Archive for the ‘Verhoudings’ Category

THE MAGIC OF RELATIONSHIPS

Introduction

So much has been written and spoken about relationships, but the last word has not yet
been spoken. Sometimes it is a positive experience, easy, uncomplicated and heaven on
earth to be together. At other times things turn negative and we become entangled in
conflicts that remain unresolved and then we become one another’s hell on earth.

The Systems Approach in Communication is a practical and easy way to assist us in
creating a little bit of order in the confusion that sometimes goes hand-in-hand with
relationships.

SECTION A

The Systems Approach in Communication

The system comprises inputs, delivered by persons A and B, into the invisible
communication field that exists between them, namely system C. In diagram format, this
may be represented as follows:

 

 
In accordance with this approach, there are three conditions for communication of high
quality in system C.

Honesty. This entails saying exactly what you mean and meaning exactly what you say
because, in a relationship, only honesty can result in mutual  trust and respect. I believe
that these 3 elements form the foundation of a relationship that facilitates openness and
growth.

However, honesty could be cold and cruel and could cause major damage to a
relationship – therefore, warmth is of crucial importance.

Warmth.  That is reflected in the  way in which we talk to each other, in the words that
we use – i.e. verbal communication, but also in our body language or our non-verbal
communication. Honesty and warmth are essential in a relationship, but then we still need
an even deeper level of communication, namely understanding of feelings or empathy.

Empathy or understanding of feelings
This implies trying to understand my own, as well as the other person’s feelings and
verbalising this understanding. It assists us to be in contact with our own as well as each
other’s feelings on a deeper level, namely emotionally. Emotional contact is a satisfying
experience because we feel understood and accepted by our partner.
Discussion

The three concepts mentioned above seem to be very easy to accomplish. However, it is
not all that easy, because:

* If A is honest and B uses this honesty at a later stage during an argument in
order to cause hurt, then A learns that it is dangerous to be honest and
discontinues this practice. When I observe the above in therapy I see red lights
flickering and I know the relationship is in trouble.

* If we feel that it is going to cause too much damage. For example: A younger
sister is sexually abused by her prospective brother-in-law. She could decide
to protect the family system against the truth, only to carry this burden all
alone in the years to follow. Many people often feel obliged to protect each
other against the truth – usually at high cost to themselves.

* Should a third person be brought into the relationship, usually, at some stage
or another, the truth will surface and the results are usually disastrous! It is
extremely difficult to  regain trust and respect that have been lost.

* Should A and B become entangled in a situation of conflict, warmth usually
flies out the window. The trick is to handle the conflict and to try and find a
solution so that the warmth in a relationship could be rekindled.

* In my consulting room, I often see people who have no contact with their own
feelings, with the result that they are totally incapable of talking about their
emotions or “reading” their partner’s feelings. The implication is that
emotional needs go unsatisfied, that one or both partners feel that they are not
being UNDERSTOOD, with the result that they find themselves in a
relationship lacking in emotion.

* We filter that which we say by means of our own perceptions, prejudices,
values, culture, self-image and a whole lot more. The other person does
exactly the same. In one way or another we have to penetrate each other’s
filters in order to decipher the true message. An even worse scenario: We
build walls in system C by withdrawing, ignoring the other person or refusing
to discuss an issue. Research has shown that the person behind the wall feels
safe and experiences greater control. However, the one standing in front of the
wall gets frustrated and hesitant, because he/she does not know where he/she
stands with the other person. And, in the majority of situations, to withdraw
results in losing your partner somewhere along the way.
And yet, honesty, trust and respect remain the foundation of a healthy
relationship. Should these elements be lacking, the chances are excellent
that the relationship will be broken off, or that it would end up being a
most unhappy relationship. Warmth in a relationship is akin to the sun
shining on flowers in the garden. Without the warm rays of the sun,
everything withers.

When empathy is absent, then an important, deeper dimension is absent
in the relationship. 

PLEASE NOTE: The communication process is not finalised before it has
not become clear to both A and B what the sender of the message actually
MEANT. Therefore, when the message is not fully comprehended,
without fail, the secret lies in asking for clarity or for an explanation with
regard to the meaning of the message.
 
Underpinning everything that has been said so far, is the skill to really
LISTEN to each other. Nobody can be accused of perfect listening – there
is always room for improvement.

To summarise:
Many people say: “I have to WORK at my relationships, but few people have the tools to
enable them to know HOW to do this. The systems approach lays the foundation and
gives one an idea of the basic components of a good relationship.

In Sections  B, C, D and E, additional tools are discussed .

