Tag Archive - differentiation

It’s Impossible That You Aren’t Communicating In Your Relationship!

April 12, 2012 in Marriage-Family, Therapy-Psychology with 1 Comment

Often in the midst of a therapy session a couple will frustratingly declare to me, “We never communicate.”

The truth is that they are communicating all the time, but they just don’t like the message their partner is sending them. If my wife decides to get up when I’m talking to her, walk into our room, and slams the door — she is communicating to me. I just don’t like that message.

In the very short and helpful book, Family Ties That Bind: A Self-Help Guide to Change Through Family of Origin Therapy, Dr. Ronald W. Richardson says this:

“What most people mean by ‘communication,’ however, is sameness. When people think they are ‘really communicating,’ they usually mean they are thinking about things in the same way. When Maggie says George is not communicating, the problem really is that he is not communicating what she wants communicated. We are always communicating; we can’t not communicate.” (pp. 41)

Often couples who are unable to tolerate different messages from one another are struggling with a lack of differentiation in their relationship. Their inability to securely “stand on their own two feet” may signal an emotional fusion that has its roots in their family of origin.

A healthy couple is able to tolerate a healthy balance between togetherness and separateness in a marriage, rather than always feeling the need for agreement.

Marriage: The Two Becoming One Is Not What You Think…

August 16, 2011 in Marriage-Family, Pastoral Counseling, Therapy-Psychology with 4 Comments


[image by The Welsh Poppy]

Differentiation is a natural process in committed relationships that involves developing more of a self while growing closer to your partner. Men often sacrifice their relationship to hold onto their sense of self. Women often sacrifice their sense of self to stabilize their relationship. Differentiation is about having it both ways: having a stronger sense of self and a stronger relationship. (An Interview with Dr. David Schnarch)

.

Over the last couple of weeks there has been some back and forth online debate about writer Donald Miller’s two blog posts that eventually led to this post by him, How to Delete a Good Love Story — and writer Rachel Held Evans’ response with this blog post My Story Is More Interesting Than That.

It was pretty fascinating watching the online exchange and perusing through all of the online comments. Obviously as a Christian community we are often divided on what relationships and marriages look like. More specifically we tend to be divided on the roles and boundaries between men and women in relationship with one another.

I think that this is a fascinating topic and it’s one that is often at the forefront of my work with couples in counseling — and for that matter the Christian counseling/therapy community is divided as well.

As I was following some of this online conversation I was reminded of the words of two of my favorite poets….The Bohemian-Austrian poet Rainer Maria Rilke and the Lebanese American poet "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kahlil_Gibran">Kahlil Girban.

One of the things that has drawn me to these two poets, especially when they write on love and marriage is the way in which they speak of relational boundaries, specifically what we talk of in marriage therapy as differentiation (paraphrasing David Schnarch: knowing where one begins, and one ends. Or the balance between one’s desire for belonging/relationship, and the desire for freedom/independence). This has always been intriguing to me, but even more so as I work with couples in therapy.

Knowing where one begins, and one ends in a relationship/marriage, as well as the balance between one’s desire for belonging and independence is something that I think Rilke and Gibran capture beautifully:

Rilke on Marriage…

“The point of marriage is not to create a quick commonality by tearing down all boundaries; on the contrary, a good marriage is one in which each partner appoints the other to be the guardian of his solitude, and thus they show each other the greatest possible trust. A merging of two people is an impossibility, and where it seems to exist, it is a hemming-in, a mutual consent that robs one party or both parties of their fullest freedom and development. But once the realization is accepted that even between the closest people infinite distances exist, a marvelous living side-by-side can grow up for them, if they succeed in loving the expanse between them, which gives them the possibility of always seeing each other as a whole and before an immense sky.”

……….

“To love is good, too: love being difficult.

For one human being to love another: that is perhaps the most difficult of all our tasks, the ultimate, the last test and proof, the work for which all other work is but preparation.

For this reason young people, who are beginners in everything, cannot yet know love: they have to learn it.

With their whole being, with all their forces, gathered close about their lonely, timid, upward-beating heart, they must learn to love.

But learning-time is always a long, secluded time, and so loving, for a long while ahead and far on into life, is–solitude, intensified and deepened loneness for him who loves.

