Back to School Monday
Jan. 6th, 2025 12:17 pmA. is back at school. It was rough getting her up, and she was super exhausted, which I’m attributed to her sleep schedule sliding since the return from vacation. I’d kept her lined up pretty good while in Florida, but the medical event threw me off pretty hard. Despite leaving later than is ideal, I got her to school early enough that she should have made it to class on time. Traffic was light, but lots of emergency vehicles out with flashers and sirens that I had to work around.
A couple nights ago, her bedframe broke. She slept in her brother’s room that night, but his mattress is thin with a mattress pad and it’s not a great sleeping experience. Since we still hadn’t fixed the bed yesterday, around 11 pm A. and I wrestled her mattress (it’s only a double, but it’s one of the higher end Purple so it’s awkward) over to his frame. That helped, but it’s still weird not sleeping in her own space. We’re going to try to get her bed fixed today. It was necessary to get her mattress out of the way to fix the frame, so the work needed to be done. It’s just with R. out of commission with DVT, it’s a bit of a struggle.
Today, we got the last of the photos from J. into a frame and up on the wall. I’ve cleared out the box that the new photos were in, put the old photos into portfolio or other storage, and put the box with the thumb drive of the gallery next to my computer for uploading. Getting the photos into frames and on the wall is always a huge accomplishment. It’s faster but more work, since I quit buying frames, and just reuse the existing ones.
I also got the small artificial tree in its box that was sitting in the hall (T. set it up in his dorm room this year) back into the basement. Just getting the tree in its box, and the photo box out of the downstairs was a huge improvement.
Yesterday, I had a delightful zoom with I.
I also chatted with H. (R.’s cousin) on the phone last night, and we talked through feelings about the less than ideal AirBnB experience. After taking care of the mattress, I did some research and came up with three much better possibilities for next December. I figure I am only going to have the opportunity to create a holiday experience for H. and her mother C. a very small number of times (C. is elderly and fragile, which is part of why this is a difficult problem — she really wants to be isolated and finding a space that is tolerable for H. and for C. for the amount of time involved is tricky), and I’m learning a lot about how personality disorder manifests. The context is sufficiently distant that it’s not overtly stressful for me (mildly annoying on occasion) but at the same time detailed and continuous enough that I can genuinely learn a lot from what I hear and see.
The puzzle I’m working on currently is how to think about enabling and enablers. I’ve come to the conclusion from watching TikTok that virtually everyone producing content (in academic work, in books, in memoirs, on social media) about neurodiversity (whether that’s autism or ADHD or personality disorders or whatever) is operating on the assumption that some or even most of the people surrounding the neurodiverse person are “neurotypical”. Generally this includes the person producing the content, but not always.
This assumption is hilariously, cartoonishly wrong virtually all the time.
With C. and H., it’s not completely clear who is aware of what diagnoses, but one person has been forthcoming, and R. and I are very clear that both parties share comparable diagnoses. At the same time, it is abundantly clear that the dynamic between them, if viewed through more common lenses, would label one of them an Enabler.
Generally, enablers / enabling are characterized as getting more of a free pass than they probably should as “part of the problem”, but the part of the problem they are usually characterized as is that they are preventing feedback from reaching / forcing change / wtf the person with the diagnosis / abusers / problem person / identified victim or perpetrator or whatever. When I’ve historically thought about enabling, I have assigned anyone who is present long-term as part of a dyad with a problem person (spouse, parent, child, business partner or bestie, sibling, whatever) as being just as much a problem as the problem person, and I usually sniff around for their agenda / motive / what they get out of being the Helper, stuff like that. My father, for example, who is about as perfect a match for OCPD as could possibly be imagined, acted very much as an enabler for my mother (who definitely had a personality disorder with borderline and narcissistic overtones, and occasionally other things as well); it’s extremely clear that he picked her (they got married when he was 25 and she was 19) because he wanted a junior partner who was dependent and who would never leave and who would never give him any particular trouble and who would keep house and raise kids and so forth. He had seen his father do the same thing, and I think my dad picked someone who was less of a hard worker than his mother and his older sister for reasons that include things like sexual compatibility and interest and also include the fact that the chaotic emotionality around my mother completely concealed the absolute dead zone of emotion around him.
I’ve been entertaining very seriously the idea that the enabler, in addition to having problems of roughly the same kind and intensity as the person they are enabling, and in addition to having an agenda of their own, may actually not be very good at their job. I was assuming that enabler failings at protecting children from the problem person’s abuse were likely to be part of the enabler’s agenda. If you are having trouble processing that, I’ll try to be really clear. If parent A is beating up the kids, and parent B isn’t stopping it, I’ve been assuming it’s because parent B wanted the kids beat. A lot of people have assumed the contrary. I don’t really know, honestly, but I’m increasingly prepared to entertain the idea that some of the things that the problem person does that the enabler scaffolds / fails to prevent / wtf are actually NOT what the enabler wanted to happen. Like, sometimes the enabler is bad at their job BUT like a lot of people who mess up at work, they are covering up rather than forthrightly being accountable, mitigating harm, remediating, doing all the quality control stuff to prevent recurrence etc.
So I am going to do some experimentation. I’m going to see what happens when I help the enabler do their job better.
I’ll try to report back.
I did get R.’s buy in on this project, because it’s pretty fucking dark as a project, and I feel like it’s best if someone is looking over my shoulder to pull me back if I get a little too gleeful when things get sticky (because 100% I can love that kind of a car wreck), and also these are his relatives.
