Please read the following paragraph and ask yourself which of these values you can feel genuine in saying out loud to your partner. Both partners make the following commitment out loud to each other.

I am committed to not tolerating hostility, violence, rejection or abandonment in my relationship with you. If you tell me that you feel intimidated or belittled by me I will stop speaking about you and let you leave the room to take a time out, or I will leave the room. If I leave then I will state a time that I will return to finish talking more respectfully about the problem . I will not prevent you from leaving the room, or continue to shame you if you say you're taking a 'time out'.

I seek progress and not perfection. If I cannot reasonably honor this time out commitment then I must admit that I am 'out of my own control' and will put more effort into changing by going to anger management classes, groups, religious counselors or individual therapy.

The solution for stopping an argument before it turns destructive is for the couple to learn to take "Time Outs" early enough so that the passion of the moment does not have couples saying and doing things they regret later.

I know it sounds simple, but that's why it works. I've worked in domestic violence men's groups for 12 years and can tell you that 80% of the men who attend our anger groups were arrested for an incident that involved someone trying to leave the room. Or because someone made abandoning or rejecting statements just to make their point or get through to the other person.

• Make sure the agreement about time outs is secured before the conflict begins. Make these agreements now, before you need it!
• Use the phrase "I'm taking a time out.". This makes it official. State that "This doesn't feel constructive" or "I want to understand what you're saying to me but I can't listen to you now. I'm too mad (or defensive)." Just make sure the words 'time out' are used.
• The person who takes the time out says, "I'll be back by _____ (time) and that we'll talk about this subject later in a more respectful way"

 

Taking 'time outs' is the cornerstone of restoring trust within a relationship that has been damaged by intimidation, dominance and fear of being controlled. The time out commitment is presented with an emphasis on both parties making the commitment out loud to each other and following it up with successfully practicing the method, especially using it before you think you need to use it.

"Wish we'd taken a time out sooner!!!!"

It's the most common statement made by both partners after bad things have happened is that they say Seeing evidence of the partner's attention to physical and emotional safety can allow one to begin to trust that these terrible build ups to explosive anger, hostility or violence are becoming a thing of the past. Using time outs is also the measuring stick with which someone who feels abused can make a decision about staying in the relationship any longer. If a respectful request to agree to the guidelines of a time out is turned down by a partner then the impossibility of achieving safety becomes absolutely evident. The person who won't agree to the rules of time out is saying "I reserve my right to use intimidating, controlling and hostile tactics to get what I want".

Without an explicit agreement between partners, what happens when someone tries to end an argument because it's getting too intense, angry or destructive? I probably don't have to tell you that the one who is left behind feels abandoned, rejected and furious. The questions, exercises and advice given here will WORK if you both make the commitments to each other, and do the best you can to mean what you say and to do as you say.

The time out section continues with knowing when to take time outs and identifying warning signs that anger is becoming destructive. Warning signs include thoughts, feelings and body sensations which can be watched for as cues that one is close to losing control. These cues then become the trigger for taking a time out. When coming back after a time it is critical that at least one of the partners is able to say....continued in the workbook.

Free Sample Exercise & Agreement- Join my monthly 'Couples Communication Skills Tips' newsletter. You'll receive effective and practical techniques and resources no more often than once a month. Your address is NEVER shared or sold with any other organization.

You'll get a confirmation email that contains a link to our where you can download a 31 page section of the workshop manual. It includes a really great exercise to get couples to be willing to accept a part of the responsibility for problems. AND it includes, the full section on 'Stop Destructive Arguing Using Time Outs."

We are now programming our video and Flash components for this section of the site. We expect to launch our first web based learning modules in mid to late 2005. To be notified when our online training modules become available join our Couples Communication Tips newsletter.

The missing piece when there's blaming communication is "I need...", "I want...", "I feel..." or "It makes me think that...".Sometimes anger is expressed by blaming the other person and doesn't include an expression of what's going on inside of the person who is expressing the feeling. In short, the person expresses 'This is what's wrong with YOU!' rather than "This is how I'm affected!"

 As long as a person is talking about what she thinks, feels, fantasizes or wants then there is less reason for the partner to feel threatened or provoked. This style of communicating is often called making 'I statements.' The value of using 'I statements' is that there is no labeling or mind reading of the other person's motivation or intent.

