Reunification Therapy... what can you tell me?

[JustSaying]

This is about to be ordered for D and X. What can you tell me? What does it mean as regards the CE? Any hidden implications? Any reading between the lines? Any nights I should be sleepless?

D and X have not been estranged... .never interrupted visitation. But D can't stand X's behaviors toward her and isn't shy about that. Started long before the separation and not improving now because X's behaviors are not improving.

Anyone have experience with this?

[Matt]

No experience with it.  My suggestion would be to talk with D before and after, but mostly listen to D and try to understand what help and support she needs from you, and provide that.  It may be hard to keep your focus off your ex but best to keep it on D... .

[JustSaying]

Well, I'm not allowed to say anything before... .or at least not yet. L and I are trying to figure out whether or not to support the notion (we will) but also how to keep the emphasis on the need for mom to change behaviors and that this isn't because of anything D has done wrong. If mom can acknowledge the need for change and then effect useful change, all well and good. If she blames D for the troubles, or me, then it will be ineffective.

We're also trying to understand if the T will need my input or if I'm irrelevant to the process. For example, this needs to be seen as coming from mom's dysfunctional behaviors and not dad's alienation.

And also, I'd be pissed if the commencement of this therapy was used to get mom extra visitation now. L assured me that's not the case. Maybe in a year or two, if there's marked improvement and D favors it, but not now.

BTW, this falls under "therapeutic intervention" authority granted to the custody evaluator.

[ForeverDad]

Perhaps too the CE wants to see whether it's possible to get past her mother's outbursts and comments.  He could be thinking, "Surely I can teach them how to stay on safe ground and not keep veering off into the rocky waters of confrontation."  So yes, D should be all for this just in case some headway could be made, though it might be short term and not last.

How does D get along with her mother's relatives?  One telling indication of alienation is when a child hates or paints black the parent AND ALL that parent's relatives too.  If the CE is wondering that, it would be a good idea for her to be sure the CE knows that some (or many) of her mother's relatives are just fine or normal people.

[beyondbelief]

Where did this come from?

I would say it looks bad for the mom and doesn't implicate you in causing it. 

[JustSaying]

FD, D gets on fine with everyone else. No issues with relatives. [A recent event that has me really po'd is that X alleged I alienated relatives from her. Know how I did this? By sending them email updates of D's activities and "not including X's point of view"! You know, like the boring holiday letters people send. Unreal.] D and I both get along with relatives on both sides of family. Good point! If I'm ever accused of alienation by the evaluator, I'll raise it!

BB, it came out of the blue. CE is allowed to prescribe intervention therapy, and this popped up, and he'll be requiring it immediately. I'm not mentioned in that part at all. I agree that it doesn't appear to implicate me and it looks like mom has troubles needing intervention, but L cautioned against reading too much into it yet.

[beyondbelief]

I think your L's concern is the CE might play warm and fuzzy.  By this I mean yeah mom has some problems but lets give her a chance to turn things around. 

[Matt]

I'm sorry but I don't remember if your ex has been diagnosed... .?

If you are pretty sure that she has BPD, then this sounds like it might be like what many of us have been through - marriage counseling with a BPD sufferer - but your daughter is surely more vulnerable than an adult.  Marriage counseling doesn't work, because someone who has BPD but isn't pretty far along in a program like DBT isn't capable of a healthy relationship.  Marriage counselors may want everything to be "fair" and "equal" but you can't have a healthy relationship if one of the individuals just simply doesn't have the ability to deal with stress in a healthy way.

So if that's the case - if your ex has BPD and isn't pretty far down the recovery path - this could put stress and expectations on your daughter that aren't fair or healthy.  If you can't prevent it from happening, you may want to look for ways to minimize the risk, by having your daughter in counseling with someone who knows a lot about BPD and can help her process what's going on.

[JustSaying]

Don't know if X has been diagnosed. Been to multiple therapists. I expect to learn if there's a diagnosis.

I have another interview with the CE, I've learned. If it fits the agenda of that meeting, I plan to explore the sorts of things you're all asking. What's the real problem? Will X have to improve her own disorders irrespective in D? How do we protect D from being manipulated in the same way that marriage counseling never worked? How do we keep track of the stresses on D? How do we make sure we aren't being too warm and fuzzy regarding X's behaviors?

I'll find a way to organize that to get my point across. In this meeting I'll focus on what is the proper way to head into the future with D's best interests at heart, whereas the prior meetings were "here's what D is currently experiencing."

