Some years ago
I held a workshop for therapeutic foster parents titled The Bright and Dark Sides
of the Wounded Healer. In it, I defined therapy as “the response the child needed
when she was first hurt.” I hold to this definition, which contains several
meanings. One is that the essence of healing is neither science nor art, but
nature: the good relationship that takes away a child’s pain. Another meaning
is that dysfunction grows from pain and injury and that these must be “felt
through” rather than reasoned, tough-loved, bright-thought, “spiritualed,” drugged
or behaved away. And another is that this definition doesn’t change across the
lifetime.
Look at the
powers that help a child recover. The mother’s care and deep listening, full
patience, the buoyant “arrived” strength to hear and contain pain and not
flinch, believing her child not spinning his story, and her power to strive for
real justice, or at least emotional justice.
Why should
healing be any different for an adult? Especially when so many have been
waiting all these years – since childhood – for it?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are welcome, but I'd suggest you first read "Feeling-centered therapy" and "Ocean and boat" for a basic introduction to my kind of theory and therapy.