,

When Your Adult Child Hasn’t Launched

There is a particular ache in parenting adult children: they are old enough to vote, drive, and ignore your excellent advice, yet sometimes not quite old enough to stop making decisions that make you want to stare at the ceiling and reconsider every permissive moment since preschool.

The job has changed, but the love has not.

Psychologists call this season “emerging adulthood,” a stretch of life, often from the late teens through the twenties, marked by freedom, instability, and uneven progress. Temple University psychologist Dr. Laurence Steinberg has noted that the path to adulthood now takes longer than it once did, and that many parents and grown children are trying to build a new relationship while the old one is still rattling around in the trunk.

That helps explain why so many parents feel confused. We were trained for bedtime, broccoli, and booster seats. Nobody really prepared us for a 22-year-old with a fully formed opinion, a half-formed plan, and a habit of making choices that leave the family group text one message away from combustion.

The research is surprisingly clear on one point: love helps, but over-control does not.

In a 2016 study in the Journal of Child and Family Studies, Kayla Reed and colleagues found that helicopter parenting was linked indirectly to worse outcomes for emerging adults through lower self-efficacy, while autonomy-supportive parenting was linked to better life satisfaction and physical health. A newer review in Youth likewise found that parents still matter a great deal in this stage, but the healthiest approach balances warmth, expectations, and autonomy support.

The more troubling findings involve psychological control, using guilt, intrusion and manipulation tactics, or treating a grown child’s mind like it is still your rental property. Developmental psychologist Brian Barber famously described psychological control as parenting that “constrains, invalidates, and manipulates” a child’s emotional and psychological experience. In real life, it sounds like: “After all I’ve done for you, this is how you repay me?” or “If you loved this family, you wouldn’t do this,” or “I guess you just don’t care about us anymore.” The key difference is this: behavioral guidance says, “If you live here, you need to follow these rules.” Psychological control says, “I will make you feel guilty until you think and feel what I want.” Research has long distinguished those two forms of control because psychological control is more strongly tied to internal distress, while healthy behavioral limits are a separate thing altogether.

That distinction matters when an adult child has not launched well, or is making decisions that are harmful to themselves or others. Parents are still allowed to have standards. In fact, they need them. But a boundary is not a guilt trip in pearls. “You may not live here rent-free if you are using drugs,” is a boundary. “You are breaking your mother’s heart, and good children do not do this,” is emotional pressure wearing a church hat.

If you are in this season, the research points toward a hard but hopeful middle path: support without rescuing, honesty without humiliation, and love without emotional takeover.

Bowen family systems theory, developed by psychiatrist Murray Bowen, warns that in anxious families, the person who does the most accommodating can end up absorbing everybody else’s anxiety. That is a helpful reminder for parents who have become full-time fixers, financiers, or emotional paramedics. Steinberg makes a similar point in gentler language: the task is not to dominate your adult child, but to learn how to resolve conflict and build a strong adult relationship.

Which is another way of saying: your grown child may still be on the runway, but you do not help the plane take off by tying yourself to the landing gear, screaming directions along the way.

Love them dearly. Tell the truth calmly. Set boundaries you can actually keep. Refuse to confuse rescuing with helping.

That is not giving up on your child. It is making room for them to become an adult, which, in the end, was the assignment all along.

Lauren Hall is the President and CEO of First Things First. Contact her at lauren@firstthings.org

/0 Comments/by
,

The Long Shadow of Harsh Parenting

Most parents have had that moment.

You are tired, running late, already stretched thin, and your child does the very thing you asked them not to do. Again. The milk spills. The attitude appears. The shoes are still not on. And suddenly, before you can even catch it, your voice is louder than you meant for it to be. Your words are sharper. Your patience is gone.

Most of us know what it feels like to parent from frustration instead of wisdom.

That does not make someone a bad parent. It makes them human. But it is also worth asking an uncomfortable question: when does discipline stop being correction and start becoming harm?

