This is what keeps us doing the workshops

The following is an endorsement from a participant from our most recent (10/19 and 10/20) Art and Science of Love Workshop in Sonoma. Dr. Sarkisian also took the above photo of us that day.

The Gottman workshop presented by Michael Basta and Marcia Gomez, LCSW’s, has been (and is) profound, challenging and life-changing. The issues we face in our relationships can be addressed in healthy ways that nourish growth and foster healing. Everyone engaged in a relationship should attend, and if you’re fortunate to have Marcia and Michael as your presenters, you will experience two of the most approachable, transparent and dynamic marriage therapists ever, jointly bringing years and years of helping troubled couples navigate their way through the trials, traps and turbulence encountered on the high seas of disharmony and dysfunction. The best part? Hope. And optimism. And the rock-solid tools (no more sense of helplessness) that will help build, re-build or strengthen an existing relationship.   Rick Sarkisian, Ph.D.

Stress Reducing Conversation Continued

Here is another thought about the aforementioned Stress Reducing Conversation. The purpose of this practice is to help a couple support each other in the management of external stresses (i.e. stresses from work, conflicts with friends or neighbors, the daily commute, etc...). When done well, each partner is able to feel validated and supported by the other on a daily basis. The practice becomes a "ritual of connection" in the language of Dr. Bill Doherty.

I introduced the idea to a couple and they sent me a link to an episode of Seinfeld to let me know how difficult they thought it would be for them to practice the Stress Reducing Conversation. They said "You want us to have the Kramer conversation?" After viewing the link I said, "No, I want you to have the Anti-Kramer Conversation." Here it is:

Michael Basta, LCSW

Stress Reducing Conversation

One of the key skills that we teach couples in the Art and Science of Love Workshop is the Stress Reducing Conversation. The root of the practice is Dr. John Gottman's response to an unanticipated outcome from the two year follow-up study on the effectiveness of Behavioral Couples Therapy done by his friend, the late Dr. Neil Jacobson. Although none of the communication skills that Dr. Jacobson taught couples through his Behavioral Couples Therapy approach persisted at two year follow-up, a large number of the couples in his study that maintained gains in therapy independently reported that they were better able to manage "external stress" as a couple. Dr. Jacobson chose not to do anything with this finding, but Dr. Gottman found the finding interesting and created a daily ritual for couples to discuss their daily stresses called The Stress Reducing Conversation.

One of the key skills involved in the successful practice of the Stress Reducing Conversation is to listen and "validate" the emotions of one's partner while suspending the impulse to give advice. Thus Gottman's motto: "Understanding must precede advice". This is easier said than done for some of us. Many people believe that we men tend to have a more difficult time with this skill than do women, although many women have argued that they also struggle with withholding advice. For example, the mothers of teenagers have told me that they find this particularly difficult to do with their teenagers. Thanks to our colleague, Kevin Russell, MFT, here is a video to demonstrate how hard it can be to bite our tongues with our partners when the urge to give advice arises.

Michael Basta, LCSW

Dan Wile on the Rules of Good Communication

When Marcia Gomez and I trained as Gottman Method Couples Therapist in 2002, we were introduced to the work of Dr. Dan Wile, an accomplished couples therapist from Oakland, CA. Dan's techniques have been integrated into Gottman Method and John Gottman frequently quotes from Dan's work. Marcia and I have both gone on the take Dan's intensive training seminar and have joined in on case conferences that he offers locally. The following is an exert from his most recent newsletter regarding the rules for good communication and our difficulty keeping to the rules: 


Thanks to those who commented on my previous newsletter, one of whom, Judith, raised issues that I had planned to address in this newsletter. I have put that aside for the moment to prepare the Workshop for Couples that Dori Kaufmann and I are giving at Esalen on April 19-21, 2013. Since I’m in the midst of preparing for this workshop, I decided to present a segment of it in this newsletter. This following is a distillation of material from my books with several new twists.

WHY THE RULES FOR GOOD COMMUNICATION
ARE SO DIFFICULT TO FOLLOW

The problem with these rules is that you can’t use any of them when you’re angry—which, of course, is when you most need them. Communication skills trainers are sad about it and I’m sad about it, too. You can’t use any of them when you’re angry because they’re telling you in essence, “Don’t be angry.” They’re telling you not to do what every fiber in your body is pressing you to do.

