Is boundary something you do when you can't / don't want to validate anymore?

[joshbjoshb]

I spent some time thinking about this topic. Last night my wife was very upset - she has been in the past few weeks, and in my opinion she needs to decide how to move forward. But instead she is focusing on how of a victim she is, and how everyone and everything is just bad to her - starting with me, of course.

I didn't validate her at all. When she told me that she was even thinking to speak to a friend of her that recently divorced, I told her she can speak to whoever she wants. I wasn't rude, but wasn't validating almost anything, just affirming my approach, how I see it, and telling her the keys are in her hands.

So that got me thinking about validation / boundary. If you validate, most times you don't set a boundary. For example: she tells you that you are bad. You can either validate ("I can sense that something is upsetting you today", "it must feel horrible to feel this way" etc.), or set a boundary ("please don't talk about me this way" or "I don't want to be part of conversations in which you call me name".

Validation, to me, is putting the focus on the other person. Instead of thinking about yourself and how you feel, you focus on how they feel and try to understand and feel emphatic.

Boundary is exactly the opposite. You decide what you can handle and what not, and you decide what is acceptable to YOU, putting your emotional needs above theirs.

So what gives? Is boundary only something you use based on your own emotions? So if, for example, I am not in such a good place right now, I should be all about boundaries because I don't want to hear any complaints? And if I am in a good mood, I should tolerate all kind of crazy things she says about me?

Can the 2 really co-exist, or they are not really part of the same family - when one comes, the other leaves? 

[RELATIONSHIP PROBLEM SOLVING]

RELATIONSHIP PROBLEM SOLVING This is a high level discussion board for solving ongoing, day-to-day relationship conflicts. Members are welcomed to express frustration but must seek constructive solutions to problems. This is not a place for relationship "stay" or "leave" discussions. Please read the specific guidelines for this group.

[Cloudy Days]

Boundaries are about not allowing the other person to walk all over you, it's about protecting yourself and your rights. It's usually reserved for when they have crossed a line. You are basically setting a boundary line for yourself. If she calls me a name, I am going to excuse myself from the room, but you need to tell her at some point that calling you names is not going to be tolerated anymore and that is going to be the response that she gets when it happens. She will cross the boundary, it will be up to you to enforce it.

You can still Validate, I'm sure that was really upsetting to you, I can understand why you are upset about this, however I cannot tolerate you calling me names so I am going to excuse myself. If you want to talk to me in a calm manner we can try again after you have calmed down.  

It's up to you to decide which boundaries to enforce as there is usually a fight before she will not cross them any longer. But it isn't up to her to follow the boundary it is up to you to enforce it, because she will at some point cross the line you set.

[Michelle27]

I do think there is some overlap but they are 2 different things.  It's possible to validate while still keeping your boundaries intact.  I think boundaries are about self respect and validation is about care and compassion.

[formflier]

I do think there is some overlap but they are 2 different things.  It's possible to validate while still keeping your boundaries intact.  I think boundaries are about self respect and validation is about care and compassion.

Is the pwBPD going to feel validated when they "bump into" you enforcing a boundary?

This is a great topic... .and there is some critical nuance I'm hoping to draw out in this conversation.

FF

[an0ught]

Hi joshbjoshb,

validation and boundaries are complementary. They differ in a lot of aspects.

validation is often tactical

 - they are about the others emotion

 - you do it in a specific situation

 - provide short term relief (which is also accumulating and there is some learning of self validation too)

 - affect immediately emotional regulation

 - provide a sense of connectedness

boundaries are strategic

  - they are about your values

  - they are stable

  - they provide structure

  - enforce accountability

  - result in long term relief, changes nature of relationship

  - provide a better sense of self and then emotional regulation

  - bumping against them is painful and can be resulting in extinction bursts

You really need both. I've seen again and again members stalling in progress by focusing on one and neglecting the other. Yes, learning one tool requires focusing on it but don't forget there are important complementary tools.

[formflier]

You really need both. I've seen again and again members stalling in progress by focusing on one and neglecting the other. Yes, learning one tool requires focusing on it but don't forget there are important complementary tools.

Lately... .I've been focused more on my boundaries... .and trying to build/enforce a new boundary and I will admit... I'm a bit off my game on validation. 

