Gestalt Therapy Case Studies Blog

Case #208 - Recognising spiritual authority

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Fri, 19 May 2017 08:07:00 +0000

Jacinda talked about going to the Vatican. She felt a great deal of religous sentiment - awe, excitement, respect, anticipation.
But she went into one church there, and was told rudely by the priest that she could not join the service. There were some exclusive people in the vestibule, and not everyone was welcome.
Jacinda was affronted, and felt excluded. This hurt her sentiment, and her retaliation was internal - she decided that the whole place was just ordinary; it held no spiritual power; it was just a historical relic.
Then some years later, her husband died. She went to the local priest, wanting to recieve some solace from him. Although her husband was quite well known to the priest, he seemed to forget who she or her husband were.
Susanna was furious. She resolved internally not to recognise the priest as any kind of authority.
From this time on, she had not given up spirituality, but had instead found her own version of faith. She had spent many years working on this, developing herself without being dependant on external authorities to instruct or guide her. She had also further suffered - a son had died. Throughout this time, she had reached deep inside, and found a solid ground of spiritual meaning, purpose, and practice for herself.
Jacinda was now in her 60's. She dedicated hereself to the teaching work she did with her university students. She exuded a kind of deep strength.
I spoke to her, telling her that I recognised that she had achieved a place in her life where I believed it was appropriate for her to be recognised as an authority. I explained: there is authority which is 'given' - that of a role such as priest. And authority which is earned - by virtue of experience, insight, and deep reflection. It seemed to me that she was in this second category, and I suggested to her that she could take up this mantle - as a person who could be a guide for others.
Even though she was not in a formal role of a spiritual teacher, I suggested that she could legitimately offer herself in some way as a spiritual guide to others.
Jacinda was deeply touched, and was able to recognise the truth of what I was saying. It provided a meaningful way forward for her, to move into sharing what she had learned over the years, with others. After all, many people seek spiritual guidance, and the best comes from someone who has really lived it.
In this case, Jacinda did not need a therapeutic process. I believed that, apart from witnessing her story, she did not need help in digesting her experience - she had already done that work. What I could offer her was using some of my role-power as a therapist to recognise something valuable about her, which she would not otherwise recognise as clearly. Because she had moved away from religious authorities, it would not occur to her to offer herself as any kind of authority in the spiritual realm. Yet, she had in fact exactly the characteristics that make up the best authorities.
So, by recognising her in this way, I strove to empower her to consider stepping into a larger role. This is a Gestalt that is oriented towards the future, and in this case was not based so much on a horizonal/dialogical process, as an empowering/vertical one.
Gestalt is greatly flexible - we use the resources we have to address the uniqueness of the client.

Case #207 - Restoring spirituality

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Fri, 05 May 2017 01:53:00 +0000

Aggie's brother died in his 20's. Her mother suggested Aggie go to confession, hoping she would get some comfort from the priest.
But the priest seemed to think Aggie was just another tourist (rather than a local), and blithely told her to let it go, spend her money, and enjoy herself.
Angie was both disappointed, and very angry. She had looked for spiritual support, and instead she got a banal response. The effect was to turn her away from spirituality, and organised religion.
I set up two chairs, and invited her to put the priest in the other chair and speak to him. This incident was 20 years previously, but she still felt angry and bitter about it.
Angie told the priest, 'you let me down.' She repeated this several times. I directed her to use 'I' in the statement. She said, 'I am sad that you didnt understand me. I needed support.'
Then she repeated, 'you let me down' several times again.
I asked her to add 'and I am angry about that'. Aggie was reluctant to do so. But without full ownership, the statement was simply blame rather than including herself and her feelings.
I asked her about the priests face in the chair - how was he responding? She said that his face was blank - ie. unresponsive.
She talked to him again about her sadness, but there was still no response. And her voice did not show her anger.
So I asked her to stand over him, and express her anger in her voice - to yell at him if necessary.
She did this, though not very loudly. I kept supporting her to stay present, breathe, feel her feelings..and to keep telling him directly how angry she was.
Finally, she saw him bowing his head.
She felt relief - there was some impact of her feelings.
I kept focusing her on her breathing. Her mouth was tight - I asked if she felt bitterness; she said she felt very disappointed…I asked her to be aware of that feeling in her mouth.
I echoed a saying, 'Holding onto resentment is like drinking poison, hoping the other person will die'. I also strongly acknowledged her feelings - of sadness, anger and disappointment.
This was important, to both hold her feelings, and to confront her with the conequences of holding on. Even after the work, her mouth was still a bit tense.
I then invited her to put Spirituality in a chair, and talk to it. This was an important and tender moment. Up to then, the result of this incident was that she had, for 20 years, been indifferent to spirituality. Her emotional hurt had led (as it often does) to eschewing spirituality altogether.
Now, as she talked to Spirituality, a flood of emotion came over her. She felt, for the first time in a long time, her longing, and openess to it. She truly felt herself letting go of the hurt, the offense, and moving forward to a new chapter in her life, where she could once again embrace spirituality, without it being tainted by the actions of one priest.

Case #207 - Restoring spirituality

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Fri, 05 May 2017 01:35:00 +0000

Case #206 - The voice of God

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Wed, 19 Apr 2017 14:04:00 +0000

Each time Mabel spoke about her spirituality, she reported feeling some turmoil. She said she was tense in the stomach.
Mabel had not previously been religious, but of recent years had joined the church. There were many things she appreciated, and valued about her newfound religious experience. But there were certain dogmas which she couldnt and wouldnt accept, and these troubled her. This included a negative view of sexuality, and a damning of homosexuality. Her brother was homesexual, and this felt like too much of an affront to her. Yet, she did not want to let go of her spiritulity.
So I invited her to have a 'conversation' with a priest. We pulled up a chair for the priest. She told the priest how she felt, and what was true for her. When she took the role of the priest, his response was superior, and dismissive.
I supported Mabel to stand her ground, to clearly identify her boundaries and limits - what she would not swallow. The conversation went on back and forth, with the priest sticking to his guns, and she to hers. It seemed unresolveable.
I then pulled up another chair for 'God'. I asked to her sit in that chair, and 'talk to Mabel'. 'Gods voice' said - 'have compassion, and accept him [the priest] as he is'.
This seemed to be a circuit breaker. Mabel, back in her own seat, was now able to say to the priest 'I disagree with you. I know we will never come to an agreement. I accept that, and respect our differences. I accept you are doing the best you believe, with your sense of God, and I am doing my best, with my sense of God.'
Back in the priest role - the response was agreement.
As Mabel finished this dialogue, she report feeling greatly peaceful. The inner turmoil, that she had been struggling with for some time, had gone. She felt a genuine resolution and clarity, and a truly spiritual way to deal with this intractable conflict.
She also was able to keep intact her spiritual faith, and in fact felt renewed energy for moving forward. By doing this, she claimed her own spirituality, whilst being able to remain in relationship with the dogmatic aspects of the church.
This is an issue many people face. Gestalt allows us to find a higher order resolution, without giving direction or advice. In the realm of spiritual issues such as this, it is enormously useful as we are able to use the therapuetic process to support people's spiritual journey.