If the rules of communication are impossible to obey—if they fly out the window just when we need them most—are they any use at all? My answer is yes. We can use them when we’ve calmed down after the fight as part of a recovery conversation. And we can point out to our partners when they violate these rules. “There you go again, bringing up grudges from the distant past.” Or, “You just said ‘never.’” Or, “That’s a ‘you” statement.”

Okay, maybe that’s not such a good idea, since it would just provoke our partners. In fact, maybe we need an additional rule: Don’t use the rules for good communication as weapons against your partner.

The best use of these rules is paradoxical. We can master them so we’ll be able to realize—if not during the fight at least afterwards in retrospect—that we violated them. If we realize we’ve violated them, we won’t be surprised by our partner’s angry or defensive response and we won’t get stuck concluding that there’s no way to reason with them.

I’m going to take ten of these rules and show what’s behind the breaking of each of them.

Communication Rule 1. Make “I” Statements not “You” Statements. Your partner’s going to like it much better if you express feelings (“I feel unlovable”) rather than make accusations (“You’re selfish and unloving”). Okay, sure, we know that. But sometimes—especially during a fight—nothing but a good “you” statement will do. And, anyway, we usually don’t think we’re really making “you” statements. We think we’re just saying what’s true—that, for example, our partner is a jerk—and it wouldn’t be hard to prove.

When we’re angry, parts of our brain shut down and other parts open up. We become “you” statement generating machines. We lose the ability to make “I” statements or do anything other than attack or defend. We forget what an “I” statement is. Even if we were to remember, it wouldn’t matter, because we’d have absolutely no interest in making one.

 “You” statements are often first approximations of “I” statements. “You’re completely selfish and irresponsible coming home late like this,” may be a rough first draft of, “I wish I didn’t get so upset when you’re late. You know me, I take it personally.” “You” statements indicate that something needs to be talked about; “I” statements provide the means to do so.

Communication Rule 2: Don’t Say “Always” or “Never” since it raises your partner’s hackles and can easily be refuted by his or her pointing to an exception. If you say “You never lift a finger around here,” your partner can bring up how at times he has emptied the dishwasher, set the table, or made the kids’ lunch. What you really mean is, “I’d like you to do a whole lot more around here and I have a great deal of resentment that you don’t.” “Never,” “always,” and such words are at once too powerful (they are exaggerations that make the other person less likely to listen) and too weak (they are typically easy to refute).

But it’s difficult to avoid using them. When we feel that words are failing us—when we feel that we are not getting through to our partners—“always” and “never” spring naturally to our lips. If these words didn’t exist, we’d have to invent them.

So we’re going to say “always” and “never.” But here’s what you can do. When you find yourself saying one of these, know that you’ve got a frustrated person on your hands, and that person is you. And know that you’re likely to end up feeling even more frustrated because your partner will likely point to an exception.

Communication Rule 3: Don’t interrupt your partner, since it frustrates them, prevents them from having their full say, and makes it less likely they will listen to you. Also, you might be jumping to false conclusions about what they are planning to say. (I’m not talking about those people who like being interrupted because it shows that their partners are really engaged in what they are saying.)

But the more you force yourself to sit there quietly while your partner misrepresents you, lectures you, or makes unfair charges, the angrier and more dispirited you become and the less you’ll be able to listen. By the time you get a chance to talk, you may have built up so much resentment that you throw a tantrum. Or you may have become so demoralized that you no longer feel like saying anything at all.

So here’s the problem: If you interrupt your partner, he or she may become an angry or dispirited person who can’t listen; if you don’t interrupt your partner, you may become an angry or dispirited person who can’t listen.

Occasionally you can resolve this dilemma by making a limited interruption—breaking in but immediately giving the floor back to your partner: “I’m having trouble listening to you right now, but go on” or “There’s something important I’ll want to say about that as soon as you’re done.” For some people, commenting like that—registering that they have an objection—may make it possible for them to listen. And it may only briefly interrupt their partners.

Communication Rule 4: Paraphrase what your partner just said. State it in your own words and check it out. Say, “I hear you saying that you feel … Do I have it right?” or “Let’s see if I understand what you’re saying. You’re saying … Am I right?” The purpose of this rule is to get you to listen to your partner when you hadn’t realized you weren’t and to get your partner to realize that you’re listening when he or she hadn’t thought you were. Also, it’s to make sure you’re not mishearing.

