Responding to rage by High-Functioning BPD

[KarlTOO]

I think my partner has BPD; in any case, she is extremely high-functioning.  Accordingly, she can't be aware she has some sort of problem to solve within herself.

Periodically she goes into a rage.  As a high-functioning, the rage is emotionally damaging to me but not physical.  Accordingly, little-to-nothing of the advice applicable to low-functioning BPDs is illuminating. 

(The subject of a rage might have some validity; or, it might be completely illogical.  The key sign is that it is disproportionate to the matter at hand.)

My assumption is that there is nothing I could possibly do to make her change for the better.  Failure in futile attempts only wears me down creating the experience of self-defeat. 

My realistic hope is to figure out how to respond in such a way as to preserve my own sense of dignity, self-respect, empowerment. 

At the same time, I am guided by the constraint of "do no harm".  So, if I could choose a tactic that made me feel good but further damaged her emotional state, I'd want to avoid that.

So far, the only tactic I've found is to refuse to engage.  Refuse to respond.  Refuse to carry on any conversation that is not somehow necessary to the routine chores at hand (e.g., 'Do you want pork or beef for dinner?"  At least: I haven't said anything that explicitly might make her feel worse (no-harm); and, I have registered my objection to her rage behavior.

How effective is this "silent treatment" tactic deemed to be?

Is there a recommended alternative tactic that should be better?  E.g., is there a humorous response that will break her emotional cycle?  Something general and fit for any purpose such as Regan's quip: "There you go again!" 

Clearly, it's got to be non-critical.  (Ragan's quip doesn't meet this criteria.)  It would have to be humorous or otherwise diversionary (e.g., 'Isn't it wonderful how much Congress is accomplishing by cooperating with Trump!') 

Or, perhaps it should be a boundary declaration such as 'Stop that!'.  Not that she would respect the boundary; but, at least she would hear a response that objected to her behavior. 

Has anyone found anything that works with a high-functioning BPD?

[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.

[No-One]

Hi KarlTOO:
Welcome! 

My assumption is that there is nothing I could possibly do to make her change for the better.  So far, the only tactic I've found is to refuse to engage.  Refuse to respond.  Refuse to carry on any conversation that is not somehow necessary to the routine chores at hand (e.g., 'Do you want pork or beef for dinner?"  

  You can't change her.  She is the only one who can change what she does and how she acts. You have control over yourself and how you interact and react.

Refusing to engage in arguments is a good tactic (Don't JADE - Justify, Argue, Defend, Explain).  Do you have a certain tactic you use when you refuse to engage?  i.e. Do you just walk away and stay silent?  Do you say something like: "I'm not going to argue" or "I need to stop this discussion.  We can discuss ____ on another day, when we are both calm"

Other than staying out of any topics that could lead to further argument, probably best to just carry on with normal conversation on your part and just act normal.  She might choose to not interact for awhile, but that's on her.   

How effective is this "silent treatment" tactic deemed to be?. . . Is there a recommended alternative tactic that should be better?  E.g., is there a humorous response that will break her emotional cycle?  Something general and fit for any purpose such as Regan's quip: "There you go again!"

   Be cautious with humor, especially if she lacks a sense of humor.  She could think you are making fun of her.  I don't think "There you go again!" would give you the result you desire.  If you could both agree on something funny, to signify a "time out", that could work.

The "silent treatment" isn't a recommended tactic.  It's a common tactic used by people with BPD or BPD traits.

Periodically she goes into a rage.  As a high-functioning, the rage is emotionally damaging to me but not physical.  Accordingly, little-to-nothing of the advice applicable to low-functioning BPDs is illuminating.    

  What advice isn't illuminating?  All the communication skills on this website are merely means for emotionally intelligent communications.  They can actually work any where in life:  at work, church, with friends, more normal family members, etc.

Or, perhaps it should be a boundary declaration such as 'Stop that!'.  Not that she would respect the boundary; but, at least she would hear a response that objected to her behavior. 