[OffRoad]

You can do both, or either, or none. It depends on what you want out of this relationship.

She tells you you are bad. How does she think you are "bad"? That is a little too generic to be helpful to you.

"It seems like you are upset with something. I'd like to know what that is, however it is hard for me to have a conversation with you when you are yelling at me. Since I don't want to be part of conversations in which you call me names, I will be leaving the room unless/until you can have a conversation with me where you don't call me names."

Validation and boundary.

She wants to go talk to a friend who was just divorced (sounds like that's why she picked the fight in the first place, but that's just me). If it bothers you "It would be hurtful to me if you went to see *whomever*, but you have the right to speak to anyone you choose." Sometimes it's about validating YOU, too. You get to have feelings, and the pwBPD needs to know what those feelings are. IMO, they don't get a free pass on trampling your feelings because they have BPD.

I think the key to all of it is what your intention is. Sometimes, I just don't care if I validate H's feelings. When he is picking a fight so he can withdraw, he can sit in his computer room and play games all week if I don't have to deal with him. Other times, I can see he's really hurting and want to help. But the boundaries protect me from harm, so those I try to keep in place all the time.

[joshbjoshb]

You can do both, or either, or none. It depends on what you want out of this relationship.

That's exactly what I was asking. Since, in my eyes, there are kind of opposites (one is about me, the other about them), so are we using them whenever we are "up" to it?

Lately I find myself doing much more boundary. I know it's because I am not in a good, happy emotional state, so I have no energy to deal with her constant negative talk. But if I will up to it, all of a sudden I will be doing validation.

[Sunfl0wer]

It is probably important, that when you set and communicate a boundary, that you maintain consistency with that boundary even when the behavior is not upsetting you in that moment.

Don't base your enforcement of boundaries on your ability to cope with disrespect at that moment.  Base it on the level of respect you want others to show you always.

[Grey Kitty]

I am hard pressed to come up with an example of boundary enforcement that is validating.

You are taking action to prevent your partner from doing something to you. I'd say that it is usually a tiny bit invalidating to enforce a boundary.

If you try to validate while you enforce a boundary, it usually makes the boundary enforcement mushy and less effective... .and doesn't have the good effects of validation often either. (You are more likely to end up doing boundary enforcement with a side dish of JADEing to convince them that you are doing the right thing by enforcing the boundary)

I find that choosing which to use depends a lot on my mood at the time.

Example: Your partner says something unkind which is blaming you for something you didn't do.

You can validate if you are feeling strong and compassionate, and you are feeling secure in the belief that your partner is doing this because they are upset an freaked out, and that it really has nothing to do with you at all. At that point, you can validate how your partner is feeling which has them lashing out in your direction. If you are sincere, it may well help them out of their difficult mood.

If you are tired, or irritable, don't try to validate. Unless you are a real wizard, you probably won't manage it well, and bad validation has the same result as no validation--generally your partner spooling up to full-blown dysregulation.

This is a time for boundary enforcement. Change the subject or end the conversation. You may not be able to improve your partner's mood at all... .but at least you can avoid the damage of getting into a full-blown fight this time.



... .I'd add that validation can be tactical--you can validate in a difficult situation as I described above... .and validation can also be strategic. I think this use of validation is ultimately more powerful.

You can just make it a point to validate what your partner is feeling and expressing on a regular basis, whether they are happy, sad, angry, tired, busy, or anything else. A steady diet of this will do wonders for your relationship.

[joshbjoshb]

So you are basically agree that:

Validating and boundaries can't co-exist

And it depends on your mood.

I am having a hard time with this concept of "do whatever you are in the mood of doing". What's bothering me even more is that basically boundary seems to be something that you do because you can't cope, so in some way it's a weakness of me.

[OffRoad]

Think of it less as "can't cope" and more as "I have the right not to be subjected to XXX". Others may have a different take on this, but I will not allow myself to be blamed for something I did not do, by anyone, not just H. I don't care what kind of mood I am in, I will not stay in the room if any false blaming occurs. H knows this. As an example, H has put off doing something he was supposed to do and now it's crunch time (this is a common occurrence). He gets stressed, and starts trying to find anything and everything to blame on me to make himself feel better (because he feels like a loser for not getting his work done in a timely fashion). Fortunately for me, I know this one and can see it coming. H can't find X. He tells me I took X. I moved it so he couldn't find it. Often, X is sitting right there on the table in front of him, partially obscured by something else.

