structure. And it kills and dishonors the life of the individual. This is what collectivism does, because it is caught up with its own vision, purpose, plan or "image". The politics of collectivism is demeaning and demoralizing, unless one is "at the top".
So, I don't think I like Sociology, like I once did. And yet, I know that the world must survive by organization.
Since I married before finishing college, I was going to transfer to the new college shortly after moving and finish my degree. But, out of state tuition was prohibitive, so we decided to wait the year to establish residency and a lower tuition bill. But, an uplanned pregnancy changed the plans of my life for the next 13 years. I was too busy raising my family and establishing a "home".
As my husband changed vocations and tuition was underwritten by his institution, he encouraged me to finish my degree. But, the institution did not have a major in Sociology, only Social Work. I couldn't see myself committing to the socialistic view of welfare (at least that was the way I understood social work). And I still can't. I am too much of an individualist.
I used to like Sociology, as I used to be "enamored with family". But, family, and organizational structures as a whole leave a lot to be desired, when one comes to understand that these structures do not "care" about the individual, only their agenda, or goals. This is not as it should be in families, but all too often the conservative have a "right way" of teaching that they can't see the child themself. Or the more liberalized are too concerned for their career to be bothered with "such nonsense" of child-rearing to consider the needs of the child. (I know that I am overly sterotyping "cultures", but just to make my point...).
And then, there is the "culture" of "evil", which is "inhabiting" a organizational structuring that doesn't "see" the parts for the whole. This is the culture of "social death", and "isolation". The individual's own life is consumed and assumed by the organizational structure. And it kills and dishonors the life of the individual. This is what collectivism does, because it is caught up with its own vision, purpose, plan or "image". The politics of collectivism is demeaning and demoralizing, unless one is "at the top".
So, I don't think I like Sociology, like I once did. And yet, I know that the world must survive by organization.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
When Someong Thinks They "Know Your Name"
Names are important, as they give us a way to hear and understand when another is addressing you. Marketing and leadership "ideals" always emphasize knowing someone's name to "make the sell". So, names are important. But, I am not talking about a name of adressing someone casually, but knowing someone. That is the issue of "knowing someone's name".
The height of arrogance and disregard for another individual is when one assumes or presumes upon another, without the relationship. The relationship is an ongoing understanding of what another is facing and what another's life values and purposes are. These are always changing, as we grow and encounter different "contingencies" in our lives. This happens a lot with parents as they learn to "grow with their children". Children are not "written in stone", but are growing individuals.
I have found that I didn't really know my children deeply, as they were only persons to be "controlled" so that their "outcome" would be something that I had in mind. I hurt for me and them, because this is not the way of making a relationship "work".
But, since they have grown, I have come to understand them better, but it doesn't help the ache I have inside because I had an "agenda' of making them "obedient". Otherwise, they could not get along in life. What I really did was hinder their self-confidence and undermine their efforts at "finding themselves". I have repented and they are now growing and flourishing adults.
There is something about 'agendas" or goals that gets in the way of relationships. These agendas or goals are defined by everyone co-operating and "being in their rightful place". This is proper understanding of organizational structuring. But, an understanding of leadership also affirms the value of the individual on the team. No one should feel they are part of an agenda, or "purpose", even if it is formulated in "God's will".
In fact, using "God" in this way, I think is 'taking God's name in vain", because if man is created in God's image, then we will respect the right of another to have differences of opinion, values, and convictions. There is no "one size fits all" in this 'image".
Social contruction or social engineering defines the outcome all too strictly. This is an undemocratic way of functioning in society. And it breeds all kinds of discord, from economic to familial relationships, as I have shared.
"Knowing someone's name" is personal, because humans are personal beings. Though we have many things in common with the animal kingdom, we are more than the animal and treating another as an animal only heightens their resistance. Unfortunately, those who view humans as animals, will define resistance as "animal behavior" that must be controlled. This is when revolutions occur, as there is no other option for freedom of individual conscience and personhood.
Humans need to be respected and valued in thier own right, and this is the value of our form of government, where individual voices can be heard. Leaders in our government are "Representative", because liberty is of ultimate value and concern in "moral structuring". And whenever the "moral structuring" hinders the ethical ideal, our government allows grievances to be heard in our courts.
The height of arrogance and disregard for another individual is when one assumes or presumes upon another, without the relationship. The relationship is an ongoing understanding of what another is facing and what another's life values and purposes are. These are always changing, as we grow and encounter different "contingencies" in our lives. This happens a lot with parents as they learn to "grow with their children". Children are not "written in stone", but are growing individuals.
