Beyond Boundaries Buy the new eBook from Bon. "Beyond Boundaries" is the culmination of five years of research, practice and hard work. It's $18.00 at Google Checkout.
When Hope is Not Enough Buy "When Hope is Not Enough" eBook from Google Checkout (and save $0.50!):
But I Love You Buy "But I Love You" eBook from Google Checkout:
A free eBook – 4X4 for Nons
|
 Sometimes the holidays can be stressful Hey all, I haven’t posted much in the way of skills lately, but today, as the holidays are upon us, I think it is helpful to go over some emotional skills and other tools that can help us non-BPD people get through the holidays reasonably unscathed. The holidays are a tough emotional time for everyone. There are expectations that the holidays be “jolly and happy” when, sometimes, the holidays are anything but. The get-together with relatives – many who don’t understand the actions, feelings and behaviors of someone with BPD – can cause huge stress for those with BPD and for the loved ones. Expectations of a low conflict Christmas (or other holiday) are typical, but not often “delivered upon”. Stress and the feeling of being “on-stage” or “good enough” for the family can cause emotional dysregulation and distress. Sometimes an invalidating family can compare the person with BPD with other, less emotional family members. You know, “why can’t you be like your cousin?”
So, in order to skillfully approach the holidays, I’d like to remind non-BPD people and people with BPD alike of the following skills that can help all of us get through. Here we go:
1. Frustration Tolerance. Sometimes we are overcome with frustration. We feel like we “can’t stand it” or “can’t take it anymore.” When you feel that way, I would encourage you to ask yourself some questions that can help build frustration tolerance. Some questions are:
a. Can I really not stand it?
b. Am I really going to explode?
c. How does exploding/raging help me in my relationships?
d. What can I do to decrease the frustration?
2. Mentalizing with yourself in a search for meaning within other people’s actions. Often people jump to conclusions or assume the intent and motivation of others. Sometimes these motivations are assumed to be malevolent, invalidating or uncaring. You can ask yourself the following questions to help understand the intent within yourself:
a. Do I really believe that he/she is being mean?
b. Is there another explanation as to his/her motivations?
c. What would he/she be feeling that could explain this action?
3. Mentalizing with others to understand others’ internal mental states. Be curious. Ask questions. Don’t “load” these questions. That is, ask “can you clarify what you meant, I’m not sure I understand you intention?” vs. “Why are you being so mean to me?”
4. Be validating toward yourself and others. Remember that emotions are a major influence on people’s behavior. Listen to others and validate the emotions. Validation does not equal agreement with behavior. It shows that you have heard the other person’s emotions and that it is ok to feel however one feels. Normalization can also be helpful here.
5. Don’t label people, label events. In other words, rather than saying “he’s an asshole”, say “he did something that bothered me.” This can be used on your own actions as well. Rather than telling yourself you’re a “failure,” you can say “I didn’t do that as I would have liked.”
6. Be mindful of the moment. Monitor interactions actively and in a way that is non-judgmental. Don’t get caught up in past reactions or fear of future reactions.
7. Cheerlead yourself and others. This is not “positive mental attitude” statements. This is encouraging others to be brave and effective. The essence of this skill is “you can do/face hard/difficult things.”
8. Consider the consequences of mind-altering substances. Too much alcohol and/or drugs can create impulsive situations and ones that you may regret later. Think before you drink.
Here’s wishing you all an effective holiday season!
Take good care,
Bon
 Are you and your BP on the same team? I often hear people with BPD/ERD say that they feel that their loved ones are “not on my side” or that the loved ones are “supposed to be on my side.” This phrase stuck out at me when I read the story about the suicide of Megan Meier (the “MySpace suicide” case), because, although I have no insight into Megan’s mental health, clearly when she was insulted and rejected on MySpace, and she was emotionally dysregulated. She came to her mother, and after her mother admonished her for the use of foul language on MySpace, Megan cried and said, “You’re my mom. You’re supposed to be on my side!” ( This according to her mother’s reports).
When someone is highly emotional, they need to know that they have an advocate and that someone is on “their side.” I often ask my consulting clients (especially partners of people with emotional regulation issues) if they feel that their partner and they are “on the same team.” Many times the answer is no. Why does someone have a desire to have someone on their side, even when the “sides” are not desired, intended or even clearly delineated? The answer in my mind comes down to shame and rejection sensitivity.
