Love Makes You Blind: The Chemistry of Forever Love

The Early Stages of Love: Chemistry at Play

The saying "love is blind" captures a profound truth about romantic relationships: intense feelings of love and attraction can often obscure our ability to see or acknowledge a partner's flaws. This phenomenon is particularly evident in the early stages of a relationship, where idealization and emotional highs can create a temporary veil over reality. However, as relationships mature, this initial blindness can evolve into a deep, enduring love marked by compassion, consideration, intention, and commitment.

Idealization of the Partner

In the excitement of new love, individuals often engage in romantic idealization, focusing on their partner’s positive traits while overlooking any flaws. This idealization is fueled by the novelty of the relationship and the intense emotional connections being formed. People may also project their own desires and values onto their partners, interpreting behaviors through the lens of their expectations rather than recognizing underlying issues.

Emotional Highs

The initial stages of love are characterized by the release of neurochemicals like dopamine and oxytocin. Dopamine, often dubbed the "feel-good" neurotransmitter, heightens feelings of euphoria and pleasure, encouraging individuals to focus on the positives in their partners. Oxytocin, known as the "bonding hormone," is released during physical intimacy, fostering feelings of closeness and attachment. These neurochemical responses contribute to a heightened emotional state that can cloud judgment, leading to an uncritical view of a partner.

The Rational Blindness and Bonding of Orgasm

During orgasm, the brain’s lateral orbitofrontal cortex and prefrontal cortex, areas responsible for rational thinking, self-control, and critical judgment, temporarily deactivate, creating a state of reduced inhibition and heightened emotional and physical sensation. Simultaneously, the brain floods with oxytocin and dopamine, hormones associated with bonding and pleasure, which enhance feelings of love and connection. This neurochemical cocktail, paired with the suppression of fear and judgment (reduced amygdala activity), can make love feel all-encompassing and overwhelming, effectively “blinding” you to rational concerns or potential flaws in your partner, reinforcing intimacy and connection.

Fear of Loss

The desire for connection can create a fear of loss, prompting individuals to avoid addressing potential conflicts. In the early stages of a relationship, the instinct to maintain harmony often takes precedence over confronting issues. This desire to sustain emotional closeness can lead partners to overlook red flags, believing that love alone will resolve any problems.

Transition to Compassion and Consideration

As relationships progress, the initial blindness can transform into a more nuanced understanding of one another, driven by intention and commitment.

Growth Through Experience

As partners navigate the challenges that arise in their relationship, they are often required to confront each other's complexities. This journey fosters deeper understanding and empathy, as they learn to appreciate one another’s struggles. Recognizing that everyone has imperfections allows for a more realistic and compassionate view of the relationship.

Communication and Vulnerability

With the establishment of trust, partners may begin to share their vulnerabilities and concerns openly. Honest communication enables them to address issues constructively rather than avoiding them. As they actively support each other through challenges, a sense of teamwork and resilience develops, further deepening their bond.

Building Resilience

Overcoming difficulties together strengthens the connection between partners. The process of addressing and resolving conflicts cultivates solidarity, reinforcing their commitment to one another. As love matures, partners often learn to accept each other's imperfections, rooted in a deeper understanding of what it means to be human.

The Biological Basis of Forever Love

Dr. Mary Fridman O'Connor, in her book "The Grieving Brain," explores the emotional and biological chemistry that underpins deep, enduring connections—what she refers to as the Forever Bond. This bond is shaped by several key biochemical and neurological factors:

Neurotransmitters and Hormones

- Oxytocin: Released during physical touch and intimacy, oxytocin promotes feelings of closeness and trust, reinforcing emotional bonds.

- Vasopressin: Similar to oxytocin, vasopressin is linked to protective behaviors and commitment, contributing to the stability of long-term relationships.

- Dopamine: This neurotransmitter enhances feelings of pleasure and motivation, crucial for establishing and maintaining attraction.

- Serotonin: Regulating mood, stable serotonin levels contribute to emotional balance and well-being, essential for a healthy Forever Bond.

Brain Regions Involved

- The Limbic System: Responsible for processing emotions and forming memories, the limbic system fosters emotional connections that reinforce the Forever Bond during moments of love and attachment.

- The Prefrontal Cortex: This area of the brain is involved in decision-making and rational thought. A healthy balance in prefrontal cortex activity allows individuals to navigate the complexities of relationships, fostering understanding and compassion.

The Role of Intention and Commitment

While chemistry plays a critical role in the formation of love, intention and commitment are equally vital. Partners who approach their relationship with a conscious intention to understand, support, and grow together create a fertile ground for compassion and consideration. Commitment provides a sense of security and stability, allowing both partners to navigate challenges with resilience.

Therefore

Initially, love can create a blindness to a partner's issues due to idealization, emotional highs, and the desire for connection. However, as relationships evolve and partners face challenges together, this blindness can transform into compassion and consideration. The interplay of biological chemistry, intention, and commitment is essential for developing a mature and enduring love—one where both partners feel seen, understood, and supported in their complexities. The journey from blind love to a lasting Forever Bond is not just about overcoming obstacles; it's about nurturing a deep connection that thrives on empathy, communication, and resilience.

Finding Your Own Voice While Loving A Strong-Voiced Partner

Loving someone with a strong personality can be both exhilarating and challenging. Their confidence and clarity may inspire you, but it can also feel overwhelming sometimes, leaving you unsure how to express your thoughts and needs. Finding your own voice in a relationship like this doesn’t mean competing for attention or dominance or submitting to them—it’s about discovering your own voice and practicing the balance between honoring your individuality (Differentiation) and staying deeply connected (Attachment).

What Holds The “Us” Together As You Face The Challenges Of Finding Your Own Voice in Relationships

Attachment is like the invisible string that connects a child to the people they love and trust the most, like their parents or caregivers. This string helps the child feel safe, loved, and cared for, even when they can’t see or touch that person. It makes children run to their parents when they’re scared or sad, and it gives them the courage to explore the world, knowing someone is there to catch them if they fall. For a six-year-old, you might say, “Your heart has a magic string that connects to mine, so even when I’m not near, you can feel my love and know I’m always here for you.”

As children grow, they also need to develop something called differentiation. Differentiation is the process of learning that while we’re all connected by those invisible strings of attachment and we’re also our unique selves. It’s like having your special backpack full of feelings, thoughts, and ideas that belong only to you. Differentiation helps children understand that it’s okay to think differently from others or to want different things, even from people they love. For a six-year-old, you might say, “You’re like your own superhero with your very own powers. You can make choices and feel your feelings, even if they differ from mine. And guess what? That’s a good thing!”

But what happens when a child’s unique thoughts and feelings aren’t validated? The invisible attachment string can feel tangled or frayed when they feel forced to hide or stop asserting their needs. The child may still love and rely on their family, but they might begin to think that being themselves isn’t safe. Instead of running to their parents when scared or sad, they might hide their true feelings to avoid rejection or conflict. This can make the magic string feel less comforting and more like something they must tiptoe around to keep intact. The child’s unique features are locked up or ignored when differentiation isn’t supported in this environment. Instead of feeling free to share their unique powers—like their feelings, ideas, and needs—they might have to copy what others think or feel to stay connected. Over time, the child might lose confidence in their development, considering their feelings or ideas aren’t as important as other people’s.

How Attachment and Differentiation Work Together In Relationships To Support Two Strong-Voices

In a marriage, the bond between partners is also built on two key aspects: attachment and differentiation. Attachment is the emotional glue—that invisible string— that holds the relationship together, creating a sense of security, trust, and connection. It’s about feeling safe and close, knowing you can rely on each other in need. This is the “we” of the relationship—the shared bond that nurtures intimacy and togetherness. However, differentiation is just as important as the other side.

Differentiation is your ability to hold on to your unique self—your values, needs, and identity—even while deeply connected to your partner. It means staying true to who you are, even as you engage emotionally with your partner’s concerns, ideas, and emotions. Finding your unique, satisfying balance between these two aspects can create a more fulfilling relationship. Attachment allows partners to build trust and a sense of “home” with each other. At the same time, differentiation enables personal growth and resilience. It can deal with conflict without building resentment toward each other, with a pattern of dominance and submission instead of discussion, which can yield compromises with flexible things and support the core needs that need to be supported in each person and family member.

A well-differentiated person can stay present and emotionally engaged without becoming overwhelmed and shutting down or as a pattern of “losing themselves” in the relationship. Together, these dynamics help couples manage challenges, respect each other’s individuality, and grow as individuals and as a team. A healthy marriage challenges each person to work toward blending these forces of closeness and independence, building a relationship where love and personal authenticity can have enough emotional and mental space to thrive side by side.

Guidelines For Developing Your Own Voice With A Strong-Voiced Partner Whom You Love

1. Understand Self-Differentiation As It Differs From Attachment

David Schnarch, Ph.D. author of The Passionate Marriage, describes self-differentiation as regulating emotions, making clear choices, and standing firm in your values while staying emotionally present with your partner. It involves resisting the urge to either:

• Emotionally fuse with your partner by abandoning your needs to keep the peace. (Submit)

• Emotionally cut off by withdrawing to avoid discomfort or conflict. (Stonewall)

Key Takeaway: Self-differentiation is not about creating distance; it about staying close and connected while maintaining your individuality.

2. Tolerate Emotional Discomfort For Growth

According to David Schnarch, Ph.D., emotional growth requires tolerating discomfort. This means staying engaged when your partner’s concerns challenge you or provoke difficult emotions. For example:

• Instead of Immediately agreeing to avoid an argument, practice listening actively and reflecting on what they want you to hear. Ensure they are satisfied that you understand before you shift and calmly state your perspective, even if it creates temporary tension.

Key Takeaway: Emotional discomfort is not a sign of failure but a normal part of meaningful intimacy.

3. Practice Speaking Authentically In Small Steps Taken Often

Schnarch distinguishes between the "SOLID SELF" (Meaning when you speak up in your authentic values and beliefs and personal core needs and are still open to learning more about yourself and your partner—not easy but doable) and the "PSEUDO SELF" (values adopted to gain approval or avoid rejection, also known as Masking, sometimes socially necessary but overuse leads to confusion and fatigue). In this discussion, where there is tension with your partner, you can learn more about your values and core needs. An attitude of discovery and curiosity can open that possibility so you learn more about your core values and needs and know what to hold on to. To hold on to yourself:

• Please reflect on your evolving core values and beliefs to understand what matters.

• Avoid changing your stance to align with your partner’s views without dismissing theirs so you don’t avoid conflict.

• Acknowledge your partner’s concerns without compromising your integrity.

Example: If your partner insists on a particular financial decision that doesn’t align with your priorities, you might respond, "I understand why this feels important to you, but I need to explore options that align with my long-term goals, too."

Key Takeaway: A solid self provides the foundation for authentic connection, respectful negotiation, and discovering creative new options where both people’s core needs can be considered.

4. Practice "Holding Onto Me While Holding Onto You"

Schnarch’s framework involves balancing individuality with connection. This requires engaging in honest, respectful conversations where:

• When expressing your thoughts and feelings clearly while validating your partner’s perspective without trying to edit what you hear, even if you disagree, you can better resist the urge to shut down or give in completely. You can hold on to each other, tolerate the intensity, and lean into understanding instead of proving the other wrong. It is just different.

Example: If your partner is upset about your work schedule, you could say, "I hear that my late nights have been hard for you. I want to find a balance that supports us both, but I must also prioritize this project for the next month."

Key Takeaway: Balancing "me" and "we" allows the relationship to grow without sacrificing either partner’s individuality.

5. Manage Emotional Reactivity

One of Schnarch’s key principles is the need to manage emotional reactivity. This involves:

• Self-soothing: Regulating your emotions during difficult conversations instead of reacting impulsively. - Staying grounded: Remaining calm and clear-headed, even when faced with strong emotions from your partner.

Example: When your partner expresses frustration, avoid defensiveness by responding, "I see this is upsetting for you. Let me think about what you\u2019ve said so I can respond thoughtfully."

Key Takeaway: Managing your emotional reactions fosters mature, constructive dialogue.

6. Embrace "Pressure Points"

Pressure Points are the intense relationship challenges that push you to grow. These moments often occur when partners express conflicting needs or desires. Instead of avoiding these moments:

• Lean into them as opportunities to deepen intimacy and self-awareness. Use them to clarify your values and core needs and strengthen the relationship. Use your self-soothing practices to allow honesty that is most hard to surface to come up and put on the table so it can be known and worked with instead of hidden and avoided and showing up in other unrelated issues.

For example, if your partner challenges a long-held belief or habit, please use the opportunity to look at your stance, articulate your perspective, and engage in a meaningful conversation.

Key Takeaway: Growth happens when you embrace discomfort from Pressure Points and use it to strengthen yourself and the relationship.

Holding on to yourself while staying connected to your partner’s concerns requires developing a strong inner self, tolerating emotional discomfort, and balancing autonomy with intimacy. By practicing self-differentiation, managing emotional reactivity, and embracing challenging moments, you can create a relationship where both partners feel valued and respected without losing their individuality. As Schnarch emphasizes, true intimacy emerges when both partners bring their authentic selves to the relationship, one small, slow step at a time.

In essence, differentiation helps you balance being considerate of your partner’s desires and core needs with staying true to your core needs, fostering a healthier, more collaborative relationship dynamic that can forge new agreements and choices that both can support and change when Life brings something that requires see what has changed in a fundamentally new way to adapt to what is acctually occuring in the moment..

10 Examples

Example 1: Handling Decision-Making

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “We’re spending our vacation with my family this year. End of discussion.”
You: “Fine, whatever. You always get your way anyway.”

Explanation: This response fosters resentment and reinforces an unhealthy power dynamic. It dismisses your own needs and does not invite collaboration.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “We’re spending our vacation with my family this year. End of discussion.”
You: “I hear that spending time with your family is important to you. Can we find a way to balance this with my need for relaxation?”

Explanation: This approach acknowledges your partner’s desire while asserting your own needs. It invites collaboration rather than conflict.

Impact on Relationship: Encourages mutual respect and a shared sense of decision-making.

Quick Repair Response: “I realize my initial reaction wasn’t constructive. Let’s talk about what’s important to both of us.”

Example 2: Addressing Criticism

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “You’re always late. It’s so disrespectful.”
You: “If you weren’t so controlling, I wouldn’t be late.”

Explanation: This response escalates the conflict and deflects accountability.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “You’re always late. It’s so disrespectful.”
You: “I’m sorry my lateness upset you. I’d like to understand how it’s affecting you so we can address it together.”

Explanation: Validating your partner’s feelings and showing a willingness to collaborate defuses tension.

Impact on Relationship: Builds trust and fosters problem-solving.

Quick Repair Response: “I realize my response was defensive. Let’s start over.”

Example 3: Sharing Financial Decisions

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “We’re buying a new car this weekend. I’ve already picked it out.”
You: “You can do whatever you want. I’ll just deal with it.”

Explanation: Avoiding engagement creates emotional distance and a sense of unilateral control.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “We’re buying a new car this weekend. I’ve already picked it out.”
You: “I appreciate your research. Can we discuss the options together to ensure they meet our needs?”

Explanation: Acknowledging your partner’s efforts while asserting your involvement invites teamwork.

Impact on Relationship: Promotes equity and mutual respect in decision-making.

Quick Repair Response: “I should have voiced my thoughts earlier. Let’s revisit this together.”

Example 4: Managing Household Tasks

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “You’re doing the dishes wrong. Just let me handle it.”
You: “Fine. If you think you’re so perfect, do everything yourself.”

Explanation: This response exacerbates conflict and discourages cooperation.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “You’re doing the dishes wrong. Just let me handle it.”
You: “I’m open to hearing your preferences. Let’s talk about how we can share this task effectively.”

Explanation: Staying calm and collaborative prevents escalation and supports shared responsibility.

Impact on Relationship: Strengthens partnership and reduces resentment.

Quick Repair Response: “I got defensive. Let’s figure this out together.”

Example 5: Responding to Micro-Management

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “You’re not folding the laundry correctly. Just let me do it.”
You: “Why do you always have to control everything? Just back off.”

Explanation: This response creates defensiveness and escalates the conflict.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “You’re not folding the laundry correctly. Just let me do it.”
You: “I know you have a specific way of doing things. Can we divide tasks in a way that works for both of us?”

Explanation: You promote mutual respect by acknowledging your partner’s preference while asserting your desire to contribute.

Impact on Relationship: Builds cooperation and reduces friction.

Quick Repair Response: “I didn’t mean to sound dismissive. Let’s talk about how to make this work better.”

Example 6: Planning Social Activities

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “We’re attending my friend’s party on Saturday night. I’ve already RSVP’d.”
You: “You never ask me what I want to do. You’re so inconsiderate.”

Explanation: This response creates feelings of alienation and disconnection.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “We’re attending my friend’s party on Saturday night. I’ve already RSVP’d.”
You: “I’d like to be included in these plans. Can we check in with each other before making commitments?”

Explanation: By expressing your desire to be consulted without attacking your partner, you create a space for a conversation.

Impact on Relationship: Encourages mutual respect and shared decision-making.

Quick Repair Response: “I shouldn’t have jumped to conclusions. Let’s figure this out together.”

Example 7: Balancing Parenting Styles

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “You’re being too lenient with the kids. That’s not how I want things done.”
You: “Well, you’re too strict, so there.”

Explanation: This response leads to polarization and undermines parenting unity.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “You’re being too lenient with the kids. That’s not how I want things done.”
You: “I see we have different approaches. Let’s sit down and discuss a consistent strategy we both agree on.”

Explanation: Collaborating on a shared parenting approach supports alignment and reduces conflict.

Impact on Relationship: Strengthens teamwork and parental partnership.

