I wrote the following note to a middle-aged client who had painful divorces in the past. Now he’s with a woman who he loves, respects, and trusts. But there is a problem. In the quest to achieve the elusive balance between “adequate emotional contact” and “adequate emotional space” she is frustrated, which frustrates him. She wants more contact, he is upset by her pressuring. He isn’t sure she will ever respect his craving for space. She’s itching for a proposal, and he worries that once married, the problem will worsen.
Ever heard that before? This type of challenge appears in all types of relationships, such as with launching children, boss and deputy, gay men, aging parents.
I wrote this to him, trying to express my belief that the solution to many relationship challenges does not require a change in how the other person acts. Bowen theory offers an alternative solution: More self.
“Maybe he doesn’t really need her to be less frustrated, less needy, less critical, LESS ANYTHING.
Maybe all he needs is to feel sure, inside himself, that he can provide himself the “adequate space” he needs. When he can dance with her needy frustrated slips with exceptional poise, perhaps he’ll find the spacious acceptance he craves within himself.
If taking space became easier for him, if he became free from the internal voices that make those intrusive moments painful, threatening, guilt ridden….if he became even more sure, even more calm, even more clear, more fully differentiated within himself while defining himself to her seemingly intrusive pushing….maybe if he found it in himself to consistently experience love in his “I position”, love in his boundaries, quiet love for self and other within a calm, well defined “Nah, not now”….would the intrusive feeling within their relationship dance fade?
Slips on the dance floor of relationship life might never fully disappear, but the feeling that they are dangerous could soften considerably.
And in its place another feeling might awaken: “I know myself. I got this. I can make this work.”
Amazingly enough, I have a client just like the man you describe. Your way of guiding him on the therapeutic dance floor is elegant and graceful.
Very kind of you Stephanie. Means a lot from one I have always respected.
Erik,
You have taken a specific client with a particular relationship issue, but through your excellent writing about it, the wisdom expands to apply to relationship slips, disappointments, etc. in general. Very practical, realistic, not going for some ideal, but inspiring nonetheless. I would like to see this published in the journal.
Laurie
Is the journal open to this kind of writing? I thought not.
Erik, the idea of an immaterial reality underlying material reality is not something I think much about. One thing I remember Bowen remarking on is that, at high levels of emotional fusion I think, mothers sense trouble for their offspring without the usual sensory communication across the continent. This is in line with the healing stories and voodoo stories. I’ve wondered myself how it works that I have many times had the experience in my clinical practice that someone I hadn’t heard from or thought of in some time is suddenly crosses my mind and then I get a call from them. One thing I do think is factual is that the human is limited in how we perceive the world by our physiology just as are other species, so that the full range of reality is unknown to us.
Erik, I posted this by mistake and meant it for your spiritual world post where I also posted it and is better accepted to publish there. Laura
Well said Laura.
Laura, these coincidences are of interest, yes. Vedic science has a theory to explain them. It has to do with the nature of consciousness. It is viewed as a field that the mind/brain/physiology is a receptor for, but whose fundamental nature is not “individual”. What you said about physiology as a limiting factor is well said.
I am thinking about the hierarchy of self. Basic self would vary among species, with humans having the neurophysiology to support more basic self than an ant or dog. (Not to insult them. They have different values of awareness that are more impressive than ours. Different doesn’t mean better in any absolute way.) A dog could not comprehend what we mean by DOS, or Basic Self. I wonder if there are levels of awareness that we can’t comprehend as well? If talk to a chimp about DOS, they are befuddled. Is this true of humans also? Hard to comprehend something wider than what we are.
Well said, Erik.
Well said Erik. It is calming to think of interactions in this way. Thanks.
I am wondering if people can be more self, especially in marriage unless they do something about the extended family?
Bowen did a most elegant explanation of that in the video Bypassing the Nuclear Family. It’s on the archive site.