|
Resolving Conflicts: We Don't Have To Argue About It Keiron Brown, Psy.D. One thing that I've learned from many years of working with all types of couples is this: Couples are going to argue! It's bound to happen. If individuals can have conflict within themselves, how can two people with different histories, views of the world and different temperaments, hope to avoid arguing with their partner? I'm typically skeptical of people who say that they've been in long-term relationships and have never argued with their partner. Either they're not being honest with me, or they're not being honest with themselves or the person they're with. How a couple handles anger and conflict is at least as important as how they show love and caring. It is usually during an argument that feelings are most often hurt. It's important to understand what people do when they're mad at each other. When the couple argues, do the partners seek to obliterate each other with words and actions? Do they show any hint of respect or courtesy? Do they implicate their children, family, or friends when embroiled in a heated debate? Does either partner seek to end the relationship when things get tough? Most of these issues are harder to detect when a couple is getting along versus when they are not. It's important to understand what partners do when angry or hurt feelings are present. There are numerous ways of helping people improve things; too many to list here. However, I would like to present some of the ways in which people can make a bad situation even worse. The following are examples of what couples can do to make their relationship much harder than it needs to be. The idea here is: If you recognize that you do these things, try to be aware of them when they happen, stop doing them, and replace those behaviors with the more adaptive alternatives provided in each example. Call your partner on his or her job and either start or continue an argument. PROBLEM: This is one of the most unfair things to do to someone. The person being called is usually at a big disadvantage: it's probably not convenient for them to talk, there's a lack of privacy, they probably can't react the way they want or need to, it adds to the pressure they already face on the job, it interferes with them getting their work done, and they become upset, they have to pull it together and try not to show hurt feelings in front of coworkers or their boss. Another problem this may cause is that the person who was called may smolder about the conflict all during the work day and either explode or shut down when he or she gets home. ALTERNATIVE: If you must call your partner at work, don't get into the problem topic while on the phone. Instead, schedule with him or her a time when you can both sit and discuss your differences, free from distractions, deadlines, and the watchful eyes of others. Get everything off your chest, all at once. PROBLEM: Many times, in an effort to present their side of things, partners will say what's on their minds in one long, seemingly endless monologue. What the partner on the receiving end of this sees is a huge wall of words and information coming at them. If the lecture is long enough, the listening partner has almost no chance to respond to what has been said, and if they do have a point to make, they've probably forgotten what it was by the time the speaker is done. The result: one person gets to say everything he or she wants to, and one person gets to say very little and feels "shut down". ALTERNATIVE: Before you and your partner sit down to talk, each of you is to have no more than a few specific issues to address. Restricting the issues to just a few items forces a person to prioritize what's really important, and to discard relatively minor issues. When each person presents what's on their mind, keep it to a couple of minutes in length. Again, this forces one to choose and be specific about what is said, and keeping it brief helps the listener to not feel so overwhelmed and shut down.Involve as many other people as you can to support your point of view. PROBLEM: Few things bog down effective communication as partners who present what other people have said and done, as a way of supporting their viewpoint. Statements like, "Why can't you be like...", and "I was talking to So-and-so and she said...", not only get in the way of effective communication, but can easily build resentment and a resistance to listening to what each other has to say. Who wants to be compared to, or subjected to the opinions of, people outside of the relationship? ALTERNATIVE: Keep it local! Use your own opinions and views when discussing issues with your partner. Boundaries need to be drawn between the couple and whoever else who stands to intrude on the relationship. Infamous intruders are: in-laws, relatives, friends, and coworkers, all of whom offer their sage advice. Remember: you are the one in the relationship, not "Gina's cousin's friend, Emma". Expect your partner to read your mind. PROBLEM: A lot of people get caught up in the romanticism of ideas such as, "We're so compatible, we always know what each other is thinking", or "We've been together long enough that you should know what I want or what you should do". While these thoughts may help the sales of romance novels, in the real world they often keep hurt feelings and