Therapist says codependency gets a bad rap

[bestintentions]

"Codependents get a bad rap.  Most often they are just kind-hearted, good people"

What do you all think of my therapist's statement and why?

[Hisaccount]

My therapist says I am co dependent. My ex who is most likely BPD disagrees because that somehow places blame on her I think.

I think it gets a bad wrap. Depends on how you view it. I am a very caring and loving person. I like doing things for others. Those are codependent traits. So it is tough to say what is dysfunction and what is just me.

Now you move onto the other traits. Fear of abandoment? Oh hell yeah. I am there right now.
Depression, yep.
Anger, yep.
Controlling, maybe.

When I went through the checklist I could say yes to every one of them because I was taking care of a BPD.

It wouldn't be a bad thing except, she saw my serving as a door mat, a sign of weakness. Instead of it as trying to make her happy.

The start of the codependent conversation for me was simple, the therapist says, what is your favorite place to eat.
My answer was trying to come with where would my wife like to eat. Never once thinking of myself.

So I believe it is a tough balance trying to find what is who you are and what is actually a problem.

[Julia S]

Curiously, I just read a post on facebook, reposted by a retired psychiatrist friend. I was going to start a thread with it here but didn't because it was partly advertising a book. It's about the myths of codependency - how some people make out it's a mental illness when mostly it's just people being kind. Will get the link.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/change-your-codependent-ways-anne-dranitsaris-ph-d-

[Mutt]

Hi bestintentions,

Most often they are just kind-hearted, good people"

I am a very caring and loving person. I like doing things for others. Those are codependent traits.

I'm not suggesting that the following is codependant, I'm just saying that being a helper can be good, for example, nurses, doctors, firefighters, animals rescuer all have compassion in common. Helping others also helps you feel better too. You could use that quality and be a volunteer and help those in need?

[fromheeltoheal]

Hi best-

To be clear, there's independent, dependent, interdependent, and codependent, all distinctly different.  If we put someone else's needs ahead of our own, which could be labelled kind-hearted and good, and common in interrelations among humans who are social animals, no worries.  And when someone's needs always need to be ahead of someone else's, because one partner is always needy, at some point we may ask where's mine?  But if we go beyond that and don't ask that question, let go of our needs entirely, and not only that, take on the identity of someone who is the "need meeter" for someone else, a reactive stance and a backhanded way to get our own needs met, that's codependency.

Up to each of us to decide if that's acceptable.  I'm way too independent to ever take a subservient role to someone like that, let alone build an identity around it, and the fact that I felt myself going in that direction was the main reason I left her, that was never going to change, but it took a while of being out for me to see that clearly, it takes what it takes for all of us.

[Skip]

Codependency doesn't a have a formal definition, so it means a lot of different things to different people. I've read many apples and oranges discussions.

Co-dependency, as it is clinically defined, is not about being a nice giving person. Many people are giving are not codependent. Codependents have dysfuntions.

Timmen Cermak, M.D., proposed that co‐dependency be listed as a personality disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III-R; American Psychiatric Association, 1987). Cermak reasoned that when specific personality traits become excessive and maladaptive and caused significant impairment in functioning or caused significant distress, it warrants a personality disorder diagnosis.

Cermak "codependency" is the best studied and defined. It describes it this way:

  Continued investment of self-esteem in the ability to control both oneself and others in the face of serious adverse consequences.

  Assumption of responsibility for meeting others' needs to the exclusion of acknowledging one's own.

  Anxiety and boundary distortions around intimacy and separation.

  Enmeshment in relationships with personality disordered, chemically dependent, other co ‐ dependent, and/or impulse ‐ disordered individuals.

  Three or more of the following:
        Excessive reliance on denial
        Constriction of emotions (with or without dramatic outbursts)
        :)epression
        Hypervigilance
        Compulsions
        Anxiety
        Substance abuse
        Has been (or is) the victim of recurrent physical or sexual abuse
        Stress ‐ related medical illnesses
        Has remained in a primary relationship with an active substance abuser for at least two years without seeking outside help.

[rfriesen]

Most often they are just kind-hearted, good people

The thing about this statement is it describes a cardboard cut-out, not a real human being. Every individual is, if we take a second to think about it, an incredibly complicated mix of tendencies, patterns of behaviour, emotions, desires, needs, wants, hopes, etc etc.

Certainly there are people who tend to act in ways that we would describe as kind-hearted and good. But in the context of an intimate relationship, this can be expressed in countless different ways, and so much depends on the circumstances of the relationship, the partner, and any number of chance events that bring it all together.

