Family of Origin and Interpersonal Issues (From: Understanding Group Dynamics)
One of our major operating assumptions is to assume that the way people act in your group is representative of how they tend to act in any group throughout their lives. Of course, there would be exceptions to this, but generally speaking, people will often re-create the same patterns and behavior in group that have been established as templates from their early years. This means that people will create a social microcosm, an extended reality of what they are used to in their outside world. They will negotiate with others in the group for comfort zones that are familiar. They will engage in the same dysfunctional patterns that get them in trouble elsewhere. And they will respond to people not just as they really are but how they imagine them to be. Simply put, one’s interpersonal style and maladaptive patterns that are present in every other facet of life ultimately will appear in group, too. Regardless of attempts to change or hide patterns, each group member’s true self will appear. In reality, then, there is really no need to describe one’s interpersonal problems or difficulties in life, as they will eventually come to life in the group.
Discussion:
When we talk about the concept of social microcosm with our students and group members, it often creates some personal anxiety. The premise of this idea is that regardless of your efforts to hide, appear different, or present a different version of yourself in group, the true you will ultimately be revealed. That can be scary simply because of the notion that one cannot hide in group. Putting your anxiety aside, what might that mean for you in a group setting? What parts of yourself, either parts of your personality or interpersonal behavior, do you like to hide or keep hidden from people when you first meet them? What are you fears around having these parts of you revealed? How do you think that people respond to these parts of you?
Under the right circumstances and leadership, the group environment can be used to produce a “corrective emotional experience” (Frank & Ascher, 1951). The premise of the corrective emotional experience is to expose the group member to emotional stimulation that he or she could not handle in the past. However, in a supportive and effective group setting, the group member can work through this experience in a more productive manner, essentially healing the wounds of the past.
For the corrective experience to occur, the group must be safe and supportive enough so that sensitive and risky, interpersonal emotions can be honestly expressed, and there must be enough engagement and honest feedback between group members to permit effective reality testing so that the group members can explore the situation with consensual validation from others. As this occurs, one can gain increased awareness and recognition of entrenched patterns and inappropriateness of some interpersonal feelings and behavior. An individual can also use the group to interact more deeply and honestly to try new behaviors and work through destructive patterns. Such an interaction would look something like this:
Dorothy: When I was your age, I never . . .
Nevin:
|
What is this crap about when you were my age? You were NEVER my age! I’m so sick of hearing old people like you judge me when you don’t even . . .
|
Leader:
|
Hey, Nevin, calm down. I can see you’re upset with what Dorothy said but you need . . .
|
Nevin:
|
You’re another one! Always telling me what I need to do. You know what? Y’all can just kiss my ass. I’ve had just about enough of this.
|
Monty:
|
Nevin, man, hey, the guy’s just trying to help. Tranquillo, buddy. He don’t mean nothing. He’s just trying to help.
|
Nevin:
|
Stay out of it. This ain’t your business either. This is between me and Dorothy. She’s been on my back since this group started.
|
Leader:
|
Okay, Nevin, let’s stop for a minute and look at what’s going on.
|
Nevin:
|
What is the point!
|
Leader:
|
I know that the two of you have not been getting along since the group began. It may be hard to understand right now, but I believe there is a good chance that you will learn from each other and ultimately be important to each other over the course of this group.
|
Nevin:
|
What do you mean?
|
Leader:
|
Even though I know this is uncomfortable for Dorothy and Monty, I can see that your feelings are hurt, too. I think this is important stuff. In all the time we’ve been together, Nevin, this is the first time you’ve really spoken from your heart.
|
Nevin:
|
Damn right! I am pissed off.
|
Leader: And that is good. And while I applaud your courage to finally say out loud what you’ve been feeling—including confronting me, too—I can’t help but think there’s something else going on here as well.
Nevin: Whaddaya mean?
Leader: Anyone want to help Nevin with the question?
You can see how the leader is trying to get other group members involved in sorting out why Nevin reacted so strongly to Dorothy’s offer of help and then reacted rather strongly to his friend Monty’s support. The leader has a hypothesis that what is going on right now has little to do with the present members but is actually a reenactment of previous interactions that Nevin has experienced with older authority figures. With further exploration and prompting it is discovered that Dorothy reminds Nevin of his fifth-grade teacher, the one who beat him with a set of extra long rosary beads for no reason that he could ever understand. Furthermore, the whole group reminded him of situations he had faced over and over again in his life—a bunch of dogooder white folks pretending to care but who secretly harbor beliefs that he is not capable and inferior.
It turned out that this interaction was a very familiar one to Nevin, and so he began to unconsciously respond in the same way that he had always responded in the past. He got angry as a way to push people away in an attempt to protect himself. This time, however, after the intervention by the group and the group leader, events unfolded considerably different from that in the past. Once it was recognized what was occurring, the dynamic could be labeled and the alternative responses could be developed.
Reviewing the process that was just described, there will be times when you are sitting in groups and you notice that people seem to be reacting not only to what is actually occurring in the room but also to some perception they have that is more influenced by their past experiences rather than present circumstances. In the psychological literature, this is often called transference, yet psychoanalytic theorist Harry Stack Sullivan called it parataxic distortion. This describes the tendency in group not to see others for who they are, but rather to distort them into who they represent or who we expect them to be based on our own past experiences. So this means that we (group members and even the group leaders) often are not relating to others in reality but instead relating to internal ideas and fantasies of what that person represents.
• What is this emotional outburst really about?
• What is this person seeing, feeling, and experiencing that I am missing?
• What is it about this person’s cultural, ethnic, and gender background that would explain his or her unique experience?
• How does this fit with what else I know about this person?
• To what extent is this person distorting or exaggerating what is going on?
• How are others in the group reacting to what is happening?
• What does my intuition tell me is going on?
• What can I do to help this person become more aware of his or her behavior and find connections to the past?
• Who might this group member represent?
• What are the intrapersonal needs that are trying to be met through the distorted relationship?
• What do I need to do to work this through toward closure in the group?
• What object lessons can be generalized from this single episode to other group members’ experiences?
