Module 4
Experiential
a. A Shared Philosophical Commitment
Experiential interventions are, by definition, uniquely fitted to the individual
client or family by a personally involved therapist. Each approach in this engages
families in different ways, although they share certain philosophical tenets. All
emphasize choice, free will, and the human capacity for self-determination and self-
fulfillment, thus accentuating the client’s goals over any outcomes predetermined by
the therapist. Disordered or dysfunctional behavior is viewed, especially by the early
experientialists, as a failure in the growth process, a deficiency in actualizing one’s
capabilities and possibilities.
Within the framework of contextual therapy, the recognition of each
individual's or family's uniqueness forms the cornerstone of the therapeutic process.
Contextual therapists embrace the idea that no two individuals or families are alike,
each possessing their own distinct set of experiences, values, and relational dynamics.
From this understanding springs the fundamental belief that each person or family has
the capacity to reach their full potential and discover solutions to their current
problems through a process of self-awareness, exploration, and growth.
Central to the practice of contextual therapy is the notion of empowerment,
wherein individuals and families are encouraged to take an active role in their own
healing and transformation. Rather than imposing external solutions or directives,
contextual therapists guide clients on a journey of self-discovery, helping them to
uncover their strengths, resources, and untapped potentials. By fostering a sense of
agency and self-efficacy, contextual therapy empowers individuals and families to
become active agents of change in their own lives.
Furthermore, contextual therapy emphasizes the importance of embracing
complexity and nuance in understanding human behavior and relationships. Rather
than adhering to rigid diagnostic categories or one-size-fits-all interventions,
contextual therapists adopt a flexible and dynamic approach that takes into account
the unique circumstances and needs of each client. This personalized approach allows
for a more nuanced understanding of the underlying factors contributing to current
problems and facilitates the development of tailored solutions that resonate with the
individual or family's specific context.
Moreover, contextual therapy recognizes the interconnectedness of individuals
within their broader social and cultural contexts. Therapists acknowledge that
individuals and families are deeply influenced by their cultural backgrounds, societal
norms, and relational networks, all of which shape their identities, values, and
behavioral patterns. By exploring these contextual factors, contextual therapists can
gain a deeper understanding of the systemic influences at play and help clients
navigate the complexities of their lived experiences.
In addition, contextual therapy emphasizes the importance of fostering
collaborative and egalitarian therapeutic relationships. Therapists approach clients as
partners in the therapeutic process, respecting their autonomy, expertise, and unique
perspectives. Through open dialogue, mutual respect, and shared decision-making,
therapists and clients work together to co-create solutions that are meaningful,
relevant, and sustainable.
In summary, contextual therapy offers a holistic and client-centered approach
to healing and growth, grounded in the belief that each person or family possesses the
inherent capacity to reach their full potential and overcome their challenges. By
embracing the uniqueness of each individual or family, contextual therapists empower
clients to become active participants in their own transformation, fostering resilience,
self-discovery, and well-being along the way.
Psychotherapy with individuals or families is an interpersonal encounter in
which therapist and client(s) strive to be real and authentic. Acquiring sensitivity,
accessing feelings and their expression, and learning to be spontaneous and creative
(by engaging in nonrational experiencing) are typical avenues clients take to arrive at
their goals. If the intervention succeeds, it should facilitate growth for both clients and
therapists.
The primacy of emotional experience over rational thought and especially
intellectualization is underscored in each of the approaches. Human growth potential
and the importance of the therapeutic alliance are stressed. Therapists are active, often
self-disclosing, and likely to use various evocative procedures to help clients get
closer to their feelings, sensations, fantasies, and inner experiences. Sensitivity to
one’s here-and-now, ongoing life experiences is encouraged throughout therapy;
denying impulses and suppressing affect is viewed as dysfunctional and growth
retarding.
In emotionally focused approaches to therapy, such as Emotionally Focused
Therapy (EFT), the cultivation of empathic attunement and responsivity to others lies
at the heart of the therapeutic process. These approaches place a strong emphasis on
creating a safe and supportive therapeutic environment where each person feels
deeply understood and validated in their emotional experience. By fostering empathic
connections between individuals, therapists aim to promote healing, strengthen
relationships, and facilitate emotional growth.
Central to the practice of emotionally focused approaches is the concept of
emotional responsiveness, which involves the ability to recognize, validate, and
respond sensitively to the emotions of oneself and others. Therapists in these
approaches work collaboratively with clients to help them develop greater awareness
and understanding of their own emotions, as well as the emotions of their family
members. By fostering a climate of empathy and understanding, therapists create the
conditions necessary for emotional healing and relational transformation to occur.
One of the key skills emphasized in emotionally focused approaches is helping
family members overcome constricted emotional expressions that may hinder
empathic responses. Many individuals and families struggle with difficulties in
expressing and regulating their emotions, which can lead to misunderstandings,
conflicts, and relational distress. Therapists in emotionally focused approaches work
sensitively and compassionately with clients to identify and address these emotional
barriers, helping them to access and express their feelings in a more open and
authentic manner.
Moreover, emotionally focused approaches recognize the importance of
creating a secure emotional bond between family members as a foundation for healthy
relationships. Therapists help families cultivate emotional intimacy and connection by
facilitating honest and vulnerable communication, promoting mutual understanding
and validation, and fostering a sense of emotional safety within the family system.
Through experiential exercises, role-playing, and guided conversations, therapists
encourage family members to express their emotions openly and authentically,
deepening their emotional bonds and strengthening their relational resilience.
In addition, emotionally focused approaches integrate principles of attachment
theory into their therapeutic framework, recognizing the profound impact of early
attachment experiences on individuals' emotional development and relational patterns.
Therapists help clients explore how their attachment histories may influence their
current emotional responses and relational dynamics, offering insights into the
underlying factors contributing to their difficulties. By fostering greater awareness of
attachment needs and working to meet those needs within the therapeutic relationship,
therapists help clients heal from past wounds and develop more secure and satisfying
relationships with themselves and others.
In summary, emotionally focused approaches to therapy emphasize the
importance of empathic attunement, emotional responsiveness, and the cultivation of
secure emotional bonds within families. By helping family members overcome
barriers to emotional expression and fostering a climate of empathy and
understanding, therapists facilitate healing, growth, and transformation within the
family system. Through compassionate and collaborative interventions, emotionally
focused therapists empower families to build stronger, more resilient relationships and
navigate life's challenges with greater emotional clarity and connection.
Experiential family therapists attempt to expand their own experiences, often
having to deal with their own vulnerabilities in the process (which, when appropriate,
they are likely to share with clients). Their interventions attempt to be spontaneous,
challenging, and personalized (therefore often idiosyncratic) as they help clients gain
self-awareness (of their thoughts, feelings, body messages), self-responsibility, and
personal growth.
