Ongoing confusion here. I messaged my brother to say that we needed to talk. I got a message in response which ignored the suggestion of actually talking. My mother then told my brother he needed to talk to me. That produced a further message to me from my brother that it is my mother's "express wish to be alone on her birthday."
Mum says she is baffled. She can't think of anything she might have said to my brother to make him think she wouldn't want to be with her adored grandchildren on her birthday / anniversary of Dad's death. She says that all she can recall saying to my brother was that it would be a bittersweet family gathering.
I had assumed that Mum was saying one thing to my brother and a different thing to me, but that is seeming less likely.
Plus, she has had family with her on the previous anniversaries.
That sounds very difficult @North East Quine . Things between my sister and me aren't great but we don't and hopefully never will get to this point.
I'm flying to Chicago to be with my lover who has been very ill over the last couple of months. We have made our peace with what may happen, though being a retired teacher I don't think my mother will die until her granddaughters have finished their exams. One is doing a levels and the other GCSEs. They finish after I get home.
It sounds to me as though your brother has got his own emotional stuff going on, which he isn't going to want to unpack with you, if he even realises that there is any kind of issue or difficulty. I may be way off the mark, but that's just how it sounds to me. (My own tricky relationships with my parents and siblings are possibly improving a bit as I get older and mellower about past hurts, however I suspect that at times during my adult life, my behaviour towards family members has been closer to that of your brother's apparent arse-hole-ness than to your own graciousness.)
2 thoughts which strike me from your most recent post.
1) Is your mum willing to contact your brother, ideally while you are with her in person, stressing that she is looking forward to seeing her grandchildren on her birthday and that she very much wants to see them even though it's obviously bittersweet? Thinking of a phone call or voicemail message to your brother, which you hear being made (and with your brother being told that you're there), which suggests maybe there's been some confusion at some point in family communications, but your mum definitely does want to see her grandchildren as planned on her birthday.
2) Apologies if I've missed something which answers this point already. Are your brother's statements about what your mum wants affecting anybody other than you? Is he telling the grandchildren they shouldn't be seeing your mum on her birthday? If your brother is only saying this to you, would your best option be trying not to get drawn into a debate about it, e.g. standard response of, "Mum's told me she does want to see the grandchildren as planned on her birthday and is really looking forward to it," then no further discussion. Obviously, the bigger pain is if he's making these comments to the grandchildren and trying to get them to change the plan. If that if the case, maybe the grandchildren also need a one line response, "Grandma's said she does want to see us and is looking forward to it," etc.
Are your brother's statements about what your mum wants affecting anybody other than you?
Yes. My brother messaged to say that he had spoken to my (adult) nephew, his son, and that his son now sees that the lunch is "ill-advised" and won't be attending. My nephew himself has not contacted his baffled cousins, or my mother, or me. But it's no longer "all the grandchildren", my mother is telling me that she is upset about that, and my daughter can't understand why her cousin, with whom she regards herself as having a warm cousinly relationship, has left it to his father to send a cold message that he won't be coming.
My brother and his family are going to take my mother out for a birthday lunch at a more appropriate time "probably within the next fortnight."
It sounds to me as though your brother has got his own emotional stuff going on, which he isn't going to want to unpack with you, if he even realises that there is any kind of issue or difficulty.
That comment made me realise that I have my own "stuff" going on. As a child / adolescent I often didn't "get" social nuance, unspoken rules etc etc. As soon as I got to university I found my tribe and left that socially awkward me behind. But being told that my mother has "clearly expressed wishes" which I have somehow failed to register, by someone who was a big part of my life in the awkward years, and I'm flipping straight back into panicky adolescent mode - what have I failed to understand? why have I failed to understand it? Why have "clearly expressed views" somehow gone right over my head?
I do think your brother is running this. He feels your mother ought to be spending the day in sackcloth and ashes. He has taken on himself to refuse on his son's behalf - who was probably quite ready to go.
I don't suppose there's any chance of direct grandmother to grandson communication? 'I'll really miss you - sure you won't change your mind?' Silly me, of course not. That's not how these things work. Bafflement, misunderstandings and hurt feelings much better.
Has your brother or your nephew told your mum that your nephew is now not planning to attend? And what has your mum said in response?
