Monday, September 17, 2012

Adler

ADLER

[I should point out here that the final statement turned out to be utterly false. One of Freud’s major contributions to theory (and least understood or utilized) is that the therapist should regard everything that the client says as true. On the surface, this may seem naive, it has several advantages. First, it is much easier to remember what the client has said in previous sessions. Second, the patient probably experiences reality differently than does the therapist. Finally, and most important, it is much easier to question the client when he or she makes a statement that contradicts and earlier one. In this contradiction is most likely an opportunity for intervention.]

3.c.: Evaluation, limitations, unique contributions, most and least liked.

     While Freud's terminology and basic concepts are extremely useful from a theoretical and diagnostic standpoint, they are limited in that they emphasize sexual urges and the ability of the individual to change through conscious cognition is depreciated. Adler, on the other hand, shifts the focus from sexual urges to power or superiority, defined as perceived improvement in ones status, abilities, and/or competence -- the drive to "master" a situation. Gemeinschaftsgefühl is the key to Adler's therapeutic approach -- working with the client to develop a social interest ("intuition" might be a better translation although mnemonically "feeling" is close enough).

     The strength of Adler's theory lies in the more optimistic view of humankind to change and develop and on the focus on individual differences. Through awareness of our irrational beliefs and self-defeating behavior, we can change and gain this power. In addition, it allows for the variance in perceptions from one individual to another. No two people perceive reality (whatever that is) alike because they come to it not only with different sensory capacities but with different minds shaped by their backgrounds which greatly influences their perceptions of reality. Indeed, if our entire makeup were determined prior to the age of six, there would be no sense in trying to change it and there would be no reason for therapists.

     I would alter the concept of Gemeinschaftsgefühl from being perceived as an end to employment as a means of obtaining personal power. It seems to imply that one can only be happy or have personal power when accepted by a group whereas one aspect of personal power seems to me the ability to transcend the need for belonging and the concomitant subscription to group norms. Eventually, of course, the individual through self-sufficiency may well become integrated into a group with similar norms and values, but the establishment of health individual norms and values should take precedence.

     I will discuss birth order under personal application, below.

3.d.: Concepts and techniques I want to incorporate.

     Fictional finalism (I do wish the German terms were available here) seems an inherent stressor that I would like to incorporate -- strongly akin to Ellis' irrational beliefs. I would certainly incorporate the capacity for change through cognitive activity which would include encouraging insight. Acceptance of the individual and encouragement are very important. The phenomonological view of reality is essential in understanding individual differences. I would still use some of the Freudian terms, internally, to come to a basic understanding of these differences, but I would not employ them in communicating that understanding. Adler's Weltanschauung is superior in helping a client to develop Selbstgefühl (or self-reliance -- cf. Gemeinschaftsgefühl).

     When appropriate, I would employ any or all of the techniques listed in Corey (150-151). One that could work very well with intelligent, introverted clients is called "Acting as If" (151) or role-playing. It should be possible to teach a client how to role-play a "type." Once the client knows the type of person to play, he or she is protected behind that role. If the role evokes the desired reactions from people, he or she may wish to incorporate some of its characteristics into his or her behavior. If it fails, only the role failed, not the client. Another approach can be attempted with little ego-damage.

3.e.: Personal application.

     The order of birth or place in the family is important in development. I am a first child. I believe that one of the characteristics of a first or only child is introspection and a striving for self-improvement. My sister, second in line, fits Adler's profile in that she was and is entirely conventional. The next sister combined these characteristics to some extent. I was most like my father and they were most like my mother. While growing up, I could at times communicate with the youngest but almost never with the older. I had not kept in touch with either of them until my father's death, however, and I noticed that I could communicate with my oldest sister who was and is very materialistic. At least we were able to organize the disposition of the estate. The youngest one became impossible to deal with as her emotionalism was entirely undirected.

     However, more important as I look back, was my main peer group in high school (before that groups were less defined, it seems to me). I can list nine of them immediately. Of those nine, five were only children. I was close to being an only child as our household became sharply divided as to father/mother alliances and the same applied to the other first child. The remaining two were last children and nothing at all like their parents or society expected. There were no middle children whatsoever. As I think of secondary relationships beyond the group, no group member was involved with a middle child either.

