Thanks for sharing your personal perspective in this article. I suspect many of us also have/had difficult family histories. Being a gen x’er, I don’t know if our generation’s way of dealing with our childhood “trauma” was much better— drugs, alcohol, avoidance, (small e) estrangement. As my 20 y/o son fairly pointed out, our generation didn’t have the awareness, outlet or access to all the mental health resources they have now (perhaps to excess). Eventually we learned to make peace with our parents and our past, but, for me personally, it took decades. Perhaps we expect too much of our children who are going through their own process of finding their own identities and paths in life. I’m hopeful that at some point we will be able to see each other as flawed imperfect “people” instead of parent-children.
I agree, and yet I hope my two estranged adult children are able to realize this soon. I am currently living the last year of my 7th decade completely alone, and time is no longer a luxury.
I would love to be viewed as an imperfect person rather than a child needing to be controlled if I’m anything less that perfect. I do not think my parents are capable of treating me with the mutual respect “2 imperfect parties” should require.
Estrangement Ideology is harmful in its narrowmindedness. I have one child who estranged suddenly and without explanation and without any preceding blowup or "incident". I expect myself to be able to make reasonable, conciliatory, sane words with others when there's disagreement or ? trouble ?. The goal should be coming to understand - even a little...even if we end up agreeing to disagree. I think it would be basic human decency for my EC to make words...say something about why. Not doing so is cowardly. That said, I don't own my children. I don't make demands of them. If this EC doesn't want a relationship with me, nothing I can say or do will fix it. I won't wallow, beg or live in misery over it. Do I miss EC? yes. Do I love EC? yes. If he "made words" of some kind with me, would I grovel or comply with ridiculous demands? No. Would I concede to some fault of my own? Yes...but not for anything I truly did not do.
This post was particularly insightful to me, including the comments. I'm always interested in the viewpoints of those adult children who have estranged; the generational expectations and attitudes are strikingly at oddsl.
As a child, if my emotions got the best of me, I was encouraged to take some time to cool down and when I was a little more level-headed and could reasonably work toward ending the argument, come back to the table. When I was young, I also had some relatives who estranged from each other, off and on. To me, their estrangements always felt like a bigger, grownup version of taking time to cool off, eventually returning to find common ground again. Estrangement ideology feels... not like that at all.
We all need to learn to listen and understand that another's experience and perspective is just as valid as the next person's, parents, estranged children, and just everyone in general.
The most difficult experience is to be rejected by your family. The last 6 years of my life have been spent trying to make sense of what happened to my relationship with my daughter, son-in-law, and grandchildren. At this point I must surrender my life to God. He will take care of this great brokenness in His time.
This article explains a lot of the answers to questions I have about estrangement in the family. It is helpful to my understanding . The family is under attack in our world.
This article is very insightful and is addressing a widespread social contagion that isn’t being talked about. My hope is that because this seemed to be another byproduct of our extreme “woke” culture and attack on family, that as culture shifts this too will shift back to more acceptance of family relationships. Leading with love.
Estrangement ideology isn’t inherently evil. I believe your experience with your father is just one anecdote among many, and it reflects one way of coping with deep family wounds. Families and systems change over time, and what might work as a protective boundary in one situation isn’t necessarily a permanent or universal rule. For some, adopting an estrangement framework provides a clear way to safeguard their emotional well-being when facing ongoing harm. For others, the family dynamic might evolve, making space for gradual healing and reconciliation.
I think it’s important to remember that estrangement ideology is just one tool among many. It can serve a critical role in protecting individuals from toxic or abusive environments, yet it isn’t the only valid approach to handling family conflict. As family systems change…through personal growth, new circumstances, or shifts in perspectives-so too can the strategies we use to navigate those relationships. Rather than labeling estrangement ideology as evil, we might better understand it as one possible response to complex family dynamics, one that is useful in certain contexts and may need to evolve as those contexts change.
Rather than viewing Estrangement Ideology as evil vs good—black and white thinking—it seems to me it is based on a particular view of the world that reflects a separation of the generations and loosening of the traditional bonds of family connection, love and loyalty. It also reflects a political, social and economic time in history where we are transitioning from one style of societal control to another—from a form of hidden or masked control styled as "liberal democracy" featuring a reasonably affluent middle class to a more overt tightly controlled authoritarian technocratic society with huge disparities between the ultra wealthy and a have-nothing lower class—essentially, techno-feudalism. People under the age of 40 are the first generation to feel the bite of this new system and many have been conditioned through mass media to blame their parents who seemed to do so well under the previous arrangement. It is also observably true that the State has increasingly been assuming the role of life-long parent—assuming more and more rights of parenthood every day—and hence real parents are to be considered disposable, redundant and set for the garbage heap of history. I have written about this in my "Stepping into Logan's Run" article. My question is: What's love got to do with it?
I just mentioned this in my response to Laura, but I wanted to reiterate it here. I push back because I believe Estrangement Ideology is as nuanced as we are as individuals and it’s not something that can be neatly categorized or confined.
I don’t blame my grandparents or parents for a lack of affluence, nor do I know anyone who does. However, I sense that many people my age feel as though they are being blamed for it, which emphasizes the discourse that is being sown. I also believe the radicalization of news and social media plays a significant role in this, as it fosters echo chambers that reinforce division rather than encourage meaningful dialogue.
I also believe that the concept of familial bonds is shifting as our society becomes more global. With families now spread across different parts of the world, the traditional expectations around proximity and obligation are evolving. Many, including myself, are experiencing this firsthand.