In the realm of experiential family therapy, the primary aim is to enhance the
quality of family interactions and expand the range of experiences available to each
family member, thereby unlocking their individual and collective potential for growth
and fulfillment. Experiential family therapists operate from a humanistic perspective
that emphasizes the inherent dignity, worth, and capacity for self-actualization within
each individual.
At the core of experiential family therapy is the belief that families possess a
reservoir of untapped resources and creativity that can be harnessed to address
challenges and facilitate personal and relational transformation. Therapists work
collaboratively with families to create a therapeutic environment that fosters
exploration, discovery, and experimentation, encouraging family members to engage
in new and meaningful experiences that expand their horizons and deepen their
connections with one another.
One of the key principles of experiential family therapy is the importance of
authenticity and genuine expression within the therapeutic process. Therapists strive
to create a safe and supportive space where family members feel empowered to
express their thoughts, feelings, and desires openly and authentically. By encouraging
vulnerability and emotional honesty, therapists help families to cultivate deeper levels
of intimacy, trust, and understanding within their relationships.
Moreover, experiential family therapists place a strong emphasis on the power
of experiential learning and direct engagement with emotions. Through a variety of
experiential techniques such as role-playing, guided imagery, art therapy, and
expressive movement, therapists facilitate opportunities for families to explore their
emotions, beliefs, and relational patterns in a hands-on and embodied manner. These
experiential activities provide family members with new insights, perspectives, and
ways of relating to one another, fostering personal growth and relational healing.
In addition, experiential family therapy recognizes the importance of creating
rituals, traditions, and shared experiences that strengthen family bonds and promote a
sense of belonging and connection. Therapists work with families to identify and
create meaningful rituals and traditions that reflect their values, beliefs, and
aspirations, fostering a sense of continuity and coherence within the family system.
These rituals and traditions serve as touchstones for family members, providing
opportunities for reflection, celebration, and reaffirmation of their shared identity and
purpose.
Furthermore, experiential family therapy emphasizes the importance of
exploring and celebrating each family member's unique and extraordinary potential.
Therapists help families to identify and nurture individual strengths, talents, and
aspirations, empowering each family member to pursue their own path to fulfillment
and self-actualization. By fostering a culture of appreciation, acceptance, and
encouragement within the family, therapists enable family members to embrace their
uniqueness and contribute their gifts to the collective wellbeing of the family unit.
In summary, experiential family therapy offers a holistic and humanistic
approach to promoting personal and relational growth within families. By creating
opportunities for authentic expression, experiential learning, shared experiences, and
individual empowerment, therapists facilitate a process of exploration, discovery, and
transformation that enriches the lives of each family member and enhances the overall
wellbeing of the family system. Through collaboration, creativity, and compassion,
experiential family therapists empower families to realize their full potential and
create more fulfilling and meaningful lives together.
b. The Experiential Model
Experiential family practitioners tailor their approach to the unique conflicts
and behavior patterns of each family with whom they work. The work of some
experiential therapists such as Carl Whitaker (1976) clearly reflects the
psychodynamic orientation of their training,1 though they are careful, as far as
possible, not to impose any preconceived theoretical suppositions or techniques upon
families. Others, such as Kempler (1981), evidence their training in Gestalt therapy.
Virginia Satir, renowned for her warm, intuitive, and highly empathic
approach to therapy, stands as a pioneer in the field of family therapy. Grounded in a
humanistic outlook that emphasized the innate capacity for growth and transformation
within each individual, Satir utilized a range of creative techniques and interventions
to facilitate positive change within families.
At the heart of Satir's therapeutic approach was her unwavering belief in the
inherent dignity, worth, and potential of every human being. Drawing on her deep
empathy and intuitive understanding of human nature, Satir worked collaboratively
with families to create a safe and nurturing therapeutic environment where each
member felt valued, heard, and understood. Through her compassionate presence and
genuine warmth, Satir cultivated a sense of trust and openness that allowed families to
explore their challenges and aspirations with honesty and vulnerability.
One of Satir's key contributions to the field of family therapy was her
innovative use of experiential techniques to engage families in the therapeutic
process. Satir employed a variety of creative interventions, including role-playing,
sculpting, and family mapping, to help families explore their emotions, beliefs, and
relational patterns in a tangible and experiential manner. These techniques not only
facilitated deeper insight and understanding but also provided opportunities for
healing, growth, and transformation within the family system.
Moreover, Satir was known for her ability to foster resilience and self-esteem
within individuals and families facing adversity. Through her compassionate and
empowering approach, Satir helped families to recognize and build upon their
strengths, resources, and inherent capacities for resilience. By reframing challenges as
opportunities for growth and learning, Satir empowered families to overcome
obstacles and thrive in the face of adversity.
In addition to her therapeutic work with families, Satir was a tireless advocate
for social change and transformation. Recognizing the interconnectedness of
individual, family, and societal wellbeing, Satir sought to promote greater awareness,
understanding, and compassion within communities and society at large. Through her
writing, teaching, and public speaking, Satir inspired countless individuals and
organizations to embrace the principles of empathy, respect, and collaboration in their
interactions with others.
In summary, Virginia Satir's warm, intuitive, and highly empathic approach to
therapy left an indelible mark on the field of family therapy. Through her humanistic
outlook, creative techniques, and unwavering belief in the potential for growth and
transformation, Satir empowered countless individuals and families to heal, grow, and
thrive. Her legacy continues to inspire therapists and clients alike to embrace their
inherent worth and resilience, and to cultivate deeper connections and understanding
within their families and communities.
David Kantor, Fred Duhl, and Bunny Duhl are notable figures in the realm of
experiential family therapy, each contributing unique insights and perspectives to the
field. Building upon the foundational principles laid down by pioneers like Virginia
Satir, these early influential therapists expanded the boundaries of family therapy
through their innovative approaches and creative interventions.
David Kantor, a clinical psychologist and systems theorist, made significant
contributions to the field of family therapy through his work on communication
patterns and relational dynamics within families. Drawing upon his background in
linguistics and communication theory, Kantor developed a framework known as
Structural Dynamics, which provided a comprehensive model for understanding and
intervening in family systems. Through his research and writing, Kantor illuminated
the ways in which communication patterns and power dynamics shape family
relationships, offering therapists valuable insights into the underlying processes that
contribute to relational distress and dysfunction.
Fred Duhl and Bunny Duhl, a husband-and-wife team of therapists, were
instrumental in popularizing experiential approaches to family therapy in the 1960s
and 1970s. Drawing upon their backgrounds in psychoanalysis and group therapy, the
Duhls developed a dynamic and interactive style of therapy that emphasized the
importance of emotional expression, spontaneity, and authenticity within the
therapeutic process. Through their innovative use of role-playing, psychodrama, and
experiential techniques, the Duhls helped families to explore and address deep-seated
emotional issues, facilitating healing and growth within the family system.
Together, Kantor and the Duhls represent a diverse range of perspectives
within the field of experiential family therapy, each bringing their own unique
strengths and insights to the therapeutic process. While Kantor's work focused on
understanding the structural and communication dynamics within families, the Duhls
emphasized the importance of emotional expression and authenticity in fostering
healing and transformation.
In addition to their individual contributions, Kantor, Fred Duhl, and Bunny
Duhl were instrumental in shaping the broader landscape of family therapy through
their teaching, writing, and mentoring of future generations of therapists. Through
their workshops, training programs, and publications, they helped to disseminate the
principles and practices of experiential family therapy to a wider audience, leaving a
lasting legacy that continues to influence the field to this day.
In summary, David Kantor, Fred Duhl, and Bunny Duhl are esteemed figures
in the history of experiential family therapy, each leaving a distinct mark on the field
through their innovative approaches, creative interventions, and dedication to helping
families heal and thrive. Their contributions have enriched our understanding of
family dynamics and relational processes, providing therapists with valuable tools and
insights for facilitating positive change within family systems.
They cofounded the Boston Family Institute in 1969 and developed expressive
techniques, such as family sculpting, a nonverbal communication method whereby a
family member can physically place other members in a spatial relationship with one
another, symbolizing his or her perception of the family members’ differences in
power or degrees of intimacy with one another.
c. Carl Whitaker and Symbolic-Experiential Family Therapy
Symbolic-experiential family therapy (S-EFT), pioneered by Carl Whitaker, is
a multigenerational approach that uses therapy to address both individual and family
relational patterns. Oriented toward personal growth and family connectedness, the
therapist assumes a pivotal role in helping family members dislodge rigid and
repetitive ways of interacting by substituting more spontaneous and flexible ways of
accepting and dealing with their impulses. Several generations of a family are
typically included in the therapeutic process, since practitioners of S-EFT consider the
influence of extended families, past and present, to be omnipresent in the family’s
unverbalized symbolic experiences.
To understand how symbolic-experiential family therapy evolved, we must
trace the career of Carl Whitaker, an unconventional, colorful, and iconoclastic
psychiatrist who, right up until his death in 1995, was the epitome of an experiential
family therapist. He first made his national influence felt with his innovative and often
radical work in individual psychotherapy, especially his trailblazing efforts to redefine
a schizophrenic’s symptoms as signs that an individual was “stuck” in the process of
growth (rather than suffering from a deteriorative condition) and was attempting to
apply “creative” solutions to vexing interpersonal problems. Coauthor of a landmark
book, The Roots of Psychotherapy (Whitaker & Malone, 1953), Whitaker was an
early champion for the active therapist, pushing for growth and integration in his
patients and not simply offering insight or understanding to facilitate their
“adjustment” to society.
In his work with schizophrenics, Whitaker took the audacious position, never
before espoused in family therapy, that each participant in therapy is to some degree
simultaneously patient and therapist to the other (a similar view for one-on-one
therapy was first espoused by psychoanalyst Sandor Ferenczi in the 1920s but was
stifled by the psychoanalytic establishment of the time). Both invest emotion in the
process, both are vulnerable, both regress, both grow as individuals as a result of the
experience. Both expose themselves to the risks of change. Each takes responsibility
for his or her own maturing process, but not for one another. The therapist must be
committed to personal growth if he or she is to catalyze growth in others.
Raised in relative isolation in rural upstate New York, and perhaps less bound
by customary social convention than most people, Whitaker early on pursued an
unorthodox career path. Trained as an obstetrician/gynecologist in the early 1940s,
Whitaker found himself interested in the psychological aspects of that field. In an
unconventional move, he spent his final year of training at a psychiatric hospital,
working largely with schizophrenic patients. He received further training at the
Louisville Child Guidance Clinic and at the nearby Ormsby Village, a residential
treatment center for delinquent adolescents. There he learned to develop here-andnow
techniques for reaching patients ordinarily resistant to more customary forms of
psychiatric intervention.
As the United States entered World War II in 1941, Whitaker, a civilian, was
called upon to treat patients in Tennessee at Oak Ridge Hospital, a closed community
located where the secret U.S. atomic bomb was being assembled. Perhaps because of
the heavy workload (Whitaker is said to have treated 12 patients per day in half-hour,
back-to-back sessions), or perhaps because he believed he lacked sufficient
experience with adult patients, or perhaps because he wished to share his intense
personal involvement in the therapeutic process, Whitaker began working with
colleagues such as John Warkentin as part of a co-therapy team. Following the war, he
was asked to establish and chair the psychiatry department at the medical school at
Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. There, together with associates such as
Warkentin (who possessed a doctorate in psychophysiology but with additional
training as a child therapist) and later Thomas Malone (trained in psychoanalytic work
with adults), Whitaker continued his earlier unconventional co-therapy treatment of
schizophrenics. The technique allowed one therapist to serve as an observer while the
other engaged the client more directly.
As Whitaker delved deeper into his unorthodox approach to treating
individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, he began to recognize the significant
influence of family dynamics on the manifestation and course of the disorder. His
observations led him to challenge conventional notions of individual pathology,
prompting him to question the very concept of personhood and its relationship to the
family unit.
In his characteristic provocative style, Whitaker provocatively suggested that
"there is no such thing as a person," proposing instead that individuals are merely
fragments of the larger family system from which they emerge. This perspective
underscores the interconnectedness of individual identity and family dynamics,
highlighting the ways in which familial relationships and experiences shape and
inform one's sense of self.
Furthermore, Whitaker's assertion that "marriage is not really a combination of
two persons" but rather "the product of two families who send out a scapegoat to
reproduce themselves" reflects his keen insight into the complex interplay between
family systems and intimate partnerships. By framing marriage as a convergence of
familial influences and expectations, Whitaker challenges the notion of romantic love
as solely an individual experience, emphasizing instead its roots in broader familial
dynamics and intergenerational patterns.
Moreover, Whitaker's provocative statements invite reflection on the ways in
which family systems perpetuate themselves through the selection and socialization of
partners and the transmission of values, beliefs, and relational patterns across
generations. By conceptualizing marriage as a process of familial reproduction,
Whitaker highlights the enduring influence of family of origin dynamics on adult
relationships and the potential for intergenerational patterns to shape marital dynamics
and outcomes.
In summary, Whitaker's provocative insights into the role of family dynamics
in shaping individual identity and relational patterns challenge conventional
understandings of personhood and marriage. By reframing these concepts within the
context of the family system, Whitaker invites us to reconsider the complex interplay
between individual and collective identity, shedding light on the ways in which
familial influences permeate all aspects of human experience.
