Agree to disagree

[Before you can make things better, you have to stop making them worse...]

Hi,
As some context, I have taken to saying "lets just agree to disagree" to attempt to deescalate conflict when we both have different opinions, or views on what was said or wasn't said. Or different views /memories on how something happened etc

I was sent quite a long text but it started like this:

"Moving forward it would help if you can also not just agree to disagree but also understand the fact that
Our perception is the reality we live. True or not
You have a Perception of events
And I do also
Every second of every day is an interpretation of our own perception. The actual truth really makes no difference!"

Like I understand we all have different perceptions, but I am concerned about the statement the actual truth makes no difference.

What are peoples views here am I reading too much into this? Any advice on what this could mean?

[findthewayhome]

Hi,
As some context, I have taken to saying "lets just agree to disagree" to attempt to deescalate conflict when we both have different opinions, or views on what was said or wasn't said. Or different views /memories on how something happened etc

I was sent quite a long text but it started like this:

"Moving forward it would help if you can also not just agree to disagree but also understand the fact that
Our perception is the reality we live. True or not
You have a Perception of events
And I do also
Every second of every day is an interpretation of our own perception. The actual truth really makes no difference!"

Like I understand we all have different perceptions, but I am concerned about the statement the actual truth makes no difference.

What are peoples views here am I reading too much into this? Any advice on what this could mean?

[ChooseHappiness]

Does the other person have an official diagnosis? "Agree to disagree" may be helpful in that case, although it doesn't seem like it from the response you received.

My xwBPD does not have an official diagnosis and any of my attempts to say we have different views of the same event, etc. have only served to enrage her further. I've found the only thing that works to de-escalate is to go no contact with her. Which doesn't really work if it's someone you in a relationship with or have to maintain contact at some level.

Personally, I would be very concerned by someone stating "the actual truth really makes no difference" as that indicates they are only going to follow their emotions/perceptions on a given subject, which may very well not be grounded in any sort of reality. This could quickly get into real danger territory.

If you have any concerns, it may be time to keep a journal and even video/audio recordings.

[findthewayhome]

Thanks, no diagnosis. Well she did tell me her therapist says she has emotional dysregulation some time ago. But in couples therapy when I brought that up when the couples therapist said has either of you been diagnosed anything, she walked that back and said "we" have emotional dysregulation not her , which the therapist nodded to as it was getting a bit heated and also her therapist said she is an empath.

[kells76]

Believe me, I am the queen of "am I reading too much into this? But still... what could it mean"?  

When disordered family dynamics are present, we often have to cope by scraping up any and every clue we can possibly find, in order to try to put together a picture of reality... because stuff is not talked about, it's talked around, or not discussed, or distorted. It can be common to be in hypervigilant, over-interpretive mode, much of the time -- because we don't receive straightforward communications.

It takes conscious choice to put ourselves in a mental space of balancing what I feel/fear with what I think/know (Wisemind). I've recently been given "opportunities" to practice being really aware of if what I think I notice is a real thing happening, or is me imposing a filter over it to match how hypervigilant I feel inside. Not easy stuff.

There's often a significant track record with pwPD in our lives where they manifest odd behavior, say weird things, or do unexpected stuff, and sometimes they say/do those things before a "blowup" or drama or conflict. So it isn't crazy to notice something odd and think, well, there's history there; in the past, that would lead to XYZ.

...

All that being said, it sounds like you are moving towards being done with the relationship? And your current concerns are more about the divorce/custody process? Is that true?

I think she's telling you exactly what it looks like -- she really, really, really doesn't experience reality the same way you do, and that is because if BPD is involved, she has a serious mental illness that impairs her experiences, perceptions, and interpretations of life.

I don't see any need to respond to her message.

[findthewayhome]

Believe me, I am the queen of "am I reading too much into this? But still... what could it mean"?  

When disordered family dynamics are present, we often have to cope by scraping up any and every clue we can possibly find, in order to try to put together a picture of reality... because stuff is not talked about, it's talked around, or not discussed, or distorted. It can be common to be in hypervigilant, over-interpretive mode, much of the time -- because we don't receive straightforward communications.