Quick Repair Response: “I’m sorry for being dismissive. Let’s revisit this as a team.”

Example 8: Navigating Boundaries

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “I don’t want you spending time with that friend anymore.”
You: “You can’t tell me what to do. Stop being so controlling.”

Explanation: This response creates a power struggle and erodes trust.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “I don’t want you spending time with that friend anymore.”
You: “I’d like to understand your concerns. Can we talk about what’s making you uncomfortable?”

Explanation: By seeking to understand your partner’s perspective, you open the door for dialogue rather than defensiveness.

Impact on Relationship: Builds understanding and reduces tension around sensitive topics.

Quick Repair Response: “I didn’t mean to dismiss your feelings. Let’s discuss this openly.”

Example 9: Resolving Miscommunications

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “You never listen to me. What’s the point of even talking?”
You: “That’s not true. You’re the one who doesn’t listen.”

Explanation: This response dismisses your partner’s feelings and escalates the conflict.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “You never listen to me. What’s the point of even talking?”
You: “I’m sorry you feel unheard. Let’s take a moment to clarify what’s important to you.”

Explanation: Validating your partner’s feelings and expressing a willingness to listen fosters connection.

Impact on Relationship: Encourages open communication and emotional intimacy.

Quick Repair Response: “I didn’t mean to shut you down. Let me listen better.”

Example 10: Managing Conflicts About Time

Done Badly Dialogue: Partner: “You never make time for me anymore.”
You: “I’m busy. What do you expect me to do?”

Explanation: This response dismisses your partner’s concerns and creates emotional distance.

Done Well Dialogue: Partner: “You never make time for me anymore.”
You: “I hear that you’re feeling neglected. Let’s plan some quality time together this week.”

Explanation: Acknowledging your partner’s feelings while offering a solution builds trust and connection.

Impact on Relationship: Enhances emotional closeness and mutual understanding.

Quick Repair Response: “I’m sorry for being dismissive. Let’s prioritize time for each other.”

Neurodivergent Traits Appear Uniquely In Self, Self-Image, and Masking

In understanding neurodivergence, it is essential to explore how neurodivergent traits manifest differently in three layers of identity: the Self, self-image, and masking. These layers provide a framework to understand the interplay between one’s authentic nature, perceiving oneself, and navigating societal expectations. Each layer shapes how neurodivergent individuals experience and express their uniqueness daily.

The Self: The Source of the Aliveness of Authenticity

The Self, as described by Carl Jung, is like the complete picture of who a person is. It includes the parts of ourselves we know about and the parts we might not realize yet. For neurodivergent people, traits in the Self are natural and authentic to who they are. Outside pressures don’t shape these traits but come from how their brains are uniquely wired. They are a key part of a person’s identity and stay with them no matter what happens around them.

The phrase "The Self: The Source of the Aliveness of Authenticity" fits well with Jung’s ideas about the Self. He saw the Self as a central part of the mind that moves all the pieces of who we are toward awareness and acceptance of what lives inside a person in all if its vast diversity.

The Self is often thought of as the source of aliveness, energy, and purpose. When people align with their Self, they feel more connected to who they are uniquely inside. Jung believed that the journey to understand and become one’s true Self—a process he called individuation—was essential for feeling this kind of vitality.

Authenticity happens when someone’s actions and feelings match who they are inside. This authentic way of being feels “alive” because it connects what’s happening inside a person with how they live and interact with the world around them.

How the Phrase Could Be Misinterpreted:

If "aliveness" is interpreted purely as emotional or outward energy, it might oversimplify the Self's deeper psychological and spiritual dimensions in Jung's framework. It’s important to note that the Self is not just about feeling "alive" in the energetic sense but about embracing a meaningful, integrated existence.

Therefore

"The Self: The Source of the Aliveness of Authenticity" is an elegant and accurate way to encapsulate Jung’s views on the Self, as long as "aliveness" is understood in the context of deep psychological integration and authenticity. It aligns well with the sources in your memory, particularly Jung's emphasis on wholeness and the vitality that emerges from learning what makes you unique and being okay with it, even if it’s different from others.

Examples of Neurodivergent Traits in the Self

1. ADHD: An individual’s spontaneity and creativity, driven by their brain’s tendency to seek stimulation, might be a core part of their authentic Self.

2. Autism: A natural affinity for patterns, systems, or intense focus on specific interests reflects how the mind instinctively engages with the world.

3. Dyslexia: Unique problem-solving approaches, such as visual-spatial reasoning, might shape how they inherently process information.

How This Functions in Daily Life

In daily situations, neurodivergent traits in the Self manifest organically. For example, a person with ADHD might energize group dynamics with humor and quick thinking. At the same time, an autistic individual might excel in detail-oriented tasks that align with their natural focus.

Self-Image: Conscious Identity and Perception

Self-image refers to how a person consciously perceives and defines themselves. For neurodivergent individuals, self-image involves an awareness of their unique traits and how they align with their sense of identity. Self-image is shaped by personal reflection, societal feedback, and life experiences. Whether neurodivergent traits are embraced or resisted often depends on the individual’s environment and the messages they’ve received about their differences.

Examples of Neurodivergent Traits in Self-Image

1. A person with dyslexia might view themselves as a “creative thinker” who innovatively approaches problems.

2. An autistic individual might embrace the label of “detail-oriented” or “deep thinker” as a source of pride.

3. Someone with ADHD might describe themselves as “spontaneous” and “full of ideas.”

How This Functions in Daily Life

Positive self-image enables neurodivergent individuals to advocate for themselves and pursue opportunities that align with their strengths. For instance, a person with ADHD who views hyperfocus as a superpower might choose a career that allows them to dive deeply into areas of passion, leading to professional and personal growth.

Masking: Navigating Societal Expectations

Masking involves suppressing or altering neurodivergent traits to conform to societal norms and expectations. While masking can help individuals navigate environments that may be less accommodating, it often leads to emotional and mental strain. Masking creates a divide between the authentic Self and outward behavior, leaving individuals disconnected or unseen.

Examples of Neurodivergent Traits in Masking

1. A person with ADHD might suppress their urge to move or speak impulsively during meetings to appear “professional.”

2. An autistic individual might mimic neurotypical social behaviors, such as maintaining eye contact or engaging in small talk, even if it feels unnatural.

3. Someone with sensory sensitivities might endure overwhelming stimuli in public to avoid appearing “difficult.”

How This Functions in Daily Life

While masking can smooth social interactions or help individuals succeed in structured environments, it often comes at a cost. For example, a person with autism who spends all day masking at work might feel drained and require significant alone time to recover. Over time, chronic masking can lead to burnout and a diminished sense of self.

How These Layers Interact

Understanding the interplay between the Self, self-image, and masking is crucial for supporting neurodivergent individuals:

1. Alignment: When self-image aligns with the authentic Self, individuals can live authentically and experience greater clarity, purpose, more well-being, and degrees of fulfillment.

2. Conflict: When masking becomes dominant, it creates a disconnect from the Self, often leading to anxiety, depression, or burnout.

3. Growth: Encouraging positive self-image and reducing the need for masking can help neurodivergent individuals embrace their authentic traits as strengths.

Therefore

Neurodivergent traits appear in different ways in the layers of the Self, self-image, and masking. These layers affect how a person sees the world and experiences life. By understanding the differences between these layers, we can create spaces that help people feel accepted for what they experience and the diverse elements of their inner world. This means encouraging a way to be more compassionate in a way that reduces the pressure to fit in when it feels unnatural. For neurodivergent individuals, this approach can lead to more confidence in addressing life circumstances that lean and favor the unique strengths of their minds while accepting and managing the more challenging ones.

The Relationship of Self, Self-Image and Masking

The concepts of self, self-image, and masking are interconnected but distinct aspects of identity and perception. Here’s an exploration of their similarities and differences:

Similarities

1. Relationship to Identity
   All three concepts are related to the broader construct of identity. They reflect how an individual understands, perceives, and expresses their sense of self.

2. Shaped by Internal and External Factors

   • Self is influenced by innate traits, life experiences, and existential reflection. The fundamental aspect of you that doesn’t change, no matter the situation.

   • Self-image is shaped by how individuals interpret their experiences, societal feedback, and personal achievements or failures.

   • Masking emerges as a response to social and environmental pressures, often as a way to align outward behaviors with societal norms.

3. Impact on Behavior and Well-being
   All three influence behavior and emotional health. A well-integrated self and positive self-image promote authenticity and well-being, while masking can create internal conflicts if it’s misaligned with the true self.

Differences

Key Takeaway

• Self: The fundamental aspect of you that doesn’t change, no matter the situation.

• Self-Image: How you perceive and evaluate yourself.

• Masking: How you modify your external presentation in response to social demands.

The balance between these elements is crucial for emotional and psychological health. A strong and authentic connection to the fundamental aspect of you that doesn’t change—no matter the situation, a positive self-image, and reduced reliance on masking contribute to overall well-being.

The difference between Harm Reduction and Change Therapy in Domestic Violence situations?

In psychotherapy, when a person works on change rather than harm reduction, it is often referred to as abstinence-based treatment, transformational change, or simply behavioral change. The exact term depends on the therapeutic approach and the context. Here are some examples of how it might be framed:

1. Abstinence-Based Approach: In addiction treatment, this involves completely stopping a harmful behavior (e.g., substance use) rather than moderating it.

2. Transformational Change: This focuses on deep, lasting changes to core beliefs, behaviors, or identity, aiming to eliminate harmful patterns altogether.

3. Skill-Building and Growth: Many therapy models, like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) or Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), focus on building new skills and changing behaviors rather than simply mitigating harm.

4. Self-Actualization or Personal Growth: In humanistic or positive psychology frameworks, this involves striving for higher levels of functioning and fulfillment rather than just avoiding harm.

For instance, a person working on changing their anger management might focus on developing healthier emotional regulation skills (change) rather than just avoiding physically harmful outbursts (harm reduction).

In psychotherapy, when a person works on change rather than harm reduction, it is often referred to as abstinence-based treatment, transformational change, or simply behavioral change. The exact term depends on the therapeutic approach and the context. Here are some examples of how it might be framed:

1. Abstinence-Based Approach: In addiction treatment, this involves completely stopping a harmful behavior (e.g., substance use) rather than moderating it.

2. Transformational Change: This focuses on deep, lasting changes to core beliefs, behaviors, or identity, aiming to eliminate harmful patterns altogether.

3. Skill-Building and Growth: Many therapy models, like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) or Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), focus on building new skills and changing behaviors rather than simply mitigating harm.

4. Self-Actualization or Personal Growth: In humanistic or positive psychology frameworks, this involves striving for higher levels of functioning and fulfillment rather than just avoiding harm.

For instance, a person working on changing their anger management might focus on developing healthier emotional regulation skills (change) rather than just avoiding physically harmful outbursts (harm reduction).

In the context of psychotherapy addressing domestic violence, a focus on change rather than harm reduction involves moving beyond strategies that aim to minimize immediate risks (e.g., avoiding physical altercations) to addressing the underlying causes and dynamics of abusive behaviors or victimization. Here’s how it might look for both parties:

For the Perpetrator of Violence:

1. Harm Reduction:

   • Strategies might involve teaching anger management techniques to reduce the frequency or severity of violent outbursts.

   • Safety planning to de-escalate potentially volatile situations.

2. Change-Oriented Approach:

   • Accountability-Based Interventions: Programs like batterer intervention programs (BIPs) focus on helping perpetrators understand the root causes of their behavior, take responsibility, and develop nonviolent relational skills.

   • Transforming Belief Systems: Challenging and changing harmful beliefs about power, control, and entitlement that perpetuate abusive behavior.

   • Skill-Building: Developing empathy, emotional regulation, and healthy communication to replace the reliance on violence as a conflict resolution tool.

For the Survivor of Violence:

1. Harm Reduction:

   • Safety planning to ensure immediate physical safety (e.g., identifying escape routes, contacting support networks).

   • Learning coping strategies to reduce the psychological impact of abuse.

2. Change-Oriented Approach:

   • Empowerment Therapy: Working on self-esteem, boundary-setting, and recognizing red flags in relationships.

   • Trauma Recovery: Addressing trauma responses, such as learned helplessness or hypervigilance, to rebuild a sense of agency.

   • Rebuilding Identity: Focusing on long-term goals, personal growth, and life skills to move beyond the cycle of abuse.

Key Therapies Used in Change-Oriented Work:

• Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT): Helps both parties identify and modify harmful thought patterns contributing to the cycle of abuse.

• Trauma-Focused Therapy: For survivors, this helps heal the emotional wounds caused by the violence.

• Motivational Interviewing (MI): Supports the perpetrator in finding intrinsic motivation to change.

• Systems-Focused Approaches: Examines family dynamics or cultural factors contributing to abuse.

Change in this context often involves dismantling the abusive cycle entirely, fostering healthier patterns of behavior, and ensuring long-term safety and emotional well-being for all involved.

Therefore

John and Julie Gottman’s research distinguishes two primary types of domestic violence: situational domestic violence (SDV) and characterological domestic violence (CDV). Situational domestic violence arises from escalated conflicts between partners, typically in the context of stress, poor communication, or inability to de-escalate tension. It is often mutual or reciprocal and may occur sporadically rather than as a pervasive pattern. This form of violence is not rooted in a desire to control or dominate the partner but rather stems from a breakdown in emotional regulation and communication. The Gottmans highlight that SDV can occur in otherwise healthy relationships and is not predictive of ongoing abuse if the underlying conflict patterns are addressed.

In contrast, characterological domestic violence is deeply rooted in an abuser’s personality structure and is characterized by intentional efforts to dominate, control, or harm the partner. It is often unidirectional, with one partner exerting power over the other through a sustained pattern of physical, emotional, or psychological abuse. This type of violence is linked to personality disorders, attachment trauma, and a deeply entrenched sense of entitlement or insecurity. Unlike SDV, CDV is not situational or reactive but a chronic and systematic pattern of behavior. Victims of CDV often experience isolation, fear, and diminished self-esteem due to the persistent nature of the abuse. The Gottmans emphasize that CDV is far more damaging and requires interventions that prioritize victim safety and often involve legal or systemic responses.

The treatment approaches for these two forms of violence differ significantly. For situational domestic violence, the Gottmans recommend therapeutic interventions that focus on improving communication, conflict resolution skills, and emotional regulation. Couples therapy, particularly Gottman Method Couples Therapy, can help partners learn to de-escalate conflicts and foster healthier dynamics.

However, for characterological domestic violence, couples therapy is not appropriate or safe. Instead, treatment focuses on protecting the victim and addressing the abuser’s patterns through individual therapy, accountability programs (such as Batterer Intervention Programs), and legal intervention if necessary.

The Gottmans stress the importance of accurately identifying the type of domestic violence present to ensure that treatment prioritizes safety, healing, and long-term relational health.

Shame, Necessary and unnecessary, and what to do about both.

Shame is a universal human emotion deeply embedded in our evolutionary and social wiring. It serves a dual purpose as a guide to moral behavior and a potential source of harm when misplaced or magnified. Understanding the difference between necessary and unnecessary shame can help us navigate this emotion in our relationships and personal growth.

Necessary shame arises when we violate our own values or harm others, serving as a natural corrective. It prompts reflection, accountability, and a desire to restore balance. Without it, our relationships and communities might lack empathy, honesty, and moral direction.

10 Examples of Necessary Shame:

1. Breaking a promise to a close friend and recognizing the breach in trust (Gottman: repair through turning toward the relationship).

2. Speaking harshly to your partner in anger and later feeling remorse for the harm caused (Sue Johnson: rebuilding trust through emotional attunement).

3. Failing to meet a professional obligation and realizing it impacted a colleague’s work (Ellyn Bader: owning your role in relational systems).

4. Betraying a partner’s trust by keeping a secret (David Schnarch: confronting personal integrity).

5. Ignoring a child’s emotional needs and realizing the long-term effects (Stan Tatkin: the importance of secure functioning).

6. Acting insensitively toward a grieving friend and later understanding their pain (Grief Recovery Method: emotional honesty in relationships).

7. Failing to contribute equally to a shared responsibility at home (Murry Bowen: acknowledging interdependence in family systems).

8. Mocking someone’s vulnerability and realizing it was rooted in your own insecurities (Bateman: exploring shame’s adaptive roots).

9. Lying to avoid accountability and later facing the consequences (Gottman: reestablishing trust through openness).

10. Neglecting self-care to the detriment of your well-being and relationships (Sue Johnson: self-compassion as part of secure bonding).

How to Address Necessary Shame:

• Acknowledge it: Name the action and its impact.

• Apologize authentically: Offer a sincere, non-defensive apology.

• Make amends: Take corrective action to repair the harm.

• Learn and grow: Reflect on the values violated and how to uphold them moving forward.

Unnecessary shame stems from internalized societal messages, unresolved trauma, or harsh self-criticism. It often exaggerates mistakes, isolates individuals, and undermines self-esteem. It is rarely productive and can perpetuate cycles of insecurity and fear.

10 Examples of Unnecessary Shame:

1. Feeling ashamed for needing help with mental health (Gottman: reducing stigma by normalizing vulnerability).

2. Blaming yourself for a relationship breakdown that wasn’t entirely your fault (Sue Johnson: unpacking emotional wounds in secure connections).

3. Experiencing shame over a physical or learning disability (Ellyn Bader: challenging systemic beliefs about worth).

4. Internalizing guilt for a partner’s infidelity (David Schnarch: rejecting false responsibility).

5. Feeling unworthy after losing a job, even when it wasn’t personal (Stan Tatkin: recognizing external factors).

6. Being ashamed of grieving “too long” or in a way others don’t understand (Grief Recovery Method: honoring individual grief processes).

