She knows my feelings about this...

[Enabler]

and if it's not actionable then the action of reporting and likely motivation of reporting is to transfer responsibility in the event that anything bad might happen... which frankly I wouldn't care two hoots about if something bad did happen... I'd likely not care that I might have "put D10 in the middle of conflict" by asking her to let me know when they've been left alone. I dare say D7, D10 or even D12 wouldn't be sympathetic with the conclusion I came to to leave alone because I would be triangulating D10, in the event of an accident happening.

[Skip]

I am not co-parenting with my wife, and instead (under your advisement) I am parallel parenting. My wife lacks the consistency to carry out agreed parenting plans and guidelines in the manner she talks so passionately about...

The reason to parallel parent is because of a couples inability to work together without conflict. Conflict is bad for the adults and worse for the children.

I think it will help if you can see that it's not about her being a defective irresponsible idiot - its about the two of you having irreconcilable differences and being at each others throats - willing to fight over just about anything.

Look at your past posts. There is very little you can discuss without going off on a tangent about what a pathetic human being she is. You continue to mock even her exercise (running) as a fault. The resentment and the anger is neck deep and its only increased in separation.

You've played a significant role in that. As has she. Who is the chicken and who is the egg doesn't matter anymore - you are not able to work together or sort things out so its best to parallel parent.

Parallel parenting means letting her do what she is going to do unless it is so egregious that the authorities or the court needs to intervene.

Being effective to me =
- D7 to be supervised within the bounds of normal parent behaviour (and that could mean 10 mins with D10 to pop to the corner shop), normal parents do take a punt ever now and again, but typically they don't systematically deviate from social norms.
- W is able to pull the rip cord and go for a run if it's her means of coping, and have a means of ensuring D7 and D10's supervision.
- W is not able to use the rip cord for alternative "needs"... W is not able to take advantage and on the whole feels the full burden of her parenting responsibilities.
- Or that W doesn't know that a safety net is being provided

Q: Why did you not handle this in a non-threatening, non-judgemental way to start?

A: Because you are fearful it will trigger your wife's wrath.

So the work around in your relationship is to deliver an edict. And to work  through the children who are cooperative because they trust you (and her).

Expressing that it displeases you and telling the child to call you, blows any possible cooperation out of the water. She is just going to build a higher wall between you.

This is a little like a bar fight that spilled into the street. Things are better in the bar - but the fight is going stronger than ever.

Being effective to me =
- D7 to be supervised within the bounds of normal parent behaviour (and that could mean 10 mins with D10 to pop to the corner shop), normal parents do take a punt ever now and again, but typically they don't systematically deviate from social norms.
- W is able to pull the rip cord and go for a run if it's her means of coping, and have a means of ensuring D7 and D10's supervision.
- W is not able to use the rip cord for alternative "needs"... W is not able to take advantage and on the whole feels the full burden of her parenting responsibilities.
- Or that W doesn't know that a safety net is being provided

This is complicated and you know it won't work with her. I don't know that it would work with anyone. When people break up, they don't feel accountable to their ex.

And you know this, so you added "or that W doesn't know that a safety net is being provided ". In other words, have the children mitigate for the parents.

My hunch (based on talking to my lawyer friend) is that my lawyer would recommend the least culpability route of telling social services therefore leaving the problem in their hands to investigate or not, but she's not so much concerned with minimising conflict as she is about risk management.

Do you think your friend is OK for you to put young girls in harms way? Or do you think she is saying, in a professional way, stay out of it?

NL, be careful not to think that everything you do is for a higher purpose. I remember you arguing some of your confrontational  behaviors becaus you following gods plan. The argument here is that you are saving the children from imminent danger.

Why not meet with the child psychologist - by yourself - and talk this out? If she will only provide services for $45,000 - then find another more reasonable child psychologist.

[Enabler]

The reason to parallel parent is because of a couples inability to work together without conflict. Conflict is bad for the adults and worse for the children.

The reason I parallel parent is because anything that is agreed in harmonious communication is abandoned soon after and things are rarely put into practice. Co-parenting typically requires compromise by me or parenting being "put upon me in her way", which is not reciprocated. It becomes one sided and definitely not collaborative. Since collaboration is voluntary and I have no effective way to encourage adherence to collaboration, yet me collaborating is typically detrimental to me and/or my relationship to the children it seems futile to continue. My W talks a good game with regards to co-parenting but her ability to achieve it is limited. There is typically very little conflict around how parenting should happen, there is typically conflict around me pointing out that the agreed way did not occur.

Parallel parenting means letting her do what she is going to do unless it is so egregious that the authorities or the court needs to intervene.

As discussed, authorities would not get involved until something bad happened, that strikes me a bizarre situation where the negative outcome determines whether or not a decision was good or bad. At work we record all trade errors whether or not they have positive or negative outcomes. So is leaving D7 egregious if she inadvertently covers herself with boiling water and gets 50% 2nd degree burns... but otherwise it was okay? Like I said, there is a line with parallel parenting and I think you, I and others differ on where that line is.

Why did you not handle this in a non-threatening, non-judgemental way to start?

This has been discussed already in such a way, the very fact that she has said to the children "it's none of Dad's business", wouldn't that point to non-threatening, non-judgemental ways having already failed since she's aware of our discussion yet choosing to act anyway?