   Boundaries are personal to you and are things that you set, have control over and can enforce by yourself.  You could enforce a boundary by refusing to argue or listen to her rants by removing yourself from her presence.  Perhaps, you say something like, "Sounds like you are having a bad day.  I'm leaving now.  We can talk later, when you are feeling better" Or  calmly say something like, "I'm not having that conversation now.  I'm going for a walk (home, to the gym, the store, etc.)"

[KarlTOO]

Thank you No-One, for replying.

"Do you have a certain tactic you use when you refuse to engage? . . . . probably best to just carry on with normal conversation on your part and just act normal."

THIS is the sort of feedback I was hoping for.  Thank you!  So, if I have the gist of your tactic, it is to ignore the rage and look for something timely to say which would be a subject-changer.  E.g., if we are cooking dinner I might ask: 'Do you think the soup is done?'  Thus, I'm not making things worse by abandoning her (either by ignoring her or walking away)  NOR am I engaging in the slightest by acknowledging the rage ("I'm not going to argue" or "I need to stop this discussion.  We can discuss ____ on another day, when we are both calm").  Instead, I would be maintaining the relationship as-IF it were normal and the rage wasn't happening. 

Your suggestion seems to relieve me of the challenge of trying to think of something appropo to the rage; difficult while under fire.  Your suggestion turns the challenge on its head; I must think of something appropo to ANYthing ELSE going on at the time OTHER than the rage.  I think I can manage this.

"If you could both agree on something funny, to signify a "time out", that could work."  In the context of a high-functioning BPD, the idea that "we could both agree" on as a "time out" signal, that seems difficult. 

I am reminded of a professional joke, which I will transform for a lay audience:  "Q:  What's the difference between a lawyer and a terrorist?  A: You can negotiate with a terrorist!"  Simply substitute "BPD" for "lawyer".  Because a H-F BPD can't be broached on the topic that there might be something wrong with the way she handles disputes, this isn't something about which we can "both agree".

Nevertheless, it suggests a tactic.  I have a quip which she has acknowledged is a joke and which turns the issue of culpability (for anything) on her (in a particularly light hearted way).  No explicit agreement; nevertheless, she clearly views it as a well established joke.  Suitable for all rages. 

"What advice isn't illuminating?"  The majority of what I have read deals with Low-Functioning BPDs or those who are in therapy.  I acknowledge these subsets are important and worthy of discussion.  Nevertheless, there is a huge gap between H-F and L-F.  In the L-F case there are conspicuous and objectively indisputable facts that serve as a pretext for attempting to engage the BPD.  Suppose the L-F is cutting herself.  You can say to her that this is clearly self-harming and she needs help.  You can make suggestions about how one - as family/friend - might be helpful, such as by communicating in a useful way. 

In the H-F case, there is NO such pretext (conspicuous and objectively indisputable fact) that serves to engage with the H-F BPD.  The 'fact' on the table is that the there is nothing wrong with 'me' (the BPD); it is 'you' the family/friend who is all screwed-up. 

"All the communication skills on this website are merely means for emotionally intelligent communications.  They can actually work any where in life:  at work, church, with friends, more normal family members, etc."

Your point is very well taken.   They "can actually work any where in life"  -  whenever there is a plausible presumption of "emotionally intelligent communications".  However, the H-F BPD is precisely the context where the presupposition does NOT exist.

The BPD (whether L-F or H-F) isn't capable of "emotionally intelligent communications".  The L-F BPD is actually a better candidate because there IS some pretext (e.g., the conspicuous self-harm) which serves as a candidate entry-point about which to attempt to engage the BPD.  Conversely, the H-F BPD does not acknowledge any such pretext.  Nor is it prudent for any non-BPD family/friend to point out that the BPD really does have a problem she should be dealing with; e.g., 'Honey, your rage behavior is symptomatic of a personality disorder; maybe we could talk about how to help YOU'. 

Now, let's SUPPOSE the non-BPD present were a therapist highly skilled in dealing with counter-transferrance issues in a BPD patient context.  Such a non-BPD would be best equipped to begin to engage the BPD in a constructive therapeutic dialogue.  Yet, it would be difficult without an undertaking by the BPD to acknowledge her issues.

