copyright by ed young, phd, 1998 115 outline of ‘possible’ middle stages likely to occur as a...

copyright by ed young, PhD, 19981

Outline of ‘Possible’ Middle Stages Likely to Occur As a Relationship Unfolds Over a Long Period of Time


The Influence Of Implicit Others On the Quality and Course Of A Relationship

The Influence Of Explicit Others, Namely Parents and In-Laws On the Course and Quality Of A Relationship

• c


The Dynamics Of Suppressed Rage In Intimate Relationships


CAUSES VS REASONS FOR SEPARATIONCauses of Separation Are Usually Unconscious

Criteria for Fulfillment and Style of Relating

PSYCHOLOGICAL SEPARATION

Reasons are conscious, either spoken or unspoken, unresolved issues and unbearable feelings

Dynamics of Separation:


Final Stages: Terminating The Relationship


The Open Alienation and the Exchange Theory: ‘You Took My Life, You Owe Me, And You’re Gonna Pay-big Time!’

An Implicit Concept of Psychological ‘Equity’


Restructuring The Relationship

• Confession and rapprochement

• Negotiation

• Third party mediation and arbitration

• Couple’s Counseling


THE ROLES OF SIMILARITY, COMPLEMENTARITY, HISTORY, AND

RECIPROCITY IN THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS


DYNAMICS OF NEGOTIATIONPOSSIBLE POSTURES OF MATES TOWARD EACH OTHER DURING PATHOLOGICAL NEGOTIATION

Imagine the following scenarios and see if you have been involved in any of them:

(D)OMINANT (S)UBMISSIVE

Suppose D wins the negotiation. D is smug and self satisfied, put one over on S. S knows the way D feels a sickening, suppressed resentment. S will make sure there eventually is a cost to D, probably in a passive-aggressive maneuver.

Suppose D lets S win. S will probably feel triumphant and first and then begin to wonder what D’s ulterior motive was - distrust is generated. S initially felt appreciative but later takes it back, showing distrust. D then feels resentment because there is no way of winning with or satisfying S.

Suppose D loses the negotiation. How can D, in the dominant position, lose (without throwing the fight) to S without feeling the dominant position is threatened. S had to have found some leverage, used some form of blackmail, threatened to withhold something of greater importance to D, used some form of deception, or other type of manipulation. The position of dominance being important to D, there will be a determination not to just win big next time, but to extract some pain or humiliation to teach S a lesson to never try that again. S knowing, or suspecting this possibility will have a short lived, disguised, elation, followed by a fear of severe retribution in the near future.

Suppose D wins easily on an important issue. D knows winning is the norm, but in this case, winning easily makes D suspicious of possible ulterior motives or insincerity. S may have an ulterior motive but does not want to be questioned about. Being questioned results in S becoming enraged. On the other hand, S may simply have not felt up to fighting, especially knowing the battle will still be lost. Being questioned when there is no ulterior motive, just fatigue or resignation, S sinks into agitated despair.

Suppose there is a very important issue that S feels must be fought for, insisting on a win. After proving the importance of S’s position, after bringing out the ledger of how often D had won, after pulling out all the stops, S still loses, S will feel indignant, disillusioned, exasperated, and perhaps take the lack of a win in this case as a clear sign that this relationship is untenable and consider getting out. D, on the other hand, feels the dominant position is made more secure and feel more confidant. If S does leave, or D is later proven to have been wrong, D is surprised , hurt, confused, and humiliated and ready to inflict retribution.

None of these interactions demonstrate rationality. Neither do they lead to a trusting, genuine, warm relationship. Winning and losing in a intimate relationship is always destructive to the relationship, erects walls, and leaves both feeling lonely and unsatisfied, like the mate they are supposed to receive nurturance, comfort, and support from is actually their enemy.


NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES AND THEIR FALL-OUTWITH EQUAL AND UNEQUAL ROLES

D

S

D WINS

D

SS WINS

D S

EQUITABLE, FAIR DECISION There is NO ‘D’ or ‘S’. Both WIN.

Mutually empowered, open, transparent, trusting, satisfying relationship.

D feels powerful and direct.S feels weak, suppressed resentment, subtly manipulative.

D feels humiliated, enraged.S feels brief satisfaction, then anxiety and dread.

D

S

S surrenders so as to pacify D

D

SD surrenders so as to pacify S

D S

EQUITABLE, FAIR DECISION There is NO ‘D’ or ‘S’. Both WIN.

Mutually empowered, open, transparent, trusting, satisfying relationship.

D feels powerful, direct, but patronized.S feels psychologically superior, disrespects D.

S feels smug but patronized, displays insincere gratitude.D feels psychologically superior, disrespects S.

Gender role expectations of dominance and submission leads to pathological negotiation and dysfunctional relationships.


SOME ISSUES REQUIRING NEGOTIATION AND CATEGORIES OF OPTIONS

• What are the long term goals to be. Whose career will take priority when opportunities may require major changes.

• How honest to be and about what. How are emotions to be expressed and reacted to.• How much freedom ‘to go and do’ each is going to have and to allow the other. How much

freedom is permitted in society and what are the limits. How will disapproval be expressed. • How much self reliance versus dependence is going to be assumed by each for self and the

other. How much mutual support is expected.• What kinds of things will each expect from the other without having to spell it out.• What will the expectations about sexual relations be. How are relations with other members

of the opposite sex to be handled.• What information about themselves and the relationship does each consent to have shared

outside of the relationship. How are in-law relations to be handled.• How are the financial resources going to be stored, invested, distributed, spent, recorded, and

managed. How are exceptions to be handled.• How are schedules going to be arranged and how are exceptions to be handled.• How are differences in beliefs, affiliations, interests, preferences, values, to be handled. How

are differences over mutual participation in activities and functions to be handled.• How are household chores to be distributed and carried out. How are exceptions and

incomplete tasks to be handled.• What is the style of child rearing to be. How are problems to be resolved. What are the goals

both have for the child: Achievement, happiness, independence and self reliance, maturity, specific traits. What will be required of the child: degrees of obedience and conformity, limits, dealing with consequences, levels of achievement, types of recreational involvement.

