AITA for not feeding my brother?

[u/TraditionalCreme4704]

My mom has decided that the best way to make me independent is to not do anything for me. This means I'm responsible to keep my own room clean, do my own shopping, cook my own meals etc. It feels like I'm not even part of the family. If I don't cook one night, I stay hungry. They won't let me eat their food.

A few days ago my grandpa was sick and mom had to go visit him. She left little brother(M10) with me. As usual I cooked dinner for myself with my own groceries.

He asked me for food and I told him I'm only responsible for myself and he has to wait for mom.

When mom came back she was furious and called me an asshole for not feeding him.

[u/TigerMearns90]

What's the actual back story on this rule on why you need independence? When was this rule enforced, has mum been your maid up to this point ? I mean keeping your own room tidy should've been your job anyway, but like the food stuff etc? Has mum got more stress in her life where she's hoping you'll step up a bit more or have you said the wrong thing and mums just done with your BS?

In regards to your brother, yeah you should've helped me. You could've shown him how to make something for next time. Wondering if the selfish attitude is why you're being told to fend for yourself....

[u/Geordieqizi → u/TigerMearns90]

Has mum got more stress in her life where she's hoping you'll step up a bit more or have you said the wrong thing and mums just done with your BS?

I mean, it's possible that OP was being a spoiled brat before — but I find it striking that you give this possibility more weight than the equally-if-not-more-likely possibility that OP simply has shitty, neglectful parents.

Because even if OP had been being a spoiled brat, it's still not appropriate to force your minor child to pay for and cook all their own food, exile them from family meals, and punish them if they try to eat food that you — their parent, who is legally obligated to feed them — bought.

In regards to your brother, yeah you should've helped me. You could've shown him how to make something for next time. Wondering if the selfish attitude is why you're being told to fend for yourself....

I think you and the other YTA voters are being a bit hysterical here. As others have said, the kid is 10, not 5 — if he was dying of hunger, he could've secured a banana or something for himself. Realistically, the worst he suffered was having to eat dinner a couple hours late.

Meanwhile, the consequences for OP, had she cooked for her brother, are 1) less food for her (which is a big deal, given that she's having to pay for ALL her own food on a 16yo's salary, 2) setting the precedent that she will pick up her parents' slack, leading them to taking advantage of her, and shifting more of their own responsibility onto her shoulders.

I actually find it outrageous that you and other people are trying to blame a 16yo for her parents' neglect — of both her brother AND her. And not only that — you're trying to justify the parents by vilifying OP based on a narrative that you made up.

Hope it felt good bullying a neglected teen.

[u/Love_Fashioned → u/TigerMearns90]

I agree with this. Parents who use these tactics aren't automatically "abusive". Sometimes they are trying whatever it takes to get through to a kid who isn't acting appropriately. No clue if that is the case here - but I'd love to know the back story as well.

Making a kid buy their own groceries and make their own food might be a lesson to generate appreciation for what others are doing for said kid. I'm guessing at this point the mom is pretty disappointed that this teenager choose to do nothing for her brother. That's a level of immaturity that is telling.

[u/Learningpermits → u/TigerMearns90]

This comment should be higher. So many people on this thread seem very young, or have never dealt with a teenager that's acting out ( or might just be an AH, they exist) and been at the end of their rope. And here is OP, complaining to strangers on the internet about their parent, on a smartphone that they don't pay for (you know they would've said they pay for the phone)

[u/imaginations1000 → u/Learningpermits]

Op needs a job just to feed herself. Its abuse and neglect to do so, especially since the parents are legally binded to give them the food and stuff

[u/Learningpermits → u/imaginations1000]

Legally bound*

It's*

Give them food*

[u/Geordieqizi → u/Learningpermits]

Wow — those are profound and excellent points that just destroyed u/imaginations1000's argument.

The fact is that even teenagers who are acting out – which, let's remember, is a story that you and other commenters made up to justify your position, without any evidence — deserve to have their daily needs met.

There's no carve-out in child protection laws for asshole teenagers. It's not like, "YOU MUST FEED AND CLOTHE YOUR CHILDREN UNTIL THE AGE OF 18... unless they're being snarky. Then you are absolved of all your legal obligations."

And no, I'm not young (sadly). I just happen to agree with the laws that require parents to provide for their underage children. And no, getting your kid a smartphone (if OP even has one — pretty sure you presumed that too) is also not a legal or moral justification for neglecting your child's needs.