heated conflict going strong. The bottom line is this: regardless of how potent the love or how long the relationship has endured, expecting someone to read your mind and know what you're thinking is setting yourself up for eventual disappointment. If you base the value of a partner's love for you on whether or not he or she knows, 100% of the time, your preferences or feelings about something, the first time the partner doesn't fulfill this huge expectation, you're bound to call into question the truth of that person's caring for you. That's an awfully big consequence to accept, especially since you didn't directly tell the person what it was that you wanted. ALTERNATIVE: Dispense with the sideshow mind-reading bit! If you want someone to know or do something, tell them. Anything short of a partner hearing what you want from your own lips is just speculation. Clearly, of the two of you, only you know what it is that you want or need. So, speak up! Joke about aspects of your relationship or your partner to other people. PROBLEM: While attempting to join in on party chit-chat, a lot of people bring up "little" things about their partner or their relationship because they think it's humorous, cute or not a big deal. Guess what? Those tidbits are probably humorous, cute, and no big deal to you! Your partner might not take those things as lightly as you do. Many a man has been embarrassed about his lovemaking prowess (or lack thereof), and many a woman has been humiliated by a crack about her weight or about getting older. ALTERNATIVE: Don't do it! Sensitivity is the word here. Despite the party atmosphere, you're still making jokes or comments, airing dirty laundry, or taking potshots at your love mate in front of other people! What's worse is that if you touch upon something that your partner is particularly sensitive about, in addition to it being brought up in front of friends and strangers, these people are also laughing at them. Is that what you really want to do to someone you care about? Be careful at that party or gathering, or get ready for a very long and very quiet ride home! In Closing... The list of options here is not intended to be exhaustive by any means. It's meant to give the reader some insight into some behaviors that we all engage in at some point, but to raise an awareness of how they can make problems in a relationship even tougher to work through. These are hints and tips. If couples have longstanding or very disruptive problems and issues, it is strongly recommended that they seek the services of a trained therapist or counselor. Many people are resistant to seek out this kind of help, because they feel that it's a sign of weakness or an indication that they can't handle their own problems. For those of you who may feel this way, think about this: Even the most skilled surgeon in the world can't take out his or her own appendix; that person would have to rely on someone else to intervene, do what needs to be done, and then allow the healing to begin.
|
For each concern below, mark 1, 2, or 3
1. I wonder if I am ready to get married.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
2.Things about my fiancé worry me.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
3. We have important things to work through.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
4. I love my fiancé but I am not sure we should marry.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
5. I will have to give up a lot if I marry.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
6. We have trouble working out differences.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
7. I think there will be 1problems with in-laws.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
8. We have differences in religious beliefs, finances, or children.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
9. One of us wants to change the other too much.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
10. We have differences in romance/sex.
1-a little, 2-medium, 3-a lot
HOW DID YOU DO?
If you scored 10-12, you have the usual anxieties but are doing pretty well; premarital counseling is optional.
If you scored 13-22, it would be a very good idea to get premarital counseling.
If you scored 23-30, Don't Delay-- get premarital counseling!
This questionnaire is designed to measure the degree of satisfaction you have with your present marriage. It is not a test, so there are no right or wrong answers. Answer each item as carefully and as accurately as you can by placing a number beside each statement as follows.
1 - Rarely or none of the time
2 - A little of the time
3 - Sometime
4 - A good part of the time
5 - Most or all of the time
To score this questionnaire the positively worded items must be reverse-scored. If you have scored a positively worded item as 1 it is re-scored as 5, 2 becomes 4, 3 remains 3, 4 becomes 2 and a score of 5 becomes 1. The positively scored items that must be reversed scored are 1,3,5,8,9,11,13,16,17,19,20,21,23. After all the positively worded items have been reverse scored, all 25 items are summed. The final step is to subtract 25 from this sum. Scores below 30 are considered indicative of satisfaction with the relationship. The higher the score the more dissatisfaction with the relationship is indicated.
How can couples therapy can make a difference?
