Hope Counseling & Psychotherapy Services Ltd.

Jesus Promises Another Helper
15 “If you love Me, [a]keep My commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another [b]Helper, that He may abide with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

Bible Gateway passage: John 14:15, John 14:16, John 14:17, John 14:18 - New King James Version Jesus Promises Another Helper - “If you love Me, keep My commandments.

Healing the inner self or the "inner man" is a deeply personal and sometimes complex journey toward emotional, spiritual, and psychological well-being. It often involves identifying and addressing past traumas, understanding one's emotions and thought patterns, and developing healthier coping mechanisms.

To start this journey, it's important to acknowledge that healing is a multifaceted process that can include various approaches such as therapy, self-reflection, spiritual practices, and supportive relationships. Here are some strategies to help in healing the inner man:

1. Self-Awareness: The first step in healing the inner self is to develop self-awareness. This involves recognizing and understanding your emotions, thoughts, and behavioral patterns. Journaling, mindfulness practices, and self-reflection can be valuable tools for cultivating self-awareness.

2. Therapy and Counseling: Seeking professional help from therapists or counselors can provide valuable support in healing the inner self. Therapy offers a safe and non-judgmental space to explore past experiences, process emotions, and learn new ways of coping with challenges.

3. Emotional Expression: It's important to find healthy ways to express and manage emotions. This can include creative outlets such as art, music, or writing, as well as physical activities like exercise or yoga. Expressing emotions in a safe and constructive manner is essential for healing.

4. Identifying and Addressing Trauma: Many individuals carry emotional wounds from past traumatic experiences. Healing the inner self often involves recognizing these wounds and seeking help to address and process them. Trauma-focused therapy can be particularly beneficial in this regard.

5. Spiritual Practices: For some, spiritual practices such as meditation, prayer, or mindfulness can play a significant role in healing the inner self. These practices can provide a sense of purpose, connection, and inner peace.

6. Self-Compassion and Self-Care: Treating oneself with kindness and compassion is essential in the healing process. Practicing self-care, setting boundaries, and prioritizing one's well-being are crucial components of nurturing the inner self.

7. Building Supportive Relationships: Connecting with supportive and empathetic individuals can provide a sense of belonging and validation. Healthy relationships can contribute to healing by offering understanding, encouragement, and companionship.

8. Cognitive Restructuring: Examining and challenging negative thought patterns is an important aspect of healing the inner self. Cognitive-behavioral techniques can help in identifying and changing self-defeating beliefs and behaviors.

9. Acceptance and Forgiveness: Healing often involves accepting past experiences and finding a way to forgive oneself and others. This does not mean condoning harmful actions but rather releasing the burden of resentment and moving forward with greater inner peace.

10. Setting Realistic Goals: Establishing achievable goals and making small steps toward personal growth can be empowering. Celebrating progress, no matter how small, can boost self-esteem and motivation.

Ultimately, the journey of healing the inner man is deeply personal and may take time and effort. It's important to approach this process with patience, self-compassion, and a willingness to seek help when needed. Each individual's path to healing is unique, and it's okay to seek support and guidance along the way.

Hope Counseling & Psychotherapy Services Ltd. is now on WhatsApp.

