Hi James,

I agree that there are times when “agreeing to disagree” is the best option. Without better understanding the history and dynamics of your conversation, I couldn’t offer advice specific to your situation, but you are right that not every discussion has to end with the other person feeling perfectly understood and/or right. With arguments that aren’t central to your relationship (i.e. making sure you’re not avoiding difficult conversations that need to be had), it can be best for both people to just “agree to disagree” and move on.

Michael

Hi Maya,

That’s a tough situation. My article on what to do when someone is constantly complaining, and my podcast episodes on boundaries here and here may help, as you’re right—you can’t just lay back and validate, validate, validate all day every day and expect things to change. Validation is a tool, but rarely the only tool needed for more difficult situations. The above articles provide a little more direction.

Michael

Question what do you do when you feel even though you validate their feelings you’re constantly expected to each time they jump to their conclusion after conclusion, assassinating your character in the process. It’s like they start little fires everywhere and I’m expected to put one out one right after the other. It’s pretty exhausting having to be guilty until proven innocent. All the whiles the other person also ignores all the other finer parts of a productive conversation etiquette . They make assumptions, they jump to conclusions, they get aggressive, they talk over or interrupt you, they curse at you, they gaslight you. Not only am I expected to keep my cool they but want their feelings validated on command. They also haven’t done the emotional work to pinpoint their issues or articulate them properly enough for you to validate their experience but expect you to fix them. They even demand apologies even after you give them clarity and prove your innocence because apparently validating them first is more important.

Thanks for sharing that link, to a great article! Both articles have already given me some insight. What do you do when someone who feels consistently invalidated, is not doing it for others because they are so used to giving up? How can you communicate with someone who has valid emotions, but that you feel they invalidate yours, and you disagree?

Thanks alot for the responses. Appreciate it. Trying to learn what I can about this validation concept as a loved one is in a bad place with alot of negative emotions but is getting extremely angry and keeps saying he feels invalidated.

That depends on whether or not you feel they’re open to changing their mind. In my experience, few people are open to alternate perspectives until they feel theirs has been heard and understood (which is where validation comes into play). However, there are plenty of times when people dig their heels in no matter what, and won’t change their opinion, even when validated and presented with the strongest counterarguments.

So in a situation like yours (whether hypothetical or real, I do not know), you may try to better understand their perspective, validate what you can, and then ask if they’re open to another perspective. Asking that question is big, as it shows respect, and invites them to verbalize whether they’re open or not.

The second thing I’d suggest you do is look at why you feel the need to change their opinion. Obviously, there is no place in this world for racism, so I think it’s important we speak up and help educate people and call them out when they’re not being respectful. And, if they choose to never change, it can be helpful to understand how that is affecting you. Can you get comfortable with knowing that you disagree on those points, and still love them and be around them anyway? (Perhaps with boundaries around conversations that could lead to racist remarks?) Or are their comments and actions so inappropriate or uncomfortable that you need to distance yourself from them? If the latter, you can tell them as much, such as saying, “I love you, AND I can’t listen to you talk like that. So if you’re unwilling to change, I’m no longer comfortable coming over.” (Another boundary).

Not an easy situation, no matter how you look at it.

Thanks. Is there any room to attempt changing their mind? Or should one just not cross that boundary even if it means them stewing in their (hostile, negative) feelings?

Hi Brother,

This is a tough situation, and you’re right to suspect that validation will be a valuable tool in helping you navigate it. While it’s fairly easy to just walk away, or shut another person down, when we disagree and don’t care about damaging a relationship, it’s much harder to figure out how to disagree, hold your ground, and PRESERVE the relationship.

In the example you presented, I would take one of two approaches. The first would be to tell them that I’d like to “agree to disagree,” and then ask that we change the topic. (This is an example of a boundary, and one that would be entirely appropriate). If they continue to argue their point, I would set a firmer boundary such as telling them I will leave if they continue on in the conversation. “I love you and I disagree with you. And I would like to stay and keep talking, but not about this. Should I come back another time?”

The second approach I might take is one of curiosity. Asking as many questions as feel appropriate to better understand where the other person is coming from, to see if there is anything I CAN validate, to help them become more open to my perspective. So I might ask why those horrific actions were justified. Then I’d hear them out, and ask any follow-up questions that feel appropriate, until I feel I understand where their coming from.

I don’t have to (and likely won’t) agree with their viewpoint after that, but my goal will be to at least understand HOW they could come to such an extreme opinion. Most people generally act quite rationally, all things considered. Meaning most people’s actions and reactions are understandable once we fully understand their background, family upbringing, perception, trauma, etc. That doesn’t mean their viewpoint/opinion/interpretation is “right” or correct, but it often times IS fairly rational.

If I don’t find anything I feel I can validate, though, I will return to the first option: agree to disagree and set a boundary. But if I do uncover something I can validate (let’s say they witnessed or were a victim of a crime committed by someone of a particular race), I could validate that by saying, “that makes a lot of sense. Especially to have witnessed something so horrific.” And then, after a pause, say “AND, can you appreciate the fact that that doesn’t mean everyone is like that?” Or whatever my point is.

It’s all very situation dependent, but I hope that helps.

How would you recommend dealing with such a situation?

Thank you for your reply, Michael. The additional information does, indeed, explain why you did what you did. I did wonder if there was more to this story than met the eye, but I made my comments in good faith based on the information before me. Thank you so much for taking the time to respond. I do appreciate it. All the best.

Hi Sheila,

Thank you for your comment, as you raise some important observations and fair points.

To add some background to the situation, Jace was in a director role, and while he wasn’t this particular team member’s direct manager, he nevertheless had some stake in the project in question.

And as you suspected, there is much more background to the story than I’ve shared here—for privacy reasons as much as for brevity. Suffice it to say, prior to the project in question, this particular team member had demonstrated that he *was* under qualified for certain types of work, which had been made apparent by poor performance. So Jace’s fears were understandable and I felt it important to validate them.

I also agree wholeheartedly that speaking poorly of another team member—whether of similar standing or not—is unproductive and inappropriate. My conversation with Jace in this instance focused on helping him feel heard and understood, while also holding firm to my belief that this other team member *was* qualified for this particular project. So while I can appreciate how my retelling of the story here doesn’t make that clear, it was generally positive toward the other employee, and focused more on what I needed Jace to do to help.

I hope that color helps to better understand the story?

Michael

In your case study, taken from your book, you refer to having placed an “under qualified” coworker in charge of “a few menial projects”. People will read this differently, of course, but to me that could come over as slightly belittling – both in terms of the capabilities of the person involved, and in the level of “importance” being assigned to the roles being fulfilled.

This “impression” could then be further compounded as in trying to “identify” with Jace, to understand where HE is coming from, you then go on to, potentially, further undermine the unnamed worker by agreeing that whilst he’s not necessarily the best fit for the job, he’s essentially good enough.

Also, it’s not clear to me whether Jace himself was in a senior enough position to warrant your discussing another employees relative merits, albeit indirectly.

If Jace was a fellow manager, who perhaps had a right to expect input into the choice, he is, perhaps, owed that sort of explanation.

If he was simply a peer of the coworker, I think you’ve potentially, and unintentionally, undermined the other chap.

Now, maybe you feel I’m nitpicking here although that is not my intent. I do understand the bigger point you’re making and, of course, I wasn’t there to hear the words you actually said. But when faced with a similar situation with coworkers of similar “standing”, I’d suggest it might be better to chose to emphasise the positive deployment of the resources best suited to the another, bigger job – leaving Jace to infer that the lesser able individual was placed in a lower value job – without my actually having to “agree” that that was the case. Just my two-penny worth.

Hi Bill,

Thanks for the comment. That’s good insight—-valuable to understand. Kudos to you for looking inward and working on yourself. That’s powerful, what you just mentioned. Thank you for sharing.

Michael

Thank you, Abril. I couldn’t agree more.

I experienced trauma last year that left me unable to work for a few months. I had two friends that constantly gave me “unsolicited advice” to “fix me.” In order to save money while I healed, I moved in with a not as a close friend. She gave me the greatest gift anyone has ever given me – she held space for me while having her own boundaries (https://upliftconnect.com/hold-space/). She just listened. It was more healing than all of the unhelpful unsolicited advice aka judgment my “fixers” poured upon me. I realized she and I didn’t have these drawn-out, circular conversations about my experiences, as I had with my two friends, because I didn’t feel like I needed to give them enough details or defend my feelings so they could be validated “rational” or “right” for them.

Stumbled across this page for insight on how to express this to my friends in effort to try to repair our relationships.

Accepting a person is not about condoning behavior, buying into their reality, or even understanding them. Its accepting that this is how the person’s feeling, thinks, believes, and operates and responding effectively.

Hi Chris,

I’m not certain I understand the situation – your girlfriend wanted you to validate her friend?

Michael

Hi MeetMeHalfway,

I don’t blame you for a second for not wanting to sit and validate people for hours on end. And I don’t. I am a big proponent of boundaries, and strong believer that we are all responsible for our own happiness. (I preach often that we cannot “make” other people angry, “make” them sad, etc. nor should we try to.)

I have also found that, in most situations, I can validate someone and get right into my feedback in a matter of minutes—if not seconds. I’m not at all a proponent of coddling or walking on eggshells around people. We can be empathic and validating, while also being direct, assertive, boundaried, and efficient.

As with anything in life, there is a need to find the proper balance in difficult conversations. Certainly, if it’s working for you to get right to the point and duke it out with others, and all ends well with respect and understanding, then more power to you!

Michael

So, what do I do– I just say what I feel needs to be said, and if it turns off the more emotional types, then so be it. I’m willing to engage and explain myself, and if they can’t help this with a ton of coddling, then too bad???

