Tag Archives: relationships

Being in Group Therapy

General and Miscellaneous, Interpersonal Roles, Personal Conflict, , , , , , , , , , ,

While many clients prefer individual therapy, group therapy offers various benefits beyond what we might typically expect in individual therapy. First, group therapy offers the opportunity to learn vicariously from the experiences of others who share in the group. Learning from the others’ mistakes means getting valuable lessons without having to suffer the consequences of learning from our own trials and errors. When this sharing is back and forth, everyone benefits. Another important benefit of group therapy is getting feedback from other group members. It should be noted that such feedback can be no better than the information upon which it’s based. For this reason, telling “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” is essential for getting the most helpful feedback. Opening up like this requires trust in the group leader and the other group members, both that they will respond constructively in the group and that they will honor the confidentiality of the material being shared.

Feedback from the Group Leader

Feedback, whether from an individual therapist or from a group leader, carries the extra baggage of being “authoritative” – which can be both good and bad. On the positive side, the education, training, and experience of the leader can offer some valuable concepts, principles, and knowledge that members can apply in their own lives. Yet authoritative feedback has its downside, as well. On the one hand, group members might embrace the feedback or advice of a group leader as the ultimate truth, without any questioning – buying into the authoritative reassurance of, “Trust me, I’m a doctor,” even when it is neither stated nor intended. Members could use such blind trust to avoid personal responsibility for their own actions (e.g., “I was only following the doctor’s orders – you can’t blame me for this mess.”). On the other hand, authoritative statements can trigger a backlash for those who have “authority issues.” This often involves an attitude of, “Who are you to tell me what I should think or do?” This reflex reaction often involves rebellion, opposition, or defiance, which is quite different from the reflective understanding of independent thought (e.g., processing and weighing how the feedback is relevant to one’s particular situation, then reaching one’s own conclusions about its usefulness). A useful perspective on feedback from authorities is implied in the famous line from The Wizard of Oz, when Toto pulls back the curtain to reveal the wizard as a little old man: “Pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain.” This paradoxical message actually redirects the viewer’s focus from the larger-than-life authority image projected on the wall to the actual person behind that projection. In doing so, it conveys the message that even the experts in whom we place our trust are only human, too. This realization suggests that we can only empower ourselves when we think for ourselves.

The Group Leader and Confidentiality

The group leader should maintain the confidentiality of information shared within the group, except for some particular circumstances. These include situations where there is a risk of members harming themselves or others, reasonable suspicion of incidents of abuse or neglect of children or elders, and court orders and subpoenas for records. However, ther are times when group members may want the leader to provide progress reports or treatment summaries to their referral sources, particularly when these sources are requiring satisfactory involvement in treatment. In these cases, members must sign an authorization to allow the leader to share information. This latter exception to privacy may well discourage some members from being completely candid in the group, yet it should be noted that members have little to worry about as long as they continue to do the next right thing.

Feedback to and from Group Members

Peer-to-peer feedback can reduce many of the pitfalls of authoritative or expert advice noted above. Often it is easier to receive and use feedback based on peers’ similar personal experiences rather than on advice based on abstract knowledge and principles. Here, offering one’s own past or current experience on the issue is usually more productive than passing judgment or offering advice. Sharing one’s similar experiences emphasizes the peer-to-peer relationship in the group, in contrast to an unequal relationship, such as between therapist and client or mentor and student. It is important that the feedback be offered in a positive, constructive manner, rather than with an attitude of criticism, judgmentalism, condescension, or blame. Members who offer authoritative advice tend to evoke resentment from other members, who can be even more resistant to receiving the expertise of their peers than they are when it comes from authority figures.

There may also be times when members are motivated to provide feedback because they view another member’s participation as infringing upon their rights as group members (e.g., monopolizing the group time, interrupting other members, or introducing topics irrelevant to the group purpose). Here, it is important to discuss the situation in terms of the disruptive behavior and its impact on one’s comfort and involvement in the group, rather than through an attack on the other’s character or personality. We can then ask for a change in that offending behavior. This offers the opportunity to practice one’s assertiveness skills. For some, this may require some toning down of verbally aggressive feedback, which may have a rather judging or blaming tone. For others, the challenge is to speak up for oneself in the first place, particularly when one has tended to avoid conflict in order to keep the peace.

