quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiteRadiance

I have never seen this topic so if it has been approached- please forgive me.
It occurred to me that almost all D/s relationships are co-dependant.  It SEEMS that way to me, anyway.  And actually, I find that comforting.  I think it is good to have someone to rely upon, and who can rely on me as well. :)
 
Also I have seen many instances of both parties (in a relationship) enabling the other. For instance, I know a married couple who were initially vanilla.  The husband eventually confided in his wife that he had a particular "need".  She tried to supply his need but, was unable to fulfill his desire.  She began to bring her friends over, and he would service them.  She began to take on a stable of studs.  He became a cuck.
I am not judging- as I understand that they altered their relationship to meet their unique needs- however- would not a therapist call this enabling?  he enables her to fuck other men, she enables him to fulfill his fetishes?
 
Not judging, just thinking about it! 
 
Any insight would be appreciated. :)
 
 

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

Relationships are dependent on everyone involved within them feeling the desire to keep them going.

Relationships should also enable everyone within them to be fulfilled in who they are.

As long as everyone is being true to themselves, fulfilled, and not harming others in the general sense- I don't see it as bad. 

I enable my partners foot fetish regularly.  I love it.  I see no reason to stop.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LordODiscipline
and you buy shoes so you are both happy, then that is a symbiotic and healthy relational dynamic.~J

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterFireMaam

An exerpt of a blog entry of mine on Unconditional Love and Conditional Relationships:

Negative Co-dependency In order for a relationship to be judged as healthy, it should not result in us, or our relationship partners, becoming emotionally or intellectually dependent on one another. In other words, the relationship shouldn't become negatively co-dependent. Co-dependency, in and of itself, can be defined as, "the tendency to put others needs before your own."[3] If you think for a moment, putting someone else's need before your own isn't such a bad idea IF you are in a relationship with someone who treats you the same way! It becomes negative co-dependency when it's done to the detriment of your own self-worth or because you are basing your self-worth on the outward approval from you partner. A partnership needs to be a symbiotic relationship between two people who have an inward sense of self-worth in order to be healthy.

Master Fire

quote:

ORIGINAL: LordODiscipline

"Co-Dependant" is a term used by mental health professionals denoting that one person is enabling another person to persue something which is life or health threatening (something negative).
 
You had me going for a bit until I realized you were misusing the terms
 
The relaitionships might be symbiotic or mutually beneficial *or, even parasitic* - but, they are not (as a rule) co-dependent or enabling (although - I think we all know some that are)
 
~J



_____________________________

Staci

The drop of rain makes a hole in a stone not by violence, but by often falling.

(in reply to LordODiscipline)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhiteRadiance

I understand the terminology and am not confused. 
 
My question is in regards to the situation I described in the OP.. how do, or would- a mental health professional perceive such behavior?  Would THEY think it co-dependant or enabling? 
 
What is- or is not- negative- is a matter of opinion, is it not? 
Some may think something I do to my slave is negative or unhealthy... but perhaps is just another alternative?  Who judges what is "negative?" 
If both parties are content, happy and fulfilled- this is what makes the determination.
 
However... (playing devil's advocate)..
I have seen people do anything and everything to please one another.. and often they tend to feel obligated, and take little pleasure in it.  They seem to do it out of FEAR of change, or of loss.. or of being alone.  It is much easier to say you are content and happy with something than to ACTUALLY be that way. 
Another term the mental health community uses is denial.
 
 
(I personally love foot worship, new shoes and pedicures, myself and hell yes, I indulge my slave every chance I get.  It is a win-win!)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LordODiscipline

"Co-Dependant" is a term used by mental health professionals denoting that one person is enabling another person to persue something which is life or health threatening (something negative).
 
You had me going for a bit until I realized you were misusing the terms
 
The relaitionships might be symbiotic or mutually beneficial *or, even parasitic* - but, they are not (as a rule) co-dependent or enabling (although - I think we all know some that are)
 
~J

quote:

ORIGINAL: toservez


As a person who works in the medical field I agree with everything LordODiscipline has written. You are not using co-dependency in the proper medical definition.

You are using it in a broad sense in a pop culture society way. You can literally have millions of things that describe co-dependency the way you are describing it. Technically I am co-dependent on the oil companies as I need my gas for my car and I am enabling all the problems that lead to the Iraq war.
  Enabling and co-dependency are people who help a person cause damage, undue unhappiness on themselves and others including the enabler. The situations you point out you state the person is unhappy but does it anyway could be dependent issues on the person but might not have anything to do with enabling if the person has no idea that they are hurting the others and to me that is a huge distinction. There is a huge difference to doing something for someone because it makes the other person happy but not you and doing something that will directly cause you or others harm or long-term unhappiness.