Because you are fearful it will trigger your wife's wrath.

No, because it's not effective

So the work around in your relationship is to deliver an edict. And to work  through the children who are cooperative because they trust you.

The children do trust me, that is correct. Because I have demonstrated to them that I am consistently trustworthy. My W has demonstrated to them that she is not trustworthy and they continue to see disparities and contradictions in what she says and what she does. The workaround you are suggesting is that I leave the children at risk, keep myself to myself and support my wife's unprofessionally supported view that it's okay for D7 to be left with D10 for longer than "pop out".

Do you think your friend is OK for you to put young girls in harms way? Or do you think she is saying, in a professional way, stay out of it?

Not sure how you got that from what I said... my lawyer friend would fire both barrels at her because he absolutely doesn't think it's okay and it needs to stop NOW or at the very least flag it to someone, and he realises how ineffective a quiet word has/would be. Lawyers like to outsource risk to professionals though and often a bit trigger happy about the knock-on consequences. 

Why not meet with the child psychologist - by yourself - and talk this out? If she will only provide services for $45,000 (like the $120,000 lawyer) - then find another more reasonable child psychologist.

To clarify I said "+ the co-parenting 3-6 month course that she pushes is a commitment of about £30k (no joke) which is hugely out of scope, and the P doesn't seem keen to spot solve issues (rightly so probably as it's just plugging holes)" ... because the child P teaches people how to co-parent not spot weald a leaking bucket. I believe that she would not want to spot weald this issue with me directly (not possible as contractually she is not allowed to see us individually) or as a couple as she would see it as a little pointless. Cost is £2k a month for 6-12 months so £12-24k. I have spoken to my own T who is also works with children (whom is very supportive of the approach I am taking with the children generally) but that was when this situation arose several years back. I will discuss with him when I next see him.

NL

[Enabler]

its about the two of you having irreconcilable differences and being at each others throats - willing to fight over just about anything.

and willingness to exert their right to freedom of choice over just about anything.

[Skip]

The reason I parallel parent is because anything that is agreed in harmonious communication is abandoned soon after and things are rarely put into practice. Co-parenting typically requires compromise by me or parenting being "put upon me in her way"

Is this any different than what I said? If your wife was here, she would blame all the problems in the relationship on you. Irreconcilable differences. Right?

there is a line with parallel parenting and I think you, I and others differ on where that line is.

NL, there is not a single person in this thread who encouraged you to strike a deal with your children to call you when mom goes for a run or to deliver an edict to your wife on what is acceptable to you regarding home-alone time.

Posters said, universally, do not put your kids in the middle of this dispute.

Posters offered you a myriad of alternatives for dealing with this including:

"let it go" deal with it via third party in the settlement discussions deal with it via third party in the discussions with the psychologist deal with it via third party in Child Services respectfully talk to mom and offer to take the kids in a pinch

You considered and rejected the above and decided to put your 10 year old in the middle "To be clear re D10, at the moment I have told her to contact me if she is uncomfortable with the situation or she feels in danger. "

You were clear.

... authorities would not get involved until something bad happened, that strikes me a bizarre situation where the negative outcome determines whether or not a decision was good or bad. At work we record all trade errors whether or not they have positive or negative outcomes. So is leaving D7 egregious if she inadvertently covers herself with boiling water and gets 50% 2nd degree burns... but otherwise it was okay?

I assume this is a rhetorical question  

... but lets treat it as a real question.

Most child protective authorities in the countries represented here would not go knocking on the door if a husband reported that a wife leaves a 10  and a 7 year old alone while she goes to jog.

The survey I send you said that ~500 professionals didn't have strong feelings that a 4 hour home-alone situations were bad (some did, some didn't). The researcher used 4 hours because he knew shorter times would be of far less concern.

Are all these professionals calloused, unconcerned about children, and incompetent? Probably not.

Would they have had the same reaction if the question included a loaded handgun within easy access of the children?  Probably not.

The point is that responsible parents can leave children at that age alone for periods of time safely and it is happening all the time.

Of course they will investigate if there is harm. They would investigate if a child drowns in a pool, too - but they are not going to take kids away from parents with pools?

You personally think anything over 10 minutes is dangerous. That's OK for your parenting time. But it doesn't mean your wife or the large number of social workers in the survey have bizarre reasoning.

It also doesn't mean that you are bizarre for thinking 10 minutes is the max.

It does mean that reasonable people can see this differently and that while you have every right to draw the line at 10 minutes in your house - you wife has every right to draw in at 30.

I have grand-kids (from three kids) around the house in the same age groups as your kids from time to time. All three have different ideas on leaving children alone. All three are good parents and have good kids. In my house we have our own ideas on child safety too - we are more careful than any of them because we try to be role models.

All three kids have questioned each others parenting choices from time to time - a lot of that has happened especially in CoViD-19 world. But they keep it to themselves (or tell us)... because there are many reasonable ways to raise children and not everyone see everything the same. Frankly, even in my house we see things differently about where to draw the line with CoViD-19 exposure... and we compromise.

There are going to be many more parenting disconnects going forward. You two are not going to see eye to eye of her dating, or her socializing. You will likely disagree on freedoms for the kids, discipline, who pays for braces, etc. You will be endlessly wrapped in conflict unless you truly parallel parent. Especially in the beginning when tensions are high.