Case #205 - Hands around her neck

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Fri, 31 Mar 2017 11:47:00 +0000

Rosa was a recovering addict. I asked her what part of her body she associated with the addiction (alcohol). She said her throat. I asked the feeling - she said, like bands, choking her.
I asked her to show me, with her fingers. She did so.
This is important in Gestalt - to focus awareness, we say sharpen awareness, both for the client, and also for me to be more in touch with their experience in detail.
I then suggested an experiment - I would move my hands slowly towards Rosa's throat, and would stop whenever she said to.
The Gestalt experiment is a combination of safety (I would stop, she was in control) and risk (the experience of choking). Its also a way to move away from what we call 'retroflection', which is something that you do to yourself - the energy is all internal. This way, I could take over that aspect, to allow her to experience it in a different way. It also creates a relational experiment.
So I did this, and she told me to stop when I was 3cm away from her throat.
I asked to feel, breate, stay present. This is important, or else the person can dissociate, and then the awareness experiment has no value - there is too much risk.
I then pulled back. I asked what she was feeling - she said 'one of the ropes has snapped'.
I then noticed 2 marks on her neck, and asked her about them. She told me they were 'from childhood', and she started crying. I did not enquire more- we could go into the story another time. In the present it was more important to stay with the experience.
So I moved my hands closer, and this time she asked me to stop at 2cm away. Again, I asked her to breath, feel, stay present.
I stepped back
I now asked her to make a sound - she found it hard to so so. I asked her to breath out, and let whatever sound could come out.
I then moved closer again, and this time she let me put my hands around her neck. I asked her to make a sound. I could feel a small vibration in her throat. She was trying. She felt warmth in her neck and told me the ropes were gone.
She said it was hard for her to stay present, and she felt embarassed.
This means we had reached her exposure limit. So I invited her to put her hands around my neck. This exposed me, and allowed her to take over that energy.
She said she felt more steady and comfortable, and more present with me.
She then stepped back. There was a very strong connection between us, and she felt safe, and warm.
This was an important transformative experience for her. Some of the energy which drove her addiction was confronted, head on, and then she could experience it, in the safety of the experiment, and the relationship. This relationshiop between us became very strong through the experience, and lay the ground for excellent therapeutic work in the future. There was a high degree of trust, and this is an essential ingredient in successful therapy.

Case #204 - In the best interests of the child

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Sat, 25 Mar 2017 13:39:00 +0000

Fay had reached the end of her marriage. She had tried really hard to make it work. They had been so much in love at the start. Together now for 5 years, they had a 3 year old son. She was a competent professional; he had been the house husband. This worked very well for both of them. But the interpersonal dynamics had not worked. Her increasing confidence in the world was matched by his collapse. He did not contribute financially; and although he was caring for their child, she wanted him to be moving ahead towards a career, so she did not ultimately have to carry all the financial weight. He promised, but did nothing. She felt like she was the man in the relationship. He felt disempowered.
Part of the issue here was not an interpersonal one.
Thus, in the therapy, I pointed out that there was a social context - ideas about how men and women should be, that were influencing both of them in ways which were disruptive in their relationship. Rather than being able to be with each other as they were, they compared each other to an ideal of what a man or woman is 'supposed' to be - women, soft and caring/ men confident and successful.
Fay's response to challenges was to become more competent, to apply her intelligence, and figure out soltions. Her husbands response was to become timid, to make promises, and to pull back into himself.
This cycle had eventually undermined their marriage.
Now, at this time of separation, they had come to an agreement about parenting.
Fay, who had not done much of the daily care of her child, took custody (a traditional response in the culture in which she lived). She applied her intelligence and competence, and soon started feeling more confident about being able to care for their child as the main person, despite the fact she worked at a demanding job.
Her soon-to-be-x husband was relegated to seeing the child for no longer than a day a week, but he could come and bring him to school, or take the child when Fay had a business trip.
Gestalt is oriented towards finding the right balance of challenge and support. 'As much support as necessary and as little as possible' was Laura Perls' dictum.
This is the growth edge, and what we strive for in the Gestalt experiment.
In this case, I spent a whole session challenging Fay.
Firstly, she was operating from an assumption that she could set the frame on the discussions with her husband. She set up the paramaters for the childcare, and then gave him choices within that. He acquiesced.
She argued with me that she was acting in the best interests of their child -giving him a stable environment, the least disruption during the separation.
I pointed out to her that this was a conflict of interests. She was setting things up as she wanted them, and the lines between what the child needed and what she wanted were blurred.
She also took over entirely the child care, virtually pushing her husband to a peripheral role in the picture, where he had been the main carer. She had many rationales for doing so, but what was masked was her own need to be in control.
I also pointed out to her that as I listened to her talk about all this, I heard her brusque, business-like voice. I heard strength and resolve. Whilst those were good qualities, and understandable in terms of her marshalling herself to the care of her child, they were also the very things which had contributed to the breakdown of the marriage - her taking over, and not really giving space to her husband, on his own terms.
Thus, although they were separating, she was continuing that pattern. I pointed out that she had another two decades of co-parenting with him. And if she simply continued the same pattern they had in their marraige, it would be equally dysfunctional. In that sense, nothing would have changed except they were not living together, and she had taken over charge of child rearing.
This was all very challenging to her, and somewhat of a shock. She was coping as best she could in an uncertain situation, and this is how she knew best to do so. I acknowledged that, and also pointed her to the bigger picture -the next 20 years of coparenting, and how that might go.
This placed the larger content of the field into our discussion, not just focusing on here and now awareness. The future of the field is as important as the past of the field. And in both cases, we bring that into the present interaction.
I highlighted that there were many other choices available to her, other than either relinquishing control over child rearing to her husband, or taking it over entirely herself. And that each choice she made, had consequences. In Gestalt we respect choices, bring them into awareness, and direct people towards taking responsiblity for the consequences - all of them.
Fay realised that she was using the child as a way to hurt the husband - a common reaction. This insight was particularly important, as it clarifies the dynamic underlying all the rational reasons.
The session was very confronting for her. But she was up for it. And I, in good faith, could not just give her empathy in a place where I thought her actions were unconscious and potentially destructive in the long run.
Such confrontation needs to be done very sensitively, maintaining connection with the person. And it requires strength and clarity on the part of the therapist. And then the next session needed to be about support - going into depth about Fay's creative adjustment - her way of being in the world, in terms of needing to always be in control

Case #204 - In the best interests of the child

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Sat, 25 Mar 2017 13:39:00 +0000

Case #203 - Trying to please and impress

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Mon, 20 Mar 2017 01:55:00 +0000

Renee was very frank. She said that her underlying motivation was to impress the group, and, to please me as teacher.
I was also frank to her - I said 'I dont need you to please or impress me; and, there's a part of me which would like you to please me.'
Gestalt invites us to be honest about our underlying motivations, our selfish or aggressive impulses, and to recognise and own our contradictions. Its especially important as therapist not to be too 'good', too understanding too perfect.
I asked Renee what she was feeling - tense in the stomach.
Straight away, she recalled a memory from when she was 5 years old.
She described being put through an IQ test. There were two containers, and she had to pick the right answer. She was a very smart kid. But it took her 40 minutes, sweating it, and she still hadnt worked out the answer.
Then a boy came in, sweating from the playground; a boy who was not the smartest in the class. He was able to choose, straight away, the correct answer.
Renee felt stupid at the time. She wanted to impress every one. And everyone expected her to do well, they were watching her.
This was clearly an incident that contained shame, trauma, and a mix of strong expectations, at the same time as a failure to meet those expectations.
I asked Renee what she felt in the present. This is a common form of shuttling awareness in Gestalt - if we go to the Field - a contextual experience, then we bring it back into the present.
She said she felt cold - an understandable reaction to that experience.
I told her that I wanted to give her some warmth - a novel experience in the place where she was used to contracting into herself, and a restorative experience in terms of what she probably needed at the time.
She agreed, so I sat next to her, put my hand on her back, and invited her to breathe, and take in the support.
Renee reported that she felt relaxed after a while.
But she said her hands were still feeling cold. So, with her permission, I sat in front of her and held her hands.
Straight away she recalled some experiences with her first boyfriend, where he had commented on her sweaty hands. I reassured her that I was ok with her hands in any condition.
Her hands warmed up, and she reported feeling more relaxed.
She had her eyes shut. I invited her to open her eyes, look at me, and try the sentence 'I am enough, just for myself'. I asked her to breathe deeply, and repeat the sentence, or change it.
We often give a suggested sentence to a client, for them to try. In Hakomi this is called a 'probe'. It allows them to 'try out' a new idea, with the flexibility to change it, and with checking in as to how it feels. This prevents it simply being an imposition from the therapist.
Renee reported feeling good saying it.
She then reported feeling tense in her hips. So then, with permission, I put a hand on the side of one hip. She then relaxed after a while. I invited her to repeat that sentence.
Renee started crayig, deeply, and said she felt her chest opening up.
This indicated that she was able to feel the deeper feelings from that particular incident, without tensing up, or pushing anything away.
After some time, Renee was completly relaxed. She looked at one of the women in the group, made a comment, and they both laughed.
This represented a full circle - she was able to be herself, in the group, without having to impress or please, but simply be herself.

