As such, I believe it is essential our clients are consciously aware of those insecurities and the behaviour they drive.  Failure to get clients to make that connection leaves them looking in the wrong places for solutions – either blaming their partner or collapsing into shame and self-blame – neither of which will solve their relationship issues.

Since writing that blog, I have had many conversations with colleagues discussing how hard it is to accurately identify core insecurities, especially when clients are reluctant to accept the impact of their upbringing on their present-day behaviour.  Where their answers to my final four questions in the previous blog are superficial or dismissive. Many clients seem offended or contemptuous if you suggest they are still being affected by less-than-ideal circumstances in their childhood (probably as sign they feel ashamed or exposed by your suggestion). 

Their tone and manner suggests they regard still being under the influence of childhood events as a moral failing rather than an inevitable truth of the human condition.  Ironically, this is often a reflection of, or result of, the kinds of core insecurities their upbringing created. The strong emotional reaction they are having is probably rooted in exactly the shame that you are trying to get them to track (and that is causing difficulty in their relationships). There is often also a sense that being open to the idea that their childhood was anything less than “fine”, “normal” or “good” is being unappreciative and disloyal to their parents or family.

Reflecting on those conversations, I realised I have a four-pronged approach to clients like this

• Psychoeducation about the neuroscience of the developing brain (esp pre-adolescence), emphasising how self-centred kid’s minds are because of their cognitive limitations
• Exploration of their childhood with me highlighting how seemingly unimportant or “normal” events might have had more impact than they realise.  Showing them how the theoretical concepts I have discussed in #1 might have played out in practice in their life.  Sometimes this is done in the face of great scepticism from clients (often hiding their fear of exposure).  But I am setting the scene for…
• Stressing the reflexive ways they are protecting themselves in the present (ineffective self-protective behaviour) and demonstrating how those behaviours were adaptive in the context of their upbringing but are damaging to their current relationship(s).
• Accompanying this all the way through is an emphasis on self-compassion.  Clients need to understand that, while they are responsible for their behaviour as adults, they were NOT responsible for the events that shaped them in childhood.  That when we recognise that we are reflexively doing unhelpful things, the useful response is to be kind to ourselves and try and attend with love to the parts of ourselves that are still hurting because of what we came to fear all those decades ago.

I think the key is persisting in showing them how this way of understanding themselves opens up new possibilities for changing things.  How being vulnerable instead of shut down draws their partner closer.  How being assertive instead of appeasing allows their partner to become more attuned to them.

Many people will not easily follow your lead – you will have to be tenacious and back your knowledge and experience.  A lot of clients equate self-compassion with self-indulgence and vulnerability with weakness.  Others have been trained to blame themselves and take responsibility for things that are not their fault.  Those clients need help in understanding where they learned such unkind and self-destructive beliefs.  It’s vital that we don’t let those beliefs stand unchallenged in our therapy. 

It is a situation where we need to lead, not follow, our clients.  To have the confidence that, in this respect, we therapists see more broadly and deeply than they do, because their core insecurities blind them to seeing their true worth. Hence, our perspective is much more likely to give them hope and a path towards achieving the intimate relationship they crave.

At the heart of most relationship difficulties are self-protective strategies that were learned in their formative years.  The client who hears criticism where it’s not intended or over-reacts to a small complaint.  The client who behaves like a small mistake by their partner is a big rejection or evidence that “I don’t matter to you”.  The client who shuts down and withdraws because they were misunderstood.

These sorts of strategies arise because of the way the child or adolescent has processed the experiences of their upbringing (remember it’s not just their “family of origin” who shape them – peers and other adults like teachers, coaches, pastors etc can sometimes be influential).  Kids’ brains are limited and self-centred – they don’t finish growing their frontal lobes until they are in their mid-twenties.  So the younger they are, the more likely they are to take (inappropriate) responsibility for events that are actually under the control of the adults in their lives.

So when you take a history, especially when you enquire into someone’s childhood experiences, it’s important not to get too caught up in the events.  As therapists, we are not so much interested in what happened but in what meaning the person, the child, made of the events.

Imagine your client says, “Mum was very strict, always telling us off, and Dad was never home (and when he was, he was doing chores or working on his car)”.   This is probably significant information, but its significance comes from what the child made these facts mean about themselves.