     Before that I had discovered the role playing or "Acting as If" technique. By the time I had found the primary group, I was also involved in two other groups, one completely athletic and the other completely socio-sexual. I found both groups shallow. (Locker room conversation and discussions of the weather and "top 40" music can be stifling.) However, without first being able to "master" inclusion into these groups, membership in the primary group may not have happened. With the primary group, knowledge of Sartre and enjoyment of Bach was an asset, not a characteristic to be suppressed. (Parenthetically, the only person I know of who had a working knowledge of Zen and became a major league baseball player was Bill Lee who was given the nickname of "spaceman." He did, however, say that negotiating with the team owner while sitting in the Lotus position gave him a psychological edge.)

3.f.: Questions to pursue further.

     There are several questions to pursue further. His approach to women seems enlightened. I would like to find out more about specific techniques. His own versions of "perversions," having talked once of "curing" a man of homosexuality and his attitudes towards masochism and sadism are interesting, but they seem quaint by today's standards. Since his approach serves as the basis for other, more modern, approaches (Existential, REBT, etc.), I will be pursuing those instead of delving further into Adler. I would say my approach will be much closer to Adler's than Freud's.

Monday, September 10, 2012

    Theory has always been one of the most interesting aspects of education in Psychology,
although studies show tthat it is almost impossible to asertain the theoretical orientation of
the therapist by observing them in practice. This is not so much as to say that theory and practice
are widely at variance as to say that they are two unrelated fields.

     However, when I first began studying the subject I had a fairly good instructor. She was not very
adept in theory and certainly was no scholar, but she did stimulate discussion and thought and allowed
the student to progress as rapidly as possible without obstruction. She would also help those who
were cognitively handicapped.

    I just happened to come across some of the earlier writings in did in that class (before I had any
background or training in the field). I thought they might be interesting to someone out there just starting
out in the field or interested in teaching the course for the first time. Here is the one on Freud:

Probably the most listed positive aspect of Freud's approach is that he is the first, the pioneer. Unfortunately, this statement could also become his unique contribution and the most-liked aspect of his theory. In general, the theory is considered superseded by subsequent theories. However, we might as well say the same about Newton.

Freud postulated that there is some sort of driving force (libido) that seeks to manifest itself through us (libido). The first part of our consciousness that expresses this drive is the Id. However, society will not tolerate every individual's expressing that urge directly, so it prescribes values to check the Id and this system of values becomes ingrained in the mind and is called the Superego. The individual seeks to mediate between these two forces through the Ego. The ego is developed in stages, each associated with a specific biological task (or, in later versions such as Erickson's social task). Unresolved conflicts in these stages of developments are called complexes and they are often repressed into the unconscious. These repressed, unconscious conflicts cause inadequate ego functioning or neuroses. It is the task of the therapist to bring these unresolved conflicts to the conscious level. From there, presumably, the patient is able to deal with them and reconstruct the ego and thus function more optimally.

3.d.: Concepts and techniques I want to incorporate.

I do not see myself using any of the techniques such as complete non-disclosure nor would I be looking for early childhood problems unless my client was a child. I think that it is important to separate diagnosis from treatment here.

However, I think that most clients would have some sort of conflict between Id and Superego to resolve, at least the normal dichotomy between what they want to do and what they feel they ought to do. Quite often, what they feel they ought to do should be examined. Another concept not really explored in Corey is the dichotomy between Thanatos and Eros, between restraint and desire. There are definite social constraints placed on the individual that force repression of the libidinous forces which society, by and large, has labeled negatively. To what extent can the individual be helped to separate external and internal repression? And what external or socially induced repressions can the individual manage to ignore? To some extent, this reconciles Freud with Ellis (examining irrational beliefs) and that is where I would be concentrating.

3.e.: Personal application.

An attempt at self-psychoanalysis in a page or less seems a bit self-defeating. However, Freud might say that I developed an oral fixation manifesting itself through talking, smoking, and liking to drink just about anything. In the anal stage something happened as my office often shows signs of the primordial chaos. During the phallic stage, my guilt as a result of an Oedipal fixation on my mother led me first to want to kill my father but I "joined" him instead as my personality, beliefs, and intellectual curiosity were characteristics of him.

If I were to analyze myself using the terminology, on the other hand, I'd say that early on I had realized the Superego structure my mother and the church (which also was her idea) was self-defeating and that I had reconstructed it more along the model of my father. One other contribution he made was to introduce me to reading and through that numerous other sources for refutation of traditional superego concepts and a knowledge that society uses guilt to police its members and repress them.

