Click here to contact Jo-Ann and/or see her GoodTherapy.org Profile

We know that relationships can be stressful in good economic times. Thanks to the economic problems facing our country today, many couples are experiencing even more stress. This added stress can weigh heavily on couples and create problems even in good relationships. Some couples react to stress by withdrawing while others, take their frustrations out on each other. What is important is how couples manage this stress instead of reacting to it. Here are some tips to help you “stress-proof” your relationship:

1. Remember that you are not the only one feeling the pressures and stress in your relationship. Support each other…you’re a team.
2. Make your relationship a priority! Take time to focus on each other and nurture your relationship.
3. Schedule times to talk to each other. Discuss your thoughts and feelings as well as possible solutions.
4. Make time for fun and enjoy each other. Be creative…fun does not have to cost a thing.
5. Focus your attention on the positive things in your life and relationship. Remember to have gratitude.
If you feel you need help with “stress-proofing” your relationship, please feel free to contact us to schedule an appointment (TheLoveBirds4u@yahoo.com or 813-769-9039 ).

©Copyright 2008 by Jo-Ann H. Bird, Ph.D., LMHC, NCC, Dip.ABS All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry. Click here to contact Jo-Ann and/or see her GoodTherapy.org Profile

Click here to contact Arthur and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile

DYADIC DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOTHERAPY is a treatment approach to trauma, neglect, loss, and/or other dysregulating experiences that is based on principles derived from Attachment Theory and Research.

DYADIC DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOTHERAPY involves creating a safe setting in which the client can begin to explore, resolve, and integrate a wide range of memories, emotions, and current experiences, that are frightening, stressful, avoided or denied. Safety is created by insuring that this exploration occurs with nonverbal attunement, reflectivenonjudgmentaldialogue, along with empathy and reassurance. As the process unfolds, the client is creating a coherent lifestoryor autobiographical narrativewhich is crucial for attachment security and is a strong protective factor against psychopathology. Therapeutic progress occurs within the joint activities of coregulating affect and coconstructing meaning.

Nonverbal attunement refers to the frequent interactions between a parent and infant, in which both are sharing affect and focused attention on each other in a way such that the child’s enjoyable experiences are amplified and his/her stressful experiences are reduced and contained. This is done through eye contact, facial expressions, gestures and movements, voice tone, timing and touch. These same early attachment experiences, which are fundamental for healthy emotional and social development, are utilized in therapy to enable to the client to rely on the therapist to regulate emotional experiences and to begin to understand these experiences more fully. Such understanding develops further through engaging in a conversation about these experiences, without judgment or criticism. The therapist will maintain a curious attitude about the memories and behaviors, encouraging the client to explore them to better understand their deeper meanings in his life and gradually develop a more coherent lifestory. This process may be stressful for the client, so the therapist will frequently “take a break” from the work, provide empathy for the negative emotion that may be elicited, and reassure the client about his efforts and the therapeutic relationship.

The primary therapeutic attitude demonstrated throughout the sessions is one of playfulness, acceptance, empathy and curiosity (PACE).

For the purpose of increasing the client’s safety, his/her readiness to rely on significant attachment figures in his life, and his/her ability to resolve and integrate the dysregulating experiences that are being explored, a person who an important attachment figure to the client will be actively present. When the client is a child, this most often will be the child’s parent or guardian. When the client is an adult, this most often will be the adult’s partner.

The role of the parent in his/her child’s psychotherapy is the following:

1. Help him to feel safe.
2. Create a healing PLACE (Playful, Loving, Accepting, Curious, and Empathic), both nonverbally and verbally.
3. Help him to regulate any negative affect such as fear, shame, anger, or sadness.
4. Validate his/her worth in the face of trauma and shamebased behaviors.
5. Reassure him/her that your relationship remains strong regardless of the issues.
6. Help him/her to make sense of his/her life so that it is organized and congruent.
7. Help him/her to understand your perspective and motives with respect to him/her.

The parent’s role is not to criticize, lecture, nag, or amplify shame. Periodic confrontation may be necessary and needs to be integrated into the overall treatment session. Reassurance and repair of the relationship after confrontation is crucial. The child will not participate fully in therapy, and will not benefit much from the process if s/he does not feel safe in a setting primarily characterized by PACE.

Frequently a person’s symptoms are his/her unsuccessful ways of regulating frightening or shamebased memories, emotions, and current experiences. Angrily telling a person to stop engaging in these symptoms may actually increase their underlying causes. In helping the child in therapy and at home to regulate the affect associated with the symptoms, and to understand the deeper meanings of the symptoms, we are increasing the likelihood that the symptoms will decrease. At the same time it may certainly be necessary to address the symptoms through increased supervision or through applying natural consequences for them. Again, however, the issues will be addressed more effectively when done with PACE rather than habitual anger, rejection, or other shameinducing actions.

When we are asking a client to address frightening or shamebased memories, emotions, and current experiences, when are asking him/her to engage in an activity that will be emotionally painful. In do so it is crucial that we maintain an attitude characterized by PACE in order to insure that the client is not alone while entering that painful experience. The client has developed significant symptoms and defenses against that pain, most often because s/he was alone in facing it. When we help to carry and contain the pain with him/her, when we coregulate it with him/her, we are providing him/her with the safety needed to explore, resolve, and, integrate the experience. We do not facilitate safety when we support a client’s avoidance of the pain, but rather when we remain emotionally present when he is addressing the pain.

