"Find the Bad Guy" Dance

Because I do a lot of work with couples in my marriage and family therapy practice, I often see something known as “Find the Bad Guy.”  It is the dynamic that occurs when both partners are supposedly trying to protect themselves from the other, but really it is mutual attacking, accusation or blame.  I see this dynamic repeatedly.  My intention is to shine a light on it by helping people to understand it and to how to escape from it. 

This “dance” begins when one partner or the other is hurt or feels vulnerable, and one or both feel out of control.  Emotional safety begins to disappear.  The negativity continues as one or both say anything in an attempt to regain control through defining the partner in a negative way.  The receiving partner then reacts angrily.  Soon one or both feels cornered and actually are flooded with fear.  They perceive that something hurtful has been done to them, and do not usually see the impact of their responses on the other.  They forget about what is good in their partnership; they only see that “that you just stepped on my toes.”

Once this negative dance pattern occurs over and over again, a partner will come to expect it, watch for it, and react even quicker in the future when they perceive it is coming.  Subsequently, this reinforces the pattern.  By watching for and anticipating the perceived hurt, we close off all the ways out of this dead-end dance.  The partners find it hard to relax with one another, to let down their guard.  It becomes harder to emotionally connect with the other in a positive way.  The range of responses becomes more restricted as the “Find the Bad Guy” dance becomes more deeply entrenched in their interactions.

When a partner is attacking or counterattacking, they try to put their feelings aside.  After repeated occurrences, positive feelings get completely lost and the couple itself becomes lost.  The relationship becomes more unsatisfying and unsafe as partners begin viewing the other as uncaring or even defective.  Soon this pattern becomes habitual and deeply rooted, and the dance becomes almost automatic, and starts going in a “circle”:  the more one attacks, the more dangerous they appear to the other, and the more the other partner watches for the attack, the harder they hit back.  Round and round they go. 

This negative pattern is caustic and can destroy a marriage.  The only way to stop the dance and to restore safety and trust is to recognize that no one has to be the villain, to be the bad guy.  It doesn’t matter who started the dance or who is right or which details are true.  The pattern needs to be recognized as “The Bad Guy,” not the couple.  The dance is the villain and the partners are the victims.

If a couple really wants to say “enough,” they must recognize the pattern.  They both must be weary of the bickering and the drama.  They need to:

• ·         Attempt to stay in the present and focus on what is happening in the “here and now”
• ·         Attempt to not use past behaviors to justify present perceptions
• ·         Try to break the pattern of mind-reading, blaming, or assuming motives of the partner
• ·         Look at the pattern or the dance as a circular dance, fed by criticism and even contempt, realizing that there is no true “start” to a circle
• ·         Consider the alternative of continuing to do the “Find the Bad Guy” dance

I hope that this posting helps some couple out there.  Partners don’t need to do this dance anymore.

Sorry, Your Family & Friends Can’t Come to Your Mormon Wedding

Los Angeles LDS Temple

When I was the bishop, the ecclesiatical leader, of a single adult congregation of the LDS Church in Glendale, California, I was asked to do a "ring ceremony" for a couple that were married earlier in the day in the Los Angeles LDS Temple.  It consisted of the newlyweds and their bridal party entering the chapel area of an LDS Sunday meeting house, as bridal parties usually do to the music of the Lohengrin Wedding March, I welcoming the guests, I being kind of a master of ceremonies and offering very brief advice to the couple, overseeing the vows each offered to their new partner, and overseeing the exchange of rings.

For many Californian members of the LDS Church, this serves as kind of a "consolation gift" to family members and loved ones who are not members of the Church, or who are members but who voluntarily do not enter into the Temple because of worthiness issues, or who are too young.

Besides the honor of being asked to participate with this particular bride and groom on their special day, my excitement was tempered by the knowledge that non-member family could not be present at the real wedding ceremony.  It seemed a shame to me.  I had heard stories about, and had personally witnessed, how challenging it was to not allow loved ones, particularly parents who were not members of the Church and were attempting to accept their child becoming a member of it, to be excluded on this momentous day. Now I was in the middle of this dilemma.  It seemed so exclusionary, so off-putting to non-members at a time when the Church hungered for acceptance and pushed for missionary work among family and friends.  

