Curiosity as an Intervention by Linda Stewart MA
Each client that enters our therapy room has their own point of view. Bowen’s Internal Working Model (IWM) - is the lens through which our clients make sense of the world and their own experiences, including the thoughts and feelings that they have in response to those experiences. IWM and other terms for this concept of individual perspective are incredibly important for professionals to keep in mind. We owe it to our clients to be curious about their IWM and we can use curiosity as a tool in order to get a feel for and acclimate to the lenses through which our clients see the world. In this way, curiosity enhances our initial and ongoing assessment.
The first step of curiosity is to acknowledge that we wear our own lenses, and even so, be willing to put on and peer through our clients’ lenses so that we might have a better look. Clients are best helped when we leave any assumptions and quick conclusions attached to our own personal lenses outside of the therapy room. Our clients benefit when we listen and engage with what they bring into the room. G. Cecchin, G. Lane, and W.A. Ray (1993, 1994) have written two books in particular regarding therapist ‘prejudice’ and curiosity that you may find helpful for diving deeper into this topic of how a therapist with his or her own lens can best engage with a clients’ lens and experience. It is unethical, and can do harm to the very people we wish to help if our biases, personal experiences, and own lenses cloud or distort the lens of our clients. Even if we have had a similar thought, fear, or trauma as a client, we dare not presume to know what it is like for another person with a different Family of Origin, culture, biology, faith journey or religion, or the cumulative effect of countless personal experiences. We must remain curious.
In terms of theory and evidence-based practices, we are better therapists when we follow the client’s reported experiences within the framework of our theory and professional training. Your theory will inform how you use curiosity as an intervention as well as what you are curious about. Presenting issues can have predictable aspects for the seasoned therapist, or therapist that finds him or herself in a niched population. However, our client’s personal experience of even a “common” presenting topic can be very individual and specifically different from other clients’ experiences of the same issue or concern. Internal working models (IWM) influence and color the way that our clients experience even the most prevalent of issues. If we, as clinicians remain curious about our client’s view of their presenting and other issues, then we will be able to better assess what is truly being presented. In this case, assessing how abortion has or has not affected our client will influence treatment plans and treatment outcomes.
In the interest of what we are doing here at AATTART, this means remaining curious about an experience that already has countless voices telling our clients how they should feel and respond or how they should not feel and not respond. Even more so, we can serve our clients by being curious because, quite possibly, no person and no space has allowed them to process how they feel about the abortion experience at all. While there are similarities in experience and response to abortion or other pregnancy losses, for each man and woman this process is still uniquely his or her own and the journey will be slightly, if not dramatically, different from another’s. Our role as therapist is to offer hope in letting him or her know that they are not isolated in the thoughts and feelings that they have had. Healing is in allowing him or her to explore thoughts and feelings, meaning, and grieving (we must remain curious in order for clients to identify losses, if any). We can maintain a stance of curiosity as we process with our clients in accordance with our theory informed goals for growth and healing.
We cannot presume to know what the abortion experience or decision was like for a client, until we allow him or her to explore what it was like. We cannot presume that he or she is relieved and empowered by their abortion experience, nor can we presume that he or she is unable to cope and that the abortion is at the heart of all other presenting issues brought into the room. Our job is neither to minimize an abortion experience, nor to treat it as a trauma until our client or professional assessment leads us to do so. Assessing for loss can help to clarify the picture and strengthen the power of the lenses we borrow from our client, and pregnancy losses, including abortion, are a part of this. However, as stated earlier, the interpretation of this picture, of this loss, comes from our client.
The curious therapist remains open. Sometimes meaning or interpretations can change for our clients. Perspectives regarding loss can change with another life experience, new information, a new position or view of self, and as primary attachments change. All of this can happen along with or parallel to professional treatment, and even without therapy. Since we are talking about those in therapy - when (in this case) an abortion related loss is disclosed, we assess without bias or assumption. If reasons present later in treatment that prompt re-assessing the abortion related loss or other losses, this is recommended and is consistent with remaining curious about our clients. Remaining curious means that assessment is ongoing and never stops. We remain open to the idea that thoughts and feelings can shift or be processed from a new perspective.
Whether abortion is or is not traumatic for a particular client are not our conclusion to make at the start – but for our client to disclose to us and for us to professionally assess over time. We can follow their experience until we, and most importantly they, have an understanding of what this experience was like for him or her. Abortion can be a traumatic experience for some, and others disclose that it is not a traumatic loss (anecdotal self-reporting support both experiences and peer-reviewed research and articles illustrate both points). We look to the client’s disclosure and whether they experience their report or experience as ego syntonic or ego dystonic. As with any other assessment, we look at the big picture and never distill a client down to one experience or decision. By curiously engaging with our client and viewing the abortion experience through his or her lens, we are more equipped to outline a treatment plan that is appropriate. Assessment is key – without assumptions or bias – and curiosity is the best way to avoid assumptions. When we remain curious, we will serve our clients well and promote better care and research.
References
Cecchin, G., Lane, G. and Ray, W. A. (1993) Irreverence: A Strategy for Therapists’ Survival. London: Karnac Books.
Cecchin, G., Lane, G. and Ray, W. A. (1994) The Cybernetics of Prejudices in the Practice of Psychotherapy. London: Karnac Books.
