Trialbyfire Posted July 20, 2008 Posted July 20, 2008 MC is about fixing a marriage, in some situations, at all costs. I sometimes wonder if this is the ideal situation to get into, if both parties haven't first received IC so they begin to get an inkling about who they are and what's within their own personalities that can fuel a negative dynamic within a marriage. From what I've read on LS about MC, is that some therapists can put too much responsibility on the stronger partner since they know they can take it. Is this fair to force one of the partners to either be mother or father figures to people who can't get it together? Does anyone else have these thoughts?
carhill Posted July 20, 2008 Posted July 20, 2008 I've found MC to be a great way to clarify the differences, both in perspective and intrinsic psychology, and approach the relationship mindful of those differences. Perhaps this is the difference in using a competent psychologist as a therapist, compared to, say, a LCSW. For me, the most important results are the "whys". Why I (or wife) relate the way we do; why I (or wife) lost the "love"; why my personality, expressed unfettered, can be toxic to our M. Lots of why's. The psychologist has placed more "work" on me, mainly because I'm more emotionally open and receptive to change and introspection, but I don't resent that now (though I did, in the moment and in the early stages of therapy), as I can better empathize with my wife's path than I could before, and can see that changes I make in myself aren't "losing" or "giving in". Our psych did a couple sessions of IC prior to bringing us together to assess our individual dynamics, but clearly the focus has been on relating to each other. Whether long-term "love" develops from this, I don't know. The fundamental difference, for me anyway, and what MC has clarified, is that of how we each perceive what a loving relationship is. My truth is a lot more involved and intense than my wife's. She would be quite happy with companionship and sex and someone to mow her lawn Hence, her lament in therapy that she wishes I were a "normal" guy.... Don't know if that helps with the OP, but I offer it up anyway.....every situation is different...
Author Trialbyfire Posted July 20, 2008 Author Posted July 20, 2008 No, I'm not looking for help since I'm divorced. More an open discussion about the merits/detriments to MC.
Woggle Posted July 20, 2008 Posted July 20, 2008 Therapy and counseling in general can work with the right person but most of them just get paid to pretend they care and they talk about you with their friends. If my marriage ever gets to a point where I need a referee just to get along with it would be better just to pull the plug.
Curmudgeon Posted July 20, 2008 Posted July 20, 2008 Does anyone else have these thoughts? Quite honestly, I don't think about it at all. I'm an adult. I believe I can either make it or break it on my own and actually take personal responsibility for my choices and actions. How's that for radical?
Author Trialbyfire Posted July 20, 2008 Author Posted July 20, 2008 Quite honestly, I don't think about it at all. I'm an adult. I believe I can either make it or break it on my own and actually take personal responsibility for my choices and actions. How's that for radical? Not everyone is at this point in their lives. It's possible they've not self-audited sufficiently or have the coping tools to remould a dysfunctional relationship.
Curmudgeon Posted July 20, 2008 Posted July 20, 2008 Not everyone is at this point in their lives. It's possible they've not self-audited sufficiently or have the coping tools to remould a dysfunctional relationship. Perhaps you're right. Maybe it's just an issue of age, experience and stubborness. Either that or maybe I'm just done! I'm tired.
Author Trialbyfire Posted July 20, 2008 Author Posted July 20, 2008 Perhaps you're right. Maybe it's just an issue of age, experience and stubborness. Either that or maybe I'm just done! I'm tired. ((hugs)) C. Take a breather on trying to make things work. That's not to say give up on your wife and your marriage. You've laid out your boundaries clearly for her, now give her time to get her act together, while you solely put in your half only. It's too easy for people to get into the habit of relying on the stronger partner to take up the slack.
Mustang Sally Posted July 20, 2008 Posted July 20, 2008 I'm an adult. I believe I can either make it or break it on my own and actually take personal responsibility for my choices and actions. How's that for radical? I'm with you, C. If more folks would be open to this type of thinking, there would be a lot less dysfunctionality in relationships, I believe.
