Indeed, none of us should be servitude to our partners. If you initially went down that path to show your love, it was a task to get the balance back.
Yes, I initially went down this path. It started with me reciprocating the initial 'love bombing' patterns way back in the courtship phase, it just never ended until last year when I finally recognized it as an issue. In effect it was mutual love bombing; however, it took me over two decades to begin to gradually pull back to twice her level of apathy; whereas, her love bombing exceeded the textbook maximum at the time of two years by a few months and went from her 100% (my 150%) to 0% inside of a week.
Service is my partner's love language, and she loves to give me a to-do list before I get out of bed or when she goes on a trip. I've gone through a similar process of saying no.
I don't mind the 'to-do lists' as long as there is some form of reciprocity that is close to equal in time committment of the top two (of 5) love languages for each partner, or top 5 (of 10) emotional needs, depending on which version you ascribe to.
I also commend you on recognizing the importance of waiting until your wife returns to baseline to deal with matters rather than getting in a lather when she is highly emotional.
IMHO, it's the only way to maintain sanity in the relationship.
I think of Don't JADE as a more universal tool and a tool to manage ourselves. It's helpful for us to recognize that it is often our insecurity or inability to read the room that makes us feel that we need to "set the record straight" when we feel doubted or criticized. JADE happens in all relationships, but more so when communications/relationships are broken down, and we trigger on keywords (or expressions) and jump back into prior disagreements where left off.
When we JADE, at best, people stop listening to us. Often people feel unheard and shut down or they ramp up (because, in truth, we are not listening). JADE happens more and more as relationship communications break down and people find themselves just talking at each other.
I agree with the "don't JADE" as a universal tool. The thing is that she wants me to
explain my behaviors/actions, and it only ticks her off.
ACTIVE LISTENING is another universal tool and alternative. It's when we let the other person know we are hearing and understanding what they are trying to tell us. People love it when we listen, absorb, and validate (show where we agree). I believe people are more inclined to listen to you when you are listening to them.
These are two complementary tools we can use to improve our communications in a relationship. The tools are not about changing or controlling our partners side of the street - they are about improving our side of the street.
I agree "active listening" is another good universal tool. I agree it is about 'cleaning up' our side of the street. However, validating them with the same tool so they feel heard is important too, so they can re-regulate (if they are not too far gone) and self-soothe.
I believe I hear you using "Don't JADE" in a context that means "don't engage because another person is being unreasonable and it will make matters worse". That is different than how we use the term at BPDFamily. Don't JADE is altogether different than "don't engage".
Half a year ago, I would have completely agreed; however, if you look at my more recent posts, I encourage others to use 'active listening' tools, such as SET / BIFF / etc. Using the analogy of an operating theater, the surgeon will use a variety of tools to physically repair a person, not dissimilar to an auto mechanic using a different skill set with a variety of tools to repair a vehicle. I feel, that we too must use a variety of emotional tools together in order to repair the relationship to a more manageable place.
You said:
Gottman termed not engaging "because we feel another person is being unreasonable and it will make matters worse" as "stonewalling".
Gottman said:
Stonewalling
The fourth horseman is stonewalling, which is usually a response to contempt. Stonewalling occurs when the listener withdraws from the interaction, shuts down, and simply stops responding to their partner. Rather than confronting the issues with their partner, people who stonewall can make evasive maneuvers such as tuning out, turning away, acting busy, or engaging in obsessive or distracting behaviors.
It takes time for the negativity created by the first three horsemen to become overwhelming enough that stonewalling becomes an understandable “out,” but when it does, it frequently becomes a bad habit. And unfortunately, stonewalling isn’t easy to stop. It is a result of feeling physiologically flooded, and when we stonewall, we may not even be in a physiological state where we can discuss things rationally.
If you feel like you’re stonewalling during a conflict, stop the discussion and ask your partner to take a break:
My interpretation is to 'pause' the conversation, to 'take a break' from it, when she becomes dysregulated.
