I've recently started dating again, and in a short amount of time became exclusive with this one guy I've felt a strong connection to. We enjoy hanging out and dating, but I can't spend as much time as he'd want me to because I also have to take care of my disabled mom. My mom has, among physical issues, mental health struggles. She also has paranoia and tends to have outbursts if I spend long amounts of time somewhere, especially if it's with somebody that I haven't known for a long time or that I don't know well (I need to call or text her periodically to reassure her).
Recently I've had to delay a date because I've needed to help her with some things as well as to wait for a good opportunity to leave her alone for longer than usual. It's something I have to basically prepare for.
He thinks that I'm choosing my mom over him and is basically putting a wedge into our relationship until I "disobey" my mom. To me, this isn't a question of obedience, but that I'm trying my best to maintain a relationship and at the same time cope with my mom's deteriorating health. But he thinks she is ruining things because she's the reason that I can't date or visit him any time that he'd like us to.
Does he have a point? Does it look like I'm clinging to my mom or that she's manipulating me, and I'm actually in the wrong for thinking I can balance both relationships? It's never occurred to me that this was an issue, because it never came up with any of the guys I've dated previously; they were ok with me taking care of her and delaying dates if it was necessary. They themselves would delay dates in order to attend a friend's party or take care of a visiting relative or do overtime at work, and I never held it against them either.
TL;DR: I take care of my mom, who has (mental) health issues that make it hard for me to go on long dates (>6h). My bf thinks we can't maintain a relationship because of it, and now I'm looking for input from others, whether I'm in the wrong and should listen to him, or I should continue the way I'm doing things.
[link] [comments]
* This article was originally published here
No comments:
Post a Comment