Case #202 - Integrating warmth and cold

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Sun, 12 Mar 2017 01:10:00 +0000

I invited Sandy to notice her present awareness.
I declared my own awareness - firstly of her - my experience of her warmth, her smile, and then at the same time, her tears, and at the same time, some tension she had mentioned feeling.
I also offered my own awareness of myself - feeling touched by her openess, and my feeling of peacefulness, openess, and being happy and connected.
In Gestalt, its not just about starting with the client's awareness, like an interrogation - its equally valuable to start with one's own experience as therapist - it opens up the way for the client to feel comfortable to share themselves.
So then I asked her what her current experience was.
Sandy said she felt fear…and then some terror.
I asked how those feelings may be connected to me. In Gestalt we want to take generalised experiences, bring them into the here and how, I and thou. This enables us to focus awareness, and work with it directly, and immediately.
Sandy said she was afraid of my coldness, she wanted to see me smile.
I acknowledged the validity of her perception: I said, 'yes, you see my coldness, and its truly, I do have some within me'.
Its important to recognise the grain of truth in what the client sees.
Sandy talked about her feeling of a 'cold wind'. So asked her to personify that, and 'be the cold wind'.
At the same time, I drew her attention to the fact that outside of the room, there was in fact a strong wind blowing - we could hear it! This was the perfect setting for what was happening in the room. This utilises 'outer zone' awareness - sensory awareness, of the environment.
Sandy said she wanted to feel the warmth again, to see my smile.
Her hands were raised when she said this. So I offered to reach out, and touch her hands - offering her contact, but not smiling 'for her'.
She said her hands felt numb. This indicated that as much as she wanted contact, she was not fully available for it.
I asked her to tell me about being cold.
She said her father was warm and understanding, but her mother was cold, and still is, even 50 years later.
I suggested that she try a new experience, with her mother.
I invited her to imagine I was her mother; I reached out to touch her hands again, and we moved our hands together. I checked her experience as we did this. She went from feeilng warm, to cold, and back and forth.
Finally the warm feelings stayed steady.
There was a great sense of connection between us.
We hugged - the natural culmination for both of us to this experience.
I said 'I embrace both coldness and warmth, in you as well as me'.
In making this statement I wanted to underline the integration of the elements that had previously been polarised - coldness and warmth. At this point, it was not simply an interpretation, or insight I was offering her. It was an echo of the integration that she now felt in her body.

Case #201 - The dizzy woman

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Sat, 18 Feb 2017 07:33:00 +0000

Abagail said she felt a pain in her heart. She wanted to know why it was there, and what she could do about it.
I explained to her that the Gestalt approach neither attempted to answer 'why', nor was I going to give her some sage advice. I would however work with her to go into the experience to understand it more deeply.
So I asked her to pay attention to the pain, and describe it to me. She said she felt a movement, and indicated with her hands in an upwards spiralling direction.
I asked how she felt, and she said 'dizzy'.
Now, knowing something about Abagail, I had encountered previously her tendency to get dizzy. I remarked on this, and asked what would happen if the spiralling kept moving up. She told me she would faint.
Now, given this was a familiar tendency of hers, it indicated a basic 'creative adjustment' - her way of coping with a difficult situation. Clearly, this had historical antecedents, but I did not want to go into those on this occasion. I was more interested in staying close to the process.
I remarked on this, her way of 'coping' with whatever the pain was, by distancing/dissociating.
Rather than try to bring her closer to the pain, the Gestalt way is to 'go with' what the person is doing, but with awareness.
So I asked Abagail how far away she would need to be from the pain to be able to look at it.
She said 'well it could be on the moon'.
I invited her to look at it on the moon then. But she said it was too public, others could see it.
So then she looked at a little arrangement of flowers, with a snowman in the middle. It was about 3 metres away. She said she could look at it there.
I remarked that was relatively close, and a lot closer than the moon.
Abagail said - 'its hard to face it on my own'.
So I told her I would accompany her, sitting next to her and supporting her so she didnt have to do it on her own.
Going *with* the distancing, then finding the right distance so she could look at it (rather than spiral off and faint), allowed her to consider the possibility of safely being in the proximity of the pain. Offering to sit with her provided the support to be able to take the next step.
So I sat next to her, and then asked her to pick something in the arrangement of flowers, to represent the pain. She chose the snowman. I invited her to talk to the pain.
She said 'I can see you'.
This of course was a very big step.
I aksed her to imagine she was the snowman/pain, and to describe her experience. She said 'I need to be released'.
I asked her to come back to herself, while she looked at the pain, and asked what she felt. She touched her throat, and said she felt pain and constriction. I asked what else she wanted to say to the pain.
Abagail started burping, and continued to do so for several minutes. This is a very good sign, and I encouraged her to continue to allow this to happen. Its an incation that the body is releasing, deep on an emotional level, things that have been held back.
Abagail felt very calm and centred, fully came into her body, and was able to be much more present in the connection. This was a new experience for her - to be able to feel internally, and stay with that experience, in relationship.

Case #200 - An ordinary pair of jeans reveals all

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Mon, 06 Feb 2017 08:18:00 +0000

Aaron, a young man in the audience, asked me to describe the phenomenological approach of Gestalt. I explained to him that its based on the use of awareness, involves attending to the obvious, and bracketing preconceptions. But this sounds theoretical, whereas the practice is always focused on direct experience.
So I invited him to come up and I would demonstrate it to him.
I suggested that I woudl start with something he was wearing - and I would purposely pick the item of clothing that seemed to have the least meaning - give the least clues, and be the most ordinary.
So I settled on his jeans. They were standard blue jeans, looking identical to the blue jeans that many young people wear. People would hardly think that this would reveal, in a short space of time, something unique and deeply personal.
So I simply commented on what I say - blue jeans, a seam visible on the inside, the seam on the outside with an invisible seam.
Aaron looked at me expectantly -and asked 'so what does that mean'. I replied 'I dont know, and dont want to try to make meaning. I am interested in you, your uniqueness, your individual experience'.
Aaron commented, 'I like slim jeans, and I like them simple, not having to choose everyday'.
I said, 'Ok, so I have learned something about you already - you are a person who likes things simple.'
Aaron added, 'yes, when I focus on something I want to achieve, I dont want to be distracted, so I dont want to have to think about what to wear'.
I told him that I could relate to that - I was less interested in what I wore, and more focused on what was of interest to me. This was a relational statement - connecting with him by bringing who I am into the contact.
I said, 'so I also know this about you'.
Aaron then shared, 'I am focused on my own world, and not so outgoing'. I shared with him that I was different - more extroverted. Again, this provides a point of contact to his sharing.
I think asked him a feeling question - 'how do you feel about being about being more inwardly focused?'. He replied, 'I am a quiet person, and I am happy with being that way'.
So, I have learned some key things about him.
I then asked him a contextual question - 'tell me about who in your family is quiet, and who is not'.
Aaron described his mother as quiet also, and his father as outgoing. He felt much more comfortable with his mother, and quite uncomfortable with his father, who would pressure him to be more expressive and louder. Aaron also spoke in a quiet voice.
I told him that I actually enjoyed his slow pace, and quiet thoughtful manner - another relational statement, so that his self relevantions did not just occur in a vacuum.
I think invited him into an awareness experiment - to imagine I was his father, and see what he would like to say to me about being quiet.
He said 'You are always criticising me and the way I am'.
I pointed out this was a critical statement on Aaron's part, and did not really share who he was as a personal statement.
He tried again and said, 'You should be more tolerant of other ways of expression'. I pointed out this was a 'God' statement - telling his father how he should behave, what was correct. Again, I invited him to make a personal statement. Aaron was blank.
I explained this involved the word 'I' and the statement of a feeling.
For instance, 'I feel hurt when you dont accept my quietness'.
Aaron was at first reluctant - he said 'but that will hurt him'. I explained to him the difference between a personal, boundaried statement, which described his own experience and was therefore not 'hurtful' in terms of stepping over a boundary, and a critical or 'God' statement, such as he first made, that might. If we make such clear personal statements, then we are minimising our harm - and any reaction is then truly the other persons 'stuff', and indicates that they are not really interested in who we are or what we feel.
So Aaron said, 'I feel uncomfortable when you push me, and tell me I should be different'.
I checked how he felt - he said, more comfortable - but he said 'I would find it difficult to say this to my father'. I explained that he may need more practice, or more support in a variety of ways before he might be ready to do so. However, what had shifted was his awareness, his skill in make an authentic statement, and his clarity about how he really liked being a quiet person.
If we were to continue therapy, these would be very valuable themes to explore. We arrived at quite a core place, from an ordinary pair of jeans!

