Is It the Relationship Structure or the Relationship Skills? Challenging the Monogamy-Superiority Myth

By Sarah Wolfer, LICSW 

Courageous You Founder

For many clients exploring or practicing non-monogamy (NM), a visit to a therapist can come with apprehension. Will I be judged? Will my therapist subtly (or overtly) suggest that my relationship structure is the cause of my distress? Too often, the answer is yes. Despite growing visibility of relationship diversity, mental health professionals frequently fall into a cognitive trap: assuming that the relationship structure is the problem, rather than focusing on the relational skills (or lack thereof) that drive conflict, dissatisfaction, and disconnection.

The Clinical Reflex: Blame the Structure

When a monogamous client experiences jealousy, clinicians often ask: "What’s beneath the jealousy?" But when a non-monogamous client experiences jealousy, the question frequently shifts to: "Are you sure this relationship structure is really working for you?" The difference in framing is subtle, but powerful. One explores emotional dynamics; the other pathologizes the relational context.

This bias reflects what scholars like Anderson et al. (2025) have dubbed the "monogamy-superiority myth.” This myth is a pervasive assumption that monogamous relationships are inherently more stable, intimate, or emotionally safe. When clinicians unconsciously absorb this cultural script, it can distort assessment and treatment planning, leading to misdiagnosis, missed opportunities, and even client harm.

The therapist promotes open dialogue by questioning the myth of monogamy's superiority, creating an environment of curiosity and growth to better support diverse relationships.

Research Snapshot: The Monogamy Superiority Myth Debunked

The 2025 meta-analysis by Anderson et al. analyzed 35 studies with over 24,000 participants and found no significant differences in relationship satisfaction or sexual satisfaction between monogamous and non-monogamous individuals. This finding was consistent across key dimensions such as:

• Trust

• Commitment

• Intimacy

• Sexual satisfaction

• Emotional support

  
  

This growing body of evidence makes it increasingly clear: relationship outcomes are not determined by structure. Instead, what predicts satisfaction and resilience are the same factors that benefit all relationships: communication, boundaries, trust, emotional intelligence, and mutual respect.

Research shows no significant difference in satisfaction, trust, and intimacy between monogamous and non-monogamous relationships.

What Actually Matters: The Core Skills for Healthy Relating

Rather than defaulting to a structural diagnosis, clinicians should assess and support the following relational capacities:

1. Communication Clarity and Frequency

Non-monogamous relationships often require explicit communication about needs, boundaries, time, sex, and expectations. This makes non-monogamous dynamics a powerful training ground for enhancing communication skills, when supported well.

Key practices to assess or support:

• Regular check-ins and renegotiation of agreements

• Directness in expressing needs and desires

• Attunement to non-verbal and emotional communication

  
  

2. Boundary Setting and Honoring

Effective boundaries are foundational in all relationships. In non-monogamy, these may include:

• Time management across multiple connections

• Sexual health practices and agreements

• Emotional disclosures and containment

  
  

Therapists should inquire about whether boundaries are collaborative, communicated, and enforced, not whether they exist within a monogamous container.

3. Attachment Style Awareness and Flexibility

Attachment theory is often misused to suggest non-monogamy is incompatible with secure bonding. However, secure attachment can flourish across several diverse structures. Non-monogamy may even foster attachment security through:

• Encouraging differentiation and autonomy

• Reducing over-reliance on one partner for all needs

• Promoting explicit emotional caregiving

  
  

Rather than assuming structure-related insecurity, clinicians should explore how clients navigate proximity, availability, and responsiveness.

4. Emotion Regulation and Jealousy Literacy

Jealousy is not a non-monogamous problem, it’s a human emotion. In non-monogamous relationships, clients often:

• Learn to distinguish between insecurity and actual boundary violations

• Use jealousy as a cue for unmet needs

• Develop tools like self-soothing, cognitive reframing, and compersion (joy in a partner’s joy)

  
  

Clinicians can support emotional growth by helping clients unpack jealousy rather than avoid or eliminate it.

5. Conflict Navigation and Repair

Conflict is inevitable in all relationships. In non-monogamy, the complexity of multiple relationships can amplify this. Therapists can:

• Normalize conflict without attributing it to structure

• Support effective repair processes

• Explore how power, privilege, and marginalization shape conflict dynamics

Cultivating a Strong Relationship: The Importance of Boundaries, Communication, and Emotional Intelligence.

Clinical Red Flags: What NOT to Do

To provide affirming care, clinicians must avoid common missteps that pathologize structure over skills:

• Don’t assume non-monogamy is the source of distress. Ask: Would I ask this question if the client were monogamous?

• Don’t prescribe monogamy as a solution. "Closing the relationship" rarely addresses the core issues.

• Don’t treat non-monogamy as a phase, rebellion, or trauma response. Be curious without condescension.

• Don’t conflate non-monogamy with infidelity. The presence of agreements and consent is a key distinguishing factor.

  
  

For Therapists: Assessment Questions That De-Pathologize

Try these instead:

• How do you and your partner(s) navigate emotional needs across your relationship network?

• What boundaries or agreements have felt most helpful or challenging?

• What strengths have you developed through this relationship structure?

• What, if any, support do you need to feel more secure or grounded?

  
  

For Clients: Questions to Ask Yourself or Bring to Therapy

• Am I communicating my needs clearly and regularly?

• Are my relationships structured in ways that align with my values and capacity?

• What emotions come up for me, and how do I tend to them?

• Do I feel seen and respected in my relationship(s)?

Client shares insights with therapist, highlighting key themes of self-trust, agency, and the importance of healthy relationship skills.

The Bigger Picture: Systems, Stigma, and Structural Competency

NM clients don’t exist in a vacuum. They navigate:

• Family rejection

• Legal invisibility

• Medical discrimination

• Lack of culturally competent care

  
  

When clients are struggling, it’s often due to external stigma and minority stress, not inherent dysfunction. Therapists must practice structural competency, understanding how social systems shape client wellbeing, and not default to internalizing those systemic harms as personal failures.

A Values-Aligned Approach

Therapists working with non-monogamous clients should strive for a stance that is:

• Curious, not assumptive

• Collaborative, not directive

• Contextual, not pathologizing

• Affirming, not tolerant

  
  

Remember: Clients are the experts on their own lives. Our job is to support their growth, not to push them into normative models.

Conclusion: Relationship Skills Over Scripts

The next time a client presents with relationship distress, pause before diagnosing the structure. Ask instead:

• What’s the quality of the communication?

• Are needs being named and negotiated?

• How are emotions being processed and expressed?

  
  

The evidence is clear: non-monogamy doesn’t predict dysfunction… relationship dynamics do. When we shift our lens from structure to skill, we open space for healing, growth, and authentic connection in all forms.

The foundation of successful relationships lies in empathy, open communication, and relational skills, transcending the structures of monogamy or non-monogamy.

References

Anderson, J. R., Bondarchuk-McLaughlin, A., Rosa, S., Goldschlager, K. D., & Jordan, D. X. H. (2025). Countering the monogamy-superiority myth: A meta-analysis of the differences in relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction as a function of relationship orientation. The Journal of Sex Research, 62(3), 287–301.

Conley, T. D., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., & Ziegler, A. (2013). The fewer the merrier?: Assessing stigma surrounding consensually non-monogamous romantic relationships. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 1–30.

Flicker, S. M., et al. (2021). Relationship quality among individuals engaged in monogamy, open relationships, swinging, and polyamory. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 50(4), 1519–1531.

Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., Ziegler, A., Rubin, J. D., & Conley, T. D. (2013). Stigma toward individuals engaged in consensual non-monogamy. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 52–69.