I have found that I didn't really know my children deeply, as they were only persons to be "controlled" so that their "outcome" would be something that I had in mind. I hurt for me and them, because this is not the way of making a relationship "work".
But, since they have grown, I have come to understand them better, but it doesn't help the ache I have inside because I had an "agenda' of making them "obedient". Otherwise, they could not get along in life. What I really did was hinder their self-confidence and undermine their efforts at "finding themselves". I have repented and they are now growing and flourishing adults.
There is something about 'agendas" or goals that gets in the way of relationships. These agendas or goals are defined by everyone co-operating and "being in their rightful place". This is proper understanding of organizational structuring. But, an understanding of leadership also affirms the value of the individual on the team. No one should feel they are part of an agenda, or "purpose", even if it is formulated in "God's will".
In fact, using "God" in this way, I think is 'taking God's name in vain", because if man is created in God's image, then we will respect the right of another to have differences of opinion, values, and convictions. There is no "one size fits all" in this 'image".
Social contruction or social engineering defines the outcome all too strictly. This is an undemocratic way of functioning in society. And it breeds all kinds of discord, from economic to familial relationships, as I have shared.
"Knowing someone's name" is personal, because humans are personal beings. Though we have many things in common with the animal kingdom, we are more than the animal and treating another as an animal only heightens their resistance. Unfortunately, those who view humans as animals, will define resistance as "animal behavior" that must be controlled. This is when revolutions occur, as there is no other option for freedom of individual conscience and personhood.
Humans need to be respected and valued in thier own right, and this is the value of our form of government, where individual voices can be heard. Leaders in our government are "Representative", because liberty is of ultimate value and concern in "moral structuring". And whenever the "moral structuring" hinders the ethical ideal, our government allows grievances to be heard in our courts.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Divorce
Humans are social animals, but they are also rational animals. If the social context leaves no room for reasonable "personhood", where compromise, negotiation and solutions are met, then inevitably, relationships are dissolved through divorce.
Although divorce is a personal relational term, the issue plays across other types of relationships, whether they be business contracts, treaties, or community rules. Sometimes "peace and goodwill" dissolves before personal desires and necessities.
I think the Christian community and liberalism, in general, is living in denial, when it comes to many of these situations. Divorce happens and the long-term implications are many. Those who have never experienced divorce in their families are clueless as to how this affects the whole family system. But, they may be attempting to "protect society" from the inevitability of divorce, or other social ills.
The Christian community has a "pie in the sky" attutitude where the stereotypical "1950's" family is the standard, while the social liberal has their "ideal" as "peace and goodwill" in a globalist context. How can people continue to believe in a "ideal reality"? This is absurd!
Conflict is inevitable in this world and reconcilliation is not possible in some cases, either because of the situations involved, or the parties' lack of desire for reconcilliation. People all have their reasons for divorce. A childish hope for the "ideal" will not bring solutions to the real world.
Dr. Chris Smith, the sociologist from Notre Dame alluded to the Church being a solution to these kinds of problems, when he suggested a kind of "family intervention". I wonder how he imagines this being a solution, when the Church is full of those who are ill-equipped to deal with the realities in life, either through their "idealistic mentality" or their lack of education in the psychological or sociological fields.
Social ills are the real world of social problems and they will not be resolved through spirituality. "Spirituality" separates the ideal from the real and life is lived in the real realities of social contexts, personal problems and irreconciable differences.
No Church or liberal agenda is going to eradicate the issue of divorce, but they might continue to stigmitize the issue and distance themselves from divorced people. And this would be the worst of all possible "sins".
Although divorce is a personal relational term, the issue plays across other types of relationships, whether they be business contracts, treaties, or community rules. Sometimes "peace and goodwill" dissolves before personal desires and necessities.
I think the Christian community and liberalism, in general, is living in denial, when it comes to many of these situations. Divorce happens and the long-term implications are many. Those who have never experienced divorce in their families are clueless as to how this affects the whole family system. But, they may be attempting to "protect society" from the inevitability of divorce, or other social ills.
The Christian community has a "pie in the sky" attutitude where the stereotypical "1950's" family is the standard, while the social liberal has their "ideal" as "peace and goodwill" in a globalist context. How can people continue to believe in a "ideal reality"? This is absurd!
