Assertive Boundaries: You have the right to make mistakes and be responsible for them.

Nobody’s perfect – we make mistakes.  Does that make you a “bad” person? 

Some people believe that they should never make a mistake or a bad decision, and when it happens, they judge themselves harshly.  They may decide to punish themselves in some way and violate their own right to be human.  In the same vein, they do not accept that others have the right to make a mistake and use it as an opportunity to criticize.  They will judge (and punish) the other person too.  To quote the TV show, The West Wing, “I want you to stand there in your wrongness and be wrong.”

The only way not to make mistakes is to not do or try anything; people who have given up on doing or trying things are people that may be suffering from depression.  An assertive person accepts that he or she will make mistakes and knows that they can use it as an opportunity to evaluate the decision and learn from it.  This kind of self-awareness and self-care allows us to reject criticism and judgment and accept our humanness.  When you accept another person’s right to make mistakes, you are asserting your rights and supporting their assertive rights as well.  This has the added effect of enhancing the discovery and growth process by reducing tension and conflict within a relationship.

It's Okay – Take Responsibility for it

Adjacent to the right to make mistakes is the right (or duty) to take responsibility for them.  Both parts of the agreement are necessary to avoid trending toward aggressiveness.  In addition, taking responsibility for your mistakes minimizes the impact of other peoples’ criticism or judgment of your actions.  This is a necessary part of the evolutionary growth process. 

When someone criticizes us for making a mistake it creates a maladapted recognition of our actions which they use to teach us a lesson or even to hurt us.  They say, “You’ll pay for this!”  They do not acknowledge that mistakes are a part of life, no matter how big or small, and they don’t give us the grace to resolve them without punishment.  Imagine your child is having some ice cream and leaves a blob of it melting on the counter.  Do you want to yell, flail your arms, call her names and demand an apology?  NO!  This is an opportunity to teach her that cleaning up the mess will avoid having ants in the kitchen!  An assertive parent shows the child that making a mess is okay – no apology needed – as long as she takes responsibility for wiping it up!

Okay, this is a “little” mistake but if every mistake was treated the same way – acceptance that they happen and taking responsibility when they do – we could eliminate much of the emotional turbulence around the expectations of others.  Gone are the criticisms and the leap to judgment.  Also gone?  Control.  When we exercise control over the other person, they live with the fear of punishment.  If your objective is to keep them in line, or teach them a lesson, they will learn to act out of fear.  But what happens when you’re not around to see their mistake?  If you never taught them that it is okay to make a mistake and to take responsibility for it, their passive behavior will bleed into other areas of life.  They will have problems at school or work and their actions will impact other relationships negatively. 

The Long Game

We have a recurring story in our house called, “I lost the remote control.”  It happened again yesterday.  There is a TV in the girls’ room for watching movies; it’s new enough that there are no buttons or dials on the unit, it only operates via the remote.  When I went to say goodnight, my daughter said she could not turn off the TV because she could not find the remote.  I reminded her that we’ve had this conversation before and that she needs to look until it is found.  After a few more minutes she announced that it was nowhere to be found.  The next part of the script is for me to tell her that she would have to unplug the TV.  “Well, I don’t know which plug goes to the TV.”  “Follow the cord from the back of the TV to the wall.” 

At this point in the running saga, she’s out of excuses so I take her through the discussion of her right to be responsible for the mistake of losing the remote control and also the responsibility to find a way to turn off the TV.  The drama ratchets up another level as she feels trapped in a corner with no way to escape.  I have no intention of exerting control and meting out punishment, so I asked her if she would just listen to me (to teach her a skill for solving this problem).  She agreed (because we’d been through this scenario before) and she knew that she was not going to be yelled at, and I wasn’t going to take away any privileges.  The goal was to turn off the TV somehow, whether the remote was located or not, and prepare for bedtime.  She wanted to find the remote, however, so that tomorrow the TV could be turned back on!  I suggested that she think back to when she had the remote in her hand, and what she was doing at that time.  I call this “marking your hands in space” and it’s useful for finding lost objects.  Ultimately, the reason we can get to the solution is that there is no punishment. 

