DBT Skills — Adult Group

Options for Asking and Saying No

How firmly to ask, how firmly to refuse, and what to do when the answer is still no.

Welcome

8 to 10 minAbout today

DEAR MAN tells you what to say. GIVE FAST tells you how to say it. Options tells you how firmly. The skill is the dial: how strong an ask the situation calls for, how strong a no the situation calls for, and which factors push the dial up or down. Most failed asks are not failures of words or manner. They are failures of intensity — too soft when firm was needed, too firm when soft would have worked.

Today also covers the other half, which Linehan's worksheet leaves implicit: what to do when you have calibrated cleanly, asked at the right intensity, and the answer is still no. That moment is where a lot of skills training falls apart. The ask was good; the response was a refusal; the question is whether you can receive it without collapsing into shame, escalating into willfulness, or punishing yourself behaviorally for having asked at all.

Confidentiality

What's shared here stays here. Names, stories, details, all of it is protected. The only exception is safety.

You can pass at any point. No explanation needed. If something doesn't fit right now, say "pass" and we move on.

Opening

5 to 7 minLand in the room first

Share your name, then take these two. Pass on either. The point is to arrive before we start working.

What's alive for you today?

Anything you walked in carrying. Body, mood, weather, what happened on the way here, what is loud in your head. One word counts.

What are some relationship dynamics going on for you right now?

Partner, family, friend, coworker, clinician, anyone taking up real estate in your week. One or two relationships, a sentence each.

Bridge in

8 to 10 minThree questions toward the skill

These ask where Options applies in your own week. Take them one at a time. You can pass on any.

Name a recent ask where you were unsure how firm to be.

Examples: redrafting a message multiple times, postponing a phone call, or deciding not to ask after considering it. All of these count.

Name a no you received recently that affected you more than expected.

Examples: a declined invitation, a partner saying not tonight, a clinician without an open slot. The actual situation was small, but your response was larger.

In the family you grew up in, what happened when people asked for things directly?

Were direct requests typically granted, ignored, refused, or criticized? How were softer requests treated? The pattern from then usually carries into how you ask now.

Facilitator note

Three patterns typically show up in this go-round: the chronic under-asker, the chronic over-asker, and the no-collapser. Listen for which one is loudest in the room. The teaching weights toward the missing side: if most members under-ask, spend longer on the asking-side dial and on rights/self-respect factors. If most members over-ask, spend longer on the relationship and timing factors. If most members collapse on a no, spend longer on the receiving-no section in the dials tab.

Orientation 5 to 7 min

Where this skill sits on the map

Options is the calibration skill in Linehan's Interpersonal Effectiveness module. It pairs with DEAR MAN (the content of the ask) and GIVE FAST (the manner of the ask) to complete the picture: what to say, how to say it, how firmly. Before we work the dials and the factors, three quick orientations on where the skill fits.

Target hierarchy

Linehan ranks behaviors so the work has a clear priority. Options sits in the quality-of-life tier alongside DEAR MAN and GIVE FAST, since the skill addresses the chronic mis-calibration that erodes the conditions of a working life without immediately threatening it. The earlier tiers have to be stable enough to allow the slower work of weighing factors and reading a relationship, which is what Options asks for.

1 Life-threatening behavior
2 Therapy-interfering behavior
3 Quality-of-life-interfering behavior Options works here
4 Skill deficit
5 Goals and values

Regulation scale

Options is a deliberate thinking skill, which means it needs the prefrontal cortex online and a working read of the other person's situation. Below -2 the body is in collapse and the factors will not be readable, since the read of the relationship and the read of capability both depend on a regulated nervous system. Above 5 the activation overruns the calibration, and the dial drifts to whichever default your family trained. Outside this band, run a body-first skill — TIPP, paced breathing, ACCEPTS — until the system returns to the working zone, then bring the calibration in.

Working band: -2 to +5

−10

−5

+10

Shutdown Collapse Window Activation Elevation

Polyvagal-informed regulation scale. Options sits across the window of tolerance and into low activation, where the social-engagement system is online and the ten factors can be read without being colored by physiological state.

Diary card

Between sessions, Options gets tracked the way every other skill is tracked: a yes or no for whether you used it that day, an effectiveness rating from 0 to 7, and a one-line note on the calibration. The point is the noticing. Even a "no" with a one-line note about why the ask did not get made is useful data for the next session.

Day	Used Options	Effectiveness 0–7	Note (one line)
Mon	Yes	5	Asked partner at 4. Got a real yes. Self-respect held.
Tue	No	—	Sat on the email to my advisor. Knowledge of facts not ready yet.
Wed	Yes	3	Got a no from the dietitian. Calibration was right. Collapsed for 30 min after.