That question matters because there is a real difference between raising children with strong boundaries and raising them with strong fear. One builds character. The other can quietly chip away at it.

Researchers generally define harsh parenting as discipline that relies on fear, pain, shame, or intimidation. That can include physical punishment like spanking, hitting, or grabbing, but it also includes verbal and emotional aggression: yelling, threatening, insulting, humiliating, or regularly tearing a child down. In simpler terms, it is parenting that tries to control behavior by overpowering the child rather than guiding the child.

That is not the same thing as being firm. It is not the same thing as setting rules, following through on consequences, or expecting respect. Healthy parenting can absolutely be strong. It can be clear, steady, and unmoving when it needs to be. But it does not require cruelty to be effective.

That distinction is important because decades of peer-reviewed research show that harsh parenting is linked to poorer outcomes later in life, especially in the areas of mental health and substance abuse.

Large reviews of the research have found that children exposed to harsh parenting are more likely later to struggle with anxiety, depression, aggression, and difficulty regulating emotions. That makes sense when you think about what children are learning at home. A child’s earliest lessons about love, safety, authority, and belonging are not learned in a classroom or from a podcast. They are learned in the living room, at the dinner table, and in the moments when something has gone wrong.

When discipline is consistently wrapped in fear or humiliation, the lesson may not simply be, “I made a bad choice.” The lesson can become, “I am a bad kid,” or “The people I trust most can turn on me when I fail.”

That message has staying power.

Child development experts have long noted that repeated harsh treatment can shape how children respond to stress. Kids raised in tense, explosive, or emotionally unsafe homes may become overly alert to conflict. They may struggle to calm themselves, trust others, or manage strong feelings. In childhood, those patterns may look like acting out, shutting down, or living constantly on edge. In adulthood, they may show up as anxiety, depression, anger, or unstable relationships.

In other words, what starts as survival can later become suffering.

This is one reason harsh parenting is connected to later mental health struggles. A child who grows up bracing for criticism may become an adult who expects rejection. A child who is constantly shamed may carry that shame into friendships, marriage, work, and parenting. Sometimes the wounds are loud and visible. Sometimes they are quiet and buried under achievement, busyness, or a good sense of humor. But hidden pain is still pain.

Research also shows a connection between harmful childhood environments and later substance use risk. That does not mean every child from a harsh home will struggle with addiction. It does mean the odds are higher. And honestly, that is not hard to understand. Alcohol and drugs often offer what wounded people have been needing all along: relief. Relief from anxiety. Relief from shame. Relief from emotional pain that never had a safe place to go.

For someone who never learned how to calm distress in healthy ways, a substance can feel like help before it becomes harmful.

That is one of the heartbreaks here. A child who needs comfort may grow into an adult who goes looking for comfort in dangerous places.

None of this is meant to heap shame on parents. Parenting is hard, and many mothers and fathers are trying to raise children while carrying their own exhaustion, wounds, and family histories. Some are repeating what they were shown because it is the only model they ever had. But love alone does not cancel impact. Good intentions are important, but they are not the same as good outcomes.

The hopeful news is that families are not stuck.

Parents can learn to correct without crushing. They can hold boundaries without humiliation. They can lead without threats. They can apologize when they get it wrong, repair what has been damaged, and create a home where truth and grace live together. That is not weak parenting. That is deeply strong parenting.

Strong families are not built on fear. They are built on trust, consistency, accountability, repentance, forgiveness, and love that knows how to stay calm. Children need rules, yes. They also need dignity. They need guidance, but they also need safety.

Because in the end, the goal is not just a well-behaved child at the moment. The goal is to become a healthy adult later on.

And that kind of future is shaped, in part, by what kind of home we build now.

Lauren Hall is the President and CEO of First Things First. Contact her at lauren@firstthings.org

/0 Comments/by

How Confidence in Your Relationship Shapes Your Well-Being

There is something deeply calming about believing your relationship is steady.