Individuals also use this Superego structure to manipulate others. An excellent example is an insurance salesman selling life insurance. He is trying to play on guilt feelings ("Don't you love your family? What if you were gone? How can you live with yourself if you don't buy this?"). A way to attack this is to think of it as a bet. They are betting you that you will live. If you die, you win the bet.

At the current time, I believe that one secret to a content life is the facility to make what one needs to do also what one wants to do.

3.f.: Questions to pursue further.

I believe that there will be a growing interest in the area of spirituality. I am not referring to traditional monotheistic preoccupations, but to any sort of "supernatural" answer to anything. We know, for example, that the client's belief in the therapist is a paramount factor in adjustment. To what extent is this similar to "faith-healing?" The ability to reconcile Superego and Id, to make them identical, to "sublimate," so to speak, is a characteristic of Zen in which I have some interest. It is the ability to focus on the immediate and concrete to the extent of identification with the concrete which seems to me something that can be achieved through meditation and other such exercises. What I have already pursued is attacking irrational Superego mandates through logical attacks on them.

In short, the Freudian terminology works, helps one to focus on problems, gives names to processes and forces we all share, uncovers the truth that we all have conflicts or problems we have not resolved. The specific causes of those conflicts and the specific solutions to them are what is unique, not universal. To some extent, however, they are caused by an irrational belief in socially imposed dicta.

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Reality Theory

As I first read about "reality therapy," I found myself wondering "in what way is this approach superior to that of Freud, Adler, Rogers, the existentialists, or Ellis?" An alternate question could be "in what way does it add to my knowledge or theory?" I found I was asking myself the wrong questions as I could not find a single positive answer.

I think that Glasser's Control Theory has some techniques that can be applied well and may prove useful with clients in need of direction as opposed to those who are able to benefit from an alteration of existing cognitive structures or patterns. I can see myself using on adolescents or adults who are not philosophically inclined. In short, the type of client who asks for advice, those who need to be taught. I realize that Corey talks about a "learning process," but this process seems to take place on the superficial level. I am also aware that this approach has its fervent admirers and that my own view is more a reflection of my own inclinations than it is a fair, objective evaluation, but at the same time I would prefer to keep this approach as a last resort, something to do with a client I can not reach or communicate with on a deeper level.

Take, for example, his notion that a client "chooses to depress." As I see it, this is true only to the extent that the client's perception of the situation is such that the objective phenomenon encountered becomes depressing. The approach I would try first is exploration with the client as to why the phenomenon appears depressing. However, Glasser would argue that we choose to be depressed because it gives us certain rewards or control over our environment. Others may either pity us or leave us alone, for example. Having a "headache" is another example, but it is one thing to say one has a headache as an indirect way of avoiding unpleasant tasks that involve others and quite another to actually have a headache because the unpleasant task is "causing" it.

Probably the single most irritating aspect of "reality therapy" for me is the planning. Again, while it may be very effective with the type of client mentioned above, I am one of those people who never make New Year's Resolutions. One reason is that it seems such a faddish, ritualistic, process with little real meaning. The only person I know who has actually kept a New year's Resolution is myself and that resolution was never to make one. I have made decisions to change behavior on my own and done it successfully, but it has never come about through declaration of it to others. It has always been through an internal, cognitive, alteration. I could make a New Year's Resolution by changing my attitude towards the process of making such resolutions first, however. I could use this approach with a client, but I would do my best to make sure that it was an attainable one that would lead to others.

3.d.: Concepts and techniques I want to incorporate.

Some of the questions seem helpful. For example, the question "what do you want?" has always seemed to me quite ludicrous and I generally associate this question with weak-minded authority figures or significant others (who soon became insignificant). What do I want? Money, health, happiness, world peace, compulsory Mozart listening, friends with triple digit I.Q.s -- want a longer list? In other words, I have an aversion to such questions.

Glasser's questions, on the other hand, help formulate ideas and goals, albeit for less reflective clients. "What would your family be like if your wants and their wants matched?" Through this question, one can eventually arrive at an understanding of what is causing family conflict as it will most likely lead to a discussion of a difference in wants and these wants will be defined as a result. Now we may have an insight into the person's wants.

I favor having the client commit to a goal, to a behavior change, and for some writing it down as a sort of contract might achieve this end. More effective would be to foster a sense of "internal commitment" directly so that the contract was not needed. For some, writing the contract may actually produce some cognitive changes.

3.e.: Personal application.

As I've mentioned above, with a client, the list of rules for planning that Corey lists (270-71), would prove helpful. I may use the analogy of the front wheels and the back wheels with some clients.

So far as applying it to myself, I see little application. For example, in the discussion of headaches, above, I distinguished two different type of headaches -- real and feigned. The next time I have a real headache, I may ask myself if I am choosing to have one, but the process would be introspective, self-analysis.

The American Presidency Project

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Interactions of Self-organizing Systems in Nature

Interactions of Self-organizing Systems in Nature
Atanu Bikash Chatterjee
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Bhilai Institute of Technology, Bhilai house
Durg, 490006 Chhattisgarh, India
e -mail: abc3.14160@yahoo.com
Abstract: Nature essentially consists of complex systems. The paper presents a conceptual
framework to understand how complex systems interact with each other in nature. All natural
systems are thermodynamically open and physically adaptive. The process of adaptation and
continual self-organization cause these systems to interact continuously with the environment
and compete against such similar systems for limited resources.
Keywords: complex systems, complexity, information, self-organization, network, hierarchy,
natural process, human mind, cognitive process.
Introduction: A system is a collection of
internally interacting elements and
constraints. The systems that are found in
nature are thermodynamically open and
therefore, continuously exchange energy
and entropy with the surrounding media.
The systems found in nature are
structurally complex. A system can also be
defined as a connected network.
Complexity increases not with the amount
of connections between the nodes that are
present in a system but due to the
numerous combinations of possible
connections. All natural systems have a
tendency to organize with time. Processes
that result towards greater organization are
called natural processes
1
. Evolution is a
cyclic process
1, 2
; therefore, the changes
incurred by the system affect the system
itself. Thus, the system evolves through a
positive feedback loop. On reaching a
certain level of organization (node), the
system stores the information in its
physical memory.
The theory and practice of sustainable
environment - by which each level of [2]
hierarchy (physical, chemical, biological,
social and cultural) is supported by the
previous one - has in theories of evolution
of complex systems, a useful tool for
designing, planning, monitoring and
evaluating different strategies and
interventions. At its own scale each
species is unique; while at their scales,
their parts differentiate increasingly as
they recover from perturbations during
development, becoming ever more
intensively unique
3
.
Interaction can be thought of as process of
information exchange between the systems
and nature.
Interaction as a process of information exchange
Complex systems interact with each other
through exchange of energy and entropy.
Entropy is a measure of the lack of
information about a process
4
. Thus,
entropy is a quantitative notion and it can
be used to quantify the amount of
information present within a system. The
Shannon entropy is given by,
� = − ��
��
�
It can also be used as a tool for measuring
the information exchange between
systems. Interactions between systems
occur at all levels of hierarchy and even
surpass metaphysical and philosophical
levels. Metaphysical level of interaction is
a form of social interaction between all
self-organizing complex systems existing
in society
5
. It is this form of interaction at
meta-physical level that helps us to
understand nature. Human thought process
is affected by nature and various natural
processes as the human mind is itself a
complex self-organizing system.
Conclusion: The paper presents an idea to
understand the interaction of complex
systems at the social and philosophical
levels. The idea presented in this paper can
be applied to understand the human-self
and the various conscious processes in
more detail.
References:
1) Chatterjee, Bikash Atanu, “Certain
Interesting Properties of Action
and Its Application Towards
Achieving Greater Organization in
Complex Systems” arxiv:
1111.3186 (2011).
2) Chatterjee, Bikash Atanu,
“Principle of Least Action and [3]
Theory of Cyclic Evolution” arxiv:
1111.5374 (2011).
3) Salthe, Stanley N., Development
and Evolution, (MIT Press, 1993).
4) Lloyd S., Black Holes, Demons
and the loss of Coherence: How
complex systems get information,
and what they do with it, PhD
thesis.
5) Gershenson Carlos, “Living in
living cities”, arxiv: 1111.3659v1
(2011).
6) Georgiev, G. and Georgiev, I.,
“The Least Action and the Metric
of an Organized system” open
systems and information dynamics
9, (4) 371-380 (2002).
7) Georgiev G., “A quantitative
measure for the Organization of a
system, Part-1: A simple case”
arxiv: 1009.1346 (2010).
8) D. Kondepudi and I. Prigogine,
Modern Thermodynamics, (John
Wiley & Sons, 1998).
9) Nicolis, G. and Prigogine, I., Self
Organization in Non equilibrium
Systems, (John Wiley & Sons,
1977).
10) Vidal C., “The Future of Scientific
Simulations: from Artificial Life to
Artificial Cosmogenesis” arxiv:
0803.1087 (2008).
11)Bar-Yam, Y., Dynamics of
Complex Systems, (Addison
Wesley, 1997).
12)Bak, P., How Nature Works: The
science of self-organized