It takes conscious choice to put ourselves in a mental space of balancing what I feel/fear with what I think/know (Wisemind). I've recently been given "opportunities" to practice being really aware of if what I think I notice is a real thing happening, or is me imposing a filter over it to match how hypervigilant I feel inside. Not easy stuff.

Totally! I turn myself inside out trying to work out if there is a hidden meaning, or what is actually meant.

There's often a significant track record with pwPD in our lives where they manifest odd behavior, say weird things, or do unexpected stuff, and sometimes they say/do those things before a "blowup" or drama or conflict. So it isn't crazy to notice something odd and think, well, there's history there; in the past, that would lead to XYZ.

...

All that being said, it sounds like you are moving towards being done with the relationship? And your current concerns are more about the divorce/custody process? Is that true?

Yes I think so. I have said I do not want to be married to her anymore. But she thinks I am not respecting my vowels and should try harder for the kids. I do agree I don't want to give up, I love those kids so much. The threat of every other weekend and Wednesday for 3 hours has hurt me deeply. I am a very active dad.

I think she's telling you exactly what it looks like -- she really, really, really doesn't experience reality the same way you do, and that is because if BPD is involved, she has a serious mental illness that impairs her experiences, perceptions, and interpretations of life.

I don't see any need to respond to her message.

So our first marriage therapy session the therapist concluded there was not a realistic prospect of saving the marriage. Too much resentment both sides. She had rules. No discussing any of this outside the room (which is something I had said before the session lets only discuss these things with the therapist). Of course that night as soon as the kids were in bed, she came to me to discuss it. I tried to maintain we shouldn't , we were told not to, the kids might hear etc. But she pushed so eventually I said lets go downstairs (terrified the kids would hear) and before long (that night) we were in a text exchange... I didn't maintain the boundary..... And here we are. You are right I should just maintain lets discuss these things in therapy once a week.

[ChooseHappiness]

I suppose it depends what your goal is here. If you are trying to save the relationship, well, are you comfortable being in a relationship with someone who says the truth doesn't matter?

If you are sticking around for the kids, you may be able to get some more time out of it, but if you're not invested in your relationship with your partner it will eventually implode. (Been there!)

Why would your parenting time in the case of a split only be every other weekend and a few hours Wednesdays. Where I live the default is 50/50 shared time, and I thought that was the norm now.

What reading have you done on the subject? I just finished Stop Walking on Eggshells and found it every helpful. I'm halfway through Splitting as well as Raising Resilient Children, and I'm finding them both useful as well.

[eightdays]

How to untangle this.  Well, to me the tone is passively condescending with the words 'moving forward', and the message seems to be they are irritated by the phrase agree to disagree.   The ‘truth doesn’t matter’ comes across as offensive because it is stated as a fact when it is an opinion.   Where it gets tangled is that there is no allowance for the idea that there can be two truths when there are two people and that both are important.   What it seems this is saying, with some passivity by dressing it up intellectually, is that for them there is no room for your truth.   So it would make sense they would be irritated by ‘agree to disagree’.

[jaded7]

"Moving forward it would help if you can also not just agree to disagree but also understand the fact that
Our perception is the reality we live. True or not
You have a Perception of events
And I do also
Every second of every day is an interpretation of our own perception. The actual truth really makes no difference!"

I'll try to help with interpretation here. No expert at all, just a person who was in a relationship with an uBPD/dcPTSD.

"Moving forward it would help": you need to to ___________. (I got the the 'I need, I need you to ____' and 'you need to_____ ' a lot' !)

"not just agree to disagree but also": your agreeing to disagree doesn't work for me but I'm trying to make it sound like I'm listening and accepting that approach

"but also understand our perception is the reality we live": I don't like that you think I'm wrong, or won't accept my version of things

"true or not": no matter what I say, it's reality for me, even if it's not true. That's why I can't accept agree to disagree since it implies you're as right as I am, and that's not true.

"every second of every day is an interpretation of our own perception": my reality is true (see above), yours is not, even if I did/said something awful.

"the actual truth makes no difference"': my emotional responses are completely justified, and you probably caused them. Even if you're right, it doesn't matter.

