355: Relationship Problems: Be Gone!
Featuring Dr. Matthew May
In today’s podcast, Matt, Rhonda and David discuss relationship problems, and how to overcome them. We also give instructions on the Paradoxical Invitation, one of the most important and difficult techniques for TEAM-CBT therapists to learn.
We started today’s podcast interviewing Tania Ahern and Andy Persson who give a plug for the upcoming TEAM-CBT intensive from August 14 to 17, 2023 in Bristol, and incredible British city with an outstanding TEAM-CBT training program in store for you. Many notable TEAM experts will be presenting, including Drs. Leigh Harrington, Heather Clague, Marius Wirga, Stirling Moorey, Mike Christensen and many other notable teachers. Special thanks to Peter Spurrier for being a fantastic TEAM therapist and organizer!
I will also be there virtually doing a keynote address, a Q and A session, and a live TEAM-CBT demo with a workshop volunteer. The amazing Mike Christensen will be my co-therapist. Hope to see you there! Go to TEAMCBT.UK for registration and more information.
Today we focus on relationship problems, starting with a real example, which often makes for the best teaching. Rhonda recently spent time with her son and daughter-in-law to help with their new twin babies. Rhonda’s daughter-in-law had a very difficult delivery, and was in the hospital for several weeks following the birth of the babies. Rhonda worked relentlessly cooking and cleaning for them, feeding the babies, changing their diapers, and comforting them, and providing help for the new mom, who was overwhelmed and fearful of bathing the babies, thinking she might hurt them when attempting to bathe them.
As so often happens in real life, Rhonda ran into a severe conflict with her daughter-in-law and responded with anger, and we all so often do. She reveals how terrible she and her daughter-in-law felt, and how she saved the day after deciding to have a “redo” of the interaction, using the Five Secrets of Effective Communication.
Rhonda, Matt and David described one of the most difficult therapy tools in TEAM-CBT, the Paradoxical Invitation Step, and contrasted it with the Straightforward Invitation.
Rhonda also mentioned some podcasts for further information on the Relationship Journal and the Interpersonal Model in TEAM-CBT. There are even more, but here are some that might interest you. My book, Feeling Good Together, is also a must-read for anyone wanting to make profound changes in the way you connect with the people you love, as well as your patients if you’re a shrink!
This was the first time I listened to your podcast. It was an incredible learning experience, especially when you role played. I look forward to hearing more and gaining additional skills for the tough interactions.
Thanks so much, Sailly! Appreciate you! Best, david
What happens if you make the paradoxical invitation and they don’t accept? For example, “you might not want to work on this because of how mean (this person) is to you” and they reply, “you’re right. I don’t care to work on this?”
Hi Dan, Great question, and that’s the whole point, isn’t it? Then you can let them know you enjoy working with them, and wonder if there’s some other problem they might want to work on instead! After all, there’s no rule that says we have to try to get along with everybody, and there’s also no rule that says that therapists have to impose their own “helping” agendas on their patients!
Let me know what you think!
Best, david
Well, you’re right. Loving relationships are not easy, and can be very painful at times. I don’t think anyone should feel obligated to pursue loving relationships with others, and if that does not appeal to you, I accept your thinking 200%. As a shrink, my goal is, hopefully, never to tell people what they “should” or “shouldn’t” do, but rather to help people who are asking for help with something. Right now I’m working with someone who can be perfectly happy on their own, but might be open to developing a loving relationship as a way of expanding his life and experiences into an area they have been kind of avoiding for many years.
Your thoughts are really good ones, but I can’t tell if you’re looking for help, and just a debate. Debate can be fun, but in my experience, it is sometimes not terribly effective or satisfying if the goal is to prove the other person “wrong” or to prove that your own thinking is “correct.”
But you’re right. If you are not motivated to pursue relationships with others, that’s okay with me. And if you want help developing more loving relationships, that’s okay, too, as long as you’re willing to examine your own role, as opposed to blaming others for the conflicts that inevitably arise.
