Disordered Thinking and Enmeshment Theory

Also posted to my Facebook on September 2, 2026 

There is a quote I heard at church, 'the philosophies of men, mingled with scripture'. I guess the meaning may be fairly self-explanatory. There is 'science' or the process by which we take our observations, posit a theory, conduct an experiment, and analyze the data to draw a conclusion. In other words we have the scientific method (the philosophies of men), and we have 'scripture'.

Some people would argue that scripture is just a written version of oral history, which is also open to error and revision. For the purposes of this post, I'm going to say, I think the meaning of 'mingled with scripture' actually means intertwined with foundational truth. You don't personally have to find your truth in scripture. But let's just go with this premise: scripture (for this discussion) is referencing the concept of universal truth.

Years ago when my (now ex-)husband was working on his Master's degree in Spanish at the University of AZ, a doctoral student from our congregation spoke in church. The speaker wasn't in a medical or social worker program, but did reference Enmeshment; to provide an example of being too involved in something that didn't help a relationship. The speaker referenced getting lost in reading a novel for 5-6 hours, instead of striking a balance, with a little less time spent with the book, and more time on something higher the list of priorities - like the grad research or their spouse.

There is more (and less) to Enmeshment theory. 

An article by Saul McLeod, PhD (in Psychology) writes in Psychology Today (updated Feb 2025),

"Enmeshment is a psychological term describing an extreme form of emotional closeness where personal boundaries become blurred or non-existent.

"In an enmeshed relationship, individuals are overly involved in each other’s lives to the point that they lose a clear sense of their own identity and autonomy."

Naturally, Wikipedia also has an article (albeit very short) about Enmeshment theory

But just because we come up with a theory about something doesn't make it true.

I do believe that we can be so over-involved in caring for other people that we fail to care for our own basic needs - ie. nutrition, exercise, hygiene, etc. And sometimes, that becomes disabling for the whole family.

There are also syndromes or conditions with other names that describe extreme familial disfunction (like Munchausen syndrome by proxy, now referred to as FDIA or Factitious disorder imposed on another).

But again, just because we see something, and label it, doesn't always make it true.

If all parents of offspring with special needs (developmental, medically fragile, or other) or even normal needs, prioritized themselves above their children, what would become of the next generation?

Nearly always, we have family members that require us to give more during certain seasons. Infants would be an obvious example. Some families have members whose needs are developmentally appropriate, but unique to their chronologically aged peers. And so, for that season (or earth-bound lifetime) those families will have lives that look very different than the general population.

I also have a theory.

Continually asking families that have members with special needs, to step up to the plate and serve the priorities of the common population, can occasionally be societally tone deaf.

My positing that theory doesn't make it true, even if it is based on observation. I'm currently living enmeshed in the experiment phase. I'm uncertain if any of my interim conclusions are truly factual because of the dysfunctional nature of my thought process.

Perhaps we are all enmeshed a little too much in our own first world problems priorities.

We could all potentially be dysfunctional, depending on our point of view.

They will be much more able to give you something.

Sense and Sensibility by Jane Austen, ch 2

I'm going to conclude: by even making these statements about a hesitancy to serve (in any season of my life), I understand some people I know would consider this as being lazy, less humble, having a lack of faith, or self-damnation . . . aka dividing oneself from 'god'. I accept the label, as with many other man-made theories, while knowing it still makes me unable to run faster than I have strength . . . which apparently is currently the case.

The philosophies of men mingled with scripture (aka my disordered thinking) . . . is making my head ache (unless it's something else).

I must be feeling at least a little better, because I'm back to being philosophical (I didn't say rational) . . . now, we'll see if I can avoid crying today as well.

Did I mention we're going to the PsyNP today?
I am not the client / patient.
Though perhaps I should be.