The ABC’s of REBE - Rational Emotive Behaviour Education

Rational Emotive Behaviour Education (REBE) is a powerful teaching tool to use in the classroom at any level. It is based on REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy). It’s been around a long time, and  started out as RET (Rational Emotive Therapy) in the 1960’s.

Dr. Albert Ellis created the theory and his counselling paradigm, the ABC Theory of Emotional (and behavioural) Disturbance, provides us with a framework for our teaching and counselling practice. As with all effective teaching it helps to know what we are doing and why. So, step one in our learning journey would be to understand what the ABC Theory is.

ABC easy as 1,2,3…

It might appear easy, but there’s more to it than meets the eye. And therein lies the genius of Albert Ellis as he took all his reading, thinking and psychotherapy practice and put it into a little package, a formula for us to use in the classroom. Indeed, Albert Ellis said a long time ago that:

‘The future of psychotherapy is in the school system.’

So, acquaint yourself with the ABC theory and begin your learning journey and remember whilst you may readily understand what the model is on first impressions, it will take a lot longer to fully appreciate what it means and this will come with practice and again as Ellis said we all need to ‘practice, practice, practice’ to get better at what we do.

And the other Albert, Albert Einstein said:

‘If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.’

The ABC Theory has a lot of layers to it and when you get to the point where you can do as Einstein said, you’re on your way. And of course, we never stop learning and the more we engage with the ABC Theory the more we will learn and discover!

The ‘A’ bit

‘A’ represents whatever happens that may evoke some kind of emotional and behavioural response to it e.g., I didn’t do so well in my driving test. Or at school a child is not included in a game at lunch break, or a child finds that when she looks in her school bag at recess, her drink and snack is not there! Any happening or event is the A component of the ABC Theory, the Activating event.

The ‘B’ bit

‘B’ represents what we believe; our personally constructed philosophy, what we think about ourselves, others, and life in general. The beliefs we have may not be something we are aware of and the ABC Theory helps us to identify what they are and to decide if they are helpful or unhelpful.

Ellis called unhelpful thinking irrational as it stops us achieving our goals i.e., for happiness and success. And helpful thinking, he called rational thinking. Any thinking, rumination about or perception, interpretation of an event or happening is the B component of the ABC Theory, what we Believe.

The ‘C’ bit

‘C’ represents how we respond emotionally and behaviourally to an event, A. When a child is not included in a game at recess for example, the event A of the ABC Theory, how she might feel and behave is the C component of the ABC Theory. Does she feel a little disappointed or does she feel enraged? What does she decide to do? How we might feel and behave in response to A, the Activating event, is the emotional Consequence of A.

And there’s more ... The D, E and F bits! 

‘D’ represents the process of challenging the identified beliefs at ‘B’ which are causing us emotional and behavioural distress at C. This stage of the ABC’s, the ‘D’ bit, stands for Disputation, where we challenge (Dispute) the veracity of what we believe at B. Are you still with me? It’s worth persisting so on to the ‘E’ bit!

‘E’ represents a new way of seeing or thinking about things because we’ve learned to appreciate that what we believed at ‘B’ of The ABC Theory, is not helpful as it is associated with extreme emotional and behavioural upset. Once we identify the habits of thinking that ail us, and we work hard to dispute them, we can replace them with more helpful, rational ones. We have a new and improved way of regarding or thinking about uninvited happenings, new effective rational thinking E.

‘F’ represents a new, improved better way of Feeling about things at A, because the irrational beliefs we once held at B of the ABC model, have been challenged (disputed) and changed to more rational ones.

And there we have it, the ABC Theory of Emotional (and behavioural) Disturbance … and the D’s, the E’s, and the F’s!

A simple example of the application the ABC (& D and E) Theory for your consideration follows.

A - A driver on the road lets someone in who doesn’t acknowledge the courteous act.

B – The driver thinks, ‘How rude! He should have waved back. What an #$%^&!!’

C- The driver feels extreme annoyance and anger and waves his fist at the other driver.

D – The drivers thinking at B is challenged e.g., why should he have waved back? Could there be any reasons why he didn’t? Is it so bad that you can’t stand it? Can you think of other things that could happen worse than this? Where do you think this sits on your catastrophe scale?

