Overcomplicated

I think it’s a question of listening to what the other person is saying, really listening, and responding with tact, kindness and respect, even if you don’t share their views.

It only becomes an argument when someone comes along and makes it personal by saying I disagree with YOU instead of Here are my thoughts on this

Hmmm... But if someone doesn't agree with a statement or point of view that's been made, it's simply that: a disagreement of the point of discussion. So what one person sees as invalidation of their personal views or experiences, another person will see as I just don't agree with what you say. I suppose it's how the poster and the reader percieves the post isn't it?

HolyHannah that was what I was trying to get across.

People come here looking for advice and support and want to discuss their experience and feelings and of course we do that... We can still validate those feelings and that experience while helping them reframe it if needed or reminding them that there is room for everyone's feelings or saying that our experience shows xyz is a possible outcome from that future decision.

It only becomes an argument when someone comes along and makes it personal by saying I disagree with YOU instead of Here are my thoughts on this

If people make a statement about an event or the past like I went to a therapist for this problem and that problem is now thankfully resolved and it's given me this understanding That's not up for debate. Questions about it is fine but telling us it's wrong is invalidation. Especially as a statement is not even asking for validation, it just is.

rosecarmel you posted that scientifically parents are incorrect when they say did nothing. This thread is on the estrangement forum and there is nothing scientifically proven that parents who say they did nothing with regard to their estrangement are incorrect, therefore what you posted is an opinion.

HolyHannah

*"What anyone chooses to do or doesn't produces results- In other words, nothing isn't an option- It's an illusion, an ecapsulated, imaginary space where reality ceases to exist"*

rosecarmel -- You gave me a thought. You are correct nothing is never an option. I can say I didn't do anything to deserve estrangement, which is true... I can't say I have zero responsibility for my estrangement because I don't.

I am 100% responsible for 'walking away'/going No Contact. I am 0% responsible to control the REASON(s) I went NC -- I was being abused.

What doesn't 'work' is -- "I did NOTHING to 'deserve' estrangement..."

One way or another WE ALL did "something". Who is willing to admit to "what" is what makes the difference and shows who is the healthier thinker.

In think the zero (clear mind) you're referring to is love- Completely liberating your thoughts of burdens and responsibilities that weren't yours to begin with, by providing yourself with the undivided attention and fully present experience you didn't receive -- understanding it was never your choice to be here, to be born-

So the zero you discovered isn't nothing- It's love-

"What anyone chooses to do or doesn't produces results- In other words, nothing isn't an option- It's an illusion, an ecapsulated, imaginary space where reality ceases to exist"

rosecarmel -- You gave me a thought. You are correct nothing is never an option. I can say I didn't do anything to deserve estrangement, which is true... I can't say I have zero responsibility for my estrangement because I don't.

I am 100% responsible for 'walking away'/going No Contact. I am 0% responsible to control the REASON(s) I went NC -- I was being abused.

What doesn't 'work' is -- "I did NOTHING to 'deserve' estrangement..."

One way or another WE ALL did "something". Who is willing to admit to "what" is what makes the difference and shows who is the healthier thinker.

Smileless2012

You said "scientifically"rosecarmel and I see nothing scientific in your "pre-cellphone example" or anything that relates to my post which you gave the impression you were responding too.

"One is just as worthy and valid of expressing as another, surely" if only that were the case Chewbacca

Smileless, no opinion can alter what's already proven- It can create the illusion that something isn't true, which can be healthy at times when used as a temporary, short term coping mechanism- It provides a person time to think, to sort things and offer a bit of comfort-

Interaction is scientific, cause and effect- What anyone chooses to do or doesn't produces results- In other words, nothing isn't an option- It's an illusion, an ecapsulated, imaginary space where reality ceases to exist-

It's denial-

It's interesting that some people say, "I know my SiL/DiL is a Narcissist." based on their opinion and yet I get a diagnosis of my 'mom' being Narcissistic from a trained medical professional and that is doubted...

