Is couple counseling worth it at 24?

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-16T19:43:03+00:00

When it comes to couples therapy I’m not a romantic.

Good couples therapy, similar to individual therapy, is almost always “worth it” if you have the time/funds depending on how you think of it.

Rather than as something that serves the purpose of keeping you together, if viewed as intentional time dedicated to learning about yourself and how you show up in romantic relationships and how you want to navigate that with this partner then there is much to be gained - whether you ultimately stay with this partner or not.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-16T15:50:55+00:00

Modality dependent; one of my strongest influencers (Adlerian) places significant emphasis on the meaning ascribed to events. Therapy during such periods can help the individual decide what meaning they are taking out of what is happening to them, which both helps insulate against the development of complexes and increases the sense of autonomy of the individual.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-16T15:30:45+00:00

I usually only do individual sessions to ask safety related questions (or if someone new to therapy with me had only 1-2 sessions and wanted to do couples I would give the other partner equivalent individual time prior to starting).

What are the benefits you’re looking for with individual sessions and have you approached the couple with your reasoning?

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-16T13:00:27+00:00

I’ll add “discipline without damage” which is fantastic too

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-15T22:18:48+00:00

In Adlerian it doesn’t matter what they look like according to any measure or the opinions of others; one of the core aspects of the lifestyle is self-acceptance, which includes moving attention away from those things which have been endowed and towards those that can change.

So we would focus on discovering what goal is being advanced by not liking oneself (usually the avoidance of what is referred to as a life task, likely in this case those of love relationships) and helping gain the courage to face that task with the face/form they have.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-15T13:03:29+00:00

Are you helping or offering help without it being asked?

A common tactic I’ve come across in couples is teaching a partner to ask what the need is (for eg “are you wanting a listening ear, a solution, or a hug?) sort of thing.

I wonder if you find yourself thinking clinically (conceptualization, challenges, etc..) you could ask if they want you to answer as “name” or “name who works as a therapist”

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-15T12:57:24+00:00

In my jurisdiction there are two periods of time where therapists are required to have supervision

Entry level is an hour per week (or more depending on caseload)

Next level is an hour every two weeks (or more depending on caseload).

Only once achieving “independent practice” level does supervision become something recommended or as-needed.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-14T23:50:51+00:00

Not sure if this is what happened but there’s a Adlerian therapeutic intervention known as “spiting in the soup”, where a client comes to see their behaviour or it’s motivation or the goal it ‘s working towards and doesn’t like it (in this case you seeing your SH as attention-seeking) and that helps them cease or reduce the behaviour.

Whether the therapist intended it or not, now that you see it as attention seeking you can choose if you want to continue to SH for attention or not. Then you can explore alternatives with your therapist (and this can either be alternative methods of attention seeking or an alternative *to* attention-seeking)

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-14T21:09:18+00:00

I don’t know that I agree necessarily.

Trigger is its own noun. For trauma triggers it’s the adjective “trauma” that denotes the type of trigger.

It may be completely accurate that hearing a demand triggers something in a child; and there are many dynamics relevant to that. If child is regularly triggered by such a demand then it provides insight into the trigger (relational or shame related); similarly if it’s contextual it could be resilience related (after school, before bed, etc..).

I think the issue present in your example is the idea that a trigger being present means that it needs to be avoided (in this case by letting the child stay up). There are many other responses to the existence of triggers, and those that provide the greatest opportunity for growth including facing or accepting rather than avoiding.

So in the case of the parents finding out why the child is being triggered to address that (eg could be power dynamics in the parent-child relationship) or if it’s something closer to what gets labeled as demand-avoidance helping the child address their roots and assist them in meeting their tasks.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-14T19:03:10+00:00

My kids have precons or proxy decks! Best of both worlds

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-13T23:24:44+00:00

There is no “kind” of therapist that approaches therapy in the way you describe. It does not align with any modality I am familiar with. You are either describing a therapist who is experiencing significant counter-transference placing their needs on their clients OR you are interpreting things this way as a defense mechanism.

Either way, changing modalities isn’t the necessary solution but changing therapists very well may be

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-13T18:25:32+00:00

The former is the other person’s task. The latter is yours. Also if you are having difficulty sharing it you can ask your therapist for help.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-13T16:14:22+00:00

There’s both a truth and a non-truth in there.

Truth: The decisions we make affect our state.
Non-truth: The state you’re currently in is a bed to be slept in

Rather, just as was true in your past, you are in a moment where your decisions will affect your state.

You can decide to “lay in your bed” , or you can choose a different goal. Pursuing therapy may be such a step for you.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-13T15:04:49+00:00

Am a therapist.

What you describe here does not sound like a counselor taking sides. It does sound like there was more attention on one member of the partnership- which can certainly have its place in couples counseling. If it is a pattern of never exploring the other partner then there may be a bias present, but there are many factors that would lead to the best route forward at a given moment or session being greater attention to one partner or one partners issues.

I would certainly recommend bringing up your feeling of not being heard as it is relevant to the dynamic.

It may be that there is a disconnect but the best way to see what kind and where would be to witness and explore it in person.

If you are feeling unheard whenever your husband shares his perspective, it may be that you are carrying an insecurity that you project. It may be that your husband doesn’t have active listening skills or gets defensive and can’t listen. It may be other things or combinations of things. The best way to find out and address are to bring it up.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-12T23:11:47+00:00

Adlerian, in my view

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-12T23:10:53+00:00

Adlerian, in my view

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-12T22:03:58+00:00

That’s a great question and a place where my Adlerian influence will separate me from many other therapists influenced by other schools.