Conflict is inevitable in this world and reconcilliation is not possible in some cases, either because of the situations involved, or the parties' lack of desire for reconcilliation. People all have their reasons for divorce. A childish hope for the "ideal" will not bring solutions to the real world.
Dr. Chris Smith, the sociologist from Notre Dame alluded to the Church being a solution to these kinds of problems, when he suggested a kind of "family intervention". I wonder how he imagines this being a solution, when the Church is full of those who are ill-equipped to deal with the realities in life, either through their "idealistic mentality" or their lack of education in the psychological or sociological fields.
Social ills are the real world of social problems and they will not be resolved through spirituality. "Spirituality" separates the ideal from the real and life is lived in the real realities of social contexts, personal problems and irreconciable differences.
No Church or liberal agenda is going to eradicate the issue of divorce, but they might continue to stigmitize the issue and distance themselves from divorced people. And this would be the worst of all possible "sins".
Monday, November 2, 2009
Our Son's Leaving
Today is a celebration of our youngest son, Nate. He has left our home, which is quite normal at his age. But, his mission is a noble one of serving our country.
Our older son had taken off work, so he, our daughter and Nate could eat breakfast together "one last time". After breakfast and Nate's last minute packing, our children and I sat in their Dad's study, one last time. And I saw Nate tear up and look away several times. I knew I was not going to make it without shedding a few myself.
As I took him to the recruiting office where he was to meet others for his ride to Indianapolis, I off-handedly remarked that he probably would not miss our small town. To my surprise, he said he had enjoyed growing up in the Mid-West, not because of the location, but because of the friends he had made. He said he would miss them. I was proud that he valued his friends and that his view of 'location, location" was "where his heart was". We have always tried to impart "family values" and relational priority.
At the recruiting station, he told me that he didn't want me to go in. He said he was in the Army now, underscoring his independence from "his Mom". I got out and he hugged me so tight and didn't even look my way, as he picked up his bag to walk away. I felt my heart torn, but I drove away giving him room to "grow", and take flight.
As he said, "I will miss the people, the friends I have made". And we will surely miss him.
Bless him.
Our older son had taken off work, so he, our daughter and Nate could eat breakfast together "one last time". After breakfast and Nate's last minute packing, our children and I sat in their Dad's study, one last time. And I saw Nate tear up and look away several times. I knew I was not going to make it without shedding a few myself.
As I took him to the recruiting office where he was to meet others for his ride to Indianapolis, I off-handedly remarked that he probably would not miss our small town. To my surprise, he said he had enjoyed growing up in the Mid-West, not because of the location, but because of the friends he had made. He said he would miss them. I was proud that he valued his friends and that his view of 'location, location" was "where his heart was". We have always tried to impart "family values" and relational priority.
At the recruiting station, he told me that he didn't want me to go in. He said he was in the Army now, underscoring his independence from "his Mom". I got out and he hugged me so tight and didn't even look my way, as he picked up his bag to walk away. I felt my heart torn, but I drove away giving him room to "grow", and take flight.
As he said, "I will miss the people, the friends I have made". And we will surely miss him.
Bless him.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
My Son's Challenge
These days leave me a little sentimental and on the verge of tears. Why? Oh, the physical changes that come with life hopefully will end, but, will my love and longing for the children of my past?
Our family has had some very hard bumps. And these as well as our yearly family vacations and vaious common experiences have made memories that will never leave us.
Our youngest son is soon leaving to join the Army. He delayed his entrance because of our other son's wedding. So, I have crammed many memories into a few short months (as usual). And I think I have responded by "shutting down". I tend to do this when I am emotionally overwhelmed.
The other day my son challenged my "shutting down". He said that I had "escaped" the family by the time spent on the computor. I think he is right.
So, his challenge has been "taken up" and I have not spent as much time on the computor. Fortunately, it has not been hard, because I care about him more than I do the computor. And that is most important in these last days that he is here with us.
Our family has had some very hard bumps. And these as well as our yearly family vacations and vaious common experiences have made memories that will never leave us.
Our youngest son is soon leaving to join the Army. He delayed his entrance because of our other son's wedding. So, I have crammed many memories into a few short months (as usual). And I think I have responded by "shutting down". I tend to do this when I am emotionally overwhelmed.
The other day my son challenged my "shutting down". He said that I had "escaped" the family by the time spent on the computor. I think he is right.
So, his challenge has been "taken up" and I have not spent as much time on the computor. Fortunately, it has not been hard, because I care about him more than I do the computor. And that is most important in these last days that he is here with us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
