Published on 12, July, 2020
This is no attempt to demonise anyone who may use this. I don't know how common it is within autism spaces anyway, but I know that I've felt this sentiment before many times. If you (friend, family member etc) are not there for me when I'm struggling, then I find it difficult to accept you being there when I'm not.
On the flip side, I know that people's worst can be difficult to tolerate sometimes, depending on what it is. My all-time worst was, on the one hand, not something that I could have feasibly expected people to understand or stick with me through, but it was still extremely isolating.
My concern is that this phrase has been much (over) used within popular internet culture without a context of instance, timeframe or consideration of the necessary boundaries of the other person (the one in front of the other who is not currently at their best) to keep themselves well too - both for their own health and in order to enable them to also "be there" for the unwell person's recovery journey.
In those times when someone is really unwell; it can be tough on both parties (although it is understandably difficult for the unwell person to think about that at the time of crisis) - hence my list of the three parameters as they relate to the person trying their best to be supportive:
Instance - maybe, the episode of the unwell person is not an isolated event and during this particular iteration; the well person (who might otherwise be supportive of them) is just too worn down and burnt out (this time) to attempt bringing so much of themselves to the task of being supportive ... without also risking it being to their own detriment. To "be there" when they are better able (in the long term) - they need to act in support of their own vital boundaries ...and take themselves out of the situation to regroup.
Timeframe - there is a big difference between someone not being able to be supportive of an unwell person during one event, as opposed to when; over a considerable period of time: they have been supportive - but now they themselves have additional stressors of their own / they are physically unwell / their workplace is being extra demanding / they have other caring responsibilities / they have exhausted their personal resources of what it takes to properly "be there" for the unwell person seeking their support ...they now need a break / some respite for their own wellbeing.
Boundaries - nobody can sustain "give, give, give" to another person without their own personal boundaries being deployed and respected as required - both people becoming unwell is not the reasonable outcome.
In summary, I am not in favour of the popular phrase as it is too lightweight to be applicable in all scenarios - even when we have been unwell and perhaps felt let down at the time by someone we trust to lookout for us when we need help - somewhere along our recovery journey, there needs to be some space to acknowledge that our supportive person is only human too.
It sounds all too easy to say; that there should be neither shame, nor embarrassment, not point scoring, nor judgement applied ...in either direction. After all, it is likely both parties are doing their level best in challenging circumstances. Both parties are to be commended for their endeavour.