Deception was used to take a trip to see her sister

[formflier]

So... .looking forward to my weekly visit with my P.

The last trip that my wife went on to see her sister was "governed" or "allowed" by a signed parenting agreement about who could be left alone with who... .etc etc.

Nephew has drug and alcohol conviction... .there has been violence in the home.  Bad scene, although it seems to have calmed lately... .lately being past few months.

I left town with couple teens to work on an investment house.  I wanted to take more kids with me, as there was plenty of work to do.  My wife pushed for compromise because she needed help with babysitting and needed help around the house.

So... .after several surprisingly respectful conversations we agreed on who would stay here (our home) with her and who would go with me.  We had parenting goals, specifically for our youngest son, who would now be "the man of the house" (basically no older brothers to pick on him).

I leave... .a couple hours later she leaves youngest two with her parents and drives 8 hours to be with her sister.   Took a car that is has a repair need/appointment.

She claims that I should be happy for her that she gets to spend time with her sister.

Regarding the compromise... when I told her I was "saddened and troubled by her apparent decision to disregard our compromise"... .she said "give me a break... ."

My take:  She knows that had she asked... .I would have asked intrusive questions and/or said kids need to work... .vice be on vacation.

From looking around the house... .instead of doing work... .the finished trashing the place before they left...

Sigh... .

FF

[Notwendy]

I don't agree with deception/ manipulation, but on the other hand I understand her wanting to see her sister without going through a long and complicated discussion with you. I do understand the concern about the nephew- and that you are the head of the household. But whenever restrictions are too tight - people do resort to sneaking around them.

If the wish is to spend time with her family - is there a way for her to see her sister without all the regulations? The concern is about the influence of the nephew on your kids. Is there a way to have a visit without the kids?

[formflier]

Is there a way to have a visit without the kids?

Yes... .she has done so before and I'm sure she will again in the future.

There is  this "thing" or "fantasy" about all the cousins getting along and if she just keeps shoving them together enough... it will happen.


Basically... .there seem to be very fond memories of her childhood in this state... as a child... .with extended family.  Likely no consequences for a while... .everyone was positive... .fun... .etc etc.

My guess is she is trying to recreate it.

FF

[formflier]

This just in... .apparently... .she will be home in 20 minutes so that the plans we made today don't get changed.

I'll try to post some texts later.

I think I've done a decent job of not engaging.  Basically... .I've expressed that I appreciate her coming back and we should find time to discuss after we are both rested and have a clear head.

She doesn't appear interested in that... . 

FF

[Notwendy]

I have good memories of that kind of thing too. With all the cousins together - there was some mischief. Yet I do see the importance of not setting it up for really bad behavior. In my case it was more structure and parental input at my cousins. Your wife's family is more chaotic.

But it's an understandable wish on her part. Even with her disorder- nobody likes being controlled or feeling restricted from participating in family get togethers. I see your point of view. Deception isn't good but given her two choices to do what she wanted - deception or a long complicated discussion with rules and stipulations - that's a tough choice too.

[formflier]

It would be different, if there were any perceptible efforts at change, reconciliation, improvement, learning from the past... .etc etc.

Her FOO doesn't do that.   They just don't.

The "operating belief" seems to be that if you just love people enough (give them what they want... .keep them from crying)... .they will turn out to be well adjusted adults.

2 of the three of my nieces and nephews are essentially ruined.  IMO.  The youngest niece appears to care about how she affects other people and seems to be a fundamentally kind person.

I was into mischief as well.  Mischief didn't involve the police or putting young children as risk... .after my father said "don't do that"

My wife ordered my son 16 or 17 at the time to load up cousins in the truck and drive them across town to my parents house.   I told them not to... .that we couldn't do that here.  (no chance I can word for word it... this many years later).

