I thought I’d depart from a more standard post and offer below some verbatim interactions I recently had with a client whom I’ve always suspected as having sociopathic tendencies.
I share these interactions (with comments) not for their excitement, because their subject matter is in fact extremely mundane; but rather for the sociopathic elements I believe they instructively contain.
My client, T, is a 35 year old male, with a “work history” of voyeuristic, sexually aggressive behavior towards females. My role with him is as a “consulting therapist” for a community agency. T is not psychotic, and has no reality testing impairment. He is a verbally quick, superficially engaging, extroverted individual.
My suspicions of his having sociopathic tendencies (whether or not he meets fuller criteria for sociopathy) derive from the kinds of interactions with (and experiences of) him that I share below.
I should also note that T has a fairly substantial job history that has been undermined by his predatory behaviors (especially at work) towards females. Presently, he has held down a part-time job for several months with an excellent company. However, he does not work with women at this job, which decreases his chances of acting-out.
Briefly setting the scene, I’ve been asked by agency staff to address their concerns that T may recently be non-medication compliant (I repeat, he does not have a psychotic history). T has assured multiple staff repeatedly that he’s been perfectly, uninterruptedly medication compliant.
I meet T today at the agency, where a staff party is unfolding on the first floor. We meet in the midst of this rather crowded, claustrophobic scene. Very quickly, almost immediately, he asks me if I’ll get him something to eat? Because I intend to get something to eat for myself, although I experience his request as rather presumptuous and aggressive, I agree.
However, as I’m making a plate for him with two small sandwiches, I am intercepted by a staff person who informs me that T is not to be eating the party food. She is already on to him, because she’s already explained this to him: It is a staff, not client, party. As other clients enter the agency they, too, will feel entitled to eat the food if he does.
This is a reasonable limit, and I understand it. As I note, prior to my arrival, she had already explained this to T. However, this didn’t deter T from asking me, instantly upon my arrival, to make him a plate. After all, by using me he could circumvent the limit.
“T” sees this staff person informing me of the situation, and when I return to him, I explain the situation. He is somewhat amused, and also a bit irritated by, this frustrating development.
A minute or so later, seeing that the plate I was making up for him remains untouched on the table, he suggests with remarkable audacity, “Why don’t you get the plate now? Nobody’s touched it. Nobody’s looking.”
I am used to this kind of reaction from him, nevertheless I venture, “Don’t you think that would be unethical, since we were just told again that you can’t eat the party food?”
He says, with absolute equanimity, “You can bring it upstairs”¦no one will know. You can have one sandwich and I can have the other.”
Striking here is, of course, the obvious manipulativeness, but also the utterly blithe, shameless presumptuousness.
I’ve written in a prior post of the “shameless audacity” of the sociopath; T has shameless audacity in his personality.
To clarify, T knows very well that his latest suggestion (that I lift his plate and bring it upstairs) flatly transgresses staff’s reasserted limit, the basis of which he fully understands (even if it inconveniences him).
And there is that disarmingly comfortable presumption of my complicity in his suggestion to circumvent a staff rule (no less knowing that I am among staff).
Now here, I make a confession: Because I am really hungry, I bring a plate of food upstairs with me, where he and I are to meet. And because I’m constitutionally unable to eat in front of someone who is also hungry while I eat, I offer T a sandwich from my plate, arguably totally enabling his latest manipulation.
Now what does he do, in response to my gesture?
He pulls out his wallet and says, “What do I owe you?”
Now this is gamesmanship. This is a highly insincere gesture. He has no intention to pay me anything, and he knows on some level how ludicrous this gesture is. More audacious is that he knows that I know how absurd and insincere his gesture is. Yet with no shame whatsoever he engages me in this absurd charade.
I say: T, are you playing games with me?
T (convincingly, still fingering his wallet): No, what do I owe you?
S: For what?
T: The food, man.
S: You’re playing games, T”¦knock it off.
T: Hey, I’m just asking.
S: I know you’re just asking, but it’s a game you’re playing.
No big deal. I’m not looking to be psychotherapeutic here, just confronting of his bullshit. He drops the subject abruptly, because he has as little interest in it as he did to pay me anything for the food.
