Applying PCT - M Lazare

DTSDTO · December 18, 1997, 8:48pm

In response to Ken's post---

(Kenny, )

(Mark, you have a most difficult job. I am glad I do not have to be in your
shoes. )
I get that a lot ! !

(Applying PCT to explaining suicide is a test that makes lever
pressing by mice or discipline in school look rather tame. If PCT matters
at all, it must matter in your case.)

Thank you --- the principles come in very handy indeed.

(I hope CSG can help you make a breakthrough. It might put you and PCT on
the psychology map. It might change the world.)

ONE thing that is great about it, is that it is consistent - unlike the rest
of Psychology that is filled with situational specific theories a euphemism
for "it only works under these control (coercive) conditions".

(However, I have also thought about killing myself during my lifetime. Have
you? Am I the exception or the rule from your experience?)

I can't predict who will or who wont think about it or try it with out know
the perceptions of the individual.
Remember PCT is NOT liner cause and effect. I can't add up all the X's and
get a value for Y.

(I do believe that PCT explains suicide in every case. It seems that your
dilemma is how to prevent this behavior by another person. PCT suggests
that you can't do that short of overpowering force or helping the person
reorganize.)

True, so logic points to "helping the person reorganize" or helping the person
adapt another Reference point. Help the Ct "see" another way of controlling
for the perception they value.

(I think what you do in this regard has more to do with your own reference
values as what the Ct might say they want or what they have as a controlled
variable.)

False, A person will NEVER control for my perception or values. Also, they
wont change just because I say so. When I am talking with the Ct I am finding
out what is of utmost importance to them, then help I help the Ct align his
subordinate goals with the superordinate goal.

(It seemed you did a number of helpful things and asked questions to provide a
new plan for someone who wants help. Are you attempting to use Ed Ford's
counseling sequence from Freedom from Stress?)

In part I use Ed's work in counseling, but not for the sequence, but because
of the same principles he drew from PCT. His work is for longer term
counseling. The client is not in CRISIS, the Ct I see did not schedule a
session with me. The Ct's I see are in need right now, and can't wait. I
have an hour to respond to a page and be on scene, I am on call 24/7 for the
hospitals. As you might guess most people if they are going to have a
crisis, don't do it between 8-5 M-F during the day. Most of my work takes
place during the night and on the weekend. This puts me in a bind sometimes
because not much is open at 2 am.

(It struck me that some of your counseling process was contrary to Ed's
marvelous process. Has he responded to you? I wish he would. I feel sure
that he could help you.)

I am not aware of this could you give me an Example??

[Please tell me (privately, if you prefer) about whether or not you are a
Christian. This will certainly affect your own reference values about suicide
and the behavior you illicit in trying to do what you perceive as your job
with others in this crisis to end all crises.]

I practice the Catholic faith. However, this certainly DOES NOT affect my own
reference values about suicide (attempts or completions by others) and the
behavior I illicit in trying to do what I perceive as my job with others in
this crisis.
First and foremost- my purpose is to focus on the other person, their values,
morals, belief systems, goals, wants, needs, and desires. In short I am
trying to find what works for them and what does not. If some of these are in
conflict the solution to the conflict will NEVER be found in MY values or
morals, but they are in the Ct's values and morals. The behavior I try to
illicit, better be in line with the Ct's References or It won't work for long
or even at all.

Hope this was not yet another disturbance to your (Kenny) controlled
perceptions.

Yours truly in PCT :)~,
Mark Lazare

KENNETH_J_KITZKE1 · December 19, 1997, 10:00pm

[From: Kenny Kitzke 971219 1415 EST]

Mark,

Of course you can't. But, I asked if *you* ever considered suicide? I had
also asked if you might know about how prevalent such behavior is in the
human population? In my newspaper today, it says one Korean businessman
per day is committing suicide.

Of course. This article speculates that the cause of the increase in
businessmen suicides from 300 to 400 per year is driven by increasing
numbers of bankruptcies and the Confucian teaching that equates failure
with dishonor. At least, that is the way it appears.

