What do we Owe to Others? On Boundaries, Empathy, and Overgiving

Jasmine had just sat down to eat when the text came in. Her friend Tara was having a rough week yet again and wanted to come over to vent. Jasmine hesitated. She was drained from back-to-back work shifts and had been looking forward to a rare evening of rest.

Then another text came:“I don’t want to be alone tonight. You’re the only person I can really talk to.”

Jasmine’s stomach clenched. She wasn’t sure that was true, but now saying no felt cruel. Her thoughts spiraled fast: “She’s going through so much.” “What kind of friend would I be if I said no?” “I’m not even using this night for anything important. Shouldn’t I just give it to her?”

Even as her chest tightened and her stomach churned, she texted back, “Of course, come over.” She shoved her dinner aside, cleared the living room, and braced herself for another night of caretaking she couldn't stop saying yes to.

---

Let's talk about untangling guilt from obligation so you can give with intention, not compulsion.

Sometimes people feel like they owe others their time, resources, or energy, even when it’s not fair or expected. This can happen when someone cares deeply about being a caring person, has high standards of what it would take for themself to be a "good person," or is afraid of causing someone else discomfort by saying "no." Even though this comes from a true place of goodness, it is a form of "drama-triangle" problem-solving.

Entering a drama triangle as the "rescuer" can happen for a number of reasons. Sometimes, folks who are high in traits called antagonism and entitlement can evoke the triangle for us. Other times we have traits like high justice sensitivity, conscientiousness, and agreeableness that we are not managing well. Some others of us become rescuers as an impulse that has helped us survive relationship trauma. In this instance, we don the position both of the victim and the rescuer. We, even unintentionally, treat the person in need as though they might hurt us if we don't give in and accomodate them at our own expense. Lastly, folks who lack a strong sense of self fear what the percepetions and negative emotions of others might mean about them. They can't easily filter out when other people's opinions are inaccurate or self-serving and err on the side of people-pleasing to feel good to counter internal doubts that tell them they might not be good.

Taking on too much responsibility for other people’s feelings or problems isn't healthy and will cause us to become stressed, anxious, or feel guilty all the time. So many of my clients in this position say to me, "I don't have a straightforward way of determining what I actually do and do not owe to others. I need some sort of different process or structure for my brain to grab onto." Together, we embark on a process of adding to their internal moral code their answer to the question, "what do I actually owe to others?"

The good news is, we don't have to start from scratch in our thinking. For centuries, various scholars and thinkers have labored endlessly to provide such frameworks. Learning about these different ways of thinking can help us set healthy boundaries and treat ourselves and others with dignity, kindness, and respect at the same time.

Scanlon’s Contractualism

According to Scanlon, we do not owe to others anything that could be "reasonably rejected" by anyone who is focused on fairness, equality, and deep respect for human feelings and reasons. To decide what is "owed" in a moment, someone might follow this process:

• Identify their reasoning behind saying yes or no. This becomes a "rule."

• Ask "if I applied this rule to any reasonable person in the same situation, would they find it fair if they had to follow it too?"

Scanlon's Contractualism avoids people-pleasing and instead finds principles that anyone could see as justifiable if everyone held to a principle is treated as equals with equal worth. This framework is very helpful for folks who are navigating one-sided relationships or relatiosnhips where others manipulate their sense of morality.

In Jasmine's case, her reason for saying "yes" to her friend is based on a "rule" she has made for herself that says “Friends should always say yes to avoid hurting each other’s feelings." This "rule" could reasonably be rejected because accepting it would mean that there are some situations in which erroded consent and unfair pressure are OK.

Boundaries Theory & Systems Theory

According to Cloud & Townsend (1992) we have a "zone of responsibility" that asks us to think of ourselves as responsible to others but not for others. Murray Bowen asserted it is healthy to be self-differentiated. This means we must develop the ability to stay connected to others while maintaining our own emotional boundaries and sense of self. Bowen viewed emotional over-responsibility (taking on others’ anxiety or choices) as a sign of fusion rather than healthy interdependence. Brene Brown later asserted that poor emotional boundaries with others causes shame to accumulate which contributes to an underlying belief, "something is wrong with me."

