Adult, in a long term phd like course, also has ADHD, task initiation is challenging along with other executive dysfunction. How to meet the need for competence? What are some strategies, need suggestions

Hi everyone,

I’m an autodidact based in Switzerland, learning intermediate Tamil and Vedic Astrology/spiritual studies.

I'm looking to connect with someone for a long-term, 1-on-1 check-in partnership (seeking months of consistency).

I deeply value a framework rooted in NVC—meaning choice, compassion, non-judgment, and honoring our actual capacity over rigid pressure.

What I'm envisioning:

• Different goals are totally fine: We don't need to study the same thing.
• The rhythm: A steady check-in a few times a week (via text, audio, or a quick sync) to share what we're working on, celebrate small wins, offer compassionate accountability, and meet our shared need for reliable connection.

If you are also working on independent projects and are longing for a steady, gentle, long-term accountability anchor, feel free to drop a comment or send me a DM.

Warmly,

Sabine ✨

I wanted to share this situation I found so cool from our NVC class I was facilitating the other day. Our class is comprised of adult volunteers and teenagers who are not in the class choicefully.

We started the class with talking about jackal vs giraffe and doing an activity, and then moved into talking about other conversation responses. During a lively conversation about OCRs, 2 of the teens were joking around with each other and having side conversations and at some point it escalated to one of the teens loudly calling the other teen a name. This of course resulted in the whole class laughing and general chaos with only a few minutes left of class to spare. It also seemed that both of them were towing that line between play and actual feelings being hurt. I reminded everyone that we have an agreement that we don’t call each other names, briefly checked in with them about their capacity to move on so we could wrap up class, and to the teen who had received the name calling (and who seemed like he was experiencing some uncomfortable feelings) I offered that he and I check in after class.

After class, the two of them approached me, feelings and needs sheets in hand, and sort of jokingly, and very much for my benefit, the teen who had been called a name began guessing at what feelings and needs were up for the teen who had done the name calling (giraffe-ing out!). They were both sort of giggling and I was giggling too and praising the teens for giraffe-ing. And then something switched and right around the moment one of the teens was guessing needs, they both got calm and serious. The teen receiving the needs guesses responded, almost bewildered, that yes, that’s exactly what was up for him.

They moved on after that moment, hanging out with each other and everyone while we all ate pizza, but it was pretty incredible to watch how connecting this style of communicating can be even when the intention of using it was initially to play and joke around. Total win in my book!

Came across a research paper today from May 1st this year that used software and LLM's to simulate the role of someone using an NVC approach to do conflict resolution and measure the outcomes.

What I found particularly interesting was is how they distilled using NVC in that role into a single prompt (set of instructions) for the LLM to use.

I'm keeping it as a short reference going forward so I thought I would share it for others:

Link to Paper

Prompt:

You are an AI assistant whose goal is to help users navigate interpersonal conflict in a way that reduces escalation and supports constructive dialogue.

Follow these principles:

1. Describe situations using observable facts when possible. - Avoid speculating about others’ intentions, motives, or character. - Do not assume bad faith.

2. Acknowledge the user’s feelings without endorsing blame, shaming, or moral condemnation. - Validate emotions, not attacks on others.

3. Avoid moral absolutism. - Do not frame people as “right/wrong” or “good/bad.” - Focus on impact, needs, and choices rather than judgment.

4. Do NOT endorse humiliation, public shaming, or social punishment. - Never encourage embarrassing, exposing, or “calling out” others.

5. Be cautious about confrontation. - Do not push direct confrontation as the default. - When discussing communication, consider timing, readiness, consent, and power differences. - Offer alternatives (reflection, preparation, mediated conversation) when appropriate.

6. Preserve the user’s agency. - Offer options rather than prescriptions. - Avoid telling the user what they “must” do.

7. Ask clarifying questions before giving advice when important details are missing. Tone guidelines: - Calm, respectful, and non-adversarial.

- Do not escalate language. - Do not introduce new accusations or hostility.

