Ep 4. Feel Guilty All the Time? You're Taking Too Much Pie.

Most people think responsibility is black and white: Either it's your fault or it isn't. But that framing is too simple, and for a lot of people (particularly those with a trauma history) it's causing unnecessary guilt.

In this episode, I introduce the responsibility pie, a cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) concept I use regularly in my therapy room. It's a framework for figuring out not just whether you're responsible for an outcome, but what amount of responsibility belongs to you.

Owning responsibility is only half the equation, the other half is owning the right amount.

This is the final episode in my responsibility series. If you've ever felt like everything is your fault, or found yourself absorbing blame that was never really yours, you'll find this helpful.

• Read the Transcript

  Over the last couple of episodes we've established two things. First, that understanding someone's pain doesn't excuse the harm they caused. Second, that your intentions -- however good -- don't get you off the hook if you cause a problem. I stand by both of those arguments. I think they're solid.

  However, after sitting with the last episode on responsibility and intentions, I noticed there are some situations where the intentions argument starts to feel a little shaky. I want to address those directly, because I think the answer might just fundamentally change how you think about responsibility.

  This is the final episode in what has turned into a series on responsibility. I didn't intend it to be a series, but it turns out responsibility is super complicated. Who'd have thunk it? So this is the last one, and then we're moving on to different topics.

  Last episode I made the case that your intentions don't determine your level of responsibility for an outcome. If your behaviour contributed to harm, you own that regardless of what you meant. I stand by it -- but I did anticipate that some of you might come away with a few scenarios rattling around in your head that didn't quite fit. And I actually agree with you.

  The first scenario sounds something like: okay Helen, but what about when someone completely overreacts? My behaviour was pretty minor and they responded in a way that was way out of proportion. Am I really responsible for that?

  The second is the flip side: what about when a small error leads to a really serious consequence? Like the nurse who makes a minor dosage mistake and a patient dies. Is she a hundred percent responsible for that outcome? She had good intentions, but it still happened -- so it's on her, right?

  These are genuinely good questions. And to be clear, they're not actually about intentions anymore. They're about proportion. That means the previous two episodes don't address this problem. We need a different framework -- and that's what today is about.

  The way most people think about responsibility is very black and white. Either I caused this or I didn't. It's my fault or it's yours.

  The reality is that most outcomes are not the product of one person's actions. They're the product of multiple people, multiple decisions, multiple circumstances -- all interacting with each other over time.

  When you flatten all of that into a single question of whose fault it is, you're not actually getting to the truth of what happened. You're turning a five-dimensional reality into a two-dimensional conclusion. It's misleading, it's inaccurate, and it can cause a lot of unnecessary distress.

  So the question I want to offer instead is not "who is responsible" but: what actually contributed to this outcome, and what proportion of that genuinely belongs to me?

  This is a favourite tool of mine that comes from CBT -- it's called the Responsibility Pie. I use it all the time with clients.

  The idea is that you imagine the entire situation or outcome as a pie. The whole pie represents 100% of what contributed to the result. Most situations involve multiple people and factors, and each gets a slice proportionate to their actual contribution to what happened.

  So if I determine that 25% of a situation is my responsibility, I cut out that quarter and serve myself that piece. The rest isn't mine. Other people can have it. This quarter's mine. The rest is not.

  Let me give you a concrete example. Coming back to the nurse who makes a small dosage error and a patient dies as a result. The question of whether she's responsible seems straightforward on the surface -- she made the error and the patient died, so it's her fault. But when you map that outcome onto the pie, things look a lot more nuanced.

  Let's say the medication chart hadn't been updated properly by other staff -- there's a slice. The hospital is chronically understaffed and everyone is stretched beyond reasonable limits -- there's another slice belonging to hospital management. Maybe there were poor systems in place around double-checking doses -- another slice. Maybe she was interrupted multiple times while preparing the medication and lost track -- another slice.

  By the time you've accounted for all of these contributing factors, her slice is considerably smaller than the whole pie. Her error was the final link in the chain, but it wasn't the only link. Pretending otherwise is unhelpful to everyone.

  The nurse still needs to own her slice fully and without excuses. But her slice is not 100%. She doesn't get the whole pie -- it's not hers.

  And let's really sit with that for a moment. How different does that feel? If she's 35% responsible, she gets a slice proportionate to 35% of the outcome. Compare that to "it's all your fault, you get the whole pie." That feels really different, doesn't it? This is so important.

