Aug 25
Love0

Can cutting off family be good therapy

By Anxiety, cut off, emotional system, forgiveness, triangles

 

Some notable press has discussed that going “no contact” with one’s family and cutting off might be a good idea. The reasoning is that one’s family is so demanding or toxic that maintaining contact is harmful. For example, maybe childhood was so difficult or even abusive. Perhaps the parents or other family members won’t acknowledge this, let alone be accountable for the past. In particular, a social worker has gained a following and recognition while building a business supporting individuals in cutting off.

System view of cutting off

Dr. Bowen believed cutoff was a distinct enough pattern of human behaviour that he made it a concept in his theory. Like other patterns of emotional functioning, cutting off is a response to the emotional intensity of a relationship system. This intensity results from one feeling or believing that one must behave (feel, think, or act) as the other(s) want them to. Or maybe one can’t get (or make) others feel, think and act how one wants them to. The process takes at least two people and is a reciprocal process.

Different forms of cutting off

An important point is that Dr. Bowen’s term for cutting off is “emotional cutoff,” which he used twenty-five times in his book. This is to distinguish it from physical or geographical cutoff. The process functions to lower the emotional intensity of the relationship. We experience emotional intensity as some form of discomfort, tension, or anxiety. One lowers this intensity by disengaging with a family member(s). For example, never discussing meaningful topics. Substance use, just staying in one’s room (or office or workshop), can represent an emotional cutoff. It’s an emotional process, not a physical distance process. Duty phone calls or visits don’t qualify as good contact, so they don’t remove the emotional cutoff. (See this previous post on good emotional contact.)

Triangles and getting the right support

I believe each individual needs to weigh the impact of cutting off a family member. And be careful about who you seek support from. We often “triangle” in a third party as a way of lowering our anxiety.

This is where the wrong “support” won’t be helpful. Suppose a person believes their parents really “owe them” for what they believe was a wrong committed in the past. Talking to a third person who agrees with you and validates your feelings to give you emotional support isn’t always helpful. Remember that wanting to relieve another person’s distress is human nature. Triangles function to lower a person’s distress, but that doesn’t mean it helps resolve the issue. It can exacerbate the issue. Someone who can think with you and be more objective while empathetic would be more helpful. Often, how I think about a problem is part of the problem. A good friend who will seek to understand you but give other perspectives is a wonderful resource. A good therapist will offer perspectives that the client might not want to hear but could be helpful.

Cutting off has costs

Cutting off has short-term and long-term consequences, and not all are good.

One cost is losing the opportunity to grow by working through the issue. This growth is for self. To the degree that an issue is unresolved, it’s still there and can affect behaviour and functioning in one’s life. The person(s) you are cut off from could be a resource for you or your family. For example, I know of uncles who have been a career resource for nephews. A Bowen theory perspective would also posit that cutting off from parents removes the possibility of resolving one’s unresolved emotional attachment. Working on the parental triangle is critical to working on one’s level of differentiation.

Longer term impacts

There are practical aspects of cut-off that might not show up for years. For example, it can negatively impact dealing with an estate. This can get costly for the whole family. While a short-term benefit can make you feel less stressed, this can turn into regret. A cutoff implies an important relationship is involved. Thus, a significant relationship may be damaged or lost, leading to regret later. An issue that seemed very important at the time could simply not be important anymore. However, once cut off, it can be hard to reconnect for different emotional and logistical reasons.

Others get cut off with you.

Individuals with a family usually end up cutting off their whole family. The partner gets cut off from in-laws, and the kids get cut off from relatives and cousins. This can sever a branch of the family from the “tree” forever. One might end up cutting off from one’s uncles, aunts, siblings, and cousins because of the triangles in the system. It is tough to separate from one part of a “system.”

Cutting off is personal decision.

In more extreme situations where safety is an issue, it may be appropriate to restrict contact to a minimum or eliminate it. Distance is warranted if someone represents a threat to you, your family, or your possessions. Even if one “feels” very unsafe, don’t wait to be proven right; maintain some distance. Just be as objective about this as possible. This differs from just disagreeing with someone or being uncomfortable around them. For example, if an individual is a substance user or involved in criminal activity, having them over to your house may not be advised. But having a coffee with them at a safe (public) location could be acceptable. Another example is that some might not believe vaccines are good and refuse to take them. That’s not a reason to restrict contact with them if you know both of you are not contagious. The amount of distance in a relationship is a personal decision.

Think objectively

Cutting off is an intensely emotional process, and it’s hard to think objectively about it. Having someone to talk to who will help you think more objectively could be helpful. If one decides to cut-off, perhaps it’s best to think of “for now” and not “forever.” Try to maintain enough contact so you can connect again should you wish to. Be clear that this is your choice. Nobody is making you cut off, but it is one option at your disposal. Making your choice means you can always change your decision. After all, cutting off is a big decision, but not a permanent one.

I should note that if you have been “cut off” by someone else, maintaining a zero-demand, light level of contact can keep a connection going. This would be the topic for another post.

Thank you for your interest in systems.

dave galloway

dave.galloway@livingsytems.ca

The New York Times article Is cutting off your family good therapy? inspired this post by Ellen Barry.

Ideas for this post also came from the book “Fault Lines” by Karl Pillemer.

To learn more about Bowen family systems theory, click here.

Aug 14
Love0

Pessimism is irresponsible

By differentiation, emotional system

Is pessimism irresponsible?

Some people think it is, but many do not.

To the question “Are we doomed” Anne Applebaum replied, “Pessimism is irresponsible”. That’s an interesting reply and I think it aligns with a higher level of differentiation. What would a systems perspective indicate on this point?

Differentiated thinking isn’t pessimistic

An individual with a higher level of differentiation can think more objectively and rationally in the face of adversity. This is because their reactivity or feelings don’t overwhelm their ability to reason and think objectively. Dr. Bowen observed instances of feelings overwhelming thinking in families that he worked with. He believed humans behave as if they possess three “systems” that affect their actions due to the significant nature of this phenomenon.

Emotion, feeling, and intellectual systems

These systems are the emotional, the feeling, and the intellectual systems. The development of these ideas occurred in the early stages of the cognitive revolution in psychology. His work was based on clinical experience and organized around testing hypotheses about behavior in families. These systems are conceptual, as we now know that the brain is one very integrated system. These concepts, however, are still useful, as they reflect aspects of brain functioning. For example, thinking objectively is a type of functioning of the brain, but there is no “intellectual system” in the brain.