Case #199 - Taking in being of value

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Sun, 29 Jan 2017 07:19:00 +0000

I asked Nathan what he felt - he said he was tired. He wanted to close his eyes - a heavy feeling on his eyes.
I noticed his face - there was clear tension showing, and small movements related to the tension. Again, I asked him about his feelings - he said he was excited - a kind of tense anxiety.
I also noticed his eyes flickering.
I asked him about that - he said he found the light in the room too bright, and just wanted to close his eyes. So I invited him to do that for a while.
In Gestalt we want to find ways to go with whatever the phenomena is.
After some time he opened his eyes. I used this as a metaphor - and asked him what did he want to see in his life. He was not clear, so I invited him to stand up, and asked him to look into the distance and tell me what he saw.
'Ambition' he replied.
At the same time, he felt his tiredness. He also made a particular sound, something like 'whoosh'. I pointed out this sond had energy in it.
Nathan felt embarassed, so I asked him to down again.
I asked him what he was tired of in his life - he replied that he was tired of all the duties he had, tired of being lonely, and tired on not having enough money.
Again, I invited him to stand - I wanted to help him mobilise his energy. I asked him again to look towards his life, and see what it was doing, what it was saying to him.
Nathan said that it was saying 'you can do better', 'you are trying hard'.
I pointed out that this was future oriented, I wanted to see what was in the present.
In Gestalt we catch people's tendencies to jump ahead of themselves, and focus instead on 'who are you' in the here and now.
So Nathan said that now his life was saing to him that he should be so much more, and that he was really like a woman'. He was embarassed by this.
It was clear that the messages he was receiving were part of his low motivation.
So I asked him to step into that other position, representing his life. I instructed 'I want you to be with Nathan, just as he is', and asked how he felt. He found it hard to answer. So I suggested - imagine you are Nathan's best friend, what do you want to say.
In this position, Nathan still found it hard to speak, or to really feel deeply.
He was clearly struggling to have compassion for himself, and 'be with what is', including all this limits.
So I put a hand on his shoulder to support him.
Again, he felt embarassed.
This reocurrng experience of embarassment indicated that shame was just below the surface.
A key factor in dealing with shame is the provision of support. His indication of loneliness, his escape into the future, his tiredness, all point to a lack of ability to really be in the present, and pay attention to where is life energy is leading him.
So we spent some time with me standing next to him, my hand on his shoulder, and Nathan just breathing, coming into the present, relaxing, and letting something positive and nourishing in. I invited people in the group to come up and tell him what they liked or appreciated about him, and his task was to just breathe it in, and accept it.
This was difficult for him, but as he did so, he reported feeling the tireness lifting. His face looked more peaceful, and the twitching had stopped.
It was clear that what he needed was a sense of being valued, and it was hard for him to take this in, to feel it. So we continued for a while, his instructions to be present, and allow the support in.
Sometimes things that seem very small, are actually enormously difficult for some people. So, this requires patience, and finding just how support the person needs and where possible, offering it to them. What matters is the integration the person feels, not how 'big' or dramatic the work is

Case #198 - Statements of truth

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Wed, 28 Dec 2016 09:51:00 +0000

Marvin was a partner in a new startup company. His position was GM. His issue was in relation to the founder of the company, and CEO. They had been colleagues in a previous company, and were alumni of the same business school.
His issue was that the founder was implementing a business model which Marvin considered to be out of date. He struggled to see how he could work it successfully, although he was willing to give it a go. He was not happy about it, and felt somewhat disempowered by the situation.
So I set up an experiment - a chair to represent the founder, and the a symbol of the business model, which he put on the floor between them.
I asked him what he felt.
He replied with his thinking: there were two responses - yes, he would try to integrate the model, and no, he didnt want to do it.
People often mix up thinking and feeling, and make a statement about their cognitive experience as if they have then got in touch with their feelings. This is an important category error, and leads to a lot of confusion in relationship, and the avoidance of key somatic awareness.
So I asked him to notice what he felt in his body firstly with the 'yes, I will try to integrate the model'. He reported feeling uncomfortable.
This was a broad statement of feeling, but I wanted something more specific and precise, and therefore more contactful. So he took a few minutes, and then shared that he felt tense in his stomach.
So I invited him to make a statement to the founder - in the empty chair - a simple one sentence statement starting with his feeling. He said 'I am tense that you are not current with the way the world currently operates'.
I repeated this process with the 'no' answer. He reported feeling worse, a pain in his right side. His sentence to the founder was, 'It pains me when we miss opportunties for growth.'
These statements of truth were simple, powerful, and came straight out of his experience.
I then invited him to make a statement to the object representing the business model.
He said 'I will update you'. This was a future oriented statement. I asked him to make a statement in the present. I did this 4 times, and each time, he started with the words 'I intend…'. The trouble with that, is that it represents a cognitive orientation, rather than something more immediate, direct, and about his actual experience of the business model.
Finally he was able to make a 'now' statement: I dont agree with you, but I can accept you.
I checked that he was not pressuring himself to accept. He was clear - he felt calm in this body, which is a good litmus test.
So, these were his authentic positions. They were not the result of 'shoulds' - social pressure or pressure from his boss. They arose directly out of the nature of the situation and his true feelings. As a result, they were more likely to stick, unlike compromises which result in the sense of loss of integrity.
The important thing about the process was that at each point, there was not big posturing - the authentic statements he arrived at were clear, simple, and came from his feeling, not just his thinking. They were present centred, and solid. Such statements are more likely to be carried through, and have a positive impact, than ones which contain more of the thinking process.
Gestalt orients us, always, towards direct experience, and away from our theories, mental constructs or agendas for ourselves or others. This is the phenomenological approach - a focus on the uniqueness of each person's experience.

