Does your client have a friend or family member they’re stressed about seeing? Someone they’re uncomfortable being around because of their political views?
It’s a common situation for many clients (and practitioners, too) – and it can be hard to connect with these people when we disagree so strongly.
But Frank Anderson, MD has an interesting perspective on how we might approach this.
You see, Frank recently had an experience that transformed a strained relationship with someone in his own family – someone he was dreading sitting down to eat with.
So in the video below, he’ll get into what it was that allowed them to forge a deeper connection. Plus, he’ll describe how we might approach the political divide from an IFS perspective.
Have a look.
One of the things that happens in IFS, Internal Family Systems, is what we call polarizations, or polarities. People call them conflicts, different views.
Often, conflicts or different views are protective responses to the same wound. For example, one part of me drinks because it wants to get away from my pain. The other part of me is suicidal because it wants to get away from my pain. But these parts are in conflict. And when you listen to the part that wants to drink in your client, and when you listen to the part that’s suicidal in your client, you often find that both of those parts are protecting the same wound, they just do it in very different ways. And I believe that’s what’s happening in culture and society in this political polarity, that you can hold an extreme belief that are seemingly polar opposites, but they’re often rooted in the same wound.
And so I would really like to bridge the political divide as I did with my family member at that family wedding, and be able to see the commonality in our wounding. And interestingly enough, I will tell you, when we left the wedding and both went to our respective homes, we got on our planes, we hugged each other. And it was the first time we hugged each other ever in our lives, because he felt my wound and I felt his wound. And we joined in our pain, not in our fighting, and not in our protection.
Now, this is just one perspective on working with this issue. So if you’re interested in more viewpoints on how to help clients work through political differences with the people closest to them, check out the links below.
But now we’d like to hear from you. What are your main takeaways from this video? How would you carry this into your work with clients? Let us know in the comments.
If you found this helpful, here are a few more resources you might be interested in:
Political Differences at Holiday Dinners
When Political Differences Hurt Relationships
When Racism Triggers Emotional Reactivity
Thank’s to Frank Anderson,
I am convinced that we should share more of these experiences.
To be seen, to be heard is a need of every body, not only children, not only patients. Every child and every adult. We do not need to agree with the opinions of another person. But with a benevolent curiosity and an open ear, we may detect the underlying suffering or the underlying needs.
xaogjlvoghuktszfviwpuoixdrqssy
Very inspiring insights into an age old problem. As someone who is interested in using IFS more widely than one to one therapy, this was invaluable. Thank you.
This is very insightful comment. What isn’t addressed in the comment though is the relational context of family and the need for therapeutic interaction.
Thank you so much for sharing . I also feel this to be so true and something that needs our awakening to. I work with families as a family physician and have been struck by how that same wound can manifest in different ways in families. I have also been very touched by certain people opening up about their vulnerability about various reasons and fears for which they have their views in these Covid times… often , fear of being controlled and invalidated seem to be at the base of these. Extending these concepts to political divide is going to be an important step .
Thank you for this beautiful insight.
Absolutely. It’s absolutely not addressing power differences at all. Also this is a white (and presumably cis man) so it’s going to be easier for him to not get triggered or be having his rights taken away. I can see this working well in different types of conflicts but not without power and privilege being addressed.
I agree that power differences are vital to consider. I don’t think this changes the core idea that our wounds feed our political views though. Seeing someone’s wound doesn’t mean you have to condone their views or give up your boundaries, just to see them as human too. Also, since Frank Anderson is gay, I imagine he has plenty of lived experience of oppression.
I appreciate finding the commonality of our wounding with others who are politically divergent from our own. We so need a framework to reconnect to our neighbors and families. Thank you.
The argument there might be, argumentably and paradoxically, the involvement of the media and politics. With restrictions and reinforcements people can become more resistant, stubborn, get defensive. “I can take care of myself, I don’t need you to take care of me”, or “are you 65 ? Have you been vaccinated yet?” Those are the type of questions that can make you think as how you don’t get the care you need. A system of being “uncared” for unless in crisis. “What goes around, comes around” when an unfair system has been in place for such a long time, and now it is claiming itself as wanting to save the world. We need only 70% of the vaccinated to feel safer, and then. The frustration arises in part that there is no trust between who ought to care for you. The respect for the person individual choices. There has been so many evidence during this health crisis that the system is not only still fragile, but irrelevant and hasn’t made up to the standard since the many basic needs have still not been met.
Dr. Anderson‘s premise is very valuable. I believe one challenge in applying the concept of seeking to understand polarization as a function of an inner wound is that some people are not in touch with themselves and choose to be highly aggressive rather than admit vulnerability.
