She had always strived to protect her daughter from the shadows of a broken past, nurturing a bond between child and father despite the scars left by his abuse. Her heart held a fragile hope that love could transcend pain, that her little girl would grow up knowing the warmth of a caring father and the strength of a mother who chose kindness over bitterness.
But in the quiet moments after she returned from her trip, the devastation was undeniable—not just in the wreckage of her home, but in the shattering of trust. The chaos left behind was more than broken floors and shattered fixtures; it was a painful rupture in the delicate balance she had fought so hard to maintain.
For not allowing my kids dad in my home unsupervised
According to Dr. Stephen Stosny, a specialist in anger and violence, manipulative behaviors like gaslighting often follow incidents of irresponsibility or destruction as a means to avoid accountability and maintain perceived control. In this situation, the focus shifts from the property damage to shifting blame onto the OP, which is a significant red flag regarding trustworthiness.
The OP’s primary motivation—preserving a loving father-daughter relationship—is commendable, but it has been directly undermined by the father’s actions: gross negligence leading to significant property loss (especially in a rental), deliberate concealment of the flood, and emotional manipulation (gaslighting regarding the railing). Allowing a parent who exhibits such severe lapses in judgment and honesty unsupervised access, particularly around a four-year-old, creates an unsafe precedent. The father’s actions demonstrate a clear failure in fulfilling the basic responsibilities associated with unsupervised caretaking, irrespective of his affection for the child. Furthermore, forcing the daughter to keep the secret about the toilet damage introduces a harmful burden of adult conflict onto a young child.
The OP was appropriate in reacting strongly to the breach of trust and demonstration of irresponsibility. However, a constructive recommendation would be to establish a clear, tiered path for regaining access, rather than an indefinite ban. Future access should be strictly supervised by the OP or a trusted third party until the father takes full financial responsibility for the damage, clearly apologizes for the gaslighting, and demonstrates a measurable commitment to accountability.
AFTER THIS STORY DROPPED, REDDIT WENT INTO MELTDOWN MODE – CHECK OUT WHAT PEOPLE SAID.
The original poster (OP) is facing a severe conflict between her desire to maintain a positive relationship between her daughter and her abusive ex-partner, and her need to protect her property and emotional well-being from his destructive and dishonest behavior. Her decision to revoke unsupervised access directly challenges the established co-parenting arrangement she worked hard to maintain for her daughter’s sake.
Is the OP justified in immediately removing all unsupervised access to her daughter from the father due to the property damage and subsequent gaslighting, or does this extreme action unfairly punish the daughter by severing a loving relationship based on the father’s irresponsible actions while he was alone?
