Please pray for wisdom. I am driving to get my child from sister in law

[Family Court Strategies: When Your Partner Has BPD OR NPD Traits.]

Well obviously what is good for her isn't good for you. That's the hypocrisy in the whole situation. It gets very frustrating.
It definitely is interesting when they try to justify their actions. It is always completely self-serving. I guess that is the nature of the condition.
sometimes it is hard just keeping up with their crazy-making rationale.

Hang in there!

[allienoah]

Well obviously what is good for her isn't good for you. That's the hypocrisy in the whole situation. It gets very frustrating.
It definitely is interesting when they try to justify their actions. It is always completely self-serving. I guess that is the nature of the condition.
sometimes it is hard just keeping up with their crazy-making rationale.

Hang in there!

[Notwendy]

I think your reply to your wife shows both love and restraint.

The challenge is for her to find a Bible passage that supports her actions. In a way- since you both adhere to the same interpretation of the Bible, it puts her in a bind to find one.

I think you are dealing with the split between the idealized version of oneself and the actual version. We all do this, but I think the person with BPD tends to be more split- when they don't meet their ideal versions, they "erase" " dissociate" from the part of themselves that did not or project that on to someone else. They don't fully accept themselves as the humans they are.

Your wife professes to believe what the two of you believe about religion and marriage, but her actions didn't meet that expectation. Holding her accountable due to the shame triggering is a tricky task. Yet, you need to protect your kids.

[Grey Kitty]

FF, you have three related issues here, and there are three different solutions:

1. Your wife will be 'reasonable' or 'good' and she will make agreements, and behave well. Then she will become paranoid and 'bad' and she will behave badly and/or break agreements in any way she has the power to do so.

Especially when triggered by drama from her FOO. Especially involving money or your children, which you have limited ability to stop her from doing in advance. (Also by doing things like interfering with your sleep, which you can and have prevented by boundary enforcement)

Solution: Radical acceptance. This is who your wife is, you cannot change her. (Solution part 2... .clean up the mess, as needed... .)

2. She just did this with your children, taking them away against your previous agreements, etc... .

Solution: Take action to protect your children from further time with these people. Already done, if I read this topic correctly.

And you will have to do it again someday. (See problem #1... .)

3. Arguments with your wife about the Biblical justification and/or distorted things (which she probably believes) that she told your children.

You handled the questions from your kids well, it sounds like.

I think you can handle the Biblical discussions with your wife just fine, and I'm not in a position to advise you on how.

Keep your eye on the big picture, FF. This will be at best, a very temporary solution to problem #1.

This can be a tool for you to fix immediate issues, if you use it that way.

Depending upon your children's involvement, it might be a tool to teach them.

Don't let yourself get led down a rabbit hole with your wife, believing that you will somehow magically 'fix' anything permanently with her this way.

As long as you keep this productive, and end it when it isn't, you will do well.

[empath]

Honestly, asking your wife to defend her biblical model feels like you've stepped back onto the drama triangle as a persecutor. Claiming power seems a bit like that, too.

For me, I don't expect my husband to change or to reliably do things as a parent when I'm not here. Following through on what he has committed to doesn't necessarily happen. So, if something is important, I have to ensure that it is done by me or someone else who is reliable. Since I've made that shift, my daughter seems to feel more secure.

[formflier]

So... .empath... .any thoughts on how to address this without being on drama triangle?

FF

[empath]

What is your goal going forward?

[formflier]

What is your goal going forward?

No kids left with SIL without a parent.

FF

[empath]

No kids left with SIL without a parent.

You cannot control what your wife and their other parent does, and she has broken your trust in this area. So what can you do to ensure that this happens that doesn't involve her buy-in?

[Fian]

No kids left with SIL without a parent.

FF

Off the top of my head, you might try ensuring that children are never in same state as SIL unless you are also with them.

[formflier]

Goals going forward.

NO kids alone with SIL.

No enablement of hypocrisy in my wife's approach to religion and marriage (we are conservative Christian) and family decision making.

