« 2008-04-18 | HomePage | 2008-05-01 »
Saturday, 19 April 2008
Extractive identification - Part 2
It is interesting reading the comments here and having heard the comments about extractive identification at the workshop a week ago. There is some similarity.
One needs to distinguish between extractive identification and other processes like reflection and active listening with a client. They are quite different.
Things like reflective listening are a check out by the therapist. They may say such things as, “What I hear you saying is...” or “I understand your point as being....”. Or the therapist may simply reflect back to the client what they have heard them say or seen them do.
Reflection is a common therapeutic task.
On the other hand extractive identification is precisely that, identification on the part of the therapist. This makes it a more personal or intimate experience on behalf of the therapist. The therapist’s own Child ego state make a sort of connection with the client’s Child. The therapist thus has some form of emotive reaction about the client. The boundary between the therapist and client becomes a bit confused and thus the therapist can ‘feel the clients’ feelings, or the therapist ends up feeling the same way the client is.
So my client was at that time experiencing the devastation of the 7 year old who had felt completely abandoned. I as the therapist was to some extent experiencing those same feelings and thus I get my understanding of the client’s feelings in that way. This is what identification is, so it is much more than simple reflection or active listening.
In extractive identification there is more contact between client and therapist and then the therapist in essence states their own feeling reaction to the client and this is how they understand what the client is feeling. (This is the danger with identification as sometimes the therapist has a different feeling than the client is having but they think they are having the same one). So in this sense it is also not just a reflection. It is the therapist stating their own feelings.
Identification involves boundary fusion
This some will argue, is where the therapist steals from the client. When I told my client about what I saw as the devastating feelings of complete abandonment I had stopped the client from ever coming to their own realisation about that. I had stolen the opportunity for them to ever make a self discovery on that point, as soon as I said it. They are not permitted to do self realisation, instead the realisation is placed upon them by me. I had extracted the self experience from the client. I had stolen it from them.
Therapists at a conference on extractive identification
This has further implications for the relationship between client and therapist. In extractive identification I decide when the client was ready for the realisation. I do not leave it up to the client to decide for himself. In essence I am saying that I, the therapist, know what is best for the client and they do not.
This will then instantly generate a feeling of anxiety and a sense of insecurity in the client. What if I get the next one wrong?. By identifying I am going into the private and intimate world of the client and in extractive identification I am then going to expose that to the client and perhaps a whole group of people if it is group therapy. If ill timed, or my judgement is wrong then by doing such extractive identification I can insult or even assault the client with such an ‘extraction’. If I leave it up to the client to decide when he is ready for the realisation then this can never happen and the client will feel more secure in their relationship with the therapist.
I'm in their hands so I hope they know what they are doing.
Graffiti
18:47 Permalink | Comments (49) | Email this