The Iatrogenic Effect of Insight: What Happens When Understanding Yourself Makes Your Relationship Harder, Not Better?
Sunday, December 28, 2025.
There is a particular kind of couple-therapy sentence that almost never makes it into marketing copy:
“We were doing better before we started talking about all of this.”
Sometimes it’s said sheepishly, as if the couple is failing the assignment.
Sometimes it’s said with real alarm, because something that was once tolerable has become unbearable—not due to a new betrayal, but due to new clarity.
This article names that phenomenon without dramatizing it.
Insight is powerful. It is also not neutral.
In some relationships, insight functions like an intervention with side effects: it can temporarily (and sometimes persistently) increase distress, sharpen resentment, destabilize homeostasis, or reorganize the moral ledger of a marriage or family.
Medicine has a word for harm caused by treatment: iatrogenic.
Psychotherapy has increasingly been willing to study adverse effects and deterioration, but everyday clinical culture still tends to treat worsening as either “resistance” or “necessary discomfort” (Taylor & Francis Online+3PubMed+3Appalachian State University+3).
Sometimes it is necessary discomfort.
Sometimes it is a dosage problem.
And sometimes it is insight outrunning the nervous system.
Let’s discuss what “iatrogenic insight” actually means.
“Iatrogenic insight” is not a diagnosis. It’s a pattern:
A partner gains a coherent explanation for their experience (insight), but their relational tolerance drops faster than their regulatory capacity rises.
Therapy can reduce suffering overall, and often does.
But research also acknowledges that a meaningful minority of clients worsen during therapy (however measured), and that negative effects are under-identified and under-tracked. (American Psychological Association+3PMC+3Taylor & Francis Online+3)
Here’s the clinically important nuance:
Even when insight is true, the timing and delivery can be destabilizing.
A relationship that was held together by rhythm, avoidance, compartmentalization, or quiet accommodation can be shaken by a sudden upgrade in meaning.
Why insight can stress the nervous system.
Therapy culture often treats insight as a purely cognitive achievement: a new narrative, a new framework, a new “aha.” An epiphany!
But insight is also a physiological event. A new story changes what the body expects.
When expectations change faster than the body’s regulation systems adapt, people experience a predictable cluster of symptoms:
shorter fuse.
lower distress tolerance.
more vigilant “tracking” of slights.
sleep disruption.
a feeling of “I can’t go back to not knowing”
Labeling feelings can calm the brain—until it doesn’t
There’s good evidence that putting feelings into words (affect labeling) can reduce limbic reactivity in the moment, including reduced amygdala response in lab paradigms. PubMed+2SAGE Journals+2
But that’s the moment-to-moment picture.
In real relationships, verbal insight can also become repetitive self-focus—and repetitive self-focus can drift into rumination.
Rumination is reliably associated with higher distress and depressive symptoms across a large body of research, and it behaves differently from constructive self-reflection (ScienceDirect+2PMC+2).
So the nervous-system question becomes:
Is this insight increasing flexibility—or increasing monitoring?
Interoception, alexithymia, and the “translation problem.”
Many couples fights are not actually about content. They are about signal clarity.
If someone struggles with interoception (accurately sensing internal bodily cues) or with alexithymia (difficulty identifying/describing feelings), insight work can feel like being asked to produce a language the body cannot reliably supply.
Research in autistic adults and related populations has repeatedly examined links between interoception, alexithymia, and emotion regulation differences. (PMC+2ScienceDirect+2)
When therapy asks for ever-finer emotional narration without simultaneously building regulation scaffolding, the person may not become “more connected.” They may become more flooded.
Foe example, take my client Eva. She’s dealing with the late-diagnosis shock: realizing she’s autistic at 53.
This is one of the clearest real-world demonstrations of insight outrunning integration.
A late autism diagnosis, (or late self-recognition that leads to diagnosis) can be profoundly relieving and profoundly destabilizing—often at the same time.
Many adults report:
relief (“I wasn’t broken; I was misread”).
grief (“I built my life around the wrong explanation”).
anger (“I was punished for traits that were never a moral failure”).
fear (“What does this mean for my marriage?”).
Qualitative research on later-life diagnosis commonly finds the “two truths” experience: validation plus mourning, sometimes alongside a need for support after diagnosis. PMC+2Frontiers+2
Now add couples dynamics:
One partner experiences the diagnosis as liberation.