The following statements reflect routine features of DYADIC DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOTHERAPY:

1. Playful interactions, focused on positive affective experiences, are never forgotten as being an integral part of most treatment sessions, when the client is receptive. When the client is resistant to these experiences, the resistance is met with PACE.
2. Shame is frequently experienced when exploring many experiences of negative affect. Shame is always met with empathy, before considering interventions to question it.
3. Emotional communication that combines nonverbal attunement and reflective dialogue and is followed by relationship repair when necessary is the central therapeutic activity.
4. While supporting the reduction of shame, we also support the increase of guilt.
5. Resistance is met with PACE, rather than being criticized and/or punished.
6. Treatment is directive and clientcentered. Directives are frequently modified delayed, or setaside in response to resistance which is met with PACE.

DYADIC DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOTHERAPY involves the process having a conversation with the client and his/her attachment figure about a wide range of memories, emotions, and current experiences. This conversation occurs within the safety created by nonverbal attunement, reflective dialogue, and interactive repair.

The purpose of this dyadic conversation is to facilitate the development of a coherent autobiographical narrative that involves: a. Coregulation of affect elicited during the conversation. b. Dyadic construction of meaning regarding the focus of the conversation. c. Development of a sense of efficacy regarding being able to have a conversation about the full range of experiences, memories and emotions in one’s personal narrative.

To facilitate this process the therapist will consisting maintain an attitude that involves communicating Playfulness, Acceptance, Curiosity and Empathy (PACE).

©Copyright 2008 by Arthur Becker-Weidman, Ph.D. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry. Click here to contact Arthur and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile

Imagine a classified ad for parents. It might read:

“Wanted, parents to raise young children to adulthood. The only requirement for this position is the ability to procreate. No education, training or experience necessary. In addition, there’s no salary, no sick leave or vacation time”.

No other job in the world with such a description has so many of us lined up to take on such a difficult and demanding task as raising children.

They do not come with instructions, so it is on-the-job training and it is easy to think one is getting a failing grade, no matter how hard the parent attempts to do well.

In Ephesians 6:4, the Apostle Paul tells us, in part: “……do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instructions of the Lord.”

As with most tasks, everything is “easier said than done.”

Birthing, or adopting, and raising children are one of the most difficult responsibilities anyone can ever undertake in this life.

Think about surgeons training for twelve-plus years to perform surgical operations, but their work is not nearly as crucial as it is to be a good parent raising a child.

Notice that the emphasis is on the word “good”.

Most parents have the best of intentions, but will look back and experience many regrets about the mistakes they made raising their children. It seems that every generation repeats this same process and feels the same regrets.

Parents inadvertently injure their children with the unresolved issues of their own childhood and do not realize it until their children begin exhibiting problems. Being cognizant of their personal “apperceptions” can be helpful to a parent to know how this is impacting their offspring.

Apperception is defined as “the way a person perceives themselves, the world, and others, based on earlier emotional experiences”. It can be their childhood that is being re-enacted each day without the parent even knowing what is happening.

Occasionally, one can hear a parent comment, “That is how my parents raised me, and what was good enough for me should be good enough for my children”.

This is not always the case.

There are two things that children need from their parents more than anything else aside from the basic necessities of food, clothing and shelter.

They need to feel significant and they need to feel safe.

For children to feel significant, parents must attend to their child’s developing self-esteem.

Nurturance is an essential ingredient in this process, and to nurture, a parent has to show affection, encouragement, and unconditional acceptance to the child. A parent can state to a child, “you are a good person, but I do not approve of what you did”, thus avoiding the damaging label of “bad boy/girl”, when correcting the child.

It is far different to be an evaluative and corrective parent, keeping the focus on the behavior and not the value of the child, than it is to be a punitive and critical parent, which only damages the child’s self-esteem.

For children to feel safe, parents must understand their role as the “Protector” of the child and that the responsibility of protection comes from three different perspectives.

First, the parent is required to protect their child from others who would harm them.

Second, the parent must prevent the child from harming themselves.

Third, and the most crucial for the child to grow up perceiving the world as a safe place to be, is providing protection from the “Protector”.

Many parents do not realize when they are the source of the damage to their child because of their own emotional problems.

There are two basic psychological principles to remember when raising a child and for a parent to feel better about their parenting skills:

Principle One: Children would rather be punished than be ignored.

If you ignore your child during good behavior, they’ll find a way to get your attention even if it means getting into trouble.

Principle Two: Any behavior that is followed by a pleasurable experience is more likely to be repeated.

Catch your child in the act of doing well and make sure they get attention, praise them, and they will do it again.

Hitting or berating your child only teaches them violence, and damages their self-esteem.

In Matthew 18:6 Christ warns that it would be better for us to be drowned at sea, that it would be for any of us to harm a child.

©Copyright 2008 by Dr. Noah H. Kersey, Ph.D. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry.

Click here to contact Edward and/or see her GoodTherapy.org Profile

It is difficult to make a decision to seek treatment for alcohol abuse, dependency, or addiction. But having made that choice it becomes even more confusing when seeking an appropriate type of program. Essentially the first decision comes down to opting for either Inpatient or Out-Patient.

First consider In-Patient, commonly referred to as “Residential.” Generally these programs run from 30 – 90 days at an average cost of $1000/day, though some may run three or four times that amount. Usually the client is confined to a facility, shielded from outside pressures, assessed, counseled, and released to aftercare which usually consists of weekly groups at a hospital, clinic, or other local facility and the mandate “don’t drink, attend AA, work your program.”

The benefits are fairly straightforward: removel from immediate stressers; isolation from temptation; appeasement of family and employers; time to regroup and collect one’s thoughts; and a period away from the usual alcoholic fog.

The drawbacks are equally apparent: expense; disconnection from reality; labeling; depression; and re-entry shock which generally leads to relapse within a month or two – a return to old behaviors which will now necessitate out-patient services if can can afford them either financially or emotionally.

Out-patient, on the otherhand, allows the client to gradually modify behaviors within the ongoing context of their daily life. It also provides assessment and counseling and followup, but with continuity of program, staff, and facility.

The drawback is that the client isn’t isolated – or protected – from their usual stresses and temptations. But is this really a negative point?

