your mental illness is NOT an excuse to be an asshole

[Ivy]

No, I need to clean first. But you can come over after I clean.

 

[Frosty]

No, I need to clean first. But you can come over after I clean.

You can come over to my place if you clean it. Com'mon I think thats a pretty good deal.

 

[Ivy]

Or, and hear me out, or, you could clean mine and we could still hang out at yours so mine doesn't get messy again.

 

[á´…eparted]

Or, and hear me out, or, you could clean mine and we could still hang out at yours so mine doesn't get messy again.

We could take the extortion further and add in the caveot of them providing the transport and gas too.

 

[Ivy]

Great idea!

 

[prplchknz]

No, I need to clean first. But you can come over after I clean.

that's fair, though i must admit i always wondered if you lived/live in the same house my parents built in the 80s

 

[Amargith]

Why is it down to you to accomodate (or bitchslap) people at all? Unwelcome and unwanted help or advice is not a favor. It's unwelcome. If someone is not ready to receive help or advice, has not reached out to you, or has shown no signs that they are interested in receiving help from you, then don't give it to them. We all seem perfectly capable of understanding this in people without mental illnesses, but with mentally ill people we immediately want to step in despite the fact that we are often not wanted, and then label people as ungrateful and difficult when we aren't well received.

Give people time. There's no rush. People are allowed to process their emotions at their own pace, with lots of pitfalls and hurdles along the way. They're allowed to feel bad without your help or anyone else's being forced on them. Let people who are close to the person who feels bad and want to help and know what works and care about the outcome do the prodding, if they want to do the prodding. They don't have to. You don't have to be in a shrink's office to start working through the issues in your life.

I like Ivy's answer to this. I also agree with you for the most part.

However, the thing is, if you have to interact with this person, purely in terms of practical interaction - where influencing each other is inevitable - it can be helpful to know where you're going to draw the line. Usually, we tolerate a lot more from friends (because we understand and therefore empathise more with them, they are more valuable to us), than we do from strangers, for instance - even in the face of the same behaviour.

For me it's a matter of maximising the interaction for both parties. Mental illness or not. I'm not even talking about that - I just look at mental illness as a more noticeable personality quirk I have to work with. And I always try to minimise the damage I do to others - and that includes psychological damage. If I notice during an interaction that someone would benefit from a tough love push, I don't mind giving that, but if I notice someone is in a defensive, fragile state (due to the topic or some hidden tripwire I missed), I'll automatically try to figure out where that sensitivity is coming from and how I can soothe it - at the very least for my own comfort and for the duration of the communication, but if at all possible, to give them a bit of connection, understanding and support to take with and build on (as it is exceedingly rare in this world, as well as one of the biggest unfulfilled needs in many people, causing behavioural problems). It's not about controlling them, so much, as it is about giving us both a win-win and a pleasant moment in time. This can however be hard to do with people who are actually harmful to others - including myself. However, would it be fair to treat them differently when their need for understanding and support is equally valid. Then again, where do you draw the line on preserving your own boundaries and keeping yourself from harm and potentially harming another to do so?

It becomes a question of benefits and costs to yourself and to the other person - and when to actually choose between your protection and their needs - at least to me.

Edit: fwiw, [MENTION=4939]kyuuei[/MENTION] is ime rarely hostile, just very honest, blunt and to the point, with a clear explanation of where she stands on the topic and why. I don't always agree with her positions and she does draw lines faster than I would myself, but I've rarely seen her not open to discussing those lines. Chances are, though, that you'll find she prioritises other values than you, which are the core of her positions.

 

[Ivy]

My house was built in the 90s, so I don't think so. The old one wasn't in the same place where your parents lived.

 

[magpie]

Yes, really. I can't speak for others, but I seldom if ever see Kyueei as hostile. Blunt, but blunt ≠ hostile, which many people seem to forget or misinterpret.

That is still just your perception. It doesn't take precedence over my perception.

You seriously can't triage what mental illnesses tend to be more serious than others? Really? Of course there are so many that it becomes splitting hairs, and some cases can be so extreme it can create a data point outlier. Otherwise though, yes some tends to be much more severe than others. The big three are Schizophrenia, Schizoaffective, and Bipolar disorder.

