Transactional Analysis Journal

ISSN: 0362-1537 (Print) 2329-5244 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtaj20

Life Position Therapy

Jenni Hine

To cite this article: Jenni Hine (1982) Life Position Therapy, Transactional Analysis Journal, 12:3,
190-194, DOI: 10.1177/036215378201200304

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1177/036215378201200304

Published online: 28 Dec 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 65

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rtaj20
 Life Position Therapy
Jenni Hine
Introduction
There is a lot of heart-break in couples
and families that comes from asking for
something from one's partner and getting
an unsatisfying response. Rarely do people
see clearly that they may be asking time and
time again for something unlikely to be
available, and in the same unsuccessful
way.
Life position therapy is the name I give
to a therapy tool based on TA life positions
and their characteristics as they have been
developed by Fanita English (English,
1976) from Berne's and Ernst's original
premises (Berne, 1972; Ernst, 1973). This
technique, which I am finding increasingly
useful with couples, consists in demonstrat-
ing to people the characteristic traits that
life positions give to the personality and
enabling them to appreciate and utilize
these traits rather than being hampered by
them.
In the hypothesis used here and the
technique that is based on it, I am drawing
attention to two constellations of life posi-
tions and the possible shifts within them,
rather than the four distinct entities identi-
fied by Eric Berne (Berne, 1972).
I suggest that the 'winner' 1+ Y + and
the 'despair' 1- Y - life positions are of a
different nature from the other two. Every-
one has experience of the former two in
infancy, the euphoric oneness with mother
and the infantile despair of separation, and
my premise is that access to these is pos-
sible throughout life.
It is the other two (I + Y - and I - Y +)
which generate the very characteristic per-
sonality traits described in this article. I call
them here 'defense positions' because they
protect the individual from entering into
the despair position described above. In
general people do not switch between
190
I - Y + and I + Y -: when they do I give a
coherent explanation.
What is new here is the pinpointing of
these life positions when they are only bare-
ly visible, rather than looking at their
extreme pathological payoffs, together
with an explanation of life positions and
the seeming shifts that occur which can be
observed by clients and that they readily
identify in themselvesand others.
This is not an on-going scheme of ther-
apy. I introduce this material only after
having gained the trust of each partner.
when I find it effective in enhancing the
quality of their transaction and closeness.
Later it can be referred back to, when
transactions go awry in the same old way.
What gives the traits of these life positions
These traits are mainly determined by
whether a person, when an infant, decided
to defend himself or herself, as a first
resort, from an I'm not OK-You're OK
position (I - Y +) or from an I'm OK-
You're not OK position (I + Y - ) when he
or she was feeling threatened or under
stress. Very roughly this means: when the
infant was in trouble, did he or she cry for
help or demand justice as a first line of
defense to deal with the situation.
The distinctiveness of these positions
then becomes much stronger or is diluted
according to whether this child, when he or
she is of school age, takes the same defense
position or the contrasting one. The early
decision does not depend at all on whether
the individual is a boy or a girl, but this
later one does. "Real boys" don't "cry for
help" and "nice girls" don't "demand
justice. "
My observation is that these dynamics
color the personality at all times, though
they are much more evident in people when
Transactional Analysis Journal

