TIFT #114: Giving, Taking, and Fairness

For many, knowledge of what is fair is taken for granted and not even thought about, but in therapy it can be a source of real questions. Clients wonder what life owes them and what they should give back. With dysfunctional families and trauma, children grow up with skewed ideas of what is fair and with double standards about what they owe to others and what is owed to them. These issues come up often enough that it makes sense to have thought about the subject.

What is at stake?

Evolution started out with individuals seeking survival for themselves, but our social nature inevitably brings conflict. As discussed in TIFT #112, on “Freedom Envy,” going against self-centered instincts is hard and comes at a high cost. Altruism is mostly learned. Needing approval from parents or caregivers, small children give in to demands to be generous and giving. In the process, they internalize the value that one should practice those behaviors. Doing so soon leads to substantial rewards, and maintaining a balance between giving and receiving becomes habitual and automatic. Precisely because of the high cost of self-constraint, even with a good balance, many, if not most, individuals remain sensitive to what is fair and unfair. Giving demands receiving and vice versa. Under adverse conditions, one of the most common childhood solutions is to internalize skewed values and develop double standards, depriving oneself in the hope of solving the problems inherent in a troubled family.

The cost of unfairness

For those who have learned to cope by internalizing a double standard, adult life brings serious problems. Those who expect little receive little and those who expect more than their share receive more, but in both cases there are heavy prices to pay. Even when conscious thoughts work to justify unfairness, it seems that everyone has what I call an internal “bean counter,” an internal part who unfailingly keeps track of who really owes to whom. There are many ways a chronic experience of unfairness plays out. First we’ll talk about those who normalize receiving less than what is fair.

 Justification and values

In their conscious thoughts and what they say, those who have adjusted to receiving less than their fair share usually justify their treatment in life. They may think of themselves as altruistic or as undeserving but underneath, their bean counter knows the truth. Another solution is to identify as a chronic victim of unfair treatment. This usually spares those who were originally responsible for withholding, but focuses instead on current instances of unfairness.

When we look deeper into the source of beliefs that unfairness is normal or right, it turns out that the individual has internalized an attitude or value that they don’t deserve better, while others do. This is a component of the conscience or superego (see TIFT #4,) a standard put in place to protect the individual’s social connections by justifying conditions that are beyond the young individual’s power to change.

Anger

Open expression of anger is usually suppressed when it doesn’t seem justified or, as mentioned above, when it goes against internalized values or threatens important relationships. Instead, anger is stored up until someone clearly violates the rules. The one who has done wrong then receives not only an appropriate degree of anger, but the stored up intensity of years of mistreatment. At these times, clear cut unfairness gives permission to bypass the superego and let out the power of pent up rage. The tipoff is anger over and above what one would normally expect. Unfortunately, these expressions of anger do not have healing power. They seem to offer a temporary outlet, but no lasting change in the underlying sense of unfairness.

The payoff

Another way the inner mind deals with unfair values is to plan consciously, or more often unconsciously, for an eventual payoff. As long as the reward is somewhere in the future, the expectation and anticipation remain relatively quiet. But as time goes by, the limbic self may become aware that the chances of the payoff are dimming. This will cause an important reaction. It could be depression, vague agitation, or attempts to collect the reward. Payoffs can be in any currency, love, money, relationship, success, even a place in Heaven. This entitlement is usually experienced as shameful and doesn’t get past censors, so it may be up to the therapist to guess the source of a vague discontent. That means we need to put ourselves in the bean counter’s shoes and be aware that unfairness is not sustainable and always demands some form of resolution.

Entitlement

An opposite solution to early life conditions of deprivation, or to toxic overindulgence, is unfair entitlement. Particularly with narcissistic people, 90 for me and 10 for you feels like “50/50.” To the consternation of those who sacrifice too much, entitled people do end up commandeering more than their share of resources. They are often disliked, but may learn to charm their outside admirers while exploiting those on the inside. In another twist, people who have lived a life of deprivation may see themselves as being of little value, but, in their misery and constant complaint, somehow end up receiving more than their share of attention and resources.

Teaching fairness

When clients have lived their entire lives in unfairness, they may be bewildered and genuinely unclear about what is right. The task for therapists is, not infrequently, to help them learn what real fairness is and begin practicing it. Even with an internal bean counter, their thoughts and habits are so confused that they are genuinely not able to clarify this for themselves. To make matters worse, the superego is often on the job, generating inappropriate shame for newly healthy behavior, as the client works to override pathological values by treating the self as deserving.

Because of the degree of real confusion, it is important for therapists to help cultivate clear and memorable concepts of what is fair. A firm foundation is essential for overcoming confusion and inner obfuscation about true fairness and how give and take should balance. Only with great clarity, will it be possible to take the next step of changing longstanding behaviors.

Behavior change is complex but necessary

For the inner limbic self to learn fairness, it must be experienced. Not only that, but the experiences need to bring positive results. That is not so easy to achieve. Why is behavior change so delicate and difficult?

