Module: The Fundamentals of Gestalt Therapy part 1
24 - 28 October 2001 Ken Evans
Day One 24 October 2001
Introduction to the Gestalt Cycle. The role of Gestalt therapy was introduced in the light of changes over the past century, from the predominant approach that we are controlled by our environment only, to the exploration and adoption of varying models in the 1940/50s. Changes brought about by the research into child development as early as 8 months led to the establishment of the school of thought seeing the individual as taking in but also adapting, testing, accepting and rejecting models of behaviour and thought.
We were introduced to varying diagrams that led to to complete what we saw; the unfinished rectangle; pattern of dots; interpretation of shapes. Thus we look to complete that which seems to be unfinished. Gestalt is translated to mean the whole. Within us unresolved, unfinished gestalts wait to be finished.
The Gestalt Cycle was delivered as
Sensation - Awareness - Mobilisation - Action - Contact - Withdrawal
We performed an exercise where, first, we made written comments in the table given to us. Complete the table to indicate how each parent indicated this to you.
We then discussed with a partner our comments.
Introjection: the rules, impressions we form and carry with us from our parents, those in authority during development, are our introjects. As we mature such introjects should (an introject!) be challenged - hence the rebellious teenager, and question to lead us to acceptance of what works and what doesn't - for each of us.
What usually happens is we keep many introjects which are not congruent to our own self. We carry forward the introjects of the previous generation, who in turn had carried forward introjects.(!) Introjection may be considered the parent of all defence mechanisms.
Introjection is most likely to disturb the Gestalt Cycle between sensation and awareness, and impinges INTO the Self.
Within a different pairing we then looked at Awareness. Using a tool described as the ABC of Awareness. One partner spoke for two minutes beginning each sentence with the phrase I am aware that... Using the reference terms we decided which category we MOSTLY dealt with and which we LEAST dealt with. We discussed possible reasons for this and came to surprising conclusions on the least showing our most uncomfortable zones of thought . . .
A further (different) pairing was created in which we listed three traits of someone we admired (living or dead); and three traits of someone we disliked. The task was to then read these to our partner by introducing ourself and listing the traits as our own.
The positive and negative traits we see in others will generally have some 'home' within our self. We Project traits which we are unable to accept as ours - we do not take ownership. For example I dislike someone who comes across as being selfish - perhaps I am really disliking the fact that I wish I was more selfish - put myself first more often . . . and why do I not? The introject brought with me from my parents is that it is wrong to think of yourself first.
The act of projection is inevitably linked to an interject, an interject the individual is disowning (probably quite rightly).
Day Two 25 October 2001
The first exercise of the day was with Confluence. A group of 6 were to discuss a current topic with the rule being to agree with everything the others said. This was followed by the same group discussing how it felt to live through this model. It became clear that speaking freely was more comfortable and honest, than having to adopt an agreeing attitude.
This then demonstrated the power and conflict of confluence.
The second exercise of the day was a different 6 in which the discussion was to reach an agreement, again on a topical issue, but the rule was each member was to ensure the group would not reach an agreement. The afterward discussion highlighted the empowering feature of not needing to take responsibility for the consequences of the decisions being made. The ability to adopt such a stance is aided by a lack of emotional involvement of the consequences; making deflection easier and more comfortable.
Contact with another person requires you to remove layers of deflection, and avoidance of confluence. Enabling you to bring your Self to the meeting, the contact.
And through all of this is a increasing awareness of how Introjections form and control. In dealing with this aspect discussion centred on developing the Self to remove unwanted introjects, but in so doing what takes their place. Ken referred to this as the fertile void, and also then referenced this as possibly the futile void.
In the afternoon we split to small groups and to separate rooms where of the five, two pairs, in turn, operated as client and counsellor. this followed by discussion on how the counsellor managed the session. The restriction on the counsellor was the use only of these three statements:
What are you experiencing now
What are you feeling now
What are you aware of now
we, as therapists, work too hard with the client; meaning give more to the client, allow more from the client - you cannot force the pace.
Day Three 26 October 2001
We engaged in an exercise in feeling back to 18 months and the reaction of a parent on a bad day. For me this became so real and upsetting. Tears left my eyes silently. This exercise in Retroflection demonstrated how the reaction associated is so often, if not always, a physical one. This disturbs the healthy cycle at the point where you become aware.
Discussion included noting that all disturbances are of value, are positive, but once the disturbance becomes automatic, reflex, or acted without knowledge then damage occurs.
Desensitisation is another way of shutting down our internal system to cope.
At the base of the disturbances lies the introjections.
Day Four 27 October 2001
We considered today the 'triangulation' process surrounding conflict between two people and the injection of a mediator . . . Known as the Karpman Drama Triangle, this was developed to help explain in lay terms how the parties interact.
|
|
Gestalt therapist work with a person's defences, working with the defence mechanisms to allow the client deconstruct when ready. Remember, the defences were put in place for valid, good reason at the time of creation. In considering the Gestalt view that the child needs (is driven) to complete at some point then without a healthy gestalt process the child will use cognitive processes to provide closure. As this cognitive process does not provide an emotional closure, only a reasoned closure, the child inevitably concludes the problem lies in them, not the parent. This because the child requires the parent world to be safe as a pre-requisite to its environment. This cognitive process will be actioned in early development, as young as 2, or 3 years of age. Indeed current research is supporting earlier affective development
Coping with unclosed gestalt is termed 'life script' and is usually formed by the age of 7 and will remain and be added to throughout your life. With your life script, you will seek to fulfill this in your daily life. As such your introjections, retroflections, projections etc are in place to ensure you fulfill your role as, for example, the stupid child, the clumsy child, the well behaved child, the quiet child and so on.
This is setting the stage for the self fulfilling prophecies in our lives!
However, the truth of the person seeks to always establish itself. When the person is able to lower a defence the true self will seek to come forth. In Gestalt this is the belief that you are able to be your self.
To enable the self the defences will be dismantled as and when appropriate. The individual will (most often) do this. To try to rush or cut through defences will only lead to fragmentation of the client. Thus gestalt works with the defences, not against.
Day Five 28 October 2001
Day five being the final LAST DAY is cause enough for me to withdraw - begin shut down. My life has been a series of 'moving on', historically I have no home town, no fixed location. The effect of continually moving has left me with little ability, or grace, to understand or deal with saying goodbye, it has always been easier to just go . . . coupled with reticence on my part to mix . . .
I'm working on all this . . .
