Stephanie McCullough (00:00:06):

Welcome to Take Back Retirement, the show for women 50 and better, facing a financial future on their own. I’m Stephanie McCullough, and along with my fellow financial planner, Kevin Gaines, we’re going to tackle the myths and mysteries of “Retirement,” so you can make wise decisions toward a sustainable financial future. Through conversations and interviews, you’ll get the information and motivation you need, to move forward with confidence. And we’ll be sure to have some fun along the way. We’re so glad you’re here. Let’s dive in.

Stephanie McCullough (00:00:40):

Coming to you semi-live from the beautiful West Lakes Office Park in suburban Philadelphia, this is Stephanie McCullough and Kevin Gaines of Sophia Financial and American Financial Management Group. Say hello, Kevin.

Kevin Gaines (00:00:51):

Hello, Kevin.

Stephanie McCullough (00:00:52):

Today we have a guest for you that I think you’re going to find super interesting. Ed Coambs is a licensed marriage and family therapist and also a certified financial planner. And you’ll hear a little bit more about his journey to what he does now. It’s a really interesting and unique set of background.

Stephanie McCullough (00:01:11):

But he’s become an internationally recognized thought leader around financial therapy and specifically financial couples therapy. He works with couples who might be in financial despair and frustration, and he moves toward what he calls financial intimacy and connection. And we’ll dig into what those words mean. Ed’s the founder of healthyloveandmoney.com, and he’s got a lot of great content. Not only does he work with clients personally, but he’s got books, courses, blogs, podcasts, all kinds of stuff through the website that you can access on your own. Let’s dig in and talk to Ed. Ed Coambs, welcome to Take Back Retirement.

Ed Coambs (00:01:58):

Stephanie, thank you so much. I’m happy to be here with you.

Stephanie McCullough (00:02:02):

Ed, you and I met through another women’s organization I belong to, and you gave a talk to them. One of the things that I find so interesting about the interplay between couples, relationships, and money is that we don’t think it should be an issue. I was noticing in your book you were talking about how money is often portrayed as money’s not the real issue, it’s a proxy for something else that’s going on. But maybe that’s changed over time. Could you dig into that a little bit?

Ed Coambs (00:02:36):

Yeah, absolutely. I recently had a call from a new prospective client that I think really exemplifies this. They are very smart, engineer, mathematically oriented, and they said, “I have problems with saving. I’m saving too much. But I keep telling people I’m so afraid of not having enough money so they tell me to save more money.” And I said, “Oh, okay. All right, tell me a little bit more.” And then she says, “Well, my mom’s an economist and my sister has written a personal finance book.” This is a money family through and through, but what we know is, as she started to share a little more of her stories, they had adverse experiences directly related to money, meaning poverty, rice and beans kind of thing.

Ed Coambs (00:03:27):

And here’s the more difficult part is it was rice and beans so that they could go to private school. You have this very contrasting experience of deprivation so that you can have something quote, unquote, “better.” Private school, in most people’s minds, is better. And so that sets the internal stage psychologically for a lot of anxiety around money. And anxiety itself as a mental process is not a logical process. It’s based in fear and shame, and those are really the two big parts of anxiety. And so you have to start working through that fear and shame to reduce the anxiety coming up around the money topic.

Ed Coambs (00:04:13):

We don’t have any problems saying, “Well, if you’re having sexual dysfunction, it’s not really the sexual dysfunction, it’s something else.” No, maybe you had sexual trauma in your life and you need to work on feeling comfortable with your sexuality. The same is true with money. You’ve had adverse experiences around money. We need to work on feeling comfortable around money. And so it’s not just a logical problem or it’s not just a proxy for other issues. Yes, it can also be a symptom of other issues like relationship breakdown, low self-esteem, certainly those. If you have low self-esteem, you’re likely going to have problems with money, so you got to work with the low self-esteem to work on the money issues. It’s more a both/and than an either/or.

Stephanie McCullough (00:05:01):

That’s really helpful. And you mentioned the potential client you spoke to had maybe close to traumatic experiences or maybe little T trauma experiences with money. But it doesn’t always have to be that either. Sometimes it can be maybe just things we were told with good intention that ended up going awry.

Ed Coambs (00:05:24):

Yes, absolutely. You mentioned little T trauma, and that’s really important. If people are not familiar with that, little T trauma are those things that I like to say don’t make the 5:00 news but had an impact on you. And so let’s talk about children and shopping because that’s where kids start to get a lot of money messages. And parents have to help socialize their kids around shopping and shopping appropriateness because little kids don’t have any… very little impulse control. When you’re going through Target, I want this, I want this, I want this, I want this. And mom and dad are getting worn out, and so mom and dad might say, “Johnny, stop asking for so much,” or, “We can’t afford that right now,” or, “Now’s not the right time.” But do you hear the energy in the voice?

Stephanie McCullough (00:06:11):

Mm-hmm.

Kevin Gaines (00:06:11):

Mm-hmm.

Ed Coambs (00:06:12):

What does that feel like for the five-year-old little boy or girl? What’s wrong with me? What’s wrong with wanting something? Now, the parent is not thinking anything of it and not thinking this is going to have any lasting impact on their child, but for many children, that’s not a one time event; that may happen over and over again until they get the message. Compared to going through Target, Johnny’s asking for something, the parent stops and says, “Wow, that is really interesting. Johnny, right now we’re here to buy milk and T-shirts for back to school. We’re going to wait until next time to come get a toy.” Calm, reflective, rational explaining. Now they don’t feel bad about themselves for asking for the toy and they have some expectation that they may be able to get that in the future. Same scenario, very different parental response.

Ed Coambs (00:07:09):

Now, I’m giving the parent the benefit of the doubt. They want the same thing; their kid to delay gratification and to know it’s going to be okay and we can’t just get everything we want, but the way you go about it matters.