It’s as if this shallow, false gesture of gratitude was, for him, a fleeting source of entertainment, or solution to his momentary boredom.
Now at this point I ask him about the meds.
S: So what’s up with the meds? I understand there’s some concern you’re not taking them.
T: I’m taking them.
S: You are?
T: Yeah.
S: So why’s the staff concerned about that?
T: I don’t know. I’m takin’ them.
S: Every day?
T: Yeah. Every day.
S: The bloodwork doesn’t show it. The meds don’t show up in the bloodwork.
T: I don’t know how to explain that.
And there isn’t the remotest sense of accountability, of his feeling the remotest discomfort or anxiety to be faced with this suspicious, if not incriminating, evidence. He has reassured staff that he’s been taking his meds, and now he reassures me. He doesn’t find this bloodwork issue embarrassing, or puzzling; it’s more just a nuisance to be told about it.
T: I take ’em every day I work.
S: You said you take them every day.
T: I do.
S: Every day you work?
T: Yeah. I take ’em every day I work.
S: You work every day?
T: Yeah.
S: Weekends?
T; No ”¦not on Saturday and Sunday.
S: So you don’t take them every day.
T: Yeah, but I take ’em every day I work.
There is real glibness, and slipperiness here; also the brazen attitude that this incoherent, logic/reasoning should satisfy me.
S: You said you took them everyday, and now you’re telling me you take them only during the week, meaning 5 days, not 7.
T: Yeah.
Bald-faced lying exposed; yet again, neither embarrassment, nor the sense of anything to account for. He has used confusing, diversionary language as a strategy for evading responsibility. But even when the strategy has failed (very obviously), even when he’s been patently exposed for his prevaricating, he acts like he hasn’t been exposed for anything.
The blitheness is so striking, so comfortable, that it makes you doubt yourself—i.e., perhaps I didn’t expose him for anything?
S: So how does your not taking the meds on the weekends constitute your taking them every day?
T: I said I take them every day I work.
S: You’re saying that now, T, but you didn’t say that initially, and you haven’t been telling staff that.
T: Whatever, I’ll take ’em.
He’s annoyed now, not embarrassed. This is inconvenient for him. He’s not ashamed, but irritated. His attitude is something like, “So what. Okay”¦you got me”¦congratulations”¦who cares?”
T: I take the meds to keep me on the up and up at work.
S: Up and up? What do you mean?
T: Yeah”¦to make sure I’m like”¦exercising good judgement.
S: You don’t need that good judgment on the weekends?
T: I’m fine on the weekends. I take ’em every day, like I said, to make sure I’m good to go at work.
S: Uh huh”¦but we’ve already established you don’t take them every day”¦you haven’t been taking them on the weekends.
T: Yeah, I get you. Whatever. Okay.
There is a continued manipulation of the facts, a continued effort to blur the distinction between “every day” (7 days/week) and “weekdays” (5 days/week). It remains striking that T conveys an absence of shame”¦not suppressed shame”¦but an absence of shame. There is a difference between someone who, when caught lying, responds with suppressed shame versus no shame. T has no shame.
S: So you’re telling me you’ll start taking them seven days a week”¦that’s something I and the staff can trust?
T (apathetically): Yeah.
S: Uh huh”¦okay”¦.and you’re okay if I report this to the staff? The truth about your medication situation? And your intentions going forward?
T: Whatever”¦yeah”¦why would I care?
About now, the conversation shifts, when T abruptly raises the question of why we have to keep meeting weekly? This is a question he raises repeatedly—and, I think, manipulatively, passive-aggressively, and maybe somewhat impulsively—every week or other week, despite our having addressed it many times.
T: So”¦what do you think? You think we need to keep meeting?
This signals also his desire to drop the medication issue, as it bored and inconvenienced him.
S: You ask me this pretty much every week, and I pretty much tell you the same thing.
T: Yeah, but what do you think? I’m doing pretty well, right? No problems with women lately”¦I’m holding down my job. Why do we have to keep meeting?
S: We meet, T, every week, because it’s the expectation of the program that we do. You know this very clearly. The program expects its clients to meet every week with a therapist”¦even if just for a check-in.
T: Yeah, but what’s the point? I’m doing fine. Maybe we can cut it back to once every other week?