From your posts on this thread, like Firenze, I think your brother has got his fixed ideas which he's imposing on everybody else. You started with the charitable view that maybe there was misunderstanding because your mum was saying different things to you and your brother to try to keep both of you happy. However, you've now discussed this really explicitly with your mum, and she's clear she hasn't been giving your brother the messages he's saying he's heard. And, as you're trying to get everybody to a mutual understanding of your mum's genuine wishes, your brother is digging his heels in and coming across as being more and more illogical and intractable.
If at all possible, I very much think your mum rather than you now needs to be leading on the responses to your brother and nephew. Your brother's ongoing 'trump card' in the discussions is that he is advocating your mum's true wishes. If possible, the best way to gently point out that that's not true is for her to say so to your brother and/or nephew.
The lunch was lovely. Mum made a wee speech at the end, which I videoed on my phone, thanking everyone for coming. I've got several nice photos of Mum with the family members who were there. Mum was dressed in blue, Dad's favourite colour. Dad was certainly not far from our thoughts.
I'm still baffled as to what it was all about, but at the end of the day, my brother chose to opt-out, and to encourage his son to opt-out as well, so they have been the ones who have missed out.
I had a full house yesterday, with eight people for coffee at my house, four of whom were staying the night. They are all heading home now and I am tackling the resultant laundry mountain, with three beds to strip.
I am going back to Mum's tomorrow, to accompany her to a friend's birthday celebration.
Brothers and sisters- a strange / strained relationship in my family too, as my son and daughter have not spoken for six months now. Both their father and I have special birthdays this year. Their Dad is having a big lunch for family and friends in a hotel, big enough for the two families to keep well apart. I’m thinking of having a separate meal with each of them at the weekend, and inviting friends to an open house on the actual day. They’ ve got a few months to sort themselves out, but I don’t intend to get involved. I don’t really understand what it is about anyway.
Yes, it is not just what will need doing after I die, but when I become too frail or confused. Hopefully a long time ahead yet.
IANAL (although I work for some); have you got a Power of Attorney in place? That would make sure someone was able to look after your finances if you couldn't.
It's tricky, Piglet. I was a lawyer for many years until my retirement. The law here (and at least it used be in the other States, England and Wales, and New Zealand) is that a power of attorney becomes inoperative if the person making the power becomes incapable of revoking it. That used create all sorts of problems as the power was almost certainly created to deal with things on the incapacity. The remedy back then was a quick application to our Supreme Court for the appointment of a manager of the affairs, normally the attorney under power. The judge who normally dealt with these matters thought that something had to be done, but contrary to the usual pattern for such things, he did something. He conferred with the small group of us regularly involved in such matters, a proposal was put together and the judge went off to the Attorney-General with a proposal for legislative amendment. The result was a simple piece of legislation to set out a procedure to be followed enabling the power to continue. I don't now remember if that was followed in other Australian jurisdictions or elsewhere.
I still don't know what my brother's issue was, but my brother and sister-in-law could not have been kinder when they heard that my husband had had a TIA. We got lovely messages from them, and they sent a card through the post.
Yes, it is not just what will need doing after I die, but when I become too frail or confused. Hopefully a long time ahead yet.
IANAL (although I work for some); have you got a Power of Attorney in place? That would make sure someone was able to look after your finances if you couldn't.
It's tricky, Piglet. I was a lawyer for many years until my retirement. The law here (and at least it used be in the other States, England and Wales, and New Zealand) is that a power of attorney becomes inoperative if the person making the power becomes incapable of revoking it. That used create all sorts of problems as the power was almost certainly created to deal with things on the incapacity. The remedy back then was a quick application to our Supreme Court for the appointment of a manager of the affairs, normally the attorney under power. The judge who normally dealt with these matters thought that something had to be done, but contrary to the usual pattern for such things, he did something. He conferred with the small group of us regularly involved in such matters, a proposal was put together and the judge went off to the Attorney-General with a proposal for legislative amendment. The result was a simple piece of legislation to set out a procedure to be followed enabling the power to continue. I don't now remember if that was followed in other Australian jurisdictions or elsewhere.
In the English and Welsh jurisdiction it’s specifically what is known as an Enduring Power of Attorney, and there is a process for triggering it if the grantor of the power becomes incapacitated.