in defense positions. There is, in fact, a dif-
ferent set of characteristic advantages and
disadvantages to each of the two defensive
positions.
The Two Defensive Life Positions
(I - Y + or 1 + Y - )
People who have adopted one or other of
these two defensive positions are sufficient-
ly different that I like to call them Type I
and Type II as they have been identified by
Fanita English (English, 1976).
I find it helpful to start off by telling
people that they can consider these two
positions (1- Y + is Type I and I + Y - is
Type II) as the determining ones. That they
can also think of both Type I and Type II
as able to gain a 'plus' where they are lack-
ing one, when life is going well. This shifts
them each into I'm OK-You're OK, which
is the position of wellbeing.
Similarly each Type can lose the 'plus'
where they have it, when life goes very
badly, shifting them into I'm Not OK-
You're Not OK (nothing is OK), which is
the position of despair.
THIS GIVES THE FOLLOWING PATIERNS
OF SHIFTS IN POSITIONS
Stress
Type I positions Type II positions I
I+Y.+ position ofwell being I+Y+
l' 1"
I I
-.¥ .J,
(I-Y+) defense position (I+Y-)
l' l'
I I
-If
~
I-Y- despairing position I-Y-
Thus when a Type I person is in despair
and comes into therapy she has often lost
the hope that anyone will be able to help.
When a Type II gives up in despair, it is
more because they have lost the hope of
being able to help themselves.
How about the 1 + Y + winner position?
I then explain that well balanced persons
can maintain their 1+ Y + position even
Vol. /2, No.3, July /982
LIFE POSITION THERAPY
when under a lot of stress before they enter
their defense position. Some people main-
tain it so continuously that it is their verit-
able life position and it takes extreme
situations of stress like solitary confine-
ment or torture before they enter the
defense or despair position. By contrast the
unstable person moves into defense or
despair under only quite small stresses.
Thus the aim of therapy for each partner
is to become able to handle stressful situa-
tions more and more successfully while
maintaining their 1+ Y + positions, so that
when they or their partner is feeling defen-
sive they can draw on the advantages of
their distinctive traits and avoid the pit-
falls. Most people hear this as realistic and
encouraging.
So what are these traits like?
The next step is identifying the different
characteristics of each type. The couple is
often already confusedly aware of them
and they may be the source of pain. "Why
doesn't he ever agree with me," "Why is
she so discouraging," etc.
People can often readily pick them out
for themselves if they become aware of the
spectacles through which each Type is see-
ing the world. The Type I person, when
Stress feeling defensive, is like a small person
I living in a world of competent giants, with
I
all the privileges and fears that would go
I with this Picture. A Type II on the defen-
I sive is more like a lonely little person trying
I to take charge of, or impress, other people
I who cannot be counted on and are liable to
I
I disappoint her at any moment.
I
I This gives the following characteristics:
I
Advantages ofType I Advantages of Type II
(I-Y+) (I+Y-)
I accept information. I'm sure ofmyself and my
ideas.
I can learn from others. I can say no.
J can say yes. J am atease when:-
I am atease when:- a) t'rn the center ofattention.
a) I collaborate with others, b) I"mresponsible orleader.
work ina team. c) I can control the situation.
b) Delegate orshare
responsibility. I am often optimistic.
/9/
 JENNIE HINE
c) I must trustmyself to
plans made byothers.
I can ask forhelp, advice,
or information.
Disadvantages of Type I Disadvantages of Type II
