Repeated arguments over chores such as loading the dishwasher, leaving dental floss by the sink or abandoning wet towels on the bed may point to deeper problems in a relationship, according to counsellor Paul C Brunson.
After two decades working with couples, Brunson said recurring disputes were often less about the domestic task itself and more about what it represented. He identified three common underlying issues: a lack of closeness, insufficient respect or an imbalance of power.
He said people should consider whether their partner listens when they explain that something matters to them, even if the issue appears insignificant to the other person.
“Do they hear you, do they consider you and do they respect the fact that something can matter to you even if it seems insignificant to them?” he asked.
When one partner repeatedly carries the responsibility for household tasks, family organisation and reminding the other what needs to be done, resentment can grow. A disagreement over the dishwasher may therefore reflect a belief that domestic responsibilities are not being shared fairly.
Brunson, who has been married to Jill for 25 years, said the couple had experienced their own minor domestic frustrations. His regular responsibility was taking out the bins, although he admitted that he did not always do it or do it properly.
He joked that he had solved the problem by paying their sons, Kingston, 15, and Liam, 12, to take the bins out instead. Beneath the humour, he said, was the more serious issue of the “mental load” and the importance of equity within a relationship.
If the underlying problem is never addressed, he warned, a relationship can deteriorate over an apparently trivial dispute about whose turn it was to do the washing up.
Relationship advice on stagnation and emotional safety
Brunson said the questions people brought to him had changed over the years. Rather than asking how to save a relationship, more clients now wanted to know how to leave or whether ending it was the right decision.
He said he supported divorce in the right circumstances and did not believe that the length of a marriage was, by itself, a measure of success. Satisfaction, he argued, mattered more than simply remaining together.
One of the most common concerns he encountered among midlife women was stagnation rather than infidelity or major rows. Couples could become accustomed to a life dominated by work, children and finances, eventually mistaking the absence of open misery for a healthy marriage.
Brunson and Jill experienced a similar period after 12 to 15 years of marriage, when their lives revolved around their two young sons and followed the same routine each week.
He said their move from Washington DC to London in 2018 introduced new experiences and helped renew their relationship. However, he stressed that couples did not need to move country to create change: trying a dance class or visiting somewhere unfamiliar could provide a shared sense of novelty.
New experiences could not resolve every problem, he said. Where a couple had become disconnected, they should instead consider what each partner needed in order to feel emotionally safe again.
Emotional safety meant being able to share vulnerability, shame and fear without those disclosures later being used in an argument or met with dismissal and judgement. Over time, repeated breaches of trust could lead people to reveal less, damaging intimacy as well as communication.
Brunson said a lack of sex should not automatically be treated as the central problem. Couples should also ask whether respect had been damaged to the point that it needed to be rebuilt.
He added that exhaustion and pressure from work, money and children could sometimes be mistaken for a failing marriage. People considering whether they could no longer tolerate their partner should also examine what else in their life was contributing to that feeling.
Recognising controlling behaviour
Brunson said ordinary relationship frustrations needed to be distinguished from coercive or abusive behaviour, a subject explored in his series Paul C. Brunson: Red Flag.
One question he recommended asking was whether a partner made someone feel they had to become “less than yourself” within the relationship. Attempts to control clothing, conversation or how someone presented themselves could indicate a pattern of reducing rather than supporting them.
Requests to say when someone was leaving work or to text on arriving and departing might appear caring in isolation. But if a person became frightened about being late, felt compelled to disclose their whereabouts or faced consequences for failing to comply, Brunson said the behaviour could become coercive.
He said survivor accounts repeatedly featured pressure to move a relationship forward quickly, isolation from friends and family, and increasing dependence on the abusive partner.
The important issue, he said, was to examine patterns rather than isolated incidents and ask whether a relationship consistently made someone feel smaller or more confident, ignored or considered, unsafe or secure.
For couples in safe but disconnected relationships, Brunson recommended three small daily gestures: expressing genuine appreciation, showing consideration through practical acts, and sharing something for which they were thankful.
He said he tried to keep consideration in mind and wrote down three things he was grateful for each evening, often including something about Jill. He suggested that couples could also write those feelings in a letter, allowing the recipient time to absorb the words.
For Brunson, a strong relationship is not one without arguments. It is one in which both partners are prepared to look beyond the immediate dispute and make the other feel heard, respected and considered.
