“Agreeing to agree” can do more harm than good to your relationship
AAmericans are becoming more polarized, and even family dinners can feel tense, revealing differences that lead to endless conflict.
Difficult conversations often end with a familiar phrase: “Let’s get this over with.”
As a communications coach and trainer, I’m often asked how to handle these conversations, especially when they involve social and political issues. One piece of advice I would give is that “agree to agree” or any other phrase that politely means “don’t talk” will not restore harmony. Not only that, but it can cause permanent damage to important family relationships.
“Forbidden” topics
Conversation is the currency of communication. When the family talks about anything – from “What are your top five favorite movies?” “How did you manage to load the dishwasher like that?” – They don’t just exchange information. They build trust and create a shared story that deepens the bonds within the family unit.
According to relationship researcher Mark L. Knapp’s relationship development model, all relationships have a life cycle. People come together and strengthen their relationship through five stages, from “initiation” to “connection”. But most relationships eventually fall apart and go through the five stages of a breakup.
No relationship is as linear as the model assumes, but it can help identify potential danger zones – moments when the link is at risk of breaking. One step, in particular, shows why avoiding these difficult conversations is so dangerous: “Limiting.”
Imagine limiting conservation issues with yellow police tape around them—issues that almost immediately lead to controversy. Having a few of these “forbidden” topics in a relationship probably won’t destroy a marriage or a family. However, marking too many ideas as restrictions makes it easier for people to avoid the conversation.
Circumcision is one of the steps of “separation” in Knapp’s model. If the problems are not resolved, the relationship can descend into the final stage of termination.
We need to talk
Unfortunately, this separation from loved ones is not a theoretical problem. In a 2022 survey of 11,000 Americans, more than 1 in 4 reported that they were now separated from their immediate family.
Moreover, these relationships are not always replaced by other close relationships. Nearly half of Americans say they have three or fewer close friends. In 2023, then-Surgeon General Vivek Murthy declared widespread loneliness and isolation an “epidemic”.
Social connection is a basic human need. Relationships do more than provide support. They play an important role in how people define themselves. According to psychology’s “social influence theory,” talking to close family and friends deepens relationships while helping people express their deepest values.
So if “agree to disagree” isn’t the answer, what is?
There is no one-size-fits-all process that will solve all disagreements during family dinners. These techniques require time, patience, and compassion—all things that are in short supply in the midst of conflict. However, there are two techniques that I not only recommend to others, but also use in my own conflicts: “The Understanding Loop” and “Reframing and Pivoting.”
be aware
Originally developed for legal mediation, looping helps both people in a conversation understand each other. Feelings of misunderstanding lead to increased conflict, so this is a good starting point.
During “the loop,” each person uses active listening, which means they pay more attention to what their partner is saying without judging or interrupting. The listener then expresses their understanding using what is called “emotional elaboration”: they repeat what they heard from the speaker, but the feelings they understand. Finally, they ask for confirmation from the original speaker.
It could be something like: “So, if I understand what you’re saying, you think people shouldn’t get the flu shot in your office because you’re not sure it works, and you’re upset about what your company is telling you. Am I right?”
If the speaker says no, the listener “loops” by asking them to explain their mistake and try to rewrite it. Participants were asked until the response “Did I get it right?” They keep moving. An emphatic “yes”. This exercise ensures that both people are confident about the real issue.
Looping has other benefits as well. In one study, an emphatic paradigm not only made participants feel less anxious, but also made the speaker perceive the interpreter more positively. Feeling fully heard and understood can go a long way in easing difficult conversations.
Common ground frame
However, this understanding may not be enough. Once both parties understand each other, another technique, “referencing,” can help de-escalate the conversation and move it toward resolution.
In reframing, speakers find and discuss a single point of agreement. Instead of insisting on what they agree on, they seek a starting point for problem solving rather than conflict.
For example: “I think you and I both agree that we want to keep families safe. However, I think we disagree on the role of having guns in the home in that safety. Is that right?”
It is not always possible to find a point of agreement. However, this review shows both communicators as a key shared value – a starting point for a more constructive discussion. Reframing also steers the conversation away from inflammatory language that can automatically reignite the fight. `
There is no magic bullet
No technique will ever be a one-size-fits-all solution for every relationship—or a quick fix. Talking carefully can be mentally exhausting, and it’s always good to press pause: “I don’t think we’re going to solve our country’s finances tonight, but thanks for talking about it. Let’s talk about it. But for now, I think there’s an ending. Want something?”
It’s also important to acknowledge that not all relationships can be saved. However, it is always good to know that the relationship ended for a clear reason, not because of a misunderstanding that was never addressed.
Hopefully, however, these tactics will help keep communication open and relationships healthy, no matter what the topic is about.
Lisa Pavia Hagel is an assistant professor of English language education and technical communication at the Missouri Institute of Technology. This discussion article is republished under a Creative Commons license. to read Original article.
Post Comment