I have no problem in engaging with others in order to resolving conflict by stating the truth followed up by verifiable facts, and if I did something incorrectly, and I am shown it is incorrect, I have no issue taking responsibility for it - I have resolved conflicts on all scales from interpersonal relationships up to the international stage and in between.
There is a right way, and a wrong way to resolve conflicts. Appeasement, is an example of a wrong way of resolving a conflict. Setting a firm, but reasonable boundaries, with love, is an example of resolving a conflict in a good way.
I feel as though I am not '
conflict avoidant,' as per definition; however, I am definitely '
abuse avoidant' - there is a nuanced difference on the motivation to 'take a break from it' as I do not want her to continue to spiral out of control even more so by attempting to resolve a conflict with an irrational person when they are triggered into dysregulation rather than being baseline if I were to continue to engage them in Active Listening which soothes a normal person, but can enrage a dysregulated one.
I know that you take great exception when the therapist says you are stonewalling, but I think you might be better served to accept this characterization and to look into it a little deeper. Stonewalling is not isolated to one person's actions. It is a natural protective reaction to a difficult situation of which there are multiple participants. While stonewalling is both a natural and common response, it is also a non-constructive response in a relationship. Resolving it is not an easy fix. There are multiple moving parts.
Gottman: stonewalling =
conflict avoidance - does not return to conflict resolution process by deliberately avoiding it
Me: pausing a conversation =
abuse avoidance - does not return to topic due to disassociation by one partner (she has repeatedly stated, that she does not remember the content of the argument from the previous day). Other times she avoids talking about when back to baseline, as it was trivial in nature. I clearly communicate to her she can 'unpause' the conversation anytime the following morning. If I feel it is important, I will unpause it. If it is something not important, I won't as I do not wish to 'seemingly and deliberately trigger her' on a particular topic that she may have forgotten about as it wasn't important enough for her to 'remember' - I know this is an 'eggshell' response on my part where I pick my battles carefully - if I don't care about a topic, I will let her have her way (compromise); however, if I feel strongly - I will attempt to resolve the conflict in a manner consistent within the framework of a pwBPD which is not the same I would do for a normal person as those methods do not work for someone who can so easily become dysregulated.
That said, I would not consider giving your wife space to self-soothe and get back to baseline as "stonewalling," per se. You most certainly want to be able to support her getting back to baseline, but there is nuance in how you give your wife space and I suspect that is what he is talking about.
I agree when Gottman said 'taking a break' is a temporary pause of 'stonewalling' whether it is 1-7 hours previously, or one or two sleep cycles (up to 36 hours new after anger management was implemented by her) to let 'sleep' do the emotional reset (self-soothe) back to baseline is the method I have discovered through trial and error, as her work on 'anger management' has actually shifted her return to baseline from full rage (1-7 hours, 2-4 typical) to a sleep cycle or two (12 hours typical, up to 36 hours) depending on the level of emotional dysregulation (mood swing). This was determined through personal observation on each of her mood shifts. For the time being, until my wife learns new self-soothe techniques, I have will have to be continually vigilant in order to maintain a certain level of sanity in the family dynamic to protect our children, to protect me, and to protect her emotional wellbeing as well from her emotional dysregulation.
Getting back to baseline When someone in our life is highly reactive, I think it's best to do what we can to calm the situation as we ease our way out and wait until they (and we) return to baseline.
Agreed, and this is what I am doing, adjusting, from time to time, as she is working through her own meaningful therapy to contain her anger, and hopefully her mood swings too.
Highly reactive is on a spectrum, and in some situations, we can listen and say just a little and that alone can make the person feel they are getting through, start diffusing the situation and buy time to get to baseline. In some situations, we can say that we want to help but we are overwhelmed and we need space (to buy time to get to baseline). In the worst of times, we may just have to excuse ourselves. Learning how to calm a domestic conflict is situation specific and is trial and error. Over time we learn how to do it better (if we try). We also learn when to get out and stay out.
