BPDFamily.com

Here is a conundrum I am facing, which will only escalate as things open up post Covid:

My stbx wife has an emotional spinup at the line of sight of me.  This triggers her into a physical reaction similar to an anaphylaxis shock and she swells up and even needs to hit the epi pen or go to the ER as precaution.

During initial divorce when we were both still living in the house, if I came into a room she was in she would run out and accuse me of deliberately trying to kill her (all in front of the kids of course).

Because of this, I am unable to participate in events of my children.  Things like school plays, extra curriculars, etc.  Because if I am there mom will have a reaction and have to go to the ER.

So my daughters sometimes will even text me and tell me to not come.  (both daughters are refusing the parenting plan so I no longer see them).

The lawyers and counselors have no clear advice on this.  (parenting time is deemed unenforceable once above a certain age, my youngest is 12). 

So my conundrum is, at what point do I start attending their events and what should I do leading up to it?  A year ago it was implied by my daughters that if I came they would drop out just to avoid the situation. 

Counselors and lawyers and other health professionals have advised they have never heard of such a thing as anaphylaxis shock being triggered by line of sight.  But at the same time they feel a GAL will be of no practical value.

Any thoughts?

I wonder if there's a way to use that setup to shine light on what she *really* wants.

OK, so, up until now, the scenario has been:

"She just can't help it... it's out of her control. What, like she makes herself have a life-threatening reaction? The ONLY WAY for her to be safe is for you to not be there at the same time. What can she do?"

It's this whole scenario where the focus, the keystone, is all about her very life. "Of course, if she didn't have the reaction, of course you could be there... but what can she do, she'll die if you're there, so she wishes it were different, but sigh, this is just how it is".

It seems like the subtext is: she would be fine with you being at the school events if she didn't have the "uncontrollable" reaction.

But I bet there is something else going on.

She doesn't want you there, and THAT'S the keystone issue, but she's making the #1 issue her "health".

So, can we swap things around a bit, and get her to inadvertently expose that it isn't her health that's the "real" issue, it's her not wanting the kids to have time with you.

What if you proposed in an email (or other written form) that you completely understood her health concerns (sigh... more than she knows, but you don't have to go there), and suggested that you guys alternate attending the kids' events. Sure, nobody gets to go to 100% of the events, but surely her point can't be to exclude you from 100%... right?

That seems like a starting point to get in an email thread -- this would be a completely reasonable (I know, I know, she isn't, I know) compromise. Her rejecting that (which she will, right?) seems like it could open some doors for a new way forward.

Instead of all the engagement being about "Don't make Mom sick... is Mom's reaction real or not...", it'd sidestep all of that and focus on a solution. Her response to the solution could point the conflict down a different path. Because right now, the conflict is exactly where she wants it -- unfalsifiable and unquestionable. "Let her" have the point that sure, she has a life threatening reaction. But move past that to "but surely neither of us wants to exclude the other from events".

It also wouldn't surprise me if she wrangled the kids into saying something like "But listen to us, we want Mom there at Every Single Event". Would she pull something like "Well, I agree with you, we should alternate, but the kids don't want that"? That kind of overempowerment? I wonder if the counselors would have something to work with there.

Really curious if that could move things in a different direction.

kells76 has proposed an excellent strategy, considering the circumstances.  It should be especially practical on your official court-ordered parenting time.

Although school activities are generally open to both parents, you can go and if she has a (dramatic histrionic) fit upon merely seeing you, that's her issue.  (Obviously you would never speak to or approach your ex.)  You avoiding her - and hence the kids too - enables her to "win".  Is she Histrionic PD?

Yes, it's tough but if the children are manipulated into avoiding you anyway, what's to lose?  Well, extreme histrionics, there's that.  But would a family court actually entertain a claim someone is allergic to their ex?  I do have a concern she'll use it as a way to morph it into a 'fear' of you, that you're a danger to her, despite having been living with you as a married couple day and night for years in the past.  That's posturing and she's likely to milk it for all she can.

And I also wonder, if there could be some kind of "I will be happy to video the event and send it to you" offer from you.

Of course, she would be fine if SHE videoed every event and sent it to YOU, right? Like, if it's good enough for YOU to just see a video, surely it's good enough for HER to see 50% on video?

Again, the more problem solving of the "assumed" problems you can do, the more those "assumed" problems get swept away, and what's left won't look good for her.

I do think Kells has some great ideas.  It is going to be a lot of drama to execute and may mean the kids drop some participation.  But as FD says, not much to lose.

" I do have a concern she'll use it as a way to morph it into a 'fear' of you, that you're a danger to her"

Yes to this.  Has already been implied that I am dangerous and unsafe as a person.

The 'Parenting plan' has been deemed unenforceable.  Per multiple lawyers.  And even counseling is unlikely to help if they are opposed to it (you cant 'make' someone be open to counseling).

The only advice is to wait for them to mature and form their own views, which behavior is pretty ridiculous to an outsider looking in.  Clearly not 'normal'.  The drama is not only 'her' issue when the kids get sucked into having to manage through it.  A key question is to the degree it makes things worse for me with my kids.

It is kinda the nuclear bomb of weapons to prevent me from staying engaged with my kids.

Three themes I am trying to combat to the degree possible given limited communications:

1)  That she is the only one that loves them.  I combat this by trying to make them proud of themselves - that happiness comes from within.

2)  That your other parent (me) is dangerous and unavailable.  I combat this by trying to make them feel safe and available.  By including comments in the emails I send about concern over their health, and I moved close to the school.

3)  That pursuing a relationship with the other parent (me), you are jeopardizing the relationship with mom.  I try to communicate that BOTH parents will always love them and nothing they can ever do will stop either from loving them.  Give them freedom to love both openly.

Relatable. The drama of executing a plan that normal parents get to do.

Here's an interesting thought experiment... don't actually do it, but I am curious...

What do you think she would do if she were required to videotape every single kids event she was at, and provide it to you within X timeframe (like 12 hours or something)?

I mean... she would be "winning", the kids would be "winning", so there's nothing about that plan she wouldn't like... right?

I have this feeling like she would not comply. She would "forget" or argue or balk or whatever... but at some point, she would not do it.

and THAT, to me, would be the ultimate "reveal".

I mean, if you're at rock bottom, it might be worth trying. It'd show her true colors.

But, if it were me, I'd try the "modest proposal" of "parents split kids' events 50/50" first.

