DivorceTherapy NLP EFT

7/26/2019 DivorceTherapy NLP EFT

1/23

Divorce Therapy 1

RUNNING HEAD: DIVORCE THERAPY

Divorce Therapy Using NLP and EFT

Jeanne M. Bertoli

Florida State University

August 10, 1998

ABSTRACT: Divorce occurs in approximately 50 percent of all marriages and is known to have

deleterious effects on parents and children, at least in the short-term. Divorce therapists work

with people in the divorce process to assist them in minimizing their stress and maximizing post-

divorce adjustment. This chapter offers a new model for divorce therapy incorporating two

existing therapies, neither of which are traditionally used in treating divorce. This NLP-EFT

model combines the detailed assessment and visualization exercises of Neuro-Linguistic

Programming (to minimize the attachment to the ex-spouse) and the re-working of ex-spouses'

interactions through the methods of Emotionally Focused Therapy. This new model is based on

systems and attachment theories, as well as John Gottman's research on negative interaction

cycles in couples.


2/23

Divorce Therapy 2

DIVORCE THERAPY USING NLP AND EFT

Overview

According to 1994 census data according to the Centers for Disease Control, 2,362,000

couples married and 1,191,000 couples divorced in the United States (http:\\search.cdc.gov).

With this data, a divorce rate of 50 percent might be calculated for that year. Experts consider

this rate to be stable since the eighties (Amato & Keith, 1991; Bogolub, 1995; Cooney, 1994).

The effects of divorce have been widely reported and are generally accepted

(Furstenberg, 1990; Hetherington, 1989; Hetherington, Cox, & Cox, 1982; 1985; Seltzer, 1994;

Wallerstein & Blakeslee, 1989). What causes the damage done to children, and how might we

intervene to minimize that damage? According to the literature, the most influential factor

affecting childrens adjustment to divorce is parental hostility. That is, when parents legally

divorce they often do not emotionally divorce. Parents often remain emotionally tied to their ex-

spouses, expressing anger, hostility, and sometimes revenge towards this person they have loved

and lost. When parents are struggling to cope with their own issues they often find themselves

incapable of tending to the logistical and emotional needs of their children. We must find a way

to help parents deal with this struggle for the sake of themselves, their children, and all of

society.

Divorce therapists and state legislatures are facing the challenge of minimizing the effects

of divorce on families and society. Many states have adopted and are adopting laws requiring a

parent education course for all those divorcing who have children (Kramer & Washo, 1993). A

brand of therapy called divorce therapy has also evolved to help combat these issues. Divorce

therapy often begins as couples are deciding whether or not to divorce, and continues through the

separation and post-separation periods (Bogolub, 1995; Rice & Rice, 1986). Models of divorce


3/23

Divorce Therapy 3

therapy tend to vary according to the theoretical foundations of the practitioner. Existing models

will be explored further in the Traditional Treatment Approaches section of this paper.

Through the lens of attachment theory, divorced parents may be seen as coping with the

loss of their primary attachment object (Bogolub, 1995; Bowlby, 1969; 1988). This loss is

generally viewed as devastating whether it is the loss of a parent, a child, or a spouse. People

experiencing this loss are often overwhelmed with emotions; they may feel depression, fury,

desire for revenge, confusion, and anxiety (Bloom-Feshbach & Bloom-Feshbach, 1987; Bowlby,

1988). Addressing the need to mourn the loss of this object has been addressed in at least one

model of divorce therapy (Bloom-Feshbach & Bloom-Feshbach, 1987). The mourning

suggested by this model traditionally takes time, more time than children of divorce can afford to

relinquish.

The model proposed in this paper is new. It combines Neuro-Linguistic Programming

(NLP) and Emotionally-Focused Therapy (EFT) in an attempt first to replace the attachment to

the ex-spouse (and thereby remove the overwhelming emotional connection) and then to re-

engage ex-spouses to form new interactional patterns aligned with their new roles as co-parents.

EFT is based on systems theory and attachment theory, which will be discussed below, and has

been shown to be effective in many empirical studies. NLP is not as theoretically or empirically

sound, but is based on physiology, cognitive processes, and hundreds of cases of anecdotal

evidence.

Traditional Treatment Approaches

Existing divorce therapy models can be divided into four central categories based on the

perspectives from which they were derived: (1) marital and family therapy; (2) crisis

intervention; (3) grief and bereavement; and (4) educational-supportive counseling (Rice & Rice,


4/23

Divorce Therapy 4

1986). Those originating from the marriage and family therapy field include models based on

psychoanalytic theory, intergenerational approaches, systems theory, and behavior theory. In

psychoanalytic theory the therapist may see the divorce as an opening through which to examine

intrapsychic characteristics that could have led to the present circumstances. With

intergenerational approaches, therapists see marital conflicts as representations of family of

origin issues. Systems theory emphasizes a way of thinking in which individual issues are less

important than dynamics between and among individuals; patterns of interactions are

emphasized. Finally, behavior theory views current problems as learned behaviors to be dealt

with through new reinforcements. It is the basis of conflict management and divorce mediation

(Rice & Rice, 1986).

