Dr. Dana McNeil, PsyD, LMFT, New Directions in Couples Therapy

Montare Media presents Season 2, episode 24 of the Discover U Podcast with JD Kalmenson:  New Directions in Couples Therapy with Dr. Dana McNeil, PsyD, LMFT

Learn More about Montare Behavioral Health: https://montarebehavioralhealth.com/about/digital-library/

JD Kalmenson’s interviews Dana McNeil to explore the sometimes complex dynamics in a range of different romantic relationships– from hetero and LGBTQ couples, to polyamorous. Understanding the habits of successful couples is key to developing relationship skills that can take yours to the next level of trust, open communication, and longevity.

Dana McNeil, PsyD, LMFT, is a licensed marriage and family therapist and is the founder of The Relationship Place, a group practice with locations in her hometown of San Diego, California. Dr. Dana's practice specializes in couples therapy and utilizes an evidence-based type of couples therapy known as the Gottman Method. Dr. Dana works with all types of relationship issues from premarital counseling, dealing with the aftermath of extramarital affairs, working with addiction recovery, military deployed families, parents of
special needs children, LGBTQ partners, and polyamorous, ethical non-monogamy clients. Dr. Dana is the resident relationship expert on the Cox Communications Show “I Do” and will be featured in an upcoming documentary on the art of couples therapy. 

Host Kalmenson is the CEO/Founder of Renewal Health Group, a family of addiction treatment centers, and Montare Behavioral Health, a comprehensive brand of mental health treatment facilities in Southern California. Kalmenson is a Yale Chabad Scholar, a skilled facilitator, teacher, counselor, and speaker, who has provided chaplain services to prisons, local groups and remote villages throughout the world. His diverse experience as a rabbi, chaplain, and CEO has inspired his passion and deep understanding of the necessity for effective mental health treatment and long-term sobriety.

Follow JD at JDKalmenson.com

Transcript

JD Kalmenson: 

Welcome to another episode of Discover U, our podcast, exploring innovative and effective solutions to issues in behavioral health. I'm JD Kalmenson, CEO of Montare Behavioral Health, a family of dynamic treatment centers in California. I am honored and excited to introduce you to our wonderful guest today, Dr. Dana McNeil. Dr. Dana McNeil is a licensed marriage and family therapist and is the founder of The Relationship Place, a group practice with locations in her hometown of San Diego, California. Dr. Dana's practice specializes in couples therapy and utilizes an evidence-based type of couples therapy known as the Gottman Method. Dr. Dana works with all types of relationship issues from pre-marital counseling, dealing with the aftermath of extramarital affairs, working with addiction recovery, military deployed families, parents of special needs children, LGBTQ partners, and polyamorous, ethical non-monogamy clients. Dr. Dana, is the resident relationship expert on the Cox Communications Show “I Do” and will be featured in an upcoming documentary on the art of couples therapy. 

Welcome, Dana. That is a lot of incredible work that you are up to and we're so happy to have you with us today.

Dana McNeil:

Thank you. It makes me sound very impressive. I'm just a real person, so I, I've had a few opportunities, but thank you. I'm grateful to be here

JD Kalmenson:

A real impressive person. So let me ask you this. What led you to develop a special interest in couples counseling?

Dana McNeil:

Who hasn't been in a relationship and wondered what to do? That's right. I mean, I kind of found myself, I was just telling somebody this the other day. They were asking me, how did you end up working in insurance and then become a couples therapist? That seems like a random path and that's what I did the earlier part of my life. I was a property damage claims adjuster and I had to deal with people and their traumas, and I found that empowering and I kind of had this calling to become a therapist as an experience and I was going through a relationship at the time. And so you kind of navigate through deciding to become a therapist and you land on the population that you most resonate with and apparently that was it for me. I very much identify with the struggles that we have and hoping to normalize that journey of being in a couple, because we don't get any training anywhere. We're not taking couples communication classes in high school that tell us how to do it. And so most couples don't have any idea how to do it well or they're ashamed or they're have guilt that they need to be in couples therapy. And so I love all of that, normalizing and giving tools and being present and being a partner in relationship repairs.