Not perfect. Not conflict-free. Not untouched by stress. Steady.

A recent study published in the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy found that when couples improved their “relationship confidence” through a relationship education program, they also saw gains in their individual well-being, including mental health, sleep, and substance-use outcomes. What stood out most in this study was that relationship confidence appeared to matter even more for personal well-being than communication or partner support alone. In other words, it was not just whether couples talked better. It was whether they believed we can handle life together.

That makes sense, because human beings do not separate relationship stress from the rest of life very well. When home feels uncertain, that uncertainty tends to bleed into everything else such as sleep, concentration, mood, and even the way we carry stress in the body. Research by Brian Doss and colleagues, published in Current Opinion in Psychology, has shown that romantic relationship quality and mental health are closely intertwined, and often in a direction that runs from the health of the relationship to the health of the individual. A secure relationship does not fix everything, but it can create a kind of emotional stability that supports the person inside it.

So what does it mean to be confident in your relationship?

It does not mean never having doubts. It does not mean always feeling close. And it does not mean pretending problems do not exist. Relationship confidence is more like trust in the bond itself and the belief that your partner is with you, the relationship has a future, and the two of you can face challenges without everything falling apart.

People who are confident in their relationship usually recognize a few signs. Conflict may still be hard, but it does not immediately feel catastrophic. The future feels discussable. Reassurance is helpful, but not constantly required. There is a sense of stability underneath the ordinary ups and downs.

When confidence is low, the opposite tends to happen. Small disagreements feel loaded. One or both partners become hyperaware of distance, tone, or ambiguity. Conversations about commitment or the future feel avoided, unclear, or tense. The relationship may still exist, but it does not feel emotionally secure.

Attachment research helps explain why. Meta-analytic findings published in Personality and Individual Differences shows that insecure attachment (particularly anxiety and avoidance)  is consistently linked with lower relationship quality. Anxious partners often fear rejection and scan for signs that something is wrong. Avoidant partners often withdraw from closeness and dependence. Both patterns make it harder to feel confident in the relationship, even when love is present.

And confidence matters beyond the relationship itself. In Current Opinion in Psychology, Brooke Feeney and Nancy Collins argued that close relationships help people thrive by serving as both a source of strength in adversity and a base from which to grow. In other words, a strong relationship does not just comfort us when life gets hard. It helps us function better in life overall.

So how can confidence be built if it is missing?

Usually, not through grand declarations, but through evidence.

Confidence grows when partners become reliable in small, repeated ways. Keeping promises. Repairing after conflict. Telling the truth. Following through. Handling stress as a team. Over time, those moments create a track record that says, we have faced hard things before, and we can do it again.

It also grows through clarity. Ambiguity erodes confidence. When commitment is vague, future plans are unspoken, or one partner stays emotionally half-in and half-out, insecurity fills the gap. People feel safer when they know where they stand.

And finally, confidence grows through shared resilience. The research also noted that one way to reinforce relationship confidence is to remember past challenges the couple has already survived. That memory becomes its own kind of strength.

In a healthy relationship, confidence is not just a nice extra. It is part of what helps both people breathe easier.

We often speak of love as a feeling. But sometimes love is also a shelter. And when people trust that their shelter will hold, they are often better able to rest, recover, and live with a little more peace.

Lauren Hall is the President and CEO of First Things First. Contact her at lauren@firstthings.org

/0 Comments/by
, ,

Defining Clarity Before Marriage

A few weeks ago, I found myself standing in a room full of college students talking about relationships. Some were engaged. Some were dating someone seriously. A few were still figuring out what they wanted.

At one point, someone raised their hand and asked a question that made the whole room quiet.

“How do you know when to talk about marriage in a relationship?”

It’s a question many young adults wrestle with today. And in truth, it’s not really about timing. It’s about clarity.

Instead of answering the question directly, I asked them a different one.

Why do you want to get married in the first place?

