What Happens When You’ve Lost That Loving Feeling?

By Nathan Chua | One Life Only Counseling Services

Have you ever looked at your partner and wondered why you no longer feel the same way you once did? Perhaps you used to look forward to seeing each other, enjoyed spending time together, and experienced excitement, affection, and closeness. But somewhere along the way, those feelings began to fade. You may still care about your partner, but the romantic feelings that once seemed so natural are no longer there. And so you begin to wonder: Have I fallen out of love?

In my years of counseling couples, I have encountered many who struggle with this question. One partner may say, “I care about my spouse, but I don’t feel that romantic love anymore.” For some, the absence of loving feelings becomes evidence that the relationship has run its course. But is that necessarily true? What if the disappearance of those feelings does not automatically mean the end of love? What if the context in which those feelings once flourished has gradually changed?

Love Doesn’t Exist in a Vacuum

We often think of love as something we possess. We either have it or we don’t. When we first fall in love, the feelings can be so powerful that we hardly have to think about them. We naturally want to spend time together, show affection, and do things that make our partner happy. But relationships do not remain in the same circumstances forever. There are responsibilities, financial pressures, children, careers, disagreements, disappointments, and sometimes years of unresolved conflicts. Gradually, couples may stop doing the things that once brought them closer. They talk less, spend less meaningful time together, and become increasingly preoccupied with responsibilities and problems.

Eventually, one or both partners begin to notice that something is missing. The loving feelings are no longer what they used to be. But perhaps we are asking the wrong question when we immediately conclude that love has disappeared. Instead of asking only whether we still love our partner, we might also ask what has happened to the circumstances and interactions that once nurtured those feelings.

From a contextual perspective, feelings do not exist independently of our experiences. They are influenced by what happens around us, how we interact with others, and the histories we bring into those interactions. Love is no exception.

When Love Becomes a Waiting Game

This is where couples can become caught in a particularly difficult trap. Imagine someone who tells themselves, “I don’t feel love anymore, so why should I behave lovingly?” Or perhaps, “I’ll start being affectionate again when I feel something.”

At first glance, this sounds reasonable. After all, we do not want to pretend to feel something we do not feel. But there is a potential problem with this way of thinking. What if waiting for loving feelings to return is actually contributing to their continued absence?

In Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), there is a concept called cognitive fusion. This refers to becoming so entangled with our thoughts that we begin treating them as rules we must obey, rather than as thoughts that may or may not be useful in a particular situation.

Consider the rule: “I must feel love before I can behave lovingly.”

When we become fused with this rule, we may stop doing the very things that once helped nurture our relationship. We stop initiating conversations, making time for each other, expressing appreciation, or showing small gestures of care. As these interactions become less frequent, opportunities for affection and connection may diminish as well. Eventually, we find ourselves saying, “See? I really don’t love my partner anymore.”

Without realizing it, we may have helped create the very conditions that reinforce our original conclusion.

This is how the loss of loving feelings can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. We wait for the feelings to return before changing our behavior, while our unchanged behavior may be contributing to the conditions that keep those feelings absent.

Does This Mean We Should Force Ourselves to Love?

Certainly not. I am not suggesting that people should force themselves to feel something they do not feel, pretend to be affectionate, or engage in unwanted intimacy. That would miss the point entirely.

The question I would invite someone to consider is this: If this relationship still matters to you, are there things you would be willing to do to nurture it, even when the loving feelings are not currently present?

Perhaps it means spending meaningful time together again, listening more attentively, expressing appreciation, or becoming more responsive to each other’s needs. Not because we are pretending to be in love, but because we are choosing to engage in behaviors that serve something important to us.

In ACT, this is related to committed action: choosing behaviors that are consistent with our values, even when our feelings are not necessarily cooperating. We do not have to wait for a particular emotional experience before doing something meaningful.

Of course, there is no guarantee that loving feelings will return. And the purpose of these actions should not simply be to manufacture feelings. Rather, they allow us to participate more deliberately in creating the kind of relationship we value, while remaining open to whatever feelings may follow.

Understanding the Patterns That Keep Couples Stuck

In Integrative Behavioral Couple Therapy (IBCT), we examine how partners become caught in patterns of interaction that maintain their difficulties. For example, one partner may withdraw because they no longer feel close. The other experiences this withdrawal as rejection and becomes increasingly critical or demanding. The first partner then withdraws even further. Before long, both are responding to each other in ways that make their relationship increasingly difficult.

Rather than immediately deciding who is to blame, we try to understand the pattern. What sensitivities are involved? What circumstances contribute to their difficulties? How do the partners respond to each other, and what consequences do those responses produce?

