From author and licensed clinical social worker John S. Collier comes a powerful new series of books exploring love, loss, faith, emotional healing, and personal growth. With honesty shaped by both professional experience and a life marked by hardship, perseverance, and grace, Collier invites readers to examine the hidden places of the heart. Each book blends practical wisdom with vivid metaphor, offering encouragement to those learning to release the past, rebuild their identity, establish healthier relationships, and trust God through uncertain seasons. This is more than a collection of books—it is a journey from merely surviving life’s storms to discovering the strength, purpose, and peace needed to live fully again.
https://a.co/d/0gTmck1t
Expressions from Behind His Silence: Valume 3: Thwe Mercy of Open Hands
Some endings do not arrive with anger. They arrive with open hands.
The Mercy of Open Hands, Volume Three of the Expressions from Behind His Silence series, follows a man through heartbreak, acceptance, forgiveness, and the difficult grace of release.
Through intimate, reflective poetry, John S. Collier explores what it means to love someone without possessing them, to carry grief without becoming bitter, and to let go without denying that the love was real.
These poems speak to the moment when holding on begins to wound more than losing—and to the quiet courage required to choose peace.
This collection is for anyone learning that surrender is not weakness, forgiveness does not erase the past, and sometimes the most loving thing the heart can do is open its hands.
When parents separate or divorce, one of the most significant changes for children is learning how to live between two homes. A child who once knew exactly where they would wake up each morning, where their belongings were kept, and who would be sitting at the dinner table may suddenly have to adjust to different bedrooms, schedules, expectations, and routines.
For adults, these arrangements may be described in terms of custody schedules, parenting time, visitation, or shared parenting. Children usually experience them much more personally. They may wonder, Where am I sleeping tonight? Did I leave my homework at Dad’s house? Will Mom be upset that I had fun with Dad? Who is picking me up from school? When will I see Mom again?
These questions illustrate an important principle: stability does not necessarily mean living in only one place. Stability means having enough predictability, emotional security, consistency, and dependable relationships that a child knows what to expect and knows that the adults responsible for them are going to continue caring for them.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) emphasizes that children’s adjustment following divorce or separation is influenced significantly by how parents interact before, during, and after the separation. Parents who place children’s needs ahead of their disagreements can make the transition easier. (HealthyChildren.org)
Although every family is different, the following five strategies can help children develop a sense of security while living between two homes.
1. Create Predictable Routines in Both Homes
Children generally function better when they have some idea of what is going to happen next. Predictability creates a sense of security because children do not have to constantly anticipate changes.
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends keeping children’s routines—including school, extracurricular activities, relationships, discipline, and responsibilities—as normal and unchanged as reasonably possible following separation or divorce. (American Academy of Pediatrics)
This does not mean both homes must operate identically.
One parent may serve dinner at 5:30 while the other eats at 6:30. One household may allow television before bed while another prefers reading. Children are capable of understanding that different homes have somewhat different expectations.
However, having consistency around important areas can be helpful.
For example, parents might attempt to maintain reasonably similar expectations concerning:
Bedtime and wake-up routines
Homework and school attendance
Medication and healthcare
Personal hygiene
Screen time
Chores and responsibilities
School-night expectations
Behavioral boundaries
A predictable parenting schedule can also provide reassurance. A child who knows, “Dad picks me up every Wednesday after school,” experiences something very different from a child who regularly wonders, “I don’t know where I’m going tonight.”
Visual calendars can be especially useful for younger children. Parents can place a calendar somewhere the child can easily see it and use colors, pictures, or symbols to indicate which home the child will be staying in.
Most importantly, parents should make every reasonable effort to keep promises concerning parenting time. HealthyChildren.org specifically notes that predictable weekly or monthly schedules can be comforting and emphasizes the importance of parents following through on promised visits or time together. (HealthyChildren.org)
Children do not need every day to be identical. They need the important people in their lives to be dependable.
2. Never Make the Child Choose Between Parents
One of the greatest emotional burdens adults can unintentionally place on children is making them feel responsible for choosing one parent over another.
Children generally want permission to love both parents.
A child should not have to evaluate whether talking positively about one parent will hurt the other parent’s feelings. Likewise, children should not become messengers, investigators, negotiators, or referees between adults.
The AAP advises parents not to force children to take sides and recommends keeping disagreements and adult conversations private rather than allowing children to become involved in parental conflict. (HealthyChildren.org)
Parents should therefore avoid questions or statements such as:
“Who would you rather live with?”
“Does your dad’s girlfriend stay there?”
“Tell your mother she needs to pay me.”
“Your father cares more about his new family than you.”
“I guess you’d rather be at your mom’s house.”
Even when spoken during frustration, statements like these can create a loyalty conflict. The child may begin believing that loving one parent represents betrayal of the other.
A healthier message is:
“You are allowed to love both of your parents.”
Children should also be able to enjoy themselves in the other household without guilt. If a child returns from the other parent’s home excited about going camping, attending a ballgame, visiting grandparents, or celebrating a birthday, the receiving parent can simply share the child’s excitement.
