by Andrew May, Law Offices of Andrew May PLLC

As in so many conflicts, the issues in a divorce are often deeper than they initially present.  A heated fight about, say, airline miles is probably not about the miles themselves but about the emotion bound up with them, which may be far more intense than any bystander could make sense of.  Divorcing parties are often less-than-rational economic actors in the divorce process, no matter how level-headed they might be in their ordinary lives.  And so they and their lawyers often spend major time and money arguing over minor things.

This fact is a good reason to enlist a coach in the divorce process, as the collaborative divorce model recommends.  When divorcing parties get help from a professional who understands the emotional dynamics of divorce and decoupling, the negotiation of legal and financial issues may progress more smoothly, and the parties may begin to feel more secure in their lives.

Dominique Walmsley, a therapist, divorce coach, and Cascadia member, recently presented on the relevance of attachment theory to collaborative divorce.  I expect she will post something here on the same subject before long, but in the meantime I wanted to convey a very limited sense of what is a much bigger topic.

Viewed through the lens of attachment theory, the deep trauma of divorce and the parties’ resulting needs for emotional support are plain.  Attachment is a survival need in the same category as food and water.  When it is disrupted by a divorce, the loss can seem so great that it feels life-endangering.  Patterns that already weren’t working for a couple–cycles of conflict and alienation–may get even worse during the divorce process.  Without support, the parties can go through years of distress and instability, well beyond the time that the divorce is final in the legal sense.  And of course the emotional damage to the parties and their children can be great.

Dominique suggests that a collaborative coach can engage parties at the emotional source of their arguments and help them discover some of their own patterns in conflict.

In many marriages, for instance, there might be a typical pattern to arguments, in which one partner is predominantly a pursuer and the other a withdrawer. The pursuer may anxiously seek emotional contact, and the withdrawer may anxiously flee it.  These patterns can persist during and after a divorce, though their appearance might change.

For example, prior to a divorce, a couple might share parenting responsibilities and decisions with few if any concerns about the other’s parenting.  Under the stress of the divorce process, however, an anxious parent might develop extreme fears regarding the other parent’s ability to care for a child.  Rather than engage those fears, the withdrawing parent, true to form, might prefer to ignore them, which may only cause the pursuer more fear.

A coach experienced with attachment theory can help the pursuer become aware of the emotional source of what certainly feels like a genuine fear and, on the other hand, help the withdrawer respond to, rather than ignore, the pursuer.  Both parties can become aware of their roles in an escalating cycle of conflict and learn to defuse it.

To find out more about Dominique, please visit her website here.   For more on attachment theory and divorce, please consider the following additional reading:

The Good Divorce, by Constance Ahrons

Love Sense, by Sue Johnson