Difficulty in Pidgeon Holing Adler

Tim, What you spoke of, is regreatably a problem with Adler's theory. Much of what is available in print focuses more on the philosophical base of the theory. Which is often times only briefly treated. And due to this, a lopsided view of the whole of the approach is jumped to. My own experience, is based upon first being exposed to some of Adler's teaching while recieving training to be a teacher. Most of what I got from that was very behavioral.Later, when being trained as a counselor, I was exposed to a very different theory, also called Adler's which was, what you would call Humanistic. Focusing more on the feelings and thought processes of the individual. In my attempt to reconcile these two very different points of view of what was suppose to be the work of one man, I was exposed to the 'unity' concept of his work. That is, that try as we might, we cannot really seperate out differnt parts of the individual. Work only with the thinking process, feelings or behaviors (or however else we wish to divide it up) of the individual. And in so doing, create a change that will carry through to all the other parts. In a single person, all these are so intertwined that they cannot be seperated. When we attempt to do so, we wind up ignoring vital parts of who the person is and how all the parts fit together to form the whole of their life / self /being. Yes, trying to take ALL the variables into account is difficult. It would be easier for us to specialize our study into just the behavior, feelings, or thinking process of human kind. We might even have a chance of mastering all the material by doing so. Yet, if we were to do so and gain all the information in a particular area, what would that get us? The ability to diagnose, and maybe prescribe a course of change in THAT area that has been documented to make a difference in the majority of cases. What if our client just so happens to come from the minority of cases? To achieve change, our client have to also deal with all those other parts of themselves, which we have made ourselves unavailable to help them with. In working with the "offender population" or the "substance abuser", we often talk of a multi- modal or multi- disciplinary approach. Yet how often do we achieve that? How often do we, the helpers, get caught up in acting out the conflict within our clients? For real change to occur with a person, all the 'pieces have to change. Few drug addicts remain clean if only one area changes. (i.e. they stay away from old "playmates and playthings" yet still have the same attitudes and thinking process, or we teach them new "self talk" yet they frequent their old friends). Few "offenders" stay straight if they get a job and look clean on the surface, yet continue to have 'harmless' fantasies about their 'old behavior'. Invaraibly, in working with clients who have had slips / problems in maintaining a new lifestyle, it is reported that it was "just some little thing" that set off their most recent relapse. To be effective agents of change, we need to address all the areas of our clients lives. It takes a certain amount of courage to do so. It takes art or creativity to see the connections. This is what you will learn through practicing the ways Adler has shown us.

Replies:

There are no replies to this message.

| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |

Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.