NIMH » Serious Mental Illness (SMI) Among U.S. Adults

From what I can tell, that's just a graph that shows the prevalence of serious mental illnesses across social groups, not what mental illnesses are considered serious. Why should I define what mental illnesses are more serious than others? Categorizing in that way isn't useful to me. You're the one who made the claim so you do it.

A bias is a bias. Since you question the basis of psychology (which is something that can't actually be invalidated in the first place), that certainly removes a lot of credibility for you to be able to speak about it. If there was legimate shakey ground for it, sure then it would be legit, but in this case there is not.

Oh, here we go. Because of what I think about things I don't have credibility to have my opinions counted or even discuss with the people who hold the correct opinions. It's just more of the same. I should just submit to everyone's judgement about everything ever. This is most certainly an overreaction but at some point nothing I say on this topic matters because of the nature of what I'm saying.

If people answer, we'll see. It doesn't particularly matter all that much.

It matters to me.

 

[1487610420]

proposing being an ass hole requires an excuse is an oxymoron

 

[Jaguar]

a good sign of fakers are people who won't go get treatment.

Translated: "If you don't do what I think you should do, then you're faking." Just because someone doesn't do something your way, doesn't mean anyone is faking anything.

 

[magpie]

I like Ivy's answer to this. I also agree with you for the most part.

However, the thing is, if you have to interact with this person, purely in terms of practical interaction - where influencing each other is inevitable - it can be helpful to know where you're going to draw the line. Usually, we tolerate a lot more from friends (because we understand and therefore empathise more with them, they are more valuable to us), than we do from strangers, for instance - even in the face of the same behaviour.

For me it's a matter of maximising the interaction for both parties. Mental illness or not. I'm not even talking about that - I just look at mental illness as a more noticeable personality quirk I have to work with. And I always try to minimise the damage I do to others - and that includes psychological damage. If I notice during an interaction that someone would benefit from a tough love push, I don't mind giving that, but if I notice someone is in a defensive, fragile state (due to the topic or some hidden tripwire I missed), I'll automatically try to figure out where that sensitivity is coming from and how I can soothe it - at the very least for my own comfort and for the duration of the communication, but if at all possible, to give them a bit of connection, understanding and support to take with and build on (as it is exceedingly rare in this world, as well as one of the biggest unfulfilled needs in many people, causing behavioural problems). It's not about controlling them, so much, as it is about giving us both a win-win and a pleasant moment in time. This can however be hard to do with people who are actually harmful to others - including myself. However, would it be fair to treat them differently when their need for understanding and support is equally valid. Then again, where do you draw the line on preserving your own boundaries and keeping yourself from harm and potentially harming another to do so?

It becomes a question of benefits and costs to yourself and to the other person - and when to actually choose between your protection and their needs - at least to me.

Edit: fwiw, [MENTION=4939]kyuuei[/MENTION] is ime rarely hostile, just very honest, blunt and to the point, with a clear explanation of where she stands on the topic and why. I don't always agree with her positions and she does draw lines faster than I would myself, but I've rarely seen her not open to discussing those lines. Chances are, though, that you'll find she prioritises other values than you, which are the core of her positions.

I get what you're saying. I think it is important to be able to step back and draw a line with people, whether that line is saying "you can't behave that way around me because it hurts my feelings or makes me uncomfortable" or recognizing that you can't or don't feel comfortable helping someone with all their issues. Sometimes the line is realizing that you don't feel comfortable accepting help from a particular person or in a particular moment. But it is a guide for practical interaction and it can get really hard to navigate when people are being harmful. Technically those people do still need support and understanding but I would say that until they stop being assholes, self preservation is more important, and I guess self preservation is preserving boundaries and drawing lines.

I think you're right, my main disagreement in this thread is an issue with values.

 

[prplchknz]

proposing being an ass hole requires an excuse is an oxymoron

well if your a hole in someone bum that expels feces then i think you have an excuse to be an asshole, though i don't think you can post on a forum if you are

 

[Lark]

Translated: "If you don't do what I think you should do, then you're faking." Just because someone doesn't do something your way, doesn't mean anyone is faking anything.

Yeah and there's power differentials in any diagnostic relationship, power differentials in any labelling, power differentials in just life and a lot relationships, which involve the sorts of dilemma you highlight here, how frames things, who reframes them, who is objective, who is, in contrast, being defensive and resistant to insight.

