Yes. I am well aware of that definition of enmeshment. I am also well aware of the difference between enmeshment and empathy. Empathy is completely distinct from the ideas of enmeshment and differentiation. Empathy can be present in either, or not. Empathy is not the same as validation. I am fully aware of this.
Emotional bonding is NOT enmeshment. Differentiated people can emotionally bond with others and in fact can do so easily WITHOUT LOSING THEMSELVES. Being differentiated makes it easier to feel and empathize with another's emotions WITHOUT feeling like it is YOUR emotion.
Perhaps I should not have said emotional bonding, though I’m not sure what would be a better word. But as you can see from your definition of enmeshment, the lose of identity, when two people can’t distinguish one from the other, is what I had in mind when I say enmeshment is too much emotional bonding, when the emotions, feelings and boundaries of one become mixed up with the other. Maybe I didn’t describe this well, but my understanding is consistent with what you are saying. I also know that differentiated people can emotionally bond closer that non-differentiated people.
Enmeshment is looking to another to "complete" you
Right, I understand this.
The difference is in HOW you feel the other's pain. I am an empathetic person and an emotional person; so I tend to cry easily….
Your story may not be entirely true. My wife likes to make the very same claim. I have seen her cry for the same reasons, even over a stranger that she never knew. She claims this is because she is so empathic that she can feel the other’s pain. That might be true, but it might also be that she is reliving the pain of her mother and brother dying. Empathy seems to be VERY tightly linked to painful experiences we have personally experience in our past.
I think you see enmeshment as the only way for people to be empathetic to another's feelings.
No, I never said this. In fact, I never touched on the subject of empathy. You are the one mixing the two together.
Also I don't think we are using the same definition for detachment (and there are more than one). For me detachment is separating yourself from someone so you can remain individuals however it is NOT a disconnection or disengagement at all.
As you say, there are more than one definition. Yours may work for you, but what I see is that for two enmeshed people, detachment MUST mean and will FEEL like a disconnect and disengagement. Perhaps you are the one who does not understand the mindset and feelings of the dysfunctional person. Just because you feel as you do about detachment doesn’t mean others feel that way. Detachment can be VERY scary for some people.
So if you believe that to be a differentiated person you must disengage and disconnect from others…
Yes, in order to break the enmeshment levels…
…then I can understand why differentiation would bother you.
Wrong. It is not that differentiation bothers me. I think I have been very clear that I agree with the concept and the ideas of Schnarch, Dieda and others. It is the transition out of enmeshment that seems to be THE major obstacle for troubled marriages.
For me it is the other way around, differentiation is what gives you the power to connect to others in a truly meaningful way.
I agree. But Fearless, you seem to always can at things from your POV, that being someone who seems well balanced and differentiated. If you are as empathic as you say, then try to understand that to a troubled marriage, what you say could sound like total Greek. I know. For someone coming from a troubled background, trying to understand what is wrong with enmeshment and why s/he should instead detach and stop worrying about others is an EXTREMELY difficult and scary concept to get.
As Corri says, once you see what you could not see, it makes no sense as to why there was ever a problem. But that is hindsight. IMO, you tend to look at problems too much from the advantage of hindsight. That is not a criticism, and could actually be a compliment because you never had to experience the turmoil and craziness of living in a dysfunctional household. You have always known sanity.
I have no idea if it would surprise you to know that people have always seemed to gravitate to me to talk and open up. I get the "you are so easy to talk with" line all the time. I love people. I like having connections to people. I believe that my differentiation is probably part of that draw.
It might be your differentiation. But I bet it is just as likely that you send out the kind of signals that some would take as comforting and bonding. While you might see it as a differentiated meeting, the other might be feeling the comfortable draw of enmeshment. The difference between the two is all in the mind of the beholder.
Great Cobra! I was going to head in a similar direction too!
I also know that differentiated people can emotionally bond closer that non-differentiated people.
Great because I did not realize that.
My wife likes to make the very same claim. I have seen her cry for the same reasons, even over a stranger that she never knew. She claims this is because she is so empathic that she can feel the other’s pain. That might be true, but it might also be that she is reliving the pain of her mother and brother dying. Empathy seems to be VERY tightly linked to painful experiences we have personally experience in our past.