  One thing worth flagging before you go applying this everywhere: before you start dividing the pie at all, it's worth asking whether your behaviour is even in the pie to begin with.

  Sometimes, if you're being genuinely honest with yourself, your slice is actually zero -- because your actions didn't cause or contribute to the outcome in any legitimate way. It is so easy and really common to feel guilty in situations where your guilt simply isn't warranted.

  That usually happens because somebody is actively blaming you, or because you've been treated like that in the past and you've learned to blame yourself for things that aren't your fault.

  The pattern I encounter most often in trauma therapy is not people avoiding responsibility. It's people drowning in it.

  These are people who have been carrying slices of pie that were never theirs for so long that it has never even occurred to them that a) it doesn't belong to them, and b) they can put it down.

  Because if you grew up in an environment where responsibility was placed on you repeatedly, unfairly, and in unwarranted and unreasonable ways, that becomes your template for how accountability works.

  Someone handed you the whole pie when you were a child and you took it -- because that's what you learned to do. If the adults around you are handing me this pie, it must be mine. What other possibility could there be? Children don't think of that. Of course they don't. And they shouldn't have to.

  I spent the first two episodes of this series on the people who under-claim their slice -- who use empathy, context, and good intentions to sidestep accountability, and why that's such a problem. It is a problem. But I want to name the other side clearly, because it's just as damaging and in my experience considerably more common, at least with the people I work with.

  When one person in a relationship consistently refuses their slice -- even though that slice belongs to them -- someone else ends up absorbing it. It has to go somewhere, right?

  If you're in a friendship, a relationship, or a family where someone never takes their slice, and you don't have the context or framework to understand what's happening, you're probably going to assume that slice belongs to you. Over time this becomes internalised. It becomes a core belief in the way you think about things. Maybe it really is all my fault. Maybe I really am the problem.

  That's not a reflection of reality. That's what happens when the pie gets divided out of proportion over a really long period of time. You are getting way too much pie. It's not yours.

  Accurate responsibility is genuinely an act of care in both directions.

  As I talked about in the previous episodes, taking responsibility is empowering and genuinely good for us. It's an act of self-care. It benefits our relationships and it enables us to repair the problems we've contributed to. If something isn't on you, there's nothing you can do about it -- and that's a very powerless position to be in.

  Accurate responsibility not only helps you, it helps the other people too -- because they need to take theirs. And I don't want the whole pie. Nobody should want the whole pie if it isn't theirs.

  When you find yourself in a situation where responsibility is feeling murky -- maybe you're feeling really guilty over something, maybe you feel guilty all the time, maybe someone is insisting that something is entirely your fault -- map it out on the pie.

  A few signs that something is off: someone insisting something is entirely your fault is a red flag. A hundred percent responsibility is a very rare situation. The kind of scenario that would genuinely warrant it is something like someone deciding completely unprovoked to walk up and hit a stranger with a brick. That's on them entirely. That is extreme and outlandish -- but it illustrates the point. If someone is insisting that something is entirely your fault, or that's how you're feeling, map it out.

  Here's how:

  Write down every factor that contributed to the outcome. Real causal factors -- not emotional ones. Facts only. Ask yourself: would a judge consider that a contributing factor? Give each factor a percentage. How big a slice does it get?

  Then you get to look at the whole picture from an honest account of reality, rather than just believing your guilt or someone else's version of events. It's a quick and genuinely useful reframe for navigating feelings of disproportionate guilt.

  And remember -- if you do have a slice, own it. Taking responsibility is genuinely one of the coolest things you can do and it is so good for you. Acknowledge it. Apologise where that's called for. Do what you can to repair it. Having a smaller slice doesn't mean you skip it -- a genuine response is still required.

  But once you've owned your actual slice, the rest of the pie is not yours to carry. You're allowed to put it down. Don't be greedy. Don't take pie that isn't yours.

  So that's the series. We've covered why empathy without accountability doesn't hold up, why intentions don't determine responsibility, and now why taking the correct amount of responsibility matters -- not too much, not too little. A Goldilocks situation. We want just the right slice of pie.

  Taking on more than your share isn't noble. You're actually preventing other people from owning what's theirs. You're not responsible for everything that's ever gone wrong around you. Some of you really need to hear that, and you need to hear it more than once.

  Remember the pie. Map it out.

  Thank you so much for listening. If this resonated, share it with someone who needs to hear it. Subscribe, and sign up to the mailing list -- you'll hear about everything coming up. Send your questions and ideas for future topics through the website. I'd love to know what you want me to explore next.

  Take care, and I'll see you next time.