A thought here...what is STBX going to do when she has to appear in court with you? It's not as if you have a Cloak of Invisibility. She would either have to show her physical reaction to the court and judge (in all its dysfunctionality), or she would have to show that she can, in fact, be in physical proximity to you.

Do you have a scheduled hearing soon? It might be worth forcing this issue.

So...why not just show up at events and ignore the entire thing?


Personally...I think the safest/wisest way forward is the kells76 idea.

But...what if you ignored it. 

Just be a dad and show up.  Leave the door open for compromise is her medical doctors provide your L's with a diagnosis.

This is a head scratcher.

Best,

FF

We did have a pre trial hearing via zoom.  The start was delayed while she was able to put a sticky over my image but still see everyone else.  This was explained to the judge (didn’t bat an eye)

And ‘revealing’ her true intent is of no practical value.  You can’t physically force a teenager to do anything.  So until they are able to gain their own sense of reality they will conform to mom's narrative. One lawyer said... when a parent puts their own emotional needs at a higher priority than their children, there is little the court can do

Agree.  Kells approach is quite practical.  Useful and glad I posted. Essentially what happened in court, show up, let ‘her’ manage her own issues. 

The difference is the drama the kids will be dragged through.

When I was first separated, my ex posed/postured as though she was afraid of me.  That was after 15 years of marriage and 3 years of parenting together.  Go figure how credible that was.

However, the boilerplate temp order gifted her temp custody and majority time.  She sought out enablers.  One agency was a local child counseling center.  I didn't find out for 3 months.  When I contacted them they acted as though I was dangerous, wouldn't tell me anything and asked me to submit my request in writing.  That's when they replied with a form letter and the line checked that I was "likely to be a danger to my child or others".

This despite me having "standard" alternate weekends with my preschooler.   I expected them to know the schedule, how could I be a danger when the court order gave me full unrestricted 3 day alternate weekends?   But the court order gifted her full temp custody (around here we know "temporary" can go on and on far longer than normal) and so their position was that they could only listen to her.

So I've been there, though with a preschooler and not teens.  My ex kept up her posturing as fearful throughout the two year divorce.  Court basically ignored it and let her posture.  I walked out on Trial Day with a settlement where I had the Custody Evaluator's recommended equal time.  That's when the counseling staff became more open with me.

Kinda adding to my idea.

Express confidence in her medical teams ability to figure this out.  Provide her times that you can physically be present so they can hook her up with wires and monitors so they can figure out what is actually going on with her when you step into her line of sight.

Of course..it would be better for you to be there in person..rather than via video.  It's important to her health to get the best data possible.

Of course you are supportive because parenting time is important..right?  I mean..you wouldn't want her to miss out for not being able to "see" you.

Or something like that..

Best,

FF

Wow. That would p!ss me off to hear that! It's like a big ¯\_(''_)_/¯

kells76 has a great idea.

A lawyer could say, "Mom isn't complying. We're going to court to discuss. Here's the kells76 plan. If mom doesn't comply, then she cannot go to events. Yeeter is parent on record for attending events."

Not that draconian in language but something to get mom to solve her problem.

I'm trying to think of what my lawyer would've done ... she probably would have asked the judge to order testing, and require ex to step down from attending kid events until someone could do a medical examination.

It seems so transparent what's going on ...

And, if you end up proposing the 50/50 events plan, see if you can include some kind of "both parents... neither parent..." language. Something like, "both parents shall adhere to the time sharing schedule for children's activities. Parent A may/shall attend any event on an even #'d day, and Parent B may/shall attend any event on an odd #'d day. Neither parent shall attend an event on a day they are not scheduled to, unless there is written (paper, text, or email) agreement at least 30 minutes prior to the start time of the event. Attendance is defined as being anywhere on the property where the event is being held, from 30 minutes before to 30 minutes after the event."

Or, leave out the "unless written agreement" if you think she would manipulate the kids with it: "I begged Dad to let me see you perform, but he said no. I'm so sorry, I really tried" type BS.

The even/odd day thing means you don't have to keep working with her on "I was at D15's basketball game last week, and she has another one tomorrow, but S17 had a band concert yesterday, so that means I get to go to D15's game, not you". You both look at the calendar, that's it. No "working with each other".

The "both parents/neither parent" thing means that it's the exact same standards for both of you. You'll do great at complying, and she won't, and as LnL said, that is actionable in court.

teeter.
This post is heartbreaking. I can’t think of anything crueler then to deny a child, the love of a parent. I came across this group. I have no idea if this is worth checking out, I know nothing about it. Hopefully it is helpful and not a waste of time.

https://www.familyaccessfightingforchildrensrights.org/helping-courts-understand-the-phenomenon-of-alienation-nc-conference.html

Best of luck!
B53

There are reconciliation specialists who help children get over whatever is motivating them not to see their parent.

Perhaps you can get a court order requiring your children to go to that?  My friend's NPDex was able to get this in a court order.  The specialist talked to the kids and the dad one-on-one for a few weeks, then watched them together for a 10-min visit and then gradually lengthened the visits to see what was going on.  In that case, the specialist eventually recommended that all contact be ceased b/c the dad was emotionally damaging them.  I can't see that being the case for you.

Regardless, I'd be very careful if you are telling the children that both parents will still love them even if they love the other parent.  While that is true for *you* it is not true for their mother.  They may not consciously acknowledge that fact, but they know this.  If you gaslight them on something that is very obvious to them, they won't trust you at all.

I recall that Richard Warshak described a program he encouraged called Family Bridges, mentioned in a chapter at the end of his book, Divorce Poison.  It was on his web site as well.  As I recall, he stated it was where the alienated parent and children could have time, like a vacation scenario, to heal the estrangement.  One point he emphasized was that you don't force the alienating parent to pay for any of the process.

The reasoning behind this is that the kids are in a loyalty bind.  Support moms narrative, or else she wont love you (indirectly implied).  So they need to be released to love BOTH parents, and that BOTH parents will love them back.  And it is true - mom will always love them, even if there is uncertainty about that fact.  They need to be given the freedom to love both, and learn/become comfortable with this idea on their own accord (ultimately it is a part of breaking the enmeshment with mom - to where they can form their own independent thought in a way that is 'ok')

Yes.  There are conflicting views on Warshaks work.  Once control is fully established by mom, however, what can be done is very very limited.  Limited contact and involvment, and even a court order can not physically 'force' a teenager to participate in counseling in any meaningful way.  Most of the counselors I have engaged with will not take on family counseling without direct support and participation of both parents (and in some cases a court order). 

