After a long hiatus from writing this blog because of vacation and a home remodel that just won't seem to end, I'm back to this blog and turning my attention to using the steps as the foundation for relationships in recovery.
Step One begins with probably the most important word for couples in recovery---WE. For many alcoholics and addicts, WE is a very foreign concept. As Laura S put it so aptly in her book, 12 Steps on Buddha's Path: I had never been a we. I had always been an I. I didn't even like wes; they were WEak.
This was certainly true for me. I grew up with lots of family messages about the importance of being autonomous and self-sufficient. Some of these messages were direct: Think for yourself, don't follow the crowd. But most of them were indirect---at the age of 7 I was taking a bus by myself 5 miles into town to take swimming lessons, my parents never asked how I was doing in school or if I needed any help, etc. So by the time I started drinking and using I was fully accustomed to being only an I. I hadn't a clue about being part of a we when I married the first time at age 23---the only surprise about that marriage is that it lasted as long as it did, nearly 10 years.
Fortunately, my recovery began before my second marriage did. But my partner, S, who was the person who helped me realize I am an alcoholic/addict, had been an active member of Alanon for many years before we married. So when I began my recovery, S already had a number of years of recovery. This made it much easier to be a we in recovery.
Many of the couples I see do not have this initial advantage because only one partner chooses to be active in a 12-Step program. When this happens, when 12-Step recovery is confined to only one partner in the relationship, recovery tends to produce more distance in the relationship rather than more closeness. Over and over again, I have observed in both my practice and in meetings that many marriages end sometime between 6 months and several years after the alcoholic-addict's sobriety date because the distance has gotten so great between the partners that they are almost speaking different languages.
In the last few years, a new 12-Step program for couples has come into being. Recovering Couples Anonymous (RCA) is firmly based on the importance of we. In the online draft of the RCA Bluebook, the first few pages are about the underlying philosophy of the program. The main theme and purpose of RCA is described as follows: Couples need to treat their coupleship as an entity distinct and separate from their individual recoveries.
In the introduction to the philosophy of RCA, the Bluebook goes on to state, It is important that each partner accept mutual responsibility for the problems and/or progress of the coupleship. This, I believe, is the essence of what it takes for a couple to find their way to recovering from the devastation that alcoholism and/or addiction has done to their relationship. A couple, as opposed to an individual, is in recovery when they accept the mutual responsibility that being a we entails.
One of the most powerful ways to develop this sense of mutual responsibility in recovery is to work the steps together. I know this is an alarming prospect to many couples in recovery. Several years ago, S and I presented a weekend workshop to a group of recovering professionals and their partners about using the steps as a basis for improving their relationships. When we suggested they work the steps together, there was an audible gasp from several members of the audience. Certainly there need to be guidelines for doing so, particularly around the steps involving making an inventory; but I can speak from personal experience that discussing and working the steps together has been a powerful tool for creating a healthy sense of we in our relationship.
RCA is based on couples working the steps together. It is an excellent source of information and support for doing so. I encourage any couple in recovery to check it out.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Living with Cognitive Dissonance in Relationships
In the last 3 posts I have been writing about some of the things I learned in reading Mistakes Were Made and how they affect us in relationships. As Tavris and Aronson demonstrate repeatedly in their review of the research literature, when our idea about ourselves or our partner conflicts with our actual behavior, the distress we feel leads us to justify that behavior and/or our beliefs about our partner. Tavris and Aronson emphasize that all of us are geared to justify our behavior and beliefs because that's the way our minds work.
At the end of their book, the authors offer some suggestions about how we can keep this need to reduce dissonance from harming our relationships. These suggestions fit very well with the 12 Steps. Once again I am amazed at the genius of Bill W, Doctor Bob, and the other early AA pioneers in devising a program that not only helps us stay sober but also gives us the tools for overcoming difficulties in our intimate relationships such as the ones created by the effects of cognitive dissonance.
The first suggestion Tavris and Aronson make is to practice taking a step back to look at our thoughts and our actions critically and dispassionately. They suggest we pause and insert a moment of reflection in order to create a space between what we feel and how we respond to our feeling. Exactly what 12 Step programs suggest we do before taking action. When we do that in our relationships, we are much less likely to do something harmful which we will then feel a need to justify.
Tavris and Aronson also emphasize the need for humility and letting go of the need to be right. When we realize that our minds are so constructed that we are likely to reject information that questions our beliefs, decisions, or preferences, we can be more open to the possibility of being wrong. As they write, "When confidence and convictions are unleavened by humility, by an acceptance of fallibility, people can easily cross the line from healthy self-assurance to arrogance." Steps 4 thru 10 are all about noticing how our character defects shape our behavior and developing the humility not only to notice when we are wrong but also to admit it promptly.
Another way of overriding the power of cognitive dissonance to justify our behavior is to develop an appreciation for life's complexities. Although we live in a digital age governed by the either/or system of 1's and 0's, life is rarely that simple. It is almost always a matter of both/and or some of this and some of that. Reminding ourselves of that truth helps us remember that what is right for us might not always be right for our partner. And remembering that reality opens the door to more empathy, to more willingness to accept our partner's actions and beliefs as having as much validity as our own actions and beliefs do.
