Need opinions on what happened today.....

[square]

I'm sorry, zad. That sounds really hard.

[square]

By the way, on that boundary thing.

Boundaries don't involve controlling others. So it's not for her to say you can't visit your parents - as it would not be your right to tell her she couldn't visit hers.

Her valid boundary would be that she would not want to visit. That is her legit boundary.

As far as the kids, you both have rights there and it's murkier. But you stated you would go alone and she changed her mind and insisted you take them. So no boundary violation there for sure. And I personally would be unwilling to entertain any "but you should have known I didn't want you to take them even if I ordered you to" games.

Anyway, just saying that as outside perspective since I know hers is very loud in your mind.

[zad7242]

Complicating matters, we are a blended family. My wife thinks she has as much right, moral if not legal, to forbid my bio kids from my previous marriage as her kids. If I tell her I'll respect her boundary regarding her kids from her previous relationship and our mutual kids, she says I am just dividing the family and should keep all the kids home.

[square]

It doesn't have to complicate things.

In the comic strip Calvin and Hobbes, Calvin (6 year old boy) plays a game called Calvinball with his imaginary (stuffed) tiger, Hobbes.

In Calvinball, Calvin sets the rules. So if Hobbes makes a point, Calvin says the point didn't count because it started to rain, or his eyes were closed, or the ball bounced twice.

You'll never win at Calvinball. But you also don't have to play.

If keeping the kids together is her priority, they can all go.

If her having a problem with your parents is the priority, her kids and your (plural) kids can stay nehind while you and your (singular) kids go.

No, she can't have it both ways. No need to tie yourself in knots. It's NOT complicated. It's just a double bind and she can play by herself.

[Lookin 2 B Free]

Zad, One of the few things I remembered from my first reading of Stop Caretaking the BPD/NPD was this.  For a BPD or NPD in relationship, you're supposed to be melded into one, with identical opinions, priorities, etc.  And that one is THEM.  Not a combination of the two of you, just them.  Your autonomy is not allowed.  You are supposed to be an extension of them, not a separate individual. 

I found this to be the case with my BPDex.  Of course there were areas not really affected, like my work.  But if he thought something should be a certain way and I said I was going to do something different, it wasn't just about that issue.  I was breaking the cardinal rule and showing autonomy which was very threatening.  So little things, things that were really none of his business, became huge conflicts.

PDs also do this to their kids.  So it was a very familiar dynamic to me from childhood and the lack of respect for my autonomy didn't set off alarm bells.  Once I became aware of this, though, I could start becoming healthier by dropping the automatic compliance & claiming my autonomy through my choices (which were mine to make) even if it sent him into fits.