I can only tell you that I didn't take action (have an intervention) until level 6. I wanted to save my M and loved H (still do) that boundaries kept getting breached until it got to very dangerous levels of abuse. But I was clearly aware there was abuse at level 3.
In Z case it was a level 6 breach which caused the first intervention (with her flat mate), from what she says she struggled with awareness at level 6.
That is very serious indeed and a wake up call.
I really started seriously enforcing boundaries at level 4, at that stage I was fully aware and having IC help with boundaries but took no direct action until H behaved at level 6. Although I did record H at earlier levels, ranting etc.
The only way to break from this systematic abuse is complete no contact with the abuser or they try to control and start a new cycle. This is also going to sound very odd, but there is a "trance" style Stockholm syndrome exhibited. I sense that if I let H into my life with even a chink of R, it would be off and running. When I tell H I no longer want to see or hear from him again and make it happen, I mean it. I will not be abused.
In many ways it's an issue when you are more concerned about losing your M than rebuilding it as a result of the abuse. Abuse is after all about control and the control is with the abuser.
Where do I think the line should be? Level 2 abuse.
Where did I draw the line? at level 4.
V
Last edited by Vanilla; 06/15/1503:02 AM.
Freedom is just another word for nothing left to loose. V 64, WAW
