She grew up believing her parents loved her, only to uncover a harsh reality of neglect masked by control and deception. Their unhealthy obsessions with appearance dictated her life, pushing strict diets and medication that left her fragile and unseen, even as her body silently cried out in pain.
Years later, after breaking free and building her own life, the past resurfaced when her parents discovered her children through social media. Their cold confrontation shattered any hope of reconciliation, revealing the deep wounds that still fester beneath the surface of their fractured family ties.
AITA for reminding my parents why they are not in my life and will never meet their grandkids?
Dr. Karyl McBride, a therapist specializing in narcissistic and emotionally abusive relationships, often discusses the necessity of setting firm boundaries when dealing with parents whose actions stem from unresolved personal issues projected onto their children. In this case, the parents’ insistence on extreme dieting and secrecy surrounding the ulcer diagnosis indicates a profound lack of respect for the OP’s bodily autonomy and health, rooted in their own unhealthy lifestyle choices.
The OP’s initial reaction to cut contact upon gaining independence is a common and often necessary protective mechanism following relational trauma. The parents’ current attempt to re-engage, fueled by the existence of grandchildren, demonstrates a failure to take responsibility for past actions. Calling the OP an ‘asshole’ for bringing up the past is a clear example of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender), shifting blame away from their harmful behavior onto the victim seeking boundaries.
Given the history of deception (lying to the doctor) and emotional invalidation (‘called me a little asshole’), the husband’s recommendation to completely block them for the OP’s mental health is professionally sound advice. Continuing any form of contact risks re-traumatization. The most constructive path forward is to maintain the current boundary, perhaps sending one final, firm letter outlining the required prerequisite for future contact (e.g., acknowledging past harm), before initiating the block, thus taking control of the narrative and the pace of interaction.
THE COMMENTS SECTION WENT WILD – REDDIT HAD *A LOT* TO SAY ABOUT THIS ONE.
The original poster (OP) is grappling with the emotional fallout of childhood experiences involving parental control over their health and subsequent estrangement. The central conflict lies between the OP’s need to protect their own family unit and mental well-being by maintaining distance, and the parents’ expectation of inclusion and acceptance, which they rationalize as being ‘for the best.’
Is the OP justified in maintaining complete separation from their parents and keeping their children unaware of their existence, prioritizing past trauma recovery over familial reconciliation, or should they attempt a mediated, limited contact pathway for the sake of potential, albeit risky, long-term family connection?