Please don't mistake me for your wife because I don't think she and I are much alike other than possibly on the surface.
When I cried for Mr. Rogers, I was crying for myself. In H.S. when I went to a funeral for my brother's friend and hugged his sister and started crying, I was very aware that I was crying because I realized how I would feel if my brother died. I was embarrassed for my crying at that moment because MY EMOTION was not important at the time.
Fearless: I think you see enmeshment as the only way for people to be empathetic to another's feelings.
Cobra: No, I never said this. In fact, I never touched on the subject of empathy. You are the one mixing the two together.
That's why I said "I think." I was stating how I understood your POV and you are telling me I am wrong about my thoughts. That's fine because it helps me understand what you think.
It is the transition out of enmeshment that seems to be THE major obstacle for troubled marriages.
Exactly!! The transition about of everything is painful. My goal is to show the positives out there because why in the world would you want to go through the pain of transitioning out of enmeshment IF the end result wasn't worth it???
Detachment can be VERY scary for some people.
And that's why it helps to explain that detachment DOES NOT have to be disconnection. Thinking about it as disconnection and disengagement SHOULD frighten people. They should want human connection.
For someone coming from a troubled background, trying to understand what is wrong with enmeshment and why s/he should instead detach and stop worrying about others is an EXTREMELY difficult and scary concept to get.
I agree. So is the solution to just tell them to stay in the same mindset that got them there in the first place? Yes I am talking about being extremely brave and needing to face up to fears and fears about being able to be yourself and have that be enough.
It might be your differentiation. But I bet it is just as likely that you send out the kind of signals that some would take as comforting and bonding.
Yes but I see my differentiation and my ability to be comforting as part of the same qualities. People don't have to worry that I will insert me into their problems...
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
And that's why it helps to explain that detachment DOES NOT have to be disconnection. Thinking about it as disconnection and disengagement SHOULD frighten people. They should want human connection.
I agree. So is the solution to just tell them to stay in the same mindset that got them there in the first place? Yes I am talking about being extremely brave and needing to face up to fears and fears about being able to be yourself and have that be enough.
But don’t you see that this IS part of the problem, that dysfunctional people are in their situation because they ARE afraid and have never known the security to be brave in the first place? What you are telling people is that they should have faith and trust what you are telling them, that if they follow your advice, they will be happy and safe, they will enjoy deeper connections. How do you convince someone who has known nothing but pain and loss all their life and has come to realize that no one can be trusted, that every time they do trust someone, they get hurt? How do you convince that person to put their hand on the stove again, that this time you promise they won’t get burned? Your words will feel completely hollow to them.
This is the reality of what we are dealing with on this board. These are not people with a clear understanding of differentiation and connection. Even if we intellectually understand the concepts, once we interact with our partners, the pre-programmed emotions kick in, at it is those emotions that determine our fear and whether we can proceed or not.
Telling someone to be extremely brave is just a pipe dream. If it were that easy, all a counselor would need is 15 minutes to straighten out anyone. Look at CeMar. He is a good example of how deep pain can run and how high defenses can build. He seems to understand everything discussed on this board, yet he feels what he feels.
How do you convince someone who has known nothing but pain and loss all their life and has come to realize that no one can be trusted, that every time they do trust someone, they get hurt?
I believe when it comes to differentiation the person you need to trust is yourself. The way you come to trust yourself is by taking care of yourself. Because of my FOO issues, I need to concentrate on mothering myself in order to maintain differentiation. So now instead of a make-believe lover, Hank, I have a make-believe mother, Gloria. Pretty much she is a cross between Goldie Hawn and Cokie Roberts. My life will be great if I follow her advice.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
I believe when it comes to differentiation the person you need to trust is yourself.
This is exactly what traumatized people do. They trust only themselves and no one else. However they can still be extremely enmeshed, so differentiation and trust in others are two different things.
The way you come to trust yourself is by taking care of yourself.
Yes, this is what they do. But it still does not allow connection because the walls built up by the trauma block many vulnerabilities that might come about through connection. Taking care of oneself does not mean connection.
