Our relationship became our laboratory. As many of you know, we’ve been researching, identifying, treating and writing about developmental trauma for more than 30 years. Much of our work in this area, of course, comes from digging into and clearing our own individual and family patterns of relational trauma. It has been a very demanding but personally rewarding process.

In the first years of our marriage, we found ourselves experiencing many conflicts that involved being triggered into traumatic re-enactments. Our experiences were so intense and there was so much “material” in them that we decided to work together to make meaning from them. So we converted our relationship into a “laboratory,” by turning every conflict, every small disconnect, every experience of hurt into a small research project. We became very self-reflective, and asked ourselves probing questions.

• What’s the earliest memory I have of feeling this way? How old was I?
• What was happening at the time that I felt like this?
• Was someone else involved in this early experience? If so, who was involved?
• What did I need in that moment? Who could have filled this need?
• Do I still have this need? If so, how can I meet this need myself now? If not, who could help me meet it now?
• Do I have unexpressed resentments or beliefs I learned early in life that still interfere with me from receiving what I need?
• Do I perceive myself as a victim in this early memory? If so, am I still portraying myself as a victim in similar situations?

These and other self-reflective questions helped us focus the attention on our individual contributions to a conflict or disconnect, and take responsibility for self-correcting our behaviors. We became good at connecting the dots back to the original unhealed trauma that we were reenacting now. Then by using some of the answers to the above questions, we could work together to do what was needed to heal the trauma.

This relational crucible gradually formed the foundation for our professional work. First, we tried out a healing approach in our relationship and if it worked, we would teach it to our students. If they reported success in using it, then we would write about it. At some point, this work shifted from what we do, to being who we are. It is this integration between our personal and professional worlds that we bring to our work at the Colorado Professional Development Center.

We call the theory that serves as the foundation for all our work,  Developmental Systems Theory (DST). Based on what we were learning in our relationship laboratory, we started a heuristic research project on how to facilitate evolution in all human systems by focusing first on understanding optimal individual development. Then over a period of about 15 years, we gradually applied the principles of optimal individual development to larger, more complex human systems: couples, families, groups/organizations, cultures/nation–states, and the whole human race. By the time that we published our book on conflict resolution in 2000, we understood how all of these human systems evolved through the same four stages of development: codependent, counter-dependent, independent, and interdependent.

This part of our research also involved understanding the role of fractal patterns related to shock, trauma, stress, incomplete developmental processes, and unmet developmental needs. We saw that these patterns repeat concisely through each system and operate as templates for all biological, psychological, and social development in that system.

Finally, we consolidated our research into our systemic meta-theory, Developmental Systems Theory (DST) and based it on principles of fractal evolution in which a reiterated pattern of “structures” nests within one another. More specifically, the pattern of the whole is reflected in the parts of the whole.1 When we applied these fractal principles to the history of the human race, we could see that the evolutionary fractal pattern of the human race is also reflected in the cells of each individual human.

This holographic perspective emphasizes the interconnectedness of all life. In a hologram, any small part of a larger image contains the pattern of the whole. When you look at a nation–state as a human system and then focus on one citizen of that nation–state, it is possible to understand how and why that person behaves. Likewise, looking at one citizen of a nation–state will help you understand how the larger system behaves. Behaviorally, energetically, and structurally, they serve as mirrors for each other.

1Lipton, B. (2005). The biology of belief. Santa Rosa, CA: Mountain of Love/Elite Books. pp. 197-198.