Reality Check: Five Questions Meet a Conflict

Some people take a spontaneous seat-of-the-pants approach to life, while others find structure more satisfying. Personally, I find structure helpful: shopping lists, appointment calendars, journal reminders. Tools of this sort may not work perfectly, but they can help us develop a sense of control over our lives.
But structure isn’t just useful for keeping track of appointments. Dr. Glasser used a structured approach for marriage counselling which he described in “Counselling with Choice Theory.” His relationship counselling approach featured five questions. Those questions, or similar questions, are useful for other situations too.
Let’s take a look at his five questions.
In a previous column, I’d mentioned that Glasser’s opening question is, “Are you here because you want help for your marriage?” Your first thought might be, “Well, that’s a no-brainer; why else would they come to counselling?”
We can sometimes believe that we want help to resolve a problem, but when it comes down to the details, it turns out that we want something else.
In a difficult relationship, maybe what we most want is to be acknowledged as the good guy, with the other person shown at fault. Maybe we want to be free of the relationship, but we don’t want to admit it. Maybe we want to be able to tell our friends, “I tried everything, even counselling, but nothing could save us.”
Thus, Glasser’s question is aimed at getting agreement that the relationship is the priority. Unless both people are prepared to work toward helping the relationship, there is no value to continuing.
The second question is probably familiar to you: “Whose behaviour can you control?” We know the answer. We might not like the answer, but we know it. We can each only control our own behaviour.
Having both people acknowledge this reality can reduce the impulse to try to control each other and deflect from our own responsibility. Phrases like “If she would only…” or “This wouldn’t be a problem if he…” don’t work so well when we acknowledge what we can and can’t control.
The third question is, “What do you believe is wrong with the marriage right now?” Each person has the opportunity to present their perspective. Glasser doesn’t take a side in the dispute. No matter how the “wrongs” are presented, or who might be more at fault, his position is that he is on the side of the marriage, not on the side of one or the other of the parties. The marriage is the priority.
The fourth question might come as a surprise: “What is good about the marriage right now?”
Fascinating, eh? Two people come with a dispute, probably a serious marriage-threatening dispute, and Glasser asks them what is good in their marriage. Is there anything good?
Coming up with an answer to this question could shift perspectives. Two people involved in a long-running dispute may have become so detached from each other that any good is long forgotten.
Yet, at one time, there had been good or they wouldn’t have married. Some good may remain, but it’s become overshadowed. It’s “good” to find that again.
The final question is a challenge to both parties. “What is one thing you could do in the coming week that would make the marriage better?” Then do it. For the week. Report back.
Note that he is asking for something that you can do; that’s under your control. As you are saying it openly, your partner will know what to expect and whether it happens. Both commit to doing something positive.
Can you think of situations other than marriage counselling that could benefit from this type of questioning structure?