What kind of spouse do you want to be? What kind of marriage do you want to build?

Those questions matter much more than the calendar. Because the healthiest relationships tend to grow out of shared values and intentional choices, not simply the passage of time.

Much of this idea comes from the work of University of Denver psychologist Scott Stanley, who has spent decades studying commitment in romantic relationships. Stanley describes two ways couples move through major relationship milestones: they either slide into them or they decide.

Sliding happens when couples drift from one stage to the next without much conversation. They start dating, spend more time together, move in together, and gradually build a shared life without clearly talking about long-term commitment.

Deciding looks different. It involves deliberate conversations and thoughtful choices about the future.

Stanley and his colleagues describe this pattern in research published in the journal Family Relations. They found that when couples slide into major transitions, especially living together, it can create what researchers call “inertia.” Shared leases, routines, and finances can make it harder to step back and evaluate whether the relationship is truly the right long-term fit.

The point is that intentionality before commitment matters.

Relationships tend to be stronger when commitment grows from thoughtful decisions rather than momentum. 

That message resonated with the students in the room. Many of them weren’t confused about love. They were confused about how to move forward with purpose.

Their uncertainty reflects a broader shift happening across the country.

Marriage still matters to many young adults, but the timeline has changed dramatically. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median age for first marriage is now about 32 for men and 29 for women, nearly eight years older than it was in 1990.

At the same time, fewer Americans are marrying at all. Researchers at the Pew Research Center report that marriage rates among adults under 30 have fallen steadily over the past several decades.

Economic realities are part of the story. Student loan debt, housing costs, and longer educational paths have delayed many traditional milestones of adulthood. Researchers studying life transitions have found that fewer young adults today reach markers such as stable employment, homeownership, and marriage by their late twenties compared with previous generations.

But economics isn’t the whole picture.

Expectations for marriage have also evolved.

In earlier generations, marriage often provided financial stability and a clear social structure. Today, young adults tend to look for something deeper. They want emotional compatibility, shared values, and a partner who feels like a true teammate in life.

Sociologists Andrew Cherlin and others have described this shift as the rise of the “soulmate model” of marriage, where the relationship is expected to provide both companionship and personal fulfillment.

That’s a much higher bar and requires more preparation than previous generations needed.

The students I spoke with weren’t struggling because they lacked opportunities to date. What many of them lacked was clarity about themselves. They were still figuring out what mattered most to them, family, faith, career, lifestyle, or future goals.

Developmental psychologists often describe the late teens and twenties as a stage called emerging adulthood, a period when people are exploring identity and long-term direction. Jeffrey Arnett, whose research on emerging adulthood appears in the journal American Psychologist, describes this stage as a time when young people are learning who they are before settling into permanent commitments.

So it’s not surprising that big relationship decisions feel complicated.

And yet what struck me most that evening was how much these young adults still wanted strong relationships.

They weren’t cynical about marriage. They simply wanted to approach it thoughtfully.

Research suggests that preparation can make a meaningful difference.

Studies on premarital education led by Scott Stanley and other relationship scholars have found that couples who learn communication skills, conflict management strategies, and commitment principles before marriage often report stronger and more stable relationships later on.

But preparation for marriage doesn’t begin with engagement rings or wedding planning.

It begins much earlier—with self-reflection.

Young adults benefit from understanding their own values before trying to merge their lives with someone else’s. They benefit from learning how to talk openly about the future. And perhaps most importantly, they benefit from seeing healthy relationships modeled in the adults around them.

Those lessons shape expectations long before a proposal ever enters the picture.

One of the most freeing ideas we discussed that evening was this: dating doesn’t have to be an urgent search for someone to marry.

Instead, it can be something simpler. Dating can be a process of discovering alignment.

Finding someone who treats you with respect. Someone whose values make sense to you. Someone whose vision for life looks similar to your own.

When that kind of alignment appears, conversations about commitment tend to happen naturally, not because the clock is ticking, but because both people can see the same future beginning to take shape.