(Information:  We used to live on a farm and technically this would have been legal in that state and on some of the farm roads.  Not smart... .but legal.  From time to time we would drive around with kids in bed of truck... .on our private road... .perhaps 10mph tops.  We had discussions about what we did on our property... .versus public roads. )


At that point in our r/s... .it never occurred to me that there would be such direct going against "safety issues".  

Anyway... .I went inside or was out of sight... .my wife put them in the truck and sent them off.

I got a call from the town police after they pulled them over.  His first words to me as I pulled up was "I'm assuming that one isn't yours... ." (pointing to my oldest nephew).

He described him being the ring leader... .endangering my children and himself by hanging off side of truck... .dancing around... .at driving speeds.

Kids inside the truck were not in car seats.

A ticket was issued.  My wife blamed me for not explaining it better... said she wasn't responsible.  Also inferred that town police was lying to persecute the nephew... .sigh.

This type of incident keeps happening... .only now the cousin has actually been to jail a time or two and had a conviction in court.

No perceptible change in behavior... .parenting... .life just goes on.

That's a choice that they can make... .it's not one that I'm going to make or in any way support, as much as it is up to me, in my family.

I'm not running a popularity contest.

This are my thoughts and my attitude... .certainly not trying to argue with you Notwendy.  I can see my wife's point of view.  

I've considered it many times... .and I'm not willing to lower my standards or protect her from the consequences of her decisions.

She is home... .and finally spoke a couple words to me.  I tried a time or two to engage her in a short friendly greeting.  Complete silence for a while.

Sigh...

FF

[Sunfl0wer]

Wow, ... .she came home.

I wonder if it is simply best at this point to not discuss it any further?

Seems like if this is her attempt to "undo her wrong" then maybe better to not "rub her nose" in it and just let her sit with her own feelings about it all, her own disappointment for making a plan to decieve, then going back home.  Cause I'm thinking any engagement will just have her make you the target of her thoughts and feelings at this point... .would only serve as a further distraction to disconnect her from herself.

What do you think?

[Grey Kitty]

I leave... .a couple hours later she leaves youngest two with her parents and drives 8 hours to be with her sister.   Took a car that is has a repair need/appointment.

She claims that I should be happy for her that she gets to spend time with her sister.

Regarding the compromise... when I told her I was "saddened and troubled by her apparent decision to disregard our compromise"... .she said "give me a break... ."

My take:  She knows that had she asked... .I would have asked intrusive questions and/or said kids need to work... .vice be on vacation.

Observation #1: "saddened and troubled by... ." Really, dude? Has pointing out to her that she broke an agreement with you... .a compromise with you... .or flagrantly violated your authority ever turned out well yet?

And if you are going to say something about it, a backhanded, passive statement like that is even more invalidating!

Observation #2: Radical Acceptance. She is who she is. Her FOO are who they are. She's going to do things like this, messing up your plan for raising your children, based on her feelings/needs. It won't be the best thing for the kids, and it will certainly inconvenience you. Her FOO will be involved often. And she pack up the kids and be half-way across the state before you have any chance to be involved. And she will continue to believe that she can "love people enough to fix them" and apply that to her FOO upon occasion.

Try not to make things worse. You know when she's so far over the line that you will involve police/lawyers/etc. She really isn't that bad, and you won the war over discipline becoming physical child abuse when she was.

My take: Making it worse means trying to badger her into a "conversation" where you prove to her that she's putting children in contact with bad influences in her FOO, and getting her to make an "agreement" [yep, that again  ] not to do it again.

Sometimes you will have to lay down the law and enforce a boundary. Other times, things won't be bad enough to reach that level.

... .and today, she's back, the kids are back, the time with a bad influence from her FOO is over... .be pragmatic. Creating/participating in conflict over something in the past which cannot be changed isn't going to undo any of it.

What can you do to make things better for your family today?

[formflier]

What can you do to make things better for your family today?

Go visit P and discuss whether or not any further discussion is wise.

My wife tossed a few texts at me this morning... .talking about all the damage I had done to the relationship... .I didn't bite.