The message becomes:
“You don’t have to protect my feelings. I’m glad you had a good time.”
That response provides tremendous emotional freedom. Parents do not have to like one another to protect their child’s relationship with each parent. The goal is not necessarily friendship between former partners. The goal is creating an environment in which children are not responsible for managing adult emotions.
3. Make Both Houses Feel Like Home
There is an important difference between visiting a parent and living with a parent. Whenever practical, children who regularly spend substantial time in two households should have a sense that they belong in both places. They should not feel like permanent guests arriving with luggage every few days. Something as simple as having their own toothbrush, pajamas, clothing, school supplies, toys, books, toiletries, and personal belongings can communicate:
“You belong here.”
If circumstances allow, give the child a designated personal space. It does not necessarily have to be a private bedroom. It might be a dresser, shelf, closet, toy box, desk, or special area where the child’s belongings remain when they leave. Allowing children to personalize their space can also increase their sense of ownership.
Let them choose:
Bedding
Pictures
Decorations
Stuffed animals
Books
Nightlights
Posters
Family photographs
Parents should also consider keeping commonly forgotten necessities in both homes. Children frequently moving clothing, chargers, school supplies, medications, sports equipment, and toiletries from one household to another can become frustrated and anxious.
Whenever financially possible, duplicating inexpensive necessities can reduce this burden. Adults sometimes unintentionally make children responsible for managing the logistics of shared parenting. A seven-year-old should not experience a crisis because they forgot their school shoes at the other parent’s house.
The adults should carry as much of the logistical responsibility as reasonably possible. This principle extends beyond physical belongings. Children need emotional belonging as well. Photographs of the other parent do not necessarily need to disappear from a child’s room simply because the parents are no longer together. Children should generally be allowed to talk about their other home, siblings, stepparents, grandparents, and experiences without feeling that certain subjects are forbidden. Two homes can be very different and still communicate the same fundamental message:
“This is your home, too.”
4. Protect Children From Adult Conflict
Parents do not have to agree about everything to successfully raise a child between two homes. They do, however, need to recognize that repeated exposure to adult conflict can make an already difficult transition significantly harder. AAP guidance recommends that parents discuss disagreements privately, avoid fighting where children can hear them, and refrain from involving children in parental arguments. (HealthyChildren.org)
This includes more than face-to-face arguments. Children can also be exposed to conflict through:
Angry telephone conversations
Hostile text messages they are allowed to see
Social-media posts
Criticism from extended family members
Arguments during exchanges
Sarcastic comments
Questioning children about the other household
Asking children to deliver messages
Complaining about child support or finances
One particularly harmful dynamic occurs when the child becomes the communication system between parents.
“Tell your dad you’re staying here Friday.”
“Ask your mother why she hasn’t answered me.”
“Tell Dad you need money for your uniform.”
Children should not be responsible for carrying adult information across household lines.
Whenever possible, adults should communicate directly through phone calls, text messages, email, co-parenting applications, mediators, or other appropriate channels. When communication between parents is extremely difficult, reducing unnecessary interaction may sometimes be more realistic than attempting to create a close co-parenting relationship. The objective should remain the same: reduce the child’s exposure to conflict.
Parents can also make transitions deliberately uneventful. Exchanges do not need to become opportunities to revisit disagreements. A simple: “Have a great weekend. I love you. I’ll see you Monday.” may provide much greater security than an emotional goodbye followed by an argument in the driveway. Children watch adults carefully. When parents communicate that transitions are safe and manageable, children receive permission to experience them that way as well.
5. Give Children Permission to Talk About Their Feelings
A child can love both parents and still dislike living between two homes. Both things can be true. Children may experience sadness, anger, confusion, excitement, guilt, relief, anxiety, or frustration—and sometimes several of those emotions at once.
Younger children may have difficulty explaining these emotions verbally. Their distress may instead appear through tantrums, sleep difficulties, clinginess, regression, irritability, or changes in eating. School-aged children may demonstrate anger, distraction, academic problems, or mood changes. (HealthyChildren.org)
Rather than immediately correcting the emotion, parents can become curious about it. If a child says:
“I hate going back and forth.”
A parent may instinctively respond:
“You shouldn’t say that. You’re lucky both of us love you.”
Although well intended, that response can close the conversation. A more supportive response might be:
“Going back and forth can be hard sometimes. What is the hardest part for you?”
Perhaps the problem is not the other parent at all. The child might say:
“I always forget my stuff.”
“I miss my dog.”
“I don’t sleep well there.”
“I hate packing.”
“I miss you when I’m gone.”
Now the parent has information that may lead to a practical solution. The AAP recommends giving children opportunities to express their feelings and helping them understand that they did not cause the divorce or separation. Children also benefit from reassurance that their parents’ love and care for them will continue. (American Academy of Pediatrics) One of the most powerful messages a parent can repeatedly communicate is: “The problems between the adults are adult problems. You did not cause them, and you are not responsible for fixing them.”