Finally, Tavris and Aronson describe how dissonance can lead to either a spiral of negativity or a spiral of virtue. A spiral of negativity develops when we do something that harms our partner in some way and then find ourselves caught in the need to justify what we have just done. The most common method of doing that is to convince ourselves that our partner is neither nice nor innocent and deserves to be treated that way. Obviously this kind of self-justification creates an atmosphere which leads to a downward spiral of negativity in the relationship.
But it is possible to use dissonance to create the opposite kind of spiral, a spiral of virtue. When we treat our partner with generosity and compassion, we also are subject to the need to justify our behavior. The way we are most likely to do that is to see our partner in a more positive light and to downplay any negative feelings we might have about him or her. Having come to see the benefit of being generous and compassionate, we are likely to become even more so. Thus happy couples live in a relationship characterized by a "virtuous circle."
The trick in recovery is to move close relationships out of the downward spiral of negativity to the upward spiral of happiness and satisfaction. I have come to believe that the 12 Steps are one of the best tools for making this happen. So now it is time to turn my attention in future posts directly to the Steps and how they help relationships in recovery.
At the end of their book, the authors offer some suggestions about how we can keep this need to reduce dissonance from harming our relationships. These suggestions fit very well with the 12 Steps. Once again I am amazed at the genius of Bill W, Doctor Bob, and the other early AA pioneers in devising a program that not only helps us stay sober but also gives us the tools for overcoming difficulties in our intimate relationships such as the ones created by the effects of cognitive dissonance.
The first suggestion Tavris and Aronson make is to practice taking a step back to look at our thoughts and our actions critically and dispassionately. They suggest we pause and insert a moment of reflection in order to create a space between what we feel and how we respond to our feeling. Exactly what 12 Step programs suggest we do before taking action. When we do that in our relationships, we are much less likely to do something harmful which we will then feel a need to justify.
Tavris and Aronson also emphasize the need for humility and letting go of the need to be right. When we realize that our minds are so constructed that we are likely to reject information that questions our beliefs, decisions, or preferences, we can be more open to the possibility of being wrong. As they write, "When confidence and convictions are unleavened by humility, by an acceptance of fallibility, people can easily cross the line from healthy self-assurance to arrogance." Steps 4 thru 10 are all about noticing how our character defects shape our behavior and developing the humility not only to notice when we are wrong but also to admit it promptly.
Another way of overriding the power of cognitive dissonance to justify our behavior is to develop an appreciation for life's complexities. Although we live in a digital age governed by the either/or system of 1's and 0's, life is rarely that simple. It is almost always a matter of both/and or some of this and some of that. Reminding ourselves of that truth helps us remember that what is right for us might not always be right for our partner. And remembering that reality opens the door to more empathy, to more willingness to accept our partner's actions and beliefs as having as much validity as our own actions and beliefs do.
Finally, Tavris and Aronson describe how dissonance can lead to either a spiral of negativity or a spiral of virtue. A spiral of negativity develops when we do something that harms our partner in some way and then find ourselves caught in the need to justify what we have just done. The most common method of doing that is to convince ourselves that our partner is neither nice nor innocent and deserves to be treated that way. Obviously this kind of self-justification creates an atmosphere which leads to a downward spiral of negativity in the relationship.
But it is possible to use dissonance to create the opposite kind of spiral, a spiral of virtue. When we treat our partner with generosity and compassion, we also are subject to the need to justify our behavior. The way we are most likely to do that is to see our partner in a more positive light and to downplay any negative feelings we might have about him or her. Having come to see the benefit of being generous and compassionate, we are likely to become even more so. Thus happy couples live in a relationship characterized by a "virtuous circle."
The trick in recovery is to move close relationships out of the downward spiral of negativity to the upward spiral of happiness and satisfaction. I have come to believe that the 12 Steps are one of the best tools for making this happen. So now it is time to turn my attention in future posts directly to the Steps and how they help relationships in recovery.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Perpetrators of Pain and Victims of Pain
In their book Mistakes Were Made, Tavris and Aronson described a fascinating experiment about the perception of pain. The researchers devised an ingenious device which allowed them to measure the actual amount of pressure being applied to a finger. Even when the amount of pressure was identical, persons who were on the receiving end of the pressure always perceived the amount of pain as greater than the persons who were inflicting it. As Tavris and Aronson stated, "Pain felt is always more intense than pain inflicted, even when the amount of pain is identical."
Although the experiment was about physical pain, the same principle applies to psychological pain as well. This happens all the time in close relationships. When one partner (the perpetrator) does something the other partner (the victim) perceives as hurtful, the perpetrator almost always minimizes the amount of pain caused, while the victim emphasizes how much pain they experienced. Needless to say, this disparity in the perception of pain is endemic to addicted relationships. The alcoholic/addict either fails to see the hurt he is causing or insists it wasn't that bad, while his partner is either crushed by the hurt or enraged by it.
