Being Asian...Being Catholic

Last night, I felt that beside physically losing my son, I am also losing him as in losing him completely.  I hear stories and from my on observation, I can see that this is inevitable.


I hear stories of divorced children from mixed cultural marriage as they grow up start denouncing their Asian heritage.  It is the same story whether it is the mother that is Asian or the father that is Asian.  The Asian parent 'loses' out in a western country.  Somehow being Asian is considered 'un-cool'.  And in a divorced situation where the child have a choice, the choice is to be cool which is being NOT an Asian or have any association with it.  


In my case, I am a double 'un-cool' because I am also a Catholic.  That is SUPERBLY un-cool - Catholic and Asian in a modern westernised county.  


I try speaking to my son in Chinese but he has no interest to learn it, I take him to a Chinese community playgroup and he didnt want to attend after the first class...  This is just the beginning of indirectly denouncing his Asian heritage.  With the non-removal order in place, it is definitely inevitable by teenage years, he would completely denounce his Asian heritage and will not be surprised denouncing his Catholic upbringing too... 


I blame the law for this although readers and people out there can say it is up to me how much I want to influence him in his Asian heritage.  Sorry, they are wrong.  When he goes to school, it will be his peers and fitting in that matters.  It's not so much the parent anymore.  Especially in my case, where he does have a choice between living a complete Kiwi lifestyle which is carefree and loose or a strict cultured Asian Catholic upbringing.  


Silly jokes like this shows that people do not realise and respect the Asian culture though the joke is meant in a well mannered way -  "He might not denounce you because you are Hot.  He can show off to his friends how Hot his mother is."  I am his mother and I want him to be proud of me because I am his Mother, his Asian mother, not because I look young and petite.  


What is so humiliating being an Asian?  I have met Asians that grow up in this country that says I am as much Asian as I look.  The rest of me is Kiwi. I dont practice any Asian culture and have no interest in any Asian culture.  Why is that?  What is so embarrassing about the Asian culture/food?  

A system so flawed, a system of oppression

D-day hurt me to the core.  I am going to fight the flawed oppressive system in NZ all by myself as someone who is more traditional in my believes.  


1)  Convenience in Getting a Divorce and Protection
1 out of 3 marriages in NZ ends up in a divorce.  Why isnt this ringing alarm bells in NZ?  Because you can obtain a divorce so easily with zero to non repercussion.  Why?  Because in NZ if you throw a stone and if it lands on someone head, I bet you that person has a Family Trust.  Almost everyone has a Trust even little kids! With protection from a Trust, people are less willing to 'make it work'.  It's so easy to set up a Trust and as long as you set it up before having proof of a serious relationship with the other party.  Simple scenario - You meet someone and kissed her and maybe have sex with her (sex is so random and free in NZ!), then you go "uh huh, I'd better quickly set up a Trust in case things get serious or she gets pregnant!".  That's it, you are now protected in terms of your assets and property.  So now, with a more relax attitude, you freely have sex and then she asked for commitment, you say OK but what is commitment? It's just standing in front of a bunch of people saying the same words that your forefathers said but now those words carry no depth - "till death do us part, in sickness and in health".  It's just words to utter to make everyone happy.  When the going gets tough, OK, time to get the hell out of there. Get a lawyer, sort out the relationship property which luckily most of it is in Trust and move on.  So simple.  


If there is a child involved, that is the beauty of a Trust.  Manipulate your Trust to provide yourself a lower income so that you pay lower child support.  Or go fight for 50/50 custody so that you dont even have to pay for child support!  How beautiful is that to be a man in NZ?  As for the woman/ex-wife that is left behind, "OK, you are out of my responsibility now.  Bye bye!"


Changes That Should be Looked At
Well I am sure we cannot abolish Family Trust because many men/women out there will complain that there are women/men out there who are vultures and just marry and divorce to get money. OK, I agree that these vultures exist so I have no comments regarding Family Trust.  It should stay the way it is.  


But we can change the divorcing rules to make it harder and people feel more committed to make it work.  For example Malaysia and Singapore, if you divorce your wife, you have to pay her maintenance until she dies or re-marries!  What is classified as maintenance?  Let's see, how about paying for her basic living expenses.  Now, wouldnt that make any couple think twice or maybe thrice before saying "It's not working out, let's divorce".  I have seen many couples stay together for the sake of the children but also because they say divorce is so expensive.  Might as well stick with it!




2) Rights and Children
Over and over again, I hear a child has 2 parents, both parents deserves the child or  better phrased in a politically correct way, the child deserves equal time with both parents.  Alright, I do agree with that comment but is it taken in the context of a child's best interest (seem to be the popular phrase in the family court!).  To be honest, it is taken in the best interest of the parent!  


Many years ago, in the event of a divorce, it is without a doubt the child will be in the custody of the mother. But in the recent 10-15 years, this dynamic has changed to 'care of child'.  I can see how that comes along as fathers feel that they have their rights over the child too.  I am not disputing that fact.  But what I am disputing is the interpretation of these father's right and best interest of the child has gone so far off tangent that it has become a personal vendetta between the parents rather than really for the child.  


Changes That Should be Looked At
I am very traditional and have always believed that a child should have one place called home.  I totally disagree that a child should be treated as a yo-yo being pushed to live out of a knapsack on the basis of being fair to a father and a mother. To prove my point, a MALE mental health worker supports this thought.  
http://www.theledger.com/article/20120128/NEWS/120129672?p=2&tc=pg


Let's look at it this way, in a married stable family, the husband is usually the provider and his involvement in a child (namely toddler as it applies to me) is basically bathing and playing with him.  The caring and nurturing is the role of the mother.  So should this dynamic not stay to ensure the child grows up knowing the respective role of being a Father and being a Mother.  
A psychologist Robert Emery (male again!) has called this the approximation rule for post divorce care arrangement.


So what I am asking is to re-look at why is there such emphasis on the young child (toddler) living out of a knapsack, such insecurity and instability for a child's mind.  Can the law not accept Man and Woman are different.  We will never be alike, emotionally we are different.  So have the child placed with the mother as their Home and the father visits, takes the child out, play with the child.  The child still has contact with both parents and despite coming from a broken family, the child recognises the role of being a Father and being a Mother and this is important in their upbringing because they then know their role whether as a Father or a Mother.  God never intended equality when he make Man and Woman and in parenthood.  If he did, he wouldnt make Woman to carry the child for 40 weeks in her womb.  He knew the Woman will be the nurturer.


On a more personal note:  I am a child that lived out of a knapsack.  I spend weekdays at my grandparents and weekends at my parents. as both my parents work and it was a suitable arrangement for the adults.  My grandparents love me to bits and my parents too so I am considered lucky to be loved so much and am settled in both houses. But how the first 5 years affect a child cannot be underestimated.  I noticed I have a tendency for attachment to things / people.  As I grow up and also I have been to counselling, the counselor is not surprised that it could be linked to my instability in my childhood. No doubt I was loved by my parents and grandparents and they have the same culture and upbringing, but I am a child with developing mind.  I was probably confused and the only thing that was stable for my was Dolly who was with me weekdays and weekends.  So in a way, I have developed that attachment and fear of losing things. Quoting from an advert - The yo-yo sleeping arrangement was like 'now  you see it, now you dont'.  


