I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and by the sounds of it he has grown into a highly functional, and successful individual. This bears out a hypothesis that they were not systemically bad parents, rather they were dealing with a rather screwed up child/situation and were making the best of it.
The ends justify the means? That's rarely a good argument.
There are people who are beaten, raped, and abused on a frequent basis as children who turn out to be fine, upstanding adults, but that gives no reason to support such behavior. People can thrive despite bad circumstances, not because of it.
No rather I am saying that there aren't enough facts to make fair judgements but given the limited facts I get the impression they aren't bad parents, instead they are normal rational caring people who were dealing with a very difficult child.
The ends justify the means? That's rarely a good argument.
There are people who are beaten, raped, and abused on a frequent basis as children who turn out to be fine, upstanding adults, but that gives no reason to support such behavior. People can thrive despite bad circumstances, not because of it.