Image Credit: capc.org

When working to rebuild or save a relationship that has existed for an extended period of time in which one or both people have been hurt, are angry, feel unheard or disrespected, etc., the task is actually much harder than just doing things better. In such a case, individuals in the relationship have begun to associate the relationship itself (and often the other person) with those distressing feelings and each person has likely begun to engage the other from a place of dysfunctional patterns that also have to be unlearned and replaced. In the case of genuine abuse or relational trauma, it is only wise to try to recover the relationship if the abuse can be eliminated first (something that is often extremely difficult to accomplish).

There are, therefore, a number of things that generally have to be in place in order to rebuild the relationship if the effort is going to be successful. A partial list is below:

• Both people have to want to salvage the relationship.
  • While this sounds obvious, it is not something that people in difficult relationships have often given deep thought to. They certainly want to feel better, but that is different than committing long term to the relationship as the way to feel better. When only one person is committed, the process is not likely to be successful regardless.
• Both people must be able to articulate why being in the relationship could/would be better than being out of it.
  • Like the requirement above, finding the significant motivation necessary to commit to the process typically requires understanding why that commitment would be worth it in the first place.
• There has to be something foundational to build on and worth saving.
  • Long term, intimate relationships, are, by definition, labor intensive. Rebuilding is even more intensive to begin with and, like remodeling a home, if the foundation will not support what is built on top of it, even flashy upgrades will collapse.
• Both people must be fully committed to acting in good faith and assuming the other person is too.
  • When recovering from raw emotional wounds that have resulted in behavioral patterns that conspire against the health of the relationship, it is essential that both people enter the reconstruction process from a place of good faith, believing the other person is too, so that the process can survive inevitable mistakes and setbacks, i.e., “what you did really hurt me, but I know that was an old pattern talking and that you are committed to doing better.”
• Each person must be willing to work on issues that they individually bring to the relationship.
  • Relationships require at least two people and each of those people bring a lifetime of “stuff” to the relationship. Often, a “problem” in a relationship is not actually about the relationship, but about an unresolved issue with one of the partners.
• Both people must be able to take the “long view” to repairing/rebuilding the relationship.
  • Although dysfunctional, hurtful relationships can certainly be distressing, they actually take less work than fixing the relationship does. In order to recover the relationship, both people have to be willing to invest significant effort over an extended period of time in order to replace dysfunctional, maladaptive patterns with functional, adaptive ones.

The primary goal in rebuilding or saving a relationship is to create a relational reality that supports sustainable intimacy. Therefore, each person must regularly engage in communication and behavior that feels intimate. Typically, that includes things like vulnerability, authenticity, trust, safety, attraction, shared interest, occasional subordination of one’s own needs, healthy conflict, repair after rupture, good faith, care, honesty, respect, etc. Not all of these things are required all the time, but relationships in which intimacy is strong and resilient tend to be rewarding and sustainable even during difficult situations and periods.

While it is possible for a couple to engage the process described here by themselves, it is a very heavy lift even for skilled partners and often benefits from professional support from a therapist with experience supporting relationships. How long this repair process takes depends on how much “damage” has to be undone, how committed each person is, and what external factors either support or mitigate against the relationship. Regardless, the solid replacement of dysfunctional patterns with adaptive ones is necessary to sustain intimacy, and thus the relationship, going forward. Some examples of concrete relationship repair practices are offered below. This is not an exhaustive list and not all items apply to every relationship.

Here are some concrete practices and skills essential for relationship repair:

Communication Skills

Active listening – Fully focusing on your partner without planning your response, reflecting back what you heard (“So what I’m hearing is…”), and asking clarifying questions before reacting.

“I” statements – Expressing feelings and needs without blame: “I feel hurt when plans change last minute because I value our time together” rather than “You always cancel on me.”

Non-defensive responses – When receiving criticism, pausing before responding, acknowledging valid points even when it’s uncomfortable, and resisting the urge to immediately counterattack or justify.

Emotional Regulation

Recognizing your triggers – Identifying what situations or words activate old wounds, and learning to notice your physical/emotional state before you react.

Taking timeouts effectively – When overwhelmed, calling a pause (“I need 20 minutes to calm down, then I want to continue this conversation”) rather than stonewalling or walking away indefinitely.

Self-soothing techniques – Deep breathing, grounding exercises, or brief physical activity to manage intense emotions so you can engage constructively.

Accountability and Repair

Genuine apologies – Taking full responsibility without minimizing, making excuses, or adding “but you…” A complete apology includes: acknowledging the specific harm, expressing genuine remorse, explaining what you’ll do differently, and following through.

Making amends – Going beyond words to demonstrate change through consistent actions over time.

Accepting apologies graciously – When your partner apologizes sincerely, acknowledging their effort rather than immediately listing other grievances or withholding forgiveness as punishment.

Vulnerability Practices

Sharing fears and insecurities – Revealing not just anger but the hurt, fear, or shame underneath: “When you criticized my cooking, I felt ashamed because I was trying to do something special for you.”

Asking for what you need directly – “I need reassurance right now” or “I need you to just listen without trying to fix this” rather than expecting your partner to read your mind.

Expressing appreciation specifically – Regularly noting concrete things your partner does: “I noticed you’ve been coming home earlier this week and it makes me feel like a priority.”

Conflict Management

Staying on topic – Addressing one issue at a time rather than bringing up past grievances or kitchen-sinking (“And another thing…”).

Identifying the real issue – Learning to distinguish between the surface complaint (dishes left in the sink) and the underlying need (feeling respected and valued).