ARE YOU THE WEAK LINK IN YOUR RELATIONSHIP?
New research on couples shows which partner can lower a relationship's quality.
KEY POINTS
• Emotional expression is a key component of successful close relationships.
• New research reveals a "weak link" effect on satisfaction and communication when one partner's emotional suppression is high.
• By understanding the dynamics of couple communication, a person can establish more fulfilling relationships even if they are the weak link.
When you think about the quality of your closest relationship, how do you separate your contribution to its overall health from that of your partner? Do you believe that you give more than you take, or is it your partner who seems to make all the sacrifices? In terms of the emotional “balance of trade,” are your contributions pretty equal, or is one partner more likely to be in debt?
Although you may not like the idea of defining your relationship in monetary terms, theories of couple satisfaction often borrow metaphors from economics. For example, one model focuses on equity as the basis for a couple’s happiness, based on the proposal that the give-and-take between partners should be approximately on an even keel for both to regard their relationship as a good one. One partner gives by tending to small household tasks; the other is responsible for keeping track of finances. No one feels particularly taken advantage of in the ideal relationship, according to this model.
The exchange theory of relationship satisfaction is based, in contrast, on the proposal that each partner regards the rewards of being in the relationship as equal to the costs. When you conduct a risk-benefit analysis, you decide you’d rather stay with your partner than leave, if you’re behaving in accordance with this approach.
Expressive Suppression and Relationship Satisfaction
Couples also give and take in the emotional department. As noted by the University of Auckland’s Eri Sasaki and colleagues (2021), each person in a long-term relationship contributes to its health by virtue of the extent to which they share or don't share their feelings with the other. This quality, known as expressive suppression (ES), “involves attempts to conceal emotional expressions from others."
Keeping your emotions hidden from a partner, as the authors note, takes mental effort and can, because it’s so demanding, make it harder for you to solve problems effectively. If you’re so busy holding on to your anger about your partner’s failure to vacuum the rug that you make a mistake in paying a credit card bill, this will invariably lead to an argument when, next month, you have to make an overdue interest payment.

The other problem you create by holding in your emotions is that you don’t engage in honest communication. Your partner, in turn, won’t know how you’re feeling and could potentially fail to attend to your underlying needs. If you’re hurting because a relative treated you poorly but don’t share these bruised feelings with your partner, it would be all too easy for your partner to believe that your bad mood stems from something going on within your relationship. In the words of the authors, “greater ES during couples’ conflict interactions predicts lower conflict resolution."
The New Zealand authors note that couples rarely engage in equal amounts of ES, but if the balance is completely off, the “weak link” partner (higher in ES) could disrupt the potential happiness that both partners experience. The high-ES partner will be less easy to read, leading potentially to the other’s lack of responsiveness, understanding, and sense of connection.
It Only Takes One to Lower a Relationship’s Quality
Although there is a body of previous research showing that each partner’s ES predicts the quality of a relationship, Sasaki et al. note that most of the prior work fails to take into account the combined effect of ES tendencies in each partner as a combined effect on outcomes. Perhaps both of you are high-ES or both of you are low-ES. You may have figured out a way to get along given that each of you has the same preference for sharing or not sharing feelings. What happens when only one of you is the sharer?
The U. Auckland research team proposes that it’s the weak link in the relationship that can cause a couple’s satisfaction as a whole to suffer. By looking at the interaction of two partners (“Actor X Partner”) as an influence on relationship quality, the authors believed they could identify the unique problems that occur when a low-ES individual has a high-ES partner. The weak link in terms of ES, then, is the dyad member who engages in high levels of suppression, and that’s enough to undermine the relationship quality as a whole.