Let’s imagine four different people who reported a family situation like this.  For person A, the frequent scoldings from mum and the inability to earn praise or attention from either parent were interpreted as “It’s my fault Mum’s always angry and Dad doesn’t want to be around me”, leading to lifelong core insecurities (a.k.a.
“shame”, “negative stories” or “drivers”) like “I’m bad, I’m a problem”. 

For person B, their parents’ behaviour was interpreted as “I’m in the way of the important things my parents need to do”, leading to insecurities like “I’m not important, I don’t matter”.

Person C’s child brain understood Mum’s criticism as “You never do anything right” and Dad’s absence as “You’re not worth bothering with”, – Leading to insecurities like, “I’m not good enough, I’m unworthy.”

Person D’s young brain might have gone, “Mum’s so unfair, and Dad’s useless”, and left home with a belief, “I’m on my own; no one is there for me.”

Note that these four people could be siblings, growing up in the same situation but making quite different meanings of it. 

Our job in enquiring into someone’s past is to help them make sense of their behaviour in the present.  Often, this involves drawing to their attention experiences that remain unresolved, that need healing. Their experience is always subjective –often, when people look back on childhood events, they see them with adult eyes.

We need to help them connect with the child’s subjective experience.  A world where the adults are all-important and all-powerful while the child struggles to understand and is essentially powerless.  A world where they have no capacity (cognitively) to see it from anyone else’s point of view, and that means they are the cause of all that happens.  Where if mum is sad, dad is angry, or teacher/coach/pastor is disapproving, it’s my fault. 

So next time you ask about what happened in someone’s past, make sure you ask follow-up questions like:

What was that like for you?

How did you feel about that happening?

What did that make you think or feel about yourself?

What did that mean to you, back then?

That’s where the crucial information for your therapy will come from.

As relationship therapists, we strive to be even-handed and explore each partner’s contribution to the dynamics and difficulties that affect their relationship. However, when it comes to dealing with infidelity, I would argue that those rules don’t work very well. At least initially, it’s essential that the therapy is more focused on one person than the other. (For the sake of argument I’ll talk as if there are only two people in the relationship, but the same issues can apply in polyamorous relationships).

In an earlier blog, I suggested that infidelity was about someone knowingly breaking the relationship contract and then concealing that fact from their partner. By this definition, one of the key features of infidelity is that it is action taken unilaterally. One person is solely responsible for breaking the rules, doing it in a way that their partner had no chance to influence their choice.

One consequence of this unilateral action is that, when it is discovered, it creates a disproportionate level of vulnerability for the person whose trust has been betrayed (remember the definition of vulnerable is “more likely to be hurt”). If they wish the relationship to continue, they are forced to extend trust to someone who has been proven to be untrustworthy. It’s not surprising that people in this situation are frequently agitated, with disturbed sleep and erratic behaviour. They typically desperately and repetitively ask questions, seeking reassurance that their partner is unable to give, no matter how honestly they try and answer the questions.

In my experience, what is most likely to help someone in this situation settle down their mind and physiology is for the person who broke trust to make themselves vulnerable. Specifically by providing deep, psychologically coherent explanations for their choice to lie, cheat and deceive, coupled with a credible plan for dealing with the issues they uncover. To achieve this outcome, the initial phase of couple therapy following a major betrayal of trust can be seen as individual therapy with the contract breaker in the presence of the partner.

It’s not easy to get people who are full of guilt and shame to go deep and uncover their real motivations. They often want to “move on” to avoid engaging with painful insecurities and self-deception. Typically, they want the reassurance of immediate forgiveness the moment they apologise, rather than facing the inevitable long-term consequences of their behaviour. Sometimes they want to justify the infidelity by blaming their partner. It’s in situations like this that our ability to empathise with the underlying emotional pain and engage at that deeper level is essential to helping people restore trust. It’s the sort of work that typically is associated with individual therapy but can be powerfully healing in a relationship therapy context, post-infidelity.

We all have blind spots, and, for some of us, one of our blind spots is the inability to acknowledge having blind spots.

In my spiel in the first session explaining to my clients what therapy is going to be like, I sometimes say something like this:

“All therapy, whether individual or couple therapy, is about helping you see and understand things about yourself that you don’t already know.”

I define therapy as helping them investigate their “blind spots”.

When a couple comes for therapy, they are usually feeling stuck.  One or both will often report that they have “tried everything, and nothing has worked”.   They are looking to us for answers.  Of course, we can’t fix their problems for them; we can only show them where they might find new solutions that they have to make work for themselves.

