One of the first personal transformation events I attended was run by family systems therapist John Bradshaw.  I found myself in a triad with a young couple and I learned a lot from them that day.  She explained that in her family her parents never argued, then one day they did, and then they divorced.  He explained that in his family they argued all the time, gloriously, robustly, for-all-they-were-worth, and lived harmoniously the rest of the time.

Two things struck me: firstly, no wonder they were together (based on the repetition-compulsion theory that we are compelled to repeat unsolved scenarios over time in an effort to finally solve them); and secondly, no wonder they were having such a difficult time being together.  She was flooded almost all the time, scared half to death that he was going to leave; he was provoking her left, right and centre trying to get the type of reaction he was used to, one that he interpreted as "love" - and they were in the land of nightmares.

This sweet, confused couple from twenty years ago taught me so much about conflict.  Our family of origin experience of conflict has a lot to do with how we experience conflict later in life; hence there are different perceptions of what constitutes conflict - what is upsetting to one person isn't to another.  In therapy training we were taught the standard methodology of having couples "mirror" back to one another what the other said to build empathy and understanding and, frankly, I haven't found this works effectively with many couples.  

This is because our physiology gets upset when we are in conflict, unable to maintain its homeostasis.  When faced with such an upset our automatic (and I mean automatic, we are not at choice about this) survival instincts kick in and we are going to respond with some version of fight, flight, freeze or disassociate.  Imagine these responses on a continuum from 1-100 where 1 is a minimal response and 100 is an obvious and monumental response.  Some people may experience a slight increase in heart rate, start perspiring a little and have some underlying agitation; others will have a marked increase in heart rate so that it races to an uncomfortable level, perspiration will break out on their brow, in their armpits and perhaps on the palms of their hands, and they will become fidgety, with raised eyebrows and crinkled forehead, ready for action.

It is this somatic (physiological, whole body, whole person) response which holds the key in how a couple will manage conflict.  The extent to which someone becomes overtaken by a flood of the stress response determines the extent to which they can engage in rational conversation to work out a challenging situation.  The more flooded they are, the less equipped they are to reason and converse.  The less flooded they are, the more equipped they are to figure things out in conversation.

Imagine a couple where both are completely flooded with emotion and somatic sensation - there is absolutely no way they can engage with one another constructively in this aroused state.  My suggestion for couples having this experience is to find a way to:

• acknowledge for themselves that they are flooded
• let their partner know in some pre-determined way they are flooded and need to take a break
• take a break
• during the break engage in self-soothing activities to bring down their aroused physiological state to one of calmness
• reconvene for a conversation when they have both reached a sufficient level of calm as to be constructive (using all types of tools we will have worked on in session)

One of the tools to be used when calm is maintaining that the problem is the problem, rather than the partner is the problem.

For example, Rose complains that her partner Jane agreed to fill up the petrol tank and didn't.  A useful complaint-type statement goes something like this: "Jane, I feel disappointed and angry that you didn't fill up the petrol tank before returning the car to me, especially when you agreed you would."  This is very different to: "You never do what you promise, you always say you'll do this and that and you never do, you always let me down!"  Here's a legitimate complaint versus an attacking criticism.

[HINT: almost any time a sentence is peppered with always and never, a couple's in trouble].

Both John Gottman, Ph.D. and Harville Hendrix, Ph.D. have excellent ideas for handling conflict in their books - we'll explore them in other blogs.