I expressed appreciation... .well... here is the text "I appreciate you following through on our plans"

I also want to discuss with P today if I am getting the gist of her guidance on expressing my feelings.

My current understanding of my Ps guidance is that she is wanting me to express my feelings about my wife's actions more.  Succinctly... .don't drone on... .

This sort of fall under the big heading of "not saving or protecting my wife from her actions"... .I also don't need to "persecute" her (to me... that would be droning on about it)

My wife initiated the "feelings" talk and clarified her feelings... I clarified mine.

Last thought on this.  P has been talking to me about it being very different to "not take things personally" and "not stand up for your feelings" when anothers actions are repetitive, apparently willful... .etc etc.

I still shouldn't take it "personally".  I shouldn't believe my wife's goal was to upset me.  It is normal for people to be upset when plans (compromises) are unilaterally changed, especially about important matters (children... versus what we are having for dinner). 

I'm not in the business of protecting my wife from the "normal" consequences of her actions.  Otherwise, there is little incentive for her to mature.

Note... .RA informs me that she may not mature.  My job is to make that as little of my problem as possible... .and let her solve her own upset feelings.

Or... .I have misinterpreted some of what we have been working on with P.

FF

[BeagleGirl]

FormFlier,

I think I get what your P is saying.  It covers the discussion of feelings well, but boundaries vs "agreements" may be another topic for conversation with P.

My example of boundaries vs "agreements" is a few years old, but I still struggle to distinguish between and apply correctly. 

My BPDh used to regularly buy and sell our family vehicle(s).  When I say regularly - I mean we went through 30+ vehicles in under 20 years.  And he lost money on EVERY single one.  It was putting our family finances and relationship under constant strain because he was spending an incredible amount of time and money repairing/improving the current car and looking for the next car.  It finally got to the point where I wrote up an agreement where he promised to keep our current vehicles and not acquire any more for 3 years (which I thought a reasonable amount of time) with the idea that as my boys approached driving age project cars would add to rather than taking from family time.  I got him to agree to sign the document.  During our next round of MC (over something unrelated to the car issue), the topic of the agreement came up and I was told by our counselor that it was inappropriate for me to have made him sign an agreement.

Part of me understands that formal agreements, like what I did with my BPDh often are a form of coercion.  I wanted to take that moment when he was rational enough (worn down enough by my arguing) to agree to certain behavior being unacceptable.  Now I am starting to see that the "agreement" was an attempt at setting a boundary that I would then expect him to defend.  After all, he had "agreed" to it. 

In a way, this was linked, for me, to the topic you are discussing with your P.  I still struggle with acknowledging my "right" to express hurt, anger, and disappointment.  Those are emotions that have been used as weapons against me all my life, so I tend to resort to facts, logic, and debate.  It's really hard for me to say "Your actions hurt me and I feel like I can't trust you, therefore... .".  It feels much safer to say "We agreed that x behavior was not appropriate, therefore... .".  The second option means I don't have to be vulnerable with/defend my feelings.  It also means that I subtly distance myself from having to be the one to enforce the boundary.  It becomes the difference between placing a child in time out (me actively enforcing the consequences) vs telling the child to go sit in time out.  The first is harder, but more definitive.  The second works only if the child is really in agreement (or knows there is no point in arguing).  Otherwise, it's just another fight to get the child to do what we "agreed" they must do when they crossed boundaries.

I don't know if this counts as a hijack, but it's definitely been helpful for me to process these thoughts. 
BG

[Grey Kitty]

  I like your idea to check in with your P!

And I'm not gonna second guess what your P has in mind for you when she suggested that.

I am very much a pragmatist, and my take is that if you say something to your wife (especially when she's showing more of her 'bad' traits!), you should do it with some reasonable expectation of making things better, and at least not making things worse for sure!

So let me ask you... .what is the plausible/possible good outcome of sharing that you are upset with her actions, after it is too late to change them?