This same dynamic continues in recovery. I saw that happening the other day when Jim and Diane were in my office. Jim, who was quite promiscuous when he was drinking and using, had come home about 2 am after going out to dinner with some clients from out of town. He had not called Diane to let her know he would be coming home quite late. Jim, who has been clean and sober for nearly two years, insisted there was no reason for Diane to be upset about his lateness and failure to call. "I didn't do anything I shouldn't have; I was just doing my job entertaining important clients."
Diane, who attends Ala-non regularly, was furious. "After all those years I waited for him to come home when he had been out drinking, Jim knows how much I worry when he comes home late like that and doesn't call to let me know he'll be late. How can he be so insensitive to my pain?" And so the first part of the session continued with Jim defending himself and Diane accusing him of not caring about her. As Tavris and Aronson state, "Perpetrators are motivated to reduce their moral culpability; victims are motivated to the maximize their moral blamelessness."
Both perpetrators and victims are faced with the dissonance between their view of themselves (perpetrator: I am a good person who doesn't want to hurt anyone. Victim: I am a good person worthy of being treated with care and respect.) To reduce that dissonance, perpetrators and victims use different strategies. The strategies used by persons doing something that inflicts pain on someone else are the strategies all of us who are alcoholics and/or addicts use over and over again. Our first step is to deny that we did anything wrong at all or that it was understandable given the circumstances. If that strategy doesn't work for some reason, we then move on to admitting our wrongdoing but minimizing it or making an excuse: "It wasn't that bad;" "I was drunk and overreacted;" or "You made me mad when you said I was wrong." Finally, when our backs are to the wall and we can neither deny nor minimize responsibility, we try to make a quick, minimal apology ("Sorry!") and then move on to something else as quickly as possible.
The last strategy is one many of us use when we get into recovery. We do our fearless moral inventory, make a list of those we have harmed, and then move on to make amends. But once we have made those amends that should be the end of it as far as we are concerned. Whatever we did is in the past; but it's time to move on, and whatever happened then shouldn't continue to have negative consequences in the present.
The partners of addicts and alcoholics see things much differently. Remember pain felt is more intense than pain inflicted. Partners continue to feel the pain of events long after they have happened. They have very long memories and do not readily trust they will no longer be the recipient of hurtful behavior. All it takes is one seemingly small incident to stir up all their distrust and hostility.
Another way that partners of alcoholics and addicts see things different is their understanding of why the alcoholic/addicts did what they did. Whereas the alcoholic/addict insists her behavior made some kind of sense at the time, her partner is unable to make any sense of it, even long after the event. "Why did she do that--what was she thinking?" are questions that every victim of hurt asks and become a central aspect of the victim identity. A major reason that Ala-non is so helpful for partners of alcoholic/addicts is the clear emphasis on using the program to move out of the victim mentality.
Sometimes those of us in recovery talk as if our behavior is so different from "normies." But the reality is that everyone uses one set of strategies when they are the person causing harm and a different set of strategies when they are the person experiencing harm. AA and related 12-Step programs address this issue from the "perpetrators" viewpoint, while Ala-non and related 12-Step programs address it from the "victims" viewpoint. It is helpful for both partners in a recovering relationship to be mindful of their own strategies and to realize their partner's strategies are different but understandable.
Although the experiment was about physical pain, the same principle applies to psychological pain as well. This happens all the time in close relationships. When one partner (the perpetrator) does something the other partner (the victim) perceives as hurtful, the perpetrator almost always minimizes the amount of pain caused, while the victim emphasizes how much pain they experienced. Needless to say, this disparity in the perception of pain is endemic to addicted relationships. The alcoholic/addict either fails to see the hurt he is causing or insists it wasn't that bad, while his partner is either crushed by the hurt or enraged by it.
This same dynamic continues in recovery. I saw that happening the other day when Jim and Diane were in my office. Jim, who was quite promiscuous when he was drinking and using, had come home about 2 am after going out to dinner with some clients from out of town. He had not called Diane to let her know he would be coming home quite late. Jim, who has been clean and sober for nearly two years, insisted there was no reason for Diane to be upset about his lateness and failure to call. "I didn't do anything I shouldn't have; I was just doing my job entertaining important clients."
Diane, who attends Ala-non regularly, was furious. "After all those years I waited for him to come home when he had been out drinking, Jim knows how much I worry when he comes home late like that and doesn't call to let me know he'll be late. How can he be so insensitive to my pain?" And so the first part of the session continued with Jim defending himself and Diane accusing him of not caring about her. As Tavris and Aronson state, "Perpetrators are motivated to reduce their moral culpability; victims are motivated to the maximize their moral blamelessness."
Both perpetrators and victims are faced with the dissonance between their view of themselves (perpetrator: I am a good person who doesn't want to hurt anyone. Victim: I am a good person worthy of being treated with care and respect.) To reduce that dissonance, perpetrators and victims use different strategies. The strategies used by persons doing something that inflicts pain on someone else are the strategies all of us who are alcoholics and/or addicts use over and over again. Our first step is to deny that we did anything wrong at all or that it was understandable given the circumstances. If that strategy doesn't work for some reason, we then move on to admitting our wrongdoing but minimizing it or making an excuse: "It wasn't that bad;" "I was drunk and overreacted;" or "You made me mad when you said I was wrong." Finally, when our backs are to the wall and we can neither deny nor minimize responsibility, we try to make a quick, minimal apology ("Sorry!") and then move on to something else as quickly as possible.