Whitaker began to conceptualize schizophrenia as both an intrapsychic and
interpersonal dilemma and to treat his schizophrenic patients along with their families.
The multiple-therapist team—an extension of Whitaker’s earlier reliance on co-
therapy—was an innovation that helped prevent a single therapist from becoming
entangled in what Whitaker found to be a powerful, enmeshing family system, as well
as modeling desirable interpersonal behavior for the entire family (for example,
disagreeing in front of the family, but in a constructive manner).
By the mid-1960s, Whitaker had resigned from Emory University to form the
Atlanta Psychiatric Clinic, a private practice group. In 1965, now defining himself as
a family therapist, Whitaker moved to the University of Wisconsin School of
Medicine in Madison and began—first with August Napier, a psychologist now in
practice in Atlanta, and later with David Keith, a child psychiatrist now in Syracuse—
to elaborate his ideas about effectively engaging a variety of families, not simply
those with psychotic members. Moreover, Whitaker was starting to pay closer
attention to what he personally was experiencing in the treatment process; he saw the
potential for using that awareness to press for changes in his patients at the same time
that he himself continued to benefit by investing in the therapeutic encounter.
Symbolic-experiential family therapists insist that both real and symbolic
curative factors operate in therapy. They liken the symbolic aspect of therapy to the
infrastructure of a city; while not apparent on the surface, what runs underneath the
streets and buildings is what permits life on the surface to go on (Whitaker &
Bumberry, 1988). Reflecting a psychodynamic influence, these therapists believe our
personal subterranean worlds are dominated by the flow of impulses and evolving
symbols, even if not always conscious; indeed, they believe it is these “emotional
infrastructures” that ensure the flow of our impulse life. Since they contend that the
meaning we give to external reality is determined by this internal reality, it follows
that helping expand the symbolic inner worlds of families can aid in their leading
fuller, richer lives.
Symbolic-experiential family therapists attempt to understand a family’s
complex world of impulses and symbols by identifying and voicing similar
underlying impulses and symbols within themselves. Not willing to settle for material
from the surface world of thinking and reasoning, they probe into the covert world
beneath the surface words, trying to sense the far more important symbolic meanings
of what transpires between themselves and the client family. By showing ease with
accepting and voicing their own impulses and fantasies, they help family members
become more comfortable in recognizing, expressing, and accepting theirs. The
growth and development of individual members, according to S-EFT, is stimulated
when members feel themselves to be a part of an integrated family. Once they
experience this sense of security and belongingness, they can later feel free
(“unstuck”) enough to psychologically separate from the family and develop
autonomy as unique individuals.
Throughout therapy, advocates of S-EFT listen, observe, stay in immediate
touch with what they are experiencing, and actively intervene to repair damage
without being concerned over why the breakdown occurred. They make an effort to
depathologize human experience; dysfunction is viewed in both its structural and
process aspects. Structurally, perhaps disorganized or impermeable family boundaries
have resulted in nonfunctional subsystem operations, destructive coalitions, role
rigidity, and separation between generations. Process difficulties may have led to a
breakdown in negotiation between family members to resolve conflict, the loss of
intimacy or attachment or trust, as individual relationship needs remain unmet. In
general, these therapists assume that symptoms develop when dysfunctional structures
and processes persist over time and interfere with the family’s ability to carry out its
life tasks.
In these therapists’ view, “psychopathology” arises from the same mechanisms
that produce “normal” behavior. Consequently, following Whitaker’s lead, they are
not afraid to encourage “craziness” (unconventional, childlike, socially unacceptable
behavior) in family members or, for that matter, in themselves, believing that new
outlooks and creative solutions typically follow as the family is freed to stretch and
grow. Through his sometimes quirky and irrepressible “right-brain” style, Whitaker
was often able to help sensitize the family to its own unconscious or symbolic life.
The family therapist’s mission, as S-EFT sees it, is to help the three-
generational family (family-of-origin and current family) to simultaneously maintain
a sense of togetherness along with a sense of healthy separation and autonomy.
Family roles, while largely determined by generation, should remain flexible, and
members should be encouraged to explore, and on occasion even exchange, family
roles. In S-EFT, this exchange is an opportunity to develop healthy, straight-talking
communication, in which all family members are able to look at themselves and grow
both as individuals and as a family. Consistent with this experiential perspective,
Whitaker viewed family health as an ongoing process of becoming, in which each
member is encouraged to explore a full range of family roles in order to develop
maximum autonomy. Growth as a goal takes precedence over achieving stability or
specific planned solutions, and symbolic-experiential therapists may terminate
therapy still leaving the family uncertain about future direction but with better tools
for finding their own way.
Symbolic-experiential family therapy sets itself the goal of encouraging
individuation and personal integrity of all family members at the same time that it
helps the family members evolve a greater sense of family belonging. Rather than
attend to symptoms in an identified patient, here the family therapist immediately
engages the entire family, forcing it as a group to examine the basis of their existence
as a family unit.
In Whitaker’s colorful description of the therapeutic process, “the journey of
family therapy begins with a blind date and ends with an empty nest” (Whitaker &
Bumberry, 1988, p.K53). In its initial stages, the therapist must deal with the inevitable
battle for structure, as the family sizes up the therapist and his or her intentions and
attempts to impose its own definition of the upcoming relationship: what’s wrong with
the family, who’s to blame, who requires treatment, how the therapist should proceed.
In S-EFT, therapists insist on controlling the structure, from the first telephone contact
onward, so therapy begins on a productive note and the therapist does not compromise
his or her own needs, beliefs, or standards. If the therapist loses this initial struggle,
the family will then bring into therapy the identical behavioral patterns that are likely
creating their current problems.
In the process, the therapist is establishing an “I” position with the family,
stimulating them, ultimately, to piece together an identifiable “we” position as a
family. For example, by insisting on his own autonomy, Whitaker was telling the
family that he is interested in his own growth as a result of their experience together
and that they need not be concerned about protecting him. Real caring, for Whitaker,
requires distance, partially achieved by caring for himself and not only for his client
family. Whitaker and Bumberry (1988) emphasize dealing with the family on a
symbolic level in a “metaposition”—establishing what each can expect from the other.
Whitaker, who frequently used sports analogies, saw himself as a coach. He was not
interested in playing on the team, only in helping it play more effectively. By stepping
in to play first base, he argued, he would be indicating he did not think much of their
first baseman, a destructive message. Instead, as coach, he encouraged them to
develop their own resources. The therapist, who starts out in an all-powerful position,
eventually becomes a facilitator and resource person as the family increasingly takes
the initiative for how it wishes to change.