Finding compromise – Both people offering solutions and being willing to meet in the middle, rather than either demanding their way or martyring themselves.

Agreeing to disagree – Recognizing some differences won’t be resolved and that’s okay; focusing on understanding rather than winning.

Trust-Building Actions

Following through consistently – Doing what you say you’ll do, especially small daily commitments, to rebuild reliability.

Transparency – Sharing information proactively rather than waiting to be asked, especially about things that have been sources of conflict.

Honoring boundaries – Respecting limits your partner has set, even when you don’t fully understand or agree with them.

Intimacy Cultivation

Regular check-ins – Setting aside time weekly to discuss the relationship itself: what’s working, what needs attention, how each person is feeling.

Intentional quality time – Creating phone-free, distraction-free time together doing activities you both enjoy or trying new experiences together.

Physical affection without expectations – Hugs, hand-holding, or other non-sexual touch that communicates care and connection.

Sexual touch – If the relationship appropriately includes sex, finding time to connect sexually with a focus on connection, not performance.

Expressing admiration – Regularly sharing what you genuinely respect or admire about your partner.

Pattern Interruption

Naming the pattern in the moment – “I think we’re falling into that cycle where I withdraw and you pursue. Can we pause and try differently?”

Creating new scripts – Deliberately planning alternative responses to recurring conflicts before they happen.

Catching yourself early – Recognizing when you’re beginning old behaviors and course-correcting before full escalation.

Ongoing Maintenance

Regular relationship rituals – Weekly date nights, daily connection moments, relationship reviews, or whatever structure helps maintain intentionality.

Continued learning – Reading about relationships together, attending workshops, or working with a therapist even when things are going well.

Celebrating progress – Acknowledging improvements and efforts, not just focusing on what still needs work.

These skills don’t develop overnight. Most people need practice, will make mistakes, and benefit from professional guidance in learning and applying them consistently.

Summary

Rebuilding a damaged long-term relationship is more difficult than simply “doing things better” because partners have often developed negative associations with the relationship itself and have fallen into dysfunctional patterns that must be unlearned.

Prerequisites for successful repair:

• Both people must genuinely want to save the relationship (not just feel better)
• Both can articulate why staying together is better than separating
• A solid foundation exists worth building on
• Both commit to acting in good faith and assuming the partner is too
• Each person addresses their individual issues
• Both accept this requires sustained effort over extended time

The goal is creating sustainable intimacy through regular vulnerable, authentic communication and behavior including trust, safety, respect, healthy conflict, and repair after rupture.

Key repair practices include:

Communication: Active listening, “I” statements, non-defensive responses

Emotional regulation: Recognizing triggers, effective timeouts, self-soothing

Accountability: Genuine apologies, making amends, gracious acceptance

Vulnerability: Sharing fears, asking directly for needs, expressing appreciation

Conflict management: Staying on topic, finding compromise, agreeing to disagree

Trust-building: Following through, transparency, honoring boundaries

Intimacy cultivation: Regular check-ins, quality time, physical affection

Pattern interruption: Naming dysfunctional cycles and creating new responses Professional therapy support for the process described here is often beneficial.

The timeline depends on the extent of damage in the relationship, commitment level, and external factors. Success requires replacing dysfunctional patterns with adaptive ones consistently over time.

Image Credit: thehermitage.rehab

Boundaries in relationships (any kind of relationship) can not only be protective, they can actually improve the relationship if they are thoughtful, well-communicated, and consistently enforced. They often bring people closer rather than pushing them apart by preventing resentment from building up when one person consistently subordinates him or herself to another. When one is clear about their limits, they can show up more fully and authentically in the relationship. Boundaries also model self-respect, which often encourages others to be respectful as well.

Boundaries often reduce conflict and relational stress by establishing clear expectations. Instead of people guessing what’s okay or assuming what both people need, boundaries create a shared understanding. This typically makes interactions more predictable and comfortable for everyone involved.

When do boundaries make sense?

Signs that boundaries in a relationship might be helpful include noticing that you are frequently feeling resentful, irritable, misunderstood, ignored, or burned out by your interactions with another person.

However, boundaries by themselves are not typically a good tool for communicating one’s needs or trying to control another person’s behavior. They also typically don’t work well as a “heat of the moment” response to a real or perceived slight or as a means of eliminating all distress in relationships, which by definition, include interactions that don’t always feel good or affirming. On the other hand, when boundaries are well thought out, clearly articulated, reasonable and enforceable, they can support the health of relationships and the people in them.

Common Types of Boundaries

Although boundaries are often different based on the nature of the relationship, typical categories of boundaries include areas such as emotional, physical, sexual, financial, spiritual, language, time, etc. A boundary is a limit one sets about what they’re willing to accept or participate in. It’s about defining what’s okay and not okay for you, and what you’ll do in response—not about controlling what others do.

How Setting Boundaries Can Help a Relationship

Setting boundaries can play a vital role in fostering healthy, respectful, and fulfilling relationships. Here are some key benefits:

Benefit	Description	Impact on Relationship
Promotes Mutual Respect	Boundaries help establish respect for individual needs and values.	Fosters a safe environment for both partners.
Encourages Open Communication	Clear boundaries necessitate honest discussions, enhancing transparency.	Builds trust and understanding between partners.
Enhances Emotional Health	Protecting personal space and emotions reduces anxiety and stress.	Contributes to overall well-being and relationship satisfaction.
Mitigates Resentment	Clearly defined boundaries help avoid misunderstandings.	Reduces feelings of frustration and anger.
Facilitates Personal Growth	Encouraging individuality in a relationship fosters personal development.	Supports both partners in their personal journeys.
Establishes Accountability	Boundaries allow partners to hold each other responsible for their actions.	Promotes a sense of responsibility in the relationship.
Improves Conflict Resolution	Clear boundaries clarify the limits of acceptable behavior during disagreements.	Leads to more effective and peaceful conflict resolution.

