The first sentence of a conversation predicts its outcome

Our research shows that the way you start your conversations makes a big difference in the overall quality of your marriage. Harsh start-up—that is, beginning with criticism or contempt—causes the interaction to go downhill fast. Partners become defensive and withdraw, leading to emotional distance and loneliness. The opposite is softened start-up, which is free of criticism and contempt.

Below are five examples of common marital conflicts, followed by examples of harsh start-up and softened start-up.

1. The holidays are approaching and you’re worried because your partner often spends more on her family than the two of you can afford.

HARSH START-UP: “I hate the holidays! Your shopping always drives us into debt.”

SOFTENED START-UP: “I really want to enjoy the holidays with you this year. But I’m worried about the bills. Can we talk about a budget?”

2. Your partner likes to go to clubs with friends each weekend, but you like to spend more evenings at home together.

HARSH START-UP: “I’m sick of going out with your friends all the time.”

SOFTENED START-UP: “I feel like spending time alone together. How about if I cook a nice dinner on Saturday and we stay home for a change?”

3. After a bad day at work, you come home to a headache, a messy house, and two quarreling kids. Your partner arrives, turns on the baseball game, and asks, “What’s for dinner?”

HARSH START-UP: “How the hell should I know? And why do I always have to cook?!”

SOFTENED START-UP: “I don’t know, and I don’t feel very well. It would be great if you’d take care of dinner.”

4. You’d like to make love tonight, but your partner’s been distant. You wonder whether he even finds you attractive anymore.

HARSH START-UP: “What’s wrong with your sex drive lately? You sure don’t seem like the guy I married.”

SOFTENED START-UP: “I’ve really been missing you. Remember how we made love at the cabin last summer? Tell me what I can do to get you interested.”

-Ten Lessons to Transform Your Marriage: America’s Love Lab Experts Share Their Strategies for Strengthening Your Relationship by Joan Declaire, John Phd Gottman, Julie Schwartz Gottman

How one couple solved their conflict

Often the difference between resolving conflicts  and arguing is attitude. Why do people argue? In  one word, rigidity. We adopt a rigid attitude and  dig in our heels. In essence we’re saying, “My way is  the right way, and if you don’t do it my way, then I  will make your life miserable.” This is the attitude  of an arguer, a person who insists on getting his or  her own way.

Conflict resolvers have a different attitude. They  say, in effect, “I’m sure we can work this out in a  way that will be positive for both of us. Let’s thinkabout it together.” Spouses who adopt this attitude  are looking for a win-win resolution.

Let’s revisit Bob and Jill from chapter 1, who  were arguing about Monday Night Football. Obviously,   each of them saw the other’s position as  unreasonable. They created a miserable evening by  arguing and were left with a huge barrier between  them. But with a different attitude, the outcome  could have been totally different.

What if Jill had chosen an attitude of accommodation?   She might have said, “Bob, I know you  really enjoy Monday Night Football. It’s a way for  you to unwind from the stresses of the day. On the  other hand, I’m beginning to feel lonely and shut  out of your life. That’s not a feeling I want to have.  So, at your convenience, I’d like for us to talk about  it and look for a solution. I’m sure we can work it  out. I love you very much, and I don’t want this to  come between us.

“If Bob had chosen a conflict resolver’s attitude,  he might have responded, “Honey, you’re right. I  really do enjoy Monday Night Football, but I alsovalue our relationship more than anything in the  world. I want to meet your needs, and I’m sure we  can find a solution that will be good for both of  us. Why don’t we talk about it at halftime?” The  evening could have been pleasant for both Bob and  Jill, and they likely would have found a solution  that met their needs.

– Everybody Wins: The Chapman Guide to Solving Conflicts without Arguing (Gary Chapman)- Highlight on Page 23 | Loc. 166-78  | Added on Monday, March 14, 2011, 01:33 AM

 

In an ideal world, this is how conflict is solved

I saw an attitude of love graphically demonstrated   when I visited John and Betsy. They had recently   moved to our city and had visited our church.  During our conversation, I discovered that they had  lost a three-year-old son in a tragic boating accident  a year earlier. They had two other children, whowere now five and seven, and they told me that  Betsy was now pregnant.

