Struggling With Radical Acceptance

[user27357]

I am being asked to buy into an idea that just doesn't make it through the first rounds of critical analysis with me. I keep banging into the shortcomings and rejecting the idea, much to the displeasure of my therapist.

I agree that all emotions are valid and that we are responsible for alleviating our own fears and solving our own safety problems and satisfying our own requirements. I agree that emotions are never inappropriate, only our actions based on those emotions can be inappropriate and again, we are responsible for those reactions to our emotions.

Radical acceptance says that only our reactions to an event and the emotions justified by that event can be controlled by us, and any negative reactions or negative outcomes for anyone including ourselves are our responsibility to control.

Basically it says that I f I feel anger it is because I chose to feel anger and if anyone, including myself is negatively affected because of that anger it is my problem to solve because I am the only one that can make it better. Okay, I can almost get myself to follow the logic that far. On a good day.

It all falls apart when I am told it is irresponsible to put my reactions to my emotions in someone elses hands and letting them decide what is going to happen next is wrong.

Is it wrong to allow my wife to think that when she approaches me with a loving tone and a caring gesture that she will be met with a positive result? Doesn't that fall into the norms of a relationship between partners? And the same for me, if I approach her with care and love, she is expected to respond positively, right?

So it holds that when the opposite happens, doesn't the opposite reaction follow? Shouldn't the opposite follow? Is it wrong when the opposite happens?

I was taught somewhere along this journey that setting a boundary in place is an act of kindness. If we are unpredictable and no one knows where the boundaries are we are seen as a ticking bomb that goes off unexpectedly. We owe it to those around us to be clear about the dangers and consistent in the responses.

Radical acceptance says I should put the boundary within, that no matter what happens outside I should accept it as being from the outside and that it doesn't affect me near as much as how I respond to it.

Broken promise? not as bad as a broken friendship, let it go.

Unmet expectations? Not as bad as following through with a negative response to it, let it go, do it yourself, learn to lower the expectations to a point that they can be met easily.

Repeated problems? repetitive forgiveness.

It just doesn't sound like a life I can live. It sounds like a life headed for exactly where I don't want to be. It sounds like a ticket to traumatic events, fast track. I let some people have an unlimited trespass on me long ago and they used it to hurt me deeply. I just don't think it can be repeated, not in this life.

If you know of this radical acceptance, where you do you see it? Does it work for you? How did you get there? do you see where I get off the rails, can you help?

I wish my mortgage company practiced this radical acceptance idea. I just don't see accepting my lack of a payment next month as being a sound business model. I can't imagine them deciding that causing me grief by foreclosing would be worse than just rolling over and letting me have the title. Radical acceptance says they can't control my payment schedule, they can't make me responsible for their own financial stability, and the only thing they have control over is their response. A negative outcome for me is a mean thing to cause, they just need to accept that no more payments will be coming and let go of that title before it causes anyone any more grief.

I call BS on this theory, care to debate with me?

 

[Deleted member 1860]

I think your definition of "radical acceptance" is off. Radical acceptance is simply being able to accept something, be it good, bad, whatever, without judging it. For example, accepting that your trauma happened is not the same as condoning what happened, rather it moves you from the realm of denial into the realm of reality. And once you've accepted what happened to you, then you can move forward with your healing.

If your therapist is telling you that's what radical acceptance is, then she's off. Maybe you confused radical acceptance with something else? I just don't see the basic premise of radical acceptance in anything you've said. I think that maybe that's the big problem. You have incorrectly defined the concept.

 

[arfie]

No, I do not care to debate with you, but I will share my own thoughts on the subject. In sorting a similar body of confusions, I latched on to three parts: 1) Feelings. Feelings change constantly, whether I want them to, or not. I want to love my husband constantly, but there are times I even hate him. When I give it time, the love has returned every time so far. 2) Facts. Facts are constant and do not change. 3) Actions. Acceptance of my feelings and the facts allow me to take more rational action.

An example of how I use this. 1) Feeling. I hate paying taxes. 2) Fact. I must pay taxes if I want to put gas in my car. 3) Action. I allow myself to smile while I fill up my tank.

