Estrangement Ideology — Part 37. Sibling Relationships

How Estrangement Ideology shapes sibling dynamics.

This is the thirty-seventh in a series of articles concerning Estrangement Ideology. Key concepts are introduced in Part 1. Tenets, Goals and Methods; Part 2. Transgressions, Moral Certitude and Traditional Values; and Part 3. The One-Sided Path to Redemption. Other parts can be found here.

Sibling relationships within estrangement narratives often reflect a broader ideological framework that reinforces family division rather than resolution. The forum threads analysed suggest that siblings frequently become collateral damage in the estrangement process, serving as either “No Contact” reinforcers, “betrayers” for maintaining neutrality or surrogates for parental projections.

Siblings as Enforcers of Estrangement

One of the most common patterns in estrangement narratives is the expectation that siblings must align with the estranged individual’s decision to cut off parents. Those who fail to comply are often seen as traitors or enablers of parental toxicity.

Estrangement Ideology reinforces this dynamic, with siblings who choose to maintain a relationship with estranged parents are framed as “brainwashed” or complicit in “toxicity.” No middle ground is allowed—either the sibling supports the estranger or they are cast out as another extension of the “toxic family system.”

Example: Family Ultimatums and Loyalty Tests

In one discussion, an estranged individual recounted how their sibling refused to maintain a relationship unless they resumed contact with their mother:

“My sister told me she’s done trying to have a relationship with me unless I ‘re-join the family.’”​

This illustrates a fairly common the “with us or against us” mentality, where any attempt to remain neutral or mediate is seen as a form of betrayal. Instead of allowing for individual relationship dynamics, estrangement narratives often demand absolute alignment with the estranger’s worldview.

Example: Sibling Betrayal

Sibling relationships in estrangement narratives often become strained when one sibling is perceived as siding with the estranged parent or failing to offer full support, leading to feelings of betrayal and emotional distancing.

“She had given information about me to my parents and vice versa. She claims to understand how I feel, but refuses to stand up for me. When my dad did something against my daughter that was clearly wrong, she didn’t say anything to my dad (my other siblings didn’t either). She doesn’t want to rock the boat and piss off my dad. We don’t talk as often as we used to, and I don’t share as much with my sister as used to.”

This growing divide reinforces the expectation that true loyalty requires complete alignment with the estranged individual's perspective, making even passive neutrality feel like an act of disloyalty.

Example: Siblings Join Forces Against the Parent

On the other hand, it is also common for the siblings of the estranged to join in against the parents, as in:

“My siblings completely understand and have themselves considered going NC. So talking with them is pretty easy. I get the occasional update but we focus on our own lives.”

This dynamic illustrates how estrangement ideology can create a unified sibling front against the parent, reinforcing estrangement as a collective decision rather than an individual one, and further solidifying the divide within the family.

Projection and the Recasting of Siblings as Parental Substitutes

One of the less discussed but deeply significant aspects of estrangement ideology is the way estranged individuals project parental traits onto their siblings, effectively recasting them as stand-ins for the “toxic” parent. This projection reinforces estrangement dynamics, making reconciliation within the family even more unlikely.

Example: The Sibling Becomes the New “Toxic Parent”

A forum member shared their frustration over an estranged sibling suddenly cutting them off after years of close bonding:

“I thought my sister and I were on the same page about our mom. We had talked so much about how narcissistic she was, how we’d both suffered. But now she’s acting distant, and when I called her out, she said I reminded her of Mom. That was a punch in the gut. We grew up together, suffered together—how could she suddenly see me that way?”​

In this case, the sibling has begun projecting parental traits onto their estranged brother, making reconciliation unlikely. Instead of acknowledging a nuanced relationship, the estranged sister has applied an ideological framework where any behaviors reminiscent of the parent automatically render the sibling unsafe.

Example: The Sibling as a “Flying Monkey” or Enabler

In estrangement forums, siblings who maintain any relationship with the estranged parent are often recast as enablers or “flying monkeys”, a term borrowed from narcissistic abuse discourse—see Part 30. Got Any Flying Monkeys?