I am aware that I can't control her.  That is much different than giving her a pass which is much different than "persecuting" her.

I do want to avoid drama triangle stuff.  I see holding a person accountable, enforcing boundaries and (as a result) being perceived as a persecutor... .very different than actively choosing a role of persecutor.

So... .she may see me on triangle.  I'm hoping with you guys and P that I don't choose to play a role there.

FF

[Notwendy]

Personally, I see the triangle as the way someone with BPD perceives and acts in a relationship- whether we intend to play those roles or not. I think they tend to stay in victim mode with their perception. The triangle can be acted out with any number of people- even one person. For instance- your wife knows you don't want her to take the kids to her sister. So it plays out this way ( you as Persecutor)

Wife (Victim) "FF is so mean, he won't let me see my sister. She wants me to visit and I feel bad"
Wife ( Rescuer). " It's his fault you feel bad, let's fix that"... .go see sister

You get angry- Persecutor  Wife " He's so mean to me!".

While I understand the intent of your religion with regards to marriage, I also wonder if there is a triangle involved here- You, wife, Bible. Dysfunction is pervasive in all relationships and this includes religion- because a disordered person will relate to religion in a disordered way too. I don't know if you can enforce something different on your wife. Even if you are the head of the household- she has her own thinking about this. I think the best we can do when a boundary or agreement is broken is to act on it. That is tough if she is in the role of traditional mother- she's with the kids a lot of the time and that puts her in the role of decision maker during that time about a lot of things.

[patientandclear]

Seems to me the only way you can ensure kids aren't taken where you don't want them taken, and left where you don't want them left, is not to "let" her have the kids alone. Or be divorced with an enforceable parenting plan which rules those choices out without your permission.

The former seems completely unrealistic.

The latter is unlikely to be imposed without her negotiated agreement or a finding that the SIL situation is objectively unsafe. Perhaps she would agree (she has agreed in context of your marriage; agreeing in context of divorce would be a different matter). The difference from now is that agreement would be enforceable.

Realistically, this is a tough goal to achieve.

[Harri]

Hi FF.  So sorry this happened.  I think you did a great job of following through on your rule about the SIL and protecting your kids.  I also think answering their questions about what happened truthfully and age appropriately was wonderful.  Good work there.

So... .she may see me on triangle.  I'm hoping with you guys and P that I don't choose to play a role there.

Exactly.  How she perceives your behavior can not and does not define your role.  It is good to be aware of how the triangle plays out in her mind as it can help in putting her behavior into context, but other than that, 'her triangle' has little value here IMO and should not affect how you respond in these types of situations.  You will be seen as the persecutor... .so what.  She is violating agreements made in the marriage, under the eyes of God, and exposing your kids to things you both agreed would not happen.  

As for religion being part of the triangle, in your case, I see God as being in the middle (at least for you FF).  It sounds like your wife uses God to play the victim in her mind and to my eyes, it puts her in the role of wanna be victim but really ia a sort of persecutor when you analyze things from your end.

As long as you stay off the triangle or at least in the middle, I think you are doing fine.  You can't base your responses on her reactions.

Tough tough place to be.  Wishing you and yours the very best.

[flourdust]

Hmm. Let's break these goals down.

Goals going forward.

NO kids alone with SIL.

As others have said, this is not in your control, unless you get a divorce. If I was to ask you what your boundary was, and you said this in response, I would tell you that it's an ultimatum or a rule you want to impose on someone else, not a boundary. Right?

No enablement of hypocrisy in my wife's approach to religion and marriage (we are conservative Christian) and family decision making. ... .  I see holding a person accountable, enforcing boundaries ... .

OK... .what's the boundary? If action is "kids are left alone with SIL," what is your reaction to that?

What does "enablement of hypocrisy" look like? Is it something you can control?

What is "holding a person accountable"? If you told me "I'm holding you accountable to call me 'sir' from now on," and I ignored you, what would you do and what difference would it make? Help me understand what these abstract ideas actually mean in practice, and how they get you to your goals?