Emotions surface as feelings

The important point is this: when our emotional system, which is instinctually driven by physiology (thirst, hunger, threats) gets activated enough, our feeling system kicks in. This is when and how we become consciously aware of the emotional system’s needs. For example, your blood sugar is changing all the time, but when you “feel” hungry, it’s the emotional system coming into awareness via the feeling system. Then, hopefully, the intellectual system can come into play and the individual can make choices about what, how much, and when to eat something. One can take the least effort, most pleasurable approach, or a more thoughtful and healthy approach. It all depends on the principles and goals a person has.

Threat response turns into pessimism

A poorly differentiated person will operate more on feelings. These individuals choose what feels good at the moment, what removes or soothes any discomfort. They will want others to help them in this process. They are far less likely to take responsibility for their actions. More often, they will claim to be helpless or a victim when the going gets tough.

They are the most likely to say “We are doomed”.

The more differentiated person is more responsible for themself. In any situation, they think about what can be done. It is their principles and goal orientation that guide their behavior. They can tolerate the discomfort as they work to live by their principles and reach their goals. It’s important to note that this DOES NOT include impinging on others or taking advantage of others.

They are most likely to say, “Doomed you say? I’m curious about how you think about this.”

Doers, not doomers

Differentiated people are not afraid to have tough conversations. They are better able to manage feelings (emotional regulation) in order to think more objectively. They are more likely to think, “if this is what is, what am I going to do about it?”

A systems oriented individual accepts that they have a part to play in almost any situation. They focus on what they can do and are clear about what they won’t do. They focus on actions that fulfill their principles of being responsible to others, but not for others. Recognizing how interdependent they are with the planet and everyone on it, they work to do their part regardless of what others are doing.

Follow principles, not popularity

What Dr. Bowen observed is a common behaviour of individuals whose feelings have overwhelmed their thinking. They go helpless. They feel doomed. Their thinking gets very subjective because of the intensity of their feelings. This can happen with any level of differentiation given enough stress on the individual. However, it will happen more often with individuals with lower levels of differentiation.

Avoiding necessary work is irresponsible

The pessimism of “we’re doomed” is a feeling and a subjective judgment. Some people use this to avoid doing the hard work that needs to be done. I don’t think that’s a responsible way to live.

A more differentiated individual might be pessimistic, but will still work on doing what they can instead of just giving up. They will remember that how they think about a problem might be part of the problem. To be sure, working hard to resolve any problem isn’t easy or fun. But it’s the only way out of a bad situation. I think that is a more responsible way to live.

Thank you for your interest in systems.

Dave Galloway

If you have an idea for a post, email me at: dave.galloway@livingsystems.ca

You can read more about Bowen Theory here.

This article inspired this post: pessimism is irresponsible

 

Jul 15
Love0

Can anxiety be bound

By Anxiety, chronic anxiety, differentiation

Can anxiety be “bound”?

YES. And anxiety binding has positive and negative aspects to it.

Dr. Kerr wrote a lot about anxiety binding behaviour. He is the author of Family Evaluation, one of the original “source materials” on Bowen Family Systems. The system’s idea that a behaviour can bind anxiety is important when trying to improve one’s functioning.

The concept of binding anxiety supports the premise that dealing with anxiety is a major driver of behaviour in animals. For example, rats exhibit many behaviours in response to being stressed and or anxious. There are physical behaviours like chewing on sticks or over / under grooming. Social behaviors include distancing from other rats. If the a rat is anxious enough, all of these might occur. Humans, with our bigger brains human can be more inventive.

Anxiety binding can lead to symptoms

The importance of this concept lies in the symptoms it can create in individuals and in their family system. Anxiety binding can manifest in many forms of behaviour. Some are positive, like exercising, or getting good grades, or being very productive at work. Other forms are not healthy like drinking, over or under eating, excessive fantasying or focus on a topic. Worrying about something I can’t do anything about would be another example. Even positive behaviours can lead to negative outcomes when they are driven by anxiety and not thoughtful goal setting.  Obsessing about fitness or ignoring friendships to get perfect grades are examples of this.

Binding anxiety doesn’t address the source of anxiety

Anxiety binding behaviours are the outward signs of an underlying emotional process. Anxiety binding is like taking a painkiller to relieve pain while not fixing the underlying cause of the pain. At best, anxiety binding is a soothing, distracting behaviour. But it can be far more insidious than this because individuals are often not aware of what is driving the anxiety binding behaviour. For example, the need to prove oneself to others could lead to excessive time at work. Or it could show up as focusing on competing in a sport, to the detriment of other areas of life. Dr Kerr posits that even psychosis can be an extreme form of anxiety binding. More on this later.

“To fully understand the concept of anxiety binding, one needs to maintain a systems perspective.”

Relationships as a source of anxiety

The emotional process of a relationship can generate various levels of tension or discomfort. This is because individuals are very sensitive to the level of agreement in a relationship. Most individuals can sense the level of agreement just from a facial expression, a tone of voice, the cadence of speech, a look, or a gesture. Individuals avoid conflicts or disagreements in relationships. They want approval and acceptance, and depending on their level of differentiation will do pretty much anything to get it. This is where anxiety comes in and the binding starts.

Emotional process leads to anxiety binding

We have come by this anxiety binding process honestly. In eons past, if a member of your group of started displaying signs of stress or anxiety, it would have been important for you to notice. Whatever was bothering them could have been coming at you next. It’s adaptive to respond to another’s distress or we wouldn’t have developed to be so sensitive to others.

Let’s say you grew up in a family that had a lot of conflict. You might be extra sensitive to “keeping the peace” in your current family, having vowed to not have it be like it was in your family of origin. The result is a base level of anxiousness about any type of disagreement in your family. It’s like you are extra vigilant, but you aren’t even aware of it. This chronic anxiety could manifest in automatic, non-conscious behaviour to please others. You are over helpful and over attentive to the needs of others. This behaviour binds the anxiety related to “watch out for conflict” that you picked up in your family of origin.

A second level of anxiety binding

But this orientation to always be helpful and pleasing to others can create its own stress as well. And this also needs to be “soothed” or bound. For example, you may have found over the years that a drink or two helps take the edge off in social situations. Or maybe you feel better getting to work extra early to get ahead of the day. Or perhaps it shows up as always being helpful to your children. Whether or not they need or want it. A sense of comfort from the vigilance and effort related to your orientation to please others drives these behaviours. The challenge is that this is automatic, non-conscious behaviour unless we really start to pay attention to what is going on.