“My brother still talks to Mom and tries to convince me she’s not as bad as I think. He doesn’t get it—he’s just another one of her flying monkeys, carrying her messages and guilt-tripping me. I’ve told him how much she hurt me, but he refuses to listen. I don’t think I can have a relationship with him anymore.”​

In this case, the sibling’s neutrality is interpreted as betrayal. The forum member frames their brother not as an independent individual but as an extension of the estranged parent’s influence.

Example: The Sibling as a Threat to No Contact

Another common pattern is when an estranged individual perceives a sibling’s differing perspective as an attempt to “drag them back in” to the family system.

“My brother won’t stop reaching out. He doesn’t understand that I’ve made my decision. Every time he messages me, I feel anxious. I know he just wants to fix things, but I can’t go back to that. He doesn’t get how abusive our parents were. I feel like he’s trying to manipulate me, just like Mom used to.”​

This shows how estrangement ideology encourages extreme vigilance against reconciliation attempts. Instead of seeing the sibling’s outreach as a genuine attempt at repair, the estranged individual interprets it as a coercive manoeuvre similar to past parental behaviour.

The Isolation Effect: Losing Not Just Parents, But Entire Family Networks

Many estranged individuals express regret, sadness or frustration at losing siblings, yet their belief in estrangement as a necessary act prevents them from reconsidering reconciliation.

Estrangement Ideology reinforces these dynamics so that doubts about estrangement are invalidated, with users being reassured that their guilt is simply a sign of past “trauma bonding.” Reconciliation is framed as a weakness, leaving individuals feeling trapped in their decision, even when they question it.

Example: Emotional Toll of Sibling Estrangement

One forum member expressed deep grief at losing their sibling connection:

“It’s so painful. I genuinely thought she was doing well and that we respected each other.”​

Another forum member expressed that:

“Going NC with those who side the abusers is part of the NC journey. In my case so far 13 people are now discarded from my life.”

This pattern highlights how estrangement can escalate beyond the initial parent-child rupture, creating a contagion effect where more family members are severed, reinforcing isolation and deepening the emotional toll on all involved.

Example: Family Feuding

In another example, a clear family feud erupts from one sister taking sides against the estranging party, resulting in total breakdown of communications involving mother and sisters being estranged from daughter/sister, but also from her children:

“Several months ago my mother told me straight up that if I "reconcile" with her (aka revert to having zero boundaries) she was sure that my sisters would start speaking to me again. Hell no will I do that. As of six days ago I have blocked all of them on every platform and have accepted that my children will not have a maternal grandmother and aunts, and that I am now an only child. It’s been a rough past few days but I am already through the worst of it.”

This highlights a key contradiction in Estrangement Ideology—while it promotes estrangement as a form of liberation, many individuals continue to struggle with the emotional consequences of damaged relationships across the entire family long after going “No Contact.”

Navigating Sibling Relationships at Family Events

One of the most difficult aspects of sibling estrangement is how it plays out in family events, particularly weddings, funerals and other gatherings.

Example: Christmas Blow Up Over “No Contact” with Parents

A forum member posted about an argument with their brother over going “No Contact” with their mother:

“After two years of slowly going LC to VLC and finally NC with my mother, my brother has turned on me. He got mad at me last christmas for “ruining their christmas” by keeping my NC boundary, and he said some harsh things. He never apologized about the way he spoke to me, just silence. Throughout 2024 he has been hot and cold. Nice and cheerful, then ghosting me and so on. So I finally asked him straight up what was going on. He has answered with long texts containing all kinds of random criticism and insensitive comments about my life choices and then he goes on to defend my mother. I have extensively told him how she has hurt me and my family, mind you. He makes me out to be a horrible person and some of the stuff he accuses me of - that I’m rude and selfish - is just lies. I’m heartbroken and pretty shocked. I can’t get myself to block him and go NC. I still care about him, you know, but he is not a safe person anymore. Please peptalk me!”

