BPD's can control their behavior?

[Guest guest]

Well, I'm not disagreeing with you...I just have to ask because I genuinely am

trying to figure this out.

Maybe I am making excuses for my mother because I don't want to believe SHE

WANTED to hurt me. Maybe I'm in denial.

But why is it that a person with OCD or some other mental illness on the scale

of BPD (say, depression because I don't want to compare BPD to psychosis)...why

is it that those people CAN'T control their actions, but BPD people can?

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

I know we're all angry and frustrated and irritated and have been repeatedly

hurt by our BPD parents. I think I've shared enough that you all are able to

see my mother is as textbook BPD as many of yours are. But I'm not so sure she

could control it. I feel like my father or some other family member should have

stepped in and forced her to get help.

I'm just trying to understand why clinicians or whoever it is pick BPD out of

the hat to say they can control it, but none of the other people with other

forms of mental illness can.

Re: is BPD really mental illness?

That case is pretty much national news. There was a segment last night

on Grace, which I watched just long enough to key in on their use

of the term BPD, because otherwise I cannot stand Grace.

But there was a case there of a mother , angry at a divorce that left

dad with custody of her teen daughters, who cut both thier throats, and

calmly called 911. One daughter died. And one of the talking heads

mentioned that the Mom had BPD.

One can debate this endlessly , but a couple of observations.

BP s, by and large, unless they are experiencing a psychotic break, are

aware of their actions, and aware of right, wrong, and hurting others.

They simply don t give a shit. No, that is not right. In their system

of values, no pain or abuse of another, including their children,

outweighs their own needs. If you have to hurt in order for them to

get their itch scrated so be it.

Does a mental illness absolve one of responsibility for abhorent or

unpleasant actions? Mental illness covers a broad sprectrum of

conditions. Depression is a valid diagnosis from the DSM. It can, and

does, admittedly, make me a cranky old bear. I snarl and snap and

pout. Not my best side.

The depression may be the reason for it, but it still hurts those who

experience it. And I still owe them an apology.

One who is so delusional that he hears God telling him, from out of a

water pitcher, to do something that is divorced from reality may in fact

not realize what he is doing , or to whom.

On the other hand, one who is obsessive compulsive may be aware that his

actions are out of the norm, but find it difficult to refrain.

An drunk driver, who kills without remembering, was coherent and aware

when he began to drink with car keys in his pocket. If the results of

his actions end up in a death, he is still responsible. He may be an

alcoholic, but he can make a decision to make sure he is unable to drive

once he is drunk. He chooses not to. Sucks to be him.

Any addict in recovery will tell you, an essential part of recovery and

sobriety is accepting responsibility for one s actions. He may

acknowledge that the addiction was the driving force, but accepts that

the choices and outcomes were still his.

A wiser man than me proposed that, since insane is a legal definition of

whether one discerns right or wrong, there needs to be a legal verdict:

guilty, but insane.

Not guilty by reason of insanity is an inane oxymoron. Did the murderer

with delusions NOT kill his victim? No, he killed, the victim is dead,

and he did it. His actions are such that he is guilty of murder. The

fact that his insanity prevented him from fully understanding at the

time does not change his actions, or responsibility for it. Give him

his thorazine in prison.

Which provides incentive in the next observation: Often a psycho or

schizo who does violence, does so while voluntarily stopping his anti

psychotics because he does not like the, admittedly severe, side

effects. So, like the drunk who drives to the bar to start drinking, he

chose his comfort over the safety of others. If his comfort results

violence , he is responsible.

In the case of the man who kidnapped a 12 year old girl and made her his

" wife " , claiming God told him to is, IMHO , full of shit. He is a

mean, obsessed son of a bitch. God didnt tell his wife to assist him

in grabbing a second one. He had a very convenient outlet for his

meanness, and his desire to use a pretty little blond girl as he chose

for months. He was, just as they said, a sociopath. Not that he didnt

know it was wrong, but that he didnt care. He wanted it, he took it,

and that constituted enough of a law.

And in that, he was very much like a BP.

I maintain that BP s are all, to some extent, sociopathic .

If your mother is a BP, then yes, she is mentally ill. That provides

you with a reason, and an understanding. It does not provide her with

an excuse, nor you with a justification.

You do not have to say, oh moms sick so its ok.

As you stated, She just did not care about society's rules. Very true.

They understand that something is not right. They can, because some do,

choose to respond to therapy and improve.

Most, as one therapist put it about my mom, are " pouting because she

doesnt want to participate. " 3 year olds can grow up. It sucks. It s

hard. But they choose to stay with what they know, rather than do the

hard thing and protect us from the life of a KO.

IMHO.

Doug