You used a good term earlier; "staying in my lane". That's good. If your lawyer, and therapist, and the reference books say "let it go"... let it go... stay in your lane.

[defogging]

It seems you're spending a ton of energy on trying to prevent a big "what if" scenario from happening.  This will drive you nuts if you let it.  I've been there man, I get it.  The reality is your D7 can just as easily burn herself with hot water while you're in the shower, while you're outside getting the mail, while you're helping D10 with homework, etc.  Life happens and kids will find a way to get themselves into trouble.

I suggest you channel your efforts in a more productive way.  Instead of trying to change your W's behavior, give your kids the tools to deal with it.  I've started allowing my D10 to stay home alone for short periods, but that also came with a discussion (with all of the kids) about the rules when Dad is gone, and what to do in case of an emergency.  My kids are now armed with the knowledge that if something happens, they know which neighbors to go to, and the phone numbers for the authorities and trusted family members are posted on the wall.  You can frame this in a way that has nothing to do with Mom.  What if Dad has a heart attack and is unconscious?  Dad slips and cracks his head open?  They know what to do in my house, so by default they know what to do in Mom's house.  

You can't move the immovable object, so you have to stop attempting to be the irresistible force.  Whether it's leaving to go for a run or any other thing under the sun, your kids will deal with a lot of dysfunction at the other house just like mine do.  Keep teaching them to fend for themselves and they will develop the confidence to work around the immovable object without Mom (or them) even being aware of it.

I've gotten to the point where I feel I've taught my kids enough about an emergency situation that even if my exPDw left all three at home for an hour I trust that they would be able to handle an emergency and get help if needed.  Heck, my ex might be doing the same thing as yours, but I'm comfortable enough now that I don't worry about it.

[Fian]

Statement 1 - Not reporting to the authorities that your D7 is left alone with D10 puts you at legal risk if something happens.
Statement 2 - Authorities won't really care that D7 is left alone with D10.

One of these statements isn't true.  I suspect that you are using Statement 1 to justify the action that you want to take.  So why not report her to the authorities?  If it is truly an issue that they don't find concerning then you have covered the risk of Statement 1 without causing an escalation with your wife.  Of course if Statement 2 is not valid, then you just caused a big issue for your wife and you.

[Enabler]

Posters offered you a myriad of alternatives for dealing with this including:
          "let it go"
deal with it via third party in the settlement discussions
deal with it via third party in the discussions with the psychologist
deal with it via third party in Child Services
respectfully talk to mom and offer to take the kids in a pinch

You considered and rejected the above and decided to put your 10 year old in the middle "To be clear re D10, at the moment I have told her to contact me if she is uncomfortable with the situation or she feels in danger. "

You were clear.

I believe the board may be mislead here with the order of events and statements suggesting I was "clear" about things that I wasn't. I feel the board has gotten the impression that I have systematically rejected all proposals/ideas/suggestions.

2 incidents happened over the weekend, I made a call on it. I don't think the call I made to get D10 to call me was egregious and others I have spoken to have suggested I do that, some if not all of the participants here believe it was.

The above statement was stating the situation as it stands NOW... not as it was suggested as a statement suggesting I have rejected all other advice.

Each suggestion has it's merits but it's downfalls. I am a contrarian, if you show me the positives of something I will point out the negatives. That is not me rejecting out of hand as some members might suggest, more that I don't see these options as black or white. I would like to have a clearer picture before taking my next move, since my actions have consequences.

The only thing that I have rejected is the suggestion that this isn't a problem, and that experts have supported this suggestion. Given what's been put in front of me and the comments made about that data I do not see them aligning. I also cannot align how I would own a choice to not do anything. 

Statement 1 - Not reporting to the authorities that your D7 is left alone with D10 puts you at legal risk if something happens.
Statement 2 - Authorities won't really care that D7 is left alone with D10.

I think I was clear that I was less concerned with the legal implications than the guilt that I would feel... however I disagree that both these statements can't stand as true albeit "legal risk" might be a bit strong. I am "short that put" rather than social services. There are more risks involved than just being criminally prosecuted (which I don't think I have suggested is a risk).

Of course if Statement 2 is not valid, then you just caused a big issue for your wife and you.

Exactly... and what are the consequences of chucking that hand grenade into her life?

None of the options are without consequences, knowing what they are is important (to me). It may be that putting (continuing to) D10 in the middle is the "best" option amongst an array of less appealing alternatives, it may not. I appreciate that for some of you this appears to be a simple decision and you're miffed as to why I waste time and effort deliberating over what to do about it... a lot of people don't assess the £ per g cost of cheese in the supermarket, I do. Making informed, purposeful and considered choices is important to me. Having a consistent, joined up narrative is important to me. If parallel parenting is what I have chosen to do, and by choosing to do that I must stay in my lane, I need to get comfortable with not solving the problem or even addressing the problem and have awareness of the possible consequences of that.