JD Kalmenson:

That's amazing. That's amazing cuz some of the hardest things in life, like parenting and marriage and relationships are the things that we have no resources or formal education on, and yet the stakes could not be higher. And hearing your story, it's so inspiring because very often folks who are in treatment will ask themselves or ask their counselor and their therapist, Where's my destiny? What am I supposed to do? Where am I going to find happiness? One type of pursuit and what type of job and what type of vocation? And it's difficult because it's such a hyper individualized sort of query. But what we have found is when you take three categories of talent, passion, and circumstance, and the greatest areas of overlap is that you're most likely to find emotional satiation and success at what you're doing. And it seems like you've really found that where the passion and the talent come together and so many others get to benefit from that decision that you've made. So kudos to you. I wanna jump into the Gottman method for a moment. Tell us a little bit about it and why you prefer it to other types of therapy for couples.

Dana McNeil:

Absolutely. So I mean, your listeners may not be familiar with all the different theories that a therapist has to choose from, but there's kind of three main, most media savvy ones that are available for most couples to seek out. There's the Gottman method, there's something called emotion focus therapy or eft, and then there's something called Imago. Those are the three popular ones. I mean there's other theories, but there's somewhat less known for the majority of couples that are seeking out therapy. 

And what I have found based on my research and my personality and my clients is there's a lot of good insight that we can gather about why we do what we do.

It's important to know I grew up in a family of origin where I didn't feel emotionally safe, or I didn't have good modeling and that's changed the way that I feel about myself and my relationships. But since the average couple waits six years before they come to therapy, they need to see a behavior change. It's lovely to have insight and I think it's important because that's why I help understand what drives me to do behaviors. But unless I can see a change in my partner's behavior, I'm not going to commit to or be motivated to stick to something that's painful. Couples therapy is not easy. I'm asking you to do something different. I'm asking you have different perspective. I'm asking you to get out of your mindset that you believe your partner is the devil. Right, sometimes it's not a fun place. And so if I can give you behavior changes where straight out the gate you can see something changing, something that feels sustainable, then you're gonna be much more inspired to stay into it. And for me and my couples, the Gottman method provides that.

JD Kalmenson: 

Wow. So tell us a little bit of, in a nutshell, if you can, what are some of the core principles of the Gottman method and the aspects of it that you find most effective?

Dana McNeil: 

So the theory of the sound relationship house is kind of the basis of what we do as a Gottman method therapist. So we're looking at where's your friendship? If we don't have a solid friendship to build as the foundation of our relationship, we're gonna be in trouble. Right? Because if I can't talk to you about the things that are important to me without getting overwhelmed, if I can't take responsibility for the things that I did that helped contribute to the disagreement, if I can't find ways to ask you for my needs without assuming that you're gonna shut me down or worse you not knowing how to respond to my needs, we are not gonna have satisfaction in our relationship. Yes, conflict is normal, but if also I can't accept influence if I don't know what to do when we are not connecting emotionally, physically, I'm not feeling intimate with you.

If I don't know what to do differently, we're gonna continue doing the same things that we did before. So what the Gottman's did is when they found they did their research for the last 40 years, what we found is that there are couples who were accidentally doing it well, we call them the masters of relationships versus the rest of us, which is the disasters of relationships. We're a hot mess express, we don't know what we're doing. Our parents may or may not have modeled something that's effective for us. We're just kind of muddling through relationships. The masters knew how to ask questions, they knew how to be intimate in the way that they have conversations. They knew to do things we call small things often. Give appreciations, tell my partner how much I enjoy spending time with them, have rituals of connection, celebrate milestones together.

These are not things that we're cognitively thinking about and maybe we do one or two of 'em, but if we can collectively come up with a game plan of all the things that we can do that will make us feel successful, we're gonna be like the masters. Again, the masters were doing it accidentally. So we turned it into a therapy where we can actually teach our clients over 50 different interventions that they can do that will set themselves up for success. The Gottman method has an 86% success rate. That's astonishing. Wow. Wow. Couples want to come to something where when I'm not in their lives anymore, they have tools, tools that they can use with everybody in their life. Cuz I don't know what's gonna happen in your relationship. I don't know if you guys are gonna make it, I don't have a crystal ball, but the common denominator in all of your relationships is you are going to have connections with your parents, with your siblings, with your children, with your coworkers, with your neighbors. Investing in communication tools is always gonna serve you. And so that's the basis of what the Gottman method is. I need to learn different behaviors or undo patterns that are not serving me well.