Stability Is More Emotional Than Geographical
Parents sometimes fear that living between two homes automatically means children will have unstable lives. That does not have to be the case. A child’s stability is created through relationships, routines, expectations, emotional safety, and dependable caregiving—not simply through an address. Two homes can provide stability when the adults surrounding the child consistently communicate:
“You are safe.”
“You are loved.”
“You know what happens next.”
“You are allowed to love both parents.”
“The adults will handle the adult problems.”
“You can talk to me about how you feel.”
The transition following separation or divorce is a process rather than a single event, and children’s reactions may change as they grow and understand their family circumstances differently. The American Academy of Pediatrics therefore encourages parents and professionals to remain attentive to children’s emotional and behavioral responses over time. (American Academy of Pediatrics)
Parents should pay particular attention to significant or persistent changes such as declining school performance, social withdrawal, severe anxiety, sleep disturbances, prolonged sadness, aggression, physical complaints without an obvious medical explanation, or other substantial changes in functioning. When concerns become significant, consultation with the child’s pediatrician or an appropriately qualified mental-health professional may be beneficial. (HealthyChildren.org)
Ultimately, successful shared parenting is not measured by whether two households have identical rules, furniture, resources, or parenting styles. It is measured by whether the child experiences both homes as places where adults are dependable and love does not have to be divided. Children should never feel that they are carrying two separate lives in two separate suitcases. They should be able to understand something much healthier:
“I have one life, one childhood, and two places where I belong.”
References
American Academy of Pediatrics. (2016). Helping children and families deal with divorce and separation. Pediatrics, 138(6), e20163020. (American Academy of Pediatrics)
American Academy of Pediatrics. (2016). Parting ways: New report on divorce addresses pediatricians’ role. AAP News. (American Academy of Pediatrics)
Deciding to file for divorce can be one of the most emotionally complicated decisions a person ever makes. Even when the relationship has become unhealthy, chronically conflictual, emotionally exhausting, or destructive, leaving can produce grief, doubt, fear, and guilt. Research has specifically identified guilt toward a former spouse as a meaningful part of the divorce experience, associated with factors such as regret, compassion, perceived responsibility for the separation, and psychological functioning (Baum et al., 2012). (PubMed)
But there is an important difference between feeling guilty because you care about another person’s pain and being made to feel guilty so that you will reconsider a decision made necessary by an ongoing pattern of harmful behavior.
Sometimes the partner who desperately wants to save the marriage focuses almost entirely on the divorce itself:
“How can you do this to me?”
“You’re destroying our family.”
“You’re giving up on us.”
“After everything I’ve done for you, you’re just walking away.”
“You’re the one choosing divorce, not me.”
Technically, one spouse may be the person who signs and files the paperwork. Psychologically and relationally, however, that does not necessarily mean that person single-handedly created the conditions that ended the marriage.
Sometimes filing for divorce is not the beginning of the problem.
It is the response to a problem that has existed for a very long time.
The Difference Between Filing for Divorce and Causing the Marriage to Fail
When someone says, “You’re the one who filed,” the statement may be factually accurate while leaving out most of the story.
The more important questions may be:
What happened before the filing?
What conversations took place?
What promises were repeatedly made and broken?
Were boundaries repeatedly violated?
Was there chronic dishonesty?
Was there infidelity?
Were there repeated episodes of yelling, humiliation, intimidation, manipulation, neglect, controlling behavior, substance-related chaos, financial irresponsibility, or emotional abandonment?
Did one spouse repeatedly communicate that something needed to change?
Were opportunities for counseling, reconciliation, or behavioral change offered?
And, perhaps most importantly:
Did the person who is now devastated by the divorce take the problems seriously before divorce became a reality?
A divorce petition does not tell the entire story of a marriage.
Imagine someone living in a house where the roof has leaked for years. They repeatedly point to the water damage and say, “We have to repair this.” Their partner minimizes the problem, promises to fix it later, becomes defensive whenever it is mentioned, or blames them for complaining.
Eventually the damage becomes unbearable, and the person moves out.
It would be strange to say:
“You destroyed our home because you moved.”
Moving did not create the leaking roof.
It was a response to living underneath it.
Relationships can work similarly.
“You’re Leaving Me” Can Distract From “Why Are You Leaving?”
A spouse facing divorce understandably experiences powerful emotions. They may feel abandoned, frightened, angry, embarrassed, rejected, or devastated. Those feelings deserve compassion.
But emotions and accountability are two different things.
A person can genuinely be heartbroken that you are leaving while simultaneously refusing to acknowledge the behavior that contributed to your decision.
That distinction matters.
Instead of asking:
“What did I do that brought our marriage to this point?”
they may ask:
“How could you do this to me?”
Instead of saying:
“I understand why you no longer trust me.”
they may say:
“You never gave me another chance.”
Instead of acknowledging:
“My behavior hurt you repeatedly.”
they may say:
“You’re throwing away everything we’ve built.”