One of the primary benefits of group therapy is in receiving feedback from others who can be neutral and objective because they are not involved in our daily life. For this reason, we encourage exercizing caution in developing relationships with other members outside the group. Such relationships outside the group could adversely affect our willingness to share in the group. After all, if we could easily open up with our family and friends, we might not need therapy in the first place. A further concern is the potential for conflicts to arise during interactions outside the group. These events could interfere with the effective functioning of the group. Should such situations arise, it could be helpful for the members to share the issues with the group. Otherwise, the group leader and the other group members may notice some underlying tension, yet not have enough background information for understanding and addressing it.

Confidentiality among Group Members

An essential condition for group therapy is confidentiality among its members, as we cannot comfortably share our personal issues when we do not feel safe in doing so. So like Las Vegas’s tourist slogan (i.e., “What goes on in Vegas, stays in Vegas.”), group members need to preserve the privacy of information shared in the group. We are free to share our own personal experiences in group therapy, but this should never involve divulging the identity or personal information of other group members. While group leaders are unable to guarantee that all members will honor the confidentiality of others, we will do our best to reinforce the code of confidentiality. Serious or repeated violations of privacy could result in excluding the violator from further group involvement, not as punishment, but for the safety of the other members. So as to discourage this from happening, group members are encouraged to discuss their privacy concerns any time that these arise during the course of the group. This also presents an opportunity for group members to exercise their self-worth in asserting their concerns and rights within the group.

Summary of Benefits of Group Therapy

Group therapy offers many of the benefits of individual therapy, while also providing an opportunity to learn from one’s peers. This learning can come not only from what members share in the group discussion, but also from the style through which we interact with others. Furthermore, members have the opportunity to receive feedback from their peers, as well as from the group leader. The group also provides a sort of laboratory in which its members can experiment with developing new and potentially more effective ways of interacting with one another. These benefits can be more striking when its group members share significant issues in common, such as substance problems, anxiety and depression, or codependency. Because of the members’ often hard-learned lessons from the school of hard knocks, I often refer to them as my “panel of experts.” Their real-world experience complements the conceptual and theoretical understanding that is often provided by the group leader. With such understanding among its members, groups can function as a dress rehearsal in dealing with many of the issues its members face in daily life.

Worry, Worry, Worry

General and Miscellaneous, Personal Conflict, Stress, Vicious Cycle Patterns in Relationships, , , , , ,

Do you ever lose sleep with worry over some situation that seems out of your control? And even though you realize that worry doesn’t help, you do it anyway? Or perhaps you try blocking it out to get some sleep, but it just won’t go away? And next day, does your sleep deprivation keep you from focusing on what caused all the worry in the first place? I hate when that happens.

Possible Quick Fixes

Well, what can you do about this pattern? Perhaps you can convince your doctor to prescribe sleeping pills. They might knock you out for the night, so that you can be more rested the next day. Or maybe your doctor would be willing to prescribe a tranquilizer. Then the challenging situation wouldn’t bother you so much – you can accept it, rather than struggling over it. Or you might practice mindfulness by living in the “here and now.” Concentrating on your breathing, or on a mantra, might release the grip of fret and worry.

All of these options may serve to relieve your anxiety and worry temporarily. This could allow you to tackle the situation fresh and relaxed when in occurs. Still it may do little to help you actually resolve the dilemma that has you stuck. While you may stop spinning your wheels with useless worry, you still stay stuck. Without a new outlook toward the situation, you are likely to play out the folksy definition of insanity. That is, you keep taking the same approach (or some variation of it), while expecting different results.

Gaining Perspective: Recognizing the Pattern

Whenever we are overcome with worry, it’s usually because someone has found a way to push our buttons, intentionally or not. Some people, particularly in families, are particularly adept at pushing our buttons, perhaps because they helped install them. And often we have pushed their buttons, as well. Frequently this becomes a back-and-forth exercise of escalating tensions, one which I have explored extensively in my posts on vicious cycle patterns in relationships.

