This is for people in a relationship who want to work on themselves rather than on the couple. Sometimes that's a deliberate choice. Sometimes it's because your partner isn't willing to come, and you've decided not to let that stop you.
Either way, the work is more effective than people expect. A recurring conflict is a loop, and a loop requires both participants to keep running. When one person reliably changes their move, the sequence can't complete the way it used to, and the whole dynamic has to reorganize around the new input. That's not a workaround for your partner's absence. It's a legitimate point of entry, and for some situations it's the better one, because you have complete authority over your own behavior and none over theirs.
The other thing this format offers is a room where you don't have to be diplomatic. In couples work, everything you say is heard by the person it's about. Here you can think out loud, say the ungenerous version, and sort out what you actually believe before you decide what to bring home.
What we tend to work on:
Your specific move in the recurring fight: shutting down, escalating, conceding early, keeping a private ledger
Asking directly for what you want, rather than hinting and then resenting that the hint was missed
Boundaries, specifically the difference between stating one and issuing a threat
Resentment that has accumulated quietly and is now doing damage neither of you is discussing
What you're responsible for and what you're absorbing that isn't yours to carry
Getting clear on whether you want to stay, when you've been deciding for a long time without deciding
How to invite your partner into the conversation, if that's where this is heading
This is for people in a relationship who want to work on themselves rather than on the couple. Sometimes that's a deliberate choice. Sometimes it's because your partner isn't willing to come, and you've decided not to let that stop you.
Either way, the work is more effective than people expect. A recurring conflict is a loop, and a loop requires both participants to keep running. When one person reliably changes their move, the sequence can't complete the way it used to, and the whole dynamic has to reorganize around the new input. That's not a workaround for your partner's absence. It's a legitimate point of entry, and for some situations it's the better one, because you have complete authority over your own behavior and none over theirs.
The other thing this format offers is a room where you don't have to be diplomatic. In couples work, everything you say is heard by the person it's about. Here you can think out loud, say the ungenerous version, and sort out what you actually believe before you decide what to bring home.
What we tend to work on:
Your specific move in the recurring fight: shutting down, escalating, conceding early, keeping a private ledger
Asking directly for what you want, rather than hinting and then resenting that the hint was missed
Boundaries, specifically the difference between stating one and issuing a threat
Resentment that has accumulated quietly and is now doing damage neither of you is discussing
What you're responsible for and what you're absorbing that isn't yours to carry
Getting clear on whether you want to stay, when you've been deciding for a long time without deciding
How to invite your partner into the conversation, if that's where this is heading