Those models based on crisis intervention techniques attempt to reduce anxiety and

remove the stress-inducing triggers (e.g., court appearances, visitation issues) (Bogolub, 1995;

Rice & Rice, 1986). They use behavioral and empathy-based methods to focus on ending the

crisis. Practitioners viewing divorce from a perspective of grief and bereavement created

developmental stages of the divorce process analogous to Kubler-Ross's (1969) stages of

bereavement. They are "denial, loss, anger, reorienation, and acceptance" according to Wiseman

(1975). By viewing divorce as a developmental process, it is seen as less aberrant or deviant to

society.

The final group of traditional methods is those employing educational methods to assist

divorced adults in adjusting to their new circumstances. The many changes engendered in

divorce necessitate learning new roles and skills. These therapists help divorced people gain

confidence in their ability to handle their new environment (Bogolub, 1995; Rice & Rice, 1986).

The most common course of treatment for divorcing parents is a psychoeducational


5/23

Divorce Therapy 5

course to help parents understand what children go through when parents divorce (Kramer &

Washo, 1993). Although these courses are offered widely and are even required by some states,

their effectiveness has been called into question (Braver, 1996). Each program contains a

different curriculum lasting a different length of time. Most parents are forced to be present, and

so often resist the process. Others take advantage of the opportunity which mostly encourages

parents to look at divorce through the eyes of their children, to see their needs and feelings. With

this new perspective, the goal is that parents will be motivated to put their anger aside for the

sake of their children. Although these ideas seem admirable, evidence of those ideas becoming

reality remains weak (Braver, 1996).

Cognitive-behavioral approaches, like psycho-educational models, do not directly address

or deal with parental anger other than to ask what would be needed to transcend those feelings

(Kramer & Washo, 1993). By trying only to circumvent the anger, already overwhelmed parents

may feel more guilty, ashamed, and incapable (Bloom-Feshbach & Bloom-Feshbach, 1987).

One type of divorce therapy model does address parents anger/hostility, which is viewed

as the loss of a primary attachment object. Practitioners of this therapy warn that extensive time

may be required to allow the client to grieve the loss (Bloom-Feshbach & Bloom-Feshbach,

1987). Unfortunately, children do not realistically have time to wait months and years for their

parents to mourn. By that time, battle lines may have already been drawn, damage may already

have been done.

There seems to be no consensus regarding which method of divorce therapy is most

effective. Whether short-term stress-reducing techniques or longer-term approaches aimed

toward the re-working of intrapsychic and interpersonal organization are the "correct" methods

seems left to the individual practitioner.


6/23

Divorce Therapy 6

This Model - NLP-EFT

The literature consistently states that conflict/hostility between parents after divorce

contributes more than any other factor to a decline in parents and childrens well-being post-

divorce (Amato & Keith, 1991). Traditional divorce therapy models have not found a way to

address this factor quickly and effectively. This new model (NLP-EFT) offers a two-component

therapy based on NLP and EFT, specifically tailored to divorcing or divorced families.

Centrally focused on attachment theory, the problem is viewed as follows: Divorce leads

to parental hostility because of the loss of the primary attachment object (usually for at least one

parent). This hostility becomes present as parents: speak badly of their former spouse to their

children; send messages to their former spouse through their children (e.g., to demand money or

be critical of some lifestyle or habit); or seek vengeance through actions like withholding

visitation rights or not allowing children the freedom to call the noncustodial parent. These are

just a few examples of the innumerable stories children tell by the hundreds. This hostility

damages children of divorce; the evidence is clear.

NLP-EFT divorce therapy proposes to deal with and minimize this hostility by: (1)

acknowledging the normality of feelings of anger and hostility due to the removal of the primary

attachment object, (2) using NLP to remove the attachment to the ex-spouse, and (3) using EFT

to restructure the parents interactions based on their new relationship and attachments. This

model, uses a constructivist philosophy and systems and attachment theory to conceptualize a

solution.

NLP-EFT is not appropriate for couples where violence has eroded the possibility of

feeling physically safe in the presence of the offender. Many people feel anger or fury but do not

act on those feelings; these people may still be appropriate clients for this therapy. This model is


7/23

Divorce Therapy 7

predicated upon non-abusive parents who want to be in their childrens lives. Since the model

has just been created, no empirical evidence of its effectiveness in total is available at this time.

Effectiveness of each component is addressed within their individual descriptions. Now NLP

and EFT will each be described in detail; then a case example follows.