Note that court orders are pretty worthless.  A judge/court can not 'control' a persons behavior.  There are no repercussions if she undermines or just doesnt follow it with good faith. 

The topic of alienation (arguable if even the right term) is worth a section on this board - since there is high correlation with high conflict divorce, alienation, and personality disorders.

I'm going to push back a bit on this.

A "well written" court order is gold.  A poorly written one is perhaps worse than not having one at all.  Perhaps.

The key is to realize you don't want to give your pwBPD any "freebies".  Start out with a well written court order with consequences built in.

That way there is no debate over if it was followed or not.

That gives you clarity with the judge that the judge is being blown off (again..no wiggle room is important)

"pwBPD will do X by Y date.  If this is not done Z will happen until X is accomplished."

or something like that.

Best,

FF

Yes.  But play this all the way through.  There is a court order that isnt being followed.  The judge can give a 'stern lecture'.  The judge can even change parenting time.  But if a kid refuses to follow the court ordered parenting plan, there is no recourse.

And if a kid doesnt want to do counseling, you can not force them (teenagers).  (even if they show up they might not engage with the process so again relatively little value)

Layer this will Covid delays in the court, and things drag out such that early intervention is out the window.

Feel free to suggest other ideas on what can be written into a court order, but more than one very well respected and experienced attorneys have told me there is little practical value in court orders.  They are not going to put her in jail for alienation.  And its very hard to prove in a way that holds up in court to begin with.

Dont get me wrong I can continue to push for whatever pieces I can.  I am trying to get the kids counseling.  But mom has them convinced counseling is bad (and she herself refuses to participate).  Again a Judge could order counseling for her even, but if she isnt open to it there will be little influence (the nature of NPD is that there is nothing for her to work on, since she doesnt believe she is doing anything to warrant it).  Thus no practical value since there is no change in behavior.

I dont like the answer.  Its just what I am getting from lawyers (and even some counselors).

I welcome an example of something that can be written into a court order as a 'consequence'.  If it genuinely has teeth, I can suggest it to my lawyers ...

The way my loyalty bound stepdaughter (BPD mom) was taught to handle this is "you have a right to have a relationship with both parents."

I know she has used that phrase directly with her mom. Although it wasn't until she was living away from home that she had the strength to say that.

First of all...this just doesn't ring true.  A child is going to blow off the authorities and they will just shrug and say "oh well"? 

Isn't part of growing up and maturing learning to do things that you don't want to do (but aren't unhealthy/dangerous/abusive).

I mean..what if a child refuses (fill in the blank, such as medical care).

Can you clarify what you mean..because I doubt you intend it the way I'm taking it.


For the language with teeth.

What would you like the end result of the court order to say..what would you like you kids to do/not do...and then we can work back from there.

Best,

FF

Yes.  But many times this comes about by a parent establishing guidelines and make kids do what is good for them, not what the kid 'wants' to do.  (homework, going to church, etc).  Now imagine that, at least subvertly, the parent guidance is to not see the other parent (mom is implying that I am dangerous, that I tried to kill her, do not care about her health - because if I do not stay away she 'sees' me line of sight and has a reaction and goes to the ER).  The kids have to sort through all this to form their own opinion, then defy her narrative.

Ultimately the end goal is to get them to a point where they have the freedom to choose and be supported in that choice.  (one of the hardest things in life to do is to defy a manipulative mother).



Some things I would like:

Counseling directly for the kids.  I feel they could benefit from an outside third party to process and calibrate with.  (they have been locked down in the house with mom for the last year getting her narrative drilled into their heads 24/7)

Family counseling (reunification counseling).  They may choose to not reengage with me, but family counseling would at least reset some baseline interaction

I would like to attend my kids extracurricular activities.  I would like to be involved in decisions regarding education, medical.  Ultimately, I would like to be engages with their lives in some way.

Pretty basic

To add to what yeeter is saying...


We've been through this before, and our experience was:

If a kid refuses to follow the court ordered parenting plan, and the other parent, despite verbiage to the contrary, doesn't really want the kid to see their parent, there is no recourse.


It takes a bit of time between the kid saying "I'm not going, I'm staying at Mom's, you can't make me" and getting into a courtroom where a judge will say "Mom, you need to find a way to get that child into the car and over to Dad's house."

If yeeter's kids' mom is anything like DH's kids' mom, then after the kid says "I'm not going", Mom says "What can I do? I can't force her get in the car. I'm just listening to her voice. I didn't do anything to influence her. Of course, if she finds out you have a lawyer, she'll hate you even more and never see you. And I have no control over that".

So, while it's not the case that if the authorities saw evidence of visitation refusal, and parental non enforcement of the PP, that they'd shrug and say "oh well"... there's a time lag, and no guaranteed outcome.

What's hard is that middle ground between the visit refusal and the court date. That's a LOT of time for a child's heart and mind to be poisoned. And that's the real battle -- not just enforcement of the PP for its own sake, but the battle for your child to know the truth and not drink the Kool aid. When there's a delay between "I'm not going"/"How can I make her go" and a real authority... it's not nothing to agonize over whether to put the kids in that situation, where for months they will be fed a narrative about you that you're escalating, you want to force them to do things, you don't listen to their voice, you "got a lawyer against your own child" (yes, heard that from one of the kids), you're the villain, Mom is the only one who really listens, Mom cares about your emotions, Mom would never force you to do something traumatic.

Especially when there's no guarantee that in that courtroom with that real authority, there will be any kind of guardrails or consequences or meaningful action against Mom or for the kids. It's a gamble with the kids' hearts and minds. Sometimes it really does turn out, but sometimes it doesn't, and I don't hear about a lot of moms getting real consequences for over-empowering the kids.


That's exactly Dr. Craig Childress' argument in shining light on the really slippery, responsibility-evasive behaviors of the "alienating" parent.

He asserts that the "alienating" parent will typically display "selective competence". That is to say, the AP (generally speaking) regularly ensures that the kids brush their teeth, go to bed on time, go to school, go to the dentist, etc. The AP has parental competence in those areas, and would never say "what can I do... I can't make her go to school... she said she hates it... I'm just listening to her voice".

But, in the one area of visitation, the AP displays remarkable incompetence. Suddenly, the AP simply can't "make" the child do anything, and there's absolutely no solution that will ever be found.

So, yes, ideally, parents would make the kids do things they say they don't want to do.