In Jasmine’s example, her “zone” includes deciding whether she has the energy or desire to help and communicating this clearly and compassionately. Her friend’s potential disappointment would fall outside that zone because it’s part of the friend’s emotional landscape to manage. This perspective is particularly helpful for folks who take on excess responsibility in relationships

Virtue Ethics

In Aristotle’s view, moral maturity avoids rules and perfection and forms good habits that help us live well and act with integrity. Therefore, what we owe to each other must be based on balance and not an extreme. For example, to be "generous" means we must neither be stingy nor over-giving. Aquinas later expanded this by framing virtue as a skill of aligning reason, emotion, and behavior toward what is good. Over time, we build stability, self-trust, and inner freedom by:

• Shifting guilt over flaws to appreciation of personal growth.

• Normalizing mistakes because life is about developing not pass/failing.

Through this lens, we could say that Jasmine’s over-giving shows that her virtue of kindness is out of balance. Virtue Ethics helps her ask, “What does a balanced kindness look like?” rather than, “Am I a good or bad friend for saying no?” By finding that midpoint, she moves toward eudaimonia. This means self-respect, integrity, and sustainable care for others.

Moral Psychology

Philosopher Peter Singer argues that while we can extend concern to anyone, doing so wisely means recognizing that our resources (time, attention, emotional energy) are finite. Thus, understanding who is in our "circle of moral concern" is important. Psychologists Haidt and Fiske add that empathy evolved for cooperation within smaller groups. Without boundaries it can become overwhelming or misplaced. In other words, not every feeling of concern equals a moral duty to act. Compassion can exist without personal responsibility, and discernment about where to invest care is itself an ethical skill. This means:

• We are best at helping those we are prepared and able to help.

• Boundaried empathy is required so that care is sustainable rather than collapsing.

• Understanding that emotional reactivity is not the same as moral duty.

Jasmine may feel guilty refusing a favor to a friend if she mistakes these requests for moral claims. The Circle of Moral Concern helps her see that while kindness toward her friend is valuable, her own depletion carries more weight because she is ultimately more responsible to herself than anyone else. Recognizing this lets Jasmine act with measured empathy rather than automatic guilt.

Rights Based

Philosophers like Rawls and Nussbaum argue that morality and justice are rooted in protecting the equal rights and capabilities of all people. This means we treat others as ends and not means. When we treat others as means, we regard them as ways to gain outcomes like approval, control, comfort, or absolution of guilt. When we treat others as ends, we regard them as autonomous beings entitled to dignity, goals, and self-determination that are independent of how interacting with them benefits us. This requires mutual recognition - an identification of what rights looks like when both you and the other person are equal persons at the same time. Respecting your own rights is paramount. When we assume everyone else's needs are more important than our own, we are violating our own moral standing as equal participants in justice. Here are some self-guiding questions:

• “Do I have the same right to rest, choice, and boundaries that they have to ask for help?”

• “Would saying yes here respect both our dignity — or only theirs?”

If Jasmine says yes to her friend only to avoid tension, she’s treating herself and her friend as a means to maintain her own comfort. If her friend pressures her into saying yes, without regard for Jasmine's needs, the friend is treating Jasmine as a means to her own convenience. Through mutual recognition, both people are ends in themselves. That means Jasmine can care about her friend’s feelings and her own limits at the same time. Acting from that stance respects both parties’ humanity and ensures that care remains just rather than self-erasing.

Cognitive Psychology

Beck observed that “should” thoughts (“I should help,” “I shouldn’t say no,” “I should always be kind”) often create unnecessary internal guilt and pressure. He noted that these thoughts arise from perfectionistic or moralistic thinking patterns and not genuine care. Hayes identified that actions taken from a place of "I should" are from internal coercion rather than rooted in authentic values. Values are flexible and meaningful and not obligatory or shame-driven. Here are some guiding thoughts:

• “If I’m ruminating, I’m probably obeying a ‘should,’ not a value.”

