BPDFamily.com

There are two people A, and B.  A and B have a partnership together, that isn't working very well.   A and B both agree that the partnership isn't working well. They just don't agree on what is causing the partnership not to work well.

A thinks that B is unwell, and that this is causing the relationship not to work well. B thinks that A is unwell, and that this is actually what is causing the relationship to fail.

Based on their own view of things, and a lack of improvement over time, A decides to change their strategy of dealing with B.  They unilaterally adopt a new set of techniques for dealing with B.  These techniques improve the relationship significantly.

B notices that A has changed their behaviour. B concludes that A has seen the error of their ways, has changed their beliefs, has come around to B's way of thinking, or has simply just got better from their illness, which is why there is much less conflict.  A thinks that the new strategy has worked, and their new way of dealing with things means they are coping much better with B's anomalous behaviour, even though they still think B is unwell.

How do we decide whether A, B (or both) are unwell? Whether A or B's worldview is more accurate? Isn't the only way to determine this by looking at relationships with C, D, E etc.?  If A gets on well with C D & E, and B also has troubled relationships with C, D, & E, isn't it more likely (although not conclusive) that B is unwell, and that A has just found a good way of coping with it?  You could teach the coping mechanism to  C, D & E as well, and it would probably improve their relationship with B too.  However, if you could teach B some sort of mechanism to cope with A, C, D, & E, then this would potentially be a lot less effort, because it involved teaching 1 person, instead of 4 (or in real life, potentially many more).

So what I was asking was, would A adopting this technique to help the relationship with B have any knock-on benefits for C, D, & E, or would B think ' I've sorted A out now, only C, D & E left to go... .  '.

I see what you are asking, but the answer is (I think ) "we can't know".

And more to the point - our motivation should not be to change the other person, fix them, get them to see things our way. Because if that is our motivation, we are very, very, very likely to fail.

The farthest I would go is that maybe, if our relationship gets better, the other person might become more interested in our opinion or ideas. Might. Eventually. But they might not.

Hi again Auspicious. Thanks again for the response. I don't have any decent answers to these questions myself, but I'm interested in understanding the questions better.

I still find it difficult to understand how this principle applies, for example, to people being sectioned under the mental health act (in the UK) and being treated for a serious mental illness, sometimes against their will.  Isn't that exactly a case of A, C, D & E deciding that B is ill, and trying to fix them?

I think we're talking about two different things.

Here at bpdfamily, the tools we talk about - like emotional [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] - are tools that you can use to improve your situation.

You aren't her therapist, or her psychiatrist. And you don't have the power to compel treatment.

And even in a forced treatment situation, better outcomes happen when the person himself decides to really seek and invest in treatment. Amador in his book describes cases of people repeatedly experiencing forced treatment, but not making real progress until someone actually made a connection and was able to establish communication.

Hello again,

Yes, I understand that there's a big difference.  But I was trying to understand the principles underlying mental health matters in general, rather than the details of a specific case or application or intervention.  For example, I was thinking of an example where C was B's psychiatrist, D and E other mental health professionals.   Together, they might have the authority to support A's world view, and thereby judge that B was ill, and required urgent treatment.  I understand that A alone would never have this responsibility/right etc.   But despite their professional qualifications, in the end, it seems we are often still talking about comparing the worldviews of B with C, D & E, and making a judgement call based on that.  And sometimes mistakes have been made in the past, I think, even when C D & E were highly qualified. I certainly agree that results are probably going to be better if B volunteers for treatment instead of being forced.

I think I know just a tiny bit about the theory of emotional [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url], and I believe I've seen some effects after it was applied to my wife by therapists on some topics. But I'm not entirely sure that it always worked as intended.  For example, if a therapist said something like 'I understand that you are feeling this way', my wife would sometimes seem to hear it as 'You are justified in feeling this way', and that would be the way it would be remembered forever after.  It may have made her feel better, but perhaps because she interpreted it as support for her worldview, rather than a more neutral statement?  She certainly seemed to interpret it as support in conversations with me, and that perceived support actually sometimes seemed to make it more difficult for her to think about her own behaviour.  Could it be possible that emotional [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] might make it more difficult sometimes for the person to consider their own behaviour? Or does that stage only possibly come later, when they are more healthy?

Emotional [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] isn't about facts, it is about feelings. We can't control how someone chooses to receive it.

You don't have to argue with or agree with her worldview.

Has arguing with her worldview worked out well so far?

Hi again.

Of course, I understand you can't control how someone chooses to receive it. But aren't you choosing to give [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] because you're hoping they're going to receive it in a certain way?   Otherwise, why are you giving it?  I don't think it's because the giving itself is supposed to have an effect on the giver, is it?

I guess I don't quite understand why and how it works, and whether it is likely to always work, or whether with some people it doesn't work, and why? 

I agree, arguing about facts hasn't worked out very well at all. But so far, emotional [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] hasn't had quite the effect I would expect either. But then again, I'm not quite sure what I might expect.

Is emotional [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] purely intended to reduce conflict and anxiety, and make the other person calmer, even though it might also (inadvertently or coincidentally) reinforce worldviews that aren't ultimately helpful to the person?

Not trying to dodge your questions, but ... .  these things are exactly what Amador's book is about!  :)

I really recommend reading it. Can't really do the ideas therein justice in forum posts.

(And anyway, he's the expert, I'm not   )

Tradad,

I think you really need to read the book but I wanted to add in a few comments:

[url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]Validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] works for everyone... .  even babies. It empowers both the person on the receiving end and the one doing the [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url]. It can become automatic and it's so easy you can start doing it immediately.

A great book to read is this:

I Don't Have To Make Everything All Better (https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=128027.0) - Gary Lundberg and Joy Lundberg

This book "I am not Sick... . " deals with [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] and then sort of takes it to [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url](squared). It gives very real examples and it also discusses something called the LEAP method.

I am not going to get into it here... .  but I will give you one example of how I was able to take the lessons from this book into the real world.

In fall of 2011, my SS15 started slipping into psychosis. He still has some persistent delusions but they have gotten better since his 2 week hospitalization in March 2012, intense school support, abilify, stress reduction in all areas. He is also on the Autism spectrum and his mother has BPD.

He is a big kid. 6'1" and 220+ lbs. He wore the same sweatshirt rain or cold or heat and the same style shoes for 2 years. As his feet grew, I was able to buy almost the same style shoes one size bigger and he gradually had to start wearing the new shoes because his feet were just too big. He had a shirt he wore on Monday and Friday and all special occasions... .  used the same towel for his weekly shower... .  It was getting pretty hard for me as a parent to keep up with the ever increasing list of things and rules that he was trying to follow to keep his world together in his mind.

One of these psychotic clothes related delusions was that he believed his pants were shrinking and that he was not growing taller. he thought he might be shrinking too... .  not sure. Also thought the desks at school might be shrinking... .  

Before I read Amador's book, I would just say, "ooh SS15 you know you are just growing... .  " He would just sort of go off to his room, not acknowledging me... .  acting like I had just said something that he didn't believe. upset. Then, he would say, well-- mamachelle, this certain pair of pants fits me, look it does, I don't know why but it does. ---But really he was busting at the seams and it was the same brand, cut, style and size as his 4 other pairs  

After the book, and now I really really needed to get him new pants-- when he would say his pants were shrinking I said, "yeah, SS15, I understand why you think that. Let's go get some new pants ok. You can try on the different size pants and we can get you the same size or... .  "

He agreed to go, buying the pants was stressful for him, but we both were able to agree that he needed new pants and his old ones, whether they had shrunk or were just too small... .  were just not working anymore.