When 'I statements' are used as shown here in the Empathic Request method developed by Pacific Skills Training, there is also an 'out' given. An out is when a person says what he or she needs to feel satisfied. A request is made for both understanding and for action. Since a request is made, it can be responded to and granted. Men especially need to know that there is something that can be done to satisfy their partners. When no request is made the expression of frustration becomes just a spewing of feelings, too often giving the listener too many options of responding. The result is usually a defensive response. If practiced the 'empathic request' model will eliminate the bulk of the needless arguments that occur because of character attacks or not saying what is wanted or needed to end the conflict.

Expressing Anger & Making Requests

Is This About Me, Or Is This About You?

Talking about your needs and feelings instead of labeling the other.

I cannot argue with what my partner thinks, feels, wants or perceives as long as s/he states it as an "I statement" (ie. It makes me think....; It makes me feel...etc.) If I say to you that I felt hurt, sad or angry, how can you argue with that? Can you say "You shouldn't feel that." Or worse yet "You can't have that thought." Or the most violating comeback - "No, you don't have that feeling. I know better than you what you're feeling." And it's always negative. I can say how I'm affected, after I've listened all the way through. Many arguments escalate because one person is presuming to have the authority to pass judgment on whether or not their partner should be allowed to 'have a thought or feeling.' (ie.You shouldn't think that.; You shouldn't feel that.)

One rule in our workshops is that NO ONE CAN BE ATTACKED OR CRITICIZED FOR STATING HONESTLY WHAT THEY THINK OR FEEL. So if someone states an "I message" (ie. "I think ____." or "It makes me feel_____.") there can be no argument about the fact that the feeling exists. It obviously does exist. The issue really is how does that AFFECT the other person? So after acknowledging having heard the other's thoughts and feelings, it is very appropriate to say "This is how what you said affects me." Now you are talking in the 'This is about me.' realm. When you respond to someone else's thoughts or feelings by telling them that they shouldn't or didn't have those thoughts or feelings then you are operating in the realm of 'This is about you.'

Even when there is no direct shaming or dismissal of a person's 'I statement' there can be a real sense of invalidation when the statement is avoided, interrupted or ignored.

For example, Martha says to Gene "I felt hurt that you didn't get me a birthday card." Gene's first response is to tell her how busy he's been. Because his first response to Martha's expression of feelings was to explain his point of view she rightly sees that his priority is to defend himself; and not that he cares about what her experience is. So she gets a sense of Gene's values by the nature of his first responses to her expression of feelings. It's more important for him to defend his point of view than to empathize with her feeling.

Seeing that Gene doesn't care about her disappointment Martha grows even more angry during this exchange. Only now it has less to do

continue reading this article

with the forgotten card than it does with the fact that Gene doesn't seem to care about how she feels. She's run into this many times before with Gene.

Almost every time she tries to express a feeling he takes it personally and immediately defends himself.  Even when her feelings do not involve him Gene somehow manages to make Martha feel bad or wrong about her feelings. She thinks Gene talks down to her like she was a little girl, who needed her daddy to tell her the right way to feel or think. Now they're off and running with a contentious argument. The reason for the argument is not the card incident. That was only the trigger for Martha's longstanding resentment that Gene has trouble listening to her feelings.

Gene is probably anxious around her emotions because he doesn't know how simple it is to listen to her hurt feelings. He is busy avoiding being seen as responsible for her feelings. In that effort he makes it clear he doesn't care about her. He would benefit a lot from the chapter on 'First Pants....then Shoes' about how to listen to person who is angry. He could have ended the argument easily if he had first said "You're right, it was insensitive of me to forget your card. I know I've done that in the past also. I don't want to make you feel unimportant to me. I'm going to make it important to me in the future to remember these things."

In the example above, is Martha making a statement about Gene or about herself? Because she used the 'I statement' method of saying "I feel _____ ." it's clear that she was simply expressing her feelings. She was saying "This is about me!" Gene may be hearing something completely different. He may be hearing a statement about him. He hears it as "This is about you, Gene!" If he hears it as a statement or definition of his character then he may feel compelled to defend himself. So naturally he explains himself and offers excuses or reasons that justify his lapse of remembering to get Martha the card. He is defending his character and feels attacked by her expression of feeling.