Most of the time, those solutions lie in their blind spots.  In the aspects of their behaviour (and thought and emotion) that they aren’t seeing accurately or understanding fully.  So, all we have to do is point out the things they’re missing, and it should all be right, right? Of course, nothing is that easy about therapy.

The second part of that spiel I give them in session one goes like this:

“The trouble is that things about yourself you don’t already know… tend to be things about yourself you don’t want to know.  So basically, you are sitting here paying me to tell you things you don’t want to know.”  This usually gets a laugh, but it’s a good way of warning my clients that therapy will be challenging.

Some people welcome that challenge or are at least used to the idea of their own fallibility and can tolerate the discomfort necessary for growth.  However, some people have learned to protect themselves by being “right”, “in charge”, or only ever trusting their own judgement.  These people will find it hard to have the humility to engage in therapy.

These clients are often “difficult” and often challenge us, our methods, and our competence.  We need to be able to see and have compassion for their defensiveness and find a way to access our empathy for their pain. 

They will often struggle to reflect on the experiences in their upbringing that shaped them.  They experience a therapist’s implication that they had a less-than-perfect childhood as a criticism of their person.   Yet suppose we gently persist in our inquiries. In that case, we will find an explanation for the difficulty accepting their blind spots: the father who was grudging with his approval, the mother who was too overwhelmed to be attuned, the teacher who was shaming, the brother whom they were made to feel “less than”.  They will minimise and deflect the importance of these formative experiences. But if we keep linking present behaviour back to early learning, often, they will start to make the connections.  “I don’t know if you are aware, John, that when Sila asked if you had made the booking, your whole body went rigid.  To me, you looked like a kid who was frightened he was in trouble with Dad again.”

For those for whom any admission of error, fault or failing is a confirmation of their worst fears about themselves (“I’m no good”, “I’m a loser”, “I’m a failure”), it requires a confident, empathic and patient therapist to help them accept that they’re allowed to be human and have blind spots just like the rest of us.

As I say to my clients, “Making mistakes, being reactive or insensitive is part of being human.  No one should be judged for that.  It becomes an issue of character in how readily you can recognise and take responsibility for your mistakes.  When your insecurities and fears drive you, when you are too scared of being a failure to own your mistakes, that’s when you’re letting yourself and those you love down.”

If we are patient and persistent and pace our interventions carefully, even those whose blind spot is about their blind spots can be helped to grow and change.

Clients will choose to make themselves vulnerable if they believe that the rewards are worth it. Emotional vulnerability is an essential part of intimacy and feeling truly loved. Everyone has ways to reflexively protect themselves from emotional hurt. For example, your client might be smiley and pleasing (so they don’t offer any threat), or they might be stony-faced and grumpy (so they look tough and dangerous). They are hiding their deeper thoughts, feelings and desires from view so that people can’t use those thoughts, feelings or desires to manipulate or hurt them. They feel vulnerable, so they act defensively.

Remember, the more important someone is to you, the easier it is for you to feel hurt by them. When a stranger ignores, rejects or attacks you, that’s bad enough; but when an Attachment figure does, the pain is so much worse. That pain causes your amygdala to see your loved one as a threat. In a committed relationship, you organise your life around an Attachment figure. A rupture in that relationship threatens not just your feelings but also your living arrangements, your financial security, and your connection with your children (if you have them).

So, when their partner is upset, insincere, grumpy or withdrawn, your client may feel very vulnerable to hurt. Their instinctive response is to protect themselves. But when your client puts up their walls and acts defensively in turn, this is an ineffective way to try to care for themselves. It destabilises the Attachment relationship, making them more open to significant hurt in the long run.

To maintain their connection, they must accept their vulnerability to their significant other rather than fight it. Being vulnerable is part of acting with integrity. Consciously sharing what’s happening inside you does give their partner information they could use to hurt them. It’s a risk. But they are far better to take that risk and find out whether their partner can meet them, as well as whether they can look after themselves when their partner is unavailable.

Being vulnerable requires being Differentiated — knowing and showing how it is for you at the same time as being accepting of and interested in how it is for your partner. Being vulnerable also requires effective management of your neurobiology, i.e. good self-regulation. Your client’s impulse to protect themselves will arise and require managing. Remember, tolerating vulnerability is a hallmark of those who are Securely Attached. If they’re just ‘acting Secure’, then learning how to be vulnerable, rather than focusing on the anxiety of how vulnerable they feel, is a crucial component. The script below offers your clients a structured pathway to being vulnerable with their partner. Feel free to use it in your practice.

