FAMILY PROCESS a, *Contestoe Metacon. ‘pin della Famiglia” 1a, Neurologia e Pei. 180, 1: Boscoto, Ls Cre. G."Die erste Strang Familientherapie 197-207, 1977, ounterparados, New 11978, 4 be addréssed to Savazzana 45, 95100 The Greek Chorus and Other Techniques of Paradoxical Therapy PEGGY PAPP, A.C.S.W.t This paper has described some of the interventions developed at the Ackerman Brief Therapy Project in treating the families of symptomatic children. The interventions are based upon a differential diagnosis of the family eystem and upon an evaluation of that system's resistance to change. They are classified as compliance-based or defiance-based, depending upon the family's degree of anzi- ety, motivation, and resistance. Paradoxical interventions, which are defiance. based, are used as « clinical tool in dealing with resistance and circumventing the ower struggle between therapist and family. A consultation group acting as a Greek chorus underlines the therapist's interventions and comments on the con- sequences of systemic change. This group is also sometimes used to form a therapeutic triangle among the family, therapist and group, with the therapist and group debating over the family’s ability to change. ape ACKERMAN Brief Therapy Project was organized in 1974 under my and Olga Silverstein’s direction to experiment with the use of paradox in treating families with symptomatic children, Initially it was composed of eight self-selected family ther- apists' previously trained at the Ackerman Institute for Family Therapy. Building on the ideas of others who have made use of paradox in family therapy, such as Haley, Erickson, Selvini Palazzoli, Watzawick, Weaklend, and Fisch, the Project quickly took a direction of its own and developed its own unique characteristics, ‘Our use of paradox is based on an under- standing of three concepts: the concept of Ackerman Institute for Family Therapy, New York NY. *Oiga Silverstein, Paul DeBell, Gillian, Walker, ‘John Clarkin, Betty Lundquist, Richard Evans, Pegey Papp, Joel Berpman. Lynn Hoffman and Amita “Morewets joined the group ata later date. ily as a self-regulatory system, the | concept of the symptom as @ mect {or selfregulation, and the concept of sxe temic resistance to change, resulting from | the prece ig two, Because the symptom is / gulate a dysfunctional} h fem the symptom is eliminated,that | “The most comimion example 7 parents who divert their conflict through a child’s activating a symptom. In alleviating the-symptom in the child, thé Gnresolved issues between the parents become ex- posed, creating @ great deal of anxiety and, ‘W strong resistance (change. We use par- ‘edox primarily as a clinical tool for dealing with this resistance and circumventing 2 power struggle between the family and the therapist. : Families with symptomatic children usv- ally present the therapist with a contradic- tory request, asking that the symptom be changed without changing their system. 7 « (0014-7870/80/1901-0045S02.00/0 © Family Process, ine.ions that ie system in such a way that one cannot be changed juithout changing the other. In so doing the therapist sets the terms for the therapeutic contest. The central issue is no longer how cro elimifate the sympiom but what wil happen 11 eliminated: the herapevtic ent is shifted from the “problem™— (gecrid of t—to how thesfamnily will survive rected by its ab- at way, and Wi They do ugh this systemic redefining, a per- ceptual erisis is created, following which the family finds it increasingly difficult to regulate itself through a symptom and be- gins to regulate itself differently. One of the distinguishing features of our work is the differential and alternate use of paradox with other types of interventions. Experience has shown that paradox is nei- ther always necessary nor desirable. Our its use is besed on our evalus- tion of the degree of resistance to change in that part of the system that the sy’ no need to resort to ‘Also there are certain crisis situation, am ‘as violence, sudden grief, attempted suicide, oss of employment, or unwanted preg- nancy, in which a paradox would be inap- ‘propriate, as the therapist needs to move in uieMy to provide structure and control We reserve-paradoxical-interventions-for ‘hose covet Jong-tanding, repetitious pat. terns of interaction that do not responc direct interventions such as logical expla- iafions or rational suggestions ‘allowing @ description of interven\| tions classified under the headings of Direct Interventions or Compliance-Based,’ refer- These terms were coined by Rohrbaugh, Tennen etal. (ai. FAMILY PROCESS ring to the therapists expectation that the family will comply with them, and Para- Gorical Interventions or Defiance-Based,? referring to the therapist's expectation that the family will defy them. Direct Interventions, Compliance-Based By direct interventions are meant advice, explanations, suggestions, interpretations, and tasks that are meant to be taken liter- ally and followed os prescribed. They are aimed at directly changing family rules or roles. They include coaching parents on ‘how to control children, xedistritating jobs among family members, establishing disci- plinary rules, regulating privacy, establish- ing age hierarchy, and_providing informa- tion thet the family lacks. They also include “promoting open colimunication, eliciting feelings,-giving”personal-feedback to” the family and interpreting family interaction. Direct interven yen with the ex- pectation that they wil be followed and therefore are used when itis felt the family vill respond to them. retadoxical Interventions, Defiance- Towing them to the point of absurdity and recoiling. Ifa family continually defies com- pliance-based interventions, it ean be safely assumed there is some hidden interaction in the system that undermines their useful- rness—some secret alliance, contest, or co- alition that the family is reluctant to reveal or change. et of the systemic par: adox_is this hidden interaction that _ex- nesses itself in a symptom, The three ma- {jor techniques used in designing and apply- ing a systemic paradox are: redefining, pre- scribing, and restraining. 22 int ry Rl ka veacing the cycle that pro% i] PAPP Redefining ‘The_purpose of redefining is to change the family’s pereeption of the problem. The symptom is redefined from a foreign ele- ment outside the system to an essential part of it. Behavior thst maintains the symptom is defined as benignly mowsated ‘Anger is de- distancing asa way of reinforcing closeness, etc. Rather than trying to change the sys- tem directly, the therapist supports it, re specting the inner emotional logic on which it mins, Prescribing Having defined the symptom-producing cycle of interaction positively, it is then prescribed as an inevitable conclusion of the family’s own logic. By consciously tom, itloses its power to produce 2 symp- we are made se cement abra Letzplicit and the family must take responsi- pl bility for its own actions. In the words of Foucault (2), the family “is led through a state in which it is confronted by itself and forced to argue against the demands of its for A prereauis idle the manner in which they activate one an- che Restraining If the therapist is to be consistent with the above two steps, whenever the family shows.signs_of changing, He/she must re- strain_them, If indeed the symptom is an essential element in the functioning of this system, and the therapist respects that sys- tem, he/she can only worry about change. Ashe family recoils from this prescription and-presses for change, the therapist regu- its je/she constantly enumer- ates-the consequences of the change and Fam, Proc, Vol 19, March 1960 ation. ‘A prerequisite for preseribing this cycle _ is, ee bi the symptom_and the system and 1a Jpates the new difficulties that_will se, predicts how they wil affect the sys- tem, and cannousiyallows_ the family-to usly allows the-fami change-in spite of these. Following is an example of a systemic paradox: In a family in which an 8-year-old boy was failing in school, the therapist deter- mined that the symptom served the func- tion of keeping mother's disappointment, focused on her son, Billy, rather than on her husband. The husband was failing in ‘business and rather than redoubling his efforts was sinking into apathy, leaving mother to shoulder much of the financial ‘burden. He gave off signals that he would collapse if eonfronted openly with this is- sue, and mother collaborated in protecting him. Whenever she became angry at his lack of ambition, she nagged Billy to straighten out and make something of him- self, do his homework, practice his violin, lean up his room, etc. Mother and Billy would end up fighting, and father would Tetire to the den to watch television. Both parents denied there was a marital problem, the wife stating, “My husband doesn’t like to fight, and I've accepted this.” ‘The therapist told the mother it was important far her to contanie t cxpress her izappointment in Billy because otherwise un begin t-exprese HEF sas tion with her husk ees abe ty as her husband might-become-depressed, and since Billy wes younger and more ilient vast ake it ‘ily was advised to continue to is father by keeping mother's dis- “appointment Tocuse ther ‘ear ere Te ‘mother ‘an TAM “Fecoil saying, “You're suggesting I fight with my 8-year- old son instead of my husband, a grown man? Why should I damage my son to protect my husbend?,” thus defining her ‘own predicament: The husband supported the therapist, saying he thought her sug- gestion was a good one “because Billy bounces right back, With him it doesn’t last 4 2 _8 ‘i for a long period of time, and he doesn't eet depressed like I do. Besides, we can't know for sure if it’s doing him any damage.” Mother was outraged at her husband's val- idation of the therapist’s perception and proceeded to fight with him. The conflict ‘was refocused onto the parents, and Billy ‘was released from his middle position. De- fining and prescribing their system in a way that was both accurate and unacceptable ‘made it impossible for them to continue it. Pitfalls ‘There are several mistakes made by be- sinners in trying to follow this procedure; they are regularly brought to the attention dure Whoh leaching i The mest mon ply_preserbi {Eutiptoriwimvour coniiecting i ‘yueiy cTierelore we somites “hea, ‘Billy, you should keep failing in school and disappointing mothe: scribing the system, such as, “Billy, you should continue to fail in school and dis- appoint mother; mother, you should con- tinue to fight with Billy; and father, you should continue to withdraw.” Again, the system isnot Connected with the symptom na Greular definition. Reversals, Defiance-Compliance-Based real isan intervention in which the Chalgbt Mocs someone in the fama reverse-his attitude or behavior around a crucial issue in the-hope that it will elicit paradoxical-response from another-femily ber. It_is both defiance and compli- ance-based. It requires the conscious coop- eration of the family member who is being instructed by the therapist and the defiance of the family member who is receiving the Fesults of the instruction. Reversals are use- ful when one member of the family is eo- operative and will follow direct advice and FAMILY PROCESS another will resist it. For example, in a family in which a wife resented an overly close relationship between her husband and his mother, the therapist instructed the wife (privately) to reverse her attitude re- garding the relationship. Rather than take her usual stance of opposing it (which only solidified it), the therapist suggested she find ways of praising the beauty of this rare ‘mother-son devotion and suggest that her husband spend even more time with his mother. The wife, as expected, complied with the therapist's instructions; the bus- band, as expected, defied his wife's instruc- tions by becoming less involved with his mother. ‘Reversals.can be used effectively in help- ing parents handle rebellious children, Re- rMarkeble results can be achieved in a short ‘ef of tie tthe parent a wine ta follow-the therapist's SEE SEILE Be givenithe person who ls om ‘esiving eet Shad Bot Be pizsmnt, as the sucseavgPUTevETaT debe on that person being surprised and reacting spontaneously téan unexpected change of attitude. For example, in @ family with a 13-year-old son who was flunking school as a reaction to the constant pressuring of his parents, the parents were instructed to tell the young- ster that they were really not that con- cerned about his grades because if he had ‘to stay home and attend summer school, at least they would know he was safe and they would be able to keep their eye on him all Reversals are used in the Brief Therapy Project when it is felt one segment of the family is capable of reversing a core position that will affect another segment of the fam- ily. ‘A combination of the above techniques is used with most families during the course of treatment, based on the therapist's eval- uation of the compliance-defiance factor. Consultation Group a8 @ Grek ‘Chorus Another distinguishing feature of our work is the use of a consultation group to dremeetdedtncsiec a sctigibsiben ttPAPP underline the therapist's interventions, This group is composed of colleagues in the Brief Therapy Project who alternate in ob- serving one another from behind the one- way mirror. This group acts as a Greek Chorus, providing @ running commentary ‘on the interaction between the family and the therapist. It is the voice of the family prophet, proclaiming the systemic truths in the family and predicting the fiture course of events. Its major preoccupation is with the phenomenon of systemic change. Reg- ular messages are sent in from the group ‘commenting on this phenomenon, how it will come about, what the consequences will be, who will be effected by them, in what way, and what the alternatives are, ‘The messages are formed in collaboration with the therapist who has the final say as to their content and decides on what posi- tion to take in relation to them. At the therapist's discretion, the group can be used to support, confront, confuse, challenge, oF provoke the family, with the therapist free to agree with them or oppose them The group is presented to the family in 4 way that invests it with the highest poe- sible authority. The family are told that they are privileged to have this special re- source available to them under the auspices of the Project, that the group is composed of experts in the field who are authorities on their particular kind of problem. If the family so desire, they are introduced to the group but have no further contact with it, Ttremains at a distance, an invisible eye, an anonymous voice, lending the impact of objectivity. Although we have used the group in the following ways, we believe we have only begun to explore its potential, ‘Support ‘The group is sometimes used simply to praise or support certain aspects of the family that need strengthening. For exam- ple, in a family in which a husband pre- sented a gruff exterior to cover a tender hear, his wife often failed to appreciate his Fom. Proc., Vol. 19, March 1980 14 tenderness, as it was expressed through ges- tures rather than words. Her lack of appre- ciation discouraged him from making fur- ther advances, and he would retreat behind his “don’t give a damn” pose. When he gave her & book of her favorite poems for her birthday, the group used the occasion to define him as a romantic figure. ‘The women in the group were touched by Tom's beautiful gift to Myra, They wish their husbands would think of things like that. ‘They have always felt there was e romantic side to Tom, and they are curious as to how it ‘will express itself in the future. They are take ing bets on it but won't reveal them, In another family the group sent in a ‘message supporting the husband's right to make his own decision as to whether he would attend the therapy sessions, He had refused to come to the first two sessions as & reaction to his wife's persistent coercion, and when he did agree to come for only one session, she used that session to berate him for his lack of concern for his family. “You wouldn't give a damn if we were all dying. The consultation team countered mother's pressure, ‘The group, not having met Jim before, is impressed with his ability to take care of him- self. Somehow the family mythology had led tus to believe differently. Therefore, we respect his decision to come to terms with his life in his own way and feel sure his wife will do the ‘Thus supported, he began coming to the sessions regularly. Public Opinion Polt Sometimes the group is used as a public opinion poll to take odds on the course of change. As the sessions progress, the opin- ion of the group may shift, depending upon which way they wish to throw their weight, In a family in which the