[Sunfl0wer]

As others have said, this is not in your control, unless you get a divorce

Divorce does not allow a person to control where kids are when not in your care.
Reading around here long enough, even legal boards... .  doesn't seem divorce gains any more compliance to agreements by the pwBPD.

Not sure why divorce is being propsed as a "solution" or such... .
... .Just saying.

Idk, reading how it all went down, seems clear to me the boundaries, (kids not left with SIL)  boundary enforcement, (FF retrieve kids) etc.  Seems consistent and simple how I see it.

[formflier]

Excellent issues to raise... keep them coming.

I should have time tonight to post.

FF

[flourdust]

Divorce does not allow a person to control where kids are when not in your care.
Reading around here long enough, even legal boards... .  doesn't seem divorce gains any more compliance to agreements by the pwBPD.

Not sure why divorce is being propsed as a "solution" or such... .
... .Just saying.

Idk, reading how it all went down, seems clear to me the boundaries, (kids not left with SIL)  boundary enforcement, (FF retrieve kids) etc.  Seems consistent and simple how I see it.

You can put rules in place around custody, travel, right of first refusal, etc. in a parenting plan. Agreed that compliance can still be iffy, but there is an enforcement mechanism, albeit a slow and costly one.

FF can choose to enforce a boundary of "kids left with SIL" with "FF will go to pick up kids." That's his choice -- I get the sense he is looking for something more pre-emptive than that, which I don't think exists.

[Harri]

I am not sure I see the problem with setting rules about who the kids can be left with.  FF is well within his rights as a parent, as part of his headship role in the agreed upon biblical marriage (hope I worded that correctly). 

He can still have the boundary around the rule of "kids aren't left with SIL" with the boundary being that he will pick the kid up, he will not rescue his wife by trying to whitewash her violation of a rule he has the right to enforce nor will he try to hide her behavior from the kids but rather, will answer the kids questions and explain things in age appropriate ways.

Just because he can't prevent a behavior from happening does not mean a rule should not be in place and that boundaries can not be established for ff.  I agree that if he said "if you leave the kids with SIL I will do ___" is a ultimatum, but stating the rule (again and again and again every time ffw breaks it) is just fine.  If, or more likely when, she breaks the rule, he drives to get the kids and the chips land where they land.  No need to state the boundary to ffw and no need for her to comply.

I am fairly certain that FF is at the point where he expects that ffw will go off the rule book every once in a while.

[flourdust]

Harri, I think that's a very reasonably constructed boundary. I'm looking forward to ff's thoughts on this -- because with a boundary like that, there's no need for all of the stuff about holding people accountable, etc.

[formflier]

I am fairly certain that FF is at the point where he expects that ffw will go off the rule book every once in a while.

WHAT!  ?  You mean... .it's going to happen... .AGAIN... .       

Yeah... .you guys pretty much have it nailed... .and expressed better than I could put it.

I would add that I'm not going to "protect" her from uncomfortable conversations about how the Bible, which we both profess to follow, says kids should be raised and "things decided upon".

It's rather clear.

That's very different from chasing her around the house with a Bible demanding she "read this now"... .etc etc.

FF

[Harri]

Hey flourdust!  Glad it made sense!

I see accountability as a separate issue as it is often unattainable with mentally unstable people whether BPD/BPD traits or people with the 'jerk' syndrome. 

FF, haha.  It is only a matter of time unfortunately. 

Not protecting your wife is a good point as well. 

Be well.

[empath]

I think that the idea of "if kids are left with sil, I will___" is a good boundary, just make sure that you count the cost of that boundary and are willing to pay that cost. It is hard to enforce the 'rule' of 'no kids left there'.

I do want to avoid drama triangle stuff.  I see holding a person accountable, enforcing boundaries and (as a result) being perceived as a persecutor... .very different than actively choosing a role of persecutor.