The last strategy is one many of us use when we get into recovery. We do our fearless moral inventory, make a list of those we have harmed, and then move on to make amends. But once we have made those amends that should be the end of it as far as we are concerned. Whatever we did is in the past; but it's time to move on, and whatever happened then shouldn't continue to have negative consequences in the present.
The partners of addicts and alcoholics see things much differently. Remember pain felt is more intense than pain inflicted. Partners continue to feel the pain of events long after they have happened. They have very long memories and do not readily trust they will no longer be the recipient of hurtful behavior. All it takes is one seemingly small incident to stir up all their distrust and hostility.
Another way that partners of alcoholics and addicts see things different is their understanding of why the alcoholic/addicts did what they did. Whereas the alcoholic/addict insists her behavior made some kind of sense at the time, her partner is unable to make any sense of it, even long after the event. "Why did she do that--what was she thinking?" are questions that every victim of hurt asks and become a central aspect of the victim identity. A major reason that Ala-non is so helpful for partners of alcoholic/addicts is the clear emphasis on using the program to move out of the victim mentality.
Sometimes those of us in recovery talk as if our behavior is so different from "normies." But the reality is that everyone uses one set of strategies when they are the person causing harm and a different set of strategies when they are the person experiencing harm. AA and related 12-Step programs address this issue from the "perpetrators" viewpoint, while Ala-non and related 12-Step programs address it from the "victims" viewpoint. It is helpful for both partners in a recovering relationship to be mindful of their own strategies and to realize their partner's strategies are different but understandable.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Marital Polarization
Bill and Ann were in for another couples' session this morning. Bill is a recovering cocaine addict with plenty of sexual acting out while using; he has about 5 years of recovery. Ann is a somewhat recovering wife of an addict; she participated in the family program when Bill was in treatment, attended 12 Step programs for a few months, and has been in individual therapy for much of the past year. Despite their participation in recovery and therapy, Bill and Ann remain stuck in an endless cycle of blame and self-justification.
This morning Bill began the session by recounting several episodes during the past few weeks when he felt Ann had been hostile to him. He talked about the ways Ann continues to rebuff him despite his efforts to be a more involved husband and father. Ann responded by saying that once again Bill was blaming her and refusing to acknowledge and take responsibility for doing that. She explained she felt her angry responses to Bill were appropriate because he "always blames me."
Bill and Ann have formed what Tavris and Aronson describe as an "implicit theory" of how the other is wrecking the marriage. Tavris and Aronson describe these theories as "implicit" because most of the time people are not consciously aware they have them and/or don't realize how these beliefs filter and bias their perceptions. For instance, if we experience an interaction with our partner that confirms our implicit belief about what kind of person he or she is, we are certain that we are perceiving things accurately and that we are justified in our view of our partner. But when an interaction does not confirm our belief about who that person is, we feel the discomfort of cognitive dissonance, which we resolve by minimizing, distorting or otherwise explaining away the significance of the interaction.
Tavris and Aronson go on to say that there are 2 ways people use implicit theories to explain their own and other people's behavior. First, we can tell ourselves that the behavior happened because of something in the situation. Second, we can explain behavior as the result of something wrong with the person. When behavior is caused by the situation, there is hope of correction and compromise. But when we believe behavior is caused by who the person is, it is much more difficult to accept and forgive.
Not surprisingly, happy and unhappy couples use these two kinds of implicit theories differently to explain their partner's behavior. In happy relationships, partners tend to see each other's unskillful behavior as a result of the situation; consequently they find it relatively easy to forgive each other. At the same time, they see each other's thoughtful and loving behavior as a reflection of who their partner is and are quick to give each other credit for such behavior.
It is just the opposite with unhappy couples. Bill and Ann are ever ready to declare that when the other does something thoughtless or annoying, it's because of that person's personality flaws (Bill sees Ann as a hostile person, while Ann sees Bill as a blaming person.) But if either one of them does something loving or thoughtful, both Bill and Ann are quick to dismiss it as either a temporary fluke or because the situation demanded it (i.e., if Bill brings Ann flowers after a particularly bitter quarrel, he has done that as a way of appeasing Ann rather than because he wants to let her know he still loves her despite the quarrel.)
Not only do unhappy couples explain the other's unskillful behavior as caused by the person's fundamental personality flaws, but they also are quick to explain their own unskillful behavior as a result of the particular situation. This morning, for instance, Ann explained her hostility to Bill the past few days as coming from being premenstrual. In the past, Bill has explained his unwillingness to get involved in household tasks as the result of growing up in a traditional household where men didn't do that sort of thing.