Satir

©2010 BY Dr. Charles Stanford, CBT

Introduction

Virginia Satir is known as a communications theorist, but her approach is not theoretical in a linear sense. In this paper I first attempt to give a background sketch as to how she defies the scientific paradigm. The concepts and assumptions are difficult to separate from her view of maladaptive behavior, much the same way as Yin and Yang or right-brain and left-brain are difficult to separate—one can not exist without the other. It is almost as if one expected to have a north pole without a south pole.

Self-esteem, or maturation, a sense of ego-integrity or identity, a feeling of being comfortable with ones own uniqueness and that of another, is at the heart of being a health human being. Her Conjoint Family Therapy forms the basis for much of the discussion of the basic assumptions or concepts behind her theory. Early family life can lead to a lack of self-esteem through a series of “double-bind” relationships and messages and produce dysfunctional behavior which can be measured by the degree of indirect communication people utilize to the exclusion of direct communication. When adults with low self-esteem marry, they pass along their insecurities to their children, at least one of which becomes an Identified Patient.

An important goal of therapy is to help establish people as “centered” through effective communications patterns. These patterns are taught through a series of well-known techniques until each person is able to communicate clearly, concisely, and effectively.

Throughout her writings, one senses a warm, caring human being, perfectly centered and spontaneous.

Against the Linear Paradigm

These words are typical of what one finds in reading Virginia Satir: “Around any well-integrated person there is a circular field that is about three feet in diameter. At the edge of this field, you can feel vibrations—at least I can! When a person is relatively well put-together, those lines feel like elastic.” (Satir, Conjoint Family Therapy, 257). She continues to describe “energy fields” around various people: those who are out of contact with themselves have small ones and the violent have very large ones. The vibrations people give off are a clue to their state of mind.

Although one might be tempted to dismiss such writing and thinking as “west coast,” or today “new age,” there is absolute truth in what she is saying. Her method of communication, however, does not emulate the scientific paradigm and style. Her prose is that of a warm and caring human being who, above all, is trying to share experiences with the reader.

Perhaps this energy field can be described another way, as a heightened sense of awareness in the approaching individual, an awareness of the other person’s body language, movement, eyes, etc. For example, after I read her description of the “energy field,” I told a group of patients about it. When I am speaking to a group, I am very conscious of just about every movement and twitch of each member to start with, and mentioning that I was about to test this on them simply heightened this awareness. I then approached them, one at a time, “feeling” for the energy field.

I did not tell them exactly what I was trying to learn about them, but I did notice significant differences, especially in two cases. One person seemed not to react at all and I was able to move my hand within a few inches of his face without any reaction. On the other end of the spectrum, another became increasingly hostile looking as I approached and I could not get closer than five or six feet. I “felt” the “energy field” myself. I later checked their diagnostic charts. The first was referred to the group by the psychiatric unit as chronically depressed and the second had very violent tendencies with very many issues to work on. In other words, the “energy field” is a metaphor, a helpful way of communicating her experience. There is absolutely no scientific measuring device that can detect the presence of an energy field or an “aura”, but a person in a sensitive state of heightened awareness can “sense” it. “Left-brain” and “right brain” are like that as well. Even though scientists have noticed that certain functions seem to be predominate in certain areas of the brain, the concept of the left half of the brain doing certain things and the right brain the others is best used as a metaphor for certain ways of perceiving and thinking.