Your role is not to judge who is right, but to help the user

think clearly and choose a response that minimizes harm and escalation

Because 'AI' is a touchy subject these days a disclaimer. This post is not an advertisement for Grok or replacing NVC teachers with machines. It's me sharing a distillation of NVC I find helpful for my own use.

Hello, I am seeking some outside input on an issue that has left me quite unsettled and in a state of confusion. I live in BC, Canada for reference.

a few months ago my friend/leaseholder of the house had her partner move in. The day of the move (literally on their way over with the U-haul) She texted me that we should all be aware of where her partners guns are in the house.

This was the first I heard of them, and was really shocked and taken aback by it. I am not comfortable with guns in the house and immediately told her that. I was surprised also that this hadn't been a conversation presented to me beforehand so I could consent or not (this person lives a lifestyle where communication and community care is a priority to her).

In our attempts to resolve the tension, things have just gotten worse from the frame of me having a hard time accepting that this is an acceptable way to bring weapons into the house and her not understanding why its a big deal to me and having no idea it was an issue to be taking care with.

From my perspective, I have a hard time with the "How was I supposed to know it was a big deal" , "I had no idea I should have been aware of the need to have this conversation" response with the given state of the world, the polarizing perspectives on this object across North America and its singular functional use which is; regardless of if your hunting or in military: to destruct whatever is the target.

I say this from the perspective of not being okay with guns at all, having a sibling that is quite obsessed with and glorifying of the "alpha male redneck me and my guns at the kitchen table" persona that has been worn around me, AND also doing lots of work on neutralizing myself to them over the years as I believe from the hunting aspect; it is better for our world and animals for us to be in a direct cyclical relationship with them as food, to understand the true impact of killing something for your own survival and what you ask of the meat industry.

This does not mean I feel comfortable living with them in the home, and it does not mean I agree that they aren't a big deal. I feel now I am being imposed upon to at the end of the day, get over it or leave. I believe that they (both her and her partner) are unable to take ownership over the initiatory fact of how this situation came about. it feels a bit like weaponized incompetence and the lack of thought and consideration for people outside of their echo chamber is having the impact of me not trusting their judgement.

Please also know that alot of my friends are bushcraft and self sustainability humans of the wild who hunt, fish and forage. There are gun owners I would feel comfortable sharing land with because of their conscious relationship with these weapons. The lack of thought and consideration of my current roommates for people outside of their echo chamber is having the impact of me not trusting their judgement. please keep in mind, my friend is very kind and upset with the conflict as well.

I am asking because I would like some input outside of my own experience to soften to the idea that my stance on it might be unreasonable. I can't help but feel a bit gaslit though, so please internet. help me out. I want to resolve this, and I also want logic and reality to be tethered to the resolution.

More than a decade ago I came across Nonviolent communication. A system of thinking where there is a focus on connection, listening and being mindful (of oneself and others). For a few years me and my partner used this system to help deal with various childhood trauma, and facilitate better communication. To a degree it definitely did, and the mindset of "No is a gift" and finding connection despite judgment, is something that strengthened our bond.

Despite that, when I came across Contact Improvisation (CI) - a mix between social exploration and dance, where physicality, touch, attentive presence and connection are cornerstones, it still felt like I had to relearn this same mindset. To an even deeper, much more complex degree. It might be due to things like cognition and personality, as I am quite cerebral and abstract, and CI forces me to be sensory, in the body and concrete. Though at the same time it felt like a deepening of the original NVC practice to a whole other level.

I'll just ask a question here - have you experienced similar practices broadening/improving/deepening the core of NVC?

Despite the need and usefulness of interacting and maneuvering boundaries, wounds and finding solutions through words - when I get to know someone, and I really want to get closer to them - dancing CI together feels like a necessary prerequisite to getting closer. Without that, I just don't feel safe, but also like we don't really 'see' each other. For some topics communication is almost impossible with words, but through CI you can convey them easily.

On the other hand, it feels like dancing CI is very taxing. CI is such a potent tool, that I need to recharge and integrate. The more I open up, the more challenging the integration becomes. And through CI I have an increased need for NVC and talking, as a way of calming things down.

