Pangloss wrote:But I am thinking about the dog training sessions you described....K could get there with small changes and adjustments everyday. It's good for himself and the kids if he progresses. Thanks for the note of optimism.
I may be reading too much into that. But, I don't think dog-training principles can be used to lead an N to better behaviors. (Except dropping him off at the pound.). If he accepted his condition, was in therapy, and could be conversant with you about his discovery, it could be beneficial to point out progress which he may not see (won't see until he has one of those "looking across the field" moments.).
It's tricky because an N craves feedback (to know who they are, or confirmation that they are who they've made themselves to be). But, is so invested in who they've made (as a result of not trusting others) that they resist feedback. It's a chicken/egg problem.
Not that I think you were considering acting like a dog trainer (that's something I
would do -- and have done). But, the principles of dog training apply in a way. Karen Pryor was a dolphin trainer (behavioral scientist? I don't know) who brought those techniques to training dogs. It's very different compared to traditional jerk/push/pull coercive training. The principles (
Skinner behaviorism,
operant conditioning) are documented in her book "Don't Shoot The Dog." (But, not the technique specific to dogs.).
But, she makes clear that it only works for creatures who can choose in their best interest. It's based entirely upon that
fundamental ability. Lacking such ability is the proverbial definition of insanity: doing the same thing, expecting a different result. Her "clicker training" (adapted from the whistles used to "mark" the desired behavior of dolphins, as a secondary reinforcement) offers the choice.
There's kind of a tie-in here with problem dogs. Most dogs, especially young, can catch onto clicker training easy, and it will be like they never knew anything else. It's not a remarkable transformation. They might even be a little more problematic because they're learning to test the boundaries to see if they'll get clicked, instead of avoiding boundaries due to fear of punishment.
However, it's really startling to use clicker training with a mature dog that didn't receive any feedback. They're out of control. They don't know what they're looking for. They have 1/2 second attention spans. The trick to working with them is to catch that 1/2-second window when they can make a connection. The clicker's short duration (as a marker) works well. When such a dog "gets it" they go nuts. They transform before your eyes. It's like they never knew they could "learn" something. They'll let out a huge howl and then stand in front of you intently looking for "what's next?" It's like a new world opened to them and you *see* it happen.
I think an N is like that. They won't "get it" until they get it. I can't see any way to help an N get it except to have an honest, short and neutral conversation where you're talking to the "normal" part of their mind (I call it the Agent self, or the Mediator). It's that part of the N who has ceeded to the Confabulation and needs to have that "wake up" moment. It's that part which has to catch the 1/2-second window within the madness that's occurring in his head -- but which he's always kind of "known" is madness (but can't find the reason or energy to take control and stop it, or even look into how to stop it).
There's no way for an outside person to get through to them other than to plant some seeds for the Agent self to compare to what it's become a
spectator to.
Dogs don't have an ego like we do, I guess. When a problem dog gets that "connection" it instantly abandons the coping techniques it used. There's no negotiation, resistance, fussy/pouty baby refusing to give up its security blanket. It's an immediate transformation, like "holy crap, you mean I can learn stuff?" It's remarkable to see. I've seen it once myself (with my male rott who was going to be put down because he kept trying to bite his owners). But, I've read other accounts that are exactly the same. A very dramatic realization often marked by a bizarre howl and sudden attentiveness.
Maybe they don't have pride like humans do. Something's different with us. We give up slowly.
If K could really have that "ok, somethings wrong." It could turn into something good. But, it would still be a long process which, day to day, might not look like anything's happening.
I didn't have the opportunity to be with someone. I suspect the presence of another would have served as a distraction, someone to project onto, etc. But, if someone knew what I was going through (like you would with him), it might have been possible to establish some structure such as new boundaries, minimum expectations, who owns what, two people with their own individual existence, and what the overlap is.
After I recognized I had a problem, I think I could have appreciated that and been called back to it when I strayed. I liked structure.
I just wonder if something like that might not be possible and better for you since you're going to be prone to hoovering due to the children creating a connection you can't escape. If you have to fight emotions through hoovering, and him probably being more desperate to hoover because he's alone. Maybe staying could be better.
I think if someone told me, "look, I know what's going on with you. You do too. It's just hard to accept because you don't have something better to turn to. If I stay, you're not going to do what's necessary because you developed this way of existing with yourself as a defense mechanism. You won't give it up if you don't have to. If I stay, you'll be comfortable, and it will just be an ongoing negotiation.
"If I leave, you're going to suffer narcissistic injury from the loss of a mirror (supply) and you'll try to prove to me you've "got it." Either way I'm facing emotions I don't want -- because they're *yours*. It's always about *you*. That is the problem which you have to address."
If you had that conversation with me, I think I would have known you were right. If not, then I would eventually. It would remain with me as a seed in the back of my mind (like what the company shrink said, and a few other people in my past). It can make it easier for the Agent self to accept when the time comes. (Maybe the time will come sooner.). It wouldn't be loaded with personal disappointment, venting, anger, etc. Nothing that would allow him to turn it into his narrative (about how people are against him, and this is why he has to try harder to compensate for what he knows in the back of his mind is a problem that's *not* going away.).
It might be unrealistic, but there's a possibility he could "get it" enough to make an effort to get to the bottom of it, and accept ground rules for existing with you. Rules designed to help him own what he needs to own and has presumably committed to get to the bottom of. And, rules to respect your individuality as a person, being responsible only for yourself.
Seems like there could be a way for this to work better than separation and constantly being pulled back in to what he's facing alone. I think the question is whether he can "get it" enough now to be serious about it, or whether he'd only be doing it for you (and then continue testing, projecting, to see if you're worth continuing to do it for). There has to be a genuine recognition and revulsion of what's happening inside. He has to have a personal relationship with himself in that regard. Nobody else can make it go away. And, if it doesn't go away, he's going to end up with nobody else.
Only you could know. Maybe it's way worse than that and I'm idealizing it.