I get the concern about the hypocrisy with regard to religious practices; I live with that as well. My husband tells me one thing and other people another -- and he is in church leadership. At this point, I care more about the end result that he is telling people things that are not true. He tries to distract me by telling me his story about how he came up with this... .I keep going back to he knew something to be untrue and he told it to other people. He doesn't like this, and I'm not interested in his justifications.

[Notwendy]

To me, if a person truly feels the Bible is the set of rules they want to live by, then their choices are between them and their conscience. This marriage agreement you two have may work when the marriage is between two adults who both make this choice.

However, if your wife is emotionally younger, this influenced her emotional ability to do this. It also seems to me to put you in the position of enforcer. This changes the dynamics in the relationship. If two people have an agreement and one breaks it- that person is accountable to the other. In this situation you have brought in a third entity - the Bible- and you are enforcing her commitment to that. So it's no longer a one on one relationship for her to you or her Bible.

I'm not questioning your religious commitment, but looking at how a mental disorder affects all relationships and wondering how there can be room for your wife's way of thinking in it. I get the sense that you are trying to get her to see things your way, justified by the Bible, but it's not possible to control someone else's thinking.

It's a dilemma- a person of legal age who is legally competent and in many ways probably a good mother to the kids is hard to control.

It seems there are two issues here- the children's safety. The other is her broken agreements with you. Her behavior may have a passive aggressive element. This can be done by people who feel a lack of control. She may agree with you to avoid a conflict while thinking " I'll just do it anyway" rather than make a case for visiting her sister. It's possible she feels conflicted about that - it is her family - even if it is a dysfunctional one.

[formflier]

So... .to put the most recent weeks "behavior" in context, it was "relatively mild"

SIL moved... again... .  I think her pattern is to skip out on last month or two of lease payments and move right before eviction.  I can't prove that... .but I'm a landlord... .I know patterns... .watch deadlines... etc etc.

Her kids don't want to move... .each time... .lots of blame... .lots of stress.  There is 18 year old boy, 16 year old boy and 14 year old girl.

18 year old is ruined.  drug/domestic violence convictions, he "barely" graduated high school, suicidal ideations when was 13/14 with lots of associated counseling (it was his fault... .no family dynamic change... in SIL view).

16 year old is self absorbed teen... ignores mom... chases girls around... hides drugs and alcohol... but hides them well.  IN other words... he presents well.    18 year old does not present well... cries a lot... dysregulates.  16 year old is "cool customer".

14 year old girl is most reasonable of the lot.  There was some fight over there before the move.  14 year old girl was subject to a dominance move of some sort by her Mom.  She said no.  So... the mom picks a 3 bedroom house, takes 14 year old girl over there to show her and says.  There's my room, there is your brothers room and there is your other brothers room.

14 year old didn't ask where hers was... .she got the message and moved out to her Dad's house.  She has been there... .almost a month.  It appears permanent.  No child has disobeyed SIL this long. 

It has thrown the entire family system into disarray.     I think it's kinda funny... .if my family wasn't so tied to them.

My daughter apparently was the "bait" to get 14 year old to move back to Mom. My wife tried to "fix" the rift.

So... .luckily this was while my daughter was at BIL's house (divorced dad).  The "cool" customer decides he needs to go check out some girls (  drink and get laid) which leaves SIL and the 18 year old to do all the work.  18 year old flips out (always happening) and punches holes in the wall. 

The fix for this (in BPD land) is to prevent 16 year old from leaving... .so there is some kind of standoff where SIL is in her car and 16 year old in his car... .and SIL is blocking 16 year old from leaving property. 

Somehow... .they got moved.

Even if this story is a fabrication... .that's almost just as bad.  Stories like this are commonplace.

There is a chance that my duramax diesel truck was the vehicle being used to block 16 year old in.  My wife gave it to them for the move... .

Note:  I've not mentioned my upsetness at the truck... .I focus on daughter.

Anyway... .to give you a flavor of stuff that happens there... .like I said... relatively mild.

Bad would be SIL comes home to find drunk/high/sleeping 18 year old.  Does she let him sleep it off... .of course not.