So now, it hurts me to see my child going through the same process I went through and I am beginning to see that he is also getting a sense of attachment to toys/soft toys.




3) Non- Removal Order - action and reaction
With the increase of cross-country/ cross cultural marriages, Non-Removal Orders can be taken out so easily.  Just state your fear and you will be granted a non-removal order and the other party will be left with the agonising emotional and financial threat of that order.  Firstly, I feel that the non-removal order is a action/reaction process.  Let's look at why someone wants to leave the country:
i) so much conflict that it is draining all the energy out
ii) emotional support (one always choose to leave to return to home country for that support)
iii) financial support (NZ law does not require the man to pay any maintenance!)
iv) cultural difference


And let's look at why someone takes out a non-removal order?
i) Afraid that the child is taken out of the country and never see the child again (always this reason is used in court)
ii) or is it just a personal thing/ a way of controlling? (never the reason but mostly the actual intending reason)


Changes That Should be Looked At
As I have mentioned, it is a action/reaction process.  The person who wants to leave is usually being pushed to a corner financially and emotionally that all they seek is love and support from people who loves them.  It is a reaction to the other's party action.  As such, some of us asked for permission to relocate while some just take the drastic move to run away.  The silly ones that ask for permission to relocate (yours truly) thought it is being open and honest but resulted in a reaction that resulted in the non-removal order. So this whole process is a cycle of action resulting in reaction! 


So to ensure that everything is done in good faith, when a Non-Removal Order is taken out, the party that takes out the Order should also be told that since it is a somewhat imprisonment (as the other party cant leave the country with the child without paying you/the court a bond (note, a hefty bond too!)), then the criteria for taking the order is the party has to provide with the imprisoned party a roof over their head.  They have to pay for the mortgage/rent of the mother and child.  If the party refuses to do so, then it is clear it is all about personal control rather than really wanting to have the child stay in the country!  


The Current Trend of The Family Law in NZ and its Effects on the Younger Generation


1) The sanctity of marriage is no longer sacred.  The words "till death do us part, in sickness and in health" bears no weight.  Why should it with the current protection the law provides?  First, start up a Trust.  It is better than a pre-nuptial.  Once the money side of things are taken care of, go into a marriage casually.  And with the current upbringing, it is OK to walk out when things are not working out.  My upbringing from my parents/grandparents is "You have make that decision.  Stick with it thought thick and thin!".  So the law has somehow allowed what I call 'easy way out'.  


2)  Children are commodity, not little humans with emotions.  Ha, I am sure any lawyers especially child advocates will completely disagree with me and cursed me too.  I am just speaking as a mother.  A mother who loves her child so dearly that I am labelled as over possessive.  In more traditional and religious countries, the role of a Mother and a Woman is respected and they understand that women are emotionally different.  As such Man also respect that this woman who is the mother of his child.  I agree if the father is completely alienated from the child, then it is wrong but if the father still has contact and plays an important role in the child's life, why is pushing/forcing a child to live out of a knapsack so important.  It is almost like "It is within my rights, so I want it".  I really would like to add my 2cents thought here.  I noticed a trend in mental health amongst youngsters and also an increased in youth suicide rate in NZ.  Is this a bi-result of this Family law?


3) As such, a child grows up being unsure of their respective roles.  A boy from a broken family will grow up thinking that I can have equal rights with the woman which from a traditional point of view means, I dont really need to respect the woman and her emotions.  Secondly, he will also learn that it is OK to marry and divorce because there is no real repercussion.  If the child is a girl, she will grow up (if she picks up her mother's hurt) having doubts about man.  


4) As we are trying to encourage a cross-cultural diverse world, the Non-Removal Order and the law is having the opposite effect.  In hindsight and more prepared now, I see women thinking about their future.  They make sure that their rights and the child's right is protected in their home country too.  As such, the law has created a drift/kink in a cross cultural marriage.  Now that many of us has started sharing our hurts, other women know that if you deliver your child in that country, if anything happens, you are bound by that country's law.  Because of that many Asians I know have decided it is safer to deliver the baby in their home country, gain the right to live/ residence there and let the child have the father's home country citizenship for descent.  If only I was given that advice...  


5) Again from a traditional point of view, the current trend in Family Law will result in a morally loose younger generation with no sense of responsibility and respect.  


What am I fighting for?  I am fighting for my child's stability and my financial and emotional stability.  I am fighting for someone to acknowledge the current family law trend is very flawed to the extend of oppression. 
Everything has become so businesslike.  I was brought up that when a man marries a woman, they become one and if there is a child, they are all one big family.  When one walks out, they walked out of the union, they have disappointed both the other parent and the child.  For that action, there should be repercussion so that they know and understand their decision.  But the current family law has given them the protection and rights so people walked out of relationship so easily.  I never thought I will be a divorced woman, I never wanted to divorce, I wanted to stay on for the sake of the child.  I thought all my intentions are for the best interest of the child but looks like this is a selfish world.  You dont stay on if you are unhappy.  You just move on and hey, the child will adjust and adapt!

Fairness

My brother posted in his FB, "is there fairness?"  I commented to him, I dont think there is fairness.  In fact, what is fairness?  Isnt it just a relativity term?  A term use for when we compare against something and is not happy with the comparison?


When God created man, he didnt create 'fairness'.  He make MAN and WOMAN completely different.  If fairness were to occur then, Eve will be complaining to God why is Adam bigger, tougher and Adam will complain why is Eve prettier, daintier.   If fairness were to occur, then both man and woman should be able to pro-create without the need of each other.  So I think God created things/people to complement each other instead of equal/fair.   


I was thinking if we were to take the word FAIRNESS, I can imagine the bum telling God, why do I have to do all the dirty job and the brain just sits up there doing all the clean job and getting all the glory! :)  But imagine without the bum, would brain be able to sit up there comfortably?  So I guess the word here is equal importance instead of fairness?


Aha, so maybe in my custody case and the so called father fight for his rights/fairness, the law and men should step back and see their 'equal importance' in a child rearing situation rather than fighting for rights/fairness.  Women are made to nurture and care so leave that to the mother of the child.  Do not fight for equality/fairness by wanting to take the child away from the mother.  Instead do your duty as a father/man and provide for the child's welfare and education.  Then the child will grow up understanding the importance of A FATHER and A MOTHER even if they are not together.  But the law and disgruntled father movement has resulted in a confusion with the role resulting in the current and future generation to behave the way they are because of the confusion with their respective roles and responsibility.  


There is no longer a distinct difference between man/woman now because of all the equality/fairness/rights movement.   It is really sad.   If only we can accept our own uniqueness and then maybe the word FAIRNESS and UNFAIRNESS will no longer be in our vocabulary.  Also if people can be happy for others, fairness is also achieved.  If the rich can be happy to see their poorer counterpart getting rich instead of thinking that it is unfair how he/she could be rich. If MAN can accept their role and responsibility as different to a WOMAN and vice versa, then there is less need for comparison.  If not, unfairness will always be there FOREVER.  

