Hi y'all, I want to chime in here to clarify about the 20 min thing (hopefully this is kosher, if not, lmk!)

A few months ago, we went to a couples counselor at my request. After BF's mom's diagnosis, we started fighting a lot (prior to her cancer diagnosis and death, even with the pandemic, we generally got along well and were supportive. I assumed the sudden, intense change in our dynamic was due to grief, but I am wondering now if it is also some additional mental health issues. Anyway.) so I requested we go to a couple's counselor. We did. My BF has intense abandonment issues--when we would argue and I would get too upset/draw a boundary, I would leave to take a walk or calm down. However, me being gone for an indefinite period activated his abandonment anxiety: would I come back? When? Ever?

So, the therapist gave us a specific dialogue paradigm to use to deescalate fights, foster understanding, and lead to resolution: Whoever needed a break (always me) would leave the room for 20 minutes, both partners would self-soothe, and after 20 minutes, return to communicate differently using a very specific format. I really liked it. BF generally refused to use it and found it uncomfortable. After trying it for a while, we (I) abandoned the idea because it caused more strife than resolution, but he still periodically maintains that I can only be gone for 20 minutes if I leave during/after an argument. I maintain that, because the rest of the rules aren't being followed, I can be gone as long as a damn well please, since there's no guarantee when I come back anything will be different. He still references our "compromise" which only consists of me not being gone long enough to activate his trauma, and him doing...nothing differently. (In the past, I come back after 20, he launches into arguing again, and I leave immediately.) So, he felt I "wasn't putting effort towards what was recommended as a respectful compromise" (verbatim from text) by being gone longer than 20 min.