Am I the only one who friggin hates Laura?

pubbly^

WARNING TO OTHERS: LENGTHY POST AHEAD :)

I must say, you have managed to connect more dots than I have with Paul and all his relationships as portrayed, and in an absolutely thoughtful and very insightful way. Tis very enjoyable reading your analyses :)

*Sigh* It makes my stomach hurt when I read posts from people who want the Laura/Paul relationship to continue, to even cheer it on, when I am sitting there watching it, shaking my head, and thinking ‘No, No, No…” I label these posters ‘well-wishers’ when in fact they are inadvertently supporting a disease – unconscious ‘ill-wishers’ in a sense ;)

Some of my opinions (aside from knowing something about the professional ethics involved here, including *why* these ethical codes exist in the first place) in part stem from my knowing of a very good clinical therapist who was a “Paul” to a patient “Laura”. However, this ‘Paul’ DID go forward with a sexual relationship with his “Laura” and for several months. When he finally did arrive at some kind of ‘sense’ while in the midst of this mess, he then tried to refer the patient away (still in a fog, he tried to tell the patient THEN that he could not be in both roles of therapist and lover – it did not help that he, like Paul, was also married), and with that real/perceived *rejection*, the patient’s illness manifested out at this otherwise brilliant therapist in full force. She immediately told his wife of their affair; she reported him to his professional board; she sued him. He ended up losing his license to practice for years, had to move out of the area (in fact, out of the state), and his transgressions were published in a trade journal for all to read. The woman ex-patient was relentless. On paper, professionally, with peers, and monetarily, this therapist lost a heckuva lot, but this woman lost too, as she did not get the treatment she needed in the first place and in fact she became much worse. To add insult to injury, the machinery of the system that kicked in contributed by reinforcing her illness (monetarily, etc.) A tragic situation all the way around, but also one that anyone the least bit wise to this dynamic could have seen coming a long time prior. There was no real ‘win’ in this situation. As an aside, this therapist’s wife did deem to stay with him and kudos to her (at least, unless that was pathology on her part, too, which I do not have enough information about her to know). I do know that this therapist grew up helping to take care of a sickly sibling, who died in her mid 30's and whose death preceded the therapist’s affair by about a year.


People at first blush (especially men infatuated with the Laura ‘dummy’, and young women who would like to be a “Laura” physically, sexually and/or professionally) will look at Laura and will think nothing of Paul having a relationship with her. Others will listen to Paul and might be seduced into thinking that – why not? – maybe love CAN bloom in a therapist’s office (to quote Gina). Maybe, oh maybe, this time will be different (like, maybe the sun will rise in the West tomorrow?) To me, these feelings say more about the posters than it does about the characters of Paul and Laura.


You are very astute in pointing out how Paul and his problems are ‘infecting’ (your words – very apt!) his other relationships, whether they be personal or professional, and you also are a very good epidemiologist, tracking the levels and trajectories of the infection as it boomerangs all over the place. Paul should have taken a break from his work a long time ago and sought professional help (for the right reasons) long before knocking on Gina’s door. He does search out Gina, who is kind enough to take him as a patient although she is now retired, but it’s not long before he is attacking HER with every dysfunctional blow and weapon he has at his disposal.


Your question (in regards to characteristics of women with HPD you described): “So if the "helpless" and "dependent" Laura kept "clinging" to Paul - who allowed and encouraged the unrealistic romantic "Fantasy" to continue - then the "Pathological" situation would have also "increased" - as their relationship became more intimate?”


As in the case of the therapist above, I think ‘yes’. However, I would think we would also need to define ‘intimacy’ in the context of an HPD, as what most consider ‘true’ intimacy they are fairly unable to engage in. ‘Intimacy’ in this context I would assume to mean that the relationship becomes closer as in when a relationship goes from friend to lover, or from therapist to lover, etc. The pathology would increase, I believe: 1) Because you have two people intertwined now with separate, distinct pathologies that are feeding off each other, this results in an emergence of these two pathologies greater than the sum of their parts; 2) Unhealthy relationships cannot continue to function on dysfunction unless they are allowed to remain static, in a vacuum. However, all relationships exist within greater contexts, and even healthy relationships need to grow and adapt according to contextual change. If the strength of a relationship – indeed its very roots – is/are based almost entirely on dysfunction and that dysfunction is challenged by outside and inevitable forces, the relationship will increase its level of dysfunction if it wants to survive; that is the ‘bond’ of that relationship and without that bond, no relationship exists (this, however, may be a temporary increase, as context WILL change and continue to change, and then the prognosis for the relationship will depend on the nature of the original pathologies).


Given the dynamic of Paul and Laura, Laura would have to flick in Paul eventually, one way or the other. If she started to ‘get healthy’, she would leave Paul as her reason for being with Paul is an unhealthy one. If she continues ‘ill’, she would leave Paul because that is a hallmark of the very illness she has. Either way, the relationship is doomed from the onset. Some might say: "Okay. So the relationship is doomed. Couldn't it be that Paul could be the one to leave Laura?" I would say that it would be highly unlikely. Although I do posit an option above of Laura getting healthy, I think that is highly unlikely given the fact that her former 'Therapist' is now contributing to the sickness. And, Laura remaining sick would mean that if she got any hint (and these people are very good at reading other people as that is one of their hallmark survival mechanisms; although some do appear to be objects of rejection, often that is merely in order to then be able to strike out at the offender 'legitimately' in the eyes of others so that they can now move on), that she would 'reject first' as I discuss later in this post.