NLP

Neuro linguistic programming was created by Richard Bandler and John Grinder in the

1970s as a way to help people have what they wanted in their lives through hypnosis and special

communication skills. They based this technique on the masterful skills they observed in three

therapists: Virginia Satir, Milton Erickson, and Fritz Perls. From speaking to and observing

these three, Bandler and Grinder extrapolated characteristics which made these practitioners so

successful. Some of these characteristics included their way of speaking gently and methodically

and matching the clients mode of speech, as well as specific uses of language including

reframing problems into possibilities. NLP combines a hypnotic use of language using specifics

of the client's story (i.e., a tendency towards visual, audio, or kinesthetic terms) for its basis.

After a session of discussing the issue, the therapist creates a visualization script based on

Erickson's hypnotic techniques and Satir's empathetic way of communicating to expand the

choices currently available in the client's unconscious. As Linden (in 1997) said, It offers a

paradigm of how the brain works (neuro), about how language interacts with the brain

(linguistic), and how we use this interaction to get the results we want for ourselves and others

(programming).

NLP sees all problems as rooted to a limited amount of choices in the unconscious.

When clients have more choices, they are assumed to choose ones which are more effective for

themselves. These limited choices are rooted in childhood where they faced some similar


8/23

Divorce Therapy 8

dilemma and had access to few, severely limited options. At that time an option was chosen

which allowed survival, but it is no longer functional in the present day.

In short, NLP therapists goals are to understand a persons subjective experience, by

learning how the person has internally represented the information, and to help him/her change

that experience to one that will be more effective in his/her life. After an understanding about

the internal representation is acquired by the therapist through the consultation phase, the

therapist guides the client through a visualization process by which new images or metaphors

replace olds ones which are no longer working for the client. Other NLP processes, which are

beyond the scope of this paper, may be done by the client himself/herself.

Underlying theories and assumptions. Theories and assumptions upon which NLP is

based are not directly stated by the founders. Others have noted that this model is based upon

Freuds concept of the unconscious mind and Milton Ericksons hypnotherapy, and the

philosophical framework is clearly constructivist in this authors opinion. Beyond these

concepts, basic assumptions expressed by NLP practitioner Peter Wryckza (Linden, 1997)

include: (1) mind and body are part of the same cybernetic system (assumes systems theory), (2)

every behavior serves a positive intention, (3) all behavior is useful in some context, (4) all the

resources we need are inherent to our own physiology, (5) human interaction is systemic in

nature, (6) the meaning of my communication to another is reflected in the response it elicits, (7)

theres no failure, only feedback, (3) if it is possible for someone, it is possible for me, and (9)

since my experience is mediated through my own body/mind, I create my own experience and I

am responsible for what happens to me.

Criticisms. NLP has its critics who have commented that this process motivates people

to take control of their lives through practical skills using communication and behavior


9/23

Divorce Therapy 9

modification. Critics also say that the bases for this therapy, namely the unconscious mind and

hypnosis, have not been empirically established. Even the critics, however, have not denied that

NLP works. As one critic sums it up,

It seems that NLP develops models which cant be verified, from which it develops

techniques which may have nothing to do with either the models or the sources of the

models. And it makes claims about thinking and perception which do not seem to be

supported by neuroscience. This is not to say that the techniques wont work. They may

work and work quite well, but there is no way to know whether or not the claims behind

their origin are valid. Perhaps it doesnt matter.

Empirical evidence. All evidence of NLPs effectiveness appears to be anecdotal and

from testimonies. Cases are reported throughout NLP literature (Andreas & Andreas, 1989).

NLP has been used in psychotherapy for problems ranging from phobias to schizophrenia, and

has been expanded outside the field of psychotherapy into the business and academic worlds.

Its continued expansion and popularity, as well, speak to some level of effectiveness.

Application of NLP to divorce therapy. When using NLP to treat divorce-related issues,

the therapist works with attachment issues and the related emotions. In other contexts this same

procedure might also be used on those struggling with issues of enmeshment or co-dependence.

When people divorce, generally one or both parents is grieving the loss of their primary

attachment object. Those feeling of attachment to or dependence on another person are often

internalized as being physically connected to that person, by a cord or like a tumor or some other

representation. The thought of disconnecting from the object creates anxiety in the person as

he/she fears being abandoned. Using NLP techniques, the therapist helps the client emotionally

detach from the old object and reattach that connection to himself/herself.


10/23

Divorce Therapy 10

The NLP process allows the person to disconnect safely from the current object, identify

the needs he/she was meeting, create a more evolved self, attach to the new self, respect the

object, and elaborate on the new relationship with self (Andreas & Andreas, 1989). It is

important to emphasize here that this procedure is not magic but positive anecdotal evidence has

suggested that it allows people emotional distance from the original object, thereby allowing the

client to feel more in control and able to choose the options more closely aligned with their

values.

EFT

History. Greenberg and Johnson (1988) found that cognitive-behavioral and other forms

of marital therapy seemed to be missing something. That something was dealing with peoples

emotions. They posit that our emotional experiences are the essence of our experience and must

be dealt with in order for a marital therapy to be effective long-term.

