Verified by 
Key points
- Habits of invalidating anxiety and worry in relationships and parenting often begin with good intentions.
- Expressions of anxiety or worry, whether from partners or children, require reassurance.
- Many people think they’re reassuring when they’re dismissing or invalidating.
It’s a tricky thing. Expressions of anxiety or worry, whether from partners or children, require reassurance. Because they don’t want their partners or children to worry, many of my clients think they’re reassuring when they’re dismissing or invalidating.
At best, dismissing loved ones’ worry or anxiety seems to them that you don’t grasp the danger or risk, which makes them worry more. (If my partner doesn’t get the risk/danger, we won’t be prepared!) Worse, dismissed loved ones assume their partners and parents don’t care how they feel. How can you trust someone who doesn’t see the risk or who doesn’t care how you feel?
Even when aware that they’re dismissing or minimizing, many partners and parents attribute their behavior to impatience:
“It’s the same worry all the time.”
“There’s no end to my partner’s anxiety.”
Worries, by their nature, recur. Partners who build distrust tend to characterize the recurrence of their partners' worries as emotional disorder. Without thinking, they discount the inadequacy of their own attempts to reassure.
On a superficial level, impatience is due to differences in what partners worry about. Typically, one invests most of their worry in performance, especially at work, while the other worries most about connection and relationship quality. Both partners fear taking on the other’s worry, on top of their own. For them, validation can seem overwhelming.
On a deeper level, the barriers to validating loved ones are simple coping habits—specifically, habits of avoiding guilt or shame with blame, denial, or avoidance. If my partner’s worry seems to suggest that I’m failing or have failed, I must not give it credibility.
Errors in Judgment That Cause Distrust
The self-obsessed error:
“I wouldn’t worry about that, so you shouldn’t worry about it, either.”
The narcissistic error:
“If you worry about what I don’t worry about, there’s either something wrong with you, or you’re out to ruin my dreams.”
Sincere Reassurance Builds Trust
Global reassurances seem inadequate or insincere:
“It’ll be alright.”
“We’ll get through this if we just use our heads.”
The key to sincere validation is interest in the perspectives of partners and children, even when disagreeing with their content. Interest evokes caring and motivation to connect. A sense of connection calms anxiety and worry.
In addition to sincerity, reassurance must be specific, with as much detail as necessary. It should ask for information about the perception causing the worry and offer information about the perception, not the worry.
Of course, we want to help partners and children to worry less. The general rule is that change requires activation of the reflective brain, rather than the reactive, autopilot brain. Asking questions engages the reflective brain; making statements about the validity of feelings activates the reactive, autopilot brain.
Validation is easier when it starts with a common value, such as the general welfare of the family.
Partner One: “I worry about our relationship. We don’t seem as connected as we used to be.”
Partner Two: “Connection is a core value; I’m grateful that you’re attuned to it. What can we do to improve our connection?”
Reassurance must validate feelings:
Partner One: “I have concerns about money.”
Partner Two: “I can understand why you worry about that. Tell me more about your concerns.”
Partner One: “We seem to spend more than we make. Only the government can run a deficit indefinitely.”
Partner Two: “We certainly don’t want to get into serious debt. What do you think of making a budget together so we can feel OK about how much money comes in and how much has to go out?”
Don’t Fool Yourself With “Facts”
The goal of validation is to reconcile perspectives, not dominate your partner’s. To reconcile perspectives, you must understand them, which is hardly possible when trying to dismiss, devalue, or refute them with what you regard as facts.
Most people don’t disagree about facts; they disagree about interpretations of facts (meaning, coherence) and specifics of recall. Interpretations and recollections are subject to cognitive biases. Assuming that your partner’s interpretations and recollections are biased while yours are free of bias is another form of narcissistic error.
Interpretations and recollections are rarely completely accurate, but the feelings they cause are always valid. Disagreement about interpretations of facts and specifics of recall do not erode trust. The beginning of the end of trust is invalidation of feelings.
We must be honest with ourselves about what makes us judge and invalidate the feelings of loved ones. Is our impatience or lack of interest in their internal world born of our own hidden anxiety, guilt, or shame? Blaming those on partners and children, denying them, or avoiding them exacerbates them while destroying trust in our most important relationships.