Aren’t all neuroses we develop ‘designed’ to ‘protect us?
Hi Frank! Long time. I completely agree with you and live the way you put it. We are all protecting our wounds and find our own defense mechanisms to do the protecting. Loved seeing you talking about it.
Dealing with commonalities can bridge wounds and ease the pain of diverse and waring factions. in treatment I have avoided the politics and find out later in the work we do working with trauma that there were a few who had what I found later were totally against my views. I was shocked that we worked quite well together. When I look back on that client how we were able to avoid politics. It was obvious to me that they really did not understand what they had assimilated because they believed this in the opposing politics. Despite the fact that it grieved me to my very core I respected their woundedness and need to avoid the rhetoric heard opposing their own values. It kept them protected in some fashion.
There was so much authoritarianism in past few years and the role of the grown up child, oftentimes, continued to need this authoritarian parent or system that helped them feel safe despite abuse of perhaps a parent figure.
We often feel safe with this type of parenting style, while hating the things they did. These different styles of parenting were a major topic of parenting groups led while I wonder now if the groups would have been different if the parents had revealed their own history in those groups as that was not the context of the group. We mainly worked of styles of parenting and developmental stages.
I was lucky to do both sexual abuse groups and parenting groups but never did them together as I think that might have been a very helpful way to handle parenting although very overwhelming with that kind of gathering in retrospect. It never would have worked because of CPS issues as that would have warded off truth, which is a common problem as this kind of abuse would perhaps be diminished if a group of potential abusers might have helped them not hurt their own child, if they could address it without threat of repercussions.
I think it odd it never came up in the parenting groups ever, while in the sexual assault groups it came up fairly often. Truth can help people heal in so many ways but society and politics can potentially not allow for total honesty of one wounded from abuse due to all there repercussions.
I must say I am very critical of any political and religious involvement in discussion at the table during the holidays. It is even harder for me to believe in the ideal of a perfect community and a society with no flaws. imho
This was one of the most transformative six minutes of my life! What a fresh portal to go through to connect with people we imagine we can’t possible connect with. Thanks for this fine gift.
– David Johnson EdD, Seattle
Yes, I concur.
Thank you so much for this post! The insight from IFS perspective resonates for me. Like Dr. Frank Anderson identified, I too have noticed control issues being a significant factor when it comes to political perspectives. Wondering what other issues might contribute to challenging conversations of this nature? Also, how might one begin to bridge social interactions that are focused on commonality? When speaking with others I would take a different approach from what I use in therapy as a clinician.
Thank you for sharing your story! These examples are so helpful and powerful!
This is definitely one of the most important topic of our times – extends beyond political issues into all ideology and also can be addressed with many other contexts in addition to IFS.
It’s one of my biggest challenges and I see this work as a life’s labour in which the conflicts are the contractions. May we find support and the space within ourselves to see these these conflicts into the expansions that are its natural course. May we remember we all are much more similar than different.
‘Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I’ll meet you there’ – Rumi
Thank you so much for starting this conversation! I would love to talk further with anyone who would like to continue, as I myself have been experiencing these types of situations in my own family. One thing I would add, is that in my belief there are many types of wounds. The wound of not having control is one that is true for many people. However, I think that there are other types of wounds that also could be triggered. In addition, knowing ourselves is the most important first step. It is only then that we can have conscious conversations while watching ourselves and our own triggers during the conversations. Once we really know our own triggers, we can better recognize them in others and ultimately have more compassion.
Beautiful!!!! Thank you
If the world was introduced to IFS, and especially was more willing to be vulnerable, I can’t even imagine how much more harmonious it would be. It’s ironic. Since making a commitment to be vulnerable when I’m uncomfortable, I’ve felt safer and more accepted than ever before. It’s counterintuitive, and feels like magic! I’ll take it! Thank you Frank Anderson, MD!
Thank you for your wonderful description of what we too often feel, not just over political differences, but all differences. I have a younger sister whose interests are very different from mine and we have never been close. I’m going to use your words to try to be more compassionate when I’m around her.
Something to truly meditate on today!
This is a new and interesting concept I want to mull over. I think there might be be a deeper well to tap here. I am trying to apply it to be larger country wide vulnerable political divide.
Wow! So powerful and necessary! Thanks for sharing.
OUTSTANDING – for seeing this vital commonality with clear vision – and for sharing it!!
This clip is such a helpful reminder that in our depths we are wounded and afraid, essentially “we are they”. Personal and universal healing lies in this common ground.