Nearly anyone can modify a behavior in a controlled environment for a short period of time. People do lose weight at spas; they get into shape at camps; they quit drinking in rehab. But they almost always return to their old patterns when they return to their usual lives and problems, people and jobs, neighborhoods and families. All that has changed is that they’ve had a very expensive vacation.

The harsh reality is that change takes place within the individual in their usual surroundings, or it doesn’t last for long. That said, Out-Patient treatment is more effective because it works with all of the day-to-day problems that must be coped with. It’s cheaper – you can always stay at a hotel for awhile if you need to escape long enough to clear your head and develop some plans. It’s more inclusive, again because it is done within the context of your real life. It’s also less prone to labeling you with a permanent diagnosis which may or may not be accurate and is usually demeaning.

Finally, modifying behaviors over time is more apt to result in lasting change. It takes time to alter behavior – thirty days to break a habit and a year or more to replace the activity. If you want to succeed, expect to give yourself the time you deserve in the most efficient ways available.

©Copyright 2008 by Edward W. Wilson, Ph.D., MAC. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry.

Click here to contact Edward and/or see her GoodTherapy.org Profile

Click here to contact Allison and/or see her GoodTherapy.org Profile

This paper begins an examination into the possible characteristics of a non-racist white therapeutic Counselor. To begin addressing this topic, many questions must be asked around the history of race in this country. Therefore, significant energy is put into understanding the origins of what we call “race” and “white” in the United States. The history of counseling is examined, in its beginnings as a predominantly white professional group and clientele, and its first attempts to deal with “multicultural concerns.” This discussion brings to light, that as with other aspects of “American” life, the counseling profession has been embedded in a racist system. The discourse suggests that as counselors come to terms with this reality, they must ask themselves what their agenda is in counseling people of any race and how willing they are to acknowledge their own racial privileges.

***I have consciously decided not to capitalize “white” throughout the paper.****

What Might be the Characteristics a Non-racist white Counselor?
As I ventured into the Naropa University library, my essential question swirled around my head: What might be the characteristics of a non-racist white counselor? I wondered, is there such a thing? Can a white person be non-racist? What is a racist? What is “white”? What is the role of a counselor of any race? Does this role change based on the counselor’s race, the client’s race? Where do I even begin to find the answers, if there are any?
My search on the Naropa computer catalog with subject “non-racist white” returned “nothing found” in the Naropa circulation. Next, I searched for “multicultural counseling,” which led me to the stacks. Finally, my eyes reached the bottom shelves where there were maybe fifteen to twenty books on the topic of multicultural counseling. As I sat down on the floor to better see the titles, I was reminded of some lines I had read many years earlier by the author Adrienne Rich. I went back to the book to find her exact words. In her writing about the incredible power of words and poetry in her work, What is Found There: Notebooks on Poetry and Politics (1993), she writes about her venture into a chain bookstore in search of poetry books. When she finally asks someone where the poetry section is, a young man walks her to the back of the store and says: “Those two shelves down there.” Rich writes: “Poetry is underneath, and intermixed with, the books on rock music, movies, and theater- not a bad thing, I think, but poetry is awfully low ‘down there.’” She continues: “But why aren’t these books out front like the greeting cards or with the manuals on intimacy, parenting. sex and grief?…who [will] go all the way back and stoop, down there, looking for something labeled ‘poetry’?”(pp.30-31). How easy it was for me to replace the word poetry with multiculturalism.
As I sat on the floor in front of the small multicultural counseling section, I automatically found myself trying to justify the small section, with thoughts like: it’s just a small library, I’m sure that “they” didn’t really, intentionally, put the books out of eye level, and other similar thoughts. However, the fact of the matter remains that this topic, “Multicultural Counseling,” was something that was not immediately visible. It was as Rich puts it, “down there,” out of sight, out of mind. Upon reflecting on Rich’s words, what becomes even more clear is that “multiculturalism” is, in fact both figuratively and literally, underneath almost everything in daily, “American” life. Rich finishes her chapter by saying that “suppression can take many forms- from outright banning and burning of books, to questions of who owns the presses, to patterns of distribution and availability.”(31). It is with this notion of suppression kept in mind, that I will continue my exploration into the nature of a non-racist white counselor. Of the many questions highlighted, Rich’s comments, brings home the idea that it is possible that “someone” or some system(s) might not actually want me to understand how to be a non-racist white counselor or maybe the impossibility of this option. Nonetheless, I am intent on engaging with this essential question, which has implications that go above and beyond my future role as a counselor and into my life as a whole.
What is Race?
In watching a California Newsreel video entitled Race: the power of an illusion (2003), as part of my research, I was profoundly struck by a quote from a former Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun. In the famous Bakke affirmative action case on college admissions he said: “In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race. There is no other way.” (Adelman & Smith, 2003). It is with this notion in mind, that it becomes necessary to explore what it means to be a white person in this country before we can even begin to understand more specific aspects of being a white counselor. The history of whiteness is this country is complex and entangled. Being white has always gone beyond a simple outward appearance. Whiteness, in many ways, has its origins in an inflated and artificial legal system. In looking at the history of lawmaking in this country, we see that many immigrants were made “white by law” and thus eligible for citizenship. (Adelman & Smith, 2003).
On the creation of “white,” in a speech entitled “Who Invented White People?,” Professor Gregory Jay follows the winding and corrupt roots of what we call race. He writes: “Whiteness, then, emerged as what we now call a ‘pan-ethnic’ category, as a way of merging a variety of European ethnic populations into a single ‘race,’ especially so as to distinguish them from people with whom they had very particular legal and political relations — Africans, Asians, American Indians — that were not equal to their relations with one another as whites.” (Jay, 1998). Race is an invention; science has been unable to find evidence of race in terms of genetics or behavioral variations.
Every human population is a mongrel population, full of people descended from various places and with widely differing physical qualities… ‘Race’ is what academics like to call a ‘socially constructed’ reality. Race is a reality in the sense that people experience it as real and base much of their behavior on it. Race, however, is only real because certain social institutions and practices make it real.” (Jay, 1998).