I refer to relationships as magic, because we constantly have to use our analytical and
social judgement while we are busy communicating. For example: Should a vehicle
suddenly swerve in front of me, I have to analyse the situation and decide how to react. It
is of great value to, at the very least, keep control of our emotions and react in a socially
acceptable manner. We experience the process of analytical and social judgement
hundreds of times, if not a thousand times per day. It is therefore small wonder that we
sometimes stumble and say and do the wrong things. However, the magic is present –
and, after all is said and done, relationships do actually work!
 

SECTION B

Assertiveness

Assertiveness is a key concept in relationships, and yet few people understand what it
constitutes and how it works. Assertiveness is one of the most important tools in
relationships of high quality.

In terms of the systems approach, as discussed in Section A, an easy definition of
assertiveness is to give input  in system C and to Say on two levels:
  
* what I am really (that is where honesty comes into play) THINKING, i.e.
what is going on in my head; and
* how I really  (once again honestly) FEEL, i.e. what goes on in my heart.

If I do the above-mentioned in an honest fashion, with warmth towards, and an
understanding of the other person’s feelings, it can do no harm. On the contrary, it helps
me to say NO if that is what I want to do, and to establish healthy boundaries in the
relationship.

Assertiveness works very similarly to a radio. A radio that plays too softly cannot be
heard and makes no difference. A person who cannot be assertive will withdraw by rather
keeping quiet at all times, be too modest and too gentle. Being a pleaser is yet another
characteristic, with the  resultant bottling up of emotions. The consequence? Frustration
with the self builds up and an outburst could follow, or physical symptoms could occur,
such as a headache, a tummy ache, an aching back or numerous other symptoms. The
bottling up of emotions could eventually be a cause of depression.

On the other hand, being too assertive is like a radio that is playing too loudly and is
therefore painful to the ears. Behaviour characterising this, is displayed by people whose
noise levels are very high. Such a person could easily be sarcastic, dominating or a
control freak. The actual word that depicts too much assertiveness is AGGRESSION.
Aggression may be observed at three levels at least:
* Physical – as in physical violence – hitting, kicking, stabbing with a knife,
shooting.
* Emotional – using verbal aggressiveness or playing on the other person’s
feelings by using manipulation (i.e. causing someone to feel guilty should
he/she not do what I want him/her to do). The simple test to find out whether I
am being manipulated, is to decide:
have I done anything wrong? If the answer is NO, I know I am being
manipulated
* Sexual – abuse, rape.

Is there a difference between assertiveness and aggression?

Very definitely. If I could control my anger, I can act assertively. If my anger gets the
better of me, I am no long in control and I could act inappropriately –  and sometimes
cause irreparable damage to a relationship. 

The balance is to be found between too little and too much: rather say what you think and
how you feel as soon as possible, in a mature way, with control over your emotions, and
avoid unnecessary damage to the relationship.

By now it is crystal clear that assertiveness has everything to do with the handing of
conflict. A person who cannot act assertively will find it very difficult to handle conflict
effectively.  

 
SECTION C

Dealing with conflict

We normally inherit our style of dealing with conflict from our parents. If you never saw
how your parents handled their differences, because it took place behind closed doors
“for the sake of the children”, then your style will be to avoid conflict. Or, if conflict was
dealt with by using aggression, you might think that this is the natural way of dealing
with it.

I think life entails moving from one situation of conflict to the next. It is impossible to
lead a life free of conflict. The clever thing to do is to master the art of the effective
handling of conflict and to apply it with ease – as quickly as possible after the conflict
has taken place.

The principles of healthy communication, which are discussed here, also constitute the
foundation in terms of which conflict could be handled that much easier, even though it is
not exactly a pleasant task.

 
 
Tips for dealing with conflict in a constructive fashion

1. Stick to the point. Don’t use the opportunity to rip up old wounds. These
“funerals” are probably old conflicts that were not properly worked through. Place
them on another conflict agenda and first deal with the one at hand so that the
process is not unnecessarily prolonged.

2. Teach yourself the art of non-defensive listening and speaking. A style of
attack/defence is a style severely lacking in effective communication and often
deteriorates into naming, blaming and shaming. It does not assist us in any way to
defuse the conflict. (Section D further explains these styles.)
3. Practise detoxifying self-talk – i.e. first try to understand. Let us look at an
example. Your partner is late and has forgotten to let you know why. If you
immediately think: “I do not deserve this kind of treatment. I am no longer going
to put up with it”, you immediately assume the role of the innocent victim or that
of the justified, indignant sufferer! Oh, woe is me!

Rather ask yourself: “Am I perhaps overreacting? Is it the end of the world? What
does my partner regularly do that actually makes my life easier? Maybe I should
perhaps first try and establish why my partner is late?”

4. Take a few deep breaths and relax a little.

5. Always criticise the person’s BEHAVIOUR, not his/her character, otherwise you
once again elicit a defensive reaction and/or cause unnecessary hurt.

6. Do not generalise – i.e. do not use words such as “always” or “never”. It is simply
not true and would result in a reaction of: “But what about the time when …” –
i.e. once again defensive.

