3 ms·

Co-dependency is definitely something to watch out for. I've read a number of books on the subject, and I'm a little surprised I was interpreted that way. Ther

Co-dependency is definitely something to watch out for. I've read a number of books on the subject, and I'm a little surprised I was interpreted that way. There's a huge difference between healthy support and enabling bad behavior. Examples: Your husband is drunk in the gutter. You can A) leave him there or B) drag him inside, clean him up, and put him to bed. If you pick A, you're allowing him to experience the consequences of his own mistakes. If you pick B, you're enabling him and saving him from his own mistakes. The person picking B is co-dependent, not supportive. A wife has always dreamed of having a lake house. The state of the house is immaterial, she just wants to walk out the back door and see the water. She finds a house they can afford now, but the husband finds the dwelling unlivable, and they're unable to afford a nicer house. The husband can A) veto the lake house outright, saying he won't be uncomfortable for her dreams or B) move into the house and be uncomfortable for his wife's dreams or C) put a plan together to earn/save extra money and make sacrifices to get the house that will be agreeable to both of them. The person picking A is taking care of themselves, but sticking it to his wife. The person picking B is being co-dependent, doing something that makes him miserable for the good of their partner. The person picking C is the healthy one here, enduring shared, temporary pain to achieve an end that is agreeable to both. A husband and wife have a vacation fund. They set a goal to save enough to go to Nepal the following year, and put together a savings plan to go. The wife follows the plan, sacrificing her gym membership for jogging and making fewer trips to the hair stylist. The husband ignores the plan, buys a new TV, eats at restaurants too often, and finds himself with a sizable debt at the end of the year. When it comes time to pay for the trip, the vacation fund has enough money to A) Pay for just the wife to go on the Nepal trip B) Pay for both of them to go to Disney Land instead C) Pay off the husband's credit cards. The person who chooses C is a text-book co-dependent. The person who chooses A is probably being healthy, but missed an opportunity for relaxation with her husband. This makes B a suitable option as well. The husband still has to handle his credit card debt, but his wife was willing to sacrifice her Nepal trip so they could be together. Perhaps it will inspire the husband to change his spending habits the next time around, or perhaps next year he'll be waving to her from the dock as she leaves on a cruise with her friends. The key to avoiding codependency is setting clear, definable limits with your spouse, and then allowing them to suffer the consequences when they ignore those limits. It takes a level of self awareness to set good limits, but self awareness is not selfishness. If you're able to build a marriage around self-sacrifice that has clear, definable payoffs, then your needs will naturally begin to align and the needs of the couple will supersede the individual needs.

ZenoArrow 11y ago
Great examples, thank you padobson. I especially like the last one (the Nepal trip) as it's a little more challenging to find the right option, as there are always some grey areas when it comes to what's best (ultimately what was right would be what was right based on the personalities of those involved). Just one thing, I dislike this notion of setting boundaries and building a relationship around self-sacrifice. I realise compromise is part of relationships and sometimes necessary but I don't think it should be central. To me a successful relationship is based on enjoyment. Enjoyment of the way you can share yourself with another, and they can share themselves with you. In my mind it's that which is central, through good times and bad, and the self sacrifice and boundaries only serves to keep a good thing going. Perhaps that's naive, but that's what I believe. I appreciate you didn't intend to suggest otherwise, I just think it's worth remembering that a relationship between two healthy adults shouldn't be based on a burden.
- padobson 11y ago
  I completely agree that if the purpose of a marriage (or life in general) is to maximize enjoyment, then you definitely don't want to build it around self sacrifice. An equally commendable goal, I think, is to become a more caring, empathetic person. In this context, self-sacrifice would take a more central role. Personally, I'm trying for a mix of the two. I want to enjoy my life and marriage as much as possible, but I'll make enjoyment sacrifices if I can look back on my life and be satisfied that they were for the greater good.
dragonwriter 11y ago
> Your husband is drunk in the gutter. You can A) leave him there or B) drag him inside, clean him up, and put him to bed. If you pick A, you're allowing him to experience the consequences of his own mistakes. If you pick B, you're enabling him and saving him from his own mistakes. The person picking B is co-dependent, not supportive. Outside of the context of an extended pattern of behavior, that's a bad example: as an incident, in isolation, it is not essentially co-dependent. Broader context might reveal it to be part of a codependent relationship (e.g., the same thing happens weekly, with the same response, and no discussion or addressing of the problem) or a supportive one (e.g., it happened once, was followed by a discussion of why it happened and mutually agreed and followed-up-on steps to prevent it from happening again). Context makes the difference between A being healthy and reasonable and just being an absolutely horrible partner (and person.)

ZenoArrow 11y ago

Great examples, thank you padobson. I especially like the last one (the Nepal trip) as it's a little more challenging to find the right option, as there are always some grey areas when it comes to what's best (ultimately what was right would be what was right based on the personalities of those involved). Just one thing, I dislike this notion of setting boundaries and building a relationship around self-sacrifice. I realise compromise is part of relationships and sometimes necessary but I don't think it should be central. To me a successful relationship is based on enjoyment. Enjoyment of the way you can share yourself with another, and they can share themselves with you. In my mind it's that which is central, through good times and bad, and the self sacrifice and boundaries only serves to keep a good thing going. Perhaps that's naive, but that's what I believe. I appreciate you didn't intend to suggest otherwise, I just think it's worth remembering that a relationship between two healthy adults shouldn't be based on a burden.

padobson 11y ago
I completely agree that if the purpose of a marriage (or life in general) is to maximize enjoyment, then you definitely don't want to build it around self sacrifice. An equally commendable goal, I think, is to become a more caring, empathetic person. In this context, self-sacrifice would take a more central role. Personally, I'm trying for a mix of the two. I want to enjoy my life and marriage as much as possible, but I'll make enjoyment sacrifices if I can look back on my life and be satisfied that they were for the greater good.

dragonwriter 11y ago

> Your husband is drunk in the gutter. You can A) leave him there or B) drag him inside, clean him up, and put him to bed. If you pick A, you're allowing him to experience the consequences of his own mistakes. If you pick B, you're enabling him and saving him from his own mistakes. The person picking B is co-dependent, not supportive. Outside of the context of an extended pattern of behavior, that's a bad example: as an incident, in isolation, it is not essentially co-dependent. Broader context might reveal it to be part of a codependent relationship (e.g., the same thing happens weekly, with the same response, and no discussion or addressing of the problem) or a supportive one (e.g., it happened once, was followed by a discussion of why it happened and mutually agreed and followed-up-on steps to prevent it from happening again). Context makes the difference between A being healthy and reasonable and just being an absolutely horrible partner (and person.)