The Couple Who Stopped Giving Each Other Advice

The rule is one sentence: nobody offers a solution unless the other person asks for one.

They made it in year twelve, on a Sunday, after an argument about a colleague of hers that had somehow become an argument about him.

The argument that produced it

She had been describing a situation at work. He had suggested, reasonably, that she speak to the person directly. She had said that was not the point. He had asked what the point was. She had said she did not know, and he had said that was not very useful, and then it was eight o'clock and neither of them was speaking.

His account of it is that he had been trying to help for nine minutes and had been told off for it.

Her account is that she had wanted to be listened to for nine minutes and had been given a project plan.

Both accounts are accurate.

He heard a problem. She was describing a week. Those are not the same thing and nothing in the conversation distinguished them.

The rule

No advice unless asked for. If you want advice, you say so. If you are not sure, the default is no advice.

They also agreed, after a fortnight, on a second half of the rule, which turned out to be necessary: the person describing something has to actually say which they want, and "I do not know" is allowed and means no advice.

Why it was hard

He found the first three months genuinely uncomfortable. He says that sitting through a description of a problem without offering anything felt like negligence, and that he had to learn to do something with his hands.

What he eventually landed on was asking one question rather than offering one answer, which he says is the only technique he has ever deliberately acquired in thirty years of marriage.

She found it hard in a different way. Having been given the floor, she discovered that she often did not have very much to say, and that some of her complaints had been sustained largely by being argued with.

What changed

The obvious thing: she told him more. Considerably more. Within a year he knew about categories of her life that he had not known existed, mostly small and mostly ongoing, because the entry cost had dropped.

The less obvious thing: he told her more too, which neither of them predicted. His theory is that he had been avoiding mentioning things because mentioning them invited suggestions, and he had not consciously known that until the suggestions stopped.

And the third thing, which they both name: fewer arguments. Not because they disagreed less but because a large proportion of what they had been calling arguments had been one person describing something and the other person disputing the description.

What they kept from it

Twenty two years later the rule still stands and is occasionally broken and is usually broken by her, which she disputes.

The version they describe to other couples is shorter: before you respond, ask whether they want help or company.

She says people nod at this and do not do it, and that it took them twelve years and a ruined Sunday to take it seriously.

The written version

In the last few years they have also been answering a question each evening, separately, with neither able to see the other until both have written.

He says it enforces the rule automatically, which he finds slightly insulting and useful. When you read your partner's answer after you have already written your own, there is nothing to solve. The response has already been made. All you can do is read it.

She says that is the entire reason it works and that he is annoyed about it because he would have preferred to have learned the discipline rather than been given a format that removes the temptation.

Names and details changed; the couple is a composite.