Codependency

Post Reply New Topic

Interesting. My father (who is now 88 years old) is, IMO, an undiagnosed aspie. He used to be very controlling and emotionally abusive (especially toward me). However, I think that is because neither of us had very good social skills. Over the years, my social skills have improved (mostly through working with students), but his have not. I would even say they have gotten worse.



Yes, I am generally like that. Part of it is my relative lack of empathy.



Maybe. I have my suspicions about the category of "codependent" anyway. The American Psychiatric Association has thus far refused to consider it for inclusion in the DSM. (Actually, I don't think that any major body codes for it???)

Cheers,

Mark

Control, big big word. I absolutely am a control freak. Life long condition in trying to make it in the world. Also set in motion by my Mother, big time control freak and my Dad, probably aspie and was not a control freak to the every day around the house. He was just very happy being able to do his obsessions, lol, hobbys as they were called. But he could very easily flip it around on Mom and she wouldn't have a clue what hit her. But I set it up so I better can fit in for the long term in the outside world. Doesn't always work but you might be surprised how easy it is to set things in motion where it does. But my parents were very happy togther till death, it worked for them.

To roam around WP one would tend to think everyone is some kind of damn victim. Hell, you never see or very seldom see any owning up to the fact there can be an "evil" aspie. Damn straight I can be. I can push buttons on people too. I don't as a rule, but I'm not above it if I see a need. You see a lot of button pushing here, most don't know they're doing it, but they do. You can reinforce someone in the positive by setting little things in motion in them. I prefer to call it looking in the mirror, me being the mirror, that's a 12 stepper thing as well. Change comes from with in, you just need to see a way to do it for yourself. Works the other way for me as well here too. I see things in others that I can try to use in my own way.

But yeah, there is the very common of sharing of the roles in what are considered normal relationships. I think where it differs is in the amount of control and codependency. That there is some point where it goes out of the norm. There can be a very unheathy aspect to this type of relationship, where that line is, is different for everybody.

Last edited by postpaleo on 11 Oct 2007, 11:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yeah they have a couple of studies that show a very high rate of success. All of theirs has been shown to have very poor science behind them, they're in denial, roflmfao. But it is difficult to measure, they don't keep records. I just think it could be improved upon, a lot and still not go out of the purpose behind the programs, which I still think is fine. I am a firm believer in any port in a storm, just make sure you don't sink in the harbor too.

SwampBlossom just walked into my cave and gave me hell for taking the subject off topic. *giggle* I told her she doesn't know to damn much about aspies. She laughed.

Yep. Approximately the same low success rate is found with the Minnesota model. (That term refers to Hazelden-style clinics, including the Betty Ford Clinic, which combine cognitive-behavioral therapy with AA.) The community reinforcement approach (kind of like "tough love" for addicts) has a much higher success rate, but most people have never heard of it.

Cheers,

Mark

You scored 40% Enabling, 34% Dependent, and 63% Stable!

Congratulations!! You are a well-adjusted person. Chances are you have a lot of friends because they recognize that you are interested in being a 'real' friend and don't just look at them as someone to rescue or be rescued by. You will have much success with relationships if you keep up this healthy trend away from codependency. Thanks for taking my test, please rate it honestly! (If you skipped a significant number of questions, you may have gotten this category in error.)
My test tracked 3 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:


You scored higher than 99% on Enabling

You scored higher than 99% on Dependency

You scored higher than 99% on Stability


Not entirely true, such as the stuff about friends and relationships.
I got 12 "yes" answers on the other one.

Yes. That was similar to my results:

You scored 23% Enabling, 12% Dependent, and 95% Stable!

Congratulations!! You are a well-adjusted person. Chances are you have a lot of friends because they recognize that you are interested in being a 'real' friend and don't just look at them as someone to rescue or be rescued by. You will have much success with relationships if you keep up this healthy trend away from codependency. Thanks for taking my test, please rate it honestly! (If you skipped a significant number of questions, you may have gotten this category in error.)

My test tracked 3 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:

You scored higher than 99% on Enabling
You scored higher than 99% on Dependency
You scored higher than 99% on Stability

I guess I am well-adjusted from the standpoint of not being codependent anyway.

Cheers,

Mark

Here is an example with problems related to usages of the codependency concept:

"People in dysfunctional relationships such as cut [sic] dependence have troubles with either very low self-esteem or very high self-esteem. High self-esteem manifests itself through arrogance and a belief that I am superior to everyone else. Low self-esteem comes from the belief that you have less worth than other people your feelings and beliefs don't count."
Click for link

In other words, if you have a big ego, you are codependent; and if you have a small ego, you are codependent, too.

