Southeast Kentucky Behavioral Health, LLC

Archives January 2025

EVENING / AFTERHOURS COUNSELING APPOINTMENTS AVAILABLE!!!!

We’re now offering telehealth and in-person evening appointments for Outpatient Therapy to better serve you and your family! Whether you prefer the convenience of virtual care or a face-to-face session after your workday, our compassionate team is here to provide personalized support for your mental health and wellness needs.

Take the first step towards achieving your goals in a way that fits your schedule.

📞 Call us today at (606) 657-0532 to book your appointment!
🌐 Visit our website at www.sekybh.com for more information.

Your health and well-being are our priority. Let us help you thrive!

Understanding the Difference Between Feeling Needed and Feeling Wanted in a Relationship

Relationships are complex and multifaceted, with various emotional dynamics contributing to their strength and longevity. Two significant aspects of emotional connection in relationships are the feelings of being needed and being wanted. While these concepts might seem similar, they differ significantly in their implications for emotional health and the overall quality of the relationship.

Feeling Needed: The Role of Dependency

Feeling needed in a relationship typically involves a sense of dependency. One partner may rely on the other for emotional support, physical care, or practical assistance. This dynamic can create a sense of purpose and validation for the person being needed, fostering a bond based on mutual support.

However, feeling needed can sometimes create an imbalance in the relationship. When one partner becomes overly dependent on the other, it may lead to feelings of burden, resentment, or burnout. Dependency-driven dynamics can overshadow personal autonomy, making it difficult for both partners to thrive individually. Research suggests that while interdependence can be healthy, over-dependence may signal underlying issues such as insecurity or fear of abandonment (Fournier, Brassard, & Shaver, 2011).

Feeling Wanted: The Importance of Desire

On the other hand, feeling wanted in a relationship emphasizes desire and emotional connection. Being wanted reflects a partner’s choice to be with the other person, not out of obligation or need, but because of genuine affection and attraction. This dynamic fosters a sense of value and appreciation, affirming that the relationship is built on mutual respect and emotional intimacy.

Feeling wanted contributes to a healthier relationship by encouraging individuality and personal growth. When both partners feel chosen and valued for who they are, they are more likely to experience satisfaction and happiness in the relationship. According to research, feelings of being desired and appreciated are essential for long-term relational stability (Gordon, Impett, Kogan, Oveis, & Keltner, 2012).

The Balance Between Being Needed and Wanted

Both feeling needed and feeling wanted have their roles in relationships, but the balance between the two is critical. A relationship that leans too heavily on need may lack the spark of desire and appreciation, while one that focuses solely on want might overlook the comfort and security provided by mutual support.

Healthy relationships often incorporate aspects of both dynamics, where partners feel a sense of purpose in supporting one another while also cherishing the emotional connection and desire that make the relationship fulfilling. Communication and self-awareness are key in achieving this balance, as they help partners navigate their needs and wants in a way that benefits both individuals.

Conclusion

The distinction between being needed and being wanted in a relationship lies in the foundation of the connection. While feeling needed involves dependency and utility, feeling wanted revolves around choice and emotional desire. Both play important roles in maintaining a meaningful and balanced relationship. Understanding and nurturing these aspects can lead to stronger, more fulfilling partnerships built on mutual respect, care, and affection.


References

  • Fournier, M. A., Brassard, A., & Shaver, P. R. (2011). Adult attachment and the dynamics of romantic relationships. Attachment & Human Development, 13(1), 1-19. doi:10.1080/14616734.2011.549426
  • Gordon, A. M., Impett, E. A., Kogan, A., Oveis, C., & Keltner, D. (2012). To have and to hold: Gratitude promotes relationship maintenance in intimate bonds. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(2), 257-274. doi:10.1037/a0028723
Double Standards in Relationships: What Do They Mean?

In relationships, fairness and equality are crucial for fostering trust and mutual respect. However, the concept of double standards often challenges these principles, creating friction and misunderstandings. A double standard in a relationship occurs when one partner applies different rules, expectations, or judgments to themselves compared to their partner. This imbalance can undermine the relationship’s foundation, leading to dissatisfaction and conflict.

Understanding Double Standards in Relationships

Double standards often manifest in expectations regarding behavior, roles, or responsibilities. These discrepancies can emerge from cultural norms, personal biases, or ingrained beliefs. For example:

  • Gender Roles: Traditional gender roles may result in expectations that men should provide financially while women handle household duties. If a partner criticizes the other for not fulfilling their “role” while not meeting their own responsibilities, it creates an imbalance (Ridgeway & Correll, 2004).
  • Infidelity and Jealousy: One partner may expect forgiveness for flirting or infidelity but become intolerant if the other exhibits similar behavior (Buss, 2017).
  • Freedom and Autonomy: A partner may demand personal space and freedom while controlling or monitoring the other’s activities, reflecting an inequitable power dynamic.

Causes of Double Standards

  1. Cultural Norms and Socialization: Society often reinforces unequal expectations, especially along gender lines. These norms can seep into personal relationships, perpetuating unfair expectations.
  2. Insecurity and Control: Double standards may arise from one partner’s insecurities, leading them to impose stricter rules on the other to feel more secure.
  3. Power Imbalance: When one partner holds more emotional or financial power, they might impose double standards to maintain control (Finkel et al., 2017).

Consequences of Double Standards

  • Erosion of Trust: When one partner perceives an imbalance in expectations, trust is often compromised.
  • Emotional Resentment: The partner subjected to the double standard may feel undervalued or disrespected, fostering resentment.
  • Inequality and Conflict: Unequal standards can lead to arguments, perpetuating a cycle of blame and dissatisfaction.

Addressing Double Standards in Relationships

  1. Open Communication: Partners should discuss their expectations and address perceived inequities.
  2. Mutual Accountability: Both partners must agree to hold themselves to the same standards they expect from each other.
  3. Therapeutic Interventions: Counseling can help identify and address ingrained patterns contributing to double standards (Gottman & Silver, 2015).
  4. Cultural Awareness: Recognizing how societal norms influence personal beliefs can empower individuals to challenge unfair expectations.

Conclusion

Double standards in relationships reflect deeper issues of inequality, insecurity, or societal influence. Addressing these imbalances requires self-awareness, open dialogue, and a commitment to mutual respect. By fostering equality and understanding, couples can create a foundation of fairness and trust, strengthening their bond.


References

Buss, D. M. (2017). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. Basic Books.

Finkel, E. J., Hui, C. M., Carswell, K. L., & Larson, G. M. (2017). The suffocation of marriage: Climbing Mount Maslow without enough oxygen. Psychological Inquiry, 28(1), 1-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2017.1256692

Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (2015). The seven principles for making marriage work. Harmony Books.

Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on cultural beliefs in social relations. Gender & Society, 18(4), 510-531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243204265269

What is a Situationship? Exploring the Pros and Cons

In modern relationship dynamics, the term “situationship” has become increasingly popular. Though not officially recognized in traditional psychological or sociological terms, a situationship is generally defined as a romantic or sexual relationship that exists without clear, established boundaries or long-term commitment. Unlike casual dating, situationships often involve a level of emotional connection that blurs the lines between a formal relationship and something more casual.

A situationship typically arises when two individuals engage in a relationship-like dynamic without defining their intentions. Unlike a committed relationship, a situationship often lacks labels and exclusivity. It can involve spending time together, sharing emotional intimacy, or even acting like a couple in public, but without the explicit commitment of being “official.”

Characteristics of a Situationship

  • Lack of Definition: Neither party defines the relationship.
  • Inconsistent Communication: There may be regular interaction at times, followed by periods of distance.
  • Emotional Ambiguity: Both individuals may feel uncertain about where they stand.
  • Physical Intimacy Without Exclusivity: Sexual involvement may occur without an agreement to be monogamous.

The Pros of a Situationship

  1. Flexibility and Freedom: A situationship allows individuals to explore a connection without the pressures of long-term commitment. For those focusing on careers, education, or personal growth, it can provide companionship without demanding a structured relationship.
    • Source: Kaplan, H. (2020). “Modern Relationship Dynamics.” Journal of Social Psychology.
  2. Low Pressure: Situationships often lack the formal expectations tied to traditional relationships, reducing stress related to meeting familial or societal norms.
  3. Exploration of Compatibility: It can serve as a testing ground to evaluate compatibility before entering a committed relationship.
  4. Autonomy: Both individuals retain their independence, allowing for personal freedom and decision-making.

The Cons of a Situationship

  1. Emotional Uncertainty: The lack of clarity can lead to confusion, anxiety, or unmet expectations. People involved in situationships often report feelings of insecurity about the other person’s intentions.
    • Source: Miller, R. S. (2018). “Emotional Costs of Ambiguous Relationships.” Relationship Studies Quarterly.
  2. Uneven Investment: One party may develop deeper feelings, leading to a mismatch in emotional investment and potential heartbreak.
  3. Lack of Growth: Without clear direction, a situationship may stagnate, leaving individuals in a limbo that prevents them from pursuing more meaningful relationships.
  4. Social Challenges: Explaining a situationship to friends or family can be challenging, often leading to judgment or misunderstanding.

Navigating a Situationship

To navigate a situationship successfully, open communication is essential. Discussing intentions and boundaries early on can help both parties align their expectations. If the relationship becomes unfulfilling or one person desires a more formal commitment, addressing these concerns is crucial to avoid prolonged emotional strain.

A situationship can provide a casual and flexible connection for individuals who are not ready for a formal commitment. However, it carries the risk of emotional ambiguity and unmet expectations. Understanding the pros and cons can help individuals decide whether a situationship aligns with their personal goals and emotional well-being.

John S. Collier, MSW, LCSW-S

This article has been written by John S Collier, MSW, LCSW-S. collier has over 25 years of experience in the social work field. he currently serves as the Executive Director and outpatient provider at Southeast Kentucky Behavioral Health based out of London Kentucky. He may be reached by phone at (606) 657-0532, extension 101 or by email at [email protected]


References

  • Kaplan, H. (2020). “Modern Relationship Dynamics.” Journal of Social Psychology.
  • Miller, R. S. (2018). “Emotional Costs of Ambiguous Relationships.” Relationship Studies Quarterly.
  • Carter, P. (2019). The New Rules of Love: Understanding Modern Relationships. HarperCollins.
  • Johnson, T. A. (2021). “Navigating Emotional Ambiguity in Situationships.” Psychology Today.