[ Contents | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Anders Lundberg
Date: 10/21/03
Time: 2:31:30 AM
Remote Name: 217.209.22.186
Hi, Judy
Glad I could transmit just a little!
You also bring up very important issues, I think, and I am very happy for them since we perhaps don't have time to discuss them so often. And they are still there beneath the surface now and now and now again.
The first issue, of aggressiveness and fear. You brought up a question of the violent behavior of a young stuttering man and asked if there could be any connection (with my experience). Well, as always when talking about individuals; how could I know? But in general; of course there might be a connection. We use what we have and have been familiar with in order to cover up our real and very intimate emotions. Maybe we don't even dare to meet them ourselves for a long time. It took me a long time to understand that my habit of being a terrier (I was pretty small and very fast as as a kid, many many pounds ago) also for myself covered up myself both being afraid and sad. Aggressiveness was my basic and old interpretation of being a real man, which a kid of my size and stuttering greatly too was so far from. I didn't learn that about myself in Kalamazoo but some years thereafter. But meeting and being cared for by Dr. Van and Dr. Stromsta initiated thast process powerfully. And how could a person handle others when he doesn't know how to handle himself?
On the other hand, aggressiveness contains a lot of energy and doing, and I could use it in positive and creative ways too. You mention a dinner at the Gregorys' and I cannot but respond to Hugo's well know statement of "two sides of the coin". Of course there are two sides, one not necessarily superior to the other! Just different! And I'd like to add that this way of acting in no way is exclusive for the male part of humanity. We cover up what we don't want to be known, for ourselves and for others.
The second issue of being a friend with a client is also very interesting. Here in Sweden, at least, we talk a lot about the clinical frames, the role of the clinician vs the client. We talk about it so much that our discussions at times turn into a perspective of technicalities, listing up what you can do and what you can't do. There is so much to be said, and really discussed at length in issues reflecting what is actually happening to a clinician meeting a client. I mean, we can move from falling in love to wanting to commit murder and being a clinician is not anything that can be solved by listing do's and don'ts, if they/we are to be good at this of course. Still, still Judy! What teachers do we remember from our school-time? The warm ones or the formal "good teaching" ones? I know who reside in my memory! They were very personal to me, but very rarely private. They saw me, they saw my needs, and what their needs were, I cannot but guess many years after. I see it like this; I must become a friend with my clients, meaning that I must like them. That has included also a nazi once, not easy, but I could learn to see his needs (he had the right to be seen too) behind the swastika. But me being private? Very very seldom and after a long consideration of needs as well. And not privateprivate, you know perhaps? Bby the way, I like my students as well on the similar but yet very different bases. Clients and students come for different reasons, both however vulnerable to a considerable degree. We learn better when there is a climate for ourselves as the plants we are. To find ut about the needs is the trick, the tough one. Soooo glad for your comment! Anders Lundberg