7. Shift to your adult voice and remain there. (Section D).

8. Empathy is an excellent way of relieving tension – i.e. acknowledge your
partner’s feelings. For example.: “I can understand that you are very angry”.

9. Do not avoid conflict. Air your grievances and negotiate towards change before
an explosion takes place – if this is possible.

10. When you are peacefully together, find the time to ask: “Did something happen
during the past couple of days which made you upset”. It is far more productive to
discuss an issue when both parties are relaxed, and it assists towards preventing
the escalation of conflict.

11. Be patient. It takes time to change established negative patterns of behaviour.
SECTION D

Transactional Analysis (TA)

This model of communication was developed by Eric Berne, MD. It gained world-wide
acceptance to the extent that it is still being used today in all four corners of the globe.
Should you wish to know more about the topic than merely the basic core information
that I have included in this discussion, simply Google Transactional Analysis and have a
look at what the Internet has to offer.

In order to explain the concept of TA, I am using the following example: Should you
walk into a shop, put a few items into your basket, walk to the cashier, pay, receive your
change/till slip and pick up your parcel and walk out of the shop, a financial transaction
has taken place. During the communication process, communication transactions take
place. TA focuses on these transactions with the objective of improving your
understanding of communication, and to facilitate changing our way of communication,
if that is what we would like to do.

In terms of TA, there are three ego states inside every person: a parent, an adult and a
child. The parent could speak with one of two voices, and so could the child. That means
that each one of us could speak with one of five voices. However, the same is true of the
person to whom you talk. If you are aware of which voice you are using and with which
voice, coming from the other person, you are connecting, then you understand the
transaction that is taking place. Should you then find it necessary to change the level of
the transaction, you could easily do so – provided you now how to.

Here follows a brief description of the five voices, as well as a diagram:
 

1. The Critical Parent (CP)
This is the part of the personality that finds fault and delivers negative comment.
Criticism is often expressed. Should you become sensitised to identifying this
voice, you can hear how often it is used and abused during communication.

2. The Caring Parent (CP)
This parts tries to understand and support, and constitutes the gentle side of the
parent.

3. The Adult
This is the voice of REASON. It is that part of the personality that likes to think,
gather facts, take good decisions and carry out these decisions. It also keeps the
other two parts, namely the parent and the child, out of trouble (if possible), by
thinking and planning in advance. This is the voice which assists us most in
effective communication.

The Child constitutes a VERY POWERFUL side of you and me, and likes to
react emotionally. It could be either positive or negative emotions.

4. The Free Child (FC)
The free child likes fun and to give expression to all the other emotions.

5. The Adapted Child (AC)
This is the part that reacts in response to the other person’s communication. In
other words, I do not start the communication process, I merely react to what the
other person is saying. The AC could give a rebellious, sulky, moody response –
or a number of other responses.
  
Application. For example, I come home tired and frustrated, and my partner immediately
says to me, in a voice that I experience as the Critical Parent: “Where have you put my
cheque-book?”. I can now choose any one of five voices to respond with. Should I 
become annoyed and give a Free Child, i.e. an emotional response, I might angrily say:
“How in heavens name should I know where your cheque-book is? Are you incapable of
taking care of your own possessions?” More than likely, my partner would also get
annoyed and also resort to an emotional response. Then the transaction has shifted to the
FC level, which is one of the levels where conflict takes place. Conflict is not resolved at
this level and neither on the Critical Parent level, where I could respond without emotion,
but for example, with sarcasm. Two CP voices do not resolve the conflict either. It is only
when one or both move to the adult voice that a solution, which is acceptable to both
parties, could be found. For example: “I do not know. When last did you have it with
you?”

It would also be possible to respond in the CP voice and perhaps say: “I will immediately
see if I can find it for you!” This, of course, places the last speaker in the position of
parent and the other speaker in the position of the child. This could work, but it defines
the situation to work similarly in future: Snap your fingers and I will jump! This does not
sound either assertive or in the adult voice.

The last voice that could be used is the AC, and that could, for example be: “If only the
house was not in such a mess, things would not have disappeared like this. I will really
have to do something about it.” This is a typical victim response, which will not resolve
the problem.

THEREFORE:

If you want to deal with conflict in an effective and constructive manner, remain in your
adult voice and behave in an assertive way –  not aggressively..

In summary

Eric Berne wrote quite a bit about “ The Games People Play”. We often (mostly
unconsciously) get trapped in negative communication transactions. Read more about this
on the Internet, or consult a psychologist if you are not successful in your efforts.

 

 

 
SECTION E
Differentiation

This is a concept  I learnt from David Schnartz in his book, “Passionate Marriage”. It is
of utmost importance and I regard it as the cherry on top of everything that we have done
up to now. He describes it as follows:

 “Differentiation involves balancing two basic life forces, the drive towards
   individuality and the drive towards togetherness.”

