Rescue Syndrome: Help, Control and Healthy Boundaries

Author: Dmytro Telushko Based on the book: Mistress of Her Boundaries

A friend is moving, and you come over for two hours: take apart a shelving unit, bring down some boxes, then share a cup of tea. That evening your friend is still arranging things, while you are already home. You have made an important contribution without becoming responsible for the entire move. Sometimes this is what makes help memorable: someone actually turned up and did what you had agreed.

Wanting to support people is a valuable capacity. Difficulties can arise when an unspoken condition attaches itself to the help: the other person must now follow your advice, show gratitude in a particular way or never make another mistake. It is worth looking at the agreement, your expectations and whether both people still have a choice.

Transactional analysis uses the Rescuer role in Karpman’s Drama Triangle to examine interactions in which someone takes on more of another person’s responsibility than was discussed and may underestimate their capabilities. This is a way of exploring a pattern, not a diagnosis or a reason to call every generous act a syndrome.

Imagine that after the move you start deciding where your friend should work and which furniture to keep, although the request was only for help with boxes. Disagreement feels irritating: ‘I gave up my day off for you.’ A favour begins to turn into an unspoken exchange for obedience. Reproaches, resentment and shifts between roles can occur in such an interaction; conflict is not the inevitable outcome of every offer of help.

Taking the initiative can be entirely welcome: ‘I’m nearby. I could bring dinner or help with paperwork. Would either be useful?’ What matters is room to clarify or decline. Immediate danger, caring for a child and professional responsibilities may require action before a detailed discussion is possible. Being genuinely vulnerable does not make someone a player in a psychological game.

In this fictional moving-day story, Ihor says: ‘I can stay until two. We can dismantle the shelves and bring the boxes down. We’ll need another arrangement for the sofa.’ His friend is disappointed, having expected a whole day. Ihor dislikes letting him down, but keeps his arrangement with his family. Together they choose what matters most to finish now.

A boundary need not please everyone or make the conversation easy. It does make concrete questions available: who will book the movers, what will it cost, which item can stay in the flat for now? If you previously promised more, explicitly revise the promise, acknowledge the inconvenience and, where possible, help find an alternative. Simply disappearing leaves the other person without information.

An acquaintance brings a list of courses you ‘urgently need’ to a coffee date. She may sincerely care about you. Her good intentions do not oblige you to follow her programme. You could say: ‘Thank you for thinking of me. Today I was hoping we could just talk. If I decide to look for a course, I’ll ask you.’ One meeting cannot reliably establish a hidden motive. You can express your own request without reaching that conclusion.

If advice, articles and calls continue after you have declined, name the action you can observe: ‘I’ve already asked you not to send job vacancies. Please stop sending them.’ You do not have to explain your refusal endlessly. Equally, another person’s disappointment is not in itself proof of manipulation: you can hear their feelings while keeping your decision.

In another fictional scene, a neighbour notices that a new gardener’s seedlings are struggling. Instead of quietly replanting everything her own way, she asks: ‘Would you like us to take a look together?’ The gardener asks for help with just one bed. They try a different approach, while she keeps the other beds for her own experiments. Working together preserves their connection and her part in deciding what happens.

In the transactional-analysis ego-state model, Parent, Adult and Child describe ways of experiencing, thinking and behaving. Adult is associated with assessing here-and-now reality. In everyday practice, that offers a prompt to check circumstances and your available resources. A mature decision can draw on feelings, care and reasoning. Setting a boundary does not require becoming unfeeling.

For instance, you can notice anger after a sharp comment and still ask: ‘Are you talking about the deadline or the quality of the work?’ That clarifies the subject. ‘He wants to make me feel guilty’ remains an interpretation for now. If there are threats or humiliation, protecting yourself and seeking support matters more than finding a flawless reply.

First, find a manageable pause if you need one. Delay replying to a message, notice the support beneath your feet or take a few ordinary, unforced breaths. Neither breathing nor naming a feeling has to calm everyone quickly. A short walk or returning to the conversation at an agreed time may suit you better.

Next, separate what you know from what you infer. What did the person actually request? What did you agree to? How much time and energy remain? Check your own expectation, too. Perhaps you hoped for thanks but never discussed a return favour; perhaps the agreed workload has genuinely changed. Those situations call for different responses.

Then state the next action: ‘I can review one section today,’ ‘Let’s clarify the task,’ or ‘That option doesn’t work for me.’ You can acknowledge the fair part of a criticism without accepting the entire accusation: ‘Yes, the deadline moved. I’ll send the new version tomorrow before noon.’ The purpose is to clarify an agreement, not confuse the other person or win a psychological contest.

When working with the MriyaRun book Mistress of Her Boundaries, you can add a separate five-line note to your reflections: the other person’s request; what I want; what I can offer; the agreed amount; and when we will review the arrangement. This is a suggested use of reflective writing, rather than a claim that particular pages will resolve a conflict.

Afterwards, add what worked and what was harder than expected. Perhaps you declined an extra task for the first time and still feel guilty. You can explore that feeling without automatically reversing the decision. Gradually, more options may become visible between ‘I must get everyone through everything’ and ‘I’ll never help anyone again.’ Warm, practical help remains one of them.

Sources for the models: Stephen Karpman, Fairy Tales and Script Drama Analysis (1968); Mark Widdowson, Basic transactional analysis theory (2016).