Dear reader,
today I am talking about "problems" and once again about "paradoxical missions". First of all, I would like to mention a few pioneers in the field of systemic therapy and then I will talk about my own examples and views from my work with clients as a systemic integrative consultant for family and social affairs. Also I recommend a very unique movie, including a sex doll.
The problem is the solution
That "problems equals solutions" may not be heard for the first time by those who regularly find themselves confronted with problems in their work, such as a teacher dealing with a disturbing student. Or a biologist with a resistant virus strain. The solution for the teacher is the teacher and the solution for the virus is an effective remedy. If both workers would locate the problem somewhere else or not identify one at all in the matter they are dealing with (students/viruses), they would not need a solution and would not work on it. The biologist would quit his job and accept that people are killed by viruses and the teacher would get along very well with the student.
The fact that the solution for the teacher should be the teacher may seem confusing at first glance, but since the order of things for the teacher is that of the adult person who takes responsibility for the situation, it is up to the teacher to find the solution to his problem in himself (the teacher feels disturbed by the student and not the other way round - although by the way, that would be interesting to investigate, too ; -).
A popular question from a systemic point of view is: "Who has the problem? And who has it most?"
Changing without changing
As I said in my last article about Alfred Adler, the limited view of the "patient with an isolated problem" has been dropped by therapists over time to address the development of individuals through their interaction with their environment. A union of psychiatrists, psychologists and social workers was the "Palo Alto Group" from California, which was founded in the early 1960s. Inspired by Gregory Bateson, they originally researched schizophrenia and later on communication, psychotherapy and family therapy.
The Mental Research Institute influenced the development of systemic therapy to a large extent. In addition to Virgina Satir, its founding members included Paul Watzlawik, as well as Jay Haley, among others; the latter provided important impulses towards strategic systemic and hypnotherapy. Satir became famous for her "family therapy" and creative use of Gestalt-elements like the "family sculpture" within her therapy sessions.
The Palo Alto Group also influenced its profession in the rest of the Western world, including Mara Selvini Palazzoli and her Milanese group. She caused confusion in the field of psychotherapy with her co-written book "Paradox and counterparadox", published in 1977. In the field of family therapy, Palazzoli formulated the sentence (a family could say): "Take the symptom, but do not change us under any circumstances", which was understood as a paradoxical call to action. The therapists of the Milanese model answered this request as follows: "Yes, we will change you, but on condition that you do not change."
How do you understand that?
In practice, this meant, for example, that a supervised family was confronted with the following final commentary, which contained two elements: first, a paradoxical task such as "At present, it seems too early to propose a change to you. We think that you should at least leave everything as it is in the near future. The family's cohesion is more important than anything else right now!"
On the other hand, to find a positive connotation of all the acts or omissions that characterized the family by pointing this out as a way of ensuring the family's cohesion.
Example: The family is defined by the massive illness of the mother. Everything is organized around the mother or excluded. Since caring for the mother's wellbeing is an important part of the family's daily routine, a change in routine would be counterproductive. However, this does not rule out that the family visited the therapists precisely because of the stressful situation, but in the environment of medical treatment and permanent care within the family there is no one who has interpreted the situation positively. Aspcets could be that the family gained a significant amount of knowledge and practice in nursing and handles medications as well as doing smart scheduling.
However, the positive re-framing of a situation
that is mostly experienced as stressful has to be logical and conclusive for the clients and is not as easy to accomplish as it might read here.
To illustrate this with another examples, I quote from my previous article on the subject of positive reframed disturbances:
- Sleep disturbance is the ability to be watchful and get by with little sleep
- Depression is the ability to react with deepest emotionality to conflicts
- Schizophrenia is the ability to live in two worlds at the same time or living in a fantasy world
- Anorexia nervosa is the ability to get along with few meals and identify with the hunger of the world"
So problems themseves could be seen as positive.
What do you call "problem"?
Has anyone ever told you that what you consider problematic is just a hint that you already have a solution to this problem? How about someone answering your lamentation,"This is exactly the problem you need right now." Most of the time we want a problem to go away, we want to get rid of it and turn to the "real". But what is that? When you think about your problems in such a way that they are only made for you to develop through them and activate your abilities and resources, do you have a different relationship to them?
