Is it “parental alienation” if it’s the truth???
Honest Opinions needed. DH feels as long as he’s telling the truth to SS13 he’s not doing anything wrong. I disagree. Below is the latest thing DH did that I don’t agree too..,
SS13 is in a Individualized Educational Plan(IEP) at school since second grade. Once a year both parents meet with members of the school to discuss SS13 and how the plan is working. This year it was done over the computer with everyone in like a google meet due to the lockdown.
When SS came over last weekend DH asked SS if he listened in on the IEP meeting since he was with BM. SS said no and DH started telling him all the good things the school had to say about him. DH went on and said the school wants to start treating SS like a Normal kid just like DH wants to BUT BM Disagreed and Kept bringing up SS’s Mental condition( ADHD/mood disorder). Now this is Basically what was said in the meeting. The school wants SS to be more Responsible like other kids and BM Complained she was worried SS would fail without the extra support due to his Mental disabilities.
DH really drove home the point to SS that BM Kept bringing up SS’s mental condition and that DH kept bringing up how he was SS to be treated like a normal kid. Again this is ALL true but don’t agree it should have been brought to SS’s attention. DH sees nothing wrong with it as he was just telling the truth. Am I wrong?
The goal of parental
The goal of parental alienation is to disrupt the relationship between a parent and child. If that was his goal, then yes, it's alienation. Most people who are divorced are guilty of at least a little bit of alienating behavior, but not enough to actually damage the relationship.
So, was his goal to make SS think BM did something wrong, didn't have his best interests at heart, wasn't a good parent, etc? If so, then yes, that was alienating behavior. To some degree, it sounds like that was his goal.
There is also "unintentional
There is also "unintentional parental alienation" where a parent, out of their own frustration with the other parent, discloses information they shouldn't and hurt the child's relationship with that parent without that being a goal, and without being aware that they're doing it.
That was my mother. She vented all her frustration about my dad to me, and I ate it up. While what she said was true, I wasn't old enough to have the context to understand that true didn't always mean "bad" or ""wrong".
OP, that may be what you're dealing with here. Your DH doesn't like BM's opinion, so he's sharing "the truth" without context, that context being that BM had concerns that SS's mental health diagnoses would make him more likely to fail in a "normal" setting. THAT is a valid concern, and if your DH didn't impart on SS that BM said it out of caution for SS's future, then your DH is contributing, even if indirectly, to parental alienation.
Context is important. I can tell you that I have a blue apple, and I picked the apple on my tree in my backyard. That may all be true, but the context you're missing is that I picked the apple and paint it blue so I had a blue apple. I didn't lie, but I also wasn't 100% honest, either.
At the same time, there is an
At the same time, there is an underlying need for that parent (your mother) to have you take "her side", and that part is intentional. She may not have known how it would hurt you, but she definitely wanted you to feel bad for her and be mad at your father for how he had harmed her. That is different than the type where the parent calculates how to destroy the relationship, but it's just as hurtful (maybe more, because it makes the kid care for the parent's feelings).
In this case it seems like DH thinks all of the diagnoses are BS and only he knows the truth, and he wants the kid to agree with his truth (like you said). He may not mean to destroy the relationship with BM, but he wants the kid to think BM is wrong.
Why did't DH insist SS be
Why did't DH insist SS be present? At 13, He should have some say in his education.
You are not
wrong. And also, why does your husband have an issue with BM bringing up what conditions led to the child needing an IEP in the first place? BM was advocating for the child.
And I also disagree with your husband. There are ways to have an IEP AND treat the child like a "typical" kid. The goal of the IEP is to have things in place to support the student if they need them. If your husband apprached it like that it would go much better. And actually the school should also be approaching the IEP like this and have a gradual shift, based on successes, to a more typical learning approach at school.
What was your husband's goal in telling the kiddo about what happened?
Yes, this - at least here,
Yes, this - at least here, you don't get an IEP just because Mommy wants you to have one. There must have been educational or behavioral issues that led to him being classified, and he may be doing better because of it. So he can gradually return to regular education, as long as he's successful at each stage.
This seems more about the kind of divorce where BM and DH can't agree, both think they are right and can't compromise EVER.
Just because it is the truth
Just because it is the truth does not mean that it should be disclosed to the child. Years ago in the original Custody Complaint and Child Support filing, BM alleged that she could not work because she had to continue to be a SAHM with SS due to his mental deficiencies and emotional instability. Throughout the entire process she claimed that he was nothing short of a psychopath that needed to be closely watched or the neighborhood animals would begin to go missing. The skids had been in counseling for years to "deal with the tension in the household" since DH and BM had been in marriage counseling for years before finally splitting so there was documentation of his "treatment." It was a lie of course. SS was a pain in the a$$ kid who was taught to hate my guts but he was mentally perfectly fine, emotionally oversensitive but not out of the ordinary with an overbearing mother, and he loved animals.
She knew very well that DH would never push the issue to court and have any of that come out because it would destroy SS to find out what his own mother was saying about him. She openly dared him multiple times to the point of taunting him. In the end she was being paid a seriously high monthly support amount and then got a truly shocking financial settlement just to finally end everything but the entire time she was telling the skids that DH was giving her nothing and that he was a deadbeat SOB who hated all of them. SS did not speak to DH for about 2 years between 16 to 18 and he could not get the court to enforce the Custody Order because "BM could not force him into the car."
To this day, even though SS is grown with a child of his own, he has no idea how his mother used him. We still have all of the legal filings and they are so blatantly written that anyone with a grasp of English could understand what she is clearly saying about him. But he will never see them. They would destroy him because he loves her and believes that she loves him. Just because something is true and would punish the guilty party does not mean it should ever see the light of day.
Susanm, Wow I can relate to
Susanm, Wow I can relate to what you wrote too.
It is disturbing when a mother uses her kids for their own gain.
Courts are not equiped to deal with abuse like this.
While I am usually all in on
While I am usually all in on the mantra that facts are neither good nor bad, they are merely facts.... and that kids need the facts in order to understand the blended family/divorced parent relationship dynamic.... in this case DH should have minimized the part where BM disagreed with him and left that as a very brief element of reviewing the meeting with SS rather than repeatedly beating that point home. Accentuating the positives of the meeting in review with SS is a good idea IMHO.
However, if BM is limiting SS with her dedication to his behavioral condition, these facts may need to take a greater place in the discussion lexicon going forward as SS progresses and matures.
I think DH overplayed that point. I would think that "I think you should be mainstreamed but your mom is concerned it may be too much for you right now." Then progress from there with SS giving his thoughts. He may be gung ho on mainstreaming, he may not be ready. It will take a delicate balance to move him forward successfully.
But... if BM is hell bent on remaining dedicated to highlighting SS's label, DH may need to escalate the pressure on her. And should if that is what is best for his son.
Again,IMHO.