[Matt]

Yeah, the questions you're listing seem right on target to me.

So maybe the conversation with the CE could go something like this... .just brainstorming with you... .

* I know Ex has been in therapy, and I think that's a good thing.  I don't know what her diagnosis is or how far along in her program she is.

* I don't know if it is possible for Ex to have a good relationship with anyone til she has dealt successfully with her own issues.  From my experience it is very, very difficult to deal with her and it may not be fair to D to expect her to figure it out.

* I will support D to have a relationship with her mother but I will not force her to put up with inappropriate or abusive behavior.

* If D is required to go through this program with her mother, will there be supervision to make sure it is a positive experience for D?  Will there be a burden on her to make the relationship work, or will there be an expectation on her mom to complete the treatment recommended for her and then they can have a healthy relationship?

Without road-blocking it entirely, you may be able to establish your expectations for it, and make it clear that your support for it will be conditional - if it's helping D you will support it but if it's requiring D to do the work and allowing Ex to abuse her you will end it.

You may also want to bring a notebook with you, with notes of issues you want to get clear, and summarize the meeting with an e-mail afterwards, so there will be a record of what you are agreeing to and what the CE is committing to.

[JustSaying]

Utterly fantastic, Matt. Thank you. That's the exact tone. Getting away from the btching and more on how we move forward responsibly. But most importantly, how to keep the burden on X and not have it transfer to D. It hit all the right notes.

[scraps66]

My experience with BP-infected couple's therapy and child counsleing with BP involved, without strict oversite and bounaries like Matt describes, this has the potential to be a colossal waste of time.  If someone like the CE thinks this can go on efficiently with the BP invovled without these controls, I'd be leary of the effectiveness.  It will be telling to see D's reaction after a session or two.  If she becomes more aggravated, maybe a sign to reevaluate.

I know my S7 didn't like me and STBx being in a room with him for counseling.  He acted out and showed his anxiety.  Then STBx would give him all kinds of comforting motivation, like when he ran out of the room and hid under a tabl, she said, "Come on you goof ball, get back in with Ms. Social Worker." 

Good luck.

[JustSaying]

Thanks scraps. Part of RT is supposed to be assessment. If mom's personal issues aren't made clear, and it's not made clear that these are the direct cause of X-D difficulties, then this will be worthless. It would be putting the cart before the horse. I've sent Matt's bullet points to L to help with his response to CE. I will have time with CE soon, and will raise same issues.

I believe L's position is that we have to go along with this, at least initially. After all, the CE report is not yet out. This is a measure of our commitment to "support D having a relationship with her mom." He said that if this is a failure, though, then it is a final nail in X's coffin. He has had much experience with RT. I believe understands that this is about X making changes, and not D accommodating X's behaviors. I believe he will communicate that to CE, per our discussion yesterday. I know I will.

It helps me to know that D is so mentally tough. She's getting real good with boundaries, and I believe she will speak her piece. (The unexpected benefit is that it's making her REAL good with boundaries with boys. She says "no" when she means it, as in, "no, I don't want you calling me" and "no, I don't want to dance with you."

[david]

JS, "She's getting real good with boundaries." That is a real positive for your D. I've been working with S13 and S8 about boundaries and I do see some progress. The problem I am seeing is that they are having difficulty with setting boundaries with their mom because she is so punitive if they don't obey. I think it might just take a little more time and I just need to support them. My situation is a little different because BPDmom has the kids more and they have to deal with that. If it was less time I think they would be fine. It's Survival101.

[JustSaying]

with their mom because she is so punitive if they don't obey

Yes, I saw this in your other posts and it broke my heart. I'm so sorry that's their experience.

As for D, we've had constant conflict with mom not revealing schedule and that putting D in a bind. We didn't hear that last Sunday was a visitation day until... .Sunday! Last night her mom texted that from now on D needed to not make any plans with friends until X revealed her schedule. Obviously that implied D couldn't make plans, period.

D's texted response: "Uh, no!"

I love that child!

And there will be no retribution. X backed down. Luckily for D, she's all bark and no bite. And luckily for me, D has the confidence and courage of her convictions.