If a person has shame (or even low self-worth, which is similar), then the person is likely to have a high level of rejection sensitivity. Being rejected by others is painful, especially for emotional people. Having an advocate of their “side” of the issue, which is essentially answering, “I am on your side no matter what the situation,” is tantamount in these highly emotional, social interactions that involve rejection. One can be “on their side” emotionally without condoning whatever behavior that one doesn’t agree with.
There are teaching moments and there are times that one doesn’t teach. If you try and teach, punish or impart values during a period of emotional dysregulation, the relationship will be damaged and nothing effective will be accomplished. Instead, emotional validation and support can be used to cool the bonfire. Once it is cool, then a teaching moment can present itself.
Last week, I was reading a portion of Dr. Marsha Linehan’s book “Cognitive Behavior Treatment Of Borderline Personality Disorder” and stumbled upon a reference that I had never noticed before. It reads:
Emotional validation strategies contrast with approaches that focus on the overreactivity of emotions or the distorted basis of their generation. Thus, they are more like the approach of Greenberg and Safran (1987), who make a distinction between primary or “authentic” emotions and secondary of “learned” emotions. The latter are reactions to primary cognitive appraisals and emotional responses; they are the end products of chains of feelings and thoughts. Dysfunctional and maladaptive emotions, according to Greenberg and Safran, are usually secondary emotions that block the experience and expression of primary emotions. These authors go on to suggest that “all primary affective emotions provides adaptive motivational information to the organism” (1987, p. 176). The important point here is the suggestion that dysfunctional and maladaptive responses to events are often connected or interwoven with “authentic” or valid responses to these events. Finding and amplifying these primary responses constitute the essence of emotional validation. The honesty of the therapist in applying these strategies cannot be overstressed. If emotional validation strategies are used as change strategies – that is, if lip service is given to validation in order to simply to calm the patient down for the “real work” – the therapist can expect the therapy to backfire. Such honesty, in turn, depends on the therapist’s belief that there is a substantial validity to be found, and that searching for it is therapeutically useful.
This idea is an important one for loved ones of those with BPD because it touches on several points:
- It acknowledges that emotional validation focuses on “normal” emotional reactions, not “the overreactivity of emotions or the distorted basis of their generation.” That is the way of emotional invalidation, i.e. “You’re overreacting to something trivial. Look at what really happened.” I see that expression from Non-BPs all the time.
- It points out the differences between primary and secondary emotions. This distinction is extreme useful for Non-BPs. Why? Because most often the anger and rage are secondary emotions (not always) and that is typically what Nons focus on. If the emotional validation is used for secondary emotions, then I interpret this as not therapeutic, because you are “validating the invalid.”
- Probing (gently and compassionately) for the primary emotions seems to be a more effective strategy and those are the emotions that can be validated effectively.
- One has to approach emotional validation as a tool unto itself – without using it as a “change strategy.” That is, “it is ok to feel that, but you have to change the way you feel to be ‘normal’.” That is, bound to backfire.
- If this distinction of primary and secondary emotions – the first being true and “authentic”, the second being dysfunctional and maladaptive – is applied to the concept of mentalization, then the idea within mentalization to use emotional validation to probe for further feelings begins to make more sense. One has to help the BP locate the primary emotion.
 When Hope is Not EnoughGet the Non-BP book that has helped hundreds!
OK readers, now is the time to revisit Lindsay (I think I was spelling her first name wrong for a while there) Lohan and possible BPD. She has all of the classic signs of the disorder. I was struck by this quote:
“Sam and Lindsay are speaking,” the source tells PEOPLE. “But Sam has begged Lindsay to get help.”
“Lindsay, despite appearances, is insecure and has relied on Samantha and their relationship to build her up,” explains the pal. “Lindsay barely sleeps, which explains a lot of her behavior. She’s exhausted. She can’t even sit down for a minute without pacing around the room. It’s really sad.”
Sam is begging Lindsay to get help? For what? Well, perhaps we know. Looking at Lindsay’s case, I can’t help but see Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). She is erractic, emotional and sexually confused. She has all the classic signs of an untreated person with BPD. I hope she gets help – and I hope that, if she is diagnosed with BPD, she would come out publically and say so – to reduce the stigma of the disorder.
