Thinking behind practice – post-structuralism, culture, and individualism

I am doing a series of reflections as part of a post graduate course on Narrative Therapy. Overall there will be about ten reflection papers on various concepts and practices that currently form and shape Narrative Therapy.

I chose this set of readings for reflection because post-structuralism has been a significant influence towards my approach to counselling and other aspects of life.  In the counselling arena it has been liberating for me and my clients.  I have a client, X, who was referred to me by school personnel for anger and defiance issues.  Problems happened over the past year and the school counsellor described him as being “resistant” and unwilling to speak.

In my first meeting with the 15 year old boy at his home, he stood by the door and softly apologised for getting home late before going to his room to change out of his school uniform.  I imagined if I had taken up the image of a “resistant” angry boy as a fixed identity then I might not have noticed such subtle expressions of an alternative identity (Thomas, 2002).

Post-structuralism for me invites a sense of inquisitiveness that leaves no stone unturned, where I become an investigative journalist writing an expose (this was how Michael White described a therapist’s role during a 2007 workshop). The brief referral report on X seemed totalizing of his identity and I chose to open an inquiry into the report, allowing X to read the report and respond to all the statements.  There have been other occasions where I invited clients to expose the labels that structuralist ideas may impose on them and this endeavour has often proven fruitful in uncovering their skills, knowledge, and values in response to problems faced.

In later dialogues with X, many other stories unfolded around his school life that contradicted the problem saturated story.  This included his experience of the injustice inflicted on him by certain teachers who did not listen to his explanations, the experience of humiliation when unusual punishments were enforced on him, and the skill of walking away as a means to prevent anger from blowing up.

In his telling over two sessions, the label of an angry defiant youth was not a problem isolated to his “self” or an identity that pervaded in all contexts. I was delighted when X told me he felt more relaxed after the second session.

In working with youths, I have become more aware of their culture and how the culture encompasses their preferred response to life’s problems.  In reading about psychological colonisation (Arulampalam, Perera, Mel, White, & Denborough, 2006)  it reminds me that as adults we often impose our adult ways of problem solving as the sole acceptable or “normal” way.  I have learned to be sensitive to and to be appreciative of youth culture because privileging their ways invites personal agency and relieves the effort of introducing an alien culture to them.  For each client that I meet, I envision a meeting of cultures and therefore an exciting opportunity to learn more about my client’s life.

References

Arulampalam, S., Perera, L., Mel, S. d., White, C., & Denborough, D. (2006). Chap 3: Avoiding psychological colonisation: Stories from Sri Lanka. In Trauma: Narrative responses to traumatic experience. Adelaide: Dulwich Centre Publications.

Thomas, L. (2002). Poststructuralism and therapy - what's it all about. The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work(2), pp 91-99.