The Mother-in-Law and the Daughter-in-Law

A session arranged by Mrs. Edvick Jureidini Shayboub, in which Miss Nahla Marwa took part.

Edvick: It is very difficult to know the date when this quarrel between the mother-in-law and the daughter-in-law first arose. It is certainly of ancient standing. What we shall concern ourselves with is analyzing the primary causes of this quarrel, and proposing some ways of settling it... In your view, Miss Nahla Marwa, on which of the two falls the greater blame for the rise of this quarrel — on the mother-in-law or on the daughter-in-law?

Nahla: I incline to the belief that the mother-in-law is the one to blame in most cases of dispute. The daughter-in-law is younger in years and purer of heart, and it is unlikely that she would be the one to begin provoking her mother-in-law.

— You have spoken truly, and in the past my opinion agreed with yours on this subject; but the situation has changed now, after I have become the mother of two children, and I can no longer be unjust in my judgment of the mother, or be harsh with her even in supposition. Her position toward her daughter-in-law is no easy position — she who raised her son with the tears of her eyes and guarded his steps one by one; it is not at all easy for her to see him slip from her arms all at once, for another woman, a stranger, to embrace him. This, in my view, is the most important cause of this quarrel.

— True, but this is God's way with His creation: the woman leaves her father and her mother and follows her husband. People — all people since the days of Adam and Eve — have walked this road...

— I, my dear, incline to the belief that the daughter-in-law, or the wife, can avert most of the discord that arises between her and her mother-in-law with a little tolerance and largeness of heart, in consideration of the fact that she is the winner — has she not won the man and taken him wholly for herself? — while the mother is the loser — has she not lost her son, despite the great sacrifices and the nights of wakefulness spent in raising him? When we take all these matters into account, we can only pity the mother's state, and lend her our full sympathy, before entering into the subject.

— You are right, and I never meant anything but appreciation and respect for the mothers' position. But do you not see with me that most of our mothers tend to tyrannize over their sons' wives and impose their word by force? The mother-in-law in our country is rarely pleased by any of her daughter-in-law's doings, from cooking to running a house and the like, and for this reason she never stops criticizing her, until the daughter-in-law loses all pleasure in work, and the longing and desire to learn new things dies within her. Is it not better for life, and to guarantee peace in the home, that she confine her attention to her own affairs, and that her daughter-in-law hear from her no phrases but those signifying approval and encouragement?

— It is a beautiful theory, and I agree with it entirely, but it is difficult to carry out. The mother-in-law cannot, with her old, fossilized mentality, stand with us on one level and analyze her feelings and her psychological reactions logically... She is confident of herself, of her capacities, and of the success of her choices to a far degree; and when she takes up her daughter-in-law with criticism and correction, she is only aiming to make of her a model of her own person. She considers every act of her daughter-in-law whose method does not agree with her own particular method a mistake that must be corrected — and when she tries to correct it, the familiar collision occurs.

— Yes! The collision occurs — because the daughter-in-law has a second opinion which, in her belief, is superior to her mother-in-law's old opinion, which does not harmonize with the renewing spirit of this age. For that reason she does not easily give up her opinion — and I believe she has the right to be independent in her opinion, especially in what concerns the running of her house?

— Indeed, she has every right, and full liberty, to be independent in her house and in the management of its affairs. And she will arrive at this result sooner or later — so what prevents her from arriving at it with a little diplomacy and patience, and a little wisdom, while keeping her mother-in-law's love for her? Do you not know, my dear, that a man's love for his wife is doubled when he feels that she humors his mother and treats her with gentleness and largeness of heart, avoiding all quarrel and aversion? The young are broader of heart than the old, because hope is still wide on the horizon of their lives; so what harm does it do them if they yield some of their secondary rights lovingly, without making a stir? A single smile wipes away much anger and rancor and plants love — love alone endures and bears fruit, and everything besides it is destined to pass away...

