Search This Blog

Monday 25 February 2013

Response of a bully when held accountable

When your mother in-law (or father in-law) is a bully/ narcissist/ nasty person you're likely to spot the following behaviour:

(written by Tim Field, http://www.bullyonline.org/workbully/serial.htm)

When called to account for the way they have chosen to behave, the bully instinctively exhibits this recognisable behavioural response:


a) Denial: the bully denies everything. Variations include Trivialization ("This is so trivial it's not worth talking about...") and the Fresh Start tactic ("I don't know why you're so intent on dwelling on the past" and "Look, what's past is past, I'll overlook your behaviour and we'll start afresh") - this is an abdication of responsibility by the bully and an attempt to divert and distract attention by using false conciliation. Imagine if this line of defence were available to all criminals ("Look I know I've just murdered 12 people but that's all in the past, we can't change the past, let's put it behind us, concentrate on the future so we can all get on with our lives" - this would do wonders for prison overcrowding).

b) Retaliation: the bully counterattacks. The bully quickly and seamlessly follows the denial with an aggressive counter-attack of counter-criticism or counter-allegation, often based on distortion or fabrication. Lying, deception, duplicity, hypocrisy and blame are the hallmarks of this stage. The purpose is to avoid answering the question and thus avoid accepting responsibility for their behaviour. Often the target is tempted - or coerced - into giving another long explanation to prove the bully's allegation false; by the time the explanation is complete, everybody has forgotten the original question.

Both a) and b) are delivered with aggression in the guise of assertiveness; in fact there is no assertiveness (which is about recognising and respecting the rights of oneself and others) at all. Note that explanation - of the original question - is conspicuous by its absence.

c) Feigning victimhood: in the unlikely event of denial and counter-attack being insufficient, the bully feigns victimhood or feigns persecution by manipulating people through their emotions, especially guilt. This commonly takes the form of bursting into tears, which most people cannot handle. Variations include indulgent self-pity, feigning indignation, pretending to be "devastated", claiming they're the one being bullied or harassed, claiming to be "deeply offended", melodrama, martyrdom ("If it wasn't for me...") and a poor-me drama ("You don't know how hard it is for me ... blah blah blah ..." and "I'm the one who always has to...", "You think you're having a hard time ...", "I'm the one being bullied..."). Other tactics include manipulating people's perceptions to portray themselves as the injured party and the target as the villain of the piece. Or presenting as a false victim. Sometimes the bully will suddenly claim to be suffering "stress" and go off on long-term sick leave, although no-one can quite establish why. Alleged ill-health can also be a useful vehicle for gaining attention and sympathy. For suggestions on how to counter this see the advice on the FAQ page.

By using this response, the bully is able to avoid answering the question and thus avoid accepting responsibility for what they have said or done. It is a pattern of behaviour learnt by about the age of 3; most children learn or are taught to grow out of this, but some are not and by adulthood, this avoidance technique has been practised to perfection.

A further advantage of the denial/counter-attack/feigning victimhood strategy is that it acts as a provocation. The target, who may have taken months to reach this stage, sees their tormentor getting away with it and is provoked into an angry and emotional outburst after which the bully says simply "There, I told you s/he was like that". Anger is one of the mechanisms by which bullies (and all abusers) control their targets. By tapping in to and obtaining an inappropriate release of pent-up anger the bully plays their master stroke and casts their victim as villain.

Some books with tips on how to deal with bullies:



Wednesday 20 February 2013

2012 Starting to change

After a horrendous Christmas vacation in 2011. DH didn't mention his parents and I didn't either. I wanted him to mention it himself if he wanted us to do something with them for Christmas. I in the meantime arranged to make a Christmas dinner for my grandmother at her home. DH was really mad, however he didn't arrange anything. He called his mother after Christmas and she mentioned they were alone and bored. That was enough for my husband to ignore me for 5 days. I asked my husband during these days if something was the matter, he said nothing was wrong. So he played a game with me, he was in fact giving me the silent treatment and was fogging me all along. After a few days I was at my wits' end. I felt desperate and very lonely. I screamed at my husband that I was done with it. I was not going to live like this anymore, with him treating me that way. He got what he wanted, he was satisfied that I blew up. He had punished me for my 'misbehaviour'.

I was fuming for about two weeks and then in January I started looking for specific help with in-laws, I ended up finding a book and then a forum. This forum has greatly helped me, it helped me realise I wasn't the only one dealing with such crazy in-laws. And not the only one with a husband that tolerated almost anything and remained in the role of a little child when it came to his parents. An otherwise capable man, having a good job, a great father and responsible. There was a blame game going on which was directed at me. You're too sensitive. You're an adult you should know how to deal with people you don't get along with. I never had problems with my parents. You're a troublemaker. My mother has a problem with you, so you should work it out with her, I don't want to be in the middle. And much more. Posting on the forum and reading the stories of others gave me a much needed confirmation that I wasn't the crazy one. In dealing with crazy people normal people sometimes start doubting their own sanity, that what I was at the verge of doing anyway. I had been dealing with a crazy sociopath for about 15 years.

It was time for a change. I wasn't going to let this crazy, mean, nasty, vile woman rule my world or that of my children. I told my husband it was time for a change. I wasn't going to accept the behaviour and intrusion of the MIL anymore. I found the book Toxic In-laws by Susan Forward and started reading. This book was what I needed, I got a lot of validation for my feelings and for what I had been dealing with. Much needed, because no one should deal with such problems on their own. Isolation is always in favour of the abuser. I would recommend this book to anyone. When my husband first saw the book, he wasn't too happy. He called it a rubbish book (he found the title really provocative and took offense), anyway he ended up reading the book and now calls it a great book. It probably has helped him too, seeing that he is not the only one with a mother like his.

