By Víctor Silva and Marcela Gómez
One person wants to try to preserve the relationship. The other does not know whether they want to stay. Or both of you have doubts and wonder whether a consultation makes sense when you cannot promise you want to fix things.
You do not need to pretend to share a goal that does not exist. Clinical literature has developed approaches for couples with different goals. That does not mean any joint therapy is appropriate or establish that Ancestrina uses those models. What matters is communicating the uncertainty and checking what space the professional can offer before beginning.
There are different doubts within “we do not know whether to stay”
You may both want to continue but doubt whether the problem can change. One person may be unsure whether they want to do that work. Someone may also have already decided to end the relationship and need to communicate it.
These situations should not be treated as though they were the same. In the first, there may be a shared goal of rebuilding. In the second, that goal still needs to be examined. In the third, presenting the consultation as an opportunity to persuade may disregard a decision already made.
You do not need to arrive with certainty you do not have. It does help to describe honestly where you are: having doubts differs from having decided and not yet daring to say so.
A consultation should not begin with a fictional promise
“We are going to therapy” may mean “we are still going to save this” to one person. To the other, it may mean “I want to understand what to do.” Without clarification, that first yes becomes a promise only one person believes they have received.
You could say, “I am willing to consult, but I have not yet chosen to continue. I want that to be part of what we bring.” The other person may feel hurt and ask questions. Their pain does not turn your uncertainty into an obligation to promise to rebuild.
They also have the right to decide whether they want to participate in a space with that goal. Autonomy does not belong only to the person with doubts. Neither person should remain in a process whose fundamental conditions they do not know or accept.
What clinical literature has developed
Doherty, Harris, and Wilde described Discernment Counseling for couples with divergent goals, including situations where one person is considering leaving and the other seeks to preserve the relationship. Their publication presents a case series without a control group; by itself, it does not demonstrate effectiveness or prevention of separation.
The reference shows that differing goals have received specific clinical attention. It does not mean Ancestrina offers Discernment Counseling, is accredited in that model, or applies its protocol. That attribution has not been confirmed.
The useful distinction for this article comes before any model: working to rebuild a relationship and working to clarify whether you want to rebuild it are not exactly the same task.
Which questions you can honestly bring
You may need to understand why the idea of ending the relationship appears even when you are not arguing. Or distinguish what you want from what you hope will change. You may both want to examine whether there is a possible relationship that still interests you.
There may also be a possible separation that needs consideration without turning it into a threat. Naming it does not oblige you to carry it out, but hiding it to avoid discomfort can organize the work around a goal you do not share.
These are possible questions, rather than a confirmed description of an Ancestrina session. Before beginning a process, check whether the professional can work with them and what limits the space offered has.
What you cannot ask the process to do
It cannot guarantee your partner will choose to stay or produce willingness that does not exist. Nor should it be used to have an authority figure announce a decision for you that you do not want to take responsibility for.
Seeking help to communicate something difficult differs from delegating authorship of the decision: “the therapist said we should separate.” A position you adopt during or after the process still needs to be recognized as your own.
A shared space does not require everything to be symmetrical
You may arrive with different levels of hope, fatigue, or desire to try. You do not need to make them artificially equal to talk. What matters is being able to express that difference and avoiding using the space to pressure someone into a response.
There may also be different responsibilities for what happened. Working with uncertainty does not require erasing harm or claiming both people caused it equally. Ancestrina’s conceptual position separates examining present participation from automatically distributing culpability.
If there are threats or fear of retaliation, prioritize a safety assessment and specialist support before a joint space.
If one person has already decided to end the relationship
It helps to say so from the first contact. Accepting a proposal to rebuild while expecting the professional to prepare the other person for a decision already made would not be honest.
There may be other reasons for seeking help: understanding what you experienced, communicating boundaries, or reorganizing relational aspects of a separation. Appropriate care depends on the case and what the professional actually offers. Not every need fits within the same process.
If legal, financial, or childcare matters require specific advice, a therapeutic consultation does not automatically replace those services. The goals need to be sufficiently defined.
How to raise it when contacting Ancestrina
You can say it without softening it to seem easier to work with: “One of us has doubts about continuing”; “we both want to think before deciding”; or “we want to know whether you offer a space for different goals.”
Then confirm what work Víctor or Marcela can offer, who would accompany you, what conditions it would have, and whether that therapeutic agreement fits your situation. This article does not define a specific procedure for couples with divergent goals. You can consult Ancestrina’s couples therapy service and its conditions.
Not promising to preserve the relationship does not mean participating without seriousness. Taking the process seriously may consist precisely in not pretending to have a commitment that does not exist, listening to the other person’s experience, and taking responsibility for what each person chooses.
What to Expect in a First Couples Therapy Session brings together the points that need clarification before beginning. Arriving with uncertainty differs from arriving without willingness to speak honestly about it.
Sources and scope of the references
- Doherty, W. J., Harris, S. M., and Wilde, J. L. (2016; published online 2015). Discernment Counseling for “Mixed-Agenda” Couples. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 42(2), 246–255. Reference. Clinical literature and case series: An approach to divergent goals. A series without a control group; it is neither proof of effectiveness nor a confirmed Ancestrina model.
- World Health Organization (2013). Responding to intimate partner violence and sexual violence against women: WHO clinical and policy guidelines. ISBN 9789241548595. Reference. Clinical guidance and safety: Person-centered care, safety assessment, and access to support in situations of violence. It does not establish a universal contraindication to joint therapy.
The distinctions used to consider participation, agreements, and decisions are Ancestrina’s conceptual proposals, rather than diagnoses. The examples are hypothetical situations, rather than patient accounts or experimental evidence.