However, I simply never questioned the issue; I simply relegated it to the shelf of "that's just the way things are."  

I also didn't question the idea that if a couple decided to not get married in the temple; they needed to wait a year before doing so. That too went on that shelf. 

I embraced the belief, and still do today, that if one or both spouses were newly baptized, it was a prudent practice to have them wait a year before making the sacred promises or covenants that I believe in that are made in the Temple.  But in some cases, the bride and groom are not new members, but must still wait a year. 

Also, there is a definite stigma associated with choosing not to originally marry in the Temple.  It is widely thought in most congregations that if a couple do not at first marry there and are long-time members, they have engaged in pre-marital sex and as such are not worthy to enter.   Ironically, not every worthy couple chooses to be married in the Temple because they may want to have their non-member loved ones participate in the ceremony. But they likely will be gossiped about in the congregation by unknowing, uncaring members.  And they still must wait a year...BUT NOT EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD!

It seems very ironic that Church policy on this issue differs in different parts of the world.  In the US, Canada and South Africa, where the governments have empowered Church members with civic powers to marry people, couples who choose to not marry originally in the Temple must wait a year.  They are compelled to make a choice of whether to have only members at the ceremony or not be married in the Temple.

But in the United Kingdom, for example, where the government does not empower church members to marry, LDS couples are required to be married civically outside of the Temple, a marriage in which all loved ones can participate.  The couple then enter the Temple later in the day where they are able to "be sealed for time and eternity" and which is attended only by members.  Such temples in the UK will even go so far as to make the temple available as late as 10 p.m. to accomodate the two services.

Micah Nickolaisen, a professional LDS photographer in the Phoenix area, has observed how painful these matters often are for young Mormon couples. He stated recently, “If that pain is justified, if that’s what God wants, if there’s some doctrinal or theological reason that it has to be that way, then maybe that’s the price we have to pay, but it seems so pointless. What are we accomplishing except creating distance from us and the people we’re trying to influence and put on a good impression for?”

Consequently, some faithful Mormons are asking leaders to reconsider the policy of forcing couples wherever possible to wait a year for the sealing if they also have a civil ceremony. A new website, Family First Weddings, collects statements about the policy and encourages members to write respectful letters to the church hierarchy explaining how the policy hurts them and their relationships. I went to the website and copied their mission statement, which is found below:

Our mission is to raise awareness of a current policy of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that discourages couples from having a civil marriage prior to a temple sealing. This policy makes a temple sealing unavailable for one year to any couple that decides to have a civil wedding first. We want to see this policy changed.

Our goal is to urge people to carefully ponder this policy with open hearts and determine whether or not they would support a change. We invite all who would like to see a change to join us by writing a letter or by sharing your wedding story.  We are collecting emails, stories, and letters to help format a letter that will be sent, through official channels, to our leaders in Salt Lake City. We will be also passing along the letters and stories that will be part of a packet that will accompany the letter.

Subsequent to my research on this matter as well as looking into my heart, I am choosing to support a change in policy, at least for the US, Canada and South Africa, promoted by Family First Weddings.  I will ask the leadership of the Church along with others to embrace a Church-wide policy (I believe this issue is not doctrinal in any way) similar to what now exists in the UK, to allow there to be a choice for LDS couples.  I would like non-LDS family and friends to not be excluded on this very special day, and would like for them to walk away from the events of the day without any possible negative feelings about the Church.  In the doctrine of the Church, families are always first.  Family issues can even trump meeting attendance and acceptance of responsibilities, for ecample.  Why not promote the family first concept on this day when new families are first begun?

This marks a definite transition in my thoughts and feelings on this matter.  I hope that a change is forthcoming.