Bill and Ann are deeply caught in an ongoing pattern of mutual blame and self-justification. Each of them focuses of what the other is doing wrong, while at the same time justifying their own attitudes, preferences, and ways of doing thing. And as each of them stubbornly clings to the belief that the other is wrong, they both become more determined not to budge from their position. In essence, each of them is saying to the other, "I won't change my behavior with you until you admit your character defects and change them." They have created a polarized marriage with no room for empathic and loving acceptance of each other's unskillful behavior.
This morning Bill began the session by recounting several episodes during the past few weeks when he felt Ann had been hostile to him. He talked about the ways Ann continues to rebuff him despite his efforts to be a more involved husband and father. Ann responded by saying that once again Bill was blaming her and refusing to acknowledge and take responsibility for doing that. She explained she felt her angry responses to Bill were appropriate because he "always blames me."
Bill and Ann have formed what Tavris and Aronson describe as an "implicit theory" of how the other is wrecking the marriage. Tavris and Aronson describe these theories as "implicit" because most of the time people are not consciously aware they have them and/or don't realize how these beliefs filter and bias their perceptions. For instance, if we experience an interaction with our partner that confirms our implicit belief about what kind of person he or she is, we are certain that we are perceiving things accurately and that we are justified in our view of our partner. But when an interaction does not confirm our belief about who that person is, we feel the discomfort of cognitive dissonance, which we resolve by minimizing, distorting or otherwise explaining away the significance of the interaction.
Tavris and Aronson go on to say that there are 2 ways people use implicit theories to explain their own and other people's behavior. First, we can tell ourselves that the behavior happened because of something in the situation. Second, we can explain behavior as the result of something wrong with the person. When behavior is caused by the situation, there is hope of correction and compromise. But when we believe behavior is caused by who the person is, it is much more difficult to accept and forgive.
Not surprisingly, happy and unhappy couples use these two kinds of implicit theories differently to explain their partner's behavior. In happy relationships, partners tend to see each other's unskillful behavior as a result of the situation; consequently they find it relatively easy to forgive each other. At the same time, they see each other's thoughtful and loving behavior as a reflection of who their partner is and are quick to give each other credit for such behavior.
It is just the opposite with unhappy couples. Bill and Ann are ever ready to declare that when the other does something thoughtless or annoying, it's because of that person's personality flaws (Bill sees Ann as a hostile person, while Ann sees Bill as a blaming person.) But if either one of them does something loving or thoughtful, both Bill and Ann are quick to dismiss it as either a temporary fluke or because the situation demanded it (i.e., if Bill brings Ann flowers after a particularly bitter quarrel, he has done that as a way of appeasing Ann rather than because he wants to let her know he still loves her despite the quarrel.)
Not only do unhappy couples explain the other's unskillful behavior as caused by the person's fundamental personality flaws, but they also are quick to explain their own unskillful behavior as a result of the particular situation. This morning, for instance, Ann explained her hostility to Bill the past few days as coming from being premenstrual. In the past, Bill has explained his unwillingness to get involved in household tasks as the result of growing up in a traditional household where men didn't do that sort of thing.
Bill and Ann are deeply caught in an ongoing pattern of mutual blame and self-justification. Each of them focuses of what the other is doing wrong, while at the same time justifying their own attitudes, preferences, and ways of doing thing. And as each of them stubbornly clings to the belief that the other is wrong, they both become more determined not to budge from their position. In essence, each of them is saying to the other, "I won't change my behavior with you until you admit your character defects and change them." They have created a polarized marriage with no room for empathic and loving acceptance of each other's unskillful behavior.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
The Power of Cognitive Dissonance
Reading Mistakes Were Made (but not by me) by Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson has helped me understand one of the primary reasons why it is so difficult for couples to change their relationship in recovery. That reason can be found in the theory of "cognitive dissonance," which is backed up by a significant amount of careful research. According to the theory, cognitive dissonance occurs when a person holds two "cognitions" (i.e., ideas, attitudes, beliefs, opinions, etc.) that are contradictory and/or psychologically inconsistent. This experience occurs all the time for alcoholics and addicts who are not yet in recovery---they insist they can control their use yet are faced with repeated loss of control. It also occurs all too frequently for couples in recovery as they strive to deal with the contradiction between being in recovery and all the unhappy feelings they continue to find themselves experiencing.
The dissonance caused by such contradictions creates an unpleasant mental tension, which can range from minor irritation to deep anguish as long as it continues. People are unable to relax and feel comfortable until they have been able to eliminate the mental dissonance or at least reduce it considerably. Self-justification is the most common mental tool used to escape this discomfort. It lies at the heart of the alcoholic/addict's denial---"I got drunk because I was upset." It is also a major threat to relationships in recovery because both partners tend to justify their behavior in a way that allows them to be right while either explicitly or implicitly making their partner wrong.
Cognitive dissonance is most painful to people when some significant part of their beliefs about themselves is threatened. This usually occurs when they have done something that is inconsistent with their image of themselves. If a person has a fairly positive self-concept, believing herself reasonably smart, competent, and moral, she will use self-justification as a way to preserve her positive self-image. But self-justification also operates for people with low self-esteem, except that it moves in the direction of preserving their image of not being very smart, not being competent and/or suffering from some kind of moral failing.