The Blame Game

One of the factors which perpetuate the struggle is the debate over who started it. This often is a ruse to gain the higher ground of moral righteousness, rather than an attempt to resolve the issue: this not only inflames tensions, but also distracts from finding a healthy resolution. You don’t need to crawl out of a hole in the same place you fell in. When we recognize that in such dramas there are actually no winners, such concerns become insignificant.

Finding Acceptance through Understanding

A loose translation of one of the proverbs in the Tao Te Ching states that when we understand how a system (e.g., a vicious cycle pattern) works, we can have compassion for each and every participant in that pattern – including ourselves. Achieving this understanding on the level of the heart, and not just the head, can go a long way toward liberating us from the worries spawned by such interaction patterns.

Finding the Stillness in the Eye of the Storm

An analogy implicit in the vicious cycle model is that of the vortex, with tornadoes and hurricanes being destructive examples. These natural phenomena offer a hint for staying calm during chaos: the stillness in the eye of the storm. Yet such storms are usually on the move, requiring our constant attention to avoid getting swept by them. When we apply this image to our relationships, we recognize that others who are caught up in the drama often are more than willing to have us join them in the destructive pattern. Yet the real danger of getting sucked into the drama is often internal: our egos frequently draw us into power struggles and cause us to lose sight of our mutual goals. Here, our compassion for all involved in the struggle can help keep us centered and balanced in the midst of the storm.

Extricating Ourselves from Conflict

Here, I find the analogy of Velcro™ helpful. well. In order for Velcro™ to work effectively, one side has the hooks and the other side has the loops. In order for others to hook us, we have to expose our loops: no loops, no snag. We often overlook this simple insight because we focus on our adversaries’ faults (the hooks). And in turn, they hone in on ours vulnerabilities (the loops). By working on healing ourselves, we can free ourselves from the tangle. While this appears rather simple in the Velcro™ analogy, recognizing our loops is a daunting task, one which I have delved into in my posts on vicious cycle patterns (Vicious Cycle Patterns in Relationships 2.0, and Escaping the Victim Role). I would refer you to these articles to explore the particular guidelines of engagement in more practical terms.

Note that I am not advocating withdrawal and avoidance. Often, that is not possible without sacrificing much that is important to us. When we have a stake in the race, we want to know what our adversaries are up to. As the adage goes, “Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.” We need to engage, but we need to avoid getting locked into power struggles that threaten to knock us off-balance.

Self-Exploration and Mindfulness

This self-exploration to resolve interpersonal conflicts causing worry is compatible with relaxation strategies. Thus, I am not renouncing the mindfulness training (or the judicious use of psychiatric medications, for that matter). Indeed, we can use meditation to cultivate the clear-headedness needed to achieve insight into our involvement in these conflicts. Many mindfulness exercises offer a temporary reprieve from worry by focusing attention elsewhere. This often is on current sensory experiences, such as music, nature, or our own breathing. Yet for these exercises to help alleviate conflict, they must be strategic retreats, not avoidance.

Making Peace with Uncertainty

We can expand our view of mindfulness practices to include attention to some unsettling feelings. These might include frustrations and resentments over past interactions or apprehensions about the future – in short, worry. We might observe our minds calling up past events or conjuring up fantasies of future interactions. Yet we resist the pulls that threaten to engulf us in these scenarios. We can note our emotional reactions to these events, real or imagined, whether that might be anger, resentment, guilt, shame, embarrassment, envy, worry, disgust, fear, loathing, etc. Again, we observe our feelings, preferably with compassion for ourselves, yet without allowing ourselves to be consumed by these feelings. We might also step back to recognize how vicious cycles have engulfed others, Furthermore, we realize that they, too, are suffering, regardless of their roles they have assumed.

Letting Go of Unrealistic Expectations

By undertaking these steps, we might transform our worry into an acceptance for how things are. This contrasts with our earlier protestation over how things are not as they are meant to be. When we recognize that reconciliation is unavailable, we may need to grieve. Then, we may realize that it is time to let go of the relationship.