If the therapist must win the battle for structure, the family must be victorious
in the battle for initiative (Napier & Whitaker, 1978). Just as the battle for structure
defines the integrity of the therapist, so the battle for initiative defines the integrity of
the family. They areKin charge of their lives and responsible for decisions about the
direction they wish to go. Any initiative for change must not only come from the
family but also be actively supported by its members. These therapists shun
responsibility for changing a family and especially for seeking family leadership.
Practitioners of S-EFT insist the family convene with all members present,
underscoring their sense of a family unit and that the whole family is the client. The
family is encouraged to probe relationships—in Whitaker’s words, “to ante up”—
despite attempts to identify specific members as the problem. Rather than comfort or
reassure, the therapist is outspoken and takes risks, shaking up entrenched family
patterns. Keith (1998) suggests an initial goal of increasing family anxiety (“It’s really
much worse than you think”) to force family members to take more responsibility for
the pattern they created.
Symbolic-experiential change-producing interventions have a covert, implicit
quality. Symptoms are rarely attacked directly. Insight seems to follow rather than
precede changes in feelings and behavior. History taking is occasionally important but
not routine; in any case, it cannot impede this approach’s major therapeutic thrust—
forming a close and personal alliance with the family as a whole and providing an
experience that is symbolic to the family but does not reinforce its distress (Keith &
Whitaker, 1982). What the family therapist has most to offer, Whitaker believed, is his
or her personal maturity; the stage of the therapist’s personal development influences
the kind of support or assistance he or she gives to the family. Whitaker maintained
that the therapist who does not benefit, therapeutically, from his or her work has little
to give, therapeutically, to client families. The use of co-therapists enables both
therapists to join, have fun together, disagree, or even quarrel with each other, and
perhaps to go off on different tangents—one acting “crazy” and the other providing
stability—modeling spontaneous and productive interaction.
We’ll take a closer look at each aspect. The generation of an interpersonal set
acknowledges that Whitaker did not speak of an identified patient. Instead, he
accessed the family’s symbolic infrastructure by identifying the affectively loaded
issue and relevant themes of family life. The identified patient is replaced by a set (the
family), with all members seen as experiencing anxiety. This redistribution of anxiety
and involvement in the family dynamics helps the family experience itself as a whole.
This “whole” constitutes a “suprasystem” that Whitaker, as therapist, would seek to
join yet not be fully part of. The therapist repeatedly joins and distances herself from
the family. She stimulates movement in various ways and then backs out, functioning
as a catalyst for change.
An important therapeutic intervention is the stimulation by the therapist of
symbolic content. The authors note that when Whitaker sensed his connection with
the family, he shifted from the real to the symbolic by listening “through” what was
being said rather than “to” it. Following an analytic concept, Whitaker accessed the
symbolic world of the family to facilitate “primary process” relating. An example
offered by the authors is the withdrawn or isolated father (reality) who is called by
family members the “hermit” (symbolic designation). Now the family can play with
the symbolic concept of hermit. Once these steps are accomplished, the therapist
intentionally activates stress within the family; increasing anxiety prompts change.
For example, if the therapist says to the isolated hermit father, “You are not
desperate enough to change,” the father’s anxiety will likely increase and with it the
need to change his relationship with the family. Or the therapist may create a
symbolic experience, perhaps by amplifying the roles that the family members have
assumed. The therapist might respond to the wife of the “hermit,” who says, “Yes, my
husband often seems like he’s on another planet,” by saying something to the husband
like, “Boy, I can see how at times I’d want to be on Mars too if I had to be with the
rest of the family.” The point, of course, is not to reinforce the father-husband’s
isolation but to say something so jarring that it will prompt more feeling and talking.
Perhaps the father will become angry with the therapist for the comment; in which
case, the therapist might respond, “That doesn’t sound so isolated to me.” Of crucial
importance here is that the intervention emerges from the therapist’s authentic
emotional self and that it is offered in such a way as to resonate with the emotional
environment in the office. Otherwise, the therapist may risk being sadistic or plain
rude.
The last variable identified by Mitten and Connell is moving out. The therapist
removes herself from the family system having created live in-the-moment
experiences along with symbolic representations of them that have shifted the
respective awarenesses of family members. The hermit learns about his need to isolate
as well as his need for contact. The wife and children appreciate that the father-
husband needs some time alone even as they can now remind him that they miss their
hermit when he’s away too long.
Research on experiential therapy has extended recently to focus on
“noticings”—therapist practices that focus attention on the here-and-now by attending
to a “client’s verbal or nonverbal affectual stance,” indicating the relative impact of
facilitating, shifting, or disrupting therapist behavior (Muntigl & Horvath, 2014, p.
89). In addition, experientialists are investigating client emotional productivity (CEP),
an evaluation of the type of client experience of emotion in treatment that advances
progress toward experiential therapy goals. The construct includes emotional
activation, emotion type (primary or secondary; adaptive or maladaptive), and manner
of processing (productive or not), and initial research suggests that CEP predicts
reduction of depressive symptoms in experiential therapy for depression.
d. Gestalt Family Therapy (Kempler)
The family therapy approaches in this are all, to a greater or lesser extent,
existential. More an orientation to understanding human behavior than a formal
school of psychotherapy, existentially influenced therapies seek to enter and
comprehend the world as it is being experienced by individual family members as
well as the family as a functioning whole. The therapies share an emphasis on the
meaning the patient gives to existence, to being. Because people define themselves
through their current choices and decisions, action in the present, not reflection on the
past, is the key to understanding for the existentialist. Even the future—what people
choose to become—has more influence than issues and conflicts associated with the
past. In existential therapies, clients are urged to examine and take responsibility for
their lives.
Unconscious material may be brought forth but is not automatically assumed
to be any more meaningful than the conscious data of life. Psychotherapy in this
framework is an encounter between two or more persons who are constantly
developing, evolving, and fulfilling their inner potential. Technique is de-emphasized
to preclude one person seeing the other as an object to be analyzed. In contrast to the
common therapeutic belief that understanding stems from technique, existentialist
therapists believe that technique follows understanding. Formal and conventional
doctor–patient roles are replaced by a more egalitarian and open arrangement in
which each participant opens his or her world to the other as an existential partner.
The emphasis is on presence; in a real, immediate, ongoing relationship between two
or more persons, each tries to understand and experience as far as possible the being
of the other(s).
If existentialism is concerned with how humans experience their immediate
existence, Gestalt psychology focuses on how they perceive it. Frederick (Fritz) Perls
is generally credited with launching the Gestalt therapy movement in the United
States. For Perls (1969), who worked with individuals, change is facilitated when the
client’s thoughts and feelings become congruent; the client achieves greater self-
awareness in order to become more self-directed, more centered, more congruous. By
removing entrenched intellectualized thinking patterns, the client could break through
to his or her emotionally rooted inner experiences. (Perls enjoyed putting it this way:
Lose your mind and come to your senses.) Extrapolating from the individual focus,
Gestalt family therapists focus attention on the immediate—“What people say, how
they say it, what happens when it is said, how it corresponds with what they are
doing, and what they are attempting to achieve”.