Changes disrupt the binding

The anxiety of unresolved issues in a relationship can be bound with a focus on one’s children or career. This could also stem from the need to be successful at work or as a parent to win the approval of others, especially one’s partner. The result is an over-weighted mental / emotional investment in that area. So where does this anxiety go when that binder isn’t available? Children leaving home can leave anxiety “unbound”. So can retirement – all the investment in work now has to go some place, but where does it go? An overhelpfulness with grandkids can just be a replacement anxiety binder. If work ended up creating a level of distance in a relationship, retirement can be a problem.

Dr Kerr put it like this: “While several factors contributed to the increase in anxiety, a very important factor was that the mechanism of binding anxiety through emotional distance (reinforced by physical distance) was less available to the couple following retirement.”

Beliefs can be binding

Dr. Kerr also wrote that “beliefs are an especially important anxiety binder”. If one belief is easier or more comfortable to live with than an alternate belief, it could be an anxiety binder. We all do this. For example, I want to believe we will figure out a way to deal with climate change issues. Not believing is just something I do not want to deal with. It’s too hard. BUT, to the degree I refuse to entertain factual information about climate change, because it’s too uncomfortable, this will distort my thinking and behaviour. I’ll be adapting to avoid discomfort. I could go so far as to believing conspiracies about climate issues. As Kerr wrote, “Psychotic level thought processes are an exaggeration of this lack of discrimination between fact and fantasy that exists in all of us. Psychotic level thought processes can be powerful anxiety binders.”

Defining self gets to the root

The alternate approach to binding anxiety is to work at defining self more. This is the path to reducing the anxiety that needs to be bound. Using the climate change issue, for example, I work to stay informed about trends in technology and the effects of climate change. I take the approach of: this is what is, what do I want to do about it? This involves thinking about what am I willing to do, and what am I not willing to do. This is a big issue that involves a lot of thinking about what is a responsible way to live regarding climate change.

This process of defining self is not about denial or giving up. It’s about thoughtfully engaging the issue and deciding what I think a mature, responsible way to act would be. It helps with any issue, since how I think and respond to an issue is critical to the outcome.

It’s difficult. But living in denial or as a helpless victim around any issue isn’t easy either. Especially in the longer term. And if you are using relationships to bind the resulting anxiety, well, something is likely to suffer. The anxiety binder of over involvement with one’s child can negatively affect the child’s development.

It’s worth the effort

Another belief for me is that the more I work on my level of differentiation, the better I’ll be for myself, others, and the planet. This means I try not to avoid what makes me anxious. I try to understand what, when, where, how, how much is affecting my level of discomfort or tension. I work to see my part and I work to change that.

This has been slow work for me. So don’t get stressed 0ut looking for anxiety binding or you might end with more to bind!

 

Thank you for your interest in systems.

Dave Galloway

Email questions to dave.galloway@livingsystems.ca.

Dr. Kerr’s book, co-authored with Dr. Bowen, Family Evaluation, was the source of the ideas for this post.

You can read more about Dr. Kerr’s work here

To read more about Bowen theory, click here.

I wrote this blog. Dall-E created the image from my prompts.

Jun 23
Love0
forgiveness is important

Don’t Fear Forgiveness

By Define self, forgiveness, triangles

Why is forgiveness important? Because it’s good for us, whether it’s forgiving someone else or yourself. But adopting a systems perspective around a wrongdoing is a big shift for anyone. The more intense the situation, the harder it can be. (Before you continue, please note that extreme events can be very hard for individuals to put into a systems perspective. A systems perspective can involve a long time frame and societal level processes preceding the event that affects an individual. A systems perspective doesn’t ask why or if something is fair.)

Losing self

An important idea in family systems theory is about the gaining and losing of self in relationships. When I do something I don’t want to do, just to please or not disappoint other, I’m losing self. This differs from doing something I’d rather not do, but I do it because of my convictions or principles. That is holding on to self. Being forced into exercising because I fear the conflict with my partner is losing self. Going along with my partner, because I know it is good for me, that’s different. Choosing to do a different workout, while my partner does something else, is defining my self. It’s important to note that defining self does not impinge on other, nor does it force a particular choice on other. We are both free to choose what we will do.

Wrong doing takes self from other

A starting point for the topic of forgiveness is the concept that a wrongdoing takes self away from a person. This loss of self can be emotionally painful. There are emotional processes that can keep a person in a pattern of functioning impairs forgiving. I believe these processes vary in intensity with the degree that a person feels wronged. Emotional processes that reduce the discomfort of losing self can hinder the person from regaining that lost self. I don’t believe a person can truly forgive without working to regain the self that was lost.

Forgiveness and regaining lost self

The impinging act that needs to be forgiven took self away from the recipient of the impinging behaviour. The recipient was forced to accept something they did not want to; their self was forced to “go along” with other. This loss of self needs to be repaired, but this can only be done by the person wronged, not by the wrongdoer. I don’t believe someone else can “give” me self. (Theory says that I can borrow self from other, but that is a pseudo self, not solid self.)

Limits of cause and effect thinking

Most of the time, individuals operate with a cause-and-effect thinking. When something happens, it is because something “caused” it. This leads to blaming the individual that “caused” the wrongdoing. We then have a world of perpetrators and victims. The perpetrator was the wrongdoer, and the victim was the wronged. Across cultures and time, there have been various methods to “right”, the “wrong”. This is approach reduces our options for forgiving and regaining our lost self, because the “victim” depends on the perpetrator to make things right.

Widening the lens with systems thinking

The process of forgiving can benefit from a broader systems perspective of the situation and events that took place. Seeking a wider understanding is not saying what happened was okay. Understanding does not mean agreement. That is a critical point. A systems approach would seek to understand all the facts of the event. A systems perspective would seek to understand things like:

– who were all the players involved?
– what stressors were affecting them?
– how mature are the players?
– how unthoughtful were the players?

This is not about making excuses for someone else’s behaviour. Understanding the how, when, where, what, how much of any situation helps one learn how to avoid those situations again. It gives one agency to hold on to self.