What is the 'good' outcome of sharing those feelings with her?

I'm not expecting empathy from her, 'tho perhaps I'm setting the bar too low.

I'm certainly not expecting her to make an agreement not to do this again, and stick with it long term. (She might, however, hold off doing something like this for a week or two; that's your guess, and your assessment whether it is worth it.)

I think we can both imagine the 'bad' outcomes which are possible... .

[formflier]

I have a lot of notes to process from my P meeting today.  

My P didn't have any particular bads in what I did yesterday... .she thought some of my texts were a bit of a "soft sell" when I should have been stronger.

Essentially, my P wants me to handle this tomorrow... perhaps at a coffee shop.

My P is suggesting that I might not understand how serious this willful deception was and she reminded me of other incidents to make her point.

Random points that I need to organize better.

That I start by pointing out how well we have been doing the past few weeks and we need to get back to that.

Willful deception to do something she knows I likely wouldn't have been for.
Putting the relationship with her sister ahead of (or above) our marriage (and to the destruction of our marriage)
When my wife visits her sister... .there are usually rocky times ahead in our marriage.
Sister interfered in my legal case and apparently encouraged my wife to do so.
This sister's nickname from childhood is "Sneaky Snake".  Her parents encouraged her.

The following advice is particular to our church and religious practices.

I'm to ask if she discussed me or our marriage, past present or future with her sister.  Regardless of the answer... .I'm to clarify that "Going forward... .I forbid it"

That your sister has created a triangle in our marriage and it needs to end.

We practiced roll play with my wife trying to distract and blame and me practicing staying on point.

"We will talk about that later, right now the issue is willful deception."

I've got some practicing to do.

P ended by reminding me that my wife will be mad... .to not get drawn into that... .my roll is to stand up for our marriage... .let my wife make her own decisions.



FF

[HopefulDad]

The following advice is particular to our church and religious practices.

I'm to ask if she discussed me or our marriage, past present or future with her sister.  Regardless of the answer... .I'm to clarify that "Going forward... .I forbid it"

That your sister has created a triangle in our marriage and it needs to end.

We practiced roll play with my wife trying to distract and blame and me practicing staying on point.

"We will talk about that later, right now the issue is willful deception."

I've got some practicing to do.

P ended by reminding me that my wife will be mad... .to not get drawn into that... .my roll is to stand up for our marriage... .let my wife make her own decisions.

It sounds like you're trying to set some boundaries with regards to your SIL's relationship with your wife and your family in general, but it's not quite clear how you plan on enforcing those boundaries.  And if your plan is:

":)o not cross my boundary or we will talk a second time about this!"

... .then please come up with a better plan.

Just how are you planning on enforcing your edict regarding any discussions your wife has with her sister?

[formflier]

I'm not and enforcer... .I'm the leader of the family.  I should speak clearly and succinctly about important matters.

OK... .here is where we are off the "normal" bpdfamily advice line.

My wife pushes for a much "harder line" religious view than I do.  She wants to be "Godly" by submitting to her husband, unless I'm asking her to sin. 

So... .technically... .

"Honey... .teach our kids from Matthew this morning... " (no sin) she would have to
"Honey... .rob that bank"  (sin) she wouldn't have to

This is my P trying to be pragmatic about letting my wife's religious views do whatever they will.

I do understand the concern that my wife may choose to "live in sin"... ."willful sin"... .and I'll have to respect that choice. 

The option I'm taking off the table is for me to in anyway "enable" her to live and decide things against her (our) chosen religious beliefs... .without consequence.

There is a clearly defined way to "confront" something like this... .  That is the general model P and I are using.

I do my part and my wife gets to decide where and how to deal with her emotions... .that's not my part.

FF

[HopefulDad]

Not sure I'm following you.  Are you saying it's your job to set the rules, but completely up to your wife to choose to follow them (no sin) or not (sin)?  No consequences other than how she'll be judged by God?