All true. My wife and I moved to Brisbane, Australia some 14 years ago, leaving our son in New Zealand while our daughter and her partner moved to Melbourne not long after. We did fairly well keeping up until Christmas 2019 when we had our last apparently happy family get-together for two really great weeks in Melbourne sharing an Airbnb apartment in the central city. Then the covid came along and opinions separated on what was going on for that and then a whole heap of what was happening around. That's all it took, boundaries were erected, violated, tempers escalated, no contacts initiated and attempts to re-establish spurned. Finally, contemptuous letters demanding this and that received, then public doxing and sudden awareness of public airing of private letters and other communications and vile personal attacks and vilifying shameful disparagement. Who to blame? Does it matter? Trust and respect are lost on both sides and nothing will ever be the same.
I'm really sorry that things escalated to that point. I’m not a supporter of doxxing and there’s never any justification for it. It’s completely understandable that trust would be lost after something like that. COVID seemed to amplify underlying issues in our world, and I worry about the lasting harm it has caused among all of us.
Absolutely. We all have our own journeys, and I have the utmost respect for the dialogue we’ve shared, even if we don’t always see eye to eye. Since we represent opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to estrangement, I truly appreciate hearing your perspective.
I see that we fundamentally disagree on this issue, and that’s okay. However, I don’t believe I’m simply repeating “talking points” to justify the indefensible I’m pointing out that estrangement is complex, personal, and often comes after years of failed attempts to make a relationship work.
You believe most estrangements are unjustified and immoral, but that assumes you have insight into the deeply personal reasons behind them. From your perspective, people should always be able to communicate and work through their differences, but that presumes a level playing field…one where all parties are willing and capable of engaging in healthy dialogue. Unfortunately, that’s not always the case. Some families are toxic, abusive, or dismissive of their children’s experiences, and not everyone is willing to change. In those situations, what do you expect the adult child to do? Stay and endure it indefinitely?
You say that “running away” is cowardly, but that assumes leaving is easy. In reality, estrangement is often agonizing, and most people don’t make the decision lightly. It’s not about having a “fragile ego” or refusing to deal with insecurity it’s about recognizing when a relationship is doing more harm than good and choosing to protect oneself.
You also mention that cutting off parents over “personality differences” is cruel. I agree if the only issue is a minor disagreement, estrangement would seem extreme. But you’re making a broad generalization, assuming that most cases of estrangement are over trivial matters rather than years of unresolved pain, harmful dynamics, or a refusal to respect boundaries.
You keep insisting that estrangement is immoral, yet you have yet to address the abuse I’ve mentioned as immoral. If you believe that family bonds should always be maintained, even in cases of abuse, then what does that say about your definition of morality? Is it more important to uphold the appearance of a relationship than to acknowledge the real harm that can exist within families? Because from my perspective, enabling abuse whether through denial, minimization, or forcing people to stay in harmful environments is what’s truly immoral.
Additionally, you’ve spoken about concepts like interconnectedness, compassion, and tolerance in previous comments, yet I’ve yet to see any acknowledgment of the humanity in the experiences I’ve shared. You frame estrangement as a selfish act without considering the suffering that often leads to it. If we’re going to have a conversation about morality, then shouldn’t it also include empathy for those who have made the painful decision to step away from a toxic or damaging environment?
At the core of this, I believe in personal autonomy-the idea that people have the right to decide which relationships are worth keeping and which ones are too damaging to maintain. You may see that as selfish; I see it as a necessary part of self-preservation. You don’t have to agree, but dismissing it as “cowardly” or “immoral” ignores the real struggles that lead people to this decision
Your response is laced with assumptions, condescension, and an unwillingness to actually engage in good faith. Instead of addressing anything I’ve said, you’ve chosen to twist my words, dismiss my experiences, and project your own narrative onto them.
Let’s start with my grandmother. I didn’t “want” her to be a bigot…sh was one. She openly used racial slurs and dehumanized people who weren’t white. That’s not a matter of interpretation, nor does it have anything to do with being “properly critical of radical Islam.” You’re attempting to reframe racism as intellectual critique, which is both disingenuous and telling.
As for estrangement, your claim that it’s “all upside for the kids and all downside for the parents” is a gross oversimplification. It suggests that you aren’t actually interested in understanding why estrangement happens you’re just determined to see it as unjustified. The reality is that no one walks away from family lightly. Estrangement is painful for both sides, but sometimes it’s the healthiest or only option when a relationship is toxic, dismissive, or harmful. If you refuse to acknowledge that, then you’re not engaging in a discussion you’re just reinforcing your own narrative.
And then there’s your condescension toward me as a parent. You assume I have no authority to speak on this because my child isn’t yet an adult, but let me correct you. I had my daughter at 17 after being raped and was forced because of religious ato carry the pregnancy to term and place her for adoption. I am now caring for her because her adoptive parents failed her. So tell me again how I don’t understand the complexities of parenting or making impossible choices.
You can choose to dismiss what I’m saying, avoid addressing real points, and reduce this conversation to snide remarks, but that says more about you than it does about me. I don’t need your well-wishes, nor do I fear regret, because I know I approach my relationships including my role as a parent with intention, honesty, and care. Whether or not you choose to do the same is entirely up to you.
It’s a bold statement to assume that estrangement is predominantly selfish. In fact, I’d argue the opposite…it’s often an incredibly difficult, painful choice made out of necessity, not ease. Staying in a relationship that is harmful, unhealthy, or rooted in past trauma just to avoid the stigma of estrangement isn’t selfless-it’s self-sacrificing in a way that can be damaging.
Our children owe us nothing. They did not ask to be brought into this world, and it is not their obligation to maintain a relationship simply because we expect it. Parents who demand connection without accountability may see estrangement as selfish, but often, it’s a boundary set for survival and healing.
Estrangement isn’t necessarily about hate; it can be about recognizing the need for space, reflection, and personal growth. It can even lead to greater understanding and acceptance, as it allows individuals to see relationships for what they truly are rather than what they’re expected to be.
