Re: stopping a constellation

From: "Gail" <gail_m_allen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 01:33:39 -0000

Hi Alison,

This takes me into exploring issues around personal integrity. What
are we offering, why are we offering, what is the point and purpose
of what we do? Are we here just to make people feel better, to hold
out the promise of a quick and easy fix, whatever the problem. Is
there something that provokes us to want more than this and what is
it? Why would we choose to walk the more difficult path and expect
that others would also want this?

It's pretty much that story about the Doctor and Death that's been
mentioned recently on this site. Overstepping our place as
facilitator is when we try to turn the bed around - but does it ever
happen that Death is nowhere in the room.....? Maybe 'Life' is there
instead, in which case we may be free to step into the flow. Is it
possible that by not stepping into the flow of 'Life' that we could
understep our place as facilitators? There is a time for holding back
and accepting, and also a time for acting and seeking change - both
need to be done with open eyes and heart.
That quote from Rilke that Chiara posted recently says it beautifully
when it talks about not searching for the answers, but instead living
the questions. When we only search we protect ourselves from pain,
when we live we have both pain and joy.
The Constellation process is awe inspiring because in its exploration
we see glimpses of eternity, and can realise that we are a small part
of something much larger than ourselves.

Gail.

--- In ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Alison Rose Levy
<LevyAR@...> wrote:

Gail:

Thanks, Gail, for sharing that fascinating experience and when you

ask does

³the permission.. lie in what the client/mother can bear to see?²

that¹s

exactly the question. Does the healing intent of the client open

the system

for healing, and can an ambivalent intention block the access

needed to

work?

Under that circumstance, is the most authentic choice to stop while

offering

a metaphor that could unfold over time into movement? Or to explore

with the

client her intention?

If ones does more, is that crossing the line into helping? If one

stops what

is the obligation to children of the system who may be suffering?

I¹ve heard both Bert and Hunter Beaumont speak quite clearly about

not

over-stepping as a facilitator.. And I am wondering how you, Gail,

and

others define that point for yourselves in the work.

Many thanks,

Alison

On 6/12/07 5:03 AM, Gail at gail_m_allen@... wrote:

Hi Alison,

This would have to be the area of fascination for me in

constellation

work, thanks for opening the topic. On this subject I would like

share an experience as a representative, where the constellation

wasn't

stopped, but changed direction because I felt so strongly that the
energy was blocked and there was no permission for me to

represent that

person. There have been other representative experiences for me

in other

constellations where the energy in that particular person has

felt

completely locked, with no movement toward resolution to be

found - in

those cases it has felt like a key piece from a previous

generation is

not yet in place - but never before this intense feeling of "no
permission to work here" to the point where I asked to leave the
representation.

In this case the client was a mother of teenage daughters. She

and the

children's father were estranged. It was her first introduction to
Constellation Work, and the father knew nothing about what was
happening.

In the Constellation the oldest daughter was in deep distress at

the

father's feet, both were outside the circle. I represented the

father

and knew it was my fault but I wasn't prepared to admit anything

and was

able to distance myself from reality by talking - the more I was

allowed

to talk about what was in that space the further away from the

reality

of the feelings I went - I was making up a fantasy world. There

was a

pull backwards for me. A person was placed at a distance behind

me - the

facilitator wasn't sure who it was, but felt to check whether it

was a

distant ancestor or whether it was 'evil' - 'Evil' is what

resonated. As

the facilitator tried to work with me as the father's

representative I

reported 'there is no permission to work here' - the facilitator

tried

to find movement by bringing in someone to represent 'Whatever is

needed

for permission to work here' and shortly after that I asked to be
released from the role - it was a feeling of being ejected from

the

space, I felt physcially unable to stay.

As the work continued the children were moved into the mother's

family's

sphere, which felt much safer for them, and the relationship of

the

mother to her family of origin became the focus for resolution.

Would welcome discussion around this - my guesses are that in

this

case, the lack of permission could have been around that the

mother was

the client, not the father; that the father is secretly abusive

toward

the older child and will go to any lengths to protect this secret
(family murder/suicide situations often involve this dynamic); and
possibly that the mother may not be ready to see the abuse -

maybe some

of the permission could lie in what the mother can bear to see?

As I

think about this now the implications of the representative

for 'Evil'

added to the possible family murder/suicide potential are

resonating

quite strongly for me.

I am wondering whether a focus on working for the safety and

wellbeing

of the children could be a helpful goal - you may not be able to

anything for the parents, but it may be possible to find a safe

place

for the children. I think your question Alison 'who was at risk

if the

status quo continues?' is right to the point - and possibly 'who

is at

risk if we are allowed to know the secret?' - because that may

let you

know whether there is a perpetrator with whom you need to stand.

Gail.

--- In ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ConstellationTalk%40yahoogroups.com> , Alison Rose Levy

<LevyAR@>

wrote:

Hi!

I¹d love to hear from any of you who have had to ³stop² a

constellation

either because it felt as though there was no permission from

the

family, or

because the set-up seemed somehow compromised. I would love to

know

both

your criteria for doing that, as well as your view of what is

occurring at

those times.

This happened to me for the first time (after facilitating for

number of

years) at a workshop yesterday.

The problem presented described a deeply divided and suffering

family,

with

some kind of painful secret, yet the constellation set up by

the

client

presented what appeared more like a ³staged² picture of ³one

big happy

family,² that was very incongruent with the information shared

the

interview. All representatives reported feeling ³okay² where

they were. No

one experienced anything else. There was an overall

shallowness of

affect.

The only tell-tale aspects were that in a workshop with a

number of

women

participants young and old, the client selected as a

representative

for her

thirty-something daughter, (the youngest of the family¹s

children) the

oldest woman in the room. Also for the designated ³symptom

bearer² the

client selected a participant new to constellations who all

throughout

the

workshop consistently reported that he experienced no feelings

whatsoever

when he represented. Thus he provided no entrée into the

experience

of that

particular key family member.

The set up featured all the children as satellites orbiting

around the

central dyad of the parental relationship which indicated that

all the

family energy was directed towards supporting that. However,

the

client,

when questioned, reported a happy marriage with no former

partners nor

any

known entanglements that would lead to marital disharmony.

I ended the constellation because the set-up felt incongruent,

and I

found

no opening with the representatives. I said that I had no

permission

to work

with the system and I asked the client to contemplate who was

at risk

if the

status quo continues.

After the fact, it occurred to me that perhaps I might have

moved the

children out of orbit and into new positions to see what

happened. But in

the moment, it felt as though any movement would be an

imposition onto

a

system organized to conceal rather than reveal the secret.

Comments?

Alison

Alison Rose Levy

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

References:
- Re: [ConstellationTalk] Re: stopping a constellation
  - From: Alison Rose Levy

Re: stopping a constellation

Other related posts: