Here is a really cool post by Emmi about effective communication / sharing perspectives / support: http://thespianjourney.blogspot.com/2013/10/days-334-335-giving-feedback-to-friend.html
This comes up a lot for me at work, as I have written about some in recent posts. It also comes up sometimes with the students, who sometimes might lie or stretch the truth about their experience either at home, in their childhood, or in the classroom as to why they have been sent out for some kind of discipline / intervention.
What I am learning here, and got some confirmation in terms of my approach from one of the therapists, is that it really doesn't matter if they're lying or stretching the truth. What a person communicates as their experience is apparently what they want to work with. So if a kid for example is lying about their behavior in the classroom and says that the teacher sent them out for "no reason" (example: the student was whistling while other students were also talking, and the teacher sent that student out without any warnings), we can still approach the situation thus from understanding the shared perspective of the student and implement solutions based on their perspective (even if, when asking the teacher, we find out the student cussed at the teacher when asked to stop whistling and may have also been play-fighting with a peer) (example: explain to student that during class time no one really should be talking or whistling or singing; just because other students were doing this does not make it okay, and although it is unfortunate that this student was chosen to be sent outside, other students engaging in similar behavior does not make it okay -- you are responsible for yourself).
I had another student the other day that I talked to for about an hour who told me she had been to a juvenile detention center and had friends and family there, and so she did not care if she went back, and therefore she did not care about the consequences for if she were to follow through on her desire to break a specific staff member's nose.
I found out later that according to those with access to her record, as far as they know, she has never been to juvie.
But, the next time I talk to her, if she mentions it, I'm not going to tell her that I know she's never been and call her out on her lie. What does it matter? The motivation, most likely, behind her lying and saying she doesn't care about the consequences is probably as a way to seek out power and control over a situation by purporting that she can do whatever she wants and she doesn't care about the consequences, and also put up a wall to keep others out from even trying to help her calm down or deal with her anger in a productive way. A lot of these kids have very little when they go home, and very little support in their families, so what they do have is their words and their actions and through that, in this culture, they believe they gain the most power by acting tough, getting into fights, or making threats, also basically bragging about how much trouble they've gotten into.
So it doesn't really matter whether or not she's ever been to juvie. It's irrelevant. What's relevant is that I want her to stay in school and I want her to make choices that will support her now and in her future, and I want to encourage her to want the same things for herself (actually, what's really relevant shouldn't start with so many statements about what I want, but you get the picture). I want her to learn new skills for dealing with anger, not just justify her desire for violence with her apathy about incarceration and give up on her because she purports to not care about consequences. I can share with her my own experiences with anger, which I did, and which was cool because in sharing that I am once again given the opportunity to learn more about myself, and I can help her find ways to empower herself rather than giving herself over to her anger / memories of living in fear which "required" violence to survive.
Then this concept is also relevant even when someone is not lying or stretching the truth. A person's experience is their experience. It's where they're at. I recently had a very difficult time with this because I was having some very extreme energetic experiences (I still do sometimes), and the person who was trying to interact with me did not understand this and did not, basically, respect where I'm at, which is not the same as where they're at. Because of this, our interaction and communication was ineffective. For me, I completely lacked tact, because I was completely and utterly consumed by my anger and reactive energy, so that my anger was louder than my words and, I presume, made it difficult for the other person to hear me honestly. For the other person, I believe that the ineffectiveness came from not being able to understand me or empathize or even sympathize with my experience of myself, nor was this person apparently able to even accept or understand / trust the words I explicitly expressed. That is my perspective of what happened, anyway -- my experience that I have to work with.
I could have slowed down and taken the time to express myself effectively by letting go of the reactive energy and just communicating my experience without the anger. And I actually feel that I did that a number of times, but, then, I was still in at least some energy, so perhaps I was not as effective as I thought. What I felt I came up against however was a person who refused to understand me no matter how many times I explained myself (which, because of the energy I was creating, was very exhausting), whether due to incompetence or negligence or simply not being in a position to properly understand me (so, their experience / where they're at / what they understand -- seems likely*). I did try many times however, perhaps not always effectively (I mean, obviously: there was no productive effect) and what I found was that I was abandoning myself in my reaction to the process of trying to be understood by someone who might never understand, and who really doesn't need to understand, at least not as much as I need to take responsibility for myself and my reactions (which is to say, I should have taken responsibility for my reactions by directing and releasing them before trying to communicate / make myself understood because this is clearly best for all -- best for me in terms of taking care of and responsibility for myself and best for the other in terms of me being ready and stable to communicate effectively / not just barrage them with my anger).
*(And what I just noticed here is again this kind of "double-standard" almost where my experience was considered and treated as invalid because it was emotion-based, but their experience was considered valid because it was a "subtle" thing they "had not yet realized"... I forgive myself for accepting and allowing myself to become frustrated by this and also enter a state of like "superiority" in noticing this because it makes me feel as if I am "right." I realize "right" and "wrong" does not matter -- only realizing and then changing self in self-responsibility to live as what is best for all. I do however consider this as a way of giving myself the gift of validation for my own experience and the decision that I made to support myself in my experience, whereby I can trust myself instead of doubting myself, where here I am aware of my experience and so must direct it as I see best in self honest self support as what is best for all, rather than accepting and allowing myself to use this realization as justification for my anger / perpetuating my experience even after seeing it or expecting another person to take responsibility for my experience / trying to take responsibility for another's experience.)
This is a long-standing pattern for me in a way, of really disliking the idea of being misunderstood and so getting stuck on that point and trying to make myself understood even to people who don't want to understand me. In this case I felt that I needed to be understood in part so that I could communicate a boundary and hopefully have it respected (fear-driven). But I just couldn't keep on engaging in the conversations / arguments, because they were so ineffective in terms of having the other person understand me and in terms of self-support, and within them I was really not understanding myself and understanding that I really needed me to show up for myself and take care of myself because I was creating so much energy that I was not directing and that I was allowing to consume me and make me sick.
