Our Gemara on Amud Aleph discusses who should be penalized in a situation where an ethically improper transaction is performed, such as when a Canaanite slave is sold outside of the land of Israel (as we saw in Psychology of the Daf, Gittin 44). Specifically, should the buyer be penalized or the seller? The Gemara uses a clever metaphor: Who steals the food? The mouse or the hole?

This metaphor speaks to the psychological and behavioral pattern of circularity. Often in systems, there is mutually reinforcing behavior. For example, if one spouse engages in dishonest and secretive behavior, the other spouse will become mistrustful and angry. Conversely, if a spouse is mistrustful and angry, the other spouse might, out of fear, become avoidant and reluctant to share thoughts and actions transparently. This circularity in relationships requires mutual collaboration and self-awareness to break free from self-reinforcing patterns that often plague relationships. Let's explore how this deeply impacts marriage and family relationships.

Psychologists Scheinkman and Fishbane ("The Vulnerability Cycle: Working With Impasses in Couple Therapy," Fam Proc 43:279–299, 2004) observed:

“Couples often come to therapy polarized by reactivity and power struggles that make them feel increasingly disconnected. Trapped in impasses that they are unable to change on their own, they invite the therapist into the intimacy of their struggles, hoping for a new direction.

In working with couples' impasses in the present moment, the goal is to help partners shift from reactive positions to more dialogical ones and move from viewing themselves as victims and villains to assuming increased responsibility and personal agency. The process of change is facilitated through awareness, behavioral changes, negotiations, and the creation of alternative narratives based on greater empathy and connectedness.”

According to Scheinkman and Fishbane, the key to breaking free from this pattern is to slow down reactivity, increase empathy, and develop an appreciation for each other's triggers, which they refer to as "Core Impasses":

"Couples come to therapy feeling stuck, caught up in impasses that are characterized by intense reactivity and escalation, rigid positions of each partner, irrationality, and the repetitive recurrence of the same dynamics in the relationship. While caught up in one of these impasses, the partners are unable to empathize and see the other's perspective. They feel offended and violated by the other's behavior and become increasingly defensive, disconnected, and entangled in power struggles and misunderstandings. These impasses involve vulnerability and confusion, and they tend to become more pervasive over time, taking up more and more space in the relationship."

These triggers are related to what they call "Survival Positions":

"'Survival positions' refer to a set of beliefs and strategies that individuals adopt to protect and manage their vulnerabilities. These positions are usually the best way a person found in the past to protect themselves or others in the family of origin and to maintain a sense of integrity and control in emotionally difficult situations. Survival positions are often adopted before they can be put into words and certainly before they can be critically evaluated. Survival positions include beliefs and premises that become 'mottos' to live by. Some examples of survival beliefs are: 'It's dangerous to be angry'; 'You can only depend on yourself'; 'Always please people'; 'Don't trust women'; 'Be weak and submissive'; 'Always be strong and don't show your vulnerability'; and 'If you get too close, you will get hurt.' These beliefs are influenced by gender training, cultural norms, and family history. Survival strategies based on these premises are the actions that individuals take to protect themselves."

While survival strategies may be self-protective, they often prove to be counterproductive in interpersonal relationships. They tend to elicit in the other person the very behaviors that the individual is trying to avoid, unintentionally perpetuating self-fulfilling prophecies. When acting from survival strategies, individuals often behave in self-referential and defensive ways, becoming blind to the views, needs, vulnerabilities, and strengths of the other person. This insensitivity triggers the partner's vulnerabilities, and in a parallel manner, the partner's vulnerabilities elicit automatic self-protective responses. Thus, the vulnerability cycle is initiated, with each partner's survival strategies triggering the other's. In a core impasse, both partners are guarding their vulnerabilities and acting and reacting from their survival positions. This is what makes the impasse so heated, confusing, and intense.

The key to moving beyond these impasses is for both partners to become mutually and respectfully aware of their coping strategies and to develop a more effective internal and external dialogue regarding their use and management.”

In my experience as a marriage and family therapist, I have observed that it is not differences themselves that cause conflict in couples. Those conflicts can often be reasonably resolved. The real challenge arises when one person's safety and coping mechanisms trigger anxiety and distress in the other person. In other words, when one person's way of dealing with their triggers creates a different trigger and safety concern in the other person. This is how certain marital issues become existential and turn into a fight for survival. However, with flexibility, intelligence, and empathy, these issues can be diffused, and coping techniques that work for both individuals in the relationship can be developed.