When To Tell Your Children

[StringJunky]

Imagine: you have 3 or 4 children from beginning school to just starting senior school (5 -12 yrs); indeed, you may already have. I'd like you to consider their relative emotional maturity and life-awareness at those ages to the harsh realities of life; typically.for those ages.

 

Scenario: You are diagnosed with cancer, not terminal at this point, You are put on the relevant therapy, which is very harsh on your body; chemo or radiotherapy probably. At the end of the treatment you go into remission. with all the side effects and anxiety well to the fore in your mind. Four months later, your primary cancer has become metastatic and spread to the major organs. You are told you are in a terminal state, with weeks or months to live.

 

At what stage would you tell them and why?

 

.

Edited May 11, 2016 by StringJunky

[Nouveau]

That seems to be a horrible situation to face, I'm not sure there is a right or wrong answer. I think maybe i would decide to tell them all as soon as possible to give them time to come to terms with it. Also maybe that everyone could value the time they had left together. I think this might also give then time to express their feelings so it won't be quite as difficult or a shock come the end. I think maybe just being together and sharing that bond even if they dont fully understand will make things easier for everyone.

[studiot]

This is one of those situations that one may theorise about, but act totally differently if one ever gets into that situation.

 

Not having personal experience of this I would offer the following.

 

I would think that a number of children is better than a single child of what ever age, as they would be able to support one and other through whatever is to come in the future, rather than put it all on one child.

 

So treat them as a group, at least with the generalities.

Add specifics for the older ones as far as they can handle.

 

[StringJunky]

That seems to be a horrible situation to face, I'm not sure there is a right or wrong answer. I think maybe i would decide to tell them all as soon as possible to give them time to come to terms with it. Also maybe that everyone could value the time they had left together. I think this might also give then time to express their feelings so it won't be quite as difficult or a shock come the end. I think maybe just being together and sharing that bond even if they dont fully understand will make things easier for everyone.

It is indeed horrible. There is no right or wrong answer since everyone's situation is unique. Some people might wish to leave it as long as possible and give them everything they had left to give in terms of happiness. This is what actually happened but I'm interested to hear other perspectives. My thoughts align with yours.

 

 

This is one of those situations that one may theorise about, but act totally differently if one ever gets into that situation.

 

Not having personal experience of this I would offer the following.

 

I would think that a number of children is better than a single child of what ever age, as they would be able to support one and other through whatever is to come in the future, rather than put it all on one child.

 

So treat them as a group, at least with the generalities.

Add specifics for the older ones as far as they can handle.

 

As my very close proximity experience shows,a few years ago now, one may rationalise hypothetically to do things one way but, in reality, one might do the opposite. The weight of telling them must be immense, possibly unbearable, without contemplating ones own imminent demise as well.

 

Yes, a few siblings as support is better than a lone child, I would imagine.

 

I thought I'd ask a tough question and explore the situation.

Edited May 11, 2016 by StringJunky

[studiot]

 

Yes, a few siblings as support is better than a lone child, I would imagine.

 

Note I was talking about siblings supporting each other not the patient.

 

I assumed your question about telling the children concerned the effect on them not the patient.

I also assumed that patient as a parent was concerned with the effect on the children.

Edited May 11, 2016 by studiot

[iNow]

Tough decision, but I'd personally (at least try to) keep my approach open and authentic. Put it in terms that are sincere and don't scare them, educational but not morbid, and appropriate for each age level. Different conversations with each, but all focused on truth and openness. I find that much easier to manage for all parties, but again have not had to have that discussion myself so can only speculate.

[StringJunky]

Tough decision, but I'd personally (at least try to) keep my approach open and authentic. Put it in terms that are sincere and don't scare them, educational but not morbid, and appropriate for each age level. Different conversations with each, but all focused on truth and openness. I find that much easier to manage for all parties, but again have not had to have that discussion myself so can only speculate.

Yes of course, we can only speculate. At the time, I was in strong, but muted, disagreement with their approach to make it as happy as possible, for as long as possible, supporting the views shared here, that earlier is better. The situation was made all the harder for me because I had to act normal with the children around and couldn't express what I really felt and share that final journey because we all had to 'keep up appearances'; stiff upper lip and all that.

 

I agree with you entirely with your approach. In retrospect, I think there is a greater burden for everyone delaying the inevitable 'talk' with young ones.

Edited May 11, 2016 by StringJunky

[Delta1212]

I'm going to say that my personal instinct tends toward putting off revealing what is going on in the hopes that it ends well so I don't scare them needlessly.

