[Rollercoasterider]

What is Your Understanding of MLC and of my articles?
I think those are really two separate questions. I often read someone saying to another person that they have a good understanding of MLC and sometimes this is said together with them being told they understand my articles or their understanding of MLC or perhaps way of dealing with it is in-line with my articles.
GREAT! AWESOME!

The problem however is that included either between the lines or stated directly is that the person has a better understanding of MLC or what I have written and perhaps my philosophy than other people. This is what puzzles me because often to me the other people being silently alluded to don’t seem to be lacking in their understanding.

So I am asking you to simply state your understanding of MLC and your understanding of my message through my writings. My hope is that I will get a better understanding of how each of you are interpreting my work—my philosophy regarding Standing, view of MLC…

[Anjae]

My understatement of MLC is that its roots are biochemical (this encompasses brain and body - biochemical means relating to the chemical processes and substances which occur within living organisms). There could be some genetic predisposition, but I don't have much to base it upon. Some MLCer have a parent (or parents) that have had MLC, other don't.

Your articles pick on Jungian theory. That was how I arrived here, googling Jung + midlife crisis. In Jungian theory what we call midlife crisis is a transition period, a transformation. It starts with separation and ends with reintegration. The individual has to go through a trying psychologic and emotional period, after which they are reborn. After rebirth, there is reintegration, and the person has become a better, mature version of itself.

That was more or less my view of MLC before I start to become familiar with neuroscience/neurobiology/biology, as well as observing real life midlife cases and reading the board stories. There is one common denominator to MLCer, high levels of stress. And depression, of course. Cover for high energy one, more over for wallowers.

I think to a certain extent to believe/think the LBS has some influence upon the MLCer crisis. I don't agree with that. Even in Jungian theory the identity crisis is personal, not related to the marriage or the spouse. For someone who thinks MLC is biochemical, MLC is an issue that only pertains to the MLCer. Circumstances may, and often do, affect a person an their behaviours, but there is no way of knowing what or who affect the MLCer. It could had been work, friends, hobbies, family of origin or any other issue. The only thing I manage to gather and to align with MLCer as a whole is stress.

You philosophy regarding Standing stems from not liking divorce, think that MLC is temporary (it is) and that it is worthy to wait for the MLCer crisis to end. You also think reconnections/reconciliations are more likely if the MLCer returns within 3-3-5 years. I believe you also see standing as a grace period for the LBS. It allows us time to process, detach, thing, work on ourselves.

What I think the articles do not reflect is that, often, MLC last a real long time (I don't mean 5 or 7 years) and all that happens during that time. They also do not reflect what we have been seeing, MLCer who have been in crisis for years divorcing at year 5, 9, etc. I think you had not factored that many crisis could last so long, and that Escape & avoid could be up to 10 or more years. Nor that at year 5 or 9, or 10, a MLCer may still be deep in crisis and divorce their LBS so many years after BD.

The idea that MLC last, on average 3-7 years does not seem very accurate. There are many LBS here whose spouse has been in Escape & Avoid for more than 5 years and MLC does not end with Escape & Avoid.

It may also be asking too much from people to remain married to someone who has been in crisis for so long and not to move on with their lives, leaving the MLCer behind for good. It is not very realistic to expect reconnections or reconciliations in large, or even medium, numbers, when so many MLCer take so long in their crisis.

Do MLCer really become a better version of themselves after the crisis? I think so, but it would not be far fetched to realise that after so many years, even if the MLCer is a better person, MLCer and LBS may no longer share a connection, have similar interests and goals, etc. Not to mention that the type of love to sustain a relationship may no longer be there. Agape can be there, but agape does not sustain a relationship/marriage.

To a point, you underestimate the damages of all sort the MLCer causes. I suppose early on, when HS started, you had a more romantic view of MLC. You have been adjustting the average times of MLC, which show that early on who though it lasted far less than it does. The articles also do not leave it clear that monster can be present for a decade or so. Nor that the Replay behaviour can last that long and keep increasing for years on end.