I just get sick of the more emotional types always acting so tyrannical in these situations because when I’m dealing with thinkers we can disagree, give corrections, share opinions and keep things flowing without caring if one person is upset.

Hi Steven,

Thank you for commenting. I actually addressed that very question in the following article: https://michaelssorensen.com/does-validation-lose-its-power-when-both-people-know-about-it/

In short: yes, there can be times when validation feels more clinical than sincere, or when I’m consciously aware of someone validating me. It really all boils down to sincerity, though. If someone disagrees with me, yet is able to effectively validate the points they *can* agree on, it’s every bit as effective and appreciated.

Michael

Hi Dave,

My recent article, When Validation is Not the Answer, may address at least a few of your questions. Your question about whether we need to just be okay when people are always late, or people who don’t accept our feedback or requests to change, is addressed in my podcast episode and article on boundaries.

In general, though, heinous and egregious circumstances are absolutely not going to be solved by simply validating. Instead, I’d encourage you to look at validation as a tool—one that can likely still play an important role in the conversation or intervention—to help reach the best possible outcome.

In fact, former FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss shares in his book, Never Split the Difference, how the FBI regularly uses validation in high-stakes hostage negotiations. These are situations where people are often not in their right mind, and are threatening to harm or kill dozens or hundreds of people, and validation still plays a key role in reaching a resolution.

Michael

In such instances isn’t it healthier to not validate? I am not being disingenuous, people have been talking a lot about validation and I am struggling to understand how to apply it it heinous and egregious situations. I have looked everywhere and can’t find dialogue on ‘validation’ in these situations and I want to understand.

Hi Bugsy,

“I experience validation as a way to show respect for another human being.” <-- I absolutely love that. You're spot on! Michael

Hi Ahmen,

Happy to hear that. Thank you for taking the time to comment.

Michael

Hi Sadie,

Thank you! Perhaps you’ll find the following article helpful: https://michaelssorensen.com/2019/10/24/what-do-i-do-if-my-partner-is-constantly-complaining/

Best,

Michael

Hello Michael!

I had such a great read. I have a friend who has never opened up to me before and suddenly he’s started messaging me about a concern of his so I wanted to be a good listener as much as I can for him, thanks for the tips. I replied here because I would like to know if you’ve written another article regarding this concern, because I kind of relate to SS to.

Let me know and I’d be glad to read, thanks!

Hey Steph(?),

I’m glad you’ve brought this up, as you’re not the first to pose the question, and I’m getting it enough that I have begun a more in-depth article on the subject. (Update: the article can now be found here.)

The short answer is this: you do not need to always be at people’s beck and call, and you should always tend to your own emotional health and happiness first, before trying to help others. (Think of the “put on your own oxygen mask before helping others” principle from airline safety briefings). Most everyone will run into situations like what you’ve described—where no matter how much you validate, the other person keeps coming back for more and it begins to damage the relationship.

Depending on the nature of that relationship, you’ll either set boundaries, give them feedback on how their negative attitude is affecting you, change the way you interact with them, or simply work away from having a relationship with them. I’ll put some thoughts together into a more formal article in the next week or so, so subscribe to the blog or check back later.

Michael

Hi Cody,

Thrilled to hear you’re finding the content valuable. Regarding subscribing to the blog, there is now a form available at the very bottom of the page to subscribe. (You’re not crazy—it wasn’t there until this morning. 😉 )

I’m hoping to get that article up early next week and will look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Michael

Hi Karleen,

Excellent question—I think I’ll write a post about how to address that specifically. Subscribe to the blog to be notified when it posts!

Michael

Hi Jessica,

Thank you for taking the time to share. It’s not always an easy thing to do, so kudos to you for putting it into practice.

Michael

Agreed! Easier said than done…

Hi Georgette,

I’m happy to hear you’ve found it insightful. And I’m sorry to hear that you feel invalidated in your relationship—that’s never a fun feeling and can certainly put a strain on a relationship.

If you haven’t read it already, I published an article with some thoughts on how to handle such a situation that you might find helpful: https://michaelssorensen.com/2019/06/19/what-to-do-if-your-partner-isnt-great-at-listening-or-validating/

Best,

Michael

This was perfect validation with clarification. I have learnt a lot from the article as someone who is always feeling invalidated in my relationship. It makes more sense to me now why I resent my partner. I never felt heard or understood. I’m dismissed or discounted with these invalidations.

Thank you, Lola—I’m glad you brought this up. I see now that that example, without more context, can send the wrong message. I was imagining an argument where the upset individual heard untrue rumors about the other person. In that instance, the person validating (the one who *was* there) could still validate the other person’s emotions (they are upset because of what they *heard* happened), while also sharing more details surrounding the experience.

You are spot-on that telling someone that what they experienced wasn’t “real,” or that they are in some way being irrational, is presumptuous, disrespectful, and counter productive. I’m a big proponent of non-judgment, and allowing people the space to properly deal with and process difficult emotions. Thank you for weighing in!