The idea that estrangement is the easy way out dismisses the complexity of family dynamics and the courage it takes to step away when staying causes more harm. Sometimes, a “moment of pause” is what’s needed for clarity-whether that pause is temporary or permanent.
It seems that while you claim most people understand these responsibilities, your responses suggest otherwise. In my view, Estrangement Ideology isn’t something that can be neatly categorized-it’s nuanced and deeply personal, just as we all are. You appear quite reactive in your responses, and it may be worth reflecting on that.
We are raising our son based on his needs, with the hope that he will want to remain in our lives as we grow older. However, having witnessed the burden placed on my partner who was culturally obligated to be the head of his family…I recognize how such expectations can create barriers, resentment, and prevent a child from truly living a life of their own choosing. When children are forced into a predefined role, it limits them.
As the world evolves and relationships across different ethnicities and cultures become more common, the expectation that children must stay close to their parents until they pass is no longer universal. We do not impose that expectation on our son.
I wish you all the best. I won’t judge you as you have judged me.
I appreciate you sharing your perspective. I agree that life is full of trade-offs, and navigating family relationships is no exception. However, I see estrangement as a deeply personal and often painful decision rather than an inherently selfish act. For many, it’s not about feeling superior but about protecting their well-being in situations where relationships have become damaging or unsustainable.
You emphasize the idea of trade-offs, yet the way you frame estrangement doesn’t seem to acknowledge that reality. Every decision comes with loss, including the choice to walk away from family. That loss is often deeply felt, but it’s weighed against the alternative of continuing to engage in relationships that may be harmful or unsustainable. You present estrangement as an act of self-indulgence rather than considering it as a decision made through personal reflection and, in many cases, necessity. If trade-offs are an inevitable part of life, then why dismiss the validity of those who choose this particular one?
Using your anecdote of knowing seven parents who have been cut off doesn’t equate to the idea that estrangement is inherently bad. Do you know their children? Were you there for their entire childhood? Are you only hearing the viewpoint from one side? I was abused in multiple forms by my mother and experienced abuse from men she brought into our home. If you were to hear it from my mother’s perspective, it would sound entirely different—she would likely minimize it, claim it only happened once, or say she doesn’t remember at all. That’s the nature of these dynamics; they are rarely straightforward.
I also find it interesting that, while you speak about the importance of interconnectedness, compassion, and tolerance, you don’t seem to apply those principles to the topic of estrangement. Instead, you make a repeated statement about its supposed moral failing without considering the complexity of why people make this choice. If interconnectedness matters, then so does the quality of those connections. If compassion is important, then it should extend to people who have chosen estrangement for reasons you may not understand. And if tolerance is a value, then it should include tolerance for the idea that not all family relationships can or should be maintained.
You mentioned that one of your children believes, “Parents, we owe them everything.” But owing your parents everything is a different concept than living for your parents. Gratitude and respect for what parents provide can exist without the expectation of sacrificing one’s autonomy, well-being, or personal happiness to maintain a relationship at all costs.
Figuring out how to exist within a family while maintaining individuality is indeed part of maturation, but that process looks different for everyone. Some people are able to set healthy boundaries and maintain those relationships, while others find that distance is necessary. I don’t see this as a redefinition of terms but rather an acknowledgment of the complexity of human relationships.
And the idea that abuse is only “maybe” a justified reason for estrangement shows a fundamental lack of understanding of its impact. For many, going no-contact is not an act of selfishness, but of survival.
As for my comment, it wasn’t intended as a judgment but rather an observation. Just as you challenge my views, I challenge yours…it’s part of an open discussion.
Beautifully written & said. I have found it really helpful to know what I hope for in the relationship. Is it occasion celebrations like Christmas & Easter or would it be weekly Sunday night dinners? Phone calls once a week? What is the outward sign between the parties that could be worked toward, that could bring peace and resolution to the child?
Anything that works towards restoring their view of your humanity is probably a good start. I think the disconnection and polarisation of modern life and corrosive influence of mass media and online communities has resulted in parents being seen as toxic, deluded, and even dangerous objects—selfish Boomers, deluded conspiracy theorists, dangerous anti-vaxxers. If you are already under "No Contact" rules, things will be more complicated, as I pointed out in Part 20. The "No Contact" Double Bind for Parents.
I get what you're saying about trying to rebuild a sense of shared humanity, but sometimes the reality is much messier. I had a “boomer” grandparent that was helped raise me. I idolized and loved my grandmother as a parent. As I grew older-and as she did too-she became more easily radicalized. I accepted her throughout my earlier 20s, even though I could see her ideas growing increasingly hateful. Then I moved to the Middle East for work and met my now husband. We've been married for over a decade and share a wonderful son together.
Despite getting to know my husband and him sharing factual, balanced information about life, culture, and Islam in the Middle East, she still posted and chatted about how all Muslims were terrible and inherently evil…always insisting that my husband and his family were the only exceptions. Once I had my son, the need to protect him became impossible to ignore. How was I supposed to allow someone who held such hateful views about Arabs near my Arab child?
It's hard to rebuild bridges when someone's views become so extreme that they start to endanger the safety and well-being of the people you love. While reconnecting with our shared humanity is important, we also have to protect our family from harmful ideologies that can tear us apart.