Yet, the 'SUPPOSE' presupposition is (almost by definition) NOT applicable.  The non-BPD family/friend is typically NOT a therapist of any kind; less still, one skilled in treating BPDs and with counter-transferrance issues under control.  There is no undertaking by the BPD to acknowledge her issues.

My problem - and I think this is probably generalizable to other non-BPDs in relationship with H-F BPDs - is that we are ill equipped to make the best of the advice offered to non-BPDs in relationship with L-F BPDs. 

A reasonable response is to build the skills of non-BPDs in relationship with H-F BPDs.  There are two problems with this.

First, is to ask: "To what end ought the non-BPD in relationship with a H-F BPD build such skills?"  You can lead a H-F BPD to a fountain of gratuitous therapy, but she isn't going to drink from it.  Of all the effort by the non-BPD, there is very little hope that just a little of it might do some good with the H-F BPD.  There is very limited potential here.

Second, the non-BPD in relationship with the H-F BPD is struggling to keep his 'head above water'.  It's not really realistic to invite him to learn to perform the butterfly stroke elegantly enough to have a positive impact on his audience. This is a set-up-for-failure. It's much more realistic to teach him to learn to tread water, preserve his own emotional state in a positive plain, and try to do no harm to the H-F BPD. 

More than ANYTHING ELSE, I would like to see the advice to non-BPDs segregated into guidance for those in relation with: 1) L-F BPDs; vs., 2) H-F BPDs.  Once the two cases of L-F vs H-F are separated, it should become clearer to author and reader alike that they really NEED to be addressed independently.  To be sure, some advice will be applicable to audiences of non-BPDs in both camps.  However, I think, most of the advice will be seen more clearly to apply to only one or the other reader.

To make the argument pointed: 1) the objective for the L-F BPD is to prevent her suicide; 2) the objective for the H-F BPD is to preserve the sanity of her non-BPD. 

"a boundary by refusing to argue or listen to her rants by removing yourself from her presence." 

I acknowledge, and thank you, for this constructive suggestion.  I think that - in my own case - I will refrain from using it in favor of your earlier advice of "probably best to just carry on with normal conversation on your part and just act normal."  On rare occasion, the rage is severe enough to be really disruptive to my emotional state.  In such cases it's good to remember that I have a "parachute" to resort to. 

However, in the majority of cases, to excuse myself would seem (both to me, and to her I imagine) to be an over-reaction.  E.g., suppose she rages at me for spilling the coffee.  The rage will be tempered, not devastating to my emotional state.  To excuse myself would be an over-reaction from my viewpoint, her's, and even to a hypothetical objective observer.  To ignore the rage and carry on about whether "the soup is done" would be a very measured response.  It would not make matters worse by triggering an abandonment sensation. 

Thank you once again No-One, for responding.  I invite others to comment as well.

[Ozzie101]

Knowing how to get away from or end rage episodes is something I've struggled with and I haven't found a perfect answer. My uBPDh recognizes he has a problem and we worked out a "safe word" plan. When one person gets overwhelmed, they say the safe word, we split up to different rooms for 30 minutes, then come back together to discuss the situation after everyone's calmed down and had time to think. It's only been tested once so far but it's a method recommended by H's therapist.

I'm not sure I agree that the tools on this site don't work with H-F pwBPD. My H falls into that category. The tools I've learned here (like don't JADE, use SET, set boundaries, etc.) have definitely had an impact. By controlling and changing my responses, I have been able to keep situations from escalating or getting worse.

The tools aren't here to cure (not possible, as far as I know) or even really treat BPD. That's for professionals. They're to help the loved one cope and improve their situation. To improve their lives and help them learn how to not make things worse. That's something I and many others have had success with.

There are differences in HF and LF, particularly when it comes to degree. But there are also differences within each group. Each person and situation is different. I believe the tools here are meant to be guidelines -- guidelines that will need to be tweaked for individuals. What works for one may not work for another. That's where the boards come in very handy -- to get some more specific guidance and advice.