Developing a Plan and a Strategy

Or the acceptance might be more hopeful, if we can envision ourselves as taking a different approach, one that might improve prospects for a constructive resolution, or at least might allow our disentanglement from the vicious cycle pattern.

Rehearsal: Developing Skills

In the latter case, we might go beyond the mindfulness mindset to engage in rehearsal of how we might respond to our anticipated challenges more effectively. We undertake this step, realizing that we lack some interpersonal skills for relating to others. By performing a self-evaluation, we can identify areas requiring further work. These areas may include asserting our positions, asking for what we want and need, setting limits with others, using leverage appropriately, active listening to others’ perspectives, bargaining a compromise, and collaborating. At this point, we can practice and develop these skills.

From Worry to Planning

Here, it may be better to rehearse these positions and develop a strategy, rather than winging it and learning strictly by trial and error. Through these steps, we have the potential to transform debilitating worry into constructive contingency planning, possibly leading to conflict resolution on the practical plane and reconciliation on the deeper personal level. Hopefully, we don’t have to figure this out at 3 AM.

Dealing with Conflict in Relationships: The Art of Assertiveness

Personal Conflict, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Though seldom pleasant, conflict is a normal and healthy part of relationships. Even in the best of marriages partners will view some situations differently and will have competing wants and needs that cannot be met simultaneously. These are times when the partners must choose between their own self-interests, those of their partners, and the common good of the relationship. These instances present opportunities for the partners to assert their independence or to affirm their commitment to their relationship. On the one hand, we declare our individuality, a primary component of our identity, by differing with significant people in our lives on matters of consequence. On the other hand, we demonstrate our commitment and caring by deferring our own wishes for the benefit of our partners. In the long run healthy conflict resolution provides a balance which allows the partners to develop and maintain a vital, committed relationship while still expressing their individual identities.

When conflict is avoided, both individuality and relationship are jeopardized. When we forfeit our own needs, feelings, values and opinions in order to avoid disagreement, we diminish ourselves and eventually have less to offer to the relationship. If we make disproportionate concessions to our partners, then over time we become resentful over the inequality and less willing to cooperate. When both parties surrender their individualities to their mutual interests, the relationship gets reduced to only those activities and involvements they agree upon. Without the influx of varied and different interests and concerns, the relationship lacks the stimulation required to maintain its vitality. On the other hand, if neither party is willing to defer his or her own wishes for the other, then the relationship has little glue to hold it together. It should be apparent that a healthy relationship requires a balance of cooperation and individuality and of give and take from its partners for its viability. Conflict resolution is the vehicle by which we establish and maintain this balance.

Even when the partners are in general agreement over the balance of individual and mutual pursuits, the individual interpersonal conflicts are usually distressing, as they inevitably involve some combination of frustration, anger, alienation, self-doubt, internal conflict, and apprehension. Frustration simply involves not getting what you want when you want it – without this element conflict would simply be a difference of opinion with no practical consequences to those involved. When we see our partner as intentionally thwarting our wishes, this frustration often translates into anger at our partner. When conflict is with someone close, the opposition may create an uncomfortable distance and a sense of alienation from the other. If you depend on your partner’s affirmation for your sense of self-worth, conflict with your partner may also threaten your self-esteem. Interpersonal conflict also produces internal conflict in its participants: our own wishes are often countered by our concern for our partners or the fear of our partner’s disapproval, rejection, or retaliation. The time it takes to work out the internal and interpersonal conflicts causes a delay in fulfilling one’s wishes, which presents a further source of frustration and an opportunity to worry about the possible outcomes of the conflict, whether that might be our partner’s disapproval, the thwarting of our plans, or some other consequence.

Safety and Respect – Prerequisites For Conflict Resolution

With these various distresses, working out conflicts requires two fundamental conditions – safety and respect. Resolution requires free choice by both parties, which can only be achieved in an atmosphere of safety. Security involves freedom from the risk not only of physical harm, but also of violation of one’s personal rights and freedom. Threats are particularly intimidating when there has been a history of previous aggression and personal violations. Achieving a partner’s capitulation through intimidation only suppresses conflict, rather than resolves it. Though it may achieve a short-term victory in winning a conflict, it leads to the long-term deterioration of trust, caring and cooperation in the relationship.