Race and its related laws have made clear the rights and privileges of whites as well as what is denied to the “non-whites.” The civil activist and professor, James O. Horton points out the arbitrary nature of race in our country by looking at the Jim Crow Segregation laws of the mid 19th century to the early 20th century. He cites examples of how a person in Florida, at the time of these laws, was Black if they were 1/8th Black, and thus subject to the Jim Crow regulations, but in Virginia a person was Black if they were 1/16th black and finally in Alabama if a person had even one drop of “Black blood” they were black. Horton, laughingly, points out that just by crossing state lines one could legally change his/her race. In other words, race is a social and political construction. As Horton puts it: “give me power and I can make you any race I want.” (Adelman & Smith, 2003). Although, these institutionalized aspects of race and racism may be more invisible now than in American history they are nonetheless still alive and well underneath the governmental systems of this country.
Being Uncomfortable is Good
Making the invisible visible means taking responsibility and acknowledging what being white has given “us” and taken away from “others.” Professor John A. Powell, an internationally recognized authority in the areas of civil rights, civil liberties, and issues relating to race, ethnicity, poverty and the law, suggests that in order to accomplish anything where race is concerned, “we have to be willing to be uncomfortable.” (Adelman & Smith, 2003).The problem is that often in the counseling field “being uncomfortable,” is at times confused with a lack of knowledge. The logic is something like: if you are uncomfortable than you must not know what you are doing. This often puts professionals in a bind. But what if discomfort is actually a positive sign that an individual, in this case a white counselor, is confronting the complex reality of living and practicing in a multicultural context?
Many multicultural texts and educational programs actually do see the origin of this discomfort as a lack of knowledge, the white counselor does not know enough about other cultural/racial groups. These texts and programs then spend a great deal of time trying to educate whites on stereotypical descriptions and ways of dealing with various cultural/racial groups. As Utsey and Gernat point out in their article entitled: White Racial Identity Attitudes and the Ego Defense Mechanisms Used by White Counselor Trainees in Racially Provocative Counseling Situations: “Traditionally, programs focused on developing a knowledge base of cultural nuances, increasing awareness of the unique issues affecting clients from racial/ethnic groups, teaching specific multicultural counseling skills and competencies, and fostering nonracist attitudes toward racial/ethnic minority clients.”(2002).
However, what is often left out is the white counselor simply dealing with the understanding of the privileges that come with being part of the dominant culture. It is only a rather recent component, (in the past decade or so), of these programs for whites to confront what it means to be white. Clearly, before I can understand anything about how you are different (or similar), I need to really be able understand myself. “According to Helms (1995), for White counselor trainees to develop a nonracist White identity, they must accept their ‘Whiteness’ and acknowledge those ways in which they collude with and benefit from racism.” (Utsey & Gernat, 2002).
Now that I have acknowledged my whiteness and the privileges that come with it, does this make me non-racist or does it just mean that now I clearly see that I am indeed a racist. What is the next step? How do I address the institutional racism in the counseling profession itself? Undoubtedly, as with all other professions, counseling has been embedded in the racist systems of our country and must be approached with this in mind.

History of Counseling in the United States
As we look at the history of the counseling field, we find that it was not until the civil rights movement of the 1960′s that “multicultural concerns” actively entered the field of counseling. In the Handbook of Multicultural Counseling, the authors cite the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as a major turning point in the counseling of minority groups. It was a time when America [presumably white America] “began to listen closely to its conscience and reflect on past mistreatment of members of minority groups.” The authors point out that “the multicultural movement gained support because of Whites’ new sensitization to racial issues, and in the counseling profession this sensitization took the form of concern over the profession’s failure to provide ‘guidance for all’- that is, counseling that addresses the diverse needs of all the people who seek it.” (Ponterotto, Casas, Suzuki & Alexander, 1995, p.9).
The control that whites’ have had in the evolution of multicultural counseling sounds strangely like a path to assuaging white guilt by helping those “less fortunate.” The people that are making decisions and educating professionals regarding multicultural practices continue to be primarily white. Here are just a few statistics cited in the Handbook for Multicultural Counseling (1995), that reflect this imbalanced practice: [These statistics are from 1992, so hopefully things have progressed since that time.]
Less than 1% of the chairpersons of graduate counseling programs in the United States come from non-White groups (89% of all chairpersons in counseling training programs are White Males).
No Hispanic American, Asian American, or Native American person has ever been elected president either the ACA or the APA.
Only one African American person has been elected president of the APA.
None of the five most commonly used textbooks in counselor training programs in the United States lists ‘racism’ as an area of attention in its table of contents or index. (p.23)
My Agenda
It is with these statistics in mind that I begin to recognize that even as I partake in this dialogue on multiculturalism and being a non-racist white counselor, I must ask myself what my agenda is. Even in my very ability to become educated as a counselor, am I reinforcing a type inequality or dominance? How did I come to be in such a powerful position of even being able to ask a question about being a non-racist white counselor ? How does the asking of this question in itself maintain a system of dominance and suppression? Subsequently, my question of how to be non-racist and help all, comes across as type of white man’s burden. Is my job to help all?
What is the job of a multiculturally competent white counselor? I begin to wonder, if I truly believe that I am to be an agent of social change, is it possible to achieve this through a profession that exists as a product of a dominant system and its related ways of thinking and acting? Inherently, there is a power dynamic in the counseling situation; I am the counselor here to provide new information and to facilitate change. I am beginning to wonder if part of my job is also to normalize people, to help them to fit in, and to adapt to the realities of life. This sounds acceptable until placed into the context of multiculturalism, when it all of the sudden seems that in reality, I am being asked to help people fit into the dominant culture, to help people to adapt and to acculturate.
Of course, I have a choice. I have a choice about my own awareness. I have a choice about what I will leave buried and what I will dig up about my whiteness. I am reminded now of Audre Lorde’s words, when she wrote In Sister Outsider: “your silence will not protect you.” (1984). In fact nothing will protect me, being protected from the reality of race means being defended and being defended means that I am hidden behind a wall. I can not make contact with anyone of any race if I am in a defensive stance. Instead, I need to be vulnerable, and accept that there are many answers that I do not have.
I feel as though I have just begun to scrape the surface of this enormous topic, nevertheless, I do feel that my own awareness is continually expanding. As I was finalizing my writing, I went back to Adrienne Rich’s book searching for a poem to try to encapsulate the complexity of my feelings and my thoughts on this immense topic, instead, what I found was my own voice:
I am afraid
I am afraid that I will not know how
to just be.
I am afraid that I will not be able to simply
see you.
I am afraid that the system will get in the way and be a barrier to
just us.
I am afraid of the color of your skin as I am afraid of
my own.