Me: "Gosh, it's hard to get things done when you can't find the items you need." (validation) "I haven't taken/moved X." If he asks for help, I will give him a hand. If he continues to blame, I say "Since I don't know where X is, I have to finish *whatever*. I'm sure you'll find it. If I can help, let me know." and I disappear. (boundary-the boundary is not getting caught up in who did what, and letting H find his own stuff instead of me rescuing him)  Two good things usually come from this: I don't get upset at him for accusing me of things I didn't do and he finds X on his own, which makes him feel better-he accomplished something.

Since boundaries protect you, you decide on them to begin with and stick with them every time (to the best of your ability and allowing for flexibility if the situation requires it) And it depends on your pwBPD. pwBPD and suicidal tendencies are a different ball game than pwBPD who want everyone else to take the blame for their shortcomings.

You aren't required to listen to someone rage at you. You can acknowledge that they have every right to rage all they want (validation), but then you can politely tell them that the atmosphere in the room is too unpleasant for you and leave the room (boundary).

You aren't required to give up the things you like for your pwBPD. They can ask you to stay home or with them 24/7, but you have every right to go hike with your buds for a couple of hours on a Sunday.

I do think you can validate AND have boundaries, but they would be sequential. (validate, then boundary)

[joshbjoshb]

Think of it less as "can't cope" and more as "I have the right not to be subjected to XXX". Others may have a different take on this, but I will not allow myself to be blamed for something I did not do, by anyone, not just H. I don't care what kind of mood I am in, I will not stay in the room if any false blaming occurs. H knows this. As an example, H has put off doing something he was supposed to do and now it's crunch time (this is a common occurrence). He gets stressed, and starts trying to find anything and everything to blame on me to make himself feel better (because he feels like a loser for not getting his work done in a timely fashion). Fortunately for me, I know this one and can see it coming. H can't find X. He tells me I took X. I moved it so he couldn't find it. Often, X is sitting right there on the table in front of him, partially obscured by something else.

Me: "Gosh, it's hard to get things done when you can't find the items you need." (validation) "I haven't taken/moved X." If he asks for help, I will give him a hand. If he continues to blame, I say "Since I don't know where X is, I have to finish *whatever*. I'm sure you'll find it. If I can help, let me know." and I disappear. (boundary-the boundary is not getting caught up in who did what, and letting H find his own stuff instead of me rescuing him)  Two good things usually come from this: I don't get upset at him for accusing me of things I didn't do and he finds X on his own, which makes him feel better-he accomplished something.

Since boundaries protect you, you decide on them to begin with and stick with them every time (to the best of your ability and allowing for flexibility if the situation requires it) And it depends on your pwBPD. pwBPD and suicidal tendencies are a different ball game than pwBPD who want everyone else to take the blame for their shortcomings.

You aren't required to listen to someone rage at you. You can acknowledge that they have every right to rage all they want (validation), but then you can politely tell them that the atmosphere in the room is too unpleasant for you and leave the room (boundary).

You aren't required to give up the things you like for your pwBPD. They can ask you to stay home or with them 24/7, but you have every right to go hike with your buds for a couple of hours on a Sunday.

I do think you can validate AND have boundaries, but they would be sequential. (validate, then boundary)

But in what you described I don't see a boundary - just validation. You left the room, but you didn't set a "rule" or a boundary.

A boundary, to me, would be "I don't like being spoken to this way, and being blamed for things I didn't do. If you want to ask me if I know where is X, I'd be glad to help you." Then it follows by some sort of consequences in case he/she violates the boundary.

For example: my wife raged this morning because she woke up late and the children were late to school. Obviously she found a way to make it my fault. The rage went on about other topics as well. I told her "I don't like spending my morning with unpleasant conversations. If you want to talk about something pleasant, you are welcome but if not I will not continue to talk about these topics".

Obviously that wasn't validating, but it was setting a boundary because I was really sick of hearing the rages so early in the morning.

Someone mentioned earlier that when you set a boundary it doesn't feel validating to them, it's actually telling them "what you did was unacceptable" . Think about setting boundaries to children - it doesn't feel good! Yet its needed. 