[KarlTOO]

Thank you Ozzie101 for commenting as well.

I'm not saying that the commentary here (and other resources) are never helpful.  Instead, I'm saying that the commentary/resources are primarily addressing cases of L-F and diagnosed BPD.  Sometimes it's clear that a case is un-diagnosed or that it's a H-F BPD; nevertheless, the material is interleaved rather than segregated into separate bundles.  (Separate collections of commentary, separate chapters). 

Without a context of a particular case (specifying whether H-F/L-F, diagnosed/not-diagnosed, in-therapy/not-in-therapy) the recommendations lack a specific context that's important to understand where they are applicable.  The reader has to think about the recommendation and  try to figure out whether it's really applicable to his case.  If the sub-text is that the BPD is in therapy and one is to follow the recommendations given in that therapy, then the guidance is not applicable to a  H-F BPD who won't be in therapy and won't be diagnosed. 

You explain "My uBPDh recognizes he has a problem and we worked out a "safe word" plan."  You are one-step ahead of the situation typical of an un-diagnosed and H-F BPD.  He recognizes he has a problem; so, at least, you have managed to establish a dialogue whereby you have a common understanding that there is something not-quite-right in the communications between you.  This is - I think - a-typical of an undiagnosed high-functioning BPD.

What IS typical is that it's perfectly clear to the un-diagnosed H-F BPD what is wrong.  The other party in the relationship (e.g., spouse) is absolutely wrong and the BPD is absolutely right.  If the other party were to question the manifest truth of this obvious fact he is blaming the BPD who is (by definition) always in the right.  Any attempt at dialogue is jumping into JADEing. 

One might suggest waiting for a cooling-off period and approaching the BPD at a calm time to suggest that there might be a few things that might be agreed to as a means of maintaining a "cap" on inflamed emotions.  I don't think that this is going to work.  It's most likely to be taken as cloaked criticism of the BPD's inability to control her (fully justified) outbursts; whereupon, the gentle attempt to open a dialogue will spark a new rage. 

I'm looking for tools and techniques that consciously take into account the characteristics of a non-diagnosed, not-in-therapy, unconscious H-F BPD. 

In such a context the non-BPD family member is NOT going to be the BPD's therapist; nor can he realistically expect to play-one-on-TV.  Expecting the non-BPD to help the BPD make progress is to place an unrealistic burden on the non-BPD, setting him up for failure. 

A realistic goal for the non-BPD is to preserve his own sanity; protect children in the family (not my case) and to do no harm to the BPD. 

No doubt I am mistaken in my early understanding of BPD.  I eagerly solicit responses that will show me the error in my thinking so that I can get-up-to-speed on how to better handle cases.

To illustrate, someone more skilled than I could tell me that I can learn to "validate" my BPD's feelings without agreeing that she is correct in her perception of objective facts.  It's true; I might be able to learn to do this.  But to what end?  I wonder.  If I do learn to do this will validating her help her to overcome her BPD?  Will it get her into therapy?  Will it avoid future outbursts?  Or, will it be just another futile undertaking on my part which I will never learn to do correctly, to her satisfaction?  Will it be another way for me to fail in trying to do something to make the situation a little better? 

I don't see a positive outcome in this example situation.  So, I figure I have a lot to learn which I haven't been able to extract from what I have read so far.

Thanks for any feedback.

[MidLifCrysis1]

Hi K2.

As someone exactly in your position (except that I do have children), I can not help but to agree with much of what you are saying.

I, too, am 100%:

...looking for tools and techniques that consciously take into account the characteristics of a non-diagnosed, not-in-therapy, unconscious H-F BPD. 

And I have also pondered this, wondering, "Is this really just mitigating damage? Just attempting to defuse/minimize a , in-your-face, situation, but not really achieving any type of big-picture progress:

...I can learn to "validate" my BPD's feelings without agreeing that she is correct in her perception of objective facts.  It's true; I might be able to learn to do this.  But to what end?