Pure Innocence, Pure Love, Pure Joy

I was blessed to have four children who have produced six grand children.  The grandchildren can be a challenge, to be sure, but they bring me such joy also.  Unless there has been significant abuse, children feel no shame and are not afraid to be who they naturally are.  I enjoy young children because they are real.  They don't want or need to put on a mask or facade to be something they aren't.  It is only as they grow older that they lose their innocence and their joy.  

This loss reminds me of something I read recently.   "A researcher asked a classroom of kindergarten students, 'who in here can draw?'  All hands went up enthusiastically.  'Who can dance?'  Demonstrations of five-year-old dance talent popped up all over the room.  'Who can sing?'  Enthusiastic choruses erupted.  The researcher went to a college classroom and asked the same questions.  One or two people timidly answered yes to each question.  What happened between kindergarten and college?"  We begin to feel shame.  

Because of their "realness," their joy, I feel joy in the presence of young children.  I felt such joy recently when I was introduced to a You Tube video of a little 20-month old girl named Ella Mae (and her "daddy"), and I would invite you to watch it below.  It takes just about six minutes.  There are parts of  it that I would suggest you focus on, based upon when they occur:

• :56    Listen to who she says is singing on the stereo system in the van
• 2:29  Watch her hit her head on her car seat in time with the music
• 4:18  "Get ready" Watch her swing her arm in time with the music
• 5:34  Listen to who she wants to hear played again  

Throughout, please notice the pure love and joy she expresses for her "daddy."  You will notice that when her wee attention span goes away, she defaults to her constant, her "daddy."    Please enjoy her facial expressions and furrowed forehead, not unlike an adult imitating Elvis.

Each time I watch this video, I try to feel her love for her "daddy" and her joy in simply being.  Each time, I try to remove the mask that I may be wearing and one again experience her innocence, her love, her joy.  "Except you become as a little child...."

 

Refute-->Rethink-->Rewire, a Cognitive Choice

I have written on this blog about how I/we often think and how often those thoughts can be automatic, often irrational and unwanted.  The concept of thought and feeling control is constantly on my mind because of my schooling, professional, and personal experience.  I talk about it routinely in the work that I do as a psychotherapist, and I personally have struggled, and sometimes still struggle, with controlling my own thoughts and feelings.  Because of my extensive exposure to the issue of habitual, irrational, and unwanted thoughts, it allows my to speak about them both theoretically and as a practical matter.

It was during the course of a recent therapy session that was a follow up session to one in which I attempted to explain aspects of thought and feeling control, that the client attempted to describe what I had explained in his own words.  I was so impressed by his summation that I felt like I needed to write about it on my blog.  

Before articulating what he said, I need to review the concept.  When an particular event or behavior occurs, we often automatically experience some response to it. This response can be physical, emotional, or cognitive (thought)-- or all three, depending upon its nature.  

For example, if I am talking with someone at a party and I accidentally bump their arm and their drink spills, here are some of my possible physical responses:

--Put my drink down and use my napkin or another napkin(s) to mitigate the spill
--Feel a "knot" in my stomach
--Cry (an emotional response as well)

Here are some of my possible emotional responses:

--Embarrassment
--Shame
--Regret

Here are some of my possible cognitive responses:
--Offer an apology
--Berate myself (could also be emotional)
--Express embarrassment (both cognitive and emotional)

Such responses are likely all intertwined and likely not sequential in their occurrence.  They do flood the event.  In most cases, they are involuntary and as such completely automatic.  Based upon my life experiences, I will likely respond without thinking. Interestingly, because we usually remember events that have emotion connected with them, I will likely remember the event for awhile because of the emotional connection.

There may not always be a physical response, but there certainly will almost certainly be an emotional or cognitive reaction to such events.  Sometimes, we feel emotion and then the thought comes; sometimes the thought precedes the emotion, but one will surely follow the other.  And as previously stated, either, both, or all three can, and often do, overwhelm us like a huge wave.  The wave crashes, flooding us with thoughts and feelings that are usually automatic and not necessarily rational.