The second prerequisite for resolving conflicts is respect – both for one’s partner and for oneself. We accord respect for both our partners and ourselves when we recognize that we both can hold legitimate opinions and positions, even though based on different values, assumptions, and individual needs. We acknowledge that none of us has exclusive access to the standards by which to judge others – even if we assume that such absolute standards exist. This allows us to accept our differences without assuming that one is right and the other wrong, one good and the other bad, one true and the other false. In respecting the other we do not attempt to redefine the other’s thoughts, feelings and values. When we disagree in our opinions, we keep an open mind, recognizing that we do not have all the answers and demonstrating a willingness to learn from our partners. Since we honor our partners’ right to free choice, we do not attempt control or manipulation. With self-respect we accord ourselves the same respect that we give to others, and we expect that same respect from others as well. Self-respect also involves the responsibility for asserting our rights.

The Plight of the “Fight or Flight” Response

While hazardous enough itself, conflict gets further complicated by our “fight or flight” response to stress – and conflict can be quite stressful. We have a biological programming to respond to emergency situations which mobilizes us either to flee dangerous situations or to combat threatening forces. While appropriate for some situations, this intense reaction is counterproductive to partners who are attempting to work out their conflicts. The fight response involves an attempt to overcome one’s adversary – when enacted in conflict it is an attempt to dominate and control the other. At the very least this reaction is incompatible with the problem-solving and compromising that conflict resolution usually requires. Our stress gets experienced as anger at our partner, whom we see as obstructing our well-being, whether willfully or through negligence. At worst, the fight response may lead to a mutual escalation of hostilities that results in physical violence. In the flight response we attempt to avoid conflict either by ignoring it or by submitting to our partner’s wishes. The predominant feelings are fear and anxiety, whether for our own security or of losing our partner’s love. Our accommodation to our partner generally entails a diminishing of the self and a covert resentment of our partner. It often encourages others to take us for granted or to take advantage of our acquiescence.

Neither fight nor flight is adaptive for conflict, for both violate the respect required to sustain a committed relationship. The aggression of the fight response dominates without respecting the rights of one’s partner, while the submission of the flight response violates self-respect. In order for conflict to be constructive, some tempering of the fight or flight responses is necessary. Assertiveness involves the active advocacy of one’s needs and wants, as does aggression, yet it also respects the rights and dignity of one’s partner. A strategic retreat may be called for if conflict gets too intense, yet this flight is only temporary, until both parties are ready to return to the bargaining table. Thus, either partner should have the right to call a time-out if the atmosphere does not feel safe. This time can be used to cool down and to sort out one’s thoughts and feelings regarding the conflict, which can be difficult to do in the middle of an argument.

Communication – The Road to Conflict Resolution

Effective communication is essential to conflict resolution. We can examine this in terms of three basic components: active listening, self-expression, and negotiation. This approach is based on the assumption that both you and your partner have positions that make sense from your respective points-of-view. Active listening not only demonstrates your respect for your partner’s position, but it also encourages your partner to do likewise with you. Self-expression involves articulating your viewpoint and expectations. Verbalization of the perspectives and expectations of both partners sets the stage for negotiation and resolution of the conflict. These three functions will alternate during the course of working out a conflict, with negotiation generally following the other two processes.

Active Listening

Active listening involves our not only hearing our partners out, but also letting our partners know that we are hearing what they have to say. This can be expressed in a number of ways. Body language can be an important signal, with eye contact, leaning forward, and occasional head nods indicating that we are paying close attention. A simple “un-huh” now and then and paraphrasing what our partners say also communicates that we are listening. Seeking clarification and asking questions can also show that we are interested and concerned about our partners’ points-of-view. These can be helpful techniques, but they are only effective when they are genuine and accompany an attitude of respect, interest, and understanding for our partners.