That's a blind alley that its possible to spend a hell of a lot of time in, its also something its important to think about because struggling individuals with a bit of insight, to use a local saying "one cute hur", can usually act swiftly to frame things in such a way that suits themselves and labels everyone else defensive, resistant etc.

Its part of the reason why I think that a lot of therapeutic relationships need to be treated as terminable, why I think that more social relationships should be terminable and people actively take steps to terminate them when it looks like that sort of feedback loop is developing. The most intractable and interminable relationships generally have a huge component of that sort of feedback loop and the relationship itself winds up being fuel to that particular fire.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I would tend to say that mental illness won't eliminate consequences for being an asshole. I honestly don't know where the line is drawn for each individual. I have an adult student with mental illness - not hallucinatory, but emotional regulation and personality disorders. It's possible she is a diagnosable anti-social personality disorder individual. She has been kicked out of every gym in town, and has gone through several teachers, etc. She is in constant conflict with people and businesses in her life, and is highly manipulative.

I've worked with her consistently for over five years now, and I often step back and ponder the question: Where is the line within her between the part she has control over and the part she doesn't? I sometimes wonder if she knows. For the sake of society, the basic rules do need to apply to people like her as well as others, but her issues result in her living with feelings of intense anxiety, anger, and misery. Who would or even could fully choose such a mental state? I don't have an answer, except that each person needs to be encouraged to function in a healthy manner. For my own interactions with this person I have only one goal: every week I am going to remind her to take time to love her dog (whom she does care for) in place of getting lost in anger. I doubt she will ever change, I wonder if she even can. It isn't something that is possible to know definitively.

It's a broad, complex topic, and there isn't a definitive answer. Copouts are unhealthy, indulging negative traits is unhealthy, but I also think every human is finite and subject to cause-and-effect. I have no idea where that internal line is drawn between choice and effect. I guess we just each do out best and encourage others to do their best, and then let the chips fall where they will.

 

[Jaguar]

Yeah and there's power differentials in any diagnostic relationship, power differentials in any labelling, power differentials in just life and a lot relationships, which involve the sorts of dilemma you highlight here, how frames things, who reframes them, who is objective, who is, in contrast, being defensive and resistant to insight.

That's a blind alley that its possible to spend a hell of a lot of time in, its also something its important to think about because struggling individuals with a bit of insight, to use a local saying "one cute hur", can usually act swiftly to frame things in such a way that suits themselves and labels everyone else defensive, resistant etc.

Its part of the reason why I think that a lot of therapeutic relationships need to be treated as terminable, why I think that more social relationships should be terminable and people actively take steps to terminate them when it looks like that sort of feedback loop is developing. The most intractable and interminable relationships generally have a huge component of that sort of feedback loop and the relationship itself winds up being fuel to that particular fire.

Your pithy posts are mesmerizing.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

We really don't know the struggles of anyone else to function. And accepting that you have a problem could be devastating to many. For those that are aware they have an issue, it is very important to support them but put up boundaries.

For those not aware yet, I see it as a real struggle. From my observations, that know something is off, but that lack the ability to be cognizant of that fact. The brain is wicked good at fooling us. We might be fully able to see inappropriate behavior in others, but clueless when we do the exact same things.

As such, it is a very delicate thing. No one is getting healthy until they are willing to try. But forcing them is likely to be futile, because the treatment requires cooperation and will. We can call them on their inappropriate behavior, but saying, "hey, you are crazy!" will most likely lead them to double down in their defensiveness.

My bipolar sister only realized she had a problem in her 40s. Before that, she appeared to be a high functioning, slightly high strung and neurotic, with occasional down patches. But she is now fully aware of her issues and 6 years of CBT and meds have done wonders for her. Again, I suspect no outsider ever thought she was mentally ill. Or close family. And she got bitchy at times. But her husband was very patient. And understanding. And eventually she sought help.

My wife needs help. She never acts like an asshole in public, as she can maintain decorum. But she is often an asshole at home. Do I wish she would get help? Yes. Can I force her to actually do it? No. All I can do is put up boundaries and provide a loving environment, and run interference with the children. She may be aware how fucked up she is, because she acts contrary to her values regularly. But then she puts it out of her, mind, hiding it from herself.

