Arguing at Home? A Hostage Negotiator Has Some Advice

He’s negotiated with kidnappers demanding millions in ransom, handled middle-of-the-night calls with immediate threats, and guided terrified parents through decisions they’ll carry for a lifetime.

Scott Walker is an international kidnap-for-ransom and crisis hostage negotiator with more than 300 cases under his belt, from piracy to cyber extortion. And yet, he tells The Ethicalist that the single negotiation he still hasn’t mastered… is getting his children to load the dishwasher without an argument.

As absurd as that sounds, it’s also very revealing. Because if someone trained to resolve life-or-death conflicts can struggle with everyday domestic disagreements, there’s a lot we’re all getting wrong in how we talk to the people we love.

According to relationship research, around 65–70 per cent of couples cite communication problems as a major sticking point in their relationship. Money, chores, parenting styles, and emotional availability consistently rank among the most frequent sources of conflict.

But the difference between a stable and fractured relationship is rarely because there are no fights, but the ability to navigate them. And that, unexpectedly, is where the psychology of a hostage negotiator steps in. Because while most of us thankfully aren’t facing ransom demands, we do face something that feels threatening and personal at home: the fear of not being heard or valued.

‘At the end of the day, all of us are negotiating every single day, whether we realise it or not,’ Scott explains. ‘Because all a negotiation is, it’s a conversation with a purpose where you’re looking to influence and persuade or bring about cooperation or collaboration with another person. It doesn’t matter if it’s kidnappers, colleagues, customers, or your teenage kids.’

In other words, the stakes are different for a hostage negotiator, but the psychology isn’t.

‘People assume the hard part is managing the criminals,’ he explains. ‘But in reality, eighty per cent of my time was spent managing our own side – the family, the executives, the internal politics. There’s what I call the crisis within the crisis. The external problem might be the kidnapping. But the real volatility is usually emotional: fear, ego, impatience, people wanting to act before thinking.’

That idea translates uncomfortably well into relationships. One person escalates, and the other reacts. Status feels threatened, identity feels challenged, and suddenly a discussion about dishes becomes a referendum on respect.

Observe, don’t absorb

To manage that volatility, hostage negotiators are trained in something deceptively simple but difficult to do.

‘You have to learn to observe without absorbing,’ Scott explains. ‘Imagine standing on the riverbank watching the river of emotion flow past. If you fall in, that’s human; you climb out, dry yourself off. But you don’t go swimming. You don’t let yourself be carried out to sea.’

It’s a metaphor, but also a psychological strategy. Emotional regulation research consistently shows that couples who can pause, self-soothe, and return to discussion are significantly more likely to report long-term satisfaction than those who escalate in the heat of the moment.

Scott was candid about his own learning curve to becoming one of the most recognised hostage negotiators. ‘On my very first case, I lost my cool. I shouted at the family because they weren’t following the advice. I nearly had the shortest career in negotiation. A senior colleague stepped in, and I watched a masterclass in calm authority. That was when I understood: if I become dysregulated, I can’t lead anyone else.’

The same principle applies to a hostage negotiator as it does to a parent or spouse. If you want to calm your partner or child, you must first calm yourself.

Another idea that shifts the ground around difficult conversations is Scott’s belief that ‘we are feeling creatures that think, not thinking creatures that feel. We make decisions emotionally and then justify them logically afterwards.’

It’s uncomfortable because we prefer to believe we are rational. But in high-stakes situations, whether in crisis response or in marriage, people make emotional decisions. That’s why facts rarely win arguments.

‘None of us will agree to something – and mean it and stick with it consistently – unless it maintains or improves our status and our identity with how we see ourselves in the world,’ he explains.

That’s why domestic disagreements feel disproportionately charged. Being told you’re wrong about a parenting decision, a financial choice, or even a household habit can feel like an attack on competence or worth.

Level five listening

Hostage negotiators are trained to listen beyond words. He calls it ‘level five listening’, not just hearing what is said, but understanding why it is being said.

‘People rarely tell you something unless it matters to them,’ he explains. ‘So the question isn’t just what they are asking for. It’s what need is underneath that request? What are they protecting? What are they afraid of losing?

‘If I want to bring about cooperation or collaboration in the home with my partner or my kids… I need to understand what is really driving them. What’s the real issue here? What are their needs and their wants? And there’s a difference.’

In relationships, this might look like recognising that a complaint about chores is really a plea for shared responsibility. Or that frustration about finances is really anxiety about security. Most of us respond to the surface demand. We argue about the dishwasher, debate the bills and defend the schedule. But beneath that is usually a deeper need to feel supported, valued, safe, and seen. Listening for that need changes the conversation entirely.

Most of us enter arguments armed with the certainty that we already know what the other person is going to say. We’ve rehearsed our defence, and we’re ready to correct, counter or win.

That, he argues, is where we go wrong. ‘So many schools of thought in negotiation try to separate the person from the problem,’ Scott says. ‘But you can’t do that, nor is it desirable. Ultimately, the best way to understand what’s going on for someone is to bring more curiosity than assumptions to the conversation. Assumptions are like earplugs. They just get in the way of what is really going on.’

If you walk into a disagreement believing you already understand your partner’s motives – that they’re lazy, defensive, unreasonable or controlling – then you’re not listening. You’re confirming. Curiosity, on the other hand, asks: what’s underneath this? What need is being protected? What fear is being triggered?

‘If we bring more curiosity and listen deeply,’ he says, ‘and remember it’s not about us, seek first to understand before being understood, we uncover far better outcomes.’

Trust is behavioural, not emotional

In the work of a hostage negotiator, promises must be kept with precision. If you say you will call at 2 pm, you call at 2 pm. If you request something in return, you follow through.

‘If someone doesn’t do what they say they will, it erodes cooperation immediately,’ he said. ‘And the same is true in our personal lives. We want people who want to spend time with us. And the only way we can do that is by building trust.’

Relationship studies echo this: reliability and trust are among the strongest predictors of long-term relational satisfaction. Grand gestures are less important than small, repeated behaviours. If you often promise to handle something but don’t follow through on that, resentment can quickly build.

As Scott succinctly summarises: ‘You have to be trustworthy if you want to be trusted.’

Conflict isn’t failure

Perhaps the most reassuring insight is that conflict itself isn’t a red flag. Research from relationship psychologist Dr John Gottman suggests that nearly 69 per cent of relationship problems are rooted in personality differences.

The goal, therefore isn’t total resolution, but respectful management.

‘A dream negotiation,’ Scott says when I asked what that would look like, ‘is one where both people walk away feeling they’ve got what they needed and what they wanted.’

That line is important because, at home, we often aim to win, but if one person leaves feeling defeated, the issue hasn’t gone away, it’s simply been swept under the carpet. And so we return to the laundry basket fight, even though it’s never about clothes.

If a hostage negotiator trained to navigate ransom demands still finds a few family negotiations challenging, perhaps the rest of us can give ourselves some grace. And the real lesson from hostage negotiation isn’t dominance or persuasion, but composure and consistency.

The high-stakes negotiations in our lives may not involve kidnappers, but they do involve the people we love. And that makes them just as worth getting right.

Scott Walker is a renowned international kidnap-for-ransom and crisis hostage negotiator. He advises organisations on high-stakes negotiations and authored the book Order Out of Chaos.