If the issue were just that the kids don't want to go to yeeter's house, but he and Mom agree they should, then there wouldn't be any issue. They'd team up, tell the kids "this is happening", and that's the end of it.

But that's not the issue. The issue is -- whatever she says, whatever she does, Mom doesn't want the kids to go to yeeter's.

And she'll try to cover it up by making it "something out of her control" -- like her so-called allergic reaction.

And, while Mom may say all the right things to professionals and to the kids ("I really want you to see Dad... I would never stand in your way... I'm bending over backwards to make sure you have a relationship with him, while honoring your true feelings..."), the kids know that what Mom really wants is that they don't go, and that life will be hell for them if they do.

So that's the sticky wicket.

Dr. Childress had some superb articles about that dynamic ("selective incompetence"):

page 21 has a brief mention:

https://drcachildress.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Pathogenic-Parenting-and-the-Attachment-System-Qustion-Answer-Format-Childress-2012.pdf

this one has a "passive triangulation" section on page 5 that, while oriented towards the issue of badmouthing, would also apply to visitation refusal:

https://drcachildress.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Structural-Family-Systems-Constructs-in-Parental-Alienation-Childress-2012.pdf

Here's an example of the "kids need to grow up and learn to do things they don't want to do" situation, but in a toxic/pathological divorce setting:


(from https://drcachildress.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Enmeshed-Relationship-Question-Answer-Format-Childress-2012.pdf)

...

OK, this is getting long! FF, hope this helps shed some light on the difficulties of enforcing PP's / court orders when the other parent is pathological.

cheers

kells76

Finally found it, I think!


from https://drcraigchildressblog.com/2014/06/18/diagnosis/

So...write the guaranteed consequences in the next order...don't wait.

If child doesn't show up at Dad's house, x will happen the first time missed..then bigger..then bigger.

Be very specific about what can get the child out of it, hospitalized due to medical necessity..signed off on by a physician.

If they are sick at one home...they can go to other home and be sick.


Please don't take any of this as me suggesting it will be easy or go smoothly...

Best,

FF

Right, I get what you're saying -- something insanely specific like (and this is all just for example):

Child shall be delivered to Dad's house no earlier than 2:45pm and no later than 3pm Fridays. Dad shall wait inside with blinds drawn. Child shall ring doorbell or knock 3 times. Dad shall turn on porch light. Mom shall leave immediately once child is on porch and light is on. Dad shall let child in 15 seconds after turning on light.

Dad shall drop child off at Mom's house no earlier than 8:15am and no later than 8:30am on the Mondays following the above Fridays. Mom shall wait inside with blinds drawn... etc etc etc (same as above)

If either parent does not follow this order in every respect, then counseling for the children shall begin no later than 1 week after the most recent non-following, and shall be at the "Better Families" practice. Dad shall compile a list of 3 practitioners and Mom shall select one and inform Dad by email within 3 days of Dad providing the list. If Mom does not select one and/or inform Dad by email within 3 days, Dad shall select a practitioner.

Both parents shall abide by any and all recommendations, requirements, etc of the practitioner until such time as the practitioner communicates in writing that such abiding is no longer required. Noncompliance shall result in the noncompliant parent [X, Y, and Z consequences... sorry, running out of specific ideas].

...


Yes, this is super common... "oh, they're sick... they can't be moved from my house... they don't want to go in the car". So yeah, if airtight is what we're after, then either "hospitalization with physician signoff" is the only reason to miss visitation, or "time missed due to child illness shall be made up in exactly equal quantity down to a 15 minute increment within 30 calendar days of the last missed day, with days decided upon by the parent who missed time, and no objection possible by the other parent". That last idea should nip in the bud any temptation to misuse "we'll make it up later".

...

It's never easy.

20 months out of the house and have not yet been to court.  A trial date set in October (that could push).  Covid makes frequent court visits quite unlikely.

And there still is no answer to the kid simply refusing to come.  And refusing to participate in counseling.  As mentioned, more than one counselor said they wont do it without both parents participation and a court order with follow up.  Maybe I get that after trial (approx 2 years later).  Am calling on a regular basis to even find a counselor (all backlogged), but I found one that 'might' have availability.

The incentive/disincentive in the court order has to be such that your ex wants the child to go.

I do agree there isn't a good or easy answer...but there are possibilities.

Best,

FF

Hey Yeeter

I should clarify that I'm not arguing with or at you.

My concern is that people that look at a situation and say "there is no answer"...often stop looking and/or go through the motions...  That's not what I want for you.

As I sit here and work through my first cup of coffee...perhaps a bit of a personal story will give perspective.

My ex bro in law (FFw sister is a bit older and "much more BPD" than FFw) had to deal with refusals to come over and or refusals to follow rules for a young teen (my nephew).

He could have enforced the coming over and made the child sit in a therapists office...but decided to let them have more autonomy.

There were also two other younger kids to consider.

My ex bro in law made a decision that he was not going to "fight every move" and so he focused on creating the house/home with the values and rules that he deemed appropriate and then was satisfied with who came over or not.

My oldest nephew stayed away for a while, middle one was fairly consistent and the youngest (the only girl) eventually "saw" her Mom for what she was and moved in permanently with her father...rarely visiting her Mom and only after Mom finally came to counseling with her.

Even today (nephew is 20 or 21 years old) the relationship with his Father is distant and "polite".

Please don't take my assertions that there are answers/solutions to mean that you should "use" every solution out there or "fight every battle".

As you have realized..this is a long...long race, consistency is likely more important than exactly what you do on any one issue.

Best,

FF

No worries FF, I didnt take your posts as arguing at all.  Simply looking for 'solutions' as you say.

Most of the legal community are advising the route your BIL took.  Live your own life and values and maybe some day they will re-engage of their own free will. 

They advise perhaps in part because they know the legal system is ill equipped to deal with these situations, and perhaps also because they dont like the overwhelming amount of legal resource and energy put in for such nominal gain.  My lawyer challenges me repeatedly about what outcome I want from the court, and what practical value will it provide.  (and if we can get that outcome some other way then that is the preferred path).  But we cant.

To manage my own recovery, again the stages of grief need to be processed.  With 'acceptance' being the final stage before one can move forward with my own life.  Its not giving up, it is accepting the reality for what it is.  And making decisions within the constraints of that reality.

I can continue to reach out.  I can continue to make myself accessible.  I can continue to push for counseling.  I can play the long game and live my values and 'hope'.  There are no guarantees any of this will work.  What I cant do, is control other peoples behavior.  And it turns out neither can the court system.