 

[user27357]

Okay, hows this.....

Feeling: I want to know my wife is safe and everything is going well in my absence

Fact: She continues to leave her phone in places that it cannot be heard when I call her, she continues to break her promise to keep me aware of changes in the daily routine as they occur

Action: In order to acheive a feeling of well being and to allow myself the reward of enjoying a mutually beneficial and caring relationship I need to accept that my expectations are not going to be met and give up on them so I can smile when I call her and it goes to voicemail and be excited for her ability to experience something out of the normal daily routine when I come home to an empty house with no clues and just let my concerns for her well being disappear from the reality of our marriage because they are useless and unnappreciated and only cause me grief which manifests in anger at repetitive events.

Am i getting it?

 

[user27357]

@Solara

I get the idea that past events need to accepted and put to rest. Time spent reliving and analysing a past event is wasted time that is better spent healing. It is a tantalizing puzzle we have to resist solving. Why did I get abused? Why did the trauma happen? How did I cause my own grief? The trauma happened, just like the weather last Tuesday was sunny and warm and yesterday it was cloudy. Aint no sense to reason why, lets go outside and accept the weather today for what it is today and not blame anyone or even clarify the difference between a sunny day or a rainy day because we didn't get a choice and we don't get a choice and thats the long and short of it. Suit up, dress accordingly and prepare yourself for the worst and celebrate the best when it comes your way, it's all just weather.

But I am being asked to accept peoples actions in the same way and I don't think I can do it. People do mean things, people break promises and people cause pain for others. I don't think I can get to a point where pain being caused by someone else will be acceptable and go unjudged as a negative in my life. Sure, it may be inadvertant, it may be accidental, it may be unintended pain I feel. I set up a boundary and let it be clearly known that if it continues to happen there will be a response and then, only then, do I respond, every time. I cannot imagine being able to say, it is only pain and it has passed, it might not have been malevelant, allow yourself to go on happily hoping that it won't happen again because that is the only positive outcome within your control.

I just can't get that.

 

[Hashi]

I don't think radical acceptance means you have to smile or be happy about something. You only have to accept it. And perhaps accept that you wouldn't choose it but there it is.

I saw a TV programme about anger, and it suggested that one kind of anger comes from unrealistic expectations. They showed a taxi driver who was filled with anger as people drove badly around him. Every day. It was as if he was constantly surprised that his expectations of better driving weren't met. If he accepted that people around him would drive badly, that didn't mean he had to smile or like it. It meant that he would give up railing against something he had no control over.

I think this needs to be separated out from boundaries. If you agree a boundary with another person (ie they commit to it) and then they don't keep to it, there's a discussion to be had about trust and promises. If you simply have an expectation or your own standard, then that is not a boundary as such. I'm not really clear what the situation is.

 

[arfie]

@enough. I think I explained it badly and... I apologize for having added to your confusion.

Wishing you well.

 

[user27357]

@arfie

No harm, this is all just a discussion with no possibility for damage as long as no one gets there feelers hurt it's all just a common search for the path and it all helps

 

[user27357]

@Hashi

I think we are on the same page with the boundaries definition. Mutual definition and commitment are the ground rules and when those rules are broken any positive outcome falls off the table.

Thats my world, from in here looking out it is all agreed upon boundaries and avoidable but absolute negative responses to breaking those boundaries, everywhere I turn. My world is pretty much all have to/ because.

I am not asking for perfect drivers all around. I don't expect random encounters with unknown and unpredictable people to be any where near what I would like to hope for. But if I make a partnership with another cabbie and see driving that endangers our business I am expected to set up one of those boundaries aren't I? And if the boundaries are broken again and again, so long and see ya around, right?

That is the situation that has brought about all of this discussion with my therapist about radical acceptance.

My wife agrees to boundaries and breaks the agreements with impunity. My choices seem to be: 1) hope for a better partnership and work towards making it happen or 2) get used to the idea that I cannot make her change, I just have to know that a promise is a set up for disappointment and it is easier to lower expectations than to divorce and re marry.