Kevin Gaines (00:07:22):

Right. Today, since we’re talking about childhood — allowances, getting that allowance, it sounds like that could actually, instead of teaching the kid responsibility, it could end up warping them just as easily as anything else.

Ed Coambs (00:07:41):

Yes. Again, one of these things where it’s such a common practice for families to give children money as a part of being a family member and doing chores and responsibilities, but what’s happening around how that’s executed, the expectations, the consistency can all matter. And then adding another layer where I do see that allowance or children’s money becomes problematic for them in adulthood is when the parents then take the money back from the kids either secretly or explicitly saying, “Oh, well I know you have cash. Yeah, I’m going to use it for this.” But then they never pay the kid back. Oh, wow. When mom and dad borrow money or take money from their child but then don’t give it back, that starts to set some pretty adverse expectations around money as well is I can’t trust or it’s not worth saving, and so that’s another big factor. And when I’ve worked with other clients, they become financially responsible because they watch their parent become financially irresponsible. They’re trying to buffer their mom and dad’s financial irresponsibility with the money that they’re acquiring or having. And that leads a lot of resentment that gets carried forward into adulthood as well.

Stephanie McCullough (00:08:54):

I’m guilty of the pizza guy’s at the door and I got no cash, back when we used cash five years ago, and saying, “Oh Casey, you’ve got some cash. Can I borrow real quick?” I certainly hope I paid him back. I’m going to tell you, just as a quick aside, I was terrified to have children because I was worried I was going to mess them up. And then I finally I’ve accepted that, oh, we all mess up our children totally and unintentionally in different ways, so it’s just inevitable.

Ed Coambs (00:09:22):

Yes. And this is one of those challenges as a family therapist is we can, in our good intention to help parents and families function better, we can inadvertently create more anxiety for parents and families about, well, don’t do this and don’t do this, and if you’re going to do this, you’re going to… And there’s a healthy level of being afraid of messing up your kids, and there’s a normal amount of not doing things right. And so one of the great therapists talks about good enough mothering because none of us are perfect parents and none of us have to be perfect parents, but if we can become reflective and aware of our impact on our kids and then when we learn something go back and make corrective efforts if we need to… Today you may go home and say, “Hey Casey, I was talking with this financial therapist guy.’ I don’t know how old Casey is.

Stephanie McCullough (00:10:08):

20.

Ed Coambs (00:10:08):

20. Yes. Good. Plenty old enough now where you say, “Casey, I’m just curious. I was talking to this financial therapist about borrowing money from your kids and that that could create some resentment or hurt feelings. Do you feel that way at all? Have I betrayed you?” You know the relationship you have with your kid and whether it really has been egregious or not. And that’s the challenge is oftentimes the clients I’m working with their parents don’t have some of that self-reflective capacity to realize that what they’ve done has hurt their kids and their kids learn that they can’t go to mom and dad and talk about, “This has hurt or bothered me or created a problem.” And so really, as parents, that’s the big thing. It takes some ego strength, if you will, to hear from your kids that you did hurt them or did do something that left a bad impression even if you had good intention. And that’s a big psychological growth edge for a lot of us is good intention doesn’t always equal good outcome.

Stephanie McCullough (00:11:06):

Psychological growth edge. I like that phrase.

Kevin Gaines (00:11:09):

Yeah, that’s a good term.

Stephanie McCullough (00:11:09):

Can you explain that?

Ed Coambs (00:11:12):

Right. None of us come into this world with all the information we need about how to function in life and society and in family, and so we are continuously growing and learning about how to be in our environment and to be in an environment that’s hospitable both for ourselves and for others. And so we are learning about how to be in the environment and the feedback. And when we’re open to that, we can continually grow psychologically. But if we’re closed off or fearful about the feedback about how we’re functioning or providing functioning to another person, it stymies growth. And that’s a really big challenge. Psychological health is about being open to exploring and understanding both your growing edges, things that are not working so well, as well as embracing those things that are going great, and acknowledging that. Because if all we’re looking at are all the things that are wrong with us, then we spiral into a pit of shame.

Stephanie McCullough (00:12:07):

Oh, I have no idea what that feels like.

Ed Coambs (00:12:09):

Yeah, I’ve never been there myself, I’ve only heard about it. I’ve only read it in 20 textbooks. Wink, wink.

Stephanie McCullough (00:12:15):

Yeah. Wink, wink.

Ed Coambs (00:12:17):

Yes.

Kevin Gaines (00:12:18):

One of the things you hear about and read about all the time is that couples, before they get married or before they get settled down into their routine, I guess, that they don’t take enough time to talk about money ahead of time to set up parameters and everything like that. Is that true? Or do people just talk about it but then they just don’t follow through? Or is it not as big of an issue that a lot of these articles like to make it sound?

Ed Coambs (00:12:52):

Well, there’s probably the empirical answer to that, research based answer, and then there’s my clinical perspective. I don’t know if there’s any empirical evidence that says yes, a large percentage of couples never talk about this, but I would say, at least from my experience, most couples don’t have enough conversations about it. Some don’t talk about it at all, some talk about it a little bit, and some don’t talk about it enough. And if they are talking about it, they may be talking about the function of money but not the meaning of money.

Stephanie McCullough (00:13:24):

Say more about that.

Ed Coambs (00:13:26):

They may talk about this is how we’re going to budget, this is how much we’re going to save, this is how we’re going to approach doing our taxes, but they may not be talking about their hopes and dreams about where they want to go financially. What does financial security mean to you? When do you experience financial anxiety? When are you likely to feel embarrassed around money? What were your family rules about money? How open are we about talking about money? Can we acknowledge that we’ve made money mistakes? Those are all very relational oriented questions and meaning oriented questions. And so we need to continually learn how to ask both meaning and relational based money questions as well as functional, practical money questions because they’re interrelated.