And when that happens, the decision to move forward together becomes much clearer.

Not because you slid into it. But because you chose it.

Lauren Hall is the President and CEO of First Things First. Contact her at lauren@firstthings.org

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

The Mental Load Behind the Mess

Clutter looks harmless until you live with it.

It’s the shoes by the door that turn into a pile, the mail that never quite lands in a folder, the laundry that migrates from basket to chair to “I’ll deal with it later.” For some people, that’s background noise. For others, it’s like trying to relax while an alarm quietly beeps in the next room.

A 2025 study in the Journal of Environmental Psychology by researcher Francis Quinn helps explain why clutter can feel so heavy. In a survey of 501 adults, people who reported more clutter also reported worse mental well-being, lower life satisfaction, and more negative emotions.

The study found an important “middle step,” too: clutter tended to make people see their homes as less beautiful, and that loss of “home beauty” partly explained why well-being dropped. In other words, clutter didn’t just take up space, it changed how home felt, and that mattered.

Now, if you’ve ever thought, “Okay, but why does this stress me out more than it stresses my spouse?” you’re not imagining things. One of the most talked-about studies on this comes from psychologists Darby Saxbe and Rena Repetti. In their 2010 research, they asked dual-income couples with children to give video tours of their homes while describing what they saw, then the researchers tracked mood and measured cortisol, a stress hormone, over several days. The pattern was clear: wives who described their homes with more “stressful” language, words like cluttered, messy, or unfinished, showed less healthy daily cortisol patterns and worse mood. For husbands, the link between home conditions and stress was much weaker.

That doesn’t mean men don’t care about home, and it doesn’t mean women are simply “pickier.” It points to something deeper: clutter is rarely just clutter. It often stands for unfinished tasks, and unfinished tasks usually have an owner in the family system, even if nobody ever said it out loud.

This is where the idea of the female mental load connects to the mess on the counter.

Sociologist Allison Daminger, in her 2019 paper in American Sociological Review, described “cognitive labor” as the work of noticing what needs to be done, planning it, deciding how it will happen, and then monitoring whether it actually gets done. That’s the invisible job behind the visible chores, and it’s one reason clutter can feel like more than “stuff.” It can feel like proof that the whole mental checklist is still running.

More recent research has put numbers to the emotional cost. A 2024 study in Archives of Women’s Mental Health examined cognitive household labor and found it was linked to women’s depression, stress, burnout, overall mental health, and relationship functioning. The point isn’t that women are destined to carry this burden, it’s that many do, and clutter can become a daily trigger because it’s a constant visual reminder of all the managing that remains undone.

So what do couples and parents do with this information without turning it into a blame game?

Start by translating the fight. Many “clutter arguments” are really arguments about support, responsibility, and rest. A helpful sentence sounds like, “When the house is cluttered, my brain won’t shut off. It feels like a list I’m still responsible for.” That’s different from, “You’re a slob,” and it gives your partner something real to respond to.

Next, move from “help” to “ownership.” Helping is doing something when asked. Ownership is noticing, planning, and finishing without being managed. If the mental load is part of what makes clutter

 so stressful for women, then the solution can’t be one partner acting as the home manager who hands out assignments. A fairer approach is agreeing on a few areas that each person fully owns, like school papers, laundry start-to-finish, lunches, bedtime reset, or the kitchen close-down, and letting the owner decide how to handle it.

Then, lower the temperature by defining what “good enough” means in this season. Not your ideal house, not your childhood house, not the one on social media, just a shared minimum standard that protects peace. When couples don’t define the standard together, the more stressed partner often becomes the default enforcer, and that role is exhausting.

Finally, make it routine, not personal. A short daily reset, ten minutes after dinner, everyone involved, can do more for harmony than one big cleaning sprint on Saturday that ends in resentment. The goal is not a magazine-ready home. The goal is a home that feels livable to both of you, and restful to the person whose body treats clutter like a stress signal.

