History of the Problem

Exploration of attempted solutions

An essential part of the anamnesis is to inquire about what the couple has already done to try to resolve their situation. Rarely do they come to the consultation without having tried their own strategies.

Exploring these "attempted solutions" serves a dual purpose: it prevents the therapist from suggesting interventions that have already failed (which would generate frustration), and it provides a map of the couple's resources and problem-solving skills.

If the couple reports that they already tried, for example, to have "date nights" and ended up arguing, the therapist learns about their leisure and communication dynamics.

The absence of solution attempts may indicate learned helplessness or lack of skills, while repeated failed attempts may indicate cognitive rigidity.

Understanding why previous attempts failed is as important as the problem itself.

Analyzing the function of the symptom

From a systemic perspective, behaviors that appear destructive or maladaptive often persist because they serve a function within the relationship.

A symptom is not just a problem to be eliminated, but a piece of information that communicates something about the system.

For example, one member's explosive anger may be, paradoxically, the only mechanism he or she has found to force his or her partner to pay attention to important issues that would otherwise be ignored.

If one partner withdraws and the other yells, the yelling may have the function of breaking the wall of silence and forcing interaction.

Although the method is harmful, the underlying intention (to connect or be heard) is legitimate.

Identifying the functionality of the symptom allows the therapist to validate the need (connection) while working to change the strategy (the scream) to a healthier one.

Resource Identification and Systemic Reframing

In analyzing the history of the problem, the goal is to move the couple from a linear view (where one is the villain) to a circular view.

If it is identified that aggressive behavior arises in response to a perceived lack of communication, the problem can be reframed: it is not that "A is an angry person," but that the communication system between A and B is failing, causing escalation to be heard. This approach dilutes blame and reduces resistance.

When the problem is presented as a failure in the "software" of the relationship rather than a defect in the "hardware" of the people, both are more likely to engage in repair.

Understanding that the symptom is (clumsily) trying to fix something allows the partner to lower defenses and collaborate in finding new ways of interacting that do not require painful symptoms to function.

Summary

It is essential to inquire about the solutions the couple previously tried to resolve their current situation. This avoids suggesting failed interventions and reveals existing resolution skills.

From the systemic perspective, destructive behaviors persist because they serve a communicative function within the system. The symptom may attempt to connect or force previously ignored interactions.

The goal is to move the partner toward a circular view that dilutes blame. Reframing the problem as a relational failure encourages collaborative repair.