Thing is, as I've studied BPD and the emotions = facts, much of this might be 'true' to her. Of course, the world cannot operate this way, it would be chaos. There is not truth? Just feelings? And perceptions?

I didn't yell at you (but you did). You made me do it (your fault). I didn't say that! (you did). We agreed to _____ (we did not). I yelled and and called you names all night and mocked you because I felt rejected! (I didn't reject you, I said I will call you when I'm done with my work and you just showed up unannounced)

You can't have a relationship this way.

[seekingtheway]

My exwBPD started saying this exact phrase to me at the end of our relationship when I tried to tell him the things I was upset about. I thought it was a great tool to invalidate what had 'definitely' happened and how I felt about that, to just say that he had a different opinion. I didn't like him saying it to me after hearing it a few times. It really did leave the conversation with nowhere to go and I felt dismissed and shut down.

I feel like what she's saying is true to a large degree. In an ideal world, there would be some level of acknowledgement or agreement of the facts of whatever situation is up for discussion. And then any emotions felt are personal and not really up for discussion, and can be validated. But she is right in that we all interpret things so differently. A door being closed to one person is a door being slammed to another. A sharp, angry tone to one person is a distracted tone to another.

She's asking to be validated in her experience, and how she feels about it, maybe not with the best wording. but the question is, is she willing to accept your version of reality in a discussion? That's the part that is important. Either way, it sounds like you're not looking for ways to better or change this aspect of your communication? But if you were, perhaps a different phrase to de-escalate might work better? Something that validates her experience without giving away your own position?

[CoChuck]

As is often the case on this site, I see aspects of my life with my wife the past 35 years in some of the comments I read in this thread.

The differences in our accounts of "what really happened" are remarkable to me. For years, my wife said things with such certainty I figured I must be misinterpreting events.

I eventually started recording some conversations (with her permission). I certainly learned ways I could communicate differently. I also learned what she remembers from these conversations has no connection to reality. Amazingly, to me, even after listening to one of these recordings, she continues to hold true to her perspective.

For me, the path forward has been multifaceted.

• First, I talk about my experience and do all I can to validate her perspective. I sometimes even say, I cannot say I did that (insert awful thing), but I understand this is your perspective. If I did that ... or I don't want you to experience ...
• Second, I pose my perspective as one that might be just as far from the truth as hers. I will say, here is my experience...
• Third, I have virtually no expectations for myself from the conversation. I want to express my perspective or opinion, but I do not expect it to make a difference, at least immediately. If I do not engage with a disagreement while her emotions are in such turmoil, she often initiates some conciliatory conversation when she has time to regulate

Regardless, I have no expectation my wife will change. As such, I will continue doing mental gymnastics to make it through the day. I have a set of nonnegotiable limits I've shared and revised with her feedback. Otherwise, I try my best to calmly interact with her.

[jaded7]

As is often the case on this site, I see aspects of my life with my wife the past 35 years in some of the comments I read in this thread.

The differences in our accounts of "what really happened" are remarkable to me. For years, my wife said things with such certainty I figured I must be misinterpreting events.

I eventually started recording some conversations (with her permission). I certainly learned ways I could communicate differently. I also learned what she remembers from these conversations has no connection to reality. Amazingly, to me, even after listening to one of these recordings, she continues to hold true to her perspective.

For me, the path forward has been multifaceted.

• First, I talk about my experience and do all I can to validate her perspective. I sometimes even say, I cannot say I did that (insert awful thing), but I understand this is your perspective. If I did that ... or I don't want you to experience ...
• Second, I pose my perspective as one that might be just as far from the truth as hers. I will say, here is my experience...
• Third, I have virtually no expectations for myself from the conversation. I want to express my perspective or opinion, but I do not expect it to make a difference, at least immediately. If I do not engage with a disagreement while her emotions are in such turmoil, she often initiates some conciliatory conversation when she has time to regulate

This list sounds like a good way to approach this concept of different realities, and emotional thinking, or as Kells taught me when I first got here, feelings are facts (or something like that, not an exact quote).

At the very end, I had landed on this approach. "My experience is........" since I had come to recognize that stating the facts, or pointing out how she had misinterpreted me or assigned intent I never had, didn't work to calm things down.