Ed Coambs (00:14:21):

Oftentimes, couples will get stuck where one person’s the money person, the other person’s not the money person, and then the money person ends up having to run everything. And in time, the money person ends up resenting the other person because they now are like, “Well, why won’t they do what I’m telling them to do? I’m the money person. They’re not engaging, so I’m going to have to tell you what to do, but then you’re not going to do what I’m asking you to do.” And now we’ve got a nasty cycle going. And so, just like sex for couples, money is a shared experience. It’s okay, depending on your philosophy… And sorry if I’m talking about sex on your show too much-

Stephanie McCullough (00:14:58):

No problem.

Ed Coambs (00:15:00):

… but for the most part, we want to be doing money together. Not meaning, oh, we have to go to the store together, you have to sit next to me when I’m going to Amazon, I need you to come to work. That’s not what I’m saying. But we want to talk about our financial life, our income, our investing plan, what’s happening in the tax life because what happens… And you probably see this a good bit in the women you work with; if they’ve been more the non-money person, they have a very small slice understanding. They may know how much they spent on groceries and shopping and some of the bills, but they may not see the bigger picture. And so part of financially maturing is being able to have a working understanding of cash flow and saving, investing, taxes, insurance, and estate planning. It’s not to say you have to be at exactly the same depth of knowledge, especially if you’re married to a financial planner or something else like that, you’re not going to get to the same, but we want to find some level of knowledge, balance, and awareness.

Stephanie McCullough (00:16:04):

But just like you said, the money person might get resentful of the other. The non-money person, I feel like, can have a huge level of anxiety, they can feel cut out. I’ve seen all kinds of implications on that side too.

Ed Coambs (00:16:17):

Oh yeah, absolutely. The resentment flows both ways. Yeah. And they often start to feel less than not smart enough, not good enough or as if it’s not their money, especially if they’re… In a very conventional sense, partner one is earning the money and then becomes a money person, partner two is staying home, helping with the kids and maybe spends the money, and then that really creates another interesting dynamic. And so being able to see that we’re just in different money roles. We’re really on the same team.

Ed Coambs (00:16:53):

And it’s incredible how many couples approach their intimate relationship like a competition instead of collaboration, especially when it comes to money. And I think because just part of the culture that we live in, money is seen as a very competitive, scarce resource, and so we bring that mindset knowingly and unknowingly into our marriage around money and lose sight of the fact that marriage is a collaborative, joining experience, not a competition.

Stephanie McCullough (00:17:21):

Oh, that was a good nugget right there.

Kevin Gaines (00:17:23):

I was going to say we’ve got one or two decent sound bites here in the last minute or two.

Stephanie McCullough (00:17:29):

You mean 10?

Ed Coambs (00:17:29):

Yeah.

Stephanie McCullough (00:17:33):

Do you have suggestions if a couple or a member of a couple might be listening and feels like they’re not in this shared experience collaborative? Do you have some suggestions on steps people can take to move a little closer to that?

Ed Coambs (00:17:48):

Yeah, one of the very first I started doing with all the clients that I work with is building a bigger context for these patterns, because that starts to soften things oftentimes. And so instead of leaving the problem isolated and the husband or the wife or the wife… either way is let’s see this problem within a bigger context.

Ed Coambs (00:18:09):

And so pragmatically, what I do is I start asking them questions: Tell me about your mom and dad’s relationship. Tell me about what you saw with them and how they did money. And then we start to talk about that a little bit more, and then I’ll flip it to the other partner. And what they start to see, especially if they’re able to listen, is a much larger pattern, that this is… They’re not doing this out of nowhere.

Ed Coambs (00:18:32):

And there’s a big difference between knowing that you want to do something different and experiencing something different. Most of us, as humans, our experiences are far stronger decision makers for us than what we know intellectually, and so until we can get connected with what we’ve experienced and then start to create new experiences of doing it differently, we can know until we’re blue in the face, but it’s not going to change anything. And we have to create new experience. And that’s really what couples get when they’re working in couples therapy is not just new knowledge about what to do but a new experience of doing it.

Ed Coambs (00:19:10):

No different than if you work with a physical therapist, they’re not just telling you, “Here’s how to do a bicep curl to repair the bicep tear,” they’re showing you how to do bicep curls, but they’re also showing you how to lift your arm up high. And you’re like, “Wait, what does this have to do?” But they know that there’s a range of motions that you have to do to actually get that repaired and engage it and experience it. And so that’s really what you’re looking for when you’re trying to work on this is how do we create a new experience of doing this? Not just new knowledge. New knowledge guides what we should do experientially, but if we’re not experiencing it, it’s very hard.

Kevin Gaines (00:19:44):

Now, have you ever come across a situation where it’s all one person’s fault?

Ed Coambs (00:19:51):

Yes, all the time. I’m just kidding. Kevin, Your face was priceless. Yes, all the time. It’s absolutely one person’s fault. That’s what every couple coming into me wishes was the case. And most couples have some level of maturity and understanding it really isn’t just one person, it is both.

Ed Coambs (00:20:14):

And this is where it gets tricky is because sometimes someone can be very self-loathing and they can have the orientation it’s all my fault. And they have trouble seeing the part that their partner is contributing to the dance. That’s one side of it. The other side of it is one person can be so externally focused, it’s their fault, they’re the problem, and they can’t see it within themselves.

Ed Coambs (00:20:40):

Depending on which orientation they are, I work with it differently. If I’m self-blaming, then I’m going to help you start to see and consider and reflect on what does it mean that your partner is doing this or that to you? And I’ll be asking them questions to get them to start reflecting and making it safe enough. Now, part of the reason why they often will take it on themselves is because that’s the way they’ve been conditioned, to take on fault and blame because they’ve grown up in relationships where nobody will take responsibility for their contribution.

Ed Coambs (00:21:14):

If we circle back to our parenting child experience, if mom and dad aren’t willing to take any ownership for the way they hurt their children, the child will develop in one of two ways. They’ll follow that pattern and completely reject taking responsibility for anything or they’ll take it all on themselves. And either of those positions are too extreme. In the middle, we take personal responsibility and know that there’s other contributing factors. This is where we get into the mental health problems is I’m taking it all on myself or I’m projecting it all on somebody else. Those are the extremes…too far.

Stephanie McCullough (00:21:54):

Creating a bigger context. I love that idea for noticing your own patterns around money and the patterns of your partner. Any other particular suggestions for getting to a healthier money relationship?

Ed Coambs (00:22:08):

Yes. Yes. And I think this is also where it can be really challenging, and it’s a little bit of a longer game, but as we paint that bigger picture of our families, it can quickly seem as if we’re trying to blame our parents. And that’s not the case. We’re not trying to make people good or bad, there’s just people that have had their own way of understanding it. We’re all a product of our particular environment. That’s at least my outlook. And so mom and dad did the best they could with what they had and how they knew how to do it, and changing that pattern is very, very challenging. I think if we can let go of some of that good or bad paradigm, which is, again, part of the whole black and white continuum, all my responsibility, all their responsibility, but morally we can get into this good or bad. And so we’ve got to start seeing some of the gray space and seeing the meaning and the purpose behind it.

Ed Coambs (00:23:07):

In a more practical sense, I have a lot of couples where they get divided around spending money on experience versus on updating the house. And they’ll take staunch positions that one is better than the other. And it leads them very divided. But they’re having a hard time stepping out of their perspective and seeing the meaning and the purpose behind what they’re doing.

Ed Coambs (00:23:31):

And so a couple that I worked with grew up with a family where her home was the hub and relationships were built, and that was when it was most enjoyable to be as a family. And so there was a feeling of how the house was decorated and put together. As they were growing their family, that was something that was very important to her. And her husband on the other hand, had parents that worked very hard and were gone a lot of the times, but when they would travel was when they felt closest, and so he was very adamant about spending money on travel and would spare almost no expense there. And she would spare almost no expense on trying to furnish the house. What they couldn’t see is that they both wanted to create a great family experience, and so helping them see that they both were actually trying to create the same thing through different pathways, it helped bringing them closer and closer together over time. This was not a one time conversation. It’s not like I just said this and they’re like, “Oh, wow. Okay, well, I’ll just start doing that.” I wish it was that easy.

Stephanie McCullough (00:24:40):

You don’t have magic wand, Ed?

Ed Coambs (00:24:43):

Oh, I do. And I get it out and I wave over the couples, and then I say, “How did it work?” And I say… They, “It didn’t.” I said, “Okay, great. Then we’re going to go ahead and do the hard work.” We’ll check the magic wand later and see if it’s changed.

Stephanie McCullough (00:25:02):

In your book, one of the things I really found interesting was that you’re using these words, disconnection and intimacy. And I feel like we can relate to those words and think about them in a relationship context, but we don’t necessarily connect them to money. Can you touch on though?

Ed Coambs (00:25:15):

Yeah, absolutely. Because many of us treat money as a more matter of fact subject-

Stephanie McCullough (00:25:23):

Which is hooey.

Ed Coambs (00:25:26):

Which is hooey, because we all have a personal relationship with money. Money is inherently meaningful to every person. I’ve had the good fortune of traveling the world, working with people around money in different contexts. I went to the Philippines many years ago and did microfinance work with women borrowers. And they had a very personal relationship with money even though they lived in poverty. And I’ve worked with ultra high net worth legacy wealth families, and they all have a very personal relationship with money.

Ed Coambs (00:25:56):

And what makes this challenging is we don’t come to the same conclusion about what to do or the meaning of money. We see it play out on the global stage, on the political stage all the time. This is a huge part of the political system. What should we do with tax law? What should we do with employment law? We come to different conclusions about it.

Ed Coambs (00:26:19):

And so my responsibility is not to work on at that level. It’s there, it exists, I’m not changing that. But in your household system, the same thing starts to happen, and so if we’re not open to really looking at where do these values come from, these emotions come from? and finding a way to become collaborative, we really become a party divided.

Ed Coambs (00:26:45):

And so when we think about relational intimacy and trust and safety, that doesn’t always mean agreement. And that’s another big factor that we don’t think about is it doesn’t mean that we have to be agreement, but we don’t want to get in a position where we’re forcing our partner into something that makes them feel wholly uncomfortable. We have financial rights within the relationship. And so if we don’t understand and see it that way, we’re in big risk of violating our partners.

Ed Coambs (00:27:15):

Now, we may disagree and we may not understand where they’re coming from, and that can be really frustrating, but if we don’t start to understand, then that’s where the financial trauma piece really starts to help contextualize they’re not being irrational, they are responding based on what they’ve seen and experienced in the past. Maybe it’s unconsciously and maybe it becomes conscious, and that just becoming conscious doesn’t mean it’s resolved. It’s only until we get it conscious that we can start to work towards resolution.

Ed Coambs (00:27:49):

Let’s see, the wife would go shopping at the grocery store, and they had pretty tight budget, and she would be on budget, but she would just… And then she’d come home and she was just like, “Oh, it’s just such a mess at the grocery store.” And her husband would say, “Well, just get over it. It’s not a big deal. It’s not a problem anymore.” From his perspective, he’s trying to be supportive and encouraging, but from her perspective she’s being dismissed and minimized. And yes, they know that she grew up in poverty and that mom lived on food stamps and that going through the checkout line at the grocery store was scary, painful, critical, smack the hand, put the candy back kind of thing, and so she’s having these visceral responses. And so it’s really about how do you show up and create a safe haven for your partner to re-story this and help them come into realizing I’m safe now? And safety is really a physiological response before it’s a cognitive response. We can’t think ourselves into safety, we have to feel our way into safety.