Since Gene's first response is dedicated to defending himself against what he perceives as a character attack, Martha experiences him as not caring about her feelings. Gene may indeed care about Martha's disappointment, but because he responded first by rationalizing his mistake he conveys to her that his priority is to protect his good name. So Martha has a legitimate reason for thinking that he doesn't care about her. So often, this is the nature of arguments when the real subject is "I don't feel cared about or valued." but the argument appears to be about other things. If people, especially men, could begin to allow their partners to express this feeling without immediately defending it they would avoid getting into deeper trouble by trying to defend themselves.

Asking yourself "Is this about me, or is this about you?" before you speak when you're angry, or when listening to your partner's anger, is a great method of good communication. The guideline is this-

• When you are angry make the comments in the form of "This is about me." "This is how I was affected by you."
• When you are listening to another's anger then listen with the framework of "This is about you (her feelings, his experience)"

This works best if you can also say how you are involved in creating the experience of your partner.

When emotions are running high it's extremely helpful to have a set statement ready at the tip of your tongue that you can rely on because you've memorized it. You simply fill in the blanks with the thoughts and feelings that you're having and VOILA you've made your 'I statement'. Now you're ten times less likely to provoke the other, by labeling or mind reading; and also more likely to have your partner HEAR and respond to what you're thinking and feeling.

The exact sentences to use are not as important as capturing the spirit of simply expressing what you think and feel; rather than labeling, shaming or mind reading the other person's intentions.

Use the written format provided in the workbook and express the next 20 shaming and blaming statements using the empathic request model. The suggested sentences which we recommend as a starting place are.... (in the workbook.)

Get the .pdf of the 129 page workshop manual as a .pdf file AND get the FOUR podcasts of Marc summarizing the whole course.

 
Buy the four podcasts download file of Marc's 80 minute summary of the course.  We'll include a free .pdf file of the whole seminar manual for only $24.95 or buy the hard copy of the manual and get the .pdf and podasts, ready to use right now, as our gift.

Hearing Another Person's Anger Without Getting Defensive
It's The Sequence, Silly! 

Responding to another's person's anger - The First Pants...then Shoes method

The need to defend oneself is a powerful reflex. So powerful that it makes people say things that only gets them into more trouble. Showing that you see how you may be responsible for causing your partner's hurt or anger and that you care about it enough to do something contradicts our natural instinct to protect ourselves.

I saw a special on Discovery cable about the training of Secret Service agents who protect the President. The head of training the agents said that when most people hear a gunshot they have a natural reflex to move away from the sound of the shot. He saw one of his difficult tasks as retraining his agents to MOVE TOWARD the sound so the agent could quickly disarm the assassin or protect the president.

At Pacific Skills Training Co. we have a similar difficult task. When a person feels attacked by their partner the most natural human response is to defend oneself. Defending can be through defensive arguments, by withdrawal or by attacking back. The goal of the First Pants...then Shoes method is to respond to the anger of another without making things worse by defending yourself right off the bat. You can always defend yourself later. But once you've begun defending the other person legitimately feels you are not listening or that you don't care.

We call that 'Putting on your shoes before your pants.'

At some time growing up you probably learned that if you put your shoes on before you put on your pants, then putting on your pants becomes a difficult, if not impossible task. We learn this sequence and rarely make the mistake of reversing the order later in life; because of the difficulty that it creates.

The shoes in our illustration represents defending oneself by making excuses or trying to get our point of view (P.O.V.) heard first. The metaphor of 'First Pants ...then Shoes' reflects the idea that anger can be handled better for all concerned if we deal with it in a certain order. That order is best defined by: (It's in Manual)

The first instinct is to defend yourself. But instead you respond to your partner in a way that shows that you are responsible and that you care about how she was affected. This means that when you hear your partner's angry offended tone of voice your first you MOVE TOWARD THE ANGER in a way that shows you're interested in addressing it. Yeah, relationships are tough. This almost makes the Secret Service Training look attractive, doesn't it?

Without accepting all the blame can you see where maybe you made a small mistake. Are you even 2% responsible for the problem and how that affects your partner? Your tone of voice? Your assumptions?....

Is it possible that you were insensitive, fearful, dishonest, mean or selfish? Are you capable of saying any of these things about yourself? Are you capable of saying these things before you get the other to understand your point of view?