Assumptions and theoretical principles. EFT founders state their assumptions and

principles explicitly throughout articles on the subject. The model comes from a constructivist

perspective using attachment theory, systems theory, and the results of Gottmans research on

marital distress to implement experiential techniques aimed at restructuring couples interactions.

A brief discussion of each of these components follows.

Attachment theory. First as children and again as adults, people seek to feel safe in the

world by having someone to whom they are the most important thing in the world, called a

primary attachment object (Bowlby, 1969). The bond created with the attachment object serves

to regulate closeness to the object and creates working models of the objects dependability and

whether the self is worthy and lovable (Johnson, in press). The bond between people in this type

of relationship has been shown to maximize physical and mental health, resilience, adaptability,


11/23

Divorce Therapy 11

and personality development in those involved (Willis, 1991; Burman & Margolin, 1992).

When an attachment object is perceived as inaccessible or unresponsive, the person

responds with anger, anxiety, fear, and sadness and will seek to reestablish the connection

(Bowlby, 1988). Bowlby suggests that typically protest and anger will be the first response to

such a threat, followed by some form of clinging and seeking, which then gives way to despair

and depression and finally, if the attachment figure does not respond, to detachment and

separation (Johnson, in press).

Systems theory. As posited by the authors of this model, systems theory explains why

people get entangled in and appear unable to release themselves from interactional patterns.

Systems theory sees patterns as becoming organized over time and maintaining themselves

through homeostasis (Steinglass, 1987). Further, partners appear controlled by their partner.

Systems theory does not address, according to the authors, issues concerning motivation and the

internal dynamics of the person (Johnson & Greenberg, 1995).

The interactions of the couple are also seen as systemic. Neither person is seen as right

or wrong or good or bad. No one causes the problem; the negative cycle is the problem

trap in which they both get caught.

Gottmans research on marital distress. John Gottmans (1979; 1991) research found that

negative interaction cycles, and the concomitant inability to remain emotionally engaged, cause

separation and divorce. Couples engage in typical patterns of one partner becoming critical

while the other withdraws (aka pursuer-distancer). If this pattern escalates to either an attack-

attack or withdraw-withdraw cycle, the marriage will eventually end. Gottman (1991) says that

couples must retain the ability to be emotionally engaged with each other in order to work

through issues for a marriage to be successful.


12/23

Divorce Therapy 12

Experiential techniques. Instead of counting on insight to create lasting change in

relationships, Johnson and Greenberg (1992; 1995) emphasize the need for couples to experience

that change in the therapy room. Couples need to take chances in the safe environment created

by the therapist and know that they will be guided through first efforts. Couples also know that

an unbiased third person is there to guide them.

Major concepts. Greenberg and Johnson state that couples negative interaction cycles

result from feeling a fear of losing their primary attachment object. Because of this fear, couples

often become entangled in ineffective ways of communicating like withdrawal or attack or being

overly rational or discounting the partners concerns or criticizing. To move couples away from

these cycles, which are the cause divorce according to Gottman (1991; 1994), EFT offers a

model of therapy which leads couples through a process of: (1)identifying their own core

emotions, (2) communicating those emotions (thereby letting go of the less effective ways of

communicating), (3) understanding and taking responsibility for how their communication

evokes responses in their partner (like anger or withdrawal), and (4) restructuring their

interactions to be more genuine and vulnerable because of the renewed safety of the relationship.

EFT emphasizes that people entering therapy feel a loss of trust and connection with their

partners. Therapy aims to create or recreate the accessibility and responsiveness which engender

a safe environment in which both partners are able to express their attachment needs (Johnson &

Greenberg, 1988). Emotions are viewed as the window into peoples internal world of

attachment and models of self.

Empirical evidence. EFT has been studied extensively and is viewed as one of the most

effective therapies for treating marital distress (Alexander et al., 1994; Dunn & Schwebel, 1995,

including a study testing the creators hypothesis of how change occurs (Johnson & Greenberg,


13/23

Divorce Therapy 13

1988). Once shown to work, EFT has been used to treat other issues present in marriages such as

depression, alcoholism, chronic physical illness, and post-traumatic stress disorder (Johnson, in

press). This empirical evidence has shown EFT as more effective than no treatment and some

current cognitive-behavioral methods of marital therapy.

Specific treatment procedures. Overall, Greenberg and Johnson propose two goals of

therapy: accessing and reprocessing emotional experience and restructuring the couples

interactions (Greenberg & Johnson, 1988; Johnson, in press). They created a 9-step process by

which EFT could be implemented and wrote a manual entitled Emotionally Focused Therapy in

1988. The steps are as follows:

1. The delineating of conflict issues in the core struggle.

2. Identifying the negative interaction cycle.

3. Accessing the unacknowledged feelings underlying interactional positions.

4. Reframing the problem in terms of underlying feelings attachment needs, and negative cycles.

5. Promoting identification with disowned needs and aspects of self, and integrating these into

relationship interactions.