7. Hiding emotions because you fear being labeled as “too sensitive” (Bateman: dismantling societal pressures around emotional expression).

8. Feeling shame for setting healthy boundaries in toxic relationships (Bowen: understanding differentiation and self-respect).

9. Berating yourself for small mistakes due to perfectionism (Sue Johnson: fostering self-compassion in attachment relationships).

10. Carrying shame from childhood for parental criticism or neglect (Stan Tatkin: reframing early experiences through secure attachment).

How to Address Unnecessary Shame:

• Identify its origin: Trace the source of the shame (family, society, or trauma).

• Challenge distorted beliefs: Question whether the shame is justified or exaggerated.

• Seek external validation: Lean on trusted relationships for perspective and support.

• Practice self-compassion: Treat yourself with the kindness you would offer a friend.

• Engage in corrective experiences: Revisit old wounds with new, healing interactions.

Tools and Techniques

To manage shame effectively, consider the following evidence-based approaches:

1. Gottman’s Repair Techniques: In moments of relational shame, prioritize repair attempts like empathetic listening and affection.

2. Sue Johnson’s Emotional Attunement: Practice identifying and validating the emotions underlying shame to create a connection.

3. Ellyn Bader’s Developmental Lens: Understand shame as part of relational growth and address it within the context of relationship dynamics.

4. Schnarch’s Crucible Approach: Use shame to guide personal integrity and emotional maturity.

5. Bowen’s Differentiation: Balance autonomy and connection by resisting societal pressure to conform.

6. Tatkin’s Secure Functioning: Focus on creating a safe relational environment where shame is minimized.

7. Grief Recovery Method: Address unresolved grief that contributes to unnecessary shame and free yourself from its grip.

Therefore

Whether necessary or unnecessary, shame can profoundly shape our lives and relationships. Necessary shame is a compass for moral behavior and relational repair, while unnecessary shame often limits our potential and disconnects us from others. By recognizing the type of shame we experience and addressing it with tools like self-compassion, emotional attunement, and secure connections, we can transform shame from a paralyzing force into a catalyst for growth.

When shame is met with understanding and courage, it no longer defines us—it guides us toward healing and authenticity.

——-

Gratitude for Sources: Drawing from the works of John and Julie Gottman, Ellyn Bader, Sue Johnson, David Schnarch, Murry Bowen, Stan Tatkin, Gregory Bateman, and the Grief Recovery Method, this article unpacks how shame operates and offers actionable strategies for managing both its constructive and destructive aspects.

Disagree Better: Clarify Intentions, Don’t Assume

Here are 10 examples of how to "Clarify Intentions, Don’t Assume" in marriage. Kindness, Compassion, and Mercy turned inward, in small, slow steps.

1. Misinterpreting a Spouse’s Silence

Done Badly:
Spouse 1: "You’re ignoring me again. You always do this when something’s wrong."
Why it Hurts: This assumes the silence is deliberate and dismissive, which could escalate conflict and make the silent partner defensive or withdrawn.

Done Well:
Spouse 1: "I noticed you’ve been quiet. Is something on your mind, or are you needing some space?"
Why it Helps: Open-ended and non-judgmental, it invites the spouse to share without feeling accused. It demonstrates curiosity and care.
Impact: Encourages emotional safety and mutual understanding.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1: "I’m sorry I jumped to conclusions about your silence. Can we start over? What’s going on for you right now?"

2. Assuming Intent Behind Forgetfulness

Done Badly:
Spouse 1: "You forgot our anniversary dinner again. Clearly, you don’t care about us."
Why it Hurts: It attaches malicious intent to a mistake, which can lead to guilt or resentment.

Done Well:
Spouse 1: "I was really looking forward to celebrating tonight. Can we figure out another time to do something special together?"
Why it Helps: Expresses feelings without blame, keeping the focus on connection.
Impact: Prevents resentment and keeps the focus on shared goals.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1: "I realize I let my frustration get the better of me. Let’s talk about what happened and plan something together."

3. Misreading Exhaustion as Rejection

Done Badly:
Spouse 1: "You never want to be intimate anymore. Are you even attracted to me?"
Why it Hurts: This personalizes the issue and pressures the partner, damaging emotional intimacy.

Done Well:
Spouse 1: "You’ve seemed really tired lately. Is there something I can do to support you?"
Why it Helps: Shows care and acknowledges the partner’s possible challenges.
Impact: Builds emotional connection and fosters trust.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1: "I didn’t mean to make it about me. I care about you and want to understand what’s going on."

4. Blaming Instead of Exploring Financial Stress

Done Badly:
Spouse 1: "You’re always spending money on useless stuff! No wonder we’re stressed."
Why it Hurts: It attacks the partner’s actions and creates defensiveness.

Done Well:
Spouse 1: "I’m feeling stressed about our finances. Can we talk about how we’re managing things together?"
Why it Helps: Uses "I" statements and invites collaboration.
Impact: Encourages teamwork and shared problem-solving.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1: "I’m sorry for blaming you. Let’s figure this out as a team."

5. Assuming Intent in Parenting Decisions

Done Badly:
Spouse 1: "You’re undermining me by giving the kids dessert after I said no!"
Why it Hurts: Assumes deliberate undermining, leading to conflict and hurt feelings.

Done Well:
Spouse 1: "I noticed you gave the kids dessert. Can we talk about how we want to handle treats together?"
Why it Helps: Focuses on collaboration and aligns on parenting goals.
Impact: Builds consistency and respect in co-parenting.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1: "I realize I overreacted. Let’s align on how we handle things next time."

6. Misjudging Late Work Hours

Done Badly:
Spouse 1: "You’re working late again. Do you even care about spending time with me?"
Why it Hurts: Implies lack of care and creates emotional distance.

Done Well:
Spouse 1: "I miss spending time with you. Is there a way we can set aside some time together soon?"
Why it Helps: Expresses need without blame.
Impact: Keeps the focus on connection and shared priorities.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1: "I’m sorry for making assumptions. I really just miss you and want us to connect."

7. Misinterpreting a Partner’s Text Tone

Done Badly:
Spouse 1 (text): "Why are you being so cold? Did I do something wrong?"
Why it Hurts: Assumes negative intent and escalates anxiety unnecessarily.

Done Well:
Spouse 1 (text): "Hey, your text seemed short. Is everything okay on your end?"
Why it Helps: Asks for clarification without assuming negativity.
Impact: Avoids unnecessary conflict and builds understanding.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1 (text): "I’m sorry for jumping to conclusions. I was just feeling off."

8. Assuming Control in Vacation Planning

Done Badly:
Spouse 1: "You booked the hotel without even asking me! Do my opinions even matter?"
Why it Hurts: Suggests disrespect and causes defensiveness.

Done Well:
Spouse 1: "I saw you booked the hotel. I’d love to go over details together next time—can we?"
Why it Helps: Expresses a preference while affirming effort.
Impact: Promotes teamwork and mutual respect.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1: "I didn’t mean to make you feel unappreciated. I value your effort."

9. Assuming Intent Behind Criticism

Done Badly:
Spouse 1: "You always find something to complain about. Can’t you just appreciate me?"
Why it Hurts: Creates defensiveness and discourages open communication.

Done Well:
Spouse 1: "When you mentioned that earlier, it felt like criticism. Can we talk about what you need?"
Why it Helps: Encourages open dialogue and clarifies intent.
Impact: Builds mutual understanding and fosters safety.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1: "I’m sorry for reacting that way. I want to understand what you meant."

10. Misreading a Partner’s Disinterest as Rejection

Done Badly:
Spouse 1: "You’re not listening. Clearly, you don’t care about what I have to say."
Why it Hurts: Turns the issue into a personal attack, leading to disconnection.

Done Well:
Spouse 1: "It seems like I’ve lost your attention. Is this not a good time to talk?"
Why it Helps: Opens the door to scheduling a better time or clarifying distractions.
Impact: Maintains connection while respecting both partners’ needs.

Quick Repair:
Spouse 1: "I shouldn’t have assumed you don’t care. Can we revisit this later?"

These examples, rooted in the principles of communication and emotional attunement advocated by the experts mentioned, demonstrate how clarifying intentions prevents unnecessary conflicts and strengthens relationships.

Go or Stay? The Character Defect of Lying, And The Impact On A Relationhip

As a character defect, lying erodes the foundation of trust within relationships and diminishes one's integrity. When someone consistently lies, they often do so to avoid consequences, manipulate outcomes, or protect their ego. Over time, this behavior creates a tangled web of deceit that distances them from others and fractures meaningful connections. Lying also weakens self-esteem, as the individual becomes trapped in a cycle of dishonesty that leaves them out of alignment with their authentic self. This disconnection can breed shame and guilt, perpetuating a pattern where lies feel easier than confronting the truth.

At its core, lying often stems from deeper fears, insecurities, or unresolved emotional pain. For instance, someone who lies about their achievements might fear rejection or judgment. This reveals how lying is often a surface-level behavior, masking more profound vulnerabilities. However, rather than addressing these fears directly, lying serves as a temporary fix, ultimately compounding the issues it aims to avoid. Recognizing lying as a defect allows individuals to reflect on its roots and begin the journey toward honest, open communication, fostering trust and emotional intimacy.

Character Defects vs. Emotional Issues

A character defect differs from an emotional issue in that it reflects a persistent pattern of behavior or attitude that stems from deeper flaws in one’s moral or ethical compass. For example, lying as a character defect is tied to dishonesty and a lack of integrity, requiring accountability and conscious effort to change. In contrast, emotional issues are reactions or responses to internal or external stressors, such as anxiety, depression, or grief, which may stem from trauma or unresolved feelings. While emotional issues are often transient and benefit from processing and support, character defects require an ongoing commitment to self-awareness and behavioral change to align actions with values. The character defect of lying can profoundly damage a committed relationship, creating ripple effects that undermine trust, emotional safety, and long-term stability. Here’s an analysis of its impact based on relational frameworks:

1. Erosion of Trust

Lying directly undermines the foundational trust in a relationship. Trust is essential for partners to feel secure and valued.

• Impact:
  When lies are discovered, the betrayed partner questions the reliability of future promises or reassurances. This can lead to hypervigilance, suspicion, and emotional exhaustion, which erode intimacy.

• Example (Gottman Framework):
  Trust is built on the "small moments of connection" that accumulate over time. Lying disrupts these moments, creating emotional distance and fear of vulnerability.

2. Emotional Safety Breakdown

Emotional safety arises when partners feel they can share openly without fear of betrayal or judgment. Lying creates a climate of uncertainty and invalidation.

• Impact:
  The betrayed partner may feel dismissed, manipulated, or gaslit, leading to resentment or emotional withdrawal. Over time, this reduces the capacity for meaningful emotional exchanges.

• Example (Sue Johnson/EFT):
  Emotional connection relies on "accessible, responsive, and engaged" behavior. Lying makes a partner seem inaccessible and unresponsive, fostering feelings of abandonment and insecurity.

3. Reinforcement of Shame and Avoidance

The lying partner may lie to avoid shame, fear of conflict, or accountability. However, this perpetuates a cycle of avoidance rather than resolution.

• Impact:
  Lying impedes personal and relational growth by masking underlying issues. It creates a vicious cycle where the partner lies to avoid consequences, but the lie itself causes more significant relational damage.

• Example (Bader’s Developmental Model):
  Avoidance of accountability reflects an inability to navigate differentiation (balancing autonomy with connection). The lying partner may stay stuck in immature patterns that sabotage intimacy.

4. Resentment and Power Imbalance

When one partner lies consistently, it creates a power imbalance where the lying partner manipulates reality and the other must compensate.

• Impact:
  The betrayed partner often feels powerless, as their understanding of the relationship becomes distorted by dishonesty. This imbalance fosters resentment and, over time, emotional disengagement.

• Example (Bowen’s Family Systems Theory):
  Chronic dishonesty disrupts the balance in the relational system, increasing anxiety and creating triangulation (e.g., involving others to validate the truth).

5. Loss of Integrity and Respect

Lying damages the lying partner’s credibility, diminishing respect in the relationship.

• Impact:
  Respect is a cornerstone of love and partnership. When lying is habitual, the betrayed partner may struggle to view the liar as dependable or honorable, leading to a decline in admiration and love.

• Example (David Schnarch/Crucible Model):
  Integrity is crucial for differentiation and maintaining self-respect. Chronic lying reflects a lack of integrity, which diminishes attraction and mutual respect.

6. Compounded Grief

Each lie, when discovered, may feel like a loss to the betrayed partner—a loss of trust, safety, and the shared vision of the relationship.

• Impact:
  Unresolved grief accumulates, often leading to emotional shutdown or explosive confrontations. Over time, the relationship becomes more about damage control than connection.

• Example (Grief Recovery Method):
  Lying prevents the betrayed partner from resolving the grief associated with past betrayals, as new wounds continue to reopen old ones.

7. Sabotage of Conflict Resolution

Effective conflict resolution requires honesty and openness. Lying derails this process by introducing falsehoods that obscure the root issues.

• Impact:
  Conflicts remain unresolved, creating a backlog of unaddressed tensions. The betrayed partner may eventually give up trying to resolve issues, leading to emotional detachment.

• Example (Stan Tatkin/PACT Model):
  Secure functioning relationships rely on transparency and collaboration. Lying undermines both, leaving partners unable to navigate conflicts effectively.

Repairing the Damage: A Path Forward

For a relationship to recover, the lying partner must commit to behavioral change and the rebuilding of trust. Steps include:

1. Radical Honesty: Acknowledge lies without excuses and commit to transparency.

2. Accountability: Take full responsibility for the impact of dishonesty on the relationship.

3. Empathy: Actively validate the betrayed partner's feelings of hurt, anger, and betrayal.

4. Consistency: Follow through on promises to rebuild trust incrementally over time.

5. Therapy: Work individually (e.g., to address the root causes of lying) and as a couple to foster deeper connection and safety.

When handled poorly, lying can be the cornerstone of relational demise.

When Facing A Character Defect Of Lying Sincerely, With a Long Term Plan To Change

For someone with a character defect of lying to repair relationship damage and face their own dishonesty, they must commit to deep personal work, transparency, and rebuilding trust. Here's a guide to help navigate this process:

1. Acknowledge the Harm Done

• Take Responsibility: Fully own the fact that lying has caused pain and damaged trust. Avoid minimizing or justifying the behavior. For example:
  "I recognize that my dishonesty has hurt you and damaged our relationship. I take full responsibility for my actions."

• Validate the Impact: Acknowledge the emotional toll on the other person, such as feelings of betrayal, anger, or insecurity.

2. Offer a Sincere Apology

• Apologies must go beyond words. Be genuine, specific, and focused on the harm caused, not excuses.
  "I deeply regret lying to you. I understand how my actions have hurt you and made you question my honesty. I am truly sorry."

• Refrain from blaming external factors or shifting responsibility.

3. Commit to Radical Honesty

• Transparency is key to rebuilding trust. This includes being open, even about uncomfortable truths, and admitting when you’ve made a mistake.

• Avoid "white lies" or withholding information, as these can erode trust further. Commit to living with integrity in all interactions.

4. Identify the Root Causes of Lying

• Reflect on why you lie. Is it to avoid conflict, protect your ego, or control outcomes? Understanding the motivations behind your dishonesty is crucial to change.

• Seek professional help, such as therapy, to explore deeper issues like fear, insecurity, or trauma that might fuel the behavior.

5. Develop Self-Awareness and Accountability

• Practice self-reflection to recognize moments when you’re tempted to lie and redirect yourself toward honesty.

• Hold yourself accountable for every instance of dishonesty, even if it’s small. Share these moments with a trusted person or partner to demonstrate your commitment to change.

6. Rebuild Trust Over Time

• Trust is restored through consistent, trustworthy behavior, not promises. Show through your actions that you’re committed to change. Examples include:

  • Following through on commitments.

  • Being honest about your thoughts, feelings, and mistakes.

  • Respecting boundaries and being patient with the other person's healing process.

• Accept that rebuilding trust may take months or years, depending on the severity of the damage.

7. Seek Support and Guidance

• Consider individual or couples counseling to gain tools for honest communication and to navigate relationship repair.

• Surround yourself with people who value honesty and can help hold you accountable.

8. Work on Personal Growth

• Engage in practices that build integrity, such as mindfulness, journaling, or attending support groups focused on behavioral change.

• Commit to becoming someone who aligns their words and actions with their values.

9. Be Patient with the Process

• Understand that repairing damage and addressing a character defect takes time and persistent effort. Be prepared for setbacks but stay committed to growth.

• Respect the other person’s process, including their right to set boundaries or choose whether to continue the relationship.

Facing the Character Defect of Lying

To face the defect itself, you must adopt a mindset of ongoing self-improvement. View honesty not just as a means to repair relationships but as a core value essential for living authentically. Recognize that lying compromises not only your relationships but also your integrity and self-esteem. By committing to this work, you can transform the way you relate to others and to yourself, building a foundation of trust and authenticity.

Letting go of a relationship who has the character defect of lying

Letting go of a partner who has the character defect of lying can be a painful yet necessary process, especially if their behavior consistently undermines trust and the health of the relationship. Here's a step-by-step guide to navigating this challenging journey:

1. Acknowledge the Impact of Their Lying

• Reflect on how their dishonesty has affected your emotional well-being, trust, and overall relationship. Write down specific instances or patterns to clarify why letting go is necessary.

• Accept that while their behavior is their responsibility, staying in a relationship where lying is persistent can hinder your personal growth and peace of mind.

2. Accept What You Can and Cannot Change

• Recognize that a character defect like lying is deeply rooted and requires their willingness and effort to change. If they’ve shown no consistent commitment to addressing this, understand that you cannot force them to change.

• Shift your focus to what you can control: your decision to prioritize your own well-being and values.

