By Anodea Judith
The human force behind the New Age Movement is made of people who, for better
or worse, are survivors of the previous generation's child-rearing philosophies.
This is nothing new: every generation has had its legacy of cultural mores to plow
through, outgrow and transform. Within the family, a semi-isolated and barely conscious
evolutionary unit, this happens slowly and painfully.
However, the evolutionary
thrust of the New Age movement seems to be removing itself from the traps of family
dynamics through group activity, such as men's groups, women's groups, environmental
groups, parent's groups, magical groups, newsletter groups, 12-step groups of every
kind. Through the support of our peers we venture into the unknown, challenge the
assumptions of our inherited legacy, and try to create and embody a more productive
life plan.
There is a certain "fallout" from this transition. While
the effects of a long-standing tradition of dysfunction are being removed from the
family situation, they are being insinuated into our group situations. Let us examine
the way that we, as individuals, sabotage the work we are doing by recreating our
dysfunctional family patterns in our present group activities.
Dynamics from
our family of origin will be played out in subsequent family situations. Many groups
are designed specifically to offset this process, such as Adult Children of Alcoholics.
Because of this focus and because of "generational bonding" (common values),
such groups are expected to be immune to these dysfunctional patterns and provide
a safe place for us to go through our personal transitions. Thus we often fail to
see these patterns when they do occur. Working with other survivors of dysfunctional
families, our own neurotic patterns fit like hand in glove with those of our co-workers.
We may be aware of our authority issues when dealing with a parent figure, but we
are blind to them when it comes to friends of our own generation and shared belief
systems.
First, what do we mean by "dysfunctional family"?
A
dysfunctional family is a group energy system which either fails to perform its intended
function or is dependent upon --harmful or counter-productive methods in -order to
function. It's a system that doesn't work very well or one that hurts the people
in it Counter-productive actions are repeated again and again until they become an
intrinsic part of the system because the overall functioning of the system becomes
more important than the means.
A family's purpose can be seen as the living,
sharing, nourishing and development of life. When this purpose is no longer fulfilled,
as when making a living or caring for children becomes immersed in addictions, lies,
violence, or personal manipulation, yet still continues, that system has become dysfunctional.
If Dad's drinking or abusing Mom allows him to continue working at his meaningless
job, on which the family is dependent, then this behavior becomes accepted as part
of the family system. Because the child is born into it, the family's method of functioning
is seen as "normal." This form of dysfunctionality is shrouded in non-communication,
alienation, fear, denial and anger which, while shared by all, is not permissible
to express.
These feelings get channeled into standardized behavior patterns
designed to keep the ailing system functioning as smoothly as it can under the circumstances.
The patterns become second nature, part of our basic survival mechanisms which we
carry through into all our subsequent situations.
Non-communication and secrecy
Because
dysfunctional families believe they are dependent upon their patterns to survive,
it becomes the unwritten rule not to talk about feelings. It only brings up pain,
which the family feels is unsolvable. When dysfunction occurs in a subsequent group
there is the same tendency to avoid speaking about it and the same feeling of futility
about being able to change anything. This may make us want to drop out of the group,
blame everyone else, and do almost anything but communicate.
Anger and fear
As
a result of the lack of communication, the child is left with a constant level of
anger and fear, which becomes normal and is later exacerbated by any situation which
threatens to mimic the original.
When you have a group of people who carry
left over anger, that anger gets triggered easily, making the group a potentially
volatile medium. The anger may or may not be justified in the present circumstance,
but likely as not the vehemence of the anger is greater than the situation deserves
because it is in part a carryover from childhood. The force or frequency of the anger
may obscure its rightful cause and the end result is frustration for all concerned.
Competition
The dysfunctional family operates within a model of scarcity
-- that there is a limited amount of love, time, money, food, clothing, safety, etc.
The members of the family learn that all of these things must be earned through competition.
Rather than developing means of working together, family members pit themselves against
each other. Competitiveness exacerbates all of the problems listed here and is easy
to spot in group situations. As we strive towards collectivity, competition polarity
undermines our more benevolent ideologies. Group members may feel like they don't
get enough time or appreciation (usually true) or feel they have to compete with
each other to get a word in edgewise, to perform as well as others or to jockey for
a power position.