[Sunfl0wer]

Willful deception to do something she knows I likely wouldn't have been for.
Putting the relationship with her sister ahead of (or above) our marriage (and to the destruction of our marriage)
When my wife visits her sister... .there are usually rocky times ahead in our marriage.
Sister interfered in my legal case and apparently encouraged my wife to do so.
This sister's nickname from childhood is "Sneaky Snake".  Her parents encouraged her.

It sounds a bit like the bottom line is that historically, the sister and what she finds acceptable has comprimised your kids safety.  That it would be reckless to not object to the visit.

Also sounds like your wife in the company of her sister, makes poorer decisions than on her own.

Also sounds like the two ban together and sis is like gasoline for ffw paranoia and this planted seeds of paranoia may germinate all year long.

Idk, just trying to reframe this from what was in OP, what P says is a bit minimizing, to what the reality is. Trying to grasp better here.

... .

Way I see it is sure, some people drink, and are ok.
But what if my SO has hit me when drinking but only when drinking.
The drinking is the accelerant for his lacking impulse control.

Sounds like that is what ffw sister is for her... .an accelerant.

So like, if my SO announces they are going to go douch themself in paranoia accelerant, yea, maybe a good idea to address this in some way... .vs "let it slide," it is "only" a visit to a sister.

Not sure if I am getting it tho?

[formflier]

Sunflower pretty much has it. 

There is nothing good there for our marriage. 

I will try to further explain the religious view later.  I am mobile at the moment.

FF

[formflier]

Not sure I'm following you.  Are you saying it's your job to set the rules, but completely up to your wife to choose to follow them (no sin) or not (sin)?  No consequences other than how she'll be judged by God?

Right... pretty much right.

We each have free will. 

Now... there certainly will be "natural consequences" in our relationship of using deception and having less trust.  I won't "hide" those from my wife. 

I'm also not my wife's "Holy Spirit".  I realize bpdfamily is a secular board... .so I don't want present a lengthy Christian perspective.  My job is to lovingly confront.  If there is repentance... we move in that direction. 

If there is not... .then it's up to the Holy Spirit to "convict" a person.  Many times Christians take on the roll of Holy Spirit and become a nag.  A practical way to view Holy Spirit is a conscience.

Back to consequences.  I used to share money freely with my wife... .she had full joint access... .essentially no restrictions... .other than our agreements.

As time went on she has chosen to not honor agreements.  Not my job to convince her she should. 

She now has no access to "my" money, other than by approaching me and asking.  That is a "natural consequence of untrustworthy behavior.  Especially a pattern of such behavior with a pattern of "false repentance"

FF

[HopefulDad]

Thanks for the clarification, but I am not sure I'm seeing the whole picture correctly.  It seems like there is an inconsistency in boundary enforcement.  With the money, there is clear enforcement when she crosses the boundary.  Yet when it comes to forbidding her to speak about your marriage with her sister, there's no enforcement by you and instead the consequence is how she'll be judged at the pearly gates.  I'm sure there's a nuance there between these examples with regards to a biblical marriage, but assuming I have this right, might I pose to you that this nuance is lost upon her and thus giving you problems?  Considering she has BPD, this nuance might be too difficult for her to fully grasp.

Sometimes it's best to strip away the nuance and get to the bottom line:  When you say something, do you mean it?  With the money in your example, it's obvious you do.  You back your words with action.   With the sister talk, it's not so clear.  If she speaks to her about your marriage after you forbid it and you don't take any particular action on that, maybe she thinks you only sometimes mean what you say.  So why should she respect any rule you make?

[Grey Kitty]

Forbidding your wife from talking to her sister about your marriage, present, future, or past is an interesting mess.

