The way in which we use language determines our relationship with problems. This, in turn, establishes the courses of action available to us in attempting to lessen problems’ effects on our lives. If stories of a problem are left expressed as an identity claim (adjectival, e.g. I’m depressed) or a personal property (possessive, e.g. my depression), there is a risk that they become naturalized (it’s the way I am, my personality, my character, my fault/weakness). How can the person then take action against the effects of the problem, if they are perceived as the problem themself, without acting against their self? Alternatively, externalising the problem by using a pronoun and noun (e.g. this depression) positions the experience as both a separate and specific entity with which to engage. Externalising a problem provides a linguistic shift that objectifies the problem in a way that positions it at a distance from the person. The relationship with the problem, rather than personal performance, can then be reappraised and renegotiated. Leaving problems as identified through adjectival and possessive descriptions also risks decontextualizing them so that their relationship with lived experience is obscured. This has the added hazard of reinforcing the idea that the effects of the problem are a matter of personal failure rather than the difficulties of living in trying circumstances. Johnella Bird 1 provides a useful linguistic tactic, to ensure the problem remains specific and contextualized, by speaking it thus: (e.g.) This depression you experience when .... Michael White 2 identified a number of ways in which the practice of externalizing problems is helpful. These include: • decreasing unproductive conflict • undermining a sense of failure • uniting people in a struggle against the problem and escaping its influences • opening up new possibilities to take action • opening up more effective and less stressed approaches to problems • presenting options for dialogue rather than monologue about the problem. ___________________________________________________________________________________ 1. See Johnella Bird’s handouts, at: http://www.cybersoul.co.nz/hearts/handoutintro.htm 2. Michael White originally published these ideas in ‘The Externalising of the Problem’, Dulwich Centre Newsletter, Summer 1988/89. The article later appeared as Chapter 2 of Michael White and David Epston’s seminal work, Narrative Means to Therapeutic Ends. (1990), New York & London: W.W. Norton & Company. In narrative therapy, the person is not the problem. The problem is the problem. The person’s relationship with the problem is the issue of interest. Unlike in the Freudian tradition, where ‘externalisation‘ refers to the ‘projection’ of one’s thoughts, feelings or motives onto another, externalization, in the narrative therapeutic sense, refers to the distancing position a person takes in relation to the problem. Mandy has brought her daughter, Alley, to see me. Here is a (very) potted version of our first conversation: 3 Katy: So what’s brought you both here today? Mandy: I’m just fed up with Alley’s behaviour. It’s driving me crazy. (holds head in hands and sighs a very big sigh). Katy: Could you tell me a bit about the behavior that’s troubling you? Mandy: Well, it’s all these tantrums; I mean she’s 7 years old but she’s behaving like a 2year old. Katy: When does this happen and what would I see if I witnessed one of these tantrums? Mandy: She screams and hits when it’s time for bed. Katy (to Alley): Have you noticed this too, Alley? (Alley nods). Katy: Alley, what do you think it might be that invites all this screaming and hitting at bedtime (seeking Alley’s understanding of the problem)? Alley (looks sat her feet and whispers): I’m . . . scared . . . when the light goes out. Katy: So this FearofLightsOut (externalization) invites you scream and hit? Alley (looks up, a little relieved): Yep. Katy: Mmm, I’ve met a few FearsofLightsOut before. This one that’s been bothering you; what’s it like (seeking specificity)? I mean could you draw it (inviting specifics)? (Alley nods and smiles. Katy gives Alley some paper and crayons and she proceeds to illustrate with vigour). Katy: That looks pretty ugly! Has it got a name (personification)? Alley: Yeah! It’s really mean! (adds fierce eyebrows to drawing). It’s name is Rexthe Wrecker. Katy: Gosh, is it? What has RextheWrecker been getting up to that’s so mean? Alley: It tells me there’s monsters under the bed and to watch out! And . . . that I might die if I close my eyes. (Frowns). Katy: And what do you do when that happens (initial recognition of agency)? Alley: I do this (pulls in her arms tight to her body) and try to stop Mummy turning off the light. Katy: So, is that OK with you, that Rex The Wrecker that turns up at bedtime and pulls these mean tricks on you? (seeking Alley’s position in relation to the problem) Alley: No. Katy: How come? (seeking identification of values and intentions that guide actions) Alley: I don’t want to be scared . . . and I don’t like that it makes Mummy upset too. Katy: (holds up the drawing and considers it) It sounds like RextheWrecker has been getting away with scaring you and upsetting Mummy and this is not what you want? Following on from here, we identified some moments when Alley resisted the invitations to kick and scream at bedtime one night recently, which involved being more interested in thinking about the dance concert in which she had just performed. This opened up a conversation about her skills and knowledges in overcoming some bullying which almost stopped her from going to dance classes, which she loves. Through this process, acts of ‘notgivingin’ were articulated that made more visible to her, and to Mandy, her ability to resist acts of bullying, which were applicable to resisting the ‘bullying’ of Rex the Wrecker. 3. This is a pastiche of several cases. What is externalisation in narrative practice? An example of an externalising conversation