 

But I know on the flip side that I appreciate being kept informed at each step along the way. I think it's much easier, on the receiving end, to know what's going on early, before there's even solid confirmation that something is wrong. If nothing turns out to be wrong, then everyone is relieved and no real harm done. If something is wrong, it gives everyone the same chance to come to terms with it by degrees instead of having the whole thing dropped on them out of the blue all at once.

 

So I would like to think I'd treat my own kids the way I know I would appreciate being treated if the roles were reversed, but I completely understand the opposite impulse and how difficult it especially becomes to break the news later on if no one knows what's happening and the news is much more serious.

[dimreepr]

Imagine: you have 3 or 4 children from beginning school to just starting senior school (5 -12 yrs); indeed, you may already have. I'd like you to consider their relative emotional maturity and life-awareness at those ages to the harsh realities of life; typically.for those ages.

 

Scenario: You are diagnosed with cancer, not terminal at this point, You are put on the relevant therapy, which is very harsh on your body; chemo or radiotherapy probably. At the end of the treatment you go into remission. with all the side effects and anxiety well to the fore in your mind. Four months later, your primary cancer has become metastatic and spread to the major organs. You are told you are in a terminal state, with weeks or months to live.

 

At what stage would you tell them and why?

 

.

 

 

Each should be told, at the appropriate time, taking the impact on their emotional well-being, age and a need to know, into account; the only absolute in this scenario is when you’re told it’s terminal.

Edited May 18, 2016 by dimreepr

[StringJunky]

I'm going to say that my personal instinct tends toward putting off revealing what is going on in the hopes that it ends well so I don't scare them needlessly.

 

But I know on the flip side that I appreciate being kept informed at each step along the way. I think it's much easier, on the receiving end, to know what's going on early, before there's even solid confirmation that something is wrong. If nothing turns out to be wrong, then everyone is relieved and no real harm done. If something is wrong, it gives everyone the same chance to come to terms with it by degrees instead of having the whole thing dropped on them out of the blue all at once.

 

So I would like to think I'd treat my own kids the way I know I would appreciate being treated if the roles were reversed, but I completely understand the opposite impulse and how difficult it especially becomes to break the news later on if no one knows what's happening and the news is much more serious.

Ultimately, for me, family life is about sailing the ship together and sharing the experiences; commensurate with the age of ones children, of course. I think mutual catharsis, although the initial revelation is so emotive and potentially stressful, can begin immediately with everyone concerned, as you say. The children may not quite grasp at the time the full picture but I think later, as adults, they will appreciate the memories of shared catharsis instead feeling bereft of the truth. As an adult, I missed this opportunity; I'm sure many bereaved children, beyond a certain age, will feel the same way later if denied.

 

 

 

 

Each should be told, at the appropriate time, taking the impact on their emotional well-being, age and a need to know, into account; the only absolute in this scenario is when you’re told it’s terminal.

Yes, that's fine, but very hard if you've only got days to live when told it's terminal.

Edited May 18, 2016 by StringJunky

[dimreepr]

Hard indeed, but no less terminal, either way.

[StringJunky]

Hard indeed, but no less terminal, either way.

The endpoint is the same, but the catharsis and final goodbye can be longer in one; one has more time to get their head around it and have the the opportunity to say what one needs to say. If time is too short you may not have the time for privacy with the loved ones individually, or they may not have time for you because everyone will likely be around crowding each other out to give attention to you.

[dimreepr]

The endpoint is the same, but the catharsis and final goodbye can be longer in one; one has more time to get their head around it and have the the opportunity to say what one needs to say. If time is too short you may not have the time for privacy with the loved ones individually, or they may not have time for you because everyone will likely be around crowding each other out to give attention to you.

 

 

Doesn't that make now, so much more important than then or if?

[StringJunky]

 

 

Doesn't that make now, so much more important than then or if?

The hardest thing to live with is the uncertainty. If you gamble to leave it until later and die early the distress will be much more for those left behind. Am I understanding you correctly?

[dimreepr]

The hardest thing to live with is the uncertainty. If you gamble to leave it until later and die early the distress will be much more for those left behind. Am I understanding you correctly?

 

 

 

Basically, yes.

[StringJunky]

Basically, yes.

Good.

 

I suppose, what I'm wanting to get across from this experience, and a recent one, is that shared catharsis can help you heal painful experiences, or even memories, even though there is no solution.

 

Talking is good.

[dimreepr]

Good.

 

I suppose, what I'm wanting to get across from this experience, and a recent one, is that shared catharsis can help you heal painful experiences, or even memories, even though there is no solution.

 

Talking is good.

 

 

 

Life doesn’t always produce a solution however much we want to provide the answer..

Edited May 18, 2016 by dimreepr