Yes, I really get what you are saying and have to say I do share your distaste for racist attitudes and rather immoral support for genocide on spurious and ill-informed religious interpretations—especially when those may be targeted at innocents such as your husband and son. It seems to me that the polarisation of society is getting worse and family relationships are being severely affected as a result. That said, I do think that radicalisation is not something that inevitably or even overwhelming comes merely on account of age (Charles Manson, Jonestown and BaderMienhoff and myriad others involving young to middle aged people come to mind). Old people don't tend to be any more inherently dangerous than young ones and apart from politicians, billionaires, bankers and corporate CEOs, I'd contend most are a lot less dangerous given what we see on the news. Aging does, however, tend to bring certain inclinations for some to reflect on mortality, purpose of life and often a fear of impending death that makes one look around for consolation—be that religion or a saviour figure in the form of elements like Trump, Musk, MAGA or even QAnon. Other people suddenly become aware that have been living in a form of Truman Show (or Matrix) within which they have been lied to their whole lives and start searching for some sort of grounded reality by cutting out the clear lies—almost everything they have learned from mass media, "experts" and the government—and sifting through alternative accounts for what they can make of it all. In most cases, neither of these classes of people tend to constitute a present threat of actual physical or psychological harm to others around them, barring annoying reposts of memes and other online materials, and snide comments—both of which a mature adult should be well able to ignore or pass over. That may not apply to the case of your son and husband, and maybe a compromise might be reached where you deal with your grandmother and leave them out of it. Just a suggestion, I'm not a therapist and not offering any such service—dunno, I'm not in your shoes and who am I to say? For me, there is another issue at play which is the suspicion that the barrier for defining what constitutes "harm" seems to be getting lower, and emotion resilience is becoming less. This is discussed in my latest article on emotional fragility, which you are welcome to review and respond to as you see fit. BTW if you are sailing around the Sea of Thailand and happen to crash into a blue painted wall, keep an eye out for the nearby emergency exit stairs and door (joke).
Despite many attempts at conversation, I slowly realized that her increasingly radicalized opinions were having a harmful effect on our family, forcing me to set clear boundaries to protect my husband and son.
I've seen firsthand that radicalization isn’t solely a matter of age. While some might assume older individuals are less likely to be dangerous, I've experienced how external influences can push anyone-regardless of their age-into extreme viewpoints. Aging can lead some people to reflect deeply on life and mortality, prompting them to seek out ideologies that offer simple answers, even when those answers are steeped in hate.
Over the years, I made countless efforts to talk with my grandmother about the path she was heading down. I recall instances when she would be out in public, loudly making racial comments and accusing anyone she felt had wronged her of being an illegal immigrant. These weren't isolated incidents; they marked a gradual, years long shift in her behavior. I believe she was radicalized by sources like Fox News to the point that these views became all-consuming for her. It was particularly painful because she had never been very religious. Yet, as you mentioned—and as I’ve seen with many…when faced with the reality of mortality, some people cling to extreme beliefs as a way to find meaning, leading to a negative form of evangelicalization. Ultimately, my grandmother’s personality became inseparable from her hateful thoughts.
I do believe there is some fragility in emotions lately, and I don’t disagree with you there. I think there has to be room for conversation and change. However, dealing with my grandmother solo just wasn’t an option for me-especially once I truly understood her views. I simply didn’t think it was worth the energy on my end. I believe relationships are symbiotic; they need some give and take and a sense of equanimity to function healthily.
This evolution forced me to make some difficult choices. For the sake of my husband and son, I needed to establish boundaries around my grandmother’s influence, even though doing so meant distancing myself from a deeper familial connection that I once cherished. I share your frustration with extremist views, but I also believe that not every instance of radical thought necessitates a complete severance of family ties. Families and systems change over time, and while protective boundaries might be necessary at one stage, they’re not always permanent or universal solutions.
I also don’t disagree with your thoughts on the radicalization of younger generations. In my view, social media-especially in America-plays a major role in that process. It’s a platform where extreme views can spread rapidly, often with little challenge, and that contributes significantly to the polarized climate we’re witnessing today.
Thank you for listening, Steve. I value this conversation and look forward to hearing more of your thoughts as we continue to explore these challenging issues.
I will look out for my Truman Wall. I swear lately I really feel like there is a glitch in the Matrix.
I appreciate Steven’s perspective and the comments as well. What I have learned from therapy is that estrangement is a “yikes” response and it is therefore a coping strategy. Everyone has a yikes response to something and how it manifests is due to one’s genetics, upbringing, culture and environment. That said, the question is has estrangement become the default response for many young people and if so is the spread of an “ideology “ as Steven discussed the reason? I do think social media, internet, blogs have given rise to “estrangement ideology” by way of being able to participate in social forums that focus on psychological advice and support.
It’s similar to the divisive ideologies we see in politics, religion, social activism
Bottom line: human instinct is to respond to anything perceived to be stressful and a threat and the fight-flight response is a natural reaction. Estrangement is flight due to anxiety and fear.
It's difficult to have a relationship with a family member that continues to feel painful but it's equally painful to choose not have a relationship. Choose your hard I guess. Makes sense that some people will opt for a partial, surface level relationship.
Modern life is a difficult landscape to navigate. So many children leave home to study in remote cities and even countries, often they get a job and end up living far away, they marry or partner with someone from the new place. None of that is new; where I live, people in the 1800s emigrated in wooden sailing ships across the world, settled countries that were just land and trees and baking hot sun, raised families under canvas and in little more than tin shacks, the only contact with family back home an occasional letter that might take a year to arrive or maybe never if the ship carrying it went down. We might have better communications now, but it seems to me that families breakdown just as much if nobody bothers to pick up the phone, possibly avoiding a hard conversation or lacking patience the other being not who we expected them to be or holding views we somehow don't have the maturity to navigate with understanding. The expectation of having a "deep" relationship now might be just what holds us back from actually forming one—such a thing takes time, effort and dedication to seed, nurture and grow. This especially applies as we grow older and realise we don't actually know our parent or child—maybe the idea we do know them prevents us from taking the time to actually find out who they really are. Cutting them off because we judge them unworthy or we are not getting the relationship we think we deserve means we never get to find out.