 Lindsay Lohan and BPD?
Occasionally, a discussion on my private email list that I feel it would be helpful to share here. I only do it if the discussion is not personal in nature. This discussion is about proper application of the skills in WHINE and how they compare to DBT skills. My list member’s question/comments are indented… my responses are not.
Now I have some time to answer these questions and the ones you ask in a later post. Let me start with these.
Thanks again Bon. Now I am re-examining how best to communicate. I
have a bunch of things I have been thinking about WHINE that I wanted
to ask you about:
WHINE is not perfect. It was my best effort at the time and continues to evolve. But I think I put in WHINE what was most effective for ME, as opposed to using DBT skills by rote. I had to adapt them beyond what I learned in DBT-FST class.
- You describe a modification of DEAR (using different words) as a
tool for the non. Do you just see the rest of the acronym as not as
relevant for the non?
That’s a good question. Actually, I think the MAN part of the skill IS applicable to the non. Although it is intended to be a skill for BPs to use to have an effective conversation and ask for what they want. I believe the DEAR is the WHAT to do and the MAN is the HOW to do it.
M – mindfully (ignore distractions and stay on subject)
A – appear confident
N – negotiate
However, in the case of the non, I adapted the tool to make it about the non’s feelings, rather than about asking for what you want. What you are asking for in my version is for a behavior change that would improve your feelings. I think that what nons have to do is become more aware of emotions – both theirs and their BP’s – and become less dependent on rational argument. If you talk about desires in the communication, you might be likely to lean on rational arguments. I tried to craft the tool such that it would “meet in the middle” with a BP. You see, when you start such a conversation, your wife will immediately start to feel judged. She will fear that you are creating “boundaries” (really behavioral rules) for her and that HURTS her. If you make it about your feelings more so than her behavior, then she can’t argue with you – see below for more on that. She also finds that the conversation will not hurt as much. When you talk to her about something “important to you” she’s going to feel dread that you’re going to judge, reject and shame her.
- You discuss these modified DEAR tools in your “Inserting your
feelings” section, which is separate from your discussion of
“examining the consequences” and “facilitating problem-solving” (which
you include as parts of validation). But I think each of these are
useful for communicating to a BPD beyond validation and attempting to
elicit behavior that you would prefer to see.
The examining the consequences and facilitating problem-solving is to encourage more effective future behavior in her. You do that when ineffective behavior has arisen as a result of an EDM. It should be done in a GIVE kind of way. “Gentle, Interested, Validating, Easy Manner”. That is the HOW. What I have provided is the WHAT to do. Inserting your feelings is a way of soliciting some sympathy/empathy from your BP – it is about YOU. The complex validation technique (steps 1-6) are about HER – IAAHF. Inserting your feelings is a way to make it IAABOYF (it’s all about both of your feelings). I think one must build trust with validation and, if possible, facilitate effective behavior in HER. Both skills are important, but they have different goals. Obviously, they can be used in conjunction (and I put a conversation in WHINE in which both skills are used).
- Also, the I-AM-MAD tool seems to be a summary of the validation
tool, and does not include the “inserting your feelings” tool (but it
does include “examining the consequences” and “facilitating problem-
solving”–am I right?
Yes, the I-AM-MAD tool is a sub-set/summary of the six step validation technique.
- You say that if we state “I feel ____”, then there is nothing for
the BP to argue with because this is a non-judgmental statement. But
my wife consistently tells people what they should and should not
feel. And I really expect that she’ll feel judged by this because she
thinks in terms of blame–she’ll assume I mean that it is her fault
that I feel that way. Of course I can clarify, but my point is that I
will probably *have* to clarify.
Clarify by using normalization statements about your own feelings. I do state that you can’t be argued with and I still believe it. If I say “I feel angry” the only thing that can be argued with or thought to be judgmental is WHY I feel angry – the fact that I DO feel angry can’t be argued with – it is a statement of an internal feeling. She might expect blame and judgment – but that is why I broke the tool up into the different steps. People with BPD understand emotions. She will know how it feels to feel angry, sad, frustrated, scared, etc. Talking to a person with BPD on an emotional level is one that they will instinctively understand. One has to be careful not to have “weasel words” in your statements that indicate judgment. Even better is if you don’t actually judge the person at all, just state what happened. The “inserting your feelings” tool is like a reverse of the validation tool. It is to work on your feelings, not theirs.