It is hard to lose a child (two in this case), even if for a fixed time period (going on two years now).  And if you look back at my posts you will see a consistent theme that this was expected all along (I had filed for divorce just before finding this site - and aborted - primarily due to concerns over alienation and never seeing my kids again). 

I really dont have any insights and havent talked to anyone that does.  It doesnt seem healthy for kids to have such high drama environment.  And to lose a parent.  But they have to do what they need to for their own survival.

From what I read, this is a growing issue.  In part because PD's are growing.  And in part because men are more involved with their children than historically, but the legal system hasnt caught up to this (at least in some states) - stay at home moms are the default caregivers.  If coparenting is not possible due to high emotion/conflict, then the legal system defaults to the single parent model to reduce conflict for the kids.

One of my lawyers is considered a top 10 lawyer in my state.  Very highly respected and recommended (and expensive!).  His comment was that, he has never seen a case where there was true full PAS (parental alienation syndrome) that had a positive outcome (per the legal definition of PAS, which is severe).  Hard to imagine.

Believe it or not some of the more practical advice I see on TicTok.  One poster said: 

Love.
Live.

Continue to love your children, and ensure they know that.  Then live your life.  And live a good life including your values.  Sounds like your BIL did this with mixed results - which from what I can tell is the most to hope for - mixed results.

I dont want to come across as a self defeatist.  But I have to manage my own grief and moving forward in life while not closing the door on reuniting with my children (but for now having no/limited contact).

Its not a happy story.  But it wasnt a happy marriage either.  And I held on for another 9 years avoiding the alienation so maybe that was worth something to my kids.

Hey...are we really talking about 2 behaviors here that you want to court to control?

1. The can't be in line of sight thing.

2.  Will the child come over.


Anything else?

Remind me again ages of those involved?

Best,

FF

D12, D14, S16.  My son does follow the parenting plan and occasionally spends some addition time with me (but gets a lot of rage from mom when he does).

I dont care about the line of sight thing other than it is a weapon to prevent me from being anywhere she is (including any child event).  So the girls send me a text before most events telling me not to come.  Sure a court could order we share events (assuming we get to court some day) - but if I do go my guess is the kids will choose not to participate if they know I will show up (that is what they hinted at last year) - after all, at a minimum if I go it means mom can not, and/or would come with a lot of drama (am sure she would melt down and call the squad car to be hauled to the ER due to reaction).  The question I have to answer once Covid opens up is, whether I want to push that and cause that embarrassment and drama for the kids - which will give them additional reasons to hate me.

Will the child come over.  Sure that would be great.  Interact via email or text or phone even would be great.  All email/text monitored is my guess, other parents and family have been warned by her that any text or email interactions with me could end up in court, so be very careful when engaging with me.

The concept of a court 'controlling' a behavior is misguided from what my lawyers infer.  How will a court 'control' anyone?

The line of sight thing..to me..seems where you should focus.

If your children are not going to spend time with you...they don't get a say in what you do and where you go.

If you show up at their events...over to them (anyone really) to manage their emotions.

If they choose to stop doing events and become hermits..that's their choice..not yours.

Your legal stance is that you are deeply concerned about their Mom's health and are available anytime for her medical appointments while they figure this out.


Courts have a wide variety of things to control peoples behavior...they generally do the minimum needed...but if it comes to it they will collect a person and put them in jail for contempt.  I hope you will agree that tends to control a persons choices.

Let's hope it doesn't come to such extreme measures.

Best,

FF

yeeter, your situation reminds me more of what my husband experienced with his BPDx wife than my n/BPDx husband.

Court would not have been able to compel H's kids to see him and using court as a stick would've created a nightmare of conflict for the kids.

Whereas in my situation, the stick/court approach was effective.

When H and I first met and realized we both had BPD siblings, and both had married BPD spouses, I was concerned that he didn't use the courts to help heal his relationship with the two most alienated kids. But looking back, what worked for me would've been a disaster for him and his kids.

Have you spent any time looking at materials on Ryan Thomas's site (https://ryanthomasinternational.com/)?

He may have some creative ideas that could be adapted to your situation.

Same for us. DH's ex is uBPD and her husband is uNPD. It's unrelentingly toxic and conflictual. The kids have to "not have a good time" sometimes in order for Mom and Stepdad to accept them/be there for them. Sick.

Ryan Thomas is a good idea, and while I'm sure I've mentioned him before, getting some kind of meeting with Dr Craig Childress also sounds like it could be worth it. Or do both. See if they'll talk to each other and to your current L and counselor.

The level of drama and the impossible situation your kids are in make me think that unorthodox, and perhaps "go for broke" steps are necessary in your case. Versus "Boilerplate A, B, C, D, E, and court, and it's solved". And interestingly, the total weirdness of your kids' mom's reaction makes me actually have some hope for your. It's just so, so, so weird and untethered to reality, that if you can get an out-of-the-box approach to it (maybe via Thomas or Childress) then you might have a roundabout way to change things and shed light on what's up.

If the timing is right, I think formflier's jiu-jitsu suggestion of "I just want my kids' mom to have the best medical care... I'm ready to be there with her team if they need me for a diagnosis... I just want her to be healthy and well" is a good one, and exactly the "use their energy against them" idea that could work. Again, if the timing/context is right.

Ultimately, though, when the other parent doesn't see themselves as under the same rules... or even in the same reality as you or the court system... and I mean that in 100% seriousness... then how do you even get a foothold. There's no cooperation or "just try to work together".

I was flipping through some old Dr Childress articles yesterday, and he had a section on quotations from professionals in the field of narcissism. One that stood out to me was something like "narcissists don't see the usual rules as applying to them, even up to and including rules of science and nature".
When you're up against someone who literally might not think that morality, the legal system, and the force of gravity apply to them... what can you do? Hard stuff.

Thanks all, for some insightful ideas.  I have not spent much time on Ryan Thomas site but will look deeper.  I have consulted with Amy Baker - who was very helpful.

Generally speaking, direct confrontation doesnt work and only escalates higher to a place I am not willing to go to (past arguments have resulted in her using the kids, even physically putting them in between us, to win an argument).  The need to be right and validate her own position trumps everything else beyond reason.

But at the same time, avoidance generally doesnt work either.  smh.  I have found nothing that is effective after 19 years and over a dozen counselors...