NL

[once removed]

I am a contrarian, if you show me the positives of something I will point out the negatives.

this is, by and large, widely considered a toxic trait, New-Life. outside of the investment world, i cant tell you a time i have ever heard the term used as a positive descriptor. when i do, it tends to be used to describe a person who is being difficult... or a difficult person.

the older all of us get, the more we tend to become set in our ways. there can be a tendency to see the things about us that cause conflict as either a virtue, or just something other people need to accept.

can you see that attitude in what youre writing? can you see where that might not serve you, either in seeking support, or in navigating divorce, or in navigating parallel parenting?

can you answer those things without telling me "perhaps...but what about the positives?" 

[Fian]

As a contrarian myself, I have to disagree.  Contrarians serve an important purpose in society.  We resist group think.  We are more likely to see the upcoming storm clouds that others choose to ignore.

Now, being a contrarian can also be a negative, and it does have toxic qualities.  We should all be aware that our personality traits have downsides and try to minimize them as much as possible.  There are down sides of being an optimist too (don't bring an optimist to a casino).

[Harri]

The originating poster has filed a complaint via PM (and alluded to in the thread) that a moderator has made malicious embellishments, misrepresentions and purposely misquoted this research study:

...	Child abuse and neglect experts’ determination of when a child being left home alone constitutes child neglect. Injury Epidemiology April 5, 2018 (Suppl 1):16. PMCID: PMC5893514 PMID: 29637427

In violation of:

...

2.5 Lying and Misrepresentations: This is an anonymous support group. Please use this anonymity to speak more freely and honesty than you can in your home environment. If you lie on an anonymous message board, you are not serious about improving your emotional well being or your lifestyle, and you're not qualified to be part of this community. Lying to us is lying to yourself and that is a poor way to begin change and healing. www.bpdfamily.com/guidelines#lying

Staff findings:

The findings are that the moderator's comments were consistent with the study. We do not see anything that would be considered malicious. The representation of the study does not appear to be embellished, misrepresented, misquoted or otherwise in violations of the guideline.

Professionals were surveyed at the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Child Abuse and Neglect. The majority of respondents were 50 years of age or older.

96% percent said it wasn't neglect to leave a typical 12 year old alone for 4 hours.

52% percent said it wasn't neglect to leave a typical 10 year old home alone for 4 hours.

There are additional findings here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5893514/

Harri

[Enabler]

Thanks Harri for looking into this for me.

Could you highlight the section of the paper that says that 4 hours was chosen because the researcher knew that below 4 hours the respondents wouldn’t care. I cannot find this. This statement might suggest I was being petty (vs the expert respondents) think that 1 or 2 hours was not okay (I don’t think I used the word neglect).

Could you put forward the statistics relating to the 7 year old in question rather then my 10yr old. I can see statistic for 6 and 8 year olds which suggest that the majority of respondents DID see both these age groups as neglect. Missing out these data points might leave readers thinking my concerns were primarily related to my 10yr old rather than my 7yr old. Although one might argue that if my 7yr old is accompanied by my 10yr old the 10yr old would be the child any assessment of “neglect” would be based on... if the 10yr old is neither equipped to be responsible or willing to be responsible my 7yr old is in effect “on her own”. Would an assessment of neglect of a 2yr old left with a 10yr old be based on the 10yr olds capabilities? Missing out this information skews the readers perception that firstly we’re talking about my 10yr old which I repeatedly said I was not, but also that I was not aligned to “experts” on what is and isn’t okay.

Thanks

NL

[ForeverDad]

New-Life, let me introduce myself.  I've been here in peer support for nearly 15 years.  Most members arrive here, get the help and support they need and in time fade away.  Somehow I just haven't managed to move on from here.  But that's another matter for me to deal with.  I was even an advisor for a year or so way back in the early days but it added too much stress for me and so I stepped down.  It's been over a dozen years since then, my son was 3 years old when I arrived here, now he's grown and taking college classes.  Yes, I've seen a lot while I've been here, posting here and there, now up around 16,000 posts.

I see that we're stuck on what you should later look back on as "minutiae" — the small, precise, or trivial details of something.  Yes, the parenting responsibilities are important but there's a point where you can say, Enough said.  If need be, the courts or other authorities can step in and make a determination.  There are lots of more meaningful things to spend our time on.

Do you want to look back, say a year from now, and ponder how argumentative this issue became?  That perspective of looking back, that's what is called stepping outside the box and viewing things more impartially with time and less from a personal perspective.

There's a camaraderie we foster here — mutual trust and friendship among people who spend a lot of time together.  Hmm? 

[Harri]

Hi NewLife


In response to your request for more data about "time left alone" , I found this. 

Although some states specify an age appropriate for legally leaving the child home alone, most states do not expressly state an age. Therefore, states in collaboration with the Department of Health and Human Services have formulated some guidelines to assist parents who are making this decision:

  Ages 7 and under: Cannot be left alone at home during any period of the time. This includes leaving them unattended in the cars, backyards and playgrounds. This is a vulnerable age and their would be a high risk to their safety;[/td][/tr][/table]
  Ages 8 to 10: are permitted to be home alone only during daylight or early morning hours for no later than 1 and ½ hours;
  Ages 11 to 12: can be left alone during the day for up to 3 hours but not late at night;
  Ages 13 to 15: are permitted to be left unsupervised, but not overnight and;
  Ages 16 to 17: can be left unsupervised for up to 2 days.

I hope that helps.

[Fian]

First, I don't have any kids, so take this with a grain of salt.  I think the existence of an older child would make experts a little more tolerant of a younger child being "alone."  Doesn't mean they think it is ok, but it is not as bad as if the young child was entirely on their own.