But people feel least like paraphrasing when they need to do it the most, that is, when they’re angry and feel misunderstood. At such a time, they don’t want to listen; they want their partners to listen to them.

Furthermore, paraphrasing and checking back seems to most people artificial and stilted. John Gottman reports that even skillful couples don’t do it. On the other hand, the paraphrasing rule reveals something important about couple life, which is that partners often feel unlistened to by each other. So I recommend devising your own more informal, less stilted version of paraphrasing (active listening):
 “I’ve been so busy trying to get you to see … that I hadn’t noticed that what you’re trying to get me to see is that ….”
“I know you’re trying to tell me …. But I can’t listen because it makes me too mad.”
“Okay, you’re telling me …, but here’s why I don’t buy it.”
“You’ve said that eight times now. The repetition is driving me crazy. But, you know, maybe you’re repeating it because you don’t think I’ve heard—and, well, actually, maybe I haven’t.”
“What particularly touched me in what you just said was…”
 Communication Rule 5: Don’t Mind-Read. People mostly don’t like your telling them what they are feeling, thinking, or trying to do, especially if you’re implying that  they shouldn’t be doing it: “You’re trying to punish me;” “You’re trying to make me feel guilty;” “You must want to be depressed;” and “You always have to be in control.” Mind-reading can trigger an argument as in the following famous example:

You’re angry at me.
No I’m not.
Yes, you are.
I know when I’m angry and I’m not.
Well, then you’re angry unconsciously.
(Voice rising): I already told you, I’m not angry.
(Voice rising) Listen to your voice. You sound angry to me.
Well, I’m angry now—because you keep insisting I’m angry.

When you mind-read, you jump to conclusions. But you might also just be drawing conclusions. And even if you are jumping to conclusions, sometimes you’re right. Therapists draw or jump to conclusions all the time, as in: “You seem angry” or “You seem depressed.” (Some partners enjoy a certain type of mind-reading—finishing each other’s sentences—because their guesses, which are usually correct, show how well they know each other.)

Mind-reading is often an expression of feelings put in the form of assertions about the other person’s feelings. It’s a fear or worry stated as a fact. “You’re bored to death” might mean “I’m worried I’m boring you.” “Why are you so angry at me?” might mean: “I’m worried that you’re angry at me. I know I’ve been withdrawn lately, and I’d be angry if you had disappeared on me that way.” Accordingly, you can use your mind-reading statement—this assertion about your partner’s feelings (“You’re bored to death”)—to track back to your feelings (“I’m worried I’m being boring”).

Communication Rule 6: Stick to One Complaint, since skipping from topic to topic makes it impossible to talk anything through.

But people skip to other topics because they feel that the topic presently being discussed places them at a disadvantage in the argument or because they just thought of a better way to make their point. In other words, they change topics to put themselves in a better position in their fight with their partner—to shift away from the good, possibly unanswerable, point their partner just made or to amass further evidence in their effort (futile as it may be) to convince their partner that they are right.

Communication Rule 7: Don’t Dig Up Old Grievances, since it provokes and demoralizes your partner, leaving them feeling you won’t let them live anything down or forgive them for anything.

But you may need to go to the past to find a clear example of what you feel is happening in more subtle ways today. Alternatively, you may be stuck in the past, feeling that your partner has never fully understood or expressed adequate remorse for something quite hurtful he or she did earlier in the relationship.

Communication Rule 8: Don’t Get Sidetracked Arguing Over Irrelevant Details. “It was in November that it happened.” “No, it was October.” “I remember distinctly it was November.” “You’re wrong. I wasn’t even wearing a jacket.” Arguing over such an irrelevant detail hijacks the conversation.

But the reason people get caught up in such side arguments is that every detail is a chance to express the outrage they feel with their partner and a place to make a stand against what they see as their partner’s need to be right. People argue about irrelevant issues because they are so upset with their partners that they don’t want to agree with them about anything. In such cases, there is no such thing as an irrelevant issue.

It’s useful to realize that whenever you and your partner get bogged down over irrelevant details, the argument is no longer about a particular issue (if it ever was) but about your general frustration with each other. And it’s useful to realize that whatever sense of good will (willingness to give each other the benefit of the doubt) may have existed between you and your partner before has, for the moment at least, disappeared.

Communication Rule 9: Don’t Label, Name-Call, Use Sarcasm, or Threaten to End the Relationship. You don’t need a rule to know that these things are counterproductive and that later you’ll be sorry you said or did them.