If I look at my own relationship that brought me here, I feel something very similar to what fromheeltoheal describes:

Up to each of us to decide if that's acceptable.  I'm way too independent to ever take a subservient role to someone like that, let alone build an identity around it, and the fact that I felt myself going in that direction was the main reason I left her, that was never going to change, but it took a while of being out for me to see that clearly, it takes what it takes for all of us.

I definitely took on a "fixer" role with my ex and let her blame me for more than my share of the problems in the relationship. At the same time, I treasure my independence and made clear to my ex that I would keep it. So, for instance, I refused to move in together and I wouldn't agree to get back together unless she opened up to me and made what I would consider real change. At the same time, I kept pouring my heart out to her and was always ready to forgive her outbursts of rage and insults, and always ready to accept the lion's share of blame. In hindsight, this just added to the dysfunction because she didn't care for my emotional vulnerability, she wanted me back in the relationship. And her frustration with receiving only my emotional vulnerability would make her lash out at me in hurtful ways, and that would make me more determined to hold true to the love I felt and continue to reach out and try to at least be open and caring towards her.

It was a kind of emotional standoff -- I think, in her mind, she felt I had to first come back to the relationship, make a full commitment, and only then would she open up to me and love me like before (that was the promise, anyway); for me, though, I wanted to see openness and effort before I would even consider anything like a return to the relationship. We worked each other raw in that dysfunctional dance, and I think it deeply wounded both of us.

So, I do think I was kind-hearted in most of our interactions. But I also had a deeply held need to maintain my independence. Eventually I realized that just being kind-hearted doesn't mean your actions are doing any good to either side. That's a very hard thing for a "fixer" type to accept, I think. I couldn't give my ex what she wanted and so she wasn't going to give me what I wanted. There was no fixing that situation with kindness and good intentions.

All of this to say that I think we can have tendencies and qualities that have generally served us well (e.g. being kind-hearted towards others), but that can contribute to dysfunction in the context of a given relationship, for a whole variety of reasons. At the end of the day, there's no substitute for digging into that complexity and seeing each relationship in as much of its totality as we can. Life would be easier if relationships could be boiled down to a few personality traits. But it would be a lot less interesting too

[Julia S]

Skip, those views are being challenged. See the link in my comment. And I would certainly only view it as potentially a personality disorder if it were seriously ingrained in childhood, such that it damaged normal psychological development.

[rfriesen]

And I would certainly only view it as potentially a personality disorder if it were seriously ingrained in childhood, such that it damaged normal psychological development.

I suppose one question is -- what are we trying to achieve in any given case by labeling something a "personality disorder" or "mental illness" vs "just people being kind"?

I think for many members here, the most immediate issue is a dysfunctional relationship that is causing them pain, and in that context the goal really is to understand the role our own patterns of emotion, behaviour, thought might be playing in our confusion, hurt, and relationship dysfunction. Whether our own patterns are labeled "disordered" or not is a secondary matter, and too often we can get bogged down in the question of who is "truly" disordered in the relationship (ie who's to blame) rather than in how to move forward in a healthier way (be that through detaching or improving the relationship).

Individuals and relationships being as complex as they are, I think it's a bit of a fool's game to hunt for an elusive standard of "normal" and "well-ordered". (Just think of the wide range of cultural norms and all the individual variations within them that have existed on earth!) Better to focus on understanding what's working for each of us and each relationship and what's hurting us.

That said, I can see the value in moving away from talk of "co-dependency" to speaking in more relatable terms ("kind-hearted", "vulnerable", "taking on responsibility" IF that helps us as individuals focus on the actual dynamics at play in our relationships and how we hope to change and improve them. The worry is that this debate becomes one more move in the blame game.

[Skip]

Skip, those views are being challenged. See the link in my comment.

 

Cermack is a well know MD psychiatrist who wrote journal papers and published a book on the subject. Anne Dranitsaris is a business (human resources) consultant. This is the apples and oranges thing I was mentioning.

The APA didn't make co-dependency a personality disorder because they ruled it to be a condition rather than a cause - so its like "fever" which is associated with many causes. But the definition is still a widely respected one. It clears up the confusion between "nice giving people" and those with a condition that is ultimately causing them problems.

We have an article that might be helpful. This might close the divide. It talks about both Cermack's definition and the contemporary beliefs that it is a very curable condition if the root cause is curable.
https://bpdfamily.com/content/codependency-codependent-relationships

Hope that helps.

[Turkish]

I tried to label myself as codependent,  and my T, a PsychD, pushed back on saying that I just had a Rescuer personality,  then saying that he did as well and there was nothing inherently wrong with that (he grew up with an alcoholic father,  who was 30 years sober by the time I started T).