In the words of the authors, “because both actors and partners need be open, responsive and engaged to manage relationship challenges, we theorized that it would only take one dyad member—actor or partner—to habitually use ES to undermine relationship satisfaction." This means that even the most open and expressive member of a couple will feel tested by a partner who continually refuses to reciprocate.
Using data from 4 existing studies of couples, the New Zealand-led team examined the relationships of 427 long-term heteros*xual couples, with average ages ranging from 23 to 37 years old the majority of couples were married and those who have not described their relationship as “serious.”
Each partner completed the following 4-item measure of expressive suppression. See how you would score, rating yourself from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree):
1. I control my emotions by not expressing them.
2. When I am feeling negative emotions, I make sure not to express them.
3. I keep my emotions to myself.
4. When I am feeling positive emotions, I am careful not to express them.
The average score per item across the four samples was right in the middle of the scale, or just below the 3.5 mark.
Participants also completed brief measures of relationship satisfaction (e.g. “Our relationship is close to ideal”), and they rated their ability to resolve conflict (e.g. “When I put my mind to it, I can just about solve any disagreement that comes up between my partner and me”). (Having rated your expressive suppression, see how you think you would score on these two couple quality measures.)
Turning now to the findings, the authors calculated the contributions made by each partner’s ES to the two outcome measures of satisfaction. To test the weak-link hypothesis, the authors compared couples in the three categories of both partners low in ES, both partners high in ES, and — the weak-link combination — partners who were different in ES (i.e. high-low, low-high).
Looking first at relationship satisfaction, couples in which both partners were low in ES also were the most satisfied. This finding supports the theory that a relationship fares better when both partners can communicate their feelings openly. However, couples in which one partner was high in ES and the other low, the weak-link pattern, showed the lowest relationship satisfaction, regardless of whether it was the actor or the partner whose ES was high.
In the area of conflict resolution, the findings were even more striking: Couples in which either the actor or the partner had high ES scores were least likely to be able to use the communication tools that would allow them to settle their differences in a productive manner.
What to Do If You’re in a Weak-Link Relationship
Perhaps it is you who tends to hold onto your feelings and your partner who tries to get you to open up, particularly when there’s a problem. If so, the Sasaki et al. findings suggest that you find ways to break through your barriers in expressing emotions. It may, on the other hand, be your partner who tends to retreat when differences arise. How can you help persuade your partner to be more open and honest?
As the authors suggest, high ES interrupts a host of “social dynamics” including “perceived support, closeness, authenticity, and gratitude." At times, furthermore, couples may become involved in situations that require balancing personal needs with “appropriate relationship sacrifices.”
Thinking back to some of those economic models of relationships, this suggests that high ES can get in the way of establishing a satisfactory equilibrium. If you’re low in ES, you have no problem delving into a possible imbalance, and it can be frustrating when your partner clams up. However, as Sasaki et al. note, “cognitive reappraisal… may reduce the damaging effect” of a partner’s low ES. These strategies can include trying to tell yourself to stay calm, look at the situation in a more positive light, or just change what you’re thinking about. Staying calm may also help your partner find a way to start talking about difficult subjects without fear of making you angry.
To sum up, whether it’s you or your partner who is the weak link, recognizing the imbalance in your emotional expressiveness can be the first step to finding greater understanding and fulfilment.