Note the strong words, “two basic life forces”. He explains as follows:
Individuality:
We are all born as babies – rather selfish little creatures who want all their needs satisfied
immediately: hunger, thirst, a wet nappy, pain, etc., by crying if there is an unfulfilled
need. The parents are on duty and must establish what the need is and fulfil this need as
soon as possible.

As time goes by, the baby becomes bigger and starts developing – an own identity,
interests, self-image, personality, etc.. Schnartz calls it a “sense of self”. This entails
everything that turned me into the person I am today and that turned you into the person
you are today.

Should the development process of the “sense of self” NOT be successful, the typical
result is a person with feelings of inferiority and a poor self-image.

Should the process be successful, then the result is an assertive person who, in his or her
own right, could be himself or herself.

Should the process develop too far, then the person becomes like a baby once again –
selfish and egocentric, who expects others to fulfil his/her needs as soon as possible.

If the “sense of self” develops out of context, we find a personality disorder, which is
referred to as narcissism. These are people who believe: “The entire world revolves
around ME”.

Emotional connections:
As development continues, we realise that we are not alone on this earth – there are also
other people with whom we can establish emotional connections. If the “sense of self”
has developed well, we are capable of initiating positive relationships and maintaining
them.

If the process develops less satisfactorily, the person builds a wall around him/her and
keeps people at a distance. It is difficult to know where you stand with such a person and
then the relationship becomes complicated.

A third possible position is what Schnartz calls “emotional Siamese twins”. These are
people who become overly dependent and easily say: “If you break off the relationship, I
will commit suicide, because I cannot live without you”. People like this become a
burden because they expect to be carried in a relationship.

To summarise

Ask yourself the following questions:
 
* Do I have a positive ”sense of self”?
* Do I keep people at a distance unnecessarily?
* Am I like a creeper, suffocating my partner?

It is not always easy to find a balance between being too independent or too dependent
but rather inter-dependant. It is possible.

In conclusion

If I take a broad look at  A, B, C, D and E, my conclusion is that relationships require
continuous hard work, but if we have the necessary tools – and use them – can be very
rewarding. It helps so much if ;
* I am honest and communicate with warmth and an understanding of my
partners feelings, as well as of my own feelings.
* I can be assertive.
* I can handle conflict in an effective manner.
* I can be aware of the TA voices and successfully handle the ‘games people
play’.
* I can ensure that my “sense of self” is positive and that I am able to establish
healthy emotional connections.

Relationships that work well result in a life that is meaningful and worthwhile. An open,
growing relationship remains filled with surprises and magic.

Inleiding
Daar word so baie oor verhoudings geskryf en gepraat en tog is die laaste woord nog nie nie gesê nie. Soms is dit positief, maklik, ongekompliseerd en hemels om bymekaar te wees. Soms raak dit negatief en ons raak verstrik in konflikte wat onopgelos bly en dan word ons mekaar se hel.

Die sisteembenadering in kommunikasie is ‘n praktiese en maklike manier om ons te help om‘n bietjie orde te skep in die verwarring wat verhoudings soms bring.
AFDELING A
Die Sisteembenadering in Kommunikasie
Die sisteem bestaan uit insette wat persoon A en B lewer in die onsigbare kommunikasieveld wat tussen hulle bestaan, nl.sisteem C. Diagrammaties kan dit as volg voorgestel word:

Volgens hierdie benadering is daar drie voorwaardes vir hoë kwaliteit kommunikasie in sisteem C.

Eerlikheid. Dit beteken om te Sê wat jy bedoel en te Bedoel wat jy sê, omdat net eerlikheid  na Vertroue en Respek  in ‘n verhouding lei.
Maar eerlikheid kan koud en hard wees en groot skade in ‘n verhouding veroorsaak daarom is warmte so belangrik.

Warmte. Dit het te doen met die manier waarop ons met mekaar praat, die woorde wat ons gebruik, verbale kommunikasie, maar ook ons liggaamstaal of nie-verbale kommunikasie. Eerlikheid en warmte is noodsaaklik in ‘n verhouding, maar dan benodig ons ‘n nog dieper vlak van kommunikasie, nl. begrip of empatie.

Begrip of empatie. Dit beteken om begrip te hê vir mekaar se gevoelens en dit te verwoord en dit help ons om op ‘n dieper vlak, nl. emosioneel met mekaar kontak te maak.