Additional Insights

• Flexibility in Boundaries: Healthy boundaries can evolve as the relationship grows, allowing for adaptability and development.
• Balanced Dynamics: Setting boundaries helps maintain a balance between autonomy and connection, ensuring that both partners feel valued.

By implementing and respecting boundaries, partners can enhance their relationship’s quality, leading to greater satisfaction and emotional health.

Best Practices for Boundary Setting

Establishing healthy boundaries can be very helpful for maintaining respectful and fulfilling relationships. Start by getting clear with yourself about what you want to be different. Notice when you feel resentful, drained, or uncomfortable—these feelings often signal where boundaries are missing. Reflect on your values, particularly as they relate to relationships, and what kinds of interactions align with them. Expect some discomfort, especially if you’re not used to setting boundaries. Also, people who benefited from your lack of boundaries might initially resist—they may need time to adjust. And if they fail to adjust, and the boundary is reasonable, that is important information to have about the relationship.

Here are some effective practices:

Practice	Description	Benefits
Self-Reflection	Take time to understand your own needs and limits.	Clarifies what you value and need from others.
Communicate Clearly	Use direct and honest language to express your boundaries.	Reduces misunderstandings and promotes honesty.
Be Consistent	Enforce your boundaries consistently over time.	Builds trust and reinforces your limits.
Use “I” Statements	Frame your boundaries using “I” statements to express feelings.	Makes your needs more relatable and less accusatory.
Practice Assertiveness	Stand firm in your boundaries without being aggressive.	Encourages respect and empowers you in the relationship.
Listen Actively	Be open to hearing the other person’s perspective.	Fosters mutual understanding and collaboration.
Recognize When to Flex	Understand that some boundaries may need to evolve.	Allows for growth and adaptation in the relationship.
Seek Support if Needed	Consider talking to a trusted friend or therapist about your boundaries.	Provides additional perspective and guidance.

Additional Tips

• Start Small: If setting boundaries feels challenging, begin with minor ones to build confidence.
• Be Patient: Allow time for the other person to adjust to the new boundaries.
• Check-in Regularly: Periodically assess how well the boundaries are working for both partners.

Engaging in these practices helps create a healthier relationship dynamic where both individuals feel respected and valued.

Unenforceable Boundaries

Keep in mind that some boundaries work well and other do not, often because they are not realistically enforceable. These boundaries often lead to frustration and misunderstandings in relationships. Here are some characteristics and examples:

Characteristic	Description	Implications
Vague or Ambiguous	Boundaries that are not clearly defined or articulated.	Can confuse the other person about expectations.
Expectations Without Communication	Assuming the other person knows your boundaries without discussing them.	Leads to misinterpretations and unmet needs.
Inconsistent	Frequently changing or not maintaining the boundaries.	Diminishes credibility and respect for the boundary.
Dependent on Others’ Behavior	Boundaries that require others to change their behaviors/beliefs.	Causes frustration when the other person does not comply.
High Emotional Burden	Setting boundaries tied to emotional reactions without clear guidelines.	Creates stress and confusion for both parties.

Common Examples

• “I won’t tolerate being disrespected” without specifying what disrespect looks like.
• “You should know how I feel” implies the other person ought to be a mind reader.
• “I need some space” without clearly defining what “space” means (e.g., physical distance, time apart).

What Not to Do When Setting Boundaries

Don’t weaponize boundaries: Using boundaries to punish another person obviously compromises the benefits of boundary setting and makes the boundary itself a source of distress and conflict.

Don’t disguise an ultimatum as a boundary: Although there is a place for ultimatums in relationships, by definition, they are one-sided and not open to shared commitment.

Don’t use boundaries as a means to avoid difficult issues or stonewall important communication.

Don’t use boundaries as a way to manipulate another person.

Summary

In short, boundaries are limits you set about what you’re willing to accept or participate in. When thoughtfully implemented and consistently enforced, they strengthen relationships by mitigating resentment, encouraging authenticity, and establishing clear expectations.

Key points: Boundaries work best when they’re well thought out, clearly communicated, reasonable, and enforceable. They’re useful when you feel resentful, drained, or burned out—but shouldn’t be used to control others’ behavior, as ultimatums, or as “heat of the moment” reactions.

Benefits include: promoting mutual respect, encouraging open communication, reducing resentment, and improving conflict resolution.

Best practices: Reflect on your needs, communicate clearly using “I” statements, be consistent, and expect some initial discomfort or resistance.

Avoid: Vague boundaries, expecting others to read your mind, inconsistency, trying to control others’ behavior, weaponizing boundaries as punishment, or using them to avoid necessary conversations.

The core principle: Boundaries define what you will do or accept—not what others must do. They should leave room for others (and you) to make their own choices, including modifying or leaving the relationship.

Image Credit: ar.inspiredpencil.com

Depression is a mental health condition characterized by persistent feelings of sadness, emptiness, or loss of interest in activities that once brought pleasure. It’s more than just feeling down temporarily—it exists on a spectrum and can be a very serious mental health condition that affects how you think, feel, and function in daily life. While it can exist in isolation as its own set of symptoms and/or diagnosis, depression is often a “downstream” manifestation of trauma, grief, addiction, or sudden life crisis that exceeds one’s ability to cope. You can see one very personal description of how depression can feel here.