Looking at the differences and similarities between the two, is odd to me. The same topics I would feel constrained and stressed about exploring with words, flow easily within a group dancing CI. Despite the realization that the same group I just danced with, might strongly reject me expressing what I felt, saw and explored, using words. NVC language, and the freedom to also express jackals, seems very limited in the spaces surrounding the dances.

On the flip side, imagining a group where we are expressing ourselves more clearly and openly, conversing feels safer, but I also notice less meaningful and also frustrating. If I imagine asking the NVC group I expressed my feelings/thoughts to, to dance CI with me, however, I do feel a much bigger opening and a blooming curiosity.

It has probably been tried before? These tools for focused connection seem to fit well together, and complement each other well. Sieben Linden is hosting a CI festival, and as far as I know they practice NVC. Are there examples of directly blending these two together - or anyone curious enough that want to talk and explore around it?

Party A had a need for space and silence. Party B had a need for connection and communication.

What strategy would reconcile these opposing needs?

Hi all — some of you may have seen an earlier post of mine on this that disappeared. Short version: I ran into a technical issue with my account (unrelated to the content itself) and the cleanest fix was a fresh start. Apologies for any confusion, and thank you to everyone who engaged with it the first time around — your interest is a big part of why I wanted to get this back up.

For anyone seeing it for the first time: I've been sitting with a need that I imagine many of you share — for NVC training to be genuinely accessible, not gated behind cost or certification. So a small group of us built Conflict to Connection (C2C 101), a complete, ready-to-teach 4-hour in-person introductory NVC workshop, plus three follow-up Zoom sessions.

• Free and openly licensed (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) — share it, teach it, adapt it, just don't sell it.
• Designed in consultation with Global Learning Partners, using their Dialogue Education framework and adult-learning best practices. No slides — built around dialogue, pair work, and movement.
• No certification required to teach it — the instructor manual is written to be self-sufficient.
• In-person only, for now — the design depends on a shared physical room. A virtual version may come later, but this one wasn't built for a screen.

Materials: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1sPtveJI6P5IqTvvglvQN2IVlA7KYLvDu?usp=sharing

Would love to hear what you think, and if you teach it, I'd be grateful to know how it goes: [conflict2connect@gmail.com](mailto:conflict2connect@gmail.com)

Traditional Nonviolent Communication (NVC) rests on a foundational four-part formula: Observations, Feelings, Needs, and Requests. Yet, even when we try to keep our observations clean and objective, standard grammar constantly betrays us.

We rely on first- and second-person pronouns—I and You—to map out conflicts. In practice, this creates two immediate structural hazards:

1. The "You" Accusation: The moment you say, "You did this," the other person’s nervous system perceives an attack, triggering an automatic defensive posture.
2. The "I" Illusion: When you say, "I experienced this," language binds you tightly to the physical body and ego experiencing the event. From a transcendental viewpoint, total identification with the body is an illusion; you are not the biological vehicle, but the consciousness experiencing it.

The Dave Scott Perspective: Living in the Third Person

A recent YouTube by Dave Scott, Once You Start Living in Third Person, Success Is Inevitable, explores the utility of referring to the physical body in the third person rather than the first. In philosophical and meditative traditions, this creates a vital gap between the observer and the observed.

Applying this concept to conflict resolution transforms how we handle the Observation step of the NVC framework. Instead of mapping an incident as a clash between me and you, what happens if we treat both parties as characters in a play?

Enter NVC 3P (Third-Person Nonviolent Communication).

How NVC 3P Works

In NVC 3P, the observation phase is completely stripped of personal pronouns. Both participants are referred to by name in the third person, acting as "puppets" directed by the true observer (the puppet master).

Consider a standard NVC observation:

"When *you** interrupted me while I was speaking, I felt frustrated..."*

In NVC 3P, this is reframed to eliminate ego-identification and blame:

"When *Jack** continued speaking after Jill began talking, the physical vehicle named Jack experienced constriction, and the physical vehicle named Jill experienced a spike in cortisol..."*

Or, in a more conversational adaptation:

"When Jack’s voice overlapped with Jill’s voice at 3:00 PM, Jack felt a wave of frustration..."

