Does Estrangement Ideology foster personal growth? An interesting question, the answer to which is unlikely to fall out of the on-line estranged adult child forums. These forums form a sort of echo chamber in which the ideology is reinforced and amplified, doubters are reassured and spurred on to stand firm in their "No Contact" positions, opposing voices are denied, disparaged and ejected. Many accounts talk of doubts and, sometimes, failed reconciliations, but mostly these are quickly batted away. The charter and rules of at least one such forum specifically exclude opposing voices like parents.
I am baffled by the psychologists who encourage individualism rather than conflict resolution and forgiveness in families. I am undermined by the psychologists who consider challenging, but inevitable, family inter-relationships to be pathological co-dependence.
Therapists who encourage victimization ideology and the labeling of any discomfort as abuse encourage selfishness, rather than introspection.
I am hopeful that if studies and experience indicate that Estrangement Ideology does not lead to fulfillment, the professional therapy community may contribute positively.
Thank you for your clear and inciteful writings. This is the first time I am entering a forum, and I hope to engage constructively.
Steven, This is so timely and validating to estranged parents. But how do we turn the tide on societal norms which not only fracture families, but lead to discord among societies and the world?
Hi Serena, I truly believe in the adage that sunlight is the best disinfectant. We need to expose the ideologies behind these social manipulations, their goals and methods for all to see.
That's fantastic! I did much the same last year and worked through a lot of my own feelings – it may never be seen by another soul but it definitely helps.
1. I have heard two adults say, separately, that they always thought they had a wonderful childhood, with lots of freedom and adventure, and it wasn't until they were in therapy that they learned this was not freedom, it was neglect.
2. Many young adults make the argument that a good parent raises happy, productive children. Then they say that the fact that they aren't happy and productive proves they were raised poorly. At no point do they take any responsibility for the way their life is going.
I appreciate the passion behind your argument, but I respectfully disagree with several points. I understand that many feel parents are minimizing or distorting the past, but I see these reinterpretations as a natural evolution of memory rather than a calculated “rewriting” of history. Memories aren’t static records…they evolve as we gain new insights, sometimes through the lens of therapy, which aims to help individuals heal.
Labeling this process simply as “therapy-speak” misses the point. For many, revisiting painful memories isn’t about assigning blame or cementing a fixed narrative…it’s about understanding long-hidden wounds. When someone names experiences as gaslighting or trauma bonding, it’s often the first step in reclaiming their truth, not a tactic to exclude dialogue or reconciliation.
Moreover, the portrayal of estrangement as a battle between a revisionist child and a manipulative parent creates a divisive narrative that shuts down any opportunity for empathy. Both sides, in my view, are trying to make sense of a shared past that is naturally multifaceted and subjective. By insisting that one party holds all the objective truth, we risk invalidating the deeply personal journey of understanding and healing that many are undergoing.
I believe that moving away from these rigid labels might open up space for a more compassionate conversation…one where both parents and adult children can acknowledge the evolving nature of memory and perhaps, someday, find common ground.
I really appreciate this conversation, Steven. Your points resonate with me. Everyone interprets past events differently…what feels critical and highly emotional for one person might seem less so to another. I enjoy this discussion as we seem to be sharing a sense of estrangement on opposing sides, yet both striving to understand our differing perspectives. At the same time, it's important to be cautious about framing therapy in a negative light. While some therapy settings may risk amplifying one-sided narratives, when handled well, therapy can offer a balanced space for healing and dialogue rather than deepening divides. I don't have much experience with dedicated online forum spaces since they're not really my go-to, but I do spend time on platforms like Reddit and Substack. I've noticed that these spaces can offer a real sense of safety and community for people, even though it's also true that the same environments can sometimes lead to reinforcing negative views or fixed perspectives.