He is manipulating”¦cajoling. He wants what he wants.
S: It’s funny, but you’d think that you come out to see me, instead of my coming to see you. I drive 30 minutes to come here, to see you”¦sometimes for just a few minutes”¦you walk two blocks, I drive 30 minutes”¦who’s making the sacrifice? What’s the skin off your back?
T: I hear ya”¦I’m just saying I don’t see the point of meeting. You’ve said yourself I’m doing well.
S: You are doing well. You’re holding down this job, which everyone applauds you for”¦.you’re basically doing real well. Then again, the reason we started meeting in the spring was about your failing to own some of your behaviors”¦like the female issue. We were meeting about your failure to take responsibility for your actions. And now, with this medication situation, it’s still more of that”¦your lying, or only telling half-truths”¦this is the latest thing”¦your not being honest and responsible about your meds.
T: Look, I don’t care if we keep meeting”¦I’ve got no problem with you. I just don’t think I need it. It’s a waste of time.
No interest whatsoever in the larger points I made. He blithely dismisses them, and then superficially, emptily affirms his willingness to cooperate. But he will ask again, soon, maybe next week, about our cutting our meetings.
As I warned, these are mundane interactions. But mundane interactions can be full of interesting, diagnostically suggestive clues. In these instances, T deploys, rather characteristically, some verbal gymnastics and attitudes that, I think, lend strength to (rather than weaken) my hypothesis that he is sociopathically inclined.
(This article is copyrighted (c) 2008 by Steve Becker, LCSW.)
LOL while reading Dr. Steves coversation with “T” I automatically wanted to get up and start beating my head against the wall(not literally) I remember all the circular conversations I had with my “S” that got no where and left me looking like Wyle E. Coyote after one of his latest ACME gadgets blew up on him! The desparation to get to “a point” that never did come and the energy wasted on nothing! And all the entanglements within the circular conversations like manipulation tactics that made my futile attempts “to get through to her” seem even more futile. Wow! And to add insult to injury she always told me I didn’t possess communication skills
Thank goodness now,after being armed with the knowledge of what a sociopath is, I can save a little sanity by recognizing her patterns. She is out of my life but not totally expunged from it. She now is doing her own futile attempts of trying to get “back in” my life and as I stand up for myself I can feel and see the anxiety build in her because of her loss of control (not to mention her meal ticket) And the circular conversations she tries to have with me now have thrown her for a loop because of my different responses and reactions and it really has perplexed her so she has changed her whole entire structure of manipulation tactics which I am already on to. They are very intelligent………too bad they will never put it to good use
When the Trojan Horse Psychopath, who was, at that time, installed in my mother’s home as her caregiver, suddenly came up with a new vehicle (after having been turned down by me for a loan to buy one) I started to get suspicious and asked him “Where’d you get the money for the vehicle” and he answered my question by saying “Oh, I have FRIENDS in Texas.”
A few days later when I found out that he had “lied” to me by omission, I decided to have a “come to Jesus meeting” with him about the LIE. He defended himself by saying he didn’t “Lie,” he just stated a TRUE statement in response to my question, as he DID have friends in Texas, therefore he hadn’t lied…he had ONLY deceived me.
I got the dictionary out and looked up deceit which said by way of a explanation “a lie.” He never did “admit” he had “lied” but stated he would not deceive me in the future! Yea, RIGHT!
My mistake at that point, of course, was giving him “another chance”—which he took more than full advantage of. Though my gut told me that his “remorse” was not genuine, I over rode that feeling. My trust in this individual was shattered, but none-the-less I still gave him an opportunity to continue his “con.”
Later, looking through the letters that he and my son exchanged (only the ones FROM my P-son giving him instructions) my P-son said to him “Oh, don’t worry if Mom gets mad at you, Grandma always takes MY side.” Of course my P-son, working in concert with him were “working” my mother to tell her how “abusive” I was to her, how “neglectful” and here this “savior” was there to take care of her every need since I wouldn’t, and I was trying to drive this god sent person away.
He played it up to my mother, and very sweetly told her that he thought even though I had “forgiven” him, that it would be best if he just left—and of course by then he had her hooked, and she BEGGED him to stay! I was sunk from that time forward.