Bespreking
Bogenoemde drie begrippe klink baie eenvoudig om uit te voer, maar dis glad nie so maklik nie, omdat

• As A eerlik is en B gebruik dit soms later in ‘n argument as ‘n wapen om seer te maak, leer A dat dit gevaarlik is om eerlik te wees en hou op daarmee.
• As ons besluit dit te gaan te veel skade veroorsaak, byvoorbeeld: sê nou maar ‘n jonger sussie word deur haar aanstaande swaer gemolesteer. Sy kan besluit om die familiesisteem te beskerm teen die waarheid en dit al die jare wat volg alleen dra. Baie mense voel dikwels verplig om mekaar teen die waarheid te beskerm.
• As ‘n derde persoon in die verhouding ingebring word kom dit gewoonlik een of ander tyd op die lappe en die gevolge is gewooonlik rampspoedig! Dis baie moeilik om vetroue en respek wat verbreek is, te herstel.
• As A en B in ‘n konfliksituasie gewikkel raak, vlieg warmte gewoonlik by die venster uit. Die kuns is om die konflik te hanteer en ‘n oplossing te probeer vind sodat daar weer warmte in die verhouding kan wees.
• In my spreekkamer sien ek baie dikwels mense wat geen idee het hoe hulle voel nie en dus glad nie instaat is om oor hulle emosies te kan praat nie of hulle maat se gevoelens te “lees” nie. Die implikasie is dat emosionele behoeftes nie bevredig word nie, dat een of albei nie VERSTAAN voel nie en dat dit ‘n emosioneel arm verhouding is.
• Ons filtreer wat ons sê deur ons eie persepsies, vooroordele, waardes, kultuur, selfbeeld, en nog baie meer. Die ander persoon doen dieselfde. Op een of ander manier moet ons deur mekaar se filters kom en die ware boodskap ontsyfer. Nog erger: Ons bou mure in sisteem C deur te onttrek, ignorer of te weier om ‘n saak te bespreek. Navorsing leer dat die persoon agter die muur veilig voel en meer beheer ervaar. Die een voor die muur raak egter gefrustreerd en onseker omdat hy/sy nie weet waar hy/sy met die ander person staan nie. Om te onttrek beteken meesal om jou maat êrens langs die pad te verloor.

Tog bly eerlikheid, vertroue en respek die basis van ‘n gesonde  verhouding. As dit ontbreek, is die kanse goed dat die verhouding verbreek sal word, of ‘n baie ongelukkige verhouding sal wees. Warmte in ‘n verhouding is soos die son op blomme in die tuin – daarsonder kwyn alles.

Sonder empatie onbreek ‘n belangrike, dieper dimensie in enige verhouding.

LET WEL: Die kommunikasieproses is nie afgehandel voordat dit nie vir A en B duidelik is wat die sender van die boodskap BEDOEL het nie. Die geheim is om altyd, as ‘n boodskap nie goed verstaan word nie, te vra vir verheldering of verduideliking tov die bedoeling van die boodskap.
Om saam te vat.
Baie mense se: “Ek moet WERK aan my verhoudings, maar min mense het die gereedsakp om regtig te weet HOE om dit te doen. Die sisteembenadering lê ‘n grondslag en gee ‘n idee van die basiese bestanddele van ‘n goeie verhouding. In Afdeling B, C, D en E word verdere gereedskapstukke bespreek.

Ek noem verhoudings ‘n “misterie”, omdat ons gedurig analitiese en sosiale oordeel moet gebruik terwyl ons besig om te kommunikeer. As ‘n taxi byvoorbeelsd skielik voor my inswenk, moet ek analiseer wat nou besig is om te gebeur en besluit hoe ek daarop gaan reageer. Dit help baie om ten minste net beheer oor ons emosies te behou en sosiaal toepaslik te reageer! Ons gaan honderde, indien nie duisende kere per dag deur die proses van analitiese- en sosiale oordele. Dis geen wonder dat ons soms struikel en die verkeerde dinge sê en doen nie, maar die misterie is daar – verhoudings werk tog nog!
AFDELING B
Selfgelding (assertiveness) is ‘n sleutelbegrip in verhoudings en tog verstaan min mense wat dit is en hoe dit werk. Dis een van die belangrikste gereedskapstukke in hoë kwaliteit verhoudings.

In terme van die sisteembenadering soos in afdeling A beskryf, is ‘n maklike definisie van selfgelding om toe te tree in sisteem en op 2 vlakke te Sê

• Wat ek regtig (dis waar die eerlikheid inkom) DINK, maw wat in my kop aangaan en
• Hoe ek regtig (weereens die eerlikheid) VOEL, maw wat in my hart aangaan

As ek bogenoemde eerlik doen, met warmte en begrip vir die ander persoon se gevoelens, kan dit nie skade doen nie. Inteendeel, dit help my om NEE te sê as dit is wat ek wil sê en gesonde grense in die verhouding te stel.

