"Holding Space"
- Thread starter kalibex
- Start date
riclapaz
Dagobah Resident
Thanks kalibex for sharing, are good thoughts, in this reality we have scheduled, society, family, education, culture, we have identified to play a role in some situations, judging, criticizing, act as a "savior", although this involves lying to yourself, if you really many people follow this respect for others, help with wisdom, life would be different.
kalibex said:
It's kinda similar, but it also has a tint of a be-nice program behind the philosophy. It's a bit new-agey for me. I imagine the predator likes the idea of holding space and having the network and its ability to see us better than we see ourselves step aside.
kalibex
Dagobah Resident
Heimdallr said:
Are you referring to the recommendation about allowing people you're helping to just go ahead and trust their [un-mirrored] intuition? I get your point, yet I do remain impressed at the externally-considerate recommendation to not over-whelm people with information they're not ready for, as I haven't yet really noticed that occurring in non 4th Way venues thus far.
kalibex said:
Sure, these three things are good in principle:
not trying to fix people's problems for them
not implying that they should know more than they do
not giving them more information than they’re ready for
But the devil's in the details. E.g., in a Work environment, it's very easy for a person to reject feedback, advice, or a mirror because "you're taking away my personal power" or "you're shaming me" or "you're overwhelming me". Fact is, sometimes people SHOULD know better, sometimes people need some advice, and sometimes they need a shock.
So, unless you're in a Work environment, "holding space" is ripe for narcissistic abuse (buffers, self-calming). Plus, the phrase itself is kinda silly.
How do you 'hold space'?
kalibex said:
People sometimes need some space to learn, to process information, to deal with traumatic events and situations, etc which happens here. But with what's been mentioned about how the predators mind, buffers and self-calming works, a philosophy like this, if used often and without regard to whether it's what the person is really asking for, could possibly impede their growth.
obyvatel
The Living Force
Per my understanding from psychological literature, "holding space" refers to a therapist allowing the development of transference and counter-transference dynamics with respect to a client. In Freudian psychotherapy, transference from the client to therapist was expected but rejected to prevent counter-transference. Relational psychotherapy encourages the transference/counter-transference dynamics within the client-therapist relationship to help heal the client.
For those unfamiliar with the terms transference and counter-transference, here is my attempt to simplify the terms at the cost of some accuracy. When a client enters psychoanalytic treatment, hidden issues come up and it is common for the client to project onto the therapist the role of a parent or significant other or some other troublesome relationship. The client may occasionally behave as an example in a childish manner expecting the therapist to behave like a parent in an unconscious attempt to heal the original, possibly traumatic parent-child relationship. Similarly for significant other or such relationships. This projection from client to therapist is called transference. If the therapist accepts the projection and behaves as a parent or significant other as in the present example, it is counter-transference. Relational psychotherapists believe that consciously participating in the transference/counter-transference dynamics provides the opportunity for the client to heal old wounds. So a therapist may start behaving like a parent in some ways to the client if that is considered to be beneficial for the client.
Thus a therapist "holds the space" temporarily allowing the client to experience the original dysfunctional relational dynamics until the dissociative and mal-adaptive elements in the client's psyche is brought out in a way that facilitates insight and healing. While the terms are psych-speak, the dynamics are quite real and play out regularly in life. It is imo, quite a common occurrence in the forum dynamics as well.
For those unfamiliar with the terms transference and counter-transference, here is my attempt to simplify the terms at the cost of some accuracy. When a client enters psychoanalytic treatment, hidden issues come up and it is common for the client to project onto the therapist the role of a parent or significant other or some other troublesome relationship. The client may occasionally behave as an example in a childish manner expecting the therapist to behave like a parent in an unconscious attempt to heal the original, possibly traumatic parent-child relationship. Similarly for significant other or such relationships. This projection from client to therapist is called transference. If the therapist accepts the projection and behaves as a parent or significant other as in the present example, it is counter-transference. Relational psychotherapists believe that consciously participating in the transference/counter-transference dynamics provides the opportunity for the client to heal old wounds. So a therapist may start behaving like a parent in some ways to the client if that is considered to be beneficial for the client.
Thus a therapist "holds the space" temporarily allowing the client to experience the original dysfunctional relational dynamics until the dissociative and mal-adaptive elements in the client's psyche is brought out in a way that facilitates insight and healing. While the terms are psych-speak, the dynamics are quite real and play out regularly in life. It is imo, quite a common occurrence in the forum dynamics as well.
Shared Joy
Jedi Council Member
obyvatel said:
Hi Obyvatel and All,
yes, there are all kind of aspects one should be aware of when interacting with people, especially when you are asked to assist, counsel or teach something.
Let me express my opinion here: as a psychologist, for starters, I have to obtain the trust and acceptance of a client and therefore a strategy is needed, which is called therapeutic approach and has given birth to all sorts of psychological branches (analytic, cognitive-behavioral, gestalt), all claiming their method is better than the others'. Having a taoist approach to life matters, I believe that some approaches are good for certain people and certain occasions, and other approaches for other people in certain circumstances.
There is definitely not a singular good method for all.
Like with this post - some of Kalibex's post are OK to apply in the beginning, but if you want to produce changes, you have to proceed strategically to led those clients have their viewpoints shifted (this is an ART and I just can't describe it as it differs in each case - as I use whatever opportunity would come up for the benefit of that client) - and yes, they could be like shocks of all kinds, because they are needed to present the problem differently, and to make them see it differently. And after that, we would negotiate the tasks. And so on.
So, there's a combination...and much more. It's really an art.
Joy
obyvatel said:
obyvatel,
I think this is a pretty good explanation of transference. The bolded line above is the only line I think is a little off as per my education in the field.
Counter-transference from what I know is when the therapists reacts to what a client says or does in terms of their own issues coming into play and the therapists interacting with the client with their own issues getting in the way. It might be thought as the therapist having their own programs or issues triggered and their interaction with the client is clouded by their own issues and stuff from the past. An example might be a client is talking about substance abuse issues and how this affects the client's raising of his/her children and the therapist has a father who was an alcoholic and treated the therapist poorly in the past. The therapist, if they have unresolved issues (thoughts and feelings) about the alcoholic father, may react and transfer/project their own issues onto the client during the interaction, thus counter-transference. When counter-transference happens and a therapist realizes it, they are supposed to seek out avenues to work on their own issues in order for them not to get in the way of helping clients.
Here is a link with maybe a better explanation if mine is not clear. http://phobias.about.com/od/glossary/g/countertransferencedef.htm
Shared Joy said:
Hi Joy,
Thanks for your thoughts. It is like a skilled therapist using a 'mirror' (using Work terminology) with interventions such as challenges to a clients discrepancies in their narrative, thinking or distorted thoughts and fostering insight for the client either by directly coming out and making connections for the client or leading the client to have the aha moment where they make the connections themselves. Definitely an art.
With counseling a client is supposed to be there because they want to change and the therapist is their to help foster it. With this forum and the Work people are supposed to understand and agree that their participation is supposed to be an agreement that others here will provide mirrors pointing out discrepancies, programs, and what not in order for a forum member to grow their being, etc.
As Approaching Infinity pointed out in principle some of the basics of 'holding space' are good, yet the concept shouldn't be used as an excuse for a person in the Work to reject the objective feedback of the network or they will get nothing out of the interaction and possibly turn against the Work. OSIT
obyvatel said:
It sounds then that, as used by most non-professionals, it is akin to other new age "word salad" terms that have been picked up and popularized, or like many new age pseudo-scientific terms that people have no understanding of but use because they sound "scientific".
Perceval said:
From the opening post, it sounded like just letting a person alone to learn their own lessons, but with subsequent input it appears that this is not the case.
So, yeah, the New Agers get ahold of a term and run with it without any understanding of what it really means or how it really works.
At the same time, it should be noted that doing the "Work" as we refer to it here, is for basically healthy people. Someone who has serious therapy needs can't really do it. And, by definition, it is based on the methods of Gurdjieff with variations by Mouravieff, Castaneda, the Cs, and our own researches. Also, it is something that a person goes into by choice and agreement. Yes, quite a few do that and then find out that they can't cut it. We try to pay attention to those signals. But sometimes, people who find out that they can't do it, that it is too hard, turn against it because some narcissistic part of them simply cannot accept that they have bitten off more than they can chew. We try to watch for those signals too.
In general, we can't baby people nor do we (collectively) have the expertise, ways or means, to provide therapy for those who are very damaged. So, while we work to extract principles from various psychological researches, not all of them apply to what we do here.
In the case of this "Holding the Space", it could very well be that it is just another way of saying "giving a mirror" in a particular situation, but obviously, it must be done consciously.
This version of it:
...can apply in many situations, for sure! But we can sure see the potential for such a system to be used as an excuse or defense by narcissists. In FACT, according to George Simon in his book about Character Disturbance, you could say that this is the PRIMARY defense of many covertly aggressive people! And Martha Stout points out that one of the main weapons of the psychopath is the "pity ploy".
BUT, between sincere individuals, where the issue of covert manipulation, character disturbance, or other major things are not in play, yeah, it can be VERY therapeutic!!!
obyvatel
The Living Force
[quote author=Bear]
Counter-transference from what I know is when the therapists reacts to what a client says or does in terms of their own issues coming into play and the therapists interacting with the client with their own issues getting in the way. It might be thought as the therapist having their own programs or issues triggered and their interaction with the client is clouded by their own issues and stuff from the past.
[/quote]
Hi Bear,
Afaik, the above is accurate. The therapist often gets triggered by the client's transferential projection. There are at least 3 ways things can proceed from there.
The therapist may be unaware of him/herself being triggered and respond unconsciously based on programs. This leads to a dissociative enactment between both the client and therapist.
A second way things can go is that the therapist, in order to maintain objectivity, can take the route of maintaining an emotional detachment from the dynamics - much like what many psychiatrists do - and all traditional scientific training disciplines insist that practitioners of science do. The idea here is to be a detached observer.