Mental Framing

In the workplace, when Lynn senses others judging her when she makes a mistake, it triggers an emotion tied to her sense of responsibility.  If others do not accept the possibility of me making a mistake, that judgment stunts my ability to feel safe.  I could get mad and just say, “I don’t accept that!”   This denies me the opportunity to grow from my mistake and take responsibility for it.  Maybe I feel good for a little while, but it doesn’t change anything.  Instead, it’s a moment for principle-based teaching by diffusing the situation and explaining why judging is wrong.

People often judge others out of a sense of fear, whether it is from their subconscious or it is intentional.  If a person uses the information (about a mistake) to be manipulative, they are not portraying a loving spirit in that moment.  Ben practices taking people at face value, that what they say is honest.  In situations where he senses that what they say does not align with his foreknowledge of their personality, he does not judge or assume but uses it as an opportunity to teach them to communicate their intent more carefully.  He chooses not to play the passive-aggressive role so they may become upset (because they were found out!).  They may try to turn the tables and blame him for the situation.  In either case, we are tempted to fall into the habit of judging another’s intent in that moment.  Using the principle, Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (after this, therefore because of this) Ben is free from taking responsibility for how they chose to present themselves.  Should they recant, and recuse themselves from judging, he is able to accept and move on.  Working through the conflict, regardless of the source, others may see how to be more assertive. 

You stink!  You’re Lying!

The other night, my daughter came to me complaining that her mother asked her to take a shower before the other girls.  She was certain that her mother think she is “always smelly” and she was offended by this judgment.  It made her feel ugly.  I suggested that this was not true and that she should ask Mom, but she refused saying, “I’m not going to talk to her because she will say it’s not true, but she will be lying to me.”  I replied, “Now, you have a very large problem.  If you cannot trust what Mom says, that is a huge relationship issue, and you need to go fix that right now.  Go talk to her and tell her why you don’t trust her.”  My daughter launched into a five-minute defense of why Mom was untrustworthy.  I repeated what a huge problem that was, and how it could break down family relationships.  I took my daughter’s comments at face value, without judging her intent, and advised her to work out the problem.  After a while, she admitted that trusting Mom wasn’t a problem and told me what was upsetting her emotionally.  We were able to work through the real problem because I gave her a way out of her false claim of Mom being untrustworthy and she no longer felt trapped in her original statement. 

An alternative is to simply say, “I hear you.”  This does not signal acceptance of what they said but acknowledges that they feel hurt (or sad or rejected).  It implies that there is no point in further discussion if they stick to their story.  I may decide to spend no further time and energy in the conversation because I perceive there is no further progress to be made.  When Ben worked in social services, he found that the children would ask, “Why?”  He would spend time explaining to them before he realized that they did not know how to say, “I don’t accept this, I want you to change your mind.”  One day, Lynne asked him, “Why are you still talking?  Do you think he’s so dumb that he doesn’t know why?  Are you willing to change your mind or negotiate with him?”  Now, when Ben gets the proverbial, “Why?” he replies, “Why are we still talking?”

Is Agreement Always the Goal?

There is always a path to alignment or reconciliation (even if not complete agreement) in a relationship; however, sometimes in the moment, there might be a temporary acknowledgment of disagreement. This is not conducive to maintaining a long-term relationship with someone when there is an expectation of shared values and moral beliefs, in other words, a serious subject.  Lynn said that when two people in a relationship have beliefs that are not aligned, and neither one can accept the others’ beliefs, a decision must be made about whether to continue the relationship.  Contemplation of the options for moving forward need not imply that one person is right and the other one is wrong (that would be judging) except in very few cases (criminality, for example).  Should you “agree to disagree” about simple matters?  Well, in our family few things rise to the level of importance of Chow Mein Noodles.  Do those crispy morsels go on top of the Chow Mein or underneath it?  You do not want to be a party to that ongoing conversation!

Yet, in spite of the great Chow Mein debate, we continue to continue our relationship as a family. Because there are no value or morality conflicts in this topic. When agreement can't be reached, it's important to find a way to make space for conflicting beliefs whenever possible, and to temper that space with grace for the difference.