3. Prepare Yourself Emotionally

• Letting go of someone often involves grieving the relationship and the hopes you had for it. Acknowledge your emotions—sadness, anger, disappointment—and give yourself permission to feel them.

• Build a support system of trusted friends, family, or a therapist to provide guidance and emotional grounding during this time.

4. Communicate Your Decision Clearly

• When ending the relationship, be direct and honest, but compassionate. Focus on the impact of their behavior and why you’re choosing to step away. For example:
  "I care about you, but I’ve realized that the lack of honesty in our relationship is something I can’t continue to accept. I need to prioritize my well-being and be in a relationship built on trust."

• Avoid engaging in blame or arguments; instead, remain calm and firm in your decision.

5. Establish Boundaries

• After the breakup, set clear boundaries to help you move forward. This might mean limiting or cutting off contact, especially if staying in touch might reopen old wounds or hinder healing.

• If the person tries to manipulate you with promises to change, remember that actions speak louder than words. Without sustained effort on their part, such promises may be empty.

6. Focus on Your Healing

• Take time to reconnect with yourself. Engage in activities that bring you joy, fulfillment, and a sense of purpose.

• Reflect on the lessons learned from the relationship and how they can inform your future choices in partnerships.

7. Rebuild Trust in Yourself

• One of the lasting impacts of being with someone who lies can be self-doubt. Remind yourself that your decision to leave was an act of self-respect and courage.

• Work on trusting your instincts and judgment, which can be reinforced through self-reflection, therapy, or journaling.

8. Visualize a Healthier Future

• Imagine a relationship built on honesty, respect, and mutual understanding. Use this vision to remind yourself of what you deserve and to reaffirm your decision to let go.

• Keep in mind that letting go creates space for healthier connections, whether with others or with yourself.

While letting go can be heart-wrenching, it’s an act of self-love that paves the way for healing and a more authentic, fulfilling life.

——————-

• Don Elium, MA MFT •

925 256-8282 phone/text

• Northern and Southern California TeleHealth Counseling sessions •

Don@don-elium-psychotherapy.com

Masking Vs. Lying

Masking, or presenting a curated version of oneself in social situations, can be a helpful survival tool. It also can become a barrier to authentic connection. In relationships, social interactions, and even during transitions like divorce, masking serves a dual purpose: it can protect vulnerability. Still, it may also obscure one's true feelings and thoughts about life when overused. Exploring this dynamic through the lens of relationship and emotional health experts like John and Julie Gottman, Ellyn Bader, Ph.D., Sue Johnson, David Schnarch, Ph.D., Murry Bowen, and Stan Tatkin provides a nuanced understanding of its necessity and limits.

Masking as a Tool, Not an Identity

In many social situations, masking is a tool to navigate complex emotional landscapes. For example, during a divorce, an individual may suppress raw emotions to maintain civility or protect children from unnecessary distress. Similarly, masking allows people to engage in professional or social settings where vulnerability might feel unsafe. However, as the Gottmans emphasize in their research on trust and intimacy, masking must be balanced with moments of authentic vulnerability to build and maintain connection. Masking becomes problematic when it is habitual, leading to disconnection from one’s inner emotional truths and others. It can cause heightened anxiety and exhaustion as a necessary consequence.

Sue Johnson's Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT) highlights how vulnerability in safe relationships fosters deeper connections. A person who has masked extensively might feel disconnected from their own reality, but safe emotional spaces—often cultivated in therapy or with trusted loved ones—can help restore authenticity. Stan Tatkin’s emphasis on understanding nervous system responses in relationships underscores the role of safety in shedding masks. When individuals feel secure, their nervous systems shift from a protective stance to openness, allowing them to express themselves, reduce anxiety, and feel a connectedness, belonging, that soothes and strengthens.

Masking vs. Lying

While masking involves presenting a filtered version of oneself, it differs from lying. Lying involves an intentional misrepresentation of truth, often to deceive. Conversely, masking can stem from a need to protect oneself or manage social dynamics. For example, an individual might mask their sadness at a social gathering to avoid uncomfortable questions. In contrast, lying involves fabricating a story about why they behave a certain way.

David Schnarch’s concept of differentiation helps illustrate this distinction. Differentiation involves balancing the need for self-expression with the ability to maintain emotional independence. When individuals mask excessively to gain approval or avoid conflict, they risk losing differentiation. Contrastingly, selective masking, guided by self-awareness and intention, can help individuals navigate complex situations without compromising integrity.

Degrees of Honesty and Integrity

Life’s complexity defies all-or-nothing solutions. Absolute attitudes, such as always telling the full truth or entirely suppressing emotions, often promote denial or create conditions for dishonesty. Murry Bowen’s family systems theory suggests that emotional health thrives in the tension between individuality and connection. Degrees of honesty allow people to express themselves authentically while considering the relational dynamics at play.

For instance, sharing every unfiltered emotion might escalate tensions in a high-conflict divorce, whereas measured honesty can foster cooperation. Similarly, masking in friendships can serve a relational purpose, such as maintaining harmony during temporary conflicts. However, chronic masking in close relationships risks eroding trust, as true intimacy requires mutual understanding and authenticity.

Restoring Authenticity Through Vulnerability

When individuals lose their sense of self through excessive masking, restoration begins with vulnerability in safe emotional environments. Whether through therapy, as highlighted by Sue Johnson and Ellyn Bader, or in secure relationships, as emphasized by Stan Tatkin, vulnerability helps individuals reconnect with their emotions and needs. This process requires courage and a supportive context, as revealing one’s true self, what you really think and feel about things, can feel risky after prolonged masking.

Masking And Exhaustion

Masking, while often a necessary social tool, requires significant emotional and mental energy. Constantly monitoring one’s behavior, words, and emotions to fit into expected norms or avoid vulnerability can feel like running a mental marathon. For neurodivergent individuals, those navigating high-conflict relationships, or anyone coping with social anxiety, the energy output can be incredibly taxing. Each interaction may involve carefully crafting responses, suppressing authentic feelings, and interpreting subtle social cues—tasks that drain cognitive resources and emotional reserves. This expenditure often leaves individuals feeling mentally and physically fatigued after prolonged masking.

Over time, chronic masking can lead to emotional exhaustion, emotional crash, and even burnout. Constantly suppressing one’s true feelings creates an internal conflict, as authenticity is stifled to meet external expectations. This misalignment can erode a person’s sense of identity, leaving them disconnected and ungrounded. Moreover, maintaining a façade can take a toll on physical health, contributing to symptoms such as headaches, fatigue, respiratory-heart concerns and muscle tension. To restore balance, it’s essential to create safe spaces where masking can be set aside, allowing vulnerability and authenticity to replenish the energy lost in maintaining the mask.

Conclusion

Masking, when used as a tool, helps navigate the complexities of life while maintaining social harmony and protecting vulnerability. However, over-reliance on masking can lead to losing authenticity, undermining relationships and personal well-being. By embracing degrees of honesty and integrity, individuals can more skillfully navigate complex situations while preserving their true thoughts and feelings. Restoring authenticity is possible through safe emotional connections, where vulnerability fosters healing and self-discovery.

______

•Don Elium, MA MFT•

925 256-8282 phone/text

• Northern and Southern California TeleHealth Counseling Sessions •

Don@don-elium-psychotherapy.com

Natural Emotion vs. Triggered Emotion

An emotional trigger is a specific experience, situation, or stimulus that elicits an intense, often disproportionate emotional reaction based on past experiences, unresolved trauma, or underlying vulnerabilities. Triggers are typically tied to unresolved emotional pain and can activate automatic, intense responses without conscious thought. Recognizing the difference between a triggered emotional response and a natural, present-moment emotion requires awareness, reflection, and context evaluation.

Natural Emotion vs. Triggered Emotion

1. Natural Emotion:

• Arises organically in response to a present experience.

• Is proportional to the situation and often aligns with social or cultural norms.

• It feels authentic and connected to the here and now.

• Example: Feeling sad at a friend's tearful goodbye as they move away. The sadness fits the situation and subsides with time.

2. Triggered Emotion:

• Reactivates unresolved past pain, often resulting in an amplified or inappropriate emotional response.

• It may feel overwhelming, repetitive, or disconnected from the current context.

• It often includes a strong sense of urgency or reactivity.

• Example: Becoming enraged when someone critiques your work because it reminds you of a critical parent or past authority figure, even though the critique was mild and constructive.

How to Differentiate the Two

1. Intensity and Duration:

• A natural emotion usually fades once the triggering event resolves or when processed appropriately.

• A triggered emotion may linger, spiral, or intensify without resolution.

2. Connection to the Present:

• Natural emotions are rooted in the present context and make sense.

• Triggered emotions feel like an echo of the past, often leaving the person feeling like they’ve “been here before.”

3. Physiological and Psychological Clues:

• Triggered responses may feel like a flood of physical sensations: heart racing, body tension, or nausea.

• Thoughts during a triggered state often include "always" or "never" (e.g., "I always mess this up!").

4. Cognitive Understanding:

• In natural emotions, cognitive assessments match reality.

• Cognitive distortions (e.g., catastrophizing, mind-reading) are more likely with triggered emotions.

Clarifying the Difference with Examples

Example 1: A Friend Cancels Plans

• Natural Response: Feeling mildly disappointed but understanding their reason for canceling.

• Triggered Response: Feeling abandoned, angry, or panicked because it reminds you of times you felt left out or rejected in childhood.

Example 2: Receiving Constructive Feedback

• Natural Response: Feeling slightly embarrassed or motivated to improve.

• Triggered Response: Feeling humiliated, defensive, or unworthy because it mirrors critical treatment from a parent or authority figure.

Why This Matters

Understanding the difference empowers individuals to respond thoughtfully rather than react impulsively. It creates an opportunity for personal growth by acknowledging and healing past wounds. For example:

• Sue Johnson’s EFT explores how emotional triggers disrupt secure attachment and help partners create repair.

• John and Julie Gottman emphasize self-soothing and recognizing flooding as signs of emotional reactivity in their Sound Relationship House Theory.

• The Grief Recovery Method identifies how unresolved grief can lead to disproportionate reactions, helping individuals release those triggers.

Practical Tips

• Pause and Reflect: When emotions spike, ask, “What’s happening right now? Is this feeling about now or something earlier?”

• Track Patterns: Journaling about intense emotional responses can reveal recurring themes tied to past wounds.

• Self-Compassion: Remind yourself that triggers are natural and healing is possible.

• Seek Support: Professional therapy (e.g., EMDR, grief-trauma-focused approaches) can help untangle past pain from present moments.

———

10 Examples

1. Topic: Forgetting an Anniversary

• Done Badly:

• Response: "You never care about this relationship. I always have to remind you!"

• Explanation: The emotional trigger (feeling unimportant) leads to an accusatory tone, escalating conflict.

• Impact: Partner feels attacked and defensive, reducing emotional safety.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I felt hurt when our anniversary was forgotten. Celebrations like this are important to me."

• Explanation: Expresses emotions without blame, fostering understanding.

• Impact: Encourages empathy, repair, and deeper connection.

• Quick Recovery: "I realize I blamed you out of frustration earlier. Let me explain why this matters to me."

2. Topic: Criticism About Chores

• Done Badly:

• Response: "You’re so lazy; I always do everything around here!"

• Explanation: A triggered response tied to past feelings of being unappreciated or overburdened.

• Impact: Creates resentment and division.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I feel overwhelmed doing chores alone. Can we talk about sharing tasks?"

• Explanation: Shares feelings and invites collaboration.

• Impact: Builds teamwork and reduces tension.

• Quick Recovery: "I know I sounded harsh earlier. I’d like to work together on a solution."

3. Topic: Forgetting to Call

• Done Badly:

• Response: "You never think about me! I guess I’m not a priority."

• Explanation: A triggered fear of neglect leads to overgeneralization.

• Impact: Erodes trust and amplifies insecurities.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I was worried when I didn’t hear from you. Can we figure out how to stay in touch?"

• Explanation: Focuses on feelings and needs without assumptions.

• Impact: Strengthens communication and emotional security.

• Quick Recovery: "I realize I made assumptions earlier. Can we talk about what happened?"

4. Topic: Being Late

• Done Badly:

• Response: "You’re always late! You don’t care about my time."

• Explanation: A triggered response from past feelings of disrespect.

• Impact: Creates defensiveness and discourages accountability.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I felt disrespected when you were late. It’s important to me to start on time."

• Explanation: Names feelings while staying solution-oriented.

• Impact: Encourages accountability and mutual respect.

• Quick Recovery: "I regret accusing you earlier. Let’s discuss how to avoid this in the future."

5. Topic: Financial Decision Without Consultation

• Done Badly:

• Response: "How could you spend that much? Are you trying to ruin us?"

• Explanation: A triggered fear of insecurity causes harsh criticism.

• Impact: Undermines trust and collaborative decision-making.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I felt anxious when I saw the charge. Can we review our finances together?"

• Explanation: Shares concerns respectfully and invites partnership.

• Impact: Strengthens trust and shared responsibility.

• Quick Recovery: "I realize I reacted strongly. Let’s figure out how to handle this better."

6. Topic: Disagreeing About Parenting

• Done Badly:

• Response: "You always undermine me in front of the kids!"

• Explanation: A triggered fear of losing authority leads to defensiveness.

• Impact: Erodes teamwork and co-parenting dynamics.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I felt unsupported when we disagreed in front of the kids. Can we talk privately next time?"

• Explanation: Shares feelings and seeks solutions privately.

• Impact: Encourages collaboration and respect.

• Quick Recovery: "I overreacted earlier. Let’s discuss this calmly."

7. Topic: Withholding Affection

• Done Badly:

• Response: "You don’t care about me anymore! You never touch me."

• Explanation: A triggered fear of rejection amplifies criticism.

• Impact: Increases emotional distance.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I’ve been missing our physical connection. Can we talk about what’s going on?"

• Explanation: Invites vulnerability and dialogue.

• Impact: Promotes intimacy and understanding.

• Quick Recovery: "I expressed my frustration poorly. Let’s reconnect."

8. Topic: Partner’s Friendships

• Done Badly:

• Response: "You care more about your friends than me!"

• Explanation: Triggered insecurity leads to unfair comparisons.

• Impact: Foster’s jealousy and conflict.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I felt left out when you spent so much time with your friends. Can we balance things better?"

• Explanation: Expresses feelings constructively.

• Impact: Encourages prioritization of the relationship.

• Quick Recovery: "I didn’t express that well earlier. Here’s what I’m feeling."

9. Topic: Handling a Disagreement

• Done Badly:

• Response: "You’re impossible to talk to! This is why we never work."

• Explanation: Triggered hopelessness leads to criticism.

• Impact: Erodes relational stability.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I’m struggling to feel heard right now. Can we slow down and try again?"

• Explanation: Requests clarity and calmness.

• Impact: Promotes productive dialogue.

• Quick Recovery: "I know I shut down earlier. Let’s try again."

10. Topic: Partner Not Listening

• Done Badly:

• Response: "You don’t even care enough to pay attention!"

• Explanation: A triggered feeling of unworthiness leads to accusations.

• Impact: Creates distance and frustration.

• Done Well:

• Response: "I felt unheard earlier. Can we revisit that conversation?"

• Explanation: Expresses a need without blame.

• Impact: Encourages empathy and engagement.

• • Quick Recovery: "I was too reactive earlier. Let’s talk again calmly."

Disagree Better: Address Conflict Directly, Don’t Avoid

Here are 10 examples of addressing conflict directly in marital disagreements, each with research-backed insights from John and Julie Gottman, Ellyn Bader, Sue Johnson and EFT, David Schnarch, Murry Bowen, and Stan Tatkin.

1. Discussing Hurt Feelings

Done Badly:

Partner A: “Whatever, it’s fine. I don’t want to talk about it.”

Partner B: “Okay, let’s just drop it then.”

Explanation: Avoidance leads to resentment, emotional withdrawal, and unspoken pain.

Done Well:

Partner A: “It hurt when you didn’t acknowledge my effort last night. Can we talk about it?”

Partner B: “I didn’t realize that hurt you. Let’s figure this out.”

Explanation: Directly naming the hurt fosters understanding and prevents emotional disconnection (Gottman, EFT).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner A: “I’m sorry for how I brought this up. Can I try again?”

2. Addressing Criticism

Done Badly:

Partner A: “You always forget about me! You never care about what I need.”

Partner B: “That’s not true. You’re just overreacting!”

Explanation: Criticism and defensiveness escalate conflict and undermine trust (Gottman).

Done Well:

Partner A: “I felt forgotten when you didn’t check in about my day. Can we talk about how we connect?”

Partner B: “I’m sorry you felt that way. Let’s talk about what you need from me.”

Explanation: Using “I” statements softens the startup and invites collaboration (Gottman).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner A: “I didn’t mean to sound blaming. Let me say that differently.”

3. Managing Disagreements on Parenting

Done Badly:

Partner A: “You’re too harsh with the kids. I can’t deal with this anymore.”

Partner B: “Well, you’re too soft on them! What’s your point?”

Explanation: Accusations and dismissiveness damage the co-parenting dynamic (Bader, Bowen).

Done Well:

Partner A: “I feel uneasy when we disagree about discipline. Can we talk about what’s working and what isn’t?”

Partner B: “I hear that. Let’s sit down and figure out a plan together.”

Explanation: Collaborative discussion promotes teamwork and emotional safety (Tatkin).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner A: “Sorry if I sounded critical—I want us to be on the same page.”

4. Handling Financial Stress

Done Badly:

Partner A: “You’re terrible with money! I’m always cleaning up your mess.”

Partner B: “You’re not perfect either! Stop blaming me.”

Explanation: Blame triggers defensiveness and damages intimacy (Gottman).