As for your 10 year old not wanting that role, I think that life is forcing them to grow up a little faster.  Often, the middle child can avoid situations of responsibility as those tend to go to the oldest child.  Being forced into a more responsible role can be a positive.  I suspect that part of the issue may be that parents would prefer that a divorce would have no impact on their children.  Sadly, that can't be the case, and in some situations, like this one, children have to do more.

One thing that I would like to challenge you on is the difference between being misinformed and lying.  It is possible to be wrong, and not lying.  Lying involves intent.  At this point, we can all look at the original article and determine for ourselves what it is saying.  To be honest, it seems like the article was more focused on how state law shapes the results that they got, rather than finding a consensus from the experts on how young was too young.

[Enabler]

Thanks for all your input here. Thanks Harri for the guidelines, that’s useful at the very least for calibrating myself to what is an isn’t expert opinion on the matter.

ForeverDad, I can see why you might have stuck around, the wisdom here not just from a BPD perspective is pretty impressive. I think there is a difference in this group of people, than groups I may interact with in daily life and one might argue that I probably wouldn’t come into contact with all these types of people in my daily life... yet here we are and despite what some of you may think, I value all your opinions even if it might appear that I am being dismissive of them. I value the opportunity you offer me to try and see the downright irritating sides to me, and opportunity to reflect on how certain personality traits are combative and propel discussions into never ending circles.

I haven’t taken any action on the matter in hand at the moment. Maybe I will, maybe I won’t, but if and when I do I’d feel like I’d be equipped to do so. Having the discussion here rather than in the real world seems somewhat safer. I appreciate the little details are holistically irrelevant, but let’s say I approach my W on the matter and she stumbles upon a tiny little detail, ‘an out’... well then my experience is that the approach tends to get blown out the water and rather than being effective, it becomes a step back. Those outs could be numerous, it could be my tone of voice, the language I use, the professional I approach. Being effective is the priority.

Fian, I appreciate your point on the middle child. D10 is already stretched in that department and I think she already feels the pinch doing the right thing since D12 is here 100%. D10 currently feels unappreciated and under rewarded. Also, given the data Harri put forward it would seem that D10 is only just borderline with regards to the personal responsibility she’s already been asked to adopt if she was there on her own, I don’t think it would be reasonable to ask more of her. Ie of it wee reasonable to leave a 10yr old for 4 hours it might be reasonable to ask her to look after her 7yr old sister for 15 minutes. Do you see my point here?

D10 mentioned yesterday that W doesn’t answer her phone when she D10 is left. She said that I was her first port of call when she’s on her own on that basis.

NL

[Skip]

but let’s say I approach my W on the matter and she stumbles upon a tiny little detail, ‘an out’... well then my experience is that the approach tends to get blown out the water and rather than being effective, it becomes a step back. Those outs could be numerous, it could be my tone of voice, the language I use, the professional I approach. Being effective is the priority.

One common thread in a lot of your request for support to help you explore ways to get your wife to see things the way you do - and hopefully modify her behavior when she sees the light.

And repeatedly, she is not having it. Even if she does see it, shes not giving you that satisfaction of knowing.

You are always trying to thread the needle and not touch the sides.

Parallel parenting is letting go of trying to coordinate parenting. You've got intermediaries and a mediation process, use it. Look at the parenting software - its great - operate through that.

D10 mentioned yesterday that W doesn’t answer her phone when she D10 is left. She said that I was her first port of call when she’s on her own on that basis.

You put a flag in the ground that you are her rescuer in her conflicts with her mom when you told her last week to call you. That made her feel good and it made you feel good as often the rescuer and victim bond in a drama triangle.

This is natural.

It is not necessary good.

Triangulation can be bad. It can be good.

Bad triangulation would be the solidification that you are her "go to" person when she has conflict with her mom.

Good triangulation would be if you defuse the conflict (mommy love you, maybe she didn't hear the phone) and show her how to  problem solve with her mom.  You could even recreate the situation with yourself and let her use her new skill with you to get confidence and hone the skill.

This is at the core of Family Theory.

[Enabler]

Hi Skip,

You might be  right about the general theme of my posts, I’ll think about that. This thread however I thought I was clear that it’s not my W’s thinking that I’m looking to change, because her verbalisation of her views on leaving kids has been on the side of prudent. So I can’t say that I’m looking to change her thoughts on the matter, but I if I could I would want her to adhere in practice to the childcare policies she verbalises to me. I don’t like double standards, I’m not sure many people do, but ultimately that’s a thread I’ve lived with for many years so it’s now more of a siiiiiiiigh than the real issue.

I think we’ve ascertained that there’s no simple solution to this and that even though it might be obviously not optimal parenting (to most and the majority of experts... and my W) effecting behavioural change either comes at the cost of a lot of conflict, a game of Russian roulette OR supportive training.

My D10 wasn’t trained by me that my W’s actions were “bad”, I supppse in theory she could have been, however she’s just as likely to have listened to my W’s vocalisation of her views on children being left unattended and come to the same conclusion. Similarly I have not told my D that being contactable when she’s being left alone is “good”, maybe it’s just her experience that leads her to think this is optimal.