There are forums for both estranged parents and estranged adult children, both seem to be problematic, though I have not personally engaged in the parent ones. I found the adult children ones because I was doxed and a ping back took me to one of them. My anger at what I found there is somewhat expressed in the Part 5. The Hypocrisy of IT. As with a researcher I have been reading today, I differentiate between estrangement as a private fact and interpersonal process, and Estrangement Ideology as a formalised, pop-psychology/therapy based set of rules, a language of therapy based terminology and self-reinforcing echo chambers with cheer squads and public perception management. I have an article coming out on this where I discuss my relationship with my father, who at one point I did not speak to for some years. I didn't think of myself as an Estranged Adult Child (an identity label) or engage in forums to discuss my plight, or demand accountability or any sort of apology from him for beating my mother in front of me and splitting my entire family. We just didn't speak or make contact for a while—I guess you could say we had nothing to discuss. When my first child was born some years, later we reconnected and in his older years I supported him and my step-mother before he died. There were no rules, no "boundaries", no demands for him to change as a condition for us to speak and as it happens he gave up the booze and whatever demons he was carrying—not sure why and we never discussed it. Times have changed though.
I participated in estrangement expert Joshua Coleman's private FB group during the first year it was created. This was 2000, early on in the public discourse about this emerging phenomena. 5 years after https://www.issendai.com/psychology/estrangement/index.html
The parents/grandparents sharing of experiences was super helpful, until the sock puppets (angry estranged kids) came to abuse traumatized parents. Depending on the pathway to estrangement, i.e., spousal pressure, therapist encouraged, mental illness, etc, the stories read like scripts.
I have been looking at the Issendai Collection which at least one Estranged Adult Child forum links to as a redirect for estranged parents. It's a rather harsh look at in 2015 of parent's support groups and assumption that all participants who stay are abusers, and based on this assumption sets out to prove it so – a sort of circular logic. A later 2020 article recognises this early work has been weaponised by the estranged adult child forums and backs down slightly in providing some balance by comparing to adult child forums, which it contends have got worse over the five years, having been very supportive, rational and intellectually solidly based originally. An unfinished rough article dated July 2015 sets out a similar set of no-win scenarios for parental reconciliation as my Part 20. The "No Contact" Double Bind for Parents, but contends that because parents won't admit fault and "do the work" most attempts at reconciliation are doomed to fail.
None of what Issendai describes matches the handful of parent social media I participated in. Quite the opposition, parents do everything possible to understand and avoid harsh criticism even when deserved. We have been trained to respond this way.
Issendai appears to prove using chosen examples what was assumed in the first place—that the spaces are occupied by abusers—a circular argument. As a view from the other side though I would say it illustrates many of the things I have been pointing out rather well. I plan to do an article on it once I have absorbed it fully.
Thanks, Carri. All good points. Everyone has different perspectives on the past and events that may seem critical and highly emotional for one are nothing of the sort for another present at the same time and place. My big concern is in the online forums and some therapy situations where a feedback mechanism amplifies a one-sided version of events that inevitably escalates the stakes and drives a wedge between people.
From Dr Joshua Coleman's newsletter referencing this article:
“My top 5 take-home messages on memory:
1. Memory does not work like a video camera, accurately recording all the details of witnessed events. Instead, memory (like perception) is a constructive process. We typically remember the gist of an event rather than the exact details.
2. When we construct a memory, errors can occur. We will typically fill in gaps in our memories with what we think we must have experienced, not necessarily what we actually did experience. We may also include misinformation we encountered after the event. We will not even be consciously aware that this has happened.
3. We not only distort memories for events that we have witnessed, we may have completely false memories for events that never occurred at all. Such false memories are particularly likely to arise in certain contexts, such as (unintentionally) through the use of certain dubious psychotherapeutic techniques or (intentionally) in psychology experiments.
4. There is no convincing evidence to support the existence of the psychoanalytic concept of repression, despite it being a widely accepted concept.
5. There is currently no way to distinguish, in the absence of independent evidence, whether a particular memory is true or false. Even memories which are detailed and vivid and held with 100 percent conviction can be completely false.”
