๐ ๐จ๐ซ ๐๐ง๐ฒ๐จ๐ง๐ ๐๐๐ซ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ ๐จ๐ซ ๐ ๐๐ข๐๐๐ข๐๐ฎ๐ฅ๐ญ ๐ ๐๐ฆ๐ข๐ฅ๐ฒ ๐๐๐ฆ๐๐๐ซ
- Sreedhar Mandyam

- 11 hours ago
- 2 min read

"๐๐ฆ ๐๐๐กโ๐๐-๐๐-๐๐๐ค โ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ก๐๐ ๐๐ ๐ค๐๐๐. ๐โ๐ ๐ค๐๐ ๐๐๐ค๐๐ฆ๐ ๐๐๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ข๐ก ๐๐. ๐๐๐กโ๐๐๐ ๐ผ ๐๐ฃ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ก๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ โ๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ โ๐๐ โ๐๐๐๐ฆ. ๐โ๐ ๐ค๐๐ ๐๐๐ค๐๐ฆ๐ ๐ก๐๐ฆ๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ ๐๐. ๐๐๐ค ๐ โ๐ ๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐, ๐ฆ๐๐ก ๐ โ๐ ๐ก๐๐๐๐ ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐ ๐๐ฃ๐๐. ๐ผ ๐๐๐'๐ก ๐ค๐๐๐ก ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ โ๐๐, ๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ก ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ก ๐๐ฆ ๐ฃ๐๐๐ข๐๐ . ๐ต๐ข๐ก โ๐๐ค ๐๐ ๐ผ โ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐กโ๐๐ ? ๐ผ ๐ ๐ก๐๐๐ ๐ค๐๐๐ก ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ก๐๐ โ๐๐, ๐๐ข๐ก ๐ผ ๐๐๐'๐ก ๐ค๐๐๐ก ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐ก ๐๐๐๐ก๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ฆ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐."
Replace mother-in-law with father-in-law/ mother/father/spouse/uncle, and we have all been there. The question is, "๐ฏ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ฐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐?"
This is the tightrope many walk. The pull between duty and self-preservation, between our values and our very real emotional limits.
The answer is not found in changing the other person. The answer lies in a profound internal shift. It is the shift from seeking an emotional connection to executing a conscious duty. It is the move from being an emotionally invested daughter-in-law/daughter/son/any other relationship to becoming a compassionate, yet dispassionate, caregiver.
This does not mean becoming cold or cruel. It means becoming professional in our care.
Think of a professional nurse. They provide excellent care. They ensure the patient is fed, medicated, and comfortable. They do this with kindness, but they do not tie their emotional well-being to the patientโs gratitude or mood. They do not expect praise. They do not take the patient's complaints personally. Their focus is on the process of care, not the emotional reward from it.
This is the key. We can do the same.
We can provide the food, the medicine, and the company. We can perform these duties with quiet competence. But we do so by releasing the need for them to be different. We release the hope for an apology that may never come. We let go of the expectation for a thank you. We stop seeing them as the relative who hurt us, and we start seeing them simply as an aged relative who needs assistance. We change the label in our mind, and in doing so, we change the emotional rules of engagement.
When we detach the action from the emotional investment, we reclaim our power. The poison of their words loses its potency because we are no longer drinking it. We are simply performing a duty that aligns with our own moral code. We are caring for them because of who we are, not because of who they are.
This is the essence of duty. It transforms a draining emotional burden into a manageable, purposeful task. It allows us to be good to them without needing them to be good to us. It allows us to hold onto our values without letting them become the rope that binds us to our own misery. We can care for the person without carrying the weight of the relationship. And in that space, we find not resentment, but a profound and peaceful relief.




Comments