A "yes" at low effectiveness is more useful than a "no" with no note. The yes shows where the calibration was off; the no with a note shows what blocked the ask. Linehan's standard is 0 to 7, though some clinicians use 0 to 5.

Teaching

8 to 10 minThree failure modes the skill is built for

Linehan built Options to solve three predictable failures. The first two are the calibration failures most people associate with assertiveness training. The third is the one that gets less explicit treatment in the original worksheet but shows up in every group: the collapse that follows a no.

Asking too softly when firm was needed

The ask comes out hedged, apologetic, half-retracted before the sentence ends. Sorry to bother you, never mind if it's a hassle, totally fine either way. The other person, often genuinely willing, hears that the request is not real and does not respond as if it were. The asker walks away with evidence that asking does not work, when the actual evidence is that asking softly did not work in a situation that would have responded to a clearer ask.

The internal logic is usually about protecting the relationship from the burden of the ask. The unspoken belief is that a firmer ask would damage the connection. In practice, the half-retracted ask damages it more, since the other person now has to manage the asker's anxiety on top of considering the request.

Asking too firmly when soft would have worked

Years of unmet need pressurize the language. The ask comes out late, loud, with the cumulative weight of every previous unsuccessful ask in it. The other person hears an accusation rather than a request, defends or counter-attacks, and the conversation turns into a fight. Even if the original ask is granted afterward, what gets remembered is the fight.

A common variant in DBT-trained patients: asking firmly and framing the firmness in the language of skills. I have a right to ask. I'm just being assertive. When the firmness is being used to override a clear no, the skill has been hijacked by willfulness — using the language of self-respect to do work that is actually about not tolerating the answer.

Collapsing on a no

The ask was clean. The calibration was right. The other person said no. The response that follows is not anger ("how could they"), not sadness ("I wanted that"), but a wholesale collapse of self-worth: I shouldn't have asked, I'm too much, I don't deserve anything. The no, which was about the other person's bandwidth or limit, gets converted into a verdict on the self.

In ED recovery, the collapse is often quiet rather than dramatic. No visible affect, no argument. Within hours, the patient has restricted further, exercised compensatorily, or pulled away — performing the punishment that "deserved" the refusal. The behavior is the affect, and it would not show up in a session note unless the clinician asks specifically about the day after the no.

The receiving-a-no work runs through three moves: radical acceptance (this is the situation that exists), unjustified shame check (their no is about them, not a verdict on whether I deserved to want), and the willingness/willfulness flag (am I about to escalate intensity to override their answer). For ED patients, add a fourth: the 24-hour behavioral check.

Why these three are the same problem

All three failures solve the same problem in different directions: the discomfort of being a person in a real situation asking for a real thing the other person might not give, and the discomfort of being a person whose ask did not get the answer it hoped for. Too soft buys relief by hiding the ask. Too firm buys relief by overpowering the answer. Collapse buys relief by punishing the asker. Each move buys momentary comfort at the cost of the ask itself, the relationship, or the asker.

The ten factors are the alternative: a sober read of what the situation actually calls for, before affect colors the calibration in the direction your family of origin trained.

The hypothesis of the skill

Most miscalibrated asks are not really about the ask. They are about the discomfort of having to ask in the first place, and about the discomfort of possibly being told no. The ten factors give you a place to put the discomfort other than into the ask itself. You run the factors before, you ask at the intensity the factors support, and you receive the answer the situation produces — including the answer you did not want.

The dial

15 to 18 minTwo intensity dials, ten factors

Linehan presents the calibration as two parallel scales, one for asking and one for refusing. Each runs from 0 (do not ask / do it without complaint) to 5 (insist firmly / refuse without reconsidering). The ten factors push the dial up or down. Higher intensity is not better. The work is matching the dial to what the situation actually calls for.

Asking dial

0

Do not ask, do not hint

The ask is wrong for the situation, or the relationship cannot hold it.
1

Hint indirectly

Let the topic come up without naming the ask. Useful when the relationship is new or the timing is wrong.
2

Hint openly

Name the topic and let the other person offer, without making the ask explicit.
3

Ask tentatively

State the ask, with room for the other person to decline easily.
4

Ask confidently

State the ask directly, expect a real answer, take a real no.
5

Insist firmly

Hold the ask through resistance. Only used when the factors clearly support it.

