Been there, done that, but keep doing it: These are
the hallmarks of an argument involving an "enduring difference"
between you and your spouse. Mary" and Bill are typical;
an "enduring difference" has, for some time, occupied
a large space in their marriage of seven years:
Mary and Bill are both in their late 20s and have two
children. They argue about doing household chores, managing
her anger, his watching TV "all the time, " and
his weekly going out drinking with "the boys. "
Before their first child was born, their life together
was filled with work, family, friends, and a lot of partying.
Mary has adapted to the changes children bring and resents
the fact that Bill has not. They both have demanding jobs
they must maintain to support their lifestyle. They limit
shared family tasks to transporting children to daycare
and school. Otherwise, Bill does "fix up " around
the house, mows the lawn, and tinkers with the car. He is
indifferent to household chores and childcare, not considering
them as part of his role. He says he needs the TV and his
"one night out a week" to relax.
Though stressed, Mary feels guilty about working and
saddles herself with the major responsibility for the children,
the housekeeping, and their relationship. Mary gets angry
when she sees Bill watching TV when she is washing the dinner
dishes or putting the children to bed. She resents his weekly
Thursday night "appointment" with his childhood
buddies, but limits her own outside contacts to phoning
her friends.
She argues that he does not take responsibility for
pulling his own weight with family and household matters
so she, in effect, has a third child to care for. He views
his work and career as his contribution to the family, while
Mary's work is played down as merely an interim measure
to support their current lifestyle.
Mary resents Bill's attitude so much that she can barely
contain her anger in front of the children. Bill is angered
by what he sees as her attempts to "control" him.
Enduring differences develop out of expectations learned
from one's family-of-origin (for example, gender roles) and
longstanding character traits (for example, submissiveness).
These differences may surface as seemingly harmless disputes
about sleeping arrangements (who takes which side of the bed)
or who does the shopping to more important disagreements regarding
the control of finances or the disciplining of children. Denial
of differences, codependency, and degree of openness in communication
style often emerge as factors in enduring differences. Partners
may also differ greatly in their comfort with confrontation,
willingness to discuss relationship issues, and how decisions
are made on family matters.
What Is to Be Done?
The complexity of enduring differences and the emotions they
generate limit the usefulness of negotiation principles; differences
should, nevertheless, first be subjected to a process of negotiation
to test the degree to which they are entrenched.
Immediate differences are concrete, situation-specific, and
do not persist as frustrating arguments. Immediate difference
negotiation is idea-centered. Even as negotiation relies on
effective listening, it centers on brainstorming techniques
(rather than vulnerability) and carries with it the expectation
that the difference is resolvable.
For entrenched differences, Samuel Shem and Janet Surrey
have introduced an alternative approach they call "Getting
to We."
"We" includes activities enjoyed together; mutual
interests; shared passions; the resolution of differences;
common experiences; relying on or helping one another; and
knowledge of each other's needs, strengths, and resources.
The way to get to "we" utilizes an empathy technique
that allows each partner to develop an understanding of how
the other partner is approaching the enduring conflict. Neither
partner makes any effort to change the other. Acceptance is
the key to "getting to we." With each partner able
to make sense out of what is going on between them, they have
the resources for finding a mutual resolution to their difference.
The sign of a mutual resolution is that they are both able
to "live with" the difference.
Getting to "We"
Identify one unending argument about one enduring difference:
After trying negotiation without success, mutually agree on
one recurring issue and stick with it. The idea here is to
find a way to learn to resolve or to live with your differences,
rather than to "get satisfaction" or "be right.
"
Mary and Bill agreed to focus on their anger toward
each other.
Follow the rules of engagement: Be methodical about
following the "Rules of Engagement," (See "How
to fight fairly") otherwise your emotional reactions
will divert you into repeating your usual argument.
Each partner expresses a concern related to the enduring
difference: The first partner states an honest concern
with an "I" statement. This statement avoids blaming
and judging the second partner. ("You " statements
put the second partner on the defensive, limiting that person's
ability to listen) The more vulnerable the first partner can
be in making this statement, the more likely the second partner
will pick up on what the first partner really wants. The second
partner listens to the concern to see the situation from the
first partner's point of view. The second partner summarizes
the essence of the first partner's concern. When the first
partner is satisfied that the second partner understands,
the process is reversed and the second partner states a concern.
Mary states: "I feel angry and abandoned by your
denial of responsibility for our family and the energy you
instead put into your friends and your work."
Bill states: "I've been feeling bored at home
since our first child was born. Actually, I feel angry that
'all' your energy goes into the children and I feel that you
don't have anything left for me."
Together, detect each person's dream/yearning that underlies
the concern: Each partner makes a statement that expresses
the dream or yearning that underlies the other partner's concern.
There is no attempt at this point to join these dreams in
any way. Each partner gives feedback to the other regarding
the accuracy of the other partner's dream statement.
Mary heard that Bill's dream involved a renewal of their
former closeness.
Bill heard that Mary's dream involved a bond that included
their children.
Soothe and affirm each other: Since this activity
is an expression of vulnerability toward one another, each
partner will feel some degree of apprehension. This can be
an opportunity to support one another. Celebrate the sharing
that just took place and what that means about the relationship.
Verbal and physical demonstrations of caring and affection
soothe and affirm.
Mary and Bill were energized by the hope they saw for
their relationship.
Talk for 15 to 20 minutes about your dreams: Each
partner should take time to reflect on the meanings of the
dream statements. Each partner may then consider both dream
statements and report what can and cannot be compromised.
Each partner defines areas of flexibility and indicates the
bottom line on what he/she is unable to yield on at this time.
The test of the appropriate limits of what is acceptable is
if either partner would resent "giving in" on a
particular point.
Both Mary and Bill recognized that they were scared
of repeating the dynamics they each had observed between
their own parents - a bitterly angry wife married to a "workaholic"
and passive husband.
As they continued to talk, Mary became aware of the
fact that she felt angry about setting aside her dream,
much as her mother felt angry about doing the same thing.
Bill became aware that, like his father, he was disappointed
that he no longer was "Number One" in his wife's
affection, so he put energy into his life outside the family.
Unlike his father, Bill was angry about having to do that.
Devise a compromise that honors both dreams: Now that
both partners have similar information about their enduring
difference, they are in a position to come up with a solution
that allows them to resolve the difference or permits each
to "live with" the difference in comfort.
Mary recognized that she needed to give up being responsible
for everything, to be more inventive about including Bill
in the life of the family, and to make time for her relationship
with Bill.
Bill realized that he did not have to be "Number
One II to be loved, but that he would have to join his family
to achieve the happiness he was seeking.
Share your learning with one other: Participating
in this process with your partner can tell you a lot about
your relationship and how to enrich it. Talking about what
you have each learned helps to prepare the two of you for
the next time an enduring difference emerges.
Both Bill and Mary grew up in households where their
mothers stayed home and "took care" of the family,
so their expectations about appropriate marital roles do
not square with the reality of their present circumstances.
Change requires that they keep talking with one another,
directly, honestly, and with affection.
References:
Gottman, J.M., & Silver, N. (2000). The seven Principles
for making marriage work. NY: Three Rivers Press.
Shem, S., & Surrey, J.L. (1999). We have to talk: Healing
dialogues between women and men. NY: Basic Books.