One of the upsides of being in separate house is that I’m able to define and differentiate my world and my W’s world. Whilst we were sharing a house I’m pretty sure the kids saw us as a homogenous “parents” rather than 2 entities with different ways. I’m pretty sure that the kids see this and they’re making value judgements as to what they like and don’t like. I answer the phone... my W doesn’t. If I leave D10 or D12 I talk with them before I go and explain what I am doing, how long I’ll be and how they can get in touch with me. I am clear about this because I think it’s important. I wast critical about my D10’s value judgement about my wife being contactable. I wasn’t going to invalidate that, neither was I going to tell my D what my W’s reasons for not answering the phone were... I don’t know what her reasons are, I don’t live with her. I’m not sure why it would be appropriate for me to speak on my W’s behalf. What it sounds like you’re suggesting is that I rescue my W from the consequences of her poor parenting. I can understand it being wrong to disrupt my W’s opportunity to demonstrate optimal parenting or even be overly critical of small slip ups. But this doesn’t sound like what you’re suggesting, it sounds like you’re suggesting I compensate for her shortfalls, even maybe covering up her shortfalls, maybe even telling the kids it’s reasonable ... wouldn’t that be rather confusing for vaguely smart kid?

NL

[Fian]

Fian, I appreciate your point on the middle child. D10 is already stretched in that department and I think she already feels the pinch doing the right thing since D12 is here 100%. D10 currently feels unappreciated and under rewarded. Also, given the data Harri put forward it would seem that D10 is only just borderline with regards to the personal responsibility she’s already been asked to adopt if she was there on her own, I don’t think it would be reasonable to ask more of her. Ie of it wee reasonable to leave a 10yr old for 4 hours it might be reasonable to ask her to look after her 7yr old sister for 15 minutes. Do you see my point here?

I agree it isn't reasonable, it is more of whether it is severe enough to involve the state.  She is being forced to grow up faster than you or she would like.

[Enabler]

Involving social services is sledge hammer nut in my opinion. My guess is that these medium but not egregious issues will mount. One suggested solution is to train my D’s whilst somewhat swerving the underlying problem, however I predict this is going to be a game of ‘whack-a-mole’ where I run around like headless chicken attempting to train and swerve, rather than deal with things. If anything that sounds more like the threading the eye of a needle without touching the sides Skip referred to. I’d end up twisting myself (and the kids) in knots dragging them into premature adulthood before their time.   

[Skip]

What it sounds like you’re suggesting is that I rescue my W from the consequences of her poor parenting. I can understand it being wrong to disrupt my W’s opportunity to demonstrate optimal parenting or even be overly critical of small slip ups. But this doesn’t sound like what you’re suggesting, it sounds like you’re suggesting I compensate for her shortfalls, even maybe covering up her shortfalls, maybe even telling the kids it’s reasonable ...

I am saying you should shield your daughter from the emotional consequences of being a pawn in the parents battle with each other. And yes, an unintended consequence of that may be cutting your stbx wife some slack.

It may be that putting (continuing to) D10 in the middle is the "best" option amongst an array of less appealing alternatives, it may not. I appreciate that for some of you this appears to be a simple decision...

Triangles contribute significantly to the development of clinical problems in children.  

Few, if any of us, are capable of living a live with impeccable healthy reactions to every challenges. That's a given. Even when we know what we should do, but we slip. We need to try to do better as we go forward.

Family System Theory is rooted in a post World War II government funded program that attempted to understand why some people returning from war (with similar war experiences) ended up living under bridges, drinking, killing themselves and others became leaders, motivational speakers, won metals in special Olympics, etc.

They learned that it had a lot to do with each individuals immediate family environment. This initial research became the foundation for Family Systems Theory.

A critical choice is (has been) before you:

do your best to provide as constructive a Family System for you daughters as possible. Doing that will have the unwanted outcome of protecting you wife from some consequences. or do your best to outwit your wife and insure that she suffers the maximum consequences. Doing that will have the unwanted outcome of seeding clinical problems in children.

As it stands now, if a drama triangle begins to develop where your wife stands to be the "persecutor" in the triangle, you take actions (or don't take actions) to let it rip. The near term impact is certainly satisfying, but there are longer term consequences for the girls to be concerned about.

Your stbx wife is going to do the same when she has the opportunity. That's how drama triangles are. Retaliation lies in wait.

If this continues, your girls are not going to be well adjusted women. Members here keep telling you this. They do not have  the cognitive skills to deal with these adult actions.

Your girls already have one strike against them, they are in a family that has mental health issues and that is heritable. Statistically one or possible two of your daughters are going to be very vulnerable to being scarred for life if their family system is not tuned into their special needs.

You have to chose. Healthy Family System or revenge. They are, in many ways, mutually exclusive pathways.

[Harri]

Hi New-Life.   

I can hear the struggle you are in.  I can also easily imagine the struggle your kids are going through as they adjust to a split home and parents who are still navigating their way through new ways of relating. 

