Hello to the Systemic Constellation community,
I have been researching the ancestry of Bert Hellinger’s Family Constellations
and looking at the context in which the work developed. It felt like an
appropriate thing to do in my doctoral studies as I have been a genealogist
since childhood and now I am working with client’s as a body focused systemic
constellation facilitator. I want to understand the long ancestral line behind
Hellinger’s Family Constellation. Honouring the ancestors is integral to my
work and has been a lifetime practice for me.
The short version of my question is to anyone with deep roots in the
development of Hellinger’s Family Constellation work: Was the early work on
Family Constellation by Walter Toman in 1961 and the Family Systems Theory of
Murray Bowen in 1976 influential in Hellinger’s work?
The longer version:
At the back of Love’s Hidden Symmetry: What Makes Love Work in Relationships
(pp. 327-330), Hellinger with Weber and Beaumont list many of the major
influences in the work of Hellinger and the development of family
constellations. Included on the list are influences such as Martin Heidegger
and Richard Wagner, the complete works of Freud, and the Zulu peoples of South
Africa, from whom he gained the “awareness of the relativity of many cultural
values,” “perceiving systems in relationships,” “human commonality underlying
cultural diversity,” ritual as “common human experiences,” “the goodness of
cultural and human variety,” and “the validity of doing things in different
ways” (pp. 327-328). From the field of psychoanalysis influences mentioned are
the group dynamics and psychoanalysis of Primal Therapy, Gestalt Therapy,
Transactional Analysis of Eric Berne; the Family Therapy and Family
Reconstruction of Virginia Satir; whose work was greatly influential for the
development of the Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) of Richard Bandler and
John Grinder, also an influence, the invisible bonds of Ivan Boszormenyi-Nagy,
the hierarchy of families of Jay Haley; Hypnotherapy of Milton Erickson,
Provocative Therapy of Frank Farrelly, the Holding Therapy of Irena Precop, and
others (pp. 327-330).
Walter Toman and Murray Bowen are not mentioned as influences. I do not come
out of a background in psychoanalysis, psychotherapy, or psychology, rather my
work flows through peacebuilding and conflict analysis and management in the
world, and I’m interested in the work of Albrecht Mahr, Hellinger, and others
using systemic constellations in peacebuilding.
Since training in Hellinger’s Family Constellations in 2011, I have never heard
anyone mention the Family Constellation work of Walter Toman in 1961 as an
Associate Professor of Psychology at Brandeis University. I have his book on
Family Constellation: Theory and Practice of a Psychological Game, published by
Springer Publishing Company in New York. His book includes a great amount of
information on family dynamics including 8 sibling positions, 64 relationships
with parents, portraits of family constellations, intermediary sibling
positions, and other symbolic notation and quantitative treatment of “major
aspects of family constellation.” Toman states that he spells out how all
individuals will recognize themselves, their families and friends in the book,
including relationships and conflicts, and how we do think of these things,
however, it tends to be done “tacitly, implicitly, and without much order.”
While his work does take a different direction and emphasis on sibling order in
relationship, it does not seem totally unrelated to Hellinger’s work either.
Toman’s work has been revisited many times over the years with American and
German editions. Toman, Walter. (Fall/Winter 1994). Family constellation theory
revisited: Part 1. Family Systems. Georgetown Family Center. Dept of Psych.
University of Erlangen-Nurnberg, Germany. (4th American edition and 4th and 5th
German editions). (Publication years 1968, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1988a, 1989b,
1991a).
My assumption is that Toman’s Family Constellation work was available in
Germany during the development of Hellinger’s principles.
As well, I am also looking at the pioneering work on Family Systems Theory of
Murray Bowen (1976) and others such as Assagioli (1972) and Framo (1982). Bowen
developed the Family Diagram or early genogram expanded upon by McGoldrick and
Gerson in 1985.