The focus subtly shifts.
The conversation stops being about the pattern of behavior that damaged the relationship and becomes a trial concerning the person who finally decided they could no longer live with that pattern.
This type of blame reversal is particularly concerning when it occurs alongside manipulation, intimidation, gaslighting, coercive control, or other forms of emotional abuse. The National Domestic Violence Hotline identifies blaming a partner for one’s own unhealthy or abusive behavior as a warning sign of emotional abuse. It also identifies manipulation, humiliation, intimidation, excessive jealousy, monitoring, isolation, and gaslighting among behaviors that can constitute emotional abuse. (The Hotline)
Not every spouse who says something unfair during a painful divorce is abusive. Divorce brings intense emotions, and people sometimes speak defensively out of grief. What matters is whether there is a persistent pattern of avoiding responsibility while pressuring the other person to assume it.
Guilt Can Become a Powerful Form of Control
Guilt itself is not unhealthy.
Healthy guilt can tell us that we violated our values or harmed another person. It can motivate us to apologize, repair damage, and behave differently.
Manipulated guilt operates differently.
It communicates:
“Your decision to protect yourself is proof that you are hurting me.”
Research examining abusive relationship dynamics has found that shame and guilt can sometimes be deliberately elicited as mechanisms of coercive control. A qualitative study by Culos-Reed and colleagues examined what the researchers called “shame-to-guilt” behaviors—manipulative strategies through which abusive partners trigger shame and guilt in their partners. The researchers identified tactics involving emotional manipulation, threats, parenting, health concerns, religious values, and other emotionally significant areas. (PubMed)
This does not mean that every expression of sadness or guilt during divorce is manipulation.
A spouse is allowed to say:
“I don’t want this divorce.”
They are allowed to cry.
They are allowed to grieve.
They are allowed to wish you would reconsider.
They are even allowed to believe that divorce is the wrong decision.
What becomes problematic is when their emotional pain is repeatedly turned into evidence that you are morally obligated to remain in the relationship regardless of what the relationship has been doing to you.
Compassion does not require continued participation in an unhealthy relationship.
When Accountability Gets Replaced by Blame
Accountability sounds different from guilt-based pressure.
Accountability says:
“I hurt you.”
“I understand that my behavior had consequences.”
“I should have listened when you told me things needed to change.”
“I wish I had handled things differently.”
“I don’t want the marriage to end, but I understand that my actions contributed to where we are.”
“I’m going to work on myself whether you return or not.”
Blame sounds more like:
“Look what you’re doing to me.”
“You’re ruining everyone’s lives.”
“You’re selfish.”
“You’re breaking up the family.”
“If you really loved me, you wouldn’t leave.”
“You’re abandoning me when I need you most.”
The difference is significant.
Accountability examines one’s own behavior. Blame attempts to transfer responsibility for its consequences.
The National Domestic Violence Hotline makes a similar distinction when discussing apologies in abusive relationships. An apology that essentially says, “I’m sorry, but you made me do it,” shifts responsibility rather than accepting it. Genuine accountability requires recognizing one’s choices and taking meaningful steps to change future behavior. (The Hotline)
“But They Say They’ll Change Now”
This can be one of the most emotionally difficult parts of leaving.
Perhaps you spent months—or years—asking for changes.
You asked for communication.
You asked for honesty.
You asked them to stop yelling.
You asked them to seek treatment.
You asked for counseling.
You asked for affection.
You asked them to respect boundaries.
You explained how badly you were hurting.
Nothing produced sustained change.
Then you filed for divorce.
Suddenly there are tears, apologies, promises, therapy appointments, flowers, long messages, declarations of love, and statements such as:
“I finally understand.”
The natural question becomes:
Why did it take losing me for my pain to matter?
That question does not have a simple answer.
Sometimes the threat of losing a marriage genuinely awakens someone to the seriousness of their behavior. People can change, and genuine transformation is possible.
But urgency is not the same thing as transformation.
Promises made when consequences finally arrive should be evaluated according to sustained behavior over time, not simply according to their emotional intensity.
Accountability is demonstrated rather than announced.
The Trap of Remembering Only the Good
Guilt often becomes stronger when separation begins because distance can change how we remember a relationship.
You remember vacations.
Christmas mornings.
Inside jokes.
Their smile.
The day you met.
Your wedding.
The children being born.
The dreams you once shared.
Those memories are real.
But so are the other memories.
A painful marriage does not have to have been painful every minute to have become unhealthy.
This is particularly important in relationships involving abuse or coercive control. Recent psychological research describes how targets of partner abuse can become psychologically entrapped partly through processes of minimizing, justifying, normalizing, or reframing harmful behavior. Such processes can make evaluating the relationship-versus-self-preservation decision extraordinarily difficult (Arriaga et al., 2026). (PubMed)
Earlier qualitative research similarly found that self-blame can influence how people interpret intimate partner aggression, including situations in which partners effectively “turn the tables” and shift responsibility toward the person experiencing the harmful behavior. (PubMed Central (PMC))
You do not have to erase the good memories to acknowledge the bad ones.