You say: “Doesn't some of the other imagery listed in the symptoms of HPD also seem to sum up the "dummy" analogy pretty well?
Such as where it says an HPD is:
Concerned only with the latest conquest, the histrionic uses her physical appearance and attire as a kind of conscious bait
Isn't that also the purpose of using a "dummy" in a store window? To "bait" you into being attracted to it (inspite of its having no "depth" under that pretty exterior)?
Doesn't this description also seem to sum up the situation with Laura:
"As the histrionic depletes one source of narcissistic supply after another, she glides from one relationship to the next, experiencing a range of shallow feelings and commitments in the process. This shallowness is reflected in the histrionic's speech which is impressionistic, disjointed, and generalized.”

Yes!! Very well put and very apt, in my estimation.

These personality types have great difficulty maintaining any form of permanence, not only in their love lives, but in their friendship groups and also in their places of employment. If the Laura character would be true to the personality type she is representing, she soon would probably end up working somewhere else and maybe even in a different geographic locale.

‘Pretenders’ of this magnitude can only maintain the illusion so long as they aren’t around long enough for people around them to ‘catch on’. Once people get ‘too close’, the pretender must leave (dummy analogy: looks great in the window, but the closer you get….), for being truly found out not only portends potential real consequences for their actions, but also can become a mirror, a reflection of which cannot be comfortably tolerated. Their egos are so ill-formed and inconsistent with what these pretenders not only try to reflect to others, but also to themselves, that it would be deeply aversive for them to peer behind that illusion. That is another reason that these people come at others ‘with knives’ when others find them out in ways that are not easily escapable OR cause them rejection, whether perceived or genuine, and, in fact many times self-fulfilled. Their personal and emotional safety relies on being fleet of foot, adapting to the most current situation as much as possible no matter how shallow, finding the complement to their sickness (victim -> savior), and being externally focused to the nth degree, not only to attract bait, but also so that any internal insight is continually avoided. They are also more likely to ‘reject first’ than risk rejection by another, because being truly rejected would mean losing some semblance of ‘control’ and some ability to comfortably move on when THEY want and need to. A young HPD may be truly rejected, but if the HPD remains sick, the HPD will learn how to manipulate rejection in future and in ways that serve their illness and allow them to survive. They must control, and, as I alluded to before, the victim remains a victim (so long as the illusion lives), but the rescuer must act once stimulated by the ‘victim’ – the person whose behavior must change first in any situation is the one who is being controlled at some level. So, although the rescuer might feel the ‘strong’ one and the one in control, this person in fact is the one being controlled as his/her actions within the relationship rely on those of the victim, whose only job is to remain in victim-mode (overall status quo -- although some particulars may change, the ultimate role of victim must not).

In Paul’s situation, his wife, Kate, did experience some growth away from him. This threatened him. He was so entrenched in the role of ‘rescuer’ (stemming from childhood experiences with his mother), that once Kate no longer needed rescuing, and Paul did not adapt to that, he was primed for a “Laura” before she ever walked into his office. That, coupled with his mid-life crisis, meant that there would be some Laura (if not precisely Laura) whom he would eventually seek out. Paul has an even greater inevitably of this occurring than most experiencing this form of crisis because of his profession – the walking wounded literally come looking for him. Additionally, his mid-life crisis is not only centered around his wife not needing him in ways she did in the past, but as with other men (and some women), mid-life crises can also occur (along with a change in spousal dynamics, with aging and it’s concomitant bodily changes, existential anxiety about death, etc.), when the children start to grow up and to rely less on the parents. Given this kind of dynamic with a parent, it is not unusual to see a child start to ‘act out’. It’s like some kind of sixth sense kicks that this is what the family of origin ‘needs’. Not only do children act out in order to bring Mommy and Daddy back together as a united force, but also to put whichever parent needs it in the role of ‘rescuer’ again. The child acting out subconsciously might then believe that the parent will not attempt to fulfill this need outside the family unit, which could then threaten the integrity of the child’s family. If this strategy works for the child, the child will then have a higher probability of becoming a “Laura” of some kind in future – to grow up to be an adult who falls back on drama to keep relationships intact -- but unlike Laura, if there is absence of childhood sexual abuse/similar trauma, these children may grow up to be drama kings and queens when under stress, but not to form and leave relationships in the way that a personality type like Laura does.


What would an Andrew get from a Laura? I don’t know enough about him to know enough about his individual needs, but the level of his injury would depend on his length of time in that relationship. What did Alex get? Alex was suicidal and I think Laura was just all part of his nihilistic trip. Alex managed to further triangulate away from his issues by dragging Paul into it, thus distracting away from what he (Alex) really needed. Laura was just a tool for him, and involvement with her was further validation that he was going down AND was a barrier to allowing Paul to really help him. Alex was a very interesting character, and his suicide was a very long, drawn-out affair that he unfortunately was successful at.


In closing, to reference your wonderful disease/infection analogy, although a “Paul” or a “Laura” might not actually be aware of their own illness, they are just as safe for the un-inoculated to be around as someone who has an infectious disease (albeit unaware of its presence). A ‘typhoid Mary’ of sorts. Gina, on the other hand, was fairly well-inoculated, thus lending to some of the fierce resistance we see from Paul, as he is not successful at ‘infecting’ her.


Great chatting with you, too!









"I can't stand a naked light bulb, any more than..a rude remark or a vulgar action" Blanche DuBois