Because of my FOO issues, I need to concentrate on mothering myself in order to maintain differentiation. So now instead of a make-believe lover, Hank, I have a make-believe mother, Gloria. Pretty much she is a cross between Goldie Hawn and Cokie Roberts. My life will be great if I follow her advice.
The difference as I see what you describe is that you still WANT connection and therefore are still willing to place your trust in someone else. You are still willing to take the chance of being hurt. What do you do for those people who decide they will not take on that chance any more?
For someone coming from a troubled background, trying to understand what is wrong with enmeshment and why s/he should instead detach and stop worrying about others is an EXTREMELY difficult and scary concept to get.
Change and/or growth is like that for most people, functionally healthy or not.
People who are posting on support forums have usually recognized that *something* is wrong, that what they have been doing all along isn't working to their satisfaction, and are seeking alternatives. Initially, there is a strong tendency to lay the majority of the "blame" on the spouse that isn't posting - sometimes that proves to be the truth, but often there are major, discernable actions/attitudes/behaviors from the posting spouse that are noticeably unhealthy and contributing to the marital issues.
Quote:
But don’t you see that this IS part of the problem, that dysfunctional people are in their situation because they ARE afraid and have never known the security to be brave in the first place? What you are telling people is that they should have faith and trust what you are telling them, that if they follow your advice, they will be happy and safe, they will enjoy deeper connections.
I don't think anyone has said, "believe me, do this and you will be happy and safe and enjoy deeper connections."
My understanding of what is being said is, "If you work on some of these areas of yourself, you will become a healthier person and as a healthier person, you will be better equipped to function in a healthier manner in your relationships."
There are no guarantees or assurances that your spouse will be happier or healthier should you decide to make those changes in yourself. In fact, your changes toward being healthier are most certainly going to initially incur relational disruption as your spouse keeps pushing back toward the more familar disfunction.
Quote:
How do you convince someone who has known nothing but pain and loss all their life and has come to realize that no one can be trusted, that every time they do trust someone, they get hurt? How do you convince that person to put their hand on the stove again, that this time you promise they won’t get burned? Your words will feel completely hollow to them.
Are you speaking of yourself or your wife?
If it is in regards to your wife - if she isn't actively seeking to assess and work on her personal issues, IMO you can't convince her to do otherwise by reasoned arguments, logic or manipulations. Words are unlikely to do it.
If it is in regards to yourself who has assessed that there are problems and recognizes the possibility that there is likely a different/healthier way of relating - then it is a matter or determiniing whether or not you want to stay exactly as you are or do you want to make yourself more functionally healthy.
One spouse striving toward becoming stronger and healthier is going to impact the marriage relationship. The other spouse will react. It may be negatively (and very often is because there is a strong pull to stay with the known and familar). The other spouse will either continue trying to push the changing spouse back into the disfunction, will choose to leave the marriage by refusing to change or adjust to the new relational dynamics, or they will start to change themselves in an effort to keep the relationship and respond to the differences.
I can't quite get what you're debating, except (and I may be misinterpreting) that you seem to be asserting that it can be a good idea to stay disfunctional and unhealthy yourself because that will be good for the marriage.
The difference as I see what you describe is that you still WANT connection and therefore are still willing to place your trust in someone else. You are still willing to take the chance of being hurt. What do you do for those people who decide they will not take on that chance any more?
I'm not sure how to respond to this because I'm not sure what it is you are supposing I should entrust to somebody else. If you are positing that I should entrust somebody else with my happiness then I think you are wrong because that would be very fused and far too much to ask of another human being. In what sense am I trusting somebody if I allow myself to be vulnerable? I think the answer is that I am not trusting. If I trusted then I wouldn't be vulnerable. Vulnerability implies leaving oneself open to risk. The trust I might place in somebody else would be directly related to my perception of their strength. My ability to be vulnerable is directly related to my own strength and therefore directly related to my trust in my ability to care for myself to self-sooth and hold onto myself.