Stephanie McCullough (00:28:57):

Oh, that’s big.

Ed Coambs (00:28:59):

Yeah. That’s something that’s really important is most of us don’t have a strong enough understanding of how the brain and physiology works. And our internal world tells us what the external environment is like, and so when you’re in the grocery store and you’re having that freezer response or that pit, that’s a physiological response. And so you’ve got to learn how to connect with your body and let your body know that it’s safe now, that that threat has passed. In trauma words, we’re differentiating what happened in the past with what happened present. We’re trying to put that story on a timeline and have it be integrated.

Ed Coambs (00:29:35):

Very pragmatically, if you have a pit in your stomach around some money related decision, whether it’s paying the bills or it’s in the grocery store line or some other place, one of the practices that I start to have couples do or individuals is bring their hands to that part of their body that’s having that strong visceral response and just… And I’m going to close my eyes, because it’s just the most natural thing. Nobody’s watching this, but, you know. Is you close your eyes and you actually, instead of trying to turn away from that visceral response or ignore it or minimize it, is you actually are going to turn towards it. You’re going to close your eyes and turn yourself towards it and notice it in your body. And then just using your hands, if you’re able to, bring them to that spot of your body and imagine warmth and caring. And especially if you can bring to mind a safe, nurturing face, whether it’s another parent figure or a divine image or your partner, it doesn’t really matter. What we’re wanting to use is the power of your imagination, visual imagery, and bring that awareness into that spot in your body and let it be there until your body starts to relax and become easy. And that’s starting to let your body know we’re actually safe around this now. It’s a corrective experience to whatever happened in the past, because that’s part of…

Ed Coambs (00:31:05):

We go through many, many traumatic experiences in life, some of us many more than others, but none of us avoid. But what makes things go into PTSD, anxiety, and depression, which are all outcomes of trauma, is the lack of acknowledgement that something bad happened and that it’s safe now. Those are two really big pieces to recovering through any type of trauma is being able to receive acknowledgement that what happened did happen, and it was true for you no matter how your mind-brain interpreted it, and that you are now safe from that event. That event is now over.

Ed Coambs (00:31:46):

The hardest lessons for me, and part of why I ended up in this work is I was a professional firefighter for five years and I saw a lot of traumatic stuff. And we never talked about it. At best, we might make a joke. But I had things that were a physiological threat to my safety in my life.

Stephanie McCullough (00:32:08):

Yeah. Literally.

Ed Coambs (00:32:09):

And I had no idea, never would’ve classified it; all was minimized as not that bad or big of a deal. And so, to get through a lot of trauma, we minimize or rationalize that it wasn’t that bad. It didn’t impact me that much. But that’s a good sign that it was traumatic if we’re saying those things because experiences do impact us and they do mean something to us, but we may not have the context to work through that.

Stephanie McCullough (00:32:40):

And there’s no shame or weakness in that. It’s how we’re built.

Ed Coambs (00:32:46):

That’s right. It’s absolutely how we’re built. We don’t have control over large parts of our body, and that’s also a big disappointment for a lot of people initially, especially those that like to be in control. I want to be in control of everything including all of my processes inside of my body. And most of our body is automatic, and so we have to learn how to appreciate and work with those automatic responses instead of becoming angry or disappointed or controlling them. This is why the willpower solution often fails.

Ed Coambs (00:33:19):

Willpower is much more of a cognitive process, if you will. From a brain science, a top down perspective, top down meaning from the neocortex, which is the thinking, rational, reflective, regulating part of our brain. Bottom up is the brain stem and nervous system process. And so if we can start to recognize that we have these bottom up responses, that they’re perfectly normal and that we can accept them for what they are and what they’re trying to signal to us, then we can use our top down reflective processes to recognize, oh, this is a normal body response to whatever has happened.

Ed Coambs (00:33:57):

We talked about just a little bit ago that disconnection and intimacy piece. We’re wired as humans to feel connection and disconnection. We just had it just a moment ago. We’ve been having a great interview, and then our time and sequence of you wanted to say something, I wanted to say something got a little out of sync, and so we had a lot of things happening automatically for us to get us back into the flow of conversation because we didn’t want to disconnect. I’m having a good time with this conversation, I’m imagining you guys are having a good conversation, so we wanted to keep going right.

Ed Coambs (00:34:30):

Now, if this was a more threatening relationship and we’ve known each other for years and I felt like you’re always trying to overtalk me. See there, Stephanie? You’re doing it again. Ah, I’m so mad at you. Screw this podcast. I’m done. That’s what happens in our intimate relationships is you can’t work through that communication gap a little bit and you get frustrated and then you start to blame, and then the relationship starts to deteriorate.

Ed Coambs (00:34:55):

But again, bottom up. Our bodies were already starting to work through how do we get through this back in sync? We’re going to naturally go through periods of coordination and disconnection. That’s a very normal part. We’re going to get out of sync with each other, and then we’re going to work to get back in sync. In my book, that’s another major psychological concept that we’re working with is attachment theory. Attachment-

Stephanie McCullough (00:35:21):

Yeah. I wanted to go there. It’s so interesting.

Ed Coambs (00:35:24):

I got to be honest with you. I hated the idea of attachment theory when I first learned about it. I hated it. I did not like it.

Stephanie McCullough (00:35:30):

Why?