From the articles one has the notion MLC will last a while, a good while, but not that long and that the MLCer may more or less be tired of the Replay behaviour relatively soon, that a deeper depression will set in, and, gradually, the MLCer will be seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. The Replay time is extremely long.

OW/OM, they are a symptom, but they are also the most damaging part of MLC. And, in my view, affair is not the word to describe a relationship that is often marital like and can last many, many years. For me, affair is short lived, intense thing, not living with OW/OM for 6 or 8 or more years. OW/OM and MLCer relationships may not be good, but they can last more than some marriages.

[Velika]

My understatement of MLC is that its roots are biochemical (this encompasses brain and body - biochemical means relating to the chemical processes and substances which occur within living organisms). There could be some genetic predisposition, but I don't have much to base it upon. Some MLCer have a parent (or parents) that have had MLC, other don't.

Your articles pick on Jungian theory. That was how I arrived here, googling Jung + midlife crisis. In Jungian theory what we call midlife crisis is a transition period, a transformation. It starts with separation and ends with reintegration. The individual has to go through a trying psychologic and emotional period, after which they are reborn. After rebirth, there is reintegration, and the person has become a better, mature version of itself.

That was more or less my view of MLC before I start to become familiar with neuroscience/neurobiology/biology, as well as observing real life midlife cases and reading the board stories. There is one common denominator to MLCer, high levels of stress. And depression, of course. Cover for high energy one, more over for wallowers.

This is so well articulated and tends to correspond to what I believe as well. I think that something acute must happen to the brain in MLC. It is hard to account for otherwise the very similar thought and behavior patterns, eccentricities, and even physical changes we all observe so identically in what we are observing. I think that if this were only a Jungian journey most of these crisis would end much more quickly and personality and behavior changes would not be so radical.

Whatever it is, I think it is definitely related to depression, bipolar, and possibly dementia as well. I would love to see some articles (on this site or elsewhere) interviewing neurologists about what the behavior patterns so many of us observe may be reflecting.

[Mermaid]

I've found this site and your philosophies hugely helpful over the years, RRR. The ideas of how to handle the aberrant behaviours of our MLCer, of detachment, mirroring, working on ourselves, agape; the community you have set up here, the information, is all hugely helpful for those of us who arrive, emotional bruised and confused and wanting some glimmer of hope.

As for MLC itself, I don't think it can be so easily and succinctly described. It's certainly not based on biochemistry. Biochemistry is always intertwined with the person in social context. There is no separation.

MLC is not an inevitable process that all people pass through, but there are certainly crises. They're not all to do with aging, but some of them are. There can be biochemical triggers for depression and delusions, some of which can be age related. But most of all the crisis is one of imploding identity, when the stories MLCers have told themselves no longer make sense. Our autobiographical stories are constantly changing, but sometimes they begin to generate conflict with the self one truly believes oneself to be. There is no "soul-pearl" of the autobiographical self, and neurological self is deeply hidden beneath autobiographical and emotional self according to neuroscience.

Neuroscience cannot explain the interplay of the developing self in the social world, and clearly, in some cases, our MLCers have unresolved issues to deal with arising from different points of their lives, leading to sets of defence mechanisms which eventually break down or get accentuated. In some cases, we discover that our MLCer has a deep personality disorder; in other cases, trauma from their past or childhood; in some cases they just haven't grown up fully, and can't handle responsibility, or, in some cases, it's a question of Eriksonnian fulfilment.

There is no "one size fits all", so the idea that "they" will all go through a set of fixed "stages" is also false, as in many areas of psychology. Some may certainly go through systematic readjustment and growth. They will certainly not gravitate back to us while we are angry, blaming or begging. Our growth is in parallel to theirs, and sometimes this growth, together with compassion, can lead to reconnection.

The stories we tell ourselves about MLC perhaps help us to accept their behaviour, to forgive them, to understand that we have a role to play.

But most of all, what helps us is the idea that we are responsible for ourselves. We get that message here so clearly, kindly and with so much support, that it's surely the greatest strength of this forum.

