Don’t
Show ‘Em How You Feel; Tell ‘Em What You
Think
Rev.
Mark Stringer
First Unitarian Church of Des Moines
11/14/04
“He who understand others is
wise; he who understand himself is enlightened.”
–Saying from the Tao Te Ching
Meditation
for 11/14/04
O,
spirit of life, creative, imperfect, source of
all families…
those complicated relationship systems from
which we all came,
and from whose roots we cannot fully remove
ourselves…
those
powerful systems that can pull us together
and push us apart.
We
know you, spirit of our living,
when our family connections are a source of joy,
when the loving support of our parents, children
or siblings
has kept us afloat in turbulent waters…
and
when we have reached out to support family
members ourselves, and have been met with
gratitude.
We also know you when these same connections
bind us up inside
with anger, disappointment, resentment…
when we might wish we have never known this
strange bunch of people we call our family.
Sometimes
we look at our families and wish for happier
times,
times that once were and can no longer be,
Or
maybe times that never were but that we long for
anyway.
We
look at our families, whether in person or in
our mind’s eye,
And
we yearn for peace, forgiveness, and redemption,
even as we may tell ourselves it’s a lost
cause.
Will
we ever know why families are so
maddening? Is it possible to be grateful
for them even in our disappointment…even in
our frustration?
Thank
you, spirit of life, human possibility in
action,
For
the opportunity to live one more day with these
people who drive us crazy, even as they lift us
up…these people who challenge us to be
authentically ourselves, even as they work
consciously and unconsciously against our
attempts to do so.
And
teach us, in all the families of our lives, to
see beyond the flare-ups and the failures, the
maladies and the meltdowns, and to find the
peaceful stillness beneath the surface…the
stillness from which we came and to which we
will all one day return.
Part
I
As we find ourselves on the brink of another
holiday season, a time to gather with family
and, for many of us, a time to feel ourselves
caught once again in the sometimes joyful but
oftentimes traumatic emotional pulls of family
interaction, I have built today’s service upon
the foundation of Dr. Murray Bowen’s Family
Systems Theory. I have been a
student of Bowen theory since theological school
and have found its principles extremely helpful
not only in my ministry, but in my life.
In fact, I consider my continued study of Bowen
theory and attempts to integrate its concepts to
be an essential component of my spiritual
practice because the theory offers a means by
which I can better understand the complexity of
human relationships and my participation in
them. I share today’s Bowen-theory inspired
service with you with the expectation that it
may help you to reflect upon and even transform
your participation in the relationships of all
the families of your lives.
Bowen’s
observations indicated to him that focusing on
one person or group as the toxic element or “the
patient” actually contributes to the perceived
problem because the other family members can
then avoid their own responsibility as
contributors to the family process in exchange
for their fascination with the so-called
dysfunctional member. The theory he articulated,
then, took the emphasis off the
individual, and focused instead on the entire
family as an emotional unit, as a system
where each individual member holds a functioning
position and contributes to the working of the
whole.
Bowen
believed that even if a problem or symptom only
seems evident in just one person, an emphasis on
“fixing” or “helping” that person alone
would always be misguided, for the whole system—meaning
the entire multi-generational family itself and
not just a single individual—has contributed
to and enabled any symptom that emerges. In
other words, there is functional reciprocity
within the family system: each member’s
functioning position, both past and present,
will actually reinforce the others’.
One
classic example of this functional reciprocity
is when one family member over-functions on
behalf of another, who, in turn,
under-functions. Take, for instance,
parents who, compelled by many factors,
including their relationship with each other and
the multi-generational relationships of their
families of origin, consistently fill in the
gaps for their children. By filling in the
gaps, I mean they finish their children’s
tasks, step in before they are really needed,
don’t allow their children to succeed or fail
on their own, etc. Stuck in this emotional
pattern, these parents are often unable to see
that by over-functioning they have raised
children who habitually under-function, who
depend on their parents (and others) to continue
to fill in the gaps. Of course, this kind
of over-and-under-functioning reciprocity is not
limited to parent-child relationships. We
can find it in various forms in all of our
family relationships…between our parents,
partners, and siblings; in our work families;
even in the interactions found in the greater
family that is our human society. None of
us are immune to the influence of this
inevitable reciprocity. Our task, then, in the
face of a symptom or family crisis, is to do
what we can to better balance the
equation. Bowen theory tells us that the
only way to truly balance the equation, and
thereby alleviate the symptom, is to change the
entire system itself, to somehow shift the
interactions on a system-wide basis.