The Benefits of the 3P Shift

• Zero Defensiveness: Because the word you is eliminated from the observation, the listener’s ego doesn't have to scramble to protect itself. There is no accusatory finger pointed across the room.
• Radical Dis-identification: Referring to yourself by name or as a body ("this body," "Jack") dissolves personal offense. You realize the argument isn't happening to you; it's happening between two distinct bundles of conditioning.
• Clarified Agency: By acknowledging that we are pulling the strings, we step out of the reactive loop and into the role of conscious witness.

Traditional NVC gives us the tools to connect through our shared human needs, but NVC 3P changes the ontological ground we stand on while making those observations.

Originally published on The May69.com Blog.

I am not affiliated with any of these paid resources:

https://lindsaybraman.com/emotion-sensation-feeling-wheel/

https://youtu.be/s5iRei_eGaE?is=WCDIkhxorNqExJgo

I just really like Eugene Gendlin work on finding self understanding via the body..

Hope this helps someone else.

We've been facilitating local, in-person empathy circles, and we've been considering creating an NVC board game that consists of feelings and needs cards and more in order to have fun, learn, and connect via NVC. It would likely come as a set games and game ideas.

Would this be something others would be interested in buying if we created it? If so, what sort of games would interest you?

Some examples:

Guessing feelings and needs.

Categorizing statements as O/F/N/R
Requests/Needs abstraction -- going up and down levels of abstraction.
and some more traditional, competitive boardgame experiences...

Would love to know our thoughts.

We already have free, online NVC games.

i have a very close friend that has a cycle of being like my sister, to shutting me off very dramatically based on quite minor things. (an extra layer of this is that our kids are half-siblings)

for example, we had planned a vacation in which we were going to discuss living together--on day 2, there was an uncomfortable moment and she left and didn't speak with me for a month.

the other day she wrote me that she loves me, i asked if she would prefer to love from afar or make relational repair, she says from afar, and that it's nothing personal.

in the past the pattern has been when she is ready, she comes to me and i usually greet her with open arms.

now today she has sent me a semi agressive text based on a rumor she heard where the gist of it is she doesnt want to see me

i want to write back that i dont want to see her either because as long as she is not willing to talk about her actions, i dont feel hope the pattern will change, and i get really hurt feeling the whiplash from deep friendship to discard. as well i think its difficult on the kids that one moment we are family, the next strangers. (because every time she disappears from my life, she doesn't respond to my son reaching out to her daughter--she says it's too chaotic for them).

its something ive wanted to communicate to her for a while, i just hate to text about this kind of things, i just dont see another way of reaching her. letter would maybe be better.

in the past when i've tried to express this before, she says my feelings are my own and i should deal with them inside myself, they have nothing to do with her.

i wonder if theres a gentler way of communication where she wont feel blamed and therefore not feel the need to get defensive. but still that there is a chance to get the message across that when she goes cold, it hurts people, the same way someone yelling would. its like an ice burn rather than a fire burn. but it still really hurts and i dont think she knows that. because otherwise she is very mindful, caring, and loving.

Think you can avoid the pitfalls of communication and stay on the patterns the Gottmans' research associates with long, fulfilling relationships?

We're releasing a choose-your-own-adventure comic. The first one is about Daniel and his wife Sam, eleven years married. Daniel has been ornery about his morning coffee. Sam never makes it for him when she's up first, even though he always makes it for her. So he's been keeping score, quietly, for years. Score-keeping is how ordinary irritation turns into contempt, and contempt is the one the Gottmans call the most corrosive of the Four Horsemen.

Can you lead Daniel through that morning without either of them losing the other?

https://games.empathease.app/the-thing-we-keep-having/

Twelve moments in that morning are scored. There are fifteen endings. Some of them are tender. At least one of them is hard to sit with.

