PAS? Anyone Else?

[gemini3]

Parental Alienation sucks.  There's no other way to put it.  If you're dealing with an alienator you're also dealing with someone who has an inability to seperate her needs and emotions from her childrens, and an intense fear of abandonment.  Therefore (in her head) if she hates you her children must as well or, if they love you, they must not love her and will leave her.  An active alienator will do or say just about anything to ward off the perceived threat of abandonment and secure the perception of the children's loyalty.  There is some data that supports most alienators having some sort of personality disorder - usually BPD or NPD.  This means that logic and reason do not apply when dealing with an alienator.

My husbands ex is an alienator, and we believe that she has BPD.  She vacillates between being a passive alienator and an active alienator depending on what crisis she is currently having (or not having) in her life.  It's a struggle to deal with, but you can deal with it.  We found several books helpful:

Stop Walking on Eggshells
Understanding the Borderline Mother
Divorce Poison
Divorce Casualties

We also found "low/no contact", as recommended by "Mr. M" to be very helpful:  http://www.thepsychoexwife.com/appropriate-means-of-contact-with-high-conflict-personalities/ (http://www.thepsychoexwife.com/appropriate-means-of-contact-with-high-conflict-personalities/)

The biggest thing for us is to set firm, clear boundaries and to stick to "low contact".  When we do have to engage, we try to do so in a way that won't trip her wire, so to speak.  We have learned not to be so concerned with who's right and who's wrong, and started focusing on how best to get what the kids need.

Good luck

[FatherTime]

NM = No message

[Momfortwo]

First of all, what she is doing is wrong.  But she doesn't have to take the kids to the games on her week-end anymore than you have to take them on your week-end in the abscence of a court order.

BTW, you aren't exactly innocent here, either.  You did something that you KNEW would result in the kids not being able to play in their game.  And you did it to make a point to your ex.  Like your ex, you didn't put the kids first. 

That was wrong of both of you to do.  So now the question is:  Are you going to stop this game you are playing and start putting the kids first? 

Obviously, with a school play, you would have to just go and ignore your ex as that has a limited run and you may end up not seeing the play at all.  That is not the case with sports. 

[gemini3]

Just a thought, but, why should the kids have to pick between which parent should come to their games?  Most kids, absent feeling like one parent will get upset, would choose to have both parents there. 

I think that the parent who won't let their kids participate in extra-curricular activities because the other parent will go too is the person playing games.  Not to mention punishing the kids because they don't like what the other parent did - and then telling them to blame the other parent. 

That is called using your children as pawns, and it's disgusting and WRONG.

[Kitty C.]

I totally disagree, momfortwo.  The father has every right and is not legally prohibited from attending any and all games.  For the mother to yank the kids just because Dad shows up is NOT a reflection on Dad...he has absolutely NO control over her actions whatsoever and it was HER choice to stay or leave.  Either of them could just as easily remove themselves far away enough not to have contact with or see each other if they chose to and still watch the entire game.....we're talking a large playing field here and you can't tell me that either of them would not be capable of doing this.  And I would not be surprised if the father was already trying to do this, but if she's this hyper-vigilant, she probably visually seeks him out.

And if the ex is being this anal about seeing him in such a large, open venue, she would probably go ballistic if he tried to attend a play or something comparable.  He would literally have to be sneaky about it.......coming in right before the event starts, so as not to run into her prior to the start and leaving early or immediately at the end for the same reason, the only way to ensure he could avoid her completely.  But I'm getting the strong impression that she makes it her duty to be hyper-vigilant and probably continuously scans the people attending to make sure he isn't there......which tells me she isn't there for the kids in the first place.

Look at it this way.......if Dad could have been there but without the ex even being aware of it, would that make a difference?  You bet, because if the ex brought the children and still decided to stay, that is HER choice, no one elses.  It's all based on choices and one's inability to control the actions of another.

[MomofTwo]

I  can't help but feel there is more to this story then what is being presented....

He did not attend games for six years.

She told him she would provide the schedules and in turn, he got them and sent them to her. 

She has had to block emails in the past.

She is clearly VERY uncomfortable with his presence.  I disagree with anyone who says she just needs to get over it.   She does, but people who have no reason to be
uncomfortable, aren't. 

Does he need to stay away..no?  Does she need to keep her kids in sports ...no.   There are control issues here on BOTH of these people.  Sorry, neither one of them
is acting in the best interest of the children, including him.  If for six years they individually took them and that has worked, then do it for the sake of the children.  A court is not gong to make Mom keep them in sports, anymore then courts order NCP to allow them to participate in sports  on their time.

If you know your children aren't going to get to play if you show up, then sorry,think about them.   It isn't about what is fair to either parent, it is what works out best for the children.  Since neither parent is doing that, then do what works out best for the kids.

[pcdad]

This mother is being DISGUSTING!  Everyone needs to stop running to their lawyers and relying on the courts to be the adults for them.  My god - why would one parent not want their kids to participate in sports and not recognize the need for their kids to know BOTH parents support them.  This is a totally selfish act on the mother's part because she can't grow up.  The courts should not even be bothered with issues such as this - the parents need to be adults.  Put aside their bitterness over what happened in their marriage and recognize the fact that they have kids that love both parents and want both parents to be involved in their lives.  I can't see any reason the mother needs to act like this - she is being selfish.  Some might say that the father should not attend the events when it is not his weekend, but I totally disagree.  Each parent should be able to watch their kids at sporting, school events.

[gemini3]

MomofTwo, there is always more to the story.  And I totally disagree with the statement that "people who have no reason to be uncomfortable, aren't".  People make things up all the time to get what they want.  People block other people's e-mails all the time for no reason other than to be disagreeable.

He didn't go to the games for six years because the mom made it clear that she didn't want him there, and he (from what he said) was trying not to rock the boat and give her time to adjust.  I think she's had plenty of time to do that, and if she hasn't by now it has nothing to do with him or his actions.

Both parents have just as much right to attend the child's games.  Refusing to take them anymore because the dad will be there is manipluation and hostile aggressive parenting.  If this is the way she's going to handle things then eventually it will come down to who's going to be there at graduation, or at the kids wedddings, etc.  That's not the direction things should be going in.  It's very hurtful to the children.

No one should use their children in an attempt to control the other person.

[Momfortwo]

I totally disagree, momfortwo.  The father has every right and is not legally prohibited from attending any and all games. 

I agree.  And the mother has every right and is not legally prohibited from keeping the kids home instead of taking them to the game.

BOTH parents are in the wrong here.  Because, unless there is a court order that states the mother and father have no choice but to bring the kids to their games, the father choosing this path is depriving the kids of participating in a sport.  Don't get me wrong, the mother is not blameless here.  But if the father wants to do this right, he should take it to court and get it court ordered that the mother has to take the kids to the game. 

[gemini3]

The difference is that the mom enrolled the kids in the activities, then pulled them out because the dad wanted to go to the games.  In fact, pulled them out in the middle of a game because the dad was there. 

The father did not choose to deprive his kids.  He did not pull them out of the game.  The mother did.  No person should be held hostage by another through their own children.  That is what the mother is doing in this situation.  She is telling the father to do as she says or she will deprive the kids of something.