Break up
Break ups are inevitable because it is human nature. It has existed over the years and it has been recurring among human beings. Breaking up relationships is not unique to certain cultures. It is also not a contemporary issue. It is as old as humanity itself (Buss, D 2). There are different processes and strategies involved in terminating a relationship. The nature of the relationship has an influence in the communication strategies used in dissolving the relationship.
Romantic relationships create levels of attachment. The parties, therefore, hurt if the relational finally comes and end (Shimek, C & Bello, R. 11). The emotions involved in romantic relationships make the parties vulnerable. The ability to cope is influenced by the by mode of termination that was adopted by the parties. The process of dissolving a relationship is one of the most painful experiences to humanity.
Dissolving a relationship is an essential part of a relationship. There are two models that can be used in the dissolution of the marriage. The marriage dissolution process has many processes. The breakup does not just happen. It follows a process that eventually leads to the dissolution of the relationship (Sprecher, S. 67). The process has into three phases. The phases are intra-psychic, dyadic, social process and the grave dressing process. The model by Duke is representative of the processes that relationships go through.
There is the intra-psychic process. In this process the individual is at the center. The individual analyses the relationship. There is a psychological cognition at the individual level. This stage may commence if the individual is feeling that their expectations in the relationship are not being met by the other party (Losordo, M. 4). It may be that the partner is not providing love and care as expected. Brooding exists at this stage. Less communication from a partner can be evidence that this stage is on course. Withdrawal from other activities such as sex is common during this process. However, partners may respond differently based on the gender of the parties.
There is the second process of the dissolution in which the dissolution progresses to the partner. The partners engage between themselves. This can be called the confrontation phase. One partner confronts the other partner with the issues. The problems of the relationship are discussed by the partners in this process (Reis, H. 435). Parties lay out their reservations about the relationship and the parties attempt to reach a common ground on many issue of the relationship. It is at this point that an important decision is made. The partners can choose to repair the relationship, postpone it or dissolve the relationship. The relationship can be defined in the dyadic process or its future frustrated. The third phase of the break up only comes into play when the parties decide to terminate the relationship.
The social process of the break up begins after one or the two parties have made a decision to terminate the relationship. The break up is communicated to members of the public. Non parties such as family and friends get to know of the break up at this social process stage. This is the stage in which the partners make the break up officials. They communicate to the significant others about the end of the relationship. The parties can chose to go public either individually or as a team. Announcing the break up together shows a common responsibility.
There is also the resurrection process. In this process the parties conduct a post-mortem on their relationship. The parties learn lessons from the dissolution of the relationship and become ready to get back into the dating scene. They become ready in this process to start a new relationship. This is also referred to as the grave dressing phase of the relationship dissolution process. An assessment of the relationship is conducted. The highs and the lows of the relationship are analyzed from the beginning to the end.
The initiation of break up by a single partner, account for 63 percent according to a study. Only 37 percent of relationships are terminated by mutual agreement. This, therefore, means that the intra psychic phase of relationship dissolution is important in determining whether a relationship continues or is terminated.
There are many behavioral attitudes adopted by parties that intend to dissolve a relationship. The behavior of individuals change from the time the dissolution process begins to the time the relationship is actually terminated. There are different ways of dealing with breakups. Some partners opt to leave the relationship as friends (Losordo, M. 3). The partner in this case does not intend to cut all links with the other party. Telling the other party that friendship is still possible leads to less hurting breakups. The style adopted has gender dimensions. Women respond differently from women during and after the break up. The nature of the relationship between the parties also has an influence on the attitudes adopted by the parties to the break up.
A good number of Partners disassociate themselves from their partners. This represents about 22.7 percent according to a study. About 9.3 percent of the partners avoid their partners and refrains from public postings that may link them to them partner .A about 10.2 percent of people stalk their parties by monitoring their activities. They want to know what the partner is doing and their communications.
During the dissolution stage, a very small percentage of partners are interested in a new relationship. Only a paltry 0.4 percent is interested in new relationships at the time of dissolving the relationship. A small number of partners representing 3.5 percent of partners were in the mourning period. However, about 7.5 represent normal activity during the dissolution of the relationship.
The behavioral tendencies remain the same at the after the dissolution of the relationship. Many behaviors overlap. However, about 4 percent of partners attempt to reconcile with their partners. The number of partners in virtual mourning reduced significantly after the dissolution of the relationship.