<<(I think what you do in this regard has more to do with your own
reference values as what the Ct might say they want or what they have as a
controlled variable.)>>

<False, A person will NEVER control for my perception or values. Also,
they wont change just because I say so.>

Sorry for the poor communication. I was trying to say that what you
percieve about the Ct affects your own behavior depending upon your own
referece values. Isn't that correct?

I agree you and the Ct control internally in a negative feedback loop.
What you or the Ct perceive in your own comparator has no impact on the
other person's behavior.

This seems helpful in theory.

None of this makes any sense to me. I wonder how Ed would respond? When
you counsel you counsel live, in real time, right now. There may not be
another chance in either case.

Doesn't a student sent to the RTP room have a form of crisis? I'm not
sure he wanted to be sent there or gets sent there by others. They too
have not always asked for a counselor. Isn't your Ct in an externally
controlled hospital situation, even regarding seeing you? Can't they
prevent a suicide with restraints or drugs to stop a crisis situation?

<<(It struck me that some of your counseling process was contrary to Ed's
marvelous process. Has he responded to you? I wish he would. I feel
surethat he could help you.)>>

Sure, I'll try. In your post you said:
<If the person is evasive, vague, nonchalant, and/or aloof (s)he is not
re-experiencing the emotional pain. It is as if the person is saying, to
you, it's no big deal.>

Isn't this a sign the crisis has subsided and you can make progres on a
plan to keep it that way?

I can understand why. If I was counseling a woman about her rocky marriage
and her adulterous affair with a man 20 years her younger, I would not want
her reliving the pain she felt when her husband came home unexpectedly and
found her wrapped up (if you will) with her lover in his bed. Nor, if she
was not emotional, would I say, "Why do you want to act like a nymphamatic
whore? Isn't better to gain their trust first?

What most people do, or what you say or think most people do and why, is
all wrong from my understanding of the sequence that might help them
reorganize. Telling is usually ineffective until the patient asks.

I could go on but, you have much superior experience than I.

I don't understand how your faith cannot affect your own reference values
about suicide or how you can deal with some other person contemplating
suicide? Deeply held Christian convictions about suicide would always
affect a counselor's behavior loop toward the subject and other people. I
do understand from PCT why annunciating your reference values is not
guaranteed to affect the patient, even if they ask.

I wish Bill would help me here. Isn't the only way you can focus on the Ct
is through your own internal loop? And, doesn't what your loop produces as
the next question depend on your reference values, not the Cts?

If it was, it would be very easy to not respond and get control over your
ability to disturb me.

Hope you will help fill in the blanks and understanding gaps that do
disturb me a little bit. 8-))

Kenny

Tim_Carey · December 20, 1997, 10:15am

[From Tim Carey (971220.2005)]

[From: Kenny Kitzke 971219 1415 EST]

What most people do, or what you say or think most people do and why, is
all wrong from my understanding of the sequence that might help them
reorganize. Telling is usually ineffective until the patient asks.

Hi Kenny, thanks for a really interesting post. I was particularly
interested in the paragraph above. This is something Tom Bourbon and I have
spoken about a bit with regard to Ed Ford's RTP. I don't know how much of a
metaphorical leap what I'm about to say is going to be theoretically so I
may need Bill and Rick to correct me. When kids go to the Responsible
Thinking Classroom (we like to say they've chosen to go rather than they
were sent) it is critical that they are not pushed by the staff in the
room. The only requirement is that they don't disrupt. Apart from that,
while they're sitting at their desks they can do pretty well whatever they
like (sleep, read, class work, etc). They only start planning to get back
to class when _they_ say they want to plan. The decision to go back to
class is entirely theirs _not_ the teachers. This is because (and here
comes the leap) once the kid asks you to help him get back to class you are
becoming part of his feedback function. If you try to tell him what he
should do, or when he should plan you will simply be a disturbance which he
will act to oppose. We would much rather kids see as "something or someone"
who helps them control perceptions that are important to them rather than
as "something or someone" who gets in the way. I'm getting in over my head
here theoretically so I'll stop rambling ... it was just a thought.

Cheers,

Tim