transactional analysis

Is Closing Escape Hatches Always Possible?

11/05/2012 By Ian Tomlinson

The term “escape hatches” is used in Transactional Analysis to describe the idea that when faced with very difficult or trying situations, some people exit the situation by carrying out one of three behaviours. These behaviours are to kill or harm self, kill or harm others or go crazy.

It’s normal practice for a transactional analyst to be listening out for talk of these four options when working with a client. It’s important that this talk is brought into awareness and discussed because the therapist has a responsibility to keep the client and those around the client safe. This duty of care requires that the therapist invites the client to close the escape hatch when it is detected.

How are escape hatches closed?

The usual way a therapist will close escape hatches is by asking the client to state clearly that they will not kill themselves/harm others/go crazy within a set period of time. This may be an agreement that they will not ever do this, or for those clients that are having very strong feelings, especially around suicide, they may contract to stay alive until the next session. The therapist can then contract with them in the new session for the next week, and progress week by week, hopefully moving the client on during the sessions to where the escape hatch can be closed on a longer term basis.

An important part of the escape hatch process is that the client is making a positive decision from an Adult place (an Adult ego state in TA terms) and is demonstrating to themselves that they have some power over their own lives. For some clients, who feel that they are at the whims and mercy of others, this may in itself be a big step.

Do we all have escape hatches?

I guess the answer to that is “yes”. Whether we allow ourselves to have them open or not is a different question. There is a difference between being aware of ways in which we deal with tragic situations and making that clear decision never to kill ourselves, harm others or go crazy. It also occurs to me that this decision may also change depending on our life circumstances. If you were diagnosed with a terminal illness and you knew you were going to face immense pain and discomfort as part of your demise could you honestly say that suicide would not be an option? It makes sense to me that people in such extreme circumstances would at least think such options through as a possibility.

Where do we make decisions around escape hatches?

Berne would say that the decision around whether to have our escape hatches open and which way we think is the best way of exiting is decided as part of our script. Script decisions are made early in life (between the ages of birth and six) and we spend the time from making them until early adulthood adjusting and refining them.

Other ideas around escape hatches.

Mark Widdowson, in his book “Transactional Analysis – 100 key points” talks about this idea that it’s often difficult to draw clear lines around escape hatches and I see his point. For me, as a psychotherapist, it’s easy to spot an open escape hatch if the client that is sat in front of me is talking about, say, suicide. I can intervene, talk it through with them and invite them to close the escape hatch. But how should I deal with a client that routinely overeats? What about smoking? These too are ways in which we do ourselves harm, albeit on a longer term less obvious basis.

As a therapist I believe it is my responsibility to point these methods of self-harm out too, but I may not contract with a client to change this behaviour specifically (ie, close this escape hatch).

Escape hatches are an interesting and important issue that therapists have to be aware of but, as with all things, are not necessarily as clear cut as they may first appear to be.

Do you have questions around escape hatches? Please let me know what you thought of this blog post and any opinions you have on escape hatches in the comment space below.

The Drama Triangle – Shall We Dance?

02/10/2011 By Ian Tomlinson

I’m not sure why it’s taken me so long to write about the Drama Triangle as it’s probably the concept that has had more “aha” factor than any of the others with my clients. People tend to “get it” and, as if by magic, the behaviour patterns that they have been engaged in with others suddenly become apparent. The concept also invites the client to think about the messages they learnt about themselves and others as they were growing up. This new awareness gives an ability to change and pull themselves out of unproductive ways of being.

What is the Drama Triangle?

The Drama Triangle was created by Steven Karpman as a different way of looking at Berne’s Game theory. Karpman suggested that there are three roles that people can take when they play games:

Persecutor – Persecutors take the “I’m OK, you’re not OK” position. They bully, snipe, bitch and intimidate others.

Rescuer – The Rescuer also takes the “I’m OK, you’re not OK” position but the feel is very different. Rescuers “take care” of others whether the other person wants looking after or not. They presume that others do not have the ability to do things for themselves.

Victim – Victims take the “I’m not OK, You’re OK” position. They look for others to either “look after” them or pick on them.

So, which one are you? If you’re like the rest of us then you’re probably all of them! You are, however, likely to favour one of these Drama Triangle positions over the others.

All three of these roles are inauthentic – that is, they are based on the past ideas and beliefs that the individual has formed about themselves and others throughout childhood. The positions are likely to confirm script beliefs and are responding to past events rather than the here and now.

Let’s just take a minute to think about that for a while. If I’m treating someone like a Victim and I am Rescuing them, then that has probably more to do with my beliefs formed in my childhood than the needs of the person I am Rescuing. The here and now reality of the situation is ignored (discounted) and I just carry out those actions that have been programmed into me as a child. The great thing about that program is that we wrote it and we can change it. I think it is this program that gets revealed to clients I explain the Drama triangle to. On seeing the program they can decide whether it is useful anymore and how it needs to be altered. The process of psychotherapy then supports and facilitates the changes the client wants to make.