[david]

I think things are going to get better. S13 is getting to the point that he (I believe ) will start to stand up for himself more. He just needs a little more confidence in dealing with his mom. Mom recently has turned off his cell phone, grounded him over two weekends, and hasn't let him do anything after school. He seems to be accepting it but has revealed that he is working around her in several ways. I think his strategy is the correct one for now because he can't win going head to head with her. He tells me everything as a way of blowing off steam and also looking for validation. I walk a very fine line sometimes with that but I do validate. My T has helped me tremwndously in that area. S8 has found that he either A) gets on his Wii and tunes out of everything going on  or  B) disappears in his bedroom there and keeps quiet. He rarely plays video games with me and keeps active so I don't view A as a problem. I was concerned about B because I thought his outbursts with me were a result of that. I have found that giving him more freedom with me by giving him several choices and asking him for additional choices when with me have really helped him a lot. It's just a different form of validation for him than S13. My thinking is if I stay focused and consistent they will outgrow some of the bs their mom does to them and will stand up for themselves. I have noticed that S8 is paying a lot more attention to what is going on around him when he is with me and also at his moms. He has talked to me about how things he does with me woulkd never work at his moms because she would yell or punish him. I think it is all part of his development and his age. He has indicated in several ways he prefers being treated like a person and not a thing. He was very loyal to his mom and would lie for her but that is changing.

I think it all might help them grow into stronger adults as long as I stay involved which is not an issue. I think it's similar to you and D. The kids can all learn how to spot and deal with difficult people better than us or at least sooner than us and that's a good thing.

[JustSaying]

Agreed on all. S13 sounds like he's getting toward the realizations of what he's dealing with.

He just needs a little more confidence in dealing with his mom.

It has helped us immensely that D had a lot of early experience with challenges and successes (high-level athletics) and this did a tremendous job of helping her develop confidence in herself. That's happened not just through me, but through a multitude of coaches, teachers, other adults. Suddenly it's not 1-to-1 in believing what she sees here vs at her mom's, but it's 10-to-1 or 20-to-1, and her mom stands alone as the behavioral outlier. I cannot express how beneficial it has been that she's not been isolated from myriad strong role models.

[Matt]

Yeah, I think these are key points.

Having multiple adult role models is super-important.  My SS34 was raised entirely by his mom - she drove off his biodad when he was very little - and they moved almost every year, so he he had no other adults in his life consistently - no uncles, neighbors or teachers for more than a year or two.  He was totally dependent on his mom and she was very inconsistent - very loving one day, harshly critical the next, and ignored him for days at a time.

He started drinking in middle school, drugs in high school, and was never clean and sober til his late 20s.  (I married his mom when he was 18.)  Now he's a great young man, but still hurting and struggling with the results of how he was treated when he was little.

I think if he had other adults in his life consistently - both as role models and to validate him as a person - that would have made a lot of difference.

[JustSaying]

www.reunificationtherapy.com/article-3-stages-of-reunification.html

[david]

Has X been diagnosed with BPD ? If so, then the focus will be on her for quite some time if I am reading that site correctly. X would have to make a commitment too.

[JustSaying]

Don't know diagnosis, david, but am certain it will include many component parts of BPD, including depression, anxiety, anger, eating disorder, etc. If the assigned therapist is consistent with the linked description, then yeah, the focus will be on her. As it indicates, you can't achieve reunification if you don't resolve the underlying issues.

I will speak with the CE about this very thing if the opportunity is there, which I expect it to be.

[david]

Also, if there is no diagnosis then maybe this will get one. Depending on how good this T is will be the key. IMO many T's want to help and they enable by their actions. I think they do this because they need to get the patients trust before any real therapy can occur. THis will backfire but I don't think many look that far. Also, a diagnosis may not be possible but something in writing saying a diagnosis is necesary in order to go forward will be just as good.

[Matt]

Somebody here told me, when our CE was appointed, to ask him, ":)o you have the authority to require us both to be evaluated, so you can make a diagnosis and base your recommendations on that?"  The key phrase being, ":)o you have the authority?" because it challenges the CE to say, "Yes I have that authority." and then it begs the question, "If you have the authority why not do it?"

In our case I never had to ask that because the CE quickly made it clear he would be asking us to take psych evals - good.

In your case, if may be good to ask that question.  If the answer is "No" you can at least know that and adjust, but it's probably "Yes", and then you can expect the CE to start with a diagnosis and go from there.  "Maybe it will be best to do that first, so you can have that information when you go to the other phases of the process... ."