Done Well:

Partner A: “I feel anxious about money. Can we work on a budget together?”

Partner B: “I didn’t realize it was causing you stress. Let’s tackle this as a team.”

Explanation: A collaborative tone encourages problem-solving and connection (EFT, Schnarch).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner B: “I realize I jumped to defend myself. Let’s slow down and try again.”

5. Navigating Emotional Needs

Done Badly:

Partner A: “You never make time for me anymore.”

Partner B: “That’s not fair. I’m busy, okay?”

Explanation: Generalizations and dismissiveness deepen emotional disconnection (EFT).

Done Well:

Partner A: “I miss spending quality time with you. Can we plan something soon?”

Partner B: “Thanks for letting me know. I miss that too. Let’s schedule it.”

Explanation: Vulnerable sharing invites reconnection (Sue Johnson, EFT).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner B: “I didn’t mean to brush you off. Let’s focus on this.”

6. Addressing Sexual Intimacy Concerns

Done Badly:

Partner A: “You don’t care about our sex life at all.”

Partner B: “Well, maybe if you were more affectionate, I’d care!”

Explanation: Attacks and counterattacks destroy sexual and emotional safety (Schnarch).

Done Well:

Partner A: “I miss the intimacy we used to have. Can we talk about how we can reconnect?”

Partner B: “I feel nervous talking about this, but I want us to work on it together.”

Explanation: Vulnerability and courage build emotional and sexual intimacy (Schnarch).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner A: “That came out wrong. Let me rephrase.”

7. Acknowledging Mistakes

Done Badly:

Partner A: “I’m sorry, but it wasn’t really my fault.”

Partner B: “Yeah, you always have excuses.”

Explanation: Half-hearted apologies deepen mistrust (Gottman).

Done Well:

Partner A: “I’m sorry for how I acted. It wasn’t fair to you.”

Partner B: “Thank you for saying that. It means a lot.”

Explanation: Ownership and accountability foster trust (Bader, Bowen).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner A: “Let me try again—I want to fully own this.”

8. Discussions About In-Laws

Done Badly:

Partner A: “Your family is always meddling. I’m done.”

Partner B: “Well, your family isn’t perfect either!”

Explanation: Blanket criticism fuels defensiveness and division (Bowen).

Done Well:

Partner A: “I feel uncomfortable with how your mom approaches things. Can we talk about boundaries?”

Partner B: “I understand. Let’s figure out how to address this together.”

Explanation: Specificity and a teamwork mindset promote resolution (Bowen, Tatkin).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner A: “I realize I sounded harsh. Can I start over?”

9. Handling Busy Schedules

Done Badly:

Partner A: “You never make time for us! You’re too busy for this marriage.”

Partner B: “Oh, so now I’m the bad guy?”

Explanation: Blame and defensiveness create distance (Gottman).

Done Well:

Partner A: “I miss having time together. Can we talk about how to balance things better?”

Partner B: “I miss that too. Let’s look at our schedules and plan something.”

Explanation: Collaborative problem-solving reduces stress and strengthens connection (Tatkin, EFT).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner B: “That came out wrong. Let’s try again.”

10. Resolving Recurring Arguments

Done Badly:

Partner A: “This always happens! You never change.”

Partner B: “Why should I? You’re the problem!”

Explanation: Absolute language and escalation prevent resolution (Gottman).

Done Well:

Partner A: “This is a pattern that’s hard for me. I want us to find a way out of it.”

Partner B: “I see what you’re saying. Let’s figure out a better way to handle this.”

Explanation: Acknowledging patterns invites shared responsibility and growth (EFT, Schnarch).

Quick Repair Response:

Partner A: “I realize I’m making this about blame. Let me reframe.”

These examples show how addressing conflict directly with emotional awareness, collaboration, and vulnerability can foster stronger, more resilient relationships.

Fixable Vs. Perpetual Problems: Fix or Manage?

. . . & The Willingness To Discover The Difference

Definitions:

1. Fixable Problems: These are situational and can be resolved through problem-solving, compromise, or behavioral adjustments. They typically stem from external circumstances rather than deep-seated differences.

   • Gottman: Fixable problems relate to specific issues (e.g., chores, schedules).

   • Bader: Often arises during the early stages of couple development, where roles are being negotiated.

   • Doherty: Fixable problems are practical and can be addressed with willingness and effort.

2. Non-Fixable (Perpetual) Problems: These are rooted in fundamental personality differences, core values, or long-standing preferences. They often resurface, requiring ongoing management rather than resolution.

   • Gottman: 69% of marital conflicts are perpetual but manageable with dialogue.

   • Tatkin: These stem from attachment styles or neurological wiring.

   • Johnson: Non-fixable problems are managed best when partners remain emotionally connected.

Why They Need Different Approaches:

• Fixable Problems: Require problem-solving skills and compromise. Addressing these well strengthens trust and teamwork.

• Non-Fixable Problems: Require acceptance and empathy. The goal is not to change your partner but to create a safe space for differences to coexist.

10 Examples with "Done Badly" and "Done Well" Conversations

1. Household Division of Labor

• Fixable or Perpetual? Fixable if situational; perpetual if stemming from deep value differences.

• Done Badly Conversation: "You’re lazy and never help out. I do everything!"

  • Explanation: Blame triggers defensiveness.

  • Impact: Leads to resentment.

• Done Well Conversation: "I feel overwhelmed managing the house. Can we discuss a fairer way to divide tasks?"

  • Explanation: A collaborative approach fosters teamwork.

  • Impact: Builds mutual respect.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I appreciate your effort. Let’s find a solution together."

2. Frequency of Intimacy

• Fixable or Perpetual? Often perpetual due to differences in libido or intimacy needs.

• Done Badly Conversation: "Why don’t you ever want me? This is ridiculous."

  • Explanation: Shaming creates distance.

  • Impact: Erodes trust.

• Done Well Conversation: "I’d love to feel closer to you physically. How can we find a rhythm that works for us both?"

  • Explanation: Balances vulnerability with curiosity.

  • Impact: Builds emotional and physical intimacy.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I didn’t mean to pressure you. Let’s revisit this gently."

3. Spending and Saving Money

• Fixable or Perpetual? Fixable if due to budgeting needs; perpetual if rooted in differing financial philosophies.

• Done Badly Conversation: "You’re irresponsible with money! You’re ruining us."

  • Explanation: Criticism fosters conflict.

  • Impact: Creates tension and distrust.

• Done Well Conversation: "I feel anxious about our finances. Can we plan together?"

  • Explanation: A problem-solving focus invites collaboration.

  • Impact: Strengthens partnership in financial decisions.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I overreacted earlier. Let’s work on this together."

4. Social Preferences (Introvert vs. Extrovert)

• Fixable or Perpetual? Perpetual; rooted in personality differences.

• Done Badly Conversation: "You never want to go out. Why are you such a hermit?"

  • Explanation: Labeling creates shame.

  • Impact: Leads to feelings of incompatibility.

• Done Well Conversation: "I enjoy going out more than you do. How can we balance our needs?"

  • Explanation: Seeks compromise and mutual respect.

  • Impact: Fosters connection while honoring differences.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I love you for who you are. Let’s plan something we both enjoy."

5. Parenting Styles

• Fixable or Perpetual? Fixable if situational; perpetual if rooted in values.

• Done Badly Conversation: "You’re way too strict with the kids!"

  • Explanation: Criticism undermines co-parenting.

  • Impact: Creates conflict and weakens unity.

• Done Well Conversation: "I’d like to align on how we handle discipline. Can we talk?"

  • Explanation: Encourages shared decision-making.

  • Impact: Strengthens parental collaboration.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I respect your perspective. Let’s revisit this together."

6. Attachment Needs

• Fixable or Perpetual? Perpetual; rooted in attachment styles.

• Done Badly Conversation: "Why are you so needy? I can’t deal with this!"

  • Explanation: Dismissal creates insecurity.

  • Impact: Triggers disconnection.

• Done Well Conversation: "I notice you’re feeling anxious. How can I reassure you?"

  • Explanation: Provides emotional attunement.

  • Impact: Builds safety and trust.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I’m here for you. Let’s figure this out."

7. Career Priorities

• Fixable or Perpetual? Fixable if situational; perpetual if values differ.

• Done Badly Conversation: "You care more about work than us!"

  • Explanation: Guilt trips lead to defensiveness.

  • Impact: Erodes trust and connection.

• Done Well Conversation: "I admire your dedication to work but feel disconnected. Can we talk about balance?"

  • Explanation: Balances appreciation with expressed needs.

  • Impact: Encourages compromise and connection.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I didn’t mean to make you feel unappreciated."

8. Emotional Regulation

• Fixable or Perpetual? Perpetual; rooted in temperament.

• Done Badly Conversation: "You’re always so angry. Grow up!"

  • Explanation: Escalates tension.

  • Impact: Creates emotional distance.

• Done Well Conversation: "When you’re upset, it’s hard for me to connect. How can I support you?"

  • Explanation: Shows curiosity and care.

  • Impact: Encourages emotional safety.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I overreacted earlier. Let’s try again."

9. Cultural Differences

• Fixable or Perpetual? Perpetual; rooted in identity.

• Done Badly Conversation: "Why do you have to be so traditional?"

  • Explanation: Dismisses identity.

  • Impact: Causes alienation.

• Done Well Conversation: "Our traditions are different. How can we honor both?"

  • Explanation: Invites understanding and inclusion.

  • Impact: Builds mutual respect.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I value your traditions. Let’s find a way to include them."

10. Division of Emotional Labor

• Fixable or Perpetual? Fixable with effort; perpetual if deeply ingrained.

• Done Badly Conversation: "I’m tired of doing all the emotional work!"

  • Explanation: Blame fosters resistance.

  • Impact: Weakens connection.

• Done Well Conversation: "I feel like I’m carrying a lot emotionally. Can we share this more?"

  • Explanation: Encourages shared responsibility.

  • Impact: Strengthens teamwork.

• Quick Repair Dialogue: "I didn’t mean to sound accusing. Let’s talk."

Each example highlights the importance of tailoring responses to whether a problem is fixable or perpetual. Perpetual problems demand acceptance and ongoing management, while fixable ones thrive on solutions and teamwork.

————

Don Elium, MFT 925 256-8282 Text/Phone in Northern and Southern California

Portions of this article contain collected AI-generated material that has been edited and checked for accuracy.

Open To Influence

Gottman’s research, particularly studies on relationships and conflict resolution, found that men were generally less open to influence than women. Specifically, in their studies, about 65% of men resisted being influenced by their female partners, while only 35% of women showed similar resistance toward being influenced by their male partners.

This difference highlights a familiar relational dynamic: men in these studies were more likely to resist accepting their partner's influence. The ability to be open to influence was identified as a critical factor for healthy, sustainable relationships, especially for men in heterosexual partnerships. Couples, where both partners could be mutually influenced, were found to have higher satisfaction and stability in their relationships.

In Dr. John Gottman's research on same-sex couples, it was observed that gay and lesbian partners tend to be more open to accepting influence from each other compared to heterosexual couples. Specific percentages for men in committed gay relationships were not detailed in the available studies. However, the findings suggest that same-sex couples, including gay men, often exhibit more significant mutual influence and power-sharing dynamics.

The Gottman Institute

This openness to influence is associated with healthier conflict resolution and increased relationship satisfaction. For instance, same-sex couples are more likely to use humor and affection during disagreements and are less likely to display controlling or hostile behaviors. These dynamics contribute to a more positive interaction pattern within the relationship.

Overall, the relationship satisfaction and quality were about the same across all couple types (gay, straight, lesbian). However, the study did find some differences in how same-sex and different-sex couples argue.

“Gay and lesbian couples are more upbeat in the face of conflict,” Gottman explains, “Compared to straight couples, gay and lesbian couples use more affection and humor when they bring up a disagreement. They are also likely to remain more positive after a disagreement.”

Big Think

While exact percentages are not provided, the overall trend indicates that men in committed gay relationships may be more receptive to their partner's influence, fostering healthier and more resilient partnerships.

——-

Here are 10 examples illustrating conversations where being open to influence is done badly, their explanations, impacts on relationships, followed by how they can be done well, their explanations, impacts on relationships, and a quick repair phrase.

1. Decision About Moving

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "I’ve decided we’re moving to the city next month for my job."

  • Partner B: "What about my career? Don’t I get a say?"

  • Explanation: Partner A unilaterally makes a major decision, disregarding Partner B’s input.

  • Impact: Leads to feelings of exclusion and resentment.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "I was offered a job in the city. Can we talk about what this would mean for both of us?"

  • Partner B: "I appreciate you bringing this up. Let’s discuss our options together."

  • Explanation: Invites collaboration, valuing both perspectives.

  • Impact: Strengthens trust and partnership.

• Quick Repair: "I’m sorry for not discussing this earlier. Let’s decide together."

2. Handling Finances

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "We’re cutting out your shopping budget to save money."

  • Partner B: "Excuse me? You didn’t ask how I feel about this!"

  • Explanation: Imposes a decision without mutual agreement.

  • Impact: Creates imbalance and defensiveness.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "I’m worried about our finances. Can we review the budget together?"

  • Partner B: "That’s a good idea. Let’s work on it this weekend."

  • Explanation: Demonstrates mutual responsibility and respect.

  • Impact: Builds teamwork and financial harmony.

• Quick Repair: "I shouldn’t have decided that alone. Let’s plan together."

3. Parenting Conflict

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "You’re too soft on the kids. That’s why they misbehave."

  • Partner B: "And you’re too harsh! I won’t let you take over!"

  • Explanation: Criticism escalates conflict and shuts down communication.

  • Impact: Undermines co-parenting and creates tension.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "I think we approach discipline differently. Can we talk about a plan that works for both of us?"

  • Partner B: "Sure, let’s find a way to be consistent together."

  • Explanation: Encourages constructive dialogue and compromise.

  • Impact: Strengthens co-parenting and family dynamics.

• Quick Repair: "I’m sorry for criticizing. Let’s figure this out together."

4. Vacation Planning

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "We’re going to the beach, no discussion."

  • Partner B: "I guess my opinion doesn’t matter, then."

  • Explanation: Dismisses the partner’s preferences.

  • Impact: Causes frustration and feelings of being undervalued.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "I’d love to go to the beach. What kind of vacation are you in the mood for?"

  • Partner B: "Let’s combine the beach with something you’d enjoy."

  • Explanation: Shows willingness to balance preferences.

  • Impact: Enhances connection and mutual satisfaction.

• Quick Repair: "I didn’t mean to exclude your ideas. Let’s plan together."

5. Social Plans

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "We’re going to my friend’s party. You don’t need to decide."

  • Partner B: "Why don’t I get a say in how we spend our time?"

  • Explanation: Assumes control over joint social plans.

  • Impact: Builds resentment and erodes teamwork.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "There’s a party at my friend’s house. How do you feel about going?"

  • Partner B: "I’d rather skip it, but let’s talk about other plans we could make."

  • Explanation: Invites a balanced decision.

  • Impact: Respects autonomy and strengthens partnership.

• Quick Repair: "I should have asked first. What do you want to do?"

6. Handling Stress

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "You’re making a big deal out of nothing."

  • Partner B: "You don’t care about how I feel!"

  • Explanation: Dismisses the partner’s emotions, invalidating their experience.

  • Impact: Creates emotional distance.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "You seem really stressed. What can I do to help?"

  • Partner B: "Thanks for noticing. I just need someone to listen."

  • Explanation: Shows empathy and support.

  • Impact: Builds emotional intimacy and trust.

• Quick Repair: "I’m sorry I brushed you off. I’m here to listen."

7. Career Choices

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "I’m taking the job offer. End of discussion."

  • Partner B: "Why don’t you care how this affects us?"

  • Explanation: Makes a major decision without consulting the partner.

  • Impact: Causes hurt and lack of trust.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "I’m considering a new job offer. Can we talk about what this would mean for us?"

  • Partner B: "Thanks for including me. Let’s weigh the pros and cons."

  • Explanation: Encourages shared decision-making.

  • Impact: Strengthens teamwork and mutual respect.

• Quick Repair: "I should’ve consulted you first. Let’s discuss it now."

8. Managing Time

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "I’m spending my weekend how I want."

  • Partner B: "And you’re leaving me with everything else to handle?"

  • Explanation: Ignores shared responsibilities.

  • Impact: Builds resentment and imbalance.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "I’d like to relax this weekend. What’s on your plate, and how can we balance things?"

  • Partner B: "Let’s work together to make it fair."

  • Explanation: Balances individual needs with partnership.

  • Impact: Creates mutual respect and understanding.

• Quick Repair: "I didn’t mean to leave you hanging. How can I help?"

9. Health Goals

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "You need to start exercising more."

  • Partner B: "Why are you always criticizing me?"

  • Explanation: Comes across as controlling and critical.

  • Impact: Lowers self-esteem and creates tension.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "I’m thinking of starting a workout routine. Want to join me?"

  • Partner B: "That sounds good. Let’s support each other."

  • Explanation: Frames the suggestion positively and invites collaboration.

  • Impact: Builds shared goals and encouragement.

• Quick Repair: "I didn’t mean to criticize. Let’s approach this together."

10. Emotional Support

• Done Badly:

  • Partner A: "You’re always complaining about work. Just get over it."

  • Partner B: "You don’t even care how hard it is for me."

  • Explanation: Dismisses the partner’s emotions, increasing emotional distance.

  • Impact: Causes feelings of being unsupported and alone.

• Done Well:

  • Partner A: "Work sounds really challenging. Do you want to talk about it?"

  • Partner B: "Thanks for asking. I just need to vent."

  • Explanation: Provides validation and emotional support.

  • Impact: Strengthens emotional connection and trust.

