In this type of work I develop a complex dyad with the teenager and his parents. Firstly it is assumed I am dealing with a teenager who is primarily coming from the Rebellious Child position.
Most commonly the teenager is expecting me to respond to them from a finger wagging Critical Parent ego state position. I need to avoid this. If I do this, or even are perceived to do this then all is lost. If the psychotherapist and the teenager establish a CP - RC set of transactions in their relationship then the therapeutic gain for the teenager will be minimal.
Why are the gains so minimal? With the CP - RC dynamic one essentially has a conflict based relationship, the battle lines are drawn and thus one gets the process described in my previous post - The teenage client and conflict - Part 2.
When two parties are in battle the goals quickly stop being about the relationship or therapeutic gain. Both sides have little interest in understanding or empathising with the other, instead the goal is to win or become the dominant party and have the opponent give in or comply with their views.
Even if one party should win and the other complies what is the ‘loser’ going to do psychologically. They are not going to like loosing and are going to resent the ‘winner’, and ‘bide their time’ until circumstances allow them to come out fighting again.
At the individual level this is not an uncommon scenario with the teenager who uses drugs. The therapist can become the CP and tell them off, tell them they should abstain and so forth. Even if the teenager does stop he is doing so because of an outside CP and not from any internal motivation. With drug use, when there is little internal motivation to stop it is unlikely to be a lasting situation of abstinence.
Often when the teenager enters therapy he already has me in the authority or CP ego state position. There is little I can do about this and thus I have to duck and weave when they shoot their Rebellious Child transactions at me such that I do not respond from the Critical Parent. Some times the teenager will perceive me to respond from CP when I am not.
From a therapy point of view I am initially working at avoiding the CP - RC dynamics developing between me and the teenager. If this does develop, as I said before there will be little growth or long term psychological gain for the teenager.
At one of my recent workshops I was then asked - If I did not come from the parent type of position with the teenager was I endeavouring to be a friend to the teenager? An interesting question from a transactions point of view. Obviously I and any other therapist could do such a thing and perhaps one could diagram such a transaction as:
The therapist is trying to conform or fit in with the lifestyle of the teenager and become part of it. Clearly I do not do such transactions as therapeutically it would seem most unwise. I would expect the teenager to find such transactions as most unappealing and even perhaps consider the therapist with contempt.
If I avoid both the parent position and the friend position what do I do?
After some deliberation I think I set up a whole array of relationships involving all parties. Most often I am also dealing with one or both of the parents of the teenager.
Primarily I adopt an benign parent position with the teenager. Almost like a confidant or perhaps an ‘uncle’ type of figure who sits at the side of the parent - teenager relationship. So in one sense I get the easy job and the parents get the hard job.
The parents have to respond at some point to the teenager from Positive Critical Parent (CP+). That is set boundaries and limits and resist the teenagers RC transactions, demonstrate that there is consequences of behaviour and so forth. This is good for the teenagers psychological development. Indeed at times I am encouraging the parents to do this and thus in one sense encouraging hostilities between parents and teenager. This further allows me to establish a benign parent position with the teenager as all the heat is focused on the relationship with the parents and not on me.
I am establishing myself as this person who sits on the sidelines of such adversarial transactions. I get the easy job and will talk with both parents and teenager and listen to their gripes and so forth about the other. Also I will say to the parents at the beginning, “Is it OK for me to say to your son, that anything he tells me I wont tell the you?”. Of course they have to say yes and they do. When I tell the teenager this it creates an alliance between myself and the teenager with the parents on the outside.
Again, sort of not a fair thing to do to the parents but from a therapeutic point of view most productive as it gives the teenager a person they can talk with and confide in with their inner most thoughts and feelings and I am still attached to the parents and the family as well.
I am left with complex set of relationships when working with the teenage client.
I relate to the teenager from a benign parent position in a sort of secret alliance.
I relate to the parent(s) as therapist on how to deal with the teenager and at times personally for them
I interfere in the relationship between the parents and the teenager.
The parents know I am talking to the teenager about them and the teenager knows I am talking to the parents about him. Rarely, if ever, am I asked what the other is saying about them.
In recent times I am spending more time having the teenager and parents in the room at the same time, basically doing couples therapy with them.
Graffiti
0 comments:
Post a Comment