Re: BP vs NPD relationships / abuse / rage

[Guest guest]

I will have to cheerfully disagree, I think that bpd presents in too many

different ways to generalize their behaviors as broadly as you've suggested.

My mother has been diagnosed *only* with bpd by two different therapists, *and

yet* she also exhibits narcissistic pd traits and even some antisocial pd

traits, and she even has obsessive-compulsive pd traits.

Because only 5 out of 9 criteria must be present to diagnose borderline pd,

one person could manifest her bpd as a low-functioning Hermit/Waif, and another

person could present her bpd as a high-functioning Queen or Witch, and these two

presentations are so different from each other that they look like different

disorders. But they are both " just " bpd.

(These sub-types are based on the book " Understanding The Borderline Mother " ,

and while these sub-types are not in the DSM-IV I think they're pretty amazingly

on target.)

I tend to lean toward the Kernberg model of etiology (and his theory of how to

treat these disorders) that says that borderline pd and narcissistic pd are

like... two different leaves on the same plant: they both have the same root.

(Kernberg's main rival theorist, Kohut, sees the disorders as more distinct from

each other.)

And since I also tend to agree with Dr. Hare's views on psychopathy: that

psychopathy has its basis in narcissistic pd, I think that future research will

conclude that all these Cluster B disorders and psychopathy are not individual

" plants " but instead are really just " shoots " growing out of one giant

interconnected root system: they're all just one big entity. (Kind of like the

aspen groves in Colorado: they're not individual trees, they're tree-sized

shoots off of a single gigantic interconnected root system.)

So, while I do agree with you that some with bpd could be just sort of

accidentally or cluelessly toxic and destructive, I believe that others with bpd

are quite deliberately and maliciously destructive towards others, and that

would be the " Queen " and " Witch " types.

-Annie

> > > >

> > > > Not saying I will; just thinking out loud. It would be hard. Would the

> > > benefit be worth the struggle. I can say that my work with my step-mother

> > > has been rewarding. I am glad for the chance to make peace with her.

> > > However, my mother is a whole entirely different level of BP abuse and

> > > dysfunction. Again, just thinking out loud.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Yeah, I could see it that being able to be in contact but on your terms in

> > > a way that keeps you safe but is real and honest would be very empowering

> > > and healing. I'm glad this is working for you with your step-mother. I'd

> > > think that a certain minimum level of mental health would have to be there

> > > though for the BPDM

> > >

> > > Eliza

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

I love it when this topic comes up and especially love to get Annie's

perspective, which is always so very well presented and documented. I also have

to respectfully disagree with pdff, though I only have my own very antecdotal

evidence from my own nada, npd father, npd ex husband and certain other family

members/ relationships. I've not yet read Randi's second book, but from what I

understand she well documents the difference between the more low-functioning,

strongly self-harming borderlines and the high-functioning types that seem to

dominate the discussion on this board. I tend to believe (just my own opinion)

that severe ptsd or DID, manifest as self-harm, may sometimes be confused as

bpd. When I talk about bpd, when I use that term, I mean the *exact same thing

as Annie--a certain cluster of somewhat cohesive behaviors, with the same root

as histrionic behavior, narcissism and psychopathy.

With my nada, she DEFINITELY harmed on purpose--and she definitely was NOT a

narcissist, not dominantly--my father and ex-husband were, and so I'm sure I

know the difference. What nada did was harm, on purpose, to get ATTENTION. She

would get a gleam in her eye when she had made someone hurt, forced someone's

behavior, out of hurt. She would tell me, 'I *got to your Daddy', and gleam,

gleefully. She wilfully blinded herself to the fact that she was harming,

because she found it excusable because she needed the attention so badly.

Likewise, she wilfully blinded herself to other harms she intentionally caused,

such as overcoming her childrens'/husbands will just because she needed to prove

she was NOT separate from them, and thus not be abandoned--by feeding us foods

or depriving us of medical care that we asked for or truly needed--just because

we expressed a wish for it. She thought this intentional harm was ok, and

wilfully blinded herself to its actual effects, because she told herself she was

in so much 'pain' and needed to prevent our 'abandoning' her by being separate

people. She believed she was 'allergic' to milk, for example, and so all three

of her children were calcium deficient. She inflicted this harm on purpose not

because she enjoyed us hurting, but because she believed it was a justified way

to stop HER hurting.

That being said, she harmed on purpose, and enjoyed it and NEEDED to do it

compulsively. Would you call it 'reckless' or 'knowledgeable' instead of

purposeful? Maybe. But she still deduced ways to harm vulnerable parties, and

did so. In my book, that's a predator.

I can't say if this is a typical, general borderline pattern but from the other

borderlines I have known, I very much suspect it is. I also think that there

can be just complete MIXES--someone I just dated was, I really think, about

50/50 Npd and BPD.

I really believe that, when it comes to the Cluster Bs, the scientific

psychological researchers and doctors would REALLY do well to research among the

informed, articulate population. We who have grown UP with it have a handle on

it all, with its complexities, that I think someone who's not been exposed to it

since birth can have--scientific training or no.

--CHarlie

> > > > >

> > > > > Not saying I will; just thinking out loud. It would be hard. Would the

> > > > benefit be worth the struggle. I can say that my work with my

step-mother

> > > > has been rewarding. I am glad for the chance to make peace with her.