I want us to make a space together where your voice
is your own.
And I listen
without the filter of privilege.
I want every moment to be a creation
with no rules but reality
I want to face my fears
because I must.

I am afraid and I want.

Rich writes: “We go to poetry because we believe that it has something to do with us. We go to poetry to receive the experience of the not me, enter a field of vision we could not otherwise apprehend.” On writing a poem Rich says: “…that an ‘I’ can become a ‘we’ without extinguishing others, that a partly common language exists to which strangers can bring their own heartbeat, memories, and images.” (85).
It is in this field of vision that I wish to meet future clients of any race/culture, where we are both the same and different, and neither one less of an individual then before.

References
Adelman, L., Smith, L.M. (2003). Race: the power of an illusion, Episode Three: The House We Live In. California: California Newsreel.
Gernat, C.A., Utsey, S.O. (2002). White Racial Identity Attitudes and the Ego Defense Mechanisms Used by White Counselor Trainees in Racially Provocative Counseling Situations. Journal of Counseling and Development, 80.
Jay, G. (1998). Who Invented White People? Retrieved February 11, 2006, from

http://www.uwm.edu/%7Egjay/Whiteness/Whitenesstalk.html

Lorde, A. (1984). Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. (p.41). Freedom, CA: The Crossing Press.
Ponterotto, J.G., Casas, J.M., Suzuki, L.A., Alexander, C.M. (1995). Handbook of Multicultural Counseling. (pp. 9, 23). California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Rich, Adrienne (1993). What is Found There: Notebooks on Poetry and Politics. (p.85, 30-31). New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

©Copyright 2008 by Allison Weliky. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry.

Click here to contact Allison and/or see her GoodTherapy.org Profile

Tampa Therapy

Online counseling for substance abuse <!– @page { size: 8.5in 11in; margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } –>

There are hundreds or even thousands of people throughout North America who suffer from substance abuse, either with prescription drugs, street drugs or alcohol. Many of these people are unaware that help is just a phone call, visit or click of a button away; others are aware of the help available but they don’t feel that it will do them any good. Most are aware of the live help lines or the crisis lines they can phone in order to talk to someone, but most don’t feel that these will help them. What they need is therapy or proper counseling, but most will do their best to avoid talking to a stranger in person about their problems. For people who want help, but are uncomfortable talking with a therapist or a counselor in person, there is online therapy or counseling.

The idea of online counseling is still fairly new for many people and there are undoubtedly quite a few who are unaware of the fact that they could seek help for their substance abuse problem through a professional therapist or counselor online. Since online therapy and counseling first started, it has grown more popular all the time because of its easy access and its convenience. One might wonder how an online counselor could help someone who is suffering from substance abuse; online counseling is very much the same as regular counseling, the difference is that one has people talking face to face while the other has the counselor and patient communicating by messaging back and forth online. The online counseling can be just as successful as the regular therapy, but like regular therapy the person has to want to get over their addiction. The online counselor will work with the patient to help them get rid of their dependency on the drug and can also help the patient with any other problems they might have. Many people who develop a dependency on a drug do so because they are trying to hide from something that really bothers them.

Online counseling could be the answer for many people looking for help to get rid of their drug dependency. Many people will avoid regular therapy because this would require them to speak to someone in person, which can often be uncomfortable. Online counseling offers people the chance to ensure their confidentiality as well as get the help they need in the comfort of their own home. Online counseling takes away the need for having to leave the home to get the help; instead, people looking for help to deal with their problem only have to sit down at their computer and send off a message to an online counselor they find. The online counselor will then reply and the therapy can begin. This easy access to help makes it easier for people to get the help they need, especially if they are only looking for someone to talk to at first before they become interested in going into counseling. For many, online counseling could be the answer they have been looking for.

©Copyright 2008 by Jennifer Baxt. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry.

St. Louis Therapy

Click here to contact Mitchell and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile

Anger is a lit match that can be blown on and cooled or thrown onto a pile of paper on which kerosene is poured. It’s an opportunity for friends and lovers to resolve conflicts to the benefit of both parties and bring these parties closer to each other or it can be an invitation to start a war and turn partners into enemies. The following recommendations approach anger as an opportunity to build bridges and meaningful connections.

1)Ask for what you want respectfully. Frame the requests so that they are requests that will create mutual feelings of satisfaction and appreciation.

2)Stay in the present and address on issue at a time. Today is the first day of the rest of your lives. Avoid phrases that shape no win situations such as: “You always, you never, etc…” The blame and shame game is played in a world of black and white. Stay in a world of shades of gray.