Case #197 - Being right, or letting go

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Sun, 25 Dec 2016 06:11:00 +0000

Irene was vocal in her advice and wishes for her daughter, but, her daughter was not listening.
I empathised. I have adult children, and I have agendas for them which they do not always follow. I have knowledge which they are not always interested in. I have experience which they dont seem to value much. Sometimes my input is not asked for, and not listened to. All these things disappoint me. And, that is, indeed, my own issue.
So, I shared this with Irene. She hardly took it in, and started complaining, with some bitterness, and a look of weariness.
I could see that Irene was quite fixated on the painfulness of her lack of control. Again, I empathised, but this time, I asked her just what she was feeling about all this.
Irene responded with her judgements about her daughter. Again, I asked what she felt. Again, she replied with more complaints and judgements.
I acknowledged her judgements, and then asked her very specific questions about her feelings, in the present, in her body. I had to keep focusing her, rather emphatically, on her here and now experience, and on her feelings. I told her - sometimes I feel sad, sometimes angry. 'What about you?'.
Irene started noticing. Tightness in her chest, tension in her stomach. She felt angry. Irene said 'like a flood'. I encouraged her to feel the anger, throughout her body. She was able to do so, feel it in every part of her. She calmed a little. I said 'whats happening with the flood now?'. Soon after, Irene was clearly holding her tears back. I encouraged her to allow herself to feel. She wept. Again, I suggested she allow herself to feel, in all parts of her body. She was able to do this.
After some time, she felt calm. This was the first time she had felt so calm in a long time. Her face changed.
I pointed out that this was 'the solution'. I - or any number of others - could suggest to her that she 'just let go' of controlling her daughter. But this kind of ownership of her feelings had to come first, otherwise, that was simply an idea, which she might agree with, or not, but which wouldnt be translated into actuality.
The experience she had was one of coming back to herself, her own feelings, and allowing herself to be fully present, with herself. This resulted in taking the focus off her daughter.
Irene looked stunned. She had felt so convinced she was right, and her daughter was in the wrong, that all her efforts had gone into trying to reform her daughter.
Most of us are all a bit like this. We want to change the people we are with - our partners, parents, and our children. The sense of powerlessness that results when we are not able to can be a place that people, like Irene, are fixated on.
The Gestalt response is not to give more advice, good ideas, truisms, or behavioural interventions. The shift comes naturally, and completely, when we are truly able to be present with ourselves. The Gestalt methodology provides a way to do this, so the change comes through experience, from the inside out.

Case #196 - Playing with the wind

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Tue, 20 Dec 2016 16:10:00 +0000

Amber talked described how she would faint at times. As she described this happening, it seemed clear it was under situation of stress.
I asked her to get in touch with her feelings as she was describing this. She felt a kind of pressure on her head. As we stayed with this, she talk about the feeling a lot of air around her head, pressing down on her. Staying with this figure, she described the air moving, like a storm, or even a hurricane. She felt buffeted by the wind.
This seemed like an apt description of her experience - being swept off her feet, being overwhelmed by forces stronger than herself.
So I invited another group member to 'be' the strong wind.
Amber stood in front of, and the wind representative moved her arms like she was blowing Amber.
Amber's response was shock- she drew back, tightened up, and look scared. So I stopped the representative. I gave Amber support - came closer to her, helped her stay with her breathing, be present, let go of the tension. Then we tried again. Amber's response was the same - fear, contraction.
So I stood behind Amber, so her back was leaning against me, put my hands on her shoulders, and helped her feel safe and grounded.
Then the 'wind' came forward again. Amber was able to put her hands out, rather than withdraw, but she was still quite frozen. The 'wind' said she felt playful, even through she was coming on strong.
So I again supported Amber, to draw into herself the very energy of the wind, to be able to try to interact, and play.
This time she was able to do so, moving her hands as well, so there was a little dance of movement between the two.
We did this a few more times, as I encouraged Amber to stay with her breath, stay present, stay in her body, and feel the power of the wind in her body.
As she did this, she was able to truly play with the wind, moving along with her.
She felt incredibly empowered, and reported feeling for the first time that she was not afraid of being overwhelmed.
We didnt go into the content - what this 'meant' in terms of the specifics of her life. Nor did we explore the context, as its like she had been overwhelmed by something or someone in her life.
For now, none of those details were important. In some ways, such content can be distracting.
For what she felt was a somatic level of integration - she felt the capacity to draw the power of the 'wind' - ie. wild energy - into herself, rather than defending against it.
This is the kind of integration we work towards in Gestalt. Insight can follow, but the first and foremost thing is the experience of integration of polarities - of disowned aspects of self.
This lays the template for an increased energetic capacity to be present, from which many other good and desirable things can flow.

Case #195 - Bullying reminds of abuse

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Sun, 27 Nov 2016 15:18:00 +0000

Anastasia was a hard worker. She always performed her job at a high quality level. She was much valued in the different places she worked.

She and her husband moved to a country area. He was an engineer, she worked for a community welfare organisation. One of her co-workers was extremely difficult to work with. She reacted to Anastasia with burst of anger, accusations, and then would collapse into tears, blaming Anastasia for any problems which arose. After months of this, Anastasia felt she was walking on eggshells at work. She had to run projects with this woman, and the behaviour was making her feel sick. She felt anxious about going into work, and jittery about the unpredictability of her co-worker's reactions.

She tried everything, including broaching the subject with the coworker. But no matter what Anastasia did, her co-worker would explode, or collapse. Anastasia felt like she was going crazy, and it seemed that others at work were also intimidated by this woman, who could be an incredible bully.

Whilst I spent time addressing some of the details of the issue with her, I was also interested in the direct experience Anastasia had. The feelings - in her body, as she experienced the behaviours of her coworker. Going into these feelings moved us out of the 'talking about' (or 'complaining about') mode, into direct experience. It also brought the reality of what she was dealing with into the present, into the session, so we could work with it directly.

In cases such as this it is particularly important to do this, otherwise the session can become a 'debrief' - complaining, letting off steam getting sympathy. Whilst there may be some value in all of this, the focus of Gestalt is on exploring and deepening awareness and experience. By going into the heart of experience, we help the person go deeper than they can ofter go on their own. At the point things become 'too much', the person often goes into their head - thinking about, explaining, etc. At this point, I drew Anastasia back to the present, back to her feelings, and to see where and how she may want to express that.

In doing so, something deeper emerged. This was memories of the sexual abuse that Anastasia had experienced as a child. The way we found this, was by going into the body experience, staying with it, and then some memories and images started to arise - other times that she had felt powerless. The abuse experienced resurfaced, and again, I brought her into the present, so she could stay with the pain, anger, and powerless feelings, without being submerged in them. I kept her in touch with her 'outer zone' - what she saw when she looked around the room, and I invited her also to look at my face, and describe what she saw. This helped to stay present with the feelings, rather than dissociate. There is no point going into feelings, if they are too much, and the person simply disconnects - in ways similar to what happened in the abuse. That is why in therapy, one has to be very careful at just letting feelings arise, and ensuring that there is enough support for those feelings to be fully experienced. Cathartic therapies can be exciting to witness, and seem to yield dramatic results, but unless the person is sufficiently grounded in the present experience, such intense emotion may simply pass, and not be integrated.

So in Gestalt, we slow the person down. We are not in a hurry to get anyway, to resolve anything. The focus is on being present, in connection, and ensuring that each step of the therapy takes place with integration.

In this case. I also kept Anastasia in touch with me, to feel the support I offered in the moment, to take that in, to realise that as a 50 year old woman, she had resources, and the support externally - myself, her husband - so that she could bear the feelings which had been too overwhelming in her childhood.

After this process, when we came back to the co-worker, Anastasia felt some of her fear (and anger) replaced by an increased sense of solidity.

The problem is rarely 'other people'. It is our own resources in the face of what is happening. Hence, in Gestalt we always focus the person back on themselves, and support them to allow the new resources available in the present to provide a stronger base to address their unfinished business.