Unequal power structures
Most dysfunctional families
of the previous generation operated within the Patriarchal Power Model: the father
had the most power, the mother was dependent upon him, and the children dependent
upon her. Her powerlessness with regard to her husband was compensated for through
her power over her children. The children were powerless against their parents and
sought to make pecking orders among themselves and their peers. Because we learned
to operate within unequal power structures we are often incapable of perceiving anything
other. We either believe these dynamics are in play when they are not, or we strive
to create them by our own actions so that we may remain in familiar realms. One-down
or one-up power positions may be familiar -- equality may not be. In the familiar
our roles are defined; in new territory, we have to feel our way, and
feeling
our way is what we once learned not to do.
Dependence
Because no one
was allowed their own power for fear they might rock the fragile boat, what developed
was the shadow of power -- dependence. Each member of the system became dependent
upon people and behaviors they didn't feel good about This manifests later in people
being terrified to let go of destructive patterns, behavior which may seem baffling
to an outsider.
Guilt and shame
All the previous qualities, especially
the latter one, result in individuals within the system feeling an indefinable sense
of guilt and shame. Powerless, dependent, fearful and angry, the emotions are funneled
into the subconscious through secrecy. The end feeling is one of malaise, low self-esteem
and lack of trust, with an underlayer of shame.
Lack of trust
is the
end result and continuing state of the dysfunctional family survivor. It both causes
and increases all of the above.
In addition to these characteristics, members
of dysfunctional family systems resort to taking on roles within the family that
allow the system to be tolerable. These roles are played right through adulthood
and are especially prominent in group situations.
The Good Child
tries
to transcend the malaise of the environment by behaving like an angel. The Good Child
takes on adult responsibility at a young age, strives to excel at everything, takes
on other people's problems and generally compensates for feelings of inferiority
with a drive to accomplish and prove themselves. When this takes the form of parenting
younger children, the child becomes "parentified" and plays out the "higher-powered"
parent role in later relationships. In group situations, the Good Child takes on
too much responsibility, disallowing the empowerment of others. They run things,
but without much joy or satisfaction. The Good Child can get self-righteous or persecutory
if they are feeling unappreciated.
The Problem Child
is the circuit
breaker for the wiring of the family dynamics. The Problem Child (in therapy, often
the "identified patient") does poorly in school, gets into trouble, turns
to drugs, gets pregnant or otherwise causes problems that take focus away from the
family problems. The child does not do this consciously, but is driven by her own
intolerable sensitivity. In group situations the Problem Member role may dance among
a few people. They are often in crisis, which distracts the group from moving forward.
There is more permission to leave in a group than there is in a family, and the Problem
Child may do just that Then the group may then find that problems suddenly pop up
in another member. This is also true for:
The Scapegoat
If the Problem
Child does not leave, they may serve another function in the system: the Scapegoat.
The Scapegoat (not always synonymous with the Problem Child) is the one who gets
the blame for the dysfunctional system. ("Johnny causes such problems, I can't
get anything done.") The group itself is rarely able to perceive that their
whole way of functioning is ailing and instead puts all their anger into scapegoating,
which, of course, increases the problems.
The Scapegoat may be the newest
group member, the group leader, the editor of a newsletter, or the one who generally
has the most problems with the group process. Like the Problem Child, they may choose
to leave; but another person will quickly become the Scapegoat in their place.
The
Clown
keeps himself and the family distracted by playing the entertainer.
The Clown denies that there is any problem, gets attention for himself through bringing
some joviality into a grim situation, and keeps the emotional pain at a tolerable
level. Later in life the Clown is still distracting group process, often getting
strokes for it because they do alleviate a dreary situation, yet they prevent true
work from being accomplished. They're the ones we can't live with, and can't live
without.
The Fixer
Sometimes the same as the Good Child, the Fixer
is constantly trying to smooth things out. They become a Codependent -- one who is
fixated on solving others' problems in a way that ignores their own and allows the
others to continue in self-destructive behavior. No group would be complete without
them, they are often seen as the group's savior, yet their fixing is more like an
aspirin than a cure.
