Various forms of misery

"Disordered attachment" is a huge umbrella for all sorts of longstanding or temporary issues, problems, sources of suffering regarding relationships. Codependency, on the other hand, is a specific set of patterns and characteristics. In the same way that it bugs me when heavy drinkers say they are "alcoholic" or detail oriented people say they are "OCD," or people who have attentional probs but are not diagnosed say they are "ADD," it bugs me when various kinds of emotional attachment, some of which are not even pathological, get labeled "codependent." 

Here is a link to a fun little checklist that, were it an exam, I would get an A+ on, with possible extra extra credit. I think anyone who reflects on the list can fairly quickly see that so much of what is casually labeled "codependency" in colloquial discourse is not in fact codependency, but a huge range of various attachment issues or even just attachment styles.

A long time ago on this very blog, good old (old) Percy wrote about each set within that list at some length. Denial, low self esteem, compliance, control, and avoidance- I think there were five individual and fairly lengthy posts with lots of personal disclosure, but I am too lazy to go look. As I head back into step work in CoDA, I'll have to go back and gather that writing. 

I have done a lot more thinking and feeling about love, romance, attachment, loss and codependency since then, and I'm sure I'll do more. In particular, however, it has become more clear to me that there is a whole range of attachment styles that are not particularly problematic, then there's some extremes of attachment styles that are problematic, and then, quite separate from these styles, and neither "better" nor "worse", is codependency. 

For example, there's a very interesting psychology website where I have taken a couple of attachment style surveys. A person can learn a lot about themselves from that process. My attachment styles from November to now for family are dismissive avoidant, for close friends, secure, and for romantic partner, fearful avoidant. The fearful avoidant style is the least common (7% of the population) and causes some difficult situations. The other cool thing about this website is you take a survey every 30 days and can track how quality of life, personality traits, and attachment styles are shifting over time. Between November and now, for example, I have become less agreeable and more neurotic. Winning!

There may well be some overlap between the fearful-avoidant and dismissive attachment styles and codependency, but in very important particulars, codependency is, as the CoDA literature states, "a most deeply-rooted, compulsive behavior." 

My relationship style, romantically, as I *also* blogged about months ago, is effusive, wide open, communicative, poetic and romantic, imaginative and florid, somewhat impetuous and sometimes highly impulsive. I express admiration for a romantic partner frequently and tend to give presents, pay attention, get to know what they like, what would make good gifts, and enjoy showing up and validating. I have definitely not always been this way, and have destroyed several intimate bonds by being withholding, distant, uncommunicative, indifferent, oblivious and highly avoidant. But I seem to have grown into being much more open and warm as I have gotten older. 

I also get very deeply attached. But my tendency to become deeply attached *is not* codependency. In fact, I think a "more" codependent behavior of mine is to pretend to not be attached, when I actually am. Another codependent compulsion around attachment is to constantly check for it, make sure it is reciprocated. That's a behavior arising out of the fearful style, of course. Jumping at the chance to see someone I adore again is *not* codependent. Manipulating, strategizing, blaming myself for a canceled visit, feeling hated and taken for granted, having the impulse to collapse and feeling like I have no self worth- those are codependent behaviors. 

It seems to me that people think deep ties of attachment are a sign of codependency, or being deeply affected by heartbreak and loss, or imagining a lot of shared activities, or- really- a lot of the aspects of emotional and life attachment that I feel are perfectly natural to a close, intimate relationship. To be deeply hurt by the end of a precious relationship is absolutely not pathological. I think there are other responses to loss that are destructive and problematic. Shutting down, raging, sabotaging, ridiculing others, becoming jaded, bitter, sarcastic and distant, ghosting people, manipulating- and it's interesting to note that many of these behaviors are held up by our culture as "strong" and "independent." The self-sufficient noble person who never, ever looks back once they are done- I think that's an absurd expectation and perhaps to some people very damaging. 

There's a tendency to judge story as either codependent or not. For example, "being in an affair is codependent." Or "staying in one's marriage is codependent." This is not the case. One can be codependent in the affair or one can be non-codependent, quite separately from whether the affair is wise, or sustainable, or absolutely necessary and appropriate (a perspective on affairs that rarely gets talked about). The fact is that one can be codependent in a marriage, in a dating situation, while single, while in an affair, while polyamorous, etc. One can have an anxious attachment style, or an avoidant attachment style, or even conceivably a secure attachment style, and be codependent. It's all about the behaviors that are in the above checklist of the patterns and characteristics. 

And in that way, whether in or out of a relationship is irrelevant, at least after one gets one's basic bearings in recovery. Because there is a codependent way to be in any relationship, and a way to be in recovery in *any* relationship, with the exception of the abusive and toxic variety. One doesn't recover from codependency and then, subsequently, get into a "healthy" relationship. It simply does not work that way, usually. It's not linear. And relationship recovery is not precarious or contingent on story or outside circumstance. I think this is very difficult for people to understand. 

Far more important than the outside circumstance is whether or not a codependent is in relationship recovery. If that is the foundation, a lot of circumstances become possible. The only requirement for membership in CoDA is a desire for healthy and loving relationships, and, obviously, those can be built from a variety of narratives.