The third way can be the therapist becoming aware of getting triggered (which is not an easy thing) yet consciously accepting the dynamics and going through it with the client in a spirit of mutual exploration. Relational psychotherapists (Bromberg, Stern) say that with this approach, therapists' insights about their own self increase along with the clients' insight. So the therapist and client are "partners in thought", with the therapist being the more mature partner guiding the client, yet learning and growing himself as a result of the process. It is their contention that such a participatory approach to therapy sometimes produce better results for clients than a detached or a superior perspective held by the traditional Freudian paradigm where the therapist is completely knowledgable and the client is a complete ignoramus to be told what his thoughts and dreams "really" mean and what should be done about it.
And yes, it is an art - perhaps the most challenging of all practical arts. Sometimes, especially for pathological behaviors, an assertive and authoritarian-like approach may be necessary for a time. I don't think any seasoned clinician would object to that.
So like Perceval said, the term "holding space" can and likely has been hijacked and misused to justify pathology. The challenge is to know what is the most beneficial approach in the specific context and to stay flexible and adaptive to the changing dynamics of the unfolding reality of the relationships.
Counter-transference from what I know is when the therapists reacts to what a client says or does in terms of their own issues coming into play and the therapists interacting with the client with their own issues getting in the way. It might be thought as the therapist having their own programs or issues triggered and their interaction with the client is clouded by their own issues and stuff from the past.
[/quote]
Hi Bear,
Afaik, the above is accurate. The therapist often gets triggered by the client's transferential projection. There are at least 3 ways things can proceed from there.
The therapist may be unaware of him/herself being triggered and respond unconsciously based on programs. This leads to a dissociative enactment between both the client and therapist.
A second way things can go is that the therapist, in order to maintain objectivity, can take the route of maintaining an emotional detachment from the dynamics - much like what many psychiatrists do - and all traditional scientific training disciplines insist that practitioners of science do. The idea here is to be a detached observer.
The third way can be the therapist becoming aware of getting triggered (which is not an easy thing) yet consciously accepting the dynamics and going through it with the client in a spirit of mutual exploration. Relational psychotherapists (Bromberg, Stern) say that with this approach, therapists' insights about their own self increase along with the clients' insight. So the therapist and client are "partners in thought", with the therapist being the more mature partner guiding the client, yet learning and growing himself as a result of the process. It is their contention that such a participatory approach to therapy sometimes produce better results for clients than a detached or a superior perspective held by the traditional Freudian paradigm where the therapist is completely knowledgable and the client is a complete ignoramus to be told what his thoughts and dreams "really" mean and what should be done about it.
And yes, it is an art - perhaps the most challenging of all practical arts. Sometimes, especially for pathological behaviors, an assertive and authoritarian-like approach may be necessary for a time. I don't think any seasoned clinician would object to that.
So like Perceval said, the term "holding space" can and likely has been hijacked and misused to justify pathology. The challenge is to know what is the most beneficial approach in the specific context and to stay flexible and adaptive to the changing dynamics of the unfolding reality of the relationships.
obyvatel,
Thanks for the detailed response about counter-transference. I have a small stack of books on Relational psychotherapy that I hope to delve into once I have time, since I found it very interesting when I ran across it last year. The way you described it in relation to counter-transference is very appealing to me.
Yes, it does look like the term 'holding space' could very well be hijacked.
Thanks for the detailed response about counter-transference. I have a small stack of books on Relational psychotherapy that I hope to delve into once I have time, since I found it very interesting when I ran across it last year. The way you described it in relation to counter-transference is very appealing to me.
Yes, it does look like the term 'holding space' could very well be hijacked.
Sometimes when I read quotes on the forum, a quick interaction plays out in my mind and I find valuable information that pertains to a particular issue I'm working to understand. I don't move into a deeper understanding and analysis of what or who and ramifications that can be played out, so hearing these broader perspectives is a growing exercise and appreciated.
So reading this paragraph posted by Kalibrex set a quick process going which gave insight in how I am interacting with 2 people I know specifically. One as a mother, who for years has tried to protect her children from pain and making mistakes. I feel that more clearly just now and I have erected barriers for my childs growth and the basis for this is fear inside me. I am looking at this fear as its been controlling me for many years (and controlling them).
The second person is a long time friend who has a weak sense of self and is constantly troubled by outside/internal problems that cause a great deal of pain. I, like other people in her life, try to "help" her. The quote here shed light on my own incorrect approach with her in the past which has become more allowing and respecting her path over time. And so this was a quick reinforcement for that.
I am a reasonably healthy person with also a rather Taoist perspective and try to respond to the situation in what is called for at the time. So taking a "teaching" (for lack of a better word) and applying that in a sweeping and dogmatic belief system that is inappropriate in some situations is something I avoid but thanks for the reminder!
Anyway, the quote here was helpful for me as you can see. Also, how things can take hold and move into unhealthy territory is appreciated. I have always been interested in psychological studies/understanding and this has come back into my life now with being a member of this forum. Its all very valuable to me. Thanks