Estrangement Ideology – Part 38. The Grandparents

The consequential cut-off of grandparents: A self-perpetuating cycle of disconnection.

This is the thirty-eighth 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.

For generations, being a grandparent has been seen as a cherished role, offering a sense of continuity, wisdom-sharing and deep emotional bonds with the next generation. Many grandparents anticipate playing an active role in their grandchildren’s lives, providing guidance, support and unconditional love. However, when estrangement occurs—particularly in the modern ideological, therapeutic and neurodiverse landscape—this expectation is shattered. The sudden and often seemingly inexplicable severance of contact can be profoundly shocking, leaving grandparents grappling with grief, confusion and a sense of erasure from their own family’s future.

Under estrangement Ideology, it common that Estranged Adult Children not only cut off communications between themselves and their parents—they also restrict access to their own children. Within Estrangement Ideology, this decision is often framed as necessary for protecting the next generation from supposed emotional harm emanating from the generation before—sometimes referred to as “cyclebreaking.”

The Ideological Framing of Grandparental Cut-Off

Within estrangement discourse, restricting or eliminating a grandparent’s access to their grandchildren is often positioned as a natural extension of “No Contact”, justified by some key ideological beliefs. These justifications mirror the broader ideological tenets of estrangement, particularly the black-and-white view of relationships, where past grievances determine permanent future exclusion.

The “cyclebreaking” narrative:

In the context of grandparental estrangement, Estranged Adult Children are encouraged to take on the “cyclebreaker” identity in an effort to break the posited cycles of “harmful” and “toxic” relationships that supposedly pervade family dynamics. Some therapists play a crucial role in reinforcing the justification for strict “boundaries” and permanent “No Contact” regimes under this cyclebreaking model—as discussed in Part 4. The Therapist and Part 10. The Cyclebreaking Deception.

This framework encourages Estranged Adult Children to view themselves as morally obligated to sever ties, positioning any attempt at reconciliation as a betrayal of their personal healing journey. Grandparents, in turn, become framed as relics of a “toxic past” rather than potential sources of intergenerational support, deepening the ideological entrenchment of estrangement.

Example from a forum thread:

“I had to protect my child from the same toxicity I grew up with. My parents don’t get a second chance to mess up another generation.”

This erases the possibility that grandparents might have changed or that their relationship with the grandchild could be different from their relationship with their own child. It also negates the idea that the role of a grandparent has long been recognised as qualitatively different from that of a parent, as it often involves providing unconditional support, wisdom and a unique intergenerational bond that is distinct from the authoritative and caregiving responsibilities of parenthood. This difference has historically allowed grandparents to serve as mentors, emotional anchors and sources of family continuity, fostering a relationship with grandchildren that is rooted in guidance and affection rather than direct parental authority.

The pathologisation of grandparents’ grief as manipulation:

Much like the pathologisation of parents described in other articles in this Estrangement Ideology series, their grief as estranged grandparents is also pathologised as manipulation, reinforcing the justification for maintaining “No Contact.” When estranged grandparents express sorrow, longing or a desire for reconciliation with their grandchildren, their emotions are often reframed as guilt-tripping tactics rather than natural human responses to familial loss. Statements like “I just want to know if my grandchildren are okay” or “I miss you and would love to reconnect” are frequently interpreted as coercive ploys rather than genuine expressions of love and regret.

This framing effectively invalidates the grandparents' pain while strengthening the estranged adult child’s belief that continued estrangement is necessary for their emotional well-being. As a result, any outreach from grandparents is met with suspicion, ensuring that the estrangement remains self-reinforcing and that avenues for reconciliation are systematically closed off.

Example from a forum thread:

“My mom kept sending letters talking about how much she misses my kids. That’s just more guilt-tripping and manipulation. She hasn’t changed.”

This creates a no-win scenario for grandparents—if they reach out, they are seen as controlling, but if they don’t, they are accused of not caring.