angie2443 Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 I don't have much faith in traditional therapy. My husband and I went and it helped some, but that was it. This might just be a situational thing, and maybe MC can work wonders for others. Our counselor was wonderful. She had a good sense of what made a marriage work and she never took sides. She was kind of a wise, warm gentle lady. The problem was, that for us, we would have had to both have seen and understood each other's sides of the issues for the therapy to work. I can do this up to a point. My husband can't. He's tried. His mind is simple and he finds it impossible to see other's points of views. He's told me this several times since. I think what might have worked for us, would have been behavioral therapy. Most of our problems came from learned behaviors that we've been praticing for years. For instance, My husband has a history of name calling and bieng aggresive to get his way. We tried to understand this on an intelectual level in therapy, but it wasn't happening. He simply had to stop. He mostly did, we're still working on it. I had a habit of bieng passive in order to avoid fights. I had to just stop bieng passive and start saying "I have rights here to". I'm still working on this. I guess what I'm trying to say is, that trying to understand why we were doing these things that were destructive to our relationship, didn't work. We just had to stop and replace the destructive behaviors with possitive behaviors. The one possitive outcome of our MC was that we had a small breakthrough moment where I finally saw that my husband cared. The week prior, I was getting ready to divorce him. He didn't know this. He did know that the MC seemed to be going nowhere. I reached a point in the marriage where I had become so bitter, that I was starting to take it out on my children. I couldn't let that happen, so I called a lawyer and set up an appointment for the following week. We still had a counseling session to go to, and so I went even though I had basically called it quits in my head. My husband broke down in the session, and said "the one thing that I do right is that I do what I'm told". I understood then that he really was trying and this made a big differance.
luvstarved Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 I agree with carhill, more or less. Any type of MC or IC requires a rapport with the counselor, made doubly dicey when required to exist with two people who aren't relating properly with each other. Both my H and I have been in IC and MC. We went through three marriage counselors before finding one that is actually helping. Most of the onus has been on me for reasons similar to carhill's. I don't look at it as being "forced" to do anything. I am financially ok and very independent. None of my effort is foisted onto me...I am doing it because I want a better marriage. My H was also ok with yer plain vanilla marriage but as he has begun to witness the benefits, he is happier and more active in working on it too. We were watching some sports award show the other night and there was a category "best team". He said, we should win that. Wow. Would not have heard that a year or even three months ago. If we need a third party to help us see ourselves and each other more clearly, so be it. For me, IC was not that much help with my M. All I got there was "you cannot change anyone so accept them or leave them...what about what YOU want". Well, I wanted a better marriage. Taking my H at face value or leaving him did not serve that goal. Working with him to enhance mutual understanding and helping each other to better meet each other's needs through improved communication with a spirit of love and giving does.
OWoman Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 MC is about fixing a marriage, in some situations, at all costs. I've seen a lot of that implied here on LS, though my own experience has been to the contrary. (It may be another of those "cultural" things, since some of the other non-US posters have also said it's not that way in their countries.) My experience of MC, both my own and that of friends I've heard spoken of, has involved a trained counsellor working with both parties to get to the best situation for all parties - whether that means a future together or apart. My own MC worked out pretty quickly that our M was not working for me, nor me for it, and that my xH was clinging to notions of what a M should be rather than dealing with the flesh and blood M he found himself in, and that life would be better for both of us (and our kids) apart. So the focus shifted to a civilised split, rather than keeping the M intact. Others have said that if it comes to needing a 3rd party to resolve differences, it may as well be a priest to bury the M, and in a sense that's what MC can offer if that's what's best - a dignified end. For the record, my x was a therapy junkie. Did this enable him to handle M, or D, any better? Nope. Instead of LISTENING he'd fall back on convenient textbook case studies and quote those at me as if to tell me what I OUGHT to be feeling, and to instruct me in how to feel, to avoid the obvious denial I was in . And, as a counsellor, was I any better able? Not a damn - clinical distance over one's own life and situations is difficult, if not impossible, to attain. I think IC and MC complement each other, but I don't think IC is a prerequisite for MC. And if one party is clearly in need of more support during counselling, a responsible MC would refer that person for IC outside of the process, so that the MC can focus on the M rather than on the "needy" person, while acknowledging the need for that support both within and outside of the M.
