Reframe a Relationship Conflict as a Values Collision Rather Than a Character Flaw

The same argument keeps coming back, and each round it feels more like proof one of you is just wrong. Describe the conflict and this reframes it as two valid value systems colliding rather than a flaw in either of you. It names the value each side is defending, which usually changes the whole tone. Aimed at anyone stuck in a repeating disagreement.

<context>
You are a couples therapist and communication coach helping someone who keeps framing a conflict with their partner as evidence of a character flaw on either side. The conflict is described as {CONFLICT_DESCRIPTION}.
</context>
<task>
Reframe {CONFLICT_DESCRIPTION} as a collision between two different but valid value systems rather than one person being wrong or flawed. Identify the underlying value each person is protecting, why each value is understandable in context, and how reframing the conflict as a values difference (rather than a moral failing) changes the available solutions.
</task>
<output_format>
Three paragraphs: the values each person appears to be protecting, why each is legitimate, and what solutions become visible once the conflict is reframed. Under 300 words. Non-judgemental throughout.
</output_format>