Love is at first not anything that means merging, giving over, and uniting with another (for what would a union be of something unclarified and unfinished, still subordinate–?), it is a high inducement to the individual to ripen, to become something in himself for another’s sake, it is a great exacting claim upon him, something that chooses him out and calls him to vast things.”

Kahlil Gibran, “The Prophet”

“THEN Almitra spoke again and said, And what of Marriage, master?
And he answered saying:
You were born together, and together you shall be for evermore.
You shall be together when the white wings of death scatter your days.
Aye, you shall be together even in the silent memory of God.
But let there be spaces in your togetherness.
And let the winds of the heavens dance between you.
Love one another, but make not a bond of love:
Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls.
Fill each other’s cup but drink not from one cup.
Give one another of your bread but eat not from the same loaf.
Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone,
Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music.

Give your hearts, but not into each other’s keeping. For only the hand of Life can contain your hearts. And stand together yet not too near together: For the pillars of the temple stand apart, And the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other’s shadow.”

When the Two Become One
One of the biggest issues for Christian couples who come into counseling is their conflict over the role expectations of one another in the marriage. These missed expectations often lead to lots of relational boundary issues and conflict over one’s sense of self in marriage. I think in many communities there is a belief that when “the two become one” (Mark 10:8/Genesis 2:24) that means that they are to lose each other and their sense of self in their marriage.

More commonly in the Christian community it has been expected that the woman is to give up her sense of self for her husband. In my experience as a pastor and therapist and husband…expecting a spouse to give up themselves for the marriage tends to only lead to resentment and anger and conflict. A withdrawing from the marriage, rather than an engagement with one another. It is also very common in some more traditional Christian marriages that a spouse’s dissatisfaction with the marriage will be less likely to find a voice, but instead remains silent. Only leading to more and more missed expectations that are not communicated.

And often we have assumed that when “the two become one” the are to totally be dependent upon one another for each other’s needs and satisfaction in the marriage and in life. That is a tall order that not even the most well adjusted spouse can fulfill.

In reflecting on all of this I have really just come to appreciate the work of Terry Hargrave and Shawn Stoever in their book Five Days to a New Marriage. This is the model that was developed at The Hideaway where I am on staff, and it is a model that I have seen help create more healthy marriages than any others.

I like that in this model marriage is not solely dependent upon our partner. Too many spouses are sitting around waiting and expecting for their spouse to meet and fulfill every need. Sure, our partner has a role to play and there is a mutual interdependency that occurs. But ultimately, as Christians our marriage and our sense of self is dependent upon God, and not on others. We must learn to take responsibility for our own selves in marriage and not wait for our partner to meet every need. A truly healthy marriage is two people in a relationship taking responsibility for themselves in order that they are better able to be in a position to respond to their spouses.

So ultimately, we live a great love story when our life is anchored and dependent in Christ, not solely dependent on others for our wants and needs. And when we are in the position of dependency upon Christ, then we are truly freed to respond out of a place of love and trust in a relationship of mutuality and reciprocity with our spouses. (Ephesians 5:21).

Leaders Are Only As “Successful” As Their Level of Differentiation

May 26, 2010 in Marriage-Family, Ministry-Theology, Therapy-Psychology with 4 Comments

One of the topics that has been of great interest to me as of late is the idea of self-differentiation (differentiation of self). It has great interest to me in interpersonal relationships, and it has been really intriguing to me in terms of church leadership. There are lots of ways to talk about differentiation, but ultimately it is one’s ability to “stand on one’s own two feet”, rather than be emotionally fused, or enmeshed with others (i.e. relationships, families, congregations, church staffs, etc.).

We are all susceptible to being fused with others, but pastoral leadership can have the inherent danger where pastors often get their sense-of-self from others (i.e. congregants, staff, etc.). rather than being differentiated. Pastors receive much validation from activities such as sermons, late night visits, crisis intervention, counseling, etc., and if one isn’t careful, they can soon find themselves dependent upon these activities, and the affirmation they receive from them. How many pastors have preached a sermon, and at the end of the sermon they receive lots of praise, but they spend all day thinking about that one person who was critical of it?

