A good marriage is the best system Western society has found for
ensuring the emotional well-being of the partners and the children.
People who are not married don't live as long as those who are.
I think the reason why they don't is that a good marriage helps
us absorb and respond to the stresses of everyday life in a much
healthier way than isolated individuals can.
But not all marriages are good marriages. Couples can be miserable
together for a lifetime, and these marriages can be remarkably resistant
to change. Each partner gets a lot out of maintaining the status
quo, though each alone will complain endlessly about the other.
Some of these scenarios are so familiar that family therapists have
developed typologies of stable but destructive marriages. I am going
to describe four types of marriages that may make the partners regret
their statistically longer life expectancy.
ONE: The first is the overadequate-underadequate marriage,
where one partner looks disturbed or sick while the other one takes
care of them. This may be an emotional problem, an addiction, or
a psychophysiological condition. Sometimes a physical illness or
disability is so stressful for the couple that the relationship
develops in this destructive way. In any case one partner is identified
as having a problem that dominates the life of the couple The other
partner is a caretaker who builds his or her life around the first
spouses problem. The caretaker, the overadequate one, gets
exasperated with the spouse's disturbance but is not willing to
do anything to remedy the situation.
Codependency is a subtype of this type of relationship. What you
see frequently is that when the "sick" one gets better,
it's very upsetting to the whole relationship. Many alcoholics attain
sobriety only to have their spouses leave them; the hypothesis being
that the spouse was getting something out of taking care of an alcoholic.
But many phobic or sexually dysfunctional couples have the same
dynamics. If you talk to a couple who have a sexual problem, you
usually find that they've defined it in a way that blames one or
the other she's frigid, he's impotent. But if you explore
in sufficient depth you may find that maybe she's not really frigid,
maybe he just doesn't know how to arouse her. She is either afraid
to explain or so self-blaming that she just accepts that it's her
fault. Or maybe he's not really impotent, he's just impotent with
her, and that's got something to do with how angry she is, or how
remote or unattractive she makes herself; but in this case, he's
willing to be the fall guy, to take the blame and say it's his problem.
They get a stable relationship in which neither has to function
on an intimate or sexual level. Perhaps they are willing to settle
for this because they're both really scared, it's just that one
gets to take the blame.
TWO: In the conflictual marriage the partners take turns
trying to make the spouse take the underadequate role, to blame
the other for the self's unhappiness. The same projection processes
are going on but the spouse refuses to accept the projection. They
spend most of their time blaming each other for their own misery.
This can be quite a stable system because the payoff for each is
that they don't have to take responsibility for themselves.
I had one couple like this once where I ended up with a severe
headache after every session. I couldn't imagine saying the kinds
of things they said to each other. I had to get up and leave the
room or blow my traffic whistle to get them to pay attention to
me. Their agenda in marital treatment is to get the therapist to
agree with them that it's all the other guy's fault, that it's the
other guy who has to change; and of course we won't do this. You
have to separate them, get them each working on themselves in individual
treatment, in order for anything to happen. But often nothing will,
because they are really more comfortable with things just as they
are than with the dangers of change. Similarly, though they will
often threaten divorce, this threat is used as a club to punish
their partner, rather than a serious intention. The idea of being
separate and alone is too unstabilizing.
Every marriage faces a series of crises of disappointment, when
one or both partners realize that the spouse is not able to help
solve one's own neurotic problems. These crises reoccur throughout
the life cycle of the family, as people deal with different developmental
issues. The scenarios above are possible responses to these crises.
But there is an alternative.
If we have good communication, real affection, and are willing
to own our own problems, we can talk about our mutual disappointment,
acknowledge that there is a common problem, acknowledge that some
of our disappointment in the other is based on unfair expectations,
and form a stronger alliance and a mutual support system out of
it. This takes a degree of trust and emotional health that is missing
from most troubled marriages, but most marriages are going to get
in trouble at some point. Being responsible for oneself and avoiding
the impulse to fix the blame are the first steps toward getting
out of trouble.
So, we have pointed out that just because a marriage lasts doesnt
mean it's good. Indeed, family therapists recognize that there are
some destructive, painful, joyless relationships that are remarkably
stable and impervious to change as in the overadequate-underadequate
marriage and the conflictual marriage discussed above. Now for two
more types, and we will also consider what people get out of staying
in unhappy relationships.
THREE: In the distant relationship, sometimes called emotional
divorce, the spouses have withdrawn from real interaction with each
other. They are miserable, but its not obvious. They refuse
to accept either the others blame or their own responsibility
for the relationship. They may medicate or sedate themselves somehow,
they may watch a lot of TV, they may even get along well enough
superficially that everyone thinks everything is OK.
In the film Ordinary People, if readers remember that, it takes
the death of the older son and the breakdown of the younger for
the family to realize that the mother has been cold, withdrawn and
angry for years. The father doesn't understand this; he thinks things
are normal until he realizes his wife hates their son and doesn't
really care that much for him [her husband]. When people are in
a stable relationship like this, they don't deal with the reality
of each other, they just go on forever silently blaming the other
for their own unhappiness.
FOUR: A fourth scenario is the united front family, where
the spouses have stopped blaming each other for their own unhappiness
and focused their energies on someone outside the marital system,
frequently a child. A common script is that both parents are conflicted
about sexuality. They have a distant, unsatisfactory sexual relationship
but neither will discuss it with the other because each is afraid.
As the female child in the family approaches adolescence mother
begins to worry too much about how her daughter is going to express
herself sexually. Daughter picks up that something anxiety provoking
but really fascinating is going on here. She may not understand
a lot but she does get the idea that boys are forbidden fruit. What
may begin as normal adolescent sexuality gets escalated because
mother, and father too, get invested in trying to control the girl.
They ground her, they listen to her phone calls, they read her diary,
they try to limit who she can associate with. The family soon spends
all its time worrying about the daughter's sexuality and the parents
never have to worry about their own.
This pattern is what Eric Berne, with his tongue firmly planted
in his cheek, called the game of uproar. In uproar,
14-year-old Susie announces that she's going to run off with 23-year-old
Johnny, who rides a big Harley and has served time in prison. It's
called a game because the purpose of Susies announcement is
to get a response from her parents; otherwise she'd just do it.
You can take the same scenario we've been talking about with girls,
moms, and sex, and apply it to boys, dads, and aggression. Everyone
worries about the boys antisocial tendencies,
which turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy. The harder the family
tries to control the kid, the more his antisocial behavior escalates.
Marriage starts in a projection. We endow the person we love with
the magical ability to make us happy. The more emotionally mature
we are, the quicker we realize that no one else really has that
power. Then we have to deal with the effect of that disappointment
on the relationship. Every marriage faces a series of such disappointments,
as new developmental tasks make us wish again for some magical solution.
These destructive marriages are patterns of responses to disappointment.
Why do people stay in such painful, poisonous relationships?
There is no simple answer, and there are probably a lot more reasons
than I will ever know about. But I do know that its nice to
have someone else to blame. We can always feel self-righteous if
we have a good grievance. These destructive relationships give us
the ability to rationalize to ourselves, to say Its
not my fault, its his/her fault, that Im unhappy, unsuccessful,
an alcoholic, an abuser, scared, bored, lonely ... The list
goes on and on. Its harder to give up blaming and take responsibility
for oneself.