Equality, Racism and All that

This is probably continuation of my musing yesterday.  I see in my FB newsfeed articles on racism in Malaysia. Sigh! Seriously racism does occur every where.  Malaysians, wake up, for I have finally woken up.  Like the rest of Chinese Malaysians, I also thought that we were not treated fairly, equally, blah, blah.  OK, maybe to some extent, we are not as privileged as the Malays but does it only occur in Malaysia?  Nope, it occurs anywhere else in the world.  Do you really think in a western country, we as Asians will be treated with equality and no racism.  I see Anti-Asian sentiment everywhere in western country.  Sometimes even as jokes - 'chinky', yellow skin, slitty eyes, our accent by mocking some Asians inability to pronounce R and S.  In comparison, where else in the world can you find a country that observes a Chinese New Year, a Malay New Year, a Western New Year, An Indian New Year and all other races important celebration?  Sure, here in New Zealand, they put up some shows for the Chinese New Year but it is not observed as an important  holiday for us Chinese.  The celebration that is put up is for entertainment purpose, not really explaining the root and meaning of the celebration.  


On the religion side, we can have churches, temples, mosques and they are all respected place of worship.  Our chinese culture is also respected.   We are allowed to have street performances for 1 month during Hungry Ghost Festival!  Come on, try doing this in a western country and you will probably be laughed at.  What?  The chinese really think that the Hades gate open and the souls are roaming the streets eating and watching shows?  - that would be the reaction you get from most (Note most but not all) western counterparts.  


So in terms of racism, I will say No-lah, there is no difference whether you are in an Asian country or western country, whether it's amongst Asian/Asian or Asian/Western.  It occurs everywhere so there is no 'grass is greener' the other side.  Unless maybe you return your origin country!  Even then, I believe some level of racism will still occur.  


As for equality, there is no such thing as Women and Men are equal.  For those feminist women (which I once was), no matter where you are in the world, you are still less preferred for higher position compared to men.  There is still  a salary difference between men and women and it is justified by the 'organisation' as women commitment will be less as she will ultimately want to have a family and might leave the workforce.  So a woman is a riskier investment for corporate gain.  


So, the same goes for family.  Men, why do you have to hurt women for fighting for equality in parenting?  Did God not make it so clear that men provide, women nurture even as early as the conception stage?  All it takes is few seconds for the MAN to provide what is necessary for conception but it takes the WOMAN 40 weeks to nurture that conception.  If God wanted equality, he would have allowed men and women to reproduce without the need for each other.  


Now, for the western idolisation, we Asians arent that bad.  Maybe we are shy, not as outspoken but that doesnt make us any less capable.  Remember Tunku Abdul Rahman gained independence for us in 1957 from the western rulers because he believes we are equally as good ourselves.  But from then many of us still believe we were not good enough so we want to study in a western country, migrate for a better life in a western country, pay the westerners a huge salary when they work as expat in our country because we take it as a blessing to have them in our company.  Aiyah...


As for me, I will be happy if I never work as an engineer again, as long as I can be the mother for my child until he is of age, if I have to cook and bake and knit till then.  As for where I live, I no longer idolise the western world and I am willing to put down my ego and say that I have make a mistake.  Something that most Asians fail to admit is to let down their ego and admit their mistake.  I have honestly found happiness in being a mother and if I could be with him and nurture him the way a mother should, I am willing to give everything else up.  

A Better Life

I have a new neighbour and they moved here from their home country to have a 'better life'.  I noticed with us Asians, we always seem to think if we can migrate and live in a western country, we are considered seeking a better life for ourselves and our family.  But is it really just our Asian perception that our Asian country is not good enough?  I am one who used to think the same that a better life is in a western country.  


But what is a better life?  My new neighbour is an exec in his home country but now have to work in a petrol station as a pump attendant.  They have no car and he says life is so difficult but it's OK, I am giving my family a better life.  I met taxi drivers who tell me that they were doctors and engineers in their home country but are now reduced to being a taxi driver and finding it so difficult to make ends meet.  


I guess I feel that unless you are living in a war torn country or where you are barely surviving on necessities, then migration to get a better life is justifiable.  But if it is just perception that you can get a better life, better education, etc in a western country, I think we Asians have to wake up and start seeing the beauty in our own country.  


Now that I look back, a better life would be where I am loved, where I can spend time with my family, where there is always laughter in the house.  Education is the same everywhere in the world - it's how we make the best of it.  


If life in your home country means less stress, I cannot fathom how struggling financially and being stressed all the time can constitute a 'better life'.  


Today I guess, I am feeling like the prodigal daughter...

Conversation With God

I was given the Conversation with God series as a birthday gift.  It is a very powerful book but I do ask - how do we know it is really God that is speaking to us?  I do get little voice telling me stuff too but I am not sure whether it is God or just my conscience...


If it is God, then I will definitely be the 'odd' one out in my thinking.


With my situation, I keep asking, praying to God for enlightenment and discernment.  Over and over again, I keep getting affirmation that I am not wrong in wanting to move on with my son without further involvement from the ex-husband while the rest of the world, the law, psychologist thinks it is better for the child if it is co-parenting.  


This voice gave me an example.  It says that when a woman marries a man, she becomes his missus so she becomes Mrs X.  They become one body.  And when they have a child, the child is a product of their union which means man, woman and child is one body.  They become one complete body and no longer 3 separate entities.  Therefore, when one of the member of the body walks out, which in my case, if the husband choose to walk out, he is not only walking on me.  He is walking out of the body - the body that is him, myself and our child.  So when I felt that I cannot fathom how the court can say that although my husband walked out on me, he didnt walk out on the child.  We are all one body, not 3 separate entity!  


I asked God and said that I want a better example.  This little voice really gave me a simple example.  The voice says - Imagine your left hand tells your body, you are not pretty, you are not fun.  I want to be amputated and be on my own to have some fun.  But after amputation, the left hand realised that if misses right hand because life with right hand is fun even though body is not fun.  Could the left hand actually do that medically?  Would the body accept left hand's temporary involvement and would right hand prefer to have left hand there on a 'as and when' basis?  Or would it be better for the body to accept that the left hand is gone and the right hand then compensate for the missing left hand?  


I still have trouble accepting that God or my little voice can have such 'ridiculous' discernment.  I wanted example from the Bible!  And strange enough my son turned on the Bible CD and it talked about Adam and Eve.   Later, I turned the bible and it opened up the page "When a man divorces his wife, he is causing her to commit adultery".  I was like "What does that mean?"  The little voice says "The current law and humankind has allowed many things to happen on their own need and no longer the law of nature."  We say that we want to shield our child from abusers, pedophile but we do not shield our child from wrongdoings.  We are now exposing to our child that it is OK to walk out when the going gets tough, when you dont feel like trying anymore.  Just walk out and it is OK.  There is no repercussion for doing that.  It is also OK to put your own need ahead of anyone else's.  Love thyself and everyone else comes second.  I guess those who strongly believe in the Book 1 of Conversation with God will say this is exactly what God says "The best Love is a self - centered love'.  But my voice says "the Bible says Love your Neighbour as you would love yourself"  


So, I guess a different God spoke to me compared to the God that spoke to Neale Donald Walsch?  Or is it just our own conscience and upbringing speaking?

