The Life and Legacy of Dr Albert Ellis, Creator of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy

Albert Ellis

Dr Debbie Joffe Ellis agreed to answer a few questions about her mission to keep the work and legacy of her late husband Dr Albert Ellis, creator of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy, alive and thriving. She took time out from her busy schedule to answer some questions.

Giulio: Thanks for the chat, Debbie. Could you give us a snapshot of Dr Ellis’ childhood?

Debbie: His childhood contained a number of challenges. He suffered from various serious and painful conditions, including nephritis and migraines, from infancy onward. Al made a conscious decision that he didn’t want to feel so very sad, hence he found ways to distract himself from the deep sadness such as reading books in the hospital’s children’s library, making up games to play with children in the ward, talking with their visitors, and daydreaming about his baseball heroes and about what he wanted to do when he grew up.

Al was 3 years of age when he taught himself to read with the help of his 5-year-old friend. They would sit on the stoop in front of their building and his friend would read out loud while Al observed and, by doing so, learned to read!

He was a voracious reader, often borrowing books from his school’s library and from the New York public library, and after he’d read every book that he borrowed, and there were no books there that he hadn’t already read - he would re-read the books he’d enjoyed reading previously!

One of his dreams had been to write the great American novel, and he had also said that if he could have afforded to learn music, he would have loved to be a composer/musician. Due to the financial depression of those years, he could not afford to pay for such lessons. He was able to study for his Master’s degree and Ph.D. at Columbia University Teachers College due to his getting scholarships.

Incidentally, I teach two courses at Columbia University: Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT) and Comparative Psychotherapies, in the very building in which Al did those studies! Carl Rogers also attained his degrees there a few years prior to Al doing so.

Giulio: Dr Ellis thrived on thinking, working, creating, and spreading the ‘Gospel of St Albert’. What was his motivation?

Debbie: Indeed, his life was dedicated to helping as many people around the globe as possible, of every culture, gender, religion, or lack of religion, learn that they were responsible for creating their emotional experiences. He taught that it wasn’t their circumstances, but their attitudes and beliefs, which created their emotions.

REBT is incredibly empowering for people who are genuinely wanting to change unhelpful ways, and who are willing to make ongoing effort. Having suffered so much in various ways in his earlier years, he earnestly wanted to make a profound difference to humanity by helping individuals to help themselves to prevent unnecessary suffering.

Giulio: And of course, his sense of humour. How important did he consider humour to be in the therapeutic process?

Debbie: Al considered humour to be very important and very beneficial to people who wanted to not only feel better, but to get and stay better! Humour helps us put things into healthy perspective, helps us prevent ourselves from blowing things out of proportion or minimizing them, and is very beneficial in helping bring equanimity to those who take themselves, others, and life in general tooooo seriously!!!

Giulio: I’ve read that Dr Ellis, when giving therapy, was expert at listening to his clients and parsing out those debilitating beliefs that caused them so much bother, and that he did so with warmth, empathy and of course humour. What can you tell us about Dr Ellis in practice?

Debbie: Yes, Al was a respectful and superb listener. He could practically instantly identify any of their irrational thoughts. Also, he picked up on the nuances of what was said rather than just falling for the literal words and had a very finely tuned intuitive ability that enhanced that.

He demonstrated the power to help, inspire and contribute healing guidance to those who were open to receiving those gifts, utilizing his years of experience, wisdom, knowledge, and compassion.

Giulio: Dr Ellis was originally trained in psychoanalysis in the tradition of Freud and others. He famously said that people felt better when talking to the therapist, but rarely did they get and stay better. The idea that people could learn to help themselves seemed to be a revolutionary idea at the time. Where did this thinking lead Dr Ellis?

Debbie: Yes, he was probably the first psychologist/psychotherapist to encourage self-help for people who were not severely or endogenously disturbed. That added to his unpopularity among many of therapist peers who gave long term therapy and unintentionally (or perhaps some did so intentionally) encouraged clients/patients to develop dependence on them.

The so-called “new age” period that started around the 1960/70/80s contains many Ellisonian elements, as does executive coaching which is very popular these days. Many of the current approaches in psychotherapy are based on, or significantly influenced by, the incredible contributions of my brilliant Al, the pioneering genius, visionary, humanist, scientist, artist, humourist, and so much more.