Ed Coambs (00:35:31):

Well, because first, it goes back to when I started… I didn’t share this, but I went from firefighter to MBA CFP, so I was becoming highly analytical and self-reliant, and attachment theory basically says uh-uh; self-reliant and other reliant. And it starts in childhood. And I didn’t know enough about the biological sciences, and so I remember in grad school when they first started to introduce attachment theory, when they showed the rhesus monkey study by Harry Harlow. You can look it up online, YouTube, it’s available. They show that infant monkeys… They set up a wire mesh mother with a bottle so it could feed, and then a terry cloth mother so it could be nurtured and help.

Ed Coambs (00:36:20):

And what they watch consistently is the baby monkeys would go and feed from the nipple but immediately go and cling to the terry cloth for the comfort. And so it showed the power of needing to be bonded and connected and held softly just as much as being nourished. Those things are equally important. They’re both profound needs. When we think about needs, we often think, well, food is a survival need, but attachment theory would say connection is a survival need as well.

Ed Coambs (00:36:52):

And what they have shown through multiple other studies is when there’s not enough relational connection, the monkeys will start beating their heads against the walls of their cages. They will become quite angry. They struggle to coordinate socially with the other monkeys. When they’ve looked at the old Romanian orphanages, and they used to institutionalize all the babies and the babies got no care and connection, they could not connect and they struggle for the rest of their life.

Ed Coambs (00:37:22):

What we don’t know as a society is that there’s a lot of cortical and brain structure development happening through the interactional process of being cared for as a baby that is essential for our brain growth and development. It’s how we learn how to become coordinated is experientially, and it’s incrementally built on from infancy through childhood and into adulthood. The layers of our brain are growing and developing from early infancy in that coordination. Attachment theory really has studied that very, very extensively over the last seven decades, and it’s become more and more robust in understanding.

Ed Coambs (00:37:57):

And so in very simple terms, attachment theory… Psychology always loves to try to categorize people. And as humans, we need to categorize to try to frame and understand what’s similar and different, so there’s some value in that. An attachment theory says there’s basically four patterns of bonding or connection that we can be classified into. The first is secure, the second is anxious, the third is avoidant, and the fourth is disorganized.

Ed Coambs (00:38:26):

If you’re securely attached, that means you generally had good enough parenting and caregiving. The people that were responsible for caring for you were attuned to your needs, both from a material and emotional relational perspective, both/and. And so you develop a positive view of yourself and a positive view of others that, you can be there for yourself and you can count on others to be there for you, both in the good times and the bad times.

Ed Coambs (00:38:53):

Those that develop an anxious attachment start to learn that caregiving is more their responsibility than the other person’s and that other people can’t really understand their needs, and so their job then is to try to care the other people. But they’re never really sure that they’ve been effective in doing that, and so they often are working very hard at relationships but not finding relationships very satisfying.

Ed Coambs (00:39:20):

On the other side of that is the avoidantly attached. And these are individuals that learn that relationships are not satisfying as well, but their adaptation is to keep people at an arm’s length distance. You can’t possibly know or understand my needs so I’m going to meet my own needs because I can trust that I can meet my own needs.

Ed Coambs (00:39:40):

And then the fourth category are people that are disorganized, and so they vacillate back and forth between those two anxious and avoidant orientations. They’re over functioning trying to get connected with people, and then they get disappointed, and then they withdraw and go back to the other side, “Ah, screw it. I’ll just take care of myself. I can’t.” And it’s vacillating.

Ed Coambs (00:40:00):

The research shows, depending on which population you’re looking at, roughly between 50% to 60% of the adult population would categorize as secure attachment. And securely attached individuals, that doesn’t mean that they don’t have relational doubts from time to time or they don’t have self-doubt from time to time. They’re not perfect, mythological creatures. They’re very ordinary humans, but they also recognize and can work through when there is relational doubt, either with themself and their abilities or somebody else. They can address that and try to get back on balance.

Ed Coambs (00:40:34):

Then somewhere between 15% to 20% of the population would be classified more in that anxious category, 15% to 20% in the avoidant, and then the remaining 5% to 10% is disorganized. When we understand that that’s part of who we are relationally, we can’t just change that automatically or quickly; that takes relational healing and growth for our attachment system to repair and recover. And our attachment system is made up of many, many different pieces, including the ability to coordinate linguistically, to make eye contact, to hold a mental representation of another person as being there.

Ed Coambs (00:41:20):

Another example of this couple that I’m working with where there was a lot of trauma for both of them and they both had low quality caregiving environments in their childhood. There’s a lot of rejection by their parents. And so one partner is highly anxious, the other person is highly avoidant in relationships. This starts out really well for couples because avoidant actually likes having someone pursue them initially, but over time they want to withdraw back into their own world. And they have a hard time imagining the other person, that they have relational needs. And the person that’s pursuing all the time eventually fatigues because they’re giving, giving, giving, giving all the time and not giving back.

Ed Coambs (00:42:00):

This couple I’ve been working with, she had a shopping problem, and he would get quite angry about it, and then he would blow up at her. And they met with a financial planner, the financial planner said, “Well, let’s get her on a budget.” Wrong answer. They went to couples therapy, and this is to your point, Kevin, he identified the problem in her because she was the one overspending. The problem was not in her, the problem was in the relationship and both of them. And when I was able to help them see that this… and help them understand that this is part of their attachment systems and that they learned how to be relationally oriented and that her shopping was actually a mechanism to try to get him to engage with her, it was maladaptive, not very effective, but she couldn’t figure out any other way for him to talk with her.

Ed Coambs (00:42:59):

Now, he started from the position of seeing her as the problem, and she started from the position of seeing herself as the problem, so tying it back to what I was talking about earlier. And so as we worked together… And I will say over the years… This has been a multi-year process. And they’re not all the way there, but they’ve made a lot of progress in being able to see. But I regularly have to invite him to turn and look at her because otherwise he just stares straight out. And that’s an unconscious choice. That’s part of his relational wiring is to be self-oriented within himself, hers is to be constantly looking at him, looking for connection.