I didn't take very good care of myself within the relationship of my marriage. Since my marriage ended I have experienced several instances where this has been starkly revealed to me and I have been emotionally over-whelmed. My initial reaction was to flare out in anger at my 2bx but that was quickly followed by a sense of sorrow and loss. I do want to form relationships and be in connection with others but I realize that the sense of loss is due to my lack of care for myself and I can't fill that void with fusion with others. If I call Gloria up on my mental telephone and ask her for advice what I might say is "How can I best care for myself when in relation to others?" The answer to this question will also necessarily answer the question "How can I best care for others?"
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
I can't quite get what you're debating, except (and I may be misinterpreting) that you seem to be asserting that it can be a good idea to stay disfunctional and unhealthy yourself because that will be good for the marriage.
Is that what you're saying?
No, that’s not at all what I am saying. In a way I am having an internal debate, questioning the whole process of marriage recovery as we know it and practice it on this board. Sometime it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Why is this and is there another, better way?
Are you speaking of yourself or your wife?
My wife.
One spouse striving toward becoming stronger and healthier is going to impact the marriage relationship. The other spouse will react. It may be negatively (and very often is because there is a strong pull to stay with the known and familar). The other spouse will either continue trying to push the changing spouse back into the disfunction, will choose to leave the marriage by refusing to change or adjust to the new relational dynamics, or they will start to change themselves in an effort to keep the relationship and respond to the differences.
Yes, I understand this dynamic well. As you say, changes by the other spouse can be limited, and by all sorts of reasons. But once the relationship can move past those roadblocks, I think things can greatly improve (at least until the next roadblock is encountered). The problem I have is with “…choose to leave the marriage by refusing to change or adjust.” A good system should be able to rule this out as a necessary option, for saving the marriage is one of the main objectives of recovery, especially when children are involved.
I am not sure I buy this part either: “…they will start to change themselves in an effort to keep the relationship and respond to the differences.” Maybe the spouse feels it is safer to not keep the relationship. But that decision would be based on a warped view and unresolved issues. So it would be a poor decision, with the benefit of hindsight of course.
I see ALL the problems with relationships as a matter of information – whether we have wrong or limited knowledge, impressions and reactions to ourselves and others. The cure is information. The obstacle is getting that information into the brain, to create understanding. I am not sure that the methods we commonly use are the best ways of accomplishing the objective. I am just not sure what a better method would be.
In what sense am I trusting somebody if I allow myself to be vulnerable?
This is the heart of what is required to make a leap of faith, isn’t it? Once you trust, you have comfort because you have placed concern for your safety (or whatever is in question) into the hands of someone else, or some higher power. But what if you deem that no one, not even God is trust worthy because of the suffering you have lived through?
I think the answer is that I am not trusting.
But you are. If you put yourself into the hands of a mass murderer whom you did not trust, would you feel safe?
If I trusted then I wouldn't be vulnerable. Vulnerability implies leaving oneself open to risk. The trust I might place in somebody else would be directly related to my perception of their strength.
Yes
My ability to be vulnerable is directly related to my own strength and therefore directly related to my trust in my ability to care for myself to self-sooth and hold onto myself.
Yes, but it does not follow that just because you are confident in yourself that you would be confident and trusting in someone else.
"How can I best care for myself when in relation to others?"
When there is no trust in others, caring for yourself in relation to others can cause some problems. Caring for yourself WITHOUT relations to others is clean and simple.
Yes, but it does not follow that just because you are confident in yourself that you would be confident and trusting in someone else.
You perceive your wife as relatively weak, right? Therefore, if you allowed yourself to be vulnerable in relation to her you would be acting in opposition to your trust of another person. Therefore the strength you would need in order to be vulnerable in relation to your wife would have to come from you. You can be weak and still have the ability to put your trust in someone you perceive to be strong. Vulnerable is to weak as strong is to guarded.
Quote:
When there is no trust in others, caring for yourself in relation to others can cause some problems. Caring for yourself WITHOUT relations to others is clean and simple.
We are always in relations to others. However, sometimes avoidant fusion can look like lack of relation. Avoidant fusion is not a good way to care for yourself. That's why I was questioning BB' suggestion of fantasy-free MB. Maybe it's a differentiated thing to do and a good way to care for yourself. Maybe it's avoidant fusion. Probably depends.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