We really do need to help those we can by showing love, but not accepting poor behavior. Our boundaries must be clear.

 

[á´…eparted]

That is still just your perception. It doesn't take precedence over my perception.

Not all perceptions are valid, so in some cases yes, one can take precedent.

From what I can tell, that's just a graph that shows the prevalence of serious mental illnesses across social groups, not what mental illnesses are considered serious. Why should I define what mental illnesses are more serious than others? Categorizing in that way isn't useful to me. You're the one who made the claim so you do it.

You failed to understand it then. Further, I guess my sarcasm was missed; I find the fact that you can't (or worse, won't) see some mental illnesses as having a tendency to be worse than others. The big three do indeed frequently have more serious complications than personality disorders do. It's intellecually dishonest to not regard the severe mental illnesses as severe.

Oh, here we go. Because of what I think about things I don't have credibility to have my opinions counted or even discuss with the people who hold the correct opinions.

Yes. Someone who doesn't believe in gravity, isn't really qualified to disprove or speak poorly about it, because it can't be disproven or invalidated in the first place. Same goes with psychology, an established scientific and medical field, is not something that can be denied. If you deny it, then you are indeed not qualified to speak about it with as much weight as someone who does regard it and recognizes what it does.

It's just more of the same. I should just submit to everyone's judgement about everything ever. This is most certainly an overreaction but at some point nothing I say on this topic matters because of the nature of what I'm saying.

If you're judgements are faulty, then yes indeed you should submit to the judgements of others who are within the field. Indeed, this is an overreaction on your part, and you are taking it to the extreme by thinking you can't have your own opinions, but the opinions need to be properly informed for them to carry reasonable weight. It's also not black and white; it's not an all matters or nothing matters thing.

 

[Amargith]

I agree [MENTION=25377]SearchingforPeace[/MENTION]. I think that the best option is to make you boundaries clear in a calm, explanatory way to the other party and to at the same time be understanding as to what may be motivating their behaviour, while being prepared to walk away for your own defense - if only temporarily.

It is kind of like parenting, in a way

You walk a belligerent child through their temper tantrums without giving in (by acknowledging their frustrations as real and giving them the space to express them, while they come to terms with the reality of the situation), so they learn how to manage it and how to ask for what they truly need (and without talking down to them - I hated that as a kid, that adults don't even listen and just dismiss your objections because 'mommy knows best')

While adults do not need to be treated like children, perhaps it is warranted to treat the childlike part of them, the part that somehow got arrested in development that way in order to provide them with what they need (and what we need for our own protection) - provided this is needed in the interaction and/or they've reached out to you to do this.

 

[noyo]

From my own personal experience, I've noticed that people who actually have mental illnesses usually don't use them as excuses.

As a person who has been officially diagnosed and coming from a family in which many people have different mental disorders, in my experience telling people you have this or that to explain your behaviour only makes things worse.
I don't know why, but it looks to me like neurotypical people and people who claim they have mental illnesses when they don't (for whatever reason they might do that) think that if you tell them them the cause of your behaviour, people will accept it with an "I see", and just keep it in mind for the future.
Now, it has never been like that in my life. Whenever I have told people about my issues (and it happened very few times, since I soon understood it was better to keep quiet), they either didn't care at all (I even received an "I don't care if you have Asperger's, you're a shitty person anyway" comment once), or tormented me with questions and questions about it for days or, worst of all, they told me my diagnosis had to be incorrect because I didn't fit the stereotype they heard about in a crappy TV show about "crazy people".
I've grown so tired of it that I just mention it to those closest to me, to the point that in school I always sent my mother to talk to teachers and she told them herself, because it looks like a neurotypical person talking about someone else's disorder has more credibility than the person themselves talking about it.
Now, I don't see why anyone would want to be treated like that by people, so I just don't get why anyone would want to use a disorder as an excuse when most people don't understand.


That being said, I do not think that anyone who self-diagnoses is seeking for attention or that only "experts" can make correct assumptions. I myself think that I might have OCD, even though I haven't been officially diagnosed with it.
A research is valid if it's accurate and not based only on a wikipedia article; but when someone tells me "I am pretty sure I have BPD, even though I've never experienced intense mood swings" (yes, someone has actually told me that), then forgive me, but I'm not gonna believe them.