The hardest question

Another aspect of taking a systems perspective is asking, “what part might I have played in this?” This is NOT about “blaming the victim.” It is often very hard for individuals to accept this idea. Again, more agency for self can come out of looking at this aspect of system functioning. A core tenet of systems is that every part contributes something to the system,s functioning. For example, it could be one or more of the following, was I:

– in the wrong place at the wrong time
– late with something, hence wrong time
– taking a shortcut, rushing
– trying to avoid effort, time, cost
– not paying attention
– not listening to my intuition

I can not stress enough that playing a part doesn’t make one wrong, or make something one’s fault. The impinging act still had to happen, and that wasn’t you. The value of understanding what role I might have played is that I can work to not do that in the future. It gives me more agency. I get to define self and my future behaviour. In many situations, some level of my immaturity contributed to what happened to me. Here’s an important point. In many situations, many factors contributed to the event, so there are many things to blame. But this means there is no ONE thing to blame. Blame just isn’t useful.

It happened. How do I want to show up now?

Another key point with systems is that I can’t fix the past, but I can work to keep the past from affecting my present and future. There is only now and going forward. A key question is: given this is what is what I am going to do about it?. This is the start of defining self and getting my lost self back. But one of the biggest blockers to this process is your system. And triangles.

Triangles can be a trap

Family systems theory posits that when two people have some level of tension between them, one or both will seek a third party to get on their side. This is a natural process and it can help lower one’s anxiety. Sometimes the third person can offer useful insights. But too often, the third person actually facilitates the level of tension and blocks a resolution. If a “wronged” person gets a lot of sympathy and validation, this can impede work to regain the lost self. The emotional process of triangles can make things worse.

Forgiveness and emotional process

Let’s say I have gotten to a place of not blaming and I’m not using triangles to be comforted and validated. I believe there are still strong emotional processes that can work to prevent me from moving forward with forgiveness. These can come from the stories I might have about what forgiveness means. Such stories (not facts) can make it very hard for me to forgive and move forward. The stories could include:

– I’m betraying myself and others if I forgive
– Forgiving means I condone or accept that behaviour
– It’s not fair to ‘forgive and forget’
– If I forgive, what will I do next?
– If I forgive, will I forget? Forgetting would be wrong?
– It’s too painful to confront the memories in order to forgive
– Forgiving means the wrong doer “won”

Forgiveness is not…

Forgiving is not betrayal, because I’m NOT agreeing with the wrongdoer. I am NOT saying what they did was okay. It’s as if I am carrying a heavy load and I are decide to put it down and not carry it anymore. It is still a heavy load. I will remember it was a heavy load. It will be a heavy load forever. But carrying it doesn’t make things better. It will wear me down and wear me out. There are better things to carry.

Reflecting on how I got the heavy load can help prevent me from getting it again. Or I may learn that life just provides heavy loads, but I don’t have to carry them forever. Since there is no ONE person or thing to blame for the load, I let go of blame. Since I understand how the load got so heavy, I have agency to avoid it in the future.

The wrong-doer can also put down their load. They will never forget it either. But they won’t be able to change and improve by carrying that load. Putting down the load frees them up to carry new and better things.

Carrying the load can take a lot of time and effort. It can consume a lot of one’s life. One can get very focused on the load, which distracts on from the pain of moving forward without a loved one or  a desired future. But if I don’t deal with the pain, the pain will deal with me. I believe the pain will win in the end. The load won’t get lighter, the individual gets weaker.

Define Self to get back the lost self

Forgiving requires a strong defining of self. One has to become clear on how they want to be in the world now and going forward. What principles are truly important to them that will guide their thinking and behaviour? Defining myself means that I have to confront the stories I make up and the perspectives that I have that are too narrow and need to change. It means I have to live with the discomfort of life being painful and unfair.

Forgiveness is a choice

But defining self means I get to make choices. I get to see where I can change to improve my life. Not being a victim is an option for me. Now I can understand how my load came about in a broader context. I can recognize the heaviness of it and how hard it is to carry. This allows me to understand how I can put it down. The acceptance comes from understanding. This understanding allows for forgiveness. Or maybe one understands that there is no one thing to “blame” so there isn’t anything to forgive. There is an acceptance that comes from understanding and a conviction to define self in order to move forward.

I can choose to put down that burden and work on a new future. A future where the burden is a memory that I’ll honour. I can decide to never forget, even while I forgive, because I want to reclaim my “self” that was taken from me.

I’d like to give credit to Pumla Gobodo-Madikizela for inspiring this post with her article in the New York Times titled “Why Do We Fear Forgiveness”.

Also to Charles F. East for is Family Systems Journal (V9, N1, 2012) article “Triangles, togetherness and the challenge to forgive”

Thank you for your interest in family systems.

Comments are welcome: dave.galloway@livingsystems.ca

This post was inspired by this article:  Why Do We Fear Forgiveness

Read more about Bowen Theory here

For an overview of Bowen Theory in Psychology Today: Bowen Theory.

 

 

 

May 23
Love0
Attachment Theory Alternative

Attachment theory revisited

By attachment, differentiation

Origins of attachment theory

John Bowlby created attachment theory in the 1950s and published articles on it for twenty years. He drew on concepts from several areas in psychology. For example, Freud’s ideas of the mother/child relationship and its impact on the unconscious. Lorenz’s ideas on imprinting in birds contributed to Bowlby’s thinking on the role of instincts in the “bonding” relationship. Darwin’s theory of evolution supported his idea that an infant’s innate propensity to form an attachment is more adaptive. Piaget and Robertson, with their work on development stages, contributed as well.

Bowlby also incorporated concepts from control systems theory, viewing attachment quality as a regulator of a child’s behavior. From cognitive psychology, he developed the idea of an “internal working model” that the child develops about self and others. In his clinical work, he noticed the effects of foster care and institutionalization on children and sought a theoretical framework to explain his observations. As the chart in the image above shows, his was very much of a top down, cognitive approach. 

Mary Ainsworth’s “strange situation”

Empirical support for Bowlby’s theory comes from Mary Ainsworth’s “Strange Situation” studies. She proposed four categories of attachment styles. These broad categories have be used for years and are still popular labels.

  • Secure. With this style, toddlers are more comfortable exploring their surroundings. Mothers can quickly comfort these children.
  • Anxious-ambivalent. Separation from their month will upset these children. Comforting them can take longer. They can cling, but not calm down.
  • Anxious-avoidant. These children can ignore or avoid the caregiver and show little emotion when separated. They appear both distant and self reliant.
  • Disorganized attachment. Ainsworth added this category because the behavior just didn’t fit into the other categories.