Obviously, the goal here is to get an answer in at least one case. The question is: if you assist the enabler in what they purport they are trying to do, in a way that is effective, do they then mad scramble to blow it up OR do they actively participate in learning to do their job better. Anyone with experience in this type of situation knows that it is wildly unlikely that there will be a middle ground (passively accept assistance but fail to make any effort to reproduce when successful). If these were truly neurotypical people, there would be middle ground. But that’s not what we’re dealing with here.
A couple nights ago, her bedframe broke. She slept in her brother’s room that night, but his mattress is thin with a mattress pad and it’s not a great sleeping experience. Since we still hadn’t fixed the bed yesterday, around 11 pm A. and I wrestled her mattress (it’s only a double, but it’s one of the higher end Purple so it’s awkward) over to his frame. That helped, but it’s still weird not sleeping in her own space. We’re going to try to get her bed fixed today. It was necessary to get her mattress out of the way to fix the frame, so the work needed to be done. It’s just with R. out of commission with DVT, it’s a bit of a struggle.
Today, we got the last of the photos from J. into a frame and up on the wall. I’ve cleared out the box that the new photos were in, put the old photos into portfolio or other storage, and put the box with the thumb drive of the gallery next to my computer for uploading. Getting the photos into frames and on the wall is always a huge accomplishment. It’s faster but more work, since I quit buying frames, and just reuse the existing ones.
I also got the small artificial tree in its box that was sitting in the hall (T. set it up in his dorm room this year) back into the basement. Just getting the tree in its box, and the photo box out of the downstairs was a huge improvement.
Yesterday, I had a delightful zoom with I.
I also chatted with H. (R.’s cousin) on the phone last night, and we talked through feelings about the less than ideal AirBnB experience. After taking care of the mattress, I did some research and came up with three much better possibilities for next December. I figure I am only going to have the opportunity to create a holiday experience for H. and her mother C. a very small number of times (C. is elderly and fragile, which is part of why this is a difficult problem — she really wants to be isolated and finding a space that is tolerable for H. and for C. for the amount of time involved is tricky), and I’m learning a lot about how personality disorder manifests. The context is sufficiently distant that it’s not overtly stressful for me (mildly annoying on occasion) but at the same time detailed and continuous enough that I can genuinely learn a lot from what I hear and see.
The puzzle I’m working on currently is how to think about enabling and enablers. I’ve come to the conclusion from watching TikTok that virtually everyone producing content (in academic work, in books, in memoirs, on social media) about neurodiversity (whether that’s autism or ADHD or personality disorders or whatever) is operating on the assumption that some or even most of the people surrounding the neurodiverse person are “neurotypical”. Generally this includes the person producing the content, but not always.
This assumption is hilariously, cartoonishly wrong virtually all the time.
With C. and H., it’s not completely clear who is aware of what diagnoses, but one person has been forthcoming, and R. and I are very clear that both parties share comparable diagnoses. At the same time, it is abundantly clear that the dynamic between them, if viewed through more common lenses, would label one of them an Enabler.
Generally, enablers / enabling are characterized as getting more of a free pass than they probably should as “part of the problem”, but the part of the problem they are usually characterized as is that they are preventing feedback from reaching / forcing change / wtf the person with the diagnosis / abusers / problem person / identified victim or perpetrator or whatever. When I’ve historically thought about enabling, I have assigned anyone who is present long-term as part of a dyad with a problem person (spouse, parent, child, business partner or bestie, sibling, whatever) as being just as much a problem as the problem person, and I usually sniff around for their agenda / motive / what they get out of being the Helper, stuff like that. My father, for example, who is about as perfect a match for OCPD as could possibly be imagined, acted very much as an enabler for my mother (who definitely had a personality disorder with borderline and narcissistic overtones, and occasionally other things as well); it’s extremely clear that he picked her (they got married when he was 25 and she was 19) because he wanted a junior partner who was dependent and who would never leave and who would never give him any particular trouble and who would keep house and raise kids and so forth. He had seen his father do the same thing, and I think my dad picked someone who was less of a hard worker than his mother and his older sister for reasons that include things like sexual compatibility and interest and also include the fact that the chaotic emotionality around my mother completely concealed the absolute dead zone of emotion around him.
I’ve been entertaining very seriously the idea that the enabler, in addition to having problems of roughly the same kind and intensity as the person they are enabling, and in addition to having an agenda of their own, may actually not be very good at their job. I was assuming that enabler failings at protecting children from the problem person’s abuse were likely to be part of the enabler’s agenda. If you are having trouble processing that, I’ll try to be really clear. If parent A is beating up the kids, and parent B isn’t stopping it, I’ve been assuming it’s because parent B wanted the kids beat. A lot of people have assumed the contrary. I don’t really know, honestly, but I’m increasingly prepared to entertain the idea that some of the things that the problem person does that the enabler scaffolds / fails to prevent / wtf are actually NOT what the enabler wanted to happen. Like, sometimes the enabler is bad at their job BUT like a lot of people who mess up at work, they are covering up rather than forthrightly being accountable, mitigating harm, remediating, doing all the quality control stuff to prevent recurrence etc.
So I am going to do some experimentation. I’m going to see what happens when I help the enabler do their job better.
I’ll try to report back.
I did get R.’s buy in on this project, because it’s pretty fucking dark as a project, and I feel like it’s best if someone is looking over my shoulder to pull me back if I get a little too gleeful when things get sticky (because 100% I can love that kind of a car wreck), and also these are his relatives.
Obviously, the goal here is to get an answer in at least one case. The question is: if you assist the enabler in what they purport they are trying to do, in a way that is effective, do they then mad scramble to blow it up OR do they actively participate in learning to do their job better. Anyone with experience in this type of situation knows that it is wildly unlikely that there will be a middle ground (passively accept assistance but fail to make any effort to reproduce when successful). If these were truly neurotypical people, there would be middle ground. But that’s not what we’re dealing with here.