therapist was trying to get the parents to keep the chil. ren out of their marital issues, the thera. pist began the interview by stating that the50 / group was split on the crucial issue of whether the parents would be able to pre- vent the children from sabotaging their new-kindled romance. Half the group be- lieved the children would win, but the other half were rooting for the parents. As the session continued and the parents began to Jose, the count shifted and the therapist informed the family that according to the latest pol, all but one person in the group believed the parents had lost the battle. ‘That one person was holding out because he believed that father was stronger than all three children and would find a way of regaining ground. There are many different ways of split- ting the opinion of the group in order to make a therapeutic point. Sometimes it is divided along sex lines to increase the in- centive of each partner in the battle of the sexes. ‘All the women in the group predict it will be the husband who will be responsible for ere: ating the next crisis by drinking too much, but all the men believe the wife will do it by involving her mother in their private affairs. In families in which women’s liberation is a hot issue, it is used as a spur for disen- tanglement, A mirror image of the confliet- ing issues is constructed in the group and fed back to the family. For example, in a family in which the mother wes ambivalent over her own liberation, alternating be- tween an obsessive involvement in a trian- gle with her busband and son and a con- certed effort to get a doctorate in anthro- ology, the group defined and exaggerated the conflict. Mother's predicament has created a political division among the women in the group. One- third feels she should stay home and devote her entire time and attention to her husband and son, as this is the highest achievement a woman can aspire to; one-third feels she has already done this for fifteen years with litte sppreciation from either husband or son for her efforts and that now she has the right 10 fulfil her own creativity and potential; the FAMILY PROCESS remaining third agrees with the latter, that mother has the right to fulfil her own potene tial but is worried that father and son may become totally helpless without her and she should therefore remain at home, Hearing the issues defined in these terms, only the second alternative was acceptable to her. She got her doctorate and gave up trying to change father and son. Surprise and Confusion Since surprise and confusion are impor- tant elements of change, the group is some- ‘times used to produce them. It may send in ‘4 message to arouse the family’s curiosity, stir up their imagination, or provoke them into revealing hidden information. These messages are sometimes left deliberately unclear as an invitation to the family to fill in the gaps. For example, in one family the Parents were extremely closed off and se- cretive, creating a stilted atmosphere of vague foreboding that was difficult to de- cipher. Their adolescent son constantly provoked them with disruptive behavior in an effort to counteract the deadly atmos- phere. This produced a round robin in which the parents engaged in a never-end- ing battle to quiet their son and the son ‘engaged in a never-ending battle to disquiet his parents, The therapist and group speculated that some kind of well-guarded family secret was creating this foreboding ‘atmosphere and the concomitant turmoil. ‘The therapist returned from a consultation with the group to deliver the following mes-_ sage: : ‘The group has the impression that this family is like prison, but it’s unclear who is the jailer and who are the prisoners. Somebody here secretly in his heart might want to escape, but this might be devastating to the family, as itis e very close family, (Turning to the boy) In a sense B., your job is to keep this game of prisoners art jailers going, as in reality that person might try to make a bresk for it, B. stated, “I'm the one that’s locked up." The therapist replied, “I'm not so sure— Ankeny ACTS ia di AYPAPP are you being locked up or locking everyone se up’ During the next session the mother re- vealed she had been thinking of leaving the family for some time. Now that the issue was out in the open it could be dealt with between the parents, and the boy's symp- tom subsided. Forming a Therapeutic Triangle ‘One of the most potent uses of the group is the creation of a therapeutic triangle resulting from an ongoing, planned conflict between the therapist and the group. In this triangle, the group usually takes the position of antagonist of change and the therapist, who has the personal relationship with the family, takes the position of pro- tagonist of change. The group regularly warms the therapist against the conse ‘quences of systemic change and continually defines the part of the system that is work- ing against this. The therapist swings back and forth as family resistance shifts, alte nately agreeing and disagreeing with the group. For example, ina family in which the symptom is the daughter's inability to leave home, the therapist might initially oppose the group by saying, “I disagree with the group that Linda needs to stay home to protect her mother from being alone with her father. I believe mother is capable of handling father and the two of them can manage on their own.” If the parents disprove this, the therapist can shift to, “I see now what the group was trying to tell me about your difficulty in being alone with one another. 1 apologize for having misjudged the situation, It seems the group was right and for the time being Linda needs to remain at home to console her mother.” Remaining Outside the Circle "The therapeutic triangle created among the group, family, and therapist gives the therapist « unique maneuverability, ema- nating from a Uberating distance, In A Journey to Iztlan (1, p. xi), the Indian philosopher, Don Juan, advises the author, Fam. Proc, Vol. 9, March 1980 7 51 Carlos Castenada, “If one wants to stop our fellow men, one must always be outside the circle that presses them. That way one can always direct the pressure.” Carlos has asked Don Juan's advice about a friend of hhis who cannot control his unruly son. Don Juan suggests thet the father go to Skid Row and hire a frightening derelict, instruct the derelict to follow him and his son, and in response to a prearranged cue, after some objectional behavior on his son's part, leap from the hiding place, pick up the child, and spank the living daylights out of him. ‘The father must then console his son and help him regain his confidence. This should be repeated several times in different places. Don Juan assures Carlos that “the boy would soon change his view of the world.” "The consultation group serves a function similar to the derelict, a5 an agent “outside the world that presses them,” and the ther- apist, in a similar postion to the father who ‘directs the pressure.” ‘The physical procedure for using the group can be structured in a variety of ‘ways, Our regular procedure is for the ther- apist to excuse himself or herself near the tend of the session to consult with the group in a different room (leaving the video cam- era running to record the family interac- tion), The therapist then returns with a communication that is usually written and read aloud to the family with a proper solem ‘copy of this communication is then mailed to all family members so they can study it at their convenience, This lends ‘an additional importance and authority to the message. After reading the communi- cation, the therapist terminates the session, not allowing the family to dissipate the content through an intelectual discussion oft. It is dropped like e time bomb and left to explode at a Ister date as the family comprehends it. - "The group is free to'interrupt at any time uring the session of call the therapist out to make suggestions. A pre-arranged signal may be agreed upon by the group and ther-2 / spist, by which the group interrupts at a articular point in time with a particular message. If cotherapy is used (at the discre- tion of the therapists), a three-way strategy [ is worked out between the two therapists and the group. In presenting this material the question is often asked, “What does one do if one doesn’t have a group?” The same principles may be applied by a regular cotherapy team, with each therapist taking an oppos- ing position on various issues, or a trainee and supervisor may agree on a division of opinion around a central theme, or even a single therapist may change his/her own opinion. I've been thinking sbout your family alot, and I realize I've been making a serious mistake in trying to get mother and Susie to stop fighting, because that’s the only time father becomes involved in the family, and if they stopped father might totally disappear, So for the time being, Suzie, i's important for you to fight with your mother until she can find another way to keep father at home. Another question that is raised concerns the effect this has on the child. “Isn’t it harmful to tell the child to continue de- structive behavior in order to save the par- ents?” We believe that is what the child is actually doing and by making the covert overt, we are releasing him or her from that Position, at the same time making the par- ents aware of it. Following Through on a Systemic Paradox After the systemic paradox has been for- mulated and delivered comes the difficult task of following through on it. During the next session the family will most likely not mention the message. They have many in- genious methods for trying to wipe it out, including ignoring it, forgetting it, dismise- ing it, contradicting it, or coming in w new crisis thet has nothing to do with the original problem. the therapist assiduously to hold on to his/ ‘her. cifeular dennltior lem and FAMILY PROCESS to continually fit family behavior into the at requires thE convic- chat his/ spinners often elivering a paradoxical message as they lack this conviction. Afraid the message may sound absurd, they be- come self-conscious and deliver it in a ten- ative way that makes the family feel they are being facetious or sarcastic. In order to be effective, it_must_be stated with the uumost-sinterity-thet-can ofly come fe ystemic tut ie fe fe have found that ho matier how absurd’ messege may sound, someone in the family usually confirms its validity, as in the case of the father who confirmed that it was better for his wife to fight with her son than with him. This has led us to the ‘comforting conclusion that it is difficult, if not impossible, to surpass the absurdity of ‘an emotional system. In order to give the reader as clear an idea as possible of this process, the follow- ing case, in which I was the therapist, is described with some verbatim dialogue. ‘The R. family was referred to the Brief ‘Therapy Project by a trainee who worked in the inpatient unit of a psychiatric hos- pital to which the mother had been taken after a suicide ettempt. Family therapy was recommended when the mother refused to give up her pills. After six sessions the trainee became incapacitated by the sever- ity of the problems in the family and re- ferred the case to our unit. ‘The event that precipitated the mother's suicide attempt was a scuffle over the cou- ple’s “problem son,” Gary, 11. Mother bad been trying unsuccessfully to discipline him. She had called to father for help, but he was asleep end didn’t come, whereupon she went to the bathroom and took an overdose of sleeping pills. During the past-two years father had suffered a series of heart attacks that left him with an “inoperable” heart condition. His doctor had ordered him to stop wark- ing, and he now stayed at home, 2 semi taiidaibsainisinnontsPAPP invalid. ‘The family was beset with every kind of problem—financial, legal, physical, social, and emotional—and lived from crisis to crisis. ‘Not only was Gary's problem an old prob- lem, but the conflict between the parents was of many years’ duration. Five years previously they had been in marital therapy ‘and, according to them, had been told their ‘marriage was hopeless and they should seek a divorce. Instead, they placed Gary in in dividual therapy for three years. The par- ents were involved in a power struggle round every issue of their lives: where they should live—in an apartment or # house, near to his parents or to hers; how much money they should spend; who should do ‘what eround the house; where they should spend their vacation; and who should dis- cipline the children. vere settled by default. The person who couldn't HE aiaT GoW. The family rule was For many years Gary had been at the center of this le. The cycle that ‘maintained the symptom was as follows: ary would misbehave in some Smal SAY, id mother would become angry at father for_not disciple eae die [ee ee eitine Gar in uch 8 wat became us mbeavior She Wo ohn id be “\sick Tm the process, and father_ would be ‘angina attack from the exertion, and Uppysical symptoms were used as a means of control, and each parent kept escalating. Father was now ahead in the contest be- cause of the seriousness of his heart condi- tion, The ante being raised, the mother retaliated by increasing the severity of her colitis, back psins, and severe depression, ‘culminating in a suicide attempt. ‘The contest between the parents might best be described as “he who loses, wins,” the winner not having to take rest ity for-punning the family. It was literally a 1 83 trying to produce a symptom more serious than her husbané’s heart condition. In the middle of attempting to discipline Gary, she would suddenly fall to the floor with an ‘attack of colitis and, according to her, “lie there bleeding for hours, unable to get up.” Or she would develop pains in her back and have to go to bed for a week in traction. ‘After each of father’s hospitalizations she hospitalized herself with one of her symp- toms. Periodically she would threaten to have Gary piaced, screaming, “If he stays here, either I'l Kill him or he'll kill me,” and the cycle continued without end. ‘The children duplicated the contest be- tween the parents, with the younger sister, Sally, 9, developing physical symptoms like her mother to control her brother and par- tents. She had a repertoire of dramatic ail ments, such as nightmares, insomnia, faint- ing spells, stomach pains, headaches, and would declare tearfully in a session, “What ‘about me? I have terrible problems, you know; I'm emotionally disturbed too,” which would prompt the mother to ask if she shouldn't be in individual therapy. Direct interventions such as trying to get the parents to work cooperatively in estsb- lishing consistent controls for Gary or com- ‘municating their own needs directly rather than indirectly, were doomed to failure. ‘There was always a different reason they were unable 6 Tollow through on sue- gestions, or if they di it “contest wi ing its power from being played “outside awareness” of ‘the participants and therefore did not re- ‘spond to suggestions, explanations, or con~ frontations. When the decision was made to use a systemic paradox, I was faced with the difficult task of redefining the deadly ‘contest positively. This was done by de- soribing the power maneuvers as Deifig mo- tivated By To ;. The therapist Sa sage from the eo up stating thet En this family people showed their love for one another_by being miserable so that “other. bers could feel more for- “fight to death with mother desperately _tufate than they. This message was ‘dra Fam. Proe., Vol. 18, March 1960a matized within the family sessions at every ‘opportunity, both in the parental system and the sibling subsystem. For example, during one session Sally talked about win- ning the lead in the school play. Although she wanted it desperately, she complained about getting it as now the other children were jealous of her. She thus managed to tum a winning experience into a losing one. After 8 consultation with the group, the therapist returned with the following mes- sage: Sally is wise to complain and ery at the mo- ‘ment of her greatest triumph, which is winning the lead in the school play. By not appearing joyous, she is following her ‘mother’s example of not allowing herself to feel pleasure. This is for fear of making other family members feel less fortunate. We be: lieve, therefore, that it is only fitting that father and Gary encourage Sally and mother to be unhappy, because in this way they will show their appreciation for what Sally and ‘mother are doing for family closeness. ‘The_family’ mn_can bé ‘- ee ae time the mother mentioned the word “change.” “Isn't ie way to change that? It sounds very bad... Isn't some way we rould'all Téel good, not bad?” questioned the wisdom of this since feeling ‘bad Was their Way Of showing