Systems viewpoint on attachment

From a systems viewpoint, attachment theory does not address several issues. First, it is an individual model, with a focus on the primary caregiver’s behaviour. (My mother didn’t love me enough, so my relationships are messed up). It doesn’t address the effects of the caregivers’ “system”. It also doesn’t address the role of anxiety in the system. Anxiety can manifest as not enough attention, but it can also manifest as an anxious focus with too much attention on the child. Anxious driven attention can distort the quality of the relationship. A child can notice anxiety in their parents and in the system and be reactive to that. A more anxious child might easily display a non-secure style. (I’m condensing a two-day conference into a paragraph!)

Emotionally autonomous, not emotionally attached

According to Bowen Theory, development is about becoming more emotionally autonomous or differentiated. More differentiated individuals can develop their own goals based on their own thinking and values. They have more ability to hold on to their principles, even if it means being criticized. Being more differentiated, they aren’t (as) threatened by what others might think or feel. Thus, they can form very meaningful relationships. The level of parental affection does not limit the relationship quality of these individuals.

An alternative to attachment theory

Welch and Ludwig have a new way to think about attachment. They propose that attachment is based on the development of the adaptive Autonomic Socio Emotional Reflex (ASR). This is a bottom up, physiologically based approach to the concept of attachment. They posit that during a healthy gestation and birth, conditional learning for the mother and infant takes place. They both learn to orient and approach to each other, automatically. It is relationship based. It is also adaptive since the mother and infant both need to orient to and approach the other to minimize distress for both. Welch named this regulating influence in her “calming cycle theory”. She also developed an intervention call Family Nurture Intervention that can create an adaptive ASR using emotional connection.

Observer first, theory second

The ASR and Calming Cycle Theory are based on over ten years of clinical work and studies. Researchers observed that creating an adaptive ASR is possible even with a premature birth. Welch developed the Family Nurture Intervention in order to improve the quality of the mother infant emotional connection. Later, she developed the Welch Emotional Connection Scale (WECS) in to objectively assess the quality of the emotional connection. The measures include: eye contact or gaze aversion, physical attraction or avoidance, vocal cooing or distress, and reciprocal responsiveness. With this model, Welch developed her theory in order to explain her observations. This is the same approach Dr. Bowen used in his work. If the theory didn’t fit the observations, the theory was wrong and needed to be adjusted.

The emotion connection emotional contact continuum

Welch’s concept of emotional connection exists along a continuum of maladaptive to adaptive. An observer can quickly “score” how adaptive or not the connection is using the measure in the WECS. The quality of this connection sets a foundation for the quality of emotional regulation and social interactions of the child. Being on a continuum, there are no categories that are artificially created and labeled. The mother and child aren’t broken or “normal”, they are just at a point on a continuum as an outcome of natural processes.

There is more research being done using the Family Nurture Intervention with very positive results. Biology appears to be telling us that Welch’s “emotional connection” is the first stage of being in a relationship. It is an immature relationship and highly fused. I also believe that biology is tells us what an adaptive, mature relationship looks like. In fact, I think it would look like a mature version of WECS!

It appears that our relationship self develops along a continuum of emotional connection (fusion) to good emotional contact (differentiated). And I’m still working to move along the continuum towards being more differentiated. At least I know I’m moving in the adaptive direction.

Thank you for your interest in family systems.

Comments are welcome: dave.galloway@livingsystems.ca

This post was inspired by this article:  6 week intervention.

Read more about Bowen Theory here

This is brief overview of Bowen Theory in Psychology Today: Bowen Theory.

May 14
Love0
Mother and infant

Emotional Connection Theory

By emotional contact, fusion, togetherness

Emotional Connection Theory – what is it?

Emotional Connection theory is an attempt to explain the mother infant bonding process. The authors believe that the mother infant bonding is a learned or conditional response. This learning occurs during the natural process of mother and infant interactions. The mother and newborn develop a connection by touching, looking at each other, using familiar sounds, and speaking. It is an adaptive process to have the mother and infant automatically orient and approach to each other. Based on their findings, the authors suggest that the mother and fetus develop this adaptive orientation during a full-term pregnancy. If fact, it was Dr. Welch’s work related to premature infants that let to the development of this theory.

Natural experiment of emotional connection

Dr. Welch, who has worked with infants for years, wondered why some mothers and infants did well after a premature birth while others did not. She observed some mothers did not develop a “bond” with the infant. This tended to manifest in mothers as anxiety because of having a “difficult” infant. The infants would display a non-orienting, avoidant type behavior. The infants would later have less emotional regulation and more difficulty socializing. Dr. Welch developed the Family Nurture Intervention process that can substantially restore the adaptive orienting – approach behavior (the bond). This intervention involves one-hour sessions where the mother and infant interact through smell, touch, and eye contact. Importantly, the mother talks to the infant and expresses her emotions. (Welch, et al. 2019).

Key aspects of emotional connection

This is what Dr. Welch wrote about the mother’s talking to the infant.

  • “The mothers were led by the Nurture Specialist to speak directly to their infants in an emotional manner, including expression of their upset feelings about the early birth, their infant’s fragile condition, and about the hardships posed to the pair by NICU care. They were asked to speak in their native language, the emotional language spoken to them by their own mothers and family, while establishing eye contact.”

In another paper, Dr Welch expressed as follows:

  • Crying is one of the deepest, most powerful, and most therapeutic emotions a mother can express to her baby in the NICU…the mother typically feels an emotional connection to her baby, most often for the first time.

Special emphasis on relationships

Another interesting aspect of the author’s work is the special emphasis on reciprocity and relationship. Both the mother and infant become conditioned to each other. They are co-regulating each other at the autonomic nervous system level and at a behavioral level. They both orient to each other and they both approach each other. It becomes so automatic that it appears to be instinctual. But that it can be disrupted and then “repaired” supports the idea that both the mother and infant learn this behavior. They learn via a Pavlovian level conditioning and not via a cognitive process, which isn’t possible for the infant.

The first stage of emotional contact

So what does this have to do with Bowen Family Systems Theory? I think it’s interesting in several ways. First, the concept of Emotional Connection is like Bowen’s concept of emotional contact. The mother is making good emotional contact with the infant. She can express anything that is meaningful and important to her child. The expression of any meaningful and important idea to is a key point in the concept of emotional contact. It would be fascinating to track reactivity in two adults over a period of six weeks of having meaningful conversations with each other. (Note – There is no trying to change the other’s thinking. Each is working to be as emotionally non-reactive as possible, while simply sharing their thoughts, fears, hopes and dreams about whatever is meaningful to them.)