• By your wife's religion as she understands it, you have the right to command her this way. (You don't really buy this thing quite so much, but would rather use it than argue with her over it.)
• It really does sound like sis is a horrible influence, so the end result if shey obes is for the best.
• This behaves like a rule or agreement, not an enforceable boundary. That is, you couldn't stop her this time, and won't be able to stop her next time... .and you won't divorce her over it.
• So when she does it, you give her a stern talking to (like the one you have planned), and wait 'till next time you have to repeat it.

Ultimately, you will have to decide if your efforts to get her to follow this rule are worth it or not.

[formflier]

There is a bit of a shift here in my approach.

I am worrying far less about what she thinks and worrying far more about my analysis of a crappy relationship situation and speaking succinctly about my decisions.

My P repeated over and over that pwBPD try to get you off message.  Make the issue about something else.

Stay on message.  :)on't take bait to argue or shift.

My wife very well may not be able to get it.  She may very well get confused.  She may choose to disobey.

For me to back away from such a bedrock concept because I "don't think she will get it"... or she will "pitch a fit"... .or "lash out"... .is operating out of FOG (IMO)

Deception is poisonous to a marriage.  

There is nothing good that comes from in any way enabling a woman that was praised and given a "term of endearment" of "Sneaky Snake" as a child to in any way influence my marriage. My was does react badly to her sisters influence

For GK specifically.

There is nothing good that will come from trying to control my wife's relationship with her sister.  My wife will react badly to this.

Both are incredibly crappy options.  

Pilot analogy:
There is not always a good area for a forced landing.  That doesn't mean you stop flying the airplane.  Pick your poison... .pick your course of action... .and go for it.  

That's what I'm doing.

FF

[Sunfl0wer]

I don't think this is about one adult, punishing and enfocing consequences on another.  Not about taking the stance of a "punitive parent" schema mode.

More like if someone is going to express behavior, attitudes not in line with marriage values... .then not validate the invalid.  Not act like it is all honky dory that someone veers away from an agreement just made... .etc, but express ones truth, ones reality, in the face of the reality that doesn't match.

I don't see this as "issuing consequences"
More like, leading with appropriate responsiveness to the situation.

[formflier]

Thanks for the clarification, but I am not sure I'm seeing the whole picture correctly. 

I'm sure there's a nuance there between these examples with regards to a biblical marriage

So why should she respect any rule you make?

The "reward" is not only at the pearly gates. 

A bit about how I read the Bible.

I believe that God designed marriage and put forth "guidance", that if followed, especially by both at the same time, will result in unbelievable happiness and satisfaction. 

I don't read much of the guidance as saying "this is the only way".  Yes... there are places in the Bible that says "thou shalt not" or other places that says "thou shall"... .ok... .I'm a plain reader... there is not much wiggle room there. 

I read the marriage guidance as guidance.  Yes... .a wife should obey her husband.  More importantly a husband should love his wife, as Christ loved the church.

I'm a plain reader... .clearly (to me) the burden of responsibility is on the husband.  I should treat the authority granted to me to "order" my wife to do something with the utmost tenderness and care.  It should be rare that this ever happens. 

Unfortunately there are many men that have abusively used this and IMO given this a bad name.  My wife's course of action makes a mockery of any "plain reading" of a Christian woman.

There are times when, out of love, the truth must be spoken.  Succinctly.

That's on me

My wife may not listen.

That's on her.

Part of Christ's love involves speaking clearly.  Another part is allowing free will and allowing consequences.  Offhand, I'm not aware of any place where Christ forced someone to follow him (boundary enforcement).  There are times where he spoke clearly... .and people rejected.

That very well may happen in my marriage.

Hope this helps.

FF

[Fian]

To toss in a little spiritual perspective here.  For one who does not believe, relying on God's judgement seems like a waste.  He doesn't exist, so nothing happens when you do actions that offend His Law.  However, if He does exist, then that also means that he can take action.  In fact, He doesn't just wait for "pearly gates," He can correct/punish today as well.  By FF not trying to enforce it himself, he is allowing himself to trust God to take care of the situation (FF, I recommend that you pray when your wife is disobedient and ask Him to correct the situation).