Thanks for sharing your personal perspective in this article. I suspect many of us also have/had difficult family histories. Being a gen x’er, I don’t know if our generation’s way of dealing with our childhood “trauma” was much better— drugs, alcohol, avoidance, (small e) estrangement. As my 20 y/o son fairly pointed out, our generation didn’t have the awareness, outlet or access to all the mental health resources they have now (perhaps to excess). Eventually we learned to make peace with our parents and our past, but, for me personally, it took decades. Perhaps we expect too much of our children who are going through their own process of finding their own identities and paths in life. I’m hopeful that at some point we will be able to see each other as flawed imperfect “people” instead of parent-children.
"I’m hopeful that at some point we will be able to see each other as flawed imperfect “people” instead of parent-children."
Exactly.
I agree, and yet I hope my two estranged adult children are able to realize this soon. I am currently living the last year of my 7th decade completely alone, and time is no longer a luxury.
I would love to be viewed as an imperfect person rather than a child needing to be controlled if I’m anything less that perfect. I do not think my parents are capable of treating me with the mutual respect “2 imperfect parties” should require.
Estrangement Ideology is harmful in its narrowmindedness. I have one child who estranged suddenly and without explanation and without any preceding blowup or "incident". I expect myself to be able to make reasonable, conciliatory, sane words with others when there's disagreement or ? trouble ?. The goal should be coming to understand - even a little...even if we end up agreeing to disagree. I think it would be basic human decency for my EC to make words...say something about why. Not doing so is cowardly. That said, I don't own my children. I don't make demands of them. If this EC doesn't want a relationship with me, nothing I can say or do will fix it. I won't wallow, beg or live in misery over it. Do I miss EC? yes. Do I love EC? yes. If he "made words" of some kind with me, would I grovel or comply with ridiculous demands? No. Would I concede to some fault of my own? Yes...but not for anything I truly did not do.
This post was particularly insightful to me, including the comments. I'm always interested in the viewpoints of those adult children who have estranged; the generational expectations and attitudes are strikingly at oddsl.
As a child, if my emotions got the best of me, I was encouraged to take some time to cool down and when I was a little more level-headed and could reasonably work toward ending the argument, come back to the table. When I was young, I also had some relatives who estranged from each other, off and on. To me, their estrangements always felt like a bigger, grownup version of taking time to cool off, eventually returning to find common ground again. Estrangement ideology feels... not like that at all.
We all need to learn to listen and understand that another's experience and perspective is just as valid as the next person's, parents, estranged children, and just everyone in general.
The most difficult experience is to be rejected by your family. The last 6 years of my life have been spent trying to make sense of what happened to my relationship with my daughter, son-in-law, and grandchildren. At this point I must surrender my life to God. He will take care of this great brokenness in His time.
This article explains a lot of the answers to questions I have about estrangement in the family. It is helpful to my understanding . The family is under attack in our world.
This article is very insightful and is addressing a widespread social contagion that isn’t being talked about. My hope is that because this seemed to be another byproduct of our extreme “woke” culture and attack on family, that as culture shifts this too will shift back to more acceptance of family relationships. Leading with love.
Many thanks, loving the attitude.
Estrangement ideology isn’t inherently evil. I believe your experience with your father is just one anecdote among many, and it reflects one way of coping with deep family wounds. Families and systems change over time, and what might work as a protective boundary in one situation isn’t necessarily a permanent or universal rule. For some, adopting an estrangement framework provides a clear way to safeguard their emotional well-being when facing ongoing harm. For others, the family dynamic might evolve, making space for gradual healing and reconciliation.
I think it’s important to remember that estrangement ideology is just one tool among many. It can serve a critical role in protecting individuals from toxic or abusive environments, yet it isn’t the only valid approach to handling family conflict. As family systems change…through personal growth, new circumstances, or shifts in perspectives-so too can the strategies we use to navigate those relationships. Rather than labeling estrangement ideology as evil, we might better understand it as one possible response to complex family dynamics, one that is useful in certain contexts and may need to evolve as those contexts change.
Rather than viewing Estrangement Ideology as evil vs good—black and white thinking—it seems to me it is based on a particular view of the world that reflects a separation of the generations and loosening of the traditional bonds of family connection, love and loyalty. It also reflects a political, social and economic time in history where we are transitioning from one style of societal control to another—from a form of hidden or masked control styled as "liberal democracy" featuring a reasonably affluent middle class to a more overt tightly controlled authoritarian technocratic society with huge disparities between the ultra wealthy and a have-nothing lower class—essentially, techno-feudalism. People under the age of 40 are the first generation to feel the bite of this new system and many have been conditioned through mass media to blame their parents who seemed to do so well under the previous arrangement. It is also observably true that the State has increasingly been assuming the role of life-long parent—assuming more and more rights of parenthood every day—and hence real parents are to be considered disposable, redundant and set for the garbage heap of history. I have written about this in my "Stepping into Logan's Run" article. My question is: What's love got to do with it?
Hi Steven,
I just mentioned this in my response to Laura, but I wanted to reiterate it here. I push back because I believe Estrangement Ideology is as nuanced as we are as individuals and it’s not something that can be neatly categorized or confined.
I don’t blame my grandparents or parents for a lack of affluence, nor do I know anyone who does. However, I sense that many people my age feel as though they are being blamed for it, which emphasizes the discourse that is being sown. I also believe the radicalization of news and social media plays a significant role in this, as it fosters echo chambers that reinforce division rather than encourage meaningful dialogue.
I also believe that the concept of familial bonds is shifting as our society becomes more global. With families now spread across different parts of the world, the traditional expectations around proximity and obligation are evolving. Many, including myself, are experiencing this firsthand.