Second, there is a special emphasis on the reciprocity of the relationship interactions. This is not about either the mother or the child. It’s about the relationship process.

Third, this is taking place at the level of physiology. Dr. Bowen would refer to this as the emotional system level.

An adaptive level of fusion

The term fusion often has a negative connotation when one talks about differentiation. Fusion implies that person “A” is automatically reactive to person “B”. This automatic reactivity leads to automatic behaviors that may not be thoughtful or effective. But with emotional connection, this automatic response is effective. I believe that Dr. Bowen was referring to fusion as something that represents my lack of differentiation. For example, my reduced ability to think and act for myself, while not impinging on others. Or, my ability to not change my thinking, or my principles, in order to avoid tension or conflict, or in order to gain approval.

Differentiation is a developmental process, a process of maturation, from being more fused to being far less fused and more differentiated. Thus fusion, or automatic responsiveness, isn’t all bad. Some aspects of it are adaptive.

The authors also propose an alternative to attachment theory. I’ll explore that in the next post.

Thank you for your interest in family systems.

Comments are welcome: dave.galloway@livingsystems.ca

The following articles inspired this post.

Impacts of Family Nurture Intervention

How babies learn: The autonomic socioemotional reflex

Read more about Bowen Theory here

This is a brief overview of Bowen Theory in Psychology Today: Bowen Theory.

Apr 24
Love0
Infant benefits

Change a preterm brain

By emotional contact, fusion

The Power of Emotional Connection

(Please note: This post could create powerful feelings in some individuals. The research references are listed below and will provide a more complete description of the material. They are quite easy to read and understand.)

Changing a preterm brain is possible.  The Family Nurture Intervention had a positive impact on the development of infants in a control group study. The FNI process, which lasted for six weeks with 36 hours of treatment, resulted in improved brain function, overall health, and development. These improvements persisted through the five years of the research.

The researches report findings in 18 papers but reported that the brain changes were the most significant. Notably, prefrontal brain functioning improves over the six weeks to be comparable to that of a full-term infant. These changes persist and predict function at 18 months. But what is it that facilitates the changes?

Family Nurture Intervention

The intervention includes one-hour sessions where the mother holds and talks to the preterm infant. Skin contact, smells, and tone of voice are an important part of these sessions. This leads to co-regulating each other’s autonomic nervous system. The researchers propose a concept called Calming Cycle Theory to explain this. I’ll review this in the next blog post.

Emotional connection is key to changing the preterm brain

An important aspect of the FNI is the mother fully expressing her emotions to the child. Even those thought to be negative, such as her worries and fears about the premature birth process. This facilitates a cycle of calming that literally programs the nervous systems of both the mother and infant. The researchers reported that the “Crying is one of the deepest, most powerful, and most therapeutic emotions a mother can express to her baby in the NICU. It is common for the mother to hold back crying.” This openness allows the mother to feel more connected to her infant.

In order to measure the quality of the emotional connection, Dr. Welch developed the Welch Emotional Connection Scale (WECS). This instrument measures behaviour (e.g., approach orientation) and physiology (e.g. vagal tone). This allows the tracking of changes over the period of the intervention.

It is the author’s belief, supported by studies, that our biology is designed to have the infant learn the foundation of socio-emotional interactions, such as orienting and co regulation, in the womb. Because the brain is plastic enough, programming the brain of a preterm infant and mother is possible with the right intervention.

What about Bowen theory?

There are several aspects that make this body of work relevant to Bowen Family Systems Theory. First, this is a relationship process. The researchers stress the relationship aspects of the intervention. Second, it shows how sensitive human nervous systems, especially developing ones, are to each other. The sensitive starts in the womb. Third is how repeated interactions with an individual can program automatic responses. Finally, the work shows the importance of openly expressing feelings to another individual.

When do you feel the most connected?

I would propose that one feels the most connected to another person when they are sharing important and meaning experiences. Hopes, dreams, fears, worries. Being about to share them with someone that doesn’t judge or react in a way that impedes the sharing. I think this would be calming. This is what Dr. Bowen described as good emotional contact. The researchers not only found it was calming, but it literally rewired the infant brain.

Dr. Bowen proposed that a measure of being more differentiated is the ability to have good emotional contact with family members. It appears that this process actually starts in the womb, but is something that we need to keep working on to fully mature as individuals.

Regular emotion contact appears to be what the doctor ordered.

 

Thank you for your interest in family systems.

Comments are welcome: dave.galloway@livingsystems.ca

This post was inspired by this article:  6 week intervention.

Read more about Bowen Theory here

This is a brief overview of Bowen Theory in Psychology Today: Bowen Theory.

 

 

Apr 15
Love0

What is good emotional contact

By Anxiety, differentiation, emotional system, togetherness

Dr. Bowen and Dr. Kerr have written about the value of having good emotional contact with family members. But what is “good emotional contact”? How is this different from an emotional connection? How does it relate to one’s level of differentiation? Is this something a person can intentionally work at increasing the quality or amount of emotional contact with others? And importantly, what would the benefit be to oneself and others of having good emotional contact?

What is emotional contact?

Neither Bowen nor Kerr clearly defines the phrase “emotional contact.” Bowen used the term thirty-three times, and Kerr more than that. Dr. Bowen also used “viable” and “meaningful” as part of the term. I will do my best to reverse engineer what I think the meaning is.

Put on your systems hat, as we must think of systems to find meaning. I believe Dr. Bowen intentionally chose the term because it is descriptive and accurate for the idea he wanted to convey.

Emotional connection is different.

Emotional Contact is not an emotional connection. Connection means “connected,” as A and B are connected. This implies that when A moves, B moves. Contact means they are touching, so A and B can move independently of each other.

Bowen was very specific in his definition of emotion, which stems from biology. Emotion relates to our physiological and biological functioning. Having low blood sugar is an emotional level state. Feeling hungry, consciously, is what Bowen called “feeling.” Strictly speaking, an emotional connection is when my emotional state changes in response to your emotional state. I’m automatically getting reactive. The “connection” is strong enough that the reactive behaviour actually gets in the way. I’m not autonomous in my feelings and thinking. This is fusion. You get anxious, and this leads to me getting more anxious. (I’m simplifying things as always.)

Emotional contact – I’m next to you, not stuck to you.

