Hi Daddy Who Cares: The greatest learning experience you can give your daughter (in support of her being whole and complete) is to relate to her incident-by-incident what you have done to your wife that incites such spiteful anger. Your wife is obviously dramatizing an accumulation of abuse (mostly likely the insidious leave-no-marks kind of non verbal abuse) that to most readers is unconscionable; however, you and I know what it takes to trigger such anger.

Your letter is a covert make-wrong of your wife, as though she is sicker than you. You’ve turned an entire country of readers against her. That’s not only very powerful of you, it verges on evil, at best it's abusive. Furthermore, it serves as a model for your daughter on how to turn others against others and how to blame another for her creations. What she needs is for someone to model what to do when she finds herself surrounded by abuse addicts such as you and your wife. It's a shame that you have custody. She needs to hear from both of you,  separately, how each of you masterminded the divorce, else, she'll have a warped view of responsibility, of who causes what in a relationship.

Your daughter needs to hear from you what you did to mastermind the divorce in such a way as to have others think her mother is sicker than you.

I assure you your daughter can handle the truth as well as you can. We already know that if neither of you share your considerations with her she will remain confused and incomplete for life. If you wait to tell her she'll angrily say, "Why didn't you tell me earlier?"

BTW: Both of you have communicated those "abortion" considerations non verbally. She doesn't know the specifics just that there are  withholds in the space, it's been a persistent experience of being out-integrity—something's missing.

I recommend that you be the one to tell her first, from love. —Gabby

PS. Do show both this post

Gabby’s comments about the three replies to the Original Daddy Who Cares

Dear Writers and Readers: It's disheartening to realize that so few people know that traumatic experiences can be erased (completed). The following reply is only for readers who intend to complete a traumatic incident. It supports a communication model of open, honest, and spontaneous communication, zero withholds.

In communication coaching we say that there is talking and there is communication. With talking ones problems persist. With communication ones problems disappear. If one still has the same problem after they conversed with another then it's said that they zoned out and resorted to talking, that communication did not take place. We know this to be true because when communication takes place all concerned feel good, they are whole and complete at the end of the conversation.

Talking is unstructured. When two talk there's lots of repeating and restating and one or more lies aren't being verbally acknowledged. Some thoughts and judgments are stuffed, they aren't being shared spontaneously. There's an implied agreement between talkers that it's OK to hide certain thoughts from each other. Such conversations are characterized by irresponsible blaming, "they never . . .," "he never . . ."etc.. Most importantly, when a couple becomes stuck in talking the person who listens to the talker talk about his/her problem doesn't have an experience of having served, of being of value. That is to say, the dumper (the person who dumps a problem in another's space) has no intention to use their friend as a means of disappearing a specific problem. For example: Complainers dump misbehaving-children problems in their friend's space, and, the complainer still has and talks about the same problem the next day.

The difference between talking and communicating is that all communications have beginnings, middles, and ends. How one measures whether or not communication took place is by looking at the end, the results. If, upon completion, all concerned experience being whole and complete then communication took place.

Interactions that don't end in mutual satisfaction are incompletes. Put another way, if you interact with someone and it doesn't forward them in their growth, if it doesn't support consciousness, then what happened was both parties were doing their imitation of communication. It looked like communication, it sounded like communication, and both may have parted feeling good, but, each still have his/her exact same problems the next day.

Another characteristic of talking is that all talkers, yes all, are enablers. Their leadership-communication skills are such that they empower their friends/partners in having mediocre relationships and stagnate addictions (unhealthy, overweight, drugs, abuse).

As pertains to a "you were unwanted" interaction between a child and parent: Notice I use the word "interaction" instead of communication (more about this follows): If, say, a mother dumps "you were unwanted" in a child's space and doesn't know enough to keep clearing the child until all considerations have been gotten, as obviously happened with the three letter-writers, then those interactions, for each woman, are an incomplete. Both the mother and the child had become stuck doing their imitation of communication. Again, when communication takes place all concerned feel good upon completion.

As we read each woman's words we can get a sense of the upset they experienced (as they were told back then, "you were unwanted") and, that each are still experiencing the same spectrum of emotions to this very day. The upset and anger and grief have not diminished very much, if at all. The charge is still present. If we were in their presence listening to them today we'd see facial expressions consistent with emotional charge.

For example: If I asked you what you did on your sixth birthday you'd probably not be able to remember. That incident, that experience, is complete. There's not only no charge about the pony ride, which at the time was extremely emotionally exciting, until you fell off the pony and broke your arm. There's not only no charge there's no memory of the fall. Now we ask, why? In part it's because the incident has been told and retold so many times that it went from being boring to being vaguely remembered, to being complete.

Also, the anecdotal drama associated with an incident such as, "you were unwanted" is not healthy. What if research proved that "accidental" children are more trustworthy and the best marriage partners, that they can be trusted to tell the truth no matter the cost or how difficult. Then the "unwanted" story would take on an entirely different meaning. Part of what causes an upset about an incomplete (a less-than-mutually satisfying interaction) to persist is because the incident has become conceptualized. The anger and energy (referred to as a charge) associated with the interaction reveals that there is more to the incident than what is being remembered. The mind doesn't have full access to everything that was going on during and after the "you weren't wanted" interaction. In short, there is a lie in the telling of the incident. It has yet to be experienced fully.

For example: If one starts to get upset and cry when they think about the "not wanted" conversation they have yet to choose to experience the hurt and pain associated with the incident. They have not experienced the conversation. They went unconscious at some time during the interaction, most likely judging the mother, which took them into their mind, rather than to stay with the experience.

A common thread in the letters is an addiction to blaming make-wrong. Here they are, years and years later, still making their parent wrong for a mistake, worse yet for having the integrity to tell the truth. The story retold wreaks havoc on their children who are confused about what truths to tell and which ones to hide.

It's a given that many people are addicted to their drama, like an orphan who throughout life tells everyone their "poor me" story; they use it to manipulate outcomes and to explain and justify their behaviors and the results they produce. Some develop a mind-set, that the effects of a traumatic event can never ever be undone, "the damage to her psyche will be forever" and so they do what it takes to make this belief come true.

What's not being acknowledged are the millions of children who knew or intuited that there were considerations surrounding their conception yet, they have typical normal lives with no need to drag resentments into each new day.

The bottom line: The "you weren't wanted" communication is an important one. It introduces a child to the meaning of the words,  "wants," "intentions," and "considerations."

For example: "I said I didn't want you.  I said it was an accident, but here you are. Obviously I was lying because you're living proof of my intention, however unconscious I may have been at the time."

For those who wish to complete their experience of not being wanted I recommend that you seek a therapist skilled at Rescripting. Such a therapist designs and delivers personally customized scripts for you; they create/recreate the conversations you wish you had heard. The hearing of these specific communications, even years later, have the exact same effect as if your mother had spoken them at the time. You will live thereafter whole and complete. You can also write your own script and ask you mother to say the words you need to hear. You can also accomplish the same result via intention but it requires impeccable integrity —use the four free Clearing House processes.

Please check back from time to time for corrections/edits and always refresh your browser. (last edited 2/25/11)