I feel that MessyONE and BonzaiBetty have basically said it all, but I have one more thought to offer---especially to the apologists on this list.

Incest can happen even if no one lays a hand on anyone else. It happens when someone in a family (say a mother) places an inappropriate person (say a son) in a role that is not that person's (say the role of the father). She then draws on or demands from that person emotional energy or support which that person is constitutionally unable to give and helpless to refuse. This kind of cathexis/overreliance doesn't make a literal sexual substitution, but it messes with the head ever after.

In this case, the mother controls her son's world 24/7, physically and emotionally, and the son has literally taken the father's place in the marital bed. He is the mother's primary emotional involvement, standing in the place of the abdicated father in what should be the adult-adult parental alliance. He is overpowered. He is only 9 years old. What chance does he stand?

This situation works on so many bad levels . . .

If I were to begin a conversation with my sister (as a warning shot---this calls for action and probably dissension within the family), I would not place the focus on the child ("He seems clingy"), but rather right where it belongs, on the sister: "It's your responsibility as a parent to educate him for independence, in large and small ways. He needs to learn to bathe himself, to go to sleep without you, etc." Do not be cowed by your childless state and do get some back-up from the rest of the family, if possible, before proceeding.

by a bunch of people in therapy.

I doubt it has any standing in a court of law.

I just say it's creepy and let it go at that. The mother is doing something wrong and should stop it, "incest without laying a hand on a person", eh, I'm not so sure.

Chloe:

Incest can happen even if no one lays a hand on anyone else. It happens when someone in a family (say a mother) places an inappropriate person (say a son) in a role that is not that person's (say the role of the father). She then draws on or demands from that person emotional energy or support which that person is constitutionally unable to give and helpless to refuse. This kind of cathexis/overreliance doesn't make a literal sexual substitution, but it messes with the head ever after.

Wow, Chloe, your insights into this are probably the most insightful I've read or thought through this week. The subtlety of this particular abuse is so unnerving... it should force the sil to see that the potential ramifications in this situation are so horrendous... how can she NOT do something about this?

Your observations are sublimely on-target. Sickeningly so, I fear. I hope she realizes this and responds accordingly!

Really excellent insights...

I'm having some trouble with this post. Even though the words seem sincere, the grammar is of a type I have only seen in accompaniment to overwhelming sarcasm. Some points:

• Dead-pan usage of interjections
• Rhetorical question
  
• Italics and boldface at the same time
• "Really (adjective)" followed by ellipsis

Never came back to this til today...no, Physicist, not sarcastically meant (gramatical misuses notwithstanding). Sarcasm is a subtle art; I use it only occasionally, and usually when I know it won't hurt someone because, well YES, yes, I'm a sensie!!!

In double astrology (Chinese and Western signs together)... I'm a Leo Monkey... (rarely deadpan) demonstrative and enthusiastic - guess I attempt to translate that verbally and I should actually read before I post... in any case, Chloe, I was sincere, I thought your insights were spot-on.

Creepy, icky, nasty, vile, disgusting, repulsive, abhorent. Creepy is a good summary.

Some people don't seem to have a problem with the situation though, or maybe they just want to minimize the seriousness. Maybe some families have that kind of tradition; practices vary by region. I am trying not to get a rant started.

Giving a 9-year-old a bath when he is capable of doing it himself is creepy. Almost as disturbing is the fact that the mother lets this child run her life. He dictates when she should be home. She might think he is a cute mama's boy, but if this kid ever marries, that poor wife of his is going to be subjected to all kinds of hell. He is going to be a control freak. Why does her husband allow this? I see the beginnings of a Norman Bates.