Excerpt from Chapter - Developing and Articulating an Appropriate Response to Avoidant Abuse

As the nature of the trauma in avoidant abuse can be better addressed as a layered rather than a stage by stage process, many prevalent ideas and methods can be limited in effectiveness to deal with the peculiar nature of avoidant abuse trauma. With the problems inherent with many approaches, it can be challenging to not just to reach a point of resolution for recipients, but also to develop and articulate an appropriate response to the abuse. To this end, an appropriate response would need to begin long before the abuse strategies of an extended campaign, rather it would need to begin in first being able to recognise the existence of abuse behaviour, as well as being aware of how to respond to it in a manner which does not inadvertently further the abuse.

The initial challenge for many can be to reveal abuse, to expose its existence, and to be able to detect it when it takes place. As we know, dealing with conflict in an abusive situation differs from dealing with conflict in a non abusive situation. Common techniques to aid conflict resolution can be unsuited to abusive contexts. Techniques for conflict management specific to abuse contexts can help recipients avoid some of the common pitfalls which often lead to more attack rather than benefit. For example, being aware of the dangers in putting oneself in a vulnerable position after knowing the possible ways in which abusers can exploit it, can prevent undue trauma. At the same time, being able to strike a balance where one acts with compassion and the other party is given a chance, but not doing so at the cost of harm to the non abusive party can be a challenging exercise. Further on we will see how developing resilience and self validation can be the keys to striking this balance.

Being able to withstand psychological manipulation can be assisted by developing ones own stance and developing a coherent narrative of events right from the start, guided with principles of honesty, authenticity and integrity with the truth. Commonly touted advice can be inappropriate and can retraumatize instead of heal recipients of avoidant abuse. Often the advice for abuse recipients it is their responsibility to get out of the abuse situation. But it cases of avoidant abuse the abuse and its effects continue even after physical distance has been established. It becomes in a sense impossible to escape from. As emphasized frequently earlier, an escape approach can be ineffective with avoidant abuse. Developing a stance is a more effective response, and this cannot take place without first building resilience. Combating the abusers intent to force and impose control by upholding the values which promote freedom for all parties and interdependence - rather than dependence and avoidance. Developing strategies which are unconditional rather than dependent on a particular situation or outcome can be empowering. Reaching a point of resolution on the basis of ones experience and perception while retaining the value and significance of experiences and developing a view which can be encompassing of the entire experience instead of conflicted can be the best outcome in many cases.

Earlier we listed some of the specific principles which abusers employ and value and which they do not - and interestingly, much of the counter to their tactics and strategies can be based on the principles which are opposite to those commonly employed by abusers. So an approach guided by principles of truth, integrity, freedom, respect and honour can be very effective in developing a response to avoidant abuse which can work together to face abuse. While there is never any guarantee to avoid the possibility of ever facing abuse in life, it helps to be aware and respond in a way that is healthier and can minimise its traumatic effects, as well as allowing oneself to develop more powerfully and positively in spite of it.

Conflict situations with avoidant abusers

When dealing with abuse, it needs to be recognised that unlike a healthy situation, both partners are no longer in the 'same team' - at least according to the abuser. The recipient cannot rely on care, compassion or kindness from the abuser, and cannot entrust information to them nor be open and vulnerable. Working together is often no longer an option as understanding and cooperation may not be forthcoming. In addition there is the risk of facing unexpected attacks or withholding tactics, whether this translates into disclosure which can be used against one party by the other, or a an extreme refusal to provide closure or participate in any communication by one party.

One of the most important tools to help in countering avoidant abuse is to be able to increase ones resilience, and withstand the effect of being emotionally overwhelmed without numbing, retaining sensitivity and yet without losing one's security. At times of conflict the primary needs are to hold on to ones sense of self firmly, and develop a personal response that can be resilient against the many strategies of avoidant abuse, including withholding communication, psychological manipulation, social abuse and excommunication or abandonment.

