When relationships break down due to controlling and abusive behavior, couples therapy might seem like a logical step toward resolution or recovery. However, this approach is rarely effective in cases of abuse and can even prove harmful.
Carol Lambert, in her book Women with Controlling Partners, and Lundy Bancroft in Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men, both highlight the inadequacies and dangers of couples therapy in these contexts.
At a minimum, years of couples counseling can prove fruitless if the therapist has not learned to address the specific challenges faced by women in abusive relationships. In the worst-case scenario, such therapy might dramatically worsen the situation. It can end up empowering the abuser, allowing them to continue their behavior and potentially escalating the abuse further.
“Attempting to address abuse through couples therapy is like wrenching a nut the wrong way; it just gets even harder to undo than it was before,” writes Bancroft (2003, p. 351), who has spent over 30 years providing interventions to abusive men.
Coercive Control Involves One Perpetrator
Coercive control is a subtle, insidious form of abuse that manipulates and confines the victim through psychological and emotional abuse. Unlike physical violence, its signs are not always obvious, making it difficult for therapists to recognize and address it effectively. It involves tactics like intimidation, isolation, and control that dominate every aspect of the victim’s life.
In her book Coercive Control in Children’s and Mothers’ Lives, Emma Katz (2022) explains that the reason why ‘conflict’ may occur in the context of a controlling relationship is not because of common disagreement. Instead, problems arise because of “the highly unequal power dynamic generated by the coercive control perpetrator over their target that precludes the possibility of mutuality between them” (Katz, 2022, p. 37).
Why Couples Therapy Fails in Abusive Relationships
Couples counseling aims to address mutual issues and improve communication. However, as Katz articulated, mutual issues are not the problem in an abusive relationship. The control and fear imposed by one partner skews the dynamics. Here, therapy can unintentionally empower the abuser, giving them another platform to manipulate and exert power. This often occurs without the therapist even realizing it.
Some of the risks involved in engaging in couples therapy in the context of abuse include the following:
Dominance and Manipulation in Sessions
Abusers often use therapy sessions to further their control by dominating the conversation and manipulating the therapist’s perceptions. They are skilled at presenting a distorted reality that serves their agenda, often gaslighting their partners right in front of the therapist. If the therapist lacks a deep understanding of the dynamics of abuse, they may fail to recognize the manipulation. This leads to a biased view that favors the abuser’s perspective.
Safety and Retaliation Concerns
Victims may ordinarily feel unsafe to speak openly in the presence of their abusers due to fear of retaliation. However, the therapeutic setting might temporarily encourage them to express concerns or disagree with the abuser. This can lead to severe consequences outside of therapy, where abusers may punish them for their openness, accusing them of humiliation or betrayal. This only deepens the cycle of abuse.
Therapist’s Misguided Focus
Therapists untrained in the dynamics of coercive control might inadvertently place the responsibility for repairing the relationship on the victim. They might advise victims to avoid triggering the abuser or to be more understanding of the abuser’s background, which not only invalidates the victim’s experience but also reinforces the abuser’s behavior. This accommodation can confuse and leave victims feeling unsupported, echoing the same dynamics they experience at home.
“The message to you from couples counseling is: “You can make your abusive partner behave better toward you by changing how you behave toward him.” Such a message is, frankly fraudulent,” Bancroft explains (2003, p. 352).
“Abuse is not caused by bad relationship dynamics. You can’t manage your partner’s abusiveness by changing your behavior, but he wants you to think that you can. He says, or leads you to believe, that “if you stop doing the things that upset me and take better care of my needs, I will become a non-abusive partner.” It never materializes” (p. 352).
Misuse of Therapy for Coercion
Therapists might unknowingly assist abusers in their manipulation. For example, they may broker agreements where a victim might give up something valuable, like social connections, under the guise of reducing tension in the relationship. Such ‘agreements’ are often forms of coerced concessions that further isolate the victim and empower the abuser.
Lambert (2002) offers the example of a therapist who agreed with a couple that the man would avoid his intimidating behaviors in return for the woman cutting back on prioritizing her friendships. In essence, the therapist facilitated the man’s use of the threat of violence to control his partner. At the same time, it cut her off from crucial social support.
