Across the Pond

by Joe Sinclair (The Brit)

As a rule, I try to avoid three subjects in these columns: sex, religion and politics, in order not to give offence.  It is a rule I am going to break briefly on this occasion before moving to my main theme.

My conscience would be offended if I failed to mention my disgust at the refusal of the Bush regime to support the Kyoto protocol on environmental protection.  For the richest nation in the world to be not only the major source of global pollution, but also to fail to adopt the measures being taken by every other important country in the Western world, is totally mind-boggling.

Particularly when that regime is wielding sabres in a Middle Eastern escapade that is beginning to bear a remarkable resemblance to Custer at the Little Big Horn.  Am I being too cynical in suggesting that this is part of a process of distracting attention from domestic issues.

Nuff said!  To my main article.  And, once again, I must apologise for lack to time to prepare something more appropriate to this column, but I am still in the throes of house-buying and house-selling, so I hope that this extract from my recent contribution to the Nurturing Potential magazine, on Boundaries, will be of interest.

Boundaries ^[1]

Every one of us is involved in boundaries in one form or another, whether this be in our personal or professional lives.  

In recent years it has become a buzzword in its application to misconduct, particularly sexual misconduct, between professional therapists and their patients/clients. It represents the limit of what is appropriate behaviour in a professional relationship.

But it applies also to virtually all relationships and inter-relationships. Thus, what are appropriate boundaries between organisations or within organisations?  What boundaries should be established between children and their parents?  How should boundaries be established and observed between educators and their charges?

Furthermore, what is the most appropriate way to set personal boundaries and/or to reinforce them?  How do we maintain boundaries?   Whose is the responsibility for maintaining boundaries?  

Here are a few observations on boundaries:

  An important condition of boundaries is that we can establish our own; no one can force us to accept their boundaries if we do not choose to do so.

   A boundary need not be regarded as a barrier to keep people out, but a footpath designed to keep them away from areas of danger.  

   Perilous areas may be more effectively circumvented by a series of stepping stones with restricted access rather than a bridge available to all and sundry.

   To understand a person's boundaries, it is necessary to understand the person.

   To value a person's boundaries is to value the person.

   We all have boundaries even when they appear to be non-existent.

   The prime function of a boundary is to maintain a neutral position so as to avoid posing a threat to another person's concerns.

   To maintain one's own boundaries while respecting the boundaries of others is the art of negotiation.

   A boundary may be physical or abstract.  The one delineates a person's physical space; the other marks the area of the ideas and beliefs that they cherish.

   Infringing either physical or perceptual boundaries can profoundly affect relationships of all kinds.

   Ritual greetings such as shaking hands, kissing on the cheek, or hugging are typical examples of the wide range of physical activities that may be acceptable to some people at certain times, yet abhorrent to others.  At the limit of such contact, for example, might be the level of intimacy permissible to the therapist giving a body massage.

   The abstract boundaries corresponding to these physical boundaries could comprise such behaviour as rudeness, abrasiveness, being judgemental, scorning the other's opinions, and asking inappropriate questions.

Here are a few appropriate words from an article written in 1990 by Sandra D. Shattuck of the University of Alabama:

". . . as I flipped through the thesaurus, I was reminded of the double meaning of "bound." As a verb, the word means to demarcate, circumscribe, restrict and define. But as an adjective, "bound" means to be obligated, committed, engaged, responsible, accountable. This meaning resonates for me when I am given the gift of my students' courage and anger as they grapple with old maps and with the bewildering spaces of the unexplored. Together we are committed and accountable to the journey."

Boundaries for children:

It is important to instil the idea of boundaries into children from the earliest ages.  They will inevitably get conflicting messages from authority figures, peers, and media, but they have to be introduced to a set of clear and respectful rules and limits that will enable them to acknowledge the rights of others while establishing rights of their own.

It is essential to recognise that young children do not intentionally violate standards and infringe boundaries.  If they have been inadequately explained or grasped they must not be blamed.  But every unintentional violation is an excellent opportunity to explain and reinforce lessons.

Boundaries need to be drawn in simple, direct and specific terms and must be enforced consistently to avoid confusion.  Modelling behaviour is a more valuable way of teaching than simply telling them what to do or what not to do.

Boundaries that are established for the physical safety and security of children are non-negotiable and must be firmly maintained.  Boundaries that are respectful of others, however, may be re-negotiated as children grow older and can appreciate the limits of flexibility.

^[1] Part of an article published in Nurturing Potential, Issue 17.  http://www.nurturingpotential.net