I’m a pastor’s kid, and I have worked in the church for the last 15 years as well, so this is a topic that I am beginning to look more seriously at. Unfortunately, it wasn’t until I began my work as a therapist that I have begun to see more clearly the toxic situation that is set up in many church leadership structures.

A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix by Edwin Friedman is a book that I think all pastors and ministry leaders should read. He talks extensively about differentiation in leaders and I found this one excerpt particularly insightful:

I wrote above that one outstanding characteristic with families that endure and perhaps even grow from crisis is the presence of a well-differentiated leader. Now I want to add that the factor which is almost always present in relationship systems that are deeply disturbed, if not disintegrating, is a conflict of will.

For example, one will find in almost every family experiencing the severest emotional symptoms (such as suicide, schizophrenia, psychosis, anorexia, abuse) and sometimes the most debilitating physical symptoms (such as multiple sclerosis, coronary conditions, persistent gastrointestinal problems, even cancer) a deep, abiding conflict of will within the family–sometimes blatantly contentious and sometimes subtly masked by charm or passive obstinacy. Similarly, such conflict is always present in the failure of teachers, counselors, clergy, and consultants to make headway against the riptide of resistance that run counter to their intent. It goes without saying that when continued efforts by CEO’s, managers, and administrators are producing little or no progress, they are probably swimming against a tide.

How, then, does one go with the flow and still take the lead? Answer: by positioning oneself in such a way that the natural forces of emotional life carry one in the right direction. They key to that positioning is the leader’s own self-differentiation, by which I mean his or her capacity to be a non-anxious presence, a challenging presence, a well-defined presence, and a paradoxical presence. Differentiation is not about being coercive, manipulative, reactive, pursuing or invasive, but being rooted in the leader’s own sense of self rather than focused on that of his or her followers. It is in no way autocratic, narcissistic, or selfish, even though it may be perceived that way by those who are not taking responsibility for their own being. Self-differentiation is not ‘selfish.’  Furthermore, the power inherent in a leader’s presence does not reside in physical or economic strength but in the nature of his or her own being, so that even when leaders are entitled to great power by dint of their office, it is ultimately the nature of their presence that is the source of their real strength. Leaders function as the immune systems of the institutions they lead–not because they ward off enemies, but because they supply the ingredients for the system’s integrity.

Much of what I have said about leadership can be summarized in the following chart:

POORLY DIFFERENTIATED LEADERSHIP

  • focuses on pathology
  • is obsessed with technique
  • works with symptomatic people
  • betters the condition
  • seeks symptomatic relief
  • is concerned to give insight
  • is stuck on treadmill of trying harder
  • diagnoses others
  • is quick to quit difficult situations
  • is made anxious by reactivity
  • has a reductionist perspective
  • sees problems as the cause of anxiety
  • adapts toward the weak
  • focuses empathically on helpless victims
  • is more likely to create dependent relationships

WELL DIFFERENTIATED LEADERSHIP

  • focuses on strength
  • is concerned for one’s own growth
  • works with motivated people
  • matures the system
  • seeks enduring change
  • is concerned to define self (take stands)
  • is fed up with the treadmill
  • looks at one’s own stuckness
  • is challenged by difficult situations
  • recognizes that reactivity and sabotage are evidence of one’s effectiveness
  • has a universal perspective
  • sees problems as the focus of preexisting anxiety
  • adapts toward strength
  • has a challenging attitude that encourages responsibility
  • is more likely to create intimate relationships

….Leadership that is rooted in a sense of presence can also be misconstrued as a justification for passivity–for avoiding getting your feet wet, for just being, ‘nice so everyone will love or respect you.’  It can also lead to mistaken notions that data and method are unimportant, that the bottom line does not matter, or that outcome is irrelevant and the approach, therefore, impractical.  Leadership through self-differentiation is not easy; learning techniques and imbibing data are far easier.  Nor is striving or achieving success as a leader without pain: there is the pain in isolation, the pain of loneliness, the pain of personal attacks, the pain of losing friends.  That’s what leadership is all about. (pp. 230-233)

Are We Fooling Ourselves To Think Intimacy Can Be Created Online Through Social Media?