This shift in perspective can be important. Instead of viewing the problem simply as one partner’s lack of love, we begin to recognize how both partners may be participating in a pattern that makes closeness increasingly difficult.

Understanding the pattern does not automatically resolve it, but it may create opportunities for both partners to respond differently. And when their interactions begin to change, the context of their relationship may change as well.

What If the Commitment Is No Longer There?

There is, however, another important consideration. Does the person still want to remain in the relationship?

Losing loving feelings and losing commitment are not necessarily the same thing. Someone may say, “I don’t feel the way I used to, but I still want to see whether we can make this relationship work.” That is quite different from someone who has already decided that they no longer wish to continue.

Sometimes people are uncertain. They may care about their partner but no longer know whether they want to remain together. These differences matter because the goals of couples counseling should take into account what each partner wants and is willing to work toward.

For some couples, counseling may focus on improving the relationship. For others, the immediate task may be clarifying whether they wish to continue. And when separation has become the chosen direction, counseling may help the partners navigate that process more constructively.

Commitment matters, but it should not become another obligation imposed on someone. Nor should nurturing a relationship mean tolerating abuse, coercion, or threats to one’s safety.

Perhaps We Have Been Waiting for the Wrong Thing

When someone says they have fallen out of love, I do not immediately assume that the relationship is over. I become curious about what has happened. What has changed? What interactions have become less frequent? What disappointments remain unresolved? What rules might the partners be following that keep them from responding differently?

Perhaps the question is not simply, “Do I still love my partner?” Perhaps another question worth asking is, “What has happened to the context in which our love once flourished?”

And if the relationship still matters, there is another question worth considering:

“Am I waiting for my feelings to change before I do anything differently, when doing something differently might help create the conditions for those feelings to return?”

We cannot command ourselves to feel love. But we may still have choices about how we nurture relationships that matter to us.

Sometimes, the feelings we are waiting for may be influenced by the very actions we have stopped taking.

And perhaps that is something worth considering before concluding that love is gone.


Nathan Chua is a counselor at One Life Only Counseling Services in Quezon City, Philippines. His work draws from contextual behavioral approaches, including Integrative Behavioral Couple Therapy (IBCT) and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT).

When Breakups Teach Us How to Break Up, Not How to Love

By Nathan Chua

We’ve often heard people say:

“I’ve learned so much from my past relationships. Now I know what to look for.”

But here’s a question worth asking.

What exactly did they learn?

Did they learn how to sustain a relationship? Or did they simply learn how to avoid another painful one?

Because breaking up doesn’t necessarily teach us how to stay together.

Sometimes, it simply teaches us how to break up better.

Think about it.

After a painful breakup, we often develop a list of things to avoid.

“I’ll never date someone like that again.”

“I won’t tolerate that kind of behavior anymore.”

“The moment I see a red flag, I’m out.”

And we call that learning from experience.

But what if some of those lessons actually make it more difficult for us to sustain our next relationship?

Let me explain.

When a relationship ends painfully, leaving can bring tremendous relief.

The arguments stop. The disappointments end. The anxiety subsides.

And naturally, we learn something from that experience.

We learn that leaving can make the pain go away.

Now, there’s nothing necessarily wrong with leaving. Sometimes, especially in harmful or abusive relationships, leaving is precisely what we need to do.

But here’s the interesting part.

What brings us relief isn’t necessarily what teaches us how to build something better.

If every disagreement reminds us of a previous painful relationship, we might become quicker to withdraw.

If we were betrayed before, we might become increasingly suspicious.

If our previous partner disappointed us, we might develop stricter expectations of the next one.

Without realizing it, we may become very good at protecting ourselves from relationships, rather than learning how to participate in them.

And there’s a difference.

You see, sustaining a relationship requires skills that breaking up doesn’t necessarily teach us.

It requires learning how to navigate differences.

How to have difficult conversations.

How to respond when our partner disappoints us.

How to recognize that the person we love will sometimes behave in ways we don’t particularly like.

And perhaps most importantly, how to distinguish between difficulties we can work through and situations we genuinely need to leave.

Unfortunately, we sometimes approach new relationships with old rules.

“If someone really loves me, they should know what I need.”

“If we argue too much, we’re probably incompatible.”

“If I feel unhappy, maybe I’m with the wrong person.”

But are these rules helping us build the relationship we want?

Or are they simply helping us avoid the pain we’ve experienced before?

Here’s something else to consider.

When we evaluate a potential partner, we often ask:

“Is this person right for me?”

But perhaps we should also ask:

“Am I learning how to become a better partner in this relationship?”

Because relationships aren’t sustained simply by finding someone who meets our expectations.