Common symptoms include:

• Persistent sad or “empty” mood
• A physical sense of weight on the body
• Darkness and/or despair
• Loss of interest or pleasure in hobbies and activities
• Changes in appetite or weight
• Sleep disturbances (insomnia or oversleeping)
• Fatigue and decreased energy
• Feelings of worthlessness or excessive guilt
• Difficulty concentrating or making decisions
• Physical symptoms like aches or digestive problems
• In severe cases, thoughts of death or suicide

Effective treatment approaches:

Most evidence-based treatments combine different approaches tailored to the individual, which include, but are not limited to the following:

Psychotherapy is highly effective, with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), which helps identify and change negative thought and behavioral patterns, interpersonal/relational therapy (IPT), and EMDR (EMDR), which facilitates reprocessing of previous and current trauma and other stressors, as good, evidence-based therapies. Other approaches such as behavioral activation and psychodynamic[1] therapy can also be beneficial.

Medication, particularly antidepressants like SSRIs or SNRIs (there are other classes of antidepressants as well), can help regulate and recalibrate brain chemistry. These typically take several weeks to show full effects and work best when combined with therapy. As with all medications, they often come with side-effects which must be carefully evaluated with mental health clinicians. This is particularly important with younger patients.

Lifestyle changes and specific activities play an important supporting role: regular exercise (which can be as effective as medication for mild to moderate depression), maintaining consistent sleep schedules, eating nutritious foods, and staying socially connected all contribute to recovery.

Evidenced Based Activities That Can Improve Mood and Support Well Being

Intervention	Frequency	Activity
Mindfulness	Daily
Self-Compassion	3-5 x Week
Sleep	Daily
Diet	Daily
Physical Activity	3-5 x Week
Social/Human Connection	3-5 x Week
Gratitude	Weekly
Kindness towards Others	Daily

Other treatments like light therapy (especially for seasonal depression), psychedelic and ketamine therapy, and in treatment-resistant cases, options like electroconvulsive therapy (ECT)[2] or transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) may be considered.

A Note on Environment

Environment matters significantly, so if the inputs that are causing depression are not addressed (or can’t be addressed), that will compromise the efficacy of depression treatment. Ideally, treatment of depression also includes identifying and mitigating environmental factors.

Summary

Depression is fairly common with clinical depression experienced by about one fifth of the population over a lifetime. Rates of depression are much higher among those 25 years of age and younger. It exists on a spectrum from mild to incapacitating. The best approach for treating depression is typically a combination of therapies and, when appropriate, medication, along with lifestyle modifications. What works varies by person, so working with a mental health professional to find the right treatment plan is important. Fortunately, recovery is possible—most people with depression improve with proper treatment.

---

[1] Psychodynamic therapy is a therapeutic approach that explores how unconscious thoughts, feelings, and past experiences—particularly from childhood—shape current behavior, emotions, and relationships. It’s rooted in psychoanalytic theory but has evolved into various modern, evidence-based forms that are typically shorter-term than traditional psychoanalysis.

[2] Although ECT has evolved significantly and is much safer than when it was first developed, it is an invasive therapy that requires general anesthesia and works by using electrical current in the brain to induce a type of seizure that is thought to “re-set” the brain, often relieving depression and other symptoms. It is usually reserved for severe, “treatment resistant” depression, with a relatively high success rate for symptom relief. It also has relatively rare, but potentially significant side effects related to memory and other kinds of cognition.

If you are a leader in a large, corporate setting, your greatest risk is related to your youngest employees who are likely: suffering poor mental health, disengaged, and about to quit.

A recent paper from researchers at Dartmouth and the University of Glasgow found that, for workers under 25, mental health is now so poor, it is equal to or worse than those who are unemployed or disabled, and is roughly 15 points lower than those 55 or older. This despair is particularly acute for women, minorities, and those with less formal education. Additional research shows that about two thirds of Gen Zers report at least one mental health symptom, 60% are taking a psychotropic medication, and 42% have actually been diagnosed with a mental health condition. A full 85% are worried or very worried about the future.

What is causing this historically unprecedented despair among today’s youngest workers?

Within organizations themselves, the researchers see an increasingly poor work environment, with limited opportunities for autonomy, mentorship, and growth, and unprecedented micromanagement via technological surveillance, all in the face of declining wage-based buying power, declining or non-existent benefits, and reduced job security.

The paper notes that “there has been a growth in job demands and a reduction in worker job control,” and that, “employers are successfully deploying new technologies to minimize “break’ times, and exert greater control over production processes, often aided by close technological monitoring of work processes, which limit worker control and autonomy over ever-more-demanding processes.” While companies may think they are leveraging “productivity,” they are also effectively eliminating opportunities for creative thought, collaboration, innovation, problem solving, and a sense of purpose, which by definition are not “surveilable,” and, which are at the core of job satisfaction. Probably more importantly, most Gen Z employees struggle to see meaningful purpose in their work as what they do is becoming more about discreet tasks, which are rarely visibly connected to bigger picture outcomes.