May 19, 2010 in Marriage-Family, Ministry-Theology, Technology-Social Media with 23 Comments


[image by Jesse Millan]


In the last year I have blogged on the topics of ambient intimacy/ambient awareness, as well as some of the discussion involving the use of technology in fostering intimacy. I was a big fan of this topic, and a believer in the use of technology in fostering intimacy. Especially how the sharing of minor details in our life online can create a sense of belonging and togetherness.

I have experienced in my own life how the sharing of myself online via Twitter, Facebook, my blog, etc. have brought me closer to those I am contact with online. Numerous are the times that I have been able to sit down at coffee with someone I met online, and it felt like we had been friends for a long time because we knew so much about each other through our online sharing.

But can technology and social media create intimacy? That I am no longer sure of.

What has me thinking about this recently is this excerpt from David Schnarch’s Passionate Marriage where he talks about the pitfalls of other-validated intimacy in marriages (versus self-validation which is central to one achieving a healthy level of differentiation). Here is what Schnarch says:

3. Other-validated intimacy is inherently limiting because it leads to self-presentation rather than self-disclosure. When you need a reflected sense of yourself and acceptance/validation from your partner, your most important priority becomes getting the response you want. To accomplish this less than virtuous goal, you start misrepresenting, omitting, and shading information about who you really are (self-presentation), rather than disclosing the full range of yourself (intimacy). Self-presentation is the opposite of intimacy; it is a charade rather than an unmasking.

Self-presentation is one way we adapt to our partner’s differences in order to reduce our anxiety. Unfortunately, it never provides the security and acceptance we crave, because we know our partner never really knows us. Attempts to cajole someone into making us feel secure only make us insecure, the same way trying to protect ourselves through other-validated intimacy offers no real protection at all. Self-presentation creates an inherent paradox that sets the typical marital squirrel cage spinning. And as you’ll see in a few minutes, self-presentation brings us one step closer to emotional gridlock.
–Passionate Marriage: Keeping Love & Intimacy Alive in Committed Relationships (David Schnarch)

Social media is a great tool for other-validation intimacy, or why else would people obsessively track their blog stats, Twitter follower numbers and number of Facebook fans? It’s a form of other-validating intimacy. It’s a way that one seeks affirmation and validation. And have you ever seen more low-level anxiety in people than when they begin to worry about their online persona and statistics? I’ve noticed it in myself.

But is it intimacy, or is it really self-presentation? How much do we omit things about us when we create our online persona for others to see?

I would argue that even the people that present themselves, and come across to others as humble, authentic and “real” are still using a form of self-presentation since it’s something they have created on their own. It’s what they want others to see of them. But it may really not be what others truly see. We are rarely completely honest with ourselves, because we are often unaware and blind to our own shortcomings and issues. That’s why true intimacy in a relationship involves the unmasking of ourselves, often by the other we are in relationship with. True intimacy involves conflict and pushing through anxiety. It involves being able to stand on our own two feet, rather than constantly needing the propping up of ourselves by our partner.

Social media allows us to create a reflected sense of ourselves through the mirroring of online affirmation we receive from others. True intimacy in a relationship doesn’t allow us to create a reflected sense of ourselves, but requires us to see and been seen for who we truly are. Blemishes and all.

I think even those that attempt to be real online can/are still masquerading behind a created sense of self that is fueled by online other validation. I sometimes wonder about those who are constantly talking about the need to be real, or authentic. That can be as much a distorted sense of self as those they castigate.

When this makes sense, you will slowly begin to see the powerful drive that allows technology to fuel so many online affairs and inappropriate relationships.

Perhaps I’m writing this post because I first noticed it in myself. Becoming aware is the first step. It is only when we are aware, that then can we take action to live more healthy lives online.

Are You Having an Affair With Your Social Media Persona?

April 12, 2010 in Marriage-Family, Technology-Social Media, Therapy-Psychology with 9 Comments


[image by Rojer]


One of the things that I have come to understand more clearly about marriage affairs, has come from a result of my continual growth as a therapist working with couples, and as a result of some great insight from some mentors and authors. And this is what I have learned:

Affairs often have less to do with the other person, than how the person feels, or is perceived in that relationship. That person they are having an affair with reflects something back to them that they like. There is something they like that they don’t feel they are getting in their current marriage. Often the person having an affair lacks a clear sense of self, or has little differentiation, therefore they need someone to reflect back to them a sense of self they don’t actually have themselves.