The diagram used to show the relationship between these positions is drawn like this:

The important thing to see here is those arrows going in both directions. When playing games an individual tends to move around the triangle taking all of the roles at different times. We dance around the triangle with our opposite number taking on all of the roles.

Here’s an example of a conversation between two people that demonstrates the triangle nicely.

Jamie: Why are you late again? You’re always late for everything and I’m sick of it! (persecutor)

Lesley: I’m really sorry, I forgot to set my alarm. Please don’t be mad at me. (victim)

Jamie: Well you’re stupid and inconsiderate. I’ve no idea why I put up with you! (persecutor)

Lesley: It’s not as if you are perfect. Stop shouting at me now otherwise you will regret it! (persecutor)

Jamie: OK, OK. Calm down. I didn’t mean to upset you. (victim)

Lesley: Well you never help me with my lateness so what do you expect? (Persecutor)

Jamie: OK, so from now on I will set your alarm for you and make sure you get out of the house on time. (Rescuer)

Note how the positions change, and when one player moves position that invites movement of the other player.

When is a rescue a Rescue?

The convention is to capitalize the R when discussing the drama triangle type of Rescuing, Persecuting or Victim to distinguish it from the non-drama type. The difference is that when a game-playing Rescue takes place then the Rescuer is usually doing something that they do not really want to do but they think that they “ought” to. A Rescue also involves a discount of self or other (as all the positions in the triangle do). In the example above, Jamie is discounting the ability of Lesley, who is an adult, to set an alarm clock. Also, Jamie really does not want the added stress of making sure that Lesley is not late any more but feels obliged to “help” Lesley with this. The ideas that Jamie should do this will have been formed in childhood and are part of her script beliefs.

Why do we play on the Drama Triangle?

We dance round this triangle for the same reason that we play games; we want to get our needs met but we are often too scared to ask for what we want directly. Asking for what we want, being intimate with others, feels dangerous and there is the highest risk that we may be rejected so we take one step down and play games instead to attempt to manipulate others into giving us what we want without being explicit.

The cost of doing this can be high. Each position has its own payoff and these often reinforce the beliefs about self. For example, in the script above, Jamie may once again see that her needs are not important and that she has to look after others to be OK. This leaves her feeling angry and uncared for.

How do we step off the Drama Triangle?

The solution is simple. Step off the triangle by being intimate with those you talk to. This can be carried out simply by using Steiner’s “action-feeling” statements.
The first transaction from Jamie may then have looked like this:

Jamie “When you turn up late I feel angry and annoyed. In future I would like you to turn up on time or ring me to let me know you’ve been held up”.

This statement invites Lesley to think about her behaviour and how it’s had an impact on Jamie. It invites Lesley to stay in Adult ego state and be empathic to Jamie’s needs.

What’s the next step?

I think the next step is to become aware of the ways in which you are dancing on the drama triangle. Notice which positions you take more often. Do you take different positions with different people? How does your drama triangle position connect with your experiences in childhood? When you have gathered this information you can decide to do things differently. Whenever we do things differently there is likely to be feelings that come up for us so seek out a close friend or family member you can talk this through with or work with a therapist to help you make the changes you want.

What do you think about the drama triangle? Do you have great strategies to get yourself off the triangle into closer connection? Please comment on your Drama Triangle experiences using the space below.

Transactional Analysis – Passivity

07/08/2011 By Ian Tomlinson

What is passivity?

Passivity is when we put something off or don’t do it at all. It is an interesting and important subject when we are attempting to work out what makes humans tick.

I deal with clients displaying passive behavior pretty much every session I deliver therapy. Sometimes this may be a minor part of the problem, other times it can be the root of the issue. Passivity stops us growing, realizing our potential, confronting our fears and doing what we really want to do.

In this blog post I want to take passivity apart. I want to give you the theory (mostly taken from Aarron and Jacqui Schiffs paper “Passivity”, Jan 1971) and see how we can translate this to practical, doable steps for action. I want to do this because I am convinced that if we can confront and overcome our passive behavior then we can move towards happier, less frustrated, more fulfilled lives.

Understanding where passivity comes from.

The first stage of passivity is to understand symbiosis and in order to understand symbiosis you have to understand the ego state model that we use in transactional analysis. Fortunately I have already written a post on egostates that you can read here so check that out before reading further if you are not up on your “Parent, Adult and Childs”.

In symbiosis, the two people involved behave as if they are only one person from an egostate perspective. One individual will have an active Parent and Adult and the other will have an active Child. We diagram it like this;

Symbiosis is normal between mother and infant, and is important. The mother needs to be aware of the child’s needs and the child needs to know that the mother is there and will be cared for as he is completely dependent on the mother.