Saying-no dial

0

Do it without complaint

Sometimes the right move. Pick this on purpose, not by default.
1

Do it but show preference otherwise

Comply, while letting the other person know your real read.
2

Do it but say you would rather not

Comply with the request, name the cost honestly.
3

Say no tentatively

Decline with room to be talked into it if the other person makes the case.
4

Say no confidently

Decline clearly. Hold the no through one round of pushback.
5

Refuse firmly, do not reconsider

Hold the refusal regardless of pressure. Use when self-respect or safety requires it.

The ten factors are the read. Tap any factor to open the detail. The ten do not need to be run in order, and not every factor applies to every situation, but skipping more than two or three usually means the calibration is being made on affect rather than on a real read.

Capability

Can the other person actually do this? Can you?

If the other person genuinely cannot give what you would ask for, hard asks turn into resentment on both sides. The same in reverse: if you genuinely cannot do what is being asked, a soft yes turns into a broken commitment later. Read capability honestly, not optimistically.

In ED recovery, this is the most miscalibrated factor. The pattern is to overestimate your own capacity (perfectionism), then underestimate the other person's (the burden script). Check both.

Priorities

Which matters most here: the goal, the relationship, or your self-respect?

Linehan ranks three priorities. Sometimes the goal is the point (you need the rent extension, the schedule change, the prescription refill) and you ask firmer. Sometimes the relationship is the point (the goal is replaceable, the person is not) and you ask softer. Sometimes self-respect is the point (the goal does not matter, but the asking does) and you ask cleanly, regardless of outcome.

Naming the priority before the conversation prevents the drift where one priority quietly substitutes for another mid-conversation.

Self-respect

Will asking weakly leave you smaller than you were before?

If asking too softly will reinforce the cognitive structure that your needs are not real, ask firmer than the situation strictly requires. The goal is not the goal in that case. The goal is keeping yourself intact.

Counter-side: if asking too firmly will leave you ashamed of the manner afterward, even if you got the goal, soften the dial.

Rights

Are you owed this? Are they owed something from you?

Some asks are about rights — the paycheck owed, the medical record release, the apology after harm. Rights generally push the dial up. Some refusals are about rights — what is not yours to give, what would cost more than you have. Rights generally push the no dial up too.

Rights are not the same as deserving. Deserving is a separate question. This factor is about whether the request has a legitimate claim on the other person, or whether their request has one on you.

Authority

Are you the right person to ask? Are they the right person to ask of?

If you have no authority in the situation, asking firmly often produces a no that is not really about you, and you spend self-respect on a calibration that was wrong from the start. If the other person has no authority either, your ask cannot land regardless of intensity. Read the org chart, the family system, the legal structure.

Common error: asking the parent who cannot say yes for the thing only the other parent can grant. Common error: asking the friend who has no say for the thing the partner controls.

Relationship

Is the ask in proportion to what this relationship can hold?

Different relationships hold different weights. A request that lands cleanly with a partner of ten years can rupture a friendship of three months. The factor is not whether the ask is reasonable, but whether the relationship can carry a reasonable ask at this level of intensity.

New relationships, or repairing ones, can carry less weight than the asker often estimates. Old, stable relationships can carry more than the asker often dares.

Give and take

What is the running balance between the two of you?

If you have been giving consistently and asking rarely, the relationship can usually hold a firmer ask. If you have been asking consistently and giving rarely, calibrate down or shift the balance first. The accounting does not need to be exact, only honest.

ED-specific pattern: many ED patients run a chronic deficit in their own favor — give constantly, ask almost never — and then ask too softly when the balance would clearly support more.

Homework

Have you actually thought this through?

Asks that have not been thought through tend to fail at the first follow-up question. The other person asks something basic — how long would this take, what would it cost, what happens if X — and the asker realizes the ask is half-formed. Run the homework before the conversation, not during.

Homework is also a respect cue. Asking the supervisor for a schedule change without having reviewed the coverage gaps tells the supervisor the ask is not serious.

Timing

Is this a good moment, for them and for you?

Even a well-calibrated ask fails if the timing is wrong. A parent in the middle of a work crisis, a partner running out the door, a friend who just got hard news. The ask is not wrong; the moment is. Timing does not mean waiting forever. It means waiting until the next reasonable window, then asking cleanly.

Counter-pattern: using bad timing as an excuse to never ask. If every moment is wrong, the real issue is somewhere else.

Knowledge of facts

Do you have what you need to know to be asking this?

Asks made from incomplete information tend to ask for the wrong thing. The roommate is angry, but the actual issue is not what you assumed. The dietitian declined the change, but you misread the reason. Find out what you do not know first, then calibrate.

Knowledge of facts is the factor most easily skipped under affect. The urge to ask now, before the next wave of anxiety, drowns out the part that would have asked better.

