SETTING EFFECTIVE, INTELLIGENT BOUNDARIES EVERYWHERE
FREEING ONESELF
Draft, substantial
APPLY THIS PIECE TO ALL OF LIFE
Originally, I wrote in this piece on boundaries in relationships as that is the most apparent area to use them in. But "boundaries" should be set very, very clearly in all areas of life, so that you can not only have relationships that work but have each area of life be working well, for your maximum happiness.
Read the following discussion about relationships, but apply the concepts to all areas of life.
BOUNDARIES IN RELATIONSHIPS
Often, good people focus so much on being loving and unselfish that they forget their own limits and limitations.
When confronted with their lack of boundaries, they ask:
- Can I set limits and still be a loving person?
- What are legitimate boundaries?
- What if someone is upset or hurt by my boundaries?
- How do I answer someone who wants my time, love, energy, or money?
- Aren't boundaries selfish?
- Why do I feel guilty or afraid when I consider setting boundaries?"
Quoted from Amazon's introduction of the book Boundaries, by Henry Cloud, et.al.
(The words in italics are ones I substituted for religious words. Even if a person is not religious,
he/she can get benefit from this book, by simply substituting mentally secular words.)
The most important:
Emotional boundaries help us to deal with our own emotions and disengage from the harmful, manipulative emotions of others.
____________________________________________________________
THE TRAGEDY OF "LEAKY BOUNDARIES"
Leaky boundaries lead to lives of quiet desperation (to borrow from Thoreau), where one tries to keep up with the impossible and tries to deal with more than mere humans can. They most often incur undue stress trying to "do it all" AND they do not have enough time left over to do the higher priorities of life! AND they may also feel resentment of others, forgetting that it was their choice to allow this!
Not a pretty sight! Sad...
What is especially sad about this is that those people who suffer from leaky or nonexistent boundaries are conscientious people trying to do good in the world, for friends and family and beyond.
We think of boundaries as something we draw to keep people at bay, but they are useful in all areas of life.
Basically, boundaries should be set so that you do not allow yourself or others to go across them.
You are trying to make sure that what is within the boundaries is valuable to you and to make sure that what is outside the boundaries excludes what is not important and/or what is harmful.
At Strategic Coach, Dan Sullivan, a great guru of productivity at work and in life, suggests that you rise to the level of only doing that which you can uniquely do in business. And, also, continuing on in the logic, you would do only that which you can uniquely do (like spend time with the kids, spouse, etc.) and/or that which is most impactful for you. See Strategic Coach's Unique Ability: Creating The Life You Want, which includes a CD.
So, the boundary is to keep out all that which is not the most important, as you really only have time to do what is most important - and if you stick to that, you will have lots of time and also not be stressed!!!
RESCUING - AND KILLING YOURSELF AND/OR YOUR PRODUCTIVITY
The classic victim of boundarylessness is the person who "rescues" either a person and/or the task to be done. Whether it is from perfection, and its sister need of approval, or from compassion and the desire to help, it is a literal killer in terms of the stress it creates. This is the classic codependent's routine, where we rescue people from the consequences of their actions or lack thereof, confusing the boundaries of where other people leave off and where we start.
Less clear, since we may consider it part of our responsibility, is the practice of a person (often a leader or a parent) who will delegate responsibility, but then take it back when the other person is not doing the job as well as he/she 'should'. The person does it to make sure that it is done right and that the right results are achieved. That seems to make sense, but it has severe consequences: it sucks up the person's time so greatly that he/she cannot produce much greater impact by doing high impact items!
Yes, the other person may end up looking bad to a group, by failing to follow through, and/or it could be attributed to you and harm the results of what you are aiming for, but it may be something you need to tolerate. Of course, that is hard to do when one needs to avoid getting disapproval. There will be some instances where it is important enough to do the rescue, but that should be the exception and not the rule! Perhaps up to 10% is inside your boundary, but probably 90% is outside your boundary. If you measure this, you'll find that the time you spend inappropriately will fatten up the percentage of "tasks you can remove" from your life in order to experience a better and more productive life. (Review what has occurred for you over the last month or year to see what you did that was more from obligation/"responsibility" than productivity - and list those as items outside your boundary. See the exercises in the overview perspective in Time Savers - How To Save 40% Of Your Time.)