To
hear that the system itself must change in order
to ease a chronic family problem or crisis may
seem daunting. And yet there is good news…good
news at the heart of Bowen theory and good news
in the message I hope you will carry with you
today. This news has implications for every one
of us, in all the families of our lives.
The good news is that any member of a family…yes
that means you and me…any member can introduce
change into the system simply by altering her
own behavior…by observing, learning from, and
eventually shifting her own functioning within
the system. Any member, then, over
time, has the potential to transform the
emotional and relational landscape of his family…but--and
here’s the key--only through a commitment to
developing a greater understanding of his own
participation in that family. This broader
awareness of one’s role in all family
relationships is a contributing factor to his or
her level of self-differentiation, a
cornerstone concept of Bowen’s theory.
The level of a person’s self-differentiation
can be described as the degree to which he can
define his own life goals and values as separate
from his other family members. The more
differentiated a person is, the greater her
capacity to say “I” when others surrounding
her keep saying “you” and “we.”
The more differentiated a person is, the greater
his capacity to maintain a non-anxious presence
in the midst of an anxious system…the greater
the degree to which he can take responsibility
for his own destiny and emotional well-being
even in the face of panic or crisis.
Self-differentiation is not self-centeredness or
a willingness to remove oneself from the family
system when things aren’t going one’s
way. On the contrary, one’s level of
differentiation is equivalent to his ability to
remain connected to all members of the system
while maintaining his identity and status as an
individual.
While
there are many important concepts in Bowen
Family Systems Theory (in fact, I could do a
whole year of sermons based in Bowen’s ideas
and still not even begin to adequately cover
them), the idea of self-differentiation is
extremely important because to move oneself
towards a higher level of self-differentiation
and thereby closer to one’s basic self, is the
project of all Bowen students.
Simply
put, self-differentiation is an embodied
understanding of the adage, the only thing over
which you can develop true control is yourself…which
is also expressed in the quote at the top of
your order of service: “He who understand
others is wise; he who understand himself is
enlightened.”
Part
II
For
the remainder of my time this morning, I will
focus on the contrast that Bowen theory draws
between responses to family crisis that are
emotional or feeling versus intellectual or
thinking. Most of us have been taught, if
not through therapy ourselves, then through a
kind of pop psychology-cultural osmosis, that
feelings are for sharing. When we
experience strong feelings, we have been
encouraged to talk them out, especially with
those directly involved. No matter what
the situation, conventional wisdom says that
getting things out on the table is usually
best. While there may be times when
talking out emotions is an appropriate thing to
do, on the balance, study of Bowen theory
suggests that we may do better to process our
feelings on our own…that purging our emotions
onto others can more typically burden our
relationships with inordinate amounts of
emotional intensity. As one Bowen theorist
puts it, “if relationships are the court of
first resort for feelings, the relationships
most often run into trouble.”
Why
might the sharing of too many feelings be a
cause of relationship tension and trouble?
Because everyone operates at a different level
of self-differentiation, and therefore, everyone
has a different level of adaptability.
While some people are perfectly capable of
handing the emotional intensity of another’s
feelings with an appropriate level of emotional
detachment, others will almost inevitably react
emotionally themselves, thereby stoking the
fires of emotional responses of all
involved. When a family member
indiscriminately acts out his reflex emotions on
the rest of the family…and by reflex emotions,
I mean those knee-jerk emotional responses that
even the most self-differentiated among us have
from time to time… the member is filling the
system’s need for an escalation of emotional
intensity. This escalation is predictable,
familiar and, therefore, comfortable…even when
it doesn’t feel good.
Most
of us have experienced this kind of
escalation. Think of a time when you
pursued a conversation with a member of your
family in which you mostly just wanted to share
your feelings. Maybe you sat down with your
mother and told her that it upset you when she
committed you to do something you didn’t
really want to do. You approached the
conversation with confidence. After all,
there should be no argument about your
feelings. And yet, you are surprised when
your mother gets defensive and goes on the
attack, “Well,” she says, “I never know
what you have time to do because you never
call me.” The words “you never
call me” slam into you, just as they always
do, adrenaline rushes through your body, you
begin to get flushed and find yourself stuck in
well-worn patterns of behavior that have little
to do with the reason you initiated the
conversation in the first place. Maybe you
attack right back, telling her how ridiculous it
is that she would say such a thing. Or
maybe you clam up, knowing that it is futile to
go any further. Or maybe you storm away,
making a big scene of your frustration, which,
while high in dramatic value, does nothing to
further understanding between you. All of
these are emotional responses. You know what the
triggers are, you know how to flip them, and you
know when yours have been
flipped.