So, yeah, the book made a big difference for me, helped my SS15 get the new pants that he had realized he needed but couldn't express rationally why he needed them... .  and also helped me to really understand that when you go directly into conflict with someone who is mentally ill and in a b/w or delusional thinking mode about a particular thing you are going to fail. You have to come to a shared goal and also be able to accept their worldview but not necessarily agree with it, just agree that if you were that person you would feel that way too.

Hope this helps. 

mamachelle

Hi again mamachelle. Your posts always help, so thanks again for your comments.

It was very interesting to hear about your SS and his issue with his pants.

I suppose delusion affects people different ways.  I mentioned in the other thread that my father died of cancer two years back. He became delusional near to the end, and kept seeing faces in things like carpets and wallpaper, and saw 'ghosts' -people from his past that weren't alive any more.  He always used to tell me about these things, and I would smile, and say don't worry about it - they won't do you any harm. So I suppose that was a form of [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url]. I didn't try to argue with him that these things didn't exist. But on the other hand, they didn't make a great deal of difference to his life. He saw them now and again, commented on it, but was otherwise just the same as he was usually.

With my wife, though, it's different.  She isn't delusional in the sense that she sees objects that definitely aren't there. Instead, she see emotions that aren't there.  Whereas my father integrated his delusions into his otherwise relatively normal daytime routine, my wife changes her behaviour because of the way she sees things.

You mentioned you and your SS had a shared goal - getting some pants that fit.  It seems to me having a shared goal is quite key in this.  You were able to get your SS towards your shared goal by not challenging his worldview - I can understand that, and it makes perfect sense.

But what if the delusion caused the person to change their goal too? If you say 'I understand you think that' to them, then it may be interpreted as 'I understand why you have changed your goal - you are reasonable to do so'.  In fact, you really may think the complete opposite, and wished they hadn't changed their goal at all.

For example, my wife sometimes thinks our kids are being unreasonable, and starts shouting at them.  If I ask her why she's shouting at them, she says 'Because they're being unreasonable'.  I may not think they're being unreasonable.  What do I say?  If I say something like 'I understand that you think that the children are unreasonable', she may well take this to mean 'I understand why you are annoyed - shouting is justified, carry on'.  My goal is to stop her shouting at the children. Her goal is to teach the children not to be 'unreasonable'. We don't have a shared goal. 

If she later described this incident to a third party, she would make sure that the kids were depicted as unreasonably as they could be made to seem without distorting the essential facts too much (often by ascribing false motives to the participants - things she couldn't possibly know, just to make them come across as unkind or unsympathetic).   If the third party accepts (validates) this account, she feels justified in having shouted at them.  The [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] has reinforced the shouting behaviour, and makes it more likely to happen again.

Does that make it clearer why I worry that [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] might reinforce worldviews that are unhelpful?

I'll try and read the references, though. Thanks again for them.

 
tradad,

Here's a quick answer... .  best as I can do in 10 minutes w/o a PsyD. :)

I would say... .  ahead of time... .  work through a plan to a shared goal of keeping kids from being unreasonable or stopping them in the midst of unreasonableness by using x,y,z  methods. Listen to why she thinks yelling is effective. Listen to what she finds unreasonable. You can agree to disagree on what is unreasonable. See if she will accept sending children to their room for time out, or removing electronics without yelling. Inform children of these expectations at a family meeting. Listen to the children as to what they think is unreasonable. Find common ground with them. Secondary goal: peace in the house.

Really, [url=https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation]validation (https://bpdfamily.com/content/communication-skills-validation)[/b][/url] and LEAP work. It's pretty powerful stuff and I am afraid that I am just not doing it justice.

The authors do deal with your concerns in the books. |iiii

mamachelle

|iiii

traddad, why don't you give  I am Not Sick I Don't Need Help! - Xavier Amador, PhD  (https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=61716.0) a read, then come back and let us know what you think?

My take is that we can't change anybody, nor is telling somebody that they're in denial will ever work.

A person can only change his/ her point of view when they are willing, and able to.  And a pwBPD is unable to do it.

Also, what good is it to label somebody as "ill", if it doesn't change anything?  My choice, therefore, is to just think that "me and this person think in a different way- I may not understand his way, but what can I do to make our communication smoother"? 

And as some have already mentioned, validation isn't about "the truth", but about allowing somebody to have their own views and feelings.  It's not just about conversations with pwBPDs- many times we don't agree with our bosses (they think bad numbers mean it's our problem, etc.) but we can validate them and also suggest solutions.  Truth is, many deviations in viewpoints will never get resolved but I don't think it necessarily means we're stuck.

Do we want to be proven right?

Or, do we want to do what works? (or at least improves things)

Other than clients who believe little green men are growing in the fridge or are breaking the law... . whose world view is more correct is a dicey area.

Everyone disagrees or has a different world view at some level of detail. Al Turtle always says if someone agrees with you all the time, someone is lying. He also concludes everyone makes sense all the time... . if you don't get someone... . you just haven't learned yet what their sense is (what their experience is).

Emotional validation is understanding another person's 'sense'.

And it's  different for every single person.

I think perhaps the thing to keep in mind is that, in terms of her world view, it doesn't matter what you say. Validation will improve your interaction with your wife. It will defuse the situation. It will help your wife to calm down in the moment. All good things. Now, will it reinforce her world views because she twists your words to suit herself? Probably. But that's the thing - you aren't reinforcing her world views, she is. She is going to believe whatever she wants anyway, no matter what you do. So the validating isn't making things worse, because the 'worse' part (the 'con' if you will) is inevitable as part of her illness. She is unable to recognize that her world view does not fit with the world view of C, D, E, etc. She does not care, does not comprehend, and no amount of validation or argument is going to change that. So you might as well go ahead and validate and at least get what benefits you can.

Validation also reinforces emotional boundaries (i understand you have a different experience) and helps protect against enmeshment; you have your world view, and I have mine. We are two separate people.

When we cannot validate anothers experience... . we mistake sympathy or pity (poor thing is crazy, doesnt have my same experience) and anger for logic (only my view is right), this leads to arguments and bresks in connection, and/or Enmeshment to avoid arguments/breaks in connection... . and enmeshment and poor boundaries blurs the lines and prevents individuation: you must have my world views or I will feel anxious and try to argue you into being more like me  And vice versa... .

Validation also encourages ownership; When someone isn't arguing with you and instead

seeks to really understand and reflects back what you said... . "I hear that you are yelling

because you feel overwhelmed, this makes sense"... .

Then the other person is in a better position to own their stuff, too. "I DO yell when I'm feeling overwhelmed... . " (the beginning of insight)

traddad,

There are also many different ways to be validating without saying "I understand . . ."  If you are worried that telling her you understand she feels angry will mislead her into believing you said you understand why she feels angry (or that you might agree with her "why", you can always change your formulation - You sound angry or Are you feeling frustratated with the kids?

Check out the validation workshop in the Lessons, and watch the Fruzetti video in there - it will give you other ways to validate her that may be more appropriate for the situation, and sound less like agreement with her worldview.  

traddad- Im not sure exactly what your asking or looking for, but it seems to me that if A makes changes in behavior which in turn helps B. (who is mentally ill) I would thing that could have some effect on C, D and E due to B being under less stress and coping better. But unlikely to see significant improvements in  C, D or E with out changes in  C, D and E.

Chosen asks: Why tell someone their ill if nothing will change?

I recently saw a question posted on another website which stated: How did you find out you had BPD? And how did you feel when you found out? Angry, relieved or other?

There were 200+ responses in one day. Around 200 borderlines came forward eager to share. About 175 of them said  RELIEVED that they finally new WHAT was wrong with them and that there were treatments that could help them. Many found out in hospitals after suicide attempts after years of suffering with their madness and no one helping or knowing what was wrong. These were diagnosed by psychiatric doctors. Several had found out via loved one's and social workers bringing it to their attention and then later diagnoses by psych's. Some had even diagnosed themselves after reading books and then were later diagnoses by psychs. More than half of these people claimed they were in DBT or graduated from DBT both with significant improvements and some had even improved themselves via self help after finding out what it actually was that was wrong with them, thus directing them to the appropriate self help products. I find this to be good evidence for me to believe that bringing awarness to them is better than doing nothing and expecting them to just figure it out on their own. But that's just my opinion based on these facts observed.

Hey all,

Great thread this has turned into. I just want to clarify that this thread started over here in the Book Review Section.

I am Not Sick I Don't Need Help! - Xavier Amador, PhD (https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=61716.0)

A mod or other advisor broke it and moved it to Staying-- so Tradad's concerns could be better met.

 mamachelle

Maybe I'm been too simple-minded here, but I think that when a pwBPD starts to sense something is "wrong" with him/her, you will feel it.  Maybe they don't say "there's something wrong with me" outright, but from your conversations you will know.

And then it may be a good time to tell them about BPD.  I have seen some members here who have has success with it, but only those who's pwBPD sense that something is wrong and begins looking inward.

When the pwBPD is still at the stage of thinking everybody else is wrong, if you hint that they are sick, they will likely just think that you are, or worse still, perceive that as an attack rather than a genuine wish to help.  Sure it works differently depending on the case, but many casese have shown that prematurely suggesting BPD may not be the most helpful for the pwBPD.

With my person with BPD, he will both say he knows something is wrong, then flip and say nothing is wrong. So, he flips in and out of conciousness regarding his condition currently. It does take some time to come to an acceptance of it for most.

A couple of the MC's we saw asked this question (to both of us):

Do you want to be 'right'.  Or do you want to be in a relationship?

Implying these were mutually exclusive goals.

My experience:  Validation definitely works.  Think of it in the reverse - if you make a comment that completely undermines or 'invalidates' someones thoughts or feelings, they are going to have a naturally defensive reaction.  All the biological triggers go off, the emotions overload, and we (as humans) will naturally want to defend our position and ideally win the other person over to our viewpoint (which will make us feel better about our self).

True of anyone.  With a BPD, the triggers and biological responses are much higher.

So figuring out how to understand what is happening with her, will help prevent the triggering of the biological chemicals and subsequent overload and melt down.  Which will in turn make all the interactions more rational and easier to deal with (less conflict as well).

But to do so means you have to give up your goal of being right, and trying to convince the other person of this.  Whether its true or not.

I dont think you have to be dishonest about it either.  Fact is, you will never really understand another person fully, because you are not them (and they are not you).  If you pretend you do, it will come off as insincere and often times just patronizing.  So instead, I dont try to claim I 'understand' my wife.  I do state that her feelings are valid and she is entitled to them, and even state that I dont understand them nor do I feel I have to.

But then what to do in terms of action, as it involves the kids.  Here is where it gets trickier.   A non emotional discussion on healthy parenting skills I have found has worked the best.  Research articles, know how - discuss parenting situations before they present themselves, so you will have some interaction on them before faced with them real time.  (certain categories you know will always come up like punishment, motivations, rewards, expectations to set, etc etc).  Talk through as many of these as possible in the hypothetical, before being faced with them.

Then if she is deregulating on the kids you have to step in and call a time out.  You just have to (without criticizing her parenting style).  After a few times of this it gets easier for everyone.

No one size fits all action when in the moment, for parenting actions.

Hello yeeter, thanks for your post and your contribution to the thread.

Personally, I find these topics very difficult to get my head around a lot of the time.

My experience is that being in a relationship with someone with BPD can feel rather emotionally abusive.

If I was in a relationship with someone who was physically abusive, I doubt anyone would ask

':)o you want to be 'unhurt'?  Or do you want to be in a relationship?'

Everyone seems to accept nowadays that physical abuse in a relationship is just plain and non-negotiably wrong, and that the person doing the hitting is the one at fault.  People who are physically abusive are usually immediately expected to attend some sort of treatment - I don't think there are frequently suggestions that victims need to change their behaviour to lessen their chances of being hit.

When it comes to emotional abuse, though, the waters seem to get much more muddy.  When my wife screams at me and threatens extreme behaviour, she claims I have caused her to act like that.  She argues that I am the ill one, and that my mistreatment of her and insistence on being 'right' means her behaviour is justified.   The recommendations for how to deal with people who behave like that often seem to be along the lines of not challenging the other person's worldview, letting them believe what they want, and just validating what they seem to be saying.

If it's just the two of you that you're considering, and you wish to continue with the relationship with that person for whatever reason, then yes, I can see that validation and not challenging the other person might be an effective strategy to allow the relationship to continue.  It is up to the individual, I think, whether you choose to continue supporting someone else's worldview that you may not necessary agree with, or even feel represents a valid interpretation of reality.

However, when children are involved, I feel the story is rather different.  You're not just talking about personal decisions you are making to support and have a relationship with another individual in spite of your large differences in outlook.  Parents have a crucial role to play in building confidence in children, setting values for them, promoting ethical behaviour and so on.  They are supposed to be role models for their children.  So when you validate your partner's (sometimes very peculiar) world view, the message you are (perhaps unconsciously) giving to your children is 'This is legitimate point of view'. And perhaps in some cases this is not a message you would ideally like to give out.

Similarly, when you tolerate your partner's rages, and forgive them afterwards, you are not just making a personal decision that you can take it and can carry on, which is of course your prerogative - you are demonstrating to your children that this sort of behaviour is, in some way, acceptable. Because you have tolerated it, and have accepted that this is just your partner's way of dealing with things.

When you start to see your own children pick up the same ways of behaving, it is very, very worrying and you begin to fear for their future.  Do we really want to (perhaps passively)  give youngsters with the impression that acting in this way towards other people is a valid way of behaving? They will be the adults filling up bulleting boards like this in the future.  And they didn't ask to be brought up in a family where one of their parents had BPD - they didn't make that choice, in the same way you made the choice to stay in the relationship with the person with BPD. 

This is why I think there's more to this than just saying ':)on't challenge the person with BPD'.  If it's just you and them - fair enough.  But when there are youngster's futures at stake, surely some dose of 'reality' is necessary to try and ensure that those youngsters get a fair chance to have a happy and BPD-free successful life?

Hi traddad.  

First, I agree with everything you wrote.

And nowhere on this site do we suggest putting up with abuse, nor allowing abuse of children.  And yes, emotional and verbal abuse is still abuse.

As for your own hurt though, its only to the degree that you allow it.  And the tools here do help, and work, to develop the skills to detach and prevent it.  She can feel a certain way, and you can validate and accept it, but it doesnt mean you have to feel the same way, nor does it mean you have to own or fix her feelings.  Its on her then to figure out what to do with herself after that.

Indeed its much much more difficult when coparenting.  Children dont get to pick their parents.  But they are still a part of their lives, whether they like it or not (meaning this BPD person is their mother for the rest of their life, like it or not).  So its critical that you try to provide some stability and healthy perspective, which includes stepping in when needed, talking about their feelings with them, helping them develop skills in dealing with mom, and setting an example on a healthy way to behave and live.  These things can all be done independent of your wifes actions.  And if she is abusing the children, and you are unable to prevent it, then the CPS services will put them in a better environment.

One of the key things that CPS looks for is conflict in the home.  The philosophy is that conflict is bad for children, and if they need to separate mom and dad for the sake of reducing conflict for the children then they will do it.

What I have found is that by letting my wife have her view.  And also sharing my own view (which is different) - simply as an alternative view - that my children absorb it and make their own decisions.  At a very early age even, they understand a lot and will go out and calibrate with the world to come up with their own views (which are sometimes different than my own, but thats what makes us all individuals).  And no, I dont mean learning that its ok to put up with abuse.  

One of the things that is confusing me in your post is what 'problem' is it that you disagree with?  (the title of the post).  You seem to be lumping a number of things together, and it might help to segregate for clarification purposes.

Putting up with abuse (in any form) - not ok

Allowing someone to abuse your children (in any form) - not ok

Differences of parenting 'style' - fuzzy and will be debated until the end of time

Constantly trying to get a mentally disordered person to see the logic and reasonableness in your viewpoints - an exercise in futility

Same with defending yourself against illogical and unfounded accusations - another futility exercise which takes a lot of emotional energy

Learning a new approach of interacting with your partner and your children - a worthwhile effort that really can change the dynamics (no guarantees, and a lot of work)

Hello again Yeeter.

Thanks for taking the time to reply again.  I sometimes find it amazing how similar experiences the people who write to this forum have had.   And it definitely helps to know that you're not the only one out there going through this sort of thing.

The thread title, btw, is nothing to do with me.  This thread was split off a different thread, and the mods decided to give it this title.  But I think they intended it to mean ':)isagreement over who is the source of the conflict in the relationship'.

It sounds daft, I know, but I feel sometimes a slight twinge of jealousy when I hear about couples where the BPD partner is prepared to admit their condition, and actually seek treatment, even if the treatment isn't entirely successful.  There's a lot to be said for someone who is trying to get better.

I think my wife would rather die than ever admit she might have a problem, regardless of the volume of evidence she might be presented with.  She accepts all the conflict in our household happens, but in her worldview, it is everyone else's fault.  When she shouts at the kids, it's their fault, because they deserved it.  When she shouts at me, it's my fault because I deserved it.  She is actually extremely good at coming up with convincing sounding explanations why it is always the other party's fault.  The fact that she's so clever and can easily construct such elaborate scenarios just makes it harder. The only problem is, though, that these excuses are just constructed on the spot purely to exonerate her, so they can never be collected together to form a coherent philosophy, that you could say represents her worldview - they all clash and contradict one another. Which is why trying to make sense of what she actually believes is next to impossible.

In my view, that's one of the main differences between someone who is ill and someone who is healthy. If we were just talking about marital conflict born of different philosophies, you might still hope to be able to assemble the other person's statements and actions into a (more or less) coherent worldview, even if you didn't agree with it. You might still argue vehemently about the differences, and (unfortunately) upset each other.  But there would always be some chance of compromise, if you could come around to understand enough of each other's worldview and you were tolerant enough of each other.  When dealing with someone with BPD though, there seems to be no consistent worldview, even if it sometimes appears there is to third parties, who can't spot the inconsistencies, and shifting values over time.  So you can't really come to any sort of solid compromise, because the landscape is always moving, and any agreement will not hold in the medium or long term.  My wife puts on a very convincing show, though, and can nearly always convince third parties that I am the unreasonable one, who is trying to prevent her from doing what she wants in life,  naturally omitting the fact that what she wants in life this month is completely different from what she wanted last month.  If I try and point this out, it just makes me look like I am trying to tie her down and be restrictive towards her, rather than being 'supportive' of her latest set of values. 

I understand what you are driving at with regard to the validation for reducing conflict, and I've tried to do similar things at various points in the past.  But even there, I usually find I do not succeed.  My wife views _everything_ as a form of contest of wills.  If we are arguing, winning the argument is the goal. If I am withdrawing, stopping me withdrawing is the goal.  However I attempt to shift the dynamic, resisting that shift is the goal.  Because in her mind, if I want it like that, then that is a good enough reason to try and prevent it.

So if I refuse to argue, and refuse to get riled, and simply validate her comments, she will take a different tack.   She will claim that I am 'emotionally withdrawn', that I have taken away my love from her, and that I am deliberately trying to wreck the marriage by not being 'good' with her. She always finds a way to make whatever is happening at the time the other party's fault.  She takes responsibility for nothing, at least in an emotional sense.  Oddly, she will take responsibility for practical things, though.

The really sad thing is that the mentality that goes with BPD seems rather 'infectious'.  It corrupts your own values, and those of the children, and so you soon find yourself getting instinctively drawn into the emotional haemorrhages that go on in your household. They become part of the currency of your relationship, and part of the example that is set to the children.  And your partner's accusations that you are the source of the problem start to slowly become more true, as your own mental health starts to deteriorate.  It's hard to describe the feeling of peace that sometimes comes over me when I get to have a normal conversation with a group of normal people, and don't have to choose my words ultra-carefully,  pre-process everything I say, and be afraid of what might happen next.

Yes, you are right about the children listening to what we both say, and making their own decisions.  But again, this easily becomes just another contest of wills.  My wife often seems to see it as a battle for the 'hearts and minds' of the children, and if they start to lean more towards my way of thinking, she will accuse me of corrupting them, and turning them against her, even though the children all love their mum very much.

Third parties and our children are a big problem for us.  We share parental responsibility, and there are times when my wife is representing us both to a third party.  I often simply have no idea what she will say to them, whether it will be consistent with what she has said in the past, or whether it will something entirely new. Or even, in extreme cases, whether she will criticize me, and make inappropriate comments and inferences about me and my character to others. If it's important, I naturally try and be there too. But that is sometimes hard logistically, and it's not always appropriate to take a contrary opinion to my wife in public, even it would be for our children's benefit.

If my wife were prepared to admit she had a problem, this might open up conversations like 'Look, this might be hard for you, why not let me handle it this time?'.  But that's never possible, because we're all the source of the problem, not her. So why should my wife not be able to tackle anything she wants to?  Because anything else would just be being controlled by me, wouldn't it?

I get it traddad.

My wife is uNPD/uBPD, so there is and underlying need to always be right and represent to the outside world in a way that puts her in the most positive light possible (at my expense often)

It's maddening.  But something out of your control

as was advised to me at the time the way you combat it is to regain you own sense of person. Confidence. And let your actions speak for themselves.  You can't control what another person does, thinks, or says.  You just can't. And running around bhind them trying to represent your view isn't a viable plan.  So you lift yourself up, and start being the person you want to be (as you say, your own mental Health has suffered to where you are someone you don't want to be). You CAN control your own behavior.  Take th high road.  Set a course by example and lead forward in the relationship.

Draw boundaries.  Detach.  Get off the codependency merry go round and put your attention on yourself and not her.

Your kids will notice.  You will bcome more confident and also more capable.  And very likely, as hard as it is to imagine, your wife will adjust to your change.

Keep reading.  Posting.  Practicing.  Reading some more.

I still think you should read the book ... .


A possible angle here for partnership lies in the fact that whether or not they were being unreasonable, shouting at them is unlikely to cause any positive change.

In other words, rather than arguing with her about whether they were being unreasonable, maybe - yes, there are no guarantees, but maybe - you and she could partner on more effective ways to deal with the situation. Especially if guided by a family therapist.

Hello again Auspicious.  Thanks again for your consideration.

I understand what you're saying.  But in practice, these things seem very, very difficult. I have tried to make agreements with my wife that she will not shout at the children.  But one problem is, she denies actually doing it.  I can go up to her, straight after she has shouted at the children and say in a neutral voice 'You are shouting at the children' and she will deny it.   She says something like 'I'm not shouting - I'm just raising my voice so that they can hear'.   The children think she's shouting. I think she's shouting.  She doesn't.

If I insist that she is shouting, she will accuse me of victimising her.  Then she sometimes goes to the other extreme, and refuses to talk to the children at all, because ':)addy doesn't believe I'm talking to you properly'.

If a family therapist could see the situation, I'm sure they would think she is shouting too.  But they can't - they just have our accounts of the situations to work with.  And who should the therapist believe?  I say my wife is shouting, she says she isn't, and says it's my perceptions of the family dynamic that are at fault.  When our perceptions of reality differ so much, how is it possible to judge who's version is nearer the mark?  She claims that I'm the one with the problem, and that I'm simply blaming and victimising her for my own shortcomings.  She'll happily further claim that if ever she does raise her voice, it's because of the absolute exhaustion of living with a hopeless husband, that doesn't support her properly, and expects her to cope with everything.  Many therapists will accept that exhaustion can make people cranky, so again she successfully shifts the diagnostic attention on to me.   It's only by looking at the details, comparing what she's said over time, noticing that her actions frequently contradict her statements, that one can see there's something not quite right there. But most therapists aren't that bothered about getting down to the nitty-gritty - it's too complex to take account of all the things one partner has said and done over years ("he said, she said", and after all - they've only got my word that she ever said or did most of these things at all.  So as long as she puts forward a reasonably self-consistent view to the therapist at the time, and cries a lot about how terrible it is to live with me, she usually garners enough sympathy to deflect attention from herself, and onto me. 

If I point out that the children think she's shouting too, she will say that they're just siding with me to try and curry favour ('divide and rule', and that a good husband would support his wife and not undermine her authority with the children.  She says I'm causing the problem by siding with them against her, and that if I supported her in her attempts to discipline them, everything would be much better, and she wouldn't feel so victimised and alone.  What do you know? I'm the problem again.

So it's not just that we can't agree whether the kids were unreasonable. We can't agree whether my wife was shouting either.   Surely, in order to have any chance of holding to some sort of agreement, there has to be some element of 'shared reality' that we can agree on?  Then snag is that any element of 'shared reality' that would imply that she might be behaving less than angelically is usually instantly rejected, or somehow undermined, because she can't emotionally accept the implication that she might be doing something wrong.

I promise I will try and get hold of the book, and read it with an open mind!

Yeah, that's really tough to have to accept, though.

My wife doesn't seem to have what you might regard as 'normal boundaries' of behaviour. Especially if for whatever reason, she feels threatened.

For example, she has no qualms about talking to officials who are responsible for child welfare, and hinting that I am a bad father, and am the source of our children's problems.   She's too clever to say that outright, though, because that might be picked up and the facts challenged.  So she does it all with a 'nod and wink'.  She's very good at using trailing sentences, that say things without actually saying them.  If challenged, she happily denies she said anything, and of course, she didn't.  But the listener would usually be in no doubt what she is implying.

She's been doing this for years with various officials, like her doctor, our children's doctor, our children's teachers,  her psychiatric nurse, anyone who will listen really, and might have a say in our children's future.  I think she's trying to use it as a form of 'insurance'.  She knows that one day our relationship might come to an end, so she's trying to 'seed' enough of her point of view into key officials that they might support her case if push comes to shove.

It's very hard sometimes to sit back, and just accept that she is doing things like this. It's also embarrassing to have to meet the officials concerned, knowing what my wife has been saying to them, and the opinion they may well have formed of me as a result of it.

What I'm suggesting is that instead of focusing on the shouting, focusing on working together to find things that do work to improve things.

Shouting, raising voice, or whatever, I doubt it's working very well to accomplish what she wants. So maybe she could collaborate on finding other ways. Focused on the finding other ways, NOT on how wrong wrong wrong the shouting is. She can't handle being wrong, so don't make it about her being wrong.

She's not going to be motivated by what's bothering you ... . if anything is going to motivate her (which is by no means guaranteed, granted in full), it would be what's bothering her.

Nobody is saying that any of this is easy ... . it isn't. It's very hard. But a shift in focus can at least improve the odds of improvements.

Hello again Auspicious.

Thanks again for the reply, and I'll try and keep the advice in mind.

I do understand the idea that telling her she's wrong isn't going to help.  I can see that from our life together.


My parents-in-law make a grim warning for me, though, of what can happen if you follow this path for too long.  My mother-in-law has a very similar temperament to my wife, and after 40 years of marriage, her husband seems to have concluded that the only way to avoid 'incidents' between them is to do pretty much everything himself, and not to expect anything from his wife.  She happily accepts him doing everything, and yet he still gets no credit for it,  and she criticises him at every opportunity.  My own future, if I'm not careful.

I've gone through periods where I've thought 'If only I changed this, or if only I changed that - everything will be alright then'.  But it never has been.  And by now I'm convinced there's no magic solution. As soon as one problem is solved, another magically appears to take its place, like a hydra.

I feel convinced by now that BPD is entirely emotion driven.  There's no logic to it, and it's desperately looking for the logic that actually drives you crazy.  I think it's a mistake to imagine that you can make the relationship better by making adjustments to your lifestyle as a couple.   The reasons that the BPD gives are just rationalisations for their emotions.  It's the emotions that drive everything, and the rationalizations follow to justify them, so if you listen to the rationalizations and try and act on them, you are doomed to failure, and just make yourself exhausted and frustrated into the bargain.

Until something happens that lends emotional stability (therapy, desire to change, whatever) the same patterns of behaviour keep happening again and again, under different pretexts.  But if you start to see through the pretexts and refuse to play the game, you're just accused of being insensitive and uncaring.  Anything to draw you into the conflict zone again.

It IS hard!  I live in a small town and this especially bothered me.  And at one time she was connected to people at work, with similar behaviors and I was always worried about it (reputation matters!).

BUT - eventually I just stepped up and made myself visible.  Developed my own interactions with various people, independent of my wife.  And then guess what happened - a handful of times now people have reached out to me, unsolicited, to tell me specifically they see what my wife is like.  I almost cried the first time that happened.

Now Im sure there are still those that she has completely hooked on her reality.  But it doesnt bother me any more, because I now know there are some that arent, and that see the dynamics. 

To put this in perspective, those who read the question and responded were pwBPD (people with BPD) who were aware of and working on their issues.  That's only one subset of pwBPD.

The 'other' subset of pwBPD who have heard about BPD are those who are in Denial of their issues.  Denial is common, as well as Blaming and Blame Shifting.  In other words, "I'm okay so you must be the problem."  Sadly, pwBPD generally find it extremely hard to be receptive to that information from their close relationship partners.  There's just too much emotional relationship baggage for the messages to get through to them positively as intended.  That is why the best odds for success, if any, is from a neutral, trained and perceptive professional who has no emotional relationship with the individuals.

There is another huge group or subset, ones who have never (yet) heard of BPD and it's spectrum of behaviors and the wide range of intensity.  Will they respond as those on that BPD board quoted above?  Some will quickly, some will in time, some won't.

While getting therapy is good, my experience has been that courts are not often inclined to force or enforce people going to therapy.  Courts seem to deal with people as they are and is not focused on improving behaviors.  They mostly make decisions based to some extent on the existing behaviors.  Yes, they may order 'Anger Management' but often that is just some classes and success is of course not guaranteed.  Then what to do after that?

My experience... . I tried Staying for years (not here, I hadn't found out about BPD until mere months before my marriage imploded and I came to peer support after we separated) and yet my then-spouse consistently refused to listen to me during her periodic rants and rages.  And over time she gradually stopped listening during the ever-shorter times in between.  She literally told me she had lost respect for me and instead demanded 'respect me' and she declared she was going to 'wear the pants'.  I took that as her declaration she wouldn't listen to me or reason with me any more.  It has been 7-8 years and I haven't seen recovery, I still get blamed and raged at periodically.  I deal with things as they are, not as I'd like them to be.  Our marriage ended, not my wish.  Sadly.  But that's reality.

I hope you can find success in your endeavors.  Maybe 'Staying' will work for you.  Maybe it will only be 'Staying For Now'.  Only time will tell.  If your spouse still doesn't respond over time, then decide what to do next.  As you become more educated with the disorders, behaviors, coping methods, communication skills, understanding your options and legal strategies then you will be able make more informed and more confident decisions.

Yes, exactly. Denial is the difficulty.

I've raised the topic of BPD twice with my wife, the first time 7 years ago.   Her response was 'They're the people who cut themselves, aren't they? I don't do that'.  That was the end of it, as far as she was concerned.

I raised it again more recently, and she agreed to go and see her doctor, and ask him about it.  He asked her some general questions about her past behaviour, and she gave some (in my view) blatantly incorrect replies.  So on that basis, he dismissed a diagnosis of BPD.  It seems quite likely that she deliberately gave him the less than honest answers, to make sure that the investigation didn't go any further.

It's like the old joke about how many psychiatrists does it take to change a lightbulb?  One, but the lightbulb really has to want to change.  At the moment, my wife doesn't want to change.   She can see the unhappy environment she lives in very keenly, and it certainly makes her unhappy too, but it seems very important for her mental state that she feels responsible for precisely none of it.  She told me explicitly not so long ago that she believes our relationship problems are 100% caused by me.  She won't even contemplate owning 1% of our marital problems.  Even in a marriage with someone I strongly believe has BPD, I can see that I am also responsible for some of our problems, and I would never imagine myself as having no responsibility whatsoever.  She even went so far as to say that if she did turn out to have some mental health issues, those were also caused by me!

This is why therapy doesn't work for her.  She doesn't want to fix what's wrong. At least not yet. She just wants to be told that whatever is wrong, it isn't her fault.  So she twists everything, to make it sound like nothing is her fault, and in fact, that she's a saint for putting up with it all.  When  it's very hard to do that, because the facts are strongly against her, she instead derails the discussion by breaking down and sobbing, to divert attention back to her distress.   The concept being, I think, that with 'nons',  the more distressed person is often the one more likely to be telling the truth.  So she hopes that her emotional distress will make her story seem more convincing.  It often does.

I'm really happy that this happened to you, yeeter.  You deserve it, you really do.

I hope people will do me the same courtesy, and judge me by what they see when I interact with them, rather than what my wife leads them to believe.

Time will tell, I guess.  But I'm really glad that happened for you.

Without external input, such as from you, the doctor couldn't really make any reliable judgment.  And if that was her GP, perhaps it would have been wiser for him to refer her to someone more qualified such as a perceptive psychologist or experienced therapist.  However, likely if you insisted that you go too then she would have refused since she wouldn't control the interaction?

So it's been many years.  She hasn't improved significantly, despite you actively trying.  The ball's in your court.  So far she's resistant to change, what can you do differently?  How are your boundaries?  What are your alternatives?

Since the children are affected, what can you do to make things better for them?  So far your tactics have had limited effect, limited benefit.

(Disclaimer... . I spend most of my time here on the Family Law and Divorce board since that was my outcome.  Sad and distressing as the prospect of divorce may be, one positive is that the children would have at some regular time in a calm and peaceful environment - your separate home.  Also, they'd have an example of what parenting should be like and that there are some behaviors not tolerated.  That example would help them when they grow up and choose spouses for themselves.  With the way things are now, you don't want them to default to choosing relationships like Dad and Mom have, right?  While family court may not see their mother's behaviors as actionable enough to severely limit her contact with them, that alternative could be be an improvement to the current situation.  And for all you know, standing up for yourself and hence the children too may have a positive effect on her and she might take a closer look at herself.  Maybe.  After all these years, maybe not.)

Hello again ForeverDad,

Yeah, it was her GP.  They're very fussy about patient confidentiality here, so it's very difficult to get joint appointments.  In general, you often hear patients complaining that you have to diagnose yourself before you can get appropriate treatment from a GP, so here it's clearly even harder, because altered perception of reality is one of the hallmarks of this condition. So it seems essentially rather daft asking the patient ':)o you think you're mentally ill, then?'.

I've found that medical profession have in general made things for us worse, not better.  They diagnosed depression in my wife 7 years ago when she was hospitalised, and ignored my suggestion that BPD seemed a more likely diagnosis (although she may well have been depressed too).  She's been on anti-depressants ever since, but they haven't really done any good.  Probably because depression isn't the underlying problem.

To be honest, I get the impression that unless the patient goes up to their GP and says, 'you know, I keeping mirroring people all the time, see everything in black and white, have very unstable emotions and keep alternately idolizing and devaluing my partner - what could it be, doc?', they aren't going to help much.  And my wife certainly doesn't view herself like that, even though she does all of these things. 

She's very clever when I'm around as well. For example, at one of our therapy sessions, she said something like 'He's so insensitive and uncaring, he even accused me of having Borderline Personality Disorder ! (sob, sob) Can you imagine how terrible it is to be told that by someone you love?'  Phrasing it like that practically begs the listener to go 'There, there - of course you don't'.

If I say, 'That's because you do have it' - it makes me look like exactly what she's just said - uncaring and insensitive. 


Poor.  But I'm working on them at the moment. We'll see if it does any good.  The problem is, she sees setting boundaries as a 'provocative act', and they can be triggers for rages.  I've established a few more recently.



Too right.  But  I've got rather a lot against me.  Her father's a family lawyer, for a start.  And her family are very wealthy, and can afford as much legal support as they want.

Wow - good discussion!

Just some thoughts... .

* In some cases, there is a diagnosis based on objective testing.  My wife and I both took the MMPI-2, under court supervision, and it enabled the Ph.D. psychologist who had been appointed by the court to diagnose her with "multiple psychological disorders" including BPD.  I was advised to learn about BPD and how to deal with someone who has it - the kinds of stuff we work on here - and that has been a huge help.

* If there is no diagnosis, that doesn't mean the other party doesn't have BPD (and/or some other stuff).  We amateurs can't diagnose someone, and it's especially impossible to diagnose someone you're close to.  So usually, if there is no professional diagnosis, it's best to observe the patterns of behavior, and focus on them - not the underlying causes like BPD or whatever - and figure out strategies for dealing with those behaviors effectively.  The key to that may be to give up (which is hard to do!) the idea that you can somehow persuade or trick the other party into changing those patterns - you might be able to get her to do a specific thing one time, or to stop doing a specific thing, but the big patterns will remain, because they are driven by underlying causes (which may include BPD or whatever).

As an example, my wife used to accuse me (100% falsely) of cheating on her.  It may have been reasonable for me to ask her never to make such an accusation in front of the kids - in fact she did not make that change, but it was worth a try.  But expecting her to never accuse me of something I didn't do would be unrealistic - just not within her capability.

* It may help - as others have suggested - to get very skilled with boundaries, and how to make them work for you.  I found it completely ineffective to say, "You shouldn't do X" or "I expect you to always do Y." - just caused a fight and made things worse.  Even if I phrased it in a better way - as a boundary - "If you do X I will do Y." - which works with many people, but not with my wife - she just dug in her heels.

But... . if I said nothing at all, and instead just put my boundary into action - if she did X, I did Y - that worked better.  For example, she used to call me and rant at me, pretty often.  Instead of saying, ":)on't rant at me over the phone" - bad boundary! - or "If you raise your voice or say unfair things I will hang up" - good boundary but not for my wife - what I learned to do was, if she raised her voice or said inappropriate things, I just hung up the phone.  If she called back, I didn't answer - we were done for that day.  (I was often out of town on business.)

That worked!  She pretty quickly quit speaking to me inappropriately on the phone.  We never discussed it, and a few times she tested that boundary, but I maintained it.  I think you may find some solutions like that too - think very clearly about the pattern and how you will change your behavior, and then do it very consistently.

* I think it is super-important to clarify in your own mind what your objectives are.  For example, is it #1 to stay in the relationship?  Or is #1 to provide a good home for the kids?  Or is #1 to be in a healthy relationship?  When you decide exactly what outcome you are aiming for, then you can choose your steps accordingly.  But if you say, "My objective is for my wife to act right", you're cheating - that's an expectation for her to make different choices, and it's outside your control.  You have to choose objectives which are more-or-less in your control, and then figure out the steps to get you to those objectives, without expecting the other party's behavior to change much.

* At the very end of your answer to FD, you talk about what you're up against, if you decide to end the marriage.  That's a big subject, and worth exploring;  don't assume that you can't win.  If you want to explore that further, you might want to post about it on the "Family Law" board here - not here on "Staying" - and maybe work through what strategy options you might have.  (Most of those on Family Law are in the US, and things may be somewhat different in the UK - might be good to put "UK" in the title of your thread to see if other Brits will see that and help.)

Hello Matt.  Many thanks for your consideration.

I found this paragraph really helpful, and it matched my own experience.  I've always been puzzled why the "If you do X, I will do Y" stuff doesn't ever seem to work with my wife.   I've always described it as 'deal making' in conversations with her, but it amounts to the same thing. My wife simply can't (or won't) do it. Even if Y is something she really wants (or at least says she does!) she won't do X for it, more or less whatever X is.   Perhaps it's about power?  Or maybe it's that 'executive control' thing again?  But whatever's the cause, I agree it's a problem.

It's even more of a problem, because a lot of the text books on relationships absolutely recommend deal making as a way to solve relationship problems.  It tends to be the default strategy with marriage therapists.  So trying to get that to work with someone who doesn't ever like deals isn't going to be easy.  Which has been exactly my experience.  She says stuff like 'If you really loved me, you'd be happy to do Y for me without asking for X' etc.


That's also a very interesting observation.  Yes, reflecting on it, I've had more success when I just imposed boundaries, rather than negotiating them.  There's typically a lot of thunder and lightning and indignation from her that goes along with that, of course, but in hindsight, the boundaries had better luck at sticking. I've often tried to be upfront and negotiate boundaries in the past, and haven't really got anywhere (my wife hates talking about relationship stuff.  Is this common for women with BPD I wonder?) 



I think this is also very helpful.  My #1 priority is most probably the kids.  I could definitely live without the relationship, although if I'm honest, I fear the reprisals that might follow if I act to end it.  As I mentioned above, my wife's family are rather rich and 100% on her side.  My wife has stormed out many times over the years and threatened never to come back, but y'know, in recent times I've actually started hoping that she might follow through with that for once.  Because if she really left, that would then be her choice, and then hopefully she would be less mad with me because she'd done what she wanted.  But perhaps that's a vain hope - she'd probably be just as mad with me as if I'd walked out, anyway.

I don't think of boundaries as either "negotiated" or "imposed".  I think of it as "Here's what I will do" - and then I do it.

"Negotiated", to me, means you both will agree, and that would be great, but what I found - after 10 years! - was that we weren't going to agree, and I still needed some things.  So - back to my example - when I was traveling, after a long day, I was glad to talk to my wife, but I needed to not be yelled at or accused of stuff - I just couldn't have that in my life anymore.  So I didn't "negotiate" or even "impose" - I just did it - hung up the phone any time she started in.  And that ended the phenomenon - I still experienced the very beginnings of a rant, a few times, but if I tried to change the subject, and she didn't go with that, but continued the rant - "Click!".  End of rant.  No negotiation, and I didn't "impose" anything on her either - I took a unilateral action - hanging up - every time she crossed my boundary.  It worked!

Not so easy when you're in the same room, but I would sometimes leave the room, and if she followed me, leave the house.  A few times I took a book, and went to Barnes and Noble, and just sat there and read for a few hours, and then went home.  My boundary was, "If you speak inappropriately to me, I will go to a different room, or out of the house, and come back later."  Never stated - action not words.  That worked too, though it had a cost... .

I don't think deal-making is likely to be the right idea, if the other party has BPD or something similar.  And frankly, I don't think there is any chance you will have a healthy relationship - ever - unless she gets a diagnosis and treatment;  a few years of good treatment can make a huge difference, but without that, you can manage the situation, but you can't make it anything that I would call healthy.

So... . if your priority is the kids... . what do you think is the best path forward for them?  Do you think it will be best to learn ways to keep the marriage intact?  Or better to look for the best way to end it?

Well, what you are looking for there is rational thinking. None of us is rational all the time, and mental illness (which you believe her to suffer from) pretty much by definition involves a lot of irrationality.

So it kind of makes sense that your expectations of this kind of rationality from her would leave you feeling disappointed.

That's what makes tools like emotional validation, and boundaries, so important. They don't depend on getting her to change what she is doing - they depend on getting you to change what you are doing. Which is what you actually have control over.

Right :)  If anything, you "impose" discipline on yourself, not the other person.

Yes - exactly.  This is the key - finding ways to make things better by making more effective choices for ourselves.

Right smiley  If anything, you "impose" discipline on yourself, not the other person.
I understand what you are driving at gentlemen, and you may well be right that this is the correct approach to take.

However, I'm not clear that the line between imposing discipline on yourself and the other person is always so clear cut... .

Suppose, for example, you always allow yourself to get drawn into helping the other person in certain situations, even though the other person is perfectly capable of helping themselves. 

If you impose discipline on yourself to not automatically offer help (creating a boundary for yourself), possibly because you feel overstretched, this can look like an "aggressive" action to the other person (you are no longer offering help, where you used to), or that you are "imposing" the responsibility for dealing with the situation on the other person (you are effectively forcing them to do things for themselves, and hence you really are sort of forcing them to change their behaviour).

A similar situation to this cropped up recently - my wife needed a new car, and simply expected me to buy her one. She is perfectly capable of buying her own car - she has plenty of money.  In the past I might have just paid for one to keep the peace, but this time I refused, and said I thought she should buy her own car, since she has the money.  She made a big fuss about how unreasonable it was that she should have to buy her own car, and that if I couldn't see that, then I was the one with the problem.   In the end, she gave in, and bought her own car, but not without creating a huge amount of fuss and strife about it (for example, deliberately buying an overpriced vehicle, just to show what trouble I had caused her by not helping out with the buying process).  I'm sure she thinks that me choosing not to buy her a car was an aggressive and unpleasant action, whereas in reality it was just me imposing a boundary on myself.  But me imposing that boundary did force her to change her behaviour (buy a car out of her own money).

Ultimately, you only have control over what you do.  You have no control over what your wife does.  As an adult, she gets to make her own decisions.  You may suggest, and even choose to do some things for her, but only she controls what she does.

I had a hard time with this one too until I started trying it several months ago.  There had been things that my wife asked me to do, and even more that she complained about to the point where I stepped in and did something about it.  It then baffled me when she accused me of not helping her, or of helping her for all the wrong reasons.

When I started not to jump in and try to help, at first my wife went through what was probably an extinction burst.  Then she got used to it.  She started to do some things for herself.  Others, she never did anything about.  Those may have turned out just to be complaints for sake of complaining.  Ironically, she even thanked me for helping her more!  I think this was because now I tend to help her only with things that she wants help with.  I no longer impose myself and my help when she doesn't want it.

When you choose not to get drawn into something with your wife, she may do something different than she used to do, but that's her choice.  You are not making her do this new thing.  You are just stepping out of the way, and she then does whatever she chooses to do.  If the responsibility was hers in the first place and you took it over, you're just giving the responsibility back to her.

I agree that no-one is rational all the time - we're all human, not robots.  

But there's something deeper here, I think.  I like to think of myself as 'goal driven'.  I usually find it quite easy to decide in most situations what it is I want to achieve.  Then it's a matter of working out how to get there ('the process' which can be difficult, or in some cases, impossible.

Broadly speaking, I think my actions are usually consistent with my goals.   Of course, sometimes I make bad decisions, which take me further away from my goals. But when I spot those, I try and admit them, and make better ones in future.  I can usually explain why I took the actions I did, even when those actions turned out to be mistakes.

My wife seems to be anything but 'goal driven'.  In fact, I would describe her as 'process driven'.  She doesn't seem that interested in achieving goals, and instead seems to feel that the way she does things is more important than what it achieves. She doesn't modify her behaviours if they don't bring her closer to her goals, because she doesn't have much in the way of goals to judge her progress against.  She often has great difficulty explaining her actions, and even considers it upsetting to be asked to do so.

Regarding 'deals': I will usually try and do deals that appear to bring me closer to my goals (I will do X if you will do Y, if Y is one of my goals, or the pathway towards one).  Since my wife doesn't seem to have much in the way of goals, perhaps deals just don't come naturally to her.  There are things that sometimes she complains about not getting, which I might try to construe as goals (e.g. get more sleep), but she still doesn't seem interested in doing deals to get more of what she appears to want.  I sometimes get told that if I really loved her, I would help with these things without expecting anything in return.  Other times, she takes actions that seem completely contrary to what I have assumed to be her goals (like unnecessarily getting up at 4 am to mark work.  Not likely to get more sleep like that).  If I question whether her actions are really bringing her closer to what she really wants, I am accused of interfering, and trying to control what she is doing.

One thing she's a champion at, though, is explaining all of this irrationality in a way that (nearly) makes sense.   She never says 'Gosh, I'm just feeling that way today, honey, humour me'.   She will always instead construct some elaborate and usually plausible sounding explanation as to why the thing she's doing today, even though it seems to completely contradict what she said yesterday, is not in fact a contradiction, but instead constitutes a 'special case', which she just didn't mention before.

So it's therefore not very easy to persuade my wife's that she's behaving irrationally.   She will just change the goalposts, and say, 'See, my behaviour is rational, if you look at it like this'.  And that's usually enough to convince others, who can't see the big picture, because they don't live with us, and see the effect that this type of thinking has, over time.

Hi zaqsert.

Thanks for replying.

Yeah, I've noticed the 'less is more' thing too.  But I've just attributed it to the general irrationality of our situation. 

I still find it tricky, though, in a marriage with children involved.  How do you apportion responsibility for tasks in the family?  In a 'normal' family, I would think the parties come to some sort of amicable agreement that they are all comfortable with.  But in our family, these issues are a constant battleground over who does what, and what is 'fair'.

I think we are gravitating towards a solution where the adults increasingly do our own thing, without relying on the other as much as possible. It's sad, because I don't think that's what families are really meant to be like, but anything else seems to involve too much friction and strife.

Your example about buying a car is a good one, and I like Zaqsert's thoughts:  "Ultimately, you only have control over what you do.  You have no control over what your wife does."

Let's break it down a little more:

* In the past, you've paid for her car, so it's reasonable for her to expect that this time too.

* When she brings it up, you let her know that you're not willing to do that this time.  "I'll help with the shopping if you want me to, or I'll watch the kids so you have time to shop.  We both have good incomes, so you can pay for whatever car you choose, and when I buy a car I'll pay for it."

* She throws a fit;  or maybe her style is more passive-aggressive, so she pouts and gives you the silent treatment.

You made your decision about what to do - help with the shopping but not with the paying.  Don't back down because of fits or pouting.

She made her decision - to punish you by being unpleasant.  Her choice.

But you don't have to put up with being treated badly.  You can walk away - just don't be around her when she is acting badly.  Be ready to move forward when she is, but don't allow yourself to be abused - show by your actions that you are not going to be around someone who treats you badly - your boundary (whether you state it or just show it by your actions).