I am notsure ofmyself. I don'treceive other people's
and myideas. point ofview easily.
I doubt and question easily. I need towork things outfor
myself.
I am ill atease when:- I am ill atease when:-
a) I am the leader. a) I must putmyself intothe
b) I am the center of hands ofothers.
attention. b) I have toask for help.
c) I have to say no. c) I am given advice.
Scripting
At the psychological level, the deep long-
ing of the Type II (I + Y - ) is "I want to be
accepted always and unconditionally and
to be loved exactly as I am," which covers
the belief that "I'm not lovable." This
contrasts with the Type I (I - Y +) longing
of "I want you to listento me and seeme and
agree that I'm right when I tell you some-
thing that is important to me." This covers
the belief that "There is something wrong
with me and I'm not how you want me to
be." These two beliefs are among the
important script beliefs of the racket
system developed by Richard Erskine and
Marilyn Zalcman (Erskine and Zalcman,
1979).
These traits are so characteristic that
they can be used as rough diagnosis criteria
when added to the typical ways the two
Types think about themselves when they
make a gaffe or have a failure. Type I
persons are seeing imaginary faux pas so
much of the time that they do not notice
a real one for a moment or two and may
even think it is not serious. However as the
. minutes and hours go by they begin to kick
themselves more and more. "How could I
have done that, what will they say?" and it
takes a long while for them to put together
an "I'm OK" self image.
When Type II persons finally take in that
they have made an inescapable faux-pas, or
a series of them, their first reaction is a
shocked feeling that the bottom has drop-
ped out of their world. But very soon, as
192
the minutes and hours go by they find
reasons why the mistake wasn't serious or
has already been put right, so that their
cracked image of "I'm OK" is rebuilt as
fast as possible.
How do the Types turn up in couples?
All possible combinations can occur. I
often point to my own couple as an exam-
ple of two Type I's together. When my
husband and I go sailing I am usually the
captain because I learnt to sail as a child
and I am the more experienced. However,
when the wind gets up and the waves begin
to tower, each of us is busy trying to hand
the tiller over to the other in the hope of
finding one of those 'competent giants' to
take over.
Two Type II's together in the same
straits would more likely be saying, "I'll do
it - Let me take it" and maybe busy find-
ing fault with the other's way of handling
the boat. This may ring familiar in a car
driving scene where the tension is about
which way to go in a strange city, or who
was to have checked the oil, or again, who
is the most tired and needs a rest.
A couple made up of a Type I and a Type
II is the most complementary. This couple
will only go sailing if the Type II partner
feels like it and enjoys being captain even
under stress, since one of the characteristics
is for the Type I partner to fall in happily
with, or adapt to, the initiatives of the Type
II partner. Stress often arises for this
couple when the Type I partner begins to
change.
All combinations become painful if
either or both partners are predominantly
in their defense positions and they risk be-
coming "non functional" if one or both
move into despair.
Some clinical examples
Roger, Type II and Maria, Type I.
Maria, in the despair position I - Y - ,
comes first into therapy. As she does the
script work that moves her out of being
depressed and back up into her 1- Y +
defense position, gaining back her faith in
life and in the therapy process, she begins
to see the changes she would need to make
Transactional Analysis Journal