JD Kalmenson: 

That's profound because the fact that it's behavior based not only allows the client to be able to integrate that in their life without the act of weekly session of therapy or once they're finished with that, it also takes a lot of the underlying very deep emotional work that really should be dealt with on an independent level. And it sort of takes it out of the mix, at least for now. I mean, because when you have a breakdown in a couple's relationship, to me the biggest question is always the issue that one of them is really having an issue with life with themselves, with their identity. 

Dana McNeil:

I think what you're getting to, and it's a valid point that I have to often share with my clients is there's the me stuff and there's the we stuff, right? I gotta get the me stuff tight so that when we get into the we stuff and I'm being triggered, but you're doing something that reminds me of what my mom used to do, or I get triggered and I behave in a certain way and it impacts the relationship. If I don't have an understanding of why I do my behaviors, I can't ask for my needs because you then are not my partner in this. You're somebody that's keeping me from getting my needs met. So if we can start doing a behavior where I identify what's happening for me, why I'm responding the way that I do take responsibility for it so that my partner doesn't feel defensive, and then ask for what would be a lovely gift that you could give me when I'm in the midst of that, not that I'm required to do it because we're in a relationship together, but because you view it as a gift that you're giving me because you love me.

That's a completely different way of viewing relationships.

JD Kalmenson:

That's very, very beautifully said, well-articulated. Is this a me or is this a we issue? And I just think that maybe a lot of the work that you do is helping them really get to the bottom of what is a me issue and a we issue because there's so much fog and confusion that surrounds that and naturally we're defensive and we don't like to take ownership for some of the things that really is a me issue, not a we issue. But that's a very easy sort catch line to ask ourselves very often.

Dana McNeil:

And I think that what I try to encourage my clients to do is then what happens is when I don't know how to articulate the me stuff and how that translates into behaviors from my partners, I say statements, “if you would just love me JD” Right? or “if you would just treat me like I'm special.”  I don't know what that is. When I'm in JD’s head, it might be, “well, but I bought you chocolate chip cookies when I was at the grocery store,” I wanted to show you that you were special. And special to me is you come hug me and snuggle me in the morning. What is the behavior that you're asking your partner to do? What words are you asking them to share with you? And they get the option of saying, “That's not something I can do.” Or “Yes, let me negotiate with you.” We're doing behavior bids for attention too, right? There's not just an emotional connection, but you have to give me space to say no as well, that maybe that's not an option for me. And hear it not as I'm rejecting you, but I'm asking for my needs. That's important. That's a behavior that I need to do to give myself the respect that there's things I'm looking for. But I have to also honor that my partner may not be willing to do it, not because they don't love me, but that doesn't align with who they are.

JD Kalmenson:

And talking about who they are. I mean, there's this sort of famous myth out there, and it could be true and I'd love to get your take on it, that a lot of folks end up marrying their mother or father and they work through a lot of unresolved childhood issues. And people tend to find partners whose core wounding is a counterpart to their core wounding. Would you say that's true? And if it is, once the wounds are worked through, does the attraction dissipate? Because the connection there was that they had some type of an attraction as far as how wounded or emotionally scarred they were.

Dana McNeil:

I mean, I do believe the tenant of that, but I think that it's a little bit more nuanced. I think that, let's just say I had a parent that was not attentive, that's familiar to me. It's not necessarily comfortable. I'm giving that distinction, but I'm familiar with it. I see it, I know how to deal with it, I understand it. I've been managing to live in that space. Maybe it doesn't feel ideal. So maybe I'm attracted to that because it's something that I've navigated before and I'm hoping to have a corrective experience so that I can heal from it. So I'm hoping that you'll be that person that helps correct or close down that relationship and change it in some way. Great. If you don't have behaviors to help you do it, then it's just dreamy. Right? I do agree that we're attracted to or find ourselves connecting to people that feel familiar to what we know, but we want to have a corrective experience and we can't do that without behaviors. 

JD Kalmenson:

it's very unfortunate when some people find the source of the attraction to their significant other is let's say a shared problem that they may have both been going through at that time. One of them moves past that problem, the other one doesn't. And even if they both move past that problem and they look at each other and they find themselves not having anything in common anymore other than that past problem that they experience, whether it was chemical dependency or a certain area of mental health or a trauma. So that's an unfortunate sort of reality is that's something that you find that the initial focal point of attraction was something deeply unhealthy. They actually became healthier in the process of life and now they look back at the relationship and they say, we have an issue. 

