> I am unfortunately not at liberty to share the code I'm working on.

I very much understand and am very thankful you took the time to create a simple example that you could share.  Honestly, that's the reason I felt inspired to stop what I was doing to look at this now rather than later.


> I suppose I should just work around it by checking right away if the input to my constructor has already been constructed!

There are probably a number of different ways to address it but your suggestion of adding a check to see if this is the first time that object has been constructed sounds like it might be an easy win.