If the research teaches us anything, it’s that home isn’t just where we keep our stuff. Home is where our nervous systems try to recover.

When couples take clutter seriously as a mental load issue, not a character flaw, they stop arguing about piles and start building partnership, and that is the kind of clean-up that actually lasts.

Lauren Hall is the President and CEO of First Things First. Contact her at lauren@firstthings.org.

/0 Comments/by
,

Why Mattering Matters, Especially for Children

Most of us learned “basic needs” as a short list: food, water, shelter, safety. Useful, yes. Complete? Not really.

Harvard’s Center on the Developing Child is asking us to widen the list with something that sounds soft but works like a load-bearing wall: mattering. In their working paper Mattering in Early Childhood, they define mattering as the feeling that we are valued and that we have value to add. Put simply: “I’m important to you, and what I do makes a difference here.”

What caught my attention is how direct they are: mattering isn’t a “nice extra.” It’s an essential human need. That doesn’t replace food or housing; it explains why some kids can have the basics and still feel shaky inside. A child can have a full fridge and still quietly wonder, Would anyone notice if I wasn’t here?

Harvard also clarifies a common mix-up. Belonging is about fitting in. Mattering is about significance. You can belong to a family, classroom, or team and still not feel valued. And you can feel loved but never trusted to contribute, which also chips away at mattering. Their paper keeps returning to the two parts: feeling valued and adding value.

This connects to the Center’s long-standing “serve and return” concept: the back-and-forth exchanges between a child and a caring adult. When a baby coos and you respond, when a toddler points and you name what they see, when a child is upset and you help them settle, those moments shape brain architecture and build early language and social skills.

Mattering grows in those ordinary, repeated returns: I see you. I’m with you.

It also helps explain why chronic stress hits kids so hard. Harvard defines toxic stress as prolonged activation of stress response systems, especially when a child lacks supportive relationships to buffer that stress. Support doesn’t erase hardship, but it helps a child’s body return to calm, again and again, which supports resilience.

That’s why “mattering” is so important for kids in vulnerable neighborhoods, or in families with chaos, conflict, untreated mental illness, or substance use. In those settings, mattering can be the first thing to slip, even when adults love their children. When life is unpredictable, kids often stop asking, “Do you love me?” and start asking, “Do I count? Will anyone show up consistently?” The Center’s resilience paper notes that children who do well despite serious hardship often have had at least one stable, committed relationship with a supportive adult. 

So what do we do on a normal Tuesday? Start small on the “valued” side. Make eye contact. Put the phone down for one minute. Notice what they’re trying to tell you beneath the behavior. Comfort first, correct second. That’s serve and return in real life. 

Then build the “value to add” side. It’s faster to do everything yourself, but kids need real chances to contribute. Harvard notes that welcoming a child’s contributions helps build mattering. Let them set out napkins, feed the pet, carry in groceries, sweep after dinner, read to a sibling, and say the quiet part out loud: “That helped our family. You made a difference.”

If you’re tired reading this, you’re not disqualified. Mattering doesn’t require perfect parenting. It requires consistent signals, some warmth, some attention, and some real opportunities to help, until kids believe something sturdy: My presence counts, and I can do good here.

Lauren Hall is the President and CEO of First Things First. Contact her at lauren@firstthings.org.

/0 Comments/by
,

What High Vs. Low Effort Looks Like in Families

“Low effort family” is a new term trending across social media. With therapists, researchers and relationship enthusiasts weighing in and providing different definitions of what a “low effort family” looks like, I had to do my own research.

Some families run on “auto-pilot.” Plans are last minute. Rules change depending on who’s tired. Conversations are mostly logistics (“Where’s your backpack?”). Conflict either blows up or gets buried.

Other families aren’t perfect, but they’re more intentional. They follow through. They build a few steady routines. They repair after hard moments.

That’s what I mean by “low effort” vs. “high effort” families.