All true. My wife and I moved to Brisbane, Australia some 14 years ago, leaving our son in New Zealand while our daughter and her partner moved to Melbourne not long after. We did fairly well keeping up until Christmas 2019 when we had our last apparently happy family get-together for two really great weeks in Melbourne sharing an Airbnb apartment in the central city. Then the covid came along and opinions separated on what was going on for that and then a whole heap of what was happening around. That's all it took, boundaries were erected, violated, tempers escalated, no contacts initiated and attempts to re-establish spurned. Finally, contemptuous letters demanding this and that received, then public doxing and sudden awareness of public airing of private letters and other communications and vile personal attacks and vilifying shameful disparagement. Who to blame? Does it matter? Trust and respect are lost on both sides and nothing will ever be the same.
I'm really sorry that things escalated to that point. I’m not a supporter of doxxing and there’s never any justification for it. It’s completely understandable that trust would be lost after something like that. COVID seemed to amplify underlying issues in our world, and I worry about the lasting harm it has caused among all of us.
In a way, the progression of the articles reflect my personal journey through this nightmare. Of pain, anger, grief, fear and understanding.
Absolutely. We all have our own journeys, and I have the utmost respect for the dialogue we’ve shared, even if we don’t always see eye to eye. Since we represent opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to estrangement, I truly appreciate hearing your perspective.
I see that we fundamentally disagree on this issue, and that’s okay. However, I don’t believe I’m simply repeating “talking points” to justify the indefensible I’m pointing out that estrangement is complex, personal, and often comes after years of failed attempts to make a relationship work.
You believe most estrangements are unjustified and immoral, but that assumes you have insight into the deeply personal reasons behind them. From your perspective, people should always be able to communicate and work through their differences, but that presumes a level playing field…one where all parties are willing and capable of engaging in healthy dialogue. Unfortunately, that’s not always the case. Some families are toxic, abusive, or dismissive of their children’s experiences, and not everyone is willing to change. In those situations, what do you expect the adult child to do? Stay and endure it indefinitely?
You say that “running away” is cowardly, but that assumes leaving is easy. In reality, estrangement is often agonizing, and most people don’t make the decision lightly. It’s not about having a “fragile ego” or refusing to deal with insecurity it’s about recognizing when a relationship is doing more harm than good and choosing to protect oneself.
You also mention that cutting off parents over “personality differences” is cruel. I agree if the only issue is a minor disagreement, estrangement would seem extreme. But you’re making a broad generalization, assuming that most cases of estrangement are over trivial matters rather than years of unresolved pain, harmful dynamics, or a refusal to respect boundaries.
You keep insisting that estrangement is immoral, yet you have yet to address the abuse I’ve mentioned as immoral. If you believe that family bonds should always be maintained, even in cases of abuse, then what does that say about your definition of morality? Is it more important to uphold the appearance of a relationship than to acknowledge the real harm that can exist within families? Because from my perspective, enabling abuse whether through denial, minimization, or forcing people to stay in harmful environments is what’s truly immoral.
Additionally, you’ve spoken about concepts like interconnectedness, compassion, and tolerance in previous comments, yet I’ve yet to see any acknowledgment of the humanity in the experiences I’ve shared. You frame estrangement as a selfish act without considering the suffering that often leads to it. If we’re going to have a conversation about morality, then shouldn’t it also include empathy for those who have made the painful decision to step away from a toxic or damaging environment?
At the core of this, I believe in personal autonomy-the idea that people have the right to decide which relationships are worth keeping and which ones are too damaging to maintain. You may see that as selfish; I see it as a necessary part of self-preservation. You don’t have to agree, but dismissing it as “cowardly” or “immoral” ignores the real struggles that lead people to this decision
Your response is laced with assumptions, condescension, and an unwillingness to actually engage in good faith. Instead of addressing anything I’ve said, you’ve chosen to twist my words, dismiss my experiences, and project your own narrative onto them.
Let’s start with my grandmother. I didn’t “want” her to be a bigot…sh was one. She openly used racial slurs and dehumanized people who weren’t white. That’s not a matter of interpretation, nor does it have anything to do with being “properly critical of radical Islam.” You’re attempting to reframe racism as intellectual critique, which is both disingenuous and telling.
As for estrangement, your claim that it’s “all upside for the kids and all downside for the parents” is a gross oversimplification. It suggests that you aren’t actually interested in understanding why estrangement happens you’re just determined to see it as unjustified. The reality is that no one walks away from family lightly. Estrangement is painful for both sides, but sometimes it’s the healthiest or only option when a relationship is toxic, dismissive, or harmful. If you refuse to acknowledge that, then you’re not engaging in a discussion you’re just reinforcing your own narrative.
And then there’s your condescension toward me as a parent. You assume I have no authority to speak on this because my child isn’t yet an adult, but let me correct you. I had my daughter at 17 after being raped and was forced because of religious ato carry the pregnancy to term and place her for adoption. I am now caring for her because her adoptive parents failed her. So tell me again how I don’t understand the complexities of parenting or making impossible choices.
You can choose to dismiss what I’m saying, avoid addressing real points, and reduce this conversation to snide remarks, but that says more about you than it does about me. I don’t need your well-wishes, nor do I fear regret, because I know I approach my relationships including my role as a parent with intention, honesty, and care. Whether or not you choose to do the same is entirely up to you.
Why did you delete your other comment? Should have left it-so everyone can see the true humanity you have.
It’s a bold statement to assume that estrangement is predominantly selfish. In fact, I’d argue the opposite…it’s often an incredibly difficult, painful choice made out of necessity, not ease. Staying in a relationship that is harmful, unhealthy, or rooted in past trauma just to avoid the stigma of estrangement isn’t selfless-it’s self-sacrificing in a way that can be damaging.
Our children owe us nothing. They did not ask to be brought into this world, and it is not their obligation to maintain a relationship simply because we expect it. Parents who demand connection without accountability may see estrangement as selfish, but often, it’s a boundary set for survival and healing.
Estrangement isn’t necessarily about hate; it can be about recognizing the need for space, reflection, and personal growth. It can even lead to greater understanding and acceptance, as it allows individuals to see relationships for what they truly are rather than what they’re expected to be.