Attending to our partners’ feelings is also important, since it demonstrates that we are interested not only in the issue at hand, but also in our partners’ well-being. Conflicts are frequently as much about the lack of understanding, acceptance and respect in the relationship as about the particular issue at hand. Showing these attitudes through active listening may help resolve relationship concerns that lie behind a particular demand, complaint, or request. Reaffirming our concern and acceptance for our partners is especially important when we have major differences. It can be especially difficult to listen to our partners’ anger. Often the initial reaction is to get defensive or to counterattack (e.g., “but you do . . .”). These reactions interpret our partners’ anger from our own point-of-view, as a personal attack. This approach usually come across as an attempt to invalidate our partners’ feelings and often leads to an escalation of charges and countercharges. A more effective approach is to try to understand our partners’ anger from their perspectives, wherein anger is a natural reaction to feeling frustrated, thwarted, or threatened by another. Acknowledging the anger doesn’t mean that we endorse our partners’ positions – it simply indicates that we recognize that the anger makes sense from their perspective. This approach can help to diffuse our partners’ anger and thereby help to attain a more collaborative approach.

Self-Expression

Self-expression is the complement to active listening, wherein we express and clarify our positions to our partners. Here it is important not to assume our partners know our thoughts, feelings and needs. While we might escape an outright refusal of a direct request or feel self-righteously indignant over our partner’s neglect, the net result is that we are less likely to get what we want if we don’t ask. There may be several aspects of our position to state, and attention to each one can help to convey our overall positions more effectively. These basically involve how we view the problem, how it affects us, and what we want from our partners.

There Is a definite art to expressing the problem effectively, so that our partners understand our concerns and are willing to consider accommodating to them. It is particularly helpful to define the problem in specific terms. This can involve specifying our partners’ problematic behaviors or the consequences of them (e.g., “You leave your clothes throughout the house,” or “The  house is too messy.”). Addressing the problem in terms of your partner’s personality traits (e.g., “You’re a lazy slob.”) is likely to provoke defensiveness and counterattack. It also is helpful to emphasize your own needs or inconveniences in defining the problem, rather than putting too much stress on your partner’s faults or shortcomings. The latter approach is likely to come across as blaming or attacking, which usually provokes defensiveness. It is also helpful to stick to the problem at hand rather than bringing in other complaints: keep the discussion focused on the current issue, rather than digging up the past.  Though it is tempting to bring in more data to build your case, this approach usually causes the defense to build its case, rather than attending to your perspective.  While it may be tempting to try to resolve a lot of differences all at once by putting them all under one heading, this approach can make the conflict seem overwhelming and discourage dialogue. It is generally better to tackle the conflicts one battle at a time, rather than take on the war.

A second aspect to self-expression is describing how the problem affects you – an important step for letting your partner know that the problem is a significant concern for you. As with the counterpart in active listening, you give your partner the opportunity to attend to you personally, rather than simply focusing on the overt problem at hand. One important aspect in communicating feelings is owning responsibility for them. Note the difference between saying, “I feel angry when you . . ,” and “You make me so angry.” And of course, saying “See what you made me do!” refutes our responsibility for our own actions. We may hold our partners accountable for their actions, but not for how we react to them – that’s our responsibility. Furthermore, emphasizing our feelings and needs rather than our partners’ shortcomings decreases the tone of blame and lessens the chances of our partners’ defensiveness. For these reasons articles on assertiveness often recommend use of “I”-statements to present our positions in a manner that can be more easily heard.