— There is no doubt that when the way to love is found, love is an excellent solution; but unfortunately we find the situation, in most cases, so deeply complicated that it is difficult to apply this ideal theory, and the result is that the atmosphere of the house becomes a hateful, unbearable atmosphere, with each of the husband, the wife, and the mother considering, in his secret heart, that he alone is the wronged one, and that he bears agonizing pains for the sake of the other party... So what remedy do you prescribe, Mrs. Shayboub?

— In my view, the natural solution is for the husband and wife to be independent in their own dwelling as soon as they marry, and for the mother to prepare herself to receive this arrangement naturally, without dispute or vexation — following in this the way of the Westerners, who insist, with contentment and wisdom, that the married couple live alone, out of conviction of the necessity of preserving individual liberty...

— This custom is the best thing that can well be borrowed from the West, to spare ourselves some of the domestic misery that is so often the first cause of clouding the atmosphere of the home. And I am somewhat optimistic, because this custom has begun to seep into our refined society; would that a day may come when it becomes one of the necessities of marriage, in all Lebanese circles.

— Your words are sound; only do not forget, my dear, that there are customs and traditions we cannot ignore and shed all at once. Most of our mothers, to this day, are given into the keeping of their children: they feel that their children's care of them is the first of their duties, and they consider the arrangement merely the repayment of an old debt between the young man and his parents. This, in my view, is one of our greatest social errors. For we — fathers and mothers — when we raise our children and serve them, are only doing a duty in which we take a special pleasure. If we care for them, we are caring for something that is our own, a piece of our very hearts. And if we sacrifice for their sake, we do so out of love for ourselves in the first degree, not out of love for them alone!

— Your warmth on this subject has just reminded me of a sharp altercation that reached my ears some days ago from the neighbors' balcony. The mother was shouting at her young son: "You are obliged! I raised you and educated you and spent vast sums upon you!" And the young man answered her bitterly: "And why did you bring me into the world — to hear this from you?"

— Scenes like these are common in our country, and in every country still in its primitive stage of civilization... And in this situation I incline to side with the young man. Since his mother is the cause of his existence and his being, his upbringing devolved upon her and upon his father as a binding duty, admitting no dispute and requiring no reward. Is a man rewarded for doing his duty? But the mother, when she raises her children well, has in the good result the best recompense for her toils...

— I fear there may be some extremism in this opinion of yours, with all my respect for the educational theory that calls for it. For the temperament of the Westerners is not our temperament: we live by our feelings and they live by their minds, and so they find no difficulty in the son's parting from his mother, so that she no longer sees his face except on formal occasions, and spends the cold days of her old age alone, preferring to spend them in homes for the aged rather than fetter the liberty of her son and his wife and weigh upon her by living with her.

— But the situation here in our country is different from what it is in the West. Here none take refuge in the homes for the aged but the solitary who have no children, and whose condition of hardship amounts to destitution. Yet the truth is that these homes, when the means of comfort are provided in them, prepare for the aged, in their last days, tranquility and diversion, among people joined to them by firm bonds.

— This aspect — I mean the aspect of social security — is of very great importance, and it is still, unfortunately, neglected and poor in our country, while the advanced nations, like Sweden and Norway, give it great importance and allot it vast sums, to assure the aged comfort in the last years of their lives, that they may settle into peace and rest, without a single cloud of vexation to trouble their sky...

— I am glad you have mentioned "social security," for this subject, which in most advanced nations claims a seat in the ministry of state, and to which vast sums are allotted, as you said, has a firm connection with this subject of ours. The mother's attachment to her son is not merely a matter of feeling; the greater part of it is material. It is need that binds the mother to her son with this complicated bond; so when the mother is assured on this side, she will prefer independence, and it will come easily to her to give up the rights she counts as her property — I mean her monopoly of her son.

— I understand from your words that what you meant is that the government can, in an indirect way, contribute to solving the problem of the old quarrel between the mother-in-law and the daughter-in-law, by securing social security and putting it into effect, after the example of the advanced nations. Have I understood correctly?

— That is exactly what I meant, Miss. When the government assures the aged, women and men alike, a fixed income sufficient for the necessities of life and shielding them from the humiliation of begging, it will have helped greatly toward creating understanding.