These aren’t official research labels. But they describe real, research-backed family processes that shape how kids and adults do over time.

A “low effort” family often isn’t lazy. It’s usually low bandwidth. Stress, long work hours, money pressure, anxiety or depression, and lack of support can drain a family’s capacity. When you’re running on fumes, you react instead of plan. Limits get inconsistent. Connection gets replaced by correction. And the hard conversations keep getting pushed down the road.

A “high effort” family isn’t a “perfect family.” It’s a family that puts energy into a few basics: predictable routines, warmth plus limits, direct communication, and real repair. Family therapist and researcher Froma Walsh, PhD, describes family resilience as learnable processes—how families organize, communicate, and make meaning under stress. In other words, “high effort” is a set of skills you can build, not a personality you either have or don’t.

Why does any of this matter? Because small, repeated patterns add up. For example, routines aren’t just nice, they’re protective. A large systematic review of family routines (spanning decades of studies) found that routines are linked with positive child outcomes and can be especially helpful in high-risk settings. When a home is predictable in a few key ways, like sleep, meals, school rhythm, kids tend to feel safer and more steady.

Follow-through matters too, especially as kids get older.

A 2025 meta-analysis that pulled together 571 studies with more than two million participants found parental monitoring and behavioral control are associated with lower substance use in adolescents and emerging adults. That’s a research way of saying: when parents pay attention, set limits, and stay engaged, risk goes down.

And the emotional climate matters. A systematic review and meta-analysis found parenting behaviors are meaningfully related to internalizing problems in kids and teens, things like anxiety and depression. Kids don’t need parents who never mess up. They need parents who are present, responsive, and willing to repair.

If you’re wondering where your family falls right now, don’t overthink it. Just look at the past two weeks. Have you had two or three predictable routines most days? Have you followed through on limits more often than not? Have you had any daily connection with your kids that wasn’t correction or logistics, even ten minutes? And when there’s conflict, does it get repaired within a day or so? If you’re answering “not really,” that’s a sign you might be in a low-effort season.

Here’s the good news: moving toward “high effort” doesn’t mean doing everything. It means doing one thing consistently. Pick one routine that causes the most chaos, such as bedtime, mornings, dinner, homework, and simplify it until it’s repeatable.

The goal is not a Pinterest routine. It’s predictability.

Or choose one repair habit and practice it like a script: “I didn’t handle that well. I’m sorry. I hear you. Let’s try again.” That one sentence can change the emotional temperature of a whole house.

And if your home feels stuck with constant conflict, ongoing shutdowns, or mental health concerns, getting support is not a sign you failed. It’s a high-effort move. A licensed marriage and family therapist (LMFT), psychologist (PhD/PsyD), or psychiatrist (MD) can help you build skills and lower stress.

Naming the difference between low effort and high effort matters because it turns “We’re struggling” into something you can actually work with: specific, changeable habits. And families don’t transform in one big dramatic moment.

They change through small choices, repeated often, that make home feel steadier and more connected.

Lauren Hall is the President and CEO of First Things First. Contact her at lauren@firstthings.org.

/0 Comments/by

How to Be Mad and Still Be Kind

Anger gets a bad rap. But anger isn’t the villain in your relationship.

It’s more like your body’s push notification: “Something feels unfair, unsafe, or important—please look here.” The trouble is that when anger is loud, we tend to do one of two things: explode (control) or shut down (connection at any cost). Neither one helps you feel heard.

So the goal isn’t “never get angry.” The goal is to handle anger in a way that protects the relationship and protects your dignity. That starts with a humbling truth: you can’t control another adult. You can only control what you bring to the moment through your tone, your timing, your words, and your next move.

Here’s what research suggests actually helps.

First, remember: when you’re angry, your body is part of the conversation (whether you want it to be or not). In research on couples, John Gottman and Robert Levenson found that physiology and patterns of negative emotional exchange during conflict were tied to relationship satisfaction in later outcomes (see their work in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology). In normal-person language: when your nervous system is in overdrive, your brain is not great at listening, problem-solving, or being generous.