As with listening to our partners, expression of anger can make it more difficult for our partners to listen to our perspectives on the problems. We can often improve our effectiveness by recognizing that our reactions to problems usually involve a mixture of anger and hurt. When we emphasize the anger to the exclusion of the pain, we are more likely to get defensiveness and counter-attack in response. By also disclosing our pain we are allowing our partners the opportunity to feel compassion for us. Focusing only on the pain, however, may prevent us from mobilizing sufficient anger to assert our expectations. Without a dose of anger, our complaints may come across as whining or self-pity. A healthy balance between expressions of hurt and anger can be more effective in achieving a satisfactory resolution to our conflicts. This mixture is difficult for some personality types. Staunch individualists often view expression of hurt and sadness as a weakness and therefore emphasize their anger. The so-called “co-dependents” fear alienating their partners and feel selfish and bad for expressing their anger, so they primarily show their pain and suffering. Finding a balance does not mean inventing feelings that aren’t there, but it does mean reclaiming feelings we may have disowned when we’ve heard messages such as “Big boys don’t cry” and “What makes you think you’re so special that you deserve that?” Recovering these facets of ourselves not only improves our assertiveness, but also helps to round out our personalities.

A third aspect of communication is asserting what we want from our partners. As with defining the problem, it is helpful to be specific and to request changes in behavior rather than in attitudes or traits – it is fair to ask our partners to change their actions for our benefit, but not to expect a change in personality (i.e., into someone different). Specificity of the what, when, and where helps to hold our partners accountable for the concessions they make, rather than doing it “tomorrow” or “when I have time.” Keeping requests simple and one thing at a time is more likely to produce compliance.

Negotiation and Resolution

Once both we and our partners have had the opportunity to express our viewpoints, we can work at resolving our differences and reaching a conclusion. We may be able to clarify our positions and clear up misunderstandings. We may voice disagreement with one another’s position and present our own rationales, as long as the challenges still respect each other. This involves recognizing that we both may have internally consistent and legitimate viewpoints based on different values, assumptions, or individual needs. It is important to remember that this is not a courtroom battle to determine right vs. wrong or guilt vs. innocence, but a negotiation to work out a mutually agreeable solution. While achieving agreement on the problem is optimal, it is not essential: we can reach agreement on how to handle a problem without agreeing on all aspects of it.

One element of negotiating a solution to a conflict is bargaining. This may involve indicating the consequences of our partners’ compliance or noncompliance with our requests. Offering a reward for compliance tends to work better than threatening punishment for noncompliance. It is also important to be alert to the risk of coercion, which conveys a lack of respect for our partners’ right to free choice. Bribery, blackmail, extortion, and threats are all mechanisms of control rather than free bargaining. It is at times a fine line between offering an incentive and making a threat or a bribe – and a blurry line at that. One guideline is to propose the natural consequences of their actions on us: offering what we are willing and withholding what we don’t feel like giving. Another is to make the incentive proportionate to the action: the punishment should fit the crime, and the reward fit the good deed. Other guidelines have a more strategic value: we shouldn’t offer or threaten a consequence that we are not willing to carry out, or else we erode our credibility; and we shouldn’t offer a reward that we want more than our partners or threaten a punishment that hurts us worse, or we’ll end up giving in sooner than our partners.

There are a number of possible outcomes to conflict. Problem-solving is a mode of conflict resolution in which the couple works out a solution that satisfies almost all the wants and needs of both parties. Another possibility is compromise, in which both get some of what they want, but make concessions in order to achieve it. Both these instances are the so-called “win-win” situations. A third option is a one-sided win, wherein one partner gets his or her way at the expense or inconvenience of the other – a victory that may bear some cost in terms of animosity or resentment from the partner. Even this might be an acceptable outcome, but only if there is an overall balance of give and take throughout the relationship and a basic commitment to it by both partners.

Summary

The article presents the view of conflict as a healthy aspect of relationships that serves to maintain a dynamic balance between individuality and commitment to the relationship. Assertiveness, the active advocacy of one’s own needs and wants while respecting the rights and dignity of the other, is presented as the appropriate stance for both partners in a conflict. Various guidelines have been offered for effective conflict resolution in the context of active listening, self-expression, and negotiation phases of the process. If these guidelines are followed mechanically or used to manipulate one’s partner, they will be of little help. When they are used to foster an atmosphere of mutual respect and safety, they not only facilitate conflict resolution, but also serve to deepen the relationship through enhanced emotional intimacy.

BOB DANIEL, Ph.D., is a Licensed Clinical Psychologist in private practice at Tidewater Psychotherapy Services in Virginia Beach.