A realistic goal for the non-BPD is to preserve his own sanity; protect children in the family (not my case) and to do no harm to the BPD.

I believe that much of the info available around here is targeted at this, but perhaps goes a step further insofar as the repeated utilization of the techniques is hopefully and supposed to promote a "safer" relationship with the BPD, which, ultimately, is intended to minimize their troublesome behaviors/experiences - which is, of course, better for all parties.
 
Just my perspective.

 - MLC

[No-One]

Hi KarlTOO:
I view the communication stragegies here differently.  I don't see them as ways to "fix" someone with BPD or someone with a few strong BPD traits. I see most of the strategies as battle armor and ways to NOT prompt bad behavior or accelerate it.  The strategies can't fix someone with BPD.  They are geared towards making things better for the non. Since there are a lot of different situations, not everything in the Workshop Section will apply to everyone's situation.

The criteria for personality disorders, per the DSM, appear at the link below.  Which categories of dysfunction apply to your partner?  If you are able to share some of the issues, in addition to raging, other members can perhaps offer some specific suggestions.
https://bpdfamily.com/content/borderline-personality-disorder

To illustrate, someone more skilled than I could tell me that I can learn to "validate" my BPD's feelings without agreeing that she is correct in her perception of objective facts.  It's true; I might be able to learn to do this.  But to what end?  I wonder.  If I do learn to do this will validating her help her to overcome her BPD?  Will it get her into therapy?  Will it avoid future outbursts?  Or, will it be just another futile undertaking on my part which I will never learn to do correctly, to her satisfaction?  Will it be another way for me to fail in trying to do something to make the situation a little better?  

The lesson on NOT invalidating, indicates that it is more important to NOT invalidate feelings by word, expression or body language.   Invalidating can accelerate things and validating can help neutralize situations.  So, yes, this strategy can be of value to make things better for a non.  If validating feelings isn't something you feel comfortable with and want to learn, then your strategy should be to just focus on NOT invalidating your partner's feelings.

You gave an example of you spilling coffee and then your partner started raging.  Do you have any other examples to share?  Perhaps raging about a bad day at work?

You sound like you may already have the the skill of NOT invalidating mastered. It, also, sounds like you are avoiding JADEing (justifying, arguing, defending and explaining).  Perhaps, your emotional intelligence is already higher than the average person.

Validating can be difficult for some to get comfortable with, and it doesn't fit in every situation. It sounds like your partner's rages are rather civilized.  Some people find theirselves in situations where they are unsafe.  Others can find that they get triggered at some point and need to remove theirself from the situation and cool off.  Every person with BPD traits is different and every non is different.  One size doesn't fit all.

[Teno]

This booked helped me getting a better understanding and improving my validation skills. https://bpdfamily.com/book-reviews/high-conflict-couple
https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=73976.0

It takes time to learn validating and I've accepted that I'll make mistakes.

[KarlTOO]

@MidLifCrysis1:  Thank you for commenting.  The more of us non-BPDs living with H-F Non-diagnosed BPDs calling for commentary specific to our circumstances the more likely we will get what we are looking for.

You commented: ". . . but not really achieving any type of big-picture progress:" 

The question is, 'What is the big-picture?'  That phrase might evoke any number of responses in the reader's mind.  What came up for me (not necessarily your intent) was: 'The big picture is whatever might help the BPD to get better in the long run.' 

Yet, from what we understand, there isn't a lot of evidence nor perception that an undiagnosed BPD not in therapy has much likelihood of getting better in the long run because family/friends alter their behaviors in just the right way.  I hasten to add that family/friends can make things much worse for the BPD.  The important point to recognize is that positive and negative behaviors don't necessarily have a symmetrical results pattern.  Positive behaviors seem to have negligible results; negative behaviors seem to have seriously bad results.  If this is correct, then the objective ought to be to 'do no harm' but not necessarily try to exhibit to the BPD the best possible behaviors in the vein hope that it will do a lot of good.  It probably won't. 

