In an earlier post Words that Work, I discussed the idea from political
consultant and polster Frank Luntz that “It’s not what you say, it’s what
people hear.” This blog has also discussed in detail how talking to one’s
family about dysfunctional patterns requires just the right type of wording and
tone of voice.
Disclaimers can be used to alter listeners’ perceptions
about what another person is saying. They can be very helpful in making
something that otherwise might be perceived as an attack or accusation much
more palatable.
It is also true that disclaimers can be used in for more
nefarious purposes, such as in deceptive propaganda. I wrote about this latter
purpose in two previous posts on plausible deniability - 8/31/11 and 6/19/12.
The odious purpose is summed up very well in the cartoon
below:
In an earlier post Words that Work, I discussed the idea from political
consultant and polster Frank Luntz that “It’s not what you say, it’s what
people hear.” This blog has also discussed in detail how talking to one’s
family about dysfunctional patterns requires just the right type of wording and
tone of voice.
Disclaimers can be used to alter listeners’ perceptions
about what another person is saying. They can be very helpful in making
something that otherwise might be perceived as an attack or accusation much
more palatable.
It is also true that disclaimers can be used in for more
nefarious purposes, such as in deceptive propaganda. I wrote about this latter
purpose in two previous posts on plausible deniability - 8/31/11 and 6/19/12.
The odious purpose is summed up very well in the cartoon
below:
In this post I will focus on the use of disclaimers for doing good–
their advantageous employment in discussions that aim to achieve solutions to
ongoing problems within a family. As a psychotherapist, I find them to be very
useful with my patients, and I also coach my patients on how to use then when
they attempt metacommunication with family members.
Disclaimers are
pre-statements that acknowledge the potentially unpleasant nature of an issue
at hand, proclaim the lack of any ill intent on the part of the the person
making the statement that follows the disclaimer, and give others the benefit
of the doubt concerning their motivation for engaging in problematic
behavior. Disclaimers can also be used
to avoid power struggles that tend to occur when someone might be perceived as
sounding like a know-it-all or like someone trying to “put one over” on the other
person.
Disclaimers
can make it possible to bring up for discussion just about anything. Of course, tone of voice is extremely
important. If someone is trying to bring up
problematic family behavior with other members of the family, a scolding or
sarcastic tone will automatically nullify any advantage conferred through the
use of disclaimers. Usually, tone should
be matter of fact as well as friendly sounding for maximum effect.
In the type of
psychotherapy I do, unified therapy, I frequently need to bring up and explore
a patient’s problematic or counterproductive behavior, or describe potentially
unflattering hypotheses about the patient’s family relationship patterns. Patients have a natural tendency to become
defensive in these situations, and a therapist runs the risk of provoking a negative
reaction of some sort. The use of a
disclaimer often makes the initiation of such discussions more palatable to the
patient.
When making
interpretations regarding a patient or his or her family, the therapist’s use
of disclaimers leads the patient to become less likely to get defensive and
more likely to consider the merits of the therapist’s proposition. Later on in unified therapy, therapists teach
patients to make use of disclaimers during metacommunication with their family
about relationship patterns and issues.
Disclaimers can be used
in innumerable ways. A few examples will
be given here of the types of situations in which disclaimers are useful. The examples are also meant to give the
reader a general idea about how disclaimers should be phrased.
First, when bringing up someone
else’s seemingly provocative behavior, the metacommunicator might say something
such as, “I know you’re not trying to anger me when you do that, but when you
do [such and such], it would be easy for someone who did not know you so well
to get the wrong idea.”
Second, in situations where the Other has a hard time discussing a certain topic, one might say, “I know this is hard to talk about, but it sounds like it is really important.”
Second, in situations where the Other has a hard time discussing a certain topic, one might say, “I know this is hard to talk about, but it sounds like it is really important.”
Third, family members
often hold the belief that certain behavior from another family member is
purposely meant to “ask for” or elicit a nasty response. They may be reluctant to say so, however, for
fear they will be branded as self-serving or even crazy. The metacommunicator can often get the Other to
acknowledge such thoughts by putting the burden of “craziness” on himself or
herself: “This is probably going to
sound crazy, but I wonder if sometimes you get the idea that mom wants you to steal money from her. After all, she keeps leaving it in plain
sight.”
Fourth, disclaimers are
useful for bringing up for discussion the obvious ways that the Other’s
behavior causes problems without sounding like a critical parent or insulting
the Other’s intelligence. The
metacommunicator might say, “At risk of sounding just like Mom, and as I’m sure
you already know, attacking Dad does not seem to solve anything.”
Fifth, many times a
metacommunicator has an hypothesis about what might be going on in the family,
but is not sure. However, the Other may
take umbrage at the implications of such a hypothesis. This happens for many reasons, including that
the possibility that the hypothesis in question is flat out wrong. Giving the other an “out” so that he or she
can easily reject the proposal without getting into an argument can solve this
problem. One can say, “I don’t know if this is accurate or not, but I wonder if
[such and such] might be happening. What do you think?
Sixth, whenever a metacommunicator
brings up the behavior of family members who seem to be contributing to the speaker’s
problems, others will often defend their family. They do so despite the fact that they
themselves are at wit’s end with the relative that is being discussed. Defending one’s family from a perceived
attack even if one is angry at them oneself is quite a natural reaction, but
may preclude much useful discussion about the possible reasons for the family
member’s misbehavior. A useful
disclaimer that may prevent this from happening is, “I’m not trying to turn Dad
into a villain, but…”
Last,
metacommunicators should also make use of disclaimers when explaining their thoughts
and reactions to significant others. This
is part and parcel of the important strategy of giving family members the
benefit of the doubt as to their motivation
when asking them to be aware of and change behavior
that the metacommunicator finds problematic.
For
example, they might say, "I know you wanted me to be successful, but it
often appeared to me that you did not" or "I know you really do care
about me but..." If the other then
says that the metacommunicator is stupid for thinking or feeling the way they
do, the metacommunicator can humbly say, “Maybe so, but that’s how it looks to
me, and I’m sure you don’t want me to get the wrong idea about you, so I
thought it would be important to let you know how this looks to me.”
Of course, disclaimers do not always have the desired effect, but they do often enough that employing them is an excellent strategy.
Of course, disclaimers do not always have the desired effect, but they do often enough that employing them is an excellent strategy.
No comments:
Post a Comment