Over the disappointment, the partners erect defenses against each
other. They become guarded with each other. They stop confiding in each
other. They wall off parts of themselves and withdraw emotionally from
the relationship, often into other activities--or other relationships.
They can't talk without blaming, so they stop listening. They maybe
afraid that the relationship will never change but may not even know what
they are afraid of There is so much chaos that there is usually despair
and depression. One partner may actually leave. Both may decide to stay
with it but can't function. They live together in an emotional
divorce.
Over the years of working with couples, I have developed an
effective way to help them arrive at a relationship they can both be
happy with. I may not offer them therapy. I find that what couples need
is part education in a set of skills and part exploration of experience
that aims to resolve the difficulties couples trip over in their private
lives.
Experience has demonstrated to me that the causes of behavior and
human experience a complex and include elements that are biological,
psychological, social, contextual, and even spiritual. No single theory
explains the intricate dynamics of two individuals interacting over time
to meet all their needs as individuals and as a couple. So without
respect to theoretical coherence I have drawn from almost every
perspective in the realm of psychology--from psychodynamics to family
systems, communication theory and social learning theory, from behavior
therapy to object relations. Over the past 25 years I have gradually
built a program of training in the processes of intimacy now known as
Practical Application of Intimate Relationship Skills (PAIRS). It is
taught to small groups of couples in a four-month-long course in various
parts of the United States and now in 13 countries.
There are no specific theories to explain why the course works. In
time that will come, as researchers pinpoint exactly which cognitive,
behavioral, and experiential elements (and when and for whom) are most
responsible for which types of change. Nevertheless I, my associates, and
increasing numbers of graduate students have gathered, and are gathering,
evidence that it powerfully, positively influences marital interaction
and satisfaction.
Studies of men and women before and after taking the course show
that it reduces anger and anxiety, two of the most actively subversive
forces in relationships. judging from the hundreds of couples who have
taken the PAIRS course, partners in distressed relationships tend to have
more anxiety and anger than the does the general population. Once they
have taken the course there is a marked reduction in this state of anger
and anxiety. What is most notable is that there is also a reduction in
the personality trait of anger, which is ordinarily considered resistant
to change. Learning the skills of intimacy--of emotional and physical
closeness--has a truly powerful effect on people.
We also see change in measurements of marital happiness, such as
the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Tests administered before the course show
that we are seeing a range of couples from the least to the most
distressed. And we are getting significant levels of change among every
category of couple. It is no secret that most attempts at therapy produce
little or no change among the most distressed couples. Perhaps it's
because what we are doing is not in the form of therapy at all, although
its effects are therapeutic. In addition to improvement in many
dimensions of the relationship, achieving intimacy bolsters the
self-worth of both partners.
Love is a feeling. Marriage, on the other hand, is a contract--an
invisible contract. Both partners bring to it expectations about what
they want and don't want, what they're willing to give and not willing to
give. Most often, those are out of awareness. Most marriage partners
don't even know they expected something until they realize that they're
not getting it.
The past is very much present in all relationships. All
expectations in relationships are conditioned by our previous experience.
It may simply be the nature of learning, but things that happen in the
present are assimilated by means of what has happened in the past. This
is especially true of our emotions: every time we have an experience in
the present we also are experiencing it in the past. Emotional memory
exists outside of time. It is obvious that two partners are conditioned
by two different pasts. But inside the relationship it is less obvious.
And that leads to all kinds of misunderstanding, disagreement,
disappointment, and anger that things are not going exactly as
expected.
The upshot is statements like "I can't understand women," "who
knows what a woman wants," and "you can never please a man." All of the
classic complaints reflect hidden expectations that have never surfaced
to the point where they could be discussed, examined, kept, or
discarded.
Tags:
20th century,
autonomy,
belief,
commercialization,
confusion,
cults,
intimacy,
intimate relationships,
ironies,
larger community,
love,
many generations,
marriage,
physical closeness,
primitive cultures,
productive life,
relationship,
sex,
splendid isolation