Dana McNeil:

I think I'm a little bit more positive framing of it where I think that we continue to grow and change as a couple or we don't, right?  So one of the reasons that maybe it wasn't something that was unhealthy, but maybe we were both in our twenties and all that I cared about was making sure that we both liked sushi and Depeche Mode and that seemed like a perfect basis for our relationship. And now I'm 40 and I have kids and I'm thinking about retiring and I wanna have a sense of purpose in life. You may not be the same person that you were when you got into this relationship, not because you guys were both not functioning well, but because you're ever changing and growing, I want my clients to ever change and grow. How do we keep communicating and keeping those lines of communication open so that I'm helping support your dreams for growth and you're helping support mine and I'm your team member along the way to help you achieve those goals.

And we're finding ways to connect along the path and finding ways to grow together that isn't always what's happening. Not because couples don't want to, but because the reality of life is there's Covid coming at, you might have a special needs child, you've been deployed from the military and you move 12 times and you're always unpacking boxes like aspiring to reach those apexes of dreamed and shared life together isn't always the reality. And so couples fall apart, not because they don't love each other, but because they simply don't have the energy or the time to make that a priority or they don't know that they should.

JD Kalmenson: 

That's so well said. 

The initial source of the attraction will never be powerful enough to just sustain it on a long-term level. But everything in life, if it's not vibrant and alive and evolving, it's gonna wither. It's gonna dissipate. I wanna talk to you about something that is a recent phenomenon. I think it's a recent phenomenon. We're seeing rising rates of divorce because of political polarization. When did we lose this ability to understand each other or to empathize or to just have a civil discourse without personalizing it to the point where we can disagree and still stay friends, stay married. 

Dana McNeil: 

It seems as if we, there's an expectation that my partner be a mini me or a version of me or think exactly the way that I do. And I'm curious if there's something that feels threatening when your partner doesn't view the world the same way. I wonder if that I don't have every client in front of me. And of course the reasons alter between who I'm talking to, but sometimes it seems as they, there's a fear of not feeling emotionally safe with somebody who views the world differently as you do. And so we have to of unpack what does that mean to you? If your partner views the world differently, does that mean that you fear that your partner's gonna judge you or that they won't appreciate you or that they'll want you to change in some way that fundamentally doesn't feel in alignment with your character?

Is that what the bigger issue is? Cause there's always been opportunities where couples can disconnect. We don't agree on parenting. We didn't agree on how to handle covid protocols. We didn't agree on where we should retire or where we should go on vacation. There's something very polarizing about somebody not viewing the world the same way that you do that feels threatening. So because couples don't have tools to talk about what does that represent or what needs do we feel won't get met, if my partner has a different view of the world that needs to be discussed it that's symbolic of some of their underlying issue that's happening for the couples typically. 

JD Kalmenson:

Very interesting. So to go back to the terms that, to the beautiful term that you were using earlier, first and foremost, is it a me issue? The fact that I can't, I feel like I can't live with under the same roof with somebody who disagrees with me politically, that would seem to be a me issue 

Dana McNeil:

Because what does that represent if that person doesn't view the world the way that you view the world, why does that impact you so deeply?

JD Kalmenson:

That's right. That's right. 

Dana McNeil: 

In my personal experience. There's something that's underlyingly not feeling connected about the relationship or something doesn't feel safe, or there's some conversation that we're not having. 

it's kind of like I don't feel like you give me space or have influence in your life, so I'm going to comment on the way you load the dishwasher. It's not about the dishwasher, it's about I don't feel like I influence on you that I can impact the way that you view the world, that I have space in your heart so that when you make decisions, I'm part of that decision making process.

JD Kalmenson:

That's fascinating. And at the end of the day, all of it is so much deeper than what we see at the surface. 

Dana McNeil:

I mean, everything impacts everything. That's the beauty and the curse of relationships, right? Everything I do impacts you. If I have a mental health issue, then it doesn't just exist in a bubble. I don't have Teflon around me. It rolls into you, it impacts you, right? And so relationships impact each other and can you accept the things that you can't change about your partner because that's who they are. You fell in love with other parts of them. They're political views are one little piece of the pie, right? Right. That's not who they are in their entirety. They're also like a great dad. They're a good barbecue chef, they're a good son, they're a good community member. Just because they don't view abortion rights the way that you do, doesn't mean that they're bad people. And if we can make sure that we're not taking down someone's character because it's different, then you can start talking about the issues and how are we going to navigate them and how can we coexist.