Even the biggest cons are generally made up of a tapestry of small “mundane” acts. When we see dishonesty (lies, manipulation, rules breaking, entitlement, even conning on a minor scale) I think unless it is something “big” like bank robbery, we tend to gloss over it and be “nice” and “polite” when in truth, the situation doesn’t deserve Emily Post-like etiquette. It deserves FIRM boundaries.
Not to be overly critical or second guess your judgments, Steve, but you did let him manipulate you into the sandwich, rather than a FIRM NO because of YOUR “discomfort” in eating in front of him. So from HIS persective, he “won” the round in his mind at least. A small “victory” over you because of your training in politeness (Insert your mother’s voice here) “It’s not polite to eat in front of others who don’t have anything, Stevie, you need to learn to share.” LOL
Good post and great perspective on the P-like tendencies.
I disagree with others about the sandwich. I think Steve made an informed choice in that situation, knowing that the S would perceive it as winning. I too would have felt uncomfortable eating in front of a hungry person, no matter if it had been Jack the Ripper. The way I interpreted the situation was that Steve was aware of what was going on in the interaction and made a choice that was most beneficial to himself, which was to deal with the hunger, and in line with his own sense of propriety (not eating in front of someone). I think he actually “won” because he was true to himself. The fact that the sociopath thought he won was inconsequential. Steve didn’t care how the sociopath perceived it. I think that’s very smart not to get caught in trying to “win”. Otherwise, you have stooped to the level of playing the sociopath’s game. The idea is not to beat the sociopath, but to take care of yourself, which is what Steve did.
Steve: I have a tangential question. The medication this guy is on — what does it do? Does he feel it emasculates him, and therefore he has more of a desire to get past you in terms of when he takes the medication?
I guess I’m musing that this might be someone who would have a lower score (PCL-R) than the usual cut-off, but who might have more of a drive to play these games because you’re the “cop” and his masculinity is at stake. In other words, are his P tendencies exacerbated by the situation?
In my experience, the really dangerous ones will do those tricks in ANY situation, regardless of whether they stand to gain — just because that’s what they do. They don’t need any additional motivation to do all those power trips.
Ox-D: I remember your story of “friends in Texas” from a comment awhile back. On this issue of lying, I think we should look at the context of the lie.
If you ask me, “How are you?” I might have had a horrible day, full of intrusive thoughts and self-blame. I may not want any focus on me at all, so I’ll say, “I’ve been up to my eyeballs; how are you?” There’s a “nothing” answer for you. It means, I don’t care to reveal myself and I just threw up a smokescreen.
Your Trojan Horse seems to have been adept at playing “You can’t catch me. You ain’t got nuthin’ on me.” He sounds dangerous, but more cunning than some of these dysfunctional creeps. His lying sounds “clever.”
The P I was involved with would just say, “I’m an engineer. See that cell tower? I put up that one, and all those other ones as far as you can see!” I later learned he might have gotten through one semester of college, but that never got in the way of his posturing. That sort of lying isn’t even clever! “I was a Navy Seal . . .” How many of us have heard that one?
Steve Becker
Loved it!
How it shows us all how hard it is to even have a simple conversation with someone like T. Trying to have a conversation with my ex was draining both mentally and emotionally. I saw it like trying to open up a brand new jar of Jelly. How sometimes we will struggle with it and then finally give up and ask someone else to “try” to open it. Having T or others like him that will give only half-truths or even flat out lies. How manipulation is always part of the game plan. It is more or less second nature to them. Offering to pay for “the sandwich” part of a game. Telling you he takes the meds all the time but really only 5 days a week again part of the game. Bringing up the “do we have to meet every week” routine and then saying “T: Look, I don’t care if we keep meeting”I’ve got no problem with you. I just don’t think I need it. It’s a waste of time.” When in fact it very very important to him or he wouldn’t keep bringing up the “ideal”…
No wonder when our relationships finally ends we are so “drained” and emotionally dead after we kept trying and trying to open up the damn jar of Jelly!