“Being a marriage counselor, Gary, I think you  will find this interesting,” Betsy said. “Our decision  to have another child did not come easily. John really   did not want another child, but I was strongly  in favor of having another one.

“I looked at John and he said, “The pain was  so deep when we lost josh that I couldn’t bear the  thought of going through that again. I was happy  with the two children we had left and wanted to  invest my time with them.”

“I can understand that,” I said.

Read more of this post

Eye-rolling predicts divorce

In one important study, Dr. Gottman and research scientist Sybil Carrère tracked 124 couples who had been married for less than nine months. Researchers watched and “coded” positive actions or words indicating interest, validation, affection, humor, and joy. And they also looked for more troubling signs, including contempt, belligerence, disgust, domineering, anger, fear, tension, defensiveness, whining, sadness, and stonewalling.

The study showed that the nuanced first few minutes of an argument can set the tone for the entire fight, determining whether the discussion will be productive or harmful to your relationship. In fact, in the University of Washington study the researchers demonstrated that just watching the first three minutes of the conversation helped them predict which couples would stay married and who was headed for divorce during the next six years.115

Consider what this means at the most practical level. If your marriage is struggling, you don’t necessarily need to dramatically overhaul every interaction with your spouse. The most important part of an argument between couples is the beginning, the start-up. Couples who engage in a harsh or brusque start-up—leveling harsh words and spiteful criticisms—are headed for trouble. Couples who launch conflict discussions carefully and gently are more likely to have a productive argument that strengthens, rather than weakens, their relationship. If you get the first three minutes of a fight right, you’re a long way toward improving the entire relationship.

Marriage studies show that one of the main differences between a good fight and a bad fight is whether it begins with a complaint or a criticism. Sometimes the two can be hard to tell apart.

Here is an example of a complaint versus criticism over the issue of housework.

“I was upset last night when I came home and the dishes were in the sink and the floor wasn’t swept.” (complaint)

Versus

“Why can’t you be bothered to do the dishes and clean up after the kids the one time I have a meeting? You never think about pitching in when I’m busy with other things.” (criticism)

Or sex.

“I wish we had sex more often.” (complaint)

Versus

“You never want to have sex. You’re always too tired. What’s happened to you?” (criticism)

Or child care.

“I really need more help juggling the kids’ schedules on the weekend. I’d like some time for myself too.” (complaint)

Versus

“All you think about is yourself. Why would it never occur to you that I might need some help with the kids or there might be something I want to do today?” (criticism laced with sarcasm)

Understanding the difference between a complaint and a criticism can go a long way toward improving the quality of your arguments. Couples are entitled to be unhappy, even annoyed, with each other. In fact, it’s inevitable. The key is to focus on the upsetting behavior rather than launch into a general attack on the person. It’s a sign of serious trouble when the opening to your discussion begins with criticism, contempt, or sarcasm. Not only will you not win the argument, you will end up unhappy, dissatisfied, and with a dose of negativity that can jeopardize your relationship.

The difference between a complaint and a criticism can be subtle, so it’s important to pay attention to your word choices. In his book Why Marriages Succeed or Fail, Dr. Gottman explains that complaints are specific, criticisms are global and include blame, and contempt adds insult to criticism. The phrases “you always” or “you never” are a telltale sign that your complaint has morphed into a broader criticism of your partner. Do your best to avoid the word “you” when having an argument with your spouse. Try to stick with the first person “I” or “we,” and avoid the accusatory “you.”116

Even worse than criticism is contempt, says Dr. Gottman. While criticisms are painful, contempt can be cruel. One manifestation of contempt discussed earlier is eye rolling, a dismissive gesture that suggests what the other person is saying is not important.

For Better by Tara Parker-Pope

Compatibility is over-rated

The lesson, say a number of noted marriage researchers, is that compatibility is overrated.113 In fact, focusing too much on the issue of compatibility may be in and of itself a sign of trouble, notes Ted Huston, University of Texas psychology professor, who runs the PAIR project, a longitudinal study of married couples. Dr. Huston’s research shows that in terms of likes and dislikes, happy couples are no more or less compatible than unhappy couples. But a telltale sign of an unhappy relationship is when one spouse or the other starts to fret about not being compatible or begins to overstate the importance of compatibility to a good marriage. When a man or woman says that he or she is “just not compatible” with their spouse, what they are really saying, notes Dr. Huston, is that they just aren’t getting along.