So, I'm sorry if I'm not the perfect reader of you work. As an academic, I read widely, deeply and critically. As a person, I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

[Onward]

In the interests of your research, I will respond to your question regarding how I individually interpret your work, but do first want to also offer an individual perspective on this statement:

The problem however is that included either between the lines or stated directly is that the person has a better understanding of MLC or what I have written and perhaps my philosophy than other people. This is what puzzles me because often to me the other people being silently alluded to don’t seem to be lacking in their understanding.

From my lived experience, when a statement is made about such-and-so having a good understanding of MLC, it is not made within the context of having a better understanding than it is an effort to diffuse situations where someone in a power position may be attempting to either impose a viewpoint or discredit a viewpoint of another. This occurs when either a close relationship with you or familiarity with the articles is used as leverage.

To be respectful but direct, RCR, lenses tend to have a variable calibration and it is not so much a question of reading between the lines as it is differential treatment of who has written the lines that contributes to an environment of one-up or down-manship.

In regards to your second question, this is my understanding and interpretation of your work.

I believe that there are both physiological and psychological influences on MLC, and that chemical and FOO issues can live in harmony. I also believe that MLC is internal to the MLCer. Tthat there are stages they pass though, in cycles, that do take a lot of time.

Having an appreciation for the stages and the timelines is an important foundation for the LBS, I believe, because it helps the LBS understand the context within which they must make their own decisions and work on their own growth.

I understand the sections on Mirror work are the most applicable to the LBS, because that is the only arena in which the LBS has any direct influence and control.

And, I find believe the articles on Paving the Way and the Unconditionals to be the ones least referenced, and increasingly least modelled or supported on the forum and on the board. This can make it difficult to encourage some kinds of Standing actions such as not helping with the separation or divorce, or compassionate contact with the MLCer.

The articles on Letting Go and Detachment are complex, and well articulated. I understand these to be about the LBS state of being and state of mind, rather than about communication and behaviour. These are areas where I sense my interpretation tends to differ from many others on the board. 

There are lots of other resources available on the web, and I find many of these resources/philosophies are imported into the forum in ways that are -- within my understanding --  both helpful and potentially detrimental to the overall guidance provided by your work, particularly when these resources applied in a blanket fashion, and without context.

[Velika]

And, I find believe the articles on Paving the Way and the Unconditionals to be the ones least referenced, and increasingly least modelled or supported on the forum and on the board. This can make it difficult to encourage some kinds of Standing actions such as not helping with the separation or divorce, or compassionate contact with the MLCer.

Maybe I would agree on this to the extent of type of bomb drop and post-bomb drop behavior. I think because bomb drop may not indicate MLC but a whole variety of personality disorders, mental illness, medical issue, or other psychological or psychiatric problem, it is important to be cautious at this time and number one protect mental and physical safety of the LBS. In case of emotional/psychological abuse I think that LBS should not be thinking of paving the way but rather staying away. In the case of pathological MLCer it may include taking steps to protect privacy and even restraining orders.

Some of these MLCers are so abusive and delusional that the LBS will be targeted no matter what he or she does or says.

[Ready2Transform]

I found The Hero's Spouse on a particular horrific day about seven months post-BD and 6 months after my xH moved out, but was still a clinging boomerang. I found the main site first, not the forum, but I was drawn to participate once I saw the commonalities.

First and foremost I resonated with your story. There was a picture of you and Chuck on the front page, I believe (or maybe I found your story page first), and knowing that the story had a happy ending was the first time someone had even suggested to me that this horrible situation I'd been in for so long (where I was seemingly the only person feeling that under the veneer of hate, spew, and infidelity, my husband might still exist) might really be as false as I felt it was. There was hope that the nightmare might end!

I poured over the articles because for once they were just explaining things from a perspective of 1) someone who had been through it 2) place of clarity. What I was feeling from the other "stop your divorce" landing pages was that I needed to get sucked into a sales funnel and wrap my whole life around a program if I was going to save my marriage. There was none of that at Hero's Spouse.

The Jungian research hit me at the emotional, philosophical level I had been living at. I ate it up. HB's words as well. I felt both of you were very complimentary to each other from the perspective that brought emotional, psychological, and spiritual together. I liked how inclusive the forum was to everyone, and I felt validated, respected, and at home here.