The idea that estrangement is the easy way out dismisses the complexity of family dynamics and the courage it takes to step away when staying causes more harm. Sometimes, a “moment of pause” is what’s needed for clarity-whether that pause is temporary or permanent.
It seems that while you claim most people understand these responsibilities, your responses suggest otherwise. In my view, Estrangement Ideology isn’t something that can be neatly categorized-it’s nuanced and deeply personal, just as we all are. You appear quite reactive in your responses, and it may be worth reflecting on that.
We are raising our son based on his needs, with the hope that he will want to remain in our lives as we grow older. However, having witnessed the burden placed on my partner who was culturally obligated to be the head of his family…I recognize how such expectations can create barriers, resentment, and prevent a child from truly living a life of their own choosing. When children are forced into a predefined role, it limits them.
As the world evolves and relationships across different ethnicities and cultures become more common, the expectation that children must stay close to their parents until they pass is no longer universal. We do not impose that expectation on our son.
I wish you all the best. I won’t judge you as you have judged me.
I appreciate you sharing your perspective. I agree that life is full of trade-offs, and navigating family relationships is no exception. However, I see estrangement as a deeply personal and often painful decision rather than an inherently selfish act. For many, it’s not about feeling superior but about protecting their well-being in situations where relationships have become damaging or unsustainable.
You emphasize the idea of trade-offs, yet the way you frame estrangement doesn’t seem to acknowledge that reality. Every decision comes with loss, including the choice to walk away from family. That loss is often deeply felt, but it’s weighed against the alternative of continuing to engage in relationships that may be harmful or unsustainable. You present estrangement as an act of self-indulgence rather than considering it as a decision made through personal reflection and, in many cases, necessity. If trade-offs are an inevitable part of life, then why dismiss the validity of those who choose this particular one?
Using your anecdote of knowing seven parents who have been cut off doesn’t equate to the idea that estrangement is inherently bad. Do you know their children? Were you there for their entire childhood? Are you only hearing the viewpoint from one side? I was abused in multiple forms by my mother and experienced abuse from men she brought into our home. If you were to hear it from my mother’s perspective, it would sound entirely different—she would likely minimize it, claim it only happened once, or say she doesn’t remember at all. That’s the nature of these dynamics; they are rarely straightforward.
I also find it interesting that, while you speak about the importance of interconnectedness, compassion, and tolerance, you don’t seem to apply those principles to the topic of estrangement. Instead, you make a repeated statement about its supposed moral failing without considering the complexity of why people make this choice. If interconnectedness matters, then so does the quality of those connections. If compassion is important, then it should extend to people who have chosen estrangement for reasons you may not understand. And if tolerance is a value, then it should include tolerance for the idea that not all family relationships can or should be maintained.
You mentioned that one of your children believes, “Parents, we owe them everything.” But owing your parents everything is a different concept than living for your parents. Gratitude and respect for what parents provide can exist without the expectation of sacrificing one’s autonomy, well-being, or personal happiness to maintain a relationship at all costs.
Figuring out how to exist within a family while maintaining individuality is indeed part of maturation, but that process looks different for everyone. Some people are able to set healthy boundaries and maintain those relationships, while others find that distance is necessary. I don’t see this as a redefinition of terms but rather an acknowledgment of the complexity of human relationships.
And the idea that abuse is only “maybe” a justified reason for estrangement shows a fundamental lack of understanding of its impact. For many, going no-contact is not an act of selfishness, but of survival.
As for my comment, it wasn’t intended as a judgment but rather an observation. Just as you challenge my views, I challenge yours…it’s part of an open discussion.
Beautifully written & said. I have found it really helpful to know what I hope for in the relationship. Is it occasion celebrations like Christmas & Easter or would it be weekly Sunday night dinners? Phone calls once a week? What is the outward sign between the parties that could be worked toward, that could bring peace and resolution to the child?
Anything that works towards restoring their view of your humanity is probably a good start. I think the disconnection and polarisation of modern life and corrosive influence of mass media and online communities has resulted in parents being seen as toxic, deluded, and even dangerous objects—selfish Boomers, deluded conspiracy theorists, dangerous anti-vaxxers. If you are already under "No Contact" rules, things will be more complicated, as I pointed out in Part 20. The "No Contact" Double Bind for Parents.
I get what you're saying about trying to rebuild a sense of shared humanity, but sometimes the reality is much messier. I had a “boomer” grandparent that was helped raise me. I idolized and loved my grandmother as a parent. As I grew older-and as she did too-she became more easily radicalized. I accepted her throughout my earlier 20s, even though I could see her ideas growing increasingly hateful. Then I moved to the Middle East for work and met my now husband. We've been married for over a decade and share a wonderful son together.
Despite getting to know my husband and him sharing factual, balanced information about life, culture, and Islam in the Middle East, she still posted and chatted about how all Muslims were terrible and inherently evil…always insisting that my husband and his family were the only exceptions. Once I had my son, the need to protect him became impossible to ignore. How was I supposed to allow someone who held such hateful views about Arabs near my Arab child?
It's hard to rebuild bridges when someone's views become so extreme that they start to endanger the safety and well-being of the people you love. While reconnecting with our shared humanity is important, we also have to protect our family from harmful ideologies that can tear us apart.