So, with good emotional contact, I’m in contact with you but not “stuck” or reactive to you. I’m at least not so reactive that it impedes my functioning. The topic of discussion is “emotional” in that one could physiologically measure changes that occur. We experience these topics as important and meaningful. They might be very impactful or scary. They could be very positive or negative. But, because I’m only in contact and not connected, I’m better able to manage my level of reactivity. I’m able to listen closely because I am genuinely interested. I don’t have an urge to fix anything or change your mind. I’m thoughtful about what I share, but not so worried about you I do not share my thinking. We have a meaningful exchange of our opinions. We learn about what is important to each other and how we think on that topic.

Emotions are sticky.

It’s easy to get “connected” and lose “contact.” Poor emotional contact can show up in several ways. There is distancing or avoiding on one end of a continuum and being too active and preoccupied on the other end. Avoiding contact or having shallow conversations without any significance falls under the distant side. This distancing is a form of reactivity, actually. But then getting reactive while in contact can show up as avoiding a topic, changing the topic, giving advice, being bored, frustrated or impatient. Trying to fix the other person’s problem trying to get them to change their mind or opinion is also reactivity. All of these mechanisms about trying to manage the anxiety or tension that comes up. All of these things get in the way of managing the tension and just listening with a curious, non judgemental attitude. This doesn’t mean you don’t have your own opinions or that you agree with everything.

Thinking systems can help

One thing I try to do is maintain a systems point of view. This gets me more curious about the *process* of how things came to be the way they are. It helps me avoid the blaming of cause and effect thinking and the urge to get I’m not sure that anyone wants to only talk about important and meaningful things all the time. Just getting know a person, staying informed about their life is also part of a good emotional contact. So don’t go overboard or you’ll stop getting invited to parties! Talk about the weather, sports, food, hobbies. Be open to where it might go. If weather leads to very meaningful and important discussion let it happen.

As with other aspects of working on self, I do this for my growth. I work on this because it’s important and meaningful to me. I also know that having good emotional contact is good for my emotional and physical health. Good emotional contact is an antidote to loneliness. Who will you work to have good emotional contact with? Like any fitness program, too much too soon is not recommended. Consistency is more important than intensity. Slow and steady wins the race.

Mar 25
Love0

What’s missing in best relationship advice?

By Uncategorized

Relationship advice – Ideas from a systems viewpoint

We are learning more about how good relationships are important to optimal functioning and health. The research on loneliness is making this clear, for example. A recent NY Times article offering the “best” relationship advice (the link is below) is the inspiration for this post. I believe systems thinking has some important ideas to offer.

The article points out that arguments and fights about trivial issues are actually about something else. The article offers questions one could ask their partner. Which is fine, but I believe there are important questions to ask oneself. Finally, the article brings up the topic of sex. This points to a very important issue that I’ll get to.

Idea #0 – It’s not about the “thing”

Arguments or fights are about being reactive. The topic of the disagreement is often about something relatively unimportant. For example, what’s for dinner, where are we going for dinner, who’s making dinner? Or what time is dinner or who’s coming to dinner? You get the point. They are not about a serious issue like a terminal disease, bankruptcy, or a family member being in danger. They are a signal that something related to the “thing”, is being perceived as a threat of some kind.

Idea #1 – Look at Primary Social Cues

Dr. Kerr writes about the four primary social cues. They are attention, approval, expectations, and distress. These are things that we all want and are sensitive to. When we don’t get attention or approval, we can make up stories why that might be. When we think our partner is expecting something, or we expect something from them, this can activate reactivity. Likewise, if we are in distress or think our partner is in distress, we can certainly be more reactive.

Idea #2 – What do I want?

I can get reactive when MY wants around the primary social cues aren’t being met. So it’s important for me to observe myself, to check myself on this item. Am I being argumentative because I wanted something (expectation) and you are critical of me for that (approval)? Am I afraid to ask for what I want and thus getting frustrated? Actions speak louder than words. For example, my frustration coming out as being grumpy or sarcastic has a more negative impact than just stating what I would like. So is he argument really about some underlying frustration that you don’t want to discuss?

Idea #3 – Observe and look deeper

Dr. Bowen wrote a lot about the concept of emotional process. To simplify, my automatic reactivity to sometime my partner did or said (or a look or a tone) is “emotional process”. Usually this is outside of awareness unless we look for a feeling, often some kind of discomfort. The brain is very good at jumping ahead and offering predictions. One prediction is: “If I ask for what I want, there will be a conflict and that’s bad.” Another would be: “My partner isn’t as interested in me anymore. Our relationship is in trouble.” These kinds of predictions, often based on very little information, are treated as threats. Threats trigger reactivity.

Idea #4 – Follow the reactivity

What happens when one feels threatened? They can get defensive or offensive. Both are reactivity, and this reactivity can lead to arguments. So if you notice you are getting reactivity, work backwards. What appears to be threatening to you? What story am you telling yourself that is contributing to the negative feelings? How true is that story? Where did it come from? It often relates to an emotional want that wasn’t completely resolved in one’s family of origin. It’s your work to manage that and not let it run the show. (If you think that this stuff is going to take some effort and time, you are 100% right! But, it is worth it.)

Idea #5 – Your Relationship is reciprocal

Remember that this same process is going on in your partner. What’s worse is that it is reciprocal, such that you can feed into each other’s negative stories. An important point is that I can only manage myself. I can’t manage my partner. My job is to be my most mature self. And that’s a big enough job!

Here’s an example. I have a presentation to complete and give in two days. My immaturity means that I’m getting anxious about it. I’m very focused on this. My partner is picking up on this and it’s making them more tense. They don’t like the tension when I get into “presentation mode”. They don’t want to upset me so they get busy with something themselves. It was their turn to cook, but they were busy and now dinner is going to be late. I’m hungry, because I wasn’t eating properly during the day. So I complain with “why can you just make dinner on time for once?” Boom, the fight starts.

It’s NOT about dinner. It’s all about both of us NOT managing anxiety well enough. I really need to talk about the space I need to get the presentation done AND work on not emoting my tension. My partner needs to be better at letting me be focused while not being run by it. Asking me when and what I would like for dinner, for example, but NOT reacting to a curt comment like “whatever!” My partner needs to be firm that my “stuff” around presentations is mine to work on. Sure, they will be supportive, but not a doormat.

Idea #6. It’s not really about sex

The secret about sex is that it’s not about sex. It’s about any topic that is “difficult” to talk about. The difficulty isn’t about the topic. Unless it is literally something you don’t actually know about. It’s the stories about the topic and the imagined threats or consequences they bring up. Such as, we aren’t having sex like we used to. Is our relationship over? Even if it is about sex as in what kind or how often, it’s the worry about differences that usually drives the perceived threats and consequences. So sex, money, kids, parents, health – they are all the same process even though they are different topics.