Author and therapist David Schnarch puts it this way:

When we have little differentiation, our identity is constructed out of what’s called a reflected sense of self. We need continual contact, validation, and consensus (or disagreement) from others. This leaves us unable to maintain a clear sense of who we are in shifting or uncertain circumstances. We develop a contingent identity based on a ‘self-in-relationship.’ Because or identity depends on the relationship, we may demand that our partner doesn’t change so that our identity won’t either. (Passionate Marriage, pp. 59)

So what does this have to do with social media?

I am finding that more and more people are finding their sense of self in their online social media persona. It is in their constructed online self that they maintain constant contact with, and in the process, reflects back to them a sense of self.

This is something I struggle with myself, and that is probably why I’m writing this. I caught myself last week asking my wife if she had read a certain blog post I had written. And when she said she hadn’t, I was thinking inside to myself, “Well, it was a good post, and lots of other people read it, and gave me good validation online.” I didn’t say that, but thought that. That’s when I knew I might have a problem.

There is nothing wrong with having an online persona. The problem is when we rely on that persona for our sense of self. The problem is when how we view our sense of self online is more attractive and gratifying to us than how we view our sense of self in our families, marriages and relationships. The problem is when your marriage seems like a lot of hard work, and it’s just easier to hop online, send out tweets, post blogs, and hit the Like button on Facebook versus engaging your spouse.

If you think I’m being overly dramatic, or exaggerating, then I wish you could sit down with me and the couples I work with. This is becoming a huge problem and only growing more.

Sometimes our sense of self is reflected in our work. Or our children. Or maybe even a hobby. Sometimes it’s in the continual feedback and validation that is delivered through an iPhone. There are all kinds of things that we get our sense of self from…but I’m just happening to notice more readily the trend of people being disengaged from their marriages because they like what they see of themselves more online. They like the reflected sense of self in their relationship with social media than in their marriage relationship.

6 Marriage Books That I Highly Recommend

July 14, 2009 in Marriage-Family, Therapy-Psychology with 7 Comments

There are lots of good books on marriage, but I want to mention just six of them here that I highly recommend. And in recommending them, let me just give one brief statement of why I like them.

As For Me and My House: Crafting Your Marriage to Last by Walter Wangerin Jr.

  • I love Wangerin’s approach in talking about marriage here.  He doesn’t write about steps to follow, but really approaches the topic from a real narrative standpoint, sharing story after story that the reader can enter into and relate to about marriage.

Hold Me Tight: Seven Conversations for a Lifetime of Love by Sue Johnson

Passionate Marriage: Keeping Love and Intimacy Alive in Committed Relationships by David Schnarch

  • Schnarch’s discussion on “differentiation” is very valuable.  I love his insight.

Sacred Marriage: Celebrating Marriage as a Spiritual Discipline by Gary Thomas

  • His first chapter on how marriage is about “holiness and not happiness” is paradigm shifting in most of our views.  It was mine.

The Mystery of Marriage: Meditations on the Miracle by Mike Mason

  • This is my favorite book on marriage.  Not steps, just a deep, philosophical and theological look at marriage that is quite refreshing.

The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work by John Gottman and Nan Silver

  • I mentioned this book last week, but it’s a great book with some very practical tips and exercises for couples.

What books would you add to this list and why?

Differentiation in Marriage and Committed Relationships

July 11, 2009 in Marriage-Family with 1 Comment

2607065194_a5962d9a01
[image by nzgabriel]

Differentiation is a natural process in committed relationships that involves developing more of a self while growing closer to your partner. Men often sacrifice their relationship to hold onto their sense of self. Women often sacrifice their sense of self to stabilize their relationship. Differentiation is about having it both ways: having a stronger sense of self and a stronger relationship. (An Interview with Dr. David Schnarch)

.

Schnarch will often say that differentiation is knowing where one begins, and one ends. Or the balance between one’s desire for belonging/relationship, and the desire for freedom/independence.

