| |
| |
| |
| |
Virginia often used role-plays to demonstrate the destructive results of typical and traditional family patterns of dominance and submission. She also used role-plays to teach family members an alternative: communicating as equals. As a therapist, Virginia deliberately operated from a position of equality, both verbally and nonverbally. She would bend down so that she could speak to children eye to eye, and she often stood children and shorter people on chairs so that they could be on the same level as taller grownups. She continually demonstrated how much more satisfying it is to relate to others as equals.
Virginia often included herself as an equal in the family's struggles by using the pronoun “we.” “I think we all have to struggle with that [controlling anger].” (1983, p. 38) “You know that whenever we get mad, it's hard to see anyhow.” (1983, p. 22) Often she would mention an experience of her own that was similar to something that someone in the family was experiencing. By including herself in these ways, she provided powerful experiences of what some have called normalization: seeing difficulties simply as normal problems to be solved. When we have difficulties we often blow them out of proportion, and this makes them much more difficult to solve. Perceiving them as normal is often a major step toward resolution.
Another aspect of Virginia's teaching equality was her flexibility with roles: “Any one of us can be a teacher or a student to the other.” (1989) This carried through all her work, and was particularly evident in the way she asked the family to correct her understanding of their interactions. Virginia was very direct, yet tentative, often restating what she had heard and asking the family to correct her.
Let me see now if I hear you. That if your father—if I'm hearing this—some way that he brings out his thoughts... He gets over-angry, you feel, or something like that? (1983, p. 34)
OK. Let me show you a picture that I see at the moment. I just want to get the picture out, and then you help me to check it... And this is my picture in my head from what I learned, and it may not fit at all, but it could. (She then goes on to create a “family sculpture” that illustrates her understanding.) (1983, p. 54)
Let me play back, just so I know if I understand. Part of this piece of support for you would be if your children did more of what you asked them to do. Is that a piece of it? (1983, p. 70)
This is what I heard you say before. Did I hear you correctly? (1983, p. 72)
When family members disagreed with each other, Virginia would say something like, “Everybody's got their own picture” (1983, p. 50) or “It is all right; these are human problems” (1983, p. 20). She thus validated everyone's experience and avoided taking sides in the family's right/wrong battle.
Virginia's favorite phrases for filling time as she paused to think were “OK” and “All right,” which literally means “Everyone/everything is right.”
When someone disagreed with her description of an experience, she would usually say simply, “Oh, so I was wrong,” and ask the person to clarify. Or she would acknowledge the statement and move right on to something else.
Working from a position of equality as a therapist accomplishes three important things simultaneously. First, it shows how to sidestep the one-up/one-down, dominance/submission struggles that often disturb and complicate family communication. Second, it ensures that the therapist doesn't get caught in the family hierarchy and become part of the problem instead of part of the solution.
Finally, Virginia's emphasis on equality also has a much deeper significance. Fighting and disputes are always based on incomplete information and noticing differences. When conflicts are extreme, each side perceives the other as so different as to be inhuman. In contrast, understanding and compassion are built on fuller information and seeing the similarities between people. Virginia focused on commonalities among people to create an appreciation of how we are all similar in many ways. Virginia believed that with a broad enough base of common experience and understanding, any dispute could be resolved. In the next example, she first draws out the father's childhood experiences and then draws a parallel with his own son:
Virginia: What did your father do, in your opinion, when you couldn't meet your idea of what he wanted?
Casey: He insisted that I be responsible for my younger sister, and he insisted that I act like a man although he treated me like a child.
Virginia: So that was kind of two messages. Be a man, but don't be a man.
Casey: Yeah. What really turned him on was when I started racing motorcycles at twelve, and he thought that was machismo. He'd run around town introducing me to all his buddies, especially when I'd win a race. If I fell off or something, I was the bad guy. I had to take care of my sister.
Virginia: That would be like Coby having to take care of Lisa and Lucy. That kind of thing? (1983, p. 80)
| |
| |
| |
| |