Selfgelding werk baie soos ‘n radio. ‘n Radio wat te sag speel word nie gehoor nie en maak nie ‘n verskil nie. ‘n Onselfgeldende persoon sal onttrek deur altyd liewer stil te bly, te beskeie en saggeaard te wees. Oorinskiklik (pleasing) wees is nog ‘n kenmerk en die gevolglike opkrop van emosies. Die gevolg? Frustrasie met die self bou op en ‘n uitbarsting kan volg of fisiese simptome soos hoof- maag- rugpyn of talle ander simptome. Opkrop van emosies kan uiteindelik ook‘n oorsaak van depressie wees.

Te veel selfgelding is weer soos ‘n radio wat te hard speel en ongemaklik op die ore val.

Gedrag waaraan dit herken kan word is mense wie se geraasvlakke baie hoog is; hulle kan maklik sarkasties, dominerend en ‘control freaks’ wees. Die eintlike woord wat te veel selfgelding beskryf, is AGGRESSIE. Aggressie kan op te minste 3 vlakke waargeneem word:

• Fisies – soos fisiese geweld – slaan, skop, met ‘n mes steek, skiet
• Emosioneel – op die ander persoon se gevoelens speel deur te manipuleer (dws iemand skuldig laat voel as hy/sy nie doen wat ek wil hê nie)
• Seksueel – molestering. verkragting

Is daar ‘n verskil tussen selfgelding en aggressie?

Beslis. As ek my woede kan beheer, kan ek selfgeldend optree. As my woede met my weghardloop, is ek nie meer in beheer nie, kan ek ontoepaslik optree en soms onherstelbare skade aan ‘n verhouding doen.

Tussen te min en te veel lê die balans: Sê liewer so gou as moontlik wat jy dink en hoe jy voel op ‘n volwasse manier met beheer oor jou emosies en vermy onnodige skade aan die verhouding.

Teen die tyd is dit baie duidelik dat selfgelding alles te doen het met konflikhantering. ‘n Persoon wat nie selfgeldend kan optree nie, sal dit baie moeilik vind om konflik effektief te hanteer.
AFDELING C
Konflikhantering
Ons erf on styl van konflikhantering gewoonlik van ons ouers. As jy nooit gesien het hoe jou ouers verskille hanteer het nie, omdat dit agter ‘n geslote kamerdeur gedoen is ‘ter wille van die kinders’, sal jou styl konflikvermyding kan wees. Of as konflik met aggressie hanteer is, sal jy dalk dink dis die manier om dit te doen.

Ek dink die lewe bestaan om van een konflik na volgende een te beweeg. Dis onmoontlik om ‘n konflikvrye lewe te hê. Die slim ding om te doen is om die kuns van effektiewe konflikhantering aan te leer en met gemak toe te pas – so gou as moontlik na die konflik.

Die beginsels van gesonde kommunikasie wat hier bespreek word, is ook die basis waar volgens konflikte soveel makliker hanteer kan word, al is dit nie juis ‘n aangename taak nie.
Wenke vir konstruktiewe konflikhantering
1. Bly by die punt. Moenie die geleentheid gebruik om ou koeie uit die sloot te grawe nie. Die ‘begrafnisse’ is waarskynlik ou konflikte wat nie deurgewerk is nie. Sit dit op ‘n ander konflikagenda en handel die een wat nou ter sprake is eers af, sodat die proses nie onnodig uitgerek word nie.
2. Leer jouself om nie ‘verdedigend’ te praat of te luister nie (non defensive listening and speaking). ‘n Styl van aanval/verdedig is ‘n baie arm styl van kommunikasie en ontaard dikwels in verwyte en beledigings. Dit help geensins om konflik the ontlont nie. (Deel D verduidelik die style verder)
3. “ Detoxifying self talk”, maw probeer eers verstaan. Kom ons gebruik ‘n voorbeeld: jou maat is laat en het vergeet het om brood te koop. As jy dadelik dink: “Ek verdien nie die soort behandeling, ek gaan dit nie langer verduur nie”, klim jy dadelik in die rol van die onskuldige slagoffer of die van geregverdigde verontwaardige! O wee…………
Vra liewer jouself: “Ooreageer ek dalk? Is dit die einde van die wêreld? Wat doen my maat gereeld wat tog die lewe vir my makliker maak? Miskien moet ek net eers uitvind waarom my maat laat is?”
4. Haal diep asem en ontspan eers ‘n bietjie.
5. Kritiseer altyd die persoon se GEDRAG, nie karakter nie, anders lok jy weereens ‘n verdedigende reaksie uit.
6. Moenie veralgemeen nie, dws woorde soos ‘altyd, nooit’ gebruik nie. Dis eenvoudig nie waar nie en sal lei na ‘n reaksie van “Maar wat van die tyd toe…..”
maw weer verdedigend.
7. Gaan na jou volwasse stem en bly daar. (Deel D)
8. Empatie is ‘n meesterlike manier om spanning te verlig, maw erken jou maat se gevoelens, bv. “Ek kan verstaan dat jy baie kwaad is.”
9. Moenie konflik systap nie. Lug jou griewe en onderhandel vir verandering voordat ‘n ontploffing plaasvind, indien moontlik.
10. Maak tyd as julle rustig saam is om te vra:” het daar die laaste paar dae iets gebeur wat jou omgekrap het?” Dit werk beter om ‘n saak te bespreek as albei partye ontspanne is en dit help om te verhoed dat konflikte eskaleer.
11. Wees geduldig. Dit neem tyd ou, negatiewe gedragspatrone te verander.
AFDELING D
Transaksionele Analise (TA)
Hierdie kommunikasie-model is deur Eric Bernes, MD ontwikkel. Dit het wêreldwyd soveel inslag gevind dat dit vandag nog van die Noorde tot die Suide, die Ooste tot die Weste gebruik word. As jy meer daarvan wil weet as net die basiese kerninligting wat ek vir hierdie bespreking insluit, Google net Transactional Analysis en kyk wat daar alles is.