Abuse is Not a Shared Responsibility
Abusers are adept at turning therapy into another arena for their manipulation. They may convince therapists that the relationship’s problems are mutual or even predominantly the victim’s fault, which shifts focus away from his behavior. This manipulation can lead to therapy sessions that reinforce the abuser’s narrative, leaving the victim marginalized and disempowered.
Bancroft (2003) explains that couples counseling intends to address shared problems within a relationship. In this context, it can successfully resolve communication issues, address individual past traumas that affect the relationship, or enhance closeness between partners. However, these objectives are not achievable in situations where abuse is present.
“Change in abusers comes only from… completely stepping out of the notion that his partner plays any role in causing his abuse of her,” explains Bancroft. “Unfortunately, the more an abusive man is convinced that his grievances are more or less equal to yours, the less the chance that he will ever overcome his attitudes” (2003, p. 352).
Ineffective Therapeutic Outcomes
When therapy is the only option an abuser agrees to, it’s often because it provides a platform to blame the victim. Even if therapists attempt to address abusive behaviors, abusers might accuse their partner of turning the therapist against them. This enables him to maintain his narrative and resist change.
Carol Lambert explains that couples therapy is often a form of treatment that controlling partners will try first because “if they enter treatment alone, it’s inferred that they have a problem, and that’s usually intolerable at the outset” (2002, p. 207).
Alternative Approaches
Given the complexities and dangers involved, alternative approaches need consideration:
Specialized Programs: Lundy Bancroft, who has worked extensively with abusive men, suggests referring abusers to specialized treatment programs designed to address and alter abusive behavior. He explains that no amount of individual therapy or anger management work can replace a specialized abuser program. The latter, he says, “are not designed to address the range of behaviors that make up abuse and the core attitudes that drive them” (2003, p. 307).
Individual Therapy: Carol Lambert suggests that while a coercive man attends a specialized treatment program, his partner may benefit more from individual therapy that focuses on healing from trauma and rebuilding self-esteem away from the abuser’s influence.
Bancroft agrees that individual therapy would benefit the victim but strongly advises against it for the abuser. “The more psychotherapy a client of mine has participated in, the more impossible I usually find it is to work with him,” he explains. “The highly “therapized” abuser tends to be slick, condescending, and manipulative. He uses the psychological concepts he has learned to dissect his partner’s flaws and dismiss her perceptions of abuse” (2003, p. 354).
Abuse Educated Therapists: Lambert explains that if a couple does decide to go down the route of joint counseling, it is crucial to find a therapist who is well-trained in recognizing and handling abuse dynamics. She emphasizes that a competent couples therapist will conduct separate sessions with each partner early in therapy, typically after the first or second joint session. This would allow the victim to disclose the abuse and raise concerns that they may not wish to verbalize in front of their partner. In addition, Lambert says that “this practice of meeting individually results in a natural weeding out of controlling partners who won’t tolerate their spouse or girlfriend being seen alone” (2002, p. 207).
Bancroft advises that before considering couples counseling to address mutual relationship issues, it’s crucial to ensure that your partner has not engaged in abusive behavior for at least two years. Only then might it be possible to safely address issues genuinely shared between partners.
Advocating for a Shift in Therapy Practices
The use of couples therapy in the context of abusive relationships needs reevaluation. There should be a focus on protecting and empowering victims, holding abusers accountable, and equipping therapists to handle these complex dynamics effectively. Ultimately, recognizing that abuse is not a mutual problem but one rooted in power and control can help steer therapeutic practices toward more effective and safer outcomes.
References
Bancroft, L. (2003). Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men. New York, NY: Berkley Books.
Katz, E. (2022). Coercive Control in Children’s and Mothers’ Lives. Oxford University Press.
Lambert, C. (2016). Women with Controlling Partners: Taking Back Your Life from a Manipulative or Abusive Partner. Berkeley, CA: New Harbinger Publications.
Featured image: Couples therapy is not recommended for an abusive relationship. Credit: terovesalainen / Adobe Stock.
