Family estrangement (in the sense of children or parents choosing to be disconnected from each other) is not a new topic for me. I remember reading issendai’s site on the topic in 2018 or so and finding the whole thing quite captivating. I generally subscribe to the view that we all have an absolute right to choose who we interact with and spend our time on, and that one does not owe anyone connection solely based on genetics.
Imagine my passion, then, when I read a piece by Lexi Pandell in WIRED this morning: “Are You Lonely? Adopt a New Family on Facebook Today“. Any look at estrangement will be complex, and without both sides I must admit I will be unable to make any definite statements one way or the other. But as Issendai pointed out those many years ago:
“The keywords to find abusers’ support communities are “estranged parents” and “grandparents’ rights.” – Down the Rabbit Hole
My worry with any such group is that it encourages people looking for support and emotional connection, which are certainly needed as much as any glass of water or meal, into a situation where they are matched with potentially abusive people. I know that is a bold claim that does not leave much room for good intent here. But I worry in such a way owing to the genesis of the group and it’s leader, whose actions with her own estranged family include the following:
Donna created another Facebook group, which is part open letter to her grandson, part chronicle of her experience as an estranged grandparent. She has written to her grandson about how he was a third cousin of Bob Dylan, sent him wishes for a happy Easter. She wrote letters about how his parents were keeping the family apart and attached an image of a $25 check written out to her son, which he had ripped up and returned. The content is incredibly personal, like encountering someone’s diary, but the group is public—how else would her grandson find it someday?
Her behavior is typical boundary pushing (writing checks and letters and sending them to the estranged child, thereby continuing to contact them against their wishes) and feels indicative of the kind of estranged parent that is toward the more narcissistic or abusive side. I do always err on the side of assuming children have good reasons for cutting contact, as the weight of society and perhaps your entire childhood press you to not sever your relationship with your parents.
Trying to contact people who do not wish to talk to you is abuse.
I think this article does not sufficiently deal with the family abuse dynamics that may be present, and thereby acts to rehabilitate it’s subjects (the estranged parents/grandparents). After all, they did not choose to follow parents who cut off their children, but those who were cut off.
The article cites one professional source:
Today, around 27 percent of American adults have cut off contact with a family member—one of the highest estrangement rates in the world. And it seems to be on the rise, according to Joshua Coleman, the psychologist and author of the buzzy 2021 book Rules of Estrangement. “Online support groups, Instagram influencers, TikTok influencers,” Coleman says, “all are huge contributors to this phenomenon.” While estrangement has always existed—abuse and divorce are common causes, as are disagreements over money, religion, sexual orientation, and politics—“never before was it characterized as a pathway to personal growth and identity the way it is today,” he says. But just as social media can lead to alienation, it can also bring people together. After all, Coleman runs his own private Facebook group for estranged parents and grandparents.
To my ears, this sounds like confusing a “left handedness” (or divorce rates post no-fault divorce) situation with “the kids are being influenced by social media to be trans, sorry, force of habit, to estrange their parents. I think the more logical explanation, and the one that preserves the children’s personhood and autonomy, would be as follows:
Given the nature of the parent child relationship up to the present day, in which the culture is and was so skewed towards owing your parents connection and respect solely for birthing you, is it any wonder that once presented with the view that, no, you actually are allowed to cut off your parents, that you are not inherently immoral or bad for doing so, and that there are good reasons for doing so, that more people would avail themselves of that remedy? It is no simple or easy task to decide on cutting family off. It is not a step these people take as a first resort. And yet, Coleman wants you to think of them as pursuing an identity. That they want internet clout and some apparently false ‘self-actualization’ all at the expense of the parents, who certainly didn’t do anything worth such drastic action….
You will find I do not believe in that line of thought. I feel as though they disregard the true feelings of these ‘children’ (many of who are, of course, full adults) as impulsive or somehow unconsidered. I think it is a construction that places them back into the role of children, who really ought to listen to their older and wiser betters. This incurious eye extends to the subjects of this piece. Turning back to our subject, we learn that the main subject of this piece, Karen, has two children, both of which have decided to cut off contact with her. As far as the information we have on the estrangement goes, it appears to be at the behest of the children and appears to be very limited to no contact. Given this, I find a couple of points of information very interesting.