As for this 'conversation' around invalidation... As I've said before, if I know a truth, telling me my truth isn't "real" isn't going to change my mind. That's still gas-lighting and it doesn't work on me.

Certainly anyone who claims they did nothing to contribute to their estrangement when they obviously did and yet they want me to 'support'/validate their "story"? No. I won't.

Now if someone wants to be honest and say, "Yes. I contributed to my estrangement because I did x,y and z... I see that me digging my heels in and and refusing to apologize etc. created problems..." then I would say, "I'm sorry that happened. There's no time like the present to self-reflect and send a sincere apology and work to not make the same mistakes."

Unfortunately, "I did NOTHING to contribute to my estrangement..." leaves no door OR window 'open' and nothing is going to change for that person. What kind of comfort/support can I offer?

OP didn't have an improvement in her relationship with her daughter until she owned her part. Her friends and other people affirming to her that "she did nothing wrong" (enabling) kept her in denial and the estrangement continued....

You said "scientifically"rosecarmel and I see nothing scientific in your "pre-cellphone example" or anything that relates to my post which you gave the impression you were responding too.

"One is just as worthy and valid of expressing as another, surely" if only that were the case Chewbacca

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Smileless2012

Really!! Where is the scientific evidence to support your claim that parents are incorrect when they claim they did nothing rosecarmel?

Of course a parent cannot interact with their child without outcome but whose to say that every EP's interaction with their child has resulted in them being estranged?

It takes a lot energy for an EP here on GN, to maintain they did nothing and perhaps as much energy from EAC, to project their own dysfunctional and abusive child hood experiences onto the EP who post here.

But thank you rosecarmel for so eloquently demonstrating the difference between disagreeing and invalidating.

It really very simple to understand-

Here's a pre-cellphone example:

Your teen offers to go to the store for you (so that they can drive the car) and you're like Ok, please pick up a sack of Clementines, oatmeal and 2 packages of Portobello- They grab the keys, head out of the house and start the car when you suddenly realize you didn't tell them to get butter- So you hurry to run after them and shout as they are pulling down the street BUTTER!!! I didn't tell you .. to get .. the butter ..

Validation is one of the most important aspects of parenting. It's pure love and acceptance. Its valuing that person, their experience and most importantly their feelings and it is what creates strong confident children who are resilient and feel secure.

Yup! Validation is important in parenting!

*Don't say:
I disagree...
Well, in MY experience...
My situation was worse because...
You are the most out of order because...
Etc.*

I agree that you are most out of order and My situation was worse because could well be inappropriate in many contexts.

But reference to experience and I disagree are part of good debate and discussion.

Simply offer validation and understanding

But sometimes posters are criticised for that on so many threads so many times …. criticised for understanding and validating others who are in pain because of estrangement. For saying things kindly even when giving hard messages. For enabling others by agreeing with them or by showing understanding, whether agreeing with them or not.

I do think that posters should show understanding and they can validate feelings ...but in order to discuss, to learn, to debate, to share experiences there has to be disagreement and if disagreement is seen as invalidation, then that is impossible.

If you absolutely cannot go wrong validating a person's feelings even if you can't relate to their experience why are their numerous examples of posters doing the exact opposite?

Ok

Of course validation isn't possible with ridiculous statement... All you can do is say

OK?

And maybe never invite them for tea

Holyhannah Validation is one of the most important aspects of parenting. It's pure love and acceptance. Its valuing that person, their experience and most importantly their feelings and it is what creates strong confident children who are resilient and feel secure.

To invalidate someone is the opposite. It's denying, dismissing, rejecting someone's feelings or experience (two things that impact each other) as wrong, unimportant or just plain unacceptable.

Its invalidating to dismiss another's experience because it doesn't match your own experience and definitely rude and invalidating if it doesn't match your opinion. Experience is infinite, there is not enough time in any of our lives to know or experience all of everything. Not in a hundred lifetimes.