Art_Critic Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 In my experience with MC it was used to try and fix the marriage in the beginning but after the reality of the marriage not working was apparent I used MC to help me get out of the marriage. My then wife stopped going and I continued to go and work thru the issues I needed to work thru in order to move on before the finality of the divorce was there. I used MC to deal with all the issues that were cropping up till the divorce was filed and also on how to deal with her to make sure that I protected myself.. So in the end I think MC is really all about what it is you want to make it for.. Either fixing a marriage or getting out of one
angie2443 Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 My then wife stopped going and I continued to go and work thru the issues I needed to work thru in order to move on before the finality of the divorce was there. I used MC to deal with all the issues that were cropping up till the divorce was filed and also on how to deal with her to make sure that I protected myself.. So in the end I think MC is really all about what it is you want to make it for.. Either fixing a marriage or getting out of one At this point, it wasn't really MC but IC. Apparently IC does help some people.
angie2443 Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 MC is about fixing a marriage, in some situations, at all costs. I thought about this line more. During our MC, me and my husband had one on one sessions with our counselor. Well, he just had one and I had two. Anyways, during our one on one session, the counselor seemed to be telling me that it might be best for me to leave the marriage. I don't think she told my husband this, because I know he would have told me if she did. Of course, I really don't know. In retrospect, I'm glad we did the MC first (before having our individual sessions), because we wanted the marriage to work and for it to work, we had to be in it together. If we went in with the attitude of "we'll see if this works and if it doesn't, were out of this", then we might as well have just divorced before the MC and saved us some time and money.
angie2443 Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 For the record, my x was a therapy junkie. Did this enable him to handle M, or D, any better? Nope. Instead of LISTENING he'd fall back on convenient textbook case studies and quote those at me as if to tell me what I OUGHT to be feeling, and to instruct me in how to feel, to avoid the obvious denial I was in . And, as a counsellor, was I any better able? Not a damn - clinical distance over one's own life and situations is difficult, if not impossible, to attain. . This is why I have little faith in traditional therapy.
Author Trialbyfire Posted July 21, 2008 Author Posted July 21, 2008 I've seen a lot of that implied here on LS, though my own experience has been to the contrary. (It may be another of those "cultural" things, since some of the other non-US posters have also said it's not that way in their countries.) My experience of MC, both my own and that of friends I've heard spoken of, has involved a trained counsellor working with both parties to get to the best situation for all parties - whether that means a future together or apart. My own MC worked out pretty quickly that our M was not working for me, nor me for it, and that my xH was clinging to notions of what a M should be rather than dealing with the flesh and blood M he found himself in, and that life would be better for both of us (and our kids) apart. So the focus shifted to a civilised split, rather than keeping the M intact. Others have said that if it comes to needing a 3rd party to resolve differences, it may as well be a priest to bury the M, and in a sense that's what MC can offer if that's what's best - a dignified end. For the record, my x was a therapy junkie. Did this enable him to handle M, or D, any better? Nope. Instead of LISTENING he'd fall back on convenient textbook case studies and quote those at me as if to tell me what I OUGHT to be feeling, and to instruct me in how to feel, to avoid the obvious denial I was in . And, as a counsellor, was I any better able? Not a damn - clinical distance over one's own life and situations is difficult, if not impossible, to attain. I think IC and MC complement each other, but I don't think IC is a prerequisite for MC. And if one party is clearly in need of more support during counselling, a responsible MC would refer that person for IC outside of the process, so that the MC can focus on the M rather than on the "needy" person, while acknowledging the need for that support both within and outside of the M. I guess like any other form of counselling, if the therapist isn't of quality, you get what you're willing to pay for. The sad part is that when people are in a bad marriage, are they of a qualified emotional and mental state to decide if the MC is acting in good faith for both parties? A vicious circle, which is why I wonder if IC isn't a good place to start. If the partner wants to work on the marriage, they should state this to the IC at the beginning, so there's full understanding of what they want to accomplish. This way, the IC will focus on the right area(s).
Owl Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 Just like any other "profession" out there...MC has its greats, and it has its quacks. There are some of those "save the marriage at all costs" quacks out there...true. Not all of them are that way, however. The MC my wife and I went to for nearly a year was AWESOME. He never once told us we needed to stay married, save the marriage...etc... He did do a couple of great things for us. He created a "safe place" to discuss things that were too volatile and emotional to do so on our own. He "translated" when one of us just couldn't "get" what the other person was saying. He SUGGESTED means and measures to take to improve our communication, and therefore improve our marriage. He helped us identify the real "problems" that we had in our marriage, as opposed to simply focusing on arguing over things that didn't matter. He helped us work out strategies to implement changes to fix those problems. He ROCKED. He didn't side with me, didn't side with her, and didn't have any "expectations" for the outcome of our situation. He did require US to come up with some, after we'd worked at it for a while. He didn't have a vested interest in keeping us married or seeing us divorce...so he was able to work on the problems rather than worry about his paycheck.