A crucial step learning how one can increase ones resilience (or in other words 'earn' security) or lessen emotional fusion. The key to this is through the process of emotional differentiation. Earning security isn't straightforward. The solution surprisingly isn't becoming less avoidant and thus more needy instead, or becoming less needy by becoming more avoidant. This is a common mistake many make, however. They can feel ashamed of having needs and feel helpless when these needs are not met by the withholding party. So in response they avoid the avoider in turn. While this operates as denial on one level, yet it doesn't really solve the problem because the underlying problem still remains. As we already know, the avoidant and the one who needs are dealing with the same underlying problem, hence as a result, shifting from being in a position of need to the opposite of avoidance or denial, means that the change is a superficial one. The difference is only in the the strategy chosen to deal with the same basic underlying issue which isn't changed.

This actually gives a clue to resolution of this conundrum. If one tends to be towards one end or the other of being avoidant or needing, then the effective remedy, instead of trying to deny one's need by becoming more avoidant, a better approach is to actually change the underlying sensitivity. Developing resilience deals with this in such a way that while sensitivity is maintained (ie. there is no numbing or denial process) resources are developed within the individual to manage the intense emotions that arise as a result of conflict situations, rather than being overwhelmed by it. (in cases of avoidant abuse - no contact IS the conflict situation)

By developing resilience and becoming more secure one can remain more empowered. Far more effective than co-dependent functioning is having control over oneself, understanding ones emotions and making decisions about ones behavior based upon full comprehension. An individual who can act based upon a personal code of behavior or values, rather than reacting to attack or control the other, is far more resilient and resistant to many avoidant abuse tactics. This is because in this case behavioral choices are not about trying to overpower or control the other, but on maintaining one's own stance unconditionally. Thus even without power and control over the other, paradoxically one can remain more empowered because one is making more effective choices.

Maintaining one's stance unconditionally ie. not relying on the abusers behaviour or strategies can enable oneself to exist more autonomously and be able to function interdependently with the insecure partner rather than too dependently (anxious) or too independently (avoidant). While the resilient can acknowledge their needs, yet paradoxically, they can depend less on others acceptance and approval, so they do not get disappointed or emotionally overwhelmed if it is not forthcoming. In spite of not getting what they expect or want every time, they can maintain their belief in themselves (and maintain their stance) - while still maintaining their connect with others and with reality. They do not merely adopt the attitude of those around them but acquire and maintain their principles with honesty and clear intention. These fundamentals - whether termed principles or a code of ethics - can help to decide important issues as well as to consciously or unconsciously resist lapsing into emotionally reactive thoughts and actions.

Thus, despite conflict, criticism, and even rejection, those with greater resilience can stay calm and objective enough to distinguish between a response which is rooted in a careful assessment of the facts as apart from a reaction influenced by emotion. What they decide and say matches what they do. In other words they exhibit integrity in their thoughts and actions. When they act in the best interests of the other or for the relationship, they do so willingly with awareness and choice, not because they are caving in to pressures or being manipulated or forced, and not to try covert tactics to manipulate and control the other into getting their preferred choice of outcome eventually. They can be objective, calm and confident in their own thinking, willing support another's viewpoints without losing their own stand - or, they can reject another's opinions without becoming hostile or passively disconnected from them.

Self Differentiation

Differentiation can be seen as being the opposite of emotional fusion. Developing resilience can come about as a result of increasing ones level of self differentiation. The term 'self differentiation' was first coined by psychiatrist Murray Bowen who claimed that the degree of differentiation determined the capacity of a person to manage their emotions, thinking, individuality and connection to others. It has also been defined in other terms as the measure of one's emotional maturity or personal evolution. In this view, increasing one's self differentiation levels can be seen as an evolutionary process over one's lifetime where one grows in a capacity to better manage one's own connection as well as maintain required independence from others in one's close relationships. It can thus also be described as the ability to maintain one’s sense of self when emotionally and/or physically close to others, especially as they become increasingly important.