The use of “boundaries” as a moral justification for total cut-off:

In Estrangement Ideology, “boundaries” are framed as absolute moral imperatives rather than flexible relational tools. Instead of being used as a means to improve relationships or establish healthier interactions, “boundaries” become a justification for complete erasure, where any deviation from strict “No Contact” is seen as a violation of personal autonomy.

Grandparents who attempt respectful outreach or express their pain are framed as boundary violators, reinforcing the idea that they are incapable of change and unworthy of a second chance. This rigid application of boundaries ensures that estrangement is not just maintained but continually reaffirmed as the only responsible course of action, leaving little room for reflection, reconciliation or intergenerational connection.

Example from a forum thread:

“My parents didn’t respect my boundaries, so I made the only choice left: they don’t get to see my kids.”

This strong, immediate advice to further restrict access if boundaries are violated illustrates how estrangement communities encourage escalation rather than de-escalation, ensuring that the grandparent is perceived as a persistent threat rather than a grieving family member. This rigid approach makes reconciliation nearly impossible, as “boundaries” are interpreted as fixed, absolute and non-negotiable rather than a framework for improved relationships—see Part 2. Transgressions, Moral Certitude and Traditional Values.

In a related example, one online forum member asked whether it would be ok for her to contact her estranged nieces and nephews by sending a letter to their divorced dad’s house, another forum member responded as follows:

“I think it's worth considering how you might feel if the family you cut off bypassed you and contacted your children. I personally would be beyond furious. It 100% sucks but imo your sister gets to decide this for now.”

The lesson here is that extended family—grandparents included—have no automatic right to a relationship with the children. Any unwanted grandparental outreach can be classified as inherently manipulative, even when framed as a benign gesture—like sending birthday gifts, text messages or cards. Just as often happens in divorce cases, access to and relationship with children is weaponised in the battle being waged by the adult child against their estranged parent.

The Influence of Online Estrangement Communities:

Online estrangement communities play a crucial role in reinforcing the permanence of “No Contact”, especially when it comes to cutting off grandparents. Rather than encouraging critical reflection or the possibility of gradual re-engagement, these forums often validate estrangement as the only responsible choice, discouraging any second thoughts as a sign of “weakness” or “emotional manipulation.”

When forum members express doubts about excluding grandparents, they are often met with warnings that reconciliation is a dangerous regression, as seen in responses like:

“If you’re even questioning this, you need to ask yourself why. Your parents didn’t change—you did. Keep that boundary strong.”

This rigid approach ensures that estrangement remains self-reinforcing, with any lingering guilt or regret dismissed as mere conditioning from an abusive past, making reconciliation nearly impossible.

Encouraging absolute “No Contact” for grandparents

Many posts actively discourage even supervised or conditional visitation, warning that any contact is a gateway for emotional manipulation. Example:

“If they see your kids, they’ll just use them as a tool to manipulate you back into contact. Shut it down.”

Interpreting grandparents’ grief as guilt-tripping

Grandparents who express sadness or seek reconciliation are often framed as emotionally manipulative, reinforcing the necessity of No Contact. Example:

“My mom sent me a letter about how much she misses my kids. Typical narcissistic guilt trip.”

Justifying the erasure of grandparents from the child’s life

Many estranged parents prevent their children from even knowing about their grandparents, ensuring they never question the estrangement. Example:

“My kids don’t even know my parents exist. It’s better that way.”

The Consequences of Grandparent Cut-Off

The decision to sever ties between grandparents and their grandchildren has far-reaching emotional, psychological and social consequences, impacting not just the estranged parents and grandparents, but also the grandchildren themselves. While Estrangement Ideology frames this severance as an act of “protection” or “boundary” enforcement, the long-term effects can be profound and often overlooked.

Grandparents experience deep grief and unresolved loss, grandchildren miss out on intergenerational bonds and family history and—in spite of the “cyclebreaking” sell story—estranged parents may unknowingly perpetuate a cycle of familial disconnection. Beyond the personal toll, grandparental cut-off contributes to a broader cultural shift toward the erosion of extended family networks, reinforcing isolation and generational fragmentation.