This applies:

Her brother (whom I have a good relationship with), has shared that in her mind she doesnt believe she is doing anything 'wrong'.  She genuinely believes her narrative/reality, right down to having a genetic disorder that triggers anaphylaxis shock at the sight of me.  And she is doing what a mother should do, protecting her children against a dangerous person (me). 

One of the marriage counselors flagged this at one time:  'The two of you live in different worlds.  You can experience the exact same event and come away describing it as two very different experiences with no shared interpretation of what happened'. 

Coupling narcissistic traits with the emotional runaway of borderline and you have the NPD/BPD combination that is so difficult to interact with.  At the end of the day, most of the advice in the literature is to just minimize interaction and get as far away as possible - which is happening.  Without my children.  As I told one counselor:  I always knew the price I would have to pay to get away from her.  Had hoped I was wrong, but was not.

I will maintain a 'drip' with my kids of:  Persistence.  Communication.  Love.     While looking for other ways/opportunities to add to it.

Which is why you need to find areas where you can agree with her on her view of the world...the direct line of sight thing.

Note:  Don't agree with her "solutions"..just her view. 

Splash it up on billboards...in court filings...show max empathy...show max urgency.  I mean..can you imagine how horrible it must be to not be able to look at another human being...especially one you need to co parent with.

"Judge...as you can imagine, there will likely be joint meetings that we both need to attend for the benefit of our kids.  It's so important that there is court oversight on the medical testing and treatment of this disorder."

Best,

FF

Add "presence" to this.

Otherwise...I think you are validating the invalid..by staying away from their events.

Best,

FF

True.

yeeter, I know what you're dealing with is much more pervasive than what I'm trying to wrap my head around, but I can't help wonder why, if her *health* is so fragile, does she go to all of the kids' events?

Why not take turns?

Digging into this a bit -- when the kids text you before the event, do they say "Don't come because I don't want you to" or "Don't come because Mom is coming"? IDK if it's splitting hairs, but I'd be curious how they phrase it.

If Mom is court ordered (hypothetically) to not go to events on odd numbered days, do you think the kids would still text you before an odd # day event and say "don't come"?


I'm guessing it's something like -- either Mom would not tell the kids "hey, there's a new order, and it means I go on odd # days and dad goes on even # days, that's how it is" and so they wouldn't know there's actually a plan in place, and would think you're just showing up even though "you know" what that means...

or...

Mom would tell the kids "there's a new order that Dad forced the judge to write that makes me miss half your events, but it's OK, you can tell me what you really want, and I'll be there for you".

Or, do you have a sense that there'd be a different dynamic at play -- some different way where, even if it were legally required that you take turns, Mom would undermine it?

...

Like LnL, I'm trying to keep wrapping my head around this. And, like FF, something about the over the top-ness of her reaction seems like a key to moving things in a different direction.

...

I'm also wondering if a "parallel tracks" approach to your two issues could help. I think we all know that legal stuff/court is not the right tool for opening your kids' hearts to you. But it's not useless.

What if in terms of "getting the kids to come over" (i.e., formflier's 2nd listed behavior) and having a positive relationship with them, all that work were done via Ryan Thomas/Craig Childress/non-legal means? That'd be one track -- could be totally different strategies, could be absolutely nothing legal going on in that track. Just new relational/strategic tools & skills. I know Ryan Thomas often mentions on his site using very, very specific phrases when talking to an alienated child.

And then, what if in terms of "line of sight" weirdness (i.e., formflier's 1st listed behavior), all that work were done with your L and legal/medical professionals? But at a pace that didn't upset the apple cart of what you're working on in the other track.

So, you wouldn't have the pressure of "I have to use the legal system to make my kids come over during my parenting time". Because that blows up, in cases like ours. Separate it out. Do a non-legal strategy for seeing/communicating with the kids, and then use your legal/professional team to focus really closely on how to use your kids' mom's reaction to change things for the better.

Hope that helps;

kells76

Her health is not fragile per se (she plays hockey still), just that certain things trigger a reaction.  Bleach as an example and some other chemical smells.  She lets organizations know (school, church, etc) that some cleaning chemicals can cause a trigger and they often adjust what they clean with to accommodate her. 

It is a real physical reaction that happens and I have had to hit her with the
Epi and take her to the ER once from church after she swelled up.  So there is an effect.

And now apparently the site of me is also triggering.

My middle D14 once told me 'she just uses that to get her way...'  So the kids are pretty in tune, but at the same time have no ability to challenge her narrative without major fallout.

I did have a pretty productive conversation with my lawyer yesterday regarding events.  One aspect pointed out that me attending an event is different than a kid refusing to come during parenting time.  They can refuse parenting time.  But me attending a public event is not their choice, and it is perfectly reasonable to expect a parent to attend their own childs event.  Even if the child doesnt like it.

Then ditto on what was said about validating irrational behavior by staying away.

We also made some progress towards getting family counseling in place.  Still need to confirm availability of a counselor (the hardest part), but it is likely to happen at some point.  (20 months into this, so it is a long term process)

Parallel paths for sure, there are multiple avenues (her family, kids friends parents and activities together with them, school/teachers, counseling, courts, doctors indirectly, etc).  All have some level of activity to stay available and engaged.  From interactions to date, people in general are quite sympathetic to the cause... nobody likes to see a child lose a parent. 

At the high level it is just this type of drama that she wants.  It provides a source of a lot of attention (even if bad... attention is attention).  So all that just comes with the territory - I will maintain what I can while still having some semblance of a life (also important).  Its no more work than it was remaining in the marriage - but I do miss my children.

One more clarifying question, as I try to make sense of this:

So, your son does still spend time with you -- how does he get to and from your place?

Mostly I do the drop offs and pickups.  A handful of times mom has.  And starting this year I moved close to school so he can now walk. 

Also some of his friends drive and take him

When you do the drop offs/pickups, I'm assuming that Mom stays away from the windows...?

Was there overlap with Mom doing transportation for S16, and Mom having big reactions to seeing you at events?

Again, sometimes I'm a very "tree" instead of "forest" person, so not sure there's anything to figure out here. But if she is capable of dropping S16 off at your house... where you are... and where she might see you...?

Lots of tentacles in these stories.  My head was going down one path...and now understanding that the pwBPD can drop off a son at your house and risk spontaneous combustion at the sight of Yeeter...

I think it's important that we all are deliberate about "staying curious"


Could it be something about the gender of the children? (again..trying to get in the mind of a pwBPD here) A male child is ok to spend time with Daddy but not a female?