For example: Bill is late again in coming home from the office. Bill knows that his wife , Jan, has reason to be upset that he was late for dinner, but was so irritated by the tone of her scolding voice that he failed to acknowledge her feelings and instead defended himself by saying
continue reading this article on listening...

angrily "It's not so big a deal. You've been late, before too!" which only made her more mad.

If he had first acknowledged that indeed he was late and showed that he understood how he affected her, he could then proceed to talk about being irritated by her tone of voice. She would not be so infuriated at him for invalidating her feelings that perhaps she would then be willing to listen to his feelings about being being talked to in a scolding manner.

The emphasis here is on the sequence of acknowledging the other's feelings before getting the other to understand YOUR point of view. That means listening and reflecting feelings of your partner, even when you believe that the thoughts, those feelings are based on, are inaccurate.

Bill demonstrates this if he says "I'm sorry that my being late again hurt you."; even when he knows that the accident on the freeway coming home from work is an understandable excuse. Jan would rather hear that he's concerned with her experience than that he's got a good excuse.

The 'First Pants then Shoes' technique deals first with the issue of responsibility. First acknowledge that your behavior affected the other person, then defend yourself by explaining your side. Isn't it true that Bill's history of being late and the fact that he is late again is the cause of Jan's hurt and angry feelings? What does Bill lose by simply acknowledging this fact? He'll have time to give his reasons later. If he's more concerned with being right than with how his wife feels he will be right, but he will also be alone. He's distanced Jan by showing her that it was more important to defend himself than to show that he cares about how she felt.

If he fails to acknowledge how it makes sense for Jan to be upset he'll spend hours arguing with her, when he could be done with the conflict in three minutes!!

Picture your most comfortable pair of jeans or slacks. Now see the words 'I did something' embossed on the right pant leg and the word "I understand how that could affect you." embossed on on the left pant leg. The shoes represent trying to get the other to see your viewpoint, rationale and feelings about a situation first. Now go ahead and put your shoes on first. Yes, they go on! "Halleleuia! I got my excuse out there first. I made sure that my excuse was loudly proclaimed. Now that I've explained myself she'll stop hammering me won't she? I'll show her that I care about her feelings AFTER I exonerate myself. Oh sure, I care about what you went through Jan." Now try getting your pants on (showing her that you're aware your behavior affected her and that you care). It's very difficult to do. Once Jan had to fight to get her feelings heard she becomes even harder for Bill to console. She doesn't want to fight to have her feelings heard. This is a shame because Bill actually does care about Jan's feelings. He was just more interested in defending himself. He put on his shoes first. It's just the sequence! Show you understand first..then defend, or present your point of view.

It sounds simple doesn't it? It is simple. It's just not easy. The workbook helps you practice, practice and practice some more on hypothetical examples so that your reflexes are conditioned like a jet fighter trains in a simulator, to respond in the manner you were trained.... without thinking.
Learn this skill through video simulation training at one of our Los Angeles One Day workshops.   Learn more HERE.

Handling Contempt, Rejection or Hostility

Making the 'Basic Respect Agreement'

In some relationships there is someone who shames and controls the other with the contempt and rejection in their words or in their tone of voice.

Let's take Al and Bev. No matter what problems are discussed it comes back to how it affects Al, because he makes that the subject. Only he doesn't talk about how it affects him, he makes his wife Bev feel bad for calling attention to how he may have hurt, disappointed or shamed her. Al may be having a bad sales week at work, or he may just be selfish and always want to have things go his way. Instead of saying "Bev, I wish you would...." he says "You always... " or "you never....." and he may throw in some "You're an idiot.", "Why did I marry you?", "I can't take this anymore!" or "You make me sick." lines just to make Bev feel worse. Why????? Because Al is not very good at saying "I'm scared about my job." or "Bev, I need your help." So instead of saying "I feel bad." he makes Bev feel bad. Psychologists call this projection.

Al may also have an underlying belief that tells him "If I make her feel bad enough, she will change, or at least she'll stop calling attention to my shortcomings. After all, isn't that how people change?" Or he believes that he is expressing his feelings. He is not expressing his feelings though.....he is expressing his contempt and rejection for Bev. The strategy often works as a diversion because it does indeed change the subject. However, there is a cost to the relationship that he is most probably completely unaware of. The problem for Bev is that it is very difficult to come back to normal relations after several experiences of feeling completely rejected by Al. She will likely develop passive-aggressive responses to show her resentment. (ie. forgetting things, doing the opposite of what Al wanted ...etc.)

continue reading respect article

Since she's not allowed to show her anger verbally Bev will unconscously do the VERY THINGS that bother Al because she needs an outlet for her resentment.

