Moral Disengagement in Relationships

Moral disengagement, first described by psychologist Albert Bandura, is when a person convinces themselves that ethical standards do not apply to them or to their actions. By twisting facts, they minimize transgressions, remove guilt, and maintain a virtuous image, to self and others. Moral disengagement may involve being humane in one situation and inhumane in another, often with seamless switching. It can impact personal relationships as well as social phenomena.

One example Bandura gives is a prison guard who lovingly wishes his father a happy birthday and then orders a genocide. Another, described in a memoir by Maggie Smith, is a father who blindsides his wife and young children. Suddenly, he announces he is moving about 500 miles away to join his new paramour and proclaims that this will help his children to develop "resilience." Reframing the facts to serve the self is a core aspect of moral disengagement.

4 Psychological Re-framings in Moral Disengagement

1. Reconstruction of immoral behavior: They re-write the narrative to render the self scot-free.
2. Diffusing responsibility or blaming the other" By thinking "They deserved it" or "I didn't initiate it," the victim becomes culpable and the perpetrator, a passive player.
3. Dehumanizing the victim: When dealing with souls deemed worthless or undeserving, there is no need for guilt, remorse, shame, or rethinking.
4. Pretending that one's actions were not injurious to the chosen victim: By minimizing the impact, one can press on and even reframe the blight as a positive.

Moral disengagement is a two-pronged violation—first the injury and then the disavowal. The individual perpetrates, dismisses the destruction, and can even turn it into a personal virtue. For example, the dad above gives himself credit in some subliminal way for creating a "resilience" opportunity. Suggesting that his departure is an opportunity, rather than a massive loss, interferes with the family's capacity to heal.

Witnessing, meeting someone where they are, makes it possible for the acted upon to take stock and move on. Making the survivor feel that the brutal reality is somehow not real is a form of gaslighting or mind befuddlement, such that it is harder to get a grip. Owning what you hath wrought instead of minimizing it, protects other, rather than self, and helps them heal.

Sure, destruction can lead to creativity, pain breeds gain, and trauma seeds posttraumatic growth. True, the disappearance of the disinterested father may actually be a positive. It might foster an openness for new mentors, teachers, neighbors, friends, etc. The credit for the hard work of growth, however, should go to the survivor, not the perpetrator.

The Psychic Situation

Moral disengagement involves cognitive dissonance, restructuring, and compartmentalization. These are psychic positions that allow the person to separate from an uncomfortable truth so they do not have to experience its disturbing aspects or their own role in the morass. Not knowing what you know is a defense and a strategy. As we can see from the four re-framings, base actions become benign for these individuals.

Different From Psychopathy

Moral disengagement is different from psychopathy though they both involve a lack of conscience. For the psychopath, there is a sadistic pleasure in intentional harm. Twisting facts, lying, or denying to others might occur, but psychopathic people are basically at ease with the wrongdoings they initiate. Psychopathic individuals don't need to reframe facts in their inner lives to live with themselves because there is no inner moral turmoil.

The morally disengaged person's drive to disavow the harm done allows ease with whatever mild inner turmoil may crop up. Dismissing the matter with nonchalance is a way to psychologically undo the deed, preserve equanimity, and maintain a sense of personal elevation. Like a bystander in bullying, the morally disengaged person finds a way to side-step brave action. There is an aggression in the passivity.

Relationships Essential Reads

How Overly Polite Communication Leads to Misunderstandings

6 Strategies for High Conflict Couples

Overtones of Narcissism

Moral disengagement, because it includes protecting the ego by distorting reality and maintaining harmony with the self, smacks of narcissism. "I am not responsible. It never happened. I didn't know." Denial and delusional thinking protect the narcissist's fragile ego and help him feel grand and sound in the face of flaws and failures. Pretending that the scarring situation fashioned is just fine softens self-criticism or even shame. A tacit, tossed-off, superficial, cliched apology can be yet another annoyance or offense. Duty done, box checked, but no real discomfort with the action. Self/ego gratification is an organizing principle, a raison d'etre for both the narcissist and the morally disengaged.

Deficient in the Capacity for Concern

At the core, the morally disengaged person's compromised capacity for concern (as described by psychoanalyst D.W. Winnicott) may stem from upbringing or biology. A solid sense of right and wrong, cultivated in childhood, can create awareness of suffering others and the urge to intervene. Research by psychologist Abigail Marsh indicates that there are biological differences between those who go out of their way to help (with no reward in sight) versus those who cause harm. Shadow sides and sinister moments are human. Superego lacunae, holes in the conscience, goodness here, but not there, exist. Curiosity about when and why our less-stellar moments arise and how antipathies might be channeled into higher actions protects all.

A Word About Moral Injury

Some individuals take moral dilemmas hard and actually can suffer a trauma or injury when they feel they are going against their principles. They suffer from strong conscience. Principles, deep feeling, and concern for other people can lead to personal angst. By disabusing themselves of the conflict, the morally disengaged live unencumbered while leaving wreckage in their wake.

One wonders how much of the rampant and increasing anxiety and depression we see is due to the impact of the morally disengaged. While there are many kinds of betrayals, injuries, duplicities, and violations, the trauma from moral disengagement has a unique impact because of the two prongs: perpetration and disavowal. The disavowal makes it harder for the survivor to reckon, accept, adapt, let go, and go on because there is a struggle to understand what actually happened. Reframing their worldview if a beloved other, a respected authority, or a trusted institution fell too far short is another challenge.

Since attempts at truthful communication with the morally disengaged are likely futile, moving on is a good option.

8 Actions to Move on From the Morally Disengaged

1. Step back from the situation.
2. Assess what actually occurred.
3. Identify the associated feelings.
4. Lean on reflective friends.
5. Stay engaged in vitalizing activities.
6. Create a calming habit such as meditation.
7. Find love/beauty in people, places, and things.
8. Weave a "parachute out of everything broken." (William Stafford)