When you really think about it, when someone else has offered you the solution to your problem: what did you think or feel? Could you just accept that and say, "Thank you! This is the right solution for my problem!" Or were you not rather dissatisfied and disagreeing with your friend's suggestion, since it wasn't you who came up with it?
Remove the problem from the field?
I recently had a client who was confronted with financially supporting her parents who had grown old. Because she had broken with them and thought it would continue to do so, her problem got a very unpopular place. A family system consists only of the members of this system connected by blood ties. We live in a society that recognizes the family as the first great influence on our identity. Therefore, it is not possible to turn away from the family and pretend that it does not exist. It happens the exact opposite of what the client formulates superficially as intention: that she is spared from any contact with her parents. The more distance she brings between herself and her parents, the more the problems push themselves into her subconscious, because only the intention to remove important people from the present life brings her closer than she would like to be. The lack of parents' presence makes them appear in an unchangeable light. They are framed and virtually manifested by the client in a certain image and all their actions and omissions are merely integrated into the image and fulfil what the client expects.
The logical effect of this attitude is that the problem does not get smaller but bigger or at least stays that way.
Benefits of problems
From a systemic point of view, this has a comprehensible benefit for the client. One question, for example, would be what would happen if the person degraded to "Persona non grata" were suddenly loving, caring and benevolent? How would this affect the person who wanted to send him to the devil and who, to a large extent, gave himself identity by being a victim of the outlawed person?
It should be remembered that people who tell a story about themselves again and again over many decades experience their "being I". They have created a "truth" about themselves, from which they have drawn something profitable for themselves over time. That is also called "constructivism".
I've met a lot of people who define themselves by their trauma.
One would take something away from them and even plunge them into an identity crisis if one were to say that there is now enough of the drama and that one should finally pull oneself together.
Let's take a bad case of assault. This caused a trauma and as a result, the patient was treated for a significant period of time. During this time this person was carefully questioned, examined, touched, confirmed and also criticized and corrected. The causal action "assault" is now years ago. But the consequences of this experience are still ongoing. Depending on the extent to which the affected person puts the "profit" thus experienced in relation to the "loss", this experience will constitute a part of his or her identification.
With regard to my client, I have noticed that through the bureaucratic process she had to deal with, she came into contact with her feelings again, in a strength that is actually "illogical" from the point of view of the past time, in which she had no real contact with her parents.
Acting without being asked to do so
As outsiders and observers, we all tend to "leave our long-past experiences alone" and thus "make peace". But it is not up to us to decide when someone else should do this. We don't know much about the gain of a person, which he draws from it, to maintain a part of his identity through a traumatic experience. Nor can we judge which thing, person and activity can trigger a fresh memory of a trauma.
Lars & the sex doll
If no one in the surrounding area would respond to a traumatic story with horror, anger and sadness: What would happen? What if everyone responded in a completely equal and accepting manner?
There's this great movie that shows it in an excellent way. The movie is called "Lars and the Real Girl". A deranged man, who lives in the midst of a small community and is cared for by the parishioners and his brother plus wife, buys himself a life-size sex doll and turns it into his wife. He introduces her to his brother's family for dinner and from then on he takes her everywhere. No one even starts to find this strange or takes offence, since it was quickly agreed that this was the best thing for Lars and he had to decide for himself when he would turn his wife into a doll again.
In my opinion, the main message of the film is to simply accept people's madness as a unique attempt to solve a problem for them. You could say that everything we see as strange behavior for the one who does this is an experiment. He tries to find out how far the people around him are willing to accept his attempts at solving the problem.
If the environment reacts insecurely, aggressively, scornfully and incomprehensibly, it may even happen that someone intensifies his strange or disturbing behaviour and therefore appears to be even "crazier". One could exaggerate to say that a madman merely reflects the madness around him and that the degree of his difficulties depends on the degree of difficulty of others.
Lars said goodbye to his doll at some point. The creativity in which the film realizes this is really impressive and I recommend anyone who is interested in unusual problem solving to look at it.
Back to my client
My client radiated suffering, it seemed as if she was afflicted and I had to do something to reduce her grief. The first impulse I often see in myself is to change the situation for the client as if she had to say: "Well, I know it's stupid to carry so many resentments around with me all these years. I'm only harming myself. It's not worth suffering."
