Dear
fangtray
This is a very difficult topic. I can see that you are still judging who/whom by looking at the wrong thing, so I will try to explain more clearly.
Every sentence has an independent clause, with a subject and verb.
The words "who" or "whom" introduce what is called a relative clause, or a subordinate clause, or a dependent clause. This also has a subject or a verb. It's like a mini-sentence inside the big sentence.
The
case of the relative pronoun --- that is to say, whether the pronoun is nominative ("who") or objective/accusative ("whom") ----- is
determined 100% by the role of the pronoun within the dependent clause.
The paradox is, when you take the sentence ...
Authoritative parents, whom children may resent for a time, actually provide tremendous benefit to their children's character development.
... and you remove the relative clause ...
Authoritative parents actually provide tremendous benefit to their children's character development.
... what you are left with is everything that DOES NOT tell you anything about whether to choose "who" or "whom". What's going on the sentence
outside of the dependent clause tells you absolutely nothing about whether to use "who" or "whom". It's like trying to look up a German word in a Spanish dictionary --- you are looking in the completely wrong place to answer the question you are trying to answer.
Instead, you have to isolate the relative clause . . .
... whom children may resent for a time...
Here, "children" is the subject, "may resent" is the verb, and the pronoun "whom" is the object of the verb --- which is why it must be "whom", and not "who." The case of the relative pronoun, whether it's "who" or "whom", has everything to do with its grammatical role inside the relative clause, and absolutely nothing to do with its grammatical role outside the relative clause in the larger sentence.
Again, some examples:
1)
Authoritative parents, who place restrictions on their children, benefit their children's character in the long run.
Within the relative clause, "who" is the subject of the verb "place"
2)
Authoritative parents place restrictions on their children, who may resent them for it.
Within the relative clause, "who" is the subject of the verb "may resent"
3)
Authoritative parents, whom this new liberal book criticizes, actually provide tremendous benefit to their children's character.
Within the relative clause, "book" is the subject, "criticizes" is the verb, and "whom" is the object.
4)
The teachers questioned the credentials of the books' author, whom child psychologists also have criticized.
Within the relative clause, "psychologists" is the subject, "criticized" is the verb, and "whom" is the object.
In sentences #1 & #3, who/whom modifies the subject of the outside sentence, but that doesn't matter at all for determining whether to use "who" or "whom." In sentences #2 & #4, who/whom modifies the object of the outside sentence, but that doesn't matter at all for determining whether to use "who" or "whom." The grammatical standing of the word to which "who"/"whom" refers doesn't tell you anything about the case of the pronoun. The case of the pronoun, whether to use "who" or "whom", is determined 100% exclusively by the grammatical role the pronoun has within the relative clause.
Does all this make sense? Please let me know if you have any further questions.
Mike