their love for one another. At the Beginning of the following session, 1 asked if they had followed through on the recommendation. Sally piped up with, “Oh, yes, now I remember. We should not allow ‘ourselves to feel happy because the others might feel bad.” Following is a verbatim account of their response: Gary. It says in my mother's peychol- ‘ogy book that if one person is uunhappy-and the other is happy, ill make him feel worse, so the ‘other should become sad fo make hhim not feel as bad. ‘The group feels that’s what goes fon in this family and that you Ther: Mother: Ther: Mother. Ther: Father: Ther: Gary: Ther: Sally: ‘Ther: Ther: Sally: Ther: FAMILY PROCESS show your love for each other by being unhappy and miserable and sick— Isn't there some way to change it somehow or—break the pat. tern? ‘Way. swnuld you want to do that? ‘Beceuse it seems like a sick way of doing things. (tofather): What do you think? | 1 don't know—I don’t quite une derstand—uh—I don't quite see ‘the whole thing. Mm... Gary? In my mother's psychology book it says there should be shifts. I mean we should switch over—I ‘meen one person should feel bad to make another feel better (looking embarrassed by dea), but I don't agree with it, (deciding to prescribe the coe test more explicitly) I would like to suggest something. This may sound crazy, but I'd like to sug- gest it anyway—The next time Gary throws a temper tantrum, Sally, what Id like you todo is— to feel bad (everyone laurhs). ‘arn T can hear his screams. He moans and groaas‘snd whines... ‘At that moment when you see he is going to have one of his weekly temper tantrums, could you act ‘worse...start to ery, start to com- plain about friends in school, um... (Sally giggles), Td imow she was doing thet. It doesn’t matter, Would you do that for him? ‘Yes, but once ina while you be nice tome... : cot atin ‘We'd tal about how he ean reer] ae you later, but fist let's see whether 4Pape. ‘sbout to have a tantrum, you creste ‘a rumpus, I think that will be help- fal to him, ‘And vice verss, Are you willing to do it? Gary: 1 85 Everyone feels good when they have @ secret of some kind, or something that...uh, hum...in a way they're helping someone else. ‘They feel better, they feel good. But I would show whatever's bad Sally: try, bu L want him t poy me br the ode and herp iy Rood back nthe inde Gane Yinow how. Her langage i foul ‘Ther: Le, jus to help Gary. Don't you tod Dad doc ke and she i thik haan of ie? Sent ope noncommitaty): Min hers You mean, when shes in Gee been you'l rescve her by acting up? won't do it. Gary: Yeah, is that what you mean’ Gary: It won't work because you've al- Sati, That paying me back, Teudy tld me you pg fo pre ry: ‘That's what 1 meant it for. i seaeesiereee ee Sally: But you dont know when, Don't Thats very ain fy | worry. wont at yo fel bad TU 1 dit mean to Be ft bat Toop 0 happy. You dda? Gory: But you can 1 know you wil No(porents laugh. Tobiecttochis Selly: Youll forget all about, don't ho ting won. hers What would youdoifshe bests © Gor: Tdoubtit throws : Saye Try hard ot wo beep in ming Gor: wosld begin to ory and om Don't warn) Ont ousie' el Fleir=butut as 1 ad, Tm Body but on the ise fel good. Peat chs wba te. How can sou bow bow Ife on ‘Sally: What happens if one person disre- the inside? You can't ‘gards this request? By openly prescribing the secret contest, Ganz Yeah Le ifonepeeon doses’ doi Yabbed of eT PONE 4 ‘raha of the wrk _the quality of ST inTocent game. Having ‘Then Then suppose the other person &- Hlefined it as being motivated by caring and minded him. If you start to throw protectiveness, it is now being played in Ril tanrumyoucouldsyt9 hat opin. Saly, "Please rescue me” (much | ‘The therapist then tums to the parents laughter). land prescribes their contest, i Gary: WhatifThelp her one day and she Tene aat es Taman should | Ther When one of you x fcing rs baeimsiant Gee further to allow the one to come | * Thert Yeu remind be, and you remind. | . kin : Rather: Mont knoe Sally then offers to sacrifice herself by ‘What are the signs? not showing her brother how good she feels about being in the school play. Sally: Tecan keep him happy by forgetting what's happening in school. The play will only last few days, Fam, Proc., Vol. 19, March 1960 Ther.: tire more easily (to mother); Can you make him feel |] better sbout his physical condition /36 / Father: She does Ther: She does? Father: Yes. She slways tires before me, Ther: Then what about feeling worse physically than he does to make hhim feel strong and healthy, you do that? Mother: 1 don't think that works. Father: She docs, Ther.’ She does? Father: She does to en extent, Between her back and her colitis... Ther: Maybe. Father: We plan to do things and when the ay comes she doesn't feel like it and we cancel our plans so it's an. other boring day, Ther: How do you convey to your hus- band that you're in a worse state than he is? Wife: 1 don't know...if Tam, I am. Why shouldn't everyone feel good st Both parents and children then collude to dismiss the contest. They talk about all feeling good and doing things together. This ends up with father relating a recent anec- dote about buying tickets for a play, but having an argument about which play, and ‘other geting sick so they couldn't go, Ther: don't think both feeling good to- ether is the answer. The children try again to’ work out a compromise solution for their parents, which goes nowhere. Ther: (to children): You're trying to work it out so they're both happy, but 1 don't think that will work, Aus- band) You must get more unhappy when you see her down in order to bring her up. And you have to get ‘more unhappy to bring your hus- bend up. Father: You're seying if one feels unhappy the other person will forget how FAMILY PROCESS lunheppy he feels...to help the other person? ‘That's right, that’s right, Tve seen these shifts. I've seen things like thet. Not so much now as when I was sicker. When I felt bad e number of times, you have felt very bad. One of us had to do something—prepare = meal or ‘something like that—and I was al- ready bad and you all of a sudden ‘say you're worse, £0 I would heve to go make the dinner. And I would be angry at you because you always ‘seem to find yourself sick when I'm sick. That is what I think we're getting at. But look, it was helpful to you be- cause you got up and did it ‘Just because I did it doesn't mean Tfelt any better, (to mother): Some place, deep down inside, you were being helpful to your husband. Because it got me up? (to wife: Deep down inside you knew if you felt worse than he did, it would help him, and you're very protective of him. And when do ‘you protect her like that? You're saying when do T do it con- sciously? Well, or unconsciously. I may be doing it subconsciously. Okay. 1t doesn't matter. See if you can figure out when you do it un- consciously. When do you feel worse in order to make her feel better when she's down? ‘When I feel worse I don't think I put it on, ‘You're not as protective of her as she is of you? When she feels bad I try to take over some of the burden.” , He then describes taking over the disci- plining of Gary. Ther: Father: Father: Ther: Father: Ther: Father: Ther: Father: 4 }PAPP Ther: In a sense you don't have to try as hard as your wife does because of your health. You're slways worse off than she. Father: 1 don't think recently I've felt in poorer condition than she. ‘The therapist excused herself for a con- sultation and returned with the following reinforcement from the group. ‘The group would bike to applaud mother for her efforts to be more unhappy then her hus- band. Because of her great love for him, she Iknows that the best way to energie him when hie feels low is to be even more dispirited than he so that he can rise to the occasion by helping her. She knows if she were to become energetic and take over, father might become ‘more of an invalid. "Therefore, we recommend thet the moment she sees that her husband is tempted to give {in to his illness she let herself become more miserable than he. In case she misses the signal, he should let her know in whatever ‘way he feels is eppropriate. ‘We also recommend that Selly and Gary Fam. Proc., Vol. 19, March 1960 1 87 ‘continue to provide their parents with a good example by rescuing each other when either is in trouble. ‘The hidden power struggle was no longer hidden. It was rendered impotent through its exposure and scheduling. The denial and subterfuge surrounding it were replaced with conscious intention, which made it difficult to continue it in the same virulent way. REFERENCES 1. Castewapa, C, A Journey to Iatlon, New York, Simon and Schuster, 1973, 2, Foucavtr, M., Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Rea- ‘son, New York, Pantheon, 1965. 3, Rounbavon, TENNEN ET Al, “Paradoxical Strategies in Psychotherapy,” Paper read at the meeting of the American Psycho- logical Association, San Francisco, 1977. Reprint requests should be addressed to Peggy Papp, Ackerman Institute for Family ‘Therapy, 149 East 76th Street, New York, N-Y, 10021. bese testeThe Reflecting Team: Dialogue and Meta-Dialogue in Clinical Work* TOM ANDERSEN, M.0.t EE EEE SaaS Ce eee ee A “stuck” system, that is, @ family with @ problem, needs new ideas in order to broaden its perspectives and its contex- tual premises. In this opproach, a team behind a one-way screen watches and lis- tens to an interviewer's conversation with the family members. The interviewer,with the permission of the family, then asks the team members about their perceptions of what went on in the interview. The family fand the interviewer watch and listen to the team discussion. The interviewer then asks the family to comment on what they have heard. This may happen once or several times during an interview. In this article, we will first describe the way we interview the jamily because the interview is the source fram which the refiections fiw. We will then describe and exemplify the reflecting team's manner of working and give some guidelines because the pro- "Tie author thanks the fllowing professionals at Avsganrd. Hospital for their contributions to the evelopment of the reflecting team: Carsten Berke, MLD. Bivind Eckholl, M.D, Byém 2. Bkelund. Psy: Chol, Anna Margsete Flim, Psychol. Magnus Hald, MD. Per Lutnes, Psychol, Toni! Moe, MSW. ‘Toygve Nissen, MLD, Lacents Now, M.D, Tivedar Scots, Paychol, Bise Suberg, MSM, Fino Wan tern, MSW, god Knut Waterloo, Psychol. Thanks tise w Lynn Hoffman and Imelda McCarthy for their tdivria advice and help 1 Professor of Social-aychiatry, University of “teomnsé, Institute of Community Medicine and Aas read University Mental Hospital, P.O. ox 417, ‘9001 Tromes Norway cess of observation has a tendency to mag- nify every utterance. Two case examples will be used as illustrations. Fam Proc 26:415-428, 1987. Se rears ago we were supervising ‘a young family interviewer who was repeatedly drawn into the pessimism of the family he was interviewing. The three of us who were observing from behind the screen called him out three times to suggest more optimistic questions to him, but each time the family pulled him back into their pes- simism, We knew that there was a set of microphones and speakers in both rooms ‘and asked if the family and interviewer would like to listen to the three of us talk. "The lighting and the sound were switched, and the family and interviewer watched ‘and listened to the team reflecting in a more positive fashion about the famil Phe sound and the lighting were then switched back and the family interview proceeded in a more optimistic fashion. Later, when we discussed this innovation, it was striking how everyone liked the pro- cess of reflecting. ‘The family liked it; the interviewer and the reflecting team liked its and everyone we talked to about it liked 1 “Phis is how the “reflecting team” bexan, THE BACKGROUND OF OUR WORK As Arthur Kuestler (7} noted in his book ‘The Act of Creation: “It [the creative act) 45 (0014-7370/87/2604-0816/82.00/0 © 1987 Family Process, Inc.416 / does not create something out of nothing; it uncovers, selects, reshuffles, combines, synthesizes already existing facts, ideas, faculties,” skills, ‘The more familiar the arts, the more striking the whole” (p. 120). In ine with this observation, the main contributions to our mode of working have been the'writings of Gregory Bateson and Humberto Maturana (1-3, 6, 8, 9, 15) and our observations of certain family thera- ists working with families. These thera- pists are members of the Milan team in Italy, of the Ackerman Institute in New York, and of the Galveston Family Insti- tute in Texas: What impressed us the most ‘was the carefulness and genuine respect these teams showed for the integrity of those persons with whom they talked, Our interest in the writings of Bateson and Maturana focused primarily on what they wrote about epistemology. Both agree that it-is the observer who generates ‘the distinctions we call “reality.” One's picture of or knowledge about the world will be the basis for one’s attitude to it. Because per- sons experiencing: the same. world “out there” make different pictures of it, prob- lems will arise when they debate which Picture sis: right: either. mine or yours. ‘Maturana speaks not of the universum but of ‘the multiversa—the many -possible meanings that constitute our many possi- ble worlds. ‘Phat is why he puts the word “ohjectivity” in:parentheses.. He means, I helieve, that-one should think of the pic- tore and its-explanation more in terms of both-and or neither-nor, and leave out the eitherfor. A living system composed of two or more persons allows the possibility for exchang- ing pictures and: explanations, When two persons share: their views; each receives from the other different versions of “real- ity." These differences. will give new per. spectives to each person's picture, and the enriched pictures created from these ongo- ing differences can become, as'Bogdan (5) FAMILY PROCESS calls it, an ecology of ideas. These exchanges, which one can hardly escape make life an ongoing, changing process, AAs I understand Maturana (8), he says that living entities are “structurally deter mined.” That is, they can operate only ecg of and in accord with the way they. re built. In a system of two or more people, the exchanges between them must respect the fact that the persons must remain the way that they are, This applios as well ne the relationship between groups of people, say a family in trouble and a helping team Both groups have to acknowledge the oth rs need to-retain its pattern of ongoing relationships. very living aystem is orgee nized as an autonomous system, and only the system itself knows how and when ft ready to chang its structure, or when it ir ready to disintegrate: and: cease to. o One part, whether e group or a-persom, ‘must bear in mind that the other part ext only participate through one of the modes of relating that is already available in Tepertory. If the'relationship between the arts is “safe” enough, -nonintrusive enough, interesting ‘enough, the “mutuel exchanges thet carry newideas may trigger new modes of relating. According to Maturana (9), there are three ways to foster variety, change, and observerhood ina: relationship. One. through love: Another is to become a “for, cigner” who, because of a different back. ground, ean adda new and exciting version of the world to the one the aystem hod before. The third possibility is that one can Dill back into loneliness for a while, whieh wwe in the North of Norway do when we disappear into the mountains and come back asa “smal” foreigner. Bateson points out the importance of sharing different versions of the. same World. A different version infhiences: the Person's attitude to that world and makes it different than it wes before. In thers: Peutic settings; this means that the newANDERSEN Versions presented to the stuck system Tove it away from the “standstill” around the problem. In cousidering Bateson's (1) statement that information “is a difference which makes a difference” (p. 453), we found it important to differentiate betweon three kinds of difference. The first is {itference that is too small o be noticed by the recipient, The second is an appreciable fltference, meaning that itis big enough to be noticed. The third is a difference that ic ico great and may have a disorgenizing effect on the system. In such cases, the system often closes itself to those whe Would try to implement such a difference, From considerations such as these have come a few general guidelines and some sinaller, guided steps for our work, MAIN WORKING GUIDELINES ist, a system that is standing still con- tains too many repeating samenesses (16) and too few new differences. A helper must basically respect the sameness because it represents where and how the present sys. {em is and has to be. In practical terms, this ‘means that the helping team has to find a Pot too unusual setting in order to talk about not too unusual issues ina not too Yhusual manner. Its important to respect the stuck system's resistance to that which {s too unusual. The only way to know if one. ison the right side of this boundary is to be Sensitive for signs the system itself gives us when it closes itself to our questions. So we ‘must let our imagination fly freely, but not too freely, in order to find questions that will be diferent enough but not wv ditt ferent from those the system usually asks itself. Second, the main structure of the inter- view is an oscillation between three levels that have been described by Blount (4) One is called the picture-tevel, one the explanation-level, and one the alternative. level. 