Flowery Fawning Language - an REBT perspective

Flowery language is:

‘designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect, but which is often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content.’

Dr. Albert Ellis was an efficient person by all accounts and was careful to say what he meant in his writing without employing unnecessary hyperbole or using grandiose and convoluted ways to impress his audience. He didn’t need to nor did he want to.

Einstein said if you can’t explain something in simple terms you may not understand it. He encouraged people to:

“Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.”

This is not as easy as it sounds and requires effort and consideration.

Schmaltz is another term that comes to mind to describe language used to ingratiate oneself with others; to over empathise. Sentimentality overload!

What can be the purpose of these flowery utterances in an REBT sense? What would Dr. Ellis make of those inclined to fawn over and to flatter others excessively? At which point does the message become meaningless and insincere?

Fawning is the:

‘use of people-pleasing to diffuse conflict, feel more secure in relationships, and earn the approval of others.

The latter, to earn the approval of others, is a salient point to consider in the ‘love slobbism’ stakes. Dr. Ellis’ principle of unconditional self-acceptance describes a predisposition to believe that one is worthwhile no matter what. This psychological bulwark keeps the individual in a state of ‘ ‘OK-ness’ meaning that if people don’t approve of you or you happen to fail at something your worth cannot be diminished, unless you allow it to of course!

The ‘flowery fawner’ or the one who characteristically entreats others to like or approve of them via excessive flattery are at risk because when such approval is not forthcoming the subject is rendering themselves psychologically unwell. Why? Because their sense of worth is tethered to how others esteem them. Ellis said:

So look out for this kind of attitude in yourself or others as you may knowingly or unknowingly be leaning on others too much for your sense self-worth. Consider the following to keep yourself sane:

• What am I saying and why am I saying it?
• Do I need the approval of others to be worthwhile?
• Learn to be more self-accepting? How?
• Try new things and test my resilience if I fail or others don’t approve of me.
• Remind myself daily that what I think of myself is more important than what others think.
• Remind myself to care about what others think about me but not to care too much.

Any others?

 

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? 

OK Fred

This is typical of conversations I've had over the years working with young people. From early childhood to senior high school age the theme of most topics relates to the idea of 'being' and 'doing.' This exchange serves to illustrate the point that somehow Fred has decided that what he does is indeed who he is.

Dr Albert Ellis in his Alfred Korzybski Memorial Lecture 1961 on General Semantics and Rational Emotive (Behaviour) Therapy acknowledges that Alfred Korzybski, the originator of general semantics heavily influenced his own pioneering work. Korzybski spoke of the 'is' of predication and Ellis explains this here saying that:

' ... statements like, "I am good" and "I am bad" are inaccurate over generalisations, because in reality I am a person who sometimes acts in a good and sometimes in a bad manner.'  

The notion that one 'is' good or bad is an errant one which can harm the emotional and psychological well being of the person who holds it to be true. Ellis seeks to remind us that we are human beings who can act in ways that are 'good' or 'bad' but we are not what we do.

OK Fred is not OK!

Counsellor: How’s it going?

Child: Not good.

Counsellor: Why?

Child: I’m naughty.

Fred's condition of naughtiness is problematic because this is why he has been excluded from the classroom and he feels bad.

Counsellor: What does that mean?

Child: I keep interrupting. I'm bad.

Counsellor: You are naughty for interrupting? That makes you bad?

Child: Yes

Counsellor: So you are naughty Fred? You are bad Fred?

Fred has decided that his naughtiness is linked to badness. Doing is being!

Child: I’m bad Fred because I do bad things.

Counsellor: How does that make you bad?

Child: I am bad because I interrupt a lot and the teacher doesn’t like it.

Counsellor: If you do things people don’t like you are bad. Can bad Fred be good Fred?

Bad Fred does things the teacher doesn't like. He wants the teacher to like him because what he does is who he is.

Child: Yes. When I don’t interrupt I am being good.

Counsellor: So there is good Fred and there is bad Fred. Is that right?

Child: Yes. When I’m good the teacher likes me.

Counsellor: People like good Fred but they don’t like bad Fred? It sounds like you are two people, bad Fred and good Fred.

Fred is saying that there are two of him. His sense of self worth ebbs and flows between feeling OK when others like him to feeling bad when they don't! (conditional self acceptance)

Child: I’m not two people at the same time am I?

Counsellor: Well no. That’s why I am trying to understand what you are saying about yourself.

Child: I am Fred and I can be bad and I can be good that’s what I mean.

Counsellor: So when you do something the teachers like you are Good Fred but when you do something she doesn’t like you are Bad Fred. Is that right?

Here we are trying to get a sense of what doing is and what being is. Are they the same?

Child: No I’m just Fred!!! I am Confused Fred!

Counsellor: You are Confused Fred who can be Bad Fred and Good Fred! That’s three Fred’s! Only joking Fred. When you said ‘I’m just Fred’ I think you speak the truth. There’s only one Fred and you are he. There’s no other like you.

Child: I know that.

Fred is unique. It is impossible to rate his worth totally good or bad based on a particular characteristic or behaviour.

Counsellor: Ok. Doing something ‘naughty’ like interrupting is a behaviour. It’s something you do. It’s an action. Does that make sense?

Child: Yes I understand what you say.

Counsellor: When you say ‘I am bad because I interrupt the class you believe YOU are bad because you made a bad choice. Doing something is not the same as being something.

We are making a clear distinction between doing and being here.

Child: So I am not bad but my actions might be bad is that what you are saying?

Counsellor: Yes. You are OK even when you ‘do bad’ or when you ‘do good.’ So can you be Good Fred and Bad Fred?

Child: No. I am Fred. I am worthwhile Fred. I am OK Fred who makes mistakes but I'm always OK.

This establishes that Freds worth is never contingent on a particular behaviour or personal quality or characteristic. 

Fred is on the way to feeling better about himself but where did he get these ideas in the first place? When others judge your behaviour they connect what you do with your being or your 'essence' or as Ellis says your 'you-ness.' Who is doing this? The childs parents and teachers and other people in Freds life reinforce these ideas via the messages they send, verbally and otherwise e.g. simply by saying 'good boy' to someone who has done something well is conveying the idea that doing good equates with being good.

Michel Foucault a philosopher and social theorist considered how power and knowledge is used to assert control over the individual in society via its institutions. He asserts that:

‘Children learn to ‘recite the repertoire of technologies of the self which constitute the ideal student of their literacy classrooms.’(Foucault 1988)

The ideal student is one who does as he is expected and has the qualities and competencies desired to 'be' successful and to reach full potential. What are the 'technologies of the self' and whose 'repertoire' is the child reciting?

I take this to mean the kinds of discourse that characterises the culture of the classroom, this will include the types of feedback the teacher provides to behaviour observed, the attitudes and actions that the teacher responds to and therefore reinforces. The idea that a student could conflate being with doing is possible if a student is said to 'be good' when they 'do' something acceptable to the teacher. This idea is conveyed by telling children they 'are' good for 'doing' good.

We can all take care to be aware that what we are saying when we are saying it is correct and conveys an accurate and useful message i.e. 'You did that well. Good job.' This refers to the actions of the person and not the 'essence' of who that person is. 

Nice and Too Nice - what's the difference?

What is nice? One person’s nice is not necessarily another person’s nice. How do we know we are nice is another consideration. People might comment on how obliging so and so is, that they are always available and seem so selfless and caring. This feedback either directly or via others might be comforting or assuring; it may also be affirming. Is this healthy? 

Niceness can be healthy if there is no sense of unreasonable obligation to general others attached to it. That is, one has a healthy dedication to one’s own needs and wants. She knows what these are and tends to them without fear or favour. She is not addicted to the needs, demands and appraisals of others. She intuitively understands that her worth is not dependent on others (unless allowed!). As Eleanor Roosevelt said:

If we worry about how others view us and we learn to need the affirmation of others we put ourselves at risk. What happens when we don’t get the acknowledgement we seek? What happens when our niceness isn’t rewarded? What happens when we don’t get what we have learnt we must have, the affirmation of our niceness; of us? Michelle Martin would say that we would be living in the realm of the overly nice; where we are too nice. 

Self-esteem is a concept that is used in many contexts when discussing mental health and well being. It is used to describe how a person views oneself. She makes estimations of her worth and usefulness; she makes assessments of her deeds and accomplishments and may ascribe a grade to her total efforts.

Some like Dr Albert Ellis who created Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy regards self-esteem to be detrimental to our mental health because it is conditional. How one esteems oneself is variable and can wax and wane depending on circumstances. This is self-defeating according to Ellis who asserts:

Ellis’ REBT talks about unconditional self-acceptance, the belief that our worth is not negotiable and can’t be attached to others assessment of us or how well or badly we may perform at tasks. This idea is taught to students in many schools and of course in the counselling context to help people develop a kind of ‘psychological muscle' or immunity to help deal with failure and rejection. Jonas Salk (creator of the polio vaccine) to Martin Seligman said:

"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."

So are you a 'self esteemer' or a 'self-accepter' and how do these relate to niceness? Is there a healthy nice and an unhealthy nice?

Self esteemers may get caught up with pleasing others and ascribing self-worth to personal achievement. One may seek the approval of others and in doing so will ignore personal wants, needs and aspirations. This may in turn cause anger, anxiety, resentment and depression so strong is the need to please.

Self-accepters will not feel so obliged to others. They will consider their own needs and desires which reflect a healthy and unconditional sense of self-worth. They will not need (though they may desire/prefer) the approval of others nor will they always have to succeed at tasks (though they may want to) because they understand that their worth is inviolable and will remain intact even when things don’t go so well.

Are you a nice 'self accepter' or a too nice 'self esteemer?'

When Students Are Our Teachers

Teachers beginning their careers will be challenged in their practise when situations present that require strength and resilience. One of a couple of things I will offer when asked is not to allow the fear of the disapproval of students thwart their resolve to establish their authority as classroom leader.

Why doesn't she like me? He doesn't seem to respond to my manner/style of teaching etc. Whilst these might prompt opportunities for reflection and review they don't need to become major 'crises of confidence.' Unless this is allowed to happen of course. As Eleanor Roosevelt once said: 

What we believe about ourselves is reflected in our behaviour and in how we feel when presented with difficult situations. Unconditional self acceptance is a kind of psychological buttress against the negative views and opinions that others may have of us. So suggestion number one for new educators: take ideas, opinions, advice on board but don't let them define you. What we believe about ourselves is less likely to be compromised. Our buttress isn't breached. For more on self acceptance visit:

Albert Ellis and REBT 

The second piece of advice I will offer is this; be aware of our personal prejudices about students. As we can't expect that all others must like/respect/admire us (though we may healthily prefer this) it is true that we may not have altogether positive views of others. I have heard colleagues over the years say that they 'can't seem to warm to this student and this effects how I relate to her.' This is an important insight to acknowledge and it can have positive outcomes if we determine to find 'a way in' to connecting with that child. 

Accepting self and accepting others are valuable attitudes to cultivate and educators who practise this by and large relate more effectively to their students. Those students who otherwise may be marginalised are eventually, in most cases won over!

Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy - schools are copping on!

Have you heard a child, colleague (yourself!) use expressions such as she made me angry, if only the weather were better, I can’t stand it when things don’t go my way? These kind of self-talk statements indicate an underlying belief system which precipitates feelings and behaviours that are not self-helpful and may also be harmful to others. For those of us who believe that the way we feel and behave is dictated by factors external to ourselves this will challenge that view and hopefully provide some food for thought!

A long time ago (100 AD) a person called Epictetus developed his philosophy about life. The legacy of his wisdom sits at the core of personal development programs for students, teachers and parents being implemented in school communities across the land. His message across the ages to us is this,

“We are troubled not by things, but by the view we take of them.”

Epictetus was one of many wise folk, collectively called the stoic philosophers. Their advice and good counsel have not fallen on deaf ears however. Early last century a young 16 year old began a life long journey of learning about and personal application of “stoic philosophy’ in his life. He has since incorporated this into his now famous and planet wide approach to psychotherapy called Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy. I am of course talking about the eminent psychotherapist Dr. Albert Ellis, considered to be the grandfather of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy. He formulated his ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance and began applying it in practice in 1955.

 

Albert Ellis

Our biological inheritance and our early learning combine and influence the formulation of our core beliefs (our assumptions, rules for living, our values). REBT asserts that when we think, we feel and behave; when we feel there is a thought and behaviour linked to that feeling and so on. It follows then that if what we believe (think) drives our feelings and behaviours then we have the potential to control (self-regulate) how we feel and behave! If this is so we can choose to feel and act self-helpfully, so, as Ellis says, we can achieve the goals we set ourselves. We do this by having (cultivating, learning) a ‘mindset’, (automatic habits of thinking) which helps us to live a satisfactory and rewarding life.

The ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance

A = Activating event i.e. what happened

B = Beliefs i.e. my constructed ‘thinking rules’

C = Consequences of A and B i.e. how I feel and behave

Beware of the following automatic thought categories! If you believe these to be true, you will act and behave self-defeatingly!

1.     Awfulising: using words like 'awful’, 'terrible’, 'horrible’,'catastrophic’ to describe something - e.g. 'It would be terrible if …’, 'It’s the worst thing that could happen’, 'That would be the end of the world’.

Perspective!

       2.  Cant-stand-it-itis: viewing an event or experience as unbearable e.g. 'I can’t stand it’, 'It’s absolutely unbearable’, I’ll die if I get rejected’.

       3.  Demanding: using 'shoulds’ (moralising) or 'musts’ (musturbating) e.g. 'You should not have done that, 'I must not fail’, 'I need to be loved’, 'I have to have a drink’.

       4. People-rating: labelling or rating your total self (or someone else’s) e.g. 'I’m/you’re stupid /hopeless /useless /worthless.’

Some of us are more resilient than others; we seem to cope better with the slings and arrows that come our way. Others are predisposed to feeling (and therefore acting) in ways that are self-defeating. REBT offers us the tools with which to boost the ‘psychological immune system’ of the individual as a protective mechanism against unhealthy negative emotions. Jonas Salk talked about the possibility of psychologically immunising young people. Ellis, Seligman and others would argue that this is possible through programs based on sound psycho therapeutic principles.

This is what a growing number of schools are doing through Rational Emotive Behaviour Education in South Australia.

Bully for You! REBT and Self Acceptance - a protective factor against bullying

Rational Emotive Behaviour Education is taught at Para Hills School P-7. REBE helps students to develop a strong and healthy sense of self worth i.e. a confidence that is hard to shake especially when others disapprove of them/bully them. This a way to 'psychologically immunise' students against bullying. 

Bully for You!

Do you think you have nothing to offer

Use self-talk which is negative and untrue

And you don’t think you amount to much?

Then I have just the thing for you!

Bully for you, bully for you

I have a bully for you!

I look for people to victimise

My admiring buddies think I’m great

I like to see fear in your eyes

You deserve to suffer mate!

Bully for you, bully for you

I’m the bully for you.

I will persist, never let up

I don’t consider how you feel

My life’s work is to see you suffer

You don’t matter; you’re no big deal!

Bully for you, bully for you

I’m the bully for you!

We control our thoughts

We are what we perceive

We can choose to be powerless victims

Until we change what we believe

Victim for you, victim for you

Will I be the victim for you?

I’m a worthwhile person

I have qualities unique to me

We are all different from each other

That makes us the same you see?

No, I will not allow you to bully

You don’t have my permission you see

I will not be your sporting obsession

You are not the bully for me!

Bully for me, bully for me.

You are not the bully for me.

The cloak of silence

Is the bully’s best friend

So speak out, everybody

It’s the cloak that’s specially tailored
For you and for me!

Giulio Bortolozzo

Approvalism - the need to be needed

The professional victim is adept at deflecting blame, using hard luck stories to win sympathy, making herself ‘indispensible’ to influential others. This all feeds her need to be needed. She has low self worth and has such a poor opinion of herself that she relies on the approval of others to feel good about herself, an approval addiction/dependence. In previous posts we have discussed Serious Approval Dependence (SAD) where the individual needs to be noticed and esteemed by others. When this is taken away, the individual can be left with feelings of inadequacy, self-doubt and self-loathing. She may also resent those who don’t acknowledge her talents and capabilities (as they absolutely should! – see Albert Ellis’ ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance). She is often left feeling angry, anxious and depressed.

Approval needy people are worthy of understanding and respect but at the same time those around her would be wise to protect themselves from her manipulative behaviour.

1. Be aware of she who sits on every or most committees

2. Don’t feed her need to be needed – she needs your approval, don’t give it!

3. Be prepared to become a target of her anger/resentment if you are strong enough not to be drawn into her web of lies and deceit.

4. Tears and claims of victimhood will be the strategy of choice used when there is any sense that she has been caught out (‘My integrity is at stake here! This is so unfair.’)

5. She will put others down strategically when others who are ‘on side’ are around.

6. She will delegate difficult jobs to others (that she can’t do herself) and criticize them when they fail (as they will do).

7. She will withhold important information from colleagues.

8. She will deny professional learning opportunities to her 'underlings' and then criticize them when they don’t perform as well as they ‘should’.

9. She will tell her line manager that so and so is lazy, inefficient (who will believe her as she is his confidante at his disposal 24/7 and therefore must be right)

10. The above strategies will be used to her advantage e.g. engineer the employment of people she knows to positions on staff (to replace those inefficient others who ‘don’t do a good job’) who she can control.

11. She will tell lies to get what she wants.

12. She will be aided and abetted by line managers who wouldn’t want to get her offside as she is greatly needed (just as she likes to be).

Sofi's Choice - helpful or unhelpful?

Sofia was new to the country and was vivacious and good humoured. She was an enthusiastic student, who worked hard at her studies and had a wide circle of friends. She had a ready smile and a caring nature, sensitive to the needs of others, a delight to teach.

On many occasions she would accompany me on yard duty and we would talk about things and inevitably the topic of discussion would turn to friendships and her concern about a particular student who did not seem to like her. This student would generally ignore her and chose not to associate with her in the classroom or in the yard. Sofia would become tearful and I would ask why she felt so sad. She said that she didn’t understand why this student didn’t seem to want to be her friend as ‘everyone else liked me, why doesn’t she?’ On another occasion Sofia said she wasn’t happy because this student wasn’t her friend and she would say ‘she makes me sad.’ As a Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy counsellor I used some of the REBT strategies I had learned. According to REBT Sofia was ‘musting, oughting and shoulding,’ that is believing that her fellow student ‘must’ like her and that it was so awful (awfulising) that she couldn’t stand it. To add to her sadness Sofia believed that there must be something wrong with her! There must be something about her that the other student didn’t like and that this was all Sofia’s fault!

And so our discussions began to take on a philosophical note. I asked Sofia how this other person ‘made’ her sad. Sofia said that she ‘should’ be my friend and if she was then she could be happy. So I said, ‘you feel sad because she won’t be your friend and that you can only be happy if she becomes your friend.’ Sofia agreed that this was so and this became the basis of our further talks. We talked about a ‘perfect world’ and what that meant. We agreed that it would be nice if everyone we liked liked us in return and that everything we wanted to achieve we achieved. We talked about perfectionism and how it was unrealistic to expect that everything should go our way all the time. We can work hard to get an A+ and fall short, we can try to make friends with others we like but we may not always meet their approval. This is the way the world works. Sofia agreed and could see the wisdom of what we were talking about. So we returned to what Sofia believed, what her philosophy about herself, others and the world was. Sofia understood that her unrealistic oughting, shoulding and musting were making her sadness (‘she should like me’, ‘I must get her approval’, ‘she is bad because she won’t be my friend’, ‘I am unlikeable, I can’t stand this and it’s awful’). This insight was the turning point for Sofia, as she understood that her desire for a perfect world was an unrealistic expectation. I asked her, ‘must other people you like always like you in return?’ ‘Is it awful when you don’t get an A+ for your assignments even when you tried your best?’ ‘Are others bad if they don’t approve of you or like you?’ ‘Are you an unlikeable no good person because she doesn’t approve of you?’ Sofia answered with a resounding ‘NO!’

So we talked about helpful, rational thinking that would be healthier. I asked Sofia to challenge and change some of the unhelpful beliefs she held to be true.

I said, ‘must you always do well and achieve your goals.’ Sofia said, ‘No. It is better to believe that, ‘I will work hard to achieve my goals. I would like to achieve my goals but I don’t always have to.’ Why is this better?’ I asked. ‘It is not realistic to always get what you want. That is not how the world works!’ she said. She added that she would keep trying anyway.

What about the belief that, ‘people you like must like you in return and always approve of you?’ Sofia said, ‘this is not realistic either. People don’t have to like me. They can make their own choices.’

What about the belief, ‘you are unlikeable; you have nothing to like. You are a nerd.’ Sofia said, ‘this is not true. I have other friends. I have many positive qualities so I can’t be worthless or unlikeable!’

Construction in progress

So it transpired that Sofia became more comfortable with herself and the world and she could now accommodate and accept that her fellow student did not want to be her friend, that it was OK, that it was disappointing but not awful and she was still OK. She didn’t need her approval at all!

Sofia’s errant, irrational philosophical beliefs have been challenged and modified to become more rational (self and other helpful). Thus Sofia is not unhealthily anxious, angry or depressed (unhealthy negative emotions) because she hasn’t got what she wants (to have her fellow class member as a friend). She now tends to be healthily concerned and disappointed (healthy negative emotions) as she would have preferred (and not demanded) to have the friendship and approval of her classmate.

Sofi likes elephants

Counselling - has REBT lost it's relevance?

Counselling is more than having a chat with someone though in itself this can be helpful, therapeutic even. But like any discipline there needs to be purpose to any endeavour. What is it we want to achieve for the client and what's in it for me? Can we cause more harm than good or not benefit the other at all? What is counselling any way but two people talking about something? 

What do we want to achieve? The goal will always be to help the person you are working with to develop insight and to have the tools to work on themselves as they are getting on with their life. Is it telling people what they need to know or do they know already? These are things the counsellor will consider as the session/s unfold.

Is there a payoff for me? Yes there are many but it is important to know what they are. If our main purpose is to feel good about ourselves we are not going to be useful. There are some self appointed experts who seek out opportunities to practise empathy on others asking 'how did that make you feel?' and 'it makes me (the counsellor) feel so proud when you ...' or 'I like it when you ...' It is not about how the counsellor feels or what she particularly likes that is most important here and can your client 'make' you feel anything? Of course people can be well intended but good intentions are not what counselling is about and they certainly won't help your client!

What is the counsellors approach based on? My tool of choice is REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy) developed by Albert Ellis. It is a constructivist approach to counselling based on the premise that we have developed habits of thinking that underpin the behaviours and emotions we experience in response to daily life events. Ellis' ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance model helps us teach this philosophy to others. Other peoples theories and ideas make up my counselling toolkit but Ellis' REBT is my foundation model of choice. Why? Because it works!

We have our base theory (REBT) but what skills do we need to develop to effectively support the client? Counselling skills are developed, honed with practise over time. Reflective listening, identifying issues of concern, working out what personal philosophies the client has constructed that are not helpful or indeed are harmful (Cherchez le should as Ellis would say) and activities to work on to achieve therapeutic aims. The list can go on! Is Ellis relevant? I say a resounding yes to that. Ellis' work is as relevant as ever if not more so!

Unconditional Self Acceptance - Mary Lambert 'Secrets' (Official)

This is a video about self acceptance and the courage to be who you are. Where some try to conform to some ideal of what is 'beautiful' 'cool' 'normal' Mary Lambert shows us that no such things exist ..... unless you let them! A growing number of teachers in schools all over South Australia teach unconditional self acceptance via a daily dose of REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy) through Rational Emotive Behaviour Education. This video was passed on to me by Dr Ken Rigby who advocates for the promotion of self and other acceptance through his work on bullying (www.kenrigby.net) Have a look at it and pass it on :)  

No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. Eleanor Roosevelt