What should be the objective - beyond 'do no harm' - is to preserve everyone else's sanity in the family.

Again, I solicit criticism of this proposition.  If it's wrong, explain why that might be so.  If it's right, help to fine-tune the guidance.

[KarlTOO]

@No-One:  Thank you very much for your commentary.  This is just the sort of thing I feel I need.

Because I don't know how to respond in the heat of battle my primary mode is to not respond at all.  (Over the decades I've gradually reduced my attempts to respond after finding them to be futile and merely adding fuel to the fire.  It's not that I'm naturally talented or skillful; quite to the contrary.  Rather, I'm relatively quicker at learning what doesn't work or makes things worse.)

Context is key.  I readily acknowledge that a (big) male BPD raging at a (petite) female non-BPD is a potentially dangerous - physically - context.  In such a case, physical safety is paramount.  I have no complaint about copious guidance given for such contexts. 

But my context is just the reverse.  I have no objective nor subjective basis to fear physical danger.  My problem is purely emotional damage.  Mild chronic regular damage punctuated occasionally with more intense episodes and rarely with acute episodes. 

Those of us non-BPDs need a concentrated resource of guidance that we can readily access that focuses on what we need.  There really isn't an effective "indexing" of resource materials that we can exploit to find guidance for our situations.  We have to resort to reading through all the material and picking out that which is applicable to us.  Often that requires reading carefully and figuring out the implied context.  Often, we have to interpolate or extrapolate guidance from different contexts to see how it might fit in our own contexts.  I can do this.  (I am blessed with the time and capacity to read, read repeatedly, think, digest).  Yet, it is not easy for me.  It is extremely difficult for those who don't have the time to study and are less skilled at analysing and adapting. 

And so, when you take the time - as you have here - to provide guidance tailored to my context (non-diagnosed, non-therapy, H-F BPD) I recognize that I can get what I am looking for from such a resource as bpdfamily.com.

I'll study the link you recommended and attempt to screen my observations through the criteria offered there.  I expect that - to make good use of it - I'll need to reflect for some time. 

The spilled coffee example was illustrative rather than definitional.  I suppose it's happened a couple of times over the decades but it is hardly the defining problem.  I began to sense early on that the stated objection seems to have very little to do with what so inflamed my BPD's emotions.  The stated objection might - but need not be - the spark that ignited the conflauration.  Thus, any search for the spark or its cause is not especially informative. 

I suppose it helps to look for every conceivable possibility of sparks when one lives in a magazine of gunpowder.  (Guards of colonial magazines avoided smoking, candles or lanterns.)  Nevertheless, despite the greatest of care, sparks are inevitable.

Accordingly, one needs to concentrate on mitigation.  How to contain the flame as well as possible.  How to reduce the risk of a fire roaring out-of-control into a conflagration.  How to minimize collateral damage. 

[KarlTOO]

@No-One:  Here are the DSM BPD criteria and my application to my BPD:

"Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment. (Note: Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.)"

None observed.  I have had occasions where I have traveled and she expresses little to no distress of abandonment.  I can't dismiss abandonment issues categorically because I can't presume to know how she experiences life from inside herself.  I just can't identify "frantic efforts to avoid". 


"A pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation.
Identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self."

Yes as to pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships.  This is the case with me and our daughter; albeit with me I can see idealization and devaluation alternations.  With our daughter, only devaluations.  With our son, only idealizations.  She can turn on our son on rare occasions when he calls her behavior to account. 

Not observed as to self-image or sense of self.  I can't dismiss self issues categorically because I can't presume to know how she experiences life from inside herself.  I just can't identify "markedly and persistently".


"Impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex,substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating). (Note: Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.)"

I have trouble with this criteria.  Nothing seems pointedly self-damaging as suggested by the examples.  She can and does make decisions quickly.  E.g., when we have bought our various homes over the years it takes her just minutes (1 - 9) to come to her judgement; and, without exception, I come to the same judgement almost as quickly.  In no case was the judgement a bad one.  The one clear-cut case of impulsivity that is consistently damaging is her inability to control - in the slightest - her urge to interrupt/talk-over-me when I am in the middle of a sentence.


"Recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior.
Affective instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria,irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days)."

No evidence of suicidal or self-mutilating behavior.  Marked reactivity of mood is clear.  I can - retrospectively - correlate her mood with periods of elevated stress at work (which has nothing to do with me).    Duration is short - few hours and only rarely more than a few days.


"Chronic feelings of emptiness."

I can't confirm/dismiss emptiness issues categorically because I can't presume to know how she experiences life from inside herself.  I just can't identify anything about this criterion at all.


"Inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights).

Routine as to "Inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper."  Can't say constant anger lasting for long periods of time.  Occasionally, after an argument, she mentioned that she can't remember what the argument was about.  No physical fights.


"Transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms."

Occasionally she will make accusations against me which are devoid of fact and even implausible.


I'm left with ambivalence about the diagnostic criteria.  I can't rule-out the possibility of reaching a count of 5 out of 9 because I can neither confirm nor dismiss the possibility of a few of the criteria that I could only know about if she had disclosed them to me; and, she hasn't. 

My conclusion is that the DSM criteria can't be deemed to be a "litmus test" where the color change in the litmus paper yields a TRUE/FALSE result.

I find it much more illuminating to read about the observations of non's concerning their BPDs.  When these observations match my observations I sense I have a "hit" on a diagnosis, however tentative.  These observations and corresponding diagnosis have vastly more explanatory value than any other possible diagnosis. 

It's entirely possible that my (tentative) diagnosis of BPD is mistaken or exaggerated.  Perhaps she has some "traits" of BPD.  Nevertheless, I can ask myself whether the guidance applicable to non-BPDs living with BPDs might be - coincidently - applicable to my case.  If this guidance is likely to do-no-harm and simultaneously helps me to cope, then, I would be wise to ASSUME that I have a correct diagnosis and proceed accordingly. 

Some day I might stumble upon some additional evidence that might lead to a conclusion that XYZ is a more persuasive diagnosis.  But until that occasion, a tentative BPD diagnosis seems to be the most promising.

Your commentary and insights would be welcomed.

[KarlTOO]

@Teno:  Thanks very much for the book recommendation (High Conflict Couple).  It's in my inventory of bought-but-not-yet-read books.  Now, it's at the top of my reading list because of your recommendation. 

[No-One]

Hi again KarlTOO:

The one clear-cut case of impulsivity that is consistently damaging is her inability to control - in the slightest - her urge to interrupt/talk-over-me when I am in the middle of a sentence.

Interrupting and talking over you has to be very frustrating for you.  The person doing that clearly isn't listening.

I know someone who has some strong BPD traits and does the same thing.  They don't listen to what you are saying, tend to make assumptions and can start arguing, even when there is no disagreement. They have to control the conversation.  I've even had the person I know hang up the phone in the middle of a conversation.

I don't have any good suggestions for this problem.  When they are in a dysregulated state, probably best to defer the conversation to a calmer time.  A few times, I've just kept on talking  and interjected a "let me finish"

Accordingly, one needs to concentrate on mitigation.  How to contain the flame as well as possible.  How to reduce the risk of a fire roaring out-of-control into a conflagration.  How to minimize collateral damage.

I agree. Best to not worry about whether she technically is BPD or not.  Focus on managing yourself and your children so you all can survive the storm of bad behaviors and navigate around them with as little harm as possible.

The way I look at it is that a person doesn't have to exactly fit the criteria for BPD to be extremely difficult and turn your life on end.  A couple of strong BPD traits makes someone challenging and hard to be around.

Below are a couple of strategies that could be helpful.  Although, NOT engaging can be a good strategy, there will be times when you have to discuss some issues. You may be already using some form of these strategies, but It can help to refine them and see how others are using
them.

