SteveLW, how do you suggest they attempt boundary setting without a third party to referee ??
Boundaries are the most misunderstood concept on the board, in my opinion. Boundaries aren't about the behavior of the walkaway, it is to guide the LBS's actions in relation.
Any boundary that tries to affect the behavior of the WAS is pressure and pursuit in the name of trying to control what you cannot control.
Let's take FM's situation. Maybe his boundary is that he won't tolerate her continued use of drugs. Any boundary that starts with "I told her......" is wrong. Which is why a 3rd party is not necessary for boundary setting.
The general format for a boundary is:
"If she does X, I will do Y." You don't have to state it. You don't have to tell her anything. You take action.
"If I find out she is using again, I will go file for divorce, hire a lawyer, and push for full custody of my kids."
No need to state. Just do. And in fact we had a great example of this on this board (I believe his screen name was mbr, I wish he still posted!)
Let me clarify my position on boundaries - they are for the person setting them, not the person they are directed at.
They are not going to be able to come to any consensus without a neutral third party. She's too far gone. And whatever she agrees to isn't going to stick, but at least the attempt will have been made.
As you've laid these boundaries out - they aren't boundaries, dude. There's never even any conversation to let the other person know where they stand. What you're talking about, imho, is dominance.
How's that working for anyone?
It isn't. It doesn't.
M 20+ T25+ S ~15.5 (BD) BD 4/6/15 D 12/23/16
"Someone I loved once gave me A box full of darkness. It took me years to understand, That this too, was a gift." ~ Mary Oliver
