mothertree: Some people just recover faster than others. I think the pressure can go both ways in societies. I was thinking of the prescribed ten-fifteen years of mourning for widows in the antebellum South. On one hand, that seems barbaric, but so does pressure to recover (what seems like) quickly.
[ March 23, 2005, 12:51 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posts: 1163 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree, Kat. I felt a lot of pressure to recover more quickly than I did. Especially since other people, who were "supposed" to feel worse than I did already seemed recovered. After all, I just lost my grandfather right? Not like a husband, a child, a father, a mother. Everyone can expect to lose grandparents, so I should just get over it and move on.
I remember the first Christmas after he died. He died in late May, and everybody else just seemed fine. I was not fine. I was angry and upset at him not being there and at myself for being angry and upset. I snapped at the kids, I was irritable and cranky. At one point my husband said "What is the matter with you? It's Christmas!" And I screamed back "Yes, it's Christmas and my grandaddy isn't here and no one seems to notice!"
Wes, bless him, just hugged me.
It was a strange juxtaposition of guilt and shame. Shame that I was still upset over something everyone else seemed to think I should have put behind me. Guilt for being angry at them that they weren't as upset as I was.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Which just goes to show that people grieve in different ways at different speeds for different reasons, and they should be allowed to grieve in whatever way is best for them.
One of my best friends had to make a tough decision with her husband - their son was terminally ill, some kind of rare genetic disease that I don't remember the name of. He was 2 1/2, and had already far surpassed doctor's estimates of living past the age of one. He was going downhill fast, and they had the option of keeping him on machines for a few extra months or taking him off them and letting him go then. Prayerfully, they opted for letting him go then.
I was one of the rare people she told of that decision. She felt that too many people at church would have judged them harshly for disconnecting their son from life support. I sometimes wonder if she feels guilt. I can't imagine that she didn't at some point - not that I think she did anything wrong - I don't. But it feels like a natural emotional consequence, no matter the circumstances.
He was their first son. Since then, they've had three more lovely children. But there's still a place in their heart for their first. They keep a picture of him in the living room, along with other mementoes of his life. He's still theirs, and they still love him.
They know they'll see him again, but it doesn't take away all their pain and feelings of loss.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, quid. That is such a hard decision no matter the age of the child. We had some friends whose son had menengitis and they had to decide to turn off the life support. It was heartbreaking. I try to face the fact that my heart transplant son will most likely die at an early age. Its hard. I really feel for your friends.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
Quids, I would say that's a decision similar to aborting a child with life-threatening abnormalities. The family has to decide what they feel is the Lord's will for them.
On the other hand, I know someone who was given six months to live at 18 months of age, and they now have a master's degree. So you never really know what may happen. They do have follow up surgery and never know how long they do have but who really does?
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