As I was reading Mistakes Were Made, I thought about what an extraordinary tool 12-Step programs are for dealing with cognitive dissonance in a way that minimizes self-justification. Beginning with the first step, we are asked to admit that we are powerless and cannot manage our lives, which flies in the face of seeing ourselves as competent people. Then we are asked to make a searching moral inventory of ourselves and acknowledge our mistakes and character defects. Finally, we are asked in Step 10 to do an revolutionary thing---when we do something wrong, we are promptly to admit our wrong rather than find a way to justify it.
I have kept politics out of this blog, but I find myself wondering what the last six years might have been like if President Bush had become an active member of AA when he decided to stop drinking. Would he have been more willing to recognize and admit mistakes? Would he have avoided the litany of self-justifications for his choices and decisions? Would he have acquired the humility to consider that he might be wrong and those who differ with him might see things more clearly? I believe the likely answer to these questions is yes.
The dissonance caused by such contradictions creates an unpleasant mental tension, which can range from minor irritation to deep anguish as long as it continues. People are unable to relax and feel comfortable until they have been able to eliminate the mental dissonance or at least reduce it considerably. Self-justification is the most common mental tool used to escape this discomfort. It lies at the heart of the alcoholic/addict's denial---"I got drunk because I was upset." It is also a major threat to relationships in recovery because both partners tend to justify their behavior in a way that allows them to be right while either explicitly or implicitly making their partner wrong.
Cognitive dissonance is most painful to people when some significant part of their beliefs about themselves is threatened. This usually occurs when they have done something that is inconsistent with their image of themselves. If a person has a fairly positive self-concept, believing herself reasonably smart, competent, and moral, she will use self-justification as a way to preserve her positive self-image. But self-justification also operates for people with low self-esteem, except that it moves in the direction of preserving their image of not being very smart, not being competent and/or suffering from some kind of moral failing.
As I was reading Mistakes Were Made, I thought about what an extraordinary tool 12-Step programs are for dealing with cognitive dissonance in a way that minimizes self-justification. Beginning with the first step, we are asked to admit that we are powerless and cannot manage our lives, which flies in the face of seeing ourselves as competent people. Then we are asked to make a searching moral inventory of ourselves and acknowledge our mistakes and character defects. Finally, we are asked in Step 10 to do an revolutionary thing---when we do something wrong, we are promptly to admit our wrong rather than find a way to justify it.
I have kept politics out of this blog, but I find myself wondering what the last six years might have been like if President Bush had become an active member of AA when he decided to stop drinking. Would he have been more willing to recognize and admit mistakes? Would he have avoided the litany of self-justifications for his choices and decisions? Would he have acquired the humility to consider that he might be wrong and those who differ with him might see things more clearly? I believe the likely answer to these questions is yes.
Monday, July 9, 2007
The Four Noble Truths of Relationships
I have been away from this blog for nearly a week because I was deeply engrossed in reading a wonderful new book summarizing a lot of research about the ways in which all of us try to justify our beliefs and our behavior and the ways that our efforts at self-justification get us in trouble. But before I begin writing some posts about that topic, I want to conclude my Buddhist perspective on relationships in recovery by considering how the Four Noble Truths expounded by the Buddha apply to intimate relationships.
The first noble truth is about the reality of suffering in all close relationships. All couples, happy and unhappy couples, experience conflict and anger with each other. Every couple finds itself struggling with pain and dissatisfaction arising from differences of opinion, values, desires, and behavior. There are no perfect, problem-free partnerships; at least, I have never observed nor known about such a partnership.
The second noble truth about relationships is that suffering arises because of partners' unwillingness to accept the reality of their differences. They either want their partner to be a certain way or they are unhappy about the way their partner is. Or if they can't control their partner, they move to indifference and emotional separation, which also causes much suffering.
The third noble truth about all relationships, including relationships in recovery, is the possibility of reducing the amount of suffering. There are many satisfied couples who find that the joy and comfort of their relationship far outweighs their moments of anger and unhappiness.
This is true of relationships in recovery as well, although that might not always be apparent during the first years of recovery.
The fourth and final noble truth about relationships is the existence of a path to freedom from suffering. The Buddha described a path that employed 8 different skills to end suffering. In recovery, we have the 12 Steps, which also are designed to reduce and limit suffering. Those 12 steps work very well for couples, and I want to explore how to make them work in a series of posts about the 12 Steps and Relationships in Recovery.
But first I want to talk about the material I have just read in Mistakes were Made (But not by me) because it is so useful in thinking about how relationships can so easily go awry in recovery. The research described in that book is an excellent description of the basic problem in relationships---self-justification. After writing some posts about this issue, I will then move on to looking at how the 12 Steps are an effective solution to the problem of self-justification.
The first noble truth is about the reality of suffering in all close relationships. All couples, happy and unhappy couples, experience conflict and anger with each other. Every couple finds itself struggling with pain and dissatisfaction arising from differences of opinion, values, desires, and behavior. There are no perfect, problem-free partnerships; at least, I have never observed nor known about such a partnership.