Here the goal is to bring discordant elements (within oneself or between
family members) into a self-disclosing confrontation and ultimate resolution. Gestalt
family therapy, popularized in the 1970s and 1980s, appears dated today, but we
include it as a forerunner of contemporary models because: (1) it encourages open and
honest expression of all emotions (hopes, fears, wishes, anxieties), a precursor of
today’s therapeutic approaches aimed at achieving authenticity and connection to
others; (2) it emphasizes individual growth and the development of the Self, within
family systems, again a contemporary view; and (3) it rests heavily on therapist
modeling of desired behavior, being a genuine person, and utilizing the therapist’s
personality to effect change, a part of many current collaborative procedures.
The most prominent Gestalt family therapist is Walter Kempler, whose
techniques stem from his adaptation of the individual work of Perls, with whom he
studied. Kempler, a physician, returned for a psychiatric residency at the UCLA
Neuropsychiatric Institute in the late 1950s. Later, he established the Kempler
Institute for the Development of the Family in Southern California. Kempler traveled
extensively until his retirement, especially in the Scandinavian countries, lecturing
and demonstrating his prodding, confrontational interventions with family members.
Antitheoretical, like Whitaker, Kempler’s therapeutic efforts aimed at helping clients
expand their awareness, take responsibility for their actions, and gain a sense of
autonomy and authenticity. Again like Whitaker, Kempler contends that the family
holds the key to the personal development of its members.
Employing a personally interactive way of working with families, Gestalt
family therapy blends some of the principles and procedures of family and Gestalt
therapies in order to help people reach beyond their customary self-deceptive games,
defenses, and facades. To do so, the therapist relies on the forthright expression of
what he or she is experiencing to assist clients to become aware of and release
previously unrecognized or bottled-up feelings. Kempler’s (1981) therapeutic efforts
are provocative, highly personal, uncompromisingly honest, and powerful. He presses
for self-disclosure by family members, expecting that the wish or need to resolve their
problems or improve relationships will give them the courage to expose their
vulnerabilities. He actively and directly insists that everyone, himself included,
become more intensely aware of what they are doing or saying or feeling.
Kempler is interested in what each person wants and from whom, expressed in
the most specific terms possible. Participants are forced to talk to each other, in face-
to-face, encountergroup-like fashion. If a wife complains to Kempler that her husband
lacks understanding or sensitivity, Kempler directs her to tell that to her husband, not
to the therapist, and to be specific in her complaint. If she argues that it will do no
good, Kempler insists she tell that to her husband. If she then breaks down, admits her
feelings of hopelessness, and begins to cry—all without provoking a response from
her husband—Kempler will point out his silence and invite him to answer her. From
the initial interview through the subsequent sessions, the focus remains the immediate
present. Self-disclosure and open, honest exchanges with others are basic ground rules
for family members to follow if they are to untangle a family problem or overcome an
impasse.
Gestalt family therapists attempt to help each family member achieve
maximum individuation at the same time that they promote more vital relationships
among the various members. After family members explore how their awareness is
blocked, the therapist then channels the increased awareness so that they may engage
in more productive and fulfilling processes with one another (Kaplan & Kaplan,
1978). The Gestalt therapist facilitates self-exploration, risk taking, and spontaneity.
Since such undertakings are all but impossible if an individual or family fears that
self-discovery could be harmful, it is essential that the therapist provide an unchecked
and unequivocal model for self-disclosure. To strike the familiar pose as a benevolent
and accepting therapist only plays into the client’s fantasies that disapproval is
dangerous, according to Kempler (1982). By contrast, Kempler is emotionally intense,
assertive, genuine, challenging, sometimes brutally (if refreshingly) frank; in short, he
expresses whatever he is feeling at the moment in the hope of making an impact on
the family.
Kempler’s demand for a complete and honest emotional encounter with and
between family members reflects his Gestalt heritage. Although far less popular today
than in the heyday of encounter groups and sensitivity training decades ago, this
technique offers a useful counterweight to a strong focus on cognitive analyses and
behavior change. No holds are barred, no feelings stifled. The therapist is a real
person who knows who she is, what her needs are, and what she is experiencing from
moment to moment during the shared therapeutic encounter with the family. At the
same time, she insists that all participants search for, uncover, and express what they
are experiencing now, since to Gestaltists, nothing exists except in the now. She urges
clients to stay with the experience as it is happening until they recognize and “own”
what they are feeling from moment to moment, because it is in the now that people
are or are not growing, are or are not enhancing their coping abilities, are or are not in
touch with themselves and with reality.
e. The Human Validation Process Model (Satir)
The human validation process model, experiential in nature, emphasizes the
collaborative efforts of therapist and family members to achieve family “wellness” by
releasing the potential viewed as inherent in every family (Satir & Bitter, 2000).
Clear, congruent communication is critical to maintain a balanced and nurturing
family system, and building self-esteem is considered essential if all members are to
thrive as individuals and as part of a functional system. Especially important to this
model—as in all experiential approaches—is the personal involvement of a caring
therapist who demonstrates, often through self-disclosure, his or her own honest and
spontaneous feelings. The therapist encourages family members to develop a process
for directly expressing emotions, learning to change embedded rules that discourage
or in some cases prohibit dealing with one another at a feeling level.
Virginia Satir’s central place in the history of the family therapy movement
has been noted earlier in this book. In the 1950s, among the founding parents of the
family therapy movement, Satir was in the unique position of being both a woman
and a social worker among predominantly white male psychiatrists. Actually, she
probably preceded most of her male counterparts in working with families, reportedly
having seen her first family in therapy in 1951 and having offered the first training
program ever in family therapy in 1955 at the Illinois State Psychiatric Institute (Satir,
1982). It was several years later that she read of a group engaging in family research
efforts in Palo Alto, California (Bateson, Jackson, Haley, & Weakland, 1956); having
contacted them, she was invited by Jackson to help him start what became the Mental
Research Institute (MRI). More interested in training than in research, Satir soon set
about demonstrating her techniques with families, culminating in the first published
description of conjoint family therapy (Satir, 1964), truly a groundbreaking text for
therapists and students alike.
Over a 30-year span, until her death in 1988, Satir continued to be a prolific
writer. She is especially celebrated for her inspiring family therapy demonstrations
around the world. Although linked to the communication approach because of her
early MRI affiliation, Satir’s work during the 1960s at Esalen, a growth center,
encouraged her to add a humanistic framework and emphasize a number of growth-
enhancing techniques (sensory awareness, dance, massage, group encounter
techniques) to evoke feelings and clarify family communication patterns. In her later
writing, Satir (1986) identified her approach as a human validation process model in
which the therapist and family join forces to stimulate an inherent health-promoting
process in the family. Open communication and emotional experiencing were the
mechanisms that helped achieve that end, as family members, following the
therapist’s lead, learned to take the risk of expressing feelings openly, congruently,
and without defensiveness.