The book was a starting point for me to convince my husband we needed to set boundaries. He started with telling his mother she needed to buy the presents for our children and not expect him to do it instead of her. This was a game she played every year, and oh glory when she succeeded in convincing him to buy the presents. I always prevented it but that didn't matter to her, she just wanted to show she could pull the strings if she wanted to. So she wasn't too happy when she didn't succeed this time, not even when she told him, 'so you don't care about me'. The next thing was, no more phone calls during our holidays. When we went on a vacation, my husband was obliged to call her every few days and leave all the details of the places we stayed such a s phone number and address. Everything under the guise of, what if something terrible happens (or I'll die of a heart-attack when I don't know exactly where you are), we need to be able to reach you, however texting was out of the question. So this year my husband told her that in the case of an emergency she could text us. She argued of course that she couldn't text, but we had been role playing and my husband had an answer to everything she tried to get him to allow her to call or to get him in his old role. After our summer vacation my husband called her and asked her to stop talking about death and dying in my presence because that was hurtful to me. [My mother had died 2 years before after being diagnosed terminally 9 months before. Since then (and while my mother was ill too) the MIL found it entertaining to talk to me about how she was very preoccupied with death and dying, how she suffered, how we had no idea what is was dealing with that, wait til we had her age, we had no idea]. She cold-bloodedly responded to my husband how she couldn't imagine why that would be hurtful to me in any way. (They never even gave their condolences).

The MIL got more and more furious ending in her completely ignoring me when we visited them in September after our vacation. I told my husband, I found this unacceptable. We started talking about what if she ignores me when they come here. My husband told me that he would address this if it happened. So they visited us in December and the MIL ignored me completely when she walked through the doorway, she elaborately greeted my husband, walked past me and then greeted our children in an extremely exaggerated way. My husband looked at me and wanted to confront her. I didn't want a scene in front of our children, so after an excruciating visit (she really was gloating she had pulled it off, or so she thought) they went home. Next evening my husband called her and told her he wanted to talk about her ignoring me. She started excusing and justifying what she did. When that didn't work she plainly told him that he had to accept her as she is, she did what she did and that was it. My husband told her that there wouldn't be that much of a problem if she would behave in a civil way to her DILs, then she hung up and began the silent treatment. Her goal was of course that my husband would be very sorry for his outrageous behaviour of standing up for me and would call her to make amends.

My husband and I agreed that she needed to make amends and that she was the one that needed to initiate contact this time.



Friday 8 February 2013

'I have a disease and your father is dying!'


The MIL implied to have a heart disease for many years to DH. I found out it was easily treatable high blood pressure instead, when she complained about her medication to DH. A while later, when we visited them, she started complaining again about her heart disease but then realised I knew (I told DH the combination she took wasn’t for the so called heart disease she invented, and he mentioned it to her). DH however still believed she had a heart disease and was telling her to see a cardiologist. She whispered to me, while suggesting he was a little crazy and imagining things, 'I don't have a heart disease'. Why whisper? (I now know. She wanted to keep him under the impression that she had this heart disease while telling me she knew she didn't . Working us both at the same time). Actually just recently (September 2012), she told DH she had had a heart-attack, in the hospital they had told her that she was just a bit dehydrated and that she was in good health. She however knew for sure that she had a heart-attack, she was just waiting for the lab results to prove it. Once again she had DH in rescue mode and could lean back and hear him say what she needed to do, see another doctor, go to another hospital (which she subsequently would never do).

She insinuated to have cancer. She called, on a Sunday, and soon was talking about her health. Saying she was experiencing a sudden weight loss and had no idea what the cause could be. DH started giving advice, saying she should see a doctor. (She really likes him to be in this position, she sort of leans back and enjoys). After a while, she was satisfied and said, 'Oh well, maybe this happened because I have been on a diet for the past three weeks...'.

She suggested to have Alzheimer's disease. Starting a campaign, she was forgetting things, it runs in her family. She didn't remember things she had done or said (how convenient!). Every visit or phone call she gave some hints. This one was getting so obvious that DH actually told her she didn't have Alzheimer's otherwise she wouldn't be talking about it like she did and he would have his father on the phone instead. So she stopped.

MIL let us drive for two hours believing FIL was dying. FIL was at the ICU she said and there wasn't much left they could do for him. DH thought he was going to say goodbye to his father and sat behind the wheel, hyperventilating and in a state of panic. When we arrived, MIL also happened to arrive. When we walked to the hospital entrance, MIL whispered to me (so DH couldn’t hear..). 'Oh by the way, FIL is not in the ICU anymore and he's doing really well, I spoke to him on the phone this morning'. (?!?!). Why not say it out loud, why not tell it to her son immediately. I was stunned. She had called DH earlier that morning when we were already on our way and she said : 'Maybe you shouldn't come with all this fog'. There was no fog, but not a word on his father, she didn't say 'Your father is doing well, so don't worry'. How cruel can you be to your son? She even knew the night before that her husband was doing ok, but suggested to her son his father was dying! Never mind I also happened to be pregnant and our son was just a little baby and there we were, driving for  two hours with my husband in a state of panic behind the wheel.