Authored by:
Susan Krauss Whitbourne, Ph.D., is a Professor Emerita of Psychological and Brain Sciences at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

ANATOMY OF A MARITAL CONFLICT
It's more than a disagreement.
KEY POINTS
• In a disagreement, a couple negotiates by talking to each other. In a conflict, they react personally and talk "at" each other.
• Conflicts are resolved through self-reflection about one's take on the situation.
• Resolving a conflict gives you the chance to negotiate a disagreement and for the relationship to grow.
So much is written about marital conflicts in academic and popular literature as well as scads of social media. My complaint about most of this literature is that it confounds what is a marital conflict with the usual and typical disagreements or differences between spouses. These are qualitatively different kinds of interactions.
This post is about identifying the difference between conflicts and disagreements and how to address both types of marital interactions.
Disagreements vs. Conflicts
Disagreements or differences between partners are about what you and your partner want in the relationship. When you disagree with your partner, it is about something—e.g., an activity, an event, a chore. You can differ on all kinds of things—what movie to see, how to discipline a child, when to have s*x, where to get the car serviced, etc.
The defining thing about differences and disagreements is that you are talking to each other—you are negotiating a resolution of the difference between you. You can look for a win-win outcome. One of you can make an accommodation to the other, or you can agree to disagree and move on. The most important thing is that during and after the disagreement you are talking to each other.
Conflict is different. In a conflict, you are not talking to each other; you are yelling, calling each other names, swearing at each other, talking over each other, etc. In a conflict, the thing that elicited the conflict is not resolved because you do not negotiate, you react. You react emotionally, typically with anger, fear, and hurt, setting the stage for the conflict to occur.
Elements of a Marital Conflict
One definition of anatomy is a study of the internal workings of something. I want to take you through the internal workings of a marital conflict so that you will be able to: recognize when it is occurring, resolve the conflict, address the disagreement, and learn something new about yourself.
Recognizing a Conflict
The schematic below depicts a conflict occurring between Jesse and Sarah over how she spent money on a new couch for their apartment. Sarah spent more than she and Jesse had agreed upon. When she told Jesse this, he immediately got angry at her seeing her as acting “irresponsibly." He verbally criticized her, calling her “irresponsible” in a raised voice. Jesse will “make a case” about her irresponsibility by highlighting past times she spent over the budget, citing even minor “transgressions." He is justifying his anger and his reaction—without a discussion with her about what she did.
Sarah, in turn, seeing Jesse’s characterization of her as “irresponsible” as not justified, feels hurt and angry. She does not attempt to explain why she spent more than they had agreed upon.
Jesse and Sarah now have a conflict that goes unresolved. They went their separate ways the rest of the day. Later that evening, Jesse, feeling less angry and a little sorry for what he had said, approaches Sarah amorously. She, still reeling from his accusations and feeling misunderstood, is not inclined to respond to his amorous approach. She still sees him as unkind and unfair. Alas, Jesse now feels rejected and withdraws.
Taking Things Personally
When you are angry, hurt, anxious, fearful in these situations, you will characterize not describe what your partner did. Jesse characterizes Sarah as irresponsible rather than describing her spending over the budget as a concern for them to discuss. Sarah characterizes Jesse as domineering rather than expressing her concern that he thinks she is irresponsible. You then justify your emotional reacting by the characterization you created—Jesse’s anger is justified because Sarah is irresponsible. Sarah feels hurt and shuts down because Jesse is domineering.
Others rarely, if ever, experience their actions in the same way that you characterize them. Sarah will never see herself as “irresponsible”; she may agree that she made an error, or that she did not keep to their agreement, or that she could have crosschecked with Jesse—but she will not characterize these actions as “irresponsible.”
When you characterize your partner instead of describing what the issue for you is, you are reacting personally. When this happens, you will be at risk to trigger a conflict rather than address a disagreement or difference between you and your partner.
What might be the personal reaction that is triggered by Sarah both spending over the agreed-upon budget and not consulting Jesse about her decision to do this? What might the threat to him be? How about not being “important” enough for her to check with him? Fear that he is losing his influence with her? Does he fear he might not be enough of an earner to satisfy her?
Learning About Yourself through Self-Reflection
Conflict is not resolved through negotiation because it is no longer about the spending over the budget—the something of disagreements. It is now about who is wrong, who has acted badly, who should apologize, etc. It is now about the relationship—about the way you are interacting with one another.
Conflict is addressed through self-reflection, which means you are willing to take a hard look at your motives when you react rather than interacting with your partner, i.e. when you are “taking things personally."
If you would like to learn more about how to be self-reflective when you are “taking things personally,” take a look at my post, “How to Deal with Personal Insecurities in Your Marriage,” which has an inventory you can use to help you sort out just how “taking things personally” works. It is a useful tool. It will seem awkward to use at first but keep at it. It gets easier. You might even try working an inventory with your spouse, particularly if they reacted personally to your characterization of them.
Moving From Conflict to Disagreement
Once you have taken a step back from your emotional reaction and negative (it’s always negative) characterization of your partner, and if possible, taking your inventory, you can review the situation, addressing whatever disagreement or difference still exists.
Here is how Jesse turned the conflict into a disagreement.
• Once Jesse stepped away from his anger and negative characterization of Sarah, he wanted to talk to Sarah about why she spent more on the couch than they had budgeted.
• He arranged a time for them to talk. His first task was to apologize for his angry outburst. He noted that he was concerned both about the money that was spent, and that Sarah had not consulted with him about the spending over the agreed-upon budget.
• Sarah, having also addressed her emotional reaction, made the case for the couch she bought. The couch was a high-quality piece of furniture with a significantly reduced price although still more than they had decided to spend. She had planned to use her own discretionary money to cover the extra cost of the couch.
• Jesse agreed that the purchase was a legitimate one—he also liked what she had selected. However, he was concerned that she had not contacted him about her decision.
• Sarah agreed that she should have consulted him before the purchase.
• From this discussion, they agreed to set a limit on what they could each spend over budget in a given situation without talking with each other.
Going through the steps: recognizing a conflict, being self-reflective about their reactions, and discussing the resulting disagreement or difference allowed Jesse and Sarah to reach a win-win solution to the issue at hand.

Authored by:
Catherine Aponte, Psy.D., was previously a clinical psychologist and an adjunct professor at Spalding University.