6. Promoting acceptance of the partners experience and new interaction patterns.

7. Facilitating the expression of needs and wants, and creating emotional engagement.

8. Facilitating the emergence of new solutions.

9. Consolidating new positions.

Although a detailed explanation of each step is not possible here given space

considerations, an overall description of the process is as follows. The therapist begins by

establishing a strong therapeutic alliance. Because EFT necessitates the exploration of clients

core emotions, they must feel safety and trust that they will be treated respectfully and fairly


14/23

Divorce Therapy 14

(Johnson & Greenberg, 1995). The clients are then guided to discuss some of their issues while

the practitioner notes the interaction cycles, particularly those of pursuer/distancer and

anger/withdrawal. As clients continue their discussions the therapist facilitates a transition to

discussing the underlying issues related to attachment, often asking about feelings of

abandonement or rejection and the history of those feelings.

In describing the cycle to the clients the therapist validates each persons experience and

emphasizes how they unintentionally created the cycle and are currently trapped by it. The most

significant parts of the therapy are when each partner can communicate their underlying

emotional issue (e.g., I feel like you do not need me anymore and will leave me if you become

successful at work) rather than discussing the event (e.g., I cant stand how much time you

spend at work). When one person relinquishes their defenses and speaks from their emotional

core, the other person usually increases their barriers in a fearful attempt to re-establish

homeostasis in the system. (Note that the originally angry partner is usually mistrusting of the

changes in the originally withdrawn partner and may not respond encouragingly. This is normal

as he/she is scared to trust this person who has continually withdrawn from him/her.) Clients

and the therapist must stay present and continue to delineate the core emotions and interactions

from the dialogue while the therapist encourages and validates couples interactions at that depth.

Eventually clients are able to acknowledge their needs and express them to their partners.

Once couples begin to communicate in this manner, new folutions naturally emerge to old

problems. The final step involves solidifying the new roles in couples interactions. EFT does

not follow the nine steps in a linear fashion but rather in a corkscrew-type shape, with steps

repeated as necessary.

Application of EFT to divorce therapy. Johnson and Greenberg (1995) actually


15/23

Divorce Therapy 15

recommend this therapy not be used for separating couples since the therapy in its current form

aims to make the primary attachment more secure. Johnson (in press) states, however, that,

EFT works best for couples who still have some emotional investment in their relationship and

therefore some willingness to really engage in the therapy process (p. 12). In this light, EFT

may be considered for divorced couples in that they will always have an investment in each

others lives due to their children. In NLP-EFT, EFT will be modified slightly to offer divorcing

couples a process by which they might create a new, more superficial level of attachment that is

safe.

Since EFT is normally conducted with people who seek to maintain or reestablish

primary attachment with each other, couples are seen together. During therapy each person is

asked to become extremely vulnerable as they express their underlying fears about themselves as

well as their emotions. This level of vulnerability is not necessary for divorced couples. The

goal of this therapy is to establish trust between the parents regarding the children and mutual

respect among all.

EFT with divorced couples differs from the traditional model in the following ways.

Firstly each adult is seen separately for approximately three sessions. During these sessions the

therapist leads each person to identify his/her underlying emotions, to see the interactional

pattern between each other, and to acknowledge and take responsibility for his/her part in the

pattern and the emotions he/she evokes in the other person.

After seeing the parents together for four to six sessions at two-week intervals, the

children are brought into therapy for two to three sessions. Here the parents express and allow

the children to experience their new way of interacting. The purpose is for the children to hear

from their parents together and to see consistency between their words and actions. The other


16/23

Divorce Therapy 16

purpose is that the children are able to express their feelings and concerns to their parents.

Further therapy is made available but not considered necessary.

Case Example

Tim and Sue, both 38, have been married for 10 years and have recently divorced. They

have two children, John (8 years-old) and Sara (5 years-old). The couple was awarded joint legal

custody, while Sue retains primary residence. Tim was ordered to pay $800 per month in child

support. Sue initiated the divorce against Tims objections. Tim wanted the couple to pursue

counseling to try to save the marriage, but Sue said it was too late. Since the divorce Tim has

been very hostile towards Sue. Incidents include Tim telling the children that their mother had

broken up their home and that she was never really committed to the marriage, that she was just

using him. Tim also told the children that Sue had left him so the children should not be

surprised if she left them too. He was also sending messages to Sue through the children telling

her that she better not buy anything for herself with the child support he sent and that no other

man would want to go out with her as fat as she was. John began doing poorly in school, his

grades declining from Bs to Ds, and he had gotten in a fight on the school playground. Sara

started sucking her thumb and not wanting to leave her mothers side. She did not want to visit

her father. Sue realized that the family was in trouble and sought divorce therapy with a clinic

using the X model. Tim agreed to attend sessions without Sue present for his children and

because he was beginning to have problems at work related to his temper.

The first and most important part of therapy with this model is the therapeutic alliance.