The truth is, compatibility comes and goes and there is no such thing as a couple who is compatible all the time. Sometimes couples get along. Sometimes they disagree about money, sex, kids, and time. Good marriages aren’t about being compatible all the time. People in a good marriage know how to manage their differences.

For Better by Tara Parker-Pope

Dobson on appreciating Moms

You may have noticed that this book is dedicated to my beloved son, Ryan. This little lad is now three years old, and he is a certified, card-carrying toddler. He has every single characteristic described in the textbooks as being typical for children between eighteen and forty months of age. During this dynamic period of life, emotional enthusiasm and excitement are supposed to bubble forth from some inexhaustible wellspring of energy, and so it has been with Ryan. In fact, the very day he turned eighteen months of age, it was as though a little voice whispered in his ear, “Now, kid, now!” Ryan began running that afternoon and he’s still moving at maximum velocity. He isn’t a malicious child and he rarely defies authority in a blatant manner. But he is enormously curious and he gets into everything. If it is humanly possible, Ryan can be expected to spill it, break it, disassemble it, spread it, or render it inoperable. Trying to get him to be still and quiet is like nailing Jell-O to a tree: it’s impossible! And, of course, his personal safety teeters on the brink of disaster from moment to moment. In fact, it is necessary for an emotionally stable adult to follow Ryan around all day, just to keep him from killing himself! Occasionally that responsibility falls to me.

I was at home alone with Ryan one morning when I suddenly realized that it had been approximately two minutes since my little explorer had made any noise. (When one babysits with Ryan, silence is definitely not golden.) I immediately began looking for him, searching each room of the house, but he was not to be found. Finally, I glanced through the kitchen window and saw that Ryan had managed to crawl into the back of a truck which some builders had parked in our driveway. The bed of the truck was taller than Ryan’s head, and it is still a mystery as to how he climbed so high. When I found him, he was trying desperately to get down. He was hanging off the back of the truck from his waist downward, yet his feet were still suspended twelve to fifteen inches above the ground. Seeing that he was going to fall, I slipped up behind him without him hearing me coming and placed my hands outward to catch him when he fell. But as I drew nearer, I heard him talking to himself. He was not crying. He didn’t complain or scream in terror. He was simply probing empty space with one foot and saying softly, “Somebody help the boy! Won’t somebody come help the boy?” His words characterized his way of life, for “helping the boy” has become a full-time job for Ryan’s loving mother and me.

 

Shortly after the truck-bed experience, little Ryan let me see another side of his sparkling personality. My wife, Shirley, broke her leg while skiing, thereby granting me the chance to do her thing for a few weeks. I learned a great deal during that time about the color of grass on the other side of the fence: it not only wasn’t any greener . . . it wasn’t even edible! The very first morning that I was on the job, Ryan began teaching me the rules to the game called motherhood. He awakened me with a loud cry at 6 a.m. Being jarred from a deep, dreamy sleep, I staggered from my bed and began feeling my way across the house toward Ryan’s room. All this time he was crying at the top of his lungs. (That sound has much the same effect on the nerves as fingernails scratching a chalkboard.) When I reached his door and pushed it open, the crying suddenly stopped and a cheery little voice said, “Is breakfast ready?” I said, “I’m doing the best I can, Ryan!”

So I went into the kitchen to fix the kid something palatable to eat, but was still at least 80 percent asleep. I stood there staring into the cabinets with unfocused eyes, hoping something quick and simple would tumble out. Meanwhile, Ryan had climbed down from his bed and followed me into the kitchen. He tried repeatedly to engage me in conversation—which was the last thing on earth that his sleepy father wanted or needed at that moment.

He was saying, “Are we having bacon?”

and “Why isn’t the milk poured?”

and “Is it almost ready?”

