Ways to Disengage, Re-engage During Marital Conflict

Harsh discussions short-circuited by angry outbursts and poor emotional control have a devastating effect on marriage. Too many things are said and done in the middle of heated arguments that are hurtful. This takes a toll on the goodwill, friendliness and affection marital partners have for each other.

Anger generally creates anger. Angry people aren’t thinking or screening their thoughts or the way they say things. Unfortunate things are said and remembered.

Behind the anger is often a desperate need to communicate and "break through" on a major source concern in the marriage. Repeated angry exchanges derail problem solving which in turn leads to discouragement and emotional detachment.

Equally devastating is the icy, cold withdrawal where grudges and resentments are nursed. Days go by. Obvious but veiled anger creates an emotional chasm between a couple. The process of reconciling is awkward and uneven. One partner may habitually be the one to give in and attempt to restore the relationship but without resolution of the disagreement that started the conflict in the first place.

Why time outs are necessary. Anger, however intended as communication, can cause an angry reaction, withdrawal or a discounting of the anger through logic and argument, none of which will calm the person. What really works is listening. Unless the other person is able to listen to anger, venting anger will cause more harm than good.

Couples can manage the level of intensity of conflict by monitoring their individual anger, body signals, and arousal level. If either of them feels like they are close to losing control - saying or doing things they don’t mean or being disrespectful - they can request to disengage.

It is not just an emotionally distressed or angry partner in a high conflict discussion that has a right to ask for a time out. The person on the receiving end needs to be aware of his or her ability to be a good listener to their spouse.

If the discussion becomes too upsetting and creates emotional flooding or overload, the listener will lose his or her ability to listen accurately or empathically. It is important to let the speaker know that. At this point, the listener either needs to disengage or become the speaker.

If two people are upset and angry at the same time, nobody is listening. The point of communication is to hear and understand each other. An angry person wants to be heard, not argued with or even reasoned with. Nor is an angry person emotionally ready to be a good listener.

Respecting each other’s need to disengage. Both parties need to be able to call time out on a problematic discussion and have that time out request respected without questions or debate about whether it is fair or necessary.

Marital conflicts often take the form of a "pursuer" who is anxious and wants to resolve conflict immediately and a "withdrawer". The withdrawer may not be good at thinking on his or her feet and needs time to assimilate emotional information, regulate emotions, or process the dispute.

Neither style is inherently wrong; they just happen to not match up well. They frustrate each other.

There is also a control issue. The person who controls what is being talked about and what isn’t has power in the relationship. Sometimes people withdraw, not in a good faith effort to gain control, but to derail a discussion he or she doesn’t want to have. If the issue isn’t worked through, then the status quo is maintained. Some marriage partners are suspicious that request for a time out is an unfair way of avoiding a discussion that might highlight the need for change.

The 24 hour rule. The key to having a time out being an effective tool is to have an equally binding and respected obligation that the dispute will be brought up within 24 hours. This is middle ground between the pursuer and withdrawer. The scales aren’t weighted unfairly to favor one style over the other.

Twenty-four hours is usually sufficient time to calm down and be approachable on the same topic. The 24 hour rule is a maximum time frame and not a minimum. It might take only a few minutes for either party to regain composure and be ready to resume the discussion.

Some arguments start too late in the evening. The pursuer may be so anxious to resolve a problem that he or she doesn’t respect his or her partner’s need for sleep. Emotions fray and fatigue sets in. Disengagement prevents explosive late night discussions from harming a marriage.

The discretion on when to resume the discussion should be left to the person who needed to disengage. Setting a time is courteous, but not always possible depending on the emotional level of the upset person. Besides regaining control, the angry partner can use time to think through his or her anger to be able to articulate clearly when the conversation resumes.

Both rules are necessary. One rule is stopping heated conflict graciously at the request on one partner. The second is a commitment to resume discussion within 24 hours. When both rules are honored and become a trusted part of a couples’ conflict resolution repertoire, each partner will have confidence to stop destructive interactions and be assured that important conflicts can be talked through and resolved.