Validate the Valid

Repairing relationships from ruptures can be difficult for a variety of reasons. The difficulty can stem from a variety of places requiring different tools. People can enter into a combative  stance in their relationships, struggle with immediate focus on winning the disagreement, react to perceived threats from their partners, or move away from the emotional discomfort that comes from experiencing shame. When we let go of trying to win the argument, or let go of our comfortable position, what would we have left but to work together to resolve the initial disagreement. What can we do to connect with the people in our lives, to help figure out how to resolve the disagreement, or at the very least come to terms that the couple have a disagreement?

One of the communication tools is validation, understanding where the partner is coming from in regards to the disagreement and then work on bridging gaps in communication. The idea of validation has several layers. The different levels of validation require each of us to be vulnerable  with ourselves. We require some personal work on our end to make sure that the validation is effective. The different levels of validation do require a different response to ourselves to connect with our partners and help them be understood. Dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT) identifies 6 types of validation, each requiring mindfulness from ourselves first before we begin conversations with our partners and work on repairing our emotional distress. 

The first level of validation is simply paying attention to what the other person is saying. The listener trusts that they will have a time to speak during the disagreement and will let go of the need to speak their minds immediately rather than defend themselves or attempt to win the argument. We are present in the conversation, we show that we are interested in what the person has to say. We act interested. We express cues that they are interested and we act as if we desire to hear more about what they want to say. 

The second level of validation is to reflect back what is being said. As we reflect our partner’s words back to them we show that we are engaging in understanding them. We focus on what our partner is saying at the moment, willing to see their perspective . We are together in this disagreement, and not in opposition with each other. 

The third level of validation can be difficult to take on if we neither trust ourselves nor our partners in resolving the disagreement.The third level is reading the person’s mind. I am not suggesting telepathic ability but understanding the summation of the partner’s non-verbal cues and what their emotional state can be in regards to the situation that leads to the rupture. We try to articulate our partner’s stance that has not been said but expressed through their body language, tone, and references. Can we trust our understanding of what our partner’s nonverbal cues can mean? This level also opens us up to the possibility of misreading our partner’s cues and emotions and it also opens up a chance for our partner to provide nuance to what they are saying and clarification to what they want to say. We don’t demand how we interpret their emotions to be true but bring up what we believe can be true by bringing up what they can be feeling. 

The fourth level of validation is expression and understanding of what contributes to our partner’s stance how did they get to that belief. We understand our partner not just in the immediate moments of a disagreement but also in the context of their history and personal understanding. We let go of the moment to defend ourselves and engage in seeing our partners as who they are in their whole self. We become aware of who our partners are, and become aware of how they developed their views. 

Fifth level of validation requires seceding valid points from our partners. I have a client that has told me, “eat the fish and spit out the bones”. We validate the valid, given their reaction to the situation in front of them. We aim at focusing on what we think works from their point in resolving the argument. 

The sixth level of validation is equality. We treat the person that disagrees not as a threat  but as an equal that deserves respect and consideration. We genuinely relate to the person that is speaking, and genuinely relate to where they come from. This level requires practicing the DBT skill of willingness, “Where is the Threat ?”. Though our reactive response may be to become tense and respond to a perceived threat when in an argument, we ask “where is the threat” and for the majority of the time there is no apparent threat in the now, only a partner we have ruptured with and work on repairing. 

The purpose of practicing the different levels of validation is to help strengthen the relationship in moments of disagreements. Partners create experiences of safety and trust with each other during moments of ruptures in the relationship, understand each other and then create that faithful repair. We actively eliminate defensive types of reaction when we talk with our partners intentionally from a place of validation. Validation is not the only tool that a person can use in their relationships. It can be ineffective when we engage with our partners half-heartedly or only use this specific tool and no others. We work towards developing trust and healthier understanding of where we each come from in our disagreements and create stronger bonds.