MAKING
CHANGE
By Max Lloyd
Have you ever wondered why changing some aspect of your behaviour can be so
hard to accomplish? Or watched a friend or family member continue in a pattern
that you and they knew was destructive, yet seemed impervious to change? You
would think that with the amount of popular psychology, self-help books, life
coaches and improvement seminars like the Forum available, personal change
would be a doddle. And yet it isn't.
For a good part of the 20th century the technology of personal change has
utilized approaches derived from the behavioural sciences and cognitive psychology.
In many instances these approaches (like the self-help methods mentioned above)
have been very useful. Yet they assume that all that is needed is an understanding
of what it is that needs to change and a breakdown of that change into small,
accomplishable steps. In many cases the targeted behaviour diminishes for
a while, then re-emerges later, typically as a response to stress.
At the same time, other counselling approaches have stressed the value of
empathy, insight and experiential methods. While these too have been of value,
they have lacked the structure and the research basis of cognitive/behavioural
approaches. And some were just overly complex or plain stupid. Does anyone
remember, let alone use, primal scream therapy these days? And what about
NLP (Neuro linguistic programming to the uninitiated or those with short memories)
and its ability to manipulate transactions such as car or house sales?
Over the last 10 years or so, another approach has been developed by Dr Jeffrey
Young and his colleagues in New York. In essence, Young suggests that we all
develop patterns of responding to life's situations during our childhood and
that these patterns retain a high degree of potency when it comes to influencing
our behaviours as adults. While we may deal with issues in a cognitive sense,
unless the pattern is understood, recognised and broken then we will revert
to it, especially during times of stress.
Nothing earth-shatteringly new in this, I hear you say. The same idea has
been a stock-in-trade notion of the behavioural sciences since the time of
Freud. And that is certainly true. However, what is different about Young's
formulation of this idea is that he has quantified through research a series
of "life traps" or Schemas through which people typically relate
to their experience of life. As well, he and his co-workers have arranged
a marriage of cognitive, experiential, relational and behavioural approaches
to assist individuals to change the invasive patterns that at times seem to
run our lives.
Young describes a life trap (or Schema) as a lifelong pattern or theme that
is self-destructive and seems to almost have a life of its own in that it
will struggle for survival despite efforts by the individual to change. He
identifies six broad categories (basic safety, connection to others, autonomy,
self esteem, self expression and realistic limits) within which specific lifetraps
may develop.
As an example, consider the Abandonment lifetrap: this is a pervasive feeling
that the people you love and care about will in someway leave you and you
will be emotionally isolated forever. This may be through death, moving away
or leaving a relationship. The point is that whatever the circumstances you
somehow feel that you will be left alone. Furthermore, the pervasive nature
and "survival instinct" of the lifetrap will result in you making
choices or behaving in such a way that exactly that does happen. Perhaps you
cling too closely because of the fear of abandonment and ironically smother
people into leaving you.
A common example is that of a person who has a childhood abandonment issue,
and as a result forms adult relationships with partners who are not available
to them. Forming a relationship with someone already in a relationship they
are not willing to leave, or forming a relationship with someone who works
very long hours and is not emotionally expressive, are two examples.
Subjugation is another common lifetrap. Here you tend to put your own needs
and desires last in order to please others or meet their needs. You effectively
allow others to control you, either out of guilt or fear. You may end up feeling
genuinely resentful that there is no time or energy for you and blame this
on others.
The fascinating thing about Young's lifetrap or schema theory is his way of
accounting for differences in manifestation of the lifetrap. Several children
grow up in a family environment where physical abuse is present. According
to the lifetrap idea, they should all develop the same patterns of behaviour
as adults. We know this does not happen. There are two reasons for this. One
clearly is that we differ in terms of temperament, which is thought to contain
major aspects of heredity. As a result, we also react to the childhood situations
that cause lifetrap patterns to develop in different ways: we either surrender
to the situation, try to escape or counterattack.
The nature of our response makes a great difference to the outcome. Consider
three individuals who all have a Defectiveness lifetrap: they each grew up
with the sense that they were somehow flawed. Perhaps they were constantly
criticised, unable to do anything right or meet the unrelenting standards
of their parents, or maybe they experienced childhood abuse. As a result of
temperament, one person surrenders to the defectiveness lifetrap and becomes
"defective". He does not make eye contact when you meet him, has
difficulty expressing opinions, thinks of himself as being "one down"
in relation to others and has extreme difficulty mixing socially.
The next of the trio seeks to escape the defectiveness lifetrap by settling
for superficial relationships. He has never been close to anybody special
and spends most of his time with mates in the pub or out fishing. He is married
but there is no real intimacy - he chose a woman who is out of touch with
her feelings. Thus he is not exposed to criticism or is able to shrug it off
in a superficial way. At age 40 he is now a dependent drinker, which again
reduces his ability to hear or respond to criticism.
Our third candidate, a woman, counterattacks to deal with her feelings of
defectiveness. She appears self-confident and assertive, holds down a good
job with high responsibility. In fact, she is a snob and looks down on others.
She has very strong views about most things and does not hesitate to let you
know what they are and how she is right. She is married to a man who is quiet
and sacrificing and she chooses friends who tend to reinforce her position.
From an external position, you would think there was little in common with
these three people, yet they are all manifesting a version of the Defectiveness
lifetrap.
Jeffrey Young's approach to personal change is an integrative one, utilizing
some of the best in technique and approach from a variety of psychological
theories, yet retaining a practical, problem solving approach. It is currently
used by a small number of practitioners within New Zealand and has a growing
body of support worldwide.
It is accessible through a number of publications, notably Schema Therapy:
A Practitioner's Guide and a self help guide, Reinventing Your Life. This
latter title makes Young et al's thinking about lifetraps, which are referred
to as maladaptive schemas, simple and understandable. Both are available on
Amazon.com
Max Lloyd
has a counselling practice in Ponsonby, Auckland. He can be reached at max.lloyd@xtra.co.nz
or at Health@11, ph.09 360 6026.