The Ghost
is the Hidden One, the child who tries
to make himself as inconspicuous as possible, is with- drawn, never asks for anything
for himself, is neither seen nor heard, and is often confused with the Good Child,
except he is not competitive. This type of person is less likely to join groups,
but if they do, they are quiet and unobtrusive, or they may do their disappearing
act after they have volunteered for something.
The patterns that occur are
as many and varied as the people we are. The mistake comes from focusing too much
on the individual roles, and failing to see the dynamics of the system as a whole.
We can focus on the plight of the poor Scapegoat, or the burden on the Fixer, but
we tend to focus on an individual, through the lens of our own roles, instead of
learning to think as a system.
In a family or group system, everything affects
everything else. Scapegoat or Clown, Leader or Ghost, the whole system is affected
by each action and presence (or absence). Those who obviously have power are no more
important than those who appear to have less power, and all have equal ability to
topple the system. To think systemically we need to step back, look at what the group
is trying to accomplish, what roles are necessary to accomplish this goal, and how
those roles compare with the current ones being played out.
What is your
group's purpose? Can you get it down to a few words? Does everyone in the group agree
on the purpose? Is your purpose multiple? (If so, each purpose may dictate different
roles.) Or is the group trying to achieve a secondary purpose that is unstated, such
as a group whose purpose is working magic while also trying to act as a support group?
Does it work or does it put the group at cross-purposes? Is your personal reason
for being in the group in keeping with its collective purpose?
Starhawk,
in Truth or Dare, describes four main types of groups; intimate groups, whose purpose
is "being,;" task groups, whose purpose is "doing; support groups,
whose purpose is "changing;" and learning,, groups whose purpose is "education.
Purposes may overlap, but when they get crossed, such as learning groups who try
to make people change, there may be some covert manipulation going on to which members
have not all agreed.
What are the needs of the group as a whole compared
to needs of the individuals within the group? The group may have financial pressure
which creates a need to get things done quickly. efficiently and professionally in
order to continue its purpose. Individuals within the group may have a need for intimacy
or creativity which cannot be met within the group without changing the group function.
Members who share this need can get together or start a subgroup rather than undermine
the stated purpose.
What is your role in the group. both officially and non-officially?
Is this the role you want? Is it the same role you played as a child?
What
are the roles of some of the other members? How did they get these roles and how
do they feel about it? (Ask, don't assume.)
How is power handled/distributed?
Living in a society that has, by and large, unhealthy power models, the handling
of power within a group is often the basis for conflict Our first experiences of
power were in relationship to our parents and teachers. If this was negative it will
affect how we behave when in a position of power ourselves or how we respond to those
who are in powerful or leadership positions. Ideally power and leadership should
not be synonymous, though it is often hard for people, no matter what their role,
to remember that leadership, because of its parental overtones, is a touchy issue
in groups.
Again, to quote Starhawk: "Two basic myths exist about leadership.
The first is that someone must always be in charge or nothing will get done. The
second is that leadership is always oppressive. Although both myths contain kernels
of truth, each is based on an essential confusion between power- over and power-with."
There are many questions to ask about leadership within a group. Is it necessary?
If not, what models would work better? If so, are the leaders responsible in their
positions: do they reflect the needs of the group and accomp
lish the purpose? Is their leadership recognized? Are they respected or resented
by the group?
The leaders usually receive the parental projections of the
group members. For those who were abused by their parents' authority much anger may
be projected against the leaders or founders of a group, undermining their ability
to do their job. This may also prevent leaders from emerging, which can leave the
group floundering without direction. Watch for competition and lack of trust in such
dynamics.
For those who act in the role of leaders, internalized family dynamics
may lead to an abuse of their power. Their only model may have been power-over. This
may be entirely unconscious, in which case effective communication and feedback from
the group needs to be offered and received. Internalized shame may make the group
leader need a lot of encouragement, while the group may be resisting a projected
power-over situation instead and undermine the leader's confidence.
Are the
same people always the leaders? Is this appropriate or can the roles be rotated?
The other end of the spectrum from leaders, who have usually been in the
group a long time, are the newcomers. Newcomers run the greatest risk of becoming
the Scapegoat, because they are the least incorporated into the system and the least
knowledgeable about its unspoken rules and agreements. Newcomers and leaders alike
get the largest doses of lack of trust and often have their competitive urges triggered
by having to prove themselves. If and when they do prove themselves, the role is
then defined and the next step is dependence upon that role.
Variation in
dynamics in family and group situations is endless. Being conscious of these dynamics
goes a long way towards avoiding traps. Understanding your own family dynamics is
invalu- able, as communicating current group dynamics (as you perceive them) is essential.
The best way to avoid roles is, ironically, to assign them. A consultant
is a Fixer, but recognized, respected, and usually paid for their position. The Ghost
who watches everything and says little can be sought out and given a role as a vibes-watcher.
The Clown can be given special time for entertainment and group diversion-time where
they can get strokes for their humor, and the group can be treated to an enjoyable
break. The Problem Child can be given the role of problem solver, thus taking the
focus off them and onto the group, wherein the dysfunction lies anyway. The competitive
Good Child can be given a reward for their good work by asking them to help newcomers
or people who are struggling in the group. The Scapegoat can be put in an honored
position where they have no responsibility and then the next time something goes
wrong, it can't be their fault! (Though in truth, the only real way to absolve the
Scapegoat is for group members to
deal with their own shadows.)
Another
common maelstrom of dysfunctionality arises along the compliment/criticism continuum.
Do you remember what it felt like when your parents jumped on you for what you did
wrong, yet failed to show an equal but opposite reaction over your accomplishments?
Unfortunately, I have seen this dynamic repeated in almost every group, and the effects
are the same: alienation, lack of enthusiasm, and resentment. Having clear roles
can help this process, because we know what our job is, what it takes to do it well,
and can receive appropriate recognition when it is done well.
It is also
important for the group to give itself strokes as an entity when it has done something
well. A feeling of pride in the system makes cooperating with the system a joy instead
of a burden.
To make this occur more often, keep your group's goals realistic
so that they can be achieved. In our group we tend to have long agendas for meetings
that drag us all down and leave us feeling inadequate if we don't get through it
all, burned out if we do. When we have shorter agendas we finish our work and still
have time for socializing. We get a feeling of accomplishment and a sense of entitlement
to the pleasure of visiting afterward.
Having "non-work" time is replenishing
to group energy. Our coven schedules socials once a month in addition to our magical
workings. In the Church of All Worlds, non-work time makes us remember why it is
we work so hard or put up with this crazy family. It gives us fuel for our work and
our vision and the love and bonding to get through the difficult parts when they
arise.
The most important thing to work on is ourselves. When is our behavior
a carryover from our family situation? What can we do about that when it does happen?
How can we communicate across that gap? How do we manipulate the system to meet our
personal needs?
And lastly, to remember that the group is a system and must
be viewed as a whole. How do we accomplish our tasks? Do we use the same methods
over and over even when they don't work? What did we do right when things did work?
For example, when our group examined what we had done well or enjoyed most, we found
that those were projects that had a defined leader who was supported and accepted
by the group. That was very enlightening for us because we always tried to avoid
having leaders. Since then we have taken to assigning definite roles for various
projects and we find things go more smoothly.
And if, Gods forbid, someone in
the group does foul things up, it is always helpful to look at their behavior in
view of the group dynamics. Were they given adequate instruction, tools, encouragement,
communication, time to accomplish their task? The group system should be suspect
before the individual is criticized. And if the problem cannot be found in the group
dynamics, ask the individual. They will probably tell you very quickly where the
system is flawed. And wouldn't it be nice if their criticism was coupled with appreciation?
Recommended
reading:
John Bradshaw on The Family
Starhawk, Truth or Dare
Copyright © 1996 by Anodea Judith.
Note: reprinted, with the author's
permission, from Green Egg, vol.22, no.87, Samhain, 1989,
pages 6 through 8.
By
the same author: Stepping Through to Recovery: A Pagan approach to the Twelve
Step programs.
Last updated June 27, 1998