Case #194 - Solving a business problem with awareness

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Sat, 19 Nov 2016 22:44:00 +0000

Tracy described her business problem: she was a consultant with a number of different businesses. One of her major clients was proving difficult to work with. This was her largest client, and she would go to the headquarters, to work with the staff there in her consulting basis - which included helping to identify problems in the running of the business, working with the staff to find solutions, and providing advice to management.
The boss there was treating her as an employee rather than as a consultant. He would frequently expect her to be there on a regular basis, and no matter how often she told him that as a consultant, she could come and go, as needed, he continued to press her for more time.
Tracy was irritated by this situation, but nothing she did seemed to change the attitude of the business owner. He didnt seem to be listening to her, respecting her boundaries, or willing to respect her boundaries and autonomy as a consultant.
Having heard Tracy describe the situation, I asked her to come into the present, and notice what she was feeling. She described her irritation, and the feeling of tension in her chest.
Rather than jump into a solution, provide her with advice, or try to solve her problem, I sat with her in silence for a few minutes. I invited her to stay present, and I did the same. I allowed all the elements she had described to float in my vision, and without making any effort, I stilled any inclination I had to 'do' anything. In this Wu Wei state, a question suddenly occurred to me. I asked Tracy if she had a specified number of hours that was spelled out in her consultancy agreement. She said no, it was just an 'as needed' situation, where the contract mentioned the total length of time - 6 months - but not the number of hours per week.
This became immediately clear to me - the problem was not the business owner, who was simply doing what all people do - press for the maximum return for the money he was spending on the consultancy. Rather it was Tracy - whose boundaries were not as clear as she thought. She had not specified just how long she would spend each week, and so she had set up a situation where the limits were fuzzy and unclear.
This led to an immediate solution on a business level; however it also opened up another level of more personal work that Tracy needed to do - being clear about her limits. The fact she had neglected to make her time limits clear in this situation actually reflected a more general difficulty she had in setting limits - in other business situations, as well as in her personal relationships.
In Gestalt we always focus attention on the responsibility of the person in front of us, rather than cooperate in their blaming - no matter how justified it might seem. That is the key to both personal transformation and improved business practices.
All such situations are influenced by personal context - what we refer to as the Field. In this case, the issue of limits and boundaries for Tracy is related to her experience of how limits were handled in her family of origin. Understanding more about herself, and her context, helps Tracy bring more awareness to how she operates in business.

Case #193 - Longing for intimacy and avoiding intimacy

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Thu, 03 Nov 2016 10:57:00 +0000

Marge had been married for a long time - almost 20 years. She had tried very hard over the years to make her marriage successful, but in the end, she gave up. Her husband refused to come to counselling, and there were many problems which she was never able to deal with. For instance, their sex life was bad - he was rarely interested in sex, and when they did have it, he had little sensitivity towards her, coming very quickly himself, and leaving her high and dry. He also would treat her coldly at other times and generally found her 'too much' with her feelings, her high energy, her enthusiasm.
Despite all this, she had perservered.
Now, she came for therapy.
She had certainly suffered in the marriage - though it was not all bad, all of the time.
In this picture, her husband was clearly at fault. He had not treated her with enough care or respect, and had not been considerate of her needs - often blocking things she wanted.
This was not domestic violence, but there were certain aspects of the relationship which were reminiscient of that kind of extreme disrespect.
Was she a fool for staying so long? Should she have given up much earlier in the piece?
These were not questions I was addressing. I was more interested in the systemic dynamics, and from a Gestalt point of view, who was she in there, and what was her responsibility?
As we explored, some things became clear to me.
One was that she was a very speedy person. She talked very fast, she was bursting with energy, ideas, agendas, feelings. I appreciated this about her…but it was hard to get a word in edgeways, and when I did talk, I rarely had the sense she was really listening to me.
So, already theres one phenomena which we needed to explore. Her husband had not been available in and for relationship. But - had she? As much as she desperately wanted relationship and depth and love and care…as I experience her, she was also pushing it away.
If I said something appreciative to her, she would be touch for a moment perhaps, but then quickly move on, talking, bringing up more and more material. It was like she really couldnt take anything in. She didnt know how to/was not willing to just pause, breathe, and feel the impact of another person.
So this was our first major set of experiments - I would interrupt her (an important relational skill in therapy), and bring her into the present, into her feelings, and invite her to notice how she felt about my responses to her. It was hard work, because she would quickly be off and racing.
I commented that as much as she yeared for relationship and connection, she also made herself unavailable for that connection.
This was the first of many interventions with her. It was essential - if I just stayed with the content, with her stories, with her regrets, with her aspirations, with her longings, I would be ignoring what was ACTUALLY going on in our relationship - which was that she was avoiding actual intimacy, between us. She was so busy longing for something or regretting something that didnt happen, she was not with relationship as it was on offer, between us. This was hard for her to grasp - she had a very good excuse for the last 20 years, in a partner who clearly was not available. That had taken the focus off of the question of her availability.
Now I was shining a spotlight of responsibility on her role, and she didnt like it. She needed care for her feelings - which I coudl easily do, as she was a likeable person, who had certainly sufferend. However, she also need me to not perpetuate the system, and be the 'neglected' on on the other end of her racing forward. I needed to be tough with her, to insist that this wasnt ok with me, and I was not willing to simply be 'talked at'. She found this very confronting, yet it was the only way to move forward with her, without getting coopted into repeating in some ways the dynamics of her marriage.
For this reason, in Gestalt we pay more attention to process than content, to what is happening in the therapy room and relationship, than what is happening outside of the room. Too much 'talking about' is a distraction from our primary focus on the 'what is'.

Case #192 - Topdog and underdog

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Mon, 24 Oct 2016 08:11:00 +0000

Jane talked about difficulties she had with her live-in home help. The woman did not always listen to what Jane asked for, and did not always do things to the standard Jane expected.
I pointed out that this was a complex relationship. The woman was both employee, and also a kind of family member, in the sense she was residing in the house, and very much connected with what was going on, even if in the background. I also pointed out that this woman had her own feelings and needs, which had no airspace.
The roles here were overlapping and mixed. The woman was younger, so there was an additional complication of perhaps some kind of mother-daughter dynamics going on.
The lack of attention to these complexities, and the focus on only one role relationship can lead, as in this instance, to unstated tension and conflict, which in a work-relationship arises as resistance, often passive aggressive. The dynamics of power make relationships complex. People can to some degree put aside their personal needs in order to fulfil the requirements of a job. But these boundaries can easily get blurred, and the capacity to set aside one's own needs tends to be more limited that many people realise. The personal almost always interjects into the professional, and hence the importance of attending to 'fuzzy' issues in a work setting such as feelings. Ignoring them often leads to them going underground, and the classic 'top-dog / under-dog' dyad forms.
An experiment then would be to play out this dyad with Jane, with her playing both roles - herself and the housekeeper. In this way, she gets an insight into what is going on beneath the surface with her home-help, and also she gets a chance to make explicit her anger, frustration, as well as other feelings such as superiority and hostility.
The nature of the topdog/ underdog cycle is that the more resistant the underdog role gets, the heavier the topdog becomes - exerting pressure, yelling, using 'shoulds', threats, etc. But the underdog role just goes underground, passively resisting, digging their heels in, 'forgetting', or doing a half baked job, or being careless. They might say 'sorry', or 'I will try harder next time', but these are just part of the excuses that keep the cycle going. The topdog, who feels they have the power, gets increasingly frustrated.
The only way to step out of this cycle is for the topdog to move away from shoulds, and notice feelings - personalise, rather than trying to wield their power to solve the situation. The underdog role needs to take responsibliity, and make the resistance visible.
This is what we facilitate in a Gestalt dialogue between the two sections. Jane's housekeeper may be her employee, but the same dynamic is also an internal one, within Jane.
By bringing these two parts into dialgue internally, a resolution and integration can result, that combines power with feelings.