Receiving the no

What to do with the answer you did not want

The Options worksheet ends at the moment the ask gets answered. The clinical work continues for a few minutes after that, and those few minutes are where most of the skill fails or holds. Four moves, in order.

Name the no as data, not verdict

The no is about their situation: their bandwidth, their limit, their authority, their priorities. It is not a verdict on whether your want was legitimate. Reality check, said out loud or in your head: they said no. that means they cannot or will not. it does not mean I was wrong to want.

Run the unjustified shame check

Shame is justified only when the action would, if known, cause rejection by a group whose acceptance you need. Asking a friend something they decline to give does not meet the criterion. The shame that follows the no is almost always running on an old training, not on the present situation. Label it as unjustified, then run opposite action: do not hide, do not apologize for having asked, do not pull away.

Check willingness against willfulness

Willingness is doing what the situation calls for, including accepting an answer that did not go your way. Willfulness is the urge to override the answer because it was not the one you wanted. After a no, the willfulness move shows up as: escalating intensity, repeating the ask in a different form, framing the escalation as advocacy. Catch the move before it leaves your mouth. The question to ask yourself: am I trying to be heard, or am I trying to not have been told no?

Run the 24-hour behavioral check (ED, gambling, self-harm contexts)

For populations where the shame collapse tends to express behaviorally rather than affectively, the work happens in the 24 hours after the no. What did you do with your food, your body, your sleep, your money, your relationships in that window? A no that did not produce visible upset but produced a skipped meal or a betting spike or a withdrawn day is the same shame collapse, just translated. The behavioral check is the one your clinician will ask about next session. Pre-empt it by asking yourself first.

Two rules across the four moves

One. The moves are sequential, not optional. Skipping the shame check usually means the willfulness move gets framed as advocacy; skipping the willingness check usually means the behavior check finds something the night after; skipping the behavior check usually means the clinician finds it next week and the work happens later in less useful ways.

Two. If you cannot run the moves in the moment, run them later. Within the hour is good. Within the day is still useful. Once the collapse has consolidated into a story, it gets harder.

Practice

15 to 18 minThree scenarios, two passes each

Pair up. For each scenario, the first pass runs the wrong calibration — too soft, too firm, or a collapse on the no. The partner names which factor was misread or which post-no move failed. The second pass runs the calibration the situation actually calls for. Then switch.

Scenario 1 · the under-asked schedule conversation

Your partner has been working late every night for two weeks. You want to ask for two real evenings together this week. The partner is not unreasonable. The relationship is solid. You have been carrying more than your share of domestic load while they have been working.

First pass: ask at intensity 1 or 2 (hint indirectly or openly). Second pass: ask at the intensity the factors support.

What the under-asked version sounds like. I know work has been crazy. Maybe one of these nights, if you have time, we could try to do dinner. No pressure, just whenever. The partner, exhausted and grateful for the lack of pressure, says yeah, definitely, soon and the conversation ends without a real plan. Two weeks later, the asker is bitter and the partner is confused.

What the calibrated version sounds like. Run the factors: Capability is fine (the partner can do it). Relationship is strong (long stable). Give-and-take is in the asker's favor (carrying the load). Authority is shared. The factors support intensity 4. I want to ask for two real evenings together this week, including a dinner cooked at home. Pick the nights. I know work is heavy, and this is the ask anyway, because I have been missing you and I want us to do something about it. The ask is specific, the partner has a real proposal to answer.

Scenario 2 · the over-asked family boundary

A parent made comments about your body at the last three family gatherings. The holiday is in two weeks. You want to call ahead and ask that the comments stop. The relationship is complicated. The parent is not malicious, but has not historically responded well to direct pushback.

First pass: ask at intensity 5 (insist firmly, ultimatum). Second pass: ask at the intensity the factors support.

What the over-asked version sounds like. I am calling to tell you that if you make one comment about my body at the holiday, I am leaving and I am not coming back. This has been going on for years. You never listen and I am done. The ask is buried under the threat, the parent is now defending themselves, and the holiday is half-lost two weeks early. Even if the parent complies at the gathering, the relationship has taken damage that will outlast the holiday.

What the calibrated version sounds like. Run the factors: Relationship is loaded (long history, sensitive parent). Timing is workable (two weeks ahead, not at the gathering). Rights support the ask (your body, your right to not be commented on). Homework is partial (no preparation for if the parent gets defensive). The factors support intensity 3 or 4. I want to come to the holiday and there's something I need to ask you about for that to work. The comments about my body at the last few gatherings have been hard for me, and I'm asking that they not happen this time. I'm bringing it up now rather than in the moment, because I would rather have this conversation calmly than have to leave the holiday. The ask is clear, the boundary is real, the parent has a choice.