In The Best Interest of The Child

If someone ever quote to me In The Best Interest of the Child again, I will send them the link to my blog.  I am so sick of hearing that sentence/quote over and over again by lawyers, psychologist, etc.  Honestly, if these people who quote IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD could sleep with a clear conscience that this is what they did and not in the Best Interest of the Parent, then I rest my case with them.  If these people could sit quietly and have a clear conscience towards themselves and God that they really think they put the child interest to the parent/s interest, then maybe my life journey and experience is totally different to them.


How could one quote In The Best Interest of The Child but expects the child to make all the adapting and changes and treating a child like a possession be In the Best Interest of The Child?  It was two responsible adults who created the child and it was also the adults decision to walk out of a marriage so why should the child be the one that need to change and adapt?  Has the law not decided that the adults should be the one that need to be punished for their decisions?


As a mother, In the Best Interest of the Child means the adults/parents need to make all the changes.  I suggested to my ex-husband many times that we should try to live as housemate (as we do not have major conflict) but of course, it seems like the most ridiculous idea to him and his lawyer or maybe to the whole Kiwi nation.  But it is not that unrealistic if that means the child need not live out of a suitcase.  The child gets to see both parents at all times.  I know it is also not uncommon in the Asian culture to 'stay together' for the sake of the child.  That is being mature and un-selfish.  Why should a child suffer for an adult's selfishness?


Alternatively, I suggested we live as neighbour so again the child get to see both parents all the time and could sleep in one place call home but go over to daddy's for a play.  Again, this is considered a ridiculous suggestion.


I also said to my ex-husband we should have a relax arrangement which is come and see the child as and when you could especially if you are in the area.  Drop in, play with the child and if it is bath time, bath the child, feed the child.  But no, in the eyes of the LAW, this is wrong.  We must treat the child like an ENTITY, a POSSESSION where a fixed time, a child must be with his dad and a fixed time with the mum - called a Parental Order. This is DEFINITELY NOT in the best interest of the child.  If child spends Christmas with mum this year, he must spend Christmas with Dad next year.  Come on, how could someone within the consciousness says that this is in the best interest of the child.  It is in the best interest of the parent so that there is fairness in CHILD TIME DISTRIBUTION. 


Honestly, the law is SO flawed now that I am not surprised why there is such an increase rate of suicide and mental health amongst the younger generation.  The law is so afraid of offending one parent/party that it has lost track of its 'duty'.  


Could there only be ONE King Solomon in this lifetime?  Could no one else think and discern like King Solomon?  The true classic parable of King Solomon:

The story is recounted in 1 Kings 3:16-28. Two young women who lived in the same house and who both had an infant son came to Solomon for a judgement. One of the women claimed that the other, after accidentally smothering her own son while sleeping, had exchanged the two children to make it appear that the living child was hers. The other woman denied this and so both women claimed to be the mother of the living son and said that the dead boy belonged to the other.

After some deliberation, King Solomon called for a sword to be brought before him. He declared that there is only one fair solution: the live son must be split in two, each woman receiving half of the child. Upon hearing this terrible verdict, the boy's true mother cried out, "Please, My Lord, give her the live child—do not kill him!" However, the liar, in her bitter jealousy, exclaimed, "It shall be neither mine nor yours—divide it!" Solomon instantly gave the live baby to the real mother, realizing that the true mother's instincts were to protect her child, while the liar revealed that she did not truly love the child.

Survival

A friend commented on my FB how I am able to DIY (Do It Yourself) now.  It makes me think... it's my situation that has turned me into a 'Anything Also Can Do' person.  Before this, where life is comfortable, I prefer to rely on the conventional way which is BUY something that I need.  But being thrown into this situation, my survival instinct has surfaced.  


Clothing -  I learned to knit and sew basic clothing items.  With my new knitting skills, I am also trying (and hoping) that I could get some income of it.  As for myself, I used to be ashamed of my petite size but now, it sure comes in handy.  I not only could fit whatever I owned 15 years ago, I could also fit into children's clothing which is so much cheaper.  Yesterday, I picked up 2 jackets for myself for $9.97 (for both jackets!) - a birthday present for myself after not buying anything for myself for 2 years.  My son's long pants at 1 years old has now turned into shorts for him.  Now, I am glad I didnt listened to those 'well-off' friends who commented why do I keep all my son's baby clothes! In fact, one of his 6 months old jeans is now a nice pair of shorts for him.  


Food - Occasionally I crave for my hometown food like Laksa and Sar Hor Fun.  I have learnt how to cook these dishes to feed my cravings.  I also started exploring my baking skills which has resulted in a more confident me.  Somehow as my survival skills submerge, I also feel more comfortable and confident with myself.  Previously, I buy meat to suit a dish I want to make.  Now, I just adapt and get the meats on special for the week and adapt my cooking to suit whatever meat/veges and ingredients I have at home.  In fact, it turned out so much more special because it's all home made/ self invented dishes.  Not a copy from some recipe books.  I attempted to make the sausages for my son and wasnt sure of the response but considering he finished 75% it, it is a good testimonial that I can give my son good healthy food on a budget.  


Needs - Although it is sneaky but hey, I am proud of myself for the survival skill.  I was given a $30 voucher in an expensive sports shop but they didnt sell the bike helmet I wanted for my son.  So the Asian brain kicks in - I bought an item from the shop for over $30 and put the rest on my credit card.  A couple of days later, I returned the product saying that it was not suitable with receipt and everything intact.  I got a refund of the whole sum into my credit card.  Now, I have converted the $30 voucher into credit in my credit card and with that money, I could go to the bike shop and get my son's bike helmet!  Hehe! My dad actually gave me a virtual pat on the back for that.  :)  
I also start looking at inorganic collection and collected toys that seem relatively good condition, clean it and voila, it's a new toy for my son.  Kids have such short attention span, it really does not matter whether it is brand new LEGO or something picked up and cleaned and modified by his mother. 
Thanks to trademe website, I also find whatever I could that I have and started selling it on the website.  As the saying goes "One man's junk is another man's treasure"".  :)


Overall, I guess this could be the silver lining in my situation.  A more confident person in who I am and what I can do.  As such, if it does rain 40 days and 40 nights (my son has been saying that it is going to rain 40 days and 40 nights!), I am not worried.  As for knowing what I want in life, I know for sure now that I want a man who is a REAL MAN.  One who knows what a MAN should do and how he should be as a husband and a father.  The MAN that GOD intended when he created Adam.  

Psychologist, Psychology, The Law Versus Human Instinct

Psychologist says that physical bonding with the father is very important for the child development and psychology.  OK, I can accept that.  But to what extend the importance of this area of psychology until it supercede other areas?  So a child feeling unsettled from spending nights at different places, wetting themselves from the instability, crying themselves to sleep, not wanting to bath because they are not comfortable, only eating unbalanced food is considered OK because they will soon adjust and adapt.  