JD Kalmenson:

Really, really powerful. And hopefully enough of this type of discussion and content will reverse the sort of national way of looking at it. You work with all types of couples, and you have a specialty in non-traditional couples and those with alternative relationship styles. Let's start with same sex couples. What are some of the unique challenges that you see in these relationships? 

Dana McNeil:

I think one of the unique challenges, and maybe this is off topic a little bit, but we as couples therapists don't have a lot of theories that were developed for same sex partners.. So when I did my dissertation for my doctorate back in the day, it was okay, couples therapy as an art has been around for 40 or 50 years. It was developed and researched for opposite sex partners who wanted to avoid divorce. Okay. That's not what's happening in other relationships. So here I am as this couples therapist, you have a same sex partner come to you that have different challenges in life. They weren't even given an opportunity to get married and try to avoid divorce until very recently. Like adoption and opportunities to become parents were challenging. The way that society viewed you was challenging. We were taking these theories that were developed for different kinds of relationships and trying to shove them into a box that made sense for us. And basically just said to them here, go ahead and use these theories that already exist. I'm sure they'll be fine. 

JD Kalmenson: 

Yeah, I mean, as you're saying, it's an underdeveloped area within couples therapy and I'm sure there's not a lot of evidence based hard data with some of the newer challenges that you're seeing that you're facing. 

Dana McNeil:

And some therapists are just saying, that doesn't work in consensual non-monogamy or polyamory. So I don't have anything for you. And I can't imagine how discouraging that is for clients that are committed to a lifestyle of their choice. 

JD Kalmenson: 

So in a sense, you're a pioneer with this type of specialty. You're not like, Oh, well this is exactly what I studied in college. No, you're kind of figuring, I don't wanna say figuring it out, but definitely addressing areas that are more recent. On the challenge side you reference consensual non-monogamy polyamory. Can you tell us a little bit about that? I know that there is ethical consensual open relationships. If you can give us a little bit of a breakdown of the definitions of what these refer to.

Dana McNeil: 

Yeah, I mean, this is a big topic, but to try to narrow it down a little bit, there's kind of variation. So if you are in a relationship and you decide that you want to open it up, typically what that means is, and again, these are somewhat stereotypes, so forgive me for, for those of you that are this part of this world, I'm not trying to minimize you, but open relationships typically are if we are a couple in a committed relationship and we want to bring in other sexual partners where we're not necessarily having an emotional connection with them, but we're having a sexual connection with them, that we might open up the relationship that might look like they go to swinger's parties or they go to events where they're sharing it as an organized event for them as a couple right? Then there's the idea of polyamory, which is not necessarily based on sex, but it's based on wanting to have romantic relationships, several romantic relationships.

And so you may take on an additional partner that your current partner may or may not have a relationship with. And so you are seeking that out because the idea that you're into is that one person cannot serve all your needs in life. You JD may not be the person that I go to the theater with and that I go shoe shopping with and likes to go camping with me. I might have somebody that I feel passionately about and they serve that parts of my life, but I also wanna have children with you or retire with you. And so I have multiple reasons to bring different people and different partners into my life. Consensual, monogamy, ethical, non monogamy is all basically, it's consensual and you are aware of it that I'm going to have other partners. I'm not hiding it from you. It's not considered an affair because I have given you the full opportunity to consent to it to say, Yes, I agree, I may not wanna have another partner, but I understand, appreciate and value that you do. Partners may come into a practice and say, We want support around how to set this up. 

So if you and I, JD are setting up a relationship, we're gonna be bringing in another person and we go to a therapist and we're like, Okay, JD, let's agree that I can always call you when I wanna tell you something about what's going on with the kids when you're with your metamore or your other partner, and I'm gonna interrupt your time with them cuz this feels important to our relationship.

If I'm not checking in with that other partner, if they're okay with it and letting them participate in making decisions, then that rule has an impact on them and they have no voice. So ideally what we're looking for is agreements where everybody has a voice who's impacted. 

JD Kalmenson: 

And do you find that that's probably one of the most prevalent challenges to the sustainability of this type of relationship?

Dana McNeil:

I think that, and when couples come in to fix something else that's broken, for instance, let's say that one partner had a non- agreed upon relationship, an affair using air quotes. And now the way to solve it is let's just open up the relationship. Nope, that does not work ever because you're trying to resolve an injury where you change the terms without checking in with me to now enforce another change of terms without in deciding how that impacts me. And that's how you're cleaning up the mess. That's not really creating any safety or trust.