1 like to depict this structure accord. ing to the schema below (see Figure 1) Fam. Proc., Vol. 26, December 1987 yaar They Fie. 1. Exchange of descriptions of picture, expl ‘ations ofthe problem, and eherantive dese Dopending on what the family members are willing to talk about, I begin to ask uestions and to draw my own picture of {heir picture, nuanced, of course, according {fo my epistemology. I assume that my Questioning will evoke new and different answers that will prompt new questions, all of which will create @ hopefully wider and more elaborate picture for them and myselt. 1 then ask them what explanation they have for the picture. Tracing the evolution of the picture over time, it often becomes clear that the problematic issue has vari which suggests that it might also vary in the future. One can then appropriately ask Some of hypothetical questions about the future of the kind that Penn (12) has writ, ten about. These questions, which one ean use only if the family does not believe the future is predetermined, take the form of asking if there are any changes anyone might like Lo make in the picture, and then asking what the consequences would be if that happened. One can also ask what would happen to the situatie the picture if another explanation for the picture emerged, Allernative approaches ike this may Provide alternative answers to troublesume Situations, as well as allowing more flexibil,a8 / ity in the family's thinking process. The team behind the screen will, in addition to making their own pictures, explanations, and alternatives, have the possibility of thinking about how family members draw their pictures, how they explain them, and how they invent alternatives. The inter- viewer may, as already suggested, shift from a “what is?” (picture) question to the meta-level “how come?” (explanation) question ‘One has to bear in mind that there will never be two families that. will depart from the “standstill” of a problem at the same speed. The circular questioning invented by the Milan team (11, 13) is introduced according to the family’s readiness for it. ‘The Milan group's strong emphasis on neu- trality ond its care in avoiding negative connotation is also used in our work. These two aspects of the work are considered necessary for the family to move to a meta position in relation to itself. ‘Small Guided Steps The steps mentioned helow may follow ¢ different sequence in the session because they can he taken whenever it seems most natural Watching the Openings for Conversation When the problematic situation is brought up by the family, there may he some marked utterances or expressions of emotion. If this happens, one should slow down and let the family have a chance t elaborate on these emotions because they are signifieant and may lead to the “core” of the problem, How Unusual is the Setting ‘Two of the team members first meet with the family to explain the setting, namely, that they would prefer te work with a one-way sereen and a team, This procedure allows the family to excuse themselves from such a setting if it is too FAMILY PROCESS unusual and to continue only with the two therapists. History of the Decision to Seek Help Everyone in the family is caught between two desires: to make @ change and not to make any change. Some may lean toward one end of the continuum, some toward the other, and there may be one person who is extremely suspicious of change. This is an important person to keep in touch with because that person is in charge, one might say, of conserving the family status quo. He or she should be checked with frequently or consulted in order to assess if the discus- sion is within safe limits. Some of our questions are: "Who was the person who first had the idea to come here?” “Who did this person consult first? Who second?” “Who was most pleased by the idea? Who was the most reserved?” “If the person who first presented the idea had not done s0, would another person have done it?” “Which of you talked the most together about the meeting beforehand?” “When you woke up this morning, who most looked forward to coming here?” “What did you hope to achieve from this meeting?” ‘The Problem ‘The following questions can be asked about the problem: “What is the problem or problems?” “Who agrees and who dis- agrees with the various definitions of the problem?” “What is the history of the prohlem? When did it start? Have there been any shifts?” “What is your explana- tion?” “Who is involved? How are they involved?” “Who came on the scene first? Who next? Who of the nersons involved in the problem is least invalved”” How is it that some persons became invelved and some not?” volved?” “What have the various people who are involved done to resulve the prab= Jem’ How did the others respond when this person made his or her attempt? If another Which agencies are inANDERSEN person had made the attempt, how would the outcome be different?” “If another explanation emerged for the problem, what, would happen?” What is the Usual Pattern This will emerge in the family’s way of presenting themselves, The team will have to be aware, therefore, of who sits next to whom in the circle of chairs that we set up beforehand. Who sits in opposition to ‘whom? Are some persons repeatedly agree- ing and some repeatedly disagreeing? Is the family strongly tied together or strongly disconnected? Families that are strongly tied together tend to present simi- larities. This indicates that questions Uhat reveal differences will be of value. Families in which members keep each other at a distance tend to present very different ‘opinions and attitudes and might be asked ‘questions about similarities. Whether the Questions are congruent. or incongruent with the family will be shown by its signs of openness to the interviewer. Soe families or family members may be most occupied with issues related to indi- viduals, particularly those connected with the identified patient. Questions of a rela- tional nature may provide a fruitful differ- ence here. Conversely, if a family typically uses relational notions, questions that address issues of the individual may be useful. Some people are exclusively oriented toward the past. For them, ques- tions addressing the present and future may be most meaninglul. Some people firmly concentrate on the solution to the problem, and on a particular problem- solving activity. In such instances one must stay with that theme, carefully questioning the premise on which the attempted sulu- tion is based, posing new questions to broaden the basis for the premise, and discussing alternative solutions. Some people are overwhelined by the many unclear aspects of the problem and feel that it is impossible to find a way out. In Fam. Proc., Vol. 26, December 1987 / 49 such a case, one asks about all the parts of the picture and how the paris are connect ed. Surveying the whole picture in this way may pave the way for making new deci sions. In some families, we may notice that a certain emotional overtone prevails, for instance a depressed or pessimistic mood. ‘The interviewer may inquire first about the particular mood. If the family menabers say that this mood has dominated for some time, the interviewer may ask when was the last time they felt happy: “What did you do then? Who was the happiest then? Who most believes it will happen again? When do you think it will be likely to happen again? Who will be the first to start to think of doing something thet might make ithappen again?” Being Aware of the Therapeutic Relation- ship Because the tool for our work is the relationship between the family and the ‘team or interviewer, one has to keep a sharp eye on that relationship. Sometimes family members are so eager to share their knowledge and ideas that they all try lo talk at once, not realizing that the inter- viewer becomes overwhelmed. In order to beable to talk, the team may suggest divid- ing the family into Uhose who are interviewed and those who follow the con- versation from behind the sereen. Some times the amount of talk is so minimal that the team may suggest waiting a while before continuing the conversation, Bvaluating the Process of Change If certain kinds of questions begin increasingly to he accepted, we have found that this indicates the beginning of a pro- cess of change. ‘The questions we carefully pursue in this ease are those of a relational nature, questions of dilferences and sim larities, and hypothetical questions. We also compare our impressions of the way family members shake hands and luok at us420 / when they leave the session with corre- sponding impressions from the beginning of the session. More open hands and more open eyes when the family leaves indicate that a change is in progress. ‘THE TEAM REFLECTS ON THE CONVERSATION ‘The interviewer and the family are each fully respected as autonomous systems. "They talk about what they choose to talk about in the manner they prefer. The inter- viewer, ideally, is not interrupted by the ‘team with suggestions that certain ques- tions be asked or certain topies be consi ered. The family-interviewer system is left to its own devices. The interviewer uses the guidelines mentioned above in the way that foels most comfortable. ‘As the conversation unfolds, the mem- bers of the team behind the screen create their own icleas. Recause everyone behind the sereen respects the autonomy of every other person to create his or her ideas, there is a quiet listening behind the screen. This contrasts with the way we behaved formerly, which was to discuss and hypoth- size together. We have found that the less we discuss ideas beforehand, the greater the possibility of enlarging the ecology of ideas, ‘After having followed the conversation for a while, minimally from 10 to 15 min- tutes, sometimes as much as 45 minutes, the team or the interviewer suggests the possi- bility of hearing the team reflect. The interviewer may ask the family, “I wonder if the team at this point has any ideas that might he helpful. May I ask them if they have?” If the family agrees, the people behind the sereen switch on their sound and the family and the interviewer switch off theirs. ‘The light in the conversation- room is dimmed and that in the team's room is turned on. This exehange can also ‘come about if a team member knocks on the door saying, “We have some ideas that might be useful for your conversation.” FAMILY PROCESS ‘The family and the interviewer then listen to the team's conversation about the fami- Iy's conversation, which usually lasts from 2 to 15 minutes, The reflections, which are speculative, begin by the members of the team first spontaneously presenting their ideas. Some of these ideas may be elaborated during the conversation, depending upon which ones the team members feel are most nificant. ‘These ideas should be con- nected to verbal or nonverbal material that emerged during the interview. Some fami- Ties can tolerate only a few ideas; some can tolerate more. The rule of not being too different holds also for the reflecting team, which means that the ideas discussed should be new to the family, but not too ‘unusual in content or in the way they are conveyed. ‘The team should be careful of mention- ing the family’s nonverbal exchanges. Sometimes the team sees things that the family is not ready to talk about, for instance, strong but unexpressed emotions, for evidence of distance between family members of which they are not aware. The team might either ignore such communica- tions or else comment on them with a tentative uncertainty in order to help the family become more sensitive to things previously unnoticed. What is commented fn is certainly a matter of timing. ‘We have also found it useful for the tearm as a whole to tall in terms of both-and or neither-nor because families so often vend to talk in terms of either/or, However, whenever @ family is lacking in boundaries hetween members, and presents itself as holding all beliefs ir common, this is when the team might introduce an either/or as @ contrast. How these various possibilities fre carried out varies. Sometimes each team member reflects in terms of both- and. Sometimes one person talks about the both and another person talks about the and. ‘Age general rule, everything that is saidANDERSEN should be speculative: “I am not sure,” “It ‘occurred to me,” “Maybe,” “I had the feel- ing thal,” “Maybe this is not appropriate, but,” and so forth. ‘The reflections must have the quality of tentative offerings, not pronouncements, interpretations, or super- visory remarks. So far, we have found it useful to have a reflecting team of three persons because one person listening to the other two shar- ing their ideas will come up with new ideas that she or he may feed back into the conversation. If there are more than four persons on the therapy team (one inter- viewer and three on the reflecting team), other observers should sit behind the reflecting team as a quietly observing unit, available to the interviewer-family system or the reflecting team if they want it. If the observing unit is consulted, it might be done in such a way that the whole systen family plus interviewer plus team—can benefit. ‘The reflecting team has to bear in mind that its task is to ereate ideas even though some of those ideas may not be found interesting by the family, or may even be rejected. What is important is to realize that the family will select those ideas that fit. Some may be found useful and be used; the hope is that they will trigger a small change in the family’s picture or in its understanding of the picture. The reflec- tions may even trigger a change in the ‘understanding of this understanding. ‘The team ideally tries to figure out the family's own style of reflecting, their rhythm, speed, and modes of communical- ing, so that they may copy that style as much as possible. Norwegians speak slow- ly, so our reflecting teams are often slow- moving ‘The team members’ way of dealing with their picture of the family’s picture and the corresponding explanation of itis indicated in the following schema (see Figure 2). Phe arrows show the eircular feedback between picture (P) and explanation (1) Fam, Proc., Val 26, December 1987 7 421 The family’s versions a What isthe P andits E 7 The reflecting team’s versions Fic, 2. The family’s and the reflecting tenin's ver- ‘the deseribed problem and its explanation. ‘The team may then proceed to reflect hypothetically what would happen if any- thing in the picture changed or if the expla- nation given thus far was replaced by another explanation (see Figure 3). The arrows indicate a circular loop connecting the ability vo invent alternatives (A) with the existing picture and the explanation ‘The tam, like the family-interviewer system, may leap to the level of epistemol- ogy (see Figure 4), reflecting on how the family members drew distinctions as they described the problematic situation. This may help the family to understand the link between what one understands and how one understands. Figure 4 illustrates the correspondence between what and how, that is, the underlying epistemology (IP) he reader has probably realized that there is one more level, namely, Une possi bility of expanding or implementing a new epistemology in the family. ‘The schema in Figure 5 contains arrows indieating the feedback loops of Figures 2 Unrough 4, as well as the feedback of au alternative epis- Lemology (ABP) ‘The expansion of the schema fram Fig- ure 2 to Figure 5 gues from left to right,422 The family’s versions What must remain the same, and and its 2 What is the P FAMILY PROCESS E what A alternatives are available? The reflecting team’s versions Fic, 8. The fami ‘and the reflecting team’s. versions of alternative descriptions and explanations ofthe problem. from picture and explanation to alternative explanation, and shows the increasing pos sibility for the family to grasp the meaning of the problematic situation in its whole- ness. This expansion takes place over time. ‘Mostly, the team works within the first two diagrams. ‘The larger organization of the family-team system loses the glue that sticks them together when the problem vanishes. This dissolution usually takes The family’s versions place before the team can start on the two processes shown in Figure 4 and 5. ‘As the team reflects, the interviewer on the other side of the screen follows the reactions of the family. These reactions will in themselves indicate if the reflections are positive, if they help to expand the ecology of ideas, or if they are too unusval and make the family hold on even harder to their original ideas. a What isthe P andits ( How was P and E created, and what was ‘What must remain the same, and what A. the underlying EP alternatives are available?, epistemology? The reflecting team’s versions ic. 4, The family’s and the reflecting team’s discussion of the underlying epistemologyANDERSEN ‘The family’s versions What must romain the same, and What is the P andite what ‘The reflecting team’s versions ara available? 