OK, I am no psychologist.  I am just a mother.  Do those symptoms above not indicate that a child is psychologically affected?  So why is it a lesser evil compare to the physical bonding with the father?  Why do we say that child will adapt and accept that he has to live under two different type of care and instability but we cannot say the same that a child will adapt and accept that his father has walked out of the family?


As it is said, all this came about in the recent 10 years because of some father movement.  So why the past DECADES, child/ren from a broken family still survive?  In fact some of the most prominent figures are brought up by a single parent - be it divorce or death of a parent.  Or why the psychologist then differs from the psychologist now?


My question - are the psychologist and law really based on the best interest of the child or did this stem from a disgruntled father movement started 10 years ago?  ( I do wonder why these disgruntled father's never change the law with God to allow them to get pregnant too!)


On the psychology aspect, which psychology effects has lesser/lower long term effect - 1) the divorce or 2) the result of the divorce.  


I guess most will say the result of the divorce.  OK, so this is the two scenario from my perspective as a mother. 


1) Father and mother divorce.  Mother and child move on with life with mother trying her best to provide and nurture.  Yes, father figure is gone on a permanent basis but child still continue being in contact with father.  Child grows up understanding that divorce happens, the sacrifice of mother as well as father to ensure a stable upbringing.  Mother and Father has minimal conflict as mother appreciates the sacrifice the father puts in for her and the child to move on.  Child remind to self that a marriage require hard work, not just a bed of roses.  Child recognise the sacrifice the father has to give up and the sacrifice mother has given.  As such, when child gets into a relationship and marriage, he/she is very cautious but will give their best as they do not want their children to end up the way they were.  


2)  Father and mother divorce.  Child is split like yo-yo between mother and father.  No two people are alike so under mother's care, there is a set of rules and under father's care, there is another set of rules.  In some, there are even differences in believes and culture (in my case).  If child is still a toddler, there is so much confusion and instability.  Then as child grows older, they discover the differences/feud between mother and father could be taken to their advantage and take that conflict to their advantage turning father and  mother against each other.  Meanwhile, deep in their mind, it could sway both way.  Either they are so afraid of marriage because of the conflict and scar of their parents or they take marriage easily.  They could learn from their parents that when the going gets tough, just walk out.  Besides, it's the modern world now, you can protect yourself with Family Trust, pre-nup so there's no big loss.  And the law protects your right as parent over your children so you can still have them.  So why should they make an effort to stay in a marriage.  


I could be cynical towards the law, psychologist and politicians because I find that most people now prefer to 'hide' behind laws/studies/ etc and put aside the gift of discernment, the gift of instinct given to them.  They have fear to use their instinct because it has no scientific backing so it is safer to stick to something that has a backing.  


All I feel is my instinct, my protective nature as a mother is being challenged in the name of the law and psychology.  There is no more freedom to be the way you are and to love your child the way you want.  If you protect them, there is a limit because it then becomes over protective.  If you nurture them, cross the limit, you are called not giving them the freedom.  If you care for them and cross the limit, it becomes you are their servant and get reminded that you must be the boss.  


If any psychologist reading this, I am happy to have a chat and take up any challenges you want to throw my way as long as that will provide a better life for my child and I.  A freedom to love and care without boundary.  

'Grandma' goes pub crawling

Last night, which typically is a 'sad' night because I dont have my son with me ended up as an adventure for me aka Grandma.  My friend took me out for a belated birthday treat and after that suggested that we go to a bar that is owned by her family friend.  


It is my first time out at night in a pub for over 4 years and my first time having a cocktail since I last had 5-6 years ago.  Luckily the pub had a nice ambience, no loud music and there was a nice couch next to the patio heater.  I was actually enjoying myself, sipping my Jager Mule.  :)  Then two men approached us. My first thought "Huh, I am a mother. Why would they want to come over?"  I have changed my mindset so much that I only see myself as a mother and not a woman.  


So this is the conversation between me and that guy.  A sure way to kill any guys interest!  :D
Guy : Hi, my name is ***
Me : Hi, I am Pauline
Guy :  Do you come out here often?
Me : Nope, first time in probably 4-5 years
Guy : Wow! Do you just stay at home?
Me: Yes, because I am a MOTHER.
Guy : Oh, arent you a bit too young to be a mother?
Me: Nope but thanks for the compliment.  
Guy : What do you like to do?
Me : Knitting and reading
Guy:  What do you read?
Me : Aliens Love Underpants, The Poo Bus, Monster Sleepover (OK, I could have said Liz Young's Asking for Trouble but I decided not to)
Guy : Oh OK.  
Me : I also cook for my son and make funny dishes.  I then went on about my Marmite Pasta dish, cheese on toast with marmite, my son's marmite smeared face, etc   


Haha! That was boring enough he actually excused himself and went to approach other girls.  


So while my friend was talking to the other guy, I started daydreaming and imagined 15 years from now, my son could be hanging out in a pub like this picking up girls...  But at least it is a very nice decent looking quiet pub.  I started having imaginary conversation between my son and his girl.  


Unfortunately, I got disturbed out of my sweet daydream by that guy again!  He came back and together with his friends suggested that my friend and I go to another bar and check out a band.  I was like thinking "Uh? This place is nice"  but my friend said it will be nice.  


So the grandma me tagged along and we went into this loud bar.  When I walked in, even though the people there are around my age, I actually felt like a grandma walking in.  I felt totally out of place! 


Guy :  Can I buy you a drink?  (I've got to give him credit for his persistency)
Me : Nope.  I dont want to drink anymore. 
Guy :  Errr.. OK  
I ignored him and started people watching.  
Guy : You should let loose and dance and enjoy.  
Me : Nah, I am OK watching people
Guy (probably his last drunk attempt) :  You have nice legs!
Me : Thanks.


He completely gave up and walk away.  Meanwhile this grandma here was watching and noticing how the guys are all there to charm and the girls are all there to impress.  I cant believe 7-8 years back, I am one of these people.  But now, I am like an outsider watching and just felt that this is no longer my scene.  I feel most comfortable at home in my PJ's being with my son watching Jake and the Neverland Pirate.  


I even think at one stage I subconsciously went 'tsk tsk' and sighed when I see people lip singing to the band and shaking their heads.  


Anyway, the grandma in me got really tired and couldnt stop yawning which put any guys off.  And my friend got me home 5 minutes to midnight. Ah, bliss to be away from the music and the party scene.  


Now, I am definitely doomed not to meet any guys with my attitude and interest in life... but I am also proud of myself to see how much I have changed and am comfortable with myself.  Years back, I would have tried to say things to impress or maybe not to offend but now, I just say what I want and do not care if I am out of place or no guys approaches me.  

Being a Parent is More than just Biological

I am having a huge meltdown while writing this and my son is having his nap.  The only time I do not need to hold up a front, be a brave soldier and can let my emotions out.  


It will be chinese new year in a few days time and the loneliness, the craving for love, family support, being in a family gathering is all coming to me.  Not being allowed to return home to attend my good friend's wedding last week makes me feel very angry.  


I am angry with the so called LAW.  Who make these laws?  Humans. On what basis are these laws made?  By some psychologist who are also human!  No two human are alike!  My life is now a result of some people who quotes the law and psychologists.