Here is a step-by-step guide for how to respond when you feel vulnerable or hurt.

I feel VULNERABLE
(maybe because I have been hurt)

↓

Triggers reflexive impulse to self-protect or act out, distract, feel numb, etc.

↓

Recognise the impulse for what it is, allow self to feel the VULNERABILITY and don’t let yourself act impulsively

↓

Go slow and self-soothe — attend to VULNERABLE or hurt feelings (including reaching out to friends and other supports)

↓

Organise your thinking — maybe write some notes, or practise talking out loud to yourself or a friend, so that you have clear, non-judgemental language to describe what’s going on for you

↓

Be VULNERABLE
Open up to partner about the original VULNERABLE or hurt feelings (use non-blaming descriptions)

↓

Compassionately explore and discuss the VULNERABILITY, focusing on meanings you make, your interpretations and insecurities (not the same as justifying self-protective behaviour)

↓

Be sure to talk about how much VULNERABILITY and hurt is from your upbringing rather than focusing on what your partner did

»»»

When I have made a mistake, got something wrong, or behaved in ways that are hurtful to my partner, my self-protective impulses often prompt me to talk about why I behaved that way. Usually, this involves an attempt to minimise my responsibility. The most common way to do this is to try and excuse and justify my behaviour.  For example, “I only shouted at you because you were being so rude”. 

That focus on what my partner did to “cause” my behaviour usually comes because I struggle to feel OK about myself, so recognising and accepting that I have got it wrong can feel devastating; like I am confirming what a bad person I am.  For example, I unconsciously fear that when I am aggressive I am like my domineering father.

In those moments when I am making excuses for myself, I am more in relationship with my insecurities than I am with my partner. My distress at the triggering of my fears about myself makes it hard for me to recognise, let alone accept and respond to the impact of my behaviour on them.  My partner is likely to feel twice wounded if I come across as justifying the behaviour that hurt them

If being a good partner is my top priority, then I need to aim to repair the “rupture” to the relationship caused by my ineffective self-protective behaviours asap.   Remember that John Gottman’s research showed us it’s the speed and effectiveness of relationship repair that separates the happy from the unhappy couples.  Explanation is often part of repair, but the timing of it matters. This is what our clients so often get wrong!

When I accept that I have done something unhelpful or hurtful then I will first acknowledge that without justification.  I will take responsibilty for my behaviour and focus first on repairing my connection with you; things like apologising and doing what I can to make things right.  “Sorry, I came on way too strong there.  I didn’t need to shout like that.  That must have been scary for you”.

Somewhere in that process it is likely to be useful for me to be able to understand why I acted in ways that were contrary to my values and against my intentions to be loving, kind, supportive etc to my partner.  My focus will be on myself, my insecurities, my upbringing and training around intimacy, and my present circumstances.

Working out what was going on inside me, why I interpreted my partner’s behaviour the way I did, is important for me to make effective plans for acting differently next time something like this happens.  “What I think happened for me was…”          

When clients offer this kind of in-depth, self-exploratory explanation of why they did something unhelpful it is going to make any assurances they offer about not doing it again much more believable for their partner.  It also is an example of the sort of intimate, vulnerable communication that builds trust and respect. 

So next time you are trying to help a couple resolve a conflict where one person was trying to explain why they behaved the way they did, make sure they focus on taking responsibility and repairing the relationship before they worry about “why”?  Make sure they are not looking for shame-driven excuses but, instead, are able to find a deep and self-aware explanation that will help them change their behaviour and build their partner’s trust and respect.

Once they can do that, talking about the reasons behind their behaviour becomes an explanation, not a justification.   It becomes an opportunity for intimate reflection and connection that helps both of them understand what makes one person “tick”.  It’s also a chance for both of them to show some compassion for what drives that person to be self-protective.  Processing ruptures this way is a vital plank in building a relationship that both people will want to be in.

»»»

I recently worked with a hetero couple like this.  What made their conflict more potent was they have three teenage children, so this was a disagreement that had implications not just for their personal safety, but for that of their family.