Anyway, I can see how to an unbeliever FF's approach seems empty and with no stick.

[formflier]

Good perspective Fian.

It's also important to avoid "triangulating" with God.

My wife tries to do this often... .Perhaps "shifting credit" is a better term.

Practically it plays out where she perceives me as doing bad things... .that's my "sinful" heart at work.  FF is bad.

God shows up and saves us or "changes my heart".  So... .since it was God doing it... .FF gets no credit.  God does.

God is good
FF is bad.

If FF makes a loving or good decision, it was because of God.

Very very very... .unhealthy view.

P was very clear to me that I shouldn't "invoke" authority.  As in "God's going to get you for deceiving".

My wife is not an idiot... .she is fairly high functioning and can sit and explain how a marriage should work, Biblical rules and all that. 

There are no issues with lack of knowledge with my wife.  So... .don't explain it any further.  Stick to the main points, be succinct. 

Let her deal with (or not) the uncomfortable feelings that come from claiming belief in one thing and acting in opposite ways.

Yes I am praying about the situation.  Yes this situation has and is testing my faith.  In many ways it is sharpening what I do believe... and what I don't believe.

FF

[Fian]

Hi FF, I wasn't saying you should invoke God in your discussion with her.  You pray to God to take care of the situation if she disobeys - you don't even need to tell her. 

But since you are using your husband authority to forbid her, it is up to you whether you want her to know that you will be praying to God as well.  If she knows that you are praying, it may make her more reluctant to talk with her sister about your marriage since God sees all.

[formflier]

 
Yep... .Fian... I understand what you mean.  That explanation wasn't directed at you... .more general.

Like many pwBPD... .as they get "closer" in a relationship... .things get odder.  Same with my wife's relationship with God.  The more ferociously she tries to "fix things" by reading and praying... .the more she sabotages.

For instance (i think i've mentioned this before)... .I'll likely never again "confess" anything to my wife and ask forgiveness.  A few times had been weird, the last time she laughed out loud, used the Lord's name in vain, and rambled on with a really wacky story about what I was "Really" confessing.

I confronted her "Biblically" about all of that and she insisted she didn't laugh... .that I had that part wrong.  No repentance or acknowledgement that using the Lords name in vain was in anyway... "wrong"

Completely weird... .

FF

[empath]

I'm concerned about the idea of 'forbidding' something without any boundary enforcement. There's an implied punishment or consequence with the idea of forbidding something.
 
My husband triangulates with others, including his parents. Most recently, it has been his parents. I've expressed my discomfort with him talking to his parents without telling them the truth about what is happening. The things that he complains about are boundaries that I needed - he 'tried' to be honest, but he wasn't. I confronted, and he tried to get me off the subject. I kept bringing it back to now and his lack of honesty. He 'felt that' (not an emotion or feeling, that's a judgment). Back to the point... . 

The reality is that I can't keep him from talking to his parents or to his pastors. I also don't want to be drawn into the triangulation, so I stay away for the most part. I can express my discomfort, but it's going to be hard for him to describe anything that is close to reality because his 'feelings' need a backstory filled in, one that doesn't involve him being bad. So, I must be bad, and I pray to a 'different' God.

[formflier]

Hey... .please don't hear that I like this plan either.  Not all plans are "likable".

The emphasis is more on succinct... sharp... .clear communication.

More later.

FF

[empath]

It's not that I don't 'like' the plan. I don't think it is a wise one and think that it could backfire on you. Without any boundary to enforce, it is just a threat; nothing is going to happen if she doesn't comply, except you can bring it up repeatedly... . 

My husband's parents are toxic as well, and they have in the past several months been turned against me as my husband complained to them about the boundaries that I have right now. They told him how to deal with me... . 

Something that is forbidden is going to be more attractive, especially if there isn't any consequences to doing the forbidden.