Externalising conversations & de-centered practice

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. 

The ethics of collaboration 
The ethics of control mentioned by Michael (White, 1997) stood out for me as it heightened my awareness of the dichotomies brought forth in the social service sector of Singapore.  One such dichotomy is between achievement and non-achievement of outcomes in the work that I do.  Such a dichotomy can exert pressures on how I work and sometimes I feel the “despair” of being caught in-between the voices of the client and the voices from a larger community who want to solve a problem that involves the client.

An example is when schools refer students and their families for counselling with me.  Often the desired outcome is one of problem solving to motivate students to return to regular schooling or to correct undesirable behaviours in school.  Teachers are often the ones to notice problems and make referrals but also often the ones who do not participate in subsequent meetings with the students or their families.  The result is that the outcomes desired by teachers and the outcomes desired by students and their families become distant or divergent.

When I read about the ethic of collaboration that goes towards building a “foundation of possibility”, I recall a recent meeting at a school with the student and his parent.  It was a rare occasion that the form teacher could join us.  Even though it was a short five minutes there was sufficient time to hear his expectations about outcomes, which were all about classroom behaviours. I could then clarify that my work ahead is more open-ended and not limited to the school context, and thus may not achieve such dramatic changes by the end of the counselling programme.  The teacher was a little surprised and realized that his expectations were being negotiated in the presence of the student and his parent.

I felt lighter after that dialogue in the family’s presence because there was a space for collaboration by organizing and inviting each party to speak.  After reading about the ethics of collaboration its significance is now clearer for me. 

Decentred practice 

The section on decentred practice described the micro-world of counselling and its potential to create monotony (White, 1997); I recall such monotony during one stage of counselling a client whom I had seen for over a year.  Because I had grown familiar with the client’s stories I gradually began to center my self in the therapy through the tradition of “self awareness”.  I began to wonder whether I could be better at the skills of counselling, whether I should see the client less often to prevent over-dependency, and so on.  Much of it became accountability for my actions rather than client’s.  There was indeed a sense of isolation.  A consultation with colleagues helped to dispel the feelings of isolation and helped validate my skills.  But still the focus was on me.

Now I have an acute awareness that various counselling traditions seem to contribute to the creation of this micro-world.  I am left with a dilemma about what to do with such traditions as “here and now” and “process versus content”.  These have been things that I valued from past knowledge and trainings. 

When I re-looked at the decentring practices, I found a way out of the dilemma.  The decentring practices were a way to harness the rich conversations between clients and others in their lives, including the therapist.  The conversations between client and therapist can be significant but I feel less burdened to make it so because it is only one alternative story in the counselling context. 

Externalising conversations

About a year ago I had this discussion with fellow practitioners on whether externalisation was an essential practice of narrative therapy.  We did not have a conclusion then.

A few things from the readings on externalising conversation stood out for me (Russell & Carey, 2002):

• “We sustain externalising conversations throughout the therapy process.”
• “That externalising is not a technique that we choose to use at certain times and then not at others.”
• “It can take some time, and much practice (both within and outside the therapy room) for the different language practices to become a seamless part of one’s work.” 

My understanding of externalisation had somehow become a technique.  In fact I realized my reference to it as “externalisation” implies it is finite and not a continuous process. I usually attempt to get the problems named by the client before I attempt externalizing conversations.  When the attempt fails, I tend to drop the externalising approach. I need to rethink about externalising conversations as a way of working rather than just being a “part of” my work.

Furthermore after reading the article on personalising AIDS and CARE, I am struck by how the conversations “only occur after extensive periods of consultation”  (Sliep & CARE Counsellors, 1996).  Sometimes I may be too eager to grab at the words that clients use and thus invite a sense of failure when externalising.  The CARE counsellors of Malawi consulted the community on the externalising project with respect to experiences of gender, AIDS, and sexuality.  For future externalising conversations to be useful I will want to consult clients in an extensive manner that allows externalising to occur collaboratively rather than be dependent on my own knowledges.

Externalising conversations often seem to conjure fun and drama, and yet difficult dilemmas can be raised.  I feel encouraged to inject such fun and drama into my own work yet I am not entirely comfortable.  Perhaps I need to trace the history of fun and drama in my own life and re-invite them to join in my work. 

References 
Russell, S., & Carey, M. (2002). Externalising - Commonly Asked Questions. The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work(2).

Sliep, Y., & CARE Counsellors. (1996). Conversations with AIDS and CARE. Dulwich Centre Journal(3), pp 141-156.

White, M. (1997). Part III: The Ethic of Collaboration and De-centered Practice. In Narratives of Therapists' Lives: Dulwich Centre Publications.