Giulio: Many people were lucky enough to be mentored by him (as indeed was I) and say they stood on the shoulders of this ‘Giant of Psychotherapy’ and Dr Ellis encouraged others. Many counselling paradigms lead back to Dr Ellis’ ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance, which is why he is considered the grandfather of cognitive therapy. Can you talk to this and also to his generosity and goodwill towards others in the field of psychotherapy?

Debbie: Yes indeed. He was the most generous academic I know or have ever heard of. Anyone, famous in the field or not, who sent him a manuscript asking him for his opinion, would find their manuscript returned within days – full of red markings and suggestions. The famous Dr William Glasser (Choice/Reality Theory pioneer) would often share that he sent his first manuscript for his first book to Al for Al’s feedback, and within 2 days he received it back from Al - practically re-written!

Arnold Lazarus PhD, father of Multimodal Therapy (MT) who first came up with the term ‘cognitive behaviour therapy’, credits Al for pushing him to develop, write and publish on that MT approach rather than to simply work with Al in his institute, as Arnie had originally wanted to do.

Dr Aaron (Tim) Beck, who is often thought of as the father of CT/CBT, used to give credit to Al for being a profound help and influence on his work. Al’s REBT came out in the early 1950’s, and Beck’s in the late 1960s. It is unfortunate that such facts are not being presented sufficiently by some CBT teachers, though there are some who do teach the facts. In Al’s autobiography he included letters between him and Beck. Sadly, many students these days have the wrong impression that CBT came before REBT, and don’t realize how thoroughly CBT is based on REBT.

Giulio: He advocated for the introduction of REBT principles in teaching and learning and said that ‘the future of psychotherapy is in the school system.’ This again was an idea ahead of its time as social emotional behavioural wellbeing programs are now commonplace in schools. Can you talk about his strong desire that REBT become a part of the school curriculum? What benefits did he envisage?

Debbie: Oh yes! He passionately wanted REBT principles taught to as many people as possible - and the sooner the better.
The more rigid a person’s thinking is, the more effort it will likely take for them to change it.

If people learn sound principles in childhood, there is good chance that they will develop into adults with habitual tendencies to think about their thinking (metacognize), catch and dispute irrational self-defeating thoughts, and develop the habit of thinking rationally. As a consequence of doing that, healthy emotions and behaviours are likely.

Also, one of the most important lessons in REBT is to create and maintain unconditional self-acceptance, unconditional other acceptance, and unconditional life acceptance.
In the absence of those attitudes, bullying, self-downing, shame and depression are created - and one or some of those acts, attitudes and emotions can often contribute to, or be present when suicide is attempted. Prevention can be the greatest cure.

Dr Albert Ellis wanted REBT taught in every school! - Not only to students, but also to teachers, principals, admin staff, and parents.

Giulio: Can you provide the reader with information about your work in keeping the legacy of your husband, Dr Albert Ellis alive and thriving, so many years after his passing? You have a busy schedule of teaching, presentations, and workshops. What feedback are you receiving on your travels about REBT and how it is evolving in the present day?

Debbie: It is my passion and mission to do all I can to keep REBT alive and thriving, so that as many people as possible can benefit from it. I love teaching it, presenting on it, writing about it, and practicing it with my clients.

I felt humbled and honoured when I was nominated by Dr Frank Farley and Dr Stanley Krippner this year (2023), only a few months ago, for the American Psychological Association’s International Division’s “Global Citizen Award.”

My late husband entrusted me to continue his work after his passing, he often said so in his final years, and wrote it in various places including in his autobiography. He said he loved the way I communicate (as I loved the way he did!). Certainly, we had different styles, but our love for REBT and our dedication to helping others was one of the many things we had in common.

I am grateful to receive very positive feedback from individuals who attend the events, trainings, and presentations etc. that I present here in the USA and internationally. In recent times I have been invited to speak to groups of people who are dealing with issues of addiction, and some of those attendees shared that what they learned was truly life changing.