• What strategies are going to be used: punishment, incentives, reasoning, open and mutual discussion, natural consequences, emphasis on parent-child bond.


IDEAL NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES

• The first suggestion for negotiation strategies is to always allow for a negotiated agreement to be capable of being re negotiated. Not disregard, but re negotiate.

• Regardless of how phony either feels when first attempting negotiation, be determined to endure that feeling and allow a genuine attempt to try the process and observe the results at least few times. The eventual acquisition of skill overcomes the feelings of awkwardness or phoniness.

• Negotiations work best if each agrees to express and allow the other to express all of their thoughts about the issues, all questions, alternatives, preferences, fears, and reservations.

• Negotiations should never end without each confiding and exploring their truest and deepest feelings about the agreement. If feelings arise that suggest going through the whole negotiation process again, this is preferable to a later sabotage.

• Alternatives that either strongly objects to should still be given a full hearing. Afterward, objections should be given a full hearing. Anything that is aborted or suppressed is bound to surface in a more nasty way later. Pay a little now or a lot later.

• With respect to any item being negotiated, try to brain storm and come up with all of the variations and alternatives possible. Some obvious aspects involved in a negotiation are: ‘do this now and that later’, ‘do this now or later’, ‘more of this and less of that’, ‘I do this part or this time and you the other’, ‘one of us does this and is compensated by the other doing an equivalent’.

• Never make an agreement that is negative or harmful to one or both parties. Never end with either feeling like the victor or loser.


Successful Restructuring Involves Learning to Share Resources and Divide Tasks and Responsibilities Fairly and Equitably

Positive Reciprocity Means Taking the Perspective of the Other as Though They Were Yourself and Assessing Resources as Though You Were an Objective Judge of Both You and Your Partner


What Happens When There Are Competing Interests and No Negotiations?


A Recipe For Negotiation


What A Difference A Little Friendly Negotiation Makes!


NEGOTIATION FOR SYNCHRONIZING SEXUAL BEHAVIOR AND GENDER RELATED HORMONAL RHYTHMS


Couple’s Reciprocity TestRECIPROCITY

The Tendency To Share Equally With Respect To All Things Between Mates

On the following pages you will find questions that relate toequality, fairness, sharing, and reciprocity in your relationship. Youwill be asked to estimate whether you are fair on certain issues,whether you feel you mate is fair, whether you think your mate feelsthey are fair and whether you think your mate feels you are fair.These are issues and questions that come up frequently in mostrelationships. These are issues that are often laden with strongfeelings and emotions, sometimes vocal and sometimessuppressed.

The disagreements often are grounded in myths and beliefsabout gender stereotypes, personality tendencies and personalidentities, patterns present in family histories, and beliefs aboutoccupational demands and prerogatives. People are seldomconsciously aware of the origin and influence of their biases. Theattempt of each party go address the problem in a rational mannerwithout having dealt with these underlying issues means there isreally no possibility to reach that rational decision.

Typically there are charges and counter charges untilsomeone throws in the towel. Since neither party can agree on abasic definition of the problem, these issues are seldom resolved.They can almost never arrive at a point where they can reasonablydiscuss how the issue should be assessed and therefore theproblem is never negotiated and concluded with an agreement withwhich both parties feel comfortable.

Using the following instrument, those nagging, relationshipdestroying issues can be brought into the open with disclosure ofhow each sees the problem and particularly how each really feelsdeep down about the problem. When these facets are out in theopen, it may be possible to discuss the hidden origins of theproblem from your side and the hidden biases from the other

person’s perspective. These are tough problems, but they can onlybe solved if each is willing to be brutally honest with themselves andtruly listen to the feelings and perspectives of their mate.

Therefore, you first read and respond to the questions withthe five point scale to the left of the question. On the scale, 1represents no problem or comfort with the issue and 2 that you aresafe on that issue at this time while 5 represents a serious problem,and 4 means this is an issue that portents danger for therelationship.

When you have each finished with the questions, use onesupplied profile sheet to record each person’s profile with a note, inthe space to the right or left, concerning the significance of theissue, from each party’s own point of view, for the relationship.

Any items that either party has cited as a significant issueshould be carried over to the next page where both, together, willwrite an agreed upon assessment of the issue, followed by theresults of a negotiated solution to the problem.

When the problem issue arises again at home, either of youcan return to your assessment and agreement and use it as astarting point for trying to understand the issue better and come to asuccessful resolution. As you repeat this procedure at home, youmay become more expert at being able to talk it out and resolve it tomutual satisfaction.


Couple’s Reciprocity Test


Reciprocity Scale Continued


Issues Each Party Felt Were In Need Of Discussion


Exploration and Negotiation of IssuesISSUES YOU BOTH FEEL NEED TO BE EXPLORED, REDEFINED, AND RE NEGOTIATED

Issue 1. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Negotiation and Agreement: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Issue 2. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Issue 3. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Issue 4. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Negotiation and Agreement: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Understanding The Nature Of Transparency

TRANSPARENCY

WHEN I AM TALKING:

I AM TRYING TO MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR THE PERSON LISTENING TO KNOW AND UNDERSTAND EXACTLY HOW AND WHY I PERCEIVE MY SITUATION TO BE WHAT IT IS, WHAT ALL OF MY FEELINGS AT THAT MOMENT ARE, AND WHY I FEEL THESE FEELINGS, EXACTLY WHAT I AM WANTING, NEEDING, AND TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH, AND WHY THESE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT TO ME. I AM TRYING TO COMMUNICATE AS FRANKLY, OPENLY, AND HONESTLY AS I CAN, AS CLEARLY AND UNDERSTANDABLY TO THE OTHER PERSON AS I CAN. SINCE IT IS EASY FOR ME TO ASSUME THAT THE OTHER PERSON UNDERSTANDS, YET IT IS OFTEN THAT THEY HAVE NOT FULLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT I AM TRYING TO COMMUNICATE, I ASK GENTLE QUESTIONS AND PROVIDE CLARIFICATIONS TO INSURE THAT THE OTHER HAS FULLY UNDERSTOOD.