They’re also sustained by what two people learn to do together, especially when things become difficult.

Of course, not every relationship should be saved.

And staying together isn’t necessarily a measure of success.

Sometimes, ending a relationship is the most sensible and compassionate decision.

But leaving and staying require different skills.

And learning one doesn’t automatically teach us the other.

So the next time someone says they’ve learned a lot from their previous relationships, perhaps there’s another question worth asking.

Did those experiences teach you how to love better?

Or did they simply teach you how to leave sooner?

Because the real lesson from a breakup may not be about finding someone who will never disappoint us.

It may be about learning how to respond differently when disappointment inevitably comes.

And perhaps that’s where learning how to love actually begins.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/7Frd8RFfaRuAiB1eaC1VCc?si=j76OjTd7TmKMbQCzN04TWQ

When What You Have Achieved Doesn’t Measure Up

Have you ever looked at your friends and wondered, “What happened to me?”

Maybe they’re earning more than you.
They have better jobs.
Bigger houses.
More impressive titles.

And you start thinking, “I’m already this old. I should have accomplished more by now.”

Our minds are very good at doing this.

They compare.

They rank.

They turn life into a scoreboard.

But here’s something I learned from Steven Hayes, one of the founders of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy.

Think about Abraham Lincoln.

Do you know how much money he had in his bank account when he died?

Probably not.

Do you know what awards or accolades he received?

Most of us don’t.

And here’s something even more interesting.

We don’t really remember Abraham Lincoln simply because he once became President of the United States.

There have been many presidents.

We remember Lincoln because of what he did while he was here.

We remember what he stood for.

We remember the choices he made when those choices mattered.

And maybe that’s something worth remembering when our minds start comparing our lives with other people’s lives.

Your job title is not your life.

Your salary is not your life.

Your awards are not your life.

Even your achievements are not your life.

They are things that happened in your life.

Your life is what you are doing with the moments you have.

So instead of asking:

“How successful am I compared with everyone else?”

Maybe we can ask a different question:

“What do I want to do with the life that’s in front of me?”

Maybe you want to be a loving parent.

A dependable friend.

Someone who shows kindness when kindness is difficult.

Someone who creates something worthwhile.

Someone who helps another human being.

Someone who keeps learning.

Someone who gets knocked down and chooses to stand up again.

Those things don’t require a prestigious title.

You can start doing them today.

Because perhaps we’ve been asking the wrong question.

It’s not:

“What have I achieved?”

It’s:

“What am I doing with the life I have?”

A meaningful life isn’t an award waiting for you at the finish line.

It’s something you do.

One choice.

One action.

One moment at a time.

And eventually, all those moments become the life you lived.

https://spotifycreators-web.app.link/e/B8x97A2uc7b

 

When Understanding Becomes a Rule to Follow

by Nathan Chua

We often hear that the key to a good relationship is understanding your partner.

And of course, understanding can help.

But what if understanding itself becomes a rule that both must follow?

What if we start believing that every disagreement has to be explored, explained, processed, and fully understood before we can move on?

Imagine you’re having dinner with your partner.

The service is bad.

You want to complain. Your partner says, “Forget it. Let’s just enjoy dinner.”

Now you could spend the next twenty minutes trying to understand each other.

“Why does bad service bother you so much?”

“Why don’t you speak up when something is wrong?”

Maybe you discover that one of you is particularly sensitive to being treated unfairly. Maybe the other hates confrontation. Maybe you even understand exactly where those differences came from.

That’s useful.

But then what?

Because understanding doesn’t necessarily resolve the disagreement.

And maybe it doesn’t have to.

Perhaps the more useful question is:

What are we trying to do together right now?

We’re having dinner.

We’re on a date.

Maybe this isn’t a problem we need to solve.

One partner might say, “I know this bothers you more than it bothers me. Go ahead and speak to the manager.”

Or the other might say, “You know what? Bad service really gets to me. But tonight isn’t about fixing the restaurant. Let’s enjoy our dinner.”

Nobody has to win.

Nobody has to adopt the other person’s perspective.

And nobody has to be completely understood.

Understanding is not necessarily the goal. Understanding informs the choice.

It’s like watching a sunset together.

You say it’s orange. I say it’s red.

We could argue about it. We could investigate why we see it differently. We could even find out who’s technically correct.

But if we came there to watch the sunset together, at some point we have to stop trying to solve the sunset…

and experience it.

Maybe relationships are sometimes like that.

Not every difference needs resolution.

Not every disagreement needs deeper exploration.

And not every moment needs more communication.

Sometimes the better question isn’t:

“Do you understand me?”