But I was ignoring his inquiries. He must have asked me a dozen questions, all of which went unanswered. Then I “tuned in” just in time to hear him sigh and say, “I’m getting so tired of you!”

So what’s a mother to do, folks? I don’t know! I went back and reread my book Dare to Discipline but it didn’t say anything about handling the pre-sunrise activities of an ambitious toddler. I told my wife if she would just come back to work I would rise up and call her blessed each day, as I sit among the elders in the gates.1 In fact, I could hardly wait to sit among the elders in the gates again. Through these brief forays into the responsibilities of motherhood and from the experience gained in counseling women, I have developed a deep appreciation for the unique skills required of wives and mothers. In my view, their job is of utmost importance to the health and vitality of our society, and I regret the lack of respect and status given to today’s homemaker.

 

–What Wives Wish their Husbands Knew About Women (James C. Dobson)- Highlight Loc. 54-94  | Added on Wednesday, February 09, 2011, 06:07 PM

An affair is like a drug addiction

Indeed, the person in love is an addict of sorts. Just like someone going through chemical withdrawal, a lover becomes anxious and unable to concentrate in the absence of his or her partner. But even a small dose of affection—a phone call or a text message—gives them their “fix” and calms them, at least for a while. In many ways, the brain scan studies show that the maddening feelings of love are essentially a major mental-health crisis. The chemical storm of brain changes it causes are strikingly similar to drug addiction and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Love really does make us crazy.

 

-For Better by Tara Parker-Pope

Divorce from a kid’s perspective: Oh no, not you again!

I thought it was over, but it returned.  Decisions made today will still be effective tomorrow.  Such is life.

Diary Entries

“Graduation!  Graduation!  Graduation!  Eighteen months before it was marriage!  Marriage!  Marriage!  That’s right, I got married before I graduated.  Events like this can be fun.  I guess.  I mean, my wife and I are really happy, don’t get me wrong, but you should have seen the circus act of trying to avoid hurting feelings at the wedding.

Events like this can cause stress!  Who to speak to first, who to honor in what way, even who to gravitate toward at the end of a long line at graduation!  It’s back!  That stress that I lost for awhile is back!

My lovely wife just had our first baby!  He’s beautiful!  Stress came…who sees the baby first?  You should have seen the look on our faces when I came into the hospital room with my step-father and my mom were on one side of my wife’s bed, with my dad on the other side.  I’m surprised the place didn’t explode!  They were really nice to each other, but it was so weird!  My wife asked me never to place her in that position again.

Child number two!  He’s adorable!  Same story, verse number two.  Same stress, different city…I guess it will never end.”

 

Kevin Garrett
onyourmark@bellsouth.net
http://www.facebook.com/kevinleegarrett

John Piper on how to honor your wife

Consider the analogy of a wedding anniversary. Mine is on December 21. Suppose on this day I bring home a dozen long-stemmed roses for Noel. When she meets me at the door, I hold out the roses, and she says, “O Johnny, they’re beautiful; thank you” and gives me a big hug. Then suppose I hold up my hand and say matter-of-factly, “Don’t mention it; it’s my duty.”

What happens? Is not the exercise of duty a noble thing? Do not we honor those we dutifully serve? Not much. Not if there’s no heart in it. Dutiful roses are a contradiction in terms. If I am not moved by a spontaneous affection for her as a person, the roses do not honor her. In fact, they belittle her. They are a very thin covering for the fact that she does not have the worth or beauty in my eyes to kindle affection. All I can muster is a calculated expression of marital duty.

Here is the way Edward John Carnell puts it:

Suppose a husband asks his wife if he must kiss her good night. Her answer is, “You must, but not that kind of a must.” What she means is this: “Unless a spontaneous affection for my person motivates you, your overtures are stripped of all moral value.”

The fact is, many of us have failed to see that duty toward God can never be restricted to outward action. Yes, we must worship Him. “But not that kind of must.” What kind then? The kind C. S. Lewis described to Sheldon Vanauken: “It is a Christian duty, as you know, for everyone to be as happy as he can.”

The real duty of worship is not the outward duty to say or do the liturgy. It is the inward duty, the command: “Delight yourself in the Lord”! (Psalm 37:4). “Be glad in the LORD, and rejoice!” (Psalm 32:11).