Both can be true:
“We had beautiful moments.”
and
“I cannot continue living this way.”
You Can Love Someone and Still Leave
One of the most damaging misconceptions surrounding divorce is the idea that leaving proves you never loved the person.
Sometimes people leave precisely because they spent years trying not to.
They stayed through disappointment.
They forgave.
They hoped.
They rationalized.
They waited.
They believed promises.
They tried again.
Eventually they recognized that love was no longer enough to compensate for what was happening inside the relationship.
Love does not automatically create emotional safety.
Love does not create accountability.
Love does not cure addiction.
Love does not stop repeated infidelity.
Love does not make someone communicate.
Love does not eliminate controlling behavior.
Love does not force another person to seek help.
Love does not require accepting unlimited harm.
And loving someone does not obligate you to remain married to them.
You Can Feel Guilty Without Being Guilty
This may be the most important distinction.
Feeling guilty and actually being responsible for wrongdoing are not the same thing.
Research confirms that guilt toward a former spouse is common enough during divorce to be specifically measured as a psychological construct. (PubMed)
You may feel guilty because your spouse is crying.
You may feel guilty because your children are upset.
You may feel guilty when you see the empty side of the closet.
You may feel guilty when your spouse tells you they cannot imagine life without you.
You may feel guilty because you made vows you genuinely intended to keep.
You may feel guilty because part of you still loves them.
None of those feelings automatically establishes that leaving is wrong.
Sometimes guilt is simply the emotional cost of making a painful decision that affects someone you care about.
A useful question is not simply:
“Do I feel guilty?”
Ask instead:
“What exactly am I guilty of?”
If the answer is, “I am guilty because they are hurting,” examine that belief carefully.
Causing disappointment is not automatically wrongdoing.
Setting a boundary is not automatically cruelty.
Ending a relationship you can no longer participate in is not automatically betrayal.
And another person’s distress does not automatically create an obligation for you to reverse your decision.
Do Not Confuse Their Consequences With Your Cruelty
When unhealthy behavior continues long enough, consequences eventually appear.
The consequence might be separation.
It might be loss of trust.
It might be emotional distance.
It might ultimately be divorce.
The person experiencing those consequences may sincerely dislike them. But disliking a consequence does not mean the consequence was created maliciously by the other spouse.
This distinction becomes especially important when psychological abuse has occurred. Research has associated psychological abuse with significant mental-health consequences, including symptoms of depression and posttraumatic stress, even after accounting for other forms of partner violence. (PubMed)
More recent research on psychological abuse also emphasizes potential harms involving diminished agency, loss of self-belief, and feelings of entrapment. (PubMed)
Therefore, repeatedly telling someone that they are selfish or cruel for leaving can be particularly powerful when that person’s confidence in their own judgment has already been weakened.
When Guilt Continues After Separation
Leaving does not necessarily end unhealthy relational dynamics.
A review of 48 studies concerning post-separation abuse found that harmful behavior can continue after relationships end and may involve psychological, legal, economic, and other forms of abuse, including using children as part of the conflict. (PubMed)
That makes boundaries especially important during high-conflict separation.
If every conversation becomes another attempt to make you defend the divorce, it may become necessary to stop debating the decision.
You do not have to repeatedly prosecute your case before your spouse.
You can communicate practical matters without endlessly defending why you left.
A boundary might sound like:
“I understand that you disagree with my decision and that you’re hurting. I am not going to continue arguing about whether I am allowed to leave. I am willing to discuss the practical matters we need to resolve respectfully.”
That is not necessarily coldness.
It is a boundary.
Separate Compassion From Responsibility
You can have compassion for your spouse’s suffering without assuming responsibility for eliminating it.
You can say:
“I know you’re hurting.”
without saying:
“Therefore I must stay.”
You can say:
“I’m sorry our marriage ended this way.”
without saying:
“Everything was my fault.”
You can say:
“I wish things had been different.”
without saying:
“I should return to the same circumstances that caused me to leave.”
Mature compassion allows two realities to coexist:
Their pain matters.
Your well-being matters too.
Look at Patterns, Not the Last Conversation
When guilt overwhelms you, return to the history of the relationship rather than evaluating everything according to your spouse’s reaction to divorce.
Ask yourself:
What was happening six months before I decided to leave?
What was happening two years before?
What had I repeatedly asked to change?
What boundaries had I communicated?
Were promises followed by sustained behavioral changes?
Did I feel emotionally safe expressing concerns?
Was I becoming healthier or less healthy inside the relationship?
Was I staying because the relationship was improving, or because I was afraid of hurting the other person?
If nothing changed for another five years, would I willingly choose this marriage again?
Those questions move the focus away from the emotional intensity of the present moment and toward the actual pattern that produced the decision.
Divorce Does Not Require a Villain
There is another important caution.
Not every failed marriage involves an abuser and a victim.
Sometimes two basically decent people develop destructive patterns together.