The type of the relationship between partners has an effect on the strategy used in the dissolution of the relationship. More compassionate relationships invite more compassionate strategies of dissolution. Manipulative strategies are mostly used by people who were not at the peak during the dissolution.
Strategies used can be either “other oriented or self-oriented”. Self oriented strategies are more individualistic. The person is more concerned with self than the other partner. The party initiating the breakup does not care whether the other party is hurt (Sprecher, S. 698). The other oriented strategies focus on the other party. The interest of the other partner is put into consideration by the person initiating the breakup. The person is concerned about not hurting the other party. The party initiating the break up avoids occasioning hurt on the other party. The feeling of the other party is considered in the breakup process.
Partners who experienced compassionate love tend to adopt more companionate ways of ending the relationship. Parties go for openness and positive tone if they were having compassionate love for each other. Openness means telling the other party of the breakup and the reasons for such breakup. This approach reduces the hurt that individuals go through if other less compassionate strategies.
The use of positive tone ranks second to the use of openness. The party initiating the breakup ensures that the other party does not quit the relationship with hard feelings (Sprecher, S. 702). This means more compassion and tenderness through the termination process. The other party should not feel bad about the relationship at the end of the breakup.
The use of avoidance and withdrawal techniques in the dissolution process is ranks third. Lesser number of people who experienced compassionate love uses this strategy in the break up process. Contact with the party is avoided. This means that the party does not know what is going on. The pending termination of the relationship is not communicated to the other party. Common engagements with the other party are avoided and the party initiating the break up disengages. This is a hurting strategy. The feelings of the other party are not considered in the process. This is a selfish way of terminating a relationship.
A lesser percentage use manipulation to end a compassionate relationship. Manipulations means using another person to inform one partner of the break up. This is less common for partners who were at the pick of their relationships. Sending a third party to a partner is a bad way of ending a relationship because it does not address the emotional needs of the parties. Parties who break up through this means end up hurting. Sometimes manipulative partners tend to force others make the first move in dissolving the relationship (Sprecher, S. 702).This group does something nasty to the partner with the hope that the partner would reciprocate by asking for disengagement.
The people rejected are mostly willing to keep the relationship. This is a more compassionate way of ending the relationship is desirable. Being open with partner and not resorting to selfish styles like manipulations is the best way to go in communicating dissolution of the relationship.
The strategy adopted by individuals to communicate their displeasure with the relationship and, therefore, the need to terminate has great significance. It determines whether a relationship is redefined or terminated. Communication techniques used should, therefore, be used in a manner that addressed the interest of the uncomfortable party. Termination strategies used has effect on the final outcome.
The strategy used determines the type of relationship that ex- partners cultivate at the end of the relationship. Breakups have emotional consequences that are diverse across the genders. Compassionate breakups lead to healthy and friendly relationship by former partners. The strategy used in termination may also aid in reconciliation efforts (Lorsodo, M. 9).
The process chosen by a party to a relationship depends on the individual. However, study reveals that more compassionate relationships lead to adoption of compassionate dissolution strategies.
Works cited
Buss, D Breaking up Romantic Relationships: Costs Experienced and Coping Strategies Deployed, Evolutionary Psychology Journal, Retrieved on 13 March 2015,
Losordo, M An Ex of a Friend is My Friend? : An Exploration of the Effects of Pre-Marital Romantic Relationship Termination on Social Networks,2010, Retrieved on 13 March 2015, Retrieved from http://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/cas_sites/communication/pdf/thesis10.losordo.pdf
Reis, H Dissolution of Relationships, Break up Strategies, 2009, Retrieved on 13 March 2015, Retrieved from http://my.ilstu.edu/~czimmer/Zimmerman-2009-EoHR.PDF
Retrieved from http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/EP06164181.pdf
Shimek, C & Bello, R Coping with Break-Ups: Rebound Relationships and Gender Socialization, 2014, Print.
Sprecher, S et al Choosing Compassionate Strategies to End a Relationship, 2010, Social Psychology, 41(2):66–75, Retrieved on 13 March 2015, Retrieved from http://my.ilstu.edu/~czimmer/Sprecher_Zimmerman_Abrahams_2010.pdf
Sprecher, S The influence of compassionate love on the strategies used to end a relationship, 2014, Journal of personal and social relationships, 31(5)697-705
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|