> > > > However, my mother is a whole entirely different level of BP abuse and

> > > > dysfunction. Again, just thinking out loud.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Yeah, I could see it that being able to be in contact but on your terms

in

> > > > a way that keeps you safe but is real and honest would be very

empowering

> > > > and healing. I'm glad this is working for you with your step-mother. I'd

> > > > think that a certain minimum level of mental health would have to be

there

> > > > though for the BPDM

> > > >

> > > > Eliza

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

Wow, ok; but to argue at this level we would have to talk on the phone. This is

way too deep for most people on this list. Looks like you have done some

reading, reading that I am very familiar with. I am impressed. Now come back

down to our level, lol.

> > > > >

> > > > > Not saying I will; just thinking out loud. It would be hard. Would the

> > > > benefit be worth the struggle. I can say that my work with my

step-mother

> > > > has been rewarding. I am glad for the chance to make peace with her.

> > > > However, my mother is a whole entirely different level of BP abuse and

> > > > dysfunction. Again, just thinking out loud.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Yeah, I could see it that being able to be in contact but on your terms

in

> > > > a way that keeps you safe but is real and honest would be very

empowering

> > > > and healing. I'm glad this is working for you with your step-mother. I'd

> > > > think that a certain minimum level of mental health would have to be

there

> > > > though for the BPDM

> > > >

> > > > Eliza

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

This is a good case in point by charlotte, but this is not a difference between

BPD and NPD, this is simple projection, " she believed it was a justified way to

stop HER hurting. " Especially if you father was NPD, you BP mother would

naturally project her pain onto those closest to her and would enjoy hurting the

man that hurt her. This is like the perfect storm. In this type of war zone,

it is hard to remember who the enemy is. No one trusts anyone and the damage

spills out onto anyone that comes too close. I studied a family like this and

it was the most interesting study I have ever done. NPDs can be so covert with

there abuse, not even family members can see it, but the abuse causes damage

none-the-less. Some people lash out in rage and others quietly internalize the

abuse. Sounds like you mother raged.

It sounds like you have siblings. I hope you were not an only child. Were you

able to have friends as a child? Were there other healthy family in your life?

Are your parents still together?

With my nada, she DEFINITELY harmed on purpose--and she definitely was NOT a

narcissist, not dominantly--my father and ex-husband were, and so I'm sure I

know the difference. What nada did was harm, on purpose, to get ATTENTION. She

would get a gleam in her eye when she had made someone hurt, forced someone's

behavior, out of hurt. She would tell me, 'I *got to your Daddy', and gleam,

gleefully. She wilfully blinded herself to the fact that she was harming,

because she found it excusable because she needed the attention so badly.

Likewise, she wilfully blinded herself to other harms she intentionally caused,

such as overcoming her childrens'/husbands will just because she needed to prove

she was NOT separate from them, and thus not be abandoned--by feeding us foods

or depriving us of medical care that we asked for or truly needed--just because

we expressed a wish for it. She thought this intentional harm was ok, and

wilfully blinded herself to its actual effects, because she told herself she was

in so much 'pain' and needed to prevent our 'abandoning' her by being separate

people. She believed she was 'allergic' to milk, for example, and so all three

of her children were calcium deficient. She inflicted this harm on purpose not

because she enjoyed us hurting, but because she believed it was a justified way

to stop HER hurting.

[Guest guest]

I second Annie and Charlie's emotions (or rather facts, I just wanted to

quote the song). Also, to clarify, many of us are very comfortable at this

level. It seems to mostly depend on how long you have been in the know and

how much time you have had to read and research.

> **

>

>

> This is a good case in point by charlotte, but this is not a difference

> between BPD and NPD, this is simple projection, " she believed it was a

> justified way to stop HER hurting. " Especially if you father was NPD, you BP

> mother would naturally project her pain onto those closest to her and would

> enjoy hurting the man that hurt her. This is like the perfect storm. In this

> type of war zone, it is hard to remember who the enemy is. No one trusts

> anyone and the damage spills out onto anyone that comes too close. I studied

> a family like this and it was the most interesting study I have ever done.

> NPDs can be so covert with there abuse, not even family members can see it,

> but the abuse causes damage none-the-less. Some people lash out in rage and

> others quietly internalize the abuse. Sounds like you mother raged.

>

> It sounds like you have siblings. I hope you were not an only child. Were

> you able to have friends as a child? Were there other healthy family in your

> life? Are your parents still together?

>

>

>

>

> With my nada, she DEFINITELY harmed on purpose--and she definitely was NOT

> a narcissist, not dominantly--my father and ex-husband were, and so I'm sure

> I know the difference. What nada did was harm, on purpose, to get ATTENTION.

> She would get a gleam in her eye when she had made someone hurt, forced

> someone's behavior, out of hurt. She would tell me, 'I *got to your Daddy',

> and gleam, gleefully. She wilfully blinded herself to the fact that she was

> harming, because she found it excusable because she needed the attention so

> badly. Likewise, she wilfully blinded herself to other harms she

> intentionally caused, such as overcoming her childrens'/husbands will just

> because she needed to prove she was NOT separate from them, and thus not be

> abandoned--by feeding us foods or depriving us of medical care that we asked

> for or truly needed--just because we expressed a wish for it. She thought

> this intentional harm was ok, and wilfully blinded herself to its actual

> effects, because she told herself she was in so much 'pain' and needed to

> prevent our 'abandoning' her by being separate people. She believed she was

> 'allergic' to milk, for example, and so all three of her children were

> calcium deficient. She inflicted this harm on purpose not because she

> enjoyed us hurting, but because she believed it was a justified way to stop

> HER hurting.

>

>

>