Yes, it is not just what will need doing after I die, but when I become too frail or confused. Hopefully a long time ahead yet.
IANAL (although I work for some); have you got a Power of Attorney in place? That would make sure someone was able to look after your finances if you couldn't.
It's tricky, Piglet. I was a lawyer for many years until my retirement. The law here (and at least it used be in the other States, England and Wales, and New Zealand) is that a power of attorney becomes inoperative if the person making the power becomes incapable of revoking it. That used create all sorts of problems as the power was almost certainly created to deal with things on the incapacity. The remedy back then was a quick application to our Supreme Court for the appointment of a manager of the affairs, normally the attorney under power. The judge who normally dealt with these matters thought that something had to be done, but contrary to the usual pattern for such things, he did something. He conferred with the small group of us regularly involved in such matters, a proposal was put together and the judge went off to the Attorney-General with a proposal for legislative amendment. The result was a simple piece of legislation to set out a procedure to be followed enabling the power to continue. I don't now remember if that was followed in other Australian jurisdictions or elsewhere.
In the English and Welsh jurisdiction it’s specifically what is known as an Enduring Power of Attorney, and there is a process for triggering it if the grantor of the power becomes incapacitated.
I think it's similar in Scotland; you have a combined Continuing (financial) and Welfare POA. The financial powers can take effect whenever the grantor wishes, but the Welfare powers only come into play if you're deemed by a medical practitioner to have lost capacity.
It is important to know that, in England at least, should your first appointed Attorney become unavailable, you should notify the Office of the Public Guardian. Only then can any reserve Attorneys act, even if named on the original application. We found this out when trying to enact my Mum's - I couldn’t take over without proving that my father had died. Mum's LPOA naming me as Attorney turned up 2 weeks after she died - thankfully she was of sound mind until near the end and we didn't need it.
In England, the LPA can be used, by consent, if the donor is of sound mind, but not physically capable eg of going to the bank or using a computer/ phone.
@Gee D this is a question for you as we're in the same country. My Dad never really lost mental capacity, but was physically unable to do his banking and pay bills. He left it too late to transition to an electronic life so I was able to do things as I had enduring power of Attorney. However, I wonder whether he could just have made me a signatory on his bank account and we not activated the POA. I'm asking also for future reference for myself, though I recognise that I would consult a solicitor in my own state. But I do wonder ...
Speaking only of NSW, yes, you could have attended to those matters being a signatory on his account. Given that, I'd say it is better that you proceeded as you did. Let's say that some question arises, you could point to your power as the basis of your actions. I don't know if you have any siblings, but family relationships are known to change (an understatement) where money is concerned.
Comments
Mum says she is baffled. She can't think of anything she might have said to my brother to make him think she wouldn't want to be with her adored grandchildren on her birthday / anniversary of Dad's death. She says that all she can recall saying to my brother was that it would be a bittersweet family gathering.
I had assumed that Mum was saying one thing to my brother and a different thing to me, but that is seeming less likely.
Plus, she has had family with her on the previous anniversaries.
It's all very odd.
I'm flying to Chicago to be with my lover who has been very ill over the last couple of months. We have made our peace with what may happen, though being a retired teacher I don't think my mother will die until her granddaughters have finished their exams. One is doing a levels and the other GCSEs. They finish after I get home.
It sounds to me as though your brother has got his own emotional stuff going on, which he isn't going to want to unpack with you, if he even realises that there is any kind of issue or difficulty. I may be way off the mark, but that's just how it sounds to me. (My own tricky relationships with my parents and siblings are possibly improving a bit as I get older and mellower about past hurts, however I suspect that at times during my adult life, my behaviour towards family members has been closer to that of your brother's apparent arse-hole-ness than to your own graciousness.)
2 thoughts which strike me from your most recent post.
1) Is your mum willing to contact your brother, ideally while you are with her in person, stressing that she is looking forward to seeing her grandchildren on her birthday and that she very much wants to see them even though it's obviously bittersweet? Thinking of a phone call or voicemail message to your brother, which you hear being made (and with your brother being told that you're there), which suggests maybe there's been some confusion at some point in family communications, but your mum definitely does want to see her grandchildren as planned on her birthday.