When she was really, really mad at me for not 'showing up for her' at an eye appointment she never told me about (she never gave me the date, the time, the office location; never asked me to come, never put it on our calendar, never texted or emailed or spoke to me on the phone about it except 3 months earlier some general idea that she might be going in sometime in 3 months or so- that was the only conversation about it, then she ghosted and ignored me for weeks before 'the date') I explained this to her, and she absolutely just made up things- "we talked about it all through November and December!), no we did not.

I said to her, 'honey, I want to show up for you, but I can't show up for things you don't tell me about. Why can't you just ask me for what you need? Mind reading expectations are the death of relationships'.

I even tried "honey, sometimes we get really mad when we feel unseen and heard, and I want you know I love you and I see and hear you". More anger.

I tried 'my experience is you stopped responding to calls and texts, were really angry and snapping at me in front of your family at the show, then left for Christmas without saying a word to me. That's my experience". It didn't work, she denied everything- 'I wasn't angry at the show', 'you knew where I was (how could I??), 'they didn't hear anything', etc. etc. Every single experience of mine was invalidated.


I found that one must give up pointing out the truth of the situation, it just doesn't go anywhere.

Your approach is a good one I think, as long as you aren't hoping for acknowledgment and recognition. I think it's helpful to take our own emotions out of it, but that can be really hard.

[ForeverDad]

The threat of every other weekend and Wednesday for 3 hours has hurt me deeply. I am a very active dad.

Where is this threat coming from?  Or is is just a presumption that fathers always get?

When I divorced over 15 years ago many areas still defaulted to a preference for mothers.  (Though my then-spouse had been charged with Threat of DV and I had a TPO granting me our home as a safe place, she rushed to family/domestic court and managed for the duration of our separation and divorce process to have temp custody and temp majority time.  So yes, I did live with "every other weekend and Wednesday for 3 hours" for two years.)

But that was then, this is now.  Back then courts were only starting to inch away from the old fallacy of the Tender Years Doctrine where mothers always got default preference while fathers worked and paid for everything.  However, many areas are shifting toward an equal split unless there is serious reason to do otherwise.  Have you had interviews or consultations with family law attorneys (lawyers or solicitors)?  What do you hear from professionals who have dealt with your local court?

Here's what my ex's attorney said to me in the final settlement conference before the divorce's Trial Day, it's near the end of my post below.

A century ago it was standard for father to be the 'head' of the family.  Unfortunately, some fathers were not exemplary parents.  A few decades later it became popular to claim mothers always were the best to parent the children, it was called "The Tender Years" doctrine.  Unfortunately, some mothers were not exemplary parents either.

A few decades ago the book Solomon's Children - Exploding the Myths of Divorce (1986) had an interesting observation on page 195 by one participant, As the saying goes, "I'd rather come from a broken home than live in one."  Ponder that.  Taking action, as appropriate, will enable your lives or at least a part of your lives to be spent be in a calm, stable environment - your home, wherever that may be - away from the blaming, emotional distortions, pressuring demands and manipulations, unpredictable ever-looming rages and outright chaos.

In short, you can choose to make the best of a lousy situation, whether you stay with demonstrated improvement, "stay for now" pending improvement or whether you go.  The reasonable best.

As divorces became more and more common, many resorted to supposedly less partial concepts, "the best interests of the child".  The problem with that is you may not get a truly impartial and experienced person making that call.

Here's the perception and acceptance of what usually happens that I encountered with the opposing attorney at my settlement conference.

I had a two year divorce, the last step before the trial was scheduled was a Settlement Conference in my lawyer's conference room.  I recall beforehand, while in my lawyer's office, her lawyer came in, sat down and started talking, just the 3 of us.  One of the things he said was that he himself was divorced and he had alternate weekends (same as what I then had during the temporary order).  He suggested that as something to agree with.  I said, "Sure, sounds good to me but I don't think Ms FD wants alternate weekends."   He was quiet after that.

By the way, that was one of the few times in my life where I had a wonderful answer at the right time.  I savored the moment.

It has often been noted that one reason so few dads get equal or majority time is that they're faced with discouragement from every direction that their efforts will fail so why try to change the inevitable, why fight the system?