Globally, young people have also gotten the worst “raw deal” of any generation since boomers’ parents and have lived their entire lives under the gloom of multiple existential threats such as climate change, a pandemic, the “great recession,” growing wealth gaps, and frighteningly divisive zero-sum politics. This has all transpired in the world of social media, which, is understood to be its own substantial threat to mental health and wellbeing[1], with both correlational and experimental research showing associations between heavy social media use and higher rates of depression, anxiety, and loneliness. Gen Zers are also suffering more than other generations from what psychiatrist Anna Lembke describes as the “physiologic distress of overabundance,” which refers to the overwhelming quantity, access, potency, and novelty of everything from food to smart phone content and apps to pornography to alcohol and other drugs. All modern humans are experiencing constant dopamine cycling, but Gen Z was born into a world of dopamine burnout, which like other factors, leads to depression and anxiety among other symptoms. And, of great significance, young people today are more removed from deep, human connection than at any time in modern history. Young people spend less time with other people, particularly in long-term relationships, than any generation alive and likely any generation in human history. As the NY Times columnist David Brooks recently noted, “you can build a culture around loving commitments, or you can build a culture around individual autonomy, but you can’t do both. Over the past six decades or so, we chose autonomy, and as a result, we have been on a collective journey from autonomy to achievement to anxiety.”

For many young workers, all of these factors are exacerbated by significant student debt, insecure housing, and an inability to achieve historical markers of “adulting” such as marrying, buying a home, and having children. In fact, in the 2025 Gen Z Home Buying report, “Nearly 1 in 3 (30%) have even thought about squatting or living in their car out of desperation [and] another third (36%) say they would consider marrying someone just to afford a home.” As for home ownership, “nearly half of Gen Z (49%) believe homeownership is so far out of reach that there’s no point in trying to save now,” while 79% believe they are simply priced out of homeownership under any circumstances.

Importantly, the Dartmouth and Glasgow researchers make it clear that while mental health is declining among youth at large, for the first time, this decline is prevalent among those who are actually employed, noting, “we have confirmed that the mental health of the young in the United States has worsened rapidly over the last decade, as reported in multiple datasets” and “we can conclude that the reason that mental despair now declines in age is because of the recent decline in the mental health of workers under the age of forty and especially those under twenty-five.”

To be clear, not all Gen Zers are struggling and some are thriving. Regardless, for those who are experiencing despair, it is not a result of some sort of defect or character flaw. They are simply facing far more headwinds than any generation in the last 100 years. They certainly do not possess an inherently less robust work ethic than their elder peers. They are simply and rightly pessimistic about the cost-benefit of a system in which there is little long-term value in sacrificing their time, effort, and wellbeing when there is currently far more cost than benefit.

So, what are employers to do?

While employers cannot control the myriad global realities contributing to the poor mental health and despair felt by so many young workers, they absolutely can control many factors in the work environment. Even ignoring altruistic motivations for creating a better, more sustainable work environment, there are profound self-serving reasons that leaders should care about supporting wellbeing among their youngest employees. First, as noted many times by Gallup, disengaged workers are extremely costly to the organizations that employ them—and employees who are feeling despair are rarely engaged. Second, the cost, both overt and covert, of replacing workers who quit is crippling, with the initial financial outlay alone usually exceeding the annual salary of the employee, and the downstream, indirect costs being potentially magnitudes greater. Third, it is becoming clear that so far AI by itself is a very poor replacement for human beings, with a recent study by MIT finding that only about 5% of current AI investments are providing a positive ROI. If you as a leader think that you can afford to drive young employees out of your organization with a low-quality work environment and simply replace them with bots, you are very likely to create expensive and even profound downstream problems for yourself. Moreover, who will fill your future mid-level and senior management if your youngest employees are disengaged, dispirited and feel no affinity toward their employer even if they stay? Who will be the source of new, innovative ideas? Who will be the foundation of any net-positive value for your organization? Who will comprise the market that buys your products and services and those of other companies in your eco-system if your employees (or former employees) are living in a distressed, hyper-fragile economic state?

These are not hypothetical questions. The future of your organization, both short and long-term, is meaningfully dependent on what happens to your Gen-Z workforce. Ignoring their distress is likely at your own peril.

---

[1] Social media is designed to generate comparisons of a user’s real life to false, curated lives as well as to feel a general sense of inadequacy and repeating cycles of dopamine highs and lows, which drives behavior that is beneficial to social media companies.

Image credit: KScott30

It is clear that the frequency of estrangement among family members has increased fairly significantly over the last few decades, with one in four people currently reporting being estranged from at least one other family member (Recek, et. al., 2023).

There are a number of reasons for this, including:

• Changing Social Norms: Modern society places greater emphasis on individual autonomy and personal boundaries. This can lead individuals to prioritize their mental health and emotional well-being, sometimes at the expense of maintaining challenging or toxic family relationships.
• Generational Differences: Differences in values, beliefs, and lifestyles between generations—such as attitudes toward gender roles, sexuality, and politics—can result in misunderstandings and conflict, sometimes culminating in estrangement. Moreover, Millennials and Gen-Zers are simply less willing to “endure” family dysfunction.
• Mental Health Awareness: Increased awareness and dialogue around issues like narcissism, emotional abuse, and trauma have empowered individuals to recognize and act on harmful family dynamics.
• Socioeconomic Factors: Financial stress and generational economic inequalities within families can also contribute to breakdowns in relationships.
• Technology and Communication: While technology can bridge distances, it can also facilitate avoidance or escalate conflicts through miscommunication or social media disputes. Social media also frequently validates the choice to cut off contact with “toxic” people.

So, while there may be good reasons for eliminating contact with parents, siblings, or other family members, there are also potentially significant downsides. To be clear, it is not healthy to continue to engage with anyone who is abusive or significantly compromises one’s mental health and, in those cases, ceasing all contact may be the best choice. Moreover, in the past, due to different social norms and limited options, many people stayed in relationship with other people, even though they were truly miserable, frightened, demeaned, etc. That was not desirable then and it isn’t desirable now.