But did I get this assignment from her? I don't think so. What she did in fact want from me was a formally correct response to her request as to whether she could be officially exempted from the legal obligation to take care of her parents. She came to my counselling, because she had already received a hardship exemption clause from the district office herself and now only asked for help with the writing of the document. Behind this, I also noted the desire to confirm that she wanted to renounce her parents' responsibility for the childhood trauma as a justification. To which she showed corresponding emotional reactions and reactivated the feelings, which manifested itself in tears and grief. If she hadn't shown this human reaction, and if she hadn't wanted my support in writing the letter, she might have expected my resistance.
Helpers are not objective observers
Since I too am a part of society and there is an unspoken, yet still valid intergenerational treaty between old and young, she might have had to prepare herself for a less compassionate reaction from me. We all live in this knowledge, what the generations expect from each other and in the fewest cases we react acceptingly or evenly to the evasion of confronted family members.
In my opinion, it is understandable that the client is holding on to her trauma, because otherwise she has to admit that the neglect of the parents could be interpreted as her wrong behaviour. What would actually happen in the final consequence and would be judged by us as social beings in the same way. If there is no plausible reason for us to turn away from a human being, turning away is "wrong" and turning towards it would be "right". To do this, however, it is logically necessary to go beyond one's own suffering and give up long-term identification. Those who love their "carefully maintained" identification, however, will not give it up so quickly for something that they cannot yet be sure that it can replace the loss of this identity "profitably".
A child, for example, only then gives up a lovely toy when it finds a new and more interesting one, the child has practically outgrown the old toy.
An identity as a "victim" can therefore be very profitable and positively felt by someone.
Even, and especially when people consider this to be useless and bad, this does not mean that those with a victim mentality see it as such. On the contrary, a defensive attitude towards the sacrifice made (physically or psychologically suffered violence) must then be strengthened by the person concerned, so that the fellow human beings react to it also appropriately.
To find out what kind of problem someone really and truly wants to solve is not so easy.
We all have social experiences and exaggerate it in an effort to adapt, some of the problems that have been revealed are not really felt as such or we are not really convinced of them. But we are pretending that they are obvious problems, so that the others can legitimize this.
This can be one of the reasons why some people do not seem to be treatable and cannot be helped even after years of treatment. But whose view is this? And how will it be assessed?
My paradoxical advice to the client could have been:
“Try to bring more distance between yourself and your parents. You should not keep in touch with them for the rest of your parents' lives and immediately break off any form of attempted contact from their side."
Let this advice affect you. Contemplate a while. What could happen?
But I didn't have this assignment. As long as a client does not explicitly instruct me to do or leave something that he wants to happen or not to happen, my job as a consultant is to fulfill the client's wish and accept his situation as it is. You do not believe how surprisingly often it is for me, my question about what I am supposed to do remains unanswered. But my questions about what I should do for the client must never be circumvented. It’s of utmost importance to become clear in that matter.
I always fulfil my task best when I know what is going on with me and have an awareness of it in the consulting setting. And not that I know exactly what's going on with the client. I don't really know anything about that.
It is basically very liberating of dealing with clients in such a way that they are blank white leaves for me and I don't have to make any effort to understand their complex life, but only to know myself well and to know that it can happen to me to have unconscious desire for intervention and prejudice. And I can therefore take care that when it happens, this should not be to the detriment of the client, but for the benefit of him or her.
The art of counselling is therefore not the strict avoidance of prejudices and clumsy interventions,
but rather that when they happen (and they always do), they should be handled in such a way that they belong to the counselling process and can be worked with.
Whether someone actually has the exact problem with which he/she is supposedly peddling is really a matter to be investigated at first and can also be a lot of fun. I would like to say that we treat many of our problems like good old porcelain. It stands in the cupboard for years, stirs dust, is used and cleaned again and again and then put back into the shrine. Sometimes a piece breaks down or disappears at a party.
So always remember: The problem is the solution. Change without being changed is possible.
And don't forget: The universe is a collection of beautiful porcelain pieces.
Thank you for reading!
Picture sources:
Problem: https://www.flickr.com/photos/badjonni/474558791
Virginia Satir: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Satir
Reframing: https://www.flickr.com/photos/d_pham/8072408810
Sex doll: by Photograph own work, mannequin created by www.dsdoll.com, with permission granted from dsdoll.com [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons
Movie trailer "Lars and the Real girl": extern Link
Werewolve: Reynold Brown [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
Footer Christmas: https://www.madeiraislandnews.com/2015/12/merry-christmas.html
For some fun I have a little riddle for you.