STOPPING ALL THAT IS NOT RELEVANT
The biggest overall concept here is to consider what actually produces high benefits for you and draw the boundary to include only those (to the degree possible). Highly effective people do that; ineffective or less effective people do not do that.
What you value personally, provided you have "informed" values and not immature and incorrect values, is what gets you value in life - it is the end goal, to accumulate lasting value. As above, it is your job to mercilessly, ruthlessly, eliminate all that is not relevant enough to your life. Consider doing the suggested exercise in The "Law" Of Relevancy - Staying On The Path Of What Makes A Difference To You!.
People have a vague, "blurry" view on what is truly relevant. They throw in the idea of "always doing well in whatever you do" (which is not true "always") or "I want to be a good person" and include being helpful beyond boundaries and limits of what is beneficial. They also confuse "kindness" with rescuing people and saving them from feeling bad. (The latter will kill the ability of one's children to be effective in life: Rescuing Your Child.) You've got to clear up the fuzzy boundaries, using the criteria of "what is most beneficial for me" (for instance, to have a stronger more capable child) and what is not. And, yes, you will often have to consider the tradeoff: Relieving your anxiety about the anxiety of the child or the child learning how to deal with life's difficulties better than he/she would have otherwise.)
MY HUSBAND IS FRUSTRATING AND ANGERING ME
If someone else is not doing as you wish, there are several boundaries that you set. Some of the boundaries might not be honored and/or can be outside your control, though we may find it useful to make the attempt to set the boundaries. But closing the gap between what this person wants and what is so is entirely her responsibility. She is the one who is affected, so she is automatically responsible (as she pays the price).
As in the piece called The Unhappiness Gap, we must distinguish, on the high side, how realistic our "expectations" are and the level that we can realistically get up to. If we expect another to treat us like royalty or as a princess, we may need to learn a little more about human behavior and relationships. If we let ourselves be triggered into harmful behavior, then it is up to us to learn how to no longer do that - AND at the same time we can make a request of the other person to stop doing the trigger - and he may choose to do that or not and/or he may not do it perfectly or well enough. But it is a "both/and", not an either/or. Regardless of what he does, it is still our responsibility to set the behavioral boundary for oneself that is sufficient to no longer engage in the behavior that causes herself (and/or another) harm. If he behaves badly, there is no excuse for doing stupid behavior.
As discussed in , she must do her best to separate out what is in her emotional domain and what is not. She must know that no one has the literal power to "make her feel" a certain way. She must know that such languaging is an easy way to try to escape from responsibility.
It is also her responsibility to "get the point across" to her husband. If he doesn't understand, the conversation cannot just end with his being at fault. A responsible person does not operate based on the idea of fault but based on the idea of workability, i.e. getting results, as the only criteria. She merely notes "I am not getting the point across" (which is her responsibility to do). "So, what am I not doing and/or doing ineffectively and what else can I do that will be more effective and could work." And then she does it. But she does stop at the point where the return on her effort looks like it is not going to happen or is not worth the effort. And then she looks for what will payoff and goes that route. She may need to do things like closing the door to keep him from intruding, going to the library or some place where is not so that the triggers are avoiding. She cannot be responsible for his being not responsible in his behavior and/or mind. She can only do the best she can in her area of responsibility and not expect some kind of miracle on the other side's area.
Yes, they overlap in terms of interacting with each other, but on one side is "her" and on the other side of that interaction is "him" - and the two are not to be confused. She, as it virtually never works, does not take responsiblity for him. She does not "take over" something he is to do in order to rescue him from doing it and/or to displace him - this is the harm in the co-dependent type of behavior. (Read Dependence, Independence And Interdependence - What Works And What Doesn't.)
If he is on the Asperger's Spectrum or on the not-quite-all-there emotional understanding spectrum, then she must recognize that reality. She cannot "have it all" from him, because he doesn't "have it all" (or enough capability) to give it all to her and/or not have the understanding that is sufficient to do so.
She "gets to" have the opportunity of communicating with him what it is that is true and might be helpful in alleviating her angst, frustration, anger, and unhappiness with it all.
My