What message did I perceive? That you believe in marriage and would like to stop divorce, and that maybe if others understood MLC from your perspective, they would not take the world view about what is happening to their spouse and jump to the conclusion of ending their marriages before letting this dis-ease run its course. I don't think your writing aims to define the origin of or cure MLC. I think it helps us cope with LBS-hood.

I was inspired to research the way you did, RCR. For some of us, that's also part of the journey. I think biochemistry does play a role (chicken or the egg as it may be), but I think having a grasp of the big picture from every angle is important, including commonalities of FOO, life patterns, psychology, etc.

I think you focus on the role of the spouse because we are all here as spouses of MLCers. I think that makes sense. I still believe, as it has been said here many times, "You didn't cause it and you can't cure it." But I don't think that's the point of your work, either.

The lines get blurred because we don't have a wonderful DGU pointing us back to the articles and keeping us focused! We all have strong personalities and beliefs, and new people come here now and are influenced by many different points of view who are at every different stage imaginable. It is a wonderful melting pot, but at the same time, it can breed a little confusion. We can all only express what in our hearts we feel. If we see someone hurting, we each may have a different view on the best way to end that pain. The forum, as much of a godsend as it is, can be a crutch. If you're spending more time commiserating, reinforcing the negatives in your situation instead of the positives, and transferring co-dependence from your absent spouse to us strangers - then it's time to read other things (for at least a few minutes a day). Spending time with the articles are the best way to receive one-on-one guidance and coaching from RCR when you're not getting one-on-one time with her! Before you cry out for more attention on your threads (and this is aimed at no one in particular), remember that you have 24/7 access to tips that will soothe you.

[Thunder]

RCR,

Nice of you to ask our opinions.   
I got home late, just read this and will need to collect my thoughts before answering.
Yawn...too tired right now. 

Just know I found your articles and all your research more than helpful and spot on.   

[Trustandlove]

Me, too....  a bit tired and emotional right now, but I, too, want to respond properly, and that means thinking out the answer a bit.

Suffice to say right now that when I found HS, even before the forum started, it offered a different perspective, even from the other MLC forum where I had been for the first couple of years -- this was the first one that actually offered something practical and didn't make me feel crazy for wanting my marriage.

I now think that even the 3-7 year timeline is very conservative, but at the time that seemed so reasonable, given that other places were saying "well, if he hasn't come round in 6 months it's a lost cause....". 

More as I gather my thoughts...

[MyBrainIsBroken]

So I am asking you to simply state your understanding of MLC and your understanding of my message through my writings. My hope is that I will get a better understanding of how each of you are interpreting my work—my philosophy regarding Standing, view of MLC…

My emphasis on the word simply.

Jeez, I thought I was going to get to bed early tonight for a change. 

This is a pretty challenging request. How does one "simply" state one's understanding of something as complex and multifaceted as MLC and how does one "simply" summarize one's understanding of RCR's work when that body of work comprises well over 100 book sections, 158 blog articles, and numerous FAQs linking to hundreds of pages of forum posts? Especially when that understanding has shifted over time. And how does one provide enough support for one's understanding of MLC to deflect the challenges that are likely to come from others with differing views while keeping one's response brief?

My solution to the problem of simply stating my understanding is that I will do just that, briefly summarize with little explanation or supporting documentation. My solution to the problem of my understanding shifting over time will be to divide my response into two time periods, my initial impression and my impression after enough time has passed for investigation and consideration. My solution to the problem of deflecting challenges will be to post the following DISCLAIMER: My study and analysis has focused on just two actual incidences of behavior that seem to follow the pattern that is described here as MLC. The first subject is my wife and her crisis. The second subject is me and what I've learned and am still learning about the crisis I experienced during the period from roughly 3.5 years before the BD from my wife to roughly 1.5 years before the BD from my wife. I've read numerous threads on this forum describing other suspected MLC cases and, while there are a lot of similarities, the only knowledge I have of these cases is sketchy and anecdotal so I can't say with any degree of certainty that the conclusions I've reached apply beyond the two situations mentioned earlier. Draw your own conclusions.