She wakes him up... .he beats her azz... cops come... .he goes to jail.  Technically he got a conviction, but I think it is a deal where it "goes away" after a year if no other trouble.

Just another day in BPD land.

FF

[formflier]

To be clear... .conservative Baptist belief is that a husband can and should "discipline" his family.

That would be to point out scriptural error and such.  The husband points it out... .but isn't really the enforcer, that's up to Holy Spirit (conscience).

P has worked with my wife enough to know that pointing out to her that she is wrong... .about anything... .is very triggering.  I need to make sure it matters.

In this case... .it does. 

My approach still matters.

Let her box herself in with scripture... .vice me pursuing her with it.

Or... she gives up scripture... .with some whacky explanation... but that busts her social order.

Essentially... .she has put herself in a pickle... .I'm not going to rescue... and will encourage the pickle to continue until she is tagged out.

I will avoid being the "tagger"... .if possible.

FF

[toomanydogs]

I have absolutely no advice, no insight, just a note to let you know that my heart goes out to you and your children.

I pray your faith is able to sustain you through this latest upheaval.

TMD

[Cat Familiar]

Whew, FF, I hope things have settled down in recent days. You certainly drew a royal flush of BPD with your wife's extended family!

I've seen a consistent pattern in your posts over the years. You are incredibly tolerant and patient, however you seem to desire explanations for whacky behavior and refusals to comply with agreements. I get this too--I'm very logical and unemotional and when my husband reacts in what seems to me to be a bizarre way, I'd like to understand what is going on.

However, I might as well try to figure out random throws on a roulette wheel. (Don't understand why my metaphors today revolve around gambling, as that is something I have absolutely no interest in.) Sure, over time, I've learned a lot about my husband's triggers and often I can avoid them, or at least verbally duck and run for cover if I've inadvertently triggered one of them. But for a lifetime of his history, I'll never have any knowledge or understanding, nor is it my business to know. Lots of times I don't think he even knows why he gets triggered. So my asking for clarification just becomes a bigger trigger.

I understand your situation is quite different in that you're sharing your Christian views with each other as part of your marriage. But in a similar way, asking for her scriptural rationale for behavior which conflicts with your prior agreements is very similar to asking a kid why they took cookies out of the cookie jar when they were prohibited from doing so. It definitely puts you into the persecutor role.

I cannot think of any good alternative other than having really clear rules set, which you've done. If there were some way to have natural consequences follow, that would be great. But if you're the enforcer, the judge, jury, executioner, then, again, you end up in the persecutor role. And we all know how easily pwBPD embrace victimhood.

I'm so glad you and D11 had a chance to ride horses. I can imagine she must miss them terribly.

[formflier]

Guess what my wife is trying to avoid talking about... .   

I suppose the outcome of this would be some sort of written thing that says two signatures required for any overnight visit.

Or perhaps out of state visit... where a parent is not present.

Of course... she can violate that... .but it is part of creating a paper trail... and creating structure... .inside which she can do her thing... without too much collateral damage.

We'll see.

FF

[Sunfl0wer]

Seems like kids left in her sister's care without one of you present is the issue. (Because you did not travel all that way just to prevent a sleep over.  The situation sounds unsafe even during daylight hours.)

Also cause otherwise "overnight" can easily start as... ."I intended kid to stay all day, but it got too late to drive back and just made more sense to get kid in am, kid was tired, they were having fun... .etc."

Idk. I think "overnight" actually sounds a bit like permission to leave kids with sister.  Because makes it sound like it is ok... .most of the time, except this small window when kids are sleeping anyways.

Maybe even an agreement that kids don't get left anywhere... .period... .without agreement, idk.  The simplier the better tho.

[formflier]

 
Good point... .I'll sweeten it up. 

Kids left in someone else's care when out of state, need both parents to be ok with it.  Or something like that.

Yes... the real issue is the sister.  I'm trying to solve that by enforcing a "principle".  I don't want to debate the merits of the sister.  Nothing good comes from that.

FF