Families must be comfortable with and trust that the therapist has their best interest in mind and

would not do anything harmful. Therapists see the parents separately for the initial consultation,

NLP, and initially in EFT. Therapy with the children is not discussed in this model.


17/23

Divorce Therapy 17

While NLP would be conducted with Sue to diminish any anger or residual attachment

issues she might have with Tim, Tim is the primary parent needing to re-work his attachment to

his ex-spouse. The session with Tim presented below was his second session. The first was

used as a consultation and bonding session. To begin the session, Tim was asked to do some

breathing exercises to relax and sit in a reclining chair as the therapist guided him through the

following process. For the sake of time and space the session is presented as a monologue. The

actual pace of the session is usually slow and deliberate, allowing for flexibility to each clients

needs. The entire process takes approximately 20 minutes.

TH: Tim I want you to imagine that Sue has just walked in the room. If you have trouble seeing that, pretend thatshe just walked in. Now see yourself walking up to her and then walking around her. I want you to noticeeverything about her. What does she smell like? feel like? Now tune in to your feelings. What does it feel like tobe around her? Do you feel very connected to her? How do you experience your connection to Sue? Do youexperience yourself as physically attached to her in some way? Are you physically attached to some part of herbody or is there some object that connects you? Where on her body is the connection, and where is it on your body?Notice how you experience this. How does it look? What does it feel like? How do you feel?

This step allowed the client to become aware of is over-connection to his ex-wife.

TH: Now think for a moment about breaking the connection just to know how it would be for you. You might dothis with a saw or some other sharp object. Sever the connection now. Most people find this very uncomfortablewhich shows you that this connection was very important to you and served a significant purpose in your life. If youare uncomfortable, put the connection back. It is not time for you to end it yet; you arent ready until you havesomething to replace it with.

This step allowed Tim to experience temporary independence, which would make him greatly uncomfortable given

that his paradigm is that he is very attached to Sue.

TH: Now ask yourself what you want from Sue that would satisfy you. What do you want from her? What wouldthat do for you? What are you looking for from her? Keep asking yourself until you reach a core answer likeprotection, love, security, or a feeling of value.

Therapist would continue these kinds of questions until the client signaled that he had found an answer. The

purpose of this is to help the client find the positive aspects of this attachment, what he was getting out of having theattachment.

TH: Now turn 90 degrees either to your right or left. I want you to create a three-dimensional image of yourself asyou would ideally like to be. This is you beyond your current level of functioning. This Tim knows you and lovesyou. This Tim appreciates you and wants to nurture and protect you. This Tim can provide you with all the needsyou have just identified. Get a sense of what he is like. Notice how he looks, how he feels, how you feel aroundhim. Does he glow? Do you feel his warmth?

Some people do not actually see this other self but get a sense of him instead. This step is called developing the

evolved self.

TH: Turn around and see Sue. See and feel your connection to her. Now cut the connection with her and


18/23

Divorce Therapy 18

immediately connect to your new self in the same way you were to Sue. Notice how wonderful it feels to beconnected to someone you can count on, someone in whom you can place all of your trust. This person will neverlet you down. Enjoy receiving from yourself what you had wanted from the other person.

This step transforms the connection to the other into a connection with the self.

TH: Now look back at Sue and see the severed connection. Take her cord and reattach it to another part of her. Ifthere was no cord see her connecting to a more evolved version of herself like you now are. Notice that this personis better off now just as you are. Feel how you are more able to be with her now. You now feel happy and peacefulwith yourself and wish her well.

With this step the purpose is to feel respect for the attachment object, to be able to engage more fully and in a

relaxed manner with that person, not to be emotionally reactive to her. This will allow Tim to deal with Sue more

productively than was previously possible.The final two steps in the process extrapolate on the new connection with the evolved self and go into the

future to experience the new sense of security and resourcefulness in different situations. This solidifies the new

attachment.

* Note that this procedure was modified from Chapter 3 in Heart of the Mind entitled Becoming More Independentin Relationships.

Once NLP was complete for both Tim and Sue, appointments were set up for each ofthem three weeks later. This lapse serves to have them both adjust to their new experience ofthemselves and each other. During the first sessions after NLP both Tim and Sue expressed abig relief in the level of anger and hostility between them. Both stated that although they werestill frustrated with each other and not really solving their issues together, they were more able totalk. Inevitably, however, their discussions ended with Sue getting angry and Tim hanging up onher. This pattern of interaction mimicked their pattern in the marriage. Now that the level of

hostility had decreased the therapist could work to change the interactions.EFT began with seeing the couple separately. The therapist assisted each of them inidentifying their underlying emotions and understanding the parts each played in the interactionswith the other. Sue came to see that her anger toward Tim was based on her fear that he wouldemotionally leave the children as she felt he had left her. Tim saw that his withdrawal from Sueas well as his inconsistency with the children centered around his fear that his children, like hisex-wife, would abandon him. Both Tim and Sue were able to see how their communicationevoked the opposite of the desired response from the other. After repeatedly drawing out thesefeelings and patterns both Tim and Sue felt ready to meet together. A piece of that sessionappears below.