1 423 How was? \ will the constructior ‘and E created, | of P and E remain \ and what was ¥ the same, oF is ‘A theunderlying EP there space for an AEP epistemology? 7 alternati epistemology? Fic. ‘The family’s and the reflecting team’s discussion of alternative epistemology and it eventual effect on the deserption and explanation of the problem When the team has finished ite reltec- tions, the light and sound are switched and the interviewer asks the family if there was something in the team’s conversation that, the family would like to talk about, com- ment on, or correct. The interviewer will also have gained one or two ideas from listening to the team, which she or he may share for further discussion, Because mem- ers of stuck systems often protect the team by not expressing their negative responses 10 the team’s speculations, we hhave found it safest to have the interviewer ask one or some of the following questions: “Was there anything said that you liked ry much?” “Was there anything you dis- liked?” "Was there anything of particular interest?” “Anything of no interest ofall?" ‘Was anything close to your own under- nding or oxperienee?” “Was anything far-fetched according to your understand- ing or experience?” “Was there anything that did not please you, oF that did please you?" ‘The conversation thus continues from the new place provided by te break for rellections. The interviewer may have noticed dur- ing tive team’s rellections that une ur more family imembers showed negative respunses to something that was said and that this was not expressed in answer to the ques- tions above, In such instanees, the inter Fam. Proc., Val. 26, December 1987 viewer might say: "When this or that. was said, I thought that might be hard for people te listen to or think about, But Iam not sure.” This may provide the disturbed family member a way to indicate his or her response. This kind of feedback will serve to tell the reflecting team whether it has stayed within or gone outside the appropri- ate limits for this family. ‘The sereen can be switched one to three times during a session, although twice is the usual number. It is particularly impor- ant, however, to remember that each side should have the possibility for a final com- ‘ment if that is wanted, and that the family- interviewer system must always have the last word, Reflections in Other Settings When a double set of microphones and loudspeakers is not available, the team and family exchange rooms. However, a feeling, ofstrangeness may be evoked when the two groups pass each other in the hall. Obyigus- ly, this is not as ideal as when the groups can stay in their own room and switeh the light and sound, When a sereen is not available, the (eam may sit ina corner of the rvom and retiect from there Af consultation is provided by another professional, say a general practitioner (GP), and the family is present in the room,424 / the interviewer can stop now and then and annouce to the family that he or she wants to discuss ideas with the GP. The GP and the interviewer then exchange comments, being eareful to talk only to each other in order to keep their reflections distinct from what went on in the rest of the interview. ‘The family listens to the reflections from its meta-position and does not participate. When the team consists of only one person, this person may leave the room for a while: it could be minutes, or it could be days or weeks. On returning, she or he might say, “When I was away from you, I had these ideas that J would like to share,” and then give the speculative reflections, saying afterward, “Were some of these ideas worthwhile? Would you like to talk about them?” Warnings It must he emphasized that connotations must always be positive and never nega- tive. That means that every normative judgment must be omitted. ‘The screen (the process of observing) tends to magnify crit- ieisms and remarks of the “why-did-they- do-this-or-that” category. The reflecting team must also remember that comments about family members’ behaviors may expose a sensitive area that the family does not wish to talk about. When the family is indisereet, in the sense of betraying more than they meant to, the team must respond with @ protective carefulness. The team must remain positive, discreet, respectful, sensitive, imaginative, and creatively free. ‘TWO CASE EXAMPLES A Fatherly Small Boy A mother who worked during the day as ‘a schoolteacher wanted advice hecause her youngest, eight-year-old son had beat up ‘on his five-year-old sister. The father care with her because she had asked him. His eyes, and the way he shook hands, indi cated that he did not like the idea of this PAMILY PROCESS meeting, The mother said that the boy behaved well as long as the father was at home, but when the father was at sea, he acted rebellious and hard to control. ‘The father said that being a fisherman was the only way he knew to make a living. ‘As the mother described how over- whelmed she was when she was at home alone with the children, the reflecting team (RT) noticed that the father's head sank down and his shoulders drooped. The swer asked, “Who missed the father when he was away?” “Everyone,” the mother answered. “"The kids love to be with him. They like the way he plays with ‘them. He is very strong and they love it when he lifts them above his head.” She leaned slightly toward her husband, where- upon he tured his head slightly away from her. “Was there anyone else who could do the things father could do so well when he ‘was not there?” The mother said, “The boy even protected me when a drunk man behaved impolitely toward me.” The RT (consisting of members One, Two, and Three), noticing that father was not satisif- ied so far, asked if they could share their "Three: “I was immediately struck by the importance of the parents to the children, and I could not let go of the image of the children and mother waiting for father to come home from the sea. Everybndy looks forward to his coming, mayhe most of all the boy who seems to admire his father very much.” One: “He does not only admire his father, but he seems to want to replace him when he is away.” Pwo "It is interesting, listening 10 ve because | find myself staving with the probiems presented hy the mother, prob: lems that certainly worried her.” ‘Dhree: “I saw first of all the boy's admira tion for his father. Enormous admiration.”ANDERSEN ‘The couple had been eagerly watching without sound or movement, As the family interview continued, the father straight ened his body and began to talk more. The interviewer discussed with him what the children liked most to do with him. This led into the topic of the fights between the two sons. How could that. be explained? Mishaps? Mistakes? Too much energy? Or what? The RT asked to share ideas again, and the interviewer and family agreed, Two: “Maybe the boy wok his job of replacing father too seriously. Maybe he thought he should be in charge of bringing up his sister. Maybe he thought that his sister was as rebellious as himself and needed a strong hand.” One: “If mother, who originally requested some help, still wants it, maybe the father and the oldest son should talk seriously together about what the boy might do when the father is away and what. he should be careful about, Small fathers of eight years of age need supervision.” ‘The silence in the family room when the Scteen was switched indicated that the cou- ple, especially father, felt relieved, but they had nothing they wanted to say. Their behavior told the interviewer that they wanted to think and not talk, The father’s Wet eyes and warm, solid handshake made us think that he felt included again. ‘The mother came alone the next time and said that the father had not found the ‘meeting with the team of any use. At first the team members were surprised that he had not shown up. However, they found a Feasonable explanation when they looked more closely al last session. During its reflections, the teum had assumed that the father wanted to be included without Knowing whether he wanted t be ot not. ‘The RT realized that its former strategic mode of working dues not necessarily dis- appear simply by making all discussions Fam. Proc., Vol 26, December 1987 1 425 available to the family. What they could have done instead was to reflect in a dif- ferent way: Who liked the idea of coming to this meeting the most? If both parents did not favor it equally, could other arrange- ments be made? For instance, could one Parent come and exchange sume ideas with the team and then go home and process these ideas with the other one? ‘The Body Understands Something the Mind Has Not Yet Grasped A couple requested help because the wife Was complaining of increased fatigue and a worsening problem with swallowing food in the past four years. A medical examination did not find anything physically wrong, and the woman accepted the advice that she should look at other aspects of the problem. She reported that she had to lie on a bod if she wanted to eat Her embar- rassment about this peculiar behavior kept her away from the family table where her husband and two children (ages 4 and 114) ate their meals without. her. The husband missed her company mote than she missed his. She said, “I have got so used to it that I don't remember any more what his com- pany would be like.” She spoke freely about her condition. Her husband, when commenting on her story, had a short coughing bout that indicated to the team how badly he felt about the situation The team learned that three events had happened at about the same time four Years ago: (a) the couple had their first child (one year after they got married); (b) her symptoms begaw; and (c) her brother, who was nine years older, finally left home ‘against the wishes of their mother wh had tried to prevent his leaving fur many years, ‘The mother appealed to her daughter to help bring him back. ‘This appeal was in vain, but the wife's oldest child, « nine- year-old boy from a former marriage, began to visit his grandmother frequently. The husband had often thought that the boy was a replacement person for his uncle.426 / ‘The grandmother found the boy as gentle and friendly a compsnion as her son had hheen all those years, making up for the fact that she and her husband had very litte in common and hardly spoke to each other. ‘The boy's visits to his grandmother's house did not please his mother, particu- larly when he came home and started to call his mother “grandma” and his grand- smother “mom.” His increasing wish to stay overnight at his grandmother's house did not diminish the mother’s annoyance. When the boy stayed with mother and stepfather, he behaved in such a way that the mother could not control hira, making the stepfather “guardian of the peace.” ‘The stepfather’s way of handling the hoy upset the mother and she would interfere with his angry rages. These sequences dis- tanced the couple but bronght mother and son closer. The RT, comprised of team member One and team member Two, shared the following ideas: One: “I see two problem areas. The first is the mother’s difficulties with fatigue and with swallowing. 'The second is the issue, ol yet settled, of how much the nine year-old son should stay with his grand- mother and how much he should stay with his mother.” ‘Two: “My thoughts were circling around the two problem areas too. And I wondered if these (wo areas were totally separated or somewhat connected. Sometimes the hady, full of wisdom, expresses itself clearly in situations the mind has not fully under. stood. Maybe the body, acting like this, ‘warns ‘onr patient against participating in situations she is not ready for. If the two areas are not connected, I wonder if the one problem area might influence the other indirectly, by capturing so much energy that nothing is left for the other area.” ‘One: "If I may elaborate.on your ideas, t wonder if any moves of the hoy to gct closer PAMILY PROCESS either to his mother or to his grandmother might alleviate the mother’s tension. If any such move were to be successful, I wonder whether the wife or the husband would be more pleased. I was, in fact, wondering about the effect of such a shift on their life. ‘The problem they have been. struggling with for the last four years, actually four of the five years they have had together, has forced them apart, not giving them a chance to develop a married relationship. Ttmight he that the two of them would find themselves in the same strange and unpre- pared situation that grandmother and grandfather found themselves in when ‘our Patient's’ brother finally left home.” ‘Two: “I don't know what would be most appropriate, but if there should he a ques- tion of any attempt to regulate the boy’s comings and going between mother and grandmother, I believe it would be wise of the couple to include grandmother and the boy in the conversation.” ‘The interviewer had noticed that the wife, when the RT had speculated on the hoy’s moving back and forth between his ‘mother and grandmother, had eagerly com- mented, “That's right, that’s right.” After switching the light and sound back, the couple seemed much more quiet and relaxed. The husband in particular seemed to hreathe more freely. The wife waited long time before commenting. When she did, she said, “I was shocked by the thought of what my husband and J would do if we had more time available for each other.” The husband, for his part, liked the idea of meeting together with his mother- in-law and stepson the next time in order to discuss the stepson’s position in relation to the mother and grandmother THE EFFECTS OF THE REFLECTING TEAM ‘There are a number of differences — between being on this type of team and theANDERSEN ‘more strategically oriented teams of other family therapies. We no longer use a team break to unburden ourselves of tensions or personal feelings about the family we have been seeing by making funny jokes or dis- araging remarks. Our new way of working makes us feel that we aro participants in a process in which family members become our equals. We do not feel we can or should control the therapy process, and we accept that we are merely a part of it. Also, itis a good feeling to have the family say, “We were wondering what you behind the sereen were thinking about us, Now we know.” If we have trainees, they join the reflect- ing team from the beginning of their train- ing. They determine themselves how much they wish to participate. They usually have few speculations the first time, but soon begin to share more ideas, NOTHING IS NEW The reader has probably noticed the strong influence of the Milan approach on the work presented in this article. We have made a number of small changes in adap- ting this model to our ideas. For one thing, wwe choose to meet people without making any hypotheses beforehand. Hypotheses may influence us to see the family within the frame of our prececupations rather than within the frame of what currently prevecupies the people in the family. We have also deliberately avoided inter- ventions because family members can so easily believe that our intervention is bet- ler than what they themselves have pic- tured and explained. For those who do not like a competing explanation, an interven. tion might even reinforce their own “stand still” position. ‘The reader may also have noticed the similarity the reflecting team bears lo the “Strategic Debate” developed by Papp, Olga Silverstein, and Stanley Siegel (see 14), which is a further development of the ideas presented in Papp’s article, “The Fam. Proe., Vol. 26, December 1987 f 4a Greek Chorus” (10). There are, however, some differences between the “debate” and our reflecting team. What we try to empha- size is that every person in a stuck system tends to think too much in terms of either/ or and to compete for the right to denote what is the right understanding and the right action. The reflecting team tries to imply the notion of both-and and neither- nor by having members of the reflecting team take this stance, and by members of the teain underlining that what they say is based only on the version of the problem that each perceives. In this way, they con- vey the idea that the problem has many aspects and is multifaceted. We believe that the family, or whoever is watching the reflecting team, can discover the richness embedded in the sharing of various points of view on the same issue. One version stimulated another version to become rich- er, which turns back on the first version, which. .. REFERENCES: 1, Bateson, G. Steps to an ecology of mind. ‘New York: Ballantine Books, 1972, ‘The birth of a matrix oF double bind istemology. In M.M. Berget (ed.), Beyond the double bind: Communication and family systems, theories, and tech niques with schizophrenics, New York Brunner/Mazel, 1978, 8. ——. Mind and nature: A necessary uni- ty. New York: Bantam Books, 1978. 4. Biount, A, ‘Toward a “systematically” orga: nized mental health center. In D, Camp. bell & R. Deaper (eds), Applications of systemic therapy. Landon: Grune & Stratton, 1985. Bogdan, JL. Family organization as an ecology of ideas: An alternative of dhe reilication uf family systems. Family Pro oss 251 TS—DNH, 144 6. tran, 3. & Lukens, M.D, ‘Phe world according tw Humbert» Maturans, The Family Therapy Networker 9 (3): 22-28, 1085. Koestler, A. The act of ereation. London: Picadur, 1975,7. Reflecting Teamwork as Defi Ceremony of working with therape Work, is one that is wel therapy. Many of the pioneered by the ie teams, and the use of one-way ied in the field of family Sort of teamwork were by the fac hypotheses and to plan various sues chs THE ato nom and anonymily of the tcom taeny el ! nature that a number of therapists d played a significant rol ion - began to confront, In 1987 Tom Anders sen of Norway publ ‘meet with Tom Andersen to get some iad come aveay from thi structures in my own worl all expressed t them very adequ: least place - and raised som: more organised around som: the reflecting tean nce for people consultin what sense? I had witnessed first-hand, 0: negative effect that the openness « openness? 2 Twas acutely aware of the fact th: ture of psychotherap most of the interactions between therapists and people who consu ‘hem are informed by the discourses of pathology. These discourse inform taken-for-granted ways of speaking about people’ rel practices that have objectifying people who sock of requirements ¢ ices would be necessary to undermine th ion and objectfithe effect of elevating expert knowledge claims to Wvalifying the knowledges of persons who const! 1 could see a potential for t was maximising of bo * therapists, So ing team context to be one that the imposition of the “truth” clai professional knowledges and the Ubad a degree of awareness of the extent to psychotherapy is not peripheral to to which and of the extent to which it plays a central role in the reproduction of these structures and ideologies (for example, just take th between the misogyny of dominant cul ‘of the culture of psychotherapy). In the that the reflecting team, in this reprod r-blaming the reproduction of some of the negative Over several seas, 1 have teeied ar ressions of these and other concerns. Some thera; t a (Fam making the whole idea of refle Chat soul ar to ts have Suggested ing teamwork (00 cor : liscourse rably informed by what might ee ‘cling teamwork a8 defnitionalcaremony world - thal we would find many discor 3 in what counts as int through time, and that we would be confronted by many examples of the extent to which yesterday's 7 today’s folly. To encourage team members to “trust” their intuition would be like encouraging onc to simply have faith in their own good intentions, which often isn’t a very good idea at all cemaniates from the centre" of their being. What about this notion of unexamined expression of experience? Is there such thing as @ pure ‘expression of subjective experience? Can any expression of experience avoid cexperienes in language stand out Can any expression of one’s experience within a community of persons be ide of a system of meaning that provides cely! Besides, the whole for the response that we idea of people having a cer essential self does not stand up at all well to close anal Yet other therapists suggested that notions like Habermas’ “ideal ht relieve me of some of the burden of these is through the recognition of these # of them, that action can be taken to challenge them and reduce their , and that any such actions power. Because of this, I was more notion of an ideal speech community than T was to the original proposal: toxic Re-Authoring Uves: Inteniows & Essays 178 i eetals try t0 con behaviour of others. The prob ethos, the pra these games of power to be played with 4 domination. (Foveavlt 1988, p.18) The questions and the concerns that I had wer t Won't go away), But I continu, ined enthusiastic abou Mecting teamvork, and because my early ostly reinforcing, fe stubborn (and they ied to wrestle with them, he transformative potential of explorations of this format were I describe a reflecting team structure explor: Ponse to the comments of the many therapists who have stepped into ‘eeting teamwork at Dulwich Centre, and (c) from the feedback I have ‘ved about this work from people sho have consulted mem During this discussion, J developments of reflecting these. I have no dout ‘cerns and ques seause addressed the sort of < above, and 1 also acknowledge juestions that can be raised. sor id appreciate it if readers were to read this paper as an account of would appreciate it if wiork in progress. DEFINITIONAL CEREMONIES but reserved for special nces, (Myethaff 1982, p.100) There exist many candidate metaphors for the sort of reflecting teamwork that I will be the reflecting teamwork some of the processes involved Myerhoff used this metaphor to describe some of the ak elderly, poor, and neglected Jewish commu e-Auihoring Lives: nieviews & Essays ReAuthoring arferns, gamering witnesses to ‘and being. (Mycroft 1986, p.267) haracter to these clai “he outsider *ey see themselves, an roduction of t taking place du 1 will be discouraging them from and (o deliver some intervention a:Authoring Uves: interviews & Essays 179in terms of power, contest - there is an contexts that favours ther regardless of the various measures that mi these contexts more eg; ‘Also, as part of this oricntati ts with some general gu hat are expected of the reflecting team. It wil ach other and Acknowledgin i cknowledging of people's experiences of the problems over which ion, of the dilemmas that they have fa y have engaged aspects the generation and/or resu: lives, Iwcting teamwork as de REED. emmeerermuem wore the context of their own and s0 on. ‘own responses with al experience, ima, , purposes, cu ‘2 one-way screen, viewing the session on in the interviewing room but people who are seeking consul terview, people team members before getting started, people have the of the names of tam members, and members, During, jerview cach other and have tended to direct th people who are now in the a conversation with team members presence breaks most of the rules about therapeutic encounters. However, these team members soon become more relaxed with, and enthusi ns once they have had the opportunity nd about the beneficial effects of the opportunity of witnessing one's life being spoken about so respecth to bear from people first ‘e,Authonng Uves: Inteniews & Ess+ one's presence, a the third part ofthe me: the interviewer interviews experiences of the first interview and again taking up the audience position, nthe f and the people seeking consu in a deconstruction of the interview. some di Prefer fot to reiterate them in Second Interview: Four asses of Response 1 Joining Team members introduce themselves, explain their presence at the consultation, and pr details to locate themselves in the ba (eg, workplace, projects, interests Ste) 50 that they do not = sronmne 10 are sceking the consultation, T than doing this by way of a round, tig usually more helpful for team members to make th ust before en, their fist response, Thi is way, pe S of rofl ies (0 the € are able t “rests of these team members as they oss the course of the meeting, * crn a ako Thicon te each ge oF (0 members wo members of "8 Some account of their comstances that have led people to seck ‘song tumwcrk as detinionateeremony Team members SP ere ple's experiences of iencing acknowledgement at t ion develop an understanding of the bers have about their predicaments, yan give feedback (o the team members ing. stage in the my Mystery ‘Team members respond { 1se developments that have been 10s sparkling moments, exceptions, unique ns that were identified during the fist part of the meeting. Alternatively, team members can respond to those developments that they believe developmen case, care is taken to acknowledge the fact that this response remains in the realm of speculation until confirmed or refuted by the people ‘concerned. ‘Team members respond to these preferred developments as one Fespond to a mystery - one that an ot these mysteries oftheir is cannot be achieved instantancously and but over time in collaborative proj These preferred developments provide points of entry alternative stories of peop way is generative of the curiosity of this curiosity is provocative of a nin people for some of the previously neglected but significant experiences of thcir lives. team members, and, in tu fasci UL ELLE Eee EEE a-Authoring Lives: Inenviews & Essays 183Alternative Landscapes Those preferred developments that are generative of the 'y of team members can be con: native stories of people ies provide access to gateways, so that they might explore some of the po: before them for the re-authoring of t westions. As T have provided formation about the development of these questions ns, T do not intend to provide an overview of Team Member A I fou by the steps hese were important steps. \ow Simon had prepared ready for Team Member D- Yes, I was here today. This ‘Team Member B ‘Team Member A to be able to take he has 5 Team Member B Team Member D example, team members first interact with each other around landscape of action questions, then reference landscape of jousness questions to mn in the landscape of action, then reference landscape of action questions to their ion in the landscape of consciousness, and later go on from ave described elsewhere. hroughout this second interview, the people i one-way screen become more fascinated by some ing behind the alternative Re-Authoring Lives: Interviews & Essays 185,Tandscapes of thi these questions and, S". This work is not based not founded on the no! fe reinforcement. Reflecting tcamwork based on the reinforcement can so easily degencrat comments which can be confusing and inder these circumstances, reflet a barrage of disconnected icntating for people. As ; 1g tcam members can be '§ and out of touch Ithough I caricature this sort , Thave been times they come perilously and embarrassingly ck actuality; o lose to this in Team Member E Iwas reall Team Member F Yes, sed by this development devetopn Team Member G Look, 1 Were really g00d, vas clearly excep ‘Team Member H Yes, I agree, and would congratul ‘Team Member I cannot be some disconnected series of superlatives, or a barrage of unrelated éomments and questions - the work becomes them: Very often therapists find the viewing each ot k that we are going off the track here, This work is meant to be structured along the line of a seties of interviews: ‘Throughout the rete careful to avoid the ‘eam interaction, team members are. construction of settled certainties. Deconstruction There is always an unequal distribution of power in the ic context, regardless of the steps that are taken by ists (0 render the conteat of therapy more eg; previously discussed, the pot power to be disqualifyin contexts. In view of arian. And as for this unequal di important that steps be taken to counter a {ecting teamwork as detinivonaiceremany Re-Authoring Uver: inter” & Essayspossible toxic effects oft for harm. One cor be achieved comments reflecting team members take respon ‘comments and questions in this wa positions of “truth™ that are the speech acts, n of the comments and questions of team members occurs more towatds the end of the reflecting team ot usually necessary forall ofthe team’s responses to bbe deconstructed, because when people exp for deconstruction those ‘questions and comments that seemed most emphatic, or those that might have had the greatest potent judgement, Example 1 Wat gor yor the fist place? ‘Team Member K As I said, I kirew ee Retiacting teamwork a8 detniionaleremony 188) Example 2 ‘Team Member L_ I'd like o go back a way (o ask you about why you Team Member L Yes 1 agree that it dic people in the team, why were you the first to pick up on Was Team Member M I dor as we are tal 2 ur personal figured iy. Fwas aware of ny 1s, but now F e-Authoring Uves:Exaniple 3 ‘Team Member N ‘Team Member OY Team Member N ‘Team Member N ( Team Member 0 Dellecting teamwork as Gainiionalceremony their comments and que countering the object who seek therapy. As wel sponses of the reflecting team members counters the possibility that thei * might be. imposed on people's lives, it provides therapeutic context. Ja regard to the practice of si This sharing of per form. It is Ticult experionces with people who seek cons of personal experience is not done with the goal of smuggling in “Here, tous, But this sharing of cognisance of, and in a ic contract. ing of, the therape am members do not mec interview to prepare their comments and questions. And as U interaction evolves across the second interview, they often ey would not have imagined of their reflections. A\ Fa-Authoring Uves: interviaws & Ess\e events of their rs have vivid experiences of some of of their fives, ones that bring new of reflecting teamwork is shaping of the of team members. They emerge from this work with their lives remade, In Various wa reflecting team. Necdless to say, team is work tei Jn the fourth part of the mecting, everybody gets together - the Fe interviewer, the people who sought ad members, At this time, Jn the third part of the meetin 18, everybody switches place a the people who sought the consul lerview fi focuses on people's experiences of he reflect nS were in response to, about other ced to have asked, about what s/he was ints during the meeting and about how this informed his/her comments at attention, or which seemed inguish these from those that did They can then b and questions that wer nlerviewer and the team members ca ost hi seem relevant or in this, Because of the prev eae {otlecting teamwork as dtintional ceremony 92 PCIE s9erepe TREATS eefone oF two experiences they become more acti questions, ‘There is the option for the interviewer and team members to invite tcam members can gol People’s feedback about the structure of the work itself. 1 that the therapist and the team members a portant this fourth interview not just become an intetview of family members, because, should this eventuate, the opportunity for deconstruction of the herapy. To achieve and team members is structured is ‘which shape many of the team’s Fesponses in the second interview. Being true t ible if team members use the fo purposes of further reflections of a re- . Because of to one team member the role of m | when necessary, cal sat hand, At the end F team members to the view, the people who sought the last say - to inform interviewer and promise, and (o provide feedback about any speculation on the possi ‘might be taken up at the next se: Fd this tobe very idea that is at large know what we are up to Ta the case of the ideas and practices that I have been referring t transparent we are about what we are se who are seeking consul up to, the more helpful EVALUATION paper. This was undertaken on a basis similar to that of David Epston’s study of the value of therapeutic documents whi reported on elsewhere in good therapy is a good ref evaluation was fascin unstructured discussions between the people seeking consul reflecting tcam members, When people have experienced both Re-Authoring Lves: iteriews & Essays 195,reangements, proach, Upon eng preference is invariably for 2 about the basis of Ne more structured is preference, I received has the effect of depriving ur life and experiencing it fe, and t0 be ‘experience a5 powerfu ik that this was because 1 was s0 busy editing whiat people said, and at times censoring what they who you are, CONCLUSION UT have dcasedretecting ean pri ractices of what has come to be known as rai herapy. T have no k, and so Tam 2t in a position to compare and pee 2te with other approaches. TI 6 break from the. that are so margin: believe that ts of these experiences, (¢) challenging the supremacy of expert knowledges, (d) privileging alternative knowledge systems, (2) providing some options to address the propensity of therapeutic contexts to reproduce many of the negative aspects of the structures and ideologies of the dominant culture. However, I am not satisfied that those developments in the reflect teamwork that I have described here go far enough in all ofthis, and provides me with the impetus to engage in further explorations of this work, ‘This account of reflecting teamwork does not exhaust the p any level. For example, to fac cif in the fourth interview, people who sought the con: terviewer, the team members and the down together and undertake various communities, and so on. And there are options for creating efle {eam contexts when working solo ori cc to acknowledge my debt to Tom Andersen for teamwork. 