Sometimes incompatibility becomes impossible to overcome.
Sometimes both partners caused significant harm.
Sometimes one person contributed much more heavily than the other.
And sometimes one person’s behavior clearly became abusive, coercive, or dangerous.
Avoiding inappropriate guilt does not require rewriting your spouse as entirely evil or yourself as entirely innocent.
A healthier position is:
“I can acknowledge my mistakes without accepting responsibility for yours.”
That is accountability without self-erasure.
When There Has Been Emotional Abuse or Coercive Control
If the marriage has involved intimidation, threats, stalking, coercive control, physical violence, sexual coercion, severe financial control, threats involving children, or threats of self-harm intended to prevent separation, ordinary divorce advice may not be sufficient.
Separation can sometimes be a particularly vulnerable period in abusive relationships. Research on post-separation abuse demonstrates that abusive tactics may persist or evolve after a relationship ends. (PubMed)
In those circumstances, decisions concerning communication, meetings, housing, finances, children, and legal proceedings should be made with appropriate professional support and attention to safety.
The Question That Changes Everything
When your spouse says:
“How could you do this to me?”
you may find yourself drowning in guilt.
But there is another question worth asking:
“What happened between us that brought me to the point where divorce felt necessary?”
That question does not remove your responsibility.
It puts responsibility back into its proper context.
Marriage is a relationship.
Divorce paperwork may have one person’s signature on the first page, but the history behind that signature can contain years of experiences.
Filing is an action.
The reasons behind filing are the story.
Do not confuse the two.
Final Thoughts
The person who files for divorce is not automatically the person who destroyed the marriage.
Sometimes filing is the final acknowledgment that something has already become unsustainable.
Your spouse may genuinely love you.
They may genuinely be devastated.
They may genuinely wish you would stay.
Their feelings deserve to be recognized.
But their pain does not erase the history that led you here.
Healthy accountability requires everyone involved to examine their own choices. You can examine yours. You can apologize for the things you genuinely did wrong. You can learn from your mistakes. You can treat your spouse with dignity during the divorce.
But you do not have to carry their portion of the responsibility simply because they refuse to pick it up.
Perhaps the healthiest sentence a person leaving a destructive marriage can eventually learn to say is:
“I am responsible for how I leave. I am not responsible for pretending there was no reason I needed to.”
That distinction can be the beginning of moving from guilt toward clarity—and eventually toward peace.
Baum, N., et al. (2012). Assessing guilt toward the former spouse: The Guilt in Separation Scale. Psychological Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027444 (PubMed)
Beck, C. J. A., Anderson, E. R., O’Hara, K. L., & Benjamin, G. A. H. (2013). Patterns of intimate partner violence in a large, epidemiological sample of divorcing couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(5), 743–753. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034182 (PubMed)
Culos-Reed, S. N., et al. (2025). “Don’t you love me?” Abusers’ use of shame-to-guilt to coercively control 2SLGBTQQIA+ individuals and rural women experiencing intimate partner violence. Women’s Health. https://doi.org/10.1177/17455057251335361 (PubMed)
McLindon, E. V.-M., Brown, C., McKenzie, M., Tarzia, L., & Hegarty, K. (2026). Development and validation of the Psychological Abuse in Relationships Scale. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 41(9–10), 1985–2008. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605251325912 (PubMed)
Mechanic, M. B., Weaver, T. L., & Resick, P. A. (2008). Mental health consequences of intimate partner abuse: A multidimensional assessment of four different forms of abuse. Violence Against Women, 14(6), 634–654. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801208319283 (PubMed)
National Domestic Violence Hotline. (n.d.). What is emotional abuse? (The Hotline)
National Domestic Violence Hotline. (n.d.). What if my abusive partner apologizes? (The Hotline)
Spearman, K. J., et al. (2023). Post-separation abuse: A literature review connecting tactics to harm. Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody & Child Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/26904586.2023.2177233 (PubMed)
About the Author
John S. Collier, MSW, LCSW-S is a licensed clinical social worker, mental health professional, writer, and educator whose work focuses on relationships, emotional wellness, trauma, behavioral health, personal growth, and the complicated human experiences surrounding marriage, separation, grief, and major life transitions.
Through his professional background in social work and behavioral health, Collier approaches relationship struggles from both a clinical and deeply human perspective. His writing emphasizes personal accountability while recognizing that healthy relationships require responsibility from both partners. He encourages readers to distinguish between genuine remorse and destructive self-blame, between forgiveness and permission, and between loving another person and sacrificing one’s emotional well-being to maintain a relationship that has become unhealthy.
His work seeks to translate psychological and relationship concepts into practical language that ordinary people can apply to their everyday lives. Whether addressing divorce, depression, anxiety, trauma, family relationships, personal boundaries, or emotional healing, his goal is to help individuals better understand their experiences and move toward healthier, more intentional lives.
This article is intended for educational purposes and is not a substitute for individualized mental-health, legal, or medical advice.