Understanding The Nature Of Empathy

EMPATHY

WHEN I AM LISTENING:

I AM USING MY IMAGINATION TO TRY TO PUT MYSELF INSIDE OF THE OTHER PERSON SO THAT I CAN IDENTIFY WITH THEIR UNIQUE PERSONAL, SOCIAL, AND ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY, WITH THE WAY THEY ARE PERCEIVING THE WORLD AND THEIR IMMEDIATE SITUATION, AND I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT THEIR FEELINGS ARE, AND UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE WANTING AND NEEDING, AND WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO COMMUNICATE. SINCE THIS IS USUALLY A VERY DIFFICULT THING TO DO BECAUSE MY OWN FEELINGS, WANTS, NEEDS, AND PRESUMPTIONS CAN EASILY GET IN THE WAY, I ASK GENTLE, CLARIFYING QUESTIONS AND ASK THE OTHER PERSON IF THEY FEEL THAT I AM UNDERSTANDING AND ACCEPTING WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO COMMUNICATE.


WHEN THERE IS LOVE, CARING, AND REGARD FOR THE PARTNER, ONE’S MIND AND ATTENTION IS COMPLETELY OPEN TO AND DEVOTED TO THEM

Partner A communication and demeanor conveys their feelings, intentions, goals, thoughts and circumstances.

Circumstances

Partner A

Partner A’s feelings, intentions, goals, thoughts and circumstances.

PARTNER B

Partner B allows their mind to be filled and completely occupied with what Partner A is communicating.

True love, caring, regard, empathy, compassion, interest.

Circumstances


Partner A

PARTNER B

WHEN THE LOVE HAS GONE, FORMALITY MAY REMAIN, BUT LOVE IS REPLACED WITH A HALF HEARTED, PREOCCUPIED, PERFUNCTORY MAINTENANCE OF OBLIGATIONS

Partner A communication and demeanor conveys their feelings, intentions, goals, thoughts and circumstances.

Circumstances

LOST love, caring, regard, empathy, compassion, interest.

Partner B’s mind is confining Partner A to a small corner of their mind. Disregarding and discounting A.

B is preoccupied with something else so as to shut A out.

This is a frequent scenario when people enter an intimate relationship or marriage because of a sexual attraction rather than a genuine liking for and compatibility with each other.

Empathy and Transparency dissolve into a ‘cold war’.


GRASPING THE PERSPECTIVE OF EMPATHYSuccessful Restructuring Involves Listening With Empathy and Communicating With

Transparency


Communicating Effectively Through Rhythms Of Decentering And Centering

‘A’ Communicator’s Steps to Genuine Communication1. I have a message for B.2. How can I make sure B gets the message?3. What is B really like? With respect to this message, what does B believe? What kind of language is meaningful to B? What current conditions could interfere with B’s reception of my message?

4. Now, what do I really want to communicate? How can I make sure I don’t misrepresent what I want to say? How do I make sure my words and manner of communication are true to every aspect of my intention?5. Speaking the message to B.6. Observing B’s response as the communication is in progress.7. When the message is delivered, Decentering and checking to see if B received and understood the actual intended message.8. Decenterng to listen and Centering and trying to truly hear and understand B’s response.

‘B’ Listener’s Inner StateB’s FACTORS THAT MAY BE INFLUENCING B’s LISTENING:Beliefs Feelings KnowledgeLanguage Characteristics Goals, Needs, Wants, IntentionsAffiliations and AlliancesCurrent Conditions Impact of Forces in Immediate Setting and SituationB’S Receptivity GenerallyB’S Openness and Transparency

Potential Errors When There Is No Decentering: Projection

A’s immediate feelings may result in A projecting complementary or similar feelings and thus projecting a type of receptivity onto B. For example, A’s anger or fear may result in anticipating B to be hostile, unreceptive, or antagonistic to the message and consequently A may deliver the message in a pessimistic or antagonistic manner, withholding parts or aspects of the message A feels B may attack, thus preventing transparency and full, accurate, true to the intention, communication.AssumptionsA’s lack of decentering may result in projecting only what A is like or feeling. A imposes this on B, thereby mistakenly believing that B will understand without A having to say everything necessary for communicating the message. A may feel everyone would or should think the same or agree without checking and perhaps finding everyone is either slightly or greatly different, depending on their own unique history, experiences, and concerns.

A BCentering

DecenteringCentering-Decentering 7-8

1-34-5

6 Rapid shift from decentering to decentering & revising based on B’s reactions

Decentering

Centering

Decentering-C

entering


Listening Effectively Through Rhythms Of Decentering And Centering

A BCentering

Decentering

Decentering

B CommunicatorA Listener

1. B wants to tell me something. I have to decide whether or not to listen to the topic or concern.

2. I decide to listen but now I have to decide whether to be *open minded,*reserve judgment, and *wait until B finishes telling the whole story *the way B really wants to be heard *rather than react prematurely and*put B on the defensive and *have B distort his message due to my reaction.

3. 3. As B talks, I do react, but when I realize this, *I can become sensitive to how I react and *control my reactions, *showing receptivity and *a non judgmental attitude *so as not to preclude B from telling the whole story authentically.

4. . I also have to check to see if I am understanding and not imposing my own assumptions and beliefs over B’s message.