Thank you for the powerful work you do Giulio in walking your REBT/REBE talk, and helping, teaching, and inspiring so many people. Thank you for your great questions here and thank you for your part in continuing the legacy of the magnificent Albert Ellis Ph. D!

Giulio: You’re welcome! Thanks, Debbie, for your interest and the work you do and for taking time out for this chat.

Giulio is an Ed. D. candidate at the University of South Australia. He works as a Rational Emotive Behaviour Counsellor at a public school in Adelaide.
Dr Debbie Joffe Ellis is Adjunct Professor at Columbia Teachers College, New York. She is a licensed psychologist (Australia), licensed mental health counsellor (New York), presenter and writer. You can find out more about Dr Debbie Joffe Ellis and her work here: www.debbiejoffeellis.com

"The world is neither for you nor against you. It doesn’t give a shit!"​

When I think about this Albert Ellis quote I think of how I have at times been ‘shackled’ to the belief that somehow the Universe is looking out for me and that it should give me what I want; what I believe I need. Such an arrogant position assumes that I’m so important that the universe should always meet my wants and needs; to take care of me and always give me what I must have. I can hear Dr. Ellis say:

‘Well good luck with that horseshit. Let me know how it works out!’

Eleanor Roosevelt said:

‘You probably wouldn’t worry about what people think of you if you could know how seldom they do.’

Again why should other people regard us as we believe we should be regarded; that they meet our need to be noticed and acknowledged, liked or loved?

Dr. Ellis said that we can elect to healthily prefer that significant others esteem us and look upon us favourably, which is a rational perspective according to REBT. In doing so, we acknowledge that there will be those who won’t and we can choose to learn to accept this reality unconditionally. This sensible, self-helpful view, reminds us that the universe will not always deliver to us what we absolutely demand it should, but if we accept that, we will feel better about things, especially when they don’t go our way.

Conversely, to over rely on the approval of significant others to believe we are worthwhile, is taking us into the realms of irrationality or as Dr. Ellis would say, ‘love slobbism!’  This is where our attitude of preferences, transform into ‘must’ thinking; we must get what we believe we must have! Dr. Ellis determined that one who has forged such habits of thinking and believing has developed the debilitating condition of ‘musturbation;’ the tendency to elevate our preferences, wants and desires to ‘must, ought and should’ status!’ What did Karen Horney say?

'Beware the 'tyranny of the should'!

Dr. Ellis also reminds us that whenever we begin to think that someone or something is ‘making’ us angry or sad we are thinking irrationally, as it is our own unrealistic ‘musturbatory’ expectations of life and others that are driving our emotional unease. Do we prefer things to be as we would like them to be or must we get what we must have and is it a catastrophe when we don’t?!

'When people change their irrational beliefs to undogmatic flexible preferences, they become less disturbed.' Albert Ellis

Christopher Hitchens the late renowned author, essayist and sceptic, debated many an opponent, who claimed that his views were offensive and that their feelings were somehow hurt by the points he made in argument against them. His adversaries, in making such a claim, would be met by the classic Hitchens retort:

‘What’s your point? So your feelings are hurt, so what! How does this constitute an argument!’

He would have agreed with Dr. Ellis that people make the intensity of the emotions they feel by the way they might perceive or assess a situation. They hurt their own feelings! As Epictetus said all those years ago:

'People are not disturbed by things, but by the views they take of them.'

What might have Mr. Hitchens’ ‘musturbating’ rivals been thinking? Ellis would say:

‘They were rubbing themselves the wrong way!’

The big bang set the evolution of the Universe and life as we know it in train, and as it expanded chance would have it that a convergence of molecules, carbon atoms and other elements gave rise, in time, to the phenomenon known as Dr. Albert Ellis. How serendipitous! Maybe the World does give a shit after all! 

My Toy is Broken and So Am I!

Dr. Albert Ellis uses the term ‘upsetness’ to describe a persons’ emotional discomfort when something unwanted has occurred. He says the intensity of the person’s ‘upsetness’ is not caused directly by the event or happening itself. Of course the event has a bearing on the emotional and behavioural outcome but that’s not the whole story.

Dr. Albert Ellis, creator of REBT

A young 7 year old student at my school was out of sorts; crying and quite inconsolable. After a while when he had gathered himself a little, we began to chat about what had happened. His favourite squishy toy had a small puncture and it was oozing its white fluid contents.