This post reflects the ideological reinforcement of “No Contact” as a moral necessity, where any disagreement from a sibling is interpreted as betrayal rather than a differing perspective. By framing the brother’s defence of their mother as an attack, the constructs even partial dissent as emotional harm, pushing them further into the estrangement framework where cutting off more family members becomes the only "safe" option.

One forum member responding to this post expressed the following:

“Be honest with yourself, your brother obviously does not care about you or your feelings. He seems to have expressed that to you but you are still holding on to this idealized version of who you wish he could be. You only have two options block him or continue to suffer the abuse. The ball is in your court. What’s the worse that can happen from him not being able to abuse you anymore ? Free yourself.”

Meanwhile, the follow up comment demonstrates reinforcement of a binary, all-or-nothing mindset, framing the sibling as irredeemable and pushing the original poster toward complete estrangement by equating any continued relationship with "abuse", thereby eliminating the possibility of nuance, reconciliation or a middle ground.

Example: Struggling to Attend a Sibling’s Wedding Without Engaging Estranged Parents

A forum member described their internal conflict about attending a sibling’s wedding while maintaining “No Contact” with their parents:

“I still want to go, but my parents will be there. I refuse to speak to them, but I don’t want to hurt my sibling.”​.

Another forum member discussed strategies for avoiding interactions with estranged family members:

“Make sure you work out how to sit far away from them and, if possible, a bit out of their line of sight.”​

These examples highlight how Estrangement Ideology complicates even basic family interactions, requiring extensive strategising to maintain absolute emotional distance. Reintegration into family spaces is framed as a potential emotional “trap” and attending family events is only acceptable if extreme distancing measures are in place, preventing organic or accidental reconciliation—or, worse still, confrontations between siblings over strict “No Contact” policies

The Long-Term Psychological Consequences of Sibling Estrangement

While Estrangement Ideology frames sibling estrangement as a necessary step in breaking free from “toxic” family systems, the long-term consequences can be profound.

Example: Long-Term Regret and the Difficulty of Undoing Estrangement

One forum member admitted they would never speak to their siblings again, even if circumstances changed:

“At this point, I will never forgive them or speak to them ever again.”​

This rigid stance aligns with the ideological framing of estrangement as permanent, reinforcing a black-and-white worldview where relationships cannot be repaired.

The long term emotional consequences of estrangement are often highlighted by the continuing relationship siblings have with the estranged parents:

“I respect the fact that they want to keep trying, cuz deciding to finally walk away might have been the most heart wrenching decision I ever had to make, and I don’t wish that on them or anyone really. But it still hurts to hear them talk about our parents. I think I envy them sometimes.”

Estrangement Ideology reinforces this dynamic so that forgiveness is framed as enabling abuse, even when no clear abuse occurred. Estrangement is treated as irreversible, discouraging individuals from re-evaluating their decisions.

Conclusion

The forum threads illustrate how Estrangement Ideology fosters family divisions beyond just the parent-child dynamic:

1. Siblings are expected to enforce estrangement—failure to comply often results in their own estrangement

2. Parental projections are placed onto siblings, making reconciliation nearly impossible

3. Many estranged individuals regret losing their siblings but feel trapped in their decision

4. Family events become logistical nightmares, requiring excessive planning to avoid accidental reconciliation and possible conflict

5. Long-term emotional distress is reframed as “proof” of past trauma rather than a sign of unresolved grief.

Ultimately, these narratives suggest that estrangement is not always about escaping harm—it can become a self-reinforcing ideology that isolates individuals further than intended. While some cases of sibling estrangement are necessary, many appear to be driven more by ideological rigidity than by genuine relational breakdown.

---

Note: This article was developed with assistance of ChatGPT, used as a structured analysis and writing tool. All ideas, interpretations and final outputs were authored, verified and edited by me. The model was conditioned to reflect my reasoning, not to generate content independently.