Each client that enters our therapy room has their own point of view. Bowen’s Internal Working Model (IWM) - is the lens through which our clients make sense of the world and their own experiences, including the thoughts and feelings that they have in response to those experiences. IWM and other terms for this concept of individual perspective are incredibly important for professionals to keep in mind. We owe it to our clients to be curious about their IWM and we can use curiosity as a tool in order to get a feel for and acclimate to the lenses through which our clients see the world. In this way, curiosity enhances our initial and ongoing assessment.
The first step of curiosity is to acknowledge that we wear our own lenses, and even so, be willing to put on and peer through our clients’ lenses so that we might have a better look. Clients are best helped when we leave any assumptions and quick conclusions attached to our own personal lenses outside of the therapy room. Our clients benefit when we listen and engage with what they bring into the room. G. Cecchin, G. Lane, and W.A. Ray (1993, 1994) have written two books in particular regarding therapist ‘prejudice’ and curiosity that you may find helpful for diving deeper into this topic of how a therapist with his or her own lens can best engage with a clients’ lens and experience. It is unethical, and can do harm to the very people we wish to help if our biases, personal experiences, and own lenses cloud or distort the lens of our clients. Even if we have had a similar thought, fear, or trauma as a client, we dare not presume to know what it is like for another person with a different Family of Origin, culture, biology, faith journey or religion, or the cumulative effect of countless personal experiences. We must remain curious.
In terms of theory and evidence-based practices, we are better therapists when we follow the client’s reported experiences within the framework of our theory and professional training. Your theory will inform how you use curiosity as an intervention as well as what you are curious about. Presenting issues can have predictable aspects for the seasoned therapist, or therapist that finds him or herself in a niched population. However, our client’s personal experience of even a “common” presenting topic can be very individual and specifically different from other clients’ experiences of the same issue or concern. Internal working models (IWM) influence and color the way that our clients experience even the most prevalent of issues. If we, as clinicians remain curious about our client’s view of their presenting and other issues, then we will be able to better assess what is truly being presented. In this case, assessing how abortion has or has not affected our client will influence treatment plans and treatment outcomes.
In the interest of what we are doing here at AATTART, this means remaining curious about an experience that already has countless voices telling our clients how they should feel and respond or how they should not feel and not respond. Even more so, we can serve our clients by being curious because, quite possibly, no person and no space has allowed them to process how they feel about the abortion experience at all. While there are similarities in experience and response to abortion or other pregnancy losses, for each man and woman this process is still uniquely his or her own and the journey will be slightly, if not dramatically, different from another’s. Our role as therapist is to offer hope in letting him or her know that they are not isolated in the thoughts and feelings that they have had. Healing is in allowing him or her to explore thoughts and feelings, meaning, and grieving (we must remain curious in order for clients to identify losses, if any). We can maintain a stance of curiosity as we process with our clients in accordance with our theory informed goals for growth and healing.
We cannot presume to know what the abortion experience or decision was like for a client, until we allow him or her to explore what it was like. We cannot presume that he or she is relieved and empowered by their abortion experience, nor can we presume that he or she is unable to cope and that the abortion is at the heart of all other presenting issues brought into the room. Our job is neither to minimize an abortion experience, nor to treat it as a trauma until our client or professional assessment leads us to do so. Assessing for loss can help to clarify the picture and strengthen the power of the lenses we borrow from our client, and pregnancy losses, including abortion, are a part of this. However, as stated earlier, the interpretation of this picture, of this loss, comes from our client.
The curious therapist remains open. Sometimes meaning or interpretations can change for our clients. Perspectives regarding loss can change with another life experience, new information, a new position or view of self, and as primary attachments change. All of this can happen along with or parallel to professional treatment, and even without therapy. Since we are talking about those in therapy - when (in this case) an abortion related loss is disclosed, we assess without bias or assumption. If reasons present later in treatment that prompt re-assessing the abortion related loss or other losses, this is recommended and is consistent with remaining curious about our clients. Remaining curious means that assessment is ongoing and never stops. We remain open to the idea that thoughts and feelings can shift or be processed from a new perspective.
Whether abortion is or is not traumatic for a particular client are not our conclusion to make at the start – but for our client to disclose to us and for us to professionally assess over time. We can follow their experience until we, and most importantly they, have an understanding of what this experience was like for him or her. Abortion can be a traumatic experience for some, and others disclose that it is not a traumatic loss (anecdotal self-reporting support both experiences and peer-reviewed research and articles illustrate both points). We look to the client’s disclosure and whether they experience their report or experience as ego syntonic or ego dystonic. As with any other assessment, we look at the big picture and never distill a client down to one experience or decision. By curiously engaging with our client and viewing the abortion experience through his or her lens, we are more equipped to outline a treatment plan that is appropriate. Assessment is key – without assumptions or bias – and curiosity is the best way to avoid assumptions. When we remain curious, we will serve our clients well and promote better care and research.
References
Cecchin, G., Lane, G. and Ray, W. A. (1993) Irreverence: A Strategy for Therapists’ Survival. London: Karnac Books.
Cecchin, G., Lane, G. and Ray, W. A. (1994) The Cybernetics of Prejudices in the Practice of Psychotherapy. London: Karnac Books.