Case #191 - Soft woman, hard woman

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 04:22:00 +0000

Mandy wanted to work with her vulnerability.
So I stepped straight in, and started sharing some of my own vulnerable feelings (including some internal emotional pain) in that moment. She also shared about her feelings of pain.
So we spent some time connecting, me revealing my own vulerability, and checking in with her about her experience.
She apprecaited the connection, and relaxed somewhat, reporting changes in her feelings.
She metioned wantint to become 'softer' as a woman, but the difficulty of doing so in her work, where she was known as being a very tough businesswoman. She wanted to join with some of the women employees in more relaxing activities such as flower arranging, but she didnt really know much about it. Regarding some of her previous clients who had been helpful to her - she did not call on them once she moved on - she wondered if this was too hard?
I apprecaited both sides, including the need for her to be tough in negotiations, and hard end decisions. She said however, that she felt the conflict between wanting to be one way (softer), and the demands of business.
I acknowledged the complexity of moving between the 'I-thou' and 'I-it', and the challenges of changing hats and roles with employees and clients. I shared some of my own experiences in trying to do this.
This helped build the ground between us, including my sharing my own vulnerabilities in the process.
I then suggested an experiment. She would stand up in one or other of the two positions, which she named 'soft woman' and 'manly woman', facing each other. I facilitated a conversation between the two. At first, the 'manly' side was oppositional, saying 'you are too soft, its not possible to survive in the world if I am like you'. After some dialogue back and forth, the soft side acknowledged the pain of being so busy, not enough time to spend with family or children.
When she came over to the hard side, she collapsed in tears. I supported her, as she could hardly stand, with the pain.
I gently encouraged her to put her pain into words. Finally she said 'yes, its too much, I need more of your softness'.
A little more dialogue, and the process was complete - she felt integrated, calm, and able to bridge both sides. Gestalt emphasises wholeness, and integration is the result of bringing split polarities into contact. However, this cannot simply be a technical exercise - the relational ground needs to be built firstly

Case #190 - Down the authentic river

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Wed, 28 Sep 2016 06:33:00 +0000

Jerry wanted to talk about parenting. Something I had previously said had triggered him. He related an incident about the previous day, where he had played ball with his son in the morning. In the evening, his boy wanted to play again with him, but he pushed him away and told him to play on his own, because he was very busy. But then later, he felt sorry about doing that.
He explained that he was under a huge amount of pressure. His wife didnt work outside the home, they had financial goals they wanted to achieve, he had worked hard to get where he was in his career, and afraid if he slackened off, his income would go down in a competitieve field.
I observed the universality of his dilemma - torn between differing responsibilities - work and parenting.
We discussed these difficulties for a while.
He had also cottoned onto something I had said about authentitity. He said how hard it was for him, as he had these different pressures and pulls - what direction should he decide in?
I asked him what he would like to do - he said, more exercise - he never used his gym membership. But…he couldnt see a way to change things to create more time.
So I invited him on a fantasy experiment: to 'float down the authentic river'.
I asked him to describe what an authentic day would look like.
Jerry said he would work 2 hours a day. I asked him the detail. He would get up, play with his son, do some caligraphy, then some tai chi. He explained how he used to do a lot of tai chi, but for over a decade simply had not had any time. He had recently met a tai chi teacher, whom he wanted to learn from. I asked about the rest of his day. He would do some exercise, then play more with his son when he came home from school.
He said - 'but this would mean I would not enough income, we would have to live off our savings, and that would have an end'.
This was a real world practical dilemma. The he mentioned he was in charge of a staff of 500.
So I made a creative suggestion. 'You could take some of your authenticity into the workplace. You could direct your 500 employees to do an hour of caligraphy first thing every morning. Or an hour of tai chi.'
Jerry said that there was pressure from his bosses, and pressure from the clients, so more than one day of this experiment would probably not wash with them.
I pointed out that there were examples of people doing this kind of thing in business, and productivity going up, even though working hours went down.
We discussed this for a while - I wanted to ensure he understood what I was suggesting.
Jerry reported feeling very releived. There was, after all, some way to bring authenticity into his life, and into his workplace, without giving up what he wanted.
Gestalt affirms the principle and practice of authenticity. The focus is on 'what do you want' rather than 'what should you do'. There is life energy available if we can help people tap into their authenticity, and act on it. Of course, we cant do what we want, every minute of the day - there are social adjustments. But mostly people err on the side of those adjustments, and move away from their own life energy. The point is to start somewhere.

Case #189 - The skillful blast

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Thu, 22 Sep 2016 10:05:00 +0000

Cynthia wanted to do some therapy work, but was not clear on just what to choose. I asked about her background - she was a social worker. She had been divorced for some time; she wanted a family in the future, but was not ready at this point.
Her issue as it emerged, was a current problem at work, to do with problems 'managing the team'. I asked a series of questions, focusing her on questions such as - 'what exactly, who exactly, when exactly', before we arrived clearly at the problem.
One of her employees was not pulling his weight. She and others in the team were compensating by increasing their own workload.
It was clear to me - she was avoiding conflict. I asked about whether this was also the case in her previous marriage, she agreed.
I asked if she had ever had a good fight. She thought for some time, and replied that once she was so frustrated with her mother, so many things had built up, that she blasted her, told her all her opinions. It had been 'refreshing', and had not seemed to damage her relationship with her mother.
This was an important template for me to work with.
So I invited her into a thought experiment first - to imagine 'blasting' the employee at work. She smiled, and was happy to imagine that.
I then proposed a more challenging experiment - to put a chair in front of her for the employee, and to imagine he was in front of her, and 'blast' him.
She agreed.
When she did so, it hardly seemed like a blast to me.
But she was shaking. So I moved closer to her, put my hand on her back (after checking with her) to support her. She said she had a violent feeling in her chest, but was trying to calm herself.
Instead, I invited her to be with that violent feeling.
I told her that I would rate her blast at 10%; she told me for her it was more like 50%.
I then showed her what I would do if I played her role - I did a little demonstration blast, where I spoke strongly and did not mince my words.
Cynthia's response was a fearful one - that she did not want to be a bad person - putting others down, or being mean.
This was a self belief, or introject, but I didnt want to go into that in the moment.
So I outlined to her the theory of separating out person from behaviour.
I put out two pillows on either side of the chair. One I said was the person, the other the behaviour.
I invited Cynthia to talk to them alternately. She easily did so - acknolwedging the personhood of the employee, then in a powerful voice and powerful words, outlining the unacceptable behaviour.
She felt calm, and pleased that she had been able to 'blast', without being destrutive of the other person.
Aggression is a topic of interest in Gestalt. It is not seen in negative terms. It is life energy - which usulally becomes overly suppressed according to social norms and rules - or introjects - that a person 'swallows'. This increases passivity, reduces assertion, and leads to a loss of life energy. The person doesnt really know who they are, what they want, and they dont bring themselves fully into relationship.
In this case, Cynthia's avoidance of conflict was an avoidance of her own aggressive energy. Whilst there is no doubt, aggressive energy can be destructive, its also destructive to turn it inwards, or to fail to express it when appropriate. This was the problem at work - her accepting a higher workload rather than holding someone accountable - and was likely to be a large part of the failure of the marriage.
But Cynthia needed a great deal of support to be able to get in touch with and express the full extent of her feelings. Ultimately, she needed to find a way to do so, and reconcile her values. This was provided the through process of the Gestalt experiment, finally culminating in the skill of separating behaviour and person. Without the actual experiment, this would remain simply a 'good idea', or just become a kind of skill to practice. What was significant here is that her understanding represented an integration, resulting from the combination of the challenge of the experiment, her own risk taking in the process, and then being taught the skill. These come together in our goal in Gestalt - the integration of new way of being and understanding, into the person's being.