Differentiation is a concept which relates to the ability to preserve autonomy within the context of deep intimacy with involved others. In scientific terms, the differentiation of self is said to involve the capacity to distinguish between the thinking (intra personal) and feeling (inter personal) systems, and the ability to preserve autonomy within the context of deep involvement with others - even in stressful or anxious situations. Rather than a lack of feelings or emotions it involves being able to tolerate extreme emotion without becoming overwhelmed and responding from a core of insecure - be it anxious preoccupation or avoidance.

While differentiation helps to enable an individual to handle intimacy without feeling overwhelmed and engulfed or wanting to escape, interestingly, it also determines the ability to maintain one's sense of self when one's partner is not available, or even when one is not actually in a relationship. Such a person can choose to be vulnerable, and feel secure enough to function well at the same time. Being differentiated does not mean that one is selfish or indifferent, but rather points to the ability to be able to feel and maintain connection to others at the same time. This is a more optimal response to avoidant abuse strategies and can be seen not only as an antithesis of a fused approach, but also effective in countering it.

Differentiation can be thought of as an emotional capacity such that a higher level of it enables one less apt to get drawn into other's emotional issues (for example being 'triangled' - as we saw in avoidant abuse strategies) and be less emotionally reactive in close relationships. Individuals with lower differentiation are more likely to become influenced by the predominant emotions of their partner. Often if one is dealing with an avoidant, even normal secure behaviour can be misinterpreted as dependance making the avoidant feel suffocated, while for a preoccupied partner, healthy secure behaviour may be percieved as avoidant and they can still feel neglected - that is a basic tendency for these attachment types. Greater self differentiation can help one be clear about oneself, one's stand and one's actions. It can prevent one from getting destabilised from the possibly biased perceptions of others. Avoidant abusers often exploit this vulnerability and can thrive on destabilising the secure and making them doubt themselves and lose the sense of the situation. This is seen in abuse such as ambient abuse or stealth abuse or psychological manipulation such as gaslighting and subversion techniques. The insecure - whether needy or avoidant - who often depend on others approval and acceptance and either conform themselves to others in order to please them, or attempt to force others (overtly or more often covertly) to conform to themselves. In other words they operate by controlling others or being controlled by others, which is not a healthy manner in which to operate. They are thus more vulnerable to stress, both as stressors as well as in terms of psycho-physiological stress reactivity, and they face a greater challenge to adjust or adapt to life changes and contrary beliefs as compared to more secure and differentiated individuals.

Well differentiated people can disagree, separate if need be but still be able to stay in touch and communicate with each other without feeling overwhelmed. They have a healthy sense of boundaries and can tolerate proximity without needing to run away and disappear - which the more fused feel they need to do in order to buffer the enormous impact they feel. This tendency translates into the uncoupling process as well. Conflict in a relationship usually calls for greater communication and negotiation than usual. But those who refuse to do this whether it is because they are overwhelmed with anxiousness and stress or to maintain mystery and power prefer to cut off from the other instead of dealing with conflict directly and transparently and while simultaneously holding on to their sense of self.

The time when avoidants use cutoff is often ironically the crucial time when increased communication is needed for the benefit of both parties.

Avoidants with high degrees of emotional fusion, can have poor communication skills. Even if they don't, they can still resist communication, refuse to express themselves authentically and be affronted by criticism. Expecting communication from an avoidant to help often doesn't work as the avoidants whether due to insecurity, maladjustment or power strategy will not provide it.

Raising one's level of self differentiation as we know is the most effective means to handling anxiety. Highly differentiated people are not emotionless, rather they have very strong emotional bonds. The difference is that they do not require distance to moderate their reactivity or closeness to reaffirm their sense of self. They can tolerate intimacy without feeling engulfed. They can tolerate distance without feeling abandoned. They are not indifferent but do exercise the power of choice to give others the freedom to exercise their power of choice to communicate, contact or interact instead of being forceful or persistent. This ability does not make the differentiated invulnerable immune to abuse, rather it is when this giving of freedom to choose is consequently dismissed and attacks continue inspite of it, that it is avoidant abuse which is taking place.