[JustSaying]

I think he may be making diagnosis. He has authority to require interventionist therapies, which he's done, at least in part, and that would seem to require some sort of diagnosis. He does psych testing and can require further eval. Broad powers. He doesn't feed us interim results, intentionally, because disclosing things like diagnoses early can change the behavior of the parties. And if he's required additional stuff of X, I wouldn't yet know. I have to wait till he discloses the preliminary results and then ask about diagnoses if they aren't presented. And I've posed the question to L, too.

One of the hardest things in all this to make sense of, because it makes no sense, is the concern by some (D, for example) that pwBPD will be able to scam the process by masking their behaviors. While X hasn't raged in the presence of the evaluators, she's shown anxiety, stress, and other symptoms. And it has struck me that pwBPD aren't likely to mask their behaviors because they don't think they are wrong! X has alleged to the evaluator that my sending email updates of D's activities to family is alienating, and that letting the orthopedic surgeon schedule the appointment for D's surgery is alienating. When she said those, she must have thought they were rational statements and that I was misguided. If the CE report doesn't draw conclusions about this sort of stuff and make recommendations accordingly, then I truly have fallen down the rabbit hole. Meanwhile, I wait... .

[Matt]

I think that's too simplistic.  Just because people with BPD often behave irrationally doesn't mean they always will, or that they can't control their behavior at all, or that they are totally unaware it's irrational.  I have found it to be more unpredictable than that, so I would keep your expectations in check, and not assume anything.

I do think it is a sound strategy, generally, to keep some pressure on the person with BPD;  that is, watch yourself carefully to make sure you are not protecting her from challenges, and when it's appropriate, feel free to say the truth loud and clear, or put it on paper, and let her react to it in front of the professionals.  We are usually, after years of dealing with someone like this, in the habit of carefully not doing that - we protect them from stress and do a million things to avoid a scene.  You don't want to needlessly provoke the other party in front of the professionals, but be very aware, and when she says or does something you might normally handle in such a way as to minimize it, check yourself... .

Let me give you an example... .

Years ago, when our divorce was pending, my son, then about 11, got in trouble on the school bus.  My daughter was there and saw it, and said the other child involved was the aggressor - it was a girl who was bigger than S11 and whose mother was a teacher at the school - and S11 did nothing wrong - just defended himself - and that's what S11 said too.

My stbX and I went to talk to the principle about it.  She was new, and seemed reasonable, but said she had investigated and found that S11 had acted badly, and he was banned from the bus for the few remaining weeks in the school year.  I made it clear what I thought but accepted the result, figuring it would work out OK;  I had no intention of telling S11 he was wrong, only that this is the result and life goes on... .

In the course of the discussion, stbX said "I don't know why he would do something like this.  He has never done anything like this before.  And we always teach him not to hit girls."

In the past I would have let it slide.  But in this case I didn't.  "Actually this has happened before - twice - and that is surely in your file.  In both those cases I think the other child was the aggressor and S11 handled it the best way he knew how.  And as for teaching  him not to hit girls, what I teach him is not to initiate conflict with anyone, but to defend himself if he has to, and it has nothing to do with sex.  But he has seen his mother initiate violence against me, and that is a significant part of what is going on in our family right now - aggressive behavior by his mother."  I wasn't saying, "Excuse his behavior because of his mom's behavior", and I made that clear.  I was saying, "Well since you raised these topics, I am not going to sit passively and let those lies stand.  I am going to tell the truth."

In the divorce case, she raised this issue - what I had said to the principle - to the CE.  And I responded again with the truth, which was backed up by the evidence, like what was in the principle's files and what the kids said.  I had not initiated the conflict, but when false statements were made I had not passively accepted them either.

You may find yourself in similar situations - the other party acts out in some way or makes some false statements.  I think it's important to reflect on this in advance and be prepared to shine the light of day on her behavior - not over-react or respond in kind, but also not minimize or cover up the way I imagine you may have been trained to do... .

[david]

I don't know if you have recorded any rages but that may be useful if you did. It could support the fact that she has some kind of control and seems to only happen with intimate relationships, spouse,family members,etc. The issue is X's problems with close relationships.

[JustSaying]

Nothing's been kept from evaluator or anyone, either by me, by D, or by witnesses. No one's protecting her or pulling punches. Except for maybe an email a month, there's no contact between X and me. I take care of whatever D needs and X stays in her hidey hole. I think we're at the stage where the process shifts from itemizing all X does/has done and the harm it's caused and more toward what do we do now that's best for D. Reunification therapy could either be a positive part of that or a real nuisance. When the opportunity arises, I'll chat with the evaluator on how it might be the one rather than the other.