That’s why the first step to “getting your point across” is surprisingly simple:

Regulate first. Speak second.

A large meta-analysis in Clinical Psychology Review analyzed 154 studies on anger management and found that strategies that decrease arousal, like relaxation, breathing, and mindfulness, reduce anger and aggression. Meanwhile, arousal-increasing strategies, like “venting,” punching things, or working yourself up, were not effective overall.

If your current plan is “I just need to blow off steam,” the research kindly suggests: maybe not like that.

Brad Bushman’s well-known study in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin found that “venting” while thinking about the person who angered you (basically, replaying the offense) made people more angry and more aggressive.

Instead, try this two-step move: Pause + Cool.

Pause (out loud). Say: “I’m getting heated, and I don’t want to say this in a way I regret. I want to talk about it. Can we take 20 minutes and come back?” The “come back” part matters. It protects connection.

Cool (on purpose). Do something that lowers your intensity. Breathing is not “woo.” It’s wiring. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in Scientific Reports found breathwork interventions lowered self-reported stress compared to controls. Lower stress doesn’t magically solve the issue, but it helps you show up with steadier hands on the wheel.

While you cool down, here’s the key: don’t rehearse your argument like you’re prepping for court. Rumination keeps anger hot.

Next: get your brain back online without stuffing your feelings.

A lot of us were taught that “being calm” means acting like we’re not upset. But hiding emotion has a cost. James Gross and Oliver John found that people who use cognitive reappraisal (changing how you interpret a situation) tend to have better well-being and relationship functioning than those who rely more on expressive suppression (pushing emotion down and masking it).

And in a peer-reviewed study in the journal Emotion, Emily Butler and colleagues found that when someone suppresses emotion during a conversation, it can disrupt connection and increase stress in the interaction. Suppression may look polite on the outside, but it can make understanding harder on the inside.

So what do you do instead? Try distance without disowning.

Ethan Kross and Özlem Ayduk have shown that taking a more “self-distanced” perspective while reflecting on upsetting events can reduce distress and help people make meaning rather than getting stuck. In real life, that can sound like:

What am I needing right now? Respect, help, reassurance, fairness? What story am I telling myself about what this means? If I were advising a friend, what would I tell them to do next?

Now you’re ready for the part that matters: saying your piece clearly without breaking the relationship.

Here’s a simple structure that keeps you in your lane (control yourself) while still being honest:

Observation (facts, not a verdict): “When you came home and didn’t tell me you’d be late…”
Impact (emotion + meaning): “…I felt anxious and unimportant.”
Need (what matters): “I need reliability and teamwork.”
Request (specific next step): “Can you text me when you’re running late—even if it’s just two words?”

Requests invite influence; demands invite defense. And if they say no? You still haven’t lost your power. Power was never “making them.” Power is choosing what you do with the information.

Sometimes anger is less about the topic and more about the fear underneath: “Will I matter here? Will I be alone in this?” Your job is to communicate your boundaries without trying to run their nervous system for them.

A boundary sounds like: “I’m willing to talk about this when we’re both respectful. If yelling starts, I’m going to pause the conversation and come back in an hour.” That’s not punishment. That’s stewardship.

One last research-backed reminder: delay is a superpower. In research on self-regulation in intimate conflict, Eli Finkel and colleagues found that even brief delays can change what people verbalize during provocation (and self-regulation helps override harmful impulses). Most of us don’t need the perfect response. We need ten seconds of wisdom.

So if anger has been running your relationships lately, don’t start by asking, “How do I win this conversation?” Start by asking: “How do I show up like the kind of person I want to be even when I’m mad?”

That’s connection over control. And it’s a skill. Not a personality trait.

Lauren Hall is the President and CEO of First Things First. Contact her at lauren@firstthings.org.

/0 Comments/by