The second noble truth about relationships is that suffering arises because of partners' unwillingness to accept the reality of their differences. They either want their partner to be a certain way or they are unhappy about the way their partner is. Or if they can't control their partner, they move to indifference and emotional separation, which also causes much suffering.
The third noble truth about all relationships, including relationships in recovery, is the possibility of reducing the amount of suffering. There are many satisfied couples who find that the joy and comfort of their relationship far outweighs their moments of anger and unhappiness.
This is true of relationships in recovery as well, although that might not always be apparent during the first years of recovery.
The fourth and final noble truth about relationships is the existence of a path to freedom from suffering. The Buddha described a path that employed 8 different skills to end suffering. In recovery, we have the 12 Steps, which also are designed to reduce and limit suffering. Those 12 steps work very well for couples, and I want to explore how to make them work in a series of posts about the 12 Steps and Relationships in Recovery.
But first I want to talk about the material I have just read in Mistakes were Made (But not by me) because it is so useful in thinking about how relationships can so easily go awry in recovery. The research described in that book is an excellent description of the basic problem in relationships---self-justification. After writing some posts about this issue, I will then move on to looking at how the 12 Steps are an effective solution to the problem of self-justification.
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Balance, Desire, and the Longing for Love
When we lose our balance we die, but at the same time we also develop ourselves, we grow. Whatever we see is changing, losing its balance. The reason everything looks beautiful is because it is out of balance, but its background is always in perfect harmony.
Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind
Balance comes when we learn to accept being off balance, not when we hold ourselves aloof.
Mark Epstein, Open to Desire
Early recovery is a time when everything feels out of balance, including our closest relationships. Our relationship feels out of balance because it is out of balance. Prior to recovery our partnership was centered on our addictions, whether or not we were aware of that reality. Interactions were focused on using and the consequences of using. If we are the addict, then we have been determined not to let our partner get in the way of our using. If we are the partner of an addict, then we have been constantly trying either to keep our partner from using or trying to manage the consequences of their use.
When recovery from addiction begins, most people assume that their intimate relationships will quickly move to a more harmonious balance. When alcohol, drugs, sexual acting out, gambling or other forms of compulsive pathological behavior are no longer present to upset the partnership, couples believe they will be able to relate much more easily and resolve their conflicts much more quickly. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Not only do close relationships fail to improve quickly in early recovery, they usually tend to deteriorate significantly. For better or worse, addiction has been the glue holding the relationship together. Without that glue, partners find they have no idea how to deal effectively with the powerful emotions and unresolved issues that soon emerge in sobriety. This is one of the reasons why maintaining sobriety is so difficult and why relapse is so likely if both partners have not established a strong connection to a 12-Step program or some other resource that supports sobriety and recovery.
The truth is that the old relationship must collapse and die before a couple can begin to establish a healthy relationship based on the principles of recovery. Trying to hold on to the old relationship while staying clean and sober is doomed to failure--either sobriety will be lost or the relationship will end in an angry separation. As 12-Step programs remind us over and over again, we must let everything go, including our closest relationships, and let our Higher Power, as we understand it, be in charge of our lives.
At the same time, if we are to find our way to a healthy, more loving relationship in recovery we must open ourselves to our desire for love and connection. This means allowing ourselves to become more vulnerable, more exposed to our deep longing for love and connectedness. As John Welwood has said, "We cannot receive love if we are not open to the raw and tender experience of wanting it." In order to become open to that kind of "raw and tender experience," it is imperative that we have the support of a sponsor and others who are knowledgeable about addiction and recovery.
But we must be patient about sitting with that desire during early recovery. It takes time for the old relationship based on active addiction to die. It takes time and a lot of work to establish a solid foundation of recovery before we can create a more positive, mutually satisfying intimate relationship. It is time measured in years, not weeks or months. So it is important to realize, as Mark Epstein states in the quote above, that balance in our primary relationship will come during early recovery by accepting the reality of being seriously off balance for awhile.
Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind
Balance comes when we learn to accept being off balance, not when we hold ourselves aloof.
Mark Epstein, Open to Desire
Early recovery is a time when everything feels out of balance, including our closest relationships. Our relationship feels out of balance because it is out of balance. Prior to recovery our partnership was centered on our addictions, whether or not we were aware of that reality. Interactions were focused on using and the consequences of using. If we are the addict, then we have been determined not to let our partner get in the way of our using. If we are the partner of an addict, then we have been constantly trying either to keep our partner from using or trying to manage the consequences of their use.
When recovery from addiction begins, most people assume that their intimate relationships will quickly move to a more harmonious balance. When alcohol, drugs, sexual acting out, gambling or other forms of compulsive pathological behavior are no longer present to upset the partnership, couples believe they will be able to relate much more easily and resolve their conflicts much more quickly. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Not only do close relationships fail to improve quickly in early recovery, they usually tend to deteriorate significantly. For better or worse, addiction has been the glue holding the relationship together. Without that glue, partners find they have no idea how to deal effectively with the powerful emotions and unresolved issues that soon emerge in sobriety. This is one of the reasons why maintaining sobriety is so difficult and why relapse is so likely if both partners have not established a strong connection to a 12-Step program or some other resource that supports sobriety and recovery.