- DEAR includes reinforcement–we can say that if they do change or
adopt the behavior, then there will be benefits (or negative
consequences, I suppose). But you changed reinforcement to “thank you
if they choose to do what you want” and your example says, “this will
definitely make me feel less ____.” I don’t really understand why my
wife would be motivated to change her behavior because of how I feel.
This is the last thing on her mind.
I disagree with that. I think that if your show appreciation for a commitment to change behavior that makes a BP think that they are being thoughtful and appreciative/appreciated. A person with BPD LIKES (desperately sometimes) to be liked, apprecaited and wanted. If you can navigate that tool without judgment, I suspect your wife will feel relieved that it wasn’t a dreadful statement of “thou shalt” from you to her. Also, I think “negative consequences” is not reinforcement – it is the threat of punishment. There is an implied positive consquence that you will feel better and thus treat her better – when someone is angry and frustrated they are unlikely to treat another person very well. The problem with real reinforcement at that moment is that reinforcement must occur when the desired behavior is performed (as I say in the reinforcement section) and your wife is not performing the behavior, just committing to perform it in the future.
 Not too long ago I wrote an article on why tough love is not the answer for BPD. I still believe that ONLY tough love is not the answer; however, I have come to reconsider tough love and BPD.One of the reasons was that the TIME article said that DBT is a combination of emotional validation and tough love.
One of my list members has moved from the techniques that I provide in “When Hope is Not Enough” – which is basically a non-judgmental attitude plus validation and normalization – to a combination of those techniques plus “tough love.” What is tough love? In my opinion, tough love is the application of PERSONAL boundaries on a relationship. These personal boundaries need to be understood. Often, people don’t understand personal boundaries. Even popular books about BPD for Non-BPs (such as SWOE) get this concept wrong. In fact, even books that are ABOUT boundaries get this concept wrong. The other day I posted a link to a video of a part of the film “The Basketball Diaries” in which Jim Carroll’s mother (Jim Carroll is played by Leonardo DiCaprio BTW and the film is based on the book by Jim Carroll and is true) denies her son money for drugs (he is a heroin addict). She enforces her own boundary (I will not give my son money to buy drugs). She does not enforce a “rule” which is the way that someone tries to control the behavior of another person. Rules and boundaries differ significantly. With a rule, you try and control another person’s behavior – such as telling a child “you have to go to bed at 8:30 PM.” That is a rule, not a boundary, because it has to be enforced. Rules have to be enforced, boundaries do not (except on yourself).
Back to tough love… how does one use tough love with BPD? Well, first of all I have to say you can’t START with tough love, because first emotional trust has to be established. If you start with tough love and use ONLY tough love, that is a recipe for disaster with someone with BPD. The problem is that tough love hurts too much for them. They feel “different” and “broken” and tough love reinforces these feelings. However, tough love can be used once the trust is established. Tough love is something you can use FOR YOU to establish your own boundaries with someone with BPD. But you have to make sure that it’s your boundaries that are being applied and not rules for another person’s behavior.
When Hope is Not EnoughGet the Non-BP book that has helped hundreds!
A few months ago I posted a piece on the validating statement and earlier today I posted on the I-AM-MAD communication tool. While both recommend validation (actually one is a sub-set of the other), sometimes if you are new to validation the statements and questions that I recommend can seem (as Wandering Coyote put it in her comment) “so trite, so patronizing.” It can seem that way (or rote) if you don’t validate with honesty. If you’re “reading from a script” the validation will seem empty to the other person. The key thing IMO is that you really try and empathize with the other person’s feelings and not judge those feelings as crazy, stupid or wrong. If you can find the truth in those emotions and speak to that, validation will not sound as rote or scripted. A person with BPD can be a good emotional bullsh*t detector, because, at times, that person can be all emotions. If you put your emotional glasses on and try and find the emotional truth to another person’s situation and you PRACTICE the skills with honesty, validation works well in those emotional situations. It helps to combat the invalidation that a person with BPD has grown to expect from the hostile world around them.