He said that he wad treating a true codependent,  and that the behaviors permeated every r/s in her life.

Even so,  Cermack's criteria are interesting.  At one time,  I'd judge that I met four.

[Callmemark]

"Codependents get a bad rap.  Most often they are just kind-hearted, good people"

For me the deserved criticism is when my codependency caused me not to enforce the healthy boundaries that usually define a good person. I broke all kinds of rules to try and appease my SO before I finally stopped and realized I was accountable for my decisions and couldn't blame my SO's influence.

This hit me years ago when I was waiting in court to finalize a settlement with my ex-wife. The case before me was a guy who hadn't paid his child support in several months. He tried to explain to the judge that his new wife had needs and he was trying to provide for her so she wouldn't leave him. He was very sad and humble in his presentation.  The judge wasn't having it and came down hard on the guy. "You are responsible for the decisions you make regardless of the influences around you!"

The thing is I saw myself in that same spot down the road if I didn't grow a spine. Overcoming my codependency was not only important to protecting myself but also my children and the other people I loved.

[once removed]

i get why some therapists might balk at it. its an overused and thrown around term, and they probably see a lot of clients self diagnosing. the stereotypes we see most often here tend to be synonymous with heavy enmeshment and "white knights".

like most things we discuss, i see codependency as being on a spectrum. "codependent" is never a label ive been comfortable giving myself, but that my behavior and relationship (prior relationships and some friendships included) dipped into that spectrum, or that there was a detectable, unhealthy pattern, is undeniable.

my faith, and i like to think my personality, dictate things like humility, putting yourself last, and service to others. the leader of my faith embodied these things and ive never heard him referred to as codependent 

you know what are also biblical principles: boundaries. not enabling. not being overly dependent on others. taking good care of ourselves. 

not to turn this into a discussion about biblical principles, but that good qualities and good intentions can still be misguided, hurt others, hurt ourselves.

in that case, we probably are not talking about a/the pathological condition, which is very real, but a person who would benefit from self awareness, and learning the differences.

here are some of those differences: https://bpdfamily.com/content/characteristics-healthy-relationships

[Pretty Woman]

I don't think being a co-dependent makes you a bad or lesser person... .it does signify however, you have your own issues that may have aided in your emeshment with your disordered ex.

Yes, many co-d's are good, loving people. I am a recovering co-d and I can now see my role in the dysfunction.

There comes a time when your wanting to "save" and help someone who is abusing you (and you are allowing it) becomes very unhealthy. A healthy person would walk away at that time having self-respect and not ALLOWING the BPD to treat them poorly.

When we allow people to treat us badly, putting them before us, we are enabling bad behavior, and we are showing our ex it's ok to treat us this way, we will stick around while you beat us down (emotionally or physically).

When I first came to BPD Family I would get angry when anyone suggested I was part of the dysfunction with my ex. My ex physically assaulted me, threatened RO's on me and cheated on me constantly. I was nothing but good and loving to this woman. I took care of her, treated her with respect and helped her out of binds.

I became he enabler which did neither of us any good.

But in the end, I STAYED through it all. Had I walked away the cycle would have ended much sooner. My participation in the toxic tango only perpetuated the pain and suffering I endured once I was finally and cruelly discarded, slandered at my job and in social circles.

It's ok to be a good, nice person. Heck, I encourage that! But when someone shows you who they really are, take that at face value and walk away. No need to try to "find the good" in someone who is showing you they are an a-hole. It's not giving up, it's taking care of the one person you are gonna be stuck with, hopefully for many, many, many years... .

Yourself. Be good to you and don't settle for anything less.

 

[Skip]

This is an interesting discussion. There are two parts. Reaction to stigma/blame (fear). Reaction to unhealthy practices (seeking improvement). Hopefully this gives some valuable insight into why therapists often tell a person with BPD traits that they are depressed or PTSD or ____ (but nt BPF like). Once the mindset goes to stigma and blame/accountability, the walls go up.

Co-dependecy is not officially defined anywhere so its definition has been molded by many to suit there own purpose or knowledge - its a moving target. To avoid the "moving target" issue, we have defined it here at  bpdfamily. You can look at a list, say I've got 4 of 7 criteria.

CoDEPENDENCY MEMBER SURVEY: Here is the test. 200+ members have taken it:
https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=56435.0

As yourself the questions. For example:

  Enmeshment in relationships with personality disordered, chemically dependent, other co ‐ dependent, and/or impulse ‐ disordered individuals for 2+ years without seeking outside support.

True? Isn't it helpful to know that this, as it is specifically written, is not healthy or abnormal?