Virginia Satir was a charismatic leader, truly an original, and no discussion of
experiential family therapy would be complete without paying homage to her vision.
She presented herself to families as a dynamic, nurturing, folksy, genuine person, with
a belief in the goodness of people and in the “healing power of love”. While the latter
made her appear simplistic and Pollyannaish to critics, she was revered by followers
and profoundly touched those families with whom she worked. The “love” she
practiced with clients and that she postulated as a necessary condition for actualizing
one’s capabilities was based on her assumptions about what best facilitates change.
Satir concerned herself with the family as a balanced system. In particular, she
wanted to determine the “price” each part of the system “pays” to keep the overall
unit balanced. That is, she viewed any symptom in an individual member as signaling
a blockage in growth and as having a homeostatic connection to a family system that
to keep its balance requires blockage and distortion of growth in some form in all of
its members. A presenting symptom in a family member gave Satir (1982) the initial
clues for “unraveling the net of distorted, ignored, denied, projected, unnourished, and
untapped parts of each person so that they can connect with their ability to cope
functionally, healthily, and joyously Satir believed that all humans strive toward
growth and development and that each of us possesses all the resources we need for
fulfilling our potential, if only we can gain access to these resources and learn to
nourish them. She pointed to three factors that influence human development: (a)
unchangeable genetic endowment, determining our physical, emotional, and
temperamental potential; (b) longitudinal influences, the result of learning acquired in
the process of growth; and (c) the constant mind–body interaction.
Longitudinal influences—the sum of learning since birth—are especially
significant. Satir emphasized the child’s experiences of the primary survival triad
(father, mother, child) as the essential source of self-identity. Adult self-worth or self-
esteem evolves from the relative proportion of constructive to destructive interaction
experiences arising from this triad. The child also learns to decipher parental
messages; discrepancies between words, tone, touch, and looks help shape future
adult communication patterns. Another factor in individual growth is the mind, body,
feeling triad. Body parts may take on metaphoric meaning, with each having a
positive or negative value attached to it by its owner. Some are liked, others disliked,
some need awakening. In what Satir called a therapeutic parts party, clients are
encouraged to become aware of these parts and learn to use them “in an harmonious
and integrated manner”.
Building self-esteem, promoting self-worth, expanding awareness, exposing
and correcting discrepancies in how the family communicates—these were the issues
Satir tackled as she attempted to help each member of the family develop “wellness”
and become as “whole” as possible. The extent to which they could identify and
practice new possibilities determined their chances to integrate change into their
family life.
Satir contended that the way the family communicates reflects the feelings of
self-worth of its members. Dysfunctional communication (indirect, unclear,
incomplete, unclarified, inaccurate, distorted, inappropriate) characterizes a
dysfunctional family system. One of Satir’s lasting contributions is her simple—but
far from simplistic—classification of styles of communication, especially apparent in
dealing with stress. She argued that under stressful conditions, a person in a
relationship communicates in one of five ways (Satir, 1972). These styles are
expressed through body position and body language as much as through verbal
behavior. The placater acts weak, tentative, self-effacing, and always agrees,
apologizes, and tries to please. The blamer dominates, invariably finds fault with
others, and self-righteously accuses. The super-reasonable person adopts a rigid
stance, remains detached, robot-like, calm, cool, maintaining intellectual control while
making certain not to become emotionally involved. The irrelevant person distracts
others and seems unable to relate to anything going on, afraid to offend or hurt others
by taking a position on an issue. Only the congruent communicator seems real,
genuinely expressive, sending straight (not double-binding or confusing) messages in
their appropriate context.
Various combinations of these styles exist in most families. For example, take
the case of a blaming wife, a blaming husband, and a placating child triad: “It’s the
school, they don’t teach anything anymore”; “It’s the child down the street, that’s
where she’s learned those bad words”; “It’s the way you’ve raised her, she’s just like
you”; “I’ll try to do better, Daddy. You’re absolutely right. I’ll stop watching TV
tomorrow, go to the library. . . . Leave the dishes, and I’ll do them tomorrow after
school.” In a blamer/super-reasonable couple, the wife might complain bitterly: “We
hardly ever make love anymore; don’t you have any feelings for me?” The husband
might respond coldly: “Of course I do or I wouldn’t be married to you. Perhaps we
define the word love differently.” In the case of a conversation between a super-
reasonable parent (“Let’s discuss precisely why you seem to be having difficulties
with your math problems tonight”) and the irrelevant child (“It’s time for my
television program now”), nothing gets settled or resolved; the tension is maintained
if not increased. Only the congruent person maintains self-esteem under stress,
making certain that his or her inner feelings are matched by clear and direct outer
communication and behavior.
Satir maintained that these roles are essentially poses that keep distressed
people from exposing their true feelings because they lack the self-esteem that would
allow them to be themselves. Placaters are afraid to risk disapproval if they speak up
or disagree or act in any way independent of a parent or spouse. Blamers also feel
endangered and react by attacking in order to cover up feeling empty, unworthy, and
unloved themselves. Super-reasonable people feel safe only at a distance and rely on
their intellect to keep from acknowledging that they too have feelings and are
vulnerable. Irrelevant people (often the youngest child in a family) gain approval only
by acting cute and harmless. Satir, a warm, caring, nurturing person—but also capable
of being fearlessly direct—inevitably tried to facilitate straight talk between family
members, encouraging them to be congruent in their communications, matching
words to feelings to body stance, without qualification.
In her workshops, Satir often presented two contrasting views of the world,
which she labeled the “Threat and Reward” model and the “Seed” model.
Relationships in the former suppose a hierarchy in which some people define rules for
others to follow without question. The hierarchy is based on roles that powerful
individuals hold on to for life. While those on top are not necessarily malevolent, their
behavior helps create individuals who feel weak and have low self-esteem.
Conformity is expected in the Threat and Reward model, whether based on gender or
lower-status positions in society. The cost of nonconformity is guilt, fear, or rejection.
Resentment and hostile feelings also are common, and for some people feelings of
hopelessness may be present. In the Seed model, personhood rather than role
determines identity, and every person is born with a potential that may be fulfilled.