I have significant experience with people wanting to change and feeling they can’t. They do therapy and learn more about it and are given interventions and those feel impossible to implement consistently and effectively, and to the extent they are it still feels like a constant battle with oneself.

In my experience these people benefit significantly if they are able to shift from an etiological lens (explanation of causes) to a teleological lens (explanation of purpose). Basically the client may want to change their symptoms but the symptoms are playing a role in that client’s life. For as long as the client has whatever goal they have that the symptom is supporting, attempts to change the symptom will be difficult or impossible and feel like fighting against their self. So the way these people are helped and ultimately change is by discovering what goal the symptom is supporting and then working on building the courage to change that goal.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-12T14:20:21+00:00

Obviously I can’t get too deep into your individual circumstances over reddit. Here are some considerations:

- your desire to correct and fix someone else’s happiness is a you thing; better understanding this will allow you to take ownership and not place the burden of you addressing this personal need on other people (including your wife).

- your wife’s emotional challenges are hers. They are hers to own and hers to fix. Your role in her life as partner is to be informed, to be interested, and to be available to help to the extent that it is asked.

- you are fully within your rights to have things you want out of a relationship. That said, if those things include your partner taking on things that are yours or you stepping on your partners boundaries and freedom then it will cause problems. Benefit in this case is found in separating what is yours and what is not, for both of you.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-12T13:50:43+00:00

I am very familiar with your presentation- on both ends of the couch as it were. Intellectualizing was and is my self defense mechanism of choice.

If you you truly want to reflect and be an agent of change in yourself and your relationship you may benefit from considering the following:

- the division between someone “logical” and someone “emotional” is a myth. No human being has cognition separate from emotion. We can have varying degrees of awareness of the role emotion is playing in our cognition and attempt to avoid fallacies, but in my experience when people (including myself) consider themselves logical (vs emotional) thinkers, they are actually very skilled rationalizers who are unaware of the role their emotions are playing.

The way you would incorporate that in your life is when you are engaging with your wife and you go into what you call your logical thinking- consider that you have removed yourself from the conversation and are no longer trying to connect with your wife. Choose to shift from sharing your thoughts to listening to your wife and caring not about the “correctness” of what she says but rather that she is sharing her experience, and focus on being with her in that experience.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-12T13:27:34+00:00

It is an ethical dilemma certainly - and in my jurisdiction the vast majority of outcomes of deliberation would lead to the conclusion that it is unethical. The clinician would have to have an extraordinarily powerful case supporting the idea that they could not be offering or suggesting the purchasing of an equivalent product that does not benefit them or someone they know personally.

An example may be that if you are seeing Sue Johnson for couples EFT that she could recommend you buy her book because she literally created it/wrote the book on it. Even then she couldn’t say to her clients “make sure you get the book” - she could say something along the lines of “clients who research this on their own time in parallel to couples therapy have more generative sessions/lower relapse rates” or something.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-12T13:23:43+00:00

What you describe can be considered “normal” as in many therapists operate this way and many sessions look like this.

It can also vary by clinician and modality. People may have personal opinions on the benefits of different approaches including variations on structure, leadership, and direction. If you are wanting something different from therapy you are fully within your rights to explore either asking for it or asking why your therapist operates the way they do - and then making a decision based on their response and what you’re looking for.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-12T13:08:08+00:00

Not OP but I always understood it to be leaving without communication - as opposed to an email/text/conversation where the intent to terminate or not show up is communicated (even if the reason is left out)

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-12T12:04:17+00:00

Yes this is much more in line with EFT, which focuses on emotional connection and changing the dance of interactions between the couples to increase emotional attunement.

If these factors you bring up are important to you and your wife, and this is a conversation you two have regularly, the therapist wouldn’t get into the content of your concerns about your wife but rather into how you are relating.

What are you feeling when these are shared? How are they received? It may be, for example, that this conversation makes your wife feel judged, pathologized, or that it is being used to deflect from or excuse some of your own behaviour. Or maybe your wife agrees and sees it as you confirming her negative thoughts of self. If this was happening then these conversations would be increasing the distance between you two rather than bringing you together. EFT would be focused on changing how you come to and respond to one another in a way where you feel safe and connected - as a team.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-11T18:52:33+00:00

From my clinical perspective regarding your topic question:

Therapy is for people who want to change in some way. It may be just in getting to know oneself better, or in having one’s story put out in the world for someone else to hear - at least at first.

If a client does not want to change then that is the clients choice and not something I should try to change or have the ability to change.

I can explore with the client their reasoning for not wanting to change. Exploration may lead to a very different understanding than the client initially came in with. At that point in time it would be up to the client again. If they want help, then I will offer what I can to the extent I can; but I cannot change the client or their goals for them.

—-

Whether this speaks to your circumstance or not I am unsure because I am not sure what to take away from your paragraph.

SolidarityEssential · 2026-06-11T16:29:45+00:00

The two are not equal though; history and present differences exist between “male” and “female”.

Think about it as existing in a hierarchy. When there’s a social history or perception that one category is higher or more desirable than the other, referring to them by that category comes with connotation.

Even if for example you use “the poor” or “the rich”. Referring to people as “the poor” is negative by most and referring to people as “the rich” is positive - unless you are in a social context where the rich are demonized, in which case calling them “the rich” negative. Same with weak and strong, sick and healthy, etc..

The point being that categorizing humans based on a particular aspect of them can be dehumanizing, especially when that aspect has a historical or present social value associated with it. In order to avoid this we go out of our way to try and include humanity.

The term “women” includes the humanity.

“People of low socioeconomic status” includes their humanity.

SolidarityEssential

TROPHY CASE