The other experiences it as a rewrite of the entire marital contract.
That rewrite is not just conceptual. It has nervous-system consequences:
sensory needs become newly non-negotiable.
social exhaustion is reinterpreted as overload, not attitude.
“avoidance” is reinterpreted as shutdown.
“being difficult” becomes “being over threshold.”
If the couple treats it like a systems reconfiguration, therapy becomes stabilizing.
The dangerous middle phase of therapy
Most couples move through a middle zone that is clinically real but culturally denied:
Pre-therapy equilibrium
Not ideal. But metabolized.Early insight expansion
New language. New frameworks. New meaning.The dangerous middle
Awareness up. Capacity not yet up.
This is where “iatrogenic insight” lives.
The couple is newly awake, but not yet more flexible. The marriage becomes a high-resolution scan of disappointment.
The tragedy is that many clinicians interpret this phase as proof the work is working. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it is the relationship cracking under cognitive brightness with no physiological shade.
Three mechanisms that make insight destabilizing
Insight rewrites the moral ledger.
Once sacrifices have names, they start getting counted.
“Emotional labor.”
“Attachment injury.”
“Boundary violations.”
These concepts can be accurate and useful. They also change how the relationship is scored. Couples can shift from collaboration to accounting.
Insight is unevenly distributed.
Therapy literacy is a form of power.
The verbally fluent partner often becomes the “narrator of reality,” while the other partner becomes the one who is being explained. This is rarely malicious. It is still destabilizing.
The relationship reorganizes around the lowest distress tolerance.
In many couples, the partner with the least tolerance for discomfort quietly becomes the organizing center. Therapy can accidentally reinforce this by focusing on de-escalation without building shared capacity.
This isn’t about blame. It’s about systems.
A more mature model: insight with containment
If you want this piece to be clinically responsible (and not a clever dunk on therapy culture), the antidote is simple:
Treat insight like a strong intervention that requires containment.
Containment means:
pacing.
consent.
physiology-first stabilization.
explicit tracking of negative effects.
The adverse-effects literature in psychotherapy argues for clearer definitions, better monitoring, and more honest reporting of harms and burdens( PubMed+2ScienceDirect+2)
In plain language: you don’t just ask, “What are we learning?”
You also ask, “What is this learning doing to your daily life and your bond?”
The practical pacing rule
If insight is increasing:
rumination.
contempt.
shutdown.
panic.
sleep loss.
“I can’t tolerate them” urgency.
…then the work needs more nervous-system scaffolding before more interpretation.
This is also where frameworks about autonomic regulation can be helpful as clinical metaphors—with humility about evidentiary debates.
Polyvagal theory, for example, is widely used clinically and actively debated in the research literature; if you mention it, you can do so in a way that is useful without pretending the science is settled ( PMC+1).
What to do when insight is making your relationship worse
For couples
Name the phase out loud
“We may be in the dangerous middle—more awareness, not yet more capacity.”Switch from meaning to management
For two weeks, prioritize:
sleep.
predictable routines.
lower-conflict logistics.
shorter conversations with a clear stop time.
Stop litigating the past with new language
Late-diagnosis clarity can explain decades. It cannot ethically be used to prosecute decades.Build a shared “threshold” vocabulary
Not “You’re avoidant.”
Instead: “I think you’re over threshold. I’m going to slow down.”
For therapists
Track negative effects directly
Don’t wait for dropout. Ask explicitly about worsening.Differentiate insight from rumination
Help clients tell the difference between clarifying and looping.Prevent therapy-language dominance
Make “narrative power” a treatment focus: whose language becomes the reality frame?Treat late diagnoses as identity transitions
They are often closer to “life reorganization” than to “new information.” The couple needs transition support, not just psychoeducation. PMC+2Frontiers+2
FAQ
What does “iatrogenic” mean in therapy?
“Iatrogenic” means harm caused by treatment. In psychotherapy, this can include symptom worsening, new problems emerging, dependency, increased conflict, or other negative effects that arise during treatment—not necessarily because anyone did anything unethical, but because interventions have side effects. PubMed+2ScienceDirect+2
Does this mean therapy is bad or dangerous?
No. It means therapy is powerful. Most powerful interventions help many people and also require monitoring for adverse effects. The ethical position is not “therapy is bad.” The ethical position is “we should track both benefit and harm.” American Psychological Association+1
Why do I feel less tolerant after gaining insight?
