People seek psychotherapy for a multitude of specific purposes tailored to their own lives, but one common thread is hope for change or growth through an inward look at self. However, this differs from motivation that drives couples to seek counseling in that when couples present for initial sessions, each partner’s goal is to change the other. In the earliest stages of couples work, the other person is always to blame, and the search for insight into self goes out the window because in couples cork, insight leads to accountability, accountability leads to vulnerability, and with that comes potential risk of emotional injury. This is where the therapist becomes a useful instrument in helping partners gain insight needed to allow for vulnerability that in worst case scenarios puts us at risk, but ideally allows for the intimacy we crave.
In the advent of couples work, defenses are high, weapons are loaded, and partners are entrenched in their position. Each hopes I will serve as referee, adjudicator, or teammate in a secret alliance against the other. My first order of business is to make clear my alliance to the couple, and assert that position. The way in which I first make this clear is my use of neutral statements whenever one partner “tells” on the other. For example:
Client: Can you believe he went out with his friends both nights last weekend, and left me home”?
Me: That seems to frustrate you. How do you typically respond when your needs aren’t met?
There is often blowback from the complainant because s/he is used to reactions offered by people with whom there is an existing alignment that precludes objectivity. Once the client is able to circumvent exasperation triggered by my unwillingness to criminalize the partner’s behavior, we establish I am on team couple. My response also incorporates validation of feelings, and the creation of a safe space in which the client can elaborate without fear of judgement.
“What would you have preferred” encourages clients to acknowledge their needs, and state them in a way other than the demanding or parental ways sure to push a partner out the door.
Another commonality of early stage couples work is a focus on relationship content; meaning partners report all negative exchanges between them. My suggestion is a focus on process; meaning how the exchanges were carried out. The latter approach creates opportunity for identifying patterns that lead to a breakdown in the communication process, and ultimately, intimacy. Similar to individual psychotherapy, only when insight to established patterns is gained can change be possible. It is easy for a couples therapist to be fooled by reports of no arguments in a given time frame, but that always prompts me to inquire about levels of tension throughout the same time frame. If tension was low, notable change in conflict resolution cannot be established, but if stressors presented, and the couple functioned as a team to work through the stress, mirabile dictu, progress has been made. Among the many barriers to couples functioning as a team is lack of accountability for one’s own role in the turmoil. This is where I meet the most resistance in couples work.
It is an unfortunate reality that in relationship therapy, accountability is often misconstrued as weakness. Not only is this a fallacy, but the exact opposite is true. Assuming personal responsibility for one’s own behavior indicates emotional maturity necessary for healthy relationships. What limits our willingness to be accountable for our own behavior is the inherent vulnerability in acknowledging weakness, or saying “I’m sorry.” There is an inherent dilemma to intimacy created by our simultaneous desire and avoidance of this human need. The dilemma is we can either be close, and maybe get hurt, or avoid, and experience nagging emptiness and isolation. Therefore, when relationships get heated, our defenses spring into action, and we go on the offensive. It is only when tension wanes that we realize damage done in the heat of battle is contradicts what we most want to from our closest relationships.
Can you think of an example of when you allowed your defenses to inhibit closeness?
When partners shift their focus from blame to personal responsibility, the entire dynamic of couples therapy changes. There is less fighting in sessions because they are no longer monopolized by accusations and “squealing”. As fighting in sessions reduces, there is also a reciprocal gain in each partner’s understanding of what the other thinks and feels about “self.” When one partner understands the other is struggling with some part of self, empathy is developed, and each works with the other to nullify weakness, and build on strengths. A positive byproduct of letting our guard down is reduced energy expended by keeping it up, and reduced anxiety caused by maintaining pretenses. Calm lives in our ability to accept our own humanity.
It is far too often the case that couples wait until a crisis point to enter relationship therapy, but like in all aspects of medicine, it is more sensible to be preventative in our approach to relationship problems. Entering couples therapy based on “want” rather than “need” allows for exploration of potential pitfalls, and also creates a far less turbulent emotional climate in the room. Couples can embark on discovery together, and in so doing, deepen their bond, and fortify defenses against lurking stressors sure to jump out at some point. Being proactive also shifts couples’ perception of the therapist from referee to teammate who aligns with the couple toward attaining relationship goals.
Entering therapy is its own sign of maturity, but that maturity is undermined in couples therapy when each member of the couple loses sight of who most needs to change. Once each partner understands the benefits of seeking change within self, goals are attained in the absence of blame, therapy becomes the enriching process it is intended to be, and couples flourish in the security of deepened intimacy.