2) Apologies if I've missed something which answers this point already. Are your brother's statements about what your mum wants affecting anybody other than you? Is he telling the grandchildren they shouldn't be seeing your mum on her birthday? If your brother is only saying this to you, would your best option be trying not to get drawn into a debate about it, e.g. standard response of, "Mum's told me she does want to see the grandchildren as planned on her birthday and is really looking forward to it," then no further discussion. Obviously, the bigger pain is if he's making these comments to the grandchildren and trying to get them to change the plan. If that if the case, maybe the grandchildren also need a one line response, "Grandma's said she does want to see us and is looking forward to it," etc.
Are your brother's statements about what your mum wants affecting anybody other than you?
Yes. My brother messaged to say that he had spoken to my (adult) nephew, his son, and that his son now sees that the lunch is "ill-advised" and won't be attending. My nephew himself has not contacted his baffled cousins, or my mother, or me. But it's no longer "all the grandchildren", my mother is telling me that she is upset about that, and my daughter can't understand why her cousin, with whom she regards herself as having a warm cousinly relationship, has left it to his father to send a cold message that he won't be coming.
My brother and his family are going to take my mother out for a birthday lunch at a more appropriate time "probably within the next fortnight."
It sounds to me as though your brother has got his own emotional stuff going on, which he isn't going to want to unpack with you, if he even realises that there is any kind of issue or difficulty.
That comment made me realise that I have my own "stuff" going on. As a child / adolescent I often didn't "get" social nuance, unspoken rules etc etc. As soon as I got to university I found my tribe and left that socially awkward me behind. But being told that my mother has "clearly expressed wishes" which I have somehow failed to register, by someone who was a big part of my life in the awkward years, and I'm flipping straight back into panicky adolescent mode - what have I failed to understand? why have I failed to understand it? Why have "clearly expressed views" somehow gone right over my head?
I don't suppose there's any chance of direct grandmother to grandson communication? 'I'll really miss you - sure you won't change your mind?' Silly me, of course not. That's not how these things work. Bafflement, misunderstandings and hurt feelings much better.
From your posts on this thread, like Firenze, I think your brother has got his fixed ideas which he's imposing on everybody else. You started with the charitable view that maybe there was misunderstanding because your mum was saying different things to you and your brother to try to keep both of you happy. However, you've now discussed this really explicitly with your mum, and she's clear she hasn't been giving your brother the messages he's saying he's heard. And, as you're trying to get everybody to a mutual understanding of your mum's genuine wishes, your brother is digging his heels in and coming across as being more and more illogical and intractable.
If at all possible, I very much think your mum rather than you now needs to be leading on the responses to your brother and nephew. Your brother's ongoing 'trump card' in the discussions is that he is advocating your mum's true wishes. If possible, the best way to gently point out that that's not true is for her to say so to your brother and/or nephew.
I'm still baffled as to what it was all about, but at the end of the day, my brother chose to opt-out, and to encourage his son to opt-out as well, so they have been the ones who have missed out.
I had a full house yesterday, with eight people for coffee at my house, four of whom were staying the night. They are all heading home now and I am tackling the resultant laundry mountain, with three beds to strip.
I am going back to Mum's tomorrow, to accompany her to a friend's birthday celebration.
Many happy returns to North East Mum! 🙂
It's tricky, Piglet. I was a lawyer for many years until my retirement. The law here (and at least it used be in the other States, England and Wales, and New Zealand) is that a power of attorney becomes inoperative if the person making the power becomes incapable of revoking it. That used create all sorts of problems as the power was almost certainly created to deal with things on the incapacity. The remedy back then was a quick application to our Supreme Court for the appointment of a manager of the affairs, normally the attorney under power. The judge who normally dealt with these matters thought that something had to be done, but contrary to the usual pattern for such things, he did something. He conferred with the small group of us regularly involved in such matters, a proposal was put together and the judge went off to the Attorney-General with a proposal for legislative amendment. The result was a simple piece of legislation to set out a procedure to be followed enabling the power to continue. I don't now remember if that was followed in other Australian jurisdictions or elsewhere.
I think it's similar in Scotland; you have a combined Continuing (financial) and Welfare POA. The financial powers can take effect whenever the grantor wishes, but the Welfare powers only come into play if you're deemed by a medical practitioner to have lost capacity.
Or so I hope.