E – Next time emotions are kept in check because the driver now thinks, ‘people don’t always have to do what I think they should. This is not a big deal so I won’t make it one. He’s not ‘bad’ because he didn’t acknowledge me.’

F – The driver experiences a modified, improved way of feeling about what’s happened as at B, irrational beliefs have been identified, challenged and changed.

Know your ABC’s (and D’s and E’s)!

There are many articles available that will help you develop a greater depth of understanding and appreciation of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy and its application in schools through Rational Emotive Behaviour Education. I can recommend some articles that will help you on your learning journey which you can request via the email address provided.

So, think about the above and consider if it is something you can work with in your teaching or counselling practice. Does it sit well with what you know about Social Emotional Behaviour Wellbeing teaching and learning? Can you incorporate your new learning into current practice?

P.S. You can find more information here https://debbiejoffeellis.com/ and here www.rebtnetwork.org

Giulio is an ED.D. candidate at the University of South Australia. He is a student counsellor and specialises in Rational Emotive Behaviour Education. He is also a consultant to schools in counselling-based behaviour education systems in school. He is the author of two self-published teacher/counsellor resources; People and Emotions and Have a Go Spaghettio! both endorsed by Dr. Albert Ellis, creator of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy. He is a member of the International Committee for The Advancement of Rational Emotive Education. Email: lozzog@gmail.com

What’s Unconditional Self- Acceptance?

This is warts n’ all acceptance of all the things that make up the complexity of the ‘self’,  a term we use when referring to the ‘me’ we understand ourselves to be.

We decide who we are, how our ‘selves’ are constituted, by processing and interpreting the information we glean from our environment. How do others esteem me? Do they like me?

Does my self-assessment, my own estimation of my worth, depend on the assessments of others? Or do I accept that any clanger, rejection, or failure don’t or can’t in themselves define me in a global sense i.e., my total worth or value.

If we tend to over rely on others estimation of us, we have reached a stage of ‘needing’ rather than ‘preferring’ that others view us well e.g., likeable, respected, esteemed, funny, smart.

‘I need you think I’m OK for me to be OK.’

A student once asked me if he was a good boy. I asked what he meant and he said I like it when people say I’m a good boy. I asked him how he knows when he is a good boy and he said when people ‘tell me I am.’ I asked him when he is most likely to be told he is a good boy and he replied, ‘when I do something good’ (what others expect me to do).

‘I can’t disappoint people who expect me to be good.’

He also said that when he does things that others disagree with or who may feel aggrieved about something about him, he thinks he has made them feel that way. I asked him if he thinks that other people’s feelings, like his mum’s annoyance is caused by him and he said, ‘yes.’

‘I make my mum mad!’

What has this person learned about his ‘self?’ He is learning that his worth depends on the assessment of others. He ‘is’ good or bad depending on others estimation of his worth. According to REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy) he accepts his ‘self’ only on condition that he is esteemed well by others. His ‘good’ self exists only if others say it does!

That he has learned to believe that he ‘makes’ others sad or annoyed or angry puts him at considerable psychological risk. He has learned that he is responsible for how others feel and of course this is an irrational belief. He may become hyper vigilant around other people’s sensibilities, not wanting to cause any upset or discomfort to others because he’s responsible for how they feel!

Unconditional self-acceptance regards the self as a composite of too many qualities, characteristics, capabilities etc good and bad and so it doesn’t make sense to abstract one from the many and decide that it defines your you-ness.

‘Today you are You, that is truer than true. There is no one alive who is Youer than You.’ Dr. Seuss

Alas we tend to do this at times but we can self-correct e.g., I am likeable even if others may think otherwise, I am not their opinion of me. So, the warts ‘n all idea means that our OK - ness remains constant even when as fallible human beings we will inevitably stuff up.

But for those young folk who believe their worth is subject to certain conditions e.g.,  how others rate them or how well they perform at tasks, then they will benefit from knowing how they can challenge and change the irrational ideas they may hold to be true about their ‘selves.’

So how can we help young people become the best version of their ‘selves,’ one which will serve them well?

- Talk about thinking, feeling, and behaving, what they are, and how they are each connected to each other. E.g., if I BELIEVE I’m dumb, I FEEL sad and I WITHDRAW.

- We can have helpful or unhelpful ideas about ourselves, others, and life in general, our beliefs.

- We can find out what those beliefs are e.g., ‘if someone doesn’t seem to like me then I am unlikable.’ 

- We can begin to change how we think about ourselves if we learn how to think about our thinking.

Some ideas to teach unconditional self-acceptance:

- Talk about a bike and its general composition, wheels, tyres, frame, spokes etc. If a spoke on one wheel is broken, does it make sense to decide the bike is totally no good and we should get rid of it? Why or why not? One fault doesn’t make the bike (us) worthless

- If we aren’t too good at something, or we didn’t make the soccer team does that mean we are totally useless, that we are totally no good e.g., using the bike analogy above, one of our spokes might be a bit wobbly but the bike’s essentially OK (unless we decide otherwise).

- Place a few dots on a sheet of paper. Look at the page what do we notice. We might focus readily on the dots. We may also notice that most of the page is clear of any dots or blemishes. When we self-down we notice only the blemishes and decide they define us (our ‘self’ page is full of dot blemishes), that we are no good. We might however look more broadly and decide that the sheet is essentially blemish less.

It isn’t an either/or proposition, we can’t be totally bad or be totally good, we are just worthwhile, unconditionally because as Albert Ellis (creator of REBT) says, ‘we exist.’

If we consider our ‘selves’ in the context of everything that constitutes our makeup, one fault or failure or blemish can’t represent the whole. In that sense we are always OK and that’s what we teach our young charges when we teach Unconditional Self-Acceptance.

PS Unconditionally accepting ourselves doesn’t mean we elect to remain stagnant and not develop and evolve, to improve ourselves. It isn’t a license to do nothing or to e.g., break the law because ultimately ‘I’m OK no matter what.’ It is a healthy attitude of acceptance of our makeup and to work hard at the things we decide we want to get better at. Get my drift?

Giulio is an ED.D. candidate at the University of South Australia. He is a student counsellor in the public school system and specialises in Rational Emotive Behaviour Education. He is also a consultant to schools in counselling-based behaviour education systems in school. He is the author of two self-published teacher/counsellor resources; People and Emotions and Have a Go Spaghettio! both endorsed by Dr. Albert Ellis, creator of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy. He is a member of the International Committee for The Advancement of Rational Emotive Education.

 

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

Roger Bent Walked a Crooked Mile!

Roger Bent was an aspirational type who worked out early what he wanted and aimed to become what he imagined he could be. He was not particularly gifted in any significant way but he had a brimming reservoir of self-belief that fuelled his trajectory to his goal of greatness. He was besotted with himself and his narcissistic desires, and his wants and needs took precedence over those of others, who were useful only as far as that they could help him onwards and upwards.

'The only thing worse than ignorance is arrogance.' Albert Einstein

He was a classroom teacher for a while and he tolerated the discomfort and ignominy of sitting on what he thought was the bottom rung of the corporate ladder. This was a temporary situation as he worked out the lie of the land, and how best he would use those around him to get what he wanted.

He made strategic connections with significant others, saying the right thing to the right people at the right time, making personal and professional alliances with those who would help him on his way.

His leadership colleagues recognised the attributes and qualities which would help them in their quest for corporate glory. They relayed this good news to their line manager, the local education director who deemed he had potential and had ‘corporate’ sensibilities.

Bent had ingratiated himself into what would become a powerful and influential trinity of influence and privilege, the aspiring classroom teacher leader, the narcissist principal, and the bully director.

'Sycophants suck up to those who can help them and discard them when they are of no use to them anymore.'  Dr. Dan D. Ruff

Though still a lowly classroom teacher Bents profile grew in the school as he worked hard to help his principal achieve their goals, meet site KPI’s which in turn would reflect well on the director overseer whose reputation was only as good as the network school’s performance.

The students of course were to Bent what all insignificant others were, a means to an end. He supported the director and the principal in beefing up the academics of reading, writing and arithmetic whilst music, play based learning and other secondary subject considerations became afterthought electives. The better the academic test scores, the stronger the trinity became. The results reflected well on them and their need for approval became the driving force behind what they did.

'I need their approval.' Roger Bent

It wasn’t long before Bent got his foot in the leadership door and he was rewarded by the principal for his dedication to the tasks they set for him, which he attended to without question. He was anointed duly as the curriculum coordinator with the accompanying privileges and entitlements. The director in turn was happy to rubber stamp what was essentially a principal/director strategically made appointment.

Bent became less interested in the lives and travails of his teacher peers as their usefulness diminished whilst his leadership fortunes continued upward. He had no qualms about this as he now moved in the rarefied air of the influencers and decision makers. He had become a privileged leadership group member, a comrade in arms who set themselves apart from the classroom teacher plebs who were there to do their bidding.

'Teacher's should know their place and do what they are told.' Education Director, Dame Dorrie Dumpling

The Leadership Group expressed their privilege and entitlement in not-so-subtle ways, reflecting a coarse and naïve disregard and disrespect for the classroom teachers who worked tirelessly just down the corridor from where they would often meet. They would chat, laugh, and socialise as they believed they were entitled to and they reflected on where they had come from, lowly classroom teachers to managers and decision makers. They would order in take away and go on extended ‘meetings’ outside of school with the odd Maccas stopover or shopping jaunt as they wended their way back to school, having left some underling to cover for them. Yes, this was the way to go and Bent thought that there were more spoils in the offing.

'A corporatized education leader is a person who says yes to whatever is demanded of them without question.' Aunt Nellie Norbitt

Bent was on his way to better things and he accrued brownie points for doing what was demanded of him and which he did with alacrity. The rank and file distrusted him and his motives but he cared not a jot! Those in the know valued his contributions to the collective corporate goals, aims and objectives, and he felt satisfied with his progress … for now.

Bent negotiated, fawned, and crawled his way to a principalship. He stayed connected with his mentors and they fed off each other’s egos and they’d meet and regale their successes and wins in the business of education.

'To be a leader one has to risk the dislike and disdain of others but in the end it doesn't matter as long as I get what I want.' Roger Bent

Mr Bent eventually, found himself appointed as a local education director and he felt appropriately chuffed at the speed at which he’d reached this milestone and he thought the sky was the limit though he’d focus on this role for the time being. He had an office and staff to tend to his administrative needs and he was set. But it wasn’t as easy as he thought. He was accountable and had oversight over a network of schools and he soon realised he was out of his depth.

One local school was doing particularly well and he fell into a cosy relationship with the principal there. He knew he had to look after those who made him look good but this was his undoing, the great unravelling, the beginning of his demise, the beginning of the end.

How could this be? How could our golden teacher prodigy get so close but in the end fall oh so far from the world he had imagined in the early days? He had fallen foul of his own underhanded shenanigans.

The local school which he had cosied up to had what we will call staff troubles. Though the school had ‘performed’ exceedingly well in the national tests and everyone was appropriately well chuffed there was a simmering undercurrent of discontent, a potential powder keg of resentment of the disenfranchised, a disquiet that detracted from the overall health and wellbeing of the people who worked there and which could explode at any moment, a toxic slurry of discontent!

'The shit would surely hit the fan. A big jobby was on its way!' Jim 'Jobby' McGregor

What had Mr. Bent done? A school employee had been the subject of a targeted vendetta against them, not too dissimilar to the experiences of many others over the years whose ‘miscreance’ had seen them cast out the door, dismissed and discarded at the behest of a chosen few who ran the place. One particular ‘golden child’ so much loved and respected by the principal would every now and then decide that a particular ‘other’ didn’t fit their conception of how the school should look and feel. It may be that a person was popular, vivacious, competent, and skilled or well liked by the students or their parents enough to detract from the ‘golden child’s’ self-aggrandising and overinflated sense of importance (that’s another story!).

'I don't like that one. They're not nice. Get rid of them!'  Prudence Putty Nose

So, the boss did as they were told and began the process of ‘termination’ as had happened so many times over the years. The principal couldn’t countenance a situation where their favourite mentee felt uncomfortable, tearful, and unhappy and like the proverbial knight on their white steed rode to their rescue.

The targeted other had made a complaint about bullying to the appropriate authorities and confidential correspondence which went to Mr. Bents office, found its way back to the local school where the principal and his mentee were privy to information which would be prejudicial to the bullied educator’s chances of justice and fair play. Mr Bent, Roger Bent, had stepped over the line of everything ethical, professional, and right to help a ‘mate,’ to add to the bullying dynamic of bully, victim, and bystander.

Long story short, Mr Bent was investigated by the police and duly held to account and the local school principal and their sycophant enablers were disciplined accordingly. A new school leadership team was appointed and the school moved on from this unfortunate situation.

No, wait! That’s not right! Mr Bent was moved sideways with all the usual pay and privileges due a Regional Director and the principal and their bullying buddies remained where they were. Mysteriously, the corporate protection squad made the problem go away. Nothing to see here, all’s well that ends well, no?

The bullied educator was left to ponder the imponderable and though they had some satisfaction knowing that they were heard, they were left with a sense of helplessness and disappointment in a system that favours the favoured while the rest go and suffer in their jocks!

'Suffer in your jocks!' Darryl Kerrigan

PS 'I teach kids because I want to and I like it. I don't want to 'escape' to any 'leadership' position. I have standards!' Ed. E. Cated, classroom teacher 

PPS Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead (or those who just seem that way), is purely coincidental.

My Brain Felt Sad and Then I Cried

Seven-year-old Eabha (Ava) came by my office. She would occasionally drop in to tell me one of her stories or to sing me a song, but she seemed preoccupied and wasn’t her usual bubbly self. She played with a fidget she found in the toy box and after a short while, without looking in my direction said, ‘my dad has moved out and my mum has been crying a lot.’ She continued to play with the fidget.

‘Things were not right!’

Eabha stopped playing and then she came and sat down opposite me, settled in her seat, and grabbed a teddy that was nearby. Her eyes betrayed how she was feeling, and I wondered how a seven-year-old processes such a traumatic episode unfolding before her and around her and within her.

I asked her how she was feeling, and she lowered her eyes and said, ‘When my mum told me that dad was leaving my brain felt sad and then I cried.’

I asked what she meant when she said that her brain felt sad. She said that she was thinking about why this happened and if her mum and dad loved her. She said, ‘I was thinking it was my fault.’ I asked her about how she felt when she said, ‘my brain felt sad.’ She said she felt sad and scared. ‘And because you felt sad and scared what did you do?’ I asked. ‘I began to shake, and I went to my room, and I cried,’ she said.

I reflected back to her what she said and asked her if I had her story right. She said I did, and we continued to chat.

‘She knew I was listening.’

I worked with Eabha in a one-to-one counselling situation on occasion and I also had done some work in her class. We talked about feelings and strength of feelings and that they were connected to our thinking and behaving. She understood that feeling, thinking, and behaving were connected to each other. We called unhealthy (irrational) thinking Brain Bully thinking which we agreed made Brain Bully feelings and actions. We called healthy (rational) thinking Brain Friend thinking which we agreed made feelings and behaviours that were helpful to us.

‘Brain Bully thinking makes Brain Bully feelings.’

That Eabha was familiar with these REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy) principles afforded us a common language with which we could talk about our strength of feelings, where they come from and how to work out ways to help Eabha help herself.

Eabha discovered that, for instance, ‘it’s all my fault’ thinking was Brain Bully nonsense. We also agreed that ‘it’s not fair’ thinking and ‘my dad or mum doesn’t love me’ thinking was Brain Bully trying to make her feel worse than she needed to be. We talked about different ways of thinking about things and we decided that what happened was a decision made by adults and that she had nothing to do with it. We also established that her mum and dad would still love her no matter what and that even though they would not be living together she could get used to the idea that she had two places to visit and have fun.

‘Flush stinking Brain Bully thinking down the dunny!’

We talked about bad things that could happen and we decided that there were other things that could be worse than the situation she found herself in. She said that ‘this is really bad, and I wish it didn’t happen but it’s not the worst thing that can happen (compared to other things we talked about).’ Eabha began to look at things differently, more from a Brain Friend perspective and she felt a lot better.

As a rational emotive behaviour counsellor/educator I find it useful to be able talk to children in ways that make sense to them. The idea that their emotions and behaviours are caused by someone or something apart from themselves reinforces the idea that someone or something makes their feelings and behaviours! Hence, they say things like, ‘it made me sad when my dad moved away, and I can only feel happy again if he comes back.’ In adult terms this irrational view could be framed as; ‘Things must be or remain the way they’ve always been. I can’t handle it and I can never be happy again if things aren’t how they must be.’

As it happened Eabha adopted a different view of the situation:

‘Change my thinking and the world changes.’

Did she still feel sad? Yes, she did on occasion, but it had a different intensity than before. She had changed the way she assessed a very difficult situation and in doing so modified how she felt and how she behaved in a self-helpful way.

PS Eabha bounded into my office the other day and said, ‘guess what?’ I said, ‘the sky is blue.’ ‘Mum and Dad are back together.’

PPS. This is a true happening and details have been changed to protect the subject’s identity.

 

Giulio is an ED.D. candidate at the University of South Australia. He is a student counsellor in the public school system and specialises in Rational Emotive Behaviour Education. He is also a consultant to schools in counselling-based behaviour education systems in school. He is the author of two self-published teacher/counsellor resources; People and Emotions and Have a Go Spaghettio! both endorsed by Dr. Albert Ellis, creator of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy. He is a member of the International Committee for The Advancement of Rational Emotive Education.

'Do you need an ambulance?' When small problems seem like catastrophes

A teacher colleague invested a lot of time teaching her year 3 students that thinking, feeling and behaving were all interconnected. As Albert Ellis, creator of REBT said (I paraphrase here):

‘We make ourselves more anxious than we need to be when we think events and things are worse than they really are.’

The teacher did a lot of groundwork to persuade her young group that they make themselves more upset than they need to be. She read books that had characters who helped themselves get better when they changed the way they thought about something. She reminded them often that it was their/our estimation of an event, how we thought about it that was key. ‘If they came to know this they can do something constructive about their discomfort,’ the teacher thought.

She changed her language; rather than asking ‘what makes you angry?’ she would say ‘what are you thinking about what happened that’s making your feelings so strong?’ She didn’t say ‘don’t be angry’ either as she knew her students couldn’t ‘be’ the feelings they were feeling.

How many times do we say ‘it/they/she made me angry?’ Can something ‘make’ us as angry as we feel? And the claim ‘I am angry?’ Does the assertion ‘I am scared’ make sense? Can I ‘be’ the feeling (s) I experience? Food for thought eh?

‘Message to self,’ the teacher would say inside her head:

"Teach the think – feel – do connection. Stop saying ‘it’ makes ‘me/you’ angry. Stop saying ‘good boy/girl’ (doesn’t make sense)"

So the teacher had done a great job of teaching the students that their estimation of events, their perception of what’s happening, had made the strength of emotion they feel about an event and not the thing/event itself. She had acquainted them with the notion that they could have a fair amount of control over how they feel and the actions they take. She asked them questions like:

‘What’s stronger; angry or upset?

Do I feel angry or am I angry? What’s the difference?

‘You make me sad!’ What does this mean? Is there another way to say this?’

 

The classroom discourse moved away from person specific to more behaviour or competency specific i.e. she addressed behaviour and not person in her feedback. She taught her students that what they did was up for assessment but their essence or personhood was not. She weaned herself off of using person specific terms like; good boy/girl, naughty, smart, cute etc. and focused more on what the children did. She was mindful that a person’s worth was a given, that they were always worthwhile whether they did ‘good’ or did ‘bad.’ “Doing ‘bad’ can’t make you ‘bad’” she would start each day by saying and she would add “doing ‘good’ doesn’t make you good either. You are always worthwhile!” This was a constant reminder to students that their ‘okayness’ wasn’t attached to someone’s assessment of their person.

She began to notice that those children who were generally withdrawn or lacking in confidence began to try new things. Some were putting their hands up more to ask questions; they were taking more risks. She asked herself why? But she knew why didn’t she? It was the new and developing regime she had introduced based on the philosophy that:

“People are not disturbed by things, but by the views they take of them.” Epictetus

Her children began to understand that big problems were only as big as they thought or imagined them to be. If a problem was big or not was a decision they could make by assessing its ‘badness’ against other possible happenings. She helped each child to construct their own ‘catastrophe scale’ where possible problems could be organised according to how ‘bad’ they were.

So back to the title of this piece and the ambulance reference. The children were asked in many different situations if what was happening was as bad as they thought it was. Some children referred to their hard copy catastrophe scale (CS), whilst others used the one they carried inside their heads; their virtual CS. If Sofia said ‘I don’t have my hat today and it’s a massive problem because I have to stay in the shade at playtime,’ her CS would tell her that there are far worse things that could happen and her teacher would say ‘Sofia, is it so bad that I should call an ambulance?’

 

  

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! 

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?