When the original poster (OP) was 14, she began dating Jace, who was 15. She had a close friendship with her older sister, Lauren, and believed they shared everything. This trust was broken when Lauren and Jace began cheating on the OP together, which eventually resulted in Lauren becoming pregnant.
The OP was initially supportive of Lauren until the truth was revealed to their parents, leading to the breakup with Jace, who preferred Lauren. Despite Lauren’s pleas for forgiveness and a desire to remain close, the OP cut ties, finding relief when Lauren moved in with Jace’s family. When parental pressure to forgive Lauren and resume the sisterly relationship failed, the OP moved out at 18 and initiated a period of no contact with both Lauren and Jace, a boundary she has maintained for years despite family disagreement.
AITA for keeping no contact with my sister after her husband (my ex) died?
As renowned relationship expert Dr. Terrence Real explains, ‘When someone betrays you, they are making a statement that they do not value you, and your task is to figure out how to value yourself enough to hold a boundary against that behavior.’
The OP is navigating a complex trauma rooted in a double betrayal during formative adolescent years. Her initial no contact was a necessary self-preservation tactic against a relationship (with Lauren) built on profound deceit, further complicated by parental pressure that pathologized her justified reaction. The decision to maintain distance was not arbitrary but a response to Lauren’s past actions, which included using the OP’s trust while actively undermining her relationship. The subsequent family pressure attempts to enforce a concept of ‘forgivable mistakes,’ suggesting that the OP’s pain is less valid because Lauren’s outcome (marriage, children) appeared positive to outsiders.
The death of Jace introduces an acute external crisis that tests the stability of the OP’s boundary. While the OP expresses appropriate empathy for Lauren’s current grief, she feels conflicted because continuing no contact now seemingly transfers familial criticism onto Lauren. However, a boundary, once established due to severe harm, does not automatically dissolve upon a tragic event involving a third party. The OP’s primary responsibility remains to her own long-term emotional safety. A constructive approach would be for the OP to communicate a limited, carefully controlled message of condolence directly to Lauren without rescinding the fundamental boundary, perhaps stating, ‘I acknowledge your loss,’ while keeping the established personal distance intact until she is ready to re-evaluate the relationship on her own terms, not under family duress.
THE COMMENTS SECTION WENT WILD – REDDIT HAD *A LOT* TO SAY ABOUT THIS ONE.
The central conflict for the OP is the deep betrayal felt from her sister, which led her to enforce strict, long-term no contact, a decision that has been consistently supported by her grandmother but heavily criticized by other family members. Now, with the unexpected death of Jace, the OP feels significant guilt over maintaining this distance, worrying that her actions are causing emotional strain on Lauren, even though she still views the initial betrayal as unforgivable.
The question is whether the OP is wrong (the ‘Asshole’) for continuing her no contact boundary with Lauren following Jace’s death, or if the severity of the original betrayal justifies prioritizing her own healing over familial reconciliation at this time? Readers must weigh the impact of a formative, severe betrayal against the social expectation to forgive and support a sibling after a tragedy.