So I wish that this other person was better at this skill of understanding another person's experience as being the extent of their perspective / what they have to "work with" (and it must be worked with, not just set aside as "not real"). But this is a skill I am still learning, so I support myself now to investigate it and live it. My experience may be created through and as my mind but that doesn't make it NOT my present experience / understanding of reality, if I have not yet figured out how to release myself from that experience -- it is the prison in which I am living and I haven't yet realized I am holding the key or how to unlock myself. So for another person to claim that they want to support me from a place of stability as what is best for all, and then to not even respect what I am communicating about myself and my experience... well this is very confusing, and makes me think that this person's experience / understanding is also influencing their perspective in such a way that we will not come to a common understanding as long as we are both clinging to our respective experiences -- as such I took responsibility to take the experience that was mine and work with it for and by myself. And I realized that my energy was just too extreme for me to contain and direct while continually engaging in these kinds of interactions where I felt misunderstood alongside a great many other conflict-related and memory-related points I was facing in these interactions, also coinciding with difficult points in other areas of my life. So, I was not able to further refine my communication so as to make it (more) effective, and I could no longer produce the patience needed to be understood, because through focusing on this from the starting-point of wanting to be understood by someone else, I was not really taking care of or taking responsibility for myself.
Did I really fully understand the other? I don't know. I was not really in a position to. The idea was that I was the one who was "hurt." I guess that is a victim character of believing that I have no or less responsibility in a solution interaction if I am the one who is hurt; that it is more up to the "perpetrator" to listen to me and do what I need in order for me to begin to heal. I mean it really doesn't seem "fair," does it, this whole phenomenon of the oppressed having to carry the burdens placed on them by their oppressors, and then also having then to educate those oppressors about those burdens, only to have more burdens placed on them as the oppressors doubt, question, or otherwise do not embrace or respect the oppressed's experience as "true" inasmuch as it is the experience they are having, let alone the experience placed upon them via the oppressor's actions (or inactions). And that phenomenon is precisely one of the many ways that these interactions were just allowing me to re-enact my relationship with my dad.
But, that's the way it tends to go, as long as we accept and allow ourselves to be internally influenced and directed by the reactions we have to external factors. I could be a legitimate "victim" of some real heinous travesties and yet maintain stability if this was a skill I had mastered, but I have not yet mastered self direction, self trust, and stability, and so I gave myself over to the victim character in this and many other situations.
And so I learn now to not stay in "harmful situations" for too long, and I learn to only ultimately trust myself (so not to distrust others, but also not to miss-trust (trust by mistake) others), and I learn to clear myself of my reactions when and as I hear another person say something that doesn't seem self honest / trustworthy, or when my reaction is not trustworthy / whenever I see myself becoming unstable and shifting away from my own self-honest perspective -- a skill I hadn't yet acquired for many of these old interactions that I still carry around to inform and justify my anger (so now to forgive myself as these memories as they surface in anger). And I also learn to not engage in communication unless or until I can be effective, which means having a stable starting point.
I also learn the futility of coming up with and trying to point out what the other person should have done differently. I can only take responsibility for myself. Pointing this out only serves to justify anger and project blame / responsibility onto another, as if their actions determine mine.
One thing that I do realize I need to work on and expand within myself is the point of direct communication, which is something this person seemed to be kind of pointing out to me (from their perspective, did they communicate it to me as effectively as I thought I was communicating to them? hmmm haha). When you're paranoid and anxious and in a self-belief of inferiority, it can be difficult to direct oneself to communicate directly. You just kind of hope someone sees your pain or understands your need or can read your mind... you don't believe or trust that you're right, so why would you directly say what you're thinking, especially when living in fear that whatever you share/express of yourself will be rejected or even insulted? Or when what you think is directly contradicted by three other things you also think? That has been my internal experience when I am paranoid, anxious, and trusting others more than myself, anyway. But direct communication is obviously a huge part of effective communication and so obviously this is imperative to consider, and so I am glad that it came up in the communication we did have.
I also definitely should have seen and realized that I was in no position to be trying to communicate while I was so much in reaction. But I was pretty lost, and despite the advice given to me to wait until I was stable, I had to learn for myself. I also didn't really see myself coming out of reaction unless I got some "answers" or some communication / mutual understanding. What I found however was not mutual understanding, and so in my state of reaction, I just reacted more. I was not stable. So therein lies my responsibility, which is total, because without my insistence and sense of urgency in communicating even while in reaction, none of this would have come to pass, and my reactions would not have compiled and accumulated to an unmanageable degree.
But if you are going to try to support someone, you should be stable, no? I mean that is the first question we are trained to ask ourselves when facing a crisis with a student: "How am I feeling right now?" I mean if you are seeing that another person is highly reactive and you are thinking that you might be a good candidate to show up and assist and support them through and out of that reaction, then you should be stable, and not in reaction yourself. And I think if you're stable, and if you understand effective communication, then you'll understand that it is most effective to meet a person "where they're at." I mean you wouldn't help someone out of a maze by simply standing outside of it and telling them what the exterior looks like, would you?
So go into the maze with them. Keep the rope of your breath and self-honesty tied to you as you enter, but meet them where they are and lead them out. This is the approach I take with my students, this is the approach I am learning to take with my coworkers, and it is now too the approach I am learning to take not only in friendships / all external interactions of support, but indeed even the approach that I am learning to take with myself, to ground and stabilize myself in the physical as I delve into the depths of my mind to assist and support myself out of my mind and into and as life.
+Talking+to+Myself+III.jpg)