Its not necessarily abusive, or even deliberate, sometimes its well meaning people can have the best intentions in the world and still be unable to handle the strong emotions of someone who has been hurt or they might genuinely believe that using their experience in comparison is helping you. They may not understand that feelings and experiences don't go away just because they are questioned or someone is told they shouldn't feel so bad.

The absolute best way to avoid invalidating someone is to always validate them.

This is very simple. Validate their feelings or feelings AND experience. Agree and empathise. If you absolutely cannot relate to their experience, empathising with their feelings is enough. All emotionally healthy people do have experience of how all the feelings feel and how awful some of them can get.

Using your experience or feelings to argue against someone else's, not only invalidates them but ensures you will get no validation for how you feel either.

People's experiences and feelings are simply unique to them.

So how can people with different experiences and feelings on the same subjects still validate each other?

Don't say:

I disagree...
Well, in MY experience...
My situation was worse because...
You are the most out of order because...
Etc

Simply offer validation and understanding.

Or bring up your personal feelings and experience as a seperate unique issue untied to theirs and remember that someone else's experience does not negate yours and that should work both ways. So if you feel attacked by their experience/feelings, you need to realise that's not their fault or responsibility.

Anyway I've lost track now.

Basically validate validate validate. You absolutely cannot go wrong validating a person's feelings even if you can't relate to their experience.

Scientifically, parents are incorrect when they claim they did nothing- A parent cannot interact with their child without outcome- It's impossible

I agree. All parents have an impact on their children.

Like you also my views and opinions are not static as I learn/re learn/unlearn/observe/have new experiences

However I don't think any of that answers the question I was asking which was:

At what point does that perfectly friendly and reasonable disagreeing become "invalidation" of your views by me or my views by you?

Never mind. Holy Hannah has explained from her perspective quite clearly.

Ok Thanks Holy Hannah. In your case you described the statement as invalidating...I get that.

I also see sometimes someone can feel invalidated and/or can see disagreeing etc as being invalidated

It sort of brings me back to my original pondering on this, which was that it is difficult to see how anyone can ask a question of another poster or disagree with another poster on any subject, (but perhaps particularly in discussions on relationships/estrangement) without it being seen as "invalidating" or there being a danger that someone will feel it is invalidating, if they don't hold the same opinion and the disagreement is felt to be dismissive of the other persons feelings/experience, because they don't agree.

I'm not sure there is an answer to my ponderings really. Thanks for explaining from your perspective though.

Really!! Where is the scientific evidence to support your claim that parents are incorrect when they claim they did nothing rosecarmel?

Of course a parent cannot interact with their child without outcome but whose to say that every EP's interaction with their child has resulted in them being estranged?

It takes a lot energy for an EP here on GN, to maintain they did nothing and perhaps as much energy from EAC, to project their own dysfunctional and abusive child hood experiences onto the EP who post here.

But thank you rosecarmel for so eloquently demonstrating the difference between disagreeing and invalidating.

Madgran -- What I said was that the STATEMENT is an example of being invalidating. I didn't feel invalidated. From my perspective, truth cannot be 'invalidated'.

Sometimes a person can feel invalidated and it is justified and some can see disagreeing/seeing a different truth (based on evidence) that contradicts them as also being 'invalidating'.

In other words, not just "buying" someones 'Flat Earth Theory' is not invalidating them or their faulty belief. I have a different belief based on evidence. Since the evidence is not going to change and neither is the person who thinks the Earth is flat... I'm certainly not going to go, "Okay, since you are never going to see my world as 'round', I'll just go ahead and 'agree' with YOU that the world is 'flat'..." just to end the 'argument'. Nope. I'm not like that anymore.

It's gaslighting... "If you don't believe my 'Flat Earth Story' why should I believe YOUR 'Round Earth' view?" Answer --Because one is closer to correct then the other and is based on a lot more data then, "I say the Earth is flat therefore it IS."