On the other hand, it appears that many people are currently choosing to completely cut off all contact with family members for transgressions and relational mistakes, that, while potentially significant, may not be justification for completely ending the relationship. Even when a parent, child, sibling or other family member can be profoundly challenging, often as a result of their own unresolved family of origin and other mental health issues, estrangement is a “nuclear” option that also results in its own set of problems and lost opportunities.

For example, even dysfunctional families and family relationships are often a source of refuge and human connection in a world of intense ambiguity and uncertainty. In other words, a parent may drive a child crazy, but there is often a bond with that parent that cannot be easily replicated via other relationships. When one completely breaks those ties we not only lose our connection to family identity and support, we experience relational loss and often the grief that accompanies that loss. And the people we leave behind also typically feel emotional distress and loss. In fact, in my practice, some of the most intense grief I see is felt by parents who have lost access to their adult children. Importantly, by definition, both parties end up grieving in isolation, rather than as a shared experience. Of course, to clarify again, if someone is being harmed, the abuser’s wellbeing is not the responsibility of the abused. I am referring to situations that, while distressing and even infuriating, may not justify the “nuclear” option which could result in a cure that may be worse than the disease.

Additionally, once the ties are cut, from that point on, estranged individuals experience all life events, good and bad, without being able to celebrate or navigate those events with those who are estranged. As a result, family narratives and histories fundamentally change, not just in the moment, but intergenerationally. Marriages, births, deaths, moves, new jobs, and other meaningful events occur as unshared markers of one’s life journey that become memorialized in the context of estrangement. This often leads to some level of regret even when there have also been benefits from separation.

Of equal significance, estrangement precludes opportunity for relational repair (and the growth that comes from that) and further impacts the individuals involved whose identities and self-perceptions now include the notion of unresolvable conflict and a “failed relationship.”

And, unfortunately, recent research shows that family estrangement is significantly associated with lower life satisfaction and higher levels of depression among those who are estranged (Hank, 2024). In other words, while estrangement may by motivated by a desire to improve mental health, in some cases it may achieve the opposite.

So, what are some alternatives to estrangement?

Often, a decision to break ties with a family member happens “in the heat of the moment” as part of some relational rupture. Although understandable from an emotional perspective, these decisions can be relatively impulsive even when the hurt is deep and real, and even when there have been repeated similar situations in the past. In other words, we are more likely to choose the nuclear option when we are the most emotionally activated.

If we can manage to avoid or even forestall a full relational break to begin with, there are a number of options that can provide relief and safety from genuine relational stressors without ending the relationship including:

• Mediation and Therapy: Professional support through family counseling, mediation, or therapy can provide tools for conflict resolution and healing. This can be incredibly valuable because it can facilitate communication and resolution in a less triggering environment with a third person who is not emotionally invested in the relationship nor personally affected by its challenges.
• Boundary Setting: In most cases, one can set many potential boundaries short of estrangement while maintaining some level of contact even if the relationship changes. This process can also be facilitated in a therapeutic setting.
• Changing the Relationship: In some cases it may be possible to redefine a relationship, even in fundamental ways, that allows for some level of contact at much lower risk.
• Shared Healing: Over time, with the buffer of boundaries, a commitment to repairing previous ruptures can move the relationship toward greater functionality and reward, strengthening ties and obviating the need for some boundaries.

In short, while there are situations in which cutting all ties with a family member is a preferable option, estrangement presents its own challenges and psychological distress. Moreover, once there is no contact or interaction in a relationship, life gets lived in the context of estrangement rather than connection, and downstream changes in both individuals and their families are often difficult to unwind. Additionally, the presence of loss, grief and regret can be as distressing as the relationship was before the ties were cut and depression may even be worse. As such, it is important to be extremely judicious before choosing the nuclear option, particularly when other options may be acceptable and even desirable. Sometimes even significant relational discomfort is ultimately preferable to the discomfort of no relationship at all.

A Note on Reconciliation

In most cases, reconciliation after estrangement is actually possible, particularly if both parties are willing to reconcile with an eye toward a revised relationship and reconnecting is actually safe. This can happen even when there has been zero contact over a period of time, or, if there has been contact, but it has been “negative.” Most humans would rather be in relationship with family members than not. We are evolutionarily hard wired for that connection. While some people reconcile on their own, it is often very helpful to have the effort facilitated by a therapist because many of the land mines that led to estrangement in the first place still exist and can trip up even well-meaning family members trying to rebuild connection.

References

Hank, K. (2024). Emerging Ideas. Family estrangement and its association with life satisfaction and depressiveness in adulthood. Family Relations, 73(5), 2937–2944. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.13063

Reczek, R., Stacey, L., & Thomeer, M. B. (2023). Parent–adult child estrangement in the United States by gender, race/ethnicity, and sexuality. Journal of Marriage and Family, 85(2), 494-517.

Image credit: burodenelzen.nl

We know from observational and experimental research, and brain imaging, that EMDR decreases activity in areas of the brain that are typically disrupted by traumatic stress such as the thalamus, hypothalamus, amygdala, and caudate nucleus, all of which are located in the interior regions of the brain, and all of which are involved in emotion, fear response, sleep, and memory, and in the case of the caudate nucleus, also influence motor control. We also know that EMDR activates activity in hippocampal and higher cortical areas of the brain related to problem solving, analysis, memory processing, and meaning-making. This combination of effects appears to recalibrate brain function, returning it to a state that is closer to what we would see pre-trauma—and the effects are lasting.[1]

EMDR theory itself labels what is happening in the brain during therapy as Adaptive Information Processing (AIP), which it is believed is directly related to be generated by bilaterial stimulation (BLS). Initially, BLS was achieved through eye movement, which is usually considered to be preferable if possible, but is often now achieved through other means as well such as bilateral tapping, buzzers, alternating sounds, etc.