It refers to the matter how we deal with problems. Here is one:
In a building there is a very slow elevator. This is seen as a problem. How would you solve it?
I am curious about which answers you come up with. Have fun! :-)
Thank you to everbody who supported me, the SteemSTEM curation team as well as all my readers and followers! I wish you a Merry Christmas, Love, Health, Luck & Success in whatever you do and don't do:)
@erh.germany, I have really enjoyed this post. I truly like your writing style :)
I was particularly drawn to the part you say you have clients who define themselves by their trauma. Recently, I have been reading a lot about diagnosis x labels, and it appears to me, that most of those who see their diagnosis as a label are the ones who, in your words, begin to 'define themselves through their trauma'(in my case, diagnosis).
Oh! Great movie by the way. I have seen it twice!! Your interpretation of it is quite insightful.
Thank you very much, @abigail-dantes (which is a really beautiful name:)
Yes, identification with diagnosis or problems plays a huge part and is often the hindering part in the healing process of a trauma. On the other hand it shows the very unique pace and notion of people who need to hold on to their problem as long as there is nothing better. I find it very appealing to think that way and to look for "the better". Though it is not easy because my society built up a whole system around the "sick" and forgot to leave space for what is already good:)
Ya, the movie is just mind blowing! I loved it so much to watch.
What is your interest in doing your profession? Did you have certain motives for that? If this question is not too personal.
Too many motives ! 😂
yep, understand :-)
Should I still answer this riddle problem? Lol
Great write-up as always. That Lars "experiment" would be great to be replicated in the real world. Everyone should be allowed their "madness" if it does no one any physical harm. There is always time it would be clear to the "mad" man that something is not just right.
Thanx, greenrun. Btw: Can you give me your real name? Or at least in the channel?
;-) He,he, the riddle is already solved in the secret room. But for the honored reader which can't wait to find the solution it should remain unsolved until one comes up with the right answer.
Lars: Excellent, right? To recommend this as an experiment...interesting idea-
yes, it is true, madness should be seen just as one of many character qualities one can have.
I see, you understand.
My name is Green. Lol. The Lars experiment would make the world almost utopia as no one would bat an eyelid at that boy with more weight than his peers or the girl with a "strange" hair color, etc. We are all unique in our own ways.
watch the movie if you haven't seen it yet. It also shows how difficult this free mind having actually is. If your spouse, brother or sister would behave that crazy, you would have some difficulties to accept that. That was, what I felt during watching the movie. Another part of mine was totally accepting and loving it. So... the world might be ready for it or not ....
I would look for it. It sure sounds interesting
Edit: I just saw the trailer...a 2007 movie...lemme see if I could get it.
Looks like I'm a bit late with a reply... been trying to understand all this, but I guess there was just a bit too much Glühwein over the Holidays.... ;-)
Read this really interesting post again and although I'm not sure that's your intention, I compare it to my own life and certain situations.
Maybe I should start with your riddle... since I don't have much patience for slow elevators, I'd take the stairs. Now I wonder if its the wrong answer, as my "solution" is sort of self centered and does nothing for the other people wanting to move up and down in the building 😕
Interesting what you say about the crying child and a joke teller... generally, someone who "depends" on an audience. Somehow it also applies to artists, particularly those "tormented souls"...
Still trying to figure out the solution of The problem is the solution. Change without being changed is possible... I like the sort of surrealistic sound of it, but I still don't know, what to do with my porcelain now... particularly the pieces with ugly spots and cracks. Showed it to a therapist once, many years ago, and it didn't end well 😬 🤐 🤢 but that's another story 😜
tis never too late, my friend. :-)
Thank you for visiting and reading, I appreciate that a lot!
Okay, first the riddle: there are no stairs in the building. I should have said that. Smile. But I give you the solution which is the cheapest one for the one who is running the building: Install a mirror and people overcome their boredom while standing in the elevator because they look at themselves in the mirror. Simple, no?
The evil thing about creating a work of art that touches the hearts and souls of other people is often a consequence of pain or troubled feelings. Therefore, the artist reactivates his pain memory. You might want to be careful not to do this too often, as it can easily become a habit (I'm making a joke that has a small true core, of course). But as long as the consciousness of the tortured soul is accepted by art and can thus be integrated at some point, as a mere part of life, an artist has found a form of self-therapy. Surely you know many examples where artists couldn't do this and that's why they went down so tragically in history.
