The 4th Horseman of Relapse – Stonewalling
By Clay Hightower, LMSW

“If I do not think about it, maybe it will get better.”

If you have had a thought like this about a problem before, no matter how big or small, you have engaged in a form of stonewalling. That does not mean that you committed a grave error, but take a moment to reflect on how many times you might have felt that way about a problem that ended up becoming much worse than expected. I know that it has happened to me many times in my life, particularly around the topics of physical and mental health. Just this year, it resulted in me having to complete an eight-week course of physical therapy because I was afraid of what the truth might be. This seems to be one of the more frequent driving forces behind this kind of thought. Other driving forces that clients have expressed to me in the past include the following: the identified consequences of thinking about it or taking action do not seem bad enough to warrant the effort, there are other stressors that have more immediate or more intense consequences, or they are unable to identify any consequences other than “feeling bad.”

So begins the process of stonewalling myself from the experience of “feeling bad” or having an uncomfortable experience. Sometimes this can be thought of as a useful skill, similar to compartmentalizing, but stonewalling is done without intention or consciousness. There is no intention to return to this stressor as soon as the more immediate stressors are resolved. Instead, one ignores warnings about this stressor and avoids returning to it until the consequences become too severe.

As I outlined in my introduction post, stonewalling is mentally checking out of a conversation with another person while physically remaining in the conversation. Stonewalling can be easily identified by uninterested body language like lack of eye contact, crossed arms or legs, and being distracted by other objects in the area. The tone or quality of one’s response, or complete lack of a response, can also be an indicator of stonewalling. Just like the examples of internal stonewalling that I provided, stonewalling can frequently happen in a relationship when one partner is focused on other issues, believes the lack of resolution does not have severe enough consequences, or is emotionally overwhelmed by the potential consequences of addressing the issue. For larger issues in a relationship, the potential consequence can include recognizing that this issue cannot be resolved and is divisive enough that separation is necessary. However, in most situations, the partner feels emotionally overwhelmed due to irrational fears about the issue or an inability to emotionally regulate.

The act of stonewalling, either internally or externally, has a handful of internal responses that almost ensure there will not be a resolution to the issue. These can be in response to the issue itself, to how it is presented to one by their partner, or how one perceives it. Some of these responses include the following:

Avoiding: As I stated earlier, avoidance is at the core of stonewalling. The verbal, nonverbal, and paraverbal communication behaviors observed during stonewalling are synonymous with avoidance. One will do whatever they can to not be reminded of the ongoing issue in their life, including avoiding particular relationships, locations, or topics of conversation that might bring the issue to consciousness.

Assuming: This is one of the more common mistakes when stonewalling partners or loved ones. Typically it will occur around a frequently discussed conversation topic that does not have an easy solution or where the two party’s views are at odds. The individual who is stonewalling will assume that they know how the conversation will go exactly as it has in the past. As painful or frustrating as it might be to stay mentally present in the conversation, maintaining a sense of curiosity and compassion is necessary to resolve conflict.

Escalating: This frequently occurs if one attempts to return to a conflict too soon after a previously heated conversation about the issue. Instead of starting the conversation over from a physiologically soothed and compassionate place, the individual who is stonewalling will become quickly flooded again and escalate the conflict past where it was previously stopped. This is not stonewalling in the traditional sense, but it is a more aggressive form of avoiding uncomfortable emotions and covering with anger.

As I stated in my last post on contempt, the final stage of the relapse process is called the Too Damn Late Phase. We believe that an individual is capable of reaching a point of no return, in which it is almost certainly beyond their power to stop a relapse. The relapse may not happen immediately, but it becomes a matter of “when it will happen” instead of “if it happens.” There becomes a process of secretly planning for the ideal moment to avoid being caught or facing consequences. Because of this, it is difficult to identify practices or tools to use in that phase. Instead, I believe that one needs to practice ongoing mindfulness around areas of their life in which they may be stonewalling themselves or someone else. It may be helpful to use the responses listed above as warning signs and respond with some of the tips I have given before, particularly self-regulation skills and seeking out feedback.

I hope that this series will be helpful for anyone who reads it, whether they are in recovery or not. These communication behaviors are quite common and potentially harmful but possible to change. Stay tuned for the next content series coming soon!