Any relationship will eventually lead to a disagreement between the parties involved.
While this can be said about any type of relationship, from business to family members, to friends, this is an especially important and delicate situation in romantic relationships. Because partners in an established and developed relationship, as they become more comfortable with each other, will also expose themselves in ways that make them more vulnerable than in other types of relationships. It is a challenge to minimize conflicts when disagreements arise and at the same time ensure that a compromise doesn’t lead to resentment on any one’s part.
At first glance,the best solution is to minimize conflict. This does make sense: by intentionally acknowledging the needs of a partner it is possible, with much success, to reduce the intensity and frequency of petty squabbles. Unfortunately this still leaves the important disagreements on the table because instead of being rooted in the environment (dirty dishes, unkempt livingroom) or agreed upon responsibilities (taking out the trash, preparing meals, etc.) these disagreements stem from a fundamental difference in values and to a smaller extent world views: what’s an appropriate punishment for your child not finishing homework? Does visiting your parents twice a week excessive? Is going out with your partner and few close friends for drinks a date?
And of course there’s a world of opportunity to inadvertently step on some toes simply because it’s difficult to read others minds – even if it’s your partner’s.
While any effort to reduce conflicts in a relationship is welcome, it is also important that it’s done in an appropriate manner. This is because the conflict, regardless of what it is about, fulfills an important role in a relationship. For example, in a book Nonviolent Communication (opens in a new window) the author Marshall Rosenberg, Ph.D. proposes a well documented system for quickly defusing aggressive situations. While definitely true that the techniques to reduce the intensity of conflicts and to a lesser extent their frequency might be useful in a romantic relationship, it is easy for this to become a slippery slope.
There is no doubt that what Marshall Rosenberg presents works. The question isn’t whether it works, but rather if diminishing conflicts is a benefit to the underlying relationship. This is because conflicts provide a way to:
- Assert our views
- Discover our partner’s views
- Experience the emotions which accompany the conflict
- Arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution
A necessary experience of working through a conflict ultimately benefits the relationship by making it more intimate.
These techniques work wonders in critical, high-stakes situations but if practiced with abundance will erode a long-term romantic relationship over time. This is because techniques and methodologies similar to Nonviolent Communication provide a quick-fix Band-Aid in the form of Conflict Avoidance. It has practical applications in negotiations, law enforcement, and any other field where it is critical to make the conflict “disappear” as quickly as possible so that the underlying situation can be handled in safety and in a less strained time frame.
In contrast, any lasting relationship survives not because of successful application of conflict avoidance but because of consistent, repeated and effective Conflict Resolution.
Barring any immediate danger of a relationship collapsing (in which case Nonviolent Communication would save your relationship long enough to hopefully work things out) avoiding conflict would not only not resolve it – and make it recurrent – but would also rob you and your partner of the experience or resolving a conflict which ultimately strengthens your romantic relationship.
The fundamental flaw in believing that conflict is detrimental to a relationship is that it really isn’t. Conflict from time to time is a necessary and important part of any long-term romantic relationship, and while resolving conflicts in constructive way when they come up will do wonders for your relationship, avoiding conflict perpetually without resolving it eventually would spell doom.
The relationship without ongoing experiences of conflict resolution (either due to lack of conflict – because your relationship isn’t close enough, or due to Nonviolent Communication type of techniques and successful conflict avoidance) will fizzle out and dissolve over time.
Don’t trade your ongoing disagreements of 48 years for a conflict-less life of “living with a roommate” type of romantic relationship. Embrace the conflict when it occurs and work diligently to resolve it instead of applying a quick-fix Band-Aid to make the conflict in your romantic relationship disappear.
#1 by Ray Taylor on December 14, 2010 - 3:51 pm
Quote
Hi Lenin,
I have a different understanding and experience of Nonviolent Commmunication (NVC) from yourself – and I’m happy to have a conflict with you about it and don’t seek a quick defusing.
Marshall Rosenberg’s work aims to create authentic connection, and support deep needs getting met, including the need for the kind of gutsy, close and growing relationship I think you value.
Contrary to what you state, it also helps:
-Discover our partner’s views
-Experience the emotions which accompany the conflict
-Arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution
No part of NVC is about submerging or avoiding conflicts – I’m confused about where you got that impression.
Did you read the whole book? Have you ever been to a workshop with a respected NVC trainer?
#2 by Lenin Noel on February 14, 2011 - 9:12 pm
Quote
First, thank you for taking time to read and comment!
I have read the whole NVC book twice although I’ve not taken any formal training or workshops. The impression that I was left with was akin to that of a hostage-negotiator’s script: active listening, mirroring, reflection-clarification patterns.
Rosenberg and his method, I’m certain, works wonders to diffuse any charged situation quickly. I respect that many people’s experience support that the method works. My goal was to point out that it’s application is not universal.
What I’ve observed though is that in close interpersonal relationships (family members, lovrs, etc.) diffusing a conflict is very different from resolving it. In my view NVC is a tactic, a tool in the toolbox, but not a wholistic remedy as it is presented.