Another
example. You feel that your partner isn’t
showing you the kind of affection that you
require. You have tried sending subtle
messages. You have dropped hints, you’ve
tried being more affectionate yourself, you’ve
even fought back your shame and attempted to get
your partner jealous by flirting with someone in
his or her presence. Nothing seems
to work, so you completely withdraw, figuring
that eventually your partner will notice that
you are no longer around. These are all
emotional responses…even the withdrawal…and
they may be effective in getting your partner’s
attention. However, as they are all
attempts to manipulate your partner into seeing
your position rather than you just articulating
the position yourself, they are much more apt to
create tension and anxiety in a system that is
obviously already having trouble.
And
then there are those moments of special stress
in the life of a family that arise when someone
enters or leaves the family system, due to
birth, death, marriage or divorce. These
are times of rapid change and high anxiety in
the system, when individuals have to reposition
themselves even as the well-worn behavior
patterns will be most likely to dig in.
Because these high-stress times will often lead
relationship patterns to be more intense and
involuntary than normal, the very thing that is
most needed is the most difficult to achieve: action
based in thought rather than feeling.
In these times of crisis, the family members who
will be most successful at self-differentiation
will be those who trade reactive dumping of
feelings into the relationships for a more
thoughtful approach of processing feelings on
their own, thereby opening the door for more
calm interactions where the family can begin to
think its way through the crisis.
So
how does one learn how to process a feeling
reaction? How can any of us begin to
reverse the well-worn patterns of emotional
reactivity that are so embedded in our family
relationships? There is no definite answer
to these questions, as every one of us comes at
this from different levels of
self-differentiation and every family system is
more or less differentiated as well.
However here are some suggestions that might
help us develop the ability to be less
emotionally reactive in times of crisis.
First
of all, we can pay attention.
Observe our feelings. As Bowen said, “Don’t
just do something…stand there.” Notice
when our emotions are flaring, and what may have
triggered these emotions. Calm these
feelings as soon as we can…even if we must do
so after an emotional outburst. Try to
limit our emotional intensity through deep
breathing, exercise, or meditation. Getting in
the habit of simply paying attention to the
roles we are playing in our relationships is an
important first step in changing our patterns of
reactivity. When I started paying
attention to my own emotional response patterns,
I found it helpful to simply tell myself, “Mark,
you are being reactive right now.”
Initially, naming my reactivity didn’t seem to
help much. But over time, I have
discovered that acknowledging an emotional
flare-up is the first step towards choosing a
more thoughtful response…which is the goal of
the next step in learning to process emotions…
We
can think. Thinking through the
emotional responses we have observed in
ourselves is a means by which we can determine
what changes we may want to make in our
contributions to the relationship pattern.
If we keep in mind that our goal is to lessen
our emotional reactivity to the behavior of
others, we can reflect on the things we have
been doing…or not doing…to help us toward
this goal. Part of this thinking step is
to ask ourselves questions. What feelings
got triggered? What was the trigger?
Is our response something we have felt before…is
it part of a bigger pattern? And is our
response in keeping with who we want to be in
this relationship? If we have not
responded in the way we would like, what might
have been other options? In this thinking
step, we need to be gentle with ourselves.
Not even the most differentiated among us will
always be able to maintain calm in the face of
every family stress or anxiety, and that’s
ok. After all, a complete lack of
emotional response is an unrealistic goal.
We might even say it is inhuman. However,
paying attention to our emotional responses and
being thoughtful about them can be important
steps in altering patterned emotional reactions
that are not in keeping with our best
intentions.
Much
of the content of this sermon was drawn from the
following text:
Roberta
M. Gilbert, Extraordinary Relationships: A
New Way of Thinking About Human Interactions,
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1992)
This
book provides an excellent, easy-to-read
introduction to Bowen theory.
Other
sources used:
Edwin
H. Friedman, Generation to Generation,
(New York: Guilford Press, 1985)
Friedman,
Friedman’s Fables, (New York: Guilford
Press, 1990)
Michael
Kerr and Murray Bowen, Family Evaluation,
(New York: W.W. Norton, 1988)