Contrasting Therapy With a Client to the Non Therapy Relationship With the Addicted Person

• Therapy sessions are unilateral empathy (the therapist) and transparency (the client) due to the structure of the client coming to and paying the therapist to be a unilateral listener and helper. Stages that unfold in the first therapy session can serve as a model for listening to be used in the friend or family relationship with an addicted person:

• Some examples of stages that unfold are:– “Will you accept my presented identity?’ – ‘Can you sense and grasp what I'm feeling, my pain, and how difficult this is for me?’ – ‘Can you accept the discrepancy between what I am presenting to you as my identity and the negative things about myself I

am hiding but feeling urged to say?’– ‘Can you accept my need to protect these hidden, walled off weaknesses for indulging in ineffective, harmful ways of dealing

with my nightmarish inner world?’– ‘Can you accept these flaws no matter what they are?’– ‘Are you going to pressure me to give them up?’– ‘Are you going to leave me with guilt feelings because I can’t give these weaknesses up?’

• Stages that unfold in subsequent therapy sessions can also serve as a model for listening to an addicted person in an evolving relationship.

– ‘Can you accept the way I am feeling about you?’ – ‘Can you help me see how I do these same things without being judgmental and pressuring?’– ‘Can you help me see how I use these same defenses with you and my other significant others?’

• Training couples to be transparent and empathetic. This involves taking great care to avoid exacerbating their situation. – While the therapist in the session is a model for empathy and the client is an example of the transparency, this dyad never is

and never should be duplicated in the friend or family relationship to the addict, which is always as equals and reciprocal. – As friend or family with the addicted person, it is not necessarily with a person who wants to change and wants feedback in a

manner that can help him or her change. – Here, it is justified and healthy to expect empathy to be reciprocated, and if not forthcoming, should be repeatedly

emphasized as required fairness and a condition for the relationship to continue. – Transparency, likewise, should be reciprocal, in the sense that you, as friend-helper are trying to provide the conditions for

the other to be transparent while you also are striving to be transparent, but as considerately as possible.


THE PATTERN OF INTERACTION BETWEEN THERAPIST AND CLIENT

In a therapeutic relationship, letting client/resident express negative behavior in the present with a view toward trusting the process of non judgmental coaching with respect to the client’s dealing, through a self corrective process, with the unwelcome or unexpected consequences, leads the client to adopt a tendency to use evaluative judgment of alternative courses of action in advance in order to avoid negative consequences in the future.

A. Present: Permitting poor choices and negative behavior.

B. Trusting process and being present, not to interfere, but to minimally assist in case of crisis, leads to client non judgmentally monitoring own behavior and process, as well as effects on others.

C. Non judgmentally coaching and assisting client in evaluating choices, processes, and outcomes, leads to maturation of judgment.

Therapist Processes Over TimeA.B.C.

A. Makes poor decision based on desire, oppositionalismand disregard of possible negative consequences

Client Processes Over TimeA.B.C.

B. Begins to be aware of the occurrence of negative consequences in context of own decision to take this course of action.

C. Due to prior discussion, feels free to discuss bad outcomes and better strategies for the future.


The Pattern Of Interaction Between Couples With Respect To Empathy And Transparency

In a relationship between partners, when one [1.] is tolerant, long suffering, giving the benefit of the doubt to the other [2] who is exploitative, abusive, or irresponsible, in contrast to the therapist-coach to client-resident relationship, actually reinforces and encourages the negative behavior. Non judgmental coaching feedback does not mature the judgment of the negative person but is discounted, resented and results in greater determination to persist and increase in negative behavior.

Partner 1. Processes Over TimeA. B. C.

A. Present: Tolerant of exploitation, long-suffering of abuse, doing both shares when 2. is irresponsible. 2. Protecting 2.’s reputation. Giving the benefit of the doubt.

B. Pleading for 2. To change. Suggesting help, negotiating for fairness. Threatening to leave. Believing promises 2.’s promises to change.

C. Explaining away abuse, patching up hard feelings, making up for losses, repairing damage. Preventive trying to appease, obey, and cater to, and comfort. .

Partner 2. Processes Over TimeA. B. C.

A. Fears betrayal, feels taken advantage of, needs sacrifices from 1. to feel secure & powerful. Primed to & overreacts.

B. Becomes furious at suggestions, pleading, & threats. Makes empty promises to silence 1.

C. Feels has gotten away with bad behavior, disrespects & suspects 1. Behavior becomes increasingly worse.


Modeling And Practicing Transparency And Empathy In The Therapy Session As A Way To Dissolve Or Discourage Adopting And Retaining Postures

And States Of Pseudo Incorporation And Pseudo Dis Incorporation

Client FriendFamilyAddicted Person

ClientFriendFamilyAddicted Person

TherapistEMPATHY

ClientTRANSPARENCY

TRANSPARENCY

EMPATHY

RECIPROCATED

Unilateral

Transparency

Empathy


THE DESTRUCTION OF TRANSPARENCY AND EMPATHY Adversarial Postures, In-laws, and Communication Dysfunction

• Dysfunctional Strategies Resulting From Adversarial Alliances

– Dominating and Interrupting Conversation– Screaming And/or Shutting up– Deflecting and Switching Conversation– Hair Splitting– Laundry Lists Of Past Mistakes And

Inequities– Guilt Trips– Accusing Of Hypothetical Misdeeds Or

Intentions– Questioning Motives, Accusing Of Ulterior

Motives – Logically Absurd Extremes – Emotional Blackmail - Spilling the Beans in

Public– Threatening Destructive Actions– Personal Put Downs– Questioning Loyalty and Love– Accusing of Negative Traits– Discounting, Invalidating – Word Games, Semantic Swivels, Twists

Her Parents

His In-Laws

His Parents

Her In-Laws

Husband

Baby

Wife

Dynamics of Adversarial Alliances With In-Laws

Parents tend to take sides with their own child against the spouse. But, Parents tend to maintain the parent-child relationship by continuing to advise, criticize, coerce, and manipulate with purse-strings. These manipulations extend to choice of home décor, use of money, style of child rearing, even details of the intimate relationship. They also tend to develop an indulgent alliance with the child and usurp the parental relationship with their baby. This involvement in the marriage inevitably pits spouses against each other in an adversarial relationship. When either spouse has a disagreement, they can invoke their parents as allies in the fight and ultimately attack the in-laws. This structure results in a degenerating vicious cycle that can eventually destroy the marital relationship and their relationship with their child. Parents and in-laws taking a position against the spouse in the beginning create a self fulfilling prophecy. It is extremely difficult for a young couple with nearby in-laws to avoid this pit fall.


