Separating the person from the disease

[Cumulus]

Appreciate the info mosaic bird, just one more to go

One of the " tricky" parts for me is an underlying belief that we should all take ownership of our behaviour. It is exceedingly difficult for me to understand that someone is unable to do that, especially given the shame that they feel. I try and relate it to someone with a traumatic brain injury or dementia where the emotions and behaviours come and go without leaving a foot print of memory. Another enigma is that unlike those suffering from TBI or dementia mine, as do many others, functioned quite well in the real world, for a time.

I must say that I could see that it did require an incredible amount of energy on his part to maintain that role and eventually he just gave up.

[Iced]

Does this mean that by the same logic drunk drivers should not be arrested for DUI (drinking isn't illegal but DUI is) and persons at danger for harming themselves and others (especially children) not have intervention?

I guess my question is, do you see intervention the same as assigning blame and do you see it as useless or pointless?

The end goal IMHO isn't to assign blame; it's to keep people (the pwBPD who may want to kill themselves in a fit of depression and children who don't know better and the unlucky SO who may meet physical abuse during an out of control rage) safe - the same reason other people being treated for mental disorders are under a 'contract' by their psyD/healthcare provider to agree to take care of themselves and allow for others to care for them when they themselves can't. In other words, involuntary commitment to get professional help.

They can't be blamed but the damage cannot be denied either and abuse is abuse. Though adults can easily walk out on their own, people like children cannot and know not.

If a teacher or caregiver or healthcare provider suspects child abuse they are obliged by law to report it for investigation. At least, where I am it is and so to me, at least where young ones are concerned, this whole thing has the potential to become an issue of law.

A person yelling and screaming at another adult is one thing, being violent is still another, and being abusive towards a young child who has no idea what's going on is still another (though they are all related).

I know better than to immerse myself into another of these situations. At least I ought to.

I also don't need a dependent relationship with such a person either and can make that choice.  

The child cannot make that same choice in the same way an unlucky car has no choice when the other car suddenly careens towards them.

If an accident happens an accident happens, but at the same time in the example of a child being involved, intervention could at least help remove them from such an atmosphere and give them the care and therapy they need that they can't get on their own.

That is where my thought is going or rather more along those sorts of lines.

[almost789]

BPD's lack indentity, Mosiac. There is NO 'death' of the self. The self was never formed to begin with, they are arrested developmentally. BPD's have to build their self in therapy. Think of the BPD person as a toddler, a two or three year old when they get triggered. Because that is what their brain does to them when they get triggered, they regress, only emotionally though. Very tricky. Do we hold a 2-3 year old responsible for what they do? No we don't.

[mosaicbird]

Does this mean that by the same logic drunk drivers should not be arrested for DUI (drinking isn't illegal but DUI is) and persons at danger for harming themselves and others (especially children) not have intervention?

I guess my question is, do you see intervention the same as assigning blame and do you see it as useless or pointless?

Hm, no. I think the issue for me is that interpersonal issues are a very grey area, whereas for something like a DUI there are precedents and laws in place with absolutes, such as allowable BAC levels and the like. The precedents that we have in place for intervention in domestic situations are... .  difficult, and generally require demonstrable physical harm or physical neglect. Perhaps there should be interventions for emotional abuse, but it seems unlikely to happen, and I'm not sure by what criteria said interventions would be established.

It's just a difficult concept for me. I come from that sort of background, where my mother (my sole caretaker) threatened (and sometimes attempted) suicide on a regular basis and I had no emotional support or foundation, and it seems almost laughable to me to think that anyone would intervene in such a situation, because all that happened in my childhood was me being blamed and shamed for my behavioral issues with zero consideration on the part of anyone that there could be reasons for it. I think I'm too jaded and cynical due to my own experience with this to even consider the idea of interventions for such things anything but a fantasy.

[mosaicbird]

BPD's lack indentity, Mosiac. There is NO 'death' of the self. The self was never formed to begin with. BPD's have to rebuild their self in therapy.

I believe that's what I said. "I don't think there's an absolute "death" of self in BPD, or those reactions couldn't exist, and the shame at the heart of it couldn't exist... .  There's a self, but it's one frozen in time and fear that hasn't grown up."

I tend to think that we are all born with a "self" of some kind or another, and that it cannot be completely killed off, even if its self-actualization is stalled and the person fragmented. I do not believe those feelings of fear/shame could exist without there being a piece of the original self left in someone with BPD. Feelings cannot emanate from complete nothingness.