Imaging Studies

There are numerous imaging studies (fMRI, EEG, SPECT, MRI) for EMDR, showing that it changes brain activity and structure, reducing hyperactivity in fear centers like the amygdala and increasing activity in frontal regions, which helps process traumatic memories by normalizing brain networks involved in emotion regulation and memory consolidation. These studies reveal that EMDR normalizes the hippocampus and amygdala function supporting its effectiveness for PTSD. 

Types of Imaging Used

• fMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging): Shows changes in brain activity and blood flow during tasks, revealing reduced amygdala response and increased prefrontal cortex activity after EMDR.
• SPECT (Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography): Used to observe regional cerebral blood flow, showing patterns of activation in areas like the anterior cingulate gyrus and thalamus after treatment.
• EEG (Electroencephalography): Measures electrical activity, showing shifts in brain activation from emotional to more integrated areas during EMDR sessions, correlating with symptom improvement.
• MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging):Used for structural analysis, though changes in volume (like the hippocampus) might take longer to appear. 

Key Findings

• Amygdala & Fear Response: EMDR reduces the exaggerated response of the amygdala (the brain’s fear center) to trauma cues.
• Prefrontal and Dorsolateral Cortices (PFC and DLC) Activation: Increases activity in the PFC and DLC, which helps with emotion regulation, higher cognitive functions, and executive control.
• Hippocampal Function: Helps normalize the hippocampus, a key memory structure often affected in PTSD.
• Memory Reprocessing: Imaging suggests EMDR helps move traumatic memories from limbic (emotional) areas to neocortical (semantic/narrative) networks, integrating them better. (This may partially explain how trauma memories and sensations become less intense and acute after EMDR treatment).
• REM Sleep: Sleep studies show that REM sleep improves after EMDR treatment.
• Attention: Executive function and increased ability to focus, particularly over time, improve after EMDR treatment. (This is likely a combination of decrease in threat response networks and increase in neocortical activity).

Conclusion
Neuroimaging studies and other research provide biological evidence that EMDR therapy is far more than a psychological technique; it induces real, measurable changes in brain function and structure, helping to desensitize and reprocess (EMDR) traumatic memories for better neurocognitive and mental health outcomes.

References

de Jongh, A., de Roos, C., & El-Leithy, S. (2024). State of the science: Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 37, 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.23012

P.F. Rousseau, M. El Khoury-Malhame, E. Reynaud, X. Zendjidjian, J.C. Samuelian, S. Khalfa, Neurobiological correlates of EMDR therapy effect in PTSD, European Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, Volume 3, Issue 2, 2019, Pages 103-111, ISSN 2468-7499, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejtd.2018.07.001

---

[1] While this brief article focuses on trauma, there is expansive, peer-reviewed research that also validates EMDR for treatment of depression, anxiety, addiction, ODC, and other mental health symptoms/conditions.

In popular culture, and even in therapeutic environments, we frequently refer to emotions and feelings as “positive” and “negative.” This is natural because some emotions feel better than others and some frankly feel really uncomfortable. However, although it’s natural to categorize emotions that way, it actually gets in the way of psychological health—and healing when emotions are connected to psychic wounds.

This polemic labeling of emotions creates two significant problems for our mental health. One substantial downside is that when we identify an emotion or feeling as “negative,” our natural response is to avoid or resist or suppress it because it is a “bad” emotion. The second, noteworthy problem, is that the very act of labeling the emotion as “bad” or “negative,” whether or not we avoid it, tends to result in more stress and diminished psychological wellbeing. One peer reviewed study from 2023 found that “negative judgments of negative emotions were uniquely associated with worse psychological health concurrently and prospectively.” While it may seem counter-intuitive to embrace difficult or uncomfortable feelings, part of being an evolved, emotionally healthy human being, is to have access to a broad palate of feelings that reflect the reality of life experiences—and to feel and express the emotions that make sense in given circumstances. In fact, research over the last 15 years makes it clear that acceptance, without judgment, of unpleasant or difficult emotions is actually necessary for psychological health and wellbeing, because it mitigates avoidance, it normalizes the experience, and it shortens the duration of emotional distress.

Unfortunately, because we label emotions as positive and negative, we are biased toward honoring and welcoming emotions that feel good, while short-changing, judging, or actively avoiding emotions that are uncomfortable. A recent report from Cornell University found that “labeling emotions as ‘bad’ contributes to our negative feelings, making us feel even worse.” In other words, the nature of the emotion is not predictive for our psychological wellbeing. However, how we feel about (meta-emotion) and label the emotion is predictive for our psychological health. Our propensity to label difficult emotions as “negative” is, in itself, bad for us!

Avoidance is particularly pernicious. As a client once presciently said, “When we bury emotions, we bury them alive.” Not only do they not go away just because we buried them, they often “Zombify” and eventually crawl to the surface as different/more intense emotions than when they were suppressed, frequently in a dysregulated state. Over time, they might also manifest psychogenically as migraines or gastrointestinal symptoms or addiction or even autoimmune disorders among many other “medical” conditions. To paraphrase the comedian Bill Burr from one of his comedic bits, “I’m not old enough to die, but I’m emotionally repressed enough to drop dead of a heart attack.”