It’s:

“What matters to us right now—and what would help us do that together?”

Listen on Spotify:

https://spotifycreators-web.app.link/e/WhJx0oY5M6b

@onelifeonlycounseling

When Understanding Becomes a Rule to Follow: Can “You need to understand me” become a problem in a relationship? Not every disagreement needs to be resolved. Not every difference needs deeper exploration. Sometimes we already understand each other well enough. The better question may be: “What matters to us right now—and what would help us do that together?” Understanding is not necessarily the goal. Understanding informs the choice. Relationships Couples RelationshipAdvice Communication CouplesCounseling OneLifeOnly

♬ original sound – One Life Only Counseling – One Life Only Counseling

Naming vs. Understanding Psychological Problems

“In behavioral therapy, we focus on how the problem works, not what it’s called.”
A label can describe a pattern—anxious, impulsive, avoidant, perfectionistic. But therapy needs to go further. We ask what keeps the pattern going: What happens before it? What follows it? What rules are you living by? And does the behavior still work in the context you’re in today?
Understanding how a problem works gives us somewhere to intervene.

The Hidden Costs of Greater Understanding

One of the hidden costs of developing a deeper understanding of ourselves and the world we create is grieving the unnecessary suffering within it. Once you see how much pain is sustained by unquestioned assumptions rather than inevitability, it’s difficult not to wonder how much suffering could have been averted had we been more willing to question the assumptions that shape our relationships, our institutions, and the way we understand and treat one another.

Prejudice Explained Psychologically

Why do ordinary people discriminate?

Why do neighbors become enemies?

Why do we so quickly divide the world into “us” and “them”?

For decades, psychology searched for the answer. At first, many believed prejudice lived inside certain kinds of people—that some individuals were simply intolerant or hateful.

But over the last seventy years, psychology has uncovered a much more surprising story.

It turns out that prejudice is often not just a property of the person. It is also a product of the context.

The story begins with psychologist Kurt Lewin.

He proposed one of the simplest yet most influential ideas in psychology:

Behavior is a function of both the person and the environment.

That sounds obvious today.

But at the time, it was revolutionary.

It meant that we cannot fully understand people by looking only inside them. Every person exists within a web of relationships, culture, history, opportunities, barriers, and circumstances.

Change the context, and behavior can change.

A few decades later, another psychologist, Henri Tajfel, asked a different question.

How easily do human beings create “us” and “them”?

His famous experiments produced an uncomfortable answer.

People didn’t need centuries of hatred or deep ideological differences.

Simply dividing people into groups was often enough for them to begin favoring their own group over another.

In other words, prejudice was not just something hidden inside prejudiced individuals.

The context itself could create division.

Then psychologists Lee Ross and Richard Nisbett identified another common human tendency: the Fundamental Attribution Error.

When someone else makes a mistake, we explain it by who they are.

“They’re irresponsible.”

“They’re lazy.”

“They’re selfish.”

But when we make the very same mistake, we explain it by our circumstances.

“There was traffic.”

“I was exhausted.”

“I was under a lot of pressure.”

The same behavior.

Different explanation.

We notice the person.

But we overlook the context.

More recently, modern contextual psychology—including Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Relational Frame Theory—has added another important insight.

Human beings survive because we use language.

We create names.

We create categories.

We create labels.

These are incredibly useful tools.

But sometimes we forget they are only tools.

Instead, we begin treating our labels as reality.

“He lied once”

becomes

“He is a liar.”

“She failed”

becomes

“She is a failure.”

“They are different from us”

becomes

“They are the enemy.”

The description becomes the person.

And that may be one of the deepest roots of prejudice.

Over the last seventy years, psychology has slowly moved in one direction.

Away from asking,

“What kind of person is this?”

and toward asking,

“What context helped produce this behavior?”

Understanding context does not remove responsibility.

It does not excuse harmful behavior.

It gives us a better chance of changing it.

Because if prejudice is simply “who people are,” then the story ends there.

But if prejudice emerges within contexts, then perhaps we can create better contexts.

Better families.

Better schools.

Better workplaces.

Better communities.

Maybe even a better country.

Perhaps the greatest lesson psychology has taught us is this:

People are more than the labels we give them.

@onelifeonlycounseling

Prejudice Explained Psychologically Prejudice isn’t always about bad people. Sometimes it’s the result of how our minds naturally simplify the world. Understanding prejudice starts with understanding how the human mind works. Psychology Prejudice SocialPsychology ContextMatters CriticalThinking BehavioralScience FunctionalContextualism MentalHealth Philippines OneLifeOnly#fyp #foryou

♬ original sound – One Life Only Counseling – One Life Only Counseling