These are the sources I refer to when I think about the original/authentic self of someone with BPD:

www.borderlinepersonalitydisorder.com/notes-gunderson.shtml

www.primals.org/articles/hannig03.html

www.toddlertime.com/dx/borderline/childish-BPD.htm

www.toddlertime.com/dx/borderline/emotional-child.htm

[almost789]

Mosiac, Sorry.  I misunderstood. I thought someone said there was a 'death' of self. I've not read all these posts as I'm just coming in here in spurts, and on my cell phone. There is no "death' of self. The problem is that the self didn't form healthy as it should in the identity formation periods. Good articles. I've read them all. thank you.

[mosaicbird]

Mosiac, Sorry.  I misunderstood. 

Sorry for jumping on you. I am very cranky and bitter today and should perhaps not be posting on these topics.

[tailspin]

 

Part of the beauty of making it through to where we are now is having the power to come to our own conclusions.  Technically, the decision to separate the person from the disease lies within that person.  Our ex's are the only ones who can make this distinction.  However, we can look back and decide how we choose to look at what happened to us and if separating the two makes it easier for you to move on then this is what you should do.

Radical acceptance worked for me and this involved understanding the two parts of him somehow made a whole person who I am no longer interested in saving.  We define ourselves by the choices we make.  Ultimately, it is up to each of us to decide our legacy.

tailspin

[almost789]

Hahha... .  Mosiac, I didn't think you were cranky at all. No worries.

[maria1]

Just been thinking more about this and it boils down to this in my story. My exwBPD knows at times how damaging and destructive he is. When he sees it and takes responsibility for it he hates himself. I mean really HATES himself. He sees what he has destroyed a d he cannot live with himself.

At times I could see it too but I couldn't face it because I would have to leave. By leaving I would have been saying I agreed that he was as destructive and as damaging as he was. And that I could not live with it either. I could not do that to him.

To face the truth of himself is to want to die. That's how bad it is for him. To survive he finds other ways. And the defence mechanisms protect him but not very well. His self loathing bubbles away and eats away despite them.

We should intervene always to keep people safe. We cannot intervene in any other way. It is not up to us.

[Clearmind]

Hi clear mind, I am unable to access that workshop. I get the error has occurred workshop is off limits. Is there another link I could access it through? Thanks, cumulus.

https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=62463.0

I got it open Cumulus - let me know if you still have trouble 

[WT]

We should intervene always to keep people safe. We cannot intervene in any other way. It is not up to us.

Hi maria1, the problem with not intervening until things clearly become "unsafe" is that situations can escalate very quickly and without warning.  There was another thread here recently where someone's husband hanged himself.  I'm not sure that you can say with certainty at what point someone else should have intervened to save this man from himself.  BPD is unpredictable and you can never know with certainty what's going to happen next.

[maria1]

I'm not sure what sort of intervention you're suggesting WT? I used to talk to my ex often about therapy, encourage him. But I did it when he was asking me for answers. I wouldn't discourage anybody from that.

Right from the start with my ex he would talk about suicide. I had a disordered brother who died of a heroin OD that may have been intentional. My ex knew his story and idolised him

I would drop everything and run to BPDex at the slightest hint of suicide.  He would ask me what my problem was, tell me he was fine. I knew nothing about BPD then. I thought he was depressed.

After a while I relaxed a bit. He came to my house just before Christmas, brought sandwiches, seemed grey, strange. Said he thought he had the flu. He took me to a garage to surprise me with having bought me a car. We went home, made love and he left telling me he loved me "more than you'll ever know". That evening I rang him with my kids in the new car, we were all so excited- he laughed and joked with us.

He took an overdose that evening and spent Christmas on the psych ward. On Christmas day I realised he had a stash of pills with him and asked him to give them to me after a long talk about living v dying. I spent the following month with him every hour I wasn't with my children. I threw away pills and I sat with him while the crisis team came and went. I slept next to him woken as he fought terrible battles in his nightmares, drenched in sweat. He read a book about a footballer who kills himself- I was terrified of him getting to the end.

I think he may kill himself one day and if he ever comes back to me in a distraught state I will offer support as I can. He hinted at suicide just as I was going NC and I called his Doctor. He raged at me and I told him I will do that again if he talks to me about suicide. His preferred choice is by hanging next time. Every time I've tried to go NC again he says 'OK thank you for saving my life'. I didn't save his life- he chose to live, pure and simple.

If people are determined to kill themselves they will do so. It is utterly tragic and it is a fact of the disorder that pwBPD are more likely to kill themselves than the general population. If I think someone is suicidal I will get urgent professional intervention without hesitation. But I can't force my help on somebody unless they want it. I can't tell somebody what they need. It really isn't healthy to do so in my opinion and it wasn't when I was doing it, well intentioned as I was.

[Iced]

Upon rereading the posts here I would like to add that I am not advocating intervention in place of something like packing one's bags and leaving when enough is enough is enough.

Rather, as a safety measure for ALL people involved and to help minimize the harm or potential harm involved or that could happen as fallout.