Because insight changes meaning, and meaning changes thresholds. You may now interpret the same behavior as a pattern, a wound, or a violation rather than a quirk. Tolerance often drops before skills rise, especially early in therapy.
How do we tell the difference between healthy discomfort and harmful destabilization?
Healthy discomfort tends to come with increased agency and eventual flexibility. Harmful destabilization tends to come with worsening sleep, rising contempt, increased rumination, shutdown, panic, and a narrowing of options (“I can’t do this anymore”) without corresponding skill growth. If life outside therapy is deteriorating, the pace may be wrong.
Can a late autism diagnosis strain a marriage even if it’s a good thing?
Yes. Late diagnosis often brings relief and grief together, and it can force a renegotiation of sensory needs, social demands, and the meaning of past conflicts. Many people need structured post-diagnosis support to integrate the shift—especially in close relationships (PMC+2National Autistic Society+2).
What’s one simple change that helps immediately?
Shorten the “insight conversation.” Use time limits and stop while goodwill remains. Then prioritize nervous-system basics (sleep, food, movement, predictable routines) for a brief stabilization window. You can go deep again when the body is not in discomfort.
Final Thoughts
Therapy culture sometimes implies that more insight is always better. That’s unwise and simple-minded.
A more adult truth is this:
Insight is only as helpful as the nervous system’s capacity to integrate it—and the relationship’s capacity to metabolize it without turning clarity into cruelty.
Realizing you’re autistic at 53 can be the most compassionate explanation you have ever received about your own life.
It can also destabilize a marriage if the couple treats the diagnosis as a verdict instead of a re-map.
Therapy is not just about what becomes true.
It is about what becomes livable.
If this piece hit close to home, treat that as data—not drama. The couples who do best are not the ones who discover the most insight.
They’re the ones who learn the pacing required to stay kind while reality updates.
If you want help building that pacing—especially in a mixed-neurotype relationship—ask each other a pointed question: “What are we doing to increase capacity, not just our awareness?”
And if you’re exploring science-based couples therapy options in an intensive format, choose one that treats regulation and structure as the intervention, not merely the conversation. I can help with that.
Be Well, Stay Kind, and Godspeed.
REFERENCES:
Cuijpers, P. (2019). Targets and outcomes of psychotherapies for mental disorders: An overview. World Psychiatry, 18(3), 276–285. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6732705/
Corden, K., Brewer, R., & Cage, E. (2021). Personal identity after an autism diagnosis: Relationships with self-esteem, autism pride, and quality of life. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 699335. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.699335/full
De Smet, M. M., et al. (2025). Understanding “patient deterioration” in psychotherapy: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Psychotherapy Research. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10503307.2024.2309286
Grossman, P. (2023). Fundamental challenges and likely refutations of the five basic premises of the polyvagal theory. Biological Psychology, 180, 108701. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301051123001060
Hassen, N. B., et al. (2023). Emotional regulation deficits in autism spectrum disorder: The roles of alexithymia and interoception. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891422222002086
Klein, M., et al. (2025). Interoception in individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychiatry. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1573263/full
Lieberman, M. D., et al. (2007). Putting feelings into words: Affect labeling disrupts amygdala activity in response to affective stimuli. Psychological Science, 18(5), 421–428. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01916.x
Lilienfeld, S. O. (2007). Psychological treatments that cause harm. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(1), 53–70. https://www.appstate.edu/~bromanfulksj/Lilienfeld%20-%20Psychological%20Treatments%20that%20Cause%20Harm.pdf
Parry, G. D., Crawford, M. J., & Duggan, C. (2016). Iatrogenic harm from psychological therapies—Time to move on. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 208(3), 210–212. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26932481/
Porges, S. W. (2025). Polyvagal theory: Current status, clinical applications, and future directions. [Review article]. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12302812/
Rozental, A. (2025). How to measure negative effects of psychological interventions: Moving beyond deterioration. Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X25000971
Stagg, S. D., & Belcher, H. (2019). Living with autism without knowing: Receiving a diagnosis in later life. Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine, 7(1), 348–361. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8114403/
Takano, K., & Tanno, Y. (2009). Self-rumination, self-reflection, and depression: Self-reflection as a possible adaptive form of self-focus. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47(3), 260–264. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0005796708002763