Idea #7. Talk about MY stuff – listen to their stuff

I can only talk about what is going on for me. I can’t talk about “us” or “we”. I can talk about what I would like or not like. I can talk about what gets me anxious and what I’m trying to do about it. I can talk about my experience and how I’m working to manage my reactivity. And I can listen. Really listen. This gets into what Dr. Bowen called good emotional contact. That will be the topic of my next post.

I started this post with “Advice” and then changed to “Idea”. These are ideas from my understanding of systems thinking in relationships. They have been useful to others and myself. But you’ll need to think about their usefulness to you.

Thank you for your interest in family systems.

Send comments to dave.galloway@livingsystems.ca.

You can read more about Bowen Theory here.

You can read the original New York Times article here

You can read about the importance of relationships here

 

 

 

 

Mar 14
Love0

Be a better observer

By Uncategorized

Observe, Evaluate, Interrupt: Being More Thoughtful in Real-Time

Being a better observer is essential for becoming more differentiated, a fundamental concept of Bowen family systems theory. Differentiation of self has two parts. The first is distinguishing thoughtful thinking from automatic emotions, feelings, and reactions. The second is having a level of autonomy in relationships, holding onto something you value even when people pressure you otherwise.

“Everything Isn’t Terrible” by Dr. Kathleen Smith is a clear and relatable book on how to work on differentiation of self. The book examines how to manage oneself in different areas of life and relationships, even when others don’t change. She gives a basic guide for differentiation: observe, evaluate, and interrupt.

  1. Observe: What do I do to manage anxiety?
  2. Evaluate: Is it helpful? Is it how I want to live?
  3. Interrupt: Interrupt the automatic and manage the discomfort of doing things differently.

Zoom Made Me Numb

Here is my example of using this process. I am in my third year of Living Systems’ clinical internship program. As part of the training, there are monthly clinical Zoom conferences with instructors, clinicians, and trainees. People present papers, cases, and ideas, followed by discussion and questions from the group.

In my first year, I noticed my hands would go numb when I pressed the “raise hand” button to speak up in a meeting. (I was that nervous about speaking up!) The fact that my hands went numb only increased my nervousness about putting in my thoughts and questions. One quick, simple way to relieve my discomfort was to take my hand down and never press that button again. Not pressing the raise hand button would have been a fast track to less anxiety. But it was a slow track to learning, being engaged, and possibly working on my differentiation.

Here’s how I implemented Dr. Smith’s O-E-I framework.

First Observe

I started by observing myself. “Hey! My hands are numb. That means I am feeling stressed about something! This feels gross and uncomfortable. I don’t like it.” Then, I observed my surroundings. “I just clicked on the “raise hand” button. I guess I’m nervous about speaking up. What if I mess up, or I go blank? What if I say something stupid, and everyone finds out how little I know?”

Observing is about stopping long enough to notice all of those automatic reactions we have little control over. It also includes noticing the feelings and stories I’m telling myself.

Second Evaluate

Do my physical, feeling, and mental responses match what is happening right now? And if not, what is the mismatch about, and what can I do about that? My numb hands are a physical response to my anxiety. The numbness does not feel good, and because it is uncomfortable, I could quickly get more anxious. This is called “having anxiety about one’s anxiety.” When I got anxious about my anxiety in this context, my brain got a lot less thoughtful. For example, I would think, “Everyone is going to think I’m an idiot for what I’m about to share.” If I let my automatic anxiety run the show, I would feel incompetent and never raise my hand.

Evaluating is putting a pause button on those anxious thoughts and seeing if they are valid. We may not have control over our first thoughts, but we can work on our ability to have choice and control over our second thoughts. We do that by assessing whether the first thought is factual. The physical and feeling responses are automatic. The mental reactions – the stories I make up – can be a good place to start.

Third Interrupt

I may not immediately stop my hands from going numb in a Zoom call, but I have options about what I do about the numb hands. A bit of evaluation helped me remember: 1) I have meaningful things to share too. 2) I share what is valuable for me and it’s okay if that differs from what others find valuable. 3) If I sound foolish, I likely won’t be ridiculed. I can change the stories and my perception of what things mean, especially if they are not based on fact but are false assumptions.

Interrupting often has two steps. The first step is to correct and shift the automatic thoughts, the stories I’m telling myself. The second step is to do something about it in the presence of others. (Remember the definition of differentiation? This is the microscopic work of differentiation: me and my numb hands one Tuesday evening per month.) The anxiety is coming from what I think others will think and do. So, acting in the presence of others is vital. Differentiation of self is all about holding onto self in relationships.

And I did something about it in the presence of others. I did not run away from the “raise hand button.” I kept it up and dared to speak. Sometimes, I would write out my question in case I got so nervous that my mind went blank when it was my turn. The biggest thing, though, was thinking about what I value. I value learning and engaging in dialogue. And if I didn’t put my hand up, I wouldn’t be living out of that value.

This does work

I am in my third year and rarely get numb hands in Zoom calls. Sometimes, I get a little heart fluttery when I say something, but I still have the courage to speak. I have even said some unclear and likely “stupid” things in those calls. And I’ve survived!

I observed, evaluated, and interrupted an anxious, uncomfortable experience. And I’ve learned through practice that I can do things even when my hands are numb! One small step at a time is how climbers get up Mount Everest. One slight change at a time gets one more differentiated.

Autonomic Awareness

Another area that has been helpful for me in the observe, evaluate, interrupt model? Understanding the autonomic nervous system and how the body responds to real or perceived threats. You can read more in this post.  

Knowing the specifics of my autonomic states helps me manage my immediate panic and judgment of automatic reactions. I can better remember that even uncomfortable stress responses are adaptive and there to help me respond to challenges. I also know that my body sometimes misinterprets situations! So when I can observe, evaluate, and interrupt, I have more space to manage the automatic. I am still human and prone to reacting. But this practice helps me be a bit more thoughtful in managing myself.

Thank you for your interest in systems.

Dixie Vandersluys

Living Systems is offering a conference this April about reactivity in relationships. Find out more here.

For more information from Kathleen Smith, including a link to her book, “Everything Isn’t Terrible,” see her blog.

Dixie Vandersluys, M.A., C.C.C., is a counsellor based in Manitoba. She is a third-year trainee with Living Systems. She recently completed the Polyvagal Institute’s first-ever certificate course.