Om die konsep van TA te verduidelik, die volgende voorbeeld: As jy by ‘n winkel sou instap, ‘n paar items in jou mandjie pak, na die kassier stap, betaal, jou kleingeld/strokie kry en jou pakkies optel en loop, het daar ‘n finansiële transaksie plaasgevind. In die kommunikasie-proses vind daar kommunikasie-transaksies plaas. Dis op hierdie transaksies wat TA fokus, met die doel om kommunikasie beter te verstaan en makliker te verander, as dit is wat jy graag wil doen.

Volgens TA is daar 3 egostate in elke mens: ‘n ouer, volwassene en kind. Die ouer kan met een van twee stemme praat en die kind ook. Dit beteken dat elkeen van ons met een van 5 stemme kan praat. Dieselfde geld egter vir die persoon met wie jy praat. As jy bewus is watter stem jy gebruik en by watter stem jy by die ander persoon aanhaak, verstaan jy die transaksie wat besig om plaas te vind. As jy dit dan nodig vind om die vlak van die transaksie te verander, kan jy dit maklik doen, mits jy natuurlik weet hoe.

Vervolgens ‘n kort beskrywing van die 5 stemme en ‘n diagram:

1. Die Kritiese Ouer (KO)
Dis die deel van die persoonlikheid wat foutvind en negatiewe kommentaar lewer. Kritiek word dikwels uitgespreek. As jy sensitief word om hierdie stem te identifiseer, hoor jy hoe dikwels dit in kommunikasie gebruik en misbruik word.
2. Die Versorgende Ouer (VO)
Hierdie deel probeer verstaan, ondersteun en is die sagte deel van die ouer.
3. Die Volwassene (V)
Dis die stem van die REDE. Dis die deel van persoonlikheid wat daarvan hou om te dink, feite te versamel, goeie besluite te neem en die besluite uit te voer. Dit hou ook die ander 2 dele, die ouer en die kind, uit die moeilikheid (indien moontlik) deur vooruit te dink en te beplan.
Die Kind is ‘n BAIE STERK deel van jou en my en hou daarvan om emosioneel
te reageer. Dit kan positiewe of negatiewe emosies wees.
4. Die Vry Kind (VK)
Die vry kind hou van pret en om aan al die ander emosies uiting te gee.
5. Die Aangepaste Kind (AK)
Dis die deel wat reageer in respons op die ander persoon se kommunikasie, maw Ek begin nie die kommunikasieproses nie, ek reageer op wat die ander persoon sê. Die AK kan ‘n rebelse, nukkerige of ‘n hele klomp ander response gee.

Toepassing. Sê nou maar ek kom moeg en gefrustreerd tuis en my maat sê dadelik vir my in ‘n stem wat ek beleef as die Kritiese Ouer: “Waar het jy my tjekboek gesit?” Ek kan nou kies met 1 van 5 stemme hoe ek gaan antwoord. As ek my vererg en ‘n Vry Kind respons gee, sê ek dalk kwaad: ”Hoe de joos moet ek weet waar is jou tjekboek. Kan jy nie jou eie goed oppas nie?” Waarskynlik sal my maat ook vereg wees en ‘n emosionele respons gee. Die transaksie het dan beweeg na die VK vlak wat een van die vlakke is waar konflik plaasvind. Konflikte word nie op hierdie vlak uitsorteer nie, ook nie op die Kritiese Ouer vlak, waar ek sonder die emosie, maar bv. met sarkasme sou kon antwoord. Twee KO stemme los ook nie konflik op nie. Dis net as 1 of albei na die volwasse stem beweeg, dat ‘n oplossing waarmee beide partye kan saamleef, gevind kan word, bv. “Ek weet nie. Wanneer het jy dit laas gehad?”