NZ law emphasised so much on PHYSICAL BOND with the father.  There is more to a relationship than a physical bond.  If I were to summarise what the psychologist says "If a child does not have physical bond with his father at his young age, he will not know his father. "  Does that mean many years back those soldiers and sailors do not have any relationship with their child/ren?  Love is an intangible feeling and if someone is really genuine in loving someone, no matter where they are in the world, nothing can break it. 


Asian culture emphasised on a stable foundation and here in NZ, they emphasised on physical bonding.  Which is the lesser evil psychologically?  They always say a child is resilient but honestly, how many kid have they interviewed on their opinion in living out of a knapsack?  Even movies show that a child living out a knapsack will carry that 'scar' with them forever.  


I remember back in the older days, it is the duty of a woman/mother to care for her child should the marriage dissolve.  And the child grows up being cared for by the mother in an ENVIRONMENT that the mother is supported. Mother and child move on and start live anew.  Child and mother accepted that father has left the unity of marriage and family.  When one gets married, they become one and if they have a child, they become one.  When one chose to leave the unity, that's it, they leave, and the left behind of the unity moves on.  Maybe because I am traditional and an engineer, that is how I feel about marriage and family.  A simple mathematical equation.  Of course, if the one that left chose to remain in contact,then it is great but not to the expense of hurting or imprisoning the mother and child.  


It does make me think... if the marriage had taken place in my home country and the break up occurred there, would the father have stayed in my home country where he will be the 'odd' one out in terms of skin colour and culture just for the sake of his son?  Or would he move back to NZ and resigned to fate that he will see his son whenever he goes over to visit?  If things were not that convenient for him, would he have fought for his son?  


Lastly, all these emphasis on physical bonding and family law but I do not feel a sense of filial piety here.  It is the norm to assume that once one parents grow old, they go to retirement home/nursing home.  When one child grows up, they leave and if they choose to stay at home, they have to pay rent.  In the end, it is so 'business-like' in a family environment.  The Asian culture will not charge their own kids rent even if they are 50 years old.  The Asian culture teaches that life is a cycle/circle.  We take care of our children when they are young, give them the best and as such, they know and understand and in return take care of us when we are old.  Another reason why I yearn to go back.  Besides being a mother, I am also a daughter.  My parents are ageing.  It is now my turn to take care of them.  


Just read what I wrote.  It sounds like a jumble of thoughts and feelings. It doesnt even make sense.  It is a mixture of my feeling as a mother and as a daughter.  My feeling of love for my son.  My feeling of anger and loneliness and frustration.  It is all a mixture of every feeling.  I read in Conversation with God that Love is a summation of all emotions/feelings.  So maybe this can be summed up in one word - my feeling of LOVE for my child, my family and maybe even my ex-husband.  If I had not loved him, I will not feel hurt and angry.  So I must have felt love to feel hurt... and the realisation that he probably had not loved me as he is indifferent towards how I feel.  Well, what the heck, it is my blog and I am upset so I am just going to write how I feel as I have no one whom I can talk to...who will just listen and not try to tell me what I should do and how I should live.  

Formal vs Informal Learning

I have been hassled left and right to put my son in a full time kindy.  I was like, why the rush?  He is only 3.  Yes, I will look for a kindy for him but only the public kindy where its 2.5 hours a day.  I will not put him in a half day ( 4 hours) or full day kindy.  


My reasons - he is only a toddler ONCE in his life.  Why are we living in such a kiasu world that we feel the need for our 3 years old to know his ABC and 1,2,3 all the way to 100 when they are only 3?  Nursery, childcare, kindy only come about in recent years.  I am sure when I was a toddler, I was a 'stay at home' toddler.  


I started kindy at the age of 5, where before that I feel that informal learning at home can be so beneficial.  I go to the market with my grandmother, sees how she haggles for vegetables, meat, etc.  I helped my grandfather brew chinese medicine, I followed my uncle to his school.  All these are priceless learning.  I feel that learning is not only contained in an institution.  


And they are only toddler once in their life.  Why do I want to start him on an alarm clock at 3 years old so that he could get to kindy on time when he will be living on the alarm clock for the rest of his life?   He will need to wake up on time once he starts school, then it's university, and then work.  There will be no other chance in life where he can sleep in and have a nap/siesta in the afternoon.  No other time in his life he could be this carefree and no responsibility. 


I am not being possessive for not putting my child in full time kindy.  I just want him to enjoy his toddler-hood.  It's only once in a lifetime.  I want him to play and gain his own confidence. Although my son doesnt attend kindy, I find his confidence surpasses a lot of children who attends childcare/nursery/kindy.  He is not clingy, goes off to play with anyone in any situation, he can signs his nursery rhymes and also can count.  I have set time where for 1 hour a day, I will home school him and the rest of the time, he just learns from observing me or playing.  


FYI, I dont think I turned out that bad either for starting kindy at 5.  I did graduate as an Engineer and had a JPA scholarship to fund me through uni.  It does not mean a later start = slower in life!

Kidnapping Vs Heroine

Here I am attacking Betty Mahmoody which after reading Conversation with God, attack is a cry for help.  I also think I am jealous of Betty Mahmoody.  Why Sally Field played her role in the movie and why the world hail her as a Heroine but if any of us try to do so (especially an Asian) even if we have the same intentions and love for our child, we become the 'bad person'.  Aarrrgghhh!!  Please give me some fairness here!

When Betty Mahmoody escaped Iran with her daughter Mahtob, she is considered the heroine, the great mother who will go the extraordinary length for the love of her child. Even Hollywood re-created her story with Sally Field playing her role. However, if another person performs the same dramatic rescue to be with her child and the person is of Asian descent, it is then considered kidnapping even though her intentions are similar to Betty Mahmoody, which is for the LOVE OF HER CHILD.

Similar to Betty, I am in a cross cultural marriage that has gone wrong. The only difference is, Betty is the westerner in the marriage while I am the Asian in the marriage. Like Betty, I feel alone, unloved and unsupported where I am because I do not have my family around me. Unlike Betty dramatic escape, I decided to take the 'correct' path which is asked for permission to leave and go home for some respite with my son. Unfortunately, I am instead looked upon as wanting to take my son away from his father whom has walked out on us. As such, a parental order has been made to prevent me from leaving the country. So now, each time I want to visit my parents, I have to be at my ex-husband's mercy as to whether I can go for one week or one month or risk losing my son.

The law emphasized on the bond a child required with both parents growing up which I can comprehend but the law are man made rules. It does not take into consideration cultural differences and human rights/needs for love and support from family. Now, my life is basically in jail where I need permission to see my parents or to take my child out of the country. When I am sick, no one is there to offer help as friends could not provide unconditional love and support the way family does. These man made rules in New Zealand also do not require the man to pay alimony but just child support so I am not only emotionally and psychologically drained, I am also financially drained. And all because I wanted to go down the 'correct' path. If I had done what Betty Mahmoody had done, would I be considered a loving mother who loves her child and wants to give him a good happy family or would I be considered a kidnapper? I would think the latter as I am of Asian descent.

