The Truth Behind “No Contact (NC)”
Ruban F. Ribeiro

As a casualty of this cruel, irresponsible and emotionally abusive strategy, I’d like to offer some additional points of consideration that really should be evaluated prior to making the decision to use “NC”.

While being fully aware that I am in no way informed sufficiently to make any judgements regarding your specific circumstances, a good portion of the language used would be consistent with someone’s perceived roll as a victim and the misappropriate blame placed on another for his/her own issues.

The conclusion for need and appropriateness to begin “NC” is hopefully determined not just after you’ve made your assessment and uncovered all the disorders and bias influencing the other person, but, you’ve also discovered a way to objectively assess the same in yourself. Is it possible that your diminished view of self, “indescribable hell”, abuse, and “big pile or luring, poisonous crap” are all really a consequence of not communicating in an effective, direct, way and failing to verbally set boundaries and expectations?

“NC”, in my opinion, has NO credibility, is manipulative and void of morality except in the case where genuine abuse is taking place. I believe that problems are best, and most compassionately, resolved with open dialogue. So, when rule 1 of “NC” is “no contact (communication)”, how can it be given ANY validation as a solution? Furthermore, I’ve yet to discover any morally righteous pursuit inexorably bound to secrecy, exclusion and deceit. The misuse of laws created to protect ACTUAL abuse victims at the expense of another persons rights has now become standard practice for anyone willing to fabricate some type of abuse and unwilling to answer for the chaos caused by their fickle disloyalty.

I hope my “rant” hasn’t appeared judgement or directed at you, Ruban, I appreciate the perspective you provide. As I’m sure you’ve gathered….the subject is fresh and still somewhat raw for me in my life. Thank you for writing. Best wishes.