1 was his conception of this work that st reader, I wish you al Perhaps someday we wi notes on this. Re-Authoring Lives: Inarviows & Essays 197REFERENCES, Andersen, T. 1987: “The reflecting team: Dialogue and meta-dialogue in clinical work.” Family Process, 26:415-428, of freedom. In Foucault, Myerhoff, B. 1982: “Life history among the elderly: Penformance, visi and (Ed), A Crack in The Mirror. Reflexive logy. Philadelphia: Univesity of ice: Its second life.” In Turner, V. & Bruner, Eas), Toe Anthropology of Experience, Chicago: University of Mt “Deconstruction and therapy." Dulwich Centre Newsletter, No3, 8. Therapeutic Documents Revisited sn of Narrative means to therapeutic ends, David Eps! (ed with our exploration of different forms of therapet those people who consult us, and continued these ex Jhly reinforcing of this pract sy sense that this collection would hardly be comp Since the publi and T have per ‘Although most of the theray ‘writing to the people who consult them, they often ask us questions 2 the extent to which we think that the time and energy spent on preparation of such documents is warranted, particu sumsta resources available to meet -cparation of these therapeutic documen that we so often hear, particularly in some informal research into the value-of therapeutic document anged to meet with a number of people who had consulted bis 4 them to assess the value of the documents that they bt im, These people asked what me use in determining the value of thesp documents, and Well, was the receipt of Fa-Authoriny ves: Intrviows £Books By Lyn Horsman ' FAMILY THERAPY ' AN INTIMATE HISTORY a LYNN HOFFMAN SIONAL BOOKCopyright 202 by GI6srIseteay 200104481 WW, Norn & Company. Ld T2s4Se 7890 | To My Familyjow was T t0 pi these ideas ce? Des 1 practice local partners who thought as I did. Second, 1 had to experiment. And chitd, T had to fin that would guide oan nd Bere (© find son to find a stage on Here I was Valley, was sough io Lussardi, who were co ly Therapy in Vermont. They thoy planned to st ran advertised, but they were cir teaching program, and we were wor by psychologist No Backbone an-style teach When | first started at Brattleboro, we were using 2 Peggy Penn called me from New York to tell ing to Ackerman to demonstrate an Penn had been corresponding ‘meetings and a bond of height- ened creativity had evolved berwe They often experimented with each other's new ideas, a to semi- nats in Norway for several summers ssardi of the Brattleboro Fa Jing team, Then, in 1986, me that'Tom Andersen (1987) was ation that he called a “reflecting te 1 cov | immediately ly Institute and «Penn and her colleague Marcia 1¢ reflecting team idea, so we asked them Sheinberg had also been using to come 00. Ina foreword 1 wrote for The Refle “One could call this a b new flying mac! ded to switch the nso that (Andersen, 1991), | said, I it the description of a smazingly simple: he simply sound between the one-way room and the 1d therapist could listen the team had to say, and vice versa, Even before {saw it in pract that its effect on the world of family therapy would be profound. I ‘Therapy, 1 had described a new technology of visi ve therapy process to observing, interviewing ro one-way sereen—that openedneatly a half ‘century after the mirtor bega ned back upon profesional themaches Lax and a few ofthe x : + Twas amazed by how differe ee no stricture apart fio either; each group got to be the first horse on re. dy bene Andere 2 work struck down by im in the hospital and fon oe d his flancée agreed t Gee ine ld Dans Aine rer staff member), and myself, whi ' he coupe ors interviews | took part ‘When the couple arnt remember being struck man in his ho took his ris who Tooked pp Saring athe oo met Gabe the year wer: meeting. After introd ee s. He was a stocky Gabe wasn't speaking. Tom now t to the couple, He spoke of his or Ne forway a n the North of Norway and ask: and asked lies came fiom. Ruth, speaking for Gal This regard for place was a hi shop he wouk! show vide Imark of Tom's syle Before every work- mso, or play a tape he himself had or ¢ himself had made of wi is of the Arctic Circle, He believed that we should b gical context, and, the idea that we only understand our own soctety by visions limb to the top of one of his favorite ye as a"'small strange” front of the couple, Tom hhe tuned t0 the being, pologist, hel another, He would periodical mountains so that he could come back to his her { noticed that by talking separately larly reflexive experience. Then wl Je, It seemed that this alternation ng center was another hallmark of ‘was most 1g ith her impressions abo Tooked down and said nothing, All at once, ‘got no backbone!” He repeated this Sev explanation was forth~ gave them a he put Bill on the process. Gabe's situation while Gabe Gabe burst out and said loud asked him what it meant. No fa coming, 0 he aske fan Gabe said,"“None of her got sisters got no backbone.” Furth told Bill chat father, who workt ‘Rath had no idea why: sobs. Tom sat quietly and s hhad ran into parently upset him. bt ‘Now Gabe broke ie. The sabbi to heaw a tong have backbone?” G erand sabe 1 ” Gabe 0 My grandfather had a bamboo pol itand ig, and he alway ¢ m0% A long, ily Tom asked, "If your grandlather were stil 3 renee al be tell you?” Gabe sid, "Hie tell them co, go to hel Al of them! the team changed places with the group in the ne work a refleeting person Was his point, we 1 remenbe .ghts in front of the famity we talked a hit, then went back rather than bet 1s. In any case, ren while ts on Tors Pa sguished groans. Tot te rook our place. Tom, and the cot wr to get Gabe to talk only sm wondered aloud at Bill might ws n Bill thought that id de and the conple agreed 10 com Yet Bill chat his father was a lifelong, Gabe owing day was ma week. The next day, Gabe the ‘brought on more meet Gabe Jat be. to see Gabe the fo lowing ly whoapusea and nidated Gabe’s brothers and sisters and that Gabe was the only one wh Stood up for them. He was aso in a strugele wich his divorced wife for custody of his children. Bi be over the next two yeats and whi Ruth but had-gotten his children back, When Tom came back fora visit the follow him. Despite hit many family problems, he had not had another collapse + every time Ton and his team came to Brat h Gabe. Ie seemed that th fist interview. I was 5 nued working with st heard, Gabe had split up with yyat, Gabe came in to see Noro, Tom always ipression. on my assump and I found that I began to work re people who consulted wit for the first, d he now asked, “What is the history of lation changed the nature of the ue. Tom {0 invite Harry Goolishian and Harlene Anderson to Norway 'y of theit ideas were percolating about the Arctic Circle. One thing was clear—that Tom was deeply devoted to Harry and much infla, enced by the idea of therapy as a conversation ng point of view, and the not-know about Tom’ interviewing style was his atten Id his body. He told us that iting next £0 Gabe and speaking with him, he had been careful to inhale and exhale ad worked for years ly-work trainer he had recently written a book about her work, s@ this was no surprise. Nevertheless, I was struck by the degree to which in the session showed whae the English poet gative capably” Keats had det n Keats this as “the ability to be without any irritable reaching after fits Another surprising pra ice was the way Tom spoke. We knew: that a slow tempo nd a long reaction time were charact Northern Europe, ic of people of ther north you got, the longer the time would J proceedings. This tone wt etching, : les from Lake trea wl of tenavenes re Motes whl we ube uno he he cet Yeates Kneading Bread tation with a couple a staff therapist, We The nextday. Tom and Mag wrho were being seen by Bi learned that when the fam : : 7 Sopped out o Sucre ae re hadoten Seek together and the dager had gone bck were a play, Act One would consist of Magnus speaking file couple wa the team and screen. In Act Four, boi But this was ile, and end. The event consisted of sinning, logues, with participants aleernating between a succession of and talking, There wis no set goal be vversti d.a temporary stopping IF ever there were a thing el faculty wife 1 poked a hole in it with my finger, the hole wou Tater, it aceurred to me that it was nor just the activity it was also the warmth of the human hand.srmously when I had to explain th 'n reflecting work and more conver ference ional interviews. There were no ks between what a therapist said and the outcome of any given sex nd one had to get used to The meditatis team. It seemed that the ony things one e« from o1 'S own experience or associations ly taken place. Bue there did seen 1s spoke wit on the conversation bbe a few rules. I had noticed! that issues pertaining to 1 were addressed. Magnus wanted to know what pe ceptions people had about therapy: wl ig therapy would meal 1d, who disop at issues to be resolved; to whom did they persons was each of the therapists therapists feel if they stopped now? None of these ques iple§ situation. In other words, the consultant was les interested in story of t.After ‘role to walk in and take over: This was a ra rd to pre becoming a supervisor to the therapist or discussing fam imics. Ft was hard for tra and when I first demonstrate shops because 1 was fa ‘The action in Act One was a asked ly walked out of work y therapy: le of what T mean, Magnus eeting, They said they felt strck way Were the problems leaving of the adolescent da “do her own ettin lifferences. Mardie hho seemed to be s between this obvi el White found the reflecting process useful problem-solving posi Tater, Mi because it acted to “decenter” the therapist from th ts about the different eit twenty-three-year-old the couple shor ‘we were playing it safe, But dren, Cleat Painted Language ight a key element of Toms work: his use of what and | 1 Fantasy Tom 1 of flowers. TI lyia psychiatric ori any east i the father as an out-of as, the bouguet ofJovy; Tyo: experience or a meeting or a friend, in going ing back to say “I'm still liked"—even going to coming back with a grasp of of flowers in a big bs iat when people ct—the person let is back there, and the other 2 new language, a new dialect, and the per- language, which every pei a problem understanding the new Ian- ther person took away and find new arn a new language, that be possible? Who could hold a Tong time the tendency of the metaphor to move smieling it and watal to make new ideas, or what?T i wondering if the father trusted that if he stopped let, there would be anyone else to hold it— cortant for him, he Howers—those are flowers that are already fade, and then he'll be lefe with a bunch of faded Bowers, while ing new flowers. Wi flowers? At this poi tioned the differences d picking up on this “Magnus asked her to expand, a age originally bs " basis, Her husband's role was to be the become more assertive “Tearing up, the wife then said that when her hushand went away to the hospital, she had to hold the bouguet, even though she didn't do it very well. The metaphor had made it clear to her how much the family meant ‘was now crying openly and back. She hoped the way he wanted them to be, Before the husband could respond, Magn but changed ughters argue, but Magnus stopped n for him. Remarking that ‘eventually join the wonderful conversation: vere now having. The couple began again new ideas” Magnus then ‘of Magnus’ work, Even in leaving, he left ththerapy continue or not? I asked myself how the simp! could possibly have any influence on issues like that. 1 had to bt until reassured by my own experience that thi ether: Toms image ofthe bouquet had the effect of hitting all the litte facets at orice. One fea- The Artful Schemer ‘An objection can be made that ther, who refersed to the fiancé schemer” ‘They had come to therapy beeau: rteen-year-old son was having ly resplendent in an aitline ca to disappear. The son to find back, and in my heart U was ying, fone." To my surprise, Tom sat ‘Good. Let’ see what here as peaceful asa Tom can do with Buddha, letting everything breab and observed, "Perhaps we can't dering, if we should ask the family to ge which persons nd ‘you later and you could iy ‘who had suddenly become silent “al ing that he come in wophy 3 rin tbe eso ting ink eat chem as dug-siyscl events. U, imparting inform rice fe therapistand al waiting to be11 Sharevision The “Bambi” eld has been evolving toward ce and David he project the way a reflect- jence fo they fil to ig by virtue ofthe "70s as a street-front out- iegade brigade. They weren't and 1 saw that any ise on niy part would be taken as a dare. better place to hone my search fo lly Fearned about PBA from a colleague named Lisa'Thompson, who worked there until she decided to get a degree in social work. She wanted to bring me together wi off, and she was right. ‘only paid $35 an hour, for a total of two fof an hour each way. So the staff generous aired in agency case conferencs m1 in one place only caused were were many eases where, for conter or go to as him back, and every Ihotnbard the therapist reappear sad and sorry, quo. fF wo ‘often reject the ach one. The group would then suggest that she + therapist or agency. and an argument over wh break out. an amaaing is or her own space bubble. daughter were out, so the father to see the worker, As she sat dchanged fr lemm of loneliness, and Jean used Of this young woman, Janine Roberts later included and tell her not to Id turkey.” Some of the staffs ways my agenda was to learn the next seven years, the agencies that served the poor it Massachusetts came under increasing presure to become more cost-elli= ‘ent. This meant that larger agencies be sr ones and that professionals who lacked rei the staffat PBA. ting in her se dry. he oman to he a 1 field in back of her She and bread crumbs, The turkey began to eat the food sh ‘ame regularly and became tame enough to wander close to the the wi . ; ssc pro lose oath humane edo the problem " - ‘as being let go, services to f ngulfed by North Central Hu 1d ropes courses to bu win criss, but strength and tr the major emphasis was on repairing networks and creating, comm Chief among the agency's projects were a program called’ Makby Ellen Landis and Deborah Muyskins for a group of young, poor mother. and a group called Mosaic, directed by social worker Catherine Tylor. foe mothers whose children had been sexually abused and whose families had been torn apart by the judicial system,* Here [ rant to cell the story of Mosaic and “our entry onto a larger stage, New Voices Mosaic represented a collaboration berween ‘Taylor, videographer Ca Fontes, and a gr ior mule relative. Fontes, original popular video movement, w their stories. Taylor suggested to take a videotape of their struggle to recover ightmiare. The subsequent de Not Alone roving set of images, shot by Carlos anid edited by ‘who also wrote the scrips. projects were now endangered. As the staff met sn? seemed to me to be But this and pondered how it cou nswering its own question. We looked around id colocfal progran Somebody suggested we have a 0} saw that there were nt local ageney peo} with examples of the way we had been wsing drama, to change the context of help. The hope was to move people work of pathology to one of play and imagination, Emboldened by the sc cess of our collective story-telling, we decided to have an urces of North Central Huma tional consultant Jol 1¢ up, and the artistic services of designed our brochure and poster. The presenters were outstanding writers, teachers, researchers, and practitioners like Mary Catherine Bateson, Mary and Kenneth Gergen, Sheila McNamee, an ure Donald Schoen. When T made up a list of tecent books and ne up with sixteen titles, the Mossic group covered themselves ith’ glory by showing their video, “Not Alone’ ‘The three days of this conference were attended by 250 persons repre- senting human services, teaching, and organizational consulting, In shape, the event was teflex Each presenta