In the case of children, they may not be able to advocate for themselves much less extricate themselves from an unsafe situation. For this reason, unlike adults, they cannot be responsible for themselves in the same way even if they are wise enough to know that something is wrong.

I hope that I was able to clarify without adding further confusion.

And Mosaic, I am so sorry that no one advocated for you when you were in a position where you knew not and could not and couldn't get out.

And Maria, that professional intervention is what I have been more or less talking about - getting people to safer places.

[maria1]

Yes I actually think we are really agreeing- safety is paramount. 

[mosaicbird]

Yes, I'm not disagreeing with the basic concept - that intervention in the case where there are clear victims who have no choice in the matter, such as children, would have a place in an ideal world. Early intervention is emphasized as being critical in Christine Lawson's Understanding The Borderline Mother, as regards the mental health and emotional development of the children in those situations. And yes, speaking from my own experience, it is deeply and irrevocably damaging to the psyche to grow up like that. I don't deny that, or the fact that this is a pattern in my family that has been going on for generations (and will hopefully end now, with my decision not to have children).

But I feel as though practical implementation would be difficult to impossible, and that it would be fraught with disagreement and controversy about where the line is drawn and how those determinations would be made. In most cases, these are considered "family" matters. Much like, admittedly, physical abuse used to be. So... .  I just don't know.

[WT]

I'm not sure what sort of intervention you're suggesting WT?

The sort of intervention that I'm suggesting (and I think Iced is suggesting this as well; I hope I'm not putting words into his mouth) is something like court-appointed guardianship of people with such disorders who aren't seeking treatment.  Someone who's truly unaware of how damaging their behavior is towards others or towards themselves is a potential threat to the public at large, especially if there are children involved, and as Iced already said, if the pwBPD isn't taking responsibility for their actions, then someone else needs to be, like a court-appointed guardian who will ensure that the pwBPD is getting the treatment that they need.

There had been times where my ex threatened me with a knife.  Even if I had simply ended the relationship after these threats, there's no telling what might happen with her future partners.  In my opinion, my ex should be forced by the state to go to therapy.  I watch the news regarding the Jodi Arias story and praise the heavens that my ex didn't go any further with the knife.

mosaicbird: The practical implementation of this intervention is definitely where it all gets murky for me as well, and I don't have any clear suggestions for how it could ever be properly implemented.

[Clearmind]

Our BPD partners are likely to have crossed over the line a number of times - moved mountains to bust boundaries and on occasion threaten. This is domestic violence - its a reportable offence.

bpdfamily in all instances of DV against anyone recommends calling 911 or equivalent - at the point it becomes unsafe is when we no longer can defuse and we need help. Its not our role to intervene.

The difference being is that much like the stockholm syndrome many of us did not report DV offences. Anyone, BPDs included need to be held accountable. Where the report leads to is not really something we can control.

Brings us to the point of the Leaving Board - to detach... the original thread appears to have been lost in the mix.

Separating the person from the disease - why is it we made excuses for our ex's behaviour and why is it we stayed despite the abuse and the threats with a knife or otherwise - this is the real question that will assist us to detach.

[maria1]

I don't agree there is any point in forcing someone into therapy. And what happens if they don't participate? There are laws for when people behave violently. I know that the law is imperfect and it doesn't work all the time. Restraining orders do tend to work from what I've experienced and seen and read on here and elsewhere.

You are moving into human rights law and the issue of mental capacity is complex. To need a guardian for somebody's actions in the UK they need to be assessed to be lacking in the capacity to make a specific decision for which appointee/ guardianship may be given in relation to certain welfare or financial matters.

It's an interesting point because you seem to be saying pwBPD lack the capacity to make a decision about treatment. But treatment can be given by law under the mental health act if someone is a danger to themselves or others.

What worries me most is the idea of a guardian who knows best. It's what we codependents are the best at - knowing what's best for other people whilst not having a clue what might be best for ourselves

[maria1]

My apologies for veering away from the topic- suicide, codependency, personal responsibility, mental illness and mental capacity are hot topics for me. This thread has them all but I've veered right off and I'll stop now 

[fakename]

this is a great thread. and i just wanted to add one thing i learned when quitting alcohol, going off what clearmind said about hitting rock bottom... .  

in terms of alcohol (and as i'm learning with my ex) i hit rock bottom many times. each time a new rock bottom. eventually one rock bottom affected me and my life enough that i realized if i dont make this my very last rock bottom, things will only get worse and worse from here so i need to fix myself... .  

i guess my point is, hitting rock bottom sometimes isn't enough. cause you can just keep hitting new bottoms. you need the realization.

i imagine... .  well i know, my ex gf hit many rock bottoms when it comes to relationships... from her divorce, to her other failed relationships, etc... .  i just dont know if she has the cognitive capability to know the problem lies in herself and she needs to fix herself