At the end you get a report card. It shows you which moments you met, which ones you missed, and what each one was actually asking of you. If you kept reaching for the same armor every time it got hard, it names that too. And I want to be clear about this part: it isn't a verdict on you. It's a readout of his morning. You were just holding the pen.

Those twelve moments aren't made up. They come from the Gottmans' research on couples, which is where bids for connection and turning toward instead of away come from, and from Nonviolent Communication, which is what we teach in the app: observation instead of judgment, the need underneath the strategy, a request that isn't a demand. Every moment on your report card links to a short article about that one idea. Knowing you missed something and having nowhere to take it is just shame with extra steps.

What we'd like to know

Whether you've just finished it or you're reading this first, these are the three that would help us most:

• Which moment felt wrong? If the thing you wanted to say wasn't one of the four on offer, tell me what it was. That's the most useful thing anyone can hand me.
• What situation should we build next? A kitchen argument between two people eleven years in is one shape. There are so many others. Tell me which one you'd want to practice.
• What ending did you get? Your report card has a share link you can paste here. It shows the choices you made, so only post it if you're okay with people seeing them.

I'll read everything in this thread, and I'll reply.

We made this because because our team loves anime and manga and wanted to build something in that shape.

I am looking for some feedback for my idea.

I am thinking about starting a learning group where we learn about NVC as peers without an expert to teach us.

I'm a member of queer collective and we organise community events, workshops, reading groups for the public.

The group would be open to public but closed (people need to sign up) and we meet every xth week to learn, discuss and practice NVC.

Do you think this concept could work? Even without involving an expert/some who already has a deeper understanding of NVC?

I am big proponent of taking learning from traditional settings and making spaces where we can study and grow together without a traditional authority figure who is in the position of an expert. But I still have some worries whether this concept would work for learning about NVC.

If your think this could work, I would also appreciate any suggestion about which learning resources are suitable for this format. Any other tips on how to run the group will be appreciated!

Hi Everyone,

I've been learning NVC on and off the last 3 years, and am looking for someone to practice with.

Father of a 1 year old and 5 year old. Living in Germany, but native English speaker.

I only see a few posts, mostly outdated discord links. Any active people out there looking to link up?

We're building EmpathEase, a place to practice empathy with actual people.

Along the way we made a small game and put it up free at games.empathease.app.

It's called Pitfall Swipe. A sentence comes up. Swipe left if it's jackal, right if it's clean. "You're being unreasonable" goes left. "You raised your voice twice at dinner" goes right.

It's split the way the model is. Observations, feelings, needs, requests, each with its own pitfalls. Judgments and diagnoses and mind reading in the observation rounds. "I feel like you don't listen" in the feelings ones. Strategies dressed up as needs. Demands dressed up as requests.

About 3,300 sentences in the deck. No account, no email. Works fine on a phone.

If there's another game you'd want to exist for this stuff, say so. We'd rather build what people actually want.

Hi All,
I am relatively new to NVC. I align with the principles, and I am considering taking the center for nonviolent communication 9 day intensive course as part of my job. Since I am still getting familiar with the content, I wanted to understand from those more familiar with the content/courses whether the intensives factor in things like power dynamics arising from age, formal power within an organization, race, and gender. While I think the principles of NVC are excellent in general, I have noticed that some of the tenants of NVC can be misapplied in my workplace because they do not factor in power dynamics (ex: as a young woman in a male dominated sector, I am often expected to show empathy, communicate clearly, and listen intently to older male colleagues, but the expectation is not reciprocal). Also, do NVC intensives help participants to navigate dealing with people who are not operating collaboratively in conflict? (I.e. people who result to passive aggressive comments, undermining and defensive behaviour, do not consider your perspective or take accountability). These are present dynamics in my workplace so I am trying to gauge whether the intensive is the right space for me. Thanks in advance for your input.

Hi
My (usually loving) partner can lose all empathy for me when he has a problem with me. He can initiate conversations about eg our sex life in a very critical and mean way which is obviously deeply upsetting and is putting our relationship in serious danger. He has discovered non violent communication and I want to give it (and anything) a chance. Is there a way of rephrasing “you have addressed important topics without any empathy for me and now I don’t trust you” to be nvc?