I don’t have stats to support this, but my hunch is that there are more divorced couples who slowly grew apart sans major conflict than couples who filed for divorce following a big fight. In fact, there’s a lot of evidence (Gottman, etc.) that happy and unhappy couple experience equal amounts of disagreement and arguments.
#3 by Joe Brummer on March 11, 2011 - 12:49 pm
Quote
Lenin,
It has been my experience with NVC that it isn’t so much about quick fixes for conflict. NVC is more about longer lasting resolution and management of conflict. It helps partners understand each other’s actions and helps us to see conflict as a strategy problem not a needs problem.
I can tell you that my experience is that NVC is about resolving conflict. For me, and my partner of 11 years, it has been about shifting thinking away from blame and increasing the connection between us. It has been incredibly holistic for us. Most importantly, I never see my partner as the cause of conflicts. I recognize we will resolve it more peacefully when we focus on needs.
I am also the Associate Executive Director of a mediation center. I see lots of conflict in a day. I recognize that one of the things leading couples and families into fights is that they can’t hear each other. NVC teaches folks to hear each other and to speak in ways we can be heard.
I have also met many couples who came to NVC trainings to help them manage conflict in better ways. Conflict is an given in life. Conflict is guaranteed. How we learn to communicate and think in those conflicts can greatly shift the positive things that come from conflict like growth, connection and creativity.
I would encourage you to take an NVC training to meet others who are taking on NVC not just as a trick and more as a way of life, a consciousness.
-Joe
#4 by Ian | NVCWorld on April 17, 2011 - 5:37 am
Quote
Lenin,
Having been in several relationships in my life, I have also experienced the important role of conflict in intimate relationships. And either avoiding or ‘band-aiding’ conflict does not serve intimacy or the long term success of the relationship.
In your article you specifically mention Nonviolent Communication (NVC) and also ‘techniques and methodologies similar to NVC’. I’m not sure which other methods you are referring to- maybe you would name them?
I feel concerned reading your representation of NVC as a ‘quick-fix’, ‘Conflict Avoidance’ approach – this method is very precious to me and it’s important to me it is represented accurately.
In my experience .. and from what I hear from many, many other people is that it is not necessarily ‘quick’ and certainly it is not about avoidance.
In my own relationships I’ve found NVC a powerful frame for getting difficult conflicts out in the open and using them as a route to deeper intimacy. Also as a way of recognising the conflicts and deeper layers of self v relationship surfacing from time to time in the apparently trivial day to day stuff (toilet seat up? toilet seat down?).
There may be situations, as you describe, where NVC can support taking the heat out of the immediate danger of the overwhelming emotions that sometimes come with conflict. And Marshall does describe some of these situations in his book .. and perhaps this is where you formed your impression of NVC as a quick fix technique?
However NVC is more than a technique – it is an awareness of how I respond in the world and in relationship with others and as such gives me more choice about my actions (for example in conflict and in intimacy).
Anyway … I also want to say how much I value your critical analysis of NVC as it helps me check my own understanding and application of it.
– Warmly, Ian
#5 by Lenin Noel on May 4, 2011 - 9:31 pm
Quote
Ian – thanks for taking the time to read and comment!
I’m by no means a relationship expert, and am not trained or certified in NVC at all. My opinion is strictly mine, and is based on what I’ve observed and tried, as well as many outside observations as a lot of my friends are not married so I get to see quite a few relationships begin and end several times every year.
I have high regard for the NVC and as I stated before, I definitely see value in it – just not when it comes to personal / romantic relationships. The reason being that I see this at best inapplicable and at worst detrimental is because there is no evidence in what I’ve experienced and observed of how much people argue/disagree and te intensity of the disagreement and individuals’ happiness in the relationship.
It’s interesting that you bring up the toilet seat syndrome. Everyone over the age of 15 can relate to this issue, but I have yet to find someone whose relationship ended for the official reason of seat being left in the wrong position too many times. I would venture to say that if you’re arguing about that – that’s a cause for celebration as there’s nothing more pressing to address 🙂
For many years active-listening was touted as the solution to all woes – but did anyone look at the statistics? This works just marginally better than 50/50. As it turns out, having things in common, outside of religion it seems, has about the same success rate. This doesn’t mean that active-listening is a wasted skill or that having things in common isn’t important – just that once a relationship is established, they’re not as important as common sense suggests.
I agree with you about the self-awareness required to practice NVC, and self-awareness has many benefits which as you mention affect relationships as well by allowing choice in your response / reaction. I would also venture to speculate (I might be 100% wrong here) that the learning curve is the self-awareness and not the NVC concept itself.
In one sentence, my concern is that there’s no correlation between amount and intensity of disagreements in relationships and their success – and NVC addresses that aspect. The danger is that it looks like progress is being made, when in reality what really matters doesn’t get resolved.
Cheers,
Lenin.