Owl Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 The sad part is that when people are in a bad marriage, are they of a qualified emotional and mental state to decide if the MC is acting in good faith for both parties? A vicious circle, which is why I wonder if IC isn't a good place to start. If the partner wants to work on the marriage, they should state this to the IC at the beginning, so there's full understanding of what they want to accomplish. This way, the IC will focus on the right area(s). I agree and disagree with this, TBF. Its hard for a couple who's in crisis to agree on what they "need" out of an MC. Take our case... the first MC we went to was a woman (I went along with my wife's preference in choosing based on this). And she did have a great 'plan' for helping us recover. Unfortunately, she also sided too much with me...which didn't create an atmosphere that allowed my wife to actually talk about things...we ended up doing more on our own than with her. I'd insisted at the time that we both start IC as well. MY IC rocked. I made it clear to him that my intent was to identify areas to improve my efforts in my marriage, and to validate or not the efforts I was taking up to that point. My wife's IC was lousy. Her first suggestion was that my wife probably should get divorced...she stated this on day ONE. Her entire focus was on my wife...she not only focused on that, but bashed the idea of marriage from the beginning. SHE DID MORE HARM THAN GOOD. What finally worked for us was for my wife to drop her IC, and I dropped my IC...and hired HIM as our MC. THANK GOD I DID! The problem with going IC first is that their goal is the INDIVIDUAL...and they'll often focus on the individual to the point of completely undermining and destroying any chances for the marriage to heal...regardless of how good that marriage may have been or not. Better off seeking an MC with a good track record, and one who can discuss up front with you how he/she works...and what their "gameplan" is to help you through your situation.
Virgo1982 Posted July 22, 2008 Posted July 22, 2008 Quite honestly, I don't think about it at all. I'm an adult. I believe I can either make it or break it on my own and actually take personal responsibility for my choices and actions. How's that for radical? I had to learn to look within.
silktricks Posted July 22, 2008 Posted July 22, 2008 MC is about fixing a marriage, in some situations, at all costs. This isn't what I experienced - nor would it have worked with either myself or my husband. We wanted to fix our marriage, yes. But either of us would have pulled the plug if we didn't see equality in both the amount and quality of work the other applied to making things work. I'm not much of an "at all costs" kinda lady - and my husband isn't that kinda guy. We both ditched a marriage once because it was inhospitable to our lives - we each could have done it again if necessary. That said, I don't honestly believe that marriage counseling helped us much. Most of the work we did to rebuild our lives came from our own discussions away from the counselor. I was glad to go mostly because it gave us both a partitioned time that we knew we were going to discuss "us" as opposed to any of a thousand million other things.
silktricks Posted July 22, 2008 Posted July 22, 2008 My wife's IC was lousy. Her first suggestion was that my wife probably should get divorced...she stated this on day ONE. Her entire focus was on my wife...she not only focused on that, but bashed the idea of marriage from the beginning. SHE DID MORE HARM THAN GOOD. . This is a problem I have had in IC as well. It seemed that often when I went to a counselor that their focus was completely on my husband and they would imply (or even state) he was always the core of every problem I had - which wasn't the case, of course!! But they always seemed to push for divorce, as if that would solve whatever issue I was dealing with at the time. Finally, whenever my husband would suggest that I go to a counselor I would just refuse... In the end it turned out that I was my own best help --- with a lot of help from my husband, too.
openingup Posted July 23, 2008 Posted July 23, 2008 I have to come down on the side of counseling being at best a crapshoot (depending on the relative quality of the therapist), a placebo (for partners who know it's over anyway, but don't want censure from friends and family for "not trying") or a way to vent anger and be encouraged to do so by a professional. Everyone I know who has participated in therapy has invested staggering amounts of money, time and emotional capital, trusting their mental health/future to a total stranger who may or may not have his/her best interests at heart. Nothing was resolved except the therapist's decision to go to Greece instead of the Poconos. Male or female, I say MAN UP and confront your own problems in your own flawed, human way. It's called common sense and it doesn't cost $200/hour. None of us needs to be a puppet or an empty vessel to be filled with psychobabble. I'm with Curmudgeon on this one - take responsibility for yourself!
Recommended Posts