To work with these couples the therapist needs to stay with the victim and
his or her partner and help them deal with intense negative affect, particularly
fear, and express this affect in a manner that draws the other to them, rather
than in a way that initiates stuck cycles of defense and distance. Dealing with
strong affect, such as fear, which constricts how people process information and
how they interact with others, is part of the everyday process of marital
therapy. Helping these couples is then an intensification of a process with
which most marital therapists are already familiar. Couples therapists can have an enormous impact here, helping the couple
redefine their relationship and their responses to trauma and alleviating the
stress this places on the family as a whole. Many interventions, such as
exposure or flooding can only address one set of trauma symptoms; couples
therapy is able to address each of the symptom groups that constitute post
traumatic stress disorder, re-experiencing, avoidance and numbing and
hyperarousal. These symptoms are also alive and accessible for modification as
they are played out, in front of the therapist, as part of the drama of an
intimate relationship. The creation of a satisfying intimate relationship is
perhaps one of the few things that can rob trauma of its sting and endow life
with new meaning, even in a dangerous world. by Sue Johnson, Ph.D. References Traumatic events, especially events that occur in the context of close
relationships wound us deeply, teaching us that not only is the world a
dangerous place, but those who we rely on the most for comfort in such a world
are the people who can wound us the most. Inevitably, when we come to embrace
others and hold them close, these wounds are touched. The way we react to that
touch often makes it hard for those we love to come close and give us the
support we need to heal. To heal from what Judith Herman (1992) calls, "violations of human
connection" trauma that is inflicted by those we need and love, we need
new, positive experiences of connection and caring. Often, a healing
relationship with an individual therapist can help us, but the therapist is not
there in the middle of the night when the ghosts of trauma come for us; we need
our partner to help us fight those ghosts. Often, when partners do not
understand how deeply wounded we are, and how everyday interactions contain
echoes of past terrors, they brush against those wounds, confirming all the
fears that the trauma left us with. Present relationships can be a vital part of
the healing environment for trauma survivors or they can be part of the problem,
helping to maintain trauma symptoms and dysfunctional methods of coping. Couples
therapy can make the difference between a new healing connection with others and
on-going re-traumatization. Why Couples Therapy? The ability to derive comfort from another human being appears to be a more
powerful predictor of whether trauma symptoms improve and self-destructive
behavior can be regulated than the history of the trauma itself (van der Kolk,
McFarlane & Weisaeth, 1996). Marital therapy as a modality is able to
directly address key elements in the healing environment, such as the offering
of comfort, the fostering of confiding and the confirmation of the self in
everyday interactions as lovable and worthwhile. Traditionally, however, the
treatment of trauma has focused on individual and group therapy, rather than on
couples interventions. However, there is a growing recognition that the
multidimensional nature of post traumatic stress disorders often requires a
combination of several different treatment approaches and modalities, and that
couples therapy can be a potent addition to the treatment of trauma. Why do trauma survivors and their spouses seek out marital therapy? The
answer is in the nature of trauma itself. Trauma intensifies our need for close
supportive relationships and at the same time undermines our ability to create
and maintain such relationships. If we look at the after effects of trauma,
defined in the DSM IV as an experience of intense fear, horror and helplessness,
the potential impact of trauma on a couple's ability to create a loving
relationship becomes clear. Occasionally couples come to therapy with circumscribed reactions to trauma,
for example, even in the happiest of marriages, where there has been no previous
trauma to undermine either partner's faith in others, a traumatic event external
to the relationship itself, such as the accidental death of a child, can
undermine the couple's relationship. In extreme circumstances, if partners
cannot support each other and stand together, perhaps because of different
styles of grieving, they tend to become polarized and alienated from each other.