When Hope is Not EnoughGet the Non-BP book that has helped hundreds!
 Last week I wrote an email to someone explaining the value of validation and the stance one “should” adopt when using validation. Emotional validation is valuable when someone is experiencing an “emotionally dysregulated moment” (which in the ATSTP group we call “EDM”). These moments are common when someone has BPD or ERD.
Anyway, I posted an anonymous version of my message to the group and one of my group members (thanks Tides!) edited it into what she called the “I-AM-MAD” communication tool. I will post the content of the tool below and upload the PDF…. Oh, quickly… The formatting came out a little wonky. And “IAAHF” means “it’s all about his/her feelings” which is a concept in WHINE.
I-AM-MAD
1. Identify the emotions.
It’s best to do this with “feeling” words, like “look”, “see”, or “sound”, rather than “know” or “understand”.
Examples: “I see that you are frustrated.”
“You sound aggravated.”
“You look really upset.”
2. Ask a validating question.
This encourages them to share their feelings about whatever triggered them. Do not use “what’s wrong?” If you use “what’s wrong?” they will hear “what’s wrong with YOU?” Also, don’t assume you did anything wrong. Remember, IAAHF (It’s All About His/Her Feelings).
Examples: “What happened?” (most effective because it is open-ended, requires more than yes/no answer)
“Did something go wrong at work [school] today?”
“Want to talk about it?”
3. Make a validating statement about their emotion.
Validate the feelings expressed in step 2. This helps reinforce that it is natural and valid to feel what they are feeling in the situation. Again, remember IAAHF. Don’t defend against blaming or projecting. And don’t apologize at this point, even if you are guilty. (Apologies for things you are actually guilty of can come later… after they have returned to their emotional baseline.)
Examples: “Wow, it must have made you feel awful to have done poorly on that test.”
“Yes, it is frustrating when it seems that someone is taking advantage of you.”
“Yeah, that’s really disappointing.”
4. Make a normalizing statement about their emotion.
By relating the situation as common to all people or “normal” for them, this helps alleviate their stress about feeling judged or unaccepted.
Examples: “I think anyone would feel angry if they had to do that”
“I would feel the same way if that happened to me.”
“I can see why you feel that way.”
5. Analyze the consequences of their behavior.
By examining the consequences of both negative and positive behavior with the person, you help them to separate their emotional reaction from their behavior. The behavior may need to be changed, but the emotions are natural and should not be punished for.
Examples: “When you don’t ask questions about something that confuses you, I don’t realize that you are struggling, so I can’t help you. When you do ask questions though, I can either give you the information you need to solve the problem yourself or we can work together to figure out the best solution to the problem.
“When you yell at me, I feel disrespected and become upset too. However, when you speak calmly to me, I know you have respect for me, so I am able to listen to you better.”
“When you refuse to talk to me, I don’t know what else to do except give you space. When something is bothering you, it’s best to be open and honest with me so I know what’s going on and don’t make the wrong assumptions about what you need.
6. Don’t solve the problem for them.
Solving one’s own problems helps to build self-confidence. Empower the person by getting them to come up with a solution themselves. When given the opportunity in a non-judgmental setting, most people will find that they can come up with solutions to their problems. You can guide them through this process by asking helpful questions to ascertain what they need or want.
Examples: “How would you like to handle this?”
“What would help you make a better choice next time?”
“Is there anything I can do to help?”
(Note: Sometimes you have to go back and forth to help them find the most effective solution. They may say, “I don’t know” or “I don’t care.” This can be tough. Go back to step one to deal with any additional emotions that become apparent.)
I AM MAD PDF Version
Often I see in the support groups on the Internet (especially the “Welcome to Oz” or WTO groups), people providing the “3 C’s” of understanding your role as a Non-BP. I’ve seen it quoted on BPD support websites too. These “3 C’s” go as follows:
- I didn’t cause it
- I can’t control it
- I can’t cure it
While these statements are generally true, I’d like to take some time to analyze these statements and add a fourth “C.” I’d also like to tell you what you CAN do – rather than what you didn’t or can’t do.
These statements help take the onus off the Non-BP for any responsibility for their loved one’s disorder. I can understand that. In part, they are about blame or, better, non-blame. I’ve seen many people say “when I came to terms with those ‘3 C’s’ I was free from FOG!” (which is fear, obligation and guilt, for those of you who don’t know). I want to write something about FOG specifically, but haven’t had the time.