Still, I’m pretty sure we’re NOT on the same page and not dialoguing together very well. Apologies! it sounds to me like you’re pretty intent on finding some “hole” or error in my thinking. That’s usually pretty easy, as I’m wrong really often! Maybe you can shar your own thinking. For example, you may be very convinced that love IS an adult human “need,” rather than a “want,” or something along those lines.
If so, you’ll have millions of people applauding your thinking and agreeing with you, because that’s pretty much a widespread belief!
Best, david
David
These are some good suggestions, but there’s actually a much easier method to resolving relationship problems. Since David teaches us in Intimate Connections that you don’t need anyone else to feel maximally happy, the sensible thing to do is to cut off all relations with others. Why would anyone in their right mind voluntarily choose to multiply their sources of stress by socializing?
Thanks for your thoughtful response. To me, the key is the difference between wanting and needing something. If we cut off and eliminate all the vast numbers of things in life that we don’t “need,” our banquet of life’s joys and pleasures becomes incredibly limited! Just a thought! Best, David
I like your efficiency, David. That’s why you’re special: you put the patient first. Not your ego, not your theory, not the money but the sick, suffering human being desperate for relief. So I am just pointing out that there is an easier and faster way, based entirely on your teaching, to resolve relationship problems. Namely, avoid relationships. They give you nothing you cannot give yourself, as you’ve proved repeatedly. You’ve written entire chapters in your books based on this truth — love is NOT an adult human need. I’m surprised that this seems like a topic for debate. Your position on this has been clear for decades. If this isn’t your position, then I must admit to being completely baffled and unsure what to think. What did you mean when you said that you can be maximally happy while alone? I must be missing something. Best, Adrian.
Please allow me to follow-up with this, as perhaps I can illustrate my point in this way. (Incidentally, I thought this was your point as well.)
Suppose we take a mathematician for example. To them there’s no pleasure greater than the pursuit of mathematical knowledge. Absorbed in their studies, it is then that they feel happiest they’ve ever been: 100 out of 100.
This is just one example. For some it’s sports, for others cars and for others still it’s the arts. Why would they then pursue as a source of pleasure human relationships, which will almost certainly not reliably give them maximal satisfaction but would also be a considerable source of stress? People lie. They cheat. They steal. They won’t, like math or sports or cars, always be there for you no matter what.
You say that relationships would enrich their lives and be a source of pleasure. Would they? That doesn’t seem to be at all consistent with everyday experience. Most marriages aren’t especially happy and end in divorce. The “honeymoon” phase doesn’t last longer than a few years. Most dating relationships don’t work out. Friends betray you, etc. It’s unlikely that they would achieve 100/100 through interactions with another person. If anything, their level of happiness might fall to zero. I am sure you’ve had patients devastated by the loss of a relationship who then took their own life.
The variety and stimulation that you speak of could be equally well achieved by just finding a new, non-human interest which would almost certainly bring more profit and pleasure than getting involved with other people.
Again, I’m sort of surprised to find myself arguing against you on this one, given that you were the person who has made this point repeatedly in print over the years. If there is something I have misunderstood in your message, by all means correct me.
Sure, thanks, teach me, using your own experience. I think it is perfectly okay if you want to avoid relationships. Is that the philosophy you’ve endorsed?
There are lots of things in my life that I clearly don’t “need,” and yet I enjoy them, and they are deeply meaningful to me. It sounds like this thinking does not resonate with you, which is fine. Use this platform to share your thinking, and lots of people will have the chance to think about your point of view.
However, I am not yet convinced that IS your point of view. I suspect that you are merely trying to disagree with my thinking, which is okay, too. But it would be nice if you stated your thinking. Then I’d have a better idea of what you’re actually thinking, and what you believe.