[formflier]

You aren't required to listen to someone rage at you. You can acknowledge that they have every right to rage all they want (validation), but then you can politely tell them that the atmosphere in the room is too unpleasant for you and leave the room (boundary).

Very well said... .!

FF

[formflier]

But in what you described I don't see a boundary - just validation. You left the room, but you didn't set a "rule" or a boundary.

Boundaries and rules are totally different.  Unless you make a rule for yourself... .and follow it... .that could be a boundary. 

Boundaries are for you... .not the other person

OK... .maybe there is some nuance in "leaving the room"... .it's not a boundary... .but it is how the boundary was enforced.  I suppose you could have stayed in room... put on headphones... .and enforced the same boundary (not recommending that... .just highlighting boundary and enforcement of boundary)

A boundary, to me, would be "I don't like being spoken to this way, and being blamed for things I didn't do. If you want to ask me if I know where is X, I'd be glad to help you." Then it follows by some sort of consequences in case he/she violates the boundary.

OK... .you are on right track... IMO.  I like to explain to people where they are on good... better ... .best scale. I think your boundary explanation is good.  Here is a challenge for you... .say the same thing... .but put it in SET.

Best to stay away from thinking about consequences... .unless they are for you.  There is nothing about a "proper" boundary that is supposed to "punish" the other person.  They may "feel" punished... .that's different.

it's actually telling them "what you did was unacceptable" .

I think there is a subtle nuance to change with this... .again... good better best scale.

Does "xyz is not in accordance with my values and I will not participate"  seem better or worse that what you said above.

In what way... .

Keep up good work!  These are great posts... .lots of good stuff to work with in here!


FF

[Grey Kitty]

But in what you described I don't see a boundary - just validation. You left the room, but you didn't set a "rule" or a boundary.

A boundary, to me, would be "I don't like being spoken to this way, and being blamed for things I didn't do. If you want to ask me if I know where is X, I'd be glad to help you." Then it follows by some sort of consequences in case he/she violates the boundary.

Not so much.

First off, boundaries (in general) refer to understanding where you end and where the other person begins in all ways. The tool we use here is Boundary Enforcement, often referred to as a boundary as shorthand.

The key is Enforcement, which is an action on your part.

If your partner doesn't understand boundaries... .and through their actions or words, goes past your boundaries, interfering with things that are yours, treating you in a way which doesn't match your values about how humans should be treated... .you choose to take an action which will enforce that boundary and make it impossible for your partner to continue violating that boundary.

Leaving a conversation that is abusive is boundary enforcement, and that is all that is needed.

You can announce verbally that you are enforcing the boundary, but that is usually optional.

If you walk away, you are no longer hearing verbal abuse. This is true whether you say why, or say anything at all.


The other important thing is that telling your partner about a boundary often works more like creating a rule, and that works really badly with a pwBPD.

Rule: Don't yell at me.

The other person gets to decide whether to obey the rule or violate the rule. [Hint: pwBPD often choose violating the rule--bad for you]

Boundary enforcement: If you yell at me I will leave the conversation.

The choice to leave the conversation is up to you. Your partner has no ability to change this. They can choose to yell or not... .and if they choose to yell, you choose to go away for a while. [Hint: This works a lot better at protecting you with a pwBPD. They may even realize when you get good at this that yelling at you doesn't have any useful outcome for them, and stop doing it... .but as long as you are ready to do this, you are protected.]

It is fine to start enforcement with a statement like "I won't be yelled at like this." That may cause them to calm down and stop yelling. But if the next word is shouted at you, you have no need to say another word. Stand up, walk out, and get yourself out of earshot.

[Grey Kitty]

Going back to this comment... .

I am having a hard time with this concept of "do whatever you are in the mood of doing". What's bothering me even more is that basically boundary seems to be something that you do because you can't cope, so in some way it's a weakness of me.

The 'mood' aspect for me is that I *know* that unless I am in the proper mental/emotional state, I cannot validate effectively.

I know that 99% validation with a 1% hint of invalidation completely spoils the whole thing. (How well does it go if you say 'I love you but... .' The but part completely cancels out the love aspect.)

It is purely pragmatic--validation is hard work... .if I'm not quite on my game, I know that the effort will be completely wasted, so I save my energy for a time when I think I have a chance to do some good.