Yes, it is trial and error with detailed observations on what works, and what doesn't. Unfortunately for our children's sake it is imperative since my wife has carefully cultivated an outside image of caring (with excessive volunteerism) of being the good parent, combined with societal stereotypes of my profession (sailor who was away most of the time) and gender (male), I am at a distinct disadvantage here, the 'get out and stay out' is not an option for me without financial and emotional ruin - so I need to make the best of a bad situation.
My goal is to make my wife more self-aware, as she has a good moral compass, for her own individual therapy to make things better - she is the exception, rather than the rule here. I feel the more self-aware she is, the more she can work on her issues, as I know she does not want to be this way. There has been tremendous improvement in the past 20 months, I feel we are 1/2 to 2/3 the way there, just need to address her mood swings, and I am starting to see this, so I am going to let it play out, as I know my wife is very motivated to 'fix' herself.
I am also here to fix myself, discover my own issues (caretaking/codependent), to recognize which ones are worth changing, and which ones are worth keeping. I am here to learn how to set good boundaries without going too far; learn better communication skills; learn better and healthier coping mechanisms; learn how to do more self-care; learn how to repair the damage not only in my own life, but our children's lives as well. It is a multi-faceted approach, using a multitude of tools, with a tremendous amount of effort to get-r-done.
I think we need to be careful not to dismiss all reactive situations as meaningless. This is also on a spectrum. There may be something behind the reaction. There is may be something, but not be related directly to us. Sometimes its just pure emotion that goes away on its own.
Agreed, for each and every situation there is a meaning, I do an analysis, and triage what my wife is doing, how it interacts with me, how it interacts with our children. I will only address the issues that need addressing, those that don't, I won't. Whenever possible, I directly interact with my wife first and foremost. I will interact with our children on an 'as needed' basis as they too have to deal with her dysregulation; however, my wife is learning of the natural consequences of self-alienation of her behaviors with them, which has been reversed to some extent. If it extends beyond the immediate family, I let her behaviors self-correct as I will not interfere with the natural consequences of her actions with her interactions with them - here I will validate her a bit more, as it doesn't affect the family unit.
I think of it less as a unilateral "pause" and more as helping our partner have a "controlled release." You said your wife is starting follow your lead. We want to help and be responsible for our stuff - we do not want to cross the line and take responsibility for our partners self-soothing.
I agree, this is a very fuzzy line. I will not take full responsibility for her self-soothing; however, I will shine a light on it when it goes wrong, lead by example, reframe it so she can talk to her own therapist on it, or share with our couple's therapist in order to enable good behavior and discourage bad ones. It is not a
unilateral "pause", it is actually a very complicated set of IfTTT (If This Then That) -like rules that I have come up with to address a variety of different circumstances. Initially, I had to hit the 'pause' button several times a week, 4Q 2022, now it is once every 2-3 months, and is in the process of being replaced with SET, BIFF, DEARMAN and another communication techniques and do my part to not deliberately trigger her (still doing the eggshell walk, but to a lesser extent). I am also setting firm boundaries, which is akin to manipulative behavior modification on my part towards her, so in this respect I am taking some responsibilities for her behaviors - is this wrong?
You made the step up from
"Yes dear" to
"I am leaving" to
"talk tomorrow". This is huge.
.
Agreed.
Do you think there is a next rung on that ladder? Ways to turn "unilateral pause" into "controlled release?"
As I indicated earlier, it is multifaceted, kind of like a children's jungle gym, with cargo net, you can move laterally, and choose another way to advance. 'controlled release' is already occurring with the communication techniques when she is baseline, being care not to trigger her.
The next step on the ladder is to help her become even more self-aware of her mood swings, the goal is to eliminate the 'pause' button; however, that will depend on the work my wife does on herself. In the meantime, I will continue to use the tools I have learned, and continually adjust my reactive behaviors to a more 'normal' level depending on her behaviors until more of her symptoms she forces into remission. I will continue to maintain good boundaries, and see how things progress.
Simultaneously, I also plan on reconnecting with my wife, hoping to revive some of the 'love bombing' phase mutual reciprocity to a healthy level.
Comments?
SD