I want to keep the third possibility on the table in hopes that she will get it and come through someday: 3) She can modify her behaviour and answer the phone, leave notes in this particular case, and generally keep the promises she makes to meet the rather minimal things I ask of her, all things I do for her because I want her to be at ease and confident and able to rely on my promises.

When she doesn't keep a promise and respect a boundary, I get angry. I also feel like she doesn't care.

She isn't unfaithful and she isn't doing anything I disapprove of, I just want to know she is OK out there because I have seen way too many cases were someone innocently driving home from swimming with their daughter or shopping for their husbands birthday weren't and I worry about that. And I want to know if I should cook, and for how many. And I want to know she cares enough to realise that I am worried and ease my fear. I really just want to know she cares, even if it is just that she cares enough to not want to see me angry.

She doesn't. I am being told to accept it, expect it and be OK with it. I don't think it's gonna work.

 

[joeylittle]

I don't think radical acceptance means you have to smile or be happy about something. You only have to accept it. And perhaps accept that you wouldn't choose it but there it is.

This is correct.

I once had radical acceptance broken down for me as "when we stop fighting with reality, we will no longer be suffering". In your example of your wife and the phone, @enough, I think the acceptance is to accept that you cannot control, change, or even affect her actions. You are powerless in that situation.

The beautiful thing about radical acceptance is that, when done fully, it does completely alleviate suffering. But alleviating suffering doesn't mean happiness. It just speaks to neutrality - and neutrality is really, really hard. If one can even get to "I don't like it, but it's true", that is a good step in the direction of radical acceptance.

I understood it fully after I broke my knee. It took three weeks for me to move past how horrible it was in every possible way; even if I wasn't crying my eyes out about it, I was hating not being able to move. I survived with the "this will pass eventually" mantra, but that mantra didn't address the fact that I would never fully recover from the injury. And then, one day, I woke up, and I just had a broken knee. It just was a fact. I didn't feel OK about it, I didn't feel miserable about it, it just was.

It's like a switch turns in your mind.

I also believe that a huge part of radical acceptance is the fact that it's useful to practice even if you never fully get there.

 

[Hashi]

@enough if your wife has agreed to something and is breaking her commitment to it, I'm not sure about your therapist's take on that particular situation. Are you saying your therapist understands the background and the issue but is telling you to accept it?

 

[joeylittle]

My wife agrees to boundaries and breaks the agreements with impunity. My choices seem to be: 1) hope for a better partnership and work towards making it happen or 2) get used to the idea that I cannot make her change, I just have to know that a promise is a set up for disappointment and it is easier to lower expectations than to divorce and re marry.
I want to keep the third possibility on the table in hopes that she will get it and come through someday: 3) She can modify her behaviour and answer the phone, leave notes in this particular case, and generally keep the promises she makes to meet the rather minimal things I ask of her, all things I do for her because I want her to be at ease and confident and able to rely on my promises.

To use radical acceptance here, but not also become passive, you need to break it into smaller chunks.

First step, accept that she is not changing. Don't add the condition "right now". Just she's not.
Second, address that: What do you need to do to alleviate your previous dependence/desire to have her change?
Answer: accept that you will not get what you want from her.

Next issue to radically accept: You will not get what you want from her.
Second, address that: What do you need to do to achieve that feeling of security?
Answer: You need to find your security from within yourself, in a way that you can control.

Personal problem solving: do you need to know where she is, even if she won't tell you? Do you need an agreed-upon communication system for where each of you is, when, that works for both of you? Come up with a tangible definition of what YOU need.

Couples problem solving: Bring this to her, and include discussion of the relationship dynamic; it's OK to tell her that when she doesn't keep her promises to you it causes you to feel imbalance in the relationship. That you want to accept who she is, as she is, but it is so in opposition to who you are, that it's causing tension. That there needs to be a plan for compromise. And then talk about the tangible ways you can address that.

That conversation will go much better if you've done the radical acceptance pieces first.