• Clients will expect to be rebuffed and punished for making demands.
• They may have surrounded themselves with “takers” who won’t want to give up their privilege.
• They may be hypersensitive in relation to others reacting badly.
• Their values will make them feel ashamed and unworthy for receiving.
• The risks of making demands are real, depending on circumstances.
• The skills of negotiating fairness are complex and learned over time.
• They have little experience and may make serious social errors.

The schemas that maintain unfairness are embedded in limbic learning. Words are not the native language of this part of the brain, but experience is. That’s why behavior change, rewarded with a positive response, is the most convincing evidence to the limbic self that fairness is safe and right. Without change in behavior, existing patterns continue to reinforce old expectations and schemas. Conscious attempts to change may embody elements of the old pattern and lead to the expected bad results. “See, when I demand more, everyone criticizes me.” Of course that was not because the client made demands but due to the whiney tone of voice, indicating anticipation of rejection, with which the demands were made. That’s an example of how delicate and tricky this is.

Intimate relationships

In close family relationships, conflict is normal. I like to say that “people who dance close to one another are bound to step on toes.” These missteps can cause confusion around the issue of fairness. The client may feel that they are not allowed to stress others or impinge on their territory. A way to think about it is to look at the difference between stress and damage. Stressing one another is normal for humans. It is part of life because needs don’t always fit together. Conflicts that cause lasting damage are different and more serious. When collisions happen, even if there is damage, listening to and acknowledging the hurt is the most important step towards resolution. After that, letting emotions flow until the pain and anger fade is what makes healing happen.

Importantly resolution is not always possible when the other person can’t or won’t accept it. When full sharing and honesty are not possible, it may be time to disengage and distance. Even if it seems possible and desirable, holding onto a relationship in the presence of smoldering, unresolved unfairness is difficult and costly to sustain.

Working it out

Relationships are negotiated, usually over time. A criterion for success is that the arrangement feels subjectively fair, meaning equally costly and equally rewarding to both parties. A number of things complicate the negotiation. First, some needs or wants may not be conscious, while others are. It helps a great deal to be in touch with one’s inner self and his or her needs as well as the conscious ones. In addition, needs come in different currencies. Languages of love are different. One person may want love or respect, while the other wants concrete help. This is why a simple one-time discussion is likely to miss crucial elements. This will hopefully become apparent in time. Negotiation is harder when unfairness has been accepted as normal. The one who has been taking advantage may not feel good about letting go of unfair privileges. A temptation is to give in a currency that is easy and of low cost, while demanding changes that are costly. “I’ll plan the vacations” may sound good, but it may also be what the one volunteering finds natural and easy. There is plenty of room or creativity and solutions that subjectively feel fair to both parties may seem highly unusual to outsiders.

“I just want to be left alone"

I have heard this quite a few times. It usually means that the person has so little hope of fairness or resolution that they have abandoned those goals in favor of taking care of their own needs and not expecting help. Furthermore, demand that others "leave one alone" is putting constraints on others that they won't accept. This leads to a guaranteed life of frustration and rage. In fact, trying to change others, who haven't accepted the task is almost always giving away one’s power. The first step, then, is allowing hope to resurface. Until hope in others is rekindled, this is a difficult situation to resolve.

Supporting behavior change

When behavior patterns have been supported and practiced over time, they are genuinely hard to change. This is especially true because entrenched maladaptive patterns usually represent the mind’s attempts to solve problems of real, existential importance. Furthermore, when internalized values reinforce a set of behaviors the difficulty is even greater. There are many tricks, but it can’t be overemphasized how important it is to have complete clarity about what is right.

Part of support is empathic understanding of how hard it is. Once clarity is achieved, then behavior change means acting in ways that are scary, feel unnatural, and may generate waves of shame or guilt. When I think of behavior change, I often remember episodes of the TV show, “What not to wear.” Participants allow the experts to choose their wardrobe. The emotional intensity that accompanies something as benign as wearing more fashionable clothes gives a hint at the level of emotional investment that can go with a pattern of behavior. All that energy is exposed when one tries to change an old pattern. There are many techniques for supporting behavior change. I think of ones like making a commitment or enlisting someone to be a cheerleader and hold the person accountable. A way to keep concepts vividly clear is keeping a daily diary with negative thoughts and feelings on the left and the reasons why they are not valid on the right. Exploring the negative feelings is a form of exposure therapy, using extinction or memory reconsolidation. Finally, this is a place where Prochaska and DiClemente’s six stages of readiness or change can help determine where your client is in the process. Maybe your client needs more time or a different approach before they will be fully ready.

Culture

People arrive in adulthood with values and a sense of what is right already internalized. What makes this potentially problematic is that those standards often consist of nonverbal principles that have been taken for granted and never subjected to question. There are so many different cultures, but one common divide is between those that are more individualistic and those where personal needs are expected to be sacrificed for the group. Another common mismatch is between cultures where male dominance is built-in, versus those in which women are expected to have equal power and say. These assumptions are deeply held and hard to negotiate. They present challenges at least as significant as the individual mismatches that are common to every couple or partnership. Perhaps the biggest hurdle is making unspoken beliefs and values explicit. Once made conscious and brought into the open, these differences can be worked out, but often at the expense of considerable give and take.

Jeffery Smith, MD