The original poster (OP) attempted to salvage a relationship by reaching out to his partner on New Year's Eve after receiving conflicting advice online.
The core conflict revolved around the partner's demand for the OP's Social Security Number (SSN) to ensure her safety, which the OP firmly refused to provide due to privacy and legality concerns.
The OP countered by offering to pay for a legitimate, third-party background check using other verifiable information, but the partner rejected this compromise.
She insisted on using a background check performed by a trusted friend instead of an official service. This impa*se led to an argument about trust, resulting in the OP ending the relationship.
The central question for the OP was whether he had done enough to reconcile the situation before the final breakup.



















Get the latest stories delivered to your inbox.
The OP experienced significant emotional distress while trying to navigate his partner's non-negotiable demand for his SSN, which he viewed as an extreme breach of privacy and trust.
The conflict ultimately highlighted a fundamental disagreement: the OP prioritized personal boundaries and legal limits, while the partner prioritized her personal sense of security above the OP's stated compromises.
The situation ended with the relationship being terminated just before New Year's, leaving the OP questioning the partner's true motives—whether genuine fear or manipulative testing.
The debate centers on where a person's obligation to ensure their partner's comfort ends, versus when a partner's request becomes an unreasonable demand that invalidates the relationship foundation.
When the Crowd Speaks, It Echoes Loudly:
The crowd poured into the comments, bringing a blend of heated opinions, solid advice, and a few reality checks along the way.