From what I've observed, hoarding of anything whether it's animals, kids, houseful of furniture, elaborate hobby collections, etc. fills a deep emotional need. Similar to how a shopaholic is never satisfied with one major shopping spree, they must go out and do it again and again and again. There is a brief respite of that emotional void when
procuring the excess but then it becomes a nagging need again and they start over again. More shopping, more
furniture, another baby, another car, another trinket in the hobby collection.
You're right. I'm always on the edge of being a book hoarder. I probably don't cross the line only because I've been in so many hoarder homes (but I am on the edge, for sure, with my books).
Looking at the psychological needs of hoarders we could possibly gain some insight into this couple.
I likely surround myself with books because they were my escape during a difficult childhood. I keep a large bookshelf in my living room with my favorite books because it literally brings me comfort to look at them. I unpack my books before I unpack all of my clothes when I move.
I worked for a hoarder at one time and he hoarded paper supplies, food, and books. He grew up poor, I think, in another country. I would throw things out and he would just replace them. It all began to take over his home and he was almost buried beneath it all.
Now here's where we can really draw some parallels, I think, between this situation and hoarding, looking at animals. Because I am in animal rescue, I have seen my fair share of deplorable hoarding situations, and people who are on the edge of it.
I believe that hoarding
is ultimately about saving yourself . I save myself to a degree with my books through the comfort they offer. My employer /friend was saving his childhood self who did not have things by making sure he never ran out of basic supplies. And animal rescuers who become hoarders are often also saving themselves. They see something weak, voiceless, vulnerable, and they want to rescue it. But because ultimately it's not about the animal's well-being, but rather about them saving their own vulnerable, voiceless child-self, eventually the adoration toward the first rescue wears off and they need to repeat the cycle with a new one.
So I suspect she may have begun by wanting to save her childhood self and create a perfect family for her to relive her childhood vicariously through. But since her real goal was to rescue her childhood self, the children did not ultimately matter. It was the feeling of being a new mom who would nurture the fetus in pregnancy and the child until breastfeeding was over.
Perhaps the disconnection from each child came after the closeness of breastfeeding wore off, when the child was no longer attached to her, an extension of herself, when it could survive without access to her body and eat on its own.
We know her sister has said that she was sexually abused around the time Louise married and left home. I would say it's possible that a family member abused Louise and when she was no longer available, started on the sister. Later, the sister lives with Louise during her teenage years, probably in an attempt to get away from her abuser.
OK, so now look at how Louise's children seem to be prevented from reaching full-time puberty. Is this a subconscious effort to prevent them from being sexually desirable in an abusive world? Maybe. Is keeping the adults at home also a way to prevent this?
All my opinion, and I'm not set on any of this, but I see it all as a possibility.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
. She's a control freak. I think we have just touched the tip of the iceberg.