OK..more clarifying questions.

Can you describe the relationship with both of your daughters?  Is one daughter more like your ex?  Is one less like?

For instance D15 in FF house has the most FFw in her of any of my kids so far.  It scares me and try as a might...I'm sure my feelings towards FFw...towards BPDish behavior...come across to D15 in ways that ARE NOT helpful.

Note:  None of this changes my recommendation to "legally" focus big-time on pwBPDs "good health".

Yeeter..I'm not suggesting you are hiding anything...I am suggesting there are other things here which we need to be aware of...and might be critical pieces.

Best,

FF

From 2011 nearly 10 years ago:

From this I have a conclusion:  Your then-spouse was not initially "allergic" to you... or else it would be hard to believe you two had three children during the first 7 years of marriage, right?

When did she begin claiming she was "allergic" to even the mere sight of you?

I don't doubt that she has had allergic reactions in the past, such as to chlorine, I know people who can't even be near chlorinated pools.  However, her claiming to be allergic to the sight of you feels more like posturing, expanding her chemical reactions to include her emotional reactions.  Conceivably she could claim PTSD, despite being married to you without such claims for at least the first 10 years with you.

All I'm saying is that your approach can be similar to what the others here have recommended, splitting the events between parents until she is able to get therapy for her "reactions" to sight or other contact with you... but be ready to include your many years (history) when she had intimate marital contact, produced children and never claimed overreactions in that way.

Experience of many here, including myself, is where our ex-spouses do have extreme reactions to us.  A better phrase would be "triggers".  For me it was exchanges even at the local sheriff's office, phone calls, etc.  I think your ex just took it one step further, posturing seeing you as yet another cause of allergic reactions.  (My ex could work herself into a frenzy.  How do you demonstrate that your ex has that capability and desire too?)

I think this is a piece of it.  Without wanting to disrespect the entire female population, my wife has a chip on her shoulder about men in general.  She was a youngest child with a gap between her and her older brothers.  Girls in her family were rare, and considered 'special'.  Combined with programs to promote girls in the school, work, etc, and a desire to 'take them down' regarding men in general.  I have always felt this although when things were good between us I was not the target, but the undertones come through and for sure my son feels them as well.

Plus, as I mentioned in a previous post - I had an affair and was discovered and a piece of this is making an example of how you let people treat you.  Which would be a specfic lesson to the girls.  And her pressing for disclosure of items to bring into court so it is a matter of public record so she can show my daughter the type of person their father really is (her words).



My oldest daughter has my genetics.  And for a long time, my personality to go with it.  I changed my work schedule and refused job offers to be home early every day and not travel so I can spend time with the kids.  When younger I would take a day a month with each of them to do something just the two of us.  We did soccer, basketball, built stuff in the shop, other activities together.  Over time my wife grabbed onto her hard and I would describe it as unhealthy enmeshment at this stage.  Given the amount of attention my wife gives the oldest, I picked up the youngest.  We did almost everything together (even more activities than older D) and were very close.  I tried to deliberately add back some 1:1 with the older but her schedule became so packed she just wanted some down time when a window of time presented it. 

Ironically, the one the most neglected previous was my son.  So he hid out in his room by himself and became depressed.  Now that we are split, he has come out of his shell dramatically and doing things with friends and is going a very good direction.  We have talked about the home dynamics a little, but not much.

They are all very smart, insightful kids. 


Its all good, I dont try to hide anything.  But the history and dynamics are not simple.  This has been going on since before we were married ironically, and I have spent a LOT of time and energy on the relationship.  12-13 different counselors over the years, some more insightful than others.  One of which pointed me to this site.  Ironically she has mellowed some over the years (kids will do that), so things had 'improved' as long as I kept some emotional distance and avoided upsetting her. 

Correct FD.  The reactions started during the divorce process when I was still living in the house before we had a stipulation so I wouldnt move out.  She went through the house (with kids help) to pile all my stuff in a pile in the living room.  Her family come for xmas and I couldnt join so spent xmas eve in my room while they all celebrated.  A few times I ate beans out of can with a screwdriver while hanging out in the shop to avoid the drama.  It was crazy making at its finest, and was rubbing off where at one point my youngest daughter started complaining of a 'tummy ache' when I walked into a room.  They were being told I was intentionally trying to kill their mother, by not moving out.  Eventually I moved out (with a stipulation), which is the only legal agreement we have to this day some 20 months later.

It is an emotional trigger, not just chemical/physical trigger.  Other things that upset her can cause the trigger and in fact this very dynamic had made the home life more tenable - because she would get wound up over something and feel the physical effects starting and would have to go to her room to calm down to avoid it.  So this became the most effective form of self regulation for her.

The simplest way I can describe it is that all her life she is used to getting her way by throwing tantrums.  And has learned that if you take it to an extreme enough place, the other side will cave.  Have witnessed this many times over the years.  So the entire charade is a form of a tantrum (the analogy of never developing emotion regulation skill past the age of 13 rings true).

But so what.  Drama is drama and she will take it to such extreme that it DOES impact the kids and everyone around her.  So I just have to balance when/how to engage in a way that is worth it (pick my battles), and not waver - knowing that she will take it completely over the cliff to get her way.  She is willing to go placed nobody else is (like using my children as weapons).

From a practical perspective, there is no such thing as moral 'victories' or calling out her true intent.  Its pretty obvious she has issues - so the focus is on what actions and behaviors can be done to help get my kids raised into healthy capable adults while at the same time keeping myself sane (and even my own healthy lifestyle at some point)

It's kind of a warped version of suicidal ideation.

SD24 would say things like, "I don't want to live" and "no one cares if I'm alive" and other statements that she could deny were suicidal while still getting attention.

That behavior stopped, presumably because SD26 and H got on the same page and agreed the response to SI was, "this is really serious and requires psychiatrist and psychologist having a plan of action with testing and treatment, we are here to help, when is your next appointment, I can be there with you, etc."

SD24 knows how to go right up to the limit of what others will tolerate.

Only when they insisted on shining light on the issue did she back away.

Your ex may want the medical attention, which is even better.