• Quick Repair: "I’m sorry for dismissing you. I’m here now."

These examples demonstrate the importance of being open to influence and show how small adjustments can improve communication, trust, and relationship satisfaction.

——-

Don Elium, MFT 925 256-8282 Text/Phone in Northern and Southern California

Disagree Better: Validate Emotions, Don’t Dismiss

10 Examples of Validating Emotions vs. Dismissing

These examples are grounded in research from John and Julie Gottman, Ellyn Bader, Sue Johnson, David Schnarch, Murry Bowen, Stan Tatkin, and Esther Perel, showcasing how validating emotions can strengthen connection, while dismissing them can damage trust and intimacy.

1. Feeling Hurt About a Forgotten Event

Done Badly:

“Oh, stop making such a big deal out of it. I just forgot—it’s not the end of the world.”

Why It Fails: Dismissing the partner’s feelings invalidates their emotional experience, leading to frustration and disconnection.

Impact: Partner feels unimportant, unheard, and resentful.

Done Well:

“I can see why that hurt you—it was important to you, and I didn’t follow through. I’m really sorry for that.”

Why It Works: Acknowledges the partner’s emotional reality, showing empathy and accountability.

Impact: Creates understanding and emotional safety, fostering repair.

Quick Repair:

“I realize I brushed off your feelings earlier. That wasn’t fair—I want to hear more about how this affected you.”

2. Expressing Overwhelm About Chores

Done Badly:

“You’re overreacting—it’s just a little mess. Why are you so upset?”

Why It Fails: Minimizing the partner’s feelings invalidates their experience, making them feel misunderstood.

Impact: Increases emotional distance and defensiveness.

Done Well:

“I can tell this is really stressing you out. Let’s talk about how we can handle it together.”

Why It Works: Acknowledges the partner’s feelings and offers support, fostering collaboration.

Impact: Promotes teamwork and emotional connection.

Quick Repair:

“I shouldn’t have dismissed your stress earlier. I can see this is important to you—let’s revisit it.”

3. Feeling Rejected in Intimacy

Done Badly:

“Why are you so sensitive? It’s not like I said no on purpose.”

Why It Fails: Dismissing the partner’s feelings of rejection minimizes their emotional pain, deepening the disconnection.

Impact: Reduces intimacy and increases feelings of rejection.

Done Well:

“I didn’t realize how that made you feel. I’m sorry you felt hurt—I want to understand more about what you’re feeling.”

Why It Works: Validates the partner’s emotional response, inviting deeper understanding.

Impact: Strengthens emotional and physical intimacy through empathy.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry I dismissed your feelings earlier. I want to understand how this affected you.”

4. Discussing Parenting Conflicts

Done Badly:

“You’re being too emotional about this. It’s not that serious.”

Why It Fails: Invalidates the partner’s concerns and assumes they’re overreacting.

Impact: Undermines trust and weakens the parenting partnership.

Done Well:

“I see you’re really passionate about this—it’s clear you care deeply about the kids. Let’s talk about what’s worrying you.”

Why It Works: Recognizes the partner’s concern and care, encouraging collaboration.

Impact: Builds trust and strengthens teamwork as co-parents.

Quick Repair:

“I realize I downplayed your concerns. I respect how much you care, and I want to listen.”

5. Feeling Disconnected

Done Badly:

“You’re overthinking it—nothing is wrong.”

Why It Fails: Minimizes the partner’s experience, making them feel dismissed and unsupported.

Impact: Amplifies feelings of disconnection and emotional isolation.

Done Well:

“It sounds like you’re feeling disconnected from me. I want to work on this with you—what can we do to feel closer?”

Why It Works: Acknowledges the partner’s feelings and takes responsibility for the connection.

Impact: Restores closeness and fosters a sense of teamwork.

Quick Repair:

“I shouldn’t have brushed off your feelings earlier. Let’s talk about how you’re feeling.”

6. Stress About Finances

Done Badly:

“Why are you freaking out? We’ll figure it out—it’s not a big deal.”

Why It Fails: Dismissing financial stress disregards the partner’s legitimate concerns and creates frustration.

Impact: Increases anxiety and reduces trust in problem-solving as a team.

Done Well:

“I can see how this is weighing on you. Let’s sit down together and figure out a plan.”

Why It Works: Validates the stress and offers a proactive approach to problem-solving.

Impact: Reduces financial anxiety and fosters a sense of partnership.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry I downplayed your stress earlier. I want to understand what’s worrying you and figure this out together.”

7. Feeling Unsupported During Conflict

Done Badly:

“You’re being dramatic—it’s not that serious.”

Why It Fails: Labels the partner’s emotions as over-the-top, invalidating their experience.

Impact: Leads to emotional withdrawal and a sense of being alone in the relationship.

Done Well:

“I can see this is really upsetting for you. I want to understand what’s going on and how I can support you.”

Why It Works: Acknowledges the partner’s emotional reality, inviting connection.

Impact: Strengthens trust and emotional safety.

Quick Repair:

“I regret calling you dramatic—that wasn’t fair. I want to hear how you’re feeling.”

8. Reacting to Criticism About Time Management

Done Badly:

“You’re making a big deal out of nothing. Just relax!”

Why It Fails: Dismissing the partner’s criticism invalidates their feelings and discourages constructive dialogue.

Impact: Escalates the conflict and reduces collaboration.

Done Well:

“I can see why you’re upset—I didn’t manage my time well, and it affected you. Let’s figure out how I can do better.”

Why It Works: Validates the partner’s frustration and takes responsibility, fostering resolution.

Impact: Encourages teamwork and strengthens accountability.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry I dismissed your concerns earlier. I want to take this seriously and work on it with you.”

9. Feeling Neglected

Done Badly:

“You’re always so needy—I can’t be everything for you.”

Why It Fails: Frames the partner’s emotional needs as a flaw, leading to shame and rejection.

Impact: Increases emotional distance and insecurity.

Done Well:

“It sounds like you’re feeling neglected—I want to be there for you. Let’s talk about how we can spend more time together.”

Why It Works: Validates the partner’s needs and invites solutions without judgment.

Impact: Strengthens emotional connection and reduces feelings of neglect.

Quick Repair:

“I regret calling you needy. I didn’t mean to dismiss your feelings—I care about your needs.”

10. Concerns About Work-Life Balance

Done Badly:

“You’re overreacting—I’m working hard for us, so why are you complaining?”

Why It Fails: Dismisses the partner’s feelings, framing their concerns as invalid or ungrateful.

Impact: Creates defensiveness and emotional disconnection.

Done Well:

“I hear that you’re feeling frustrated about how much I’m working. Let’s talk about how we can create more balance.”

Why It Works: Acknowledges the partner’s emotions and demonstrates a willingness to address their concerns.

Impact: Builds mutual understanding and fosters collaboration on balancing priorities.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry for dismissing your concerns earlier. I want to understand what you’re feeling and work on this together.”

Summary of Impact

Validating emotions creates a foundation of emotional safety, understanding, and trust. Dismissing emotions, on the other hand, undermines connection, increases defensiveness, and can damage the relationship over time. Quick repairs are essential to rebuild trust and ensure that dismissive behavior doesn’t take root in the relationship dynamic.

———

Don Elium, MFT 925 256-8282 Text/Phone in Northern and Southern California

Disagree Better: Start Softly, Avoid Harsh, Intense Start Ups

Here are 10 examples of how to “Start Softly” and avoid harsh start-ups in marital disagreements, incorporating insights from John and Julie Gottman, Ellyn Bader, Sue Johnson, David Schnarch, Murry Bowen, and Stan Tatkin. Each example includes a “Done Badly” scenario, an explanation of its impact, a “Done Well” scenario, its benefits, and a quick repair strategy.

1. Discussing Feeling Ignored

Done Badly:

“You never listen to me! You only care about yourself!”

Explanation: This harsh start-up is accusatory and triggers defensiveness. It conveys contempt and criticism, undermining emotional safety.

Impact: Increases conflict intensity, leads to stonewalling or counter-attacks, and weakens trust.

Done Well:

“I feel unheard sometimes, and I’d like us to find a way to improve how we connect during conversations.”

Explanation: This approach is gentle, uses “I” statements, and expresses a need instead of a blame.

Impact: Invites collaboration and empathy, reducing defensiveness and encouraging constructive dialogue.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry I started that in a harsh way. Can we try again? I didn’t mean to accuse you—I just feel hurt and want to share that.”

2. Addressing Forgetfulness

Done Badly:

“You always forget important things! How could you forget again?”

Explanation: “Always” and “again” magnify criticism and imply the partner is inherently flawed.

Impact: Triggers defensiveness, shame, or withdrawal, escalating the issue instead of resolving it.

Done Well:

“I noticed the groceries didn’t get picked up, and I was really counting on that. Can we talk about how to handle these things next time?”

Explanation: Focuses on the specific behavior without attributing a pattern or intent to the partner.

Impact: Keeps the conversation calm and solutions-focused, promoting partnership over blame.

Quick Repair:

“I realize I came across as blaming. I’m sorry for that—I know it’s not intentional.”

3. Expressing Disappointment

Done Badly:

“You never care about what’s important to me!”

Explanation: Overgeneralizations like “never” increase defensiveness and hurt the partner’s sense of being valued.

Impact: Damages emotional connection and leads to feelings of rejection.

Done Well:

“I felt sad when my concern about the budget wasn’t acknowledged. Can we revisit this together?”

Explanation: Acknowledges emotions without blaming or labeling the partner’s character.

Impact: Opens the door to understanding and repair, enhancing emotional closeness.

Quick Repair:

“That wasn’t fair—I know you care. Let me start over.”

4. Setting Boundaries

Done Badly:

“I’m tired of you crossing my boundaries. Stop being so disrespectful!”

Explanation: Combines criticism with contempt, which Gottman identifies as highly corrosive to relationships.

Impact: Escalates conflict and erodes respect, making the partner feel attacked.

Done Well:

“I feel overwhelmed when my boundaries aren’t respected. Can we talk about how to approach this differently?”

Explanation: Uses calm, clear communication to assert a boundary without shaming the partner.

Impact: Encourages collaboration and fosters mutual respect.

Quick Repair:

“I didn’t mean to sound disrespectful. I want to have a respectful conversation about my needs.”

5. Sharing a Concern About Time Management

Done Badly:

“You’re always late! You clearly don’t value my time!”

Explanation: Attacks the partner’s character and motivation, escalating conflict.

Impact: Creates defensiveness and reduces the likelihood of constructive problem-solving.

Done Well:

“When plans run late, I feel stressed because I value time together. Can we talk about how to make this smoother?”

Explanation: Expresses feelings and needs without judgment, inviting a collaborative solution.

Impact: Builds understanding and teamwork while preserving emotional safety.

Quick Repair:

“I shouldn’t have said that so harshly. I’m sorry for blaming you—I just feel frustrated.”

6. Addressing Parenting Differences

Done Badly:

“You’re way too lenient! No wonder the kids act out!”

Explanation: Criticizes the partner’s parenting style, implying they’re inadequate or to blame.

Impact: Sparks defensiveness and resentment, potentially leading to disengagement.

Done Well:

“I feel unsure about how to handle discipline lately. Can we brainstorm some strategies together?”

Explanation: Frames the issue as shared and invites teamwork rather than blame.

Impact: Strengthens the co-parenting bond and models healthy conflict resolution.

Quick Repair:

“That came out wrong—I’m sorry. Let’s talk about this together.”

7. Bringing Up a Financial Issue

Done Badly:

“You’re terrible with money! Stop wasting it on useless things!”

Explanation: Personal attacks increase defensiveness and shame, halting productive dialogue.

Impact: Deepens financial stress and erodes trust in partnership.

Done Well:

“I’m feeling worried about our budget. Can we sit down and review it together?”

Explanation: Addresses the issue directly and calmly, fostering collaboration.

Impact: Builds trust and shared responsibility, reducing financial tension.

Quick Repair:

“I was too harsh. Let me rephrase—this is something I want us to tackle together.”

8. Handling Sexual Intimacy Concerns

Done Badly:

“You’re never interested in sex anymore. What’s wrong with you?”

Explanation: Creates shame and pressure, increasing emotional and physical distance.

Impact: Damages intimacy and emotional safety, leading to resentment.

Done Well:

“I’ve noticed we’ve been less intimate, and I miss that connection. Can we talk about how you’re feeling?”

Explanation: Expresses vulnerability and curiosity, promoting emotional closeness.

Impact: Creates a safe space for addressing intimacy concerns without blame.

Quick Repair:

“I didn’t mean to make you feel bad. Let’s talk about this in a way that feels safe for both of us.”

9. Resolving Household Chores Conflict

Done Badly:

“You never help around the house! I have to do everything!”

Explanation: Accusatory language leads to defensiveness and fails to resolve the issue.

Impact: Reinforces feelings of inequity and resentment.

Done Well:

“I’ve been feeling overwhelmed with housework and could use more help. Can we divide things differently?”

Explanation: Shares feelings and invites a partnership in problem-solving.

Impact: Encourages collaboration and reduces feelings of burden.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry I came across as critical—I know you contribute. Let’s work this out together.”

10. Managing Extended Family Tensions

Done Badly:

“Your family is so controlling! Why don’t you ever stand up to them?”

Explanation: Criticizes both the partner and their family, creating a defensive reaction.

Impact: Increases loyalty conflicts and emotional distance.

Done Well:

“I feel stressed when we navigate family issues. Can we discuss how to handle this together?”

Explanation: Focuses on shared concerns and problem-solving rather than assigning blame.

Impact: Fosters teamwork and strengthens emotional intimacy.

Quick Repair:

“That wasn’t fair of me to criticize your family or you. I want to approach this as a team.”

These strategies align with research on the importance of emotional safety, repair, and constructive communication in relationships. They help de-escalate conflict, foster trust, and maintain intimacy.

——-

Don Elium, MFT 925 256-8282 Text/Phone in Northern and Southern California

Disagree Better: Regulate Emotional Responses

10 Examples to Disagree Better: Regulate Emotional Responses

1. Recognizing Emotional Flooding (Gottman Research)

• Done Badly: Partner A feels overwhelmed but continues arguing, raising their voice. Partner B shuts down in frustration.

• Why: Ignoring emotional flooding prevents either partner from being able to think clearly or resolve the issue.

• Impact: Escalation of conflict, emotional withdrawal, or a cycle of repeated negative interactions.

• Done Well: Partner A recognizes signs of flooding (e.g., increased heart rate) and calls for a 20-minute break to calm down. Partner B agrees and uses the time to self-soothe.

• Why: Pausing the argument allows both partners to return to a calmer state where they can problem-solve effectively.

• Impact: Reduces escalation, improves emotional safety, and models self-regulation.

Quick Repair:

“I didn’t realize I was getting overwhelmed. Let me step back and calm down so we can have a better conversation.”

2. Avoiding the Four Horsemen (Gottman Research)

• Done Badly: Partner A uses criticism: “You never care about my needs.” Partner B responds defensively: “That’s not true! You’re just being dramatic.”

• Why: Criticism and defensiveness reinforce negative cycles of blame and erode trust.

• Impact: Leads to feelings of inadequacy, resentment, and disconnection.

• Done Well: Partner A uses a gentle startup: “I feel hurt when I think my needs aren’t being considered. Can we talk about how we handle this?”

• Why: Using “I” statements avoids blame, invites collaboration, and fosters understanding.

• Impact: Promotes connection, problem-solving, and mutual respect.

Quick Repair:

“I didn’t mean to come across as blaming. I value you, and I want to find a way to work through this together.”

3. Tuning Into Attachment Needs (Sue Johnson – EFT)

• Done Badly: Partner A feels abandoned and lashes out: “You don’t even care about me!” Partner B withdraws, feeling blamed.

• Why: Reacting from a place of attachment insecurity leads to defensive cycles rather than connection.

• Impact: Reinforces feelings of abandonment and disconnection.

• Done Well: Partner A expresses their vulnerability: “I feel alone and scared when we fight like this. I need to feel we’re in this together.”

• Why: Sharing underlying attachment needs fosters emotional connection and repair.

• Impact: Increases trust and emotional intimacy.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry for lashing out. What I really meant is that I feel scared when I don’t feel connected to you.”

4. Differentiation (David Schnarch)

• Done Badly: Partner A relies on Partner B to regulate their emotions, saying, “If you don’t fix this, I can’t handle it.”

• Why: Enmeshment undermines each partner’s emotional autonomy and creates dependency.

• Impact: Leads to resentment and loss of respect.

• Done Well: Partner A manages their emotional response, saying, “This is hard for me, but I’ll work through it. Let’s talk about how we can both feel better.”

• Why: Differentiation fosters self-soothing and promotes mutual support without over-reliance.

• Impact: Builds mutual respect, independence, and resilience.

Quick Repair:

“I realize I was putting too much on you to fix this for me. Let me take a step back and manage my emotions better.”

5. Staying in the Present Moment (Mindfulness)

• Done Badly: Partner A brings up past grievances: “You always do this—just like last time!”

• Why: Focusing on past conflicts distracts from resolving the current issue and adds unnecessary emotional weight.

• Impact: Prolongs the argument and erodes trust.

• Done Well: Partner A focuses on the present: “Right now, I’m feeling hurt because of what was just said. Let’s talk about this moment.”

• Why: Staying present reduces defensiveness and keeps the conversation productive.

• Impact: Encourages resolution and prevents emotional overload.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry for bringing up the past—I want to focus on what’s happening right now and work on this together.”

6. Regulating Fight-or-Flight Responses (Stan Tatkin)

• Done Badly: Partner A yells, and Partner B storms out of the room without explanation.

• Why: Reactive behaviors intensify the fight-or-flight response, escalating conflict.