fed back upon the next ly speakers c starter dor reflecting pas was pased to twenty sm ly, this was the refle large and transposed to the vwas ita sucess but it actu~ 1d Geof? conference in 1. At the suggestion of Cathy Taylor, c group and the Mak-it group attended neering, Te was 0 I psychotherapists with peer advocates who had Jowever, their heartfelt stories moved many of the hem speak, and che Mosaic Mothers became a tradition for several years. people who: at that cos staff were Northamptos yghouse. One of the staff members, social worker Akiba Mermey, was a practicing Sufi, and be, swith Lisa Thompson, organized a leaving ceremony for us. 1 bought two dwarf Golden Delicious apple trees and planted chem beforehand in front of tus in a Sufi dance a in place, We offered appree of our long connection to each other, hugged each other, and took our leave. Later, when 1 a ‘was that group of crazy people 0 explain, but what could I say? That we were therapists doing So Teft ic vague: In the six years since the demise of PBA, one of the two apple trees was sliced off by burt the other éne every year in the spring and hears wormy but golden apples in theimental days, there seemed to be no end reflecting process could be put or a big. brai to introduce second group, the Lambs, would feel dumber an group never raised explained t obje said she had would join the pod ‘This seems like and out of hierarchy, because a teacher can ever be stat these years was that a ref Fa CHINS pet custody of Jack. Jeanae then dese divorced Jack’ father, se North Centeal Hiaman Services. sent wore twelve-year-old Jack and his mother. ‘avo new therapists, one wh Idren and one who was goi everybody abou hhow it was going to work. I told them it waseffect was already forming, backed by health professional school. So, looking: consciously for an emotional conne Chapter 14), [ eutt in to ask Lori: “Is that why you were crying?” Ir response, Lori said she had phoned Jack’ father to tell him about the inci dent and Fie had told her,"My gialitiend says we'te going to court for fu custody and youe not going to see Jack anymore.” I asked Jack, “Did vou know why your mom was crying?” He didn’, so Jeanne explained that his hd had threatened to take him away ftom his mom, He teplied that happened, he would steak out at night and run home from the city where his father lived. He was a sparky litle fellow. went back to the fight. Jack said he had gotten had Kicked one of his friends in the fice and was always her. Lori said that the presence of the knife in Jack's porker was an accident. The night before, Jack and his older sister were bothering he mother’s boyfriend and he was yelling at them, so she sent stirs, While there, shey decided to run away to Maine, and Jack had the knife in his pocket because they were going to use it to cate he of all of she said her worst fear was losing Jack. le of me. I don't want to Tose this cies, the point (cee nad at reflecting team of four, led by Judy, seated 1 selves in a cincle, Judy started, saying that Lori and Joe were so 4 what she had expected. Afier having heard about a family where so ings had been goi ieo—she said she had an image of an adolescent boy who wae tough, reall igged in by his mother.“What 1 sas boy. What came across the is Family. His lowe for his just permeated everything. So I was struck by the re story E made up in my head and che story 1 have afer meeting David Haddad, the clinic director, commented on how tesifent and alive wore. He had expected to see 2 family thar was ted on how far Jack was willing to go to prot ils, and how his mother was willing to g0 -eded for him. He wondered how they were nce, 1a dance therapist, spake of # "sense of knowing and c: id how she and Jack provecte cach other. Then another therapist said that what came up for her ws sense of justice. She noted that Jack had figured out a way to get rid of & ‘man who was abusing his mother, and that when he savs his brother g: Land ting hurt he went after the attacker. In other words, his sense of justice got iat it felt like to be in the other systems ice fit together. She commented on how every boxly is trying hard to do what Mont and Jack are srying to do—make in, saying, how helpfal the woe justice was. She noticed that a story about the family had evolved that lad to do with anger, but for her. She said,“There’ a piece that’ anger, But but maybe justice, wow! He's this fon Jack's resource doesn't get talked about, Many’ things in compari Tes not always easy bei other things. And we have to listen to these messages and give a kid. Its not just, ate adults and work as teae ds a voice. We dont often do chat ‘The team now went back #0 ie her head sa you expected to Lori and Jack w cares” Jack hear? Everyone people would be there and to, had 40 grandchild who everybody was, Jack said used to it too, you ever fom the “Yd steal Knight Rider’ isa James Bond type show for kids where “What was féscinating was that Jack's Is perception, was prised her, and ta be listened same teacher P80 of at Jack had ate ‘he had ad when she war Jacks age—who made hin fee “his bi course fick was going to take out his anger on other people, Jeanne sid she ight that Jack rust have been suprised by the refletions because he was50 often reprimanded at school for being a bad boy, and here he ple ay that he was a seeker afte j ¥y previo Ts would be called Jack asked why, right with her ly, [feel very good abou ard poo den switch as Dick dle she wrote abot vas trying to as they spoke, He wa 10 see?" Whenever possible he hy most tapedto watch the tape later, but Jack told Dear started talking after the first few minutes and $0 # showed of the m the world and espe While I was reading, | noticed that Jack was cut her hair in a few weeks. The was beginning to people together to witnes efforts. A staff worker at PBA h videorspe at audiences that ies took Jack t0, 1 £0 we asked Jeanne wla Certificate of Appreciation com- 1d work and listing theie join: ance. She ako lost touch with Lori and Jack, because the fimily had no telephone and had moved. However, Judy sent a copy of her atticle to and Jeanne wrote a letter back, thanking Judy and saying, waged care, covered what was once sacred & good such negativity impossible to see jf anything we did thought had any value whatsoever. There are so many lost boys like Jack im the world, Ye In ending this story, | want to repeat wh Of the long distance therapi who 12 Unforeseen Speech The Social Web grown up wi wrong with ¢: n meory appeated to me. Not ony did ie logy’ love affair with the freestanding individual, be showed he ier ear heap aa sys abue ton it did and it didn't. As vt aaa a individual to thes for disorders and rather, cone level up; you were Sanction an yon wer sl he capers whe fe Fole of the professional was now itself the circumstances, it seemed natural t0 Instead of the “system.” with is asimptions of stl ty, we were looking at interactions that were constant ws oF a country wg of strangers in a city street, Iechere wer they were products of our social and linguistic negotiation essences existing on their own. Ke Tes ances id Herbert vomas Luckmann’s book ‘The Fins Use: Secon Umme: igh the ige the way it is perceived oF acted upon Ifconstructionism is indeed a wsefil metatheory, we might fee that the sword “psychology” has outlived its usefulness, being too weighed down by ins attachment to the individual mind, In that ease, the newcomer field of bbe the area that constructionism might represent. Is research arm would be represented by forms of qualitative research (Leeds- Hurwitz, 1995; Okon, 2000). Its applied methodology would include post- modern therapies find farther apy been pushing for this extensi tionship counseling (see chapter 15), OF course, c end up as just an) struetionisin might also 1 corporate structure on Sixth Avenue, but whether it ws been very usefal to me. [In this chapter, [ hope to tell you ‘Two Sleeping Beauties With the demise of my niche in the Massachusetts take my reflecting, ticipatory format ‘material, preferring # at this time al fo the first product yons, E began to) ve expe ations to give workshops in many countries. For ing something of my own rather than reflecting process had sot free my “The frst time Texperies ness was in Thessaloniki, swhere I had gotte to take part in a seminar on cultural genograms (Hardy, 1995). Thad not used genoa time, not since leaving New York, because T did't know how to weave them into a postmodern approach leaders who were expected by the workshop leader s presied into service. simply turned the enogea ng, people from the audience to serve as miy reflecting cea set up a group of as if” hs- teners, an idea that Harlene Anderson used in her presentations and had shared with me. My version was to ask several people to become densities” thar in and oust of the viewpoints of perso story that was being told, and then report on the experience. 1 dl my first cultural genogram with a wonian of Greek ancestry wl family had suffered at the hands of the Turks in Albania and-who had recently moved back to Greece. This went so weln woman came forward and introduced her sister as well. 1 sg- gested that we do a “relational genogram” (an invention of the moment) «tI would interview the ewo of them together. In a way, T ws seeking #0 deconstruct the genogram as [knew it. Then Luigi Boscolo, of the faculty, came in to watch, [was a litle nervous, because T wat noe sure how he would react to my new not-knowing style ‘The interview was intriguing. The sisters were in thet forties culture ligent, handsome, both with Eimilies of their own, The younger of the two already had an M.A, but said that she wanted to go back to get a doc torate. On the min her daughter was away fo ide, she would have to commute to the university an sixteen, so she worried about spending so much time ier family. The older sister had not one but wo M.A. dreams of becoming a Ph.D. They told me that if either of # had been bor they would have gone on to higher edueation, but he daughters wer rected to aim so high. They ly pushed the envelope with their three M.A. issue right thete. However, instead of pursuing # directly, | took a right-brain tack and asked the older sister what legend oF ry tale came to mind in regard to the other one. She said, without skip- ig a beat, “The Sleeping Beauty” 1 asked the same question of the younger sister and got the same answer. So I had twin Sleeping Beauties re reason for working in this more associative way was to elicit insages Ito work with, I had heen finding that painted language served to expand the power of connection, and I wasn't disappointed here either. The reflecting group acted as thoughtful voices in representing the dilemna of the sisters and used the Sleeping Beauty story in their comments. But it was ‘out of their floating identities, who threw is for n a big charge of energy-The woman who istened as the mother said she was torn about her daughters’ ambitions for women to aspire to academic degrees. but she wanted whatever would make them happy. The “father” regretted hot having had a son, but ssid his daughters more than made up for that and that they had his blessing to go forward. The “daughter” ofthe younger sister came on strong, telling her mother that if she got the Ph.D. she set a pioneering precedent for her daughter, All of a sudden there appeared one n.saying that in pursuing their dream of higher ‘education, they were giving him life ‘The reaction of the sisters was interesting. The younger said the refler- ions from the “as ™ persons made hher feel much more pos her plans, but the older onc, despite staunchly bac sister, held a sadness in her face. [ thought to myself that, since their age- difference was so smal, they might well feel as ewins often do: ifone moves ‘on too fast, the other will be left behind. That could hold back both of them, So T asked her“Do T have to worry about you?” She looked startled, then reassured me, saying, “T'l be okay.” She sid she was Keeping her options open, Both sisters said they enjoyed the way T worked and that it felt very congruent with their own ideas. I said L would call them in Chicago in the fall to see where they were. 1 subsequently lost these sisters’ phone numbers, and I regret chat. In lly promise to do a follow-up. cal reinforces my effect doing consultations away from home, | like to think that the future layering of a ph asa witness. But there was an Luigi Boscolo to comment on d one of my teachers. So he gave a beaut tion of the sit T eeasn’ surprised at nerpreta- prised had superim- nterview. This experience swing how drastically my ther- not-knowing conversation really was, and to what degree T was be to escape the flybortle of my own training. The Wings of Stone and Anderson were often invited to conferences jeas were passed back and fort per se, she sees her inno- c. First, she will select a In the late "80s, Goal in Norway by Tom Andersen, and ma Ithougl vation of ips representing cach role: mothers s0 forth, Next she asks the presenter jteners’ mandate is €0 listen to the pre~ is done,to tell her with the woice of the character they they would like her to she wants fo senter and, whe inhabi what they wouldre gives a pro ide of the expert position as a reflecting tean fed by Anderson’ i id began to adopt ie in my own workshops. A c jing example was a reflecting con- ‘Mexico at the end of the "90s, The day hop given by Anderson and her co-presen- ard about, never seen, an lant way of deconstructing come up to me a mentioned Virginia Sat given, and Eva she came to Mexico the USS. At the end of our talk, she said she was 50 ie did not partner was Eva, I was gh expecting another Virg Next (0 be a reflecting group, and ar be “floating identities” I had already exphined the job of bei ofa ref asked four peo ‘as if” exercise was wanted them to listen asif they were roles to ay before, so tl be heard. Wee aunts, | told widience groups: that they could fh the rule about floating did 10 were assign 1d mikes were distributed and the t take a mor place. «to arrange my mi ‘my partner that the way 1 very wide sides, a bow! that can hol {well imagine that 1 it. Alternative! Ibe there, except up but they be for some new pebl asked her how she Tike d ing the break, fe said she wanted to thank me for being’ 1 be more Mid, to have less fear” She sid,""Today I started to fee! more ean Tdo in each mome I decided to leave the id T held ‘Yes, they are very e weight, and bers J weight."Truth to tel if it was because Eva had made Virgin 4,"What would Vi i any case, my idea was 0 know ess, $0 that Eva we the name Fva when Twas six years [asked my father, ity, because she had to get per the church eo get marr Eva continued: “I felt I carried my needed to have very big so [ was a good student. I dai said to her,'"T have the| cinversation had taken only nine minutes. However, many weighty (pun ints had surficed in a very short time, and 1 ist Lasked her if there were any other ‘My father, who is dead, was named Abraham, My aunt is dead too. My mother is alive, but she doesn’t share in Tight to break for Why did I choose to break so early? A (1995) has come up wi ered by the was puzzled, Michael White ig that might expl par }e reflecting team so valuable and it was perhaps why [ The wings of stone were on my shoulders too, «the reflecting group and the “aif” persons to share it with The Reflections Ww joined my reflecting group, a for thei ut my wish to move away from were more personal or story-like, All the same, I was “The only spoke directly to Eva, who was sitting out- was important that the reflector ditect her hot have 10 reflector said that she knew Eva personally and admired her as being the chughter of a mixed marriage, explained why she was so flexible and open to new ideas, ‘The second said that she stated crying while lis said she had tried not to took Eva's hands, she fele hat she began to feel less anguish: and 1 see her peae “to feelyeard?” and then She answered, All that was said by each per- son today was for me silence. Li inge —a Jew, ‘was a good friend of the Bishop, even though he was w here were social ocea things in my head. tying, my tear ducts were blocked. This expe- them. Befor gues were crying and t she were here. I ters of the eferring to my term would use ‘ge!A Rolling Conversation cd event, a8 it seemed to express so many aspects kind of work that now interested me, Six was lke 9 ty to hear the: ld “hear” ‘gratitude and forgiveness from fh a deep peace. She felt appreci- « from her mother imagine how she might restore these large groups of “as if" listeners had moved her deeply and she 1g to work so hard to understand 10 her, so that she could joned the part where the her professidnal life, she was interested in tion and said she, wanted later. This type of knowing, Wg everyone: present. Harlene “knew” Eva