Refute

If a given event causes unwelcome and unwanted responses, our challenge is to refute the thought(s), to challenge them, to question their validity.  If we do not attempt to refute it, but continue to dwell on it, such an event can lead us to engage in destructive behaviors, whether that be indulging in some addictive behavior, getting very upset with others, or beating ourselves up emotionally, to name just a few negative outcomes.

Refuting these thoughts and feelings is challenging. It is hard work and requires mindfulness as to what is happening.  It requires being painfully honest with ourselves.  It requires facing some of our greatest fears.  It requires us to refute previous assumptions. It requires us to choose to look at ourselves and situations through a new and different lens.

Rethink

Such mindful introspection will hopefully lead us to rethink these unwanted, occasional guests.  Emotions can be overwhelming.  The idea is to go to our cognitive, logical place and remove the emotion(s) attached to a situation.  Part of our mindfulness is to recognize what is happening in the moment. We must look to where it might have come from, likely from our families of origin and growing up years.

Rethinking makes us ask ourselves what benefit it has for us to continue harboring these thoughts and feelings.  We can ask ourselves, "Do I really want to continue to feel this way?"  "What is the benefit of continuing responding like this?  "Do these responses serve a constructive purpose, or are they just "fodder for the cannon?"

And if they are "fodder for the cannon," or in other words, something with which to figuratively shoot ourselves or others, it is a good idea to ask ourselves, "What can happen to me and others if I continue to feel and think this way?"

As with refuting, rethinking is likewise very difficult.  It demands that we be real with ourselves. It demands that we choose to not surrender to the negative thoughts and feelings but instead stay logical and mentally figure out a new strategy.  It demands that we choose to me mindful and observant of how we respond in certain situations.  Situational rethinking can lead to an overall reframing of how we choose to respond to these negatives.

Rewire

There is a growing body of research that treats the subject of "neural plasticity."  This new frontier of brain research is showing that we humans are capable of rewiring the neurological pathways within our brains, no matter our age.  The objective for refuting and rethinking unwanted thoughts and feelings is to begin the process of rewiring.  

As children, we are flooded with the new world around us.  Ultimately, we learn to respond in both positive and negative situations in fairly consistent ways.  In other words, when we experience events over time such as the one described previously, or similar painful experiences, we come to respond to them in predictable, often emotion-filled ways, much like we did as children.  The neurons that over time fire consistently (and instantaneously) come to fire automatically--with little or no thought.  They will involuntarily fire.  

All they need to begin firing in their predictable ways is for us to experience a embarrassing, awkward, or upsetting situation.  Such automatic, ingrained thoughts with accompanying emotions that began years ago, even in our childhood, can still unwillingly fire as adults in these emotion-packed situations.  They are our "default settings," to use computer jargon.

Our brains are full of "default settings."  Many of them come from our "limbic system" deep within the brain.  The "limbic system," sometimes called the reptilian brain, is our instinctual "fight, flight, or freeze" brain function that can serve us well when we're in danger.  But it can also cause havoc, if the default response is unwanted.  

The "pre-frontal cortex," located in the front of the brain, is the judgment part of the brain where choices are made.  This part of the brain can be damaged, and sadly, when we are addicted to a substance or to an addictive behavior, our ability to control and choose becomes greatly reduced.  

In essence, we are "addicted" to our negative feelings and thoughts.  But we can begin the process of rewiring by refuting and rethinking.  We start to empower our minds to act rationally and introspectively, thus taking away the power from our unwanted negative feelings and thoughts. We start to realize that feelings aren't facts, they're just feelings.  We start to believe we have power over them.

By embracing these 3 Rs, we challenge our "default settings."  By choosing to do so, the rewiring process begins.  The change does not occur over night, but change can occur.  We can begin to live without those routine responses. We can begin to take more control over our lives.  We can begin to say "no, I don't want that" to our "limbic brains.  

Refute, rethink, and rewire is a powerful, mindful, cognitive way to take control of your life.  It can be life changing!