• Impact: Reinforces disconnection and unresolved issues.

• Done Well: Partner A notices their tension and takes a deep breath before responding calmly: “I need a moment to calm down so I can really hear you.”

• Why: Regulating physiological responses reduces reactivity and invites connection.

• Impact: Creates safety and promotes a collaborative approach.

Quick Repair:

“I reacted too quickly. Let me calm myself down so I can hear you properly.”

7. Navigating Triangulation (Murry Bowen)

• Done Badly: Partner A complains to a friend or family member about Partner B instead of addressing the issue directly.

• Why: Triangulation avoids direct communication and undermines trust in the relationship.

• Impact: Increases feelings of betrayal and perpetuates unresolved issues.

• Done Well: Partner A directly addresses their concerns with Partner B: “I’ve been feeling distant, and I want to work on that with you.”

• Why: Open, direct communication strengthens the couple’s bond and fosters resolution.

• Impact: Builds trust and emotional closeness.

Quick Repair:

“I made a mistake talking to someone else about this. I should have come to you directly because this matters to me.”

8. Using Repair Attempts (Gottman Research)

• Done Badly: Partner A mocks Partner B’s perspective during a fight.

• Why: Disregarding repair attempts (e.g., humor or bids for connection) increases hostility.

• Impact: Escalates the conflict and damages emotional safety.

• Done Well: Partner A says, “I don’t want this to spiral—let’s take a breath and start over.” Partner B responds with openness.

• Why: Effective repair attempts de-escalate tension and refocus the conversation.

• Impact: Strengthens connection and reduces conflict intensity.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry for dismissing your perspective. I want to pause and reconnect so we can figure this out together.”

9. Empathy and Perspective-Taking (Ellyn Bader)

• Done Badly: Partner A dismisses Partner B’s feelings: “You’re overreacting. It’s not a big deal.”

• Why: Dismissing emotions invalidates your partner’s experience and causes disconnection.

• Impact: Creates emotional distance and resentment.

• Done Well: Partner A reflects back: “It sounds like you’re really upset. I want to understand why this matters so much to you.”

• Why: Empathy fosters validation, emotional safety, and understanding.

• Impact: Enhances connection and mutual respect.

Quick Repair:

“I shouldn’t have dismissed your feelings. I want to understand why this is so important to you.”

10. Self-Soothing and Co-Regulation (Sue Johnson and Stan Tatkin)

• Done Badly: Partner A escalates their anger, saying, “You’re impossible to talk to!” Partner B mirrors the frustration, shouting back.

• Why: Escalation creates a toxic feedback loop of heightened emotions.

• Impact: Leads to unresolved issues and emotional exhaustion.

• Done Well: Partner A notices their frustration and pauses, saying, “I’m feeling overwhelmed—I want to talk about this calmly.” Partner B responds with understanding.

• Why: Self-soothing and co-regulation de-escalate conflict and maintain emotional safety.

• Impact: Builds trust and the ability to navigate disagreements together.

Quick Repair:

“I shouldn’t have let my frustration take over. Let’s pause and come back to this when we’re both calmer.”

——-

Don Elium, MFT 925 256-8282 Text/Phone in Northern and Southern California

Disagree Better! Complain instead of Criticize. 10 Examples.

Here are 10 examples of how couples can shift from poorly expressed CRITICISM about disagreements to constructive COMPLANT delivery, done well.

According to John Gottman's research, the distinction between a criticism and a complaint lies in the nature and tone of the expression.

A COMPLANT focuses on a specific behavior or expresses how it affects the individual, often framed constructively (e.g., "I feel upset when you don’t help with the dishes").

In contrast, criticism attacks the other person's character or personality, generalizing their behavior and often using "you" statements that imply personal flaws (e.g., "You never help around the house; you’re so lazy").

This fundamental difference is significant because while COMPLANT can foster healthy discussion and understanding, CRITICISMS can lead to defensiveness and conflict, potentially damaging the relationship over time.

10 Examples

Each example includes a “done badly” scenario, an explanation of why it fails, its impact, and a “done well” alternative with its rationale and positive effects.

1. Forgetting Special Dates

• Done Badly: “You’re so inconsiderate. You didn’t even remember our anniversary. Do you even care about me?”

• Why It Fails: This attack focuses on the partner’s character (“inconsiderate”) and assumes neglect without room for explanation.

• Impact: The partner may feel defensive or resentful, leading to emotional distance.

• Done Well: “I felt hurt when our anniversary passed without acknowledgment. This day means a lot to me, and I’d like us to celebrate it together.”

• Why It Works: The focus is on the speaker’s feelings and needs rather than accusations, inviting collaboration.

• Impact: Encourages empathy and mutual problem-solving, strengthening emotional connection.

Quick Repair:

“I realize I was too harsh. What I really meant is that this day is important to me, and I’d like us to celebrate it together.”

——-

2. Dividing Household Chores

• Done Badly: “You’re so lazy. I’m always the one cleaning up after you.”

• Why It Fails: Name-calling (“lazy”) sparks defensiveness and implies the partner is inherently flawed.

• Impact: Creates resentment and escalates conflict, making it harder to resolve the issue.

• Done Well: “I feel overwhelmed doing most of the cleaning. Can we talk about ways to divide chores more evenly?”

• Why It Works: The speaker owns their feelings and invites cooperation without blame.

• Impact: Opens space for constructive conversation and shared responsibility.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry for calling you lazy. That wasn’t fair—I just feel overwhelmed and need more help. Can we figure this out together?”

——-

3. Quality Time Together

• Done Badly: “You never make time for me. You’re always on your phone or busy with work.”

• Why It Fails: Generalizing (“never”) and blaming shuts down dialogue and can lead to defensiveness.

• Impact: Partner feels accused and unappreciated, reducing willingness to engage.

• Done Well: “I miss spending time together and feel disconnected when we’re not prioritizing us. Can we plan a night to reconnect?”

• Why It Works: Expresses vulnerability and frames the issue as a shared goal.

• Impact: Fosters emotional closeness and problem-solving without defensiveness.

Quick Repair:

“I didn’t mean to make it sound like you don’t care. I just miss us spending time together and want to reconnect.”

——-

4. Handling Conflict

• Done Badly: “You always shut me out. You’re just selfish and don’t care how I feel.”

• Why It Fails: Assumptions about intent (“selfish”) and global criticisms discourage trust.

• Impact: Escalates the argument, creating emotional withdrawal or counterattacks.

• Done Well: “When you walk away during an argument, I feel alone and unheard. Can we work on staying engaged even when it’s hard?”

• Why It Works: Names the behavior, not the character, and seeks a collaborative solution.

• Impact: Builds trust and fosters better conflict resolution.

Quick Repair:

“I shouldn’t have assumed you don’t care. I’m sorry for saying that—I want us to work through this in a way that feels good for both of us.”

——-

5. Financial Decisions

• Done Badly: “You’re so irresponsible with money. I can’t trust you to make good decisions.”

• Why It Fails: Labels (“irresponsible”) attack the partner’s identity and create shame.

• Impact: Erodes trust and discourages productive financial discussions.

• Done Well: “I felt anxious when you bought that without discussing it. Can we agree to talk about big purchases beforehand?”

• Why It Works: Focuses on feelings and specific behavior, fostering collaboration.

• Impact: Encourages teamwork and reduces financial anxiety.

Quick Repair:

“I regret labeling you as irresponsible. What I meant is that I feel anxious about big purchases, and I’d like us to talk about them beforehand.”

——-

6. Showing Affection

• Done Badly: “You’re so cold and unloving. I can’t believe how distant you’ve become.”

• Why It Fails: Labels (“cold”) and catastrophizing push the partner away rather than inviting change.

• Impact: Amplifies feelings of rejection and alienation.

• Done Well: “I’ve missed your hugs and kisses lately. They make me feel loved and close to you.”

• Why It Works: Shares specific needs and invites connection without criticism.

• Impact: Increases emotional and physical intimacy.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry for calling you cold. I didn’t mean to criticize—I miss feeling close to you and want to share that with you.”

——-

7. Parenting Disagreements

• Done Badly: “You’re always undermining me in front of the kids. Do you even respect me as a parent?”

• Why It Fails: Accusatory tone and generalizations (“always”) escalate tension.

• Impact: Undermines teamwork in parenting and creates emotional distance.

• Done Well: “I felt unsupported when you disagreed with me in front of the kids. Can we discuss parenting approaches privately?”

• Why It Works: Acknowledges feelings and invites constructive dialogue.

• Impact: Strengthens co-parenting alignment and mutual respect.

Quick Repair:

“I realize saying you undermine me wasn’t helpful. I’m sorry for that—I’d like us to find a way to discuss these things privately so we can parent as a team.”

——-

8. Emotional Availability

• Done Badly: “You’re never there for me. You don’t care about my feelings.”

• Why It Fails: Absolutes (“never”) and accusations block the partner from responding empathetically.

• Impact: Creates emotional withdrawal and deepens the disconnection.

• Done Well: “I’ve been feeling lonely lately and would love to talk about how we’re both feeling.”

• Why It Works: Expresses needs without blame and invites mutual sharing.

• Impact: Promotes emotional closeness and understanding.

Quick Repair:

“I didn’t mean to accuse you of not caring. I’ve just been feeling lonely and would really love to connect more with you.”

——-

9. Decision-Making Together

• Done Badly: “You always make decisions without me. It’s like my opinion doesn’t matter.”

• Why It Fails: Implies the partner is dismissive and minimizes their intent.

• Impact: Creates defensiveness and discourages collaboration.

• Done Well: “I felt left out when you made that decision without me. Can we make future decisions as a team?”

• Why It Works: Focuses on the behavior and suggests a collaborative approach.

• Impact: Encourages shared decision-making and mutual respect.

Quick Repair:

“I’m sorry for making it sound like you don’t value my opinion. What I meant is that I want us to make decisions together because your input matters to me.”

——-

10. Handling Stress

• Done Badly: “You’re impossible to talk to when stressed. I can’t deal with you.”

• Why It Fails: Criticizes the partner’s coping mechanisms without support.

• Impact: Increases stress and emotional withdrawal.

• Done Well: “I know you’re stressed, but I feel disconnected when we don’t talk. How can I support you better?”

• Why It Works: Shows empathy while addressing the need for connection.

• Impact: Reduces stress and strengthens the bond through support and understanding.

Quick Repair:

“I shouldn’t have said you’re impossible to talk to. I know stress is hard for both of us, and I want to be more supportive while also staying connected.

——-

Don Elium, MFT 925 256-8282 Text/Phone in Northern and Southern California

Disagree Better

Disagree Better:

10 Principles with Examples

1. Start Softly, Avoid Harsh Start-Ups

• Done Badly: “You’re so selfish! You never help around the house!”

• Explanation: Aggressive accusations create an immediate defensive response and escalate conflict.

• Impact: The partner feels attacked and shuts down, reducing the chance for a meaningful resolution.

• Done Well: “I feel overwhelmed with the housework. Can we talk about how we can share the responsibilities better?”

• Explanation: Using “I” statements focuses on personal feelings and invites collaboration.

• Impact: Sets a respectful tone, encouraging cooperation and reducing defensiveness.

2. Express Complaints, Not Criticism

• Done Badly: “You never care about me or what I need!”

•Explanation: Criticizing a partner’s character with absolutes like “never” or “always” triggers defensiveness.

•Impact: Shifts focus away from the issue and into a blame game, halting progress.

• Done Well: “I felt hurt when you didn’t ask about my big meeting. It’s important to me to feel supported in moments like that.”

•Explanation: Complaints focus on specific behaviors, allowing the partner to understand the impact without feeling attacked.

•Impact: Opens a pathway for resolution and reinforces trust through constructive dialogue.

3. Regulate Emotional Responses

• Done Badly: “I’m done talking about this!” (Partner storms out, slamming the door.)

• Explanation: Reacting impulsively without managing emotions increases tension and damages emotional safety.

• Impact: Escalates the conflict, leaving both partners feeling unheard and disconnected.

• Done Well: “I’m feeling overwhelmed. Can we take a 10-minute break to calm down and return to this?

• Explanation: Pausing allows both partners to self-regulate and prevents emotional flooding.

• Impact: Maintains safety and keeps the door open for constructive dialogue.

4. Validate Emotions, Don’t Dismiss

• Done Badly: “You’re overreacting! It’s not that big of a deal!”

• Explanation: Dismissing emotions invalidates the partner’s experience, leading to feelings of rejection.

• Impact: Amplifies disconnection and resentment, making achieving resolution more challenging.

• Done Well: “I can see this matters to you. Tell me more about what’s bothering you.”

• Explanation: Validation acknowledges the partner’s feelings, showing empathy and interest.

• Impact: Strengthens emotional trust and fosters more profound understanding.

5. Address Conflict Directly, Don’t Avoid

• Done Badly: “Let’s just drop it. It’s not worth talking about.”

• Explanation: Avoiding conflict to maintain peace leaves issues unresolved and creates emotional distance.

• Impact: Builds resentment over time and prevents necessary growth in the relationship.

• Done Well: “I know this is a hard topic, but i believe in us and we can work through it.”

• Explanation: Addressing vulnerability issues fosters trust and allows for resolution.

• Impact: Encourages open communication and emotional growth.

6. Clarify Intentions, Don’t Assume

• Done Badly: “You’re just trying to make me feel bad!”

• Explanation: Assuming harmful intentions without clarifying leads to mistrust and defensiveness.

• Impact: Escalates conflict and prevents productive communication.

• Done Well: “I’m not sure what you meant by that. Can you help me understand?”

• Explanation: Asking for clarification prevents misunderstandings and encourages mutual respect.

• Impact: Builds trust and ensures both partners feel heard and respected.

7. Balance Autonomy and Connection

• Done Badly: “We need to agree on everything, or this relationship won’t work.”

• Explanation: Over-fusion* demands alignment at the expense of individuality, creating dependence and resentment.

• Impact: Stifles personal growth and weakens the relationship dynamic.

*In over-fusion, partners may prioritize the relationship to the extent that their personal needs, desires, and interests are neglected. This can lead to issues such as resentment, loss of self, and communication difficulties, as each partner may rely too heavily on the other for emotional support and fulfillment. This can make the relationship less resilient.

• Done Well: “I respect that we see this differently. Let’s figure out a way for us to move forward.”

• Explanation: Embracing differences strengthens the partnership by respecting autonomy and fostering collaboration.

• Impact: Encourages mutual respect and strengthens the bond.

8. Break the Blame Cycle

• Done Badly: “You’re the reason we’re always fighting! You don’t care about us!”

• Explanation: Blame creates a hostile environment, triggering defensiveness and emotional withdrawal.

• Impact: Reinforces a cycle of frustration and disconnection.

• Done Well: “I miss feeling close to you. Can we talk about what’s been going on between us?”

• Explanation: Expressing vulnerability without blame invites connection and collaboration.

• Impact: Encourages responsiveness and fosters emotional intimacy.

9. Honor Agreements and Secure Functioning

• Done Badly: “I know we said we wouldn’t yell, but I’m too upset right now!”

• Explanation: Breaking commitments during conflict undermines trust and reliability.

• Impact: This creates insecurity and weakens the foundation of the relationship.

• Done Well: “We agreed not to yell, please, so let’s stick to that and take turns speaking calmly.”

• Explanation: Honoring shared agreements reinforces trust and demonstrates respect for the relationship.

• Impact: Builds safety and cooperation, allowing for productive conflict resolution.

10. Embrace Differences as Strengths

• Done Badly: “We’re too different. This just isn’t going to work.”

• Explanation: Viewing differences as obstacles create division and hopelessness.

• Impact: Erodes connection and reduces the growth potential.

• Done Well: “Our differences give us a unique perspective. Let’s see how we can use them to solve this.”

• Explanation: Reframing differences as opportunities for collaboration fosters appreciation and creativity.

• Impact: Strengthens mutual respect and reinforces the sense of partnership.

These principles, drawn from the expertise of Gottman, Johnson, Bader, Schnarch, and Tatkin, provide actionable ways to navigate disagreements constructively. By starting gently, expressing needs clearly, validating emotions, and embracing differences, couples can strengthen trust, deepen intimacy, and grow together. Constructive disagreements become an opportunity to learn, evolve, and build a stronger relationship.

——-

Don Elium, MFT 925 256-8282 Text/Phone in Northern and Southern California

Why does my brain always imagine the worst?

You’re not alone if you find yourself frequently stuck in a loop of imagining the worst-case scenario. This process, known as catastrophizing, can feel overwhelming and frustrating. But here’s an important perspective: this tendency is rooted in your brain’s design, a mechanism that evolved to help humans survive. Understanding how your brain works during these moments can be a decisive step toward breaking free from the cycle of worry.

The Brain’s Key Players in Catastrophizing

Two brain areas play crucial roles in this process: the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex. These structures work together to evaluate threats and determine the best response. Let’s break down their roles:

1. The Amygdala: Your Brain’s Alarm System

The amygdala is a small, almond-shaped structure in the brain that acts as an emotional alarm system. It’s responsible for processing fear and anxiety, detecting potential threats, and triggering the body’s fight-or-flight response.

When there’s a real crisis, the amygdala kicks into action, helping you focus on immediate dangers and prioritize survival. This is why you might suddenly feel a surge of alertness or urgency in moments of perceived threat.

2. The Prefrontal Cortex: The Planner

The prefrontal cortex, located at the front of your brain, is the center for higher-order thinking. It’s responsible for decision-making, planning, and problem-solving. When the brain is not overwhelmed by danger signals, the prefrontal cortex steps in to evaluate potential scenarios, weigh risks and benefits, and develop a course of action.