Dit sou ook moontlik wees om in die VO stem te antwoord en dalk te sê: “Ek sal dit dadelik vir jou gaan soek, hoor!”  Dit plaas natuurlik die laaste spreker in die ouer en die ander een in die kind posisie. Dit kan werk, maar definieer die verhouding om in die toekoms ook so te werk: Klap jou vingers en ek sal spring! Dit klink nie selfgeldend of volwasse nie.

Die laaste stem wat gebruik kon word, is die AK en dit sou bv. wees: “As die huis nie so deurmekaar was nie, sou goed ook nie so wegraak nie. Ek sal regtig iets daaraan moet doen.” Dis ‘n tipies slagoffer respons wat nie die probleem oplos nie.

DUS
As jy konflik effektief, konstruktief wil kanteer: bly in jou volwasse stem en tree selfgeldend, nie aggressief op nie.

Om saam te vat
Eric Bernes het heelwat geskryf oor “The Games People Play” waar hierdie 5 stemme (meesal onbewustelik) vasval in negatiewe kommunikasie- transaksies. Lees gerus verder daaroor op die Web of raadpleeg ‘n sielkundige as jy nie regkom nie.
AFDELING E
Differensiasie
Hierdie is ‘n konsep wat ek by David Schnartz in sy boek ‘Passionate Marriage’ geleer het. Dis uiters belangrik en plaas vir my die kersie op die koek van alles wat ons tot dusver gedoen het. Hy beskryf dit so:

“Differentiation involves balancing two basic life forces, the drive towards
individuality and the drive towards togetherness”

Let op die sterk woorde: “Two basic life forces” . Hy verduidelik dit as volg:

Ons word almal gebore as babas – nogal selfsugtige wesentjies wat al hulle behoeftes onmiddellik bevredig wil hê: honger, dors, nat, pyn ens deur te skree as daar ‘n onvervulde behoefte is. Die ouers is aan diens en moet vasstel wat die behoefte is en dit so gou moontlik vervul.

Algaande word die baba groter en begin ontwikkel – ‘n eie identiteit, belangstellings, selfbeeld, persoonlikheid, ens. Schnartz noem dit ‘n “sense of self” wat ek nie lekker vertaal kry nie en dus net so gebruik. Dit behels alles wat van my die mens gemaak het wat ek vandag is en van jou die mens wat jy is.

As die onwikkelingsproses van die ‘sense of self’ NIE goed verloop het nie, is dit tipies ‘n persoon met ‘n minderwaardigheidsgevoel en lae selfbeeld. As die proses goed verloop het, is die resultaat in selfgeldende persoon wat in eie reg kan wees wie hy/sy is.

As die proses te ver onwikkel, word die persoon weer soos die baba – selfsugtig. egosentries, wat van ander verwag om sy/haar behoeftes so gou as moonlik te vervul.

As die ‘sense of self’ buite verband ontwikkel, kry ons ‘n persoonlikheidsversteuring wat narsissisme genoem word. Dis mense wat glo”Die hele wêreld gaan oor MY”.

Soos onwikkeling aangaan, kom ons agter dat ons nie alleen op aarde is nie – daar – is ook ander mense met wie ons emosionele konneksies kan vorm. As die ‘sense of self’ goed ontwikkel het, is ons instaat om positiewe verhoudings aan te knoop en instand te hou.

As die proses nie goed ontwikkel het nie, bou die persoon‘n muur om hom/haar en hou mense op ‘n afstand. Dis moeilik om te weet waar jy met so ‘n persoon staan en die verhouding werk dan nie goed nie.

‘n Derde moontlike posisie is wat Schnartz noem “ emosionele Siamense tweelinge”.Dis mense wat oorafhanklik raak en maklik sê:”As jy die verhouding verbreek, pleeg ek selfmoord, want ek kan nie sonder jou leef nie.

Om op te som: Vra jou self die volgende vrae:

• Het ek ‘n positiese ‘sense of self’?
• Hou ek mense te veel op ‘n afstand?
• Is ek soos ‘n rankplant en versmoor ek my maat?

Dis nie altyd maklik om die balans tussen te onafhanlik, afhanklik en interafhanklik te kry nie, maar dit is moontlik.

As ek globaal na afdeling A, B, C, D en E kyk, is my gevolgtrekking: verhoudings is harde werk en dit hou nooit op nie. Maar as ek dit nog nie geleer het nie, ek kan

• Eerlik, met warmte en begrip vir my eie en my maat se gevoelens optree
• Selfgeldend wees
• Konflik effektief hanteer
• Bewus wees van die TA stemme en die ‘games people play’ hanteer
• Sorg dat my ‘sense of self’ positief is en ek goeie emosionele konneksies kan maak.

Verhoudings wat goed werk maak die lewe sinvol en die moeite werk. ‘n Oop, groeiende verhouding bly vol verrassings en misterie.