3)When expressing your feelings express them assertively and let your partner understand the cause-effect relationship between what you are hearing and/or seeing, how it affects you and the responses that are shaped. i.e., “When you look away when I’m talking to you I feel frustrated and annoyed because I want to feel important to you and not that I’m burdensome and uninteresting. When you behave this way I feel like leaving you behind and spending the afternoon with our dog. ”

4)Listen actively and clarify what you are hearing. When we try and read minds we are acting in a disrespectful manner and often reading our own minds and confusing them with our partners’

5)Resolving conflicts are much simpler when both parties do their best to keep their tones of voice, words and body language consistent. If you are receiving mixed messages then, let your partner know in as kind and considerate a manner as possible.

6) Give your partner the benefit of the doubt and do not attribute malicious motives to justify your behaviors.

7)Two wrongs never make a right and only make matters worse. Two wrongs is a formula for a vicious cycle of victimization and retaliation in the absence of reparations being made by the alleged aggressor.

8)If your anger is holding your thoughts hostage and you are on an aggressive mission both of you will regret then, please consider calling time out, calm your self down, reflect on what just happened and then,
get back together when you are back in control of your self and willing and able to work matters out.

9)Try and throw out right and wrong, good and bad, smart and stupid, etc.. There is your cup of tea and her cup of tea. There are different strokes for different folks and the sooner you separate your self from what your partner does or not does, and will do or not do, the easier it will be to maintain your own self esteem and not blame your partner for what you cannot control. If you can hold onto your own self regard you will be better able to not lose regard for your partner when you feel frustrated, disappointed, angry, etc.

10)Remember, love is a verb and to behave in a loving manner it’s
important that you not lose sight of the fact that the same partner you
loved yesterday is the partner you hate today. We are all complex
people with many any facets to our personalities. Hold onto yourself as
a whole person and you will hold onto your partner as a whole person.

11)Relationships work when life becomes a win/win proposition. Negotiate with balanced concern for both of your interests.
When you say you don’t care about your partner’s self interest you are
also saying you don’t care about your own self interest. If you can’t
make a major decision to the mutual satisfaction of both of you then,
take the decision off the table and try again at a future date.

12)Show your appreciation of each other with compliments. If
your criticisms outnumber your compliments then life with your partner will be difficult. It’s universal to want to be known, accepted and loved as long as that love and acceptance is not at the expense of the other spouse’s integrity and core values. Unconditional love is reserved for young children. This having been said, adults want respect, consideration and love from their partners and won’t be happy if they have to be perfect and/or jump through hoops every day to get it. You’re not perfect so don’t expect perfection from your partner.

13)If you wish to have a healthy relationship speak directly to each other and not through a third party.

14)Take turns listening and speaking.

15)No one wishes to dig bunkers in their homes to feel safe and secure.
Avoid all forms of emotional and physical abuse as if they were loaded weapons. They are lethal relationship killers.

©Copyright 2008 by Mitchell Milch. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry.

Click here to contact Mitchell and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile

There are many situations or difficulties that can hurt a family unit. It could be that a parent or both parents are suffering from substance abuse problems, a member of the immediate family has passed away, or even poor communication. Families that do not spend much time together and where clear communication is lacking can have difficulty in remaining a strong family unit. Many do not realize it, but one of the first things needed to having a strong and happy family unit is communication. Without proper communication, there can be a lack of trust, an increased chance of misunderstanding and a good chance that the family could eventually fall apart; meaning that each member of the family will go their own separate way.

While good communication alone is not going to ensure that a family has strong bonds, communication does play a large roll in keeping the family a stronger unit that will have more of a chance at staying together. Communication opens the door to there being support in the family, understanding, trust, respect and even happiness. When everyone in the family feels they always have someone to talk to who will listen to them when life gets rough, they can feel more secure in the family they are in. Being able to have others they can trust and rely on can make for a happier family environment where both the children and parents can feel healthy, safe and secure. It is amazing how much the lack of communication can negatively affect the family as a whole. This is probably because without proper communication there can be many misunderstandings and even fights within the family. A lack of communication could also cause large rifts to begin forming between family members and each individual can lose track of what is going on in the rest of the family. The family members can start drifting apart and the family unit can fall apart.

Many families have communication problems and don’t even realize it. This is why it is a good idea that a family that wishes to stay together and create a strong family unit, whether they think they have good communication or not, should visit a family therapist. Online therapy is also available. A family that has questions about good communication can easily go online, do a quick search for an online family therapist and then send the therapist any questions they might have. If family counseling is necessary, the family therapist can work with the family online in order to develop good communication skills within the family unit. It is always best for a family to ensure they have good communication skills from the start, because as time goes on it can become more difficult to develop those communications skills after rifts have started to appear. An online therapist can help the family, whether they have children or not, develop these skills so that they can have a stronger family unit from the start. A good strong family helps to create a safe and secure atmosphere for all the members.

©Copyright 2008 by Jennifer B Baxt. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry.