OK, now let’s look at each of these statements and see how they fit into my way of thinking about being a Non-BP.
I didn’t cause it
Actually, this statement is liberating, especially for parents of BPs. I think that many parents carry around a lot of guilt that they DID cause their child’s disorder. Even psychologist and therapists often blame the disorder on the parents. However, there are growing studies that suggest that there are many biological causes for BPD. In the case of Marsha Linehan, she provides a “biosocial” model, in which each element (biological and social) are required to cause BPD. The environmental part of that analysis is the “invalidating environment.” So, while you (either as a parent or spouse) didn’t cause the disorder, you may have inadvertently contributed to the disorder’s severity. By reacting to a BP in an emotionally invalidating manner, the disorder can get worse. That is why I spend over 30 pages in WHINE discussing emotional validation as a tool for healing. Of course, a parent might say “Well, I have other children. I’ve treated them the exact same way. Why don’t they all have BPD?” Which again is where the biological element enters. My suggestion for parents is to read the article referenced below.
I can’t control it
Why would you want to? No one can completely control another individual. Even parents can’t completely control the actions and behaviors of their own children. No, the only behavior (which is BTW what Non-BPs are so confused and angry about) you can control is your own. That is why I have made several statements clarifying boundaries. Boundaries can’t be used to control other people’s behavior. If you try and imposed rules on another person’s behavior, you get resentment, rebellion and (in the case of BPD) a statement: “You’re trying to control me!” How many times have you heard THAT in your interactions with a BP? I’ve heard it a bunch.
I can’t cure it
Again, this statement is true. Only the BP him/herself can “cure” the disorder (usually with the help of a qualified and knowledgeable professional). It is important that you re-read that statement – you cannot make your loved one “all better.” You can’t save him or her – especially from his or herself. What CAN you do then? You can contribute to an easing of the conditions under which the BPD behavior is severe. You can re-frame your relationship with the BP in such a way that the emotional invalidation that they have learned to expect is gone. You can encourage effective behavior and practice effective behavior yourself. How? I explain this in detail in WHINE – which is why I called it a “how-to” book.
Now, I think I need to contribute a fourth “C” to the mix. I didn’t make this “C” up. In fact I found it here, on A. J. Mahri’s “BPD from the inside out” page about a mother speaking out about the illness. Please read that page! It really helps define the feelings and confusion of a mother who needed to know she “didn’t cause it.” She offers a fourth “C” which is:
All I can do is cope with it.
I have been looking over the keywords that found my blog in the past few days and have noticed that I’m getting more traffic from people seeking information, self-help, advice and assistance with their borderline personality disordered partner. Here is a (small) sample of of these search terms:
helping someone with bpd
bpd crazymaking
levels of validation
“self-destructive behavior” friend
how to get bpd to go to psychiatrist
bpd communication
bpd and lying
high-functioning borderline
borderline how to convince ex i have changed
are emotions painful for bpd
invalidating environment, boundaries
advice for dealing with someone with a bpd
bpd dealing with love
borderline girlfriend
when she clearly has a personality disorder
bpd google groups
how to deal with a bpd
rejection-sensitivity
borderline rage attack
telling someone they have bpd
mental illness that exhibits rage, blaming
borderlines and lying to hurt their partner
did i give my child bpd
If you found my blog while searching on one of the above or on a similar search term, I would suggest you read my book When Hope is Not Enough (aka WHINE), because it contains answers to all of the above search terms and provides a how-to guide for solving those issues. WHINE is available for sale on Amazon and other Internet retailers. You can also buy an eBook version from Lulu.
I’d also like to respond to two reviews of WHINE from Amazon – one negative and one positive.
First, the negative review…
Sorry, I didn’t care for this book as much as the others on BPD. The techniques were pretty much the same as recommended in “Stop Walking on Eggshells” but the technical background and reasoning behind the techniques was not as clearly discussed. Perhaps this book could be useful to someone who prefers the “lay” or non-professional approach and needs a book written in simpler terms.