in herself and her marriage relationship to
win for herself the I + self respect that she
still lacks.
It is when she starts making these
changes, taking a more responsible job,
having her own opinions, etc., that Roger
moves into I - Y - despair and comes into
therapy, saying, "I'm having troubles in
my marriage and I feel terrible, my wife is
feelingOK, so it must be ME that is not OK
after all." The first work with Roger aims
at moving him back into feeling hopeful
about himself without at the same time
losing sight that he does have a problem
and that all is not well between him and his
wife, some due to him and some due to her.
This is the tricky point in his therapy as if
he does lose sight of his own problem he
will leave and think that the work is all
done.
As they learn their life position charac-
teristics they become aware of how they
increase the heartache and the distance be-
tween themselves by often wanting what is
not readily available.
For instance, as Maria changes she puts
forward ideas, hoping that Roger will wel-
come them, but Roger's Type II does not
let him welcome other people's ideas read-
ily, so he may change them in some ways or
outwardly contest them. She feels dis-
appointed and tempted to say, "I'm not
OK," yet once more.
Conversely Roger's enthusiastic projects
automatically provoke a doubtful, Type I,
response from Maria, doubt about him or
doubt about herself. The effect on Roger is
of someone trying to spoil his renewed
good feeling about himself and so tempt
him back to his Type II defense feeling
rejected and discounting her.
When they are both aware of the pat-
terns they can learn to laugh about the
automatic responses and not respond to
them. At a later stage Maria learns not to
dump her doubts on Roger automatically
and does herself a good turn in the process
by consolidating her I'm OK self-image.
He, in turn, learns not to dump his re-
definitions on Maria. When he stops this,
her thoughts begin to reach him and his
respect and love for her increase steadily as
Vol. 12. No.3. July 1982
LIFE POSITION THERAPY
he adds the final plus to his life position
and becomes a much less lonely person.
David and Molly
They are both Type II and after the basic
despair work is done in individual sessions,
they each move into their 1+ Y - defenses.
When this happens therapy becomes prob-
lematic because as soon as a therapy issue is
identified with either of them it becomes
like a slippery eel, impossible to pin down
or not an issue after all.
At this stage I invite them in as a couple.
They do not initially see the need for this as
each denies that there is anything wrong
with their relationship. (I'm OK, my
marriage is OK.) When they are face to
face, Molly reports that talking to each
other is like a dialogue between deaf peo-
ple. We look in detail at transactions
between them and see how almost no infor-
mation is getting through to the other with-
out being modified or blocked in some
way, so that gradually through the years
each has been giving up on trying to com-
municate important personal things to the
other and often giving up on getting close
too. They only time they still feel really
close and in tune is when they are talking
about themselves as "we" to outsiders.
Some questions that are often asked:
Is it better to be Type II than Type I?
This question is nearly always asked. It
needs to be stressed that these types are just
something that gives a flavor to the person-
ality and have nothing to do with a per-
son's competence, intelligence or general
success in life. Both types have their
advantages and their disadvantages which
only begin to have an effect on success and
competence when a person spends the
major percentage of their time in their
defense position.
Do people switch between Type I
and Type II?
As mentioned earlier children seem to
make an early existential decision between
birth and 3-4 years old, in response to the
situation they find themselves in within the
family. A little girl who finds herself
193
JENNIE HINE
powerful or the center of attention as a
baby will begin to build an underlying Type
II defense. She may be a care-taker in some
way supplying mother's stroke needs or
bolstering morale, or simply be the 'apple
of someone's eye' whose needs come first
at all times. She may be the oldest child or
by being handicapped become the focus of
all the care and attention in the family, or
she may have 'losers' for parents whom she
props up in some way, etc.
When she gets to school or maybe
church, she receives a lot of pressure to
develop a Type I pliant, biddable defense.
This gets overlaid on the earlier decision
which becomes invisible except when the
really stressful situation comes along. Then
she may take people by surprise by taking
control in one way or another. This
overlay, when strong, produces confusing
transactions in adulthood.
This can also be seen in men who act like
Type II most of the time, as this was the
defense which saw them through school
and teenage gangs, but when they are in un-
familiar circumstances and feeling scared
they fall back on the Type I defense of their
baby days, looking for a competent giant
to take care of them.
These two cases do switch defenses be-
fore they get down into the position of
despair.
How does one find out the underlying
defense positions?
Two factors are involved, the present
day signs and the subjective experience of
oneself when relivingan early scene.
I invite the client to go back and relive an
important early scene in their imagination.
This can be a scene where they are feeling
loved and good about themselves or just
the reverse.
Occasionally it may be necessary to use
one of each sort. I then listen very carefully
for how they see themselves in it, how they
see the person(s} they are with, if any, and
what they think and feel about people in
general and their life to come in the world.
Do they discount the big people or do they
discount themselves or both? Are they
alone when they feel good? Where is the
power and who is taking notice of whom?
194
Obviously this work will be rich in all sorts
of script information, but I will be giving
special attention to the life position
decision.
Later I ask the person some questions
about themselves which are linked to the
chief characteristics of the Types, like,
"Do you feel at ease when you get a lot of
attention}," or better still simply observe
for the characteristics in the group setting
and the therapy process.
In conclusion
Both as client and as therapist, I have
found that a clear cognitive picture of the
signs of, and reasons for, these two well
marked patterns produces in many people a
relief of tension, which opens the door to
"here and now" affect and "here and
now" perceptions. This makes for in-
creased closenessand speeds the therapy.
Jennie Hine, MAOT, lives and works in
Switzerland.
REFERENCES
Berne, E. Positions-the pronouns. What do you say
after you say hello. New York: Bantam Books:
Grove Press, 1972,83-96.
English, F. Script and position, 1972. Selectedarticles.
Eastern Institute for TA and Gestalt, Philadelphia,
1976,151-161.
English, F. Correspondence between racketeering and
the existential position. Selected articles. Eastern
Institute for TA and Gestalt, Philadelphia, 1976,
188-189.
Berns, E. Positions-the pronouns. What do you say
after you say hello. New Yorkl Bantam Bookl
Grove Press, 1972,83-96.
Ernst, F. Psychological rackets in the OK corral.
Transactional Analysis Journal, 1973,3(2), 19-20.
Erskine, R., & Zalcman, Z. The racket system: A
model for racket analysis. Transactional Analysis
Journal, 1979.
Transactional Analysis Journal