Seattle Therapy

Click here to contact Greg and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile

(Published in The Focusing Connection, 2003)
*Focusing is a natural way of being with our own experience, patiently, until it becomes
more clear. Information on Focusing can be found at www.focusing.org
Unbeknownst to most clients, psychotherapy remains governed by many theories and
boundary ‘rules’, the actual purpose of which may be to protect the therapist from his or
her own anxiety . In this short piece, an existential therapist uses Focusing to attempt to
remain open to the difficult experience of being with a dying client. Through this example
of his work in an acute hospital setting, Greg suggests that Focusing can be a crucial
aspect of redefining therapy as a human relationship rather than an expert one.
The medical and nursing team called me to meet Loyola, a patient who was refusing to
accept her terminal diagnosis and return home. Walking onto the ward I became aware of
a nervous feeling in my stomach. Although feeling nervous is not unusual for me, I
decided to focus on this particular ‘nervousness’ and it soon became clear that it was
about carrying the staff’s expectation that I would convince Loyola that she had to go
home. The nervousness was that she might see my ulterior motive and realise that she
could not trust me to hear her experience. But finding the meaning of my nervousness at
that moment felt exciting and it suddenly became easy to set aside the staff’s expectation.
I approached Loyola feeling open to her and much freer to really meet this new person.
When I entered her room, she was sitting up in bed and her short hair and slim figure
gave her the appearance of a young boy rather than the 54-year-old grandmother that she
was. She responded to my openness and with a broad smile indicated that she was happy
to talk with me.
The senior charge nurse offered us his private office for our session. As I closed the door,
Loyola asked simply and directly, ‘What can you do to help me?’ Somewhat taken aback,
I took a seat and replied with the usual banality ‘Sometimes talking about your feelings
can help’. This sounded trite in the circumstances and I was aware that I spoke from
some sort of ‘therapist script’ rather than from a deeper sense of our situation – it alerted
me again to the presence I needed to maintain in order not to retreat into a therapist role.
As Loyola began to speak of her current ‘trouble’ and her mastectomy three years ago, a
look of pain crossed her face. She tapped her remaining breast saying ‘Now this one’s
gone all hard. They are giving me medicine to fix it like they did the last time’.
Although she was insisting on more treatment, Loyola seemed somewhat unconvinced
about the possibility of a cure. She concluded our session with the statement ‘I know this
is not my time to die. Medicine and God will cure me’. I asked Loyola how she felt about
talking to me and she paused to check her feeling (yes, a natural Focuser!), then
announced ‘I like you, can we meet again?’ I left feeling excited and looking forward to
our next meeting. I hoped that the next session might present the opportunity to naturally
introduce Focusing to Loyola, but not as a technique that I could hide behind.
In traditional therapy, often the therapist remains more or less anonymous, a friendly face
showing little sign of struggling to live a life of his or her own. Some theories of therapy
insist that certain practices are crucial in order to elicit and interpret the client’s
‘unconscious’ defences and anxieties. If Loyola and I were to truly meet, it was evident
from the outset that our therapy would be based upon a shared ‘unknowing’ rather than
an ‘expert’ analysing a ‘client’. I was also aware that a large part of our therapy would
depend on my ability to remain aware of my felt experience and ‘that part of me’ which
was terrified of witnessing Loyola’s struggle to live. I also knew that ‘something in me’
wanted more than anything to remain fully present to this person, almost as an ethical call
to acknowledge her as a legitimate person, not a problem to be solved. In doing so, it
became increasingly clear that I was being challenged to open to my own mortality.
As I arrived on the ward the next week, the medical team stopped me and reiterated that
they could do nothing for Loyola and they were anxious to discharge her to community
care. She was resisting this as leaving the hospital would amount to accepting that she
was dying. There was talk they would have to call security to escort her from the ward if
she continued to refuse to cooperate. Could I ‘help’? I said I would check whether she
fully understood the situation, that’s all I could do. This time as I approached Loyola, our
relationship brought that old nervousness together with a tinge of responsibility. The
feeling needed some kind of action.
Loyola smiled from beneath her oxygen mask when she saw me. Her breathing now
made even a short walk to the nurse’s office difficult, so I pulled a curtain around her bed
and sat down next to her. I asked if the doctors had spoken to her about her condition.
She confirmed that they had, but she didn’t understand why they wouldn’t help her like
they did three years ago. ‘If it’s all they can do, then I want them to just chop it off’ she
said, motioning to her remaining breast, ‘I don’t want to die, it’s not my time.’
I became aware of something in me that wanted to recoil from all this and comfort itself.
I wondered if there was a part like that in Loyola and I felt a surge of gentleness towards
her. While acknowledging this, the image of Loyola, terrified and uncomprehending,
being wheeled from the ward against her will, guided me to pay attention to the nervous
responsibility, which now had words. I asked gently, ‘Loyola, how do you know it is not
your time now?’ ‘I’m certain of it, God would not want to take me now’. ‘So it’s up to
God?’ I asked. ‘Oh yes, He made me and He’ll save me’. I heard a pregnant open place in
me say, ‘Yes, I guess it’s only up to God now since the doctors can’t help any more’.
Loyola stopped pulling at her bedclothes and stared at me. Her eyes were fixed steadily
on mine and after a long pause, she asked ‘You mean they can’t stop me from dying?’
We were silent. Her expression drained from her face. My body felt totally alive, every
detail of the moment, the moment many of us dread, was vibrant. I had a felt sense of life
that encompassed not only Loyola and myself, but everything. After a long silence, she
slowly looked up, right into my eyes, and said ‘Then it’s up to God. I will pray for a
miracle. It’s not my time yet, I know that’. Her faith allowed us to retreat from that
apparition of non-being and paradoxically I felt a little dulled, though relieved.
In our following sessions, as Loyola’s life began to shrink around us, we became
increasingly connected to each other. On a Thursday afternoon, I arrived at her bedside as
usual. She was now very weak and removed her oxygen mask to whisper something to
the relatives gathered at the foot of her bed. They nodded, looked at me and left us alone.
I pulled the curtain and sat down with Loyola. Again, the silence descended around us
and I felt a deep love for this woman I had known less than three weeks. I know it was
my Focusing awareness that enabled me to feel this, rather than the usual ‘professional
relationship’ of therapist and client. After a few minutes, I said ‘You’ve not been well the
past few days so I haven’t been staying very long’. She nodded. There was nothing more
to say. She struggled to remain conscious and every few moments managed to stare hard
into my eyes, as if to say, ‘please look at me’, which was the hardest thing for me to do.
But I did not look away, or analyse, or diminish her with platitudes. I had spent time after
each of our sessions Focusing on my response to her situation, learning and preparing
myself to be as open as I could to any eventuality. Now this was her dying, unexpected
and unwanted. During those silent minutes I imagined my head on that pillow, struggling
to breathe. It felt like we were children who had accidentally strayed too far into the
woods, and only one of us would make it back. Perhaps we are all children in the face of
death.
The following morning a doctor called to say that Loyola had died shortly after I left.
How should I refer to that time Loyola and I spent together? Was it therapy? I did not
diagnose her with a mental illness, pathologise her ‘denial’, give her advice or
homework, or interpret her behaviour. I did not fight with her defence mechanisms,
encourage her to think positively, or to realise her full potential. Instead I used a Focusing
awareness to try to remain open in myself to the mystery of what was happening to her
and between us. Perhaps it was only when Loyola saw my readiness to grapple with my
own death that she felt our therapy, and her life, could come to an end. Perhaps it was
really my therapy after all?