OK, the techniques that I discuss are different than “Stop Walking on Eggshells” (although some of the techniques DO overlap). The main reason that my tools are different than in SWOE has to do with the fact that I present a different view of BPD focusing on three main aspects: emotional dysregulation, impulsiveness and shame. Unlike SWOE, I do not take you on a step-by-step review of the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria and, in this way, I feel that WHINE is more practical as a how-to guide than SWOE. Additionally, I explain the techniques in DETAIL, that is, HOW to do each one, what to say and what NOT to say, etc. As an example of this surrounds validation techniques. I have flipped through SWOE and found very little on emotional validation of the BP’s emotions. There is 1/2 a page on the “triggers” of invalidation and a how a “I know how you feel” response could trigger rage (that’s on pages 113-114 of my copy of SWOE). There is some additional information that MAY be considered validation on pages 142-145 of SWOE about “Acknowledge Before Disputing;” however, this information is not detailed. In WHINE I spent over 30 pages (of a 185 page book) on emotional validation – why to do it, how to do it, how not to do it, when to do it, etc. Why? Because emotional validation is central to learning how to communicate effectively with someone with BPD.
Where SWOE spends many, many pages on boundaries and limits, the message is inconsistent. In the beginning of the introduction of boundaries SWOE says this:
Personal limits are not about controlling or changing other people’s behavior. In fact, they’re not about other people at all. There about you and what you need to do to take care of yourself. (pages 118-119)
THAT I agree with wholeheartily! However, later in SWOE we get this:
If you want the BP to change, you have to be willing to make some changes yourself if the person does not observe your limits. (page 157)
Alright, I would believe in the first part; however, the second part is what I have a problem with. My understanding of boundaries and limits are that they are for YOU and not about other people’s behavior. A person can’t “violate your boundaries” because only YOU can violate your own boundaries. If they do, your “boundaries” are not about your behavior anymore, they are about ANOTHER person’s behavior and those type of “boundaries” are really rules for the other person’s behavior. On this point (and on the importance of emotional validation) is where my book and SWOE completely diverge. (Another note creating such “boundaries” – that are really rules – is a trigger for BPD rage too).
Finally, the two books were written for two separate reasons. If you look at the subtitles of each you can see where each book has a separate purpose. The subtitle of SWOE is “taking your life back when someone you care about has borderline personality disorder.” The subtitle of WHINE is “a how-to guide for living with and loving someone with borderline personality disorder.” SWOE is written to focus on validation of the non-BP (which has its place, no doubt, I got a LOT of validation out of SWOE when I first read it 3 years ago). WHINE is written as a “how-to” guide for (peacefully) living with a person with BPD. The difference is subtle, but important. A member of my Internet list summed it up rather well this way:
I want to add another thought about this…
I think when Randi [Kreger, the co-author of SWOE] wrote her book, she likely recognized the importance of
validation, but her frame of mind was on healing herself. So, I would
venture to say that is why there was a strong bent towards validating nons.
In addition, Randi got out of her BP relationship, so she didn’t really know
what to advise those who wanted to stay. If I was her, I don’t think I’d
even care about any of that “staying stuff”… I’d probably just want to
help the nons move on with their lives (something she was familiar with.)
Bon, on the other hand, it seems had already gotten through the stage of
being able to self-validate, and had decided to stay. So, his focus was, of
course, on problem solving. And the only way to be effective at that is
through validation of BPs.
Each of their situations are different, as are their target audiences
(Randi’s being X-Nons and Bon’s being Staying-Nons.) I think they both did
an excellent job speaking to the feelings of those they could sincerely hope
to reach out to. The audiences that are getting caught up are the
Undecided-Nons. Those are the ones who would benefit most by reading both
books in the exact order you advise.
So, as you can see both books have their place in the life-cycle of being a non-BP. I think what you have to do it decide where you are in the life-cycle. My book is aimed at making BP/Non-BP relationships more calm without “walking on eggshells.” SWOE is not really a “staying” book – although Randi Kreger does have a new book due out in the Fall with staying in mind.
Ok, so back to the key words… if you are searching on those types of things and WANT to maintain a relationship with someone with BPD, WHINE is an excellent resource for that. If you’re searching on “i hear demon moaning in husband” or “cutting ties borderline personality disorder” I suspect you should look for a book other than WHINE.
I’ll have to review my “good review” in the next post.
|
Loading ...