At least as importantly, when we in some way avoid, diminish, or pejoratively judge emotions because they are “negative,” we fail to experience life as it actually is, while living inauthentically. Moreover, we can short circuit human connection and psychological healing when we interact and behave from a place of denial. Additionally, the very act of pushing back against or avoiding an uncomfortable feeling can intensify the discomfort we feel. A Buddhist perspective on this dynamic suggests that the difference between pain and suffering is resistance, so although our avoidance may be well intentioned, as the Cornell report noted, it can actually make us feel worse! A possibly more compelling argument for letting in difficult emotions is that it is the variety of emotion that gives meaning and texture to lived experience—to our quality of life. Without occasional despair, we can’t appreciate the wonder of joy. Moreover, the dialectical nature of life makes it possible to be simultaneously sad and grateful or to feel love for someone who has hurt us. It is that complexity and nuance that is often at the heart of humanity itself, but only if we embrace all emotion.

It is also likely that, similar to physical pain and discomfort, we actually need to acknowledge and feel psychic discomfort, which serves as a warning that something is not right or safe or healthy in our lives.

Of note, the importance of accepting and feeling a broad palate of emotions does not negate the value of “positive thinking” and certainly doesn’t negate the value of a positive attitude, which research clearly shows often results in choices and behaviors that support desired, positive outcomes. However, it is important that positive thinking doesn’t manifest as purposeful avoidance of unpleasant feelings. Positive thinking and acceptance of difficult emotions can co-exist.

So, why do we label emotions the way we do?

As noted previously, one obvious answer is that some emotions feel better or worse than others, so we associate those feelings with positive and negative, but that explanation is not sufficient. More importantly, Western psychology has led us to fear many of the emotions that are part of being human via the idea that we have to immediately intervene when we are feeling difficult emotions or symptoms—that we have to quickly apply “tools” so we will feel better. More pernicious is the psychiatric/diagnostic lens we use to label symptoms and emotions as pathological rather than natural, normal human feelings under given circumstances. For example, if someone is feeling intense grief related to a significant loss for more than a year (with some other criteria), the DSM 5 (Diagnostic Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association), labels that “Prolonged Grief Disorder, when the grief may be totally appropriate—and which is a very personal, individual process regardless. Other examples relate to anxiety, depression, anger, insecurity, sexual desire, etc.

What might be an alternative way to label emotions?

Rather than the highly judgmental classification of positive and negative, we might refer to emotions as pleasant and unpleasant (but necessary), or intense or less intense, regardless of the emotion. Maybe we simply remove the polemic all together and refer to emotions as diverse or varied or insightful, none of which are good or bad, but all of which reflect possible ways of feeling if we’re just paying attention!

One metaphor for thinking about the power, and adaptiveness, of all human emotions, is to think about artwork with paint or markers or crayons. The smaller the palate of colors, the less complex the hues of the artwork. What one can create (and express) with four colors is vastly different than 12 colors or 32 colors.

It’s clear that judging and avoiding emotions can be detrimental, but what are some overt benefits of embracing difficult emotions?

1. Emotional Awareness/Intelligence: Recognizing and accepting “negative” emotions can lead to greater emotional awareness and intra and interpersonal intelligence. This awareness helps individuals understand their feelings and the underlying causes, promoting personal growth and greater understanding of others.
2. Better Mental Health: Studies indicate that judging certain emotions as negative/inappropriate can lead to diminished psychological health. Accepting these feelings, rather than suppressing them, is linked to better psychological outcomes.
3. Effective Coping: Accepting and feeling unpleasant emotions can motivate individuals to make necessary changes in their lives.
4. Quality of Life: Embracing the wide variety of emotions open to us, including those that don’t “feel good,” connects us to our humanity as emotionally evolved and well-balanced humans, whose life experience is nuanced and full.

In summary, we don’t have to like or enjoy all emotions. But it is important, if not essential, to create space for all the things we feel, especially the misnomer of “negative” emotions, because that is where we typically hold distress, injury, loss, etc., and those are the feelings that are most likely to become toxic or dysregulated when they are suppressed and later reappear. When we can sit with, name, and validate those sometimes unpleasant feelings, we support emotional growth and alignment between what we are experiencing and what we are feeling—and a nice benefit is that we are likely to feel discomfort for shorter durations. Moreover, when our experiences include being wounded, honoring these emotions is also typically an important part of healing.

So, let’s stop referring to emotions as positive and negative and honor all of them as foundational for psychological health and the gift of a full human experience.

A Note about Children

We begin socializing children toward this idea that some emotions are not okay or acceptable very early in life. We discourage the open display of “negative” emotions and even go so far as to say things like “there’s nothing to be scared of” and isolating or punishing children when they act out in anger. We also often try to shut down displays of sadness and crying. This not only sets children up for an unhealthy relationship with feelings as adolescents and adults, it misses a crucial opportunity for learning social-emotional and executive functioning skills. Naming, validating, and processing difficult emotions as children results in regulated and affectively skillful adolescents and adults. And when that doesn’t happen, they end up in my office struggling to navigate intra and interpersonal issues across all domains of their lives.

References

Ford, B. Q., Lam, P., John, O. P., & Mauss, I. B. (2018). The psychological health benefits of accepting negative emotions and thoughts: Laboratory, diary, and longitudinal evidence. Journal of personality and social psychology, 115(6), 1075–1092. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000157

Hall, S. (2023, May 24). Why it’s important to accept negative emotions. Evidence-Based Living. Cornell University. https://evidencebasedliving.human.cornell.edu/blog/why-its-important-to-accept-negative-emotions/

Willroth, E. C., Young, G., Tamir, M., & Mauss, I. B. (2023). Judging emotions as good or bad: Individual differences and associations with psychological health. Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 23(7), 1876–1890. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001220