Now Al can claim that he's correct because she does seem to be wanting to 'piss him off.' He just doesn't realize that HE COULD BE THE PRIMARY REASON why she continues the passive-aggressive behaviors.

Al's unawareness of how his tone of voice conveys contempt and rejection is crucial here. Since he is not aware of how cutting or hostile his expressions are, he is completely confused when Bev reacts so strongly to his words. He may truly not understand why she is now either combatively battling him or emotionally distancing herself from him. It wasn't so much what he said that made her feel rejected. It was 'HOW HE SAID IT'! It was his tone of voice.

 Al will not let Bev talk about the 'way in which' his feelings are expressed. He may interrupt her, ignore her, shame her, demean her, call her insane or too sensitive, minimize her feelings, rationalize his behavior, justify his rage, intimidate her with his voice or his body, withdraw emotionally or physically or pout in a rejective manner...etc. etc. All this in order to cut off Bev's simple statement "I feel hurt by your contempt and rejection." Bev is not allowed to talk about feeling abused, hurt, rejected or put down by his words, his tone of voice or by his physically intimidating manner of speaking. The unspoken rule in their house becomes-

Deciding 'Should I Stay, or Should I leave'

There are a few reasons that your relationship will not improve significantly at this time. These are primary problems that are so influential that they are an obstacle that must be cleared before work on the relationship can be considered. Our agreements are a good way to determine if you can REASONABLY expect the relationship to change. These simple agreements will help you 'make up... or break up.' For instance, If a partner will not stop when you feel intimidated or disrespected then you can expect the same to continue. Of course, your commitment is to do the same.

• An ongoing affair whether it is known or secret.

• Psychological or medical disorders that are not treated. These include: depression, manic depression, attention deficit disorder, PMS or menopause disorders, post traumatic stress and anxiety disorders such as obsessive-compulsive or post-traumatic stress disorder. Post traumatic Stress is often a result of abusive, neglectful or violent experiences in childhood. These can experiences can profoundly affect how someone later processes issues of trust and conflict in current relationships. If symptoms from any of these illnesses are present and the person is unwilling to get treatment for it then there is a much reduced prospect for significant change in the relationship. First things first.

• Someone is frequently dishonest and that person is unwilling to identify that behavior as an individual problem that he or she wants to work on.

• One partner uses physical violence or emotional intimidation and is unwilling to say that this is an individual problem that s/he wants to work on separately from the relationship.

• Having made the commitments from the Coming Together for Life workbook, and even though there is a fair effort made; the frequency and magnitude of the continuing offenses are severe enough that the other partner does not feel safe enough to continue within the relationship. We emphasize 'progress, not perfection' so the issue isn't that slips or mistakes are made. The important thing is does the person eventually recognize his or her responsibility in the conflict and can the person show some concern for how that affects you. Or, if one person is unable to reasonably follow the guidelines and is not willing to seek further help.

• What do I mean when I say "an individual problem that he or she is willing to work on separate from the relationship?" Or what is meant by getting 'further help'? A person can work on the issues they struggle with alone by reading books on the subject of violence or lying but few people are able to do this without the help of others. Using the help of others could mean going to a professional therapist who specializes in the area that needs work or it can mean going to a self -help group for that particular problem. If physical violence is the problem then my recommendation is to attend a professionally led anger management or domestic violence group. Having worked for ten years in these groups I can say that the men are pleasantly surprised that they can learn useful methods that benefit their relationships. For most of the men it is the first time that they are exposed to the principle that being vulnerable will not result in being hurt.

*One partner refuses to ever consider forgiving the other for some past wrong committed by the other, even when that partner has humbly asked for forgiveness.

*Alcohol or drug dependence or abuse (prescribed medicines too!) Other addictions such as food, sex, spending, gambling or work are huge impediments to progress in a relationship which are sometimes overlooked or simply denied. continue reading Should I Stay..