Yes, you may have to resist falling for some of society's presumptions that really don't apply in your case.

[findthewayhome]

Thanks all so much for your thoughtful input. For me it felt the same as others put here. A way to tell me what she wanted, which meant I had to accept her perceptions even if they were not true. To me I have been trying to do this for over a decade and it has caused me serious emotional harm. Truth is important to me.

In terms of my comment on the custody. She said she had consulted and they said the default in my state is every other and 3 hours on wed. I did speak to an attorney who told me times have changed. He would expect worse case 40:60 more likely 50:50 as that is what he sees in cases. I asked what about temp orders or false allegations against me which I have read about here. He said they would need to be proved to impact custody.

I am still nervous of attorneys, as they get paid by the hour and this is my life....

[kells76]

In terms of my comment on the custody. She said she had consulted and they said the default in my state is every other and 3 hours on wed. I did speak to an attorney who told me times have changed. He would expect worse case 40:60 more likely 50:50 as that is what he sees in cases. I asked what about temp orders or false allegations against me which I have read about here. He said they would need to be proved to impact custody.

Yeah... she said that. She could say that the default in your state is 0 parenting hours a year and $1,000,000 per month child support. She could say that default is that you have to live on the moon. She can say whatever she wants. Remember what you posted here that she said:

"The actual truth really makes no difference!"

Reality makes no difference to her, as she desperately tries to meet her own needs above everyone else's.

As you move away from a marriage structure and towards a separated family structure, it will be important to start to collect your own data, get your own information, and make your own decisions. This may include getting a second or third opinion with lawyers, to corroborate that 50/50 is standard, and it may include understanding the mediation process so that you don't undermine yourself and your parenting through "trying to be fair to her".

I am still nervous of attorneys, as they get paid by the hour and this is my life....

That can actually be a helpful mindset to have, going in to hiring a L. It's their day job, but it's your life and your parenting. You aren't required to stick with the first L you meet  (though it is also possible that the first one you meet is a great fit). You are allowed to interview a few and pick the one most aligned with your position -- one who treats your case as the #1 priority, with the same intensity that you have. You really don't want a "rubber stamper" here, you need someone who won't push you to settle and who is willing to go to trial. That doesn't mean "no ethics, no holds barred, dirty lawyer", more of an active, assertive lawyer who treats you as "the boss" and is able and willing to align with and act for your priorities.

Anyway -- there are a lot of us here who have "been there done that" in terms of many stages of the legal process (hiring a L, attempting mediation, reading/sending complaints, discovery, etc) so don't hold back in getting help and support with us.

[findthewayhome]

Yeah... she said that. She could say that the default in your state is 0 parenting hours a year and $1,000,000 per month child support. She could say that default is that you have to live on the moon. She can say whatever she wants. Remember what you posted here that she said:

Reality makes no difference to her, as she desperately tries to meet her own needs above everyone else's.

Thanks Kells.
In my personal therapy today we were working on why do I believe things she tells me about myself, and take them as truth. I guess I have always as a default position trusted what other people say. Particularly people I have chosen to be close with. It is important for me to now realize that the truth does not matter to her. As she said. My inner critic was dancing with her critical voice, and they became aligned somewhere. Time to let that go and work on positive inner voice.

As you move away from a marriage structure and towards a separated family structure, it will be important to start to collect your own data, get your own information, and make your own decisions. This may include getting a second or third opinion with lawyers, to corroborate that 50/50 is standard, and it may include understanding the mediation process so that you don't undermine yourself and your parenting through "trying to be fair to her".

That can actually be a helpful mindset to have, going in to hiring a L. It's their day job, but it's your life and your parenting. You aren't required to stick with the first L you meet  (though it is also possible that the first one you meet is a great fit). You are allowed to interview a few and pick the one most aligned with your position -- one who treats your case as the #1 priority, with the same intensity that you have. You really don't want a "rubber stamper" here, you need someone who won't push you to settle and who is willing to go to trial. That doesn't mean "no ethics, no holds barred, dirty lawyer", more of an active, assertive lawyer who treats you as "the boss" and is able and willing to align with and act for your priorities.

