One of the things you learn as parents is about setting boundaries for your children. Being clear on what is acceptable behaviour and what isn’t. It’s all part of socialisation, fitting into your household values and beliefs, but also society’s norms and any other cultural expectations. Of course, not all parents approach things the same way and some values are different.
Sometimes very different depending on domestic circumstances. How those boundaries are communicated is also important – once upon a time for example ‘corporal’ punishment was accepted in schools and was common in some homes. These days it is, quite rightly, in my own humble view, not acceptable and, in many societies, illegal.
I would argue that bringing up an autistic child introduced additional problems in terms of behaviour and ‘normalisation’ but all parents have different issues with their children in terms of how they introduce them to the wider world. There are rules and there is being streetwise.
It always struck me that ‘setting boundaries’ was about protecting the child, enabling them to function in society, but as the years have gone by it’s become apparent to me that it is also about protecting the parents as well, to some extent, in so far as future proofing the situation when the children themselves get older and the relationship matures.
But setting boundaries isn’t just about managing children’s behaviour. After all that’s what laws are for, contracts, rules of conduct and engagement. Some are specific, legal and identifiable, others are more coded. And once again it’s also about protecting both parties otherwise there is misunderstanding and potential exploitation by one party over the other.
In life we all have to trust people from time to time, give people the benefit of the doubt but the moment that trust is broken, it feels like it’s back to square one. I’ve said before I’m more gullible than most, far too trusting and I can’t count the number of times that trust has been broken – resulting in a breakdown of confidence in oneself and then other people.
The only way I remind myself is to try and be more assertive, clear in the rules of engagement, write it down if necessary. Set targets, deadlines, financial agreements. But even then, that is often still prone to interpretation and legal nuance. It is a difficult balancing act. Do we really want to end up going back to documented or legal agreements and lawyers every time we have a transaction and engagement?
As a charity the Charities Commission requires of us to have a particular set of policies and procedures, rules of governance, accounting records etc. Understandable perhaps if its charitable money – and as I may have mentioned before we have been exemplary since Jackie and I took over this charity in following those rules since 2012. Not a blemish that I can think of.
The question is to what extent should we apply that in our personal and private dealings as well. Sometimes perhaps it’s easier to protect organisational assets than protect your own personal position? Some of us take it for granted that people will behave in the same way as we would treat them. But of course, we don’t always know their full background and circumstances and that is when we leave ourselves most exposed. I believe in total transparency, wherever possible, but of course, in the real world, that leaves us vulnerable to those people who have no qualms in exploiting such openness. So, boundary setting is there to protect both parties.
I continue to learn my lessons the hard way. But as I say to my son, whenever it happens, and sadly it will throughout your life, you just have to find a way of resetting things and go again.