Kerr, Michael E. (2000), (One family’s story: A primer on Bowen theory. The
Bowen Center for the Study of the Family), a long-time colleague of Bowens,
describes the Family Diagram developed by Murray Bowen and how it “symbolizes a
living organism, the multigenerational family emotional system. More than any
other symbol, the diagram announces the necessity to shift paradigms, to move
beyond an individual cause-and-effect model to a multiperson systems model in
understanding human behavior. The diagram represents much more than genealogy;
it represents the profound emotional connections between the generations.
People are born and die, but a family’s past lives in the present.” “Diagrams
are read chronologically from left to right: the oldest child in a family
appears furthest to the left. Males are represented by squares, females by
circles. When information about people’s lives is collected, added to the basic
diagram, and thought about, one’s own life takes on a new understanding and
meaning.”
On the Bowen Center website (http://www.thebowencenter.org/theory/)
<http://www.thebowencenter.org/theory/)>, it states that Murray Bowen, the
psychiatrist who pioneered family systems theory, which includes the 8
interlocking concepts listed below, is “a theory of human behavior that views
the family as an emotional unit and uses systems thinking to describe the
complex interactions in the unit. It is the nature of a family that its members
are intensely connected emotionally. Often people feel distant or disconnected
from their families, but this is more feeling than fact. Families so profoundly
affect their member’s thoughts, feelings, and actions that it often seems as if
people are living under the same “emotional skin.” People solicit each other’s
attention, approval, and support and react to each other’s needs, expectations,
and upsets. The connectedness and reactivity make the functioning of family
members interdependent. A change in one person’s functioning is predictably
followed by reciprocal changes in the functioning of others. Families differ
somewhat in the degree of interdependence, but it is always present to some
degree” (para. 2). Anxiety spreads “infectiously” among family members, and the
family member that “does the most accommodating literally “absorbs” system
anxiety and thus is the family member most vulnerable to problems such as
depression, alcoholism, affairs, or physical illness” (para. 3).
Bowen Family Systems Theory (8 features):
1) Triangles ( Fusion and distancing, Adequate and inadequate spouse)
2) Differentiation of Self (Fusion or differentiation, Solid self or pseudo
self, Intellectual and emotional functioning)
3) Nuclear Family Emotional Process ( Maternal conflict, Inadequate or over
adequate spouses, Emotional divorce)
4) Family Projection Process (Child focus or triangle child, Identified or
designated patient,
5) Multi Generational Transmission Processes (Compounding
effects,Schizophrenia)
6) Sibling Position (Toman’a Family Constellation. Based on the publication
of Walter Toman’s first edition of Family Constellation: It’s Effect on
Personality and Social Behavior, published in 1961)
7) Emotional Cutoff (Family of Origin)
8) Emotional Processes in Society (Societal Regression)
It seems to me that Toman’s and Bowen’s work seem to show up as very
influential in Hellinger’s Family Constellations. Toman reveals that the
ancestral lines of his work are Freud, Adler, and Jung. Can anyone elaborate on
whether Walter Toman’s and Murray Bowen’s work and principles were influential
in the development of Orders of Family in Hellinger’s phenomenological practice
of Family Constellations that are revealed within the greater system of The
Knowing Field?
Is there any acknowledgement of this earlier work? I also wondered if part of
the reason Hellinger did not copyright his way of working with Family
Constellations is because Family Constellation already existed before he used
the label? I have heard that the reason is because he wanted Family
Constellations to expand and evolve with each new facilitator as they added
their own background and experience to the work. Any thoughts to share?
Kind regards,
Patricia
Peaceful Possibilities Consulting
MA(CAM), BA(Hon), BCom, CPA, CMA
Student, Doctor of Social Sciences, Royal Roads University
Integrative Wellness Practitioner, Educator, &
Body Focused Systemic Constellation Facilitator
403-474-0452
patricia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<applewebdata://1C313E8B-6E4A-4D86-A682-A8C31B43D5F4/patricia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
www.peacefulpossibilities.ca <http://www.peacefulpossibilities.ca/>
