Time and Rhythm in Couples

Abstract

In this article, a theory is offered on the role of time in couple functioning and distress. The theory argues that no single set of temporal patterns is associated with couple distress or satisfaction. Rather, it advocates attention to the individual differences between couples in their understanding of the meaning of the temporal patterns in their relationship. The couple's narrative about the evolution and maintenance of these temporal patterns can be understood as revealing much about partners' experiences of the relationship in terms of the concepts of closeness and power. Interventions on the temporal dimension may be useful when the couple presents with an explicit problem in temporal patterns; when a particular temporal pattern prevents the couple from addressing other issues; and when the therapist wishes to reframe a problem in a manner that lowers conflict intensity. Along with the theory, a preliminary taxonomy of time problems in couples is presented as a guide to assessment. This is followed by clinical vignettes to illustrate how the theory can be used in couple therapy.

Propiedades Psicométricas del Inventario de Orientación Temporal de Zimbardo en una Muestra Chilena

“…En el factor Presente Fatalista, tiene una carga elevada el ítem de la dimensión Futuro número 56 "Siempre habrá tiempo para ponerme al día en mi trabajo", pudiera pensarse en que la connotación absoluta del ítem que contradice lo descrito por la falta de tiempo en la vida moderna (Fraenkel, 1994;Zimbardo y Boyd 2009). El ítem 28 de Presente hedonista "Es más importante disfrutar lo que uno está haciendo que terminar de hacerlo a tiempo".…”

“…Se puede consignar que en estos ítems se alude a una cualidad negativa respecto del realizar deberes y de postergación de la tarea. Por un lado, es conocida la falta de tiempo libre de las personas en la vida moderna, ya sea por falta de organización o de asimilación de las experiencias (Daly, 2006;Fraenkel, 1994;Zimbardo y Boyd, 2009). Por ello, las personas con una actitud pesimista ante la vida pueden encontrar concordantes estas afirmaciones con su diario vivir.…”

The Therapeutic Palette: A Guide to Choice Points in Integrative Couple Therapy

“…For instance, if in the course of describing a difficult interaction about money, one partner makes reference to how his or her parents seemed never to agree about money, the therapist has an easily accessible entry to the past, and what each partner witnessed in their parents' relationships. Or, if one partner comments that conflicts about money make her worry that they will have no viable future, the therapist might choose to explore each partner's vision of the future (Fraenkel 1994(Fraenkel , 2001.…”

“…Furthermore, successful treatment must respect partners' respective nexus of cultural and social locations affording them resilience, power, and privilege, or vulnerability, powerlessness, and marginalization (Boyd-Franklin 2003;Falicov 1995); their place in the life cycle and in their individually preferred plans for the future (Fraenkel 1994); life experiences such as significant stressors or traumata that highlight the salience of particular aspects of internal life and social context; individual biologically-and possibly genetically-based temperament, emotion regulation abilities, cognitive strengths and limitations, spiritual resources, physical health; and the degree of similarity or difference on all these sensitizing factors between partners. A critical area for ongoing assessment in all couples is power differences between partners, based (especially in heterosexual couples) on participation in larger societal narratives of gender roles (Goldner 1988;Goldner et al (1990), but also based on differences in gender roles in gay and lesbian couples, or on class, income, education, race, immigration status, disability, and other dimensions of difference (see chapters in McGoldrick and Hardy 2008).…”

Love in Action: An Integrative Approach to Last Chance Couple Therapy

“…Fraenkel (, ) describes two broad categories and four types of couples who describe themselves (and therapy) as “last chance.” The two categories are (a) those in which one partner wants to stay in the relationship, and the other wants to leave—what Doherty and colleagues have termed “mixed agenda couples” (Doherty & Harris, ; Doherty, Harris, & Wilde, ); (b) those in which both partners are considering ending the relationship. The four types are as follows: High‐conflict couples, those that have engaged in long‐term destructive patterns of communication and negative attributions, well‐described in the literature (Bradbury & Fincham, ; Driver, Tabares, Shapiro, & Gottman, ; Gottman & Gottman, ; Markman, Stanley, & Blumberg, ). Couples in which partners have differences in what Fraenkel (, ) has called “projected life chronologies”—life plans and goals and when to arrive at them. These are couples that differ on issues and expectations about whether or when to get married (or other formal commitment), to have a child, to reach a particular level of financial stability, to buy a home, to retire, and so on. Couples in which the behavior(s) of one or both partners violate the values, expectations, safety, or emotional comfort of the other.…”