Case #188 - Difference without rejection

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:19:00 +0000

Yuri sat in front of me. I remarked that he seemed very serious. He said he was nervous. So I engaged him in conversation - I commented that we both wore glasses. I told him a story about snorkeling recently, and not being able to see clearly without my glasses.
I noticed a pendant he was wearing, and remarked on it. He told me it was an Narcotics Anonymous symbol.
He had used drug extensively, so I asked him about his history. He said he had used pot, meth, and also gone to jail.
I told him I was a drug virgin, I had only had drugs a few times in my life. I told him about my wedding, without alcohol.
The point was for me to reveal myself, to show my limitations, to remove myself from an expert position, and to reduce the spotlight and any possible consequent shame for him. I put him in a position of knowing more, which in the case of drugs, is true.
I asked him his feeling in the present - he felt heavy in the chest. I asked how heavy - in kilograms. He said about 60kg. I remarked that thats quite a weight to carry around. I pointed out that he wasnt born feeling that weight, so where might it have come from? He was unclear. So I asked when he started feeling that weight. It was when he was 12 years old, so I asked what happened at that time.
He said it was entering into High School. He had previously been open, but he started hiding who he was.
So again, I took the spotlight off of him, and talked about myself. I shared about the way I had hid important things about myself to my peers, during my high school years, and how that changed dramatically when I went to matriculation college, and how I decided to stop hiding, and through a difficult process, reveal more about myself to others.
Yuri listened intently, and asked me some questions about my experience. I asked him in more detail about what he was hiding. He said that it was about being different, if he had a different point of view, and was not going along with others, that he would be rejected. This also made sense culturally (Japanese context).
I invited him into an experiment -'the first step'. I suggested that he and I talk openly, and explore any differences, in a way that we both come out of hiding. I told him I was very comfortable with differences, and ok if he didnt agree with me about topics - I was a safe person to do this with.
We started talking. I started with obvious difference - in culture in age, in life experience, in parental status, etc.
We got to the topic of diet - I am a vegetarian, he is not.
I explained that this wasnt for me just a 'we are different' topic. Although I never hassle people about their dietary choices, internally I disagree, and consider that killing animals is unecessary, and therefore I see it as unethical, and not ok. So I came out of 'hiding' to reveal that this difference was in fact a difficult one.
This gave Yuri the experience of encountering a real difference, one which was full of emotion and energy, and yet, it being communicated in a way which made it ok to hear each other's thoughts and feelings.
I set the example of coming out of hiding, declaring a part of me which I normally did not reveal- the strength and judgements I hold about killing animals.
We were able to have this conversation, and Yuri found that it was still ok, we were still connected, I was not rejecting him.
I asked about the weight on his chest - it was down to 10kg.
In Gestalt we are very intereted in difference. Its seen as a signnifcant opportunity for quality contact, and is grounded in notions of authenticity in the context of relationship. Part of what we offer in the Gestalt process is an opportunity for people to be fully themselves, without being either rejected, or agreed with. This is an important part of the healing that takes place in a Gestalt dialogue. Not because some wounded part is healed, but because of the experience of connection alongside difference.

Case #187 - You should die

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Sun, 04 Sep 2016 03:26:00 +0000

Jeremy spoke about the issue of bullying. He had been bullied as a child, and it was an issue for him still.
He referred to a phrase which had been spoken to him during the bullying: 'you should die'. This had stuck with him, and he now sometimes repeated it to himself.
I asked him a number of questions about the details - when did he hear this, under what circumstances, how old was he, who said it to him.
I wanted to form a clear picture of the context of this phrase.
I did not 'Gestalt' this phrase immediately. In fact, I took quite some time, to have a conversation with Jeremy about bullying, about my own childhood experiences, and the feelings they had left me with.
I shared that talking about the subject, I felt heavy. I had various of my own memories come up.
Jeremy's rhythm was slow. The conversation was slow. I was not thinking particularly clearly - I told him, I had no creative ideas occuring to me at all. My feelings were sluggish, and I also reported that.
As something occured to me, I would bring it up. I mused out loud about how people could be so mean, and he agreed.
I told him I would like to surgically remove those awful words from his brain.
But we just hung out, in that space. There were periods of silence. I affirmed my sense of connection to him.
This was building the ground of relationship, and allowing the natural development of figures without forcing them. This was what we call remaining in the 'creative void', or Wu Wei.
He said 'those words are set in concrete'.
Immediately, I had something to work with.
I moved into experiment mode - I invited him to work with this metaphor.
I asked him to give me an image of the 'set in concrete'. He talked about the colour red, and a sword and shield. I asked him to 'be' those items, to speak as 'I'.
He said that the words were burned into the shield.
Then he said, 'theres warmth. I asked him to 'be' the warmth. He said that he was in fact sunlight, coming towards the sword and shield.
As sunlight, he could actually transform the shield, through a chemical process. As sunlight his words were 'I want to live'. he could change the word 'die' to 'live' if he came in contact with the shield.
I then invited him to a conversation with the sword. The sword said that it was afraid of change. This was a moment of vulnerability.
He didnt quite know, as sunshine, how to deal with this. So I stepped in to help him shape the conversation - acknowledge with empathy the vulnerability of the sword, and reassure it that change was ok, for the good.
The sword relented, I guided him, as sunlight, to come to the shield, and accomplish the transformation he had spoken of.
He sat in silence for sometime doing this. Then he opened his eyes. He was bright, and sparkling, and said the change had occured.
It was important with Jeremy not to rush into an intervention/experiment like this. I needed to build the relational ground, to meet him in his rhythm, to not try to fix things. As a result, his own creative growth processes kicked in, and all I had to do was support their emergence.

Case #186 - Doubts about marriage

noreply@blogger.com (Steve Vinay Gunther) — Mon, 29 Aug 2016 07:32:00 +0000

Wanda had some doubts about getting married.
She definitely wanted children.
She loved the man she was with, and wanted to get married to him.
But she had recently consulted a psychological professional who had told her that she should just accept that she wouldnt have kids, and get on with her life. These kind of authoritative pronouncements are highly problematic from my point of view, and are the opposite of the phenomenological approach we use in Gestalt - working from within the person's reality, rather than imposing ideas from the outside.
Wanda was upset, confused, and not able to find a clear path forward as a result of working with that professional.
I asked what the central issues were.
Wanda said that she was concerned about her partner's financial stability, and the financial stability in his family (whom she had not met).
She mentioned he was not happy in his work, and not earning a great deal.
She had lent him money to study massage, but the work he had got was not working out very well.
I said - this seems to be about boundaries. This is core in Gestalt work - to clarify boundaries, to differentiate between one persons needs/thoughts/feelings and the other. What often happens in relationship is what we call 'confluence' - the dissolving of boundaries. This appeared to be the case here - who is minding whose business becomes blurred. And accompanying that, there are feelings of powerlessness and rage.
So I asked her a simple question: what is the minimum amount you require him to earn. She named a very modest figure. I asked if she thought it was possible. After some discussion, she agreed.
I then suggested that this was her clear bottom line. The rest was none of her business - how he earned that money, whether he enjoyed his job, etc.
I suggested that she also need a boundary around how much complaining she was willing to listen to from him about his work situation.
Immediately, she felt much more relaxed.
But she still felt some tension. This was because he gave money to his family, even when he didnt have enough.
Again, I wanted to help her draw a boundary.
This time, I asked about how she wanted their finances to be - separate, or shared.
She said she wanted them to put equal amounts into a joint account, and them make joint decisions about how that money would get spent.
I pointed out that this arrangement had an inviolable boundary. That is - her partner coudnt spend money without her agreement under this arrangement. He could for instance request to send some money to his family, but it wouldnt happen without her agreeement.
This again calmed her, gave her a sense of boundary, control and the possiblity of how to do that in relationship.
There was one more thing she said. She was worried about her partner bringing his family neurosis into their marriage and into the child-to-be.
Here I stepped into my own viewpoint. I told her, at my age (56), with the experience of raising kids, having grandkids, having seen many relationship, I had an opinion. I wanted to share this with her, with the understanding it was my perspective, not the truth. I then told her I thought no matter who she married, they would bring their family baggage with them.
I said, 'are you ready now to marry?', and she agreed - her fears were put to rest.
Next, I asked about having a baby. The previous psychological professional had been very negative, and Wanda was still uncertain and distressed about her future as a result.
She said they had been trying to conceive for some time, but hadnt. So, I suggested they take fertility tests, to find out the facts firstly.
Depending on what the results were, then there were a range of choices available. If the tests came out clear, then it is possible that some psychological dynamics were at play, and those could be examined.
Its important in therapy not to get too 'magical' in its thinking. Practical, grounded approaches are most helpful for clients, and a heirarchy of explanation works from the physical up to the psychological. Starting with more esoteric explanations for a situation such as not getting pregnant is in my view an ungrounded and unhelpful place to start. Gestalt takes a holistic view - looking at a phenomena from as many levels as possible.