Adversarial alliances create agony and a longing to be comforted and uncomplicated, undivided love

• Given all of the difficulties a couple may encounter, inequality of roles, differences in parenting styles, inequities in sharing money and goods, problems in schedules, differences in interests and preferences, underdeveloped negotiation skills, problems with intimacy, traumas from the past, communication problems, differences in temperament, undisclosed sexual aversions and preferences, differences in group identifications, competing career goals, and on and on, adversarial alliances between spouses and in-laws are easily formed. The structure of these alliances cause a wall to progressively grow between a couple. Split off from their loved one, torn between them and alliance with their biased parents, their hearts fill with agony and tension. At this, point they are easy targets for romance prowlers. Just an infidelity of the heart tends to expand the wall. Illicit affection leads to projection of the same onto the mate and jealousy feeds the growing distance and animosity. A hollow loyalty brings cold bitterness and a shriveled, dying heart.

A well meaning, but misguided, path to the destruction of loved ones.

Her Parents

His In-Laws We understand, we take your side.

His Parents

Her In-Laws

We understand, we take your side.

If she’s not treating you right, I’m here for you.

If he’s not treating you right, I’m here for you.

It is the structure of the relations with in-laws that lends itself to the development of adversarial alliances. Adversarial alliances make it impossible to solve relationship problems. As the wall thickens, the problems grow worse, putting spouses on either side of the wall in a bad light. A lack of authenticity, transparency, and empathy means it is impossible to know what is really going on in the mate. The lack of knowledge is filled with the worst speculation. The respective in-laws side with their own children in blaming the problems on the ‘personality’ of the other spouse. It is the structure of the alliances that is the cause. Otherwise, normal problems, faced with openness, are solved and the relationship grows closer.

A g o n y


DECEPTION, MANIPULATION, AND TIMING


APPLYING THE JOURNALIZING TECHNIQUE TO AN EXPLORATION OF YOUR STYLE

IN INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS

WHAT DO YOU BRING INTO THE RELATIONSHIP?

WHAT ARE THE PATTERNS OF INTERACTION IN THE RELATIONSHIP?


An Approach to Invoking Transparency and Empathy Toward Oneself: Self Reflexivity and Self Retroflexivity


Phase I. Journalizing and the Think-aloud Method: Areas Of Focus

• Self Reflexive Journalizing– Areas of focus: as you are about to write in your journal, review the topics listed below

and, being brutally honest with yourself, imagine what it is that is difficult for you about the topic. Imagine what your response to it typically is, how you relate to it. Next imagine what the consequences have been from your taking that approach. Follow the steps outlined for Self Reflexive Journalizing. As you are writing, during each step, instead of just writing, speak aloud allall of your thoughts and tape record them. When finished, read what you have written but also interject the tape recording as you read. As you read and listen, stop periodically and think about what you had avoided writing or speaking. What may have approached the fringe of your awareness but you quickly slid past it? Stop, and being brutally honest again, ask your self why you avoided these thoughts and feelings and jot down notes about this as well. Now having carried out all of the steps, review what you have done and try to imagine how someone else might have responded or related to the same issue. Imagine someone whom you feel would have dealt with the issue in a very mature, effective way. Now imagine yourself dealing with the issue in that same way. What are the barriers preventing you from doing this?

• External Focus– Difficult unavoidable situations and challenges– Difficult life conditions– Difficult past, present, and future choices– Difficult relationships– Difficult roles– Difficult types of people– Difficult situations and places avoided when it is not in your best interest to do so– Emotionally difficult but necessary types of tasks or activities



• Self Reflexive Journalizing– Areas of focus (CONT.)

• Internal Focus: Perceptual and Emotional reactions.– Habitual misperceptions or selective lack of perception.– Inability to relate accurately to basic sensations of pleasure and pain;

inability to be aware of what is going on with your body.– Selective inability to focus or think or to prevent counterproductive

preoccupations or obsessions with troublesome memories or to ignore unwanted surfacing of pre-conscious memories.

– Inability to feel, numbness, misunderstanding, confused by, or inability to relate to informative feelings or intuitions, blocking feelings, being consumed or overwhelmed with emotions, having unquenchable painful emotions or unexplainable deliriously exhilarating feelings or unexplainable intensity, lassitude or boredom.

– Inability to properly assess the degree or value of one’s capabilities or knowledge or to know one’s own true interests, preferences and values; or to prevent obsessions with and conformity to other’s preferences, interests and values.

– Inability to avoid preoccupations with negative or positive happenings or states from the past.

– Inability to relate to the present and zoning out into outlandish, unrealistic negative or positive fantasies; inability to attend to the immediate surrounding when it is necessary to do so.

– Habitual ways of seeing or envisioning the future that are counterproductive; perspectives on the past and/or future that are depressing, discouraging; perspectives that result in impulsive, inhibited, or inappropriate actions; perspectives, visions, or goals that are unrealistically optimistic or pessimistic.


Phase I. Journalizing and the Think-aloud Method: Areas Of Focus• Self Reflexive Journalizing

– Areas of focus (CONT.)• Internal Focus: Mental reactions.

– Seeking to gain approval or avoid disapproval. Sacrificing one’s own interests, incorporating goals and standards imposed by others rather than ascertaining and pursuing one’s own personal goals, standards, and criteria for fulfillment.

– Inability to hold decisions or judgments in suspension, therefore resulting in premature closure, jumping to conclusions, impulsive mental action, mental blocking, overly simplistic and rigid opinions or approaches to mental problems, shutting out inconsistent information or countervailing conditions, surrender of mental coping due to information overload, complexity, or internal or external distractions, inability to make decisions.

– Excessive self consciousness or monitoring of one’s thoughts and/or behavior or inability to monitor and revise when it is necessary.

– Chronic wide split between one’s private and public self, pretending to oneself or others to have inflated abilities or knowledge which leaves one with a feeling of being phony, having a lack of integrity, being inauthentic, fearing being found out, not feeling at home or belonging, being in despair, or haunted by boredom.

– Having a selective attention or inattention to one aspect or set outcomes: focusing on or remembering only the negative or only the positive.

– Inability to compare happenings or actions in one arena or time with another in order to see inconsistencies and incompatibilities, compartmentalizing.



• Self Reflexive Journalizing– Areas of focus (CONT.)

• Internal Focus: Interpersonal reactions.– Inability to properly and accurately assess the feelings, intentions,

motives, or character of other people, habitual misreading, habitual reliance on the readings of others; tendency to interpret these factors as much better or worse than they really are.

– Inability to differentiate oneself from the emotional reactions, opinions, and values of others; rejecting or accepting these opinions or values only because admired or feared people accept or reject them.

– Getting stuck with identities or roles imposed by others. Chronically maintaining ego states and ego feelings that are self defeating and self destructive. Imprisoned by obsolete self concepts that were forged in earlier life history. Getting stuck with a very narrow range of behaviors that are ineffective and finding it impossible to expand or vary your pattern, confined by an invisible, arbitrary impasse. Unable to be flexible.

– Inability to avoid being taken in by interpersonal strategies, manipulations, that other people use to get you to be, do, or have what they want when this is counterproductive for oneself. As a consequence of yielding to the impositions and manipulations of others, you find yourself being in a constant state of tension-filled ambivalence. You find yourself repeatedly drawn to people that suck you into these patterns and you are perpetually stuck in miserable relationships.


Comparing Reactions to Past Troublesome Situations With Alternative Reactions to Current Similar Situations

Situations of A Criticism, B Ridicule, C Rejection,D Failure

Pre

vio u

s R

eact

ions

AB

CD

New

Alt

erna

tive

Rea

ctio

ns

AB

CD


Relationship Scenarios

Identifying and changing repeated, counterproductive patterns in

relationships


A MICROSCOPIC ANALYSIS OF THE WAY COUPLES INTERACT

Relationship Styles and Strategies

Think about the styles of interacting that you have checked. We are going to examine your styles frommany angles.

One of the ways we are going to examine your styles is to put them in more global categories in order tolook at the global effect that your style has on your child or mate or supervisor, County-worker, or subordinate.Then we are going to examine how your style varies as your official position varies and see how the ’thosesignificant others your interact with react to your changes. Next we are going to examiner how your generalstyle affects your choice of roles, when and if you have a choice, and how your behavior changes with theassumption of a role. How do others react to your change when you adopt a role? Next, we are going to look atwhat you want to happen in certain types of situations and how you go about trying to make that happen, inother words, your intentions, goals, and strategies. Later we will go behind the scenes into your unconsciousand your history to see how these factors shape these aspects of your style f interacting. For now, we want todescend to the microscopic behavioral level and examine your typical behavioral moves as you carry out yourstrategy. If you and/or someone else were observing your interaction, how do you think they would characterizeyour interaction. What feelings do you typical have as your enact your interaction? And finally, looking at all ofyour interactions with a person over a long period of time, how would you characterize the trend of therelationship, where has it come from and what is it like now and how do you think it got here? We will belooking at these factors in some detail. When you feel you have a good idea of your pattern of interacting, thenwe can start considering alternative ways of interacting and how they might be received by the other, whatdifferent kinds of reactions might you expect if you changed your style to one or another of the manypossibilities?


CONCEPTUALLY GRASPING HOW YOU INTERACT WITH YOUR INTIMATE PARTNER


Describing the Characteristics of Each Party to a Relationship

We all have relationships with many kinds of people. Some relationships are contractual as in marriage and business partnerships. Some are informal as in friendships. Some are based on blood relations. Some are with people in social organizations with formalized roles. There are combinations and overlaps of all kinds. The type of relationship or categories under which the relationship fits have a formative influence on the behaviors in the relationship and on the quality of the relationship. Some relationships start out in one category and later are changed into another. When this happens people are bewildered over the fact that the nature of their interaction changes, sometimes radically.

If you have a relationship that has been or has become troubling in some way, then it can often help if you can identify patterns in the way you relate. Identifying certain types of situations that provoke troublesome interaction can help. The major benefit comes from identifying aspects of the pattern of interaction. This is what Identifying Relationship Scenarios is about. First begin by describing the type:

Your Name______________________________ What is your typical style of relating? ________________________________________ What is your formal/informal position in relation to other? __________________________________ ________________________________________ What is your short term ultimate goal? ________________________________________ What do you want your role to be? ________________________________________ How do you intend to act [your strategy] to realize your desired outcome?______________________ _________________________________________

Your Name______________________________ What is your typical style of relating? ________________________________________ What is your formal/informal position in relation to other? __________________________________ ________________________________________ What is your short term ultimate goal? ________________________________________ What do you want your role to be? ________________________________________ How do you intend to act [your strategy] to realize your desired outcome?______________________ _________________________________________

Other’s Name_____________________ What is other’s typical style of relating? ________________________________ What is other’s formal/informal positionin relation to you?________________________________________________ How do you expect other to respond? ________________________________ What do you want other’s role to be? ________________________________ What do think is other’s short termultimate goal?_____________________________________________________


IDENTIFYING TROUBLING SITUATIONSThe Following Are Examples of a Few Types of Situations or Incidents in Which You May Have

Repeatedly Encountered Difficulty

• Conducting casual conversations And chit chat At parties, with strangers, with unfriendly people, or on touchy subjects.

• When you want To join An informal or formal group or someone wants To join your group when other members could possibly say no.

• Ways you talk To someone when you want To influence them or when they are trying To influence or manipulate you In obnoxious ways.

• Verbally giving or responding To commands, especially when you do not want To or have to give commands when you know it might not be well received.

• When conflicts arise In conversations.• When you are asked To entertain And you do

not feel prepared or Up To it.• Difficult predicaments • In A recreation situation And everyone is

supposed To be spontaneous And have fun.• Talk For all stages of romance, sex, And love.• Responding To threats/danger/crises/

accidents.

• Responding when delays, frustrations, And barriers arise.

• Different forms of competition In school, social life, And sports.

• Cooperative activities and their difficult moments.

• Dealing with someone In need And you want To help or they ask For your help, counseling, or advice.

• Responding when someone wants you To cheat In school, business, etc.

• Engaged In group problem solving.• Involved In decision making with one other

person or A group. • Conducting

bargaining/negotiation/mediation.• When you unavoidably have To get

involved In An interrogation or investigation And it is A friend, foe, or stranger.

• When you are asked To or have To give your opinion, approval, or evaluation To A friend, foe, or stranger.


Identifying Strategies for Initiating Interaction

Is/was your first Other’s move to be: response: 1. Coquettish, flirtatious, seductive? 2. Overly agreeable, praising, overly accommodating, appeasing supportive, accepting? 3 .Candid, being your natural, authentic self, spontaneous, matter of fact, keeping conversation going? 4. Minimalist, barely acknowledging other, neutral, neither agreeing or disagreeing, just keeping conversation going? 5. Awkward, silly, clownish? 6.Cautious, guarded, formal? 7. Pretending to not be interested, responding unenthusiastically, nonchalant, nonplused, looking bored or preoccupied, discretely discouraging other from continuing? 8. Repartee, confronting being verbally combative, arguing, controlling, demanding? 9. Entering then overtly pushing other away, rejecting, brushing off, initiating then departing without courtesy?

• You sense that something is wrong in your way of relating, but what can you do about it? Specific types of situations and people tend to evoke a specific kind of approach or strategy for initiating interaction with the other person. Since we do this automatically and have done it throughout our lives, such patterns go unnoticed. When the interaction does not turn out right, we blame the other person and not our strategy. Actually, what happens in relationships is that the initial approach each makes sets the direction and outcome for the whole interaction. Each party has matching, complementary strategies that are repeated even though they may fail. On the other hand, a change in the initiating strategy by either party throws the whole pattern off key. The other tries to bring the pattern back to familiar notes. If the new initial key is maintained, both parties have to get creative and can sometimes come up, much to their surprise, with a satisfactory outcome.

Consequently, it is important to systematically identify the initial strategies you use in specific types of situations with specific people. Different situations with the same person evoke different strategies. The same type of situation with different types of people evokes different strategies. Therefore, it is important to identify examples of troubling interactions and then identify when it occurs, in what types of situations and with what person or types of people. Once that is done, then the next step is to be brutally honest with yourself and pin down as exactly as you can what your initial reaction tends to be. It may vary, but it will fall fairly consistently within the range of possibilities listed on the right. Once you have identified your initial strategy from recent incidents, search back to see whether it is a repeated pattern.

Another approach could be to notice the different ways other people initiate an encounter. What do they do and say and how do they do it? What kind of response do they get? Does this change the way you see your style?

• You sense that something is wrong in your way of relating, but what can you do about it? Specific types of situations and people tend to evoke a specific kind of approach or strategy for initiating interaction with the other person. Since we do this automatically and have done it throughout our lives, such patterns go unnoticed. When the interaction does not turn out right, we blame the other person and not our strategy. Actually, what happens in relationships is that the initial approach each makes sets the direction and outcome for the whole interaction. Each party has matching, complementary strategies that are repeated even though they may fail. On the other hand, a change in the initiating strategy by either party throws the whole pattern off key. The other tries to bring the pattern back to familiar notes. If the new initial key is maintained, both parties have to get creative and can sometimes come up, much to their surprise, with a satisfactory outcome.

Consequently, it is important to systematically identify the initial strategies you use in specific types of situations with specific people. Different situations with the same person evoke different strategies. The same type of situation with different types of people evokes different strategies. Therefore, it is important to identify examples of troubling interactions and then identify when it occurs, in what types of situations and with what person or types of people. Once that is done, then the next step is to be brutally honest with yourself and pin down as exactly as you can what your initial reaction tends to be. It may vary, but it will fall fairly consistently within the range of possibilities listed on the right. Once you have identified your initial strategy from recent incidents, search back to see whether it is a repeated pattern.

Another approach could be to notice the different ways other people initiate an encounter. What do they do and say and how do they do it? What kind of response do they get? Does this change the way you see your style?


Describing the Nature of the Ongoing InteractionDescribing the Nature of the Ongoing Interaction

How would you characterize the ongoing interaction?You Other

1. Continuing authenticity, feeling enlivened. 2. Authentic but unenthusiastic. 3. Pretending to be genuine but hiding true feelings. 4. Trying, but showing effort, to accommodate to other’s manner & interests. 5. Abruptly shutting out, mentally leaving scene 6. Rudely: putting down, correcting, sarcasm, criticizing, badgering 7. Ridicule, publicly humiliating,


1. Continuing authenticity, feeling enlivened. 2. Authentic but unenthusiastic. 3. Pretending to be genuine but hiding true feelings. 4. Trying, but showing effort, to accommodate to other’s manner & interests. 5. Abruptly shutting out, mentally leaving scene 6. Rudely: putting down, correcting, sarcasm, criticizing, badgering 7. Ridicule, publicly humiliating,


Characterizing the Feeling at the Close of the Interaction

How would you characterize the feeling tone after the interaction?You Other

1. Aroused, Excited 2. Happy 3. Serene 4. Content 5. Amused 6. Resigned 7. Bored 8. Despondent 9. Numb 10. Empty 11. Anxious 12. Panicked 13. Agonized 14. Frustrated 15. Alienated 16. Angry 17. Enraged 18. Vindicated 19. Sadistically delighted 20. Triumphant

