Relationships
Part 9 - Relationship dynamics

In The Self section of SD we looked at the idea of splitting ourselves up into three distinct camps: our parent-self (P), our adult-self (A) and our child-self (C). In this section we will use the same model to explore how the different parts of us engage with the different parts of other people.

Graeme is just starting to make his way in the world. and he is making lots of connections with people who appear to be on a healthy adult-to-adult level with him. Neither Graeme nor any of his friends or work colleagues are being particularly child-like or acting like they are anyone else’s parents.

After a four-month absence, Graeme returns to his parents’ house. He gets quite a shock, as straightaway he notices that his parents are treating him like a child: fussing over him, telling him where he is going wrong and what he should and should not do. It seems as though every time he tries to be adult with them, he is ignored, and only when he acts like a child does he get a (parental) response.

On the second day of his stay, Graeme resigns himself to having to play a role he is uncomfortable with. Yet he is absolutely determined that this state of affairs will have to change in the future. So, he devises a plan.

He invites his parents over to the city where he now lives. Once they accept, he books them into a B&B and prepares an itinerary of activities and events over three days. He also invites his friends to join him at some of the events and activities.

Throughout the three days entertaining his parents, Graeme does not once step into child mode. He remains an adult the whole time. Yes, there are many occasions when his parents expect him to revert to a child state, but he simply refuses to budge. And so begins a slow process of his parents having to adapt to the new landscape and having to put themselves into adult mode, in order to engage with their son and his new friends.

At the end of their stay, his parents comment on how grown-up he is, and thank him for a thoroughly enjoyable break.

Above are two diagrams representing Graeme and his parents changing roles.

Use this template to work out which parts of you (your parent, adult, child) are engaging with other people’s parts, so you can decide whether or not this is a satisfactory arrangement.

In 1935, psychoanalyst René Spitz undertook research into child development in institutions such as orphanages, prisons and hospitals. He found that infants who were deprived of touch, of love, and of intimacy went into rapid decline. He called this emotional deprivation.

Meanwhile, psychiatrist Eric Berne saw similar things going on with adults who endure a lack of physical intimacy. He saw this as a sensory and stimulus hunger that could bring about degenerative changes to the body and the mind.

Berne called this need for physical intimacy strokes. In its most basic form, a stroke could be a mere acknowledgement of our presence – that we exist in this world – or it could mean a literal stroking of the head or the hand. Berne saw the exchange of strokes as a transaction, the notion being that any type of interaction is better than no interaction at all.

To back up his claim, Berne cited the discovery Seymour Levine had made in 1957 that baby rats who received more licks from their mothers would grow up to be healthier and more relaxed than rats who received fewer licks/strokes.

In most cultures, social manners are taught to each child at an early age. These manners or ‘norms’ restrict what we can say and do. As we get to know each other better, our needs and wants start to act out in our behaviour. We learn how to compromise and get the next best thing to what we want. In these compromises, Berne saw patterns and shapes begin to form, as people navigate their way through everyday life. He saw ‘games’ being played, as we all try and get the best we can out of any social situations. In this sense, games are ultimately a substitute for intimacy, or a way to deal with a lack of intimacy.

The definition of ‘games’ are episodes or situations whereby one or more persons have a set of tricks or hidden motivations that they use for their own purposes. The pay-off for playing these games can be obvious, but is sometimes hard to spot.

If you spot a game being played (that is either initiated by yourself or by others) then congratulations for noticing, as most people have no awareness of them. Now you have the choice as to whether or not you participate in the game, or whether or not you undertake a new role that changes the dynamics of the game altogether.

Let’s start with a few straightforward examples of game-playing before we attempt some of the more complicated ones.

The point of this brief exchange is simply to acknowledge the existence of each person.

The point of this one is to expand the interaction a little more, but not much. When asked “How are you?” the other person is not expected to say, “Well, actually, since you asked…”

Young children have their own very simple games.

As we get older and get more life experience, the games become more complicated.
These are great games to blame someone else for your own failures and dissatisfactions with your own life:

What do you make of the following ones?
Do you recognise any of them?

When we get to more complex games, different stages of game-play can be recognised...

This is a classic conflict game, as explored by Stephen Karpman (a student studying under Eric Berne), which involves power struggles and three well-defined and interchangeable roles: the rescuer, the victim and the persecutor.