I have been that kid, caught between 2 parents who are not getting along and who are in conflict.  Minor or major, everything became a sh*t show that I, in my childs mind, thought I was responsible for.  One parent pulling one way and the other in an entirely different direction.  I can tell you now that looking back, who was being the good/bad parent or creating the good/bad situation I was in was not even a secondary issue to consider.   Rather, the primary issue was not having skills to understand the emotions I was dealing with and the ability to cope.  Sure, it was nice (sometimes for me) at the time to have a parent step in and solve a problem for me or tell me to call them if there was an issue, but long-term it did nothing for me.  Nothing concrete was learned.  I had a very shaky sense of how to problem solve or respond in emotionally healthy ways.   I learned a series of reactions rather than responses and nothing about agency.
Emotions ruled and often chaos ensued and that pattern of behavior followed me for a long long time.  Sound familiar?  More importantly to you and your situation, I learned that ultimately I could not even depend on my healthier parent.

It may be that putting (continuing to) D10 in the middle is the "best" option amongst an array of less appealing alternatives, it may not. I appreciate that for some of you this appears to be a simple decision...

I don't at all think this is a simple solution for you, your stbx or especially your kids.     This stuff is hard!

I will say that I think that putting or continuing to put your 10 year old in the middle is the worst option of all of them however.  I do not say that to knock you or bring you down though.   I want to see if we can work through this.   

Like I said, I have been that kid and eventually, over time, ended up being quite broken emotionally.  I seemed capable and even happy go lucky as a kid and into my 20s or so, on the outside at least.  Inside was something else entirely.  Being put in the middle, for any reason, can break a kid in ways that may not show up until much later in life.  I had and still have a huge amount of anger towards my father for putting me in the middle and using me as a means to a so-called better end.  Intentionally or not, my parents used me as a buffer and a tool to teach the other a lesson, to teach me a lesson about how they are the good parent I can depend on etc.  It backfired badly New-Life.  It back fired on all of us.  No one but me changed their behavior and not for the better. 

What I needed more than anything was for a healthy adult to teach and demonstrate the tools I would need to navigate these hard situations.  I did not need to be rescued or have my parent solve issues for me, or have a parent step in for me.   All that did was leave me helpless for the future, a future guaranteed to have more episodes and incidents that put me in the middle or pitted one parent against the other.   I learned not to trust and I learned to despise my non father.  I had and still have far more anger and resentment towards my non parent than I do or did towards my impaired parent.  My relationship with him was close when I was a kid but over the decades to follow it became distant, fraught and quite shallow.   To make things even more difficult in terms of coping with my feelings for my dad is that those very feelings were so buried and so foggy, so hard to reach, even now, about 12 years after his death.  Everything revolved around my mom, her emotions, behaviors, etc.  She was the overwhelming presence in my life and my father was a bit of nothing in comparison.  He, in his action and sometimes inaction, in his words, was barely even there and he did it to himself.  He made himself nothing.

People talk about parental alienation a lot here and rightly so.  There is an aspect of it that we do not talk about and that is how the non-parent can play into their own alienation.  I do not want to see you go further down a path that is all but certain to back fire on you New-Life.  You and your kids are worth more than that.

You are in the best position to teach your kids resilience and problem solving skills now.  Please don't put them in the middle.  Please do not simply 'rescue' with disguised digs at mom, even if that is not your intention.  Kids pick up on all of that.  They may not be able to label it, but they know something is off and badly off.  The world is confusing enough.  The new family situation is confusing enough.   It seems to me as I read your posts that you are using similar ineffectual methods to deal with your wife now as you did in the marriage.  Again, I do not say that to harm you, I say it in the hope of giving you a different perspective. 

Your thoughts?

[Fian]

I guess I am not clear what is being proposed.  It sounds like New Life has been convinced to not call Social Services and escalate things into a high conflict divorce, which I believe the board leaders would agree.  New Life has told his daughter to call him if there is a problem (D7 injured, etc).  Do you disagree with that?  It is also proposed that he train D10 on what to do in an emergency (call 911, etc).  Are you saying that "stay in your own lane" means that he can't do any of those items?

[Skip]

New Life has been convinced to not call Social Services

NL can better answer this, but I don't think he ever considered this an option.

It is also proposed that he train D10 on what to do in an emergency (call 911, etc).  

Yes. How to avoid problems when alone (e.g., no using of appliances) and to have a safety plan. Maybe mom sets it up with a neighbor so the children can run to the house next door because its the fastest way to get an adult involved. Maybe its to call the parents.There are lots of viable safety plans.

New Life has told his daughter to call him if there is a problem (D7 injured, etc).

I think the quote was "contact me if you are uncomfortable with the situation". Days later the daughter confirmed "[NL] was her first port of call when she’s on her own.

This is the "getting out of the lane" part. This opens the door for D10 to call Dad first when "uncomfortable" with mom's decisions. Mom is already in the mode of "don't tell your dad" and that is a tough place for a 10 year old to be. One parent saying call me first, one saying don't call him. This is a no win scenario.

In a healthy situation, the parents need to support each others sovereignty. Children do better with structure and where there is a simple system for getting approval or being corrected.

[B53]

I hesitate to jump into this heated debate, but I think everyone is ignoring an important point. D10 doesn’t want this responsibility. It is causing her unneeded stress. As a mother and a teacher, this is not fair to do to a child. Safety is important, but so is her mental health. You have no idea how this stress may manifest itself in the future. There are too many children these days that are having anxiety attacks, cutting, drugs, acting out. I could go on and on. The only jobs a 10 year old should be required to have, is to do well at school, be a child and have fun. She has enough on her plate, dealing with divorce and COVID.
B53

[Turkish]

As a Gen-X latchkey kid of a single mother who worked nights, I wasoften on my own. When I was 9 in 4th grade, my mom locked me out of the house when she slept.

