Secure-Functioning Relationship Shift
Move a relationship toward security through mutual, deliberate work
- Difficulty
- Expert
- Time to result
- ~months to results
- Steps
- 5
- Confidence
- 90%
Drawing on PACT couples therapy, Van Ness contrasts insecure-functioning and secure-functioning relationships. The key claim he attributes to PACT founder Dr. Stan Tatkin is that an insecure relationship can become secure when both people want that outcome and are willing to work on themselves and the relationship. This rejects the popular requirement that two perfectly healed people must meet before a healthy partnership is possible. The mechanism has two tracks: each partner owns individual patterns, while the couple examines and changes the shared dynamic. Van Ness also says healing can occur through the relationship itself. The transcript gives a high-level model rather than a clinical protocol, so applying it safely may require a qualified couples therapist and should not be used to keep someone in an abusive situation.
Origin
Van Ness says he learned the insecure- versus secure-functioning distinction from PACT, the Psychobiological Approach to Couple Therapy created by Dr. Stan Tatkin.
Core principles
- 01An insecure pattern need not permanently define a relationship
- 02Both partners must want the shift
- 03Each person works on themselves as well as the relationship
- 04Relational healing can happen inside a supportive partnership
- 05No universal romantic formula fits every couple
How to run it
- 1
Describe the pattern
Name how the relationship currently functions under stress without reducing the problem to one defective partner.
Pro tip Use a recent interaction both people can examine.
Watch out Do not use shared-pattern language to dilute responsibility for abuse.
- 2
Confirm mutual intent
Ask whether both partners genuinely want to move toward a more secure way of relating.
Pro tip Look for willingness expressed in behaviour, not only reassurance.
Watch out One partner cannot supply mutual commitment for both people.
- 3
Own individual work
Each person identifies the reactions, protective habits, or unresolved material they are responsible for addressing.
Pro tip Keep ownership specific and observable.
- 4
Work the shared dynamic
Examine what the couple repeatedly creates together and practise a safer alternative, with qualified guidance when needed.
Pro tip Track what happens during stress, not only during calm discussion.
Watch out Couples work is not appropriate in every unsafe or coercive relationship.
- 5
Review security in practice
Assess whether honesty, safety, responsiveness, and repair are becoming more reliable over time.
Pro tip Judge the shift by repeated interactions rather than a perfect-relationship ideal.
In the wild
After recurring withdrawal-and-pursuit arguments, two partners agree that both want a safer pattern. One works on staying present instead of disappearing, the other works on pausing before escalating, and together they practise a structured repair with a qualified therapist. This is an illustrative application of the high-level model, not an example supplied by Van Ness.
→ The couple measures progress through more reliable repair rather than waiting to become two perfectly healed individuals.
Common mistakes
Waiting to become perfectly healed
Van Ness rejects the idea that only two fully formed people can create a functioning relationship.
Relying on one willing partner
The shift he describes requires both parties to want it and participate in the work.
Forcing one formula onto every couple
He cautions that every relationship has its own experience and path.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for couples who both want to change an insecure dynamic and can participate safely in the work.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal where abuse, coercion, or immediate danger makes joint relationship work unsafe.
From the transcript
“an insecure functioning relationship can turn into a function a secure functioning one”
“if both parties want it”
“work on themselves work on the relationship”
From the episode
Queer Eye Star Opens Up About Hitting Rock Bottom: Jonathan Van Ness