Scenario 3 · receiving a no without collapse

You asked your dietitian for an adjustment to the meal plan: doing the new fear food twice this week instead of three times. You asked cleanly, at the right intensity. The dietitian declined and held the plan as written. You leave the session.

First pass: run the collapse (shame, escalation, or behavior). Second pass: run the four receiving-a-no moves.

What the collapse version looks like. Internal: I shouldn't have asked. I'm being difficult. She thinks I'm not trying. Behavior over the next 24 hours: a skipped snack, a longer walk, a withdrawn evening, no contact with anyone. By the next session there is a story about the dietitian "not listening" that is mostly about the shame, not about the dietitian. The clinical material gets buried under the framing.

What the four moves look like. One — she said no. That is information about the plan, not about whether I was wrong to ask. Two — the shame check: would the dietitian reject me as a person for having asked? No. The shame is unjustified. Opposite action: stay in contact, do not isolate, do not skip the next session. Three — the willingness check: do I want to argue the no in my head all afternoon? Notice the willfulness, do not act on it. Four — the 24-hour check: eat the planned snacks, keep the walk to its normal length, stay connected. Bring the actual material to the next session, framed as it actually is: I asked for an adjustment, she said no, the no was harder to receive than I expected.

Facilitator note

Insist on the first pass actually running the wrong calibration. Members will want to skip the deliberate-failure version and go straight to the polished one, since the failure version feels uncomfortable to perform aloud. The discomfort is the point: feeling the difference between the two passes is what makes the skill consolidate. For scenario 3 in particular, the collapse version may surface real material; keep the frame on the practice rather than letting it slide into a process-group moment, since the depth work belongs in individual sessions.

Discussion

8 to 10 minSkill-anchored questions

Pick two or three. Answers can be a single word, a single factor name, or a pass. The skill is the anchor.

Default drift

Under pressure, which way does your dial drift first: too soft, too firm, or no-collapse?

One word. After the go-round, name any pattern in the room without interpreting any one person's answer.

Hardest factor

Of the ten factors, which one is hardest for you to read accurately?

Just the factor name. Common cluster: ED populations often name Capability (factor 1) and Self-respect (factor 3). Trauma histories often name Authority (factor 5) and Timing (factor 9).

A real ask

If you were going to make a real ask this week using Options, what is the ask, who is it to, and what intensity do the factors support?

Concrete. The ask in one sentence, the person in one phrase, the intensity number. Members who cannot yet name the number are giving you the next session's homework.

A no you are still carrying

Pass or share: a no you received in the last month that has not been fully metabolized. Which of the four receiving-a-no moves did not happen?

Brief. Members who share get received briefly without being interpreted, since this is a skills group rather than a process group. Longer exploration belongs in individual sessions.

Family

Pass or share: in the family you grew up in, what was the rule about how strong to ask, and what was the rule about taking a no?

One or two sentences. The point is to make the original training visible, not to process it here.

Takeaway

One word you are leaving with.

Closing-adjacent. Fast go-round. Any word.

Why these are shaped this way

Linehan's manual keeps skills-group discussion anchored to the skill being taught, with low-disclosure entry points (a factor, a word, a pass) so the work stays in the skill rather than in autobiographical material that needs more containment than a group can offer. Deep exploration of any one ask or any one no belongs in individual therapy.

This week

3 to 5 minPick one

One concrete practice between now and next group. Choose the one that matches where the skill is for you right now.

Run the factors before one real ask

Pick an ask you have been carrying. Run the ten factors before the conversation, name the intensity, and ask at that intensity. Note which factors were hardest to read.

Notice one default drift

In conversations this week, catch one moment where your dial drifts to its default before you have checked the factors. Name it inside your head. Adjust if you can.

Run the four receiving-a-no moves once

When you get a no this week, even a small one, run the four moves in order. Note which move stuck and which slipped. Bring the data to next group.

Run the 24-hour behavioral check

After any no this week, check what you did with your food, your body, your sleep, your money, your relationships in the 24 hours after. Track the behavior, not just the affect.

Checkout

One sentence

Each person, one sentence. Name the specific ask or the specific no you are working with this week, and the day you expect it to happen. A general intention to practice Options dissolves by Tuesday. A sentence with a day in it has somewhere to land.

Facilitator note

Push for the day. If a checkout lands abstract, ask one clarifying question that adds the day or the trigger, then move on. Members who can name the ask but cannot yet name the day are giving the same useful information as members who pass: the work is not yet ready to leave the room.