Years of relentless turmoil had worn down a father caught in the crossfire of a fractured family. His ex-wife’s battle with BPD had turned their shared life into a relentless storm of lies, abuse, and pain, culminating in a bitter divorce that shattered the fragile remnants of trust. Yet, amidst the chaos, one line was never crossed—until now.
The heartbreaking betrayal came not from infidelity, but from the stolen futures of their children. With college savings wiped clean by the ex-wife’s hand, the father’s desperate pleas for his grown kids to act went ignored. Instead of fighting back, they turned to him for rescue, only to be met with a painful truth: some battles must be faced alone. The cost was more than financial—it was the lost hope and dreams of a brighter tomorrow.
WIBTA if I quit my job, sell my share in company and retire to be a ski patroler? I would essentially leave my adult kids (18 and 22) to fend for themselves with no way to pay for college. Ex wife as well.
As renowned researcher Dr. Brené Brown explains, “Boundaries are the distance at which I can love you and me simultaneously.” In this complex scenario, the OP is attempting to establish an extreme boundary by completely exiting their current life structure, motivated by years of emotional depletion and feeling used by their children (“just see me as a wallet”). The children, having been enabled or protected from dealing with their mother’s severe issues (BPD, abuse, theft) for years, are now exhibiting a lack of initiative by expecting the OP to serve as their sole financial and legal troubleshooter.
The OP’s plan to leave their job, sell the business, and sever financial ties represents a final, reactive boundary setting rather than a proactive communication strategy. While the OP is legally and morally correct that the children have recourse against their mother regarding the college funds (especially since they are adults who could have removed her as custodian sooner), the children’s current state of being shut-ins suggests they are emotionally paralyzed or overwhelmed. This situation highlights a failure in establishing age-appropriate boundaries earlier, leading to dependency that exploded when the financial safety net was threatened.
The OP’s proposed action—walking away entirely—would certainly achieve personal peace but would likely inflict severe emotional and practical damage on the children, potentially reinforcing negative behavioral patterns of learned helplessness. A more constructive approach would involve setting firm, non-negotiable boundaries regarding *how* the OP can help (e.g., providing specific legal consultation referrals or a small, one-time loan for immediate necessities) rather than offering to solve the entire problem or disappearing completely. The OP should address the children’s dependency directly, ensuring they understand that future support is contingent upon their independent action against the ex-wife.
REDDIT USERS WERE STUNNED – YOU WON’T BELIEVE SOME OF THESE REACTIONS.
The original poster (OP) is deeply exhausted by years of conflict stemming from their ex-wife’s behavior and the subsequent financial fallout involving their adult children’s college funds. The central conflict lies between the OP’s desire to finally sever ties with the emotional and financial burdens imposed by this difficult family situation and the children’s expectation that the OP should intervene and resolve the financial damage caused by their mother.
If the OP chooses to leave their current career and financial stability to pursue a simpler life, they are effectively abandoning their children to face the consequences of their mother’s actions alone. The core question remains: Is the OP justified in prioritizing their own mental and emotional relief by completely stepping away from their children’s immediate crisis, or does a parental obligation still require them to assist their dependent adult children in seeking legal resolution against the ex-wife?