Hi Carri,
Yes, I really get what you are saying and have to say I do share your distaste for racist attitudes and rather immoral support for genocide on spurious and ill-informed religious interpretations—especially when those may be targeted at innocents such as your husband and son. It seems to me that the polarisation of society is getting worse and family relationships are being severely affected as a result. That said, I do think that radicalisation is not something that inevitably or even overwhelming comes merely on account of age (Charles Manson, Jonestown and BaderMienhoff and myriad others involving young to middle aged people come to mind). Old people don't tend to be any more inherently dangerous than young ones and apart from politicians, billionaires, bankers and corporate CEOs, I'd contend most are a lot less dangerous given what we see on the news. Aging does, however, tend to bring certain inclinations for some to reflect on mortality, purpose of life and often a fear of impending death that makes one look around for consolation—be that religion or a saviour figure in the form of elements like Trump, Musk, MAGA or even QAnon. Other people suddenly become aware that have been living in a form of Truman Show (or Matrix) within which they have been lied to their whole lives and start searching for some sort of grounded reality by cutting out the clear lies—almost everything they have learned from mass media, "experts" and the government—and sifting through alternative accounts for what they can make of it all. In most cases, neither of these classes of people tend to constitute a present threat of actual physical or psychological harm to others around them, barring annoying reposts of memes and other online materials, and snide comments—both of which a mature adult should be well able to ignore or pass over. That may not apply to the case of your son and husband, and maybe a compromise might be reached where you deal with your grandmother and leave them out of it. Just a suggestion, I'm not a therapist and not offering any such service—dunno, I'm not in your shoes and who am I to say? For me, there is another issue at play which is the suspicion that the barrier for defining what constitutes "harm" seems to be getting lower, and emotion resilience is becoming less. This is discussed in my latest article on emotional fragility, which you are welcome to review and respond to as you see fit. BTW if you are sailing around the Sea of Thailand and happen to crash into a blue painted wall, keep an eye out for the nearby emergency exit stairs and door (joke).
Despite many attempts at conversation, I slowly realized that her increasingly radicalized opinions were having a harmful effect on our family, forcing me to set clear boundaries to protect my husband and son.
I've seen firsthand that radicalization isn’t solely a matter of age. While some might assume older individuals are less likely to be dangerous, I've experienced how external influences can push anyone-regardless of their age-into extreme viewpoints. Aging can lead some people to reflect deeply on life and mortality, prompting them to seek out ideologies that offer simple answers, even when those answers are steeped in hate.
Over the years, I made countless efforts to talk with my grandmother about the path she was heading down. I recall instances when she would be out in public, loudly making racial comments and accusing anyone she felt had wronged her of being an illegal immigrant. These weren't isolated incidents; they marked a gradual, years long shift in her behavior. I believe she was radicalized by sources like Fox News to the point that these views became all-consuming for her. It was particularly painful because she had never been very religious. Yet, as you mentioned—and as I’ve seen with many…when faced with the reality of mortality, some people cling to extreme beliefs as a way to find meaning, leading to a negative form of evangelicalization. Ultimately, my grandmother’s personality became inseparable from her hateful thoughts.
I do believe there is some fragility in emotions lately, and I don’t disagree with you there. I think there has to be room for conversation and change. However, dealing with my grandmother solo just wasn’t an option for me-especially once I truly understood her views. I simply didn’t think it was worth the energy on my end. I believe relationships are symbiotic; they need some give and take and a sense of equanimity to function healthily.
This evolution forced me to make some difficult choices. For the sake of my husband and son, I needed to establish boundaries around my grandmother’s influence, even though doing so meant distancing myself from a deeper familial connection that I once cherished. I share your frustration with extremist views, but I also believe that not every instance of radical thought necessitates a complete severance of family ties. Families and systems change over time, and while protective boundaries might be necessary at one stage, they’re not always permanent or universal solutions.
I also don’t disagree with your thoughts on the radicalization of younger generations. In my view, social media-especially in America-plays a major role in that process. It’s a platform where extreme views can spread rapidly, often with little challenge, and that contributes significantly to the polarized climate we’re witnessing today.
Thank you for listening, Steve. I value this conversation and look forward to hearing more of your thoughts as we continue to explore these challenging issues.
I will look out for my Truman Wall. I swear lately I really feel like there is a glitch in the Matrix.
Excellent article. Nailed it.
I appreciate Steven’s perspective and the comments as well. What I have learned from therapy is that estrangement is a “yikes” response and it is therefore a coping strategy. Everyone has a yikes response to something and how it manifests is due to one’s genetics, upbringing, culture and environment. That said, the question is has estrangement become the default response for many young people and if so is the spread of an “ideology “ as Steven discussed the reason? I do think social media, internet, blogs have given rise to “estrangement ideology” by way of being able to participate in social forums that focus on psychological advice and support.
It’s similar to the divisive ideologies we see in politics, religion, social activism
Bottom line: human instinct is to respond to anything perceived to be stressful and a threat and the fight-flight response is a natural reaction. Estrangement is flight due to anxiety and fear.
Thank you, this is a very insightful article.
It's difficult to have a relationship with a family member that continues to feel painful but it's equally painful to choose not have a relationship. Choose your hard I guess. Makes sense that some people will opt for a partial, surface level relationship.
Modern life is a difficult landscape to navigate. So many children leave home to study in remote cities and even countries, often they get a job and end up living far away, they marry or partner with someone from the new place. None of that is new; where I live, people in the 1800s emigrated in wooden sailing ships across the world, settled countries that were just land and trees and baking hot sun, raised families under canvas and in little more than tin shacks, the only contact with family back home an occasional letter that might take a year to arrive or maybe never if the ship carrying it went down. We might have better communications now, but it seems to me that families breakdown just as much if nobody bothers to pick up the phone, possibly avoiding a hard conversation or lacking patience the other being not who we expected them to be or holding views we somehow don't have the maturity to navigate with understanding. The expectation of having a "deep" relationship now might be just what holds us back from actually forming one—such a thing takes time, effort and dedication to seed, nurture and grow. This especially applies as we grow older and realise we don't actually know our parent or child—maybe the idea we do know them prevents us from taking the time to actually find out who they really are. Cutting them off because we judge them unworthy or we are not getting the relationship we think we deserve means we never get to find out.