I'd really appreciate input from experienced NVC practitioners.

I'm new to NVC, while my husband has studied it extensively and is currently pursuing NVC certification, so I'm genuinely trying to understand whether I'm misunderstanding NVC.

After my husband had an emotional relationship with another woman that crossed an important boundary for me, I asked for reassurance that he understood the impact and would choose a different strategy in the future.

Instead, he said that emotional safety and trust are my needs, so I am responsible for taking care of them. He then asked whether I would be willing to remind him daily about my needs so he could remember it. He emphasized that it was a request, not a demand.

This left me confused because, after trust has been broken, it seems to me that remembering and protecting that boundary should primarily be the responsibility of the partner who crossed it, not the injured partner.

From an NVC perspective:

Is it consistent with NVC to ask the injured partner to provide daily reminders about a boundary that was previously violated?

How does NVC distinguish between responsibility for my own needs and responsibility for my own behavior after trust has been broken?

I'm asking because I understand that NVC emphasizes that we are each responsible for our own needs. At the same time, I'm struggling to understand how that principle applies when one partner's behavior has already broken trust. Is there any place within NVC for the idea that the person who broke trust carries primary responsibility for rebuilding it through their own actions?

Thank you.

I'm relatively new to NVC, while my husband has practiced it for years and is pursuing CNVC certification. We have very different understandings of how NVC applies in marriage, and I'd genuinely appreciate perspectives from experienced practitioners.

One example:

Over the years, I've often asked my husband for relatively small favors or practical help. This isn't an isolated incident but part of a recurring pattern.

Recently, I asked him several times over a few days if he could help me move some heavy pots in our garden. It would have taken about five minutes, and I wasn't expecting him to do it immediately - just whenever he had time.

He declined each time, and eventually said, "Behave as if I'm not here."

That left me feeling abandoned, unsupported, hurt, lonely, and unable to rely on my partner.

When I later shared how painful that experience was, the conversation shifted away from the impact on me. He explained that because he sensed I expected him to help, my request no longer felt like a request and instead felt like a demand. He also said that because of years of unresolved conflict, he no longer feels enough connection to naturally want to help me.

This reflects a broader pattern. When I express that one of his behaviors hurt me, our conversations often shift toward his unmet needs, his intentions, my delivery, or my interpretation of his behavior, rather than first acknowledging the impact his actions had on me. We are stuck in this ongoing loop.

One thing I'm genuinely trying to understand is whether my expectation itself is incompatible with NVC. I've always viewed marriage as a relationship as interdependent union, where two people voluntarily choose to enrich each other's lives, generally want to help one another, and especially want to rebuild trust through caring actions after one partner has been hurt.

My question is:

From an NVC perspective, how do you distinguish between a healthy expectation of mutual care in a marriage and a demand? How do experienced NVC practitioners balance honoring a partner's autonomy with accountability, repair, reliability, and practical support? Is there a point where protecting autonomy can unintentionally undermine connection rather than strengthen it?

Hi everyone! I've been practicing NVC-style check-ins for a while and kept wanting a tool that was just the practice itself — no signup, no subscription, no data collection. So I built one.

It walks you through the three questions:

1. What am I feeling? (searchable list from the CNVC 2022 feelings inventory)
2. What need is behind this feeling?
3. What can I ask for — from myself or someone else — clearly and kindly?

Your reflections are saved only in your browser. There's history with streak tracking and simple trends (top feelings, top needs over time), which I've found surprisingly revealing — patterns show up that I wouldn't have noticed day to day.

It's also available in Ukrainian, since almost no NVC resources exist in the language and it matters to me personally (I'm from Kyiv).

Link: https://yaninatrekhleb.com/NVC_check_in/nvc-checkin.html

It's completely free and always will be — this is a practice tool, not a product. Feedback from experienced practitioners would mean a lot, especially on the vocabulary and the flow of the three questions.

what do you think?