Hey Holding! I got busy but I see now that a few days ago you asked about a comment I made, and East's response to it was spot on:
Originally Posted By: EastTN
I think what AS is getting at is "don't treat your R talks as a curiosity." How can that possibly make things better for you? His advice was "if you're going to have an R talk, shut up, listen, and validate" and I agree that's good advice.
Exactly what I meant. In the meantime you also got some great advice from Sandi and Zues, especially Zues's drug addict analogy, that's brilliant! Great reminder that you are dealing with someone that cannot be reasoned with through logic, and that her situation is only going to be resolved by her having an awakening of some sort. And nothing you say or do will get her there, it's a journey she must make on her own. If you Google a definition for "tough love" one of the returns is "requiring them to take responsibility for their actions". That's advice that is given for dealing with addicts of every stripe and color, and sometimes it's what is required for dealing with a WAW as well.
That said, I still think validation is appropriate when the opportunity arises. Validation is simply getting someone to talk about their feelings and then offering support and understanding of those feelings, not the CAUSE of the feelings. It's not apologizing, or negotiating, or agreeing or anything of the sort. I just mention that because some people may see East's and my advice as conflicting with Sandi's and Zues's advice. But you can validate a drug addict's feelings without agreeing with what they are doing and the same goes for a WAS.