But that’s later and now’s now. And now the intensity of your feelings exceeds your ability to think things through. You feel so powerless that you are willing to resort to almost anything, even to statements that will make your partner even less likely to listen to you.

You’re lucky if you are the kind of person who, when angry, automatically edits out anything that you’ll be sorry later that you said. You’re unlucky if you’re the kind of person who, when angry, immediately goes to just those things.

Communication Rule 10: Don’t Dump Out Stored-Up Complaints (in fact, don’t store them up in the first place). Dealing with one complaint at a time is difficult enough.

But here’s the problem: Everyone suppresses complaints, although some people do it more than others. And suppressing them means storing them up. And storing them up leads, in moments of anger, to dumping them out. So we’re going to dump out stored-up complaints.

The middle of a fight is the worst possible time to dump out complaints, but it may be the only possible time. If you don’t dump them out, they may never get out. It’s only then that you’re freed from concern about having too much impact—about hurting your partner’s feelings or starting a fight. Your concern at such moments is only that you aren’t having enough impact. 

Once your complaints are out, you and your partner have the possibility of a useful conversation later when the dust has settled.

The rules for good communication are useful to know. Equally useful is a recognition that everyone is inevitably going to break them.


Dan is Offering the Following Upcoming Event for Couples:


Workshop for Couples
(co-led with Dori Kaufmann)
April 19-21, 2013
at Esalen

We encourage interested couples to consider this workshop. It may be a nice next step for couples that have already taken the Art and Science of Love Workshop that we offer. For more information please visit Dan's website:

http://danwile.com/

To register go to:

http://www.esalen.org/workshop/11834

Best wishes, Michael Basta, LCSW, Gottman Method Couples Therapist

Turning Towards in the Workplace

Here is an interesting article referencing Gottman's research as it applies to the work place. It is written by Dr. Marty Nemko, a career coach. He makes interesting points although he seems to have changed Gottman's language a bit from turning towards, away, and against to moving toward, neutral, and moving away. The principles remain the same despite the changes in language:

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/outside-voices-careers/2013/03/04/simple-techniques-to-increase-your-likeability-at-work

Accepting Influence

Per Gottman's research, master couples accept influence from one another, meaning they show respect for each other's opinions in the decision making process. The following is a recent Facebook posting from the Gottman Institute:


You cannot be influential unless you first accept influence. Respect and honor your partner's opinions and feelings in your decision making. 

In a longterm study of 130 couples, we discovered that, even in the first few months of marriage, men who allow their wives to influence them have happier marriages and are less likely to divorce than men who resist their wives' influence. Statistically speaking, when a man is not willing to share power with his partner, there is an 81% chance that his marriage will fail. It is certainly just as important for wives to treat their husbands with honor and respect. However, our data indicates that the vast majority of wives - even in unstable marriages - already do.

Several authors, including John Gottman, have noted that even today in the United States (with more women than men in the workplace, men now present at the birth of their babies over 90% of the time, and men sharing more equally in household chores) many women are drawn to forgo their life dreams out of a sense of guilt. We recommend that all committed life partners should periodically ask their partner about their life dreams and respectfully include this information in future planning for the couple's life together. This appears to be especially necessary for women in heterosexual relationships. 

Gottman Blog

For more information regarding the work of John Gottman, check out the blog of the Gottman Institute: http://www.gottmanblog.com/2013/02/the-research-predicting-divorce-from.htm
l

Fair and Balanced (Unlike Fox News) regarding sex in committed relationships

Sex in Committed Relationships




John Gottman, Ph.D notes that a strong friendship is the best predictor of good sex in a long term committed relationship. He has been known to challenge the views of Ester Perel, author of Mating in Captivity. Dr. Gottman challenges Ms. Perel's criticism of "the dreaded flannel nighty", stating that it is still possible to explore beneath the nighty. For exposure to two very different views regarding sex in committed relationships, view this video of Ester Perel http://www.ted.com/talks/esther_perel_the_secret_to_desire_in_a_long_term_relationship.html and also check out John and Julie Gottman at http://gottsex.com/.