[joshbjoshb]

But in what you described I don't see a boundary - just validation. You left the room, but you didn't set a "rule" or a boundary.

A boundary, to me, would be "I don't like being spoken to this way, and being blamed for things I didn't do. If you want to ask me if I know where is X, I'd be glad to help you." Then it follows by some sort of consequences in case he/she violates the boundary.

Not so much.

First off, boundaries (in general) refer to understanding where you end and where the other person begins in all ways. The tool we use here is Boundary Enforcement, often referred to as a boundary as shorthand.

The key is Enforcement, which is an action on your part.

If your partner doesn't understand boundaries... .and through their actions or words, goes past your boundaries, interfering with things that are yours, treating you in a way which doesn't match your values about how humans should be treated... .you choose to take an action which will enforce that boundary and make it impossible for your partner to continue violating that boundary.

Leaving a conversation that is abusive is boundary enforcement, and that is all that is needed.

You can announce verbally that you are enforcing the boundary, but that is usually optional.

If you walk away, you are no longer hearing verbal abuse. This is true whether you say why, or say anything at all.


The other important thing is that telling your partner about a boundary often works more like creating a rule, and that works really badly with a pwBPD.

Rule: Don't yell at me.

The other person gets to decide whether to obey the rule or violate the rule. [Hint: pwBPD often choose violating the rule--bad for you]

Boundary enforcement: If you yell at me I will leave the conversation.

The choice to leave the conversation is up to you. Your partner has no ability to change this. They can choose to yell or not... .and if they choose to yell, you choose to go away for a while. [Hint: This works a lot better at protecting you with a pwBPD. They may even realize when you get good at this that yelling at you doesn't have any useful outcome for them, and stop doing it... .but as long as you are ready to do this, you are protected.]

It is fine to start enforcement with a statement like "I won't be yelled at like this." That may cause them to calm down and stop yelling. But if the next word is shouted at you, you have no need to say another word. Stand up, walk out, and get yourself out of earshot.

Wow. I never knew that! Thank you for this post.

[OffRoad]

But in what you described I don't see a boundary - just validation. You left the room, but you didn't set a "rule" or a boundary.

The boundary is to protect me. It's not "If you don't do what I want, I'm going to leave the room". It's "If I am being verbally assaulted, I must protect myself."  

I didn't explain that as well as I should have. H already knows I won't be blamed for something I didn't do. We have discussed this before. During a time when he was calm, I told his that I would tell him once, and once only, that I had not done something he accused me of, and that if he continued, I would leave the room because it felt bad to have my character impugned. This was important for my H so he didn't think I was abandoning him. It's not a requirement, though.

A boundary, to me, would be "I don't like being spoken to this way, and being blamed for things I didn't do. If you want to ask me if I know where is X, I'd be glad to help you." Then it follows by some sort of consequences in case he/she violates the boundary.

The consequences are natural when you enforce your boundary of not being present when she is raging. You aren't there to rage at anymore.

For example: my wife raged this morning because she woke up late and the children were late to school. Obviously she found a way to make it my fault. The rage went on about other topics as well. I told her "I don't like spending my morning with unpleasant conversations. If you want to talk about something pleasant, you are welcome but if not I will not continue to talk about these topics".

Small problem there. You were telling her what she could and could not talk about. Boundaries are about YOU, not her. This is still not ideal, but  "I don't like spending my morning with unpleasant conversations. If you want to talk about something pleasant, I'll be happy to converse with you, but I will not continue to talk about these topics" is about YOU, not her. In this case, you say that she can continue talking about whatever she wants, but you aren't going to be on the other side of that conversation.

Obviously that wasn't validating, but it was setting a boundary because I was really sick of hearing the rages so early in the morning.

And sometimes that's all you have in you. I so get that.

Someone mentioned earlier that when you set a boundary it doesn't feel validating to them, it's actually telling them "what you did was unacceptable" . Think about setting boundaries to children - it doesn't feel good! Yet its needed.  

A boundary ISN'T validation, so it isn't going to be validating. When I think back on it, sometimes I have to do my validating after the boundary, when H calms down. (H doesn't rage very much, but he does freak out and try to push the blame for his own shortcomings on everyone else)