Anyway -- there are a lot of us here who have "been there done that" in terms of many stages of the legal process (hiring a L, attempting mediation, reading/sending complaints, discovery, etc) so don't hold back in getting help and support with us.

Thank you so much! I appreciate the support

[ForeverDad]

One of our members used to say he knew when his ex was lying, it was when she opened her mouth.  Might have been a little bit exaggerated but his point was he never could rely on getting the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, from her.  Your spouse can't be trusted to relate the whole truth.  What you'll hear are her perceptions and her perspective.  Sadly, too often suspect and not grounded in facts or reality.

I failed to detail here what happened in my case after the long temp order over the years.  When I arrived on Trial Day, I was met with news that *finally* she was ready to settle for the Custody Evaluator's recommended equal Shared Parenting.  I knew she would be very possessive for parenting, so I held out for me to have "Residential Parent for School Purposes" (or else, I said lets go in and start the trial).  It wasn't long before I went back for full custody, then again for majority time.  It's amazing when I recall she had threatened to disappear with our kid.  He's grown now and hasn't yet move out on his own. He plans to make it His House.  I'm okay with that.

I was surprised at first, considering all her obstructions and sabotaging.  But settlements do occur here.  (It seems court lets cases play out over the months and year or two and eventually the parties settle.)  But don't expect that to happen quickly.  One of the first steps after the temp order is issued is for mediation attempts to be ordered.  I emphasize attempts.  Most of our mediations failed, our stbEx was simply too entitled to realistically negotiate at such an early stage.  I recall that my mediation failed, no big deal, court moved on to the next step.

A most helpful guide was William Eddy's handbook, Splitting: Protecting Yourself While Divorcing Someone with a Borderline or Narcissistic Personality Disorder and worth it's weight in gold.

So I want to assure you that it's rough at first but life does settle down... and for the better.  I probably need a counselor to advise me why I hang around here, most here get helped through the rough times and all too soon 'graduate' into the rest of their lives.

[jaded7]

Thanks Kells.
In my personal therapy today we were working on why do I believe things she tells me about myself, and take them as truth. I guess I have always as a default position trusted what other people say. Particularly people I have chosen to be close with. It is important for me to now realize that the truth does not matter to her. As she said. My inner critic was dancing with her critical voice, and they became aligned somewhere. Time to let that go and work on positive inner voice.
Thank you so much! I appreciate the support

This! The internalization of the abusers voice. Trust of someone you love. I bet you'll find many here with whom that resonates. It's been a major challenge for me to get her critical and judgmental voice out of my head.

And like Kells said......the truth does not matter, it's the outcome they often are going for, or simply manipulation of the truth to maintain a self view.

[findthewayhome]

You are allowed to interview a few and pick the one most aligned with your position -- one who treats your case as the #1 priority, with the same intensity that you have.

One question on this. At $300-400 an hour for a consultation it kind of puts me off interviewing many. I met with a firm that only do Divorce and with 17 attorneys. They seemed to know what they were doing, and knew the judges and commissioners, and have a policy to always update you every Friday, whether you had been speaking to them or not in the week. Which I liked. But maybe I should be forking out 300-400 on a few more. I know in the scheme of things a few k now maybe worth it. It's just this could get expensive. She maintains it will be a long divorce process due to me. In Marriage counselling yesterday she kept getting pulled up by the therapist for denying saying things that she had said in therapy, or trying to say "see Mr findthewayhome you get things wrong and mis remember things too", the therapist had to stop her and say no actually he didn't say that. You are projecting bad feelings onto him......It was very validating.

[kells76]

It sucks and is expensive to be in the position where you need a lawyer. There is no way around that.

One thought is it's better to spend the $300-400 per consultation, on a few non-urgent consultations now, and then never need any of those lawyers, than to try to save that money now, and end up scrambling to find someone last-minute if she escalates.

Another thought that members have brought up is that phrasing is sometimes important. Lawyers might charge you for a consultation but not for an interview. If you ask to briefly interview a few L's over the phone that may be a less expensive way to go than asking to schedule a consultation in the office. Not 100% sure on that but worth considering.