The workbook is a great tool to benchmark progress in changing your relationhip. If there is physical violence in your relationship you really should get some outside help. You may use the principles in the manual to progress as a couple, but if one person becomes violent, even once, then it is that person's responsibility to get professional help for his or her problem of violence. You can use the agreements of the manual in a way (agreement #5) that has the person commiting to get professional help if the behavior can't be controlled. Still it's very helpful to get the input of professionals, such as those listed in red below.

* Leaving a psychologically violent or abusive relationship. If you feel scared that you will be hurt, pursued or injured if you leave then trust your feelings and seek help from a women's shelter or hotline before taking action. Talk with them and consider the advice or recommendations that is given to you. The most dangerous time, physically, for the abused wife (or husband) is at the time of separating. There were armchair quarterbacks saying Nicole Brown Simpson should have left O.J. and divorced him. She was leaving him! It was then that she was killed.

Checklist Before You Leave

If you have done these things then you can leave knowing that you did everything you could before deciding for sure to leave. These do not apply if there is violence, addiction, continuing adultery or unrepentent lying in the relationship.

...checklist is in the workbook.

• When your partner apologizes does s/he mention both what s/he did and how s/he's hurt you?

• If any form of physical control, intimidation or violence occurs, does it get justified (ie. "I wouldn't have done it if you didn't....")?

• If apologies are made is there reference made to the person's intention about changing future behavior, or is there further justification for the disrespectful behavior?

• Are you growing in this relationship?

• Is the other person growing in this relationship? Is there improvement? It's a process. Is there an expressed willingness to grow? Or are you assuming your partner wants to change his/her behavior and attitudes. Remember we're looking for 'Progress and not Perfection'...the rest of the list of things to consider is contained in the manual.)

 The three questions to ask yourself that will help you really know if you should leave the relationship ..... are revealed below.

Read more about the workbook HERE.

Testimonials of couples who took the seminar in Los Angeles. Read emails from couples who have taken the workshop.

Free Sample Exercise & Agreement- Join my monthly 'Couples Communication Skills Tips' newsletter. You'll receive effective and practical techniques and resources no more often than once a month. Your address is NEVER shared or sold with any other organization.

You'll get a confirmation email that contains a link to our where you can download a 31 page section of the workshop manual. It includes a really great exercise to get couples to be willing to accept a part of the responsibility for problems. AND it includes, the full section on 'Stop Destructive Arguing Using Time Outs."

We are now programming our video and Flash components for this section of the site. We expect to launch our first web based learning modules in mid to late 2005. To be notified when our online training modules become available join our Couples Communication Tips newsletter.

Read more about the workbook HERE.

Testimonials of couples who took the seminar in Los Angeles. Read emails from couples who have taken the workshop.

Write out the answers to these questions-

#1.  Take a look at the last six months of this relationship. Fantasize that the next year will be an exact repeat of the last year. The good and bad parts of the relationship. Eliminate the hope that things will change significantly. You don’t change and the other doesn’t change. The second year after that will be the same, and so on for 20 years. Is that life acceptable to you; the good with the bad? If yes, then make a decision and a commitment to stay and improve the relationship. If you cannot accept the future that you imagine, then it may be time to make plans to leave.
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

 

#2.  Ask three people, whom you know love you, to give their opinion about how they feel watching you in this relationship. You must give them amnesty for their opinion. This means that you will not use what they say in any critical way with them later.
People who I know love me that I could ask include:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

For those of you with a religious faith, ask what God would have you do. Remember that there is a balancing of God’s love for you and your children, and any covenants that were made. By this, I mean that you should give as much weight to God’s love for you as you would to His rules and commandments.
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

 

#3.  Think of someone you love. Imagine this person is in exactly the same relationship you are in. Think of the good and the bad things about your relationship. What advice would you have for this person?

The person I’m thinking about is ________________________________________________.

If __________________________ were in the same relationship I’m in I would advise him or her to
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________

Lastly, ask yourself in what specific verbal and non-verbal ways has your partner demonstrated to you that he or she knows that he or she needs to change some things and is willing to take some action.   Whatever you may want to hear from your partner, you might want to make sure you are already doing also :)

The Coming Together For Life One Day workshop or the Home Study Course gives you the specific skills and methods to more objectively measure progress to determine if it's REALHOPE or Toxic Hope to believe that things are changing.

RealHope.com
Home

Home
Study Course

Testimonials

Free Tips

Relationship, Marriage Counseling
& Anger Management Resources-Links