I like how he says it in the Passionate Marriage,

People screaming, ‘I got to be me!’ ‘Don’t fence me in!’ and ‘I need space!’ are not highly differentiated. Just the opposite. They are fearful of ‘disappearing’ in a relationship and do thing to avoid their partner’s emotional engulfment. Some create distance; others keep their relationship in constant upheaval. Declaring your boundaries is an important early step in the differentiation process, but it’s done in the context of staying in relationship (that is, close proximity and restricted space). This is quite different from poorly differentiated people who attempt to always ‘keep the door open’ and who bolt as increasing importance of the relationship makes them feel like they’re being locked up. The process of holding onto your sense of self in an intense emotional relationship is what develops differentiation (Passionate Marriage, pp. 67).

In light of my posts earlier this week on the topic of marriage, and people’s fears about getting married, I wonder if differentiation doesn’t have something to do it. People sometimes see marriage as tying them down, or limiting their options, but according to Schnarch, people like that are actually not differentiated, where those who hold onto themselves in an intense emotional relationship are the ones who are growing and in the process of becoming highly differentiated.

What do you think about this topic of differentiation?

Have you ever been nervous, afraid, hesitant, to enter into a relationship, out of fear of losing yourself?

Some Poets on Boundaries and Differentiation

May 12, 2009 in Marriage-Family with 3 Comments

Two of my favorite poets are the German poet Rainer Maria Rilke and the Lebanese American poet Kahlil Girban. One of the things that has drawn me to these two poets, especially when they write on love and marriage is the way in which they speak of relational boundaries, specifically what we talk of in marriage therapy as differentiation. This has always been intriguing to me, but even more so as I work with couples in therapy.

I wrote this at the end of April concerning differentiation:
Schnarch will often say that differentiation is knowing where one begins, and one ends. Or the balance between one’s desire for belonging/relationship, and the desire for freedom/independence.

Knowing where one begins, and one ends in a relationship/marriage, as well as the balance between one’s desire for belonging and independence is something that I think Rilke and Gibran capture beautifully.

Enjoy the two entries by Rilke and the one by Gibran:

“On Love & Other Difficulties…”

Rilke on Marriage…

“The point of marriage is not to create a quick commonality by tearing down all boundaries; on the contrary, a good marriage is one in which each partner appoints the other to be the guardian of his solitude, and thus they show each other the greatest possible trust. A merging of two people is an impossibility, and where it seems to exist, it is a hemming-in, a mutual consent that robs one party or both parties of their fullest freedom and development. But once the realization is accepted that even between the closest people infinite distances exist, a marvelous living side-by-side can grow up for them, if they succeed in loving the expanse between them, which gives them the possibility of always seeing each other as a whole and before an immense sky.”

Rainer Maria Rilke
May 14, 1904, Rome

Continue Reading…

Differentiation as Boundaries

April 29, 2009 in Marriage-Family with 1 Comment

71a5bc5nhcl_sl500_aa240_Well known psychologist David Schnarch has a wonderful book called the Passionate Marriage: Keeping Love and Intimacy Alive in Committed Relationships.

When Schnarch speaks about boundaries he speaks about differentiation.

What is differentiation? In short, according to Schnarch:

Differentiation is a natural process in committed relationships that involves developing more of a self while growing closer to your partner. Men often sacrifice their relationship to hold onto their sense of self. Women often sacrifice their sense of self to stabilize their relationship. Differentiation is about having it both ways: having a stronger sense of self and a stronger relationship. (An Interview with Dr. David Schnarch)

.

Schnarch will often say that differentiation is knowing where one begins, and one ends. Or the balance between one’s desire for belonging/relationship, and the desire for freedom/independence.

I like how he says it in the Passionate Marriage,

People screaming, ‘I got to be me!’ ‘Don’t fence me in!’ and ‘I need space!’ are not highly differentiated. Just the opposite. They are fearful of ‘disappearing’ in a relationship and do thing to avoid their partner’s emotional engulfment. Some create distance; others keep their relationship in constant upheaval. Declaring your boundaries is an important early step in the differentiation process, but it’s done in the context of staying in relationship (that is, close proximity and restricted space). This is quite different from poorly differentiated people who attempt to always ‘keep the door open’ and who bolt as increasing importance of the relationship makes them feel like they’re being locked up. The process of holding onto your sense of self in an intense emotional relationship is what develops differentiation (Passionate Marriage, pp. 67).

Is the concept of differentation new to you?

Do you find yourself struggling between belonging and independence in your relationships?