In what ways is it different to lose a son than to lose a husband?

"It’s been the hardest year of Thisbe's life, yet it’s different for her. Marilyn and David were Leo's parents." In what ways is it different to lose a son than to lose a husband?

It is not natural to lose a child. Parents are supposed to die first. Not the child. The parent feels like they are supposed to be able to protect their child and keep them safe no matter what age they are. A parent wants to see their child grow up and have a full successful life not die.

Spouses die. One of you have to go first. Also, couples talk about it and kind of prepare for it through things like life insurance and wills, etc so it seems more of a possibility to a woman that her husband can die.

But this is just not so with our children. We don't prepare for it.

I agree with cynthiaa - parents are never prepared for the loss of a child. Also, when one loses a spouse there is a possibility of filling that gap with another person - new significant other or spouse, as the period of mourning eases. There is no way to replace a child - everything invested in that child (love, hope, dreams) are gone when the child dies.

I think the death of a child would have to be the most difficult loss imaginable because it goes against nature and because there is no closer relationship than that between parent and child. We all expect that we will outlive our children and usually that is the case which makes it very isolating when things disrupt this natural order. This loss is a loss of part of one's self and regardless of when it happens has to be a life altering event.

Losing a child is a very visceral experience. Having carried a child for 9 months physically bonds mother and child forever. Nothing breaks this breaks this bond except death. Mothers feel death physically and it totally disrupts her life and relationships. A wife can eventually "move on;" it takes much longer for a mother.

Great comments above. I agree -- the loss of a child has to be much harder than the death of a spouse. A parent expects to outlive a child, in all cases. When a child dies first, the parents are literally losing a part of themselves.

In the case of a spouse, even though it may have been a "soulmate" at some point one of you would die first. You do not have that biological connection that the parents do. The surviving spouse may, as mentioned above, get remarried and move on. It's not replacing the lost spouse because that can't be done but the surviving spouse can move on and have a normal life. For the surviving parents life is never "normal" again.

It has to be the most difficult situation a parent can face. I remember my mom died quite young and my grandmother was devastated. In some way it seemed like she felt guilty for surviving as she kept saying, "if I would have had a choice, I would have been the one to die". I guess it is like the others have said. It is just not natural to have a child die first.

It is such an irreplaceable loss, not only of the son you had hopes and dreams for, but of that very special bond between parent and child. The loss of a spouse can also be very devastating and significant, but there is a possibilty of replacing or developing a similar relationship as time passes.

It is unnatural for a parent to lose a child and the loss is a permanent devastation that I've never seen anyone in that situation totally get over. The loss of a spouse, while devastating in its own right, falls within the natural order. One spouse does survive the other and often remarries. The loss of a child appears to be insurmountable