Relationship distress then interferes with constructive coping and negative
coping strategies, such as withdrawal or blaming, exacerbate relationship
distress. In this kind of scenario, couples therapy may be the best intervention
and may be sufficient, if the therapist can find ways to help the couple support
and comfort each other. The therapist might help the couple construct what
Charles Figley (1989) calls a healing theory, as to why the trauma occurred and
why they each dealt with it the way they did, and help them to respond
empathetically to each other. Very often however, couples come to therapy because past traumas, such as
childhood sexual or physical abuse, have undermined their ability to form a
secure bond with each other and have to a great extent, defined their
relationship. In these cases, the trauma survivor and also his/her partner are
often suffering from post traumatic stress disorder and will usually be involved
in some form of individual treatment in addition to couples therapy. In these
couples, the classic aftereffects of traumatic experience as described in the
DSM IV and how each of theses effects impact the couple's relationship are
evident. The Effects of Trauma The first effect of trauma mentioned in the DSM is persistent re-experiencing.
This includes intrusive thoughts, nightmares, flashbacks and physiological
reactions to trauma cues. These symptoms can be disruptive in themselves. For
example, a victim of childhood abuse may react extremely negatively to her
spouse coming up behind her and encircling her with his arms. For her, this cues
a sense of helplessness that evokes an immediate fight, flight or freeze
response. These responses also often alienate the partner, who may not
understand his wife's reaction and then react negatively to her precisely when
she needs him the most. Activities such as confiding or affectionate holding or
lovemaking that have the potential, even in distressed couples, to soothe and
comfort, become laden with trauma cues and dangerous in themselves for the
survivor and also for the spouse, who is never able to reliably predict his or
her partner's response. The trauma survivors sense of shame often precludes even
talking about such responses, so that the partner has little chance of
understanding and loses any sense of positive control in the relationship. As
one client described it, "I've read the book, the one that explained what
trauma was, but I still don't know what is going to happen from minute to minute
here. I feel like I'm going crazy trying to guess how she will react. And I
never get any of my needs met." Not knowing how to make a difference and
experiencing his or her partner as unpredictable, this partner often then
withdraws and, as the survivor experiences it, leaves him or her to face the
ghosts of trauma alone. This abandonment then exacerbates the survivor's
insecurity in the relationship. The second after effect of trauma described in the DSM IV is avoidance of
trauma cues and the numbing of general responsiveness. Partners often describe
survivors as detached or estranged and as seemingly indifferent or unengaged in
everyday life and interactions. Emotional engagement, one of the prime
predictors of marital satisfaction and stability (Gottman & Levenson, 1986)
becomes almost impossible and isolation pervades the relationship. Isolation
also then tends to maintain trauma symptoms and prime problematic attempts at
self soothing, such as drinking or substance abuse. Apart from avoiding any
situation where vulnerability may arise, which already constricts interactions
between partners, survivors' general lack of emotional responsiveness is
aversive to their partners. In fact, this is a common complaint made by
non-traumatized distressed couples and a major reason for initiating couples
therapy. In couples dealing with trauma this is particularly problematic. For
example, research suggests that combat veterans wives find their partner's
withdrawal extremely aversive and these partners become profoundly lonely and
vulnerable to a variety of somatic complaints. If accessibility and
responsiveness is taken as the basis of a secure bond, as outlined in the
literature on attachment (Bowlby, 1988), this numbing and avoidance on the part
of the survivor will, in all likelihood, evoke growing insecurity and distress
for the other partner and create or exacerbate relationship distress. Numbing and avoidance also makes new experiences, that might provide new
information to the trauma victim, or a new experience of connection, hard to
come by. There is little opportunity then to potentially balance or correct the
negative lessons learned in the trauma experience about what it is to be
vulnerable to or dependent on others. More globally, the loss of ability to
regulate affective states is generally accepted as a, if not the, primary effect
of trauma. Survivors describe themselves as being in a perpetual state of alarm
or numb. Neither of these states make for open flexible communication or
interactions with others. Our emotions are key signals that communicate our
needs and concerns to those close to us in a manner that pulls for specific
responses; weeping disarms and evokes compassion and anger challenges or cues