JD Kalmenson:

Right. That's interesting. So the polyamory versus consent consensual or ethical non-monogamy between those two genres, because they're very different. One has an emotional romantic piece, and one is purely physical and sexual. So which of the two are you finding is more common, more prevalent, and which of the two is more sustainable in your experience?

Dana McNeil:

I think it's about 50 50. 

I find that my younger clients are much more able to navigate polyamory and it makes sense to them and it's part of their view of the world. And why do you do other things that make other people comfortable that's not serving you? And it's beautiful and they're very committed to it and they're coming to therapy to learn communication skills and how to have regular check-ins. And it's astonishing and it's so beautiful when it works well. Does it have problems obviously. No one listening to this is naive enough to believe that every couple can sustain this. The problem is that if you had problems in your relationship before and you didn't tighten that up, this is not going to make it work better If you're not willing to do the work up front to make this a good thing, this is not gonna help. 

JD Kalmenson:

Right. It's not a solution to a problem. It's not gonna help any preexisting issues. Are there higher divorce rates or lower divorce rates in non-traditional relationships than the national average?

Dana McNeil:

I don't think we're doing enough research on it because most therapists don't believe it works, so we're not researching it.

JD Kalmenson:

Oh, wow. So it's not a very researched area within...

Dana McNeil:

I think we're starting to, because it's not going away, but I feel like I spend a lot of my time trying to convince other therapists that they should give it attention. A lot of the trainings that I do is how to be a therapist and get over yourself if you're uncomfortable with it because it's not your life. Right. There’s this belief sometimes as therapists, that it has to make sense to me ethically and morally in order for me to endorse teaching you how to do something. And I think that's not, that's a slippery slope for us as therapists because again, how am I serving the needs of my clients if I put it through the filter that it has to fit my opinion of how relationships should be first.

JD Kalmenson:

That's right. I mean, there's definitely the case. You wanna be able to meet your client where they're at and with minimal projection of what's going on with us. 

Are you finding that it's on the rise? In 25, 50 years from now would you predict that it would sharply become a strong force within the overall world of relationships? Or do you always see this as being a sort of perpetual fringe? And I don't mean that with judgment, just a smaller subsection of society. How do you see this playing? 

Dana McNeil:

I don't think it's going away. I definitely don't. And there's more and more clients that are reaching out to us. It currently is about 25% of my practice, which is a pretty big. And there's so much more being written about it and clients are asking about it and they want to know what it is. 

JD Kalmenson: 

I mean, one thing's for sure, the fact that it's unorthodox is largely tied to the national perception of what a traditional relationship should look like. As that continues to become more fluid, you're gonna find less stereotypes and you're gonna find more people feeling, hey, this is actually something that I would entertain, even though 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago, it would've been taboo. So there's no question about the fact that as national perceptions of relationships evolve, that's going to trickle into the way people decide to live their lives.

Dana McNeil:

I guess the thing that troubles me is that there's such a strong reaction to it. And I guess that's always, it's kind of refers back to what we were talking about earlier about political choices. Why do we have such strong reactions to how other people choose to live their life? Why does it feel so threatening to us that I have to put in my opinion or tell you all the reasons that I think that what you've chosen to do in life isn't going to work? Why is there value in that that keeps us disconnected, that creates more distance? It doesn't let me be curious versus furious. It doesn't let me validate for you that there's some choice that you're making that makes sense to you and help me understand it in a curious way versus explain to me and make sure that I validate it and that I'm okay with it before I let you do it.

JD Kalmenson:

I mean, in general, it comes down to, it's a behavioral health issue, but it's one of the most, in my opinion, a fundamental wide-ranging sort of identities. Do we validate ourselves based on other people's places or things? Or is there an unconditional source of affirmation, validation, and love that we have for ourselves, irrespective of how we fit on the map of normalcy? I mean, in other words, the word normal itself presupposes that I am somehow going to be defined and judged based on my peers, my colleagues, my state, my city, my country. And the notion that society is going to be a referendum on where I fit on that map is going to definitely play itself out into whether they're making me feel comfortable with myself or not making me feel comfortable about myself. So I think that in general, however deeply passionate, and however strong your convictions are, if you have a very strong, healthy sense of validation, affirmation that comes from an inner space, not from an outer space, then you will not be angered. You will not be furious. You will be curious even if you sharply disagree, but you, the emotional venom that we're seeing, the toxicity and the discourse, I think that's largely absent when you're just comfortable in your skin.

Dana McNeil:

Great. Beautiful. All perfectly stated.

JD Kalmenson:

Yeah. I think that if that sort of thing can be behaviorally taught at higher levels of education, we would be a far more serene and civil society. 

The folks who you're in general who are in these non-traditional relationships, are you finding that they are experiencing a lot more happiness in these alternative lifestyles? Or are you finding that perhaps this was them running away from something, as you were mentioning earlier, and this is not necessarily the light at the end of the tunnel, and of course it's a generalization sort of a question. Yeah, there's not gonna be a one answer. 

Dana McNeil:

Thanks for the generalization, JD. Yes. I think that, hey, I'm not gonna lie, it is a difficult road. There are more problems because there are more people, It's a math equation. The more people that have to make a decision, the more opportunity that there is for somebody to not agree or to have their feelings hurt or to not find that this is a successful situation for them to be in. That's no different than if you and I were getting a group of our friends together to go on a camping trip and we couldn't decide where to go, and somebody forgot to bring the camping stove. And I don't like how late you stay up and you're snoring in your tent, and I don't wanna go on camping with you anymore. I mean, I'm not trying to minimize it, but it's a combination of the personalities.

It's a combination of their commitment to the relationship. It's a combination of how open you are to change and being fluid and being resilient when things don't go the way that you hoped. Those are individual characteristics. And then we create our dynamic in our relationship. And so that is a very individualized situation for whoever the partners are that are in that relationship. Is it more complicated? Yes. I'm not gonna try to sugar coat this in any possible way. It is hard work, and we are not doing a great job in our relationship status now. I mean, the divorce rate is always high. It's not necessarily getting a lot lower. And so it's not surprising that relationships are looking for other alternatives because it's not like we have it all sewed up on how to have a happier relationship. 

JD Kalmenson: 

What preventative of insight, skills, exercises can folks out there, and I'm not just talking about for non-traditional relationships, but relationships as a whole. You mentioned the very sad fact that we're not getting any better. In many other areas in society we're advancing technologically in me in healthcare and medicine in so many areas, even in behavioral health, the amount of non-invasive neurological advancements there are for depression and anxiety and for a host of different forms of trauma is astonishing. In the world of couples therapy I know you mentioned there were two evidence based, two evidence based methods that you were choosing from. What is there to be optimistic about that divorce rates might go lower, even as, I mean because if we're doing so much advancement, why should something so crucial as our foundational relationships in life not experience those, that same area of advancement and sophistication? 

Dana McNeil:

Because we're not going to couples therapy. I mean, the amount of couples that I, again, what we refer to at the beginning, there's guilt, shame, and stigma around going to couples therapy. And so we're not going and getting the services that we have available. But the recent research that I've read is that couples who go to couples therapy, they have a 96% rate of avoiding divorce. So we have these tools available and we're not seeking them out because of guilt and shame and stigma that there's something wrong with us if we need to use the tools.

JD Kalmenson:

That makes sense. We see this in the world of addiction treatment. The fact that thankfully, the stereotype around a chemical dependency has been lowering, People are much more open to checking themselves into a treatment center voluntarily. And that means that the resources available for treatment are going to have they were effective all along to whatever degree they are effective. But if people are not willing to take advantage of those opportunities, then the issue will be as pervasive in society as ever. So you're saying it's not on the intervention side, it's on the people seeking it out. That has to change. 

Dr. Dana where can people find out more about the work that you do?

Dana McNeil:

A couple places. So the website for our practice is SD short for San Diego relationship place.com. I also have my own personal website. It's danamcneil.com. And then we also do intensives where couples come for two or three days to spend with one of my clinicians. And that's therapy getaway.com. We're on all the social media, all the places. I'm happy to chat with anybody who has any questions or wants some more insight. 

JD Kalmenson:

So I wanna thank you Dana, Dr. Dana so much for taking the time and sharing your insight with us. And to our audience, thank you for joining us and I hope you enjoy today's episode of Discover U. At Montare we want you to know that you're not alone on your journey. To find that more about our innovative treatment programs, please, you can seek us out montarebh.com and listen to this podcast on iTunes or Spotify, wherever you get your podcasts. 

Wishing all of you stellar health and a safe and serene day. See you next time. Thank you.