Set Boundaries- But Don’t Use Your "Boundaries" To Control Someone Else

Excerpt from THE BOUNDARIES HANDBOOK

We have a whole bunch of new people, since many of you new folks took the Healing Through Relationship class last weekend with me and my partner Jeffrey Rediger, MD about how to approach your relationships as a legitimate transformational spiritual path of growth and depth. WELCOME! So many of you asked us for further guidance on how to learn relational skills that we’ve decided to create a biweekly new continuity program LOVE SCHOOL, where we’re going to be teaching healthy relational skills, like how to set and uphold boundaries, how to give a good apology, when to forgive (and when not to), what to do when there’s a trust breach in a relationship, how to discern whether someone should be trusted, red flags of antagonistic relationships and how to spot them early and keep your distance, how to do a good repair, what to do when someone else is reflexively defensive, how to handle feeling like a failure when someone criticizes you, and other things we should have learned by high school, ideally- but usually don’t get taught. This will be a community of practice with a lot of Q&A, experiential practices, IFS work, and community connection. You’re all welcome to join us!

JOIN LOVE SCHOOL HERE.

Okay, back to my step-wise release of The Boundaries Handbook.

Many of us are afraid to set boundaries, because we fear how someone else will respond. Sometimes but not always, our boundaries might mean setting limits on what someone else can expect from us- and if someone feels entitled to unlimited access to your body, your money, your social network, your business connections, your home, your wine cellar, your car, or your refrigerator, the other person might not like your boundaries. And that’s okay. People have a right to be upset or disappointed if you set limits on what’s okay and not okay. Their feelings matter but you don’t have to avoid setting boundaries, just to prevent someone else’s disappointment, anger, or sadness. It’s okay to let someone down, disappoint them, thwart their agenda, or cause them to feel angry because they felt entitled to something you’re no longer okay giving to them.

Let’s take an example. Because the holidays at her parent’s home have been a mess every year for the past decade, Sophie and her partner Alison hit a wall this past holiday season. It’s Sophie family, so Sophie is used to the utter chaos, cross-talking, insulting, accusation-hurling, competitiveness, and overt racism and homophobia in her family’s home. Alison is BIPOC, and she’s only been with Sophie for five years. She’s endured going to Sophie’s family’s house because she wanted to please Sophie. But after this last holiday season, Alison has hit her wall.

She told Sophie she’s okay going for short visits, but if they want to visit with Sophie’s family, they need to stay in a hotel rather than sharing her mother’s house. And she can’t tolerate going for more than two hours at a time. She gave Sophie the option of going without her, leaving Alison in the hotel to fend for herself. But Sophie actually viewed Alison’s request for this boundary as a relief and decided to back up Sophie in this new boundary with her family.

When she initiated a boundary conversation with her mother, her mother immediately got defensive. She minimized what Sophie was saying, invalidated Sophie’s feelings about how her family treated she and Alison, defended her right to express herself, regardless of the impact on Sophie and Alison, and then started blame-shifting and accusing Alison of things Sophie knew Alison hadn’t done. Her mother accused Sophie of being controlled by Alison and then shifted to accusing Sophie of controlling her mother. It all happened so fast that Sophie felt confused, dizzy, and disoriented. Who was controlling who here?

Sophie called for a PAUSE and reinstated the boundary, offering to discuss it further after her mother had a chance to digest the new boundary, once both of their nervous systems calmed down. A few days later, her mother expressed her extreme disappointment and tried to cajole Sophie into changing her mind. Sophie felt empathy for her mother and felt the tug at her heartstrings when her mother started crying. She felt some guilt and wondered if she was being a bad daughter. But she knew her commitment was to having Alison’s back in this, as she’d promised to do. And she really did want what Alison wanted. She didn’t feel controlled by Alison’s boundary request. Staying in a hotel and having a little romantic getaway when they came to visit her family, only taking in the family in small doses, felt like a massive relief, even though she knew it would be hard on her mother. This was trust-building between Sophie and Alison, even though she knew her mother was upset about it.

Sophie and Alison are not unethically controlling anyone else or each other with their boundaries. They’re taking back control of their own holidays, negotiating agreements that help them navigate other difficult situations, and coming up with a compromise that works for them both. They’re just protecting their relationship and controlling themselves, not using their “boundaries” to control anyone else.

Your Feelings Are Your Feelings. Their Feelings Are Their Feelings.

How then do we stay open-hearted with compassion for the suffering of those who might be experiencing the pain of the consequences of our boundaries? We remind ourselves that our feelings are our feelings, and someone else’s feelings are their feelings. It is not our responsibility to prevent someone else from having a painful feeling. If someone else does something hurtful, they might not like the boundaries we have to set- and that’s okay.

We come back to the idea of the greenhouse, where your vulnerability is a flower bulb it’s your responsibility to keep safe behind clear, firm, but kind boundaries. From inside this greenhouse, someone else can have all kinds of feelings about our boundaries, but we are protected in the greenhouse. We do not have to take on these feelings or let someone else’s feelings cause us to change our minds or collapse our boundaries. What IS our responsibility is making sure we’re not using “boundaries” to control someone else. Boundaries are meant to protect ourselves; not control someone else.