The experience of unresolved grief:

Estranged grandparents often experience a grief similar to the loss of a child, but without closure or social support. In his article “The Lonely, Fractured Live of Estranged Grandparents”, Dr. Joshua Coleman sets out how:

“Thousands of grandparents today have been cut off from contact with their grandchildren. While this sometimes results from the grandparent's highly problematic behavior toward the grandchild, my clinical experience, as illustrated in the case above, reveals that grandchildren are often a casualty of the conflict between parents and grandparents.”

He goes on to say:

“Most of the estranged grandparents I work with are bereft and confused. Cut loose from the insulating meanings of family, they survey a world where they have no place in the greater order of things. And like so many, they want to know, "What can I do to get my grandchildren back? What if I never see them again? What can I do to end this pain?"”

A study conducted by L.M. Drew and M. Silverstein published in in the Journal of Family Psychology likewise concluded that:

“Grandparents who lost contact with their grandchildren experienced a steeper increase in depressive symptoms as they aged compared with other grandparents. Depressive symptoms of grandparents who lost contact because of a sudden event increased up to 3 years following the loss but returned to equilibrium thereafter. The authors conclude that grandparents who lost contact with their grandchildren experienced a negative impact on their emotional health.”

The impact on grandchildren:

Estranged Adult Children cut off access between their estranged parents under the rationale that they are protecting their kids, but research suggests that grandparents often play a crucial role in child development and their absence can result in emotional and relational loss for the grandchildren.

That being said, throughout history many children have grown up without grandparents in their lives without any noticeable harm or lasting emotional damage. A point in case would by my wife whose last remaining grandparent died when she was aged 3 years, she confesses to no lasting effects from this—the role being taken up by her large extended family of much older uncles and aunts—but who knows what might have been?

Nevertheless, in a perfect world there is very much a case to be made that having supportive and engaged grandparents is a net positive in children’s lives. According to an article on the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy website:

“Being raised by a grandparent has been associated with a number of benefits for grandchildren. These include greater stability and safety, the maintenance of relationships with siblings and extended family members, and the continuation of cultural identity and community ties. Evidence also suggests that children who are raised by grandparents or other relatives have better behavioral and mental health outcomes than those who are not.”

Conversely, the article contends that a close relationship with grandchildren is also good for grandparents:

“Grandparents frequently report that raising their grandchildren is enjoyable because they have an opportunity to parent for a second time. They may also derive satisfaction from having a close relationship with their grandchild, as well as seeing their grandchild grow, develop, and learn new skills. Some grandparents experience joy and a sense of purpose in knowing that they are giving their grandchildren a better chance at life.”

Key issues for children arising from estrangement of grandparents by a parent undoubtedly hinge, therefore, on the age of the grandchild, quality and closeness of the grandparent-grandchild relationship prior to estrangement and whether access to the child is being weaponised by any of the adults concerned. Lastly, it is important to remember that grandparents are often a fallback for parental responsibilities should the parent not be able to fulfil the role—such as in case of death, hospitalisation or incarceration. In this respect, a good existing relationship between grandparent and grandchild is undoubtedly preferable in terms of adjustment and child development outcomes.

The perpetuation of estrangement as a family pattern:

When estrangement ideology justifies the total erasure of grandparents, it inadvertently normalises estrangement as a family strategy, shaping how future generations perceive and handle conflict. Children who grow up witnessing their parents cut off their own parents internalise the idea that severing family ties is a valid, even necessary, response to relational difficulties, rather than an extreme measure reserved for cases of genuine harm.

As they mature, these children may apply the same logic to their own relationships, leading to a generational cycle of family fragmentation. This cycle is reinforced by therapy language and online communities, which frame estrangement as a path to personal growth rather than a breakdown of familial bonds. In this way, estrangement ceases to be an exceptional response to extreme circumstances and instead becomes a learned behaviour, passed down as a cultural norm within certain family systems.

Example from a forum thread:

“My mom estranged her parents, and she taught me that family ties don’t mean anything. Now I’m No Contact with her. It runs in the family, I guess.”

