The description you provide of empathy is particularly relevant – understanding both mentally and emotionally, the changes that have been made and indeed are often continuing.

I would add that these are through multiple time zones in our lives – not just representing past or present interactions but also future intentions. Acuity and communication to validate needs, desires and to convey pleasure, satisfaction and highlight concerns that can then be addressed.

I’m fortunate to have good relationships – with my partner, my child and the close people that I’m fortunate to be able to call friends.

The other characteristics I’d add for good relationships would be those of loyalty, commitment, humility, grace and honesty.

Thanks for your comment. It sounds like you have some great relationships! Relationships like those I wouldn’t trade them for the world either.

I think I understand your question. I’ve found children can be quite astute at separating parents and their preferences (eg. negotiating with “Mummy/Daddy said I can” to the other parent).

Children, and adults too, can identify with the controller. I think the dynamic, in my observation, has been that they feel the need to be strong to stand up to the controller – and the controller is the only model of strength available. I think this is what you mean. The controlled person is then looked down on for being weak.

I think the response is different for children than for adults. Adults we can talk about treating themselves badly and get them to see the split in themselves. With children it may be more about talking about how they treat others and how they would like to be treated, providing other role models and so forth.

I hope I have understood your question and responded to it (this is just my experience the dynamics of every situation are complex and different and we can’t really generalise or say anything about particular situations).

I look forward to hearing what you have to say.

Thanks for your clarification and your willingness to contribute to the discussion. I appreciate both.

One can have a realationship with another that is purley defined as casual or an acquaintance. In this type of a relationship there may or may not be a trust factor. For example, a worker in one department of an organization interacts daily with another worker, yet there is no ongoing “intimate” relationship. It goes no further than “the office setting” and information shared is “on the surface.” This type of scenario is played out daily in everyday life and in everyday settings.

A “good” relationship however, goes one step further and has the key element of intimacy. The interaction between this pair is of a deeper level, a level that allows more intimate details to be shared.

Therefore, consider that congruency, empathy, and unconditional Positive Regard can exist in a casual relationship, but only intimacy can exist in a “good” one.