This situation was challenging for me as a therapist in two ways.  First, I had to really watch my bias.  Personally, I strongly agreed with the woman about the value and importance of vaccinations, not just for personal safety but for the good of the wider community.    It as a challenge to my Differentiation as a therapist to listen to the man and treat his concerns with equal validity.

Secondly, the level of frustration in each of them meant that they both resisted my attempts to focus on their process.  They both wanted to keep re-stating their arguments for their position.  Inevitably, this only served to dig them deeper into their entrenched positions,  making the atmosphere in the relationship more difficult. This presented a real challenge to my leadership of the therapy.

However, I did keep re-focusing on how they were talking to and treating each other.  In keeping with the Developmental Model’s emphasis on giving people a different perspective, my first action was to direct their attention to where they did agree.  In particular, I highlighted how they both were placing the value of their family’s health at the forefront of their efforts.  They have “done the maths” differently and ended up with different suggestions about what is the best course of action, but both are operating from the same motivations.

Once they could each acknowledge the good intentions of the other, I could then get them to look at the process.  I suggested that this sort of agreement is a perfect example of the value of being able to show care and support for your partner, even if  you disagree strongly. 

I modelled for them how talking to each other from a place of care and empathy might look.  “I am sorry that my decision on this issue is adding to your stress about this whole COVID situation.  I can see how it does that, and I wish it didn’t” 

It was really only once I modelled this way of talking to each other that the light bulb went on for them that they could be handling this whole situation differently.  Sometimes you have to show people, they can’t work it out for themselves.  At that point the whole tone of the session changed and they realised that they had lost sight of the “Big Picture” of their relationship in clinging on to such polarised positions. 

I don’t imagine they were immediately able to go away and do that for themselves, but by giving them a different experience in the session, they now know that another way of engaging around differences, even extreme differences is possible and desirable.

Having a person like this as your client can be challenging. Enquiries about their emotions or the meanings they make of events are often met with an “I don’t know” response. Many of us were trained never to lead clients. If we are rigid about this it can leave us with few options at this point. However, there is a real danger in the client remaining unseen and unheard. If you are doing couple therapy there is also the danger of partners losing hope “See, even our therapist can’t get anything out of you!”

If you suspect your client DOES know but isn’t saying you can enquire about that. You can ask “Is that an “I know but it’s too scary to tell you” type of “I don’t know” or an “I have no idea how to process what you are asking me” type of “I don’t know”?”. If the answer is “too scary” then that opens up an avenue of exploring what are the feared outcomes of answering the question.

If the person doesn’t know how to process the question, consider what you know from their history about how likely they were to have been taught or have modelled for them how to think about nor talk about their emotions and internal experience. In most cases, they haven’t had the training, and so our role becomes to scaffold them up to the kind of emotional literacy needed to maintain an intimate adult relationship.

In a sense, our role becomes one of re-parenting. It requires patience and compassion from the therapist. It is so easy for these men to feel inadequate and ashamed. In many cases, they have had years of partners expressing frustration at their inability to be open and articulate. Therapy is a very scary and hostile environment for them and it is our professional responsibility not to add to the emotional burden they carry.

One tool to use is to use the Feelings Wheel – I focus on the 6 core emotions in the centre. Although I acknowledge that there is a downside to labelling emotions as positive or negative (all feelings carry useful information), at this level of education I find it valuable. In response to an “I don’t know how I feel” I ask, “Well, do you feel negative or positive?” Most people can answer this kind of simple binary question. Armed with this knowledge I get out the Feeling Wheel. Using the wheel they then only have to choose between 3 options. If they say it’s a negative feeling – is it Sad, Mad (angry) or Scared? If it’s a positive feeling, is it Peaceful, Powerful or Joyful? If they want to, they can then look further out on the wheel to refine their language. Breaking the question down into these three steps makes it less overwhelming. This is something that they can then use with their partners at home.

In other situations I won’t use the wheel, instead, I will offer them options of feeling words based on A) my knowledge of them and B) on my experience of others and C) my own life experience. In response to the “I don’t know” I will say something like – “In my experience, people in a situation like this might feel angry or hurt or overwhelmed” OR “If I was in your shoes I think I would feel anxious or unimportant or maybe angry” and then continue with “Do you think one or more of those feelings might be going on for you?”. If your client is not completely blank, you also have the option to say – “To me, you look like you are irritated or frustrated – would that be about right?