He clearly saw this as a significant unwanted occurrence that initially triggered extreme emotional discomfort. Why did he feel as he did? Or more specifically why was his emotional response to the situation so extreme?

Firstly, why is the child’s emotional response considered extreme? We can agree that the child was feeling upset but perhaps that may not best describe the intensity of his upset. A word that comes to mind is ‘distraught’ to describe his emotional state and this would register pretty high up on the emotional thermometer, where upset might rate lower.

The Emotional Thermometer

To feel annoyed or upset is, according to REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy), a healthy negative emotion in that it doesn’t render the person incapable of going about their daily business. The situation would be deemed a minor inconvenience rather the catastrophe it appears to be in this case. Distraught, conversely, is regarded as an unhealthy negative emotion in that the person experiencing it may be disabled for a while; so upset they can’t go about the normal day to day things they would ordinarily be doing.

So why ‘distraught’ and not ‘upset?’ REBT describes a habit of thinking called ‘catastrophising’, where the person believes that what has happened is indeed a catastrophe; the worst thing that can ever happen! This is true for this young child, as at that moment in time he believes that the fact his squishy toy is broken is so awful a happening that he cannot abide the reality (to him) that it has happened.

Dr. Ellis explains when a person has constructed a belief that ‘things must always be as I want them to be’ and that it’s ‘not fair when they don’t and that it’s the worst thing that could ever happen!’ they will find themselves feeling distraught rather than upset when things go awry. Indeed, it may be so bad and awful (awfulising) that it cannot be tolerated (Icantstandititis!). It may be or become a characteristic of that person’s general disposition; something peculiar to him.

Ellis believed we are the architects of our own misery or happiness because we construct the beliefs that underlie our emotional and behavioural dispositions. If it is that this young child is constructing a self-defeating belief like ‘things must always be as I want them to be’ how can this be addressed? What can the educator, carer, counsellor do?

Constructivism

If we accept that our young students’ emotional and behavioural responses to unwanted events is due to his developing (in construction) beliefs about how the world ‘should’ work then we may be able to help him deconstruct and rework those ideas and perspectives to accommodate a more rational world view.

After the young person had gathered himself we talked about the possibility that even though his broken toy constituted a major disruption to his life, could he help himself feel better now and if other ‘bad’ things happen again?

• v  We established that what happened was true (a fact) i.e. his toy was broken.
• v  We agreed that we both thought the toy was broken and that others would also agree with us.
• v  We talked about what he thought about what happened and decided that this was not true for everyone; not a fact, because different people would think differently about it.
• v  We talked about other bad things that can possibly happen e.g. hurting his leg, his dog falling ill etc. and we constructed a list of possible problems. We constructed a catastrophe scale.
• v  We talked about where the broken toy event fits in the scale and we agreed that it registered far below other more serious possible happenings.
• v  We agreed that his broken toy event was not the worst thing that could happen and it wasn’t a catastrophe.

We wrote down old thinking and new thinking as follows:

• v  Old thinking: ‘My toy is broken and it is the worst thing that can ever happen. It shouldn’t have happened and I can’t stand it.’
• v  New thinking: ‘My toy is broken but there are other worse things that can happen. This is not the worst thing can ever happen and I can stand it’ (I accept it has happened).

Old thinking: Distraught. New thinking: Upset

The young person would have to work on himself because his default position is ‘things must be the way I want them to be’ but as time goes by and he works hard to remind himself, the ‘distraught’ emotional events will become rarer as he reconstructs his new, more robust way of thinking and believing! 

I'm Worthwhile Crocodile

Teaching young folk unconditional self-acceptance is a useful thing to do. Constructivist theory says that we construct or build the beliefs that we use to guide us (consciously or unconsciously); the decisions we make, our assessments of situations. What kinds of ideas are young people building about themselves? Do they 'see' themselves as people of worth unconditionally or do they get a sense that they're OK only when others think they are? 

How would a child conclude that their worth as a person relies on other peoples assessment of them? Well it's all to do with the sense they are making of their experiences; the meanings they make from information gleaned from the world around them. 

So what about the information provided children by their significant others? Or rather, more specifically, what's the quality of the information received by these young constructivists? That's the key in the 'construction of beliefs' caper.

If the incoming messages address behaviour, children are automatically receiving a message that says, 'we are talking about your behaviour here and not your personhood.' The child will learn that behaviour, what she/he does, is being judged but her total worth is not; they are separate ideas. She/he will learn that what they do may be adjudged good or bad but that doesn't make their 'selves' good or bad!

Conversely, if the dominant message provided/received addresses the person, the implied meaning is that 'you' or your 'self' can 'be' good or bad! The child who hears words like lazy, naughty, good, bad, clever, dumb learn that they can 'be' these things i.e. 'I am my dumbness/smartness/goodness/badness. 

So the question is; do I do good/bad or am I good/bad? Which of the two belief constructions are useful, healthy, rational? 

'I'm worthwhile crocodile' is an early childhood term which represents unconditional self acceptance. It means 'my worth cannot be diminished by other peoples opinions good or bad, nor by my successes and failures;' I am always OK no matter what! Now that's a powerful way to think!

'I'm worthwhile crocodile,' thinkers will tend to feel and act more confidently, will be less prone to anxiety or piques of anger. They will be more disposed to thinking about their thinking and regulating their sense of grievance or offence taken that events can 'cause' them. 

Beware Bullies - be aware, be vigilant, be well

Many would say that bullies bully because they feel inferior and they get a 'self esteem' boost when they put others 'in their place.' Research Ken Rigby/Giulio Bortolozzo suggests that bullies can have a healthy sense of self worth but may still be inclined to bully others. The research suggests that in schools we can focus on 'psychologically immunising' our students with a dose of Unconditional Self Acceptance (USA).

Albert Ellis encourages us to develop our USA so we are less likely to be the targets of bullies because we will more inclined to act confidently. Bullies will tend to target those they perceive to be weak. Some would also say that bullying is a cowardly act! My experience of bullies suggests that this is so. #REBT #schools #bullying #mentalhealth

Some people manage bullies well, whilst others don't. It's always a question of how well the prospective victim can learn to manage the bully. A 'good' bully will invest a lot of time setting up alliances that will deliver him what he wants. The more willing his offsiders are to play the game the better for him and them. It's always a contract of mutual benefit to both players and as long as they play by his rules all is well.

There are those who are more at risk, whose circumstances render them sitting ducks for the unconscionable and contriving professional bully. And these can be put into two categories of usefulness. 

1. The 'good' operator who is worth tolerating because she can manage projects well. A well managed project reflects well on the self aggrandising bully; makes him look good. She may have traits that he doesn't like; perhaps she is assertive and intolerant of e.g. sexist behaviour which the bully regards as 'jocularity.' He will put up with her for as long as the project needs her. He will then look for other options as circumstances demand them.

2. The person who doesn't suit his vision for the organisation and whose services are expendable. They may be excellent at their job but perhaps they aren't malleable enough, not amenable to direction, commands, edicts and who may not be predisposed to massaging his outsized ego. This person may not have an important project to oversee and is perhaps most vulnerable.

In REBT terms the bully is what Albert Ellis calls a 'musturbator.' His inflated ego betrays the underlying and unrealistic demands he will place on others. His passive and polite requests belie the need to be obeyed at all costs. A polite request is the cover we ought not judge the book by, for what you see is not what you are likely to get!

What are his rules? What does he demand of life and others?

1. I must always (be seen to) do well. I can't stand it when I can't (will look to blame others when things go awry). In other words he believes 'I must always get what I want. It's my birthright.'
2. 'Everyone else absolutely must give me what I must have (because my rules are better than your rules). If they don't they are bad people and deserve to be punished.'
3. 'Life should deliver me what I must (deservedly) have. Nothing should get in the way of my desires to be successful.' 
4. 'I am only OK if I get the respect and adulation of others especially my overlords (over whom he fawns and crawls to, to win approval). If I don't win their approval I can't handle it.' (makes him a victim of the world and others and prone to chuck tantrums - look out!)

These are the 'musturbatory' rules that dictate the bully's daily regime of terror. Other people are his means to his selfish ends and as long as they fall in line all's well.

Modus Operandi of the Bully

1. Decide who is superfluous to the grand plan.
2. Pick up on an undesired trait (long tolerated up to this point) that the person has. Speak of this often to significant others.
3. Garner the support of cronies who will agree with what the bully 'wants to hear.' Spread the word - rumour and innuendo.
4. Start to micro manage the target under the pretence of 'care and concern' preferably by an appointed other (to do his dirty work).  
5. Plan for the eventual replacement of the target.

The above would not necessarily define all bullying situations but it certainly describes scenarios as reported by those who have lived this experience.

It is time wasted to try and change a bully's perspective. They may listen and give the impression of care and concern but these are feigned gestures that have no resonance with him. If they do have any capacity for compassion and empathy it isn't and never was evident (that's another story - psychopathy which may go hand in hand with bullying) 

Advice

Be aware of what's going on.
Talk to trusted others.
Spend as little time as is necessary in his presence.
Do your job as best you can.
Join a union.
Keep a diary.
Move on if you are not happy.

Any others? 

Dr. Debbie Joffe Ellis reflections on her husbands life and legacy

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

The masterful and great Albert Ellis PhD passed on July 24th, 2007. The years have flown by, and I wonder what he might think if he were still alive. I think it is highly likely that he would enjoy the remarkable progress of neuro-physiological research and findings, and the continuing embrace of the cognitive approach in psychotherapy (he heralded in the cognitive revolution in psychotherapy in the 1950's). I suspect that journalists would be clamoring to hear his views, on a regular basis, about the current state of our country and the world - and his responses would be sharp, rational, direct, and interspersed with his fine and piercing wit! He might regret that some of the people who, in his lifetime, championed the REBT approach are in recent years merging their work with a more general CBT approach, for as much as he immensely respected CBT and the outstanding research associated with it, it does not, as much as REBT does, emphasize the humanistic and philosophical elements seen in REBT: such as the importance of choosing to experience greater unconditional acceptance, tolerance and gratitude - most especially during times of challenge. Nonetheless, there are many fine practitioners and teachers out there keeping the flames of REBT alive, as I strive to do with joy and gratitude. And the numerous books and articles written by Albert Ellis continue to help countless numbers of people, directly and indirectly, to suffer less emotional misery and to experience greater happiness in life. Remembering you with great love Wondrous Al. Thank you forever - for you. 

_______________________________________

(Albert Ellis' work continues in Australian schools, helping children to optimise their psychological health through Rational Emotive Behaviour Education)

US pyschologist to visit Whyalla for centre opening

Dr Debbie Joffe Ellis opens the world first Albert Ellis Professional Learning Centre

Dr Debbie can be contacted here Dr Debbie Joffe Ellis 

Arthur Is On the Spectrum

I am a school counsellor and one of many great delights of my working day is the opportunity I have to work with students in the 'special class.' This term will mean different things to many people but to me 'special' is the time I get to spend with children from ages 5 -12 who present with a range of predispositions and learning and developmental needs.

One such student who is on the autism spectrum, will often seek me out for a chat as we call it. I might say I seek him out just as much because it is always a fun time. We met recently over an issue that he had been dealing with which I will refer to in a moment.

On the way to our meeting place we will speak casually about things and then Arthur will burst out laughing about something obscure but which connects to what we are saying but as yet I'm a step behind on the pick up!

On this occasion he asked if he could chat with me and we got onto all the different words we could think of that had a similar meaning to 'chat.' Like 'yarn' or 'let's have a yarn' which he was familiar with and he chuckled when we said the words accentuating our Aussie nasal twang! I introduced him to the word 'blather' a Scots word which has similar meaning to chat and yarn. I put on my best Scottish accent and said 'C'mon Arthur let's have a wee blather!' More chuckles. 'Heart to heart,' and 'chitter chatter' were also terms raised and which Arthur found amusing.

Arthur though was dealing with an issue of great import to him and his family and he found himself in psychological and emotional knots over the prospect of moving house. Arthur tended to overthink things to the point where it would effect how he felt and acted. As quickly as we had joined in laughter before his face was now transformed as his thoughts returned to what had become a rather large problem for him.

We had over recent years talked about how our thinking is connected to our feelings and actions and that we can make ourselves more upset than we need to be. Arthur agreed that many of his 'trains of thought' were leading up the wrong  'railway track' if I can use a railway analogy here. He knew his thoughts were unhelpful or Success Stoppers as we would call them. Brain Bully (his thinking) was making him uncomfortable; sad, angry and scared.

*Brain Bully (*Success Stopper) thinking can be challenged by evidence and his catastrophe scale told him that there were many worse things that could happen. We talked about the positives of his family moving house and he began to feel a little more at ease. He understood that changing his estimation of how bad his situation was, changed the way he felt about it. Arthur is an expert at self regulation and these yarns we have help him to re calibrate his thinking, fine tune his 'mind motor' which gets him back on track. 

Of course he will return sometimes to the black and white thinking world that will bring him temporarily undone and it is then he realises it's time for another 'wee blather' where again we visit a more rational world where the many shades of grey demand that we adjust our 'thinking sails' to the prevailing 'winds of change.' 

Arthur is learning that when he cannot change a given situation he can change his perception of it. And this is a very positive thing I tell Arthur and he says 'thanks for the yarn' as he chuckles his way back to class!

*Brain Friend/Brain Bully and Success Helper/Success Stopper thinking are copyrighted terms used in the authors resource materials 'Hav a Go Spaghettio!' and  'People and Emotions.'

Building Confidence - accepting oneself unconditionally

Even the most competent and composed amongst us will say how we have battled or continue to battle our inner demons of self-doubt and low self-worth. Some would measure their self-worth against goals achieved and how popular they are with others. This kind of ‘confidence glow’ can be temporary if one is inclined to put all of their psychological well-being eggs in the same ‘self-esteem’ basket. Albert Ellis, creator of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy, famously stated:

‘Self-esteem is the greatest sickness known to personkind because it’s conditional.’

We condition ourselves when we rehearse and re rehearse certain ingrained thought constructions that are unhelpful or helpful to us. Ellis claims, and I agree, that if a person’s self-worth is contingent on how others regard them or how well they do at tasks it can be very harmful. They will feel OK or not OK depending on which way the self-esteem winds blow! This is what Ellis called conditional self - worth, how one esteems oneself when they are approved of and when they do well; self-esteem.

What then is the psychological antidote to the self-esteem scourge? How do we start to help those students whose confidence waxes and wanes in response to the approval of others?  Perhaps it would be useful to note some of the consequences of coming down with a bout of the dreaded self-esteem bug – approvalitis!

People who conditionally accept themselves are much more likely to experience mental ill health than not. Why? They tend to put all their faith in how others value them and if this isn’t forthcoming they feel down, undervalued, and disapproved. They might say to themselves:

I’m worthless.

No one likes me.

I’m a failure

… Etc.

If a person’s significant other withdraws her friendship and approval this can have an adverse impact on her. The fact that she has been unfriended is a fact, there is evidence to support this conclusion. However the belief that this then means she is worthless is a position that can be challenged. It is here that the teachers and counsellor’s work begins because the goal is to help her understand that her worth was never given to her in the first place so it can’t be taken away. She has constructed these ‘thinking rules’ so she can deconstruct them if she works hard at it. The question is how? As Eleanor Roosevelt said:

‘No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.’

Another question is if she gives another person consent to make her inferior how does she know she is doing this? The job is to help her understand that whilst others may reject her in fact, it is a myth to then believe she is worthless because she has been rejected. It is the goal of the educator to help her replace her fragile self-esteem belief with the more robust and evidence based unconditional self-acceptance habit of thinking. This will not change how life unfolds but it will lessen the impact of unwelcomed events will have because she is more psychologically robust. Dr. Jonas Salk who developed the polio vaccine talked about the idea of psychological immunisation:

“If I were a young scientist today, I would still do immunisation. But instead of immunising kids physically, I’d do it your way. I’d immunise them psychologically. I’d see if these psychologically immunised kids could then fight off mental illness better. Physical illness too.”

Constructivism explains how people acquire knowledge when they interact with their environment. Knowledge doesn’t exist somewhere outside the individual to be absorbed but rather it is co - constructed between the subject and others in various contexts. The idea is to acquaint the student with this idea; that they have constructed the beliefs that inform what they do and how they feel in response to life’s challenges. If they feel anxious or down then they may well be tethered to a self-esteem belief i.e. conditional self – acceptance. I will refer to one who thinks this way as a ‘self - esteemer.’ We want to challenge and change this ‘thinking rule’ to unconditional self-acceptance (USA), a ‘self-accepter’ rule.

I have posted many blog posts which suggest ways in which we can assist students develop unconditional self - acceptance e.g. Psychological Immunisation and Little Jack Horner and here I offer another suggestion. This is a lesson I developed to teach students about constructivism and how it relates to USA. These ideas can be used with students from mid – primary onwards.

First establish what unconditional self-acceptance is e.g.

When we accept ourselves unconditionally it means that anyone’s opinion of us (good or bad) is just that, an opinion and cannot define our ‘total’ selves because we are made up of maybe hundreds of different traits, qualities and characteristics none of which alone can describe us totally. We all make mistakes but we are not totally bad. The positive qualities still remain. In other words we are not our mistakes just as we are not our successes. We are just worthwhile no matter what! We want to help our students develop the ‘thinking rule’ that; ‘what I think of me is more important than what you think of me.’ This is not an arrogant position but one which is supported by what we know about ourselves and how well we accept what we know about ourselves to be true and factual.

Next hand out enough white and yellow Lego blocks to groups of two or three to construct a small wall.

Ask the students to do the following:

Please build a wall that best reflects what we know unconditional acceptance to be. Remember we can make mistakes and we may have qualities that aren’t perfect but in the main we are all OK. The white blocks represent our positive qualities and capabilities and the yellow represent those things we can work on if we choose.

•  Some may construct a wall predominantly of white bricks and a few scattered yellow ones.
• Others may have different ideas e.g. a wall constructed solely of yellow
• Others may construct ones completely white.

Encourage the class to consider the various construction’s and ask them to explain why they have made their walls as they have e.g.

Which wall best represents the idea that we are not perfect but that we are always worthwhile?

If yellow bricks represent things that we are not so good at what does a wall made of all yellow bricks mean? Is this true?

What are we thinking if our wall is made entirely of white bricks? Is this possible? Can this be true?

We want our students to see what ‘worthwhile’ looks like. If they accept what is represented by the wall constructions they can see that no matter what they are always OK (represented by option 1 above). They can then start to practice the belief of unconditional self-acceptance. It may just be a daily reminder to think e.g.

‘I will make mistakes but I am not a mistake.’ Or

‘People may not like something about me but I have hundreds of good qualities. I am not their opinion.’ Or

‘What I think about me is more important than what others think about me.’

Option 1 indicates a healthy appreciation that a person has many more positive qualities and attributes than negative ones and may regard those as areas for improvement. This reflects a rational view that even when we make mistakes or others think ill of us we are always OK. This is the hallmark of the ‘self-accepter.’

Option 2 represents a view that ‘I am not OK. Most or all of me is not good, therefore I am not good.’ This wall construction is an irrational idea because it denies the preponderance of positive qualities that a person has. It is important to provide evidence to a person thinking this way that this is not a true and accurate self-worth picture. This self-view represents the beliefs of a ‘self esteemer.’ This belief underpins a tendency to feel down often and/or anxious because this person believes that she’s bad/hopeless/unlovable.  

Option 3 suggests that there are people in the world who are perfect. This is an errant perspective that cannot be supported with evidence. Is there a person for instance who has never made a mistake? This belief causes anxiety and depression if such a view is held by a person who strives to always e.g. get 10 out of 10 for a test or who could never handle any kind of constructive advice because this would mean that she wasn't 'perfect' and then others would see how 'bad' she is and that would be a 'catástrophe!

Remind your students that we construct our beliefs just like we construct a wall. Our ‘thought walls’ are made with the bricks we think are the right ones. What we believe to be true can be helpful or unhelpful and believing that we are always worthwhile is true and if we don’t believe this we can mentally deconstruct the old wall and build a new one that best represents who we are!

We are ‘self-accepters’ and we build strong and powerful ‘thought walls!’

Not perfect but strong!