The truth is that the old relationship must collapse and die before a couple can begin to establish a healthy relationship based on the principles of recovery. Trying to hold on to the old relationship while staying clean and sober is doomed to failure--either sobriety will be lost or the relationship will end in an angry separation. As 12-Step programs remind us over and over again, we must let everything go, including our closest relationships, and let our Higher Power, as we understand it, be in charge of our lives.
At the same time, if we are to find our way to a healthy, more loving relationship in recovery we must open ourselves to our desire for love and connection. This means allowing ourselves to become more vulnerable, more exposed to our deep longing for love and connectedness. As John Welwood has said, "We cannot receive love if we are not open to the raw and tender experience of wanting it." In order to become open to that kind of "raw and tender experience," it is imperative that we have the support of a sponsor and others who are knowledgeable about addiction and recovery.
But we must be patient about sitting with that desire during early recovery. It takes time for the old relationship based on active addiction to die. It takes time and a lot of work to establish a solid foundation of recovery before we can create a more positive, mutually satisfying intimate relationship. It is time measured in years, not weeks or months. So it is important to realize, as Mark Epstein states in the quote above, that balance in our primary relationship will come during early recovery by accepting the reality of being seriously off balance for awhile.
Monday, July 2, 2007
Loving-Kindness
S and I just spent a 3-day weekend out of town with another couple. We met W and M fifteen years ago when they became our neighbors. Although they subsequently moved more than 300 miles away for almost ten years, we have kept in touch and visited each other several times. They recently moved back to our area, so we decided to celebrate by taking a trip together to the big city for a baseball game. We had a wonderful time.
We always enjoy spending time with W and M because they practice so much loving-kindness in their relationship. Their loving-kindness with each other manifests in so many ways. Every time we got in or out of the car, W would open or close the door for M. On the long drive to and from the big city, M rubbed W's shoulders and upper back in a loving way from time to time without being asked. They often held hands as they walked around the big city. They always spoke respectfully to each other and delighted in teasing each other in a light, loving way. S and I were always comfortable in their presence and never felt embarrassed by their behavior.
It is readily apparent that W and M have fully opened their hearts to each other. They like each other very much and are the best of friends. The kind and loving way they treat each other makes it clear to everyone that wanting the best for each other is a fundamental theme in their relationship. Although neither of them have read anything about Buddhism, they are walking the Buddhist path of loving-kindness in their relationship.
W and M are not a couple in recovery. They are not struggling to overcome years of anger, hurt, and unhappiness caused by addictive behavior. They are not living in fear of relapse nor do they need to repair all the damage created by their out of control behavior. They do not have to overcome a deep distrust of each other because of so many broken promises and commitments. They are not wondering if their marriage will survive.
Like all of us, however, W and M have known serious pain and suffering during their life together. Their home was badly flooded several years ago, and their insurance covered only a small portion of the restoration costs. One of their children has a chronic, life-threatening disease. They have struggled financially at times. W's health has begun to deteriorate since he retired. But the foundation of loving-kindness that supports their marital relationship has helped them weather life's problems with courage and the knowledge that their love will see them through the hard times. Their marriage is a great model for all of us in recovery about what is possible when we bring unconditional friendliness and acceptance, the basis of loving-kindness, to our partners and ourselves.
We always enjoy spending time with W and M because they practice so much loving-kindness in their relationship. Their loving-kindness with each other manifests in so many ways. Every time we got in or out of the car, W would open or close the door for M. On the long drive to and from the big city, M rubbed W's shoulders and upper back in a loving way from time to time without being asked. They often held hands as they walked around the big city. They always spoke respectfully to each other and delighted in teasing each other in a light, loving way. S and I were always comfortable in their presence and never felt embarrassed by their behavior.
It is readily apparent that W and M have fully opened their hearts to each other. They like each other very much and are the best of friends. The kind and loving way they treat each other makes it clear to everyone that wanting the best for each other is a fundamental theme in their relationship. Although neither of them have read anything about Buddhism, they are walking the Buddhist path of loving-kindness in their relationship.
W and M are not a couple in recovery. They are not struggling to overcome years of anger, hurt, and unhappiness caused by addictive behavior. They are not living in fear of relapse nor do they need to repair all the damage created by their out of control behavior. They do not have to overcome a deep distrust of each other because of so many broken promises and commitments. They are not wondering if their marriage will survive.
Like all of us, however, W and M have known serious pain and suffering during their life together. Their home was badly flooded several years ago, and their insurance covered only a small portion of the restoration costs. One of their children has a chronic, life-threatening disease. They have struggled financially at times. W's health has begun to deteriorate since he retired. But the foundation of loving-kindness that supports their marital relationship has helped them weather life's problems with courage and the knowledge that their love will see them through the hard times. Their marriage is a great model for all of us in recovery about what is possible when we bring unconditional friendliness and acceptance, the basis of loving-kindness, to our partners and ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)