- Home
- Find a Therapist
- Topics
- Tests
- Magazine
- Psych Basics
- Blogs
- Diagnosis Dictionary
Relationship style comes in several different distinct flavors -- independent, dependent, interdependent, co-dependent and counter-dependent. Bearing this in mind, if we consider one of the prime tenets of forensic psychology - the way that people do one thing is the way that they do everything - we can begin to reveal the consistencies, and, by association, the repeated patterns of behavior, in the vast majority, if not all, of our relationships. Read More
You've really only left one
You've really only left one choice haven't you?
If you are independent, your relationship style is "superseded by self-interest."
If dependent, you are so wrapped up in the other person you are "ostensibly lost to the other."
The co-dependent people exhibit an "unhealthy balance of need and support."
Those who are counter-dependent become "so consumed...that the reacting partner begins behaving...parallel to that other."
So I guess that leaves interdependent, the only 'healthy' option you've left us. Thanks, that was very enlightening, and helpful.
multiple styles
There are many ways to conceptualize relationship styles--if you were in the business world, you would be writing about "selling styles" or "management styles." What is interesting is that we "Think" in terms of relationship stles, irrelevant of the buzz phrase you want to use. Why do we do this? We are hardwired to because it is our instinct to "classify." The problem is often thinking in terms of "style" is broad and often creates broad sterotypes that are inaccurate. I have supervised dozens of mental health professionals, lectured to tens of thousands of therapists, and I would urge all not to focus on relationship styles, as this often imposes self limiting thoughts and actions on the individual. Better to focus on finding the right style for the specific interaction, just like an effective therpist does with each patient. For a great read on this, check out The Genius of Instinct: Reclaim Mother Nature's Tools For Enhancing Your Health, Happiness, Family and Work (FT, April 2009). You will find it very useful in your therapy practice.
Blatant self-promotion
Dr. Weisinger:
All due respect, but if you'd actually read the article -- instead of criticizing its content so you could promote yourself -- you'd understand that what you're talking about is an artifact of social manipulation to achieve a desired outcome and what the article is talking about is the scientifically demonstrable dynamic that underlies on-going social interaction; that's apples and oranges.
And of course categories are limiting. You're supposed to be some kind of expert in emotional intelligence. The guy who came up with the idea of emotional intelligence -- Dan Golesman -- is a Buddhist -- category-less -- duh!
I've known Michael for almost 30 years and he was working with Dan Goleman and Linda Lantierri in 1989 -- before you were even out of grad school, I bet. Why not stop living off of other peoples work and have an original thought, instead of criticizing someone elses work for your own benefit. Maybe you should start looking into character education.
Do people really fit into a
Do people really fit into a catergory once and for all, or can the catergory you fall under shift and change with time?
Categories...
This article is not about categories...it's about styles. What kind of jeans do you wear? In high school, I bet you wore a different brand than you do now. You're still wearing jeans, so your personal style hasn't changed, but the style of the jeans -- the way they look, you're intention in wearing them -- has.
So, to answer your question more directly...style is the core of the way that you go about things (wearing jeans), while the way that approach manifests (the brand of jeans you wear) shifts and changes over time...
Blessings,
Michael
So you can't change from
So you can't change from jeans to shorts, or slacks, or something else? Is there a way then that all these styles could be healthy?
Change...
Well, of course you can change. That's sort of the whole point of self-examination. What we are talking about here is our unconscious tendencies...the way that we manifest relationships simply because that's the way we do it.
All of these styles have the potential to be healthy and all of them the potential to be unhealthy. The style itself is an is...it has no charge, power or intention. It's what we do with it that matters.
For instance, codependency, which gets a consistently bad rap, is a natural and necessary part of any relationship. It becomes unhealthy when that cooperative symbiosis starts to bleed someone in the relationship, rather than feed them.
Blessings,
Michael
this is a really interesting
this is a really interesting post, where is part 2 of it?
Part 2
There really wasn't a Part 2, but more of an addendum and clarification...
Understanding the Continuum of Relationship Style: An Addendum
Wow! This deep for some one
Wow! This deep for some one as simple as me. I have been with Michael for 5 yrs or so. The Man has taught me a lot about myself and the relationship I'm in and the one's I've had before. "Styles" are a good way to conceptualize this part of life and how to cope with them, but dose one style type reflect all relationships in some ones life? How dose one separate the styles from personal to professional to casual?
danny
Post new comment