TH: So why dont we begin this discussion by having the two of you discuss a normal issue that arises in your co-

parenting situation. Tim, is there an issue that comes to your mind? [Therapist begins with Tim since he is thepartner that traditionally withdraws.]

TIM: Okay. A usual issue for us to deal with is when I want to see the kids when it is not a regularly scheduledday. That usually ends up in a big fight. As a matter of fact we got in a big fight because I am interested in takingthem to an amusement park a week from Friday.

TH: Okay. Is this conversation acceptable to you Sue?

SUE: Yes its fine.

TH: Okay why dont the two of you have that discussion, beginning with Tim. Please remember your goals here.


19/23

Divorce Therapy 19

And I will be involved in the discussion as well, helping each of you process the information just like in the othersessions. Remember to focus on your underlying feelings. What happened in the fight?

TIM: All right. I dont understand what the problem is. I want to take the kids to have a great day and its aproblem. I honestly dont get it.

SUE: The kids are in summer day camp right now and you just expect them not to go to that when Im paying forthat. Why cant you take them on one of your normal days? It makes me so mad when you try to rearrange ourschedules and our lives. You know youre not the only one who matters here.

TH: Okay Sue, tell me how you feel when you say all that? You sound angry. Can you tell me what the anger isabout?

SUE: You know were divorced now and I dont want him trying to control our lives anymore. Theres a reasonthis relationship is over.

TH: And what is that reason?

SUE: Tim cannot be counted on. Im sorry but its true.

TH: So it sounds like you are afraid that the children cant count on Tim any more than you felt you could. [focuson underlying feelings]

SUE: Yes, thats it (begins crying). I dont want them to go through what I went through. And Tim has been soerratic with them and been telling them lies and telling them too much about adult issues. I dont feel like I can trusthim. Hes been mostly hurting them in the last year.

TH: Okay so you didnt feel like you could count on Tim during the marriage and that left you sad and lonely,scared of losing him. [re-focus on feelings]

SUE: Yes, yes.

TH: And now that youre no longer married to him and you have some distance from that, you are still frightenedthat the children will not be able to rely on him? And you feel that there has been some evidence in the past yearthat your concerns are legitimate?

SUE: Exactly.

TIM: I understand your concerns. Ive done some horrible things in the past year, and I am very sorry for that. Ihave been trying to make it up to the kids in the past 3 weeks and want to continue that. Thats one of the reasons Iwant to take them to the park. Youre going to have to start trusting me. Theyre not just your kids. I have a rightto see them too, and not just when its convenient for you. You dont have the power over my relationship withthem. [Tim would not have been able to stay calm and take responsibility for his actions had it not been for NLP.

Since Sue is not longer his primary object of attachment he can interact with her on a less emotional and morerational manner.]

TH: Tim you speak about events of the past year and Sue mentioned that you might have been erratic with thechildren. Can you tell me about that?

TIM: Well I have been hours late to pick them up sometimes and sometimes not shown up at all. They reallyhavent been able to count on me.

TH: Can you please explain what you were feeling during those times?

TIM: Fear. I dont know why, but they actually scare me.


20/23

Divorce Therapy 20

TH: What do you think you were afraid of given that you had just lost your wife?

TIM: Well I guess.. no.. Maybe I was afraid that they would leave me too. Yeah I guess theres part of me thats

really scared that theyll leave me like Sue did. It scares the hell out of me. I actually feel like I want to run awayjust thinking about it.

TH: Okay so you see that some of the reason you were acting erratically with the kids was because you were scaredthey would leave you. How are you dealing with those feelings now?

TIM: Actually its not nearly as bad as it used to be. I dont feel nearly as insecure about it. Im really able to havemore fun with them in the last 3 weeks and not be so paranoid.

TH: So you feel like you have more control and are able to make better choices than you did in the monthsfollowing the divorce?

TIM: Yeah thats a good way of putting it. I feel like Im not so crazed with anger and jealousy. Im making muchbetter decisions for myself and for the kids. I know Ive got a lot of making up to do.

SUE: Yes you do. Im glad to see you realizing that. You did a lot of damage to them (angry tone of voice).

TH: So Sue youre still feeling angry, is that still about wanting the kids to be able to count on him?

SUE: Yeah (calmer), I guess so. Even though I have seen some changes in him in the past few weeks, Im reallyscared of them getting hurt. Bad enough it happened to me as an adult. They just dont deserve it. Im so scared forthem. [Sue is holding on to the anger and not quite ready to trust Tims shift. This is normal; she will eventuallysoften as these kinds of discussions continue.]

