As an academic and a licensed clinic social
worker (psychotherapist) I will add my personal
observations about constellations being accepted in Higher Education.
Any new healing or psychological practice can't
move quickly for acceptance into the academy
because there is no reliable proof of its
validity or it's connection with various
established psych-social theories. Even though
I can find many flaws with the teaching of social
and psychological models and practices in
universities today, I think psychologists careful
evaluation of what they teach is a challenge for
Constellation facilitators to explain the
Constellation model and link it to people like
Freud and Jung and/or several of the newer
psychotherapists such as Winnicott, Franklin Sills, and Mark Epstein.
A second challenge is research. How can we
evaluate the dynamics and shifts that occur in a
self experienced process? One way is to have a
person tell their story of how constellations
effected them. That is one reason I have
described on this list three significant
constellations that I have experienced and how
that has changed my life. Another method would
be to have a constellation facilitator interview
someone about their experience in the
constellation, write about that experience and
add their own observations. There are several
other research models that could be explored as well.
On a snowy day in Nevada
Ellen Pillard (epillard@xxxxxxxxxx)
At 07:17 AM 12/4/2009, you wrote:
Dear Anne -
The commentary by the psychology professor highlights three important
dimensions of the difficulty in raising interest and participation in
Constellation workshops.
First, "The description of constellation work could have been taken directly
from psychodrama's literature." What is lost in this statement is the
essential difference between Constellations and Psychodrama. No doubt the
Constellation process is difficult to describe. 30 seconds after a
Constellation concludes, it is nearly impossible to describe what happened,
no less to convey the experience in a flyer, webpage, or spoken account.
Still, the two processes are quite distinct, with the most important
difference being that the elements that made Psychodrama dangerous have been
refined in Constellations. The design of Constellations makes exponentially
safer than Psychodrama.
Second, is the paradox contained in the paired statements, 1) it is
unethical unless handled by licensed professionals; 2) how government
licensing boards view the process. Combine the logic that a) government
licensing boards will reject Constellations because their safety is not
empirically validated plus b) only licensed practitioners can ethically
provide these services, leads to the conclusion that c) no one is ethically
qualified to be a Constellation facilitator.
While this may seem like an erroneous analysis, it is in fact the
predominant mainstream view. The first expression of Western civilization
was the fortress. Before the temples, books, or abstract numbers came
walls. Psychology professors exists in universities which are defined by
walls, sometimes called ivory towers. At their root, Constellations
represent an integration of German existential philosophy and the native
wisdom of the African Zulus. Your professor can easily sniff out that
Constellations have more than a hint of shamanic ritual. By definition,
wisdom that resides beyond the walls of scholarship is rejected. This is
the logic of the walled city.
The route past this unsolvable logical dilemma is provided when
Constellation facilitators create their own professional associations,
training institutes, ethical standards, certifications, supervision, and
insurance pools. These are already in place in many countries. For
facilitators in countries without these resources, the German Association
for Systemic Constellations (DGfS) is offering interim support.
This creates its own divide, as many facilitators object to mirroring the
mainstream model by building our own walls. However, without such
structures anyone can declare themselves a Constellation facilitator and
warp the process into an experience that invites retraumatizing.
Collectively, if we seek to expand the reach of the Constellation
experience, we probably need to employ professional practices to protect the
well-being of participants.
Third, I am coming to see that group workshops are a limiting factor
themselves. The process works beautifully in a group setting, but the need
for a group to create a process for an individual is problematic. In
cultures where group healing experiences are well understood and accepted
this may not be an issue. Here in the US it is a big obstacle. I continue
to work with groups, but have reoriented the focus of my practice to provide
Constellations individually. Little is lost and much is gained from this
adjustment.
I hope this opens a broader conversation of DGfS certification and
professional practices.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From:
<mailto:ConstellationTalk%40yahoogroups.com>ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of anne becker
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 2:53 PM
To:
<mailto:ConstellationTalk%40yahoogroups.com>ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ConstellationTalk] psychodrama and oversight
Hello to everyone.
I would like to get some commentary on the following e-mail that was sent to
me recently after I invited this person ( a psychology professor) to attend
one of my constellation workshps. We have had other interesting
correspondence in the past.
*Anne: I think that maybe I have some insight into the resistance/lack of
interest that you are finding around this. In the 80's many of us 'old
timers' were introduced to psychodrama as part of our clinical training in
the modalities that were part of the human potential movement. Anyone with
gestalt background or analytic Jungian background or energy work training
found the inherent hazards/flaws/risks of psychodrama work were not worth
its use. The description of constellation work could have been taken
directly from psychodrama's literature. The other concern is the lack of
professional oversight/licensure on this work so that professionally many of
us can not ethically refer people to this unless it is handled by licensed
folks. It will be interesting to see what the state board makes of work
like this in the future given its similarity to psychodrama.
Keep me on your list---I like knowing what alternative approaches are out
there.
*
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 4658 (20091203) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
<http://www.eset.com>http://www.eset.com
