Is 'No Contact' abuse?

Going no contact isn’t abusive. It’s sad and honestly pathetic to try to define it that way. Having your feelings hurt badly isn’t abuse, and trying to contort the definition of abuse to match your specific personal experience of having your feelings hurt is insulting to those who have ever experienced actual abuse. The idea that ‘elder abuse’ includes not being able to see grandchildren on demand would be laughable if it weren’t so insulting.

ok, smileless, i just wasn't sure, esp when people use emojis.
thank you for clarifying.
take care.
are you in u.s.a.

No problem welbeck and no we aren't in the u.s.a. but we had a villa in Florida for several years.

That's how I would summarise your entire post OutsideDave; laughable and insulting and I see you're posting true to form on a thread about estrangement.

I agree Outside Dave. NO Contact cannot be protective to true abuse survivors if it is categorised as abuse.

I've always understood the term "living bereavement" and never doubted estrangement is painful. It's just not abuse.

Is 'no contact' abuse? No, not in the least.

*No Contact cannot be protective to true abuse survivors if it is categorised as abuse*; why?

Who is a true survivor? Anyone who has been abused so if no contact were to be categorised as abuse, what difference will that make to any other offence with the same classification?

Anyway as far I'm aware regarding no contact as abuse hasn't been or attempted to be categorised as abuse any way. Some EGP's including myself, refer to our estrangements as abuse, but that's hardly the same as petitioning the Parliament and requesting that it be given that legal classification.

Well then I really really don't understand why you would argue against it Smileless truly.

To be honest, if some of the posters on here were to go no contact with me, I'd feel truly blessed!

I'm not arguing against it per se Starblaze I am arguing against anyone telling me what I feel, should feel and how or whether or not I should express that.

TBH I'm surprised at your post as you've made no secret of how much you dislike being told to 'get over it' or 'move on' from your abusive past.

Chewbacca

Smileless it's cross purposes again, I am not saying your son did not abuse you in some way, I am saying the act of No Contact with you is not abuse. Which in no way detracts from your hurt feelings at all. Not in the slightest. Not even the tiniest little bit.

Chewbacca Wed 24-Jun-20 16:30:26

Is no contact abuse? It could be abuse against third parties. If children are cut off from people they love and those who love them I would call that abuse. Children think all sorts of things when they are in a situation they don't understand and can be damaged quite severely. Imagine a divorce when one parent says bad things about the other to the child. Horrible

Starblaze -- I think some do not understand that No Contact is not abuse but want it to be....

If someone goes No Contact with an abuser and society starts to accept that is protection for victims, then where does that leave the person who was "walked away from"?

It leaves them exposed as what they are. However, if they turn it around (DARVO) and call No Contact abuse, now they are 'victims' of their evil child.

Well I think HolyHannah that some don't understand that no contact can be abuse because they don't want it to be. Perhaps that's because it leaves them exposed as what they are.

Once again you're making it all about the one doing the estranging being a victim of abuse but that isn't always the case. It's you whose referring to "evil" children, not the EP's on GN.

Another accusation against EP's of DARVO; where exactly?

Smileless -- Regardless of the 'why' of the No Contact (not the 'silent treatment') the person that got "walked away from" is not being "abused". It is not an abusive act to go No Contact.

So regardless of why the person walked away, the person left behind is not automatically a 'victim'. That's where the DARVO comes in.

"He walked away! I'm the victim!" is not the same/does not equal that he walked away from an abuser. All your son did was walk away, which doesn't make you abuser but it doesn't make you a 'victim' of something either.

MarchMom19 However, if someone goes NC with the intention of manipulating for something, like money or childcare, that is abuse

Yup, MarchMom the motivation for the NC changes the context.

Earlier in the thread HolyHannah mentioned what she had written to her family (??) when she made the decision to go No contact. It was an admirably clear statement and request, giving the reasons why. In that context No Contact is not abuse. Every individual is entitled to make decisions for themselves which is as it should be

Going No Contact to manipulate is abuse as MarchMom says ...the motivation and the manipulation are abusive.

Keeps coming back to context and motivation; each NC situation is different. There are common threads identified for many, not necessarily all!

Ofcourse we have been here before; seems to go round in circles on various threads

So regardless of why the person walked away, the person left behind is not automatically a 'victim'.

Absolutely!

However what about if someone says ….."He walked away in order to manipulate me into:

…. giving him my money.....OR
….selling my house to finance him/pay his debts....OR
…. providing free child care or I wont see my grandchildren

...or whatever else he wanted me to do that I didn't want to

so who is the victim in that case?

That's situation is not No Contact Mad and March and Hare?

That situation is withholding the children until stuff is given. That's manipulation and abusive. It's not No Contact.

Yes agree Holyhannah admitting No Contact is not abuse doesn't mean you must have been the abusive one.

Madgran -- That falls into the 'silent treatment' and is "abuse" and obviously manipulation.

No Contact is walking away and staying away without ANY expectations from the estranged party.

Ok so it is using No Contact as a threat in order to manipulate that is the abusive behaviour. What about if No Contact is implemented if the manipulating threat doesn't work?

No Contact is walking away and staying away without ANY expectations from the estranged party.

I do understand that! Meant to put that in my reply above

Starblaze -- People estrange for a lot of reasons. I have always accepted that. I have had people estrange from me and didn't consider it abuse.

What I get peevish with is people who claim to be 'victims' when they are misidentifying what "abuse" actually IS or comparing non-abusive to abusive situations.

The 'silent treatment' and No Contact are two different 'things' and I have to question those who try to make them "the same".

Warning "I will stop contact with you if you continue these behaviours that are hurting me"

Manipulation “I won't speak to you ever again if you don't give me this"

Madgran No Contact as a term would of course be used by manipulative/abusive people but it's still a misuse if you see what I mean

Smileless could you please clairify what you said above? That simply saying leaving a relationship is not abusive is important to us to hide the fact that we are the abusive ones?

Madgran -- In that case, I actually have a different feeling...

IF a child is trying to manipulate their parent(s) with the threat of No Contact and the parent 'gives in', then they are now enabling the bad behavior. If they don't 'give in' and the child 'walks away', then the parent has done the most emotionally healthy thing for ALL involved.

It ends the bad behavior of the AC because they know their 'demands' will not be catered to. It also shows any grand-children that healthy adults do not use threats and intimidation to get what they want and if they do, there will be no "reward".

That's assuming the AC is an abuser/manipulator.

On the alternate side, if it is the parent that is abusive and the AC says, "Until you can start doing 'this' or stop doing 'that' we will have to go No Contact..."

That is the grey area because much of the time abusive parents will claim that the 'demands' like I made before the 'final letter' were "too much" and I was being unreasonable and therefore my cut-off was a threat/manipulation in their eyes.

So maybe some adults are demanding cars, houses, child-minding or whatever and that is just ridiculous and obviously abuse.

My 'demands' of, "Don't raise your voices around me to each other or to Me." or, "If I say 'no'? That is the end of the conversation. If you continue on the same subject after I have said 'no'. I will hang up." and silly things like that were just "too much".