Evolutionarily, this ability to simulate “what-if” situations has been critical for survival. By imagining possible outcomes, our ancestors could plan, avoid dangers, and increase their chances of survival.

When the System Misfires: Catastrophizing

In a true crisis, the amygdala and prefrontal cortex work harmoniously, making you consider worst-case scenarios and choose the best path forward. This system is adaptive and life-saving when facing immediate, tangible threats.

However, in modern life, most threats are psychological rather than physical—think worries about failure, social rejection, or financial stress. In these situations, the brain’s alarm system can become overactive.

This is where catastrophizing comes in. Instead of evaluating threats realistically, the amygdala might dominate, fixating on worst-case scenarios. The prefrontal cortex, overwhelmed by this emotional flood, struggles to provide balanced reasoning. This imbalance can leave you stuck, feeling as though every possible outcome is a disaster.

Why Does the Brain Do This?

The tendency to catastrophize is not a flaw; it’s an overextension of an evolved survival mechanism. For our ancestors, imagining the worst-case scenario—like a predator lurking in the bushes—meant they could prepare and stay safe.

Today, we face fewer immediate physical threats, but our brains haven’t fully adapted to this new reality. As a result, the same mechanism that kept our ancestors alive can lead to overthinking and anxiety in modern life.

How This Mechanism Can Be Helpful

When working as intended, the amygdala and prefrontal cortex collaboration is a powerful tool. It allows you to:

• Quickly identify potential threats.

• Generate multiple possible outcomes, including worst-case scenarios.

• Prioritize responses based on the likelihood and severity of each outcome.

• Take decisive action in uncertain or high-stress situations.

This combination of emotional alertness and strategic thinking is what enables humans to respond effectively to both immediate and long-term challenges.

Breaking Free from Catastrophizing

Understanding the roles of the amygdala and prefrontal cortex can help you recognize when your brain is catastrophizing. Here are some steps to regain balance:

1. Pause and Breathe: Slow deep breaths can calm the amygdala and reduce the fight-or-flight response.

2. Engage Your Prefrontal Cortex: Ask yourself, “What’s the evidence for this scenario?” or “What’s the most likely outcome?”

3. Reframe the Situation: Identify positive or neutral possibilities instead of focusing on worst-case scenarios.

4. Practice Mindfulness: Staying present can prevent your mind from spiraling into future-focused worries.

5. Seek Support: A therapist can help you develop strategies to quiet the alarm system and strengthen your reasoning skills.

By understanding and working with the brain’s natural tendencies, you can transform catastrophizing from a source of distress into an opportunity for growth and resilience. Remember: your brain’s ability to anticipate challenges is a strength—you need guide it toward constructive paths.

Thank You For Telling Me That, Now, What Do I Do?

Welcoming feedback from your spouse, especially when it’s hard to hear, can strengthen your relationship and deepen emotional intimacy.

1. From John & Julie Gottman: Build a Foundation of Trust and Repair

Emotion Coaching: Gottman emphasizes understanding your and your spouse's emotions. When receiving hard feedback:

1. Acknowledge your spouse's feelings without defensiveness.

   Done Badly:

   - Example: When a spouse expresses frustration about feeling neglected, the other responds defensively: "I can't believe you're saying that! I do so much for you!"

   - Why: This reaction dismisses the spouse's feelings and shifts the focus to oneself, creating a sense of invalidation.

   - Impact: The spouse feels unheard and may become more frustrated or withdraw, leading to further disconnect in the relationship.

   Done Well:

   - Example: The spouse responds: "I can see you're feeling neglected, and I'm sorry that this is happening."

   - Why: This response validates the spouse's feelings and shows empathy.

   - Impact: The spouse feels heard and understood, which fosters emotional connection and opens the door for constructive dialogue.

   • Take a deep breath and repeat what you heard to ensure understanding (e.g., "So you're saying that...").

Done Badly:

- Example: After receiving feedback, one partner immediately retorts: "That's not true! You're exaggerating!"

- Why: This reaction shows a lack of effort to understand and leads to escalation.

- Impact: Miscommunication occurs, and the initial issue remains unresolved, leading to resentment.

Done Well:

- Example: The partner takes a moment, breathes, and says: "So you're saying that you feel overwhelmed with household responsibilities?"

- Why: This shows active listening and confirms understanding.

- Impact: It clarifies the message and helps both partners feel more aligned, making it easier to work through the issue together.

• Turn Towards, Not Away: Even if the feedback feels like criticism, see it as an invitation to connect. Respond with curiosity rather than withdrawal or attack.

Done Badly:

- Example: When faced with feedback, one partner shuts down, saying, "I don’t want to talk about this right now," and leaves the room.

- Why: This response avoids engagement and can be perceived as rejection.

- Impact: It creates emotional distance and can lead to feelings of abandonment or anxiety in the other partner.

Done Well:

- Example: The partner responds with curiosity: "I want to understand what you're feeling. Can you tell me more about it?"

- Why: This approach invites deeper conversation and shows commitment to the relationship.

- Impact: It strengthens the emotional bond and allows for collaborative problem-solving, leading to improved relationship satisfaction.

• Repair Attempts: If you feel overwhelmed, please feel free to ask for a pause but express your intention to revisit the conversation. Repair attempts—like humor, affection, a genuine apology, or taking the six steps to repair—can help keep the discussion going

Done Badly:

- Example: During a heated argument, one partner throws their hands up and says, "Forget it! I’m done with this conversation!"

- Why: This reaction indicates a complete withdrawal from engagement and a lack of care for the relationship.

- Impact: It can escalate the conflict, create lasting wounds, and damage trust.

Done Well:

- Example: One partner recognizes the conversation is getting heated and says, "Let’s take a break for a few minutes, and we can come back to this. I care about resolving this."

- Why: This acknowledges the emotional intensity and prioritizes the relationship.

- Impact: It allows both partners to cool down and reflect, leading to a more constructive conversation later and reinforcing the idea that both partners are committed to the conversation and the relationship.

Repair After An Argument

2. From Sue Johnson: Focus on Emotional Safety

• Attachment Framework: Johnson’s Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT) views difficult feedback as a bid for connection. Ask yourself:

  • What is my spouse really feeling underneath the words? (e.g., fear, hurt, longing)

  • How can I respond in a way that reassures their emotional safety?

Ask Yourself: What is my spouse really feeling underneath the words?

Done Badly:

- Example: When a spouse expresses frustration about household chores, the other retorts, "You're just being unreasonable. I work hard too!"

- Why: This response dismisses the deeper emotions behind the frustration, such as feeling overwhelmed or unappreciated.

- Impact: The frustrated spouse may feel invalidated and more isolated, leading to further escalation of the conflict and emotional distance.

Done Well:

- Example: The spouse responds, "It sounds like you feel really overwhelmed with everything on your plate. Is that right?"

- Why: This response seeks to understand the deeper feelings of the spouse, such as stress or fatigue.

- Impact: By acknowledging the underlying emotions, the frustrated spouse feels heard and validated, fostering an environment of emotional safety and encouraging open communication.

• Soften Your Heart: Even if the feedback triggers defensiveness, focus on the underlying need for connection. Respond with vulnerability rather than shutting down.

Done Badly:

- Example: When receiving feedback about not spending enough quality time together, one partner responds defensively: "I can't believe you're saying that! I have a lot on my plate!"

- Why: This reaction focuses on self-protection and shuts down the conversation, ignoring the vulnerability behind the feedback.

- Impact: The other partner may feel rejected and more inclined to withdraw or escalate the conflict, leading to greater emotional disconnection.

Done Well:

- Example: The partner takes a deep breath and responds, "I see that you need more time together, and I feel sad that I haven't been there for you."

- Why: This response acknowledges their partner's feelings and expresses vulnerability.

- Impact: It opens the door for connection and understanding, creating a safe emotional space where both partners can share their needs and desires without fear of backlash.

• Name the Cycle: If the feedback spirals into conflict, label the dynamic ("It feels like we're caught in that cycle where I withdraw and you get more upset"). This externalizes the problem and helps you unite against it.

Done Badly:

- Example: In the midst of an argument, one partner says, "You always do this! You never listen!" while the other lashes back, "Well, you always overreact!"

- Why: This reaction intensifies the blame and fails to address the underlying pattern of behavior in their interactions.

- Impact: The argument escalates, and both partners feel more entrenched in their positions, leading to unresolved issues and increased resentment.

Done Well:

- Example: One partner says, "It feels like we're caught in that cycle where I withdraw, and you get more upset. Can we try to break that pattern?"

- Why: This approach externalizes the problem, shifting the focus from blaming each other to understanding the dynamic at play.

- Impact: By naming the cycle, both partners can work together to address the underlying issues, fostering cooperation and reducing defensiveness. This creates a sense of teamwork and emotional safety, encouraging healthier supportive relationship environment.

3. From Ellyn Bader: Embrace Growth and Differentiation

• Self-Regulation: Bader emphasizes the importance of tolerating discomfort to grow. When feedback feels hard:

  • Ground yourself by taking deep breaths and remembering that discomfort is part of growth.

  • Stay present rather than shutting down or trying to resolve the discomfort immediately.

Done Badly:

- Example: When a spouse receives feedback about being too busy with work and neglecting family time, they immediately react defensively: "You don’t understand how hard I work! I’m doing this for us!"

- Why: This reaction indicates an inability to tolerate the discomfort of criticism, resulting in a defensive shutdown rather than self-reflection.

- Impact: The receiving spouse feels attacked and may withdraw, leading to unresolved issues and a lack of communication. This can escalate tension and create emotional distance between partners.

Done Well:

- Example: The spouse takes a deep breath and says, "I feel defensive about my work right now, but I want to hear what you're saying. Let me take a moment to ground myself."

- Why: This response demonstrates self-regulation by acknowledging discomfort and the need for a moment to process feedback without shutting down.

- Impact: Grounding oneself fosters a more open and constructive dialogue, allowing both partners to communicate more effectively and feel heard, which strengthens their emotional connection.

• Curiosity Over Defensiveness: Instead of seeing feedback as an attack, approach it with curiosity. Ask clarifying questions to understand your spouse's perspective better.

Done Badly:

- Example: When the spouse expresses feelings of being neglected, the partner responds with, "That’s not true! You’re just being dramatic!"

- Why: This defensiveness dismisses the feelings of the other partner and avoids engaging with the feedback.

- Impact: The spouse feels invalidated and may escalate their frustration, leading to further conflict and a breakdown in communication.

Done Well:

- Example: The partner responds, "I didn’t realize you felt that way. Can you tell me more about what you’re experiencing?"

- Why: This approach demonstrates curiosity and a willingness to understand the other partner’s perspective, even if it feels uncomfortable.

- Impact: By approaching the conversation with curiosity, the spouse feels valued and understood, fostering a healthier dialogue and deeper emotional intimacy.

• Differentiate Without Disconnecting: Bader teaches that healthy couples balance individuality and connection. Acknowledge your partner’s perspective even if you don’t entirely agree. For example: "I see how you feel that way. Let me reflect on this more."

Done Badly:

- Example: In a discussion about how to spend the weekend, one partner insists, "We should do what I want; your ideas are always too boring!"

- Why: This response disregards the other partner’s perspective and creates a sense of disconnection.

- Impact: The dismissive approach can lead to feelings of resentment and frustration, causing one partner to feel undervalued and less inclined to share their thoughts in the future.

Done Well:

- Example: The partner says, "I hear that you want to relax this weekend, and I want to explore some new activities. I see how you feel that way. Let me reflect on this more."

- Why: This response acknowledges the other partner's feelings while also expressing individual desires, promoting healthy differentiation.

- Impact: By validating each other's perspectives, both partners can explore compromises that respect individuality while maintaining connection. This fosters mutual respect and strengthens their bond.

Practical Tips (Based on All Three Approaches):

1. Pause Before Reacting: Use a mindfulness technique, like counting to three, to respond thoughtfully.

2. Validate Feelings: Even if the feedback feels unfair, start with validation (e.g., "I can see why you'd feel hurt by that").

3. Own Your Part: Accept responsibility for your actions, even if you feel your partner's perspective isn’t fully accurate.

4. Ask for Specifics: If feedback is vague or overwhelming, gently ask for concrete examples to better understand.

5. Express Gratitude: Thank your spouse for their honesty, even if it’s hard to hear (e.g., "I know it’s not easy to share this, but I appreciate that you did").

10 More Examples

Here are ten examples of dealing with hard-to-hear feedback from a spouse, both done badly and done well, along with explanations of the impact on the spouse in each case, utilizing the resources from Gottman, Bader, and Johnson.

Example 1: Pause Before Reacting

Done Badly:

When receiving feedback, a spouse immediately reacts with anger, saying, "How could you even think that about me?"

Impact on Spouse: This response shuts down communication and makes the feedback-giver feel defensive and hurt, leading to further conflict.

Done Well:

The spouse takes a moment to breathe and counts to three before responding, saying, "That's a lot to take in; let me think about it for a second."

Impact on Spouse: This shows that the feedback is being considered seriously, promoting an atmosphere of emotional safety and willingness to engage in dialogue.

Example 2: Validate Feelings

Done Badly:

A spouse dismisses the other’s feelings by saying, "You shouldn’t feel that way; it's not a big deal."

Impact on Spouse: This invalidation can lead to feelings of isolation and resentment, as the feedback-giver feels unheard and unimportant.

Done Well:

The spouse responds with, "I can see why you'd feel hurt by that; I understand it means a lot to you."

Impact on Spouse: Validating feelings fosters a sense of connection and understanding, encouraging more open and honest conversations.

Example 3: Own Your Part

Done Badly:

A spouse responds by saying, "That's not true; you're the one who overreacts."

Impact on Spouse: This defensiveness creates a blame game, leading to frustration and a breakdown in trust and communication.

Done Well:

The spouse acknowledges, "I can see how my actions contributed to this; I'm sorry for that."

Impact on Spouse: Taking ownership builds trust and shows a commitment to improving the relationship, encouraging the spouse to feel valued.

Example 4: Ask for Specifics

Done Badly:

The spouse responds to vague feedback with frustration, saying, "You always do this; it's never specific!"

Impact on Spouse: This can make the feedback-giver feel criticized and less likely to share in the future, fostering resentment.

Done Well:

The spouse gently asks, "Can you give me a specific example of what you mean? I want to understand better."

Impact on Spouse: Seeking clarity encourages constructive dialogue and shows a genuine interest in resolving the issue.

Example 5: Express Gratitude

Done Badly:

A spouse reacts with annoyance, saying, "I can't believe you brought this up; it's so unnecessary."

Impact on Spouse: This response can make the feedback-giver feel unappreciated and discouraged from being honest in the future.

Done Well:

The spouse responds with, "Thank you for sharing this with me; I know it’s not easy to say."

Impact on Spouse: Gratitude fosters a positive environment where both partners feel safe to communicate openly.

Example 6: Use Mindfulness Techniques

Done Badly:

A spouse interrupts and raises their voice during a conversation, saying, "You don't understand how hard my day was!"

Impact on Spouse: This can escalate conflict and create an environment of hostility, making it hard for either partner to feel heard.

Done Well:

The spouse practices deep breathing before replying, saying, "I’m feeling overwhelmed right now, but I want to hear you out."

Impact on Spouse: This promotes emotional safety and encourages a calm exchange, allowing both partners to express themselves without escalating tension.

Example 7: Acknowledge Past Patterns

Done Badly:

A spouse denies any previous issues, stating, "This is just a one-time thing; you’re overreacting."

Impact on Spouse: This can make the feedback-giver feel frustrated and invalidated, as it dismisses their concerns and experiences.

Done Well:

The spouse reflects, "I realize we've had similar conversations before; let's work together on this."

Impact on Spouse: Acknowledging past patterns shows awareness and a willingness to change, deepening trust in the relationship.

Example 8: Maintain a Non-Defensive Posture

Done Badly:

A spouse crosses their arms and turns away, saying, "Whatever, I don’t want to talk about this."

Impact on Spouse: This body language and refusal to engage can heighten feelings of rejection and frustration, discouraging future conversations.

Done Well:

The spouse maintains eye contact and an open posture, saying, "I want to hear what you’re saying, even if it’s hard for me."

Impact on Spouse: This openness encourages sharing and reinforces emotional connection, enhancing the dialogue.

Example 9: Focus on Solutions

Done Badly:

A spouse responds with, "Well, that’s just how I am, and I’m not changing."

Impact on Spouse: This can lead to feelings of hopelessness and frustration, as it suggests a lack of commitment to the relationship.

Done Well:

The spouse replies, "I appreciate your perspective; let’s discuss how we can address this together."

Impact on Spouse: Focusing on solutions promotes teamwork and collaboration, reinforcing a shared commitment to the relationship.

Example 10: Revisit the Conversation Later

Done Badly:

A spouse brushes off the feedback and changes the topic, avoiding any further discussion.

Impact on Spouse: Avoidance can create lingering resentment and disconnect, leading to unresolved issues.

Done Well:

After taking time to reflect, the spouse later says, "I’ve thought more about what you said, and I’d like to discuss it further."

Impact on Spouse: Reopening the conversation shows commitment to understanding and resolving issues, fostering deeper intimacy and trust.

______

By approaching difficult feedback with trust (Gottman), emotional safety (Johnson), and a growth mindset (Bader), you can transform challenging conversations into opportunities for deeper connection. By applying these principles, couples can ensure that difficult conversations yield positive outcomes, strengthening their relationship rather than causing harm.

———-

• Gratitude: You appreciate their honesty.

• Openness: You’re willing to listen without defensiveness.

• Commitment to Growth: You’re eager to improve the relationship.

•       Empathy: You care about your spouse’s feelings and are dedicated to your relationship.

———

Don Elium, MFT 925 256-8282 Text/Phone in Northern and Southern California