©Copyright 2008 by Greg Madison. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry.

Click here to contact Greg and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile

http://www.goodtherapy.org/Sacramento-therapy.htm Sacramento Therapy

Click here to contact Greg and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile

Eugene Gendlin is an existential philosopher who wants to point us back to our lived
experience. He invites us to stand in our experience and then to ask from there, ‘What kind of
world is this?’ ‘What is a human being if this kind of experience is possible?’ He wants to
return the human being to a central place in our various ways of understanding life. Since the
1950s, Gendlin’s interests have lead him from the writings of Dilthey, Heidegger, Merleau-
Ponty, etc. into collaboration with imminent psychotherapists and psychological researchers. Gendlin saw therapy as a unique place where the process of symbolising experience could be explored.

According to Gendlin,A person struggles with and finds words and other expressions for unclear
– but lived – experience…What was felt but undefined by the client was
thought to be unmeasurable and incomprehensible and it made people
uncomfortable to talk about such a variable… When it correlated with
success in therapy while other variables did not, people began to try to
understand it more seriously (personal communication, c.f. Friedman,
2000:47).

This ability to stay with an unclear (but clearly felt) bodily experience constitutes a natural
form of self-reflection called ‘Focusing1’. Gendlin and others found that they could help
people re-gain and value this awareness of how we experience our life situations. Focusing is
a way of paying attention to one’s being-in-the-world, one’s interaction as it is experienced
through the individual (but not separate) body. A felt sense is a temporary wave from the sea
of being – it is understood as on-going process, not ‘internal content’. The psychotherapeutic
usefulness of Gendlin’s philosophy is that it is ‘methodologically individualised’. But, he is
concerned that this might be ‘…misunderstood as individual rather than social or historical.
The historical process is individual when we think further. History moves through individuals
because only individuals think and speak’ (c.f. Levin,1997,p.95). So, according to Gendlin,
our experience is not ‘subjective’ or ‘intrapsychic’ but interactional.

Life is not pasted together out of unrelated bits of perception, inherited concepts, or isolated
internal objects. ‘We humans live from bodies that are self-conscious of situations. Notice the
‘odd’ phrase ‘self-conscious of situations’. ‘Conscious’, ‘self’, and ‘situations’ are not three
objects with separate logical definitions’ (Gendlin, 1999,p.233).

Felt sensing often occurs in the middle area of the body, where we typically feel things;
throat, chest, stomach, abdomen. Thinking and speaking while in contact with felt sensing is
exact and not arbitrary. For example, I cannot convince a ‘tight clouded’ feeling in my chest
to be something other than what it is. And if out of that feeling comes the word ‘terrified’, and
there’s a sense that word really ‘fits’, then I can’t just make it something else. I am not free to
just change it, to mould it into something nicer or more acceptable, or more consistent with
my view of myself as a courageous person. Focusing entails acknowledging the reality of
‘what is’, and then ‘being with’ it, rather than ‘doing to’ it.

At times, my client and I can pay attention to this level of awareness explicitly so that we are
together in a way that keeps us in contact with the felt experience of our being together. This
includes being open to a flow of real-time movement, the said and unsayable, that exceeds
and may contradict our own ideas about therapy/psychology/philosophy. ‘Such sensitive
1 This initially unclear bodily feeling is referred to as the ‘felt sense’. It is physically felt, more than clearly
defined emotion, and incorporates a whole constellation of this and other situations, now and other
times, self and others, elaborated by language. By staying with a felt sense, a shift in meaning may
eventually occur that brings a physically felt relief in the way the body holds that issue. The term
‘Focusing’ is confusing in that it refers both to this natural level of awareness and to the simple method
of re-learning this.

phenomenological attention to an implicit speech which is “not yet formed” is precisely what
is precluded by standard conceptual thinking about the body’ (Wallulis, in Levin, 1997, p.277-
8). It is a radical hermeneutics where nothing is ever ‘understood’ for long. Psychotherapy is
much more than just Focusing, but learning to make explicit the implicit and vague (but
clearly felt) process of experience, can free us from forms of therapy that repeatedly obsess
over the content of the client’s narrative.

Focusing is the opposite of forcing received wisdom onto our experience (even if it’s received
from esteemed philosophers or teachers, including Focusing teachers). It is the opposite of
saying ‘tell me what to do’ or of imposing the inner dialogue of social ‘shoulds’ before we
even know what we actually feel about something. It is a philosophically-grounded practice
that is useful in therapy as well as our own daily living.

©Copyright 2008 by Greg Madison. All Rights Reserved. Permission to publish granted to GoodTherapy.org. The following article was solely written and edited by the author named above. The views and opinions expressed are not necessarily shared by GoodTherapy.org. Questions or concerns about the following article can be directed to the author or posted as a comment to this blog entry.

Click here to contact Greg and/or see his GoodTherapy.org Profile

Providence Therapy