Her theory works this way as well. Although she studied the literature and obtained the necessary credentials to practice, her theory is built on her own experience in which she displayed an uncanny, instinctive, way of knowing how to relate to people. As she says in Conjoint Family Therapy, “the process still—and always—is the relationship between you and me, here and now.” (243)

Concepts and Assumptions

So how does one approach a theorists who says, in effect, the theory is not important, that it is only a guideline to be used if it helps, who does not mention paradigms, quote from scholarly journals, and does not present abstract notions that subject themselves to reification and thus abstract analysis and discussion? How does one talk about concepts in such a situation? Satir’s main concept from a theoretical standpoint is that concepts are the product of experience and experience is only as valid as the reliability and validity of the perceiver. All therapy is a relationship between people and at the base of relationships is communication. We communicate in many ways, but the best communicators are those with the best sense of self esteem. Still, as she points out, “thought and feeling are inextricably bound together; the individual need not be a prisoner of his feelings but can use the cognitive component of this heeling to free himself.” (125) If we examine this sentence just quoted carefully we see how the first clause unites thought and feeling into a composite inseparable unit and that the second clause divides thought and feeling again so that one part can modify the other. Yet, she is saying that these are two parts of a single whole that function together. One does not easily divide the two into separate sections for analysis, nor should one.

Fortunately, for those who insist upon a linear discussion of family therapy, Conjoint Family Therapy works towards that end. The book begins with a discussion of why family therapy is needed. The Identified Patient (I.P.) is a symptom of family dysfunction. This reality came to the surface as individual therapists noticed that “schizophrenic” patients showed increased symptoms during and immediately after a family visit and upon observing how other family members interfered with therapy. It became clear that they were actually trying to change the behavior of the entire family through treating only one member so revised their approach to include the entire family and, through this process, found that mental illness had an interpersonal nature. The process usually starts when an external force labels the I.P. as “disturbed,” but that behavior was actually serving a homeostatic function within the family. The locus of difficulty could usually be located within the marital dyad, with low self-esteem of both members as a cause and this lack of self-esteem the result of their own families’ functioning. (1-6)

People with low self-esteem tend to be, in David Riesman’s terminology, extremely other-directed and have not reached a position of equality with them. Although hoping for a great deal from others, they expect disappointment. Such people all-too-often choose one another as mates, putting one another in charge of their own self-esteem, attempting to create a stronger identity for themselves through the mate. In short, they both were seeking the “good parent” from each other. (7-12)

After being married a short while, however, disillusion sets in. Neither expected to give and they notice such annoying realities such as hair curlers and snoring. In addition, what Satir calls “differentness” becomes threatening, such things that make people individuals are seen as evidence of being unloved. A lack of trust also arises from this low self-esteem. These two things, low self-esteem and mistrust expresses itself in maladaptive forms of communication. (13-24)

Soon, children enter this family and the parents expect to “get” from the child which will obviously have nothing other than self-interest at first. For example, they make economic and emotional demands which each party may see as deflecting from their own needs. (24-28)

In addition, social forces are at work placing further strains on the relationship. The Industrial Revolution (although Satir does not use the phrasing) quantified the worth of an individual through the monetary system while simultaneously mechanizing the person’s work environment and specializing it to the extent that a basic alienation from the existential construct occurred. This alienation is especially debilitating to an individual who is already suffering from low self-esteem. Roles began to shift rapidly with the rise of psychoanalysis urging greater freedom and autonomy for children while patriarchal notions became outmoded. The individuals with low self-esteem looked to the family for a “reason for being” while the family no longer was able to provide it to those very individuals. (29-33)

A child growing up in such a situation faces considerable difficulties. Not only are they growing up in the same external world, but they are being raised by parents who themselves have difficulty adjusting. In fact, “family theory postulates that outside forces are important mainly as the affect the parents.” (36) Part of the “getting” mindset of parents with low self esteem is to look to the child as a vehicle of expressing their own self-worth, as a way of bolstering their own self esteem, and as an extension of their own selves. (35-36)

The therapist should see “...himself as a resource person.” (125), a “model of communication” (125), and as a teacher. These aspects are modeled below under “techniques.”

View of Maladaptive Behavior

In discussing Satir, separation of a view of maladaptive behavior from basic conceptions is difficult. I would add that it also seems counterproductive in that she intertwines these so carefully that to force a separation of the two is contrary to her practice and way of thinking. Indeed, in the section (above) on concepts of assumptions, maladaptive behavior was already introduced and discussed. Here I wish to view maladaptive behavior as the concrete manifestation of dysfunctional relationships caused by the juncture of individuals with low self-esteem with one another and the offspring. Generally speaking, there is an inverse relationship between one’s self-esteem and the indirectness of ones communication.