Thank you, I’ve read the article and I’m very familiar with false memories. Just trying to understand more the purpose of your post related to the ongoing discussion.
While it's true that memory isn’t a perfect recording of events, dismissing one side’s narrative by claiming “the truth does not choose sides” can be overly reductive. Yes, memories are reconstructive and sometimes fallible, but that doesn’t mean that all personal recollections are unreliable or that objective facts cannot be discerned. In cases of parental estrangement like we are discussing here…especially when we are talking about abuse and neglect-individuals often report consistent, deeply felt experiences that, while they may include minor inaccuracies, still point toward a broader reality that should not be disregarded and I include myself in this.
For example, even if some details are blurred over time, the recurring patterns of behavior, corroborative accounts, and even tangible evidence (like documented communications or changes in behavior over time) can lend significant weight to one party’s perspective. Dismissing these experiences simply because human memory is imperfect risks invalidating the very real emotional and psychological impacts that drive a person’s experience of estrangement and abuse.
Moreover, research on memory shows that while we do reconstruct events, this process isn’t entirely random. Our recollections often stabilize around core, emotionally significant details that repeatedly emerge, suggesting there is a kernel of truth at the heart of our memories. Rather than concluding that “the truth does not choose sides,” it may be more productive to acknowledge that while memory has its limitations, a careful, corroborative examination of all available evidence can often reveal which account is more consistent with the reality of events.
Acknowledging the imperfections of memory should not automatically lead us to an “equal-opportunity” dismissal of all accounts. Each perspective, especially in emotionally charged situations like parental estrangement involving abuse and neglect, deserves careful, empathetic, and evidence-based consideration to truly approach the underlying truth.
Does Estrangement Ideology foster personal growth?
I would be very interested in any studies addressing this. Professor Pillemer looked at the psychological benefits of reconciliation.
Are there stories of previously estranged adult children who now are critical of Estrangement Ideology?
Does Estrangement Ideology foster personal growth? An interesting question, the answer to which is unlikely to fall out of the on-line estranged adult child forums. These forums form a sort of echo chamber in which the ideology is reinforced and amplified, doubters are reassured and spurred on to stand firm in their "No Contact" positions, opposing voices are denied, disparaged and ejected. Many accounts talk of doubts and, sometimes, failed reconciliations, but mostly these are quickly batted away. The charter and rules of at least one such forum specifically exclude opposing voices like parents.
I am baffled by the psychologists who encourage individualism rather than conflict resolution and forgiveness in families. I am undermined by the psychologists who consider challenging, but inevitable, family inter-relationships to be pathological co-dependence.
Therapists who encourage victimization ideology and the labeling of any discomfort as abuse encourage selfishness, rather than introspection.
I am hopeful that if studies and experience indicate that Estrangement Ideology does not lead to fulfillment, the professional therapy community may contribute positively.
Thank you for your clear and inciteful writings. This is the first time I am entering a forum, and I hope to engage constructively.
Steven, This is so timely and validating to estranged parents. But how do we turn the tide on societal norms which not only fracture families, but lead to discord among societies and the world?
Hi Serena, I truly believe in the adage that sunlight is the best disinfectant. We need to expose the ideologies behind these social manipulations, their goals and methods for all to see.
Thank you for doing that. I too am endeavoring to do my part as I write a memoir about my estrangement experience.
That's fantastic! I did much the same last year and worked through a lot of my own feelings – it may never be seen by another soul but it definitely helps.
1. I have heard two adults say, separately, that they always thought they had a wonderful childhood, with lots of freedom and adventure, and it wasn't until they were in therapy that they learned this was not freedom, it was neglect.
2. Many young adults make the argument that a good parent raises happy, productive children. Then they say that the fact that they aren't happy and productive proves they were raised poorly. At no point do they take any responsibility for the way their life is going.