In cases of avoidant abuse, often, avoidance is conflict. But, this is where self differentiation comes into the picture - because the ability to differentiate can determine an individuals continues ability to respond in a healthy and secure manner regardless of maladjusted triggers. The securely attached and well differentiated have higher levels of self esteem and emotional resiliency to manage strong emotions. Differentiation itself raises the threshold for triggering the attachment system, and even if triggered results in lower levels of negative behaviour and emotional turmoil. It includes self-soothing which means assuaging pain, mollifying anger, softening shock, pacifying fears, comforting sorrow and disappointment and most importantly, to be centred in oneself is to be able to settle oneself when one is anxious. Securely attached and less fused individuals are less triggered during conflict and can cope and adjust better compared to the insecure.

Responding to the absence of Validation

It is important to be able to feel and express one's feelings openly, honestly and safely. Unfortunately in abusive situations, these elements are not guaranteed to be present. In the doubt or their presence, or even in their absence, how can one express oneself and communicate without being sabotaged?

The more differentiated, when faced with avoidance will generally request of dialogue - not in a persistent or desperate or forceful manner - and at the lack of the request being granted generally tend to substitute analysis and introspection when faced with the lack of any communication opportunity with the other. A fused avoidant on the other hand, will prefer to try to avoid and escape any process of self introspection and evolution. This difference in approach can make a difference between moving on and evolving as opposed to remaining fused and 'stuck' - with or without the cooperation of a partner who may be avoidant. Many a time a need to introspect can be discouraged by others as being unnecessary or unproductive, and even stigmatised, mistakenly seen as a sign of unhealthy attachment, even though it can be a beneficial and healthy response. Rather, avoidance and denial are poorer maladjusted methods of functioning and should be discouraged. Once we understand the real reasons behind our responses, we no longer need to be fearful or feel ashamed of attending to our needs to help us grow.

Healthy well functioning can be insufficient or even problematic when dealing with an abusive personality. For example, it is often suggested that it is a good idea to be open and express our needs to our partner, to let ourselves be heard - whether the other party then supports us or not is in their hands - but at least being heard can help to feel a 'sense' of being heard or even of 'closure'. During the chapter on self differentiation, we learned how increased differentiation keeps one open to expressing ones needs - but to be able to hold on to ourselves even if they are not met. But avoidant abusers go one step further to enact their abuse. Not only is open disclosure ineffective with abusers, rather it can be harmful to the target. Many targets of avoidant abuse can be mistakenly led to try to be intimate and open with their partner, to encourage the other to let down their guard, but then become dismayed to find that not only did their efforts not elicit compassion or openness, instead their disclosure was used against them. Experiencing this abuse can be bewildering and unexpected for many victims and even seem incomprehensible at first. Even when a target is able to disclose without needing anything back such as openness or transparency or even support from their partner, they are often still not expecting nor prepared to actually deal with a brutal attack as a result of it.

One of the points in developing ones resilience is being able to request for one's needs to be met - without being overwhelmed if it is not granted. This kind of disclosure or intimacy can be helpful even if the request is not granted - because it ensures that the other party is aware and they know - they cannot claim ignorance of your trauma - which implies that if they continue to engage in behaviour that is distressing, they are doing it with awareness, and perhaps intentionally. This can be disturbing to know, because it suggests that they are likely engaging in abusive behaviour and this can be hard to accept for many recipients of avoidant abuse. Nonetheless facing this refusal can often be the first step towards recognising the existence of abuse behaviour for many.

Seeking validation from others implies requiring acceptance, empathy, validation, and reciprocal disclosure (“to be fair”) from another. This can make the person possibly become too reliant or dependent on the views and approval of others. This also hinders the ability to achieve true intimacy. The self-limiting result is due to the preference of self-preservation over self-disclosure. It also makes it easier for a person's sense of reality to be manipulated or even distorted by others. It can leave one very vulnerable in a situation of facing abuse behaviour.

