Dear Barbara
I think you have hit on a critical point that is seriously hampering the
development of ourselves as practitioners of this work.Attempts to make
peer supervision safe by avoiding shame are well intentioned but doomed to
fail because shame is inevitable.
Actually we need to minimise unnecessary shame while helping people develop
resilience in the face of shame.
I believe a very good way to do that is by learning about the healthy
aspect of shame/dampening. That way when feedback suggests an improvement
and dampening kicks in, we can use shame's adaptive natural function to
withdraw our energy from the attitude,/concept/intervention that others are
discussing and we can then adopt a broader perspective. So healthy shame
opens a space for us to let something else in. Of course there is
significant discomfort in this process, especially in our Western cultures
that spend so much time and energy avoiding it. We are encouraged to be
bigger than we really are. Healthy shame/dampening, in contrast helps us to
be the right size when we become too big.
Constellations show us that. Early in the work of Hellinger and the other
German teachers, bowing was used a lot to help people shrink to the right
size when looking at their parents, fate or death. While this movement is
often resisted at first it leads to a deep relaxation and the possibility
to thrive. The archetypal early movement of shame is the bowing of the
head. It can also help us to thrive. I am sure this is not a coincidence.
Cheers
Chris Walsh
Melbourne, Australia
ph +61 (0)3 9420 1425
www.cwalsh.com.au
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 9:25 PM, Barbara Morgan theknowingfield@xxxxxxxxx
[ConstellationTalk] <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm interested in the possible link between a reluctance for people to
engage in peer supervision and shame. I imagine we will only have
difficulty with shame in clients if we have difficulty with it ourselves.
In my experience of trying to encourage people to build peer supervision
groups and their frequent dissolution I think the issue of competition and
envy between facilitators (and probably trainers too!) doesn't get enough
air time. Albrecht Mahr gave a presentation on it one year at Bernried and
I tried a couple of times to make space for it in the evenings at Bernried.
My discovery was it was a subject not many people were ready or willing to
address. This brings us back to the role of the superego, inner critic,
judge, whatever you want to call it. It seems to me to have the potential
to be a huge block in the flow of energy within ourselves and within a
constellation. But if we can manage during our training to fully grasp the
idea of field phenomena and systemic consciousness, then our 'performance'
as facilitators becomes part of the overall field - no blame, no judgement
- just information from the knowing field of which we are as much a part as
other group members and the wider environment.
Best wishes
Barbara
Sent from my iPhone
On 14 Mar 2016, at 23:49, "Robert Grant erebees@xxxxxxxxx
[ConstellationTalk]" <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Everyone,
“to get people to some core truths, and jolt them out”
I am a bit vary of the “jolt them out” approach. In all fairness at that
point I would like to invite the facilitator to explore in a constellation
his/her need to jolt. Yes, facilitating safety and confidence and an offer
to look is my preferred way.
And this also takes me to the point Vivian Broughton makes about some
(many) facilitators “knowing for sure” what is going on.
http://www.vivianbroughton.com/?p=836
As mentioned before we organise great conferences and talkfests but there
seems to be a general reluctance to undertake regular, dedicated, on going
and frequent peer to peer practice meetings apart from some ad hoc,
basically half hearted arrangements – at least in Australia. Maybe on some
level we do not feel safe enough, confident enough? Maybe it is easier,
more rewarding and less trouble to assist others? Maybe on a deeper level
we do not trust our peers? Or maybe we are already so happy that we do not
need it.
Best wishes to all,
Robert
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 3:13 AM, Harrison Snow teambuilder@xxxxxxx
[ConstellationTalk] <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Interesting topic Steve. Shame and guilt are powerful emotions with deep
and often hidden roots
When you say “a confrontative type of approach” I wonder to what purpose?
Most people have defensives to protect their vulnerable and often
regressed parts from being shamed
or feeling the shame and guilt those parts carry, perhaps even out of
loyalty to another.
Breaking down the defenses forcefully could re-traumatize the person
rather than reassure and resource
the wounded part so it can see, feel, acknowledge and release the old
weight of shame.
The first rule I believe, “is do no harm” There may be exceptions but
if the person is ready to do the work then we work with them; If not then
its up to the person to make that leap of faith.
Best
Harrison Snow
Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
Windows 10
*From: *Steve Vinay Gunther spirited@xxxxxxxxxxxx [ConstellationTalk]
<ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Sent: *Monday, March 14, 2016 10:58 AM
*To: *ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject: *[ConstellationTalk] Shame
Hey folks
I wanted to raise a professional issue.
There are many different styles of constellation facilitation. From one
point of view, they are all welcome.
At the same time, I wonder how people feel about facilitation which
utilises shame.
Especially in the 60’s and 70’s, many forms of therapy used a
confrontative type of approach to get people to some core truths, and jolt
them out of their less functional patterns of communication.
In this century, a lot of therapies have moved towards a more
‘relational’ approach, which often is informed by current understanding of
the effect of shame, and the importance of understanding this in a
therapeutic or teaching type of interaction.
However, there are constellation facilitators who are not therapists, and
perhaps do not see Constellation work as necessarily needing to reference
therapy theory or practices. And constellation facilitators from different
cultures have different views on how to move people through their process;
some cultural styles may be more ‘robust’.
This is not just an abstract question. There are examples where
facilitators use confrontative encounters in a constellation context.
I am interested in how others see this, and to what degree there may be
culturally based views operating in our underlying assumptions about
matters such as this. For those who dont see constellations as necessarily
having to reference the world of psychotherapy, then what are the views
about the use of shame.
I reflect on these things, as most of my constellation work is done in
Asian cultures. On the one hand there is a particular kind of sensitivity
to shame. But in other ways, attitudes differ from the west regarding
teaching, as Confucian style approaches are traditionally more vertical. At
the same time, my understanding of shame is that it is a universally
experienced social emotion, which is not generally helpful in learning
contexts.
Vinay