So then, what would controlling boundaries look like? To give an example of unethical boundaries (which are not actually boundaries they’re rigid, inflexible rules), my partner Jeff’s mother applied extreme restrictions on practically every aspect of his life. When it was time to bathe, he was only allowed to sit in the tub, turn the water on and turn it off before the water hit the back of the tub, without letting it get hot. Showers were timed to 3 minutes. Children had to be observed while bathing or using the toilet, even when they were sexually mature teenagers.

Even as a four year old boy, he was forced to clean the grout on the bathroom tile floor with a toothbrush, getting berated for not getting it clean enough, even though he was doing the best he could. When he was hungry or thirsty, the refrigerator door was only allowed to be opened for timed seconds. Outside communication was almost completely restricted beyond letting him go to public school. Particularly strict clothing was mandated. He was forced to have his hair cut in a way he hated and resisted. He was not allowed to date, join sports in high school, use phones or computers, or engage in extracurricular activities. He was forced to attend frequent church services against his will. He was forbidden to even think about sex or masturbate, much less kiss a girl or actually have sex before marriage. He was beaten if he expressed anger, threatened if got scared or sad, and abused until he was dissociated.

These are not boundaries. This is coercive control. According Steven Hassan’s BITE model of authoritarian control, this is control of Behavior, Information, Thought, and Emotion. While his mother called these “boundaries,” her children were not in consent about all of this. This is controlling behavior, not healthy, flexible, reasonable boundaries. So what is a boundary and how does it differ from being controlling?

Poorly done boundaries can sometimes be controlling, but there’s a way to set and enforce them in a way that is nowhere close to coercive control, which is a criminal offense in states like Connecticut or countries like the UK. A boundary always gives the other person consent. They might choose to leave the relationship if they won’t agree to the boundary, but they still have the free will choice to leave. Controlling boundaries take away a person’s right to consent or causing undue, unfair suffering for someone else, like a minor who can’t take care of themselves if they leave. If you’re being what Resmaa Menakem in Monsters In Love calls a “choice thief,” you’re stealing someone’s choice rather than giving them options so they can choose what’s right for themselves. That’s called being controlling.

Healthy boundaries are never controlling. You might take away some privileges, and others might not like that. But they still have the choice to abide by the boundary or not, knowing there might be consequences if they fail to respect the boundary.

Dialing down the intimacy dial and withholding privileges (with your heart open) as a consequence of boundary violating behavior is a totally valid way to protect yourself and allow for the natural consequences of such actions. But it’s important to clarify that it’s crucial to be careful that your withholding of privileges is not an unreasonable manipulation or a stealth bid for control. If someone else is forcing you out of consent or crossing your boundaries, you have every right to take control of your life again by setting any boundary you need to set. Someone else might interpret that as controlling, and they might accuse you of being controlling. But that’s not unethically controlling behavior. That’s just good boundaries.

I know this can be confusing. But unless you’re trying to keep a child who’s still a minor safe from legitimate danger, or unless you’re aiming to protect an adult who isn’t able to properly care for themselves (like a parent with dementia), you do not have the right to exert control and pull a “power over” move and steal someone’s choice by dressing it up as “boundaries.” To do so would be a boundary violation, and to quote wise parents everywhere, two wrongs never make a right.

You only have the right to control yourself. Of course, you are responsible to your loved ones, so your care of them is part of what love demands. But you are not responsible for your loved ones, unless they are legitimate dependents, such as minors or mentally disabled adults. Even if they’re minors, you are not responsible for the consequences of their choices, especially if they’re making irresponsible choices. I am responsible for my irresponsible behaviors. You are responsible for your irresponsible behaviors. We need to keep such things separate so we don’t meander into enmeshment territory.

For example, let’s say your teenage son is intelligent, talented, good looking, and full of potential. You think he should be playing varsity ball, dating a cheerleader, making straight A’s, going to the homecoming dance, applying for college, and thriving in his senior year. But he’s not. He’s holed up in his room, playing video games, hacking into websites, skipping school, making poor grades, smoking pot, watching porn, perusing chat sites, and generally acting out. As his parent, you have a right to set a boundary against your son’s choice to break the law and smoke pot when he’s below the legal age to make that choice. You have a right to limit screen time or set restrictions on internet usage to put porn-free boundaries on his computer. Depending on his age, you have a right to expect him to attend school, aligned with the truancy laws of your state. As his parent, you have a duty to make sure you keep him safe and relatively law abiding.

If he refuses to respect your boundaries, you have a right to withhold privileges or assign consequences to his choice to violate boundaries. You can take away the computer, assign reasonable household chores to keep him more occupied, or take away his pot. You have the right to suggest he attend a rehab facility. If your teen is old enough and he goes way off the rails, such that you can’t get him to comply with going to school, if he won’t stop using pot, or if he keeps running away or refusing to go to school, you may even have the right to kick him out of the house if he’s old enough to make the choice to drop out of school legally. But only if you know he has a way to get a job, find himself an apartment or another place to live, and get his basic needs met. (Laws vary by state, but unless you have given up your child as a ward of the state, many states have laws that could get you arrested for child endangerment if you aren’t attending to a minor’s basic needs for shelter, food, and protection.)

What you don’t have the right to do is try to coerce him to go to college, bully him into doing what you want him to do, shame him for not trying out for the varsity team, pressure him to get a girlfriend, humiliate him for not living up to your standards, punish him for not being the teen you hoped he’d be, or get him kidnapped in the middle of the night to take him to the school for troubled teens you want him to go to.