As mentioned, the parents with low self-esteem look to the child as a mechanism for enhancing their own self-worth. Thus comments, both positive and negative, from the external community reflect upon their own self-worth. They have an inordinate need for approval from the child which makes discipline difficult. In addition, they also look to the child as an ally against the other parent, a messenger between the parents, a pacifier of the mate, and eventually place the child in some sort of conflict that demands of choice of one parent over the other. This militates against identifying with individuals of one sex or the other and thus against the child’s own sexual identity and sense of self. (61-59) The parents are not aware of these subconscious behaviors on their own part and, when the child exhibits dysfunctional behavior, they tend to attribute it to external factor because their very lack of self-esteem makes it difficult for them to realize that they have a profound effect on the child. (36-24)

Eventually, this double-bind situation takes its toll on the child who comes to the attention of the therapist as the Identified Patient. The double bind is not merely the inability to satisfy both parents at the same time, but the inability to satisfy conflicting sides of the same parent. An example given is that of the father who demands that his son obey him in all things and then objects to the son’s lack of manliness in failing to stand up to him. The I.P. actually acts out the conflicts within and between the parents and helps maintain the family homeostasis until the community objects to or at least points out the child’s behavior and may even take the child away from the parents. If parents are alert to this possibility, they may seek therapy for the I.P. (24-55)

Throughout, Satir (1983, 1988) and Satir and Baldwin (1983) identifies four distinct forms of defensive and indirect communications and provides alternatives. Later (1991), she generalizes on being “centered” in providing a consistent and congruent manner of communication. This theme, however, runs throughout her career.

She divides dysfunctional communicators into four categories: placaters, blamers, computers, and the distractor. The placater is unable to communicate for fear of getting the other person angry, so the message becomes “whatever you want is okay.” (People Making, 63). The blamer is aggressive and even violent at times so that the other person will regard him or her as strong, but who inside feels lonely and unsuccessful. (1972:66) The computer gives the impression of being ultra-reasonable and even evokes envy in the other, but inside feels vulnerable (1972:68) and hides behind intellect, all the while feeling vulnerable. The distracter is never on the point, but goes off in different directions at once, feeling that they do not belong anyway. (1972:70)

Therapeutic Goal

The therapeutic goal is recognized by the fifth category, leveling, and her therapy focuses on this. She is very succinct and clear on this point in her discussion of criteria for terminating treatment.

Family members need to be taught how to interpret hostility, complete transactions, see themselves as others see them (sic), see how they see themselves, tell one another how they appear to them, express hopes, fears, and expects from the other. In addition, the should be able to disagree, make choices, learn through practice, free themselves from the negative aspects of the past, and communicate congruently. Their language and communication pattern is delineated, meaning having a sense of ego integrity, a knowledge on the difference between the “you” and the “I”, and be clear.

In one of the best, most succinct, and meaningful statements I have seen in the literature of Psychology, she summarizes it by saying “in short, treatment is completed when everyone is the therapy setting can use the first person ‘I’ followed by an active verb and ending with a direct object.” (227-228)

Techniques

Most of Satir’s techniques seem to have been invented on the spot to communicate a particular problem to a particular family. After awhile, they have become associated with her and, in my opinion, run the risk of becoming reified into a “cookbook” approach—that is to say, a new therapist may decide, “well, sculpting is supposed to work, I guess I’ll try that.” The point is that these techniques may become useful as they are, but it is more important to understand the process and goals of them. In general, her techniques are ways of communicating visually what has not been effectively communicated orally. In all cases, they are designed as a way to break through to the clients.

Since “Family sculpting” seems to be a trademark technique, I will start with that. When observing a dysfunctional family interacting, and being unable to explain in words what is going on, or when one of the member is unable to express what is going on, it may be successful to have one of the members to place the other members in postures that they think best illustrates how each member is relating and communicating. The visual representation is then processed and discussed. Other family members may be very surprised to see how that members views them, this having been the only time that member was able to communicate that fact. Through the discussion, more effective ways of relating and communicating can be taught.