Stargazer, on your comment, yes, Steve was aware of what he was doing (being manipulated) most of what I said was tongue-in-cheek (see the LOL)
Rune, I totally agree that the Trojan Horse Psychopath is dangerous. He is the one who tried to kill my son C when C found out that the THP was having an affair with his wife. He is also a 3 x sex offender (incarcerated) for kids 9, 11, and 14 (I think in earlier posts I may have said 8 yrs old, but my son C corrected me) anyway, he is VERY HIGH RISK VIOLENT. He got out on parole (against my expressed consent) December 5th. I have been in contact with his PO and made it plain, IN WRITING, that WHEN he reoffends that I will be on the capitol steps screaming their names (the parole board’s) I had a long conversation with the head of the state parole board and I have no doubt that he wants to keep me placated, and I wrote a long letter after a telphone call to his PO.
By some gtlitch, because only one of his crimes was committed in ARkansas his 20+ year history of sexual offenses, robbery and violence is not “held against him” in this state, so he got a level 2 (not likely to reoffend) even though in Texas he was a level 4 (A HIGH RISK VIOLENCE) and he has a professional documented diagnosis as ASPD.
I also know what you mean about “social untruths” that are really just “polite” ways of saying “Nun’ya” or “I don’t want to talk” or just exchanges with people who are not important in our lives. Even if I was coming back from a cancer treatment, knowing I was going to die in a year, if I met someone on an elevator and they said “How are you today” I would respond “Just fine thank you”
I have a standing joke too that I use with people I know a bit better but don’t want to talk to in any depth. I will respond with “I’m doing just FINE, but I’ll get over it.” LOL It always gets a chuckle and no serious prying into my life.
What James said about us being so “drained and emotionally dead” is so true. I have never been so TIRED in my entire life. I couldn’t shut my brain down to regather strength or rest. I was so physically TIRED from the stress I could hardly put one foot in front of another for months. Even when I was caring for my stepfather when he had cancer and seldom had more than a couple of hours sleep in a row, I was not that tired.
Strength is not just “emotional strength” or “physical strength” if you use up one, you use up the other, they are the SAME, we only have so much energy and it is finite. If we use it in the STRESS, just coping, or trying to, we go down hill rapidly and deplete our stores of reserve strength.
I find that I am FINALLY getting to a point that I have some reserve stength to call upon if there is something that bothers me, and though I may over react a BIT, it is quickly taken care of and my emotions and brain come back to center quickly. Someting that in the past would wind me up for a month, is now over in a matter of minutes or hours.
Ooooh, Oxy, I miss so many nuances when I read posts too fast! 🙂
Dr. Hare recounts a couple conversations with sociopaths in his book Without Conscience, Dr. Steve, that are eerily familiar to what you just recounted.
What this also reminds us is that these people do this to therapists & doctors and unfortunately not all of them are as savvy as you. And therefore they get away with it.
So many of the chats and conversations we post that Cyberpaths have with their targets on our site go this same way!! The victims end the conversation before they realize that no real progress was made, nothing was learned that they needed to know and the Cyberpath somehow came out ahead again. Their use of Cognitive Dissonance and their sheer cheek in unbelievable but so so so hard for the average person to catch!
Excellent post.
Ox Drover,
“A few days later when I found out that he had “lied” to me by omission, I decided to have a “come to Jesus meeting” with him about the LIE. He defended himself by saying he didn’t “Lie,” he just stated a TRUE statement in response to my question, as he DID have friends in Texas, therefore he hadn’t lied”he had ONLY deceived me.”
That used to happen quite a bit with the N ministry leader who I associated with a few years ago. He was a master of slander, but he never said anything that wasn’t true. This was a matter of tremendous pride for him. It also helped him to avoid getting caught. Even when someone would realize they’d been misled, and trace their confusion back to him, they’d have to privately admit that they had not been lied to. He had given them misleading snippets of truth, and they’d filled in the missing puzzle piece with a lie that seemed to fit. Does that make sense? It’s the best way I can explain it right now.
I started to catch on, because he had to think a lot about what he was saying and conveying with his voice, posture and expressions in order to pull this off. He’d get this blank, faraway expression on his face as he constructed the complex web of half-truths that would lead the dupe/s to conclude a falsehood.
He’s slick. He’s got a large, affluent congregation that still believes he’s a tragic and heroic martyr who deserves their unwavering financial and social support. He and his wife are unrepentant scam artists, but that’s hard to see unless you’ve actually caught them in a theft and/or smear campaign.