Cheers,

Mark

I found this article that defined codependency clearly:
http://www.relationshiprepair.net/sample5.html
I need things to be spelled out so to speak to completely understand them. If I had read that article first I think I would've answered the questions differently on the quizzes. After reading that article I immediately recognized several people in my husband's family that behave that way. His paternal side doesn't like me much, as I will not play their game. Mostly, because I didn't understand it. I could not for the life of me, figure out why anyone would keep quiet amid all the destructiveness that his family members wreak on each other. In some ways I do like to help people, but not to the extreme that I sacrifice my own needs, and the needs of others to do so. For one thing, I cannot read people well enough to manipulate them, and I need too much personal space to be the needy one.
Thanks for posting this. At least now I have a better understanding of the dysfunctional dynamic of my husband's family. I may find gatherings a little less stressful now that I know the reason for it all.

They usually go together. Classic example is the man trodden on at work who goes home and treads on wife who treads on child who treads on dog who isn't human so doesn't do that sort of thing.The cogs of Fascism. See Alice Miller, who incidentally uses the film "The Wall" to illustrate her analysis . She is still best known for her work " The drama of the gifted child" , "For your own good" etc and an analysis of the role that german parenting system played in producing people prepared to obey blindly. The non-adapted expression of this co-existence of both lo and hi esteem in many people is manic-depression. Depression being closer to the true self , its real esteem ; that is to say LOW or non-existent!! Sense of self being so dependent on others that switch involuntarily depending on what role a person is prepared to play opposite you. As supported by , or not, the various panoplies of social prestige, power, rights,privileges, and the desire to fit in to the heirarchy .

Last edited by ouinon on 11 Oct 2007, 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

That could be, but it is the stated reason why the APA has rejected it for inclusion in the DSM. In other words, the concept is fuzzy - not well defined.

Cheers,

Mark

Sorry, what is the stated reason?
That it is fuzzy , I agree ; far too subjective. Like an onion, layers within layers ; who is the one with power over the other? etc!

That is what I wanted to say about co-dependency; that it is so difficult to see who is abusing who; if anyone is in fact being abused in many cases ; if each one gets equal support and/or reassurance from playing in the duet then it is only posible to define as real problem those relationships in which one partner ( unconsciously )encourages the others real addiction to drugs or remaining in clinically recognised state of ill-health. And if they are consenting adults , in what way is it worse than the person doing it all on their own? It is definitely fuzzy!!
So fuzzy I can feel my brain boggling visibly with the strain ! !! !

ffzsfzzzszzzzszzzzz!

Last edited by ouinon on 11 Oct 2007, 1:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Codependence is interesting, but, IMO, it needs to be more operationally, or at least clinically, defined. Of course, the idea itself developed in the context of alcoholism. The alcoholic's spouse (generally assumed to always be woman at the time) was regarded as someone who just looked the other way at, or made repeated excuses for, the alcoholic's bad behavior. As a result, the alcoholic was supposedly "enabled" to continue drinking without feeling that the spouse would leave.

More recently, however, writers like John Bradshaw expanded the concept of codependence to move beyond enabling an alcoholic to enabling anyone whose behavior might be seen as "dysfunctional" (addicts, abusers, etc.). I remember watching Bradshaw on PBS (back in the 1980s). He made some really outragous claims - like saying that 95% of the population was codependent.

As a result, the idea of codependence became a normative part of the popular culture of self-help books (along with inner child, etc. imported from the literature of transactional psychology). However, one consequence of this popularization has been that the term "codependence" lacks scientific rigor and is unlikely to be taken seriously by most researchers.

Cheers,

Mark

The APA has argued that there is insufficient evidence to support codependence as a "mental disorder."



Yes. That is fine for self-help books, but it is not specific enough to justify including the concept in the DSM.



Originally, codependence was not connected with abuse (except maybe indirectly). It related to the wife of an alcoholic making excuses for her husband's alcoholism and, therefore, enabling him to continue drinking without it having direct consequences to his family.

Cheers,

Mark

80% stable.

First

You scored 26% Enabling, 15% Dependent, and 86% Stable!

Congratulations!! You are a well-adjusted person. Chances are you have a lot of friends because they recognize that you are interested in being a 'real' friend and don't just look at them as someone to rescue or be rescued by. You will have much success with relationships if you keep up this healthy trend away from codependency.

Second

You have relatively healthy boundaries, confidence and wisdom in relationships. You can care about people without feeling responsible for their choices.

Not co-dependent at all.

I found another codependency test:

http://www.lifescript.com/quiz/quiz.asp?bid=46616

My score:

You scored between 26 and 30 points: Taking Self Responsibility.
You place your own needs above the needs of others. You understand completely that people are responsible for their own actions and feelings. It is important to you to have your own life in control before even considering offering to help someone get his or her life and situation under control.

Don't take this test unless you have a spam email address to give out. I only give out this email address when I suspect that people may use the information to spam me.

Why does not being codependent read like being a selfish jerk?

Cheers,

Mark