If an individual can maintain their own sense of identity and self-worth without expectations of acceptance or similar behaviour from the other. It can allow one to see others and their behaviour objectively, rather than being overly affected or influenced or manipulated by it. It is helpful to develop this ability in order to withstand psychological and emotional abuse tactics without compromising oneself or ones stance.

Choosing to disengage from the person who has the personality disorder can be daunting as it means relinquishing control over what they might do or say next. But this is something that one needs to make a decision to do for oneself - not to feed the the abuser or to remain in a power struggle with them. It can often be the desire to maintain control that can keep individuals locked in arguments and conflicts for a long time. It is possible to maintain one's stance in a surrendered and unconditional manner - regardless of the other party's response or lack of it - without resorting to excessive demands nor resorting to avoidance. Striking the balance is the key. This is a means to experience enhancement by one's own sense of self rather than being diminishment by someones ill intent.

The poorly differentiated are most likely to use control, manipulation and abuse as a means to control - whether by bullying or withholding. The fused tend to try and control the other - overtly or covertly - often resulting in a poorly conducted uncoupling and transition which can have long lasting adverse effects on both parties (and others including other family and also children) in a relationship. Conversely, well differentiated couples have better relationships and smoother uncouplings and transition experiences less less likely to involve abuse.

Interestingly, increasing secure attachment and raising ones differentiation involves decreasing avoidance as well as decreasing anxiety. This means that, along with not becoming anxious to the point of desperation or persistence with the avoidant, it is also counterproductive to react conversely by avoiding the avoidant in response as well. Rather, the most effective solution is a balanced approach. With higher levels of self differentiation, individual can achieve this balance by not avoiding but by continuing to request for their need whatever it may be - for example, requesting dialogue or closure - but without any need or expectation for this request to be fulfilled and thus maintaining their stand even when this request is denied. This kind of simple request can be termed as being unconditional, because it does not dependent on fulfillment (nor vengeful if denied) and is transparent without any covert or manipulative ulterior motive. This stance of maintaining an unconditional request is possible with increased self differentiation - it can help one to maintain one's stand clearly while self validating, and without feeling inadequate.

Developing resilience alongside remaining in touch with the true events and maintaining integrity with the true facts can help the recipient to cope. The less one needs continual contact, validation and consensus from others, and the more one is able to maintain a clear true sense of themselves in an uncertain context the better one can respond authentically. The solution is to develop ones own stance - a balance between unconditional action and surrender while - maintaining one's integrity.

REFERENCES :

Bowen, Murray. (1978). Family Therapy in Clinical Practice. New York: Jason Aronson

In C. Flaskas, I. McCarthy, and J. Sheehan (Eds.), Hope and despair in narrative and family therapy: Adversity, forgiveness and reconciliation (pp. 63–74). New York, NY : Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Skowron, Elizabeth A., and Myrna L. Friedlander. (1998). The Differentiation of Self Inventory Development and Initial Validation. Washington, D.C.: Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse

Rosenstein, Diana S., and Harvey A. Horowitz. (1993). Working Models of Attachment in Psychiatrically Hospitalized Adolescents Relation to Psychopathology and Personality. Washington, D.C.: Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse.

Schnarch, D. M. (1997, 2009). Passionate Marriage: Keeping love and Intimacy Alive in Committed Relationships. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

Schnarch, D.M. (2009). Intimacy & Desire: Awaken the Passion in your Relationship. New York: Beaufort Books.

Todd, N. & Wade, A. (2003). 'Coming to Terms with Violence and Resistance: From a Language of Effects to a Language of Responses', in T. Strong & D. Pare (eds), Furthering Talk: Advances in the Discursive Therapies, New York: Kluwer Academic Plenum.

Wade, A. (1999). Resistance to Interpersonal Violence: Implications for the practice of therapy. University of Victoria, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Psychology.

Wade, A. (2007a). Despair, resistance, hope: Response-based therapy with victims of violence.

Zayas, Vivian, and Cindy Hazan. (2015). Bases of Adult Attachment: Linking Brain, Mind and Behavior. New York: Springer

ISBN 978-0-9942430-4-1