For example, if you believe that love is an adult human need, as opposed to a strong “want,” how did you come to this conclusion? In my case, and with my patients, I have found that doing experiments is one useful tool among many. But we’re all learning together, I hope!
Best, David
PS I love your persistence! My mind works like that, too! I think that challenging our own beliefs is important, both in the area of philosophy / therapy, as well as in the realm of statistics, since I do tons of research with app data, and research data colleagues and students have shared, and that provides tons of opportunities for critical thinking. And here’s the cool thing: the computer does not mind telling me that a great many of my hypotheses cannot possibly be correct, based on the data I’m modeling. But it is SOOOO EASY to get our egos caught up in this or that idea and feel a tremendous compulsion to argue for our “truth.”
Oh, thanks, no I understand your point of view. If this works for you, that’s totally fine. For myself, I like a variety of activities and interests in my life.
For example, I totally LOVE statistical modeling, and often spend many hours doing this, but at a point, I get burned out and want to do something else, maybe relax with my cat in the back yard, for example, or do some editing. I love teaching, I used to love table tennis, and lots of activities. Most people are like that. I don’t personally “need” any of these activities, but have enjoyed all of them and more. And all of them can be frustrating and challenging at times.
Some of us are attracted to trusting friendships, vulnerability and sharing, and sex, too. But human relationships, as you point out, can be incredibly challenging and painful, but also a source of growth for that exact reason.
That’s about all I’m trying to say. But if you, or if anyone, does not want to pursue relationships, I would never try to persuade you otherwise. I do not know the one “correct” path for people. We all have our own journey. When people want help, I love to help them. Sometimes people who have avoided relationships due to some reason, such as intense shyness, want to connect better with others in the hope of developing a loving relationships. This is one of my favorite problems, since I struggle with it myself as a young man.
You may have decided for yourself that you are not interested in pursuing loving, intimate relationships. I accept that, absolutely!
Thanks again for sharing your own perspective, which I deeply appreciate! Best, david
You surprise me. That’s like saying, “Although there’s enough fruit and wild game on this desert island to last me a lifetime, I’m going to voluntarily undertake the misery and hardship of farming.”
If, as you point out in Intimate Connections, you can be maximally happy and self-sufficient while alone then it makes no sense at all to get involved with other people. To argue otherwise is to admit to having not thought things through, which isn’t a trait I’d associate with you.
“There is a difference between wanting and needing something. Oxygen is a need, but love is a want. I repeat: LOVE IS NOT AN ADULT HUMAN NEED! It’s okay to want a loving relationship with another human being. There is nothing wrong with that. It is a delicious pleasure to be involved in a good relationship with someone you love. But you do not need that external approval, love, or attention in order to survive or to experience maximal levels of happiness.” p. 322, Feeling Good. David Burns. (1999.)
I’m advocating your position. Oddly, you’re not advocating your position, or at least you’re not thinking it through. Love is not an adult human need. (Arguably, it’s not even a childhood need.) It’s nice. It’s desirable. But it’s not necessary, as again you’ve demonstrated clinically.
Since that’s the case, and since, as you’ve said, maximal happiness is possible even alone, then the logical conclusion is to avoid others. Because in perfect solitude you can experience maximal happiness (100%) then there is absolutely no reason to socialize, since another human being has separate interests from your own and therefore inevitably there will be conflict, and less than maximal happiness. And as stated you are as likely, if not more, to experience profound unhappiness as a result of interpersonal issues that are entirely avoided in solitude, which was the point of my original post.
That is all to say that not only isn’t love a need, but that it isn’t even really desirable. Its appeal is largely illusory, and is obviously driven by the biological imperative. To value relationships as a source of growth is again to overlook the fact that you’re entirely capable of that on your own. As your position on this has been unequivocal since the 80s, it’s again odd to see you imply otherwise.
Thanks so much. Your notes are really thoughtful, but kind of seem unconnected to my replies. Just a thought!
