How to Talk to a Borderline - Joan Lachkar, P.hD

[Cromwell]

How to Talk to a Borderline Author: Joan Lachkar PhD Publisher: Routledge; 2015 Paperback: 196 pages ISBN-10: 1138872709 ISBN-13: 978-1138872707

I have not read many books specific to BPD but came across "how to talk to a borderline" by J Lachkar at my college library and gave it a leaf through.

I found some very interesting points, I just thought id ask in advance if anyone else has read it, if it is something recommended. It has some mixed reviews on amazon but I dont put much emphasis on amazon reviews.

The point that stood out to me was a passage on object-constancy and the different ways that those with BPD or narccisist will deal with the 'object', one will ultimately destroy it (she then went on to give reasons why) the latter seeks to keep hold of it. I found it interesting because there is a lot of talk ive come across where object constancy referred to from the BPD side, but id not heard it attributed to the other partner, It led me to believe it is something specific to BPD.

[once removed]

from what i can tell (i havent read it):

its something of a textbook and the audience is clinicians. theres value in a book like that if you want to take your knowledge of borderline personality disorder to the next level.

a couple of red flags in the reviews:

It doesn't sound like she holds to mainstream interpretations, other than the perfunctory DSM references, but at the same time I really have no idea what her conceptual framework is.

from sam vaknin, a pretty controversial guy in the clinical field:

At the forefront with practical advice and scholarly innovation
Reviewed in the United States on January 9, 2011
Joan Lachkar is emerging as a major force in the burgeoning field of personality disorders. She is among the few who can both posit new psychological constructs and translate them into hands-on practical advice. She is not afraid to cull useful information from the Web and incorporate it in her important work.

in other words, the book may not be very applicable, and may take liberties.

for a more academic understanding, from one of the best in the field, i recommend masterson: https://bpdfamily.com/book-reviews/search-real-self

[Cromwell]

Thanks once removed will give it a go.

[Skip]

The point that stood out to me was a passage on object-constancy and the different ways that those with BPD or narccisist will deal with the 'object', one will ultimately destroy it (she then went on to give reasons why) the latter seeks to keep hold of it. I found it interesting because there is a lot of talk ive come across where object constancy referred to from the BPD side, but id not heard it attributed to the other partner, It led me to believe it is something specific to BPD.

Object constancy is the ability to maintain your positive feelings for someone while you are feeling hurt, angry, frustrated, or disappointed with their behavior. Without object constancy, every fight becomes a potential breakup.

What was the point in the book?

Skip

PS: Lachkar is a very technical writer - not "self-help. She was on the editorial board of Journal of Emotional Abuse at one time. One of her books is listed on our site: https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=56788.0

Here are her citations on Google Scholar:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=0&q=%22joan+lachkar%22&hl=en&as_sdt=0,44

[Cromwell]

Thanks for putting the concept in clear language skip.

I just picked it up out of curiosity in the psychology section skip I will have another look back in more detail it just caught my interest but it did seem technical and directed towards psychology students but that particular passage was interesting. (I'll get back to it next time and try to give more detail)

I found her writing style very clear, ive also noticed another book she has authored "The Disappearing Male", the first 10 pages are free to read via Google Sholar link you gave.

It gave some comfort to read from my side, a perspective that id just "disappeared" ghost like from the relationship and feelings of guilt attached at doing so.

Lachkar tries to point out mostly as a guide to women who have experienced this and the distress and confusion but offers up that there are some quote "legitimate reasons" to disappear namely in relationship with borderline woman. (page xi) stands out as a very distinct and important exception as a fair and valid reason to "disappear".

I find that quite comforting to come across after these years of being made to feel that my choice to leave was out of selfish, self preservation. it is that, but it is more and it helps to have a professional point that out in black and white that what I did was legitimate in those specific circumstances. (The Disappearing Male, Joan Lachkar) which is written for general public, I might seek it out looks interesting too.

She also mentions Masterson's borderline, the book OR mentions. and seems the way I interpret it, differentiates between types of borderline personality that differ from those that have theorised the disorder?

It just makes me realise the more I get into it, it becomes more complex than how complex I originally believed it to be

[once removed]

differentiates between types of borderline personality that differ from those that have theorised the disorder?

are you talking about the subtypes?

[Cromwell]

Because of their lack of object constancy and mood swings, paranoia and unresolved oedipal conflicts, borderlines destroy and sabotage
Unlike the narcissist who strives for success and seeks self-objects to achieve that aspiration, the borderline will destroy self-objects.
Lachkar, Joan 2011, How to talk to a Borderline, p 52

it is in the chapter on malignant borderline OR, so perhaps she is referring to sub type in the above quote. im not sure.  Lachkar makes distinctions between "Mastersons borderline" and Kleingbergs borderline and some others.
theres quite a nice chapter that covers Theoretical perspectives with about a dozen of the most common named theorists on BPD ive come across, she uses examples to show where the theories have differences such as between Kohut and Masterson for example.

Yep, subtypes, about a dozen different ones.

slightly off-track and very surprising to me, Ive often referred to my ex as being terrorist-like. Lachkar has went into quite a bit of coverage to link borderline personality with those who participate in terrorist organisations.

[Skip]

Kernberg.

[Cromwell]

Because of their lack of object constancy and mood swings, paranoia and unresolved oedipal conflicts, borderlines destroy and sabotage
Unlike the narcissist who strives for success and seeks self-objects to achieve that aspiration, the borderline will destroy self-objects.
Lachkar, Joan 2011, How to talk to a Borderline, p 52

it is in the chapter on malignant borderline OR, so perhaps she is referring to sub type in the above quote. im not sure.  Lachkar makes distinctions between "Mastersons borderline" and Kerngberg's borderline and some others.
theres quite a nice chapter that covers Theoretical perspectives with about a dozen of the most common named theorists on BPD ive come across, she uses examples to show where the theories have differences such as between Kohut and Masterson for example.

Yep, subtypes, about a dozen different ones.

slightly off-track and very surprising to me, Ive often referred to my ex as being terrorist-like. Lachkar has went into quite a bit of coverage to link borderline personality with those who participate in terrorist organisations.

[PearlsBefore]

slightly off-track and very surprising to me, Ive often referred to my ex as being terrorist-like. Lachkar has went into quite a bit of coverage to link borderline personality with those who participate in terrorist organisations.

As someone with some actual experience in speaking to actual foreign terrorists, I would say most of them have easily diagnosed personality disorders that are evident within the first few conversations, especially among the lower ranks that are "recruited" rather than leaders. As you get to know them more intimately, even the ones who are higher-functioning and able to conceal their PDs eventually end up showing the signs when they are more comfortable with you. I'd say, without exaggerating, it's over half of those I met that have PDs.

Similarly, I've also seen the detailed progression of a person with a diagnosed PD (and another, undiagnosed PD rather evident) move from basically a suburban white Rust Belt dweller to...something that would shock anyone who wasn't attending Family Connections courses or registered on bpdfamily.com.

While the few examples in Hollywood tend to display Cluster A symptoms, I'd say Cluster A is the rarest subtype of terrorist to whom I've spoken; Cluster B (which includes BPD) is the most common, and Cluster C is just behind B.

If there are ten terrorists with PDs, I'd guess five with Cluster C, four with Cluster C, one with Cluster A.

A relatively high-profile individual once confided to me, in referencing the mental health woes of someone known to both of us, "But this is [region], we are all crazy here". He wasn't entirely correct since it wasn't the whole wartorn region, although obviously there are a high percentage even among civilians, but among those who identify as actual terrorists (not freedom fighters or militias)...yeah, I'd say at least the lowest ranks are all crazy, as well as many of the middle management.


Dragging this back on-topic, the Lachkar book made it to my shortlist since it isn't on my bookshelves yet - this is actually the first I'm hearing of it so far as I can recall. I like clinical books - even when they deviate from the mainstream; I have developed a distaste for "more of the Eggshells style" books.