This way of relating is less effective when it is between you and your partner, or you and your boss once you are a fully functioning adult though yet it is surprisingly common and familiar to us all. A great example of it is those couples we all know who finish each other’s sentences or who carry out very clear roles within the relationship.

A useful example

Let me introduce you to Gladys and Jim. Gladys and Jim are a (fictious) married couple who have been together for years and slip into symbiosis at a drop of a hat.

Gladys carries out the practical duties to keep the house running, like cooking and cleaning and buying the groceries and Jim does almost nothing. Both Gladys and Jim enter into this arrangement comfortably and when it is questioned give “good reasons” for why their relationship is run like this.
Gladys would say “he’s useless, if I asked him to cook he would burn the kitchen down” and Jim would say “when I do get the shopping I buy the wrong thing so it’s best to let Gladys get on with it”.

Gladys and Jim also illustrate another two things that are needed in order to allow passivity; discounting and grandiosity.

Discounting

The Schiffs (1971) defined discounting as:

“the person who discounts believes, or acts as though he believes, that his feelings about what someone else has said, done or felt are more significant that what that person actually said, did or felt. He does not use information relevant to the situation.”

Let’s use our couple mentioned above to explain this in simple terms.

Gladys discounts Jim’s ability to cook even though when Gladys goes to look after her elderly mother for a week, Jim is perfectly able to prepare himself decent meals without causing house fires.

Jim discounts his ability to walk around the supermarket and read a simple list to ensure he does not buy the wrong thing. His belief that he cannot do this is bigger than the here and now reality that he is perfectly capable.

There are four ways in which we can discount:

Discount the problem – I find a rash on my arm, and ignore it.
Discount the significance of the problem – I find a rash on my arm, take a look and think “it’s nothing, it will go soon”.
Discount the solvability of the problem – I find a rash on my arm and feel concerned but do nothing as “there is no medicine that will cure that”.
Discount the person – I find a rash on my arm and feel concerned but do nothing because “no one will take any notice even if I did go to the doctors, there’s nothing I can do.”

Grandiosity

Grandiosity is the act of purposefully exaggerating about self or others or the environment in order to maintain the passivity. When we use grandiosity we take no responsibility for the decisions involved in a situation and we make the situation responsible for the behavior.

Grandiose language is easy to spot. Words like “always” and “never” can be heard and phrases like “I can’t stand it” “I was scared to death” or “I hit him because I was so furious”.

Jim may avoid going to the supermarket because “it is miles away” and Gladys may cook every night because if she doesn’t Jim will “starve to death”.

Why do we behave in this manner?

So why do we use discounting and grandiosity? The Schiffs say that we use discounting and grandiosity to remain in the passive symbiotic relationship with the other and not threaten the dependency contract. Jim and Gladys both have clear roles and know what they are supposed to do and where they stand. If Jim suddenly took over the cooking then this would threaten the Adult and Child ego states of Gladys and she would become agitated and uncomfortable. Equally, if Gladys expected Jim to go to the supermarket and buy the correct items this may cause him agitation or even anger as his dormant Adult and Parent ego states would be called into action.

Why is symbiosis bad?

The simple answer is that it is not always bad and can be an effective way for two people to function at times. The danger lies when we begin to discount our ability to change things that we don’t like and that are holding us back. It is this side of passivity that I see in my work with clients.

I see clients discount their ability to change their lives on a number of fronts. They discount the ability to change themselves, change their situation or can be grandiose about the response they will get if they change the situation.

5 suggestions for reducing your passivity

Notice what’s going on – your clues are discounting and grandiosity. Are you using words like “always”, “never” “I/you can’t bear it” “I can’t cope”.

Put things in perspective – you may feel nervous about doing things differently but what is really the worst that could happen? Are you being grandiose about the consequences of change?

Look at your history – Are you used to thinking that you can’t do things or can’t change? You may have learnt this as a child and are carrying it into your adulthood. As a child it is tricky to change things because you do not have much power. The power lies with your parents. As an adult you have power. You can change your life and you are not reliant on anyone else to stay alive.

Appreciate other adults will be OK – The adults in your life are just that, adults. Sometimes we have to make decisions that impact on others and that they won’t like but this choice is available to all adults and adults are self sufficient and can look after themselves.

Work with a therapist – Therapists, (especially Transactional Analysists) are trained to spot discounting and grandiosity and will see symbiotic relationships you have formed with others. When this information is brought into your awareness you can choose what to do with it.

Tell me about your experiences with passivity

We all have passivity in our lives, it’s the amount and severity of the passivity we experience that can make a difference to how happy we are and how autonomous we feel. Please comment on the post below, how does passivity affect you in your life? Have you any good suggestions to help others with their passivity?