Ed Coambs (00:43:40):

And the crazy thing is when he does give her attention, she doesn’t see it because she’s not used to having people be responsive to her. And so it’s helping her recognize and see those and store them in her memory so that she’s starting to get a mental image that he does actually care about her. Because that’s another thing is partners that are siloed often do actually care a lot about their partner, but they don’t know how to demonstrate that caring.

Stephanie McCullough (00:44:14):

Man, there’s so much here. There’s so many layers.

Ed Coambs (00:44:20):

There are a lot of layers, and it can feel overwhelming to hear something like this, but that’s part of why I’m out sharing this message is it is not as simple as a lot of people make it sound. And I understand and appreciate the need to make things simple to make them feel approachable, but sometimes we should cut our nose off to spider face.

Ed Coambs (00:44:42):

And you know that as financial planners that you’re constantly balancing that tension of trying to make financial planning approachable and simple enough that people will engage in it, but you know as financial planners, there’s a lot of different details that have to be considered in order to get the right organization and combination for folks. And so that’s the value of working with a professional, whether it’s a financial planner like you and Kevin or a financial therapist who’s really taken the time to understand the complex layers of being in a human relationship and then the intersection of money, which is a very special field of financial therapy.

Stephanie McCullough (00:45:15):

I love that. I think that’s a great sum up. Kevin, do you have any last questions before we ask Ed about-

Kevin Gaines (00:45:20):

Oh, I got a ton of questions. But yeah, I think if we go much longer, Ed may actually start charging us.

Ed Coambs (00:45:28):

No, no, unfortunately not, but yes.

Kevin Gaines (00:45:33):

Turned this into my own therapy session, but-

Ed Coambs (00:45:36):

We can’t help but think about wait, oh God, what does this mean for-

Stephanie McCullough (00:45:40):

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Kevin Gaines (00:45:42):

Exactly. But real quick. In reading through your book, you went through the different categories as you defined them, as we were just talking about. Then I took the quiz on your website and it said I was secure. And then I went back and reread the definitions or the traits within each one, it’s like, well, I’m really all over the place. How often do you find people fit neatly in a box versus, well, they’re really pretty close to the origin and it just depends on which particular issue and they fall into?

Ed Coambs (00:46:18):

Yeah. I think that’s probably more the case. And that’s why I made that reference, is psychology, we love to put people into a box, but people don’t always fit perfectly into a box, and context can matter. And so some of the further research on attachment is we may have a general attachment disposition, but then in certain contexts, we may be more secure or more anxious because, ultimately, we hold multiple mental representations of relationships.

Ed Coambs (00:46:48):

And so especially, Kevin, with your money background, that may help give you a sense of greater competence and capacity in doing relationships and money, and so that’s that scoring secure versus how you self-identified in reading through the book. Am I picking up on what you’re saying?

Kevin Gaines (00:47:09):

Yes.

Ed Coambs (00:47:10):

Right. You would’ve identified based on the book’s categories and the different descriptions like, “Oh, I would fall here,” but based on the assessment, I’m over here, on the website. Right. What’s happening there. Yeah. They’re not perfectly aligned there, for sure. Great question.

Stephanie McCullough (00:47:29):

All right, and we might have to have you back because there’s obviously a lot to dig into, but we don’t want to bend people’s ears all day long. I know you’ve got a really cool opportunity coming up for people to engage and learn more. Can you share about that?

Ed Coambs (00:47:40):

Yeah, absolutely. I’ve taken a lot of all this, and obviously we mentioned the book. The book is The Healthy Love and Money Way: How the four attachment styles impact your financial wellbeing. But I also know some people may not be able to come see a financial therapist or a couple’s financial therapist so I’ve created a program called The Couple’s Guide to Financial Intimacy where I walk couples through, in 10 modules, a lot of these major concepts in greater depth and give them more activities that they can do with each other to help start facilitating them, moving closer and closer towards financial intimacy. And so the big takeaway is, remember, this is not a light switch event, this is a progression that, for many people, will unfold over months, if not years. Setting realistic expectations that this is not something that you’re going to get done in two weeks and like, “Oh, okay, I’m done. I’ve got this.”

Stephanie McCullough (00:48:30):

All better.

Ed Coambs (00:48:31):

All better. I wish I could offer that. That would be the magic wand.

Kevin Gaines (00:48:34):

Yep. Overnight success. Nothing wrong with it. Just saying.

Ed Coambs (00:48:39):

Yes. And what do they say? Overnight success is accumulation of multiple years of trying and failing. And then all of a sudden you realize, oh, I’m successful now. And I do think that that is how mental health works is there’s a compounding effect. When you start on a mental health, relational health journey, it doesn’t feel like a lot’s happening. And it just like in working out, a lot is actually happening but you just feel more sore and tired than anything. You’ve got to stay with it for six months or more in most cases in order to start really seeing some benefits and changes. And if you stay with it for years, that’s when you really start to see the transformation. And so if you’re finding that you’re stuck, this is a longer road. And I know that’s not what people want to hear, but I know from experience that that is the reality.

Stephanie McCullough (00:49:32):

The Couple’s Guide to Financial Intimacy is an online course, class?

Ed Coambs (00:49:40):

Course. Yes, it’s an online course. People can check it out from my website, healthyloveandmoney.com. And yeah, love to have people come and join. The next group of couples will be starting in August.

Stephanie McCullough (00:49:52):

Excellent. Well, Ed, this was a fascinating conversation. My mind is a little bit blown. I might have to take a minute and sit quietly and think about some things.

