5 ms·
Both of your scenarios assume that the issue is due to some fixable personal failing, and both of those assumptions are unfounded. “Lack of planning” is how you
by stonecraftwolf 8y ago
Both of your scenarios assume that the issue is due to some fixable personal failing, and both of those assumptions are unfounded. “Lack of planning” is how you might describe “poor executive functioning” if you were to attach a moral weight to it; in reality, poor executive functioning is itself often a symptom of trauma, particularly complex or developmental trauma. It is also a feature of autism, particularly in how it manifests differently among women. Similarly, there are many people for whom no known weight loss method has worked without intolerable costs. (Suicidal ideation, dramatic hair loss, debilitating fatigue or cognitive deficits.) This seems to be one of those things that people often refuse to believe, instead gas lighting the hell out of the people who suffer from this. I have known people who’s compulsive behavior absolutely contributed to their weight problems (and in those cases, trauma was also a factor), but I’ve also known people who have done and tried everything, and the way they suffer is not something I would wish on anyone. We don’t yet fully understand how trauma, particularly long term trauma, affects the body, let alone the metabolism, nervous system, endocrine system, or even GI tract, but everything we are learning seems to point to profound effects. It seems incredible to assume that there might not be purely physiological mechanisms at work beyond the control of self-directed behavior.
In general, trauma symptoms encompass many more dysfunctional behaviors than is often understood by lay people, and while self-destructive behaviors in response to trauma or persistent C/PTSD are no less self-destructive because of their origins, describing them in moralist terms is actively harmful. It is often more accurate, and compassionate, to describe those behaviors as adaptations to stress that have become maladaptive. They are not moral failings; they are the result of bad conditioning. Put another way: if the only tools you have for internal regulation are shitty tools, you learn to depend on shitty tools to survive.
This does not make traumatized people any easier to be around or to help. You still need to draw your own boundaries, as you noted. But if you’re able to approach such people within your own acceptable boundaries with an open mind, and the willingness to point them towards trauma treatment that might actually be helpful, those conversations you’re not sure how to have might have better outcomes.
For further reading on trauma I’d recommend Van der Kolk, Levine, and others.
- DenisM 8y agoYou don't have to read moral judgement into apo's comment, and if you don't one problem comes into focus: it's well good to listen support a person unconditionally in their difficulties, but some the sufferers need to change their behavior and you can't effect that through nodding and bringing in comfort food. If you want a person to change you have to tell them something they don't want to her. At what point do switch from one to another?
- warent 8y agoUltimately it doesn't matter how much we want another person to change. Things will only affect change when people are ready and willing. When that happens, it will be pretty obvious, especially if you're someone they trust. At that point it does make sense to make the switch to being forthcoming and honest as you mentioned. In the mean time? Don't enable, but don't be direct in telling them what they aren't ready to hear either. Of course, be empathetic and gentle, offer guidance and help along the way but provide no unsolicited advice. Unless you're a therapist, you should either change the topic or don't associate with them at all, or else you risk making matters worse and deepening the problem. Disclaimer: I'm not professional in the matter, this has just been my personal approach in life that's worked well so far.
- jacobolus 8y ago> either change the topic or don't associate with them at all [...] this has just been my personal approach in life that's worked well so far. This may work out for you, but it’s hard to judge how well it works out for the people you decide to stop associating with (especially in comparison to some counterfactual other approach), since presumably you don’t get much follow-up information about the outcome.
- DenisM 8y ago> Things will only affect change when people are ready and willing I find this unsatisfactory. There is a period in a persons life where they will not listen to advice, then when they might be suggestible, and finally when they will act even on their own accord. If we pretend that the second period is non-existent we can sleep well because nothing can be done and so nothing should be done. But the logical me rebels against this notion - there has to be a transitionary period. Perhaps by pushing someone over the edge during that time I will save them years of wallowing in the tar pit of indecision.