10 isn't necessarily bad being left alone, yet the concern is valid about the younger sibling. Unless the laws are clear in that jurisdiction, social services isn't likely to do anything much, and this will escalate conflict. Just yesterday, 7 years of separate homes, our D8 told me that she wished we all still lived together.

It's sad, but reality is what it is.

I'll say shorter than I did before: the kids should have a safety plan at your home, NL, and they will likely mirror it at their mom's home. I periodically talk to my kids, 8 and almost 11, about what to do. Being upper middle aged, I could drop dead tomorrow or otherwise become incapacitated. They need to know what to do (hit the alarm, go to neighbors, etc.).

[formflier]

I think it's entirely possible that what the group is giving as general advice and what NL is seeing as a parent of these particular children are both true.

I generally agree with the ages being talked about and times they can be left alone.  I've also got children that are those ages that I would not give anywhere close to that amount of freedom because I know them and/or their relationships with siblings (I don't care what the studies say).

I think it's entirely possible that NL is completely sound in his judgment that these particular children are not in anyway ready to do this and it is completely unsafe, regardless of studies and "what everyone else says".  Perhaps even unsafe enough that he should "go to the mat" over this.

Here is flip side, which can also be completely true.

It's one thing to decide that you need to "go to the mat" for your kids.  There is a separate part of this decision where you have to decide what you can actually do...what will that look like?

Sadly, I'm going to say it appears to be true that "the system" will be unlikely to support NL, because they don't know his kids.  They will focus on studies and all that "general data".

So there is a pickle.

Deal with a system that is not a personal system or deal with a disordered parent and try to nudge them in a better direction.

My vote is to deal with the disordered parent.  The "how" to do this could use some fleshing out.

Sucky situation, no way around it.

Oh...I'm with Fian an others that appear to be ok with contrarians.  Also true that you have to be careful.

Best,

FF

[Fian]

I had a side conversation with one of the board leaders about this situation (I don't have permission to post the PM so keeping this general).  I think we came to some agreements that might be helpful in this discussion.  Hopefully I am keeping to the spirit of our discussion:

1.  Your children's safety is paramount.  Concerns about problems with the divorce negotiations and parallel parenting are secondary to this.  Part of the disagreement on this thread is whether your wife's actions are reaching the threshold of putting your children at risk.  We probably won't come to an agreement on that.
2.  Even if the children are not at risk, there is the perception from both NL and his child that they are unsafe.  Perceptions matter, and it makes sense to take actions that will give NL and his daughter more comfort in their situations.
3.  Parallel parenting is designed to prevent marital issues that can make the situation worse, both when it comes to resolving parenting issues, plus the long term health of your children.  Parallel parenting guidance should not just be ignored.

So how does this come together?  Look for solutions that resolve the concerns of #1 and #2 but ideally do not cause problems with #3.  Let's take the situation where D10 calls NL at her mom's house and is concerned about a situation.  NL comes over (or tells her to come to his house), and then wife comes home, and you find out that D10 overreacted.  Now, you have a major issue that could have been avoided with a little nuance.

Here is the approach that I would recommend (and keep in mind I am not a father):
1.  D10 should be encouraged in the case of an issue to call mom before dad (assuming at mom's house), but she should also be assured that Dad is always there if she needs him.
2.  D10 should be given some guidance on what to do in case of an emergency.  The hope is that she will be less fearful of being in charge, as she knows what to do.
3.  In an ideal world NL and his wife would discuss the issue and come to some understandings.  NL has already said his wife can't be trusted to hold her end of a deal, but the real purpose is for her to agree to what NL already plans to do (i.e. above).  Even a small agreement might prevent some problems down the road.

[formflier]

3.  In an ideal world NL and his wife would discuss the issue and come to some understandings.  NL has already said his wife can't be trusted to hold her end of a deal, but the real purpose is for her to agree to what NL already plans to do (i.e. above).  Even a small agreement might prevent some problems down the road.

So...one of the hallmarks of my relationship that used to drive me bonkers (and still stirs me up) is someone that abrogates agreements (like FFw).

As a basic statement/question...should you make an agreement with someone that abrogates agreements?  Perhaps better asked, should you expect a person that abrogates agreements to NOT abrogate them and also, how should you react when they do abrogate an agreement.

I've kinda organized this issue in my mind to be more of a "conversation" as opposed to a "contract". 

Might be better to focus on what your pwBPD is trying to accomplish that to focus on "safety of the child". 

Sort of a "oh well sure you will be a better parent after a run, alone time or whatever she is off to do and then kind of add an "of course kids are welcome over here" or "i can stop by"

Then let's say this happens 10 times in a month and they are left alone 5 or 6 times.  That's better than being alone 15 times.

Very frustrating.  I just don't see a "one and done" solution.  At least I haven't experienced one in my relationship with this type of thing.

And...for the record my stuff has included actual illegal activity such as FFw directing one child to drive and put passengers in a vehicle that state statute explicitly forbids, although thankfully instances like that are rare.

Best,

FF

[Fian]

Conversation sounds like a good approach.