The Long-Term Societal Implications

The widespread estrangement of grandparents from their grandchildren is not just a private family matter—it has broad societal consequences that extend beyond the individuals involved. As estrangement becomes more normalised and ideologically reinforced, it contributes to the breakdown of extended family networks, the weakening of intergenerational bonds and the erosion of family-based support systems.

With fewer connections to older generations, younger individuals may lose access to family history, cultural traditions and emotional stability, while aging grandparents face isolation and unacknowledged grief. Over time, the normalisation of estrangement reshapes societal attitudes toward family conflict, reinforcing individualism over reconciliation and estrangement over resolution, potentially leading to a future where severing ties is increasingly seen as a routine response to relational difficulties rather than a last resort.

The breakdown of extended family networks:

The breakdown of extended family networks due to grandparental estrangement has far-reaching consequences, particularly for the nuclear family. When grandparents are cut off, multi-generational support structures collapse, leaving parents without the traditional safety net of emotional, financial and caregiving assistance. This places greater pressure on parents to raise children in isolation, often without the benefit of wisdom, experience and practical help that grandparents have historically provided.

For children, growing up without meaningful intergenerational relationships weakens their sense of family continuity, leading to a diminished understanding of their roots, cultural heritage and broader support system. For grandparents, loss of intergenerational relationship and support can lead to worse health, depression and longevity outcomes. Over time, this fragmentation of the extended family may act to reduce overall societal resilience.

Increased emotional fragility in future generations:

Children raised in environments where estrangement is normalised as the default response to conflict may develop increased emotional fragility and a diminished capacity for conflict resolution. Without exposure to the complexities of maintaining relationships despite disagreements, they may struggle to navigate interpersonal tensions in adulthood.

Rather than learning how to set boundaries while preserving important connections, they may adopt a black-and-white mindset, viewing relational difficulties as irreconcilable rather than manageable. Over time, this conditioning erodes emotional resilience, making future generations more likely to disengage from relationships entirely rather than work through misunderstandings, disappointments or personal growth challenges. In effect, estrangement ideology not only severs existing family bonds but also shapes how future generations approach all relationships, fostering a culture where avoidance replaces reconciliation.

The loss of cultural continuity:

The loss of cultural continuity is one of the most overlooked consequences of grandparental estrangement, as cutting off an entire generation severs the transmission of family traditions, stories and cultural heritage. Grandparents often serve as living links to the past, passing down ancestral knowledge, religious customs, language and family narratives that give younger generations a sense of identity and belonging. This is especially so in indigenous native peoples, particularly those with a recent oral history culture.

When these connections are lost, children grow up disconnected from their familial roots, missing out on the wisdom and experiences that could shape their understanding of where they come from. Over time, this erasure of intergenerational knowledge weakens cultural identity, replacing deep familial ties with fragmented, individualistic narratives that prioritise personal grievances over collective history. In losing these relationships, families also lose the shared wisdom that fosters resilience, continuity and a deeper sense of purpose across generations.

Conclusion

The consequential cut-off of grandparents is one of the most severe and lasting effects of Estrangement Ideology, ensuring that family fractures persist across generations. While some cases of grandparental estrangement may be justified, the normalisation of cutting off grandparents as a default response erodes family structures, reinforces ideological rigidity and deepens emotional isolation for all involved.

Further, this cutting-off of grandparents represents a major shift in intergenerational family structures, where:

• Estranged Adult Children justify total erasure of grandparents as a protective act

• Expressions of grief from grandparents are reframed as guilt-tripping and manipulation

• Online communities reinforce the permanence of estrangement, discouraging second thoughts

• Grandparents suffer profound emotional loss, while grandchildren miss out on valuable relationships

• Estrangement becomes an intergenerational pattern, increasing family disconnection.

While some cases of grandparental estrangement are justified, the ideological framing of “No Contact” as a preferred and highly reinforced resolution mechanism ensures that many relationships are lost unnecessarily, leading to lifelong regret, unprocessed grief and weakened family bonds across generations.

Ultimately, Estrangement Ideology does not just sever individual relationships—it restructures entire family systems, often at great cost to future generations.

---

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.