Kevin Gaines (00:49:56):

Contemplation.

Ed Coambs (00:50:00):

I would encourage that. That’s actually a good, healthy, psychological process is to bring it all together and allow to reflect on it because that’s really helping part of the change process is if you hear these things and then you just keep on going on with your life, your brain doesn’t have a chance to integrate and connect them with how they apply. Hearing something like this, taking time to go and be quiet with yourself or go for a walk or journal will help to integrate the knowledge and the experience.

Stephanie McCullough (00:50:30):

Kind of like shavasana at the end of a yoga class.

Ed Coambs (00:50:33):

Exactly like shavasana at the end. And getting grounded because what we’ve done is we’ve just hijacked your mind and brain with a lot of things to consider. And your brain is like, oh my God, what does this all mean for me now? Yes, allowing some time to go in and to rest would be very appropriate.

Stephanie McCullough (00:50:52):

All right, everybody, so when you’re done with the podcast, lay down on the floor in a quiet room for a little while.

Ed Coambs (00:50:58):

Shavasana.

Stephanie McCullough (00:50:59):

Shavasana. Thanks, Ed, so much for being with us.

Kevin Gaines (00:51:00):

Ed-

Ed Coambs (00:51:02):

Thanks Stephanie, thanks Kevin.

Kevin Gaines (00:51:03):

… it was great to meet you even though you refuse to say that all of the financial situations in my life are my wife’s fault. Would’ve liked you to have said that, but despite that, it was still a great conversation. Really appreciate.

Ed Coambs (00:51:18):

Well, I appreciate you not holding that against me, Kevin. But you can tell your wife that I said it was all her fault. All right.

Stephanie McCullough (00:51:26):

Thanks a lot.

Kevin Gaines (00:51:32):

Okay. That was a lot to unpack. I may need therapy to try to get through to understand all this and figure out how to expand. But no, it was great. Definitely appreciate Ed coming on.

Kevin Gaines (00:51:45):

What I found interesting was him talking about these online surveys. And he’s talking about the legitimate ones, not the what type of animal are you? But the ones you have on his website, he goes, “Listen, I know it’s not perfect. There’s always context around it. You got to take them with a grain of salt. They’re not…” Problem with one size fits all is one size never does fit all. I like that, although I kept having the image of the old commercial of, oh, it was on the internet so it must be true. Yeah, I think of these online quizzes, or the serious quizzes have that, again, grain of salt that you just need to take these things with. And it gives you a guide. It points you, it doesn’t answer your question.

Stephanie McCullough (00:52:36):

With so many things. I decide if I can learn something from it, great. If I think it doesn’t seem like it feels right to me, I disregard. Yeah, whatever you find that’s useful.

Stephanie McCullough (00:52:49):

One of the things that Ed hit on, which I really want to emphasize and I’m going to try to take into my own personal life, is his thought that getting to a point of financial intimacy doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re always in total agreement with your partner on every single issue. I was like, oh, right. It’s more having a caring context for having conversations with each other, making sure you’re talking about the money stuff and all the emotions and all the other stuff around the money stuff. That’s intimacy. And you’re still allowed to disagree and probably even have conflict around it, but there’s healthy ways of dealing with that conflict.

Kevin Gaines (00:53:26):

Yeah. The weird thing is I found that really insightful, yet at the same time, when we have conversations with planning clients, we tell them that. It’s like, “Listen, the two of you may not always have the same goals.” It’s how do we work and blend all this stuff together. And yet when I heard him say that, I don’t want to say it was like hearing it for the first time, but it was like hearing it for the first time. Weird how some stuff can just resonate with you differently at different times.

Kevin Gaines (00:53:58):

But along that line, I really liked him exploring the idea of getting context around the issues or the patterns of your partner. And I really found that insightful because it’s not just addressing the symptom but understanding where your partner’s from can help you have better conversations, better discussions.

Stephanie McCullough (00:54:28):

One of the things that I wrote down is this idea that most couples don’t talk enough about money, not just about the function of money, but the meaning of money, the meaning of that thing you’re spending or the meaning of why you think it’s so important to save or the meaning of what it means for you to be charitable. All the different ways we use money, there’s meaning attached to all of them. It’s not just talking about how many dollars are going where, but what that means to you and how it feels. I think the feelings are important, too. I love that insight.

Kevin Gaines (00:55:02):

Well, I’m not surprised to hear that because that is one of your biggest topics, Stephanie, is the meaning behind the money. What is behind? I know you have a lot of those conversations with clients and people.

Stephanie McCullough (00:55:12):

Yeah. What does it mean to you? How do you feel about it? And sometimes it’s not really acknowledged in our world, and especially, as you know, Kevin, in our industry that feelings and money go hand in hand. That’s, I think, why Ed and I got along so well when we first met. We’re like, “Ooh, let’s talk about this fun stuff.”

Kevin Gaines (00:55:30):

Anyway, so I think that’s our show.

Stephanie McCullough (00:55:32):

Thanks everyone for being with us. We’ll talk to you next time. It’s goodbye from me.

Kevin Gaines (00:55:34):

And it’s goodbye from her.

Stephanie McCullough (00:55:42): Be sure to subscribe to the show and please share it with your friends. Show notes and more information available at takebackretirement.com. Huge thanks for the original music by the one and only, Raymond Loewy through New Math in New York. See you next time.

Disclaimer (00:55:55): Investment advice offered through private advisor group, LLC, a registered investment advisor. Private advisor group, American Financial Management Group, and Sofia Financial are separate entities. The opinions voiced in this material, are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice, or recommendations for any individual security. To determine which investments may be appropriate for you, consult your financial advisor, prior to investing. This information is not intended to be substitute for individualized tax advice. Please consult your tax advisor regarding your specific situation.