I appreciate the passion behind your argument, but I respectfully disagree with several points. I understand that many feel parents are minimizing or distorting the past, but I see these reinterpretations as a natural evolution of memory rather than a calculated “rewriting” of history. Memories aren’t static records…they evolve as we gain new insights, sometimes through the lens of therapy, which aims to help individuals heal.
Labeling this process simply as “therapy-speak” misses the point. For many, revisiting painful memories isn’t about assigning blame or cementing a fixed narrative…it’s about understanding long-hidden wounds. When someone names experiences as gaslighting or trauma bonding, it’s often the first step in reclaiming their truth, not a tactic to exclude dialogue or reconciliation.
Moreover, the portrayal of estrangement as a battle between a revisionist child and a manipulative parent creates a divisive narrative that shuts down any opportunity for empathy. Both sides, in my view, are trying to make sense of a shared past that is naturally multifaceted and subjective. By insisting that one party holds all the objective truth, we risk invalidating the deeply personal journey of understanding and healing that many are undergoing.
I believe that moving away from these rigid labels might open up space for a more compassionate conversation…one where both parents and adult children can acknowledge the evolving nature of memory and perhaps, someday, find common ground.
I really appreciate this conversation, Steven. Your points resonate with me. Everyone interprets past events differently…what feels critical and highly emotional for one person might seem less so to another. I enjoy this discussion as we seem to be sharing a sense of estrangement on opposing sides, yet both striving to understand our differing perspectives. At the same time, it's important to be cautious about framing therapy in a negative light. While some therapy settings may risk amplifying one-sided narratives, when handled well, therapy can offer a balanced space for healing and dialogue rather than deepening divides. I don't have much experience with dedicated online forum spaces since they're not really my go-to, but I do spend time on platforms like Reddit and Substack. I've noticed that these spaces can offer a real sense of safety and community for people, even though it's also true that the same environments can sometimes lead to reinforcing negative views or fixed perspectives.
There are forums for both estranged parents and estranged adult children, both seem to be problematic, though I have not personally engaged in the parent ones. I found the adult children ones because I was doxed and a ping back took me to one of them. My anger at what I found there is somewhat expressed in the Part 5. The Hypocrisy of IT. As with a researcher I have been reading today, I differentiate between estrangement as a private fact and interpersonal process, and Estrangement Ideology as a formalised, pop-psychology/therapy based set of rules, a language of therapy based terminology and self-reinforcing echo chambers with cheer squads and public perception management. I have an article coming out on this where I discuss my relationship with my father, who at one point I did not speak to for some years. I didn't think of myself as an Estranged Adult Child (an identity label) or engage in forums to discuss my plight, or demand accountability or any sort of apology from him for beating my mother in front of me and splitting my entire family. We just didn't speak or make contact for a while—I guess you could say we had nothing to discuss. When my first child was born some years, later we reconnected and in his older years I supported him and my step-mother before he died. There were no rules, no "boundaries", no demands for him to change as a condition for us to speak and as it happens he gave up the booze and whatever demons he was carrying—not sure why and we never discussed it. Times have changed though.
I participated in estrangement expert Joshua Coleman's private FB group during the first year it was created. This was 2000, early on in the public discourse about this emerging phenomena. 5 years after https://www.issendai.com/psychology/estrangement/index.html
The parents/grandparents sharing of experiences was super helpful, until the sock puppets (angry estranged kids) came to abuse traumatized parents. Depending on the pathway to estrangement, i.e., spousal pressure, therapist encouraged, mental illness, etc, the stories read like scripts.
I have been looking at the Issendai Collection which at least one Estranged Adult Child forum links to as a redirect for estranged parents. It's a rather harsh look at in 2015 of parent's support groups and assumption that all participants who stay are abusers, and based on this assumption sets out to prove it so – a sort of circular logic. A later 2020 article recognises this early work has been weaponised by the estranged adult child forums and backs down slightly in providing some balance by comparing to adult child forums, which it contends have got worse over the five years, having been very supportive, rational and intellectually solidly based originally. An unfinished rough article dated July 2015 sets out a similar set of no-win scenarios for parental reconciliation as my Part 20. The "No Contact" Double Bind for Parents, but contends that because parents won't admit fault and "do the work" most attempts at reconciliation are doomed to fail.