While roles exist, they define relationships only within certain contexts and are not
based on permanent status or role differences. In the Seed model, change is viewed as
an ongoing life process and an opportunity for growth. Satir was a strong advocate of
the Seed model, insisting that given the proper conditions of nurture, children, like
seedlings, can develop into healthy adults.
f. Emotionally Focused Therapy
The most well-known contemporary experiential family therapy model
integrates a focus on the Self with a systems outlook, presenting a model grounded in
explicit theory and supported by effectiveness research. Emotionally focused therapy
(EFT) views couples and families in both intrapsychic and interactional terms, helping
them gain access to what is emotionally significant for each person. At the same time,
it helps them examine what guides their experiences and actions and assists their
explorations through the ongoing transactions occurring in the close, personal
therapist–client(s) relationship.
EFT practitioners’ focus is on the process between people, not what is inherent
in each person. Each person learns to examine how his or her interactions with others
set off cues that maintain distress and dysfunction in the relationship. The emphasis is
on helping clients explore their moment-to-moment inner experiences and
relationship events, especially the rigid patterns that block emotional engagement.
The therapist is a facilitator, helping clients explore experiences, rather than the expert
who knows what the client is experiencing (Greenberg, Rice, & Elliott, 1996).
Greenberg (2014) views the therapist as an “emotion coach” helping clients work
through feelings rather than control or avoid them.
Susan Johnson (Johnson & Bradley, 2009), a Canadian psychologist at the
University of Ottawa, is also director of the Center for Emotionally Focused Therapy
and the Ottawa Couple and Family Institute. Les Greenberg (2014), a psychologist at
York University in Toronto, Canada, is the director of that university’s Psychotherapy
Research Center. Together, the two are the originators and main proponents of
emotionally focused therapy (EFT), with couple (EFCT), and family therapy (EFFT)
versions, considered to be among the best empirically supported interventions
currently available.
This short-term (8–10 sessions) experiential approach is an outgrowth of
humanistic therapy, especially the client-centered procedures of Carl Rogers (creating
a safe therapeutic environment and modeling active empathic understanding), and
Fritz Perls’s Gestalt therapy (directing clients toward greater awareness by engaging
in resolution-enhancing affective processes). Add to this mix Satir’s emphasis on
congruent communication and closeness in the therapist–client relationship, as well as
an adaptation of Bowlby’s contribution of attachment theory directed at adult love
relationships. EFT practitioners believe that humans have an inherent tendency to
maximize our capabilities, to actualize ourselves. We organize what we see and give it
meaning, filtered through our current emotional states and the ways in which we
organize our experiences. If couples and families can be helped to change their
negative emotional patterns, to bond to one another with positive, caring emotion, and
learn to restructure their relationship so that they become more attuned and responsive
to each other, then therapeutic changes can occur.
Skills for enhancing empathic exploration and understanding of one another
are taught, and EFT exercises aid individuals in recognizing and identifying their own
and others’ internal cognitive, emotional, and bodily processes. Brubacher (2006)
suggests that what Satir was able to achieve intuitively, such as seemingly magically
unearthing positive intentions and resources in presenting problems, EFT does
systematically in a step-by-step series of therapeutic tasks, in manual form, to
facilitate emotional change. Specifically, EFT helps clients restructure habitual
negative interactive patterns (attacking-withdrawing, pursuing-distancing) that have
created emotional removal or remoteness or have led to attack-attack engagement. In
distressed relationships, these patterns become rigid and laden with affect, curtailing
closeness or trust and precluding the evolution of new patterns or responses. The EFT
therapist tries to modify the key emotional experiences of both partners, the positions
they take in this relationship dance, and the relationship events that define the quality
of their attachment in order for them to build secure emotional bonds.
Attachment theory explains how adult relationships become troubled and
dysfunctional. Everyone needs the predictable emotional accessibility and
responsiveness of significant others in order to experience personal security, a sense
of trust and safety, and self-confidence. If not, there is no emotional engagement, and
the person is left feeling disconnected, frustrated, angry, depressed, and detached.
Under such conditions of despair, destructive interactive patterns are almost sure to
follow.
Marital distress, for example, signals the failure of an attachment relationship
to provide security, protection, or closeness, resulting in anxiety and a sense of
vulnerability in one or both partners. Couples may hide their primary emotions (their
real feelings, such as fear of rejection) and in their place display defensive or coercive
emotions (secondary, reactive emotions such as expressing anger or blaming when
afraid), leading to negative interactions in which each partner fears revealing his or
her primary emotions. Repeated over time, this pattern builds fears of trusting one’s
partner enough to exhibit honest primary emotions, which in turn become buried even
further. EFCT therapists use the therapeutic relationship to help the couple access and
reprocess the primary emotions underlying their interactional positions, enhance their
emotional bond, and change their negative interactional sequences toward increased
attachment security. Nelson (2005) notes that EFCT is based on an attachment view of
romantic love and integrates elements of both intrapsychic and interpersonal theories
of relationships.
In the therapeutic process, the therapist adopts a nuanced approach that centers
on emotions as indicators of underlying attachment needs within the context of
intimate relationships. Establishing a secure and trusting therapeutic alliance serves as
the foundation for exploring and expanding the emotional landscape of each partner's
experience. By creating a safe space where vulnerability is welcomed and validated,
the therapist fosters a climate of openness and authenticity that encourages partners to
delve into their deepest emotions and relational patterns.
Central to this process is the therapist's commitment to understanding and
empathizing with the unique emotional experiences of each partner. Through active
listening, validation, and empathic attunement, the therapist works to uncover the
underlying attachment needs driving each partner's behaviors and relational dynamics.
By shining a light on these deeper emotional currents, the therapist helps partners gain
insight into their own emotional worlds and the ways in which their attachment needs
shape their interactions with one another.
Once a deeper understanding of each partner's emotional landscape has been
established, the therapist then facilitates new ways of interacting that are more aligned
with each partner's attachment needs and relational goals. This may involve exploring
alternative communication strategies, practicing empathy and active listening, and
cultivating greater emotional responsiveness and attunement within the relationship.
Through experiential exercises, role-playing, and guided conversations, partners are
encouraged to experiment with new ways of relating to one another that promote
mutual understanding, connection, and intimacy.
Moreover, the therapist may draw upon attachment theory and research to
inform the therapeutic process and provide a framework for understanding and
addressing relational dynamics. By exploring the ways in which early attachment
experiences influence adult relationships, the therapist helps partners gain insight into
the origins of their attachment needs and the ways in which they manifest within their
current relationship. This deeper understanding can pave the way for healing past
wounds, resolving conflicts, and strengthening the bond between partners.
In summary, the therapist's focus on emotions as reflective of attachment
needs lays the groundwork for transforming intimate relationships. By establishing a
safe and trusting therapeutic alliance, exploring the emotional landscape of each
partner's experience, and facilitating new ways of interacting, the therapist empowers
partners to create more fulfilling and secure attachments with one another. Through
this process of emotional exploration and growth, partners can deepen their
connection, foster greater intimacy, and build a stronger foundation for a healthy and
satisfying relationship.