The reason this is the real duty of worship is that it honors God, while the empty performance of ritual does not. If I take my wife out for the evening on our anniversary and she asks me, “Why do you do this?” the answer that honors her most is “Because nothing makes me happier tonight than to be with you.”

“It’s my duty” is a dishonor to her.

“It’s my joy” is an honor.

There it is! The feast of Christian Hedonism. How shall we honor God in worship? By saying, “It’s my duty”? Or by saying, “It’s my joy”?

Worship is a way of reflecting back to God the radiance of His worth. Now we see that the mirror that catches the rays of His radiance and reflects them back in worship is the joyful heart. Another way of saying this is to say

The chief end of man is to glorify God

by

enjoying Him forever.

– Desiring God: Meditations of a Christian Hedonist. John Piperr

Andrew Root: for children, divorce is worse than death

Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandefur in their book, Growing Up with  a Single Parent, present a quantitative study of the effects of divorce  on children. I wish not to examine thoroughly their study, but rather  to use it to make my point about the ontological ramifications ofdivorce. Thus, I will present only enough to enable us to compare  the impact of parental death and of divorce.

These two sociologists from two renowned research universities,  Princeton and the University of Wisconsin, show statistically that  children living with both biological parents fare much better in the  areas of educational achievement, avoidance of idleness in the workforce,   and avoiding early procreation. They state boldly, “Children  who grow up in a household with only one biological parent are worse  off, on average, than children who grow up in a household with both  their biological parents. “22 For example, they show that in the matter  of dropping out of school, a child whose parents were never married  and no longer live together has a 37 percent chance of not making  it through high school; if a child’s parents are divorced, there is a 31  percent chance. If there is no disturbance, the percentage is only 13  percent. In the area of teenage pregnancy, the children of unmarried  parents face a 37 percent chance of early pregnancy. The chance for  a child of divorce is 33 percent. It is only 11 percent for those living  with both biological parents.

McLanahan and Sandefur believe there is such a gap because children   who live with only one biological parent lose a wealth of social  capital that keeps them focused on school and provides networks of  job options, as well as oversight and modeling to avoid the traps of  teenage pregnancy.

Yet there is an interesting anomaly in their statistical argument.  Where the risk of high school dropout is 37 percent for nonmarital  offspring, 31 percent for children of divorce, and 13 percent for children   with no disturbance, it is only 15 percent for children who experience   the death of one parent. This is only two percentage points  higher than for children in undisturbed, two-parent families, and  it represents less than half the number of children from divorced  families. Children who experience the death of a parent are much  less at risk to become pregnant (by twelve percentage points) than  are children of divorce.23 Why such a difference between divorce and  death in child well-being? McLanahan and Sandefur believe this can  be answered through social capital. Because of life insurance and less  negative stigma, children are less likely after a death to lose as much  social capital. This is logical and should not be dismissed. However,for most middle-class people life insurance does not always keep  families who experience the death of a parent stable (for instance,  with all of the remaining members of the family living in the same  home. And to assume that children do not feel stigmatized by friends  who fear saying the wrong thing after the death of their parent may  keep us from wondering whether social capital alone explains the  statistical variation.

Rather, it seems that the difference between death and divorce has  something to do with ontology. Death may shake a young person’s  being, as he witnesses the monster of negation take his mother, for  example. But such a situation, though frightening, never throws his  own being into question, as if making it only a shadow. It can suggest   or reveal vulnerability: the death of a parent may witness to the  reality that one day the child will also be overcome by death. But,  again, it does not retroactively threaten his being as divorce does.  Death looks to a future reality, an event that will happen as time  unfolds for the young person. Divorce does not so much point forward   as throw the foundational event of the child’s very origins into  regret and question. Death promises the eventual end of his being;  divorce questions if he ever should have been at all. This no doubt  is a much more haunting reality. Rather than wondering if you will  be remembered at all after your death, divorce asks if you ever should  have come into being, now that those who are responsible for your  being have negated the relationship that created you.24

– Children of Divorce, The: The Loss of Family as the Loss of Being (Andrew Root)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,125 other followers