Is it okay for me to disagree with part of what you’re saying? If so, it would be this sentence that doesn’t quite resonate with me: “That is all to say that not only isn’t love a need, but that it isn’t even really desirable.” To me, loving relationships are highly desirable! But if you think they are not desirable, that’s okay with me. I’m not trying to sell you on anything. Veery few things are “needs,” but lots and lots of things are desirable. Of course, you’re right that relationships can be, at times, very challenging and even frustrating!
I’m experiencing a little of that right now. We seem to be ruining around in circles. Do you notice that? And are you also feeling some frustration, or annoyance, with me? That’s the impression I’m getting, but again, I could be WAY off! Let me know! Some people argue when they’re angry / annoyed and trying to hide their feelngs. This is likely not happening here, but it’s seems possible! I’ve also said that TRUTH is the cause of a high proportion of the world’s suffering.
By TRUTH I mean the urge to prove someone else is wrong, or that one is RIGHT! Are you doing that? It kind of feels that way, and apologies if I’m way off base. I can see you’re very thoughtful, and that your ideas and beliefs are verry important to you! I wish everyone gave things as much thought as you! Maybe the world would be a better place, with more critical thinking and willingness to speak up!
Best, david
This is why we’re going in circles: If alone you’re maximally happy — one hundred percent — then how could relationships be an equally desirable source of happiness? And if they’re not as desirable, they’re not a rational choice. If you’d argue that they are as desirable, I’d ask how something contingent and unreliable (happiness in relationships, dependent on the will of another) can be as desirable as something non-contingent and reliable (happiness in solitude, dependent only on you.) I’m getting the impression that your actual belief is that solitude is incompatible with maximal happiness, and that you can be happy alone but not as happy as you would be in a relationship. I don’t agree with that, although maybe I’m wrong. But the implications of your statements seem to keep coming back to this.
If someone finds there are many activities they love and can enjoy to the max on their own, are tehy also permitted to pursue loving relationships as well, as another source of challenge and meaning in life? Is it an either or?
Also, I don’t think you’ve stated your position yet, but kind of hand behind various arguments, as if this is a debate. Perhaps I have not done a good job of listening, so I’ll take the blame if we’re running in circles. In my clinical experience, lot of people who thought they “needed” love to feel happy and fulfilled, discovered that they were often as happy, and sometimes much happier, doing things on their own. This was always a welcome discovery, and a kind of pleasant shock to the system. It also helped them in the dating arena, since they no longer felt desperate and inferior if they didn’t have a loving relationship. I do know of at least one person who is ambivalent about pursuing romantic relationships, and this person has discovered that they can be 100% happy doing the things they love to do, and that others are not required. This person, in fact, is a bit ambivalent about pursuing romantic love, since that pursuit can be pretty’s exhausting and frustrating. My hunch is that this person will want to work on developing closer relationships with men and women, since this has ben a void in their life, which has been filled with traumas followed by triumphs.
So, there could well be people who will be less inclined to pursue romance once they discover they can be happy on their own. But in my limited experience, it usually goes the other way. The discovery that happiness comes from within, from the way you talk to yourself and treat yourself, rarely limits people, but rather opens the door to a wider range of rich experiences.
Not sure if this would help. Perhaps you could let me know how you are experiencing this dialogue, and if I’ve done a poor job of understanding your thinking. I must admit, I still have no idea where you stand on this issue. I only know that you debate with great intensity, so I think you’re trying to make a point, and whatever it is, I’m sure there’s a ton of wisdom in your thinking.
Let me know if I’m being blind to something here! Thanks! david
I have tried relentlessly to find the story about Rhonda and her daughter-in-law in this podcast. I even went on your youtube account and read the entire transcript and cannot find it. Has it been removed from the podcast? If not, what is the time stamp on where it starts? Thank you
Did you listen to the podcast and not find it? If so, I may have made an error in the show notes. If so, it is probably on the previous or subsequent podcast. Best, david