How would you characterize the feeling tone after the interaction?You Other

1. Aroused, Excited 2. Happy 3. Serene 4. Content 5. Amused 6. Resigned 7. Bored 8. Despondent 9. Numb 10. Empty 11. Anxious 12. Panicked 13. Agonized 14. Frustrated 15. Alienated 16. Angry 17. Enraged 18. Vindicated 19. Sadistically delighted 20. Triumphant


Characterizing What You Anticipate the Relationship to Be Like in a Subsequent, Future Encounter

Characterizing What You Anticipate the Relationship to Be Like in a Subsequent, Future Encounter

What do you anticipate the future of the relationship to be like?You Other

1. Authentic and Natural

2. Civil Pretence

3. Icy

4. Animosity

5. Emotional turmoil

6. Open Warfare

7. Severed


Model Of Interpersonal InteractionModel Of Interpersonal Interaction

Your Name__________ What is your typical style of relating? _______________________________ What is your formal/informal position in relation to other? _______________ _______________________________ What is your short term ultimate goal? _______________________________ What do you want your role to be? _______________________________ How do you intend to act [your strategy] to realize your desired outcome? _______________________ _______________________________

How do you expect other to respond? ________________________________ What do you want other’s role to be? ________________________________ What do think is other’s short termultimate goal?____________________ What is other’s formal/informal positionin relation to you?________________________________________________ What is other’s typical style of relating? ________________________________ Other’s Name_____________________

What do you anticipate the future of the relationship to be like?You Other

_1. Authentic _

_2. Civil _ Pretence

_3. Icy _

_4. Animosity_

_5. Turmoil _

_6. Warfare _

_7. Severed _

How would you characterize thefeeling tone after the interaction?You Other

__ 1. Excited ____ 2. Happy ____ 3. Serene ____ 4. Content ____ 5. Amused ____ 6. Resigned ____ 7. Bored ____ 8. Despondent__ __ 9. Numb ____ 10. Empty ____ 11.Anxious ____ 12.Panicked ____ 13.Agonized ____ 14.Frustrated __ __ 15.Alienated ____ 16. Angry ____ 17. Enraged ____ 18. Vindicated __ __ 19. Sadistically__ delighted __ 20. Triumphant__

How would you characterize thefeeling tone after the interaction?You Other

__ 1. Excited ____ 2. Happy ____ 3. Serene ____ 4. Content ____ 5. Amused ____ 6. Resigned ____ 7. Bored ____ 8. Despondent__ __ 9. Numb ____ 10. Empty ____ 11.Anxious ____ 12.Panicked ____ 13.Agonized ____ 14.Frustrated __ __ 15.Alienated ____ 16. Angry ____ 17. Enraged ____ 18. Vindicated __ __ 19. Sadistically__ delighted __ 20. Triumphant__


__ 1. Continuing __ authenticity, feeling enlivened.__ 2. Authentic but __ unenthusiastic.__ 3. Pretending to __ be genuine but hiding true feelings.__ 4. Trying, but __ showing effort, to accommodate to other’s manner & interests. __ 5. Abruptly __ shutting out, mentally leaving scene__ 6. Rudely: putting __ down, correcting, sarcasm, criticizing, badgering__ 7. Ridicule, __ publicly humiliating,.


__ 1. Continuing __ authenticity, feeling enlivened.__ 2. Authentic but __ unenthusiastic.__ 3. Pretending to __ be genuine but hiding true feelings.__ 4. Trying, but __ showing effort, to accommodate to other’s manner & interests. __ 5. Abruptly __ shutting out, mentally leaving scene__ 6. Rudely: putting __ down, correcting, sarcasm, criticizing, badgering__ 7. Ridicule, __ publicly humiliating,.

Is/was your first Other’s move to be: response: __1. Overly agreeable, __ praising, overly accommodating, appeasing supportive, accepting?__ 2. Seductive, coquettish, __ flirtatious? __ 3.Candid, being your __ natural, authentic self, spontaneous, matter of fact, keeping conversation going? __ 4. Minimalist, Barely __ acknowledging other, neutral, neither agreeing or disagreeing, just keeping conversation going?__ 5. Awkward, silly, clownish? ____ 6.Cautious, guarded, __ formal? __ 7. Pretending to not __ be interested, responding unenthusiastically, nonchalant, nonplused, looking bored or preoccupied, discretely discouraging other from continuing? __8. Repartee, confronting __ being verbally combative, arguing, controlling, demanding? __ 9. Entering then overtly __ pushing other away, rejecting, brushing off, initiating then departing without courtesy?

First moves initiating the interaction

Quality of ongoing interactionQuality of ongoing interaction

Feeling quality at termination of interaction


Characteristics of the Parties to the Relationship Anticipation

of the nature of the relationship in the future


Tracking a Relationships’ ScenariosTracking a Relationships’ Scenarios

Characteristics of the parties to the relationship

First moves initiating the interaction

Quality of ongoing

interaction


Anticipation of the nature of

the relationship in the

future

Change in relationship structure

Tracking

Scenarios

Preparing to re enter interaction

Situation

You

Other


COMPARING SCENARIOS

1. Parties

YouOther

Initial Strategy

______________________________________

Ongoing interaction

__________________________________

Feeling at Close

__________________________

Anticipated Future

__________________________

Situation or Incident

1. Parties

YouOther

Initial Strategy

______________________________________

Ongoing interaction

__________________________________

Feeling at Close

__________________________

Anticipated Future

__________________________




1. Parties

YouOther

Initial Strategy

______________________________________

Ongoing interaction

__________________________________

Feeling at Close

__________________________

Anticipated Future

__________________________

1. Parties

YouOther

Initial Strategy

______________________________________

Ongoing interaction

__________________________________

Feeling at Close

__________________________

Anticipated Future

__________________________


RELEARNING HOW TO LISTEN


MATURE LOVE: FROM ACCEPTANCE OF REALITY TO MUTUAL FACILITATION

copyright by ed young, phd, 1998 115 outline of ‘possible’ middle stages likely to occur as a...

Documents