Without that sunlight on the issue, she has your family in a headlock  :(

I am not her parent so have fairly limited influence.  Yes I can push for court appointed counseling (which has been historically ineffective with her, since after all she doesnt have any problems is her view).  I have never seen the limit reached to the point she will back down.  Son told me that he won an argument with her once.  They just kept arguing until she had a reaction and needed to disengage and go to her room and recover.  Said he didnt even know what they were arguing about by the end, he just wanted to see if it was possible to win an argument with her.  Said it took 5 hours.  (teenagers!)   I have never been able to win an argument because she drags the kids into the middle of it on purpose and I refuse to engage at that point.  So she knows my limits and just goes there quickly as needed.  To the degree anyone else can influence her, I havent seen it (not counselors not family not even her mother).  (the reaction thing is only in recent years, early years that wasnt a problem so there was less emotional regulation).  As the BIL told me - had I went through with the divorce in 2011 it would have been worse because she would have had more energy.

What she wants is to be a victim.  And for others to feel 'outrage' on her behalf at how wronged she was (attention).  And then to punish/hurt me (vengeance).  Probably also wants to discredit me to where nobody will believe anything I say since this will go against her narrative (to be 'right').  She wants to avoid taking any form of responsibility that the marriage didnt work (false innocence to feed the victim-ness).
 And doesnt want to share in raising kids, wants them all to herself (selfishness).  And of course wants to be supported financially as much as possible.

At least those are a few of the things I think she wants.  A number of pretty classic traits.

This thread has been more helpful than I expected.  There arent any magic bullets.  But a really key phrase:  Dont validate the invalid.

This is critical information. 

There is a difference in solving a problem and winning an argument.  Yeeter you seem like a reasonable fellow.  Most likely you normally try to problem solve and from time to time...you get stuck in a "i'm going to win at all costs" thing.

Now..consider your ex.  It would appear to me that she almost always "wins" and every so often can solve a problem.

So...my challenge to you (and it may be a fools errand)...is to focus on times where something to solved...and see if there is a way to build on that. (and there may not be)


Switching gears:  You have wisely choose to stop engaging when she drags kids in, yet there is tension there...right?  "Oh...I want to win and this is what I have to do to win..works everytime."

You don't want to validate that thinking.  That's why I think you engage hard on the line of sight thing...go full bore...

Hang in there man...this is a tough nut to crack.

Best,

FF

This is good advice.  But to clarify - for me it is rarely about 'winning' - that behavior went out the window years ago.  But to my wife, it IS about winning.  And being 'right'

A saying from one of the marriage counselors:  Do you want to be right, or do you want to be in a relationship?  (implying you can not have both)

She cant let go if she believes she is 'right' (which is most times).  Then layer on a fairly distorted view, and black/white thinking, and you arent going to get anywhere and no use in the argument.  So there is no path to resolve anything (including getting my own needs met).  Hence an unworkable relationship (and an amicable divorce not possible, etc).

But having said that, focusing on problem solving is definitely great advice (she doesnt necessarily share the same set of 'problems' though).  100% conflict avoidance is not possible either.  I just have to make a decision on what balance...  And 'the only way around, is through'

I will say my skills in managing it have deteriorated in recent years.  Either that or I quit trying so hard to appease.  Or I just wore out.  Or my own emotional strength has eroded.  Or some combination thereof...

I'm essentially trying to get you to look at the global issue from a different perspective.

What is possible...

Instead of...how do I change all this "impossible" stuff.

Who knows what you may discover..but it's important to leave no stone unturned.

Best,

FF

And solving a problem in BPD land is a bit different than normal problem-solving.

The key difference is that most of us are simply proposing a reasonable solution. That's the tactic. Full stop.

Reasonable people want to solve their problems.

Your ex is saying, "Nope. Only one way to solve this problem." That's not reasonable.

Her solution torpedoes the sacred relationship between parent and child, so it's not a viable solution.

The purpose of your proposal is to shine light on her inability to deviate from the only solution she's willing to tolerate.

For example. I knew my ex would never complete anger management classes, or get treatment for substance abuse, or get a proper psych eval. But we proposed it anyway (it was a reasonable solution given what had transpired). Ex was demanding more time and our proposal was a way to shine light on the real problem, which is that ex wanted everything to stay exactly the way it was, which wasn't tenable.

It shifted the focus from "LnL is doing (controlling thing)" to "n/BPDx will be accountable for_______"

It's hard to suggest solutions to people in our situations because only we know what we're up for, what makes sense, whether the context can support it, the variables in our legal situations, how much money is available, etc.

But if/when you choose to discuss this with your lawyer, it will take some advocacy on your part to explain that the point isn't whether you can enforce the solution, or whether she follows through. The point is to shine light on her unwillingness to get proper medical attention for her problem or, while that is pending, take turns at kid events so you can see them.

An instinctive judge might even say "no events for mom" until the kids are spending equal time with dad.

Thanks everyone for chiming in.  This has been a useful thread for me


Yes.  And as my own T said to me:  You know better than anyone what might/might not help.  You have researched, learned, developed skill, and put tremendous energy into managing the relationship all along.  Trust your own thoughts as valid - even more than the experts, because they dont know as much of the detail that you do. 

Or something like that.

Another piece that was quite disappointing though, is, that 'there is no help'.  To this day the lawyers and counselors and legal system has been completely ineffective and unable to do anything.  Yes some day we might get to court - but that will have been 24 months later... So to a very large degree solutions that involve the legal system are of limited practical value.  At least for now.  And 24 months is a long time to 'normalize' the new normal. 

So as FF suggests - focus on what is possible.  Not trying to solve the impossible.  Which leaves me on an island to figure it out on my own.  Whatever those actions might be (I am not saying I do not have support, I am just saying there is very limited practical help outside of what I can do myself).  Its on me to do whatever it is I can do - independent of the rest of the system/environment/dynamics.  And up to my kids to make their own choices (understanding that at least for a fair period of time, they really do not have the freedom to do so without going through a lot of drama for it)

A lot of the advice from case studies, best practices, what is good for children, etc caused me a great deal of confusion because the actual system behaved counter to these recommendations.  'Advice' and 'solutions' for whatever reason did not apply to my case (again, I have more than one highly rated lawyer - including a conciliation judge, tell me the same things).  Getting a judge to order something implies we actually get in front a judge.  In the limit, the courts default to the SAHM being the highest priority relationship to maintain with kids.  And things do get pushed to the limit - and then some.  (or at a minimum 'benefit of doubt' is given until the professionals sort out which side is more sane - starting out with the assumption there is craziness both ways.  It takes a long time for them to sort through this).

Dont validate the invalid

Focus on what is possible, not solving the impossible

Love.  Live.  Persistence.  Communication.  Availability.

These are things that ARE possible.

 :heart: