Page 45 - EMCAPP-Journal No. 24
P. 45

ons, I was a witness to her emp�ness Because           therapeu�c alliance with a pa�ent. These rup-
        significant deficits in my own life had been           tures in the therapeu�c alliance are also trying
        witnessed and comforted during my training             for the pa�ent and can be a source of new
        analysis, I was able to comfort her with what          suffering for him or her. Henry, Schacht &
        I had “received from God” (2 Corinthians 1:4).         Strupp (1986,1990) have iden�fied the followi-
        Polly and I mourned her losses of love,                ng prac��oner behaviors in poor-outcome
        dreams, and illusions. Within Polly’s void of          cases: hos�le control (i.e. beli�ling and bla-
        losses, she became known by me in ways her             ming), hos�le separa�on (i.e., ignoring and ne-
        mother and her church family did not know              glec�ng), complexity (i.e., messages simulta-
        her. As Polly and I mourned together in the            neously conveying contradictory informa�on),
        ashes of her suffering, we together experi-            and less affilia�ve autonomy gran�ng (i.e.,
        enced redemp�ve and authen�c Chris�an re-              affirming and understanding). (See also Caston-
        la�ng—the one who has mourned and recei-               guay, Boswell, et al. 2010).
        ved comfort, witnessing and comfor�ng an-              Boisvert & Faust (2006) have demonstrated
        other. Our authen�c bonds of love become               that prac��oners tend to under-es�mate the
        the very rela�onal fabric of the present and           incidence of nega�ve treatment outcomes.
        coming Kingdom of God. (Adapted, Hoffman,              Other studies reveal similar findings: see Foa &
        2013)                                                  Emmelkamp (1983), Mays & Frank (1985),
                                                               Strupp, Hadley & Gomez-Schwartz (1977) and
        The authors understand human suffering since           Strupp & Hadley (1985). Lilienfeld (2007) has
        Jesus’ resurrec�on as a shared project between         convincingly argued that a necessary but large-
        the God who discerns good from evil and choo-          ly missing variable to be studied in therapeu�c
        ses the good, and the joint heirs in Christ (Rom.      outcomes research is the problem of poten�al-
        8:17) who can now also discern good from evil          ly harmful treatments (PHTs) and has published
        and choose the good. While human knowledge             a list of empirically based PHTs.
        of good and evil could not be reversed to an ori-      Wampold (2006) offered evidence that harmful
        ginal human innocence (Gen. 2:17, 3:3ff); God          psychotherapists’ blindness to their own intra-
        in Christ and through the Holy Spirit has em-          psychic deficits may be more predic�ve of the-
        powered regenerated ministers of reconcilia�-          rapy outcomes than the therapeu�c alliance.
        on who can now live in the ambivalence of              For instance, prac��oners who were assessed
        good and evil and choose the good and overco-          with low self-esteem and elevated levels of im-
        me the evil with the good (Rom. 12:21). In this        pulsiveness, worry and emo�onal expressive-
        fellowship, or partnership with God, we surren-        ness in rela�onships (i.e. anxious a�achment
        der to His project of shalom, and live in the          styles) were found to be less empathic in the
        eternal present to do the greater works than           provision of psychotherapy. Henry, Strupp et al.
        those done when Jesus was here with us (John           (1993) found that prac��oners who were hos�-
        14:12).                                                le toward themselves were more likely to be
        Central to our role as psychotherapists is our         hos�le to pa�ents.
        service as ministers of reconcilia�on. Staying in      A psychotherapist’s early developmental for-
        the suffering with our pa�ent un�l there is res-       ma�on can also contribute to harmful outco-
        urrec�on, o�en compels us to sit with the              mes. Chris�anson (1991) and Hilliard, Henry, &
        other “among the ashes” for much longer than           Strupp (2000) have separately found that prac-
        a week of days (Job 2). A theology of suffering        ��oner memories of parental nega�ve percep-
        calls us to persevere with the other in the ashes      �ons during their child and adolescent deve-
        with our own distress of some�mes not kno-             lopment correlated with nega�ve interpersonal
        wing what to do or say.                                psychotherapeu�c process. Henry & Strupp
                                                               (1994) found sufficient evidence to assert “a
        When the psychotherapist falters                       theore�cally coherent link between early ac-
        Suffering with a pa�ent is a trying event. Such        �ons by parents toward the therapist, the the-
        suffering can induce the psychotherapist to ta-        rapist’s adult introject state, [and the thera-
        citly if not ac�vely relinquish some or all of the     pist’s] vulnerability to counter-therapeu�c pro-


                                                           45
   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50