Relationship Micro versus macro boundaries?

[caligirl03]

Hi all,

I've been providing emotional support to someone with combat PTSD. We were in a relationship off and on for a few years. Things didn't work out romantically between us, but we've been best friends since childhood and will most likely always be in each other's lives in some way or another.

Throughout our time together, I've learned a lot about how to establish and enforce boundaries, which I think I've gotten much better at. While I understand letting him know I simply won't be engaging if he escalates over essentially nothing, I view that as more of a "micro" boundary if you will. My question is, should there be big picture boundaries? For example, if your sufferer frequently explodes, should there be a bigger boundary set, like letting them you won't be hanging out as often if these blow ups keep happening every time?

I'm torn because in the past he would explode and not even so much as acknowledge it, and at times wouldn't even really remember what he said, which I'm guessing was most likely due to dissociating. More recently, he may still get angry over trivial things but to much a lesser degree than his blind rages of the past, and he also now always apologizes right after each time and is able to de-escalate largely on his own (THANK you therapy!) So I'm not sure how to navigate rewarding his progress, giving him space to be human and have an off day, but also still encourage him to keep going!

 

[WishfulThinking123]

if your sufferer frequently explodes, should there be a bigger boundary set, like letting them you won't be hanging out as often if these blow ups keep happening every time

Your above quote appears to be almost like a "punishment" and if I was told you wouldn't hang out with as much I would feel as if I was being treated like a child or mentally handicapped. It would feel humiliating to me and I am a woman...not even a guy so I would imagine it would feel worse for him. I would continue with the not engaging part that is good and you said t is helping to deescalate things. I would just keep encouraging him along on this process but, unless your T suggested this or thinks its a good idea because, I am certainty not a professional, I wouldn't do these "macro" boundaries. I don't know maybe you could discuss with him how you could best encourage him and support him along on this journey? Or ask the T if there is anything extra you should be doing. This is just my perspective based on what you posted.

 

[Sweetpea76]

If he is having major explosions then you shouldn't hang out with him a lot if you're feeling attacked or threatened.

I guess I don't get the micro/macro thing. A boundary is a boundary. They're YOUR limits. He can't act like he's gonna act but you have every right to set your limits. If you don't want to hang out with somebody who lashes out at you as much as you are now, than you do not have to.

It's not a punishment for him. It's your line in the sand. It's what you will or will not tolerate.

"If you continue you blow up at me, I don't think I can spend as much time with you. It's not good for my mental health."

He doesn't get a say in the matter. He can choose to respect your boundary or not. It's up to you to follow through.

I will say that if you set a boundary, tou need to make sure you mean it. Micro/macro... whatever. A boundary you do not enforce is useless.

 

[WishfulThinking123]

I agree with @Sweetpea76, I didn't think of it as being "your boundary" and what you're willing to tolerate when I read this thread. Definitely, do whatever you want to feel safe whether that be emotional or physical. I think it was the way it was phrased, maybe I didn't understand but, the way I interpreted it was as a "punitive punishment" to try to "encourage" him to behave so to speak. I'm probably off base.

 

[caligirl03]

I see both your points, thank you!

 

[EveHarrington]

I don't see it as a punishment.

I see it as reality.

When my behavior is bad, people hang out with me less.

They aren't trying to "punish" me.