In Honor of Valentine's Day

My cousin, Margaret, sent me an email containing the following and I thought that it was fitting for Valentine's Day:

HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHO TO MARRY? (written by kids)   1.  You got to find somebody who likes the same stuff. Like, if you like sports, she should like it that you like sports, and she should keep the chips and dip coming.-- Alan, age 10     2. No person really decides before they grow up who they're going to marry. God decides it all way before, and you get to find out later who you're stuck with. -- Kristen, age 10 3.WHAT IS THE RIGHT AGE TO GET MARRIED? Twenty-three is the best age because you know the person FOREVER by then..-- Camille, age 10 4.HOW CAN A STRANGER TELL IF TWO PEOPLE ARE MARRIED? You might have to guess, based on whether they seem to be yelling at the same kids.-- Derrick, age 8 5.WHAT DO YOU THINK YOUR MOM AND DAD HAVE IN COMMON? Both don't want any more kids.-- Lori, age 8 6.WHAT DO MOST PEOPLE DO ON A DATE? -Dates are for having fun, and people should use them to get to know each other. Even boys have something to say if you listen long enough.--Lynnette, age 8(isn't she a treasure) 7. On the first date, they just tell each other lies and that usually gets them interested enough to go for a second date.-- Martin, age 10 8.WHEN IS IT OKAY TO KISS SOMEONE? -When they're rich.-- Pam, age 7( Love her ) 9. The law says you have to be eighteen, so I wouldn't want to mess with that.-- Curt, age 7 10. The rule goes like this: If you kiss someone, then you should marry them and have kids with them. It's the right thing to do.-- Howard, age 8 11.IS IT BETTER TO BE SINGLE OR MARRIED? It's better for girls to be single but not for boys. Boys need someone to clean up after them.-- Anita, age 9(bless you child ) 12.HOW WOULD THE WORLD BE DIFFERENT IF PEOPLE DIDN'T GET MARRIED? There sure would be a lot of kids to explain, wouldn't there?-- Kelvin, age 8 And the #1 Favorite is ....... 13.HOW WOULD YOU MAKE A MARRIAGE WORK? Tell your wife that she looks pretty, even if she looks like a dump truck.-- Ricky, age 10

 

Mission and Legacy

A big focus in the Art and Science of Love Workshop is related to "making life dreams come true". We talk about this area in regards to the life dreams that underlie perpetual conflict in couples relationships. And we end the workshop with an exercise called Mission and Legacy in which each partner is asked to share their life mission, the legacy that they wish to leave to the world, and to discuss how their relationship is or is not supporting this mission.

I was sent this video narrated by Alan Watts via Facebook and it made me think of the importance of life dreams. Please view it and let us know what you think.

Cheers, Mike Basta

Happy 2013 from Sonoma Couples Workshops

I tried to create this entry a few days ago and the forward slash key took on a life of its own. I had to quit the program to stop it. So here we are on New Year's Day and another chance to write. First of all, Happy New Year to everyone (although that seems to be select audience, so I should probably say "our loyal readers" rather than "everyone"). My colleague, Marcia Gomez, and I are in the process of scheduling three couples workshops for 2013. The first, January 26 and 27, is listed on our website sonomacouplesworkshops.com. The July and October workshops will be posted on the website soon. We also have have scheduled a Level One Training in Gottman Method Couples Therapy for professionals on May 10 and 11. Our plan is to eventually also provide Level Two and Three trainings for therapists. We hope to continue to grow Sonoma Couples Workshops and ask that you spread the word to anyone that may benefit from the work we do.

In closing, one of the hallmarks for Gottman Method Couples Therapy is the focus on partners "listening to and validating each other's subjective reality" (meaning stepping out of one's position, taking in one's partner's viewpoint, and acknowledging what part of it seems understandable). One of the roadblocks to doing this has to do with "the fundamental attribution error", a concept stemming from the work of social psychologist, Dr. Fritz Heider, which suggests that we humans tend to over-value our own ideas and under-value the ideas of others. John Gottman says that it is the fundamental attribution error that causes us to think when we are driving down the freeway that drivers going faster than us are going too fast and that the ones going slower than us are going too slow. Although I do not know if Dr. Heider or Dr. Gottman ever had a conversation with The Dalai Lama, I do think the quote below takes concern regarding the fundamental attribution error to a different level.

Accepting differences and honoring our partner's dreams (especially when these dreams seem to oppose our own dreams) is not easy business. However, it is New Year's Day and anything is possible, John Gottman did groundbreaking research on making relationships work, and who can argue with the Dalai Lama. So Happy New Year, you may want to give this listening thing a try.

Mike Basta