Chewbacca

Forgive me if I've got the wrong end of the stick here but I think what Bridie is getting at is that, whilst the counselling/treatment that you received "worked" for you personally Starblaze; the query that I raised was "how can our EP be "accused" of being narcissists, when they personally have, in all probability, have not been seen by a clinical psychologist?" I know for a fact that my mother was not seen by anyone other than an ordinary family GP but, then I don't believe that she was a narcissist; she was simply not a good mother. Do you see what I'm getting at?

I suppose, the same way that EP diagnose their children or partners with NPD.

Best guess.

In holy Hannah’s case however, she personally has been diagnosed with C-ptsd stemming from narcissistic abuse. So it’s a pretty decent leap to make that guess even though it still isn’t definite. The fact remains that she suffered narcissistic abuse. That HAS been professionally diagnosed.

Madgran77

*Holy Hannah* I can see why you would find that statement upsetting/invalidating within your context.

I also noted what you said re the parent/child relationship being the exception to the rule in terms of diagnosis.

I accept that your Dr did diagnose your mother as a Narcissist. As far as I can see the problem now is arising because some posters do not, from their experiences and observations, accept that a Dr can do that. That is their opinion. It doesn't change the fact that your Dr did do that with you, nor does it change the fact of your experiences with your Dr to help you in your situation

What I am trying to say in a rather long winded way is that I don't think you have to feel your experience is invalidated because someone else doesn't think that experience is possible. Does that make sense?

Yes- Especially that last part-

Madgran77

*There's a difference between sharing an opinion and presenting a fact*

Well yes! I agree and I don't believe I suggested otherwise.

Taking your example from my perspective:

"Some parents deny their accountability".

Based on observations and experience over many years I agree that is a fact because I have specifically seen it. I also believe posters on here who have said that happened to them (although I am aware that I will only get one perspective on that in a public forum)

I am not sure one can ever say categorically that they/other parents will continue to do so although again from my observations and experience I would say that is pretty likely ..that is my opinion, based on my observations and experience! I also agree that if some parents do continue to deny their accountability, that will lead to estrangement. That is my opinion based on my experience and observations.

Therefore I am partially agreeing with you, except on the categorical assumption that parents will continue to deny their accountability (as opposed to my view that it is "likely")

At what point does that perfectly friendly and reasonable disagreeing become "invalidation" of your views by me or my views by you?

Look .. lol ..

I cannot begin to tell you how many stories I told myself that turned out to be wrong- Why? Because my story is constantly unfolding, fleshing out and then reduced to next to nothing as I continue to learn and unlearn about what I thought I previously knew and now know-

In other words, how I look at it (life) isn't static-

But .. ?

Some things do continue to hold true in principal:

Children do not ask to be born-

Scientifically, parents are incorrect when they claim they did nothing- A parent cannot interact with their child without outcome- It's impossible-

It probably takes more energy (and wine) to "maintain" I/ we did "nothing" and "fault finding" than it does to move towards exploring responsibility, accountability and interaction-

An interesting question Madgran especially as it seems that what is asking a question from one is so often taken as invalidating by another.

To invalidate is to make or prove an argument or statement unsound or erroneous. By definition invalidation is the process of denying, rejecting or dismissing someone's feelings. Invalidation sends the message that a persons subjective emotional experience is inaccurate, insignificant or un acceptable.

It should be clear then the difference between disagreeing with what someone says and invalidating their experience.

You nailed it Madgran…

Oh good! My pondering was worth it then!

So therefore, if that is the case, can you clarify for me why, someone giving that opinion as an opinion based on their experiences is "invalidating" as so often seems to be the concern on so many threads? I am asking the question because "invalidation" through what seems to be basically disagreeing, seems to cause so much trouble, with people getting very upset and angry and accusations getting thrown around, and threads getting derailed as nearly happened on this one.