To all the women out there thinking that it is an honour to be in a cross cultural marriage, do bear in mind that things do go wrong sometimes. Do not make the same mistake as me. As for me, I have resigned to fate that I have to be in New Zealand by myself until my son is 18 years old or risk losing him forever.

Being a Single Mother

I am a bit pissed off people seem to think a stay at home mother is an easy job.  They think we 'shake legs' and play mahjong, go for dim sum, manicure etc.  Our 'job' is 24/7.  There is no shut down time.  We are every profession put into one name - MOTHER.  

Being a single mother means all professions wrapped under the name Mother. Here are my musings on being a single mother:

• A CEO
You must be assertive to let your little tantrum thrower toddler know who is the CEO. Your child can only hold the role of a COO. Competency achieved - Leadership.
• A Worker
You must also have the humility to be their little slave such as cleaning after their mess after a meal, perpetually picking up toys from the floor and if you are in the process of toilet training, cleaning up their little accidents. Competency achieved - Humility.
• A Project Manager
You will need extreme managerial skills to manage your little one as well as maintain a household which includes food on the table, pantry stocked up, clean clothing, vacuumed floors and also play time for the little one. Getting a right balance between housework and stimulation time requires precise time management skill. Competency achieved - Time Management.
• A Yogi
'Inhale, exhale' becomes your day to day mantra. When your tantrum throwing toddler drives you up the wall, you will need the calamity of a yogi to handle the situation. As a reverse, you will also need to teach your highly energetic toddler to relax and have a quiet time. Competency achieved - Calamity which is important in a big organisation of multiple characteristics.
• A Doctor
A doctor is renowned for their long working hours. As a mother, you could be up for days taking care of a sick child. When they were younger, your sleep pattern is heavily disturbed by a baby that constantly needs feeding, changing and burping. Despite the lack of sleep, you need to remain completely alert the following day. Surviving the sleep deprivation of motherhood makes working 48 hours shift a piece of cake. Competency achieved - Mental alertness despite tiredness, a trait necessary to meet deadlines.
• A Financial Analyst
Despite everything, you will find yourself looking out for deals on diapers, milk powder and toys. You begin making comparison of different brands and place to get the best deal so subconsciously, you have developed a skill with numbers. Competency achieved - Analytical.
• A Strategic Planner - Outwit, Outlast, Outsmart!
Your patience will be tested as your child discovers themselves. Since they have everlasting energy, outlasting them requires stamina, therefore the option to outwit and outsmart them is also important. Perhaps all single mothers should participate in Survivor! Competency achieved - Survivor skills.
• A Contortionist
Your little one will start throwing or maybe hiding stuff in areas that you would never imagine. You find yourself contorting beyond your natural pose to retrieve some of these lost items. Skills achieved - Flexibility.
• A Gym Instructor
A normal person works out in the gym a couple of times a week carrying weights probably no more than 10 minutes in each session. As a mother, you are constantly carrying over 10kg weight, lifting them from their highchair, car seat, into their cot or just for a cuddle. Those biceps and triceps will be nicely developed. If you are small in stature, you will soon learn to adapt to carrying such load in a manner that suits your body size. Skills achieved - Physical Strength.
• An Engineer/Repairwoman
When you are not looking, there goes your little one dismantling things or breaking whatever their hands could get on to. You soon realise that you have become quite inept with all the electronic gadgets at home when they are not working. Similarly, your DIY (Do It Yourself) skill also improved as you could not ring a repairman each time your child breaks or wreck something. Skills achieved - Independent and All Rounder.
• A Daddy
Of course, as a single mother, you will also need to play the role of a Daddy to compensate for the missing parent figure half the time.

For the Love of a Child

A very tearful day for me.  My mum leaves NZ and I feel like a child - all alone, unloved.  I am an emotional wreck tonight.  I am also very angry with the NZ family law.  I am also angry with the world so here I wrote this to channel my anger towards the West.  

My mum leaves to go home today. It is back to just my son and I in New Zealand. The emptiness is overwhelming on this first night for both my son and I. Although I am proud of him for holding up so well as a toddler, after 3 months of having my family pampering him. Tonight, in the still of the night, I felt compelled to write to Betty Mahmoody. She is the author of Not Without My Daughter and For The Love of A Child. Unfortunately I could not find her contact details anywhere on the internet. Therefore I decided to pen my feelings in my blogsite.

In Not Without My Daugther, Betty talks about her courageous escape from Iran back to the US after being kidnapped by her husband. Her second book, For The Love of A Child, talks about the courageous extremes a left behind parent would undertake to get their child back. When I read Betty's books, I was not a separated woman with a toddler therefore I had the same feelings of 'disgust' towards the parent that takes the child away. Now that I am a single mother, in a country where I have no family and most friends have their own family, I could totally understand the actions of that parent. The one conclusion I could draw from For The Love of A Child is all the parent that 'kidnapped' the children go back to their hometown, where their families reside. All the cases mentioned in Betty's book are children result of a bi-cultural marriage. One spouse moves into the country of the other spouse, has children and later decided to bring their child/children back to their origin country. What was not mentioned in Betty's book is the reason why these parents took their child back? Is it the lack of support from their spouse or they realised that bringing up a child without the support of their own family is quite a task? Or could it be that they have discussed their wishes with their spouse but it was turned down so they resorted to desperate measure?

I do wish I could also go back to my hometown for love and support but I do not want to be labelled a 'kidnapper' and the father of my child will become the helpless left behind parent although in essence, he walked out of the relationship. Of course I did discuss with the father of my child whether I could go back for some respite for a couple of years until its schooling years for our child. The answer is a blatant no for the reason that he would still like to see his child once a week. For this one reason, I decided to stay back in New Zealand, out of respect for him as the father.

Here I am all by myself nurturing my child and hoping that this is the best decision for him. In the meantime, I would like everyone out there who blamed parents who 'kidnapped' their child/children back to their hometown to really understand the situation before forming a biased opinion on them. Being alone in a country without support and with a child can be tough financially, emotionally, physically and psychologically. I was affected by a bad bout of bad health which could be due to emotional stress and environmental (extremely cold winter). Without my family and for the love of my child, I chose to not admit myself to the hospital for pneumonia but chugged along at home so that I could be there for my child. I do not deny since my separation, I am extra protective over my child because I feel indebted to him. It does get really tough and so far I thank God for giving me the strength to continue nurturing my child all by myself.

Change

I am so tired of hearing the word CHANGE.  Therapist says that, family says that, friends says that.  Do they really know what they are saying or are they just quoting the general view - change will always help.  I dont know what everyone mean by changing.  So here is my rebellious view on CHANGE..

Change - that's a word that I realised have been overused by everyone without fully comprehending what it means.  With my failing marriage, I get the same advice - 'Both of you need to change'.  Honestly, what does that mean?  Do we change to adapt to each other or do we change so that one party is happy the other party is behaving the way he/she expects?  Would this actually work in the long run?  I am surprised nobody says that accept, adapt and endure is the essence to the marriage. 