Using these kinds of strategies repeatedly I find that, over time, many clients become more self-aware and articulate. If they can do it in the therapy room, their partners begin to realise they can also expect it at home. There may need to be some discussion about inviting openness, rather than demanding on it (see the discussion of shame and inadequacy above).

Yes, talking in this way leads the client, and we need to be very cautious of clients saying something just to please the therapist. If we choose to guess, we also need to be attuned to subtle signals that our guesses are wrong. However, I would argue that the potential benefits to clients who are inarticulate in this way (and to their partners) outweigh the risk.

The secong of these stages is “Differentiating” and this is the place that so many of our clients are stuck at.  They cling on, unconsciously but desperately, to the fantasy of fusion, of “the two becoming one”, and don’t develop the skills necessary to deal with differences and the conflict that differences inevitably implies.

Differentiating means being aware of, and able to express, my inner thoughts and feelings in a way that it is considerate of who my partner is and where they are at in this moment.  Being able to be true to myself AND, at the same time, showing interest in and care for who and how my partner is.

This is care for the other is what makes Differentiating quite a different process from the more familiar individual developmental issue of Individuation.  Learning who you are and how to express it and assert it is only HALF the picture when it comes to relationships.

The ability to manage the anxiety that is inevitably raised by conflict, by being aware of our differences, is crucial.  Helping our clients understand that, regardless of how upset they feel, they are still responsible for their own behaviour is a key part of helping them learn to differentiate.

We don’t learn how to do this all at once.  There is a typical path that we tend to follow as we develop our ability to differentiate.  This can be broken into 5 phases:

1. Developing the ability to self-reflect; to notice and accept our own thoughts, feelings, wants and desires.
2. Developing the ability to express those thoughts, feelings, wants and desires.  This requires tolerating the risk involved in exposing “who I (really) am”.
3. Developing awareness of my partner as separate and different.  Often initially I may respond to this as a threat.  For example, I see your different opinion as a criticism of me, or you wanting something different meaning I will miss out etc.
4. Developing an increasing ability to listen, hear & respond to differences.  Exploring the differences with curiosity and openness and clear boundaries – caring about you AND myself.
5. Developing the ability to create an environment in the relationship that supports desired changes.  Negotiating in good faith, being able to compromise on an issue without compromising my selfhood, knowing when I can afford to be generous and when I can’t, being creative in finding solutions rather than sticking to first positions etc. etc.

Recognising where each of your clients at in their ability to perform these key developmental tasks is a great way to make our work more incisive and efficient

Like a business or a garden or a vintage car, relationships need constant maintenance; frequent and consistent attending to. If your clients are not attending to their relationship by investing time and effort in it, they can’t expect it to work well.

Even if your clients are on board with this idea that it’s important to schedule couple time into their busy lives.  That still leaves the issue of HOW they use the time. We often find that couples make an appointment but don’t talk about what the time is FOR. This means that they each arrive at the appointment with very different expectations of what’s going to happen.

To help them plan their couple time, tt can be useful to think about three key categories of communication that couples need to put time into:

1. PRAGMATICS AND LOGISTICS

Coordinating the functioning of the household and family.  Dividing up the tasks that need to be done and making sure you both know who is doing what and when.

2. CLOSENESS

Taking the time to enjoy being in a relationship – relaxing together, doing mutually enjoyable activities, focusing on the positives.  Close time usually means avoiding difficult topics and conflicts, keeping things reasonably superficial and comfortable.  Time spent like this is the pay-off or reward for doing all the work involved in being in a long-term, intimate relationship.  This is usually what people have in mind when they suggest a “date night”.

3.INTIMACY

Having the vulnerable and often difficult conversations and interactions that allow you to connect on a deep level.  Intimate time needs to include dealing with differences (i.e. healthy conflict) as well as talking about aspirations, hopes and dreams, fears, doubts and insecurities.  Not always comfortable, but when done productively makes closeness feel easy and real (when intimacy is avoided, our closeness ends up feeling forced and fragile). Tolerating intimacy of this kind requires people have started moving out of the “symbiosis” (or bonding) stage of relationship and are beginning to engage productively around differences (i.e. “differentiating”)

(Please note we don’t use “intimacy” as a euphemism for sex. For most people, their sexual relationship moves between 1, 2 & 3 at different times, so talking about making time for sex is a different, but also important, conversation)

SO by all means encourage your couples to plan some couple time – but make sure that they are A) covering all bases of what your relationship needs and B) that they are on the same page about what category any given appointment is for.