None of what Issendai describes matches the handful of parent social media I participated in. Quite the opposition, parents do everything possible to understand and avoid harsh criticism even when deserved. We have been trained to respond this way.
Issendai appears to prove using chosen examples what was assumed in the first place—that the spaces are occupied by abusers—a circular argument. As a view from the other side though I would say it illustrates many of the things I have been pointing out rather well. I plan to do an article on it once I have absorbed it fully.
Thanks, Carri. All good points. Everyone has different perspectives on the past and events that may seem critical and highly emotional for one are nothing of the sort for another present at the same time and place. My big concern is in the online forums and some therapy situations where a feedback mechanism amplifies a one-sided version of events that inevitably escalates the stakes and drives a wedge between people.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/mind-guest-blog/what-experts-wish-you-knew-about-false-memories/
Curious as to what side you’re applying this?
Side? the truth does not choose sides.
From Dr Joshua Coleman's newsletter referencing this article:
“My top 5 take-home messages on memory:
1. Memory does not work like a video camera, accurately recording all the details of witnessed events. Instead, memory (like perception) is a constructive process. We typically remember the gist of an event rather than the exact details.
2. When we construct a memory, errors can occur. We will typically fill in gaps in our memories with what we think we must have experienced, not necessarily what we actually did experience. We may also include misinformation we encountered after the event. We will not even be consciously aware that this has happened.
3. We not only distort memories for events that we have witnessed, we may have completely false memories for events that never occurred at all. Such false memories are particularly likely to arise in certain contexts, such as (unintentionally) through the use of certain dubious psychotherapeutic techniques or (intentionally) in psychology experiments.
4. There is no convincing evidence to support the existence of the psychoanalytic concept of repression, despite it being a widely accepted concept.
5. There is currently no way to distinguish, in the absence of independent evidence, whether a particular memory is true or false. Even memories which are detailed and vivid and held with 100 percent conviction can be completely false.”
Thank you, I’ve read the article and I’m very familiar with false memories. Just trying to understand more the purpose of your post related to the ongoing discussion.
To remind us what memory is and isn't.
While it's true that memory isn’t a perfect recording of events, dismissing one side’s narrative by claiming “the truth does not choose sides” can be overly reductive. Yes, memories are reconstructive and sometimes fallible, but that doesn’t mean that all personal recollections are unreliable or that objective facts cannot be discerned. In cases of parental estrangement like we are discussing here…especially when we are talking about abuse and neglect-individuals often report consistent, deeply felt experiences that, while they may include minor inaccuracies, still point toward a broader reality that should not be disregarded and I include myself in this.
For example, even if some details are blurred over time, the recurring patterns of behavior, corroborative accounts, and even tangible evidence (like documented communications or changes in behavior over time) can lend significant weight to one party’s perspective. Dismissing these experiences simply because human memory is imperfect risks invalidating the very real emotional and psychological impacts that drive a person’s experience of estrangement and abuse.
Moreover, research on memory shows that while we do reconstruct events, this process isn’t entirely random. Our recollections often stabilize around core, emotionally significant details that repeatedly emerge, suggesting there is a kernel of truth at the heart of our memories. Rather than concluding that “the truth does not choose sides,” it may be more productive to acknowledge that while memory has its limitations, a careful, corroborative examination of all available evidence can often reveal which account is more consistent with the reality of events.
Acknowledging the imperfections of memory should not automatically lead us to an “equal-opportunity” dismissal of all accounts. Each perspective, especially in emotionally charged situations like parental estrangement involving abuse and neglect, deserves careful, empathetic, and evidence-based consideration to truly approach the underlying truth.