FIRST IMPRESSION OF MLC

I had no first impression of MLC because I had no clue what was happening. I was stunned and in shock. The woman I had known for 36 years had suddenly and completely changed into a selfish, uncaring, and unfeeling stranger who was doing things that were completely out of character and for which there seemed to be no logical explanation. Furthermore, her behavior was inconsistent with both her pre-BD behavior and also her behavior from day to day post-BD and she seemed to be confused and unsure about what was happening to her. At first I thought it was my fault or due to something I had done but I quickly realized she was moving away from not just me but the whole family.

FIRST IMPRESSION OF THE ARTICLES AND RCR'S POINT OF VIEW

The Heroes Spouse site was a godsend because it was the first place where I found information that seemed to apply to my situation. The Jungian analysis seemed to explain what I was seeing and why it was happening in a way that made sense. I particularly liked the site because it was pro-marriage and didn't preach a kick them to the curb response. The articles helped me to believe that what my wife was going through was a long but usually temporary condition and that there was an explanation for her behavior other than that she was a horrible person. The site also seemed to advocate treating the MLC spouse with love and compassion which was my preferred approach and, while it stressed that we didn't cause this and we couldn't cure it, there were things that we could do called Paving the Way that might make it more likely that my wife would eventually choose to return. I was initially repelled by the forum because there were so many stories about betrayed and hurting people and few success stories using my definition of success being a restored marriage. I was initially confused by the seemingly diametrically opposed messages that I didn't cause my wife's crisis but that I needed to work on myself.

MY LATER BELIEFS ABOUT MLC

I was desperate to understand the minute details underlying MLC so that I could find a way to help my wife get through it before she carved the path of destruction I read about on so many forum threads or at least be able to explain it to our family so they would not turn away from her. While I thought the articles were good, they seemed like a "flyover" view of MLC, not a ground level description. What I've since learned is that my wife and I both were raised in severely emotionally abusive and in my case probably physically abusive and in my wife's case definitely physically abusive and probably sexually abusive environments. From the day we were born we were repeatedly traumatized by the people who were supposed to love and nurture us and neither of us had anyone with whom we could form a secure attachment. And I learned that childhood trauma or severe longterm childhood stress coupled with a lack of secure attachment and other related FOO issues could and probably would lead to the situation that I knew as MLC. And I learned that viewing this as a trauma/attachment condition was not inconsistent with viewing it as a hormonal/chemical condition because trauma or severe longterm stress during early childhood developmental stages can alter the brain's structure so that the individual's response to brain chemistry, stress chemicals and hormones can be permanently affected. These alterations of the brain's structure have been viewed using fMRI imaging.

MY LATER IMPRESSION OF THE ARTICLES AND RCR'S POINT OF VIEW

As I learned more about the effects of developmental trauma/insecure attachment it appeared to be, for my wife and I, the ground level view I was looking for to go along with the flyover view described in RCR's articles. In fact, the similarities were so striking that I repeatedly wondered if RCR had known about the effects of developmental trauma/insecure attachment when she wrote the articles and chose to simplify by describing the flyover view in the articles. If so, the decision would have made sense since so many LBSes initially come to the site in a state of shock.

Some of the similarities include both having a triggering event, covert depression, identity crisis, identity confusion, a fractured personality that is resolved through an integration process, the presence of a shadow, archetypes or alters, sudden mood changes, a strong likelihood that an affair partner will be similar to someone the person had problems with as a child, and personality cycling. Both take a lot of time to resolve. Both often result in destroyed relationships and finances. Both may resolve on their own without therapy although therapy is far more successful for resolving developmental trauma than the hands-off approach which often is unsuccessful (unsuccessful is defined as not occurring within a reasonably short timeframe). Both involve sudden, radical personality changes happening with people who appeared to be well-adjusted. Both can include confused thinking, fogginess, concentration problems, and memory loss or memory lapses regarding specific information, situations, or time periods.

I continue to believe the articles advocate a loving, compassionate, and nonjudgmental approach towards the MLC spouse. I've read articles recommending a similar approach be used when dealing with survivors of childhood trauma.