Dear Liz,
I really appreciate your willingness to have kept looking at this subtle
point. As you say your client took 2 or more years to feel safe enough so
that his defences could let go of him. From one perspective one could say
that he was never "too defended" given his circumstances and it took your
intervention to change those circumstance and make him touch enough safety
within to step into a constellation and a good job. In some ways I feel
that "defended" is descriptive whilst "too defended" is evaluative. This
may look like splitting hairs yet subtle attitudes may have subtle yet
significant impacts. Once again the main game of course is the dedication
and assistance you have demonstrated and provided to him.
Have a great and productive workshop.
Kind regards,
Robert
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Dr Liz Jelinek lizjelinek@xxxxxxxxxxx
[ConstellationTalk] <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Robert, although sometimes given to hyperbole, in this case I'd like to
remind you that this man was indeed so defended or split off that he was
indeed too defended to ask for a constellation for at least two years. It's
unfortunate that you find this statement judgmental whereas it merely
reflects his unfortunate state at the time he came to me for help. And now
four or more years after I met him he's finally dropped sufficient defenses
so that he was able to admit to lustful feelings towards his grown
daughter. So if you can find a negative or judgmental statement there then
perhaps you've not come across such a truly damaged soul.
He was unemployed and facing bankruptcy when he came to me for help and
today he has a six figure income. So he is no longer TOO DEFENDED! Yeah!
BTW Chris. I don't think much of Franz Ruppert but I still use some of his
terminology like split. But I appreciate your earlier comments
Thx Robert but I'm off to do my workshop. I think we're done with this
conversation, stimulating though it has been, Liz
Liz Jelinek, PhD
On Jun 10, 2017, at 6:07 AM, Robert Grant erebees@xxxxxxxxx
[ConstellationTalk] <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Chris, Liz and All,
It might be irresistibly tempting for me to labour the point, however for
clarity's sake the issue was not the term "defended" but the perceived
sentiment driving the expression "too defended". This is of course without
detracting from the otherwise valuable work Liz might be doing with her
client. Just a small point of playing with awareness, without expecting to
change the world.
Best wishes to all,
Robert
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Chris Walsh chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[ConstellationTalk] <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Liz
I'm not particularly fond of Freud but I defend your right to use the
term "defended" just as I defend anyone's right to defend themselves 😉
Cheers
Chris Walsh
Melbourne, Australia
ph +61 (0)3 9420 1425
www.cwalsh.com.au
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Dr Liz Jelinek lizjelinek@xxxxxxxxxxx
[ConstellationTalk] <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Well I can only guess that you are from a school that is anti-Freudian
but isn't your comment to me just ever so judgmental since you appear to be
critical of my use of the word defended.
This is a man who is highly defended if you were originally trained in
Freudian analytic psychology as I was. But if you read through this entire
thread carefully you will see that I've also suggested that he's split off
in the way described by Franz Rupert. Furthermore as someone so aptly
pointed out this is a man who's highly dissociated.
So if you find fault with my choice of words then feel free to judge me.
But this same highly defended man trusts me sufficiently due to much hard
word and building of trust to share with me the unthinkable to say nothing
of the unmentionable --that he has feelings of lust for his grown daughter.
So if I am judging him I'm so sorry. It was my believe that I'm assisting
him to heal his transgenerational wounds from not just his own early life
but the trauma he carries of the ancestors.
Liz Jelinek, PhD
On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:40 PM, Robert Grant erebees@xxxxxxxxx
[ConstellationTalk] <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello All,
Just a subtle point I find hard to resist making. "client has been too
defended to participate" somehow makes me feel uneasy. Is there a subtle
implication of blame or guilt? People often feel unsafe for many very good
reasons, too defended feels judgemental. Please correct me if I am mistaken.
Best wishes,
Robert
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 1:44 AM, Dr Liz Jelinek lizjelinek@xxxxxxxxxxx
[ConstellationTalk] <ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Interesting thx. This is especially relevant because I've been
convinced from the earliest meeting with this man that his father, a
college professor at a major university, was gay and that the wife/mother
was his cover. It's never come up in a constellation as my client has been
too defended to participate.
Interesting. Thx
Liz Jelinek, PhD