• “Compliance and empathy feel similar, but only one honors both people’s dignity.”

• “Authenticity expresses morality better than compliance ever can.”

• “Values-based choice is healthier than guilt-driven reaction.”

  
  

When Jasmine feels pressure to say yes, she can ask: “Do I truly value being generous right now, or do I just feel like I ‘should’ to avoid guilt or judgment?” If it’s a “should,” the behavior will bring temporary calm while breeding long-term shame and resentment. Acting from authentic value (“I want to be reliable, but I also need rest to stay healthy”) honors both self-respect and compassion.

Restorative Justice

In restorative frameworks (e.g., Māori whanaungatanga, Navajo hozho), justice is defined as the restoration balance, reciprocity, and harmony where there is harm. Responding to each other in relationships with self-erasure and over-functioning arguably disrupts a relationship just as wrongdoing does because the relational field becomes out of equilibrium. Restoring one-sided relationships requires truth-telling, boundary repair, and reestablishing mutual accountability. Here are some skills that guide this way of thinking:

• Truth-telling: Name the imbalance honestly. “I’ve been taking on more than is fair, and it’s left me drained.”

• Repair: Re-establish fair exchanges of care, or redefining boundaries toward healthy interdependence.

• Reintegration: Return to relationship (if appropriate) on new, equitable terms.

Jasmine asserting a boundary is an effort to make the relationship more fair, it is not a punishment to her friend. Restorative thinking helps her shift from “I’m bad for saying no” to “I’m helping us have a more just, balanced relationship.” In her case, saying "no" can operate as a form of repair through truth, fairness, and reintegration under healthier terms.

Kapwa (Filipino Indigenous Psychology)

In the Filipino Indigenous worldview, kapwa means seeing another person as part of oneself. Developed by psychologist Virgilio Enriquez within Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino Psychology) as a response to Western overemphasis on individualism, kapwa teaches that connection and selfhood coexist. Through this, we maintain integrity through relationship, not against it. This perspective obligates us to act with concern for others, but within the balance of harmony and respect and not through guilt, shame, or forced self-sacrifice. Here are some guiding thoughts:

• "What choice will validate relational closeness without collapsing into enmeshment or guilt?"

• "How can I view my boundaries as acts of mutual respect, not rejection?"

• "How can I view true empathy as grounded in equality which is a care that honors both self and other?"

When Jasmine feels torn between her own needs and a friend’s expectations, kapwa invites her to see care as a shared responsibility and not a one-sided sacrifice. Saying no to preserve her energy isn’t a withdrawal from connection, it’s her part of maintaining a just and balanced relationship. By honoring her limits, she’s also preserving the health of the shared self between them.

Bringing it all Together

At the heart of all these frameworks is the same truth: morality and compassion are about balance, fairness, and mutual dignity. Whether viewed through philosophy, psychology, or Indigenous wisdom, what we owe to others cannot come at the expense of what we owe to ourselves (or others via the shared self). Healthy giving happens when care is offered freely, not extracted through guilt or fear. The ability to say no is a declaration that love that is strongest when it honors both people’s humanity at once.

When Jasmine eventually learns to pause before saying yes she’s becoming ethically grounded. She is learning that goodness is not measured by how much she gives, but by how truthfully she lives. Acting from fairness, authenticity, and respect allows her generosity to become sustainable and meaningful. In the end, Jasmine’s growth shows us that moral life is not a constant sacrifice. She is learning that the ongoing practice of keeping relationships, including the one with ourselves, in right and honest balance.

Important Note: The information shared here is for educational purposes and is not intended to replace professional mental health advice, diagnosis, or treatment. If you’re facing challenges with your mental health, please reach out to us or another a licensed mental health professional who can support you. The stories in our posts are fictional and created to help explain important concepts. They are not based on client cases. Protecting the privacy and dignity of those we work with is central to our practice, and we do not use client experiences in our content.