Understanding and Addressing the Depression Spiral

When in it, the depression spiral, although painful, is considered to be rational, a mixture of interpretations that appear far superior to any alternative.

Usually, in the midst of a depressive episode, challenging these perspectives leads to defensiveness, as the captive sincerely believes that they aren't loved, can't be loved, and are perceived by others to be inferior. As these interpretations fit the individual's core beliefs about themselves and the world, any contradiction may feel even more destabilizing. So, when feeling insecure and generally unsafe, they hold onto the familiar.

The depression spiral tends to work like this: You say or do something that doesn't fit in my framework of how to exhibit care for another. I interpret that as meaning that you don't care about me, which activates my core belief that I'm unlovable. Then, when you challenge my interpretation, I feel scared because (a) I'm certain about my framework (as well as my self-concept) and (b) as a result, I begin to believe you're manipulating me. So, as you mount a stronger defense, I begin to feel more certain that I can't trust you, and if you're one of the few I do trust, another core belief, that others aren't trustworthy, is also activated. When we're happy, we tend to seek out reasons to remain happy, so we may search for reasons to like someone or something even more. When sad, we tend to search for reasons to dislike them. Depression helps foster self-sabotage, which acts as a form of self-protection. If I end our relationship, you can't hurt me anymore.

Again, because the individual is convinced of their reasoning, challenging those beliefs directly, at least initially, is often ineffective. Mistakes that people often make are:

1. Labeling the person or thinking as irrational.
2. Being generally defensive.
3. Becoming overly apologetic.

This may feel like a no-win situation. You're manipulative if you defend yourself (or don’t care about the suffering you cause to the other person) and awful if you apologize, as you're admitting guilt. Unfortunately, there is no exact blueprint for these cases, but here's what seems to help:

1. Shelving the conversation to revisit at a later time, when emotions aren't running so high.
2. Balancing the ideal with one's humanity. This means that while the individual's expectations may be high, they aren't necessarily wrong. "I'm only human" is the defense of those who don't want to take accountability. On the one hand, you can admit your mistake while, on the other, asking for grace. Becoming defensive can contribute to your interlocutor feeling as though their perspective, and pain, don't matter. On the whole, all of us should aspire to be more considerate of others. And, usually, humility is followed by forgiveness.
3. Trying to be more curious. This means that instead of demanding the other to think more rationally, try to understand their triggers. It sometimes helps to learn that for that individual, social mishaps trigger decreased moods, which are activated by their core beliefs. Empathy fosters compassion in conjunction with a more critical perspective.
4. When followed by curiosity and empathy, a challenge is warranted. This means that you may present your defense and ask that your interlocutor attempt to remain open-minded while jumping to conclusions, a difficult paradox to balance. In this respect, you aren't necessarily asking them not to believe you're manipulative, only to acknowledge they may be wrong and, thus, should try to acquire more information. Because both parties tend to feel hurt by the other's accusations, it's important that each tries to acknowledge the fact that they may be wrong and attempt to take the situation less personally.

It's often hard to accept that responsibility is shared. And while mental illness certainly plays a significant role in conflicts, it's unfair to solely blame it or the person in the throes of it. All of us, at bottom, could be better.