compliance. Trauma scrambles the main signaling system that organises our
interactions; no wonder the partners of survivors often speak of feeling lost,
bewildered and inadequate and survivors themselves can no longer identify or
express their longings and needs. In some cases victims are so absorbed in dealing with past events and so
uninvolved in the present that partners experience them as "there"
rather than "here" and the relationship as essentially lost. In the
novel, The English Patient, there is a point where the nurse realizes that for
her lover, even when she is actually making love with him, she is just on the
"periphery"; his attention is focused on "what is
dangerous". Sometimes this kind of absence or dissociation is specific to
particular situations; for example, a partner may ask why, after years of
seemingly normal lovemaking, his spouse will not allow him to touch her. He is
not comforted by his wife's response that she was "never there" in
their lovemaking and in fact felt that she had never really slept with anyone
except her abuser. The third aftereffect noted in the DSM IV is increased arousal,
hypervigilance and irritability. This often shows up as outbursts of anger,
hostility and an extreme intolerance to any difficulty or threat. It is
important for the couples therapist to ask specifically about violence and abuse
and if necessary, to refer violent partners for help with this issue, preferably
before beginning couples therapy. The victim's partner often comes to be defined
as the enemy, as yet another betrayer, particularly since survivors have such
compelling reasons not to trust and to be vigilant for slights or signs of
threat. Such hypervigilance often occurs exactly when the victim is vulnerable
and needs a safe haven and results in the partner feeling driven away and the
victim again feeling alone and abandoned. Impairment in social functioning is one of the diagnostic features of post
traumatic stress disorder and it is not hard to understand why, given the
problems described above. Impairment is also not only confined to the
individual; the effect of trauma on the spouse and the family are profound. The
clinical reality of post traumatic stress disorder also often involves
depression and together with that depression a sense of self as shameful,
unworthy of care and even responsible for and deserving of the trauma. In incest
survivors the definition of the self as bad and responsible for the abuse may be
viewed as way of preserving the much needed relationship with abusing attachment
figures. These survivors, often find it almost impossible years later to believe
that their partner could know them and still care for and respect them. The
nature of shame is to "hide and divide" (Pierce, 1994) and for these
people basic elements of intimacy, such as self-disclosure, can then be
exceedingly problematic. Couples Relationships can Help Recovery The flip side to this picture, which suggests that for trauma survivors and
their partners creating a close positive relationship can be a monumental
challenge, is that the couple relationship, if fostered and supported, can have
a potent impact on the recovery process, and that couples therapy has the
potential to not only improve the couples relationship but also to contribute to
this recovery. Any couples therapy that includes survivors will need to include
special features, such as a psychoeducational component about the nature of
trauma and a heightened awareness of the potential for violence and coping
mechanisms such as substance abuse and self-injury. Some interventions may also
be more appropriate than others for these couples. Approaches to couples therapy
that focus on dealing with affect and the systematic creation of a secure
attachment bond, such as Emotionally Focused Couples Therapy (EFT, Johnson,
1996) may be particularly appropriate. Secure attachment is seen by many trauma
experts as providing the primary defense against the effects of trauma (van der
Kolk, McFarlane & Weisaeth, 1996).
In general, safe attachment has been identified as the primary defense against
trauma. Couples therapy is able to directly address the bonding process between
partners. A client remarked, "I want her to find a safe place to rest from
all this horror in my arms, instead of driving too fast in her car, all alone,
on the freeway, like she does now."
Bowlby, J. (1988). A Secure Base. New York: Basic Books
Figley, C.R. (1989). Helping Traumatized Families. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gottman, J. & Levenson, R. (1986). "Assessing the Role of Emotion in
Marriage," Behavioral Assessment, vol. 8, pp. 31-48.
Herman, J. (1992). Trauma and recovery. New York: Basic Books.
Johnson, S. (1996). The Practice of Emotionally Focused Marital Therapy:
Creating Connection. New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Pierce, R.A. (1994). "Helping Couples Make Authentic Emotional
Contact," In S. Johnson & L. Greenberg (Eds.), The Heart of the Matter:
Perspectives on Emotion in Marital Therapy, pp. 75-107. New York: Brunner/Mazel
Van der Kolk, B., McFarlane, A., & Weisaeth, L. (1996). Traumatic Stress.
New York: Guilford Press.