[JustSaying]

Had a talk with CE about RT, and it's a bit different than expected. The way he described things, he could recommend any number of intervention therapies to the judge, but it's best if he recommends one from a small list of possibilities, be/c if he ventures from that list, the judges can become confused about what's actually being recommended. Among the possibilities are family counseling and reunification therapy. In our case he's recommending RT for X and D, but it could as well have been family counseling.

As L and I discussed, and we discussed here, we don't want to put D in the spot of thinking she has to change to fix their relationship. And we all know that healing that relationship depends on X making positive changes, which seems counter to putting them both in with a T.

The CE described RT differently than this, though. He said the 'subject' of the RT is D and the goal is to help her find the appropriate relationship with her mom. CE said that mom may or may not improve her behaviors, and any recommendations he made on that front are separate from RT. But he said, think if X had schizophrenia, for example. Even though it would never be 'cured', it would still be important for D to learn how to have the best relationship possible with her mom, allowing that her mom had a mental illness. In this case, whatever the disorder that affects mom, it's important for D to learn the way of interacting with her mom that is healthiest for D. It may never be a 'normal' relationship. Her mom may never change. Or may change. Nonetheless, the CE wants to help D have the right tools to handle that relationship as well as she can and in an appropriate manner for her.

The example given was her mom's rages. Currently, if mom's raging, D might text me and then we discuss her options, which include me coming for her, etc. [I said to CE that thus far I've just worked with D on ways to calm herself and remove herself, such as going to bed, locking the br door, taking a shower to 'escape', etc, and that I've never closed the cycle by taking her home early or having it out with X. CE said he admired the restraint be/c he probably would not be so calm. When I commented on that he said, "Take a compliment!"]

CE would prefer that D can communicate with her mom directly and not have to turn to me to 'save' her. I said that when X is raging she's not rational and won't listen to D. CE said one example of RT at work is that the T could discuss this situation with X and D and offer them a tool such as a 'quiet stone.' If any party is feeling stressed out or threatened by the other, that party just has to bring out the stone and the other one needs to stop all communication for the moment and go to a different room.

I mentioned that I've suggested 'talking sticks' and other such devices in the past and they've all fallen flat with X. He correctly pointed out that X would reject ANYthing I suggested, no matter how valid. He also suggested that if they are guided in this by a qualified T, there's a better chance of success. And he said that if this is properly tried, and X still behaves dysfunctionally, it would play heavily against her at any future custody issue. Again, he said the point is to equip D with the means to have the healthiest possible relationship with her mom no matter what her mom does or doesn't do. It may not amount to a whole lot, or it may be a big improvement, but it will give D more tools, more control, more... .

[Matt]

You may need to let this play out - let the CE, RT etc. do their thing - and keep your own focus on the untreated disorder.  What I mean is, don't interfere as these professionals do what they do - maybe it will help in some way, maybe it won't - but in your own mind, remember that as long as the disorder is untreated she will remain disordered and her behavior won't improve (and might get worse).

Over time, the best solution may be to minimize time the child is required to spend with the disordered adult, and to give the child as many tools as you can for dealing with her.  If the child develops a strong personality - confidence, a good self-image, etc. - she will do OK.  Relying on anything else, like RT or whatever - it's beyond my knowledge but I wouldn't put much stock in it, especially if it's short-term and doesn't hold the disordered party accountable for her behavior.

(My idea of RT would be telling the disordered party that if they behave badly they will not be able to have contact with the child, and offering DBT to help the disordered party get her behavior under control.)

[ForeverDad]

I said that when X is raging she's not rational and won't listen to D. CE said one example of RT at work is that the T could discuss this situation with X and D and offer them a tool such as a 'quiet stone.' If any party is feeling stressed out or threatened by the other, that party just has to bring out the stone and the other one needs to stop all communication for the moment and go to a different room.

I mentioned that I've suggested 'talking sticks' and other such devices in the past and they've all fallen flat with X. He correctly pointed out that X would reject ANYthing I suggested, no matter how valid. He also suggested that if they are guided in this by a qualified T, there's a better chance of success.

This always reminds me of the old movie, The Hole In The Wall Gang, an old comedy with lovable irrascible actors.  As I recall, the members had grown old and moved on and had a code word Brazzles! that was a signal to call for help to the other members of the old gang.

I tried that with my ex, didn't help, as your CE noted, everything coming from me was rejected.  Others didn't do much better.