I'd say that the fact that you showed someone your porcelain ended well. In my perception of your person you have found the gift of artistic and verbal expression, success on this platform, interesting and stimulating encounters and a source of inspiration. If you were broken, tortured or untreatable, you wouldn't be here. From this I conclude that a part of you is holding on to a certain dose of pain because it makes you feel alive. But this is pure speculation from me, which is to be understood as an offer.
For the not quite catchable surrealistic statements: It is exactly what they are good for. Because they "disturb" in a way, that one likes to think or contemplate about them.
Huggs!
Hm... have seen the mirror solution a few times. Not so sure I like it that much... plus with no stairs in the building, I'd report the owner to the fire department ;-)
With the "tortured souls", I was actually a little cynical, as I have been around one too many people who used that "excuse" to torture everyone around them. I myself created some things during bad times which I consider special and I probably wouldn't have done them, if things had been good and easy. On the other hand, I have been in such misery, that my work started to look like mud and I knew, I had to change something.. so, it wasn't my art that made me feel better, I made changes to make me feel better to create better art :-) Don't know, if this makes sense..
Haha... well, the porcelain thing is a whole different story. I tell you, if we ever meet in person ;-)
So, I don't think I'm broken or anything. I've been through some tough times, like just about everyone else and I got over it. I'm basically mostly positive 😁 and I like surrealistic thing with a touch of disturbance!
Missed the cynical tone:)
The torturer needs recipients who give enough ground to let them being tortured. One can see the drama queens & kings as a pain in the ... as well as a great chance to develop empathy without becoming sucked into the suffering. Which is a really challenging task to take. My example with Lars was an attempt to show that. It is such a wonderful method to deal with suffering people because others do not pity but take the "disturbed" behavior as it comes around. In this exaggerated example lies a great learning for me. I am always watching out for impressive narratives to get the message transported. The "aha-effect", so to speak.
It makes absolutely sense.
I had a client back then who told me that she'll be only able to dance, to have deep connections and enjoy life, once she is healthy again. I told her to ask herself, if it also could be the other way around: That she dances, gets in touch and enjoys the events in her life to become healthy again.
I see that you are anything but broken:)
My assumption was that I think everybody has something of porcelain standing in the cupboard - the pain - and likes to hold on whenever something happens which activates it. Including myself. Otherwise we would be divine, no? For my life experience I never met anyone who is already "awake" or "enlightened". Which I consider as humanly.
Does this make sense to you?
Of course it makes sense :-)
And of course I too have my porcelain in the cupboard... I just refuse to have things that I can't change, pull me down anymore. Most of the time ;-)
When I was young, I always thought I was super stable.. mentally. Then life gave me a few good hits in the face to teach me a lesson and become a bit more modest.
And then again, I was always very lucky too and with all that I found an attitude based on gratitude :-) hahaha... it rhymes! 😁👨🎨
:-D
modesty is always good when people reach a certain age and have more past than future. It is kinda strange watching a mid sixty one still acting rebellious and stubborn.
I am totally agreeing with your rhyme :-))
Hahaha... "..mid sixty one still acting rebellious.." sounds funny, when I think of my dad at 79! With him its genuine though 🤠
I found this would be a great closing thought/quote:
thank you!
I made the same experience :-)
nice work.
Spamming comments is frowned upon by the community.
Comment spam is currently defined by @steemcleaners as:
10 or more generic comments per day that are not in response to a question posed by the post or comment. “Thanks”, “Great Post!”, “Great Photo!”, “Good”, “Like”, “Nice”, “Wow”, “Cute”, “Follow me”, etc.
Commenting on old posts to hide self up-votes or a voting trail.
Copy/Paste comments that serve no purpose or the purpose is self promotion (including copying and pasting similar comments in rotating way).
Comments that inform the contributor that they have been up upvoted, resteemed, or flagged when the curator does not actually upvote, resteem, or flag the post.
Unsolicited and off topic referral links.
Continued comment spamming may result in action from the cheetah bot.
More Info: Abuse Guide - 2017.
you shouldn't do this. It won't give you the tools to thrive. You're comment will be considered as spam. Be smart and try another strategy.
thankx