TH: Sue, focusing on the best interest of the children, can you ask Tim for what you would need to be able to begintrusting him again? [reminds Sue of her goal and moves her forward to one of her goals]

SUE: (looking at Tim and thinking) You know, Im not sure. I think (in a softer tone of voice) what I need is to seeyou being consistent with the children. Would you consider making an effort at doing that? [Here Sue has softenedsignificantly. She seemed realize she needed to give him a chance to prove himself to the kids and her].

They debate what that effort would look like and other logistics. At the end of the session the therapist

warns the clients that their struggles will not suddenly end, to expect themselves to sometimes slip into their old

pattern of interacting. They developed those patterns over years and they would not be eradicated in a weeks time.

Conclusion

With over a million divorces each year and the level of hostility between parents

continuing after divorce, clinicians are being called upon to treat divorced and divorcing

families. Traditional methods of divorce therapy have used techniques that follow specific

theories. Hostility between parents has yet to be dealt with quickly and effectively in these

models. This hostility often dominates those divorcing or recently divorced and interferes with

parents making decisions that are in their childrens best interest. A new model has been offered

in this chapter which combines NLP and EFT.


21/23

Divorce Therapy 21

Using an NLP technique, attachment to the ex-spouse would be substituted with

attachment to a higher self or higher power. Dealing with hostility in this manner should

diminish the overwhelming sense of loss and allow the parents to make more appropriate

decisions regarding co-parenting. Upon completion of NLP, EFT focuses on re-working the

dynamics of the interactions between the parents. The goal is to have parents communicate their

underlying meanings rather than the specifics of any problem, thereby having more positive

interactions. For example an ex-husband might be encouraged to tell his ex-wife that he is

scared that if she remarries that the children will not need him anymore, rather than demanding

that it is inappropriate for her to bring men into her home in front of their children.

This combination of therapies seems likely to deal effectively with the emotions and

restructuring necessary for functional post-divorce relationships. Studies must be conducted to

show the effectiveness of these treatments together.


22/23

Divorce Therapy 22

References

Amato, P., & Keith, B. (1991). Parental divorce and adult well-being: A meta-analysis.

Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 43-58.

Andreas, S., & Andreas, C. (1992). Neuro-linguistic programming. In S. Budman, M.

Hoyt, & S. Friedman (Eds.), The First Session in Brief Therapy (pp. 14-35). New York: Guilford

Press.

Andreas, S., & Andreas, C. (1989). Heart of the mind. Moab, Utah: Real People Press.

Bogolub, E. (1995). Helping families through divorce: An eclectic approach. New York:

Springer Publishing Company.

Bowlby, J. (1969) Attachment & loss: Vol. I: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base. New York: Basic Books.

Braver, Sanford L. (1996). The content of divorce education programs: Results of a

survey. Family & Conciliation Courts Review, Vol 34(1), 41-59.

Furstenberg, F. (1990). Divorce and the American family. Annual Review of Sociology,

16, 379-403.

Gottman, J. (1991). Predicting the longitudinal course of marriages. Journal of Marital

and Family Therapy, 17, 3-7.

Greenberg, L., & Johnson, S. (1988). Emotionally focused therapy for couples. New

York: Guilford Press.

Hetherington, E. (1989). Coping with family transitions: Winners, losers, and survivors.

Child Development, 60, 1-14.

Hetherington, #., Cox, M., & Cox, R. (1982). Effects of divorce on parents and children.

In M. E. Lamb (Ed.), Nontraditional Families (pp. 233-288). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.


23/23

Divorce Therapy 23

Hetherington, #., Cox, M., & Cox, R. (1985). Long-term effects of divorce and

remarriage on the adjustment of children. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry,

24(5), 518-530.

Johnson, S., & Greenberg, L. (1992). Emotionally focused therapy: Restructuring

attachment. In S. Budman, M. Hoyt, & S. Friedman (Eds.), The First Session in Brief Therapy

(pp. 14-35). New York: Guilford Press.

Johnson, S., & Greenberg, L. (1995). The emotionally focused approach to problems in

adult attachment. In N. Jacobson & A. Gurman (Eds), Clinical Handbook of Couples Therapy

(pp. 121-141). New York: Guilford.

Kramer, L., & Washo, C. (1993). Evaluation of a court-mandated prevention program for

divorcing parents. Family Relations, 42, 179-186.

Kubler-Ross, E. (1969). On death and dying. London: Macmillan.

Rice, J., & Rice, D. (1986). Living through divorce. New York: The Guilford Press.

Seltzer, J. A. (1994). Consequences of marital dissolution for children. Annual Reviews

of Sociology, 20, 235-266.

Sterman, C. M. (Eds). (1990). Neuro-linguistic programming in alcoholism treatment.

New York: Haworth Press.

Wallerstein, J., & Blakeslee, S. (1989). Second chances: Men, women, and children a

decade after divorce. New York: Ticknor & Fields.

Wiseman, R. S. (1975). Crisis theory and the process of divorce, Social Casework, 57,

205-212.

Documents

DivorceTherapy NLP EFT