Point the first:
Karen still expresses frustration and sadness about her daughters and keeps up with their whereabouts through mutual friends. When Angel the dog died, Karen texted her youngest daughter the news—but used a new number and posed as a family friend.
That sure sounds like circumventing a the younger daughter’s request to not be contacted. Why else use a new number and pose as a family friend? Thats a big strike and indica of abusive behavior to me, ignoring a clear boundary and circumventing perhaps the daughter’s blocking of her own number.
Point the second:
SEVERAL WEEKS AFTER my trip to Minnesota, Karen calls to say that she’s in touch with her youngest daughter again. Her daughter’s brain cancer has returned. Karen’s voice shakes; patients with this diagnosis tend to live five years, maybe less. She wants to help her daughter through treatment, but her daughter has only agreed to communicate by phone….
When Karen got the news of the diagnosis, she hired more workers for the farm so she could drop everything for her daughter. She waited for a call that never came; her daughter stopped responding. As months passed without her daughter asking for help, Karen was left with an open calendar.
This is a stark scenario. I can not imagine facing down my mortality and then faced with that also have to manage my relationship with my estranged parent. And then she clearly decided that she did not want to communicate with Karen. To me this is such a powerful message that I would find it so hard to believe anyone but the children. I take some small comfort in thinking the daughters have each other still, as the piece alludes to the daughters being involved with each other.
One final blow:
For years, Karen’s daughter made soap, helped with the goats, and manned farmers’ market tables. Then she turned 18 and got a boyfriend. She quit her job with Rapha Farms a few days after her 19th birthday and, not long after that, moved out of Karen’s house. She got married in 2023. Karen was not invited. “I honestly don’t understand what happened between us,” Karen wrote in a Rapha Farms Instagram post congratulating the couple
“I don’t understand what happened between us”
The missing missing reasons. I hate to lean so strongly on issendai, but I believe they have put together such a comprehensive account and analysis of family estrangement it will stick with me the rest of my days. I find it terribly prescient and convincing, and will always admit that my view is terribly shaped by it.
But yet it still tracks. She doesn’t know why her youngest daughter cut her off, it came out of the blue. We only hear one reason from her on why her youngest might have estranged, and it is this:
Four years later, in 2023, Karen’s younger daughter, with her older sister’s help, left too.
Is it the older sisters fault? This feels like the closest thing we get to a reason, and it either (in the kind view) reports only that the older daughter assisted the younger, or it implies the older daughter ‘convinced’ or otherwise pushed the younger to cut off their mother. I don’t find the 2nd view to be supported by just that text alone, but it still rattles in my mind. It feels like the sort of thing you get in these situations. Leaving in my drafting-note-to-self for this section as one last indicator of my incredible bias.
— last section before close reiterating my biased-as-hell I only believe the children view —
Abuse is a complicated thing. One does not spend all their time being abused, but may spend much of it in generally acceptable, or at least non-abusive, periods. One will even be happy on occasion. None of this changes the abusive parts of the relationship, though. I worry that people searching for connection may end up being matched with some folks who may end up victimizing them.
The found family dynamic, too, is complicated. I hope that the parent/child dynamic that can be so abused to control or manipulate children is not so strong in such a relationship made of free choice, therefore lowering the amount of effort required to sever ties if any such party wishes to.
I hope all these newfound families work out. I hope they are prosperous and help each other and everyone gets a chance to build and find families for themselves. We are all owed such a chance. We are all owed second chances too. I am, perhaps, overly negative and ascribing too much weight to the red flags.
But I worry this article obscures some warning signs that, to me, would preclude my involvement if I were so inclined to build a family. There are signs that are troubling, and things that to me signal some degree of caution. I think if one knows these things and has fair warning then you can take that risk, but this article does not provide any context or explanation of such issues.