"I'"STATEMENTS:
"I" Statement can be a tool for you to use. Avoid using "You" Statements and focus on either "I" Statements or "We" Statements The 19-minute video at the link below, is a helpful tutorial for using "I" Statements:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDExNRJCUp0

The template and sample below could be helpful as well.

Start by identifying how you feel: mad, sad, etc.
I feel __________

State the reason for your feelings (what happened)
when __________

Try to identify the reason the person’s actions led to those feelings for you.
(identify)__________

Let the person know what you want instead.
I would like __________ .

I feel __________when __________Because_____I would like __________ .

BIFF:
The link below leads to a discussion on a communication technique called BIFF (Brief, Informative, Friendly & Firm)

https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=133835.0

MEDIUM CHILL:
The link below leads to a discussion on "Medium Chill".  It's more geared to use with people that you have low contact with, but you might find that it could be helpful for you in some situations with your wife, when she is in a bad mood and and you don't want to engage.

   https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=114204.0

[KarlTOO]

Thanks again No-One.

"I don't have any good suggestions for this problem.  When they are in a dysregulated state, probably best to defer the conversation to a calmer time.  A few times, I've just kept on talking  and interjected a 'let me finish'"

This is probably the most useful advice in your latest reply.  How does one proceed when he feels he is between a rock and a hard place?  None of the readily available advice seems applicable!  It's comforting to be told that there seem to be no good suggestions for such a problem.  Now I can try to relax and know that my problem isn't necessarily that I am incompetent; there may be no good approach. 

Yes, sometimes it's feasible to defer the topic of conversation; at other times, a decision really needs to be made now.  The first lesson (which I've undertaken) is to identify those cases where no answer is needed now (if ever).  That cuts down on 90% of the occasions. 

Now, for the 10%.  "Let me finish!" seems to be pretty 'Brief'; and in such a situation there are no 30 seconds for a BIFF response.  This is worth a try.  If it works occasionally, it may reduce the residual problem to 9%.


"a person doesn't have to exactly fit the criteria for BPD"  Thanks for this reassurance.  This is my view; and so, I do not agonize over being uncertain of my tentative diagnosis. 

I learned the " 'I' Statements" long ago and strive to follow this advice. 

I learned about "BIFF" recently.  Ironically, following the "BIFF" formula seems much less valuable than realizing everything else about the approach.  Where BIFF applies, if you can manage to use it, it's great advice.  However, BIFF's application is pretty narrow in the context of an intimate/family relationship.  The BIFF formula includes a great deal of invaluable information about what the dead-ends are; where nothing - especially not BIFF - is a good approach.  That reduces the propensity to drive one's self crazy.

I'll look at Medium Chill. 

Thanks again

[KarlTOO]

No-One: Starting to read Medium Chill.  Invaluable.

One thing I'm having trouble with.  "M-C" is ostensibly a prescription for someone with whom you have only occasional contact - e.g., a cousin - and would just as soon have even less contact.  Nevertheless, there seems a lot to be said for the technique with family/intimates; in which context, one's goal ought to be to deepen and enrich the relationship.

The "validation" technique and "M-C" seem to work at cross-purposes. 

Now, let's suppose I were the best BPD therapist on earth, dealing with a client.  In such a situation I would know exactly how to walk the tightrope between validation and M-C.  I'd be perfect!

Returning to reality.  I am not a therapist; let alone the best BPD therapist on earth.  Nor do I want to play one in my relationship.  I really don't want to set-myself-up-for-failure.  At best, I'd hope to get a little bit better at doing a satisfactory job at validation.

Yet, a mere satisfactory job at validation seems to conflict with the objectives of M-C.  Is there a lesson in here?

What if an intimate's attempts to validate simply serve to continue and exacerbate the BPD's propensity to project?  Might the BPD be better off in the long run if she had to struggle alone - better still, with her therapist if she would seek one out - with her intense feelings?  Is the intimate's attempts at validation merely inviting the enmeshment to continue?

I take back my earlier statement; it is this M-C reference that seems to be the most valuable! 

If you have any additional references as to how to apply M-C in an intimate relationship I'd appreciate them.