On CHANGE, I realised that I do not know how to change.  I brought into my marriage what I know from my upbringing.  I am used to my mum cleaning whilst my dad cooks.  I never see my parents going on dates or hugging or kissing.  And I remember looking forward to weekends because we get to go out as a family.  As such, that moulded me to the wife/mother I am today.  No doubt, I also grew up looking at other families that are intimate or TV shows showing a 'happy family' and thought to myself "that would be nice" but am always told not to confuse reality and fantasy.  Hence, here I am doing exactly what my mother does - clean, nurture my child and cook for the family thinking that this is adequate and has performed my duties as a wife and mother.  In my fantasy, I thought that it would be nice to have expensive clothes, jewellery and going for facial/spa but in reality, I have also adopted my mother's thriftiness and settle for simple and cheap lifestyle.  Now that I have a son, I put his needs ahead of mine.  This essentially comes across to certain people as not loving myself and I cannot be in a loving relationship if I do not love myself.  But I perceive it as loving my son unconditionally and making sure that he gets the best.  Is this perception due to different upbringing? 

Therefore when my husband talked about the 3 relationships that are lacking, it's all very new and strange to me because my perception of a family is one that involves everyone in the family and not each one as a separate entity.   I then realised is what he wants a result of his upbringing or a result of his perceived idea of a marriage and family?

We all bring into a relationship our expectation and perception but most important we also bring along our upbringing and culture (in my case).  My expectation of a family is one happy laughing family that spend every moment together, my child waking up and jumping up and down in our bed, my husband adores both of us together that he feels like he is the happiest man on earth, the house is full of drawings/photos and colours from my child scribbling, toys scattered everywhere, etc.  In short, a perfect home but not a perfect house.  That is my perception which definitely is not inline with my husband's so in this instance what does CHANGE entail? 

With my upbringing, I am not a lovey dovey intimate person.  Am I able to change who I am for the past 30 years or would it be better for us to adapt to each other's personality and mould each other to let go of our inhibitions?  I admit that I am a mathematical person so in my decisions and life, I seem to view it as black and white.  Maybe if my husband 'creates' scenarios where I can release my inhibitions, it is helping me to change?  Similarly, I feel that my husband goes through life wearing a 'mask/façade' which he denies.   Instead of dwelling on the fact that he is wearing a 'mask/façade', maybe I should have also created situations for him to 'unmask' and let go of his inhibitions too?  I do not think this is changing each other but helping each other to adapt to each other's lifestyle and expectation. 

I can only bring into my marriage what I know from observation of my parents and family members and I am sure this applies to my husband.   However, I can bring into my son's life a different perspective because I have been a child before.  I know I am easily disappointed when someone promises something and then change their mind.  As such, I do not want my son to experience that kind of disappointment therefore even though I am sick, if I have promised to take him to the park, I will do so regardless.  To some, this is a sign of weakness for not being able to say no to my child.  To me, it is keeping a promise to a little one.  As a child, I remember I did not like the fact that there is a clear distinction between the adults and the children.  I grew up listening and taking the elders ideas/words as it is without much questioning because that was the way I was brought up.  The elders always know best but when you get too old and incapable, you get treated like a child again.  However, I knew that affected me so in bringing up my son, I remember telling him when he was just 2 months old "it's your first time being a child and my first time being a mother, so let's collaborate.  You work with me and I will work with you".  So maybe to my husband's perception, I adapt to my son's whims and fancies but in fact, we are both learning to adapt to each other.   Maybe if I adopt this same principle in my marriage, things will be different?

My parents' marriage has lasted over 30 years so has my husband's parents.  I do not think there is a right and wrong way in a marriage / family but our parents just adapted and accepted each other for whom the other party is and the results are us, their kids, bringing their upbringing into our own life.  It is difficult to for two different people from two different upbringing, culture and educational background to live together, what more when there is a third person in the form of a child?  I just feel that each family/ couple is different and if we spend time wishing things were different i.e married couples with no children envy those with family and those with family envying the single carefree life of childless couple, there will never be true contentment or happiness. 

Through this process, I have also noticed that everyone of us has taken the role of Justice Pao.  We comment/judge based on our own yardstick which essentially is our upbringing.  Some of us think that just because we are smarter, richer, more successful, we are naturally a class above.  This applies in my relationship because when I chose to give up my career to care for my child, I get conflicting support - one that supports my decision to SACRIFICE and one that is totally unsupportive  indicating clinginess to my child, laziness to work etc.  I appreciate friends and family that supported me and to those who do not support, it occurs that they are judging me based on their opinion/upbringing and never once really asked me why or try to comprehend my situation.  In their mind, I have dropped a class lower by not working therefore any decisions I make are of second rating.

The one thing I have learnt is people kept asking for changes and thinking that changes will improve things but what is CHANGE?  Change to suit one person's yardstick and then offend another?  A friend asked me over the weekend whether I love my husband.  I answered him yes and also yes to the question, I would like to see this relationship work.  But these are just words and feelings which is inadequate to overcome our differences.  If for this to work, I have to change to conform to my husband's upbringing, I am unable to do so and I am sure he would not like me to 'change' into someone I am not.  In my honest opinion, my marriage, my family could only be saved if my husband, myself and my son are willing to accept each other as we are.  My husband talks about the three different relationships but in my yardstick, I think if the three of us could stand united and think as one, we are already halfway through the battle.  So in short, my husband is looking for three different relationships within the family and I am looking for unity of three to merge as one -  who has to change to make this work?  Or adapt, accept, endure and respect are all needed to make this work?

Love or Money

I wrote this because of a question my brother posted and I gave it some thought and this is my opinion.  I would say I have revolved from someone who sees material possessions as success to someone who prefers intangible possessions such as love, care as success.  

Is money more important or love?  This has been a debate for centuries.  A balance of both is ideal but what is considered a balance of both?  Is a balance means having a roof over your head, food on the table, clothes on your body and a happy family or does it mean a condominium with facilities, dining out every other day and branded clothing once a month and a family with career oriented parents and children that have money to spend on their needs?  The latter does not sound overly ridiculous either as some will associate providing for the family as love.

In this day and age "No Money No Talk' and "No Money No Love" are common catchy phrases that even little kids could utter.  When finding your life partner, what is the weightage that we put in money compare to compatibility?  For example, if you meet someone you fancy but he/she is not able to provide you with the luxury you crave, do you 'let go' of the possibility of having a beautiful relationship on the basis that without money could ultimately lead to disappointment or sufferance?

There is no straightforward answer to this matter.  Money is definitely important as love alone cannot fill the stomach.  However it is not necessary to have the best of everything in life.  Living within your means could be the yardstick to use.  Having lots of money is also not necessarily a good thing.  There are cases out there where children from career minded and rich parents, and get any material things they want actually crave for love and attention to the extent of breaking the law to get the attention.

If you meet someone you love and he could provide security and love, with adequate food for the family, do not covet your friends or neighbours that could afford an extravagant lifestyle.  Sometimes what you could see on the outside may not necessarily depict what is happening behind closed door.  Is it not better to have a loving happy family than a rich but unhappy family?  For me, I use to choose money but now I just want a fulfilling life that is true and happy and not one that have to live with a façade.  Money sometimes comes with a price to pay - you might lose yourself.