ShareThis Page
Feeling relief, not grief, about her beloved father’s death | TribLIVE.com
More Lifestyles

Feeling relief, not grief, about her beloved father’s death

Carolyn Hax
| Thursday, January 24, 2019 1:30 a.m
661918_web1_gtr-LIV-hax

Adapted from a recent online discussion.

Dear Carolyn:

It was the 15th anniversary of my dad’s death recently. I know it should have been a day marked by profound grief, but instead the primary feeling I had was … relief.

This sentiment would have been easier to accept if he had been a monster, but he was an absolutely wonderful man and deeply devoted father whom I adored, and still do.

But the truth is that his death happening when it did — I was in college at the time — forced me to really grow and change in ways I doubt I would have experienced had he not passed. The first several years were excruciating … but it was those hardships that played an instrumental role in shaping the (not perfect but) independent and relatively strong woman I am today. I am weirdly grateful now for the experience.

Is this wrong? Selfish? I felt so sad to realize I don’t miss him as deeply as I probably should. “The good is oft interred with their bones. … ” Thanks so much.

— Bonehead

No, you are not getting love and feelings all wrong.

And “should” is a lousy word.

You can love your father and still recognize that you made good fortune out of bad. Harboring these thoughts doesn’t make you a monster or a bonehead. I miss my mom but I don’t miss who I was before she got sick.

Please feel free to celebrate, without shame, the human ability to inhabit a complex moral and emotional space.

Hi, Carolyn:

I am invited to a wedding in a few weeks and can’t wait: I am so happy for the couple and so excited for the event. The invitation specifies “no gifts.” I tend to think that means, “Seriously, no gifts,” but I also don’t want to be the only person who doesn’t bring a gift if what you’re REALLY supposed to do is just give something homemade, or super meaningful, or small but sentimental, or whatever. Does “no gifts” really mean no gifts?

— Anonymous

You’re not supposed to bring gifts to the wedding itself anyway, and that means people who ignore the request and give a gift will still arrive empty-handed. So, go empty-handed.

Afterward send a thoughtful note about what a good time you had, how grateful you were to be included, and how happy you are for them both.

As for what marrying couples and guests are REALLY supposed to do, it’s this, always:

The couple isn’t supposed to expect a gift of any kind, because that expectation is rude … and in fact saying “no gifts” is an etiquette “don’t” because it acknowledges that gifts are expected, but I don’t fault anyone who declares it anyway as a kindness to guests; and guests are supposed to send whatever gift they deem appropriate if in fact they want to give a gift. They don’t have to.

Think about it, too: If the couple said no gifts, then they either don’t want gifts — in which case you don’t want to get them a gift — or they want to look like they want no gifts and really secretly expect everyone to get them gifts anyway — in which case you really don’t want to get them a gift. Right?


Email Carolyn at tellme@washpost.com, follow her on Facebook at www.facebook.com/carolyn.hax or chat with her online at noon Eastern time each Friday at www.washingtonpost.com.


Email Carolyn at tellme@washpost.com, follow her on Facebook or chat with her online at noon each Friday at washingtonpost.com.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.