Let us take the example of a family with a hyperactive child. In this particular case, depending of course on my assessment of the cognitive levels of the parents, I would actually use the body sculpting technique and I would have the hyperactive child do the sculpting. This would allow me to visually see the child interact with the parents and also illustrate how the child sees the relationship.

After that, there would be a general discussion of the situation. I would point out that, barring physiological reasons of course, the hyperactivity is the child’s way of reacting to the family structure. Much would depend on the here and now of the child’s sculpture and how the parents related to it.

One possible sculpture would be both the parents facing one another with their fingers pointed. This would indicate a blaming communication pattern within the parent’s relationship to which the child is reacting. After discussing the reframed situation as establishing it as the real problem (after all, it would be the I.P.’s vision of how things were and how the I.P. reacts to it that they are concerned with—namely, the hyperactivity), I would then proceed to teach both a “leveling” form of communication.

I think that answers the question on the academic level, but I want to add that for one to apply Satir’s method, one must be a keen observer, very involved, and able to establish close and caring relationships with all involved. What technique would work would actually depend more on how the therapist applies it within the therapeutic relationship. Often new techniques are invented on the spot and then later integrated into a theory or approach for formal presentation. The real work is done instinctively—with preparation and a belief in the importance of human communication every present, but instinct is the guide.

The division of the self into distinct entities which results in double bind messages can be addressed through “parts parties.” Each member has parts of the personality labeled and written on a piece of paper. Then, two members assume the identities of one of their own parts and role-plays. They can then see how the various parts of themselves interrelate and relate to various parts of the other’s personalities. Again, after the exercise, the results are processed and the experience is used for illustrating more effective communications techniques.

Another technique might address the topic of hidden rules within a family. Sometimes the rule is adopted that no one is supposed to talk about certain things, such as the fact that the youngest child was born without an arm (1972:99). You may have the family, independently or preferably together, start to make a list of these rules so that they better understand their subconscious inter-relating processes. Then, as usual, process the exercise, discussing the rules.

Perhaps my favorite is the strings. Get a ball of yarn or string and cut it into five foot strands. Attach each family member to another family member with one of the strands. Eventually, you will have a grid-like layout showing direct lines of communication between each member, but also triangles showing how each set of three are linked to one another. This is helpful in introducing the concept of the family system and discussing how each member affects the other. It also allows for discussion of the roles of each member with one another, with the group, and within the triangle—after all, in a triangle, the third person needs to fulfill some function, is it helpful and how? In a five member family, there will be forty-five triangles. (1972:148-149)

To continue with this technique, it is also helpful in explaining to families what happens when one member changes considerably while the other members remain static. One way of modifying this techniques, which I developed on the spot when dealing with an alcoholic family which had developed all the classic roles of the alcoholic family (drinker, enabler, hero, scapegoat, lost child, and mascot), was to explain that father would be a different person. This was done after the lines were drawn and discussed. Then, to illustrate the need for adapting, I said, “It is as if he moved here” and then moved him to a different position, between two different family members. All the lines became confused, overlapped, tangled. This illustrated the need for new communication patterns and then I cut the strings. I sensed a tangible feeling of relief and liberation.

This afforded me the perfect opportunity to introduce the use of the “I” statement, emphasizing that it was both an opportunity to assert one’s differentness and to take responsibility for ones own feelings.

One final technique (there are many) can be used with a family that seems to be making demands on one particular members. Each member of the family grabs one part of that members body and then pulls in opposite directions. Again, a physical demonstration of what is going on. This one may not be a very good one to use with people who are skittish about being touched and Satir’s own penchant for hugging people is not very likely to be productive today with professional concerns as they are, but a Virginia Satir would know when and how to use these techniques and when to invent others.

Conclusion

Ones first impression of Virginia Satir is bound to be disappointing if one expects and clinical, linear, scientific presentation. On the other hand, I have tried to illustrate, through my own experience with her works, from my first impression through utilizing her techniques and discussing them, how she presents a coherent view of how to work with families. In fact, her view and approach is so coherent that it is nearly impossible to rear it apart into constituent pieces. I think this is one of her greatest strengths. If a family is a living, organic, system, composed of constantly evolving human beings, and a therapist is someone who grows by adapting to new situations while remaining centered, certainly a theory that reflects this dynamism both on the levels of theory and practice is necessary. Such is what Satir has offered and I hope this short paper has at least provided enough background for those who are not familiar with her to make a start in that direction.