One of the most painful experiences in life is being told by someone you love that they no longer want to continue the relationship. Whether the relationship lasted months or decades, rejection often produces grief comparable to bereavement. Research has consistently shown that romantic rejection activates many of the same neural pathways associated with physical pain, making the emotional experience feel remarkably real and intense (Kross et al., 2011).
In the aftermath of a breakup, many people become consumed with questions: What did I do wrong? Can I change their mind? If I fight hard enough, will they come back? While these questions are understandable, they often keep individuals trapped in emotional suffering.
Sometimes the healthiest response is also the most difficult:
When they break it off, let them go.
This statement is not about giving up on love. Rather, it is about accepting another person’s freedom to choose while preserving your own dignity, emotional health, and future.
Acceptance Is Not Agreement
Many people confuse acceptance with approval.
Accepting that a relationship has ended does not mean you agree with the decision or believe it was fair. Acceptance simply means acknowledging reality rather than fighting against it.
Psychologist Steven Hayes, founder of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), explains that psychological suffering often increases when individuals struggle against realities they cannot control (Hayes et al., 2012).
When someone chooses to leave, you cannot control:
Their feelings
Their decisions
Their priorities
Their commitment
You can only control your own response.
Love Cannot Be Forced
Healthy relationships require mutual choice.
A relationship survives because both people choose it—not because one person convinces the other to stay.
Relationship researcher Dr. John Gottman has spent decades studying couples and consistently found that healthy relationships depend upon mutual investment, emotional responsiveness, and willingness to repair conflict (Gottman & Silver, 2015).
If only one person is fighting for the relationship, the relationship has already become unbalanced.
Trying to persuade someone to love you usually produces the opposite effect.
People naturally resist feeling pressured.
Chasing Often Pushes Them Farther Away
Immediately after a breakup many individuals engage in behaviors such as:
Excessive texting
Constant phone calls
Monitoring social media
Asking mutual friends for information
Showing up unexpectedly
Making repeated promises to change
Although motivated by love, these behaviors often communicate desperation rather than emotional security.
Attachment research suggests that anxious attachment can intensify protest behaviors following separation, often increasing conflict instead of restoring intimacy (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2016).
Ironically, chasing someone frequently reinforces their decision to leave.
Respect Their Decision
Every healthy relationship requires respect for autonomy.
Autonomy means every individual has the right to determine who they choose to love and remain committed to.
Respecting someone’s decision is one of the greatest acts of maturity.
This does not mean you stop loving them overnight.
It means you recognize that love without mutual willingness cannot become a healthy relationship.
Grieve the Relationship
Ending a relationship involves genuine grief.
Psychologist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross originally described grief in the context of death, but many clinicians recognize similar emotional responses following significant relationship loss (Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005).
People often experience:
Shock
Denial
Anger
Bargaining
Sadness
Acceptance
These emotions rarely occur in order.
Some days you’ll feel hopeful.
Other days you’ll feel devastated.
Healing is rarely linear.
Stop Trying to Earn Love
Many individuals begin believing:
“If I become more attractive…”
“If I lose weight…”
“If I make more money…”
“If I change enough…”
“Maybe then they’ll come back.”
Personal growth is healthy.
Changing yourself solely to regain another person’s affection often creates emotional dependency.
Healthy change should occur because it aligns with your values—not because it guarantees someone else’s approval.
The Difference Between Fighting for Love and Fighting Reality
Relationships sometimes recover after periods of conflict.
However, there is a difference between:
Working together to repair a relationship
and
Working alone to rescue one.
If only one person remains emotionally invested, there is no relationship left to repair.
Love requires two willing participants.
Rejection Is Not a Measure of Your Worth
One of the greatest dangers following a breakup is allowing rejection to define identity.
People often begin believing:
I wasn’t enough.
I’m unlovable.
I’ll always be abandoned.
Something is wrong with me.
Psychologist Kristin Neff’s research on self-compassion demonstrates that responding to personal failure and rejection with kindness rather than harsh self-criticism significantly improves emotional resilience and recovery (Neff, 2011).
Someone deciding not to continue a relationship does not determine your value as a human being.
It reflects compatibility—not worth.
Don’t Romanticize the Past
Memory is selective.
Following heartbreak, people often remember only:
vacations
laughter
intimacy
shared dreams
They conveniently forget:
repeated arguments
emotional distance
disrespect
incompatibility
loneliness inside the relationship
Research on autobiographical memory suggests that emotional states can bias which memories are most accessible, contributing to an idealized view of the past after loss (Levine & Safer, 2002).
Healing requires remembering the whole relationship—not just the highlights.
Closure Often Comes from Within
Many people wait months—or years—for closure.
They hope for:
one final conversation
one apology
one explanation
one last chance
Unfortunately, closure rarely arrives exactly as imagined.
Clinical psychologists increasingly describe closure as an internal process rather than something another person grants (Harvey & Miller, 1998).
Sometimes the only explanation is:
“They no longer chose the relationship.”
That may hurt.
But it is enough to begin healing.
Invest in Yourself Again
The end of one relationship creates space for rebuilding.
This season can become an opportunity to:
Strengthen friendships
Improve physical health
Develop spiritual maturity
Pursue education
Explore new hobbies
Build emotional resilience
Reconnect with family
Post-traumatic growth research suggests that many individuals experience meaningful personal development following major life crises, including relationship loss (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004).
Healing is not merely returning to who you were.
Sometimes it means becoming someone stronger than before.
Forgiveness Does Not Require Reconciliation
Forgiveness is often misunderstood.
Forgiving someone does not mean:
trusting them again
resuming the relationship
pretending nothing happened
Forgiveness primarily releases the injured person from carrying ongoing resentment.
Research indicates that forgiveness is associated with lower anxiety, depression, and stress while promoting psychological well-being (Worthington, 2006).
You can forgive someone while still recognizing that the relationship has ended.
If They Return
Occasionally people come back. If that happens, ask different questions. Instead of asking:
“Do they want me?”
Ask:
What has genuinely changed?
Has trust been rebuilt?
Are both people equally committed?
Is reconciliation healthy?
Are old patterns likely to repeat?
Second chances should be based on demonstrated change—not loneliness or nostalgia.
Letting Go Is an Act of Courage
Letting someone go is rarely about giving up. It is about making room for emotional health, personal dignity, and future possibilities. Holding onto someone who has already let go often prolongs suffering. Choosing to release them allows healing to begin.
As author and researcher Brené Brown observes, vulnerability includes accepting uncertainty and embracing life’s painful realities with courage rather than avoidance (Brown, 2012). Sometimes the strongest words you can say are:
“I wish you well.”
Then you continue walking forward.
Conclusion
When someone ends a relationship, your first instinct may be to chase, convince, or bargain. Those responses arise from grief and fear, but they seldom restore a healthy partnership. Real love cannot be coerced, negotiated, or earned through relentless pursuit. Healthy relationships require two people who freely choose one another.
Letting go does not erase the love you once shared or deny the pain of the loss. It acknowledges that another person’s decision is theirs to make, while your responsibility is to care for your own emotional, physical, and spiritual well-being. By accepting reality, grieving honestly, practicing self-compassion, and investing in your own growth, you create the conditions for healing and for healthier relationships in the future.
Sometimes the greatest act of love is not holding on tighter, but releasing someone with grace and choosing to move forward with hope.
About the Author
John S. Collier, MSW, LCSW-S, is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, therapist, author, and educator with more than two decades of experience helping individuals, couples, and families navigate life’s most difficult emotional challenges. As the Executive Director of Southeast Kentucky Behavioral Health, LLC, he has devoted his career to assisting people in overcoming trauma, depression, anxiety, relationship conflict, grief, and major life transitions through compassionate, evidence-based care.
Drawing from years of clinical practice, extensive research, and a deep understanding of human behavior, John writes in a way that bridges professional psychology with practical everyday wisdom. His goal is to make complex emotional and relational concepts understandable, relatable, and immediately useful for readers seeking healthier relationships and greater emotional resilience.
In addition to his work as a therapist, John is the author of numerous books and articles on mental health, Christian living, personal growth, Freemasonry, and healthy relationships. His writing combines scientific research, clinical experience, and genuine compassion to provide readers with realistic guidance rooted in both truth and hope.
Through his books and educational resources, John encourages readers not simply to survive emotional pain, but to grow through it. He believes that healing begins when people learn to understand themselves, establish healthy boundaries, and embrace the courage to move forward with purpose. Whether writing about love, loss, trauma, faith, or personal transformation, his passion remains the same: helping others discover that lasting healing is possible.
John lives in Kentucky, where he continues to counsel, teach, write, and speak on topics related to emotional wellness, healthy relationships, resilience, and personal growth.
References
Brown, B. (2012). Daring Greatly. Gotham Books.
Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (2015). The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work (Revised ed.). Harmony Books.
Harvey, J. H., & Miller, E. D. (1998). Loss and Trauma: General and Close Relationship Perspectives. Brunner-Routledge.
Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., & Wilson, K. G. (2012). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: The Process and Practice of Mindful Change (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Kross, E., Berman, M. G., Mischel, W., Smith, E. E., & Wager, T. D. (2011). Social rejection shares somatosensory representations with physical pain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(15), 6270–6275. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1102693108
Kübler-Ross, E., & Kessler, D. (2005). On Grief and Grieving. Scribner.
Levine, L. J., & Safer, M. A. (2002). Sources of bias in memory for emotions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 169–173.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment in Adulthood: Structure, Dynamics, and Change (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Neff, K. D. (2011). Self-Compassion: The Proven Power of Being Kind to Yourself. William Morrow.
Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (2004). Posttraumatic growth: Conceptual foundations and empirical evidence. Psychological Inquiry, 15(1), 1–18.
Worthington, E. L. (2006). Forgiveness and Reconciliation: Theory and Application. Routledge.
