Confrontation, frustration and support in therapy

Personal website of a psychologist-consultant

J. CHAPLAK, V. REZNIK, I. SOLICHUK

MODERN TRENDS IN THE USE OF CONFRONTATION IN PROVIDING PSYCHOLOGICAL CARE

Confrontation is the counselor's response to confront the client's defensive maneuvers or irrational beliefs that he is not aware of or does not change. Confrontation is always drawing the client’s attention to what he is trying to avoid; it is the identification and demonstration of contradictions between various elements of his mental experience [10]. This technique, according to N. Olifirovich, “...maintains a balance between methods of observation and influence. It becomes more effective when presented as a complex retelling or reflection of feelings. Confrontation can be achieved using methods of observation and influence, but when it occurs within the framework of retelling or generalization, there is still room for the client’s personal growth. It requires a careful balance of confrontation with the right amount of warmth, positivity and respect."[12] To date, confrontational techniques have been most developed in psychoanalytic models of providing psychological assistance[14]. O. Galustova focuses on the fact that the confrontation technique is used in psychological counseling at the stages of in-depth study of the client’s problems and conflicts, which is usually characteristic of the later stages of therapy. It is defined as the consultant’s presentation to the client of his unconscious or ambivalent attitudes, attitudes or behavioral stereotypes for the purpose of their awareness and elaboration, when the consultant confronts the client’s ambivalent behavior or his attitudes. The purpose of confrontation is to demonstrate to the client the inconsistency, the duality of his behavior, the defense mechanisms he uses and other contradictory facts and phenomena of his behavior that may interfere with the normal adaptation of the individual[5]. This technique in providing psychological assistance interacts with other methods of psychotherapeutic influence[1; 2; 7; 8; 13]. For example, N. Olifirovich says that “confrontation is a complex method that includes retelling, interpretation and other microtechniques. This term has 2 meanings: 1) stand opposite, look in the face and 2) hostilely resist, be in opposition. For a psychologist, the first meaning of the term is the main one, the second, destructive, is not used. During confrontation, the client is confronted with the fact that he does not say what he thinks and does not do what he says. Important for understanding confrontation are the concepts of “mismatch” or “incongruence.” The client gives double messages during the interview. (Yes...but). In a sentence, the client gives two messages in one sentence or phrase, demonstrating mixed feelings and thoughts. The psychologist points out these double messages to the client and thereby confronts the client with the facts. The purpose of counseling is to identify and confront the client’s main contradictions”[12].

At the present stage of development of psychological assistance, a number of specialists have a negative attitude towards confrontational techniques and contrast them with empathic ones (empathic psychotherapy). This misconception is based on a mixture of the psychotherapeutic and socio-psychological meaning of the term, when confrontation is understood as a “confrontation” between a psychotherapist and a client (patient) or group; on the revaluation of the importance of empathic techniques, which are the basis for establishing contact and the diagnostic stage in working with clients (patients), but are insufficient for psychocorrectional interventions, the effective completion of most short-term forms of psychotherapy; on personal avoidance of “hard, psychosurgical” techniques that jeopardize “good” relationships with the client (patient) and the psychological comfort of the psychotherapist, but are necessary for radical help to the client (patient); on uncontrolled identification with protective settings of clients (patients) [14]. There are significant differences between confrontation in psychotherapeutic influence and confrontation in psychological influence, when the initiator of influence uses destructive methods of influence [2; eleven; 13; 15]

Confrontation as a method of psychological influence or a method of countering influence is a positional war. Initially, confrontation was described by K. Steiner as opposing one’s own power maneuver to a partner’s power play in order to force him to reckon with us and stop ignoring us. This method is justified in cases where the initiator of influence uses such unconstructive methods of influence as manipulation, destructive criticism, ignoring or coercion. This is a powerful remedy, and if the recipient of the impact decides to use it; use, it must be consistent and follow through. Confrontation can be effective only if each of its necessary phases is implemented[15]. A consulting psychologist may find himself in a situation where a client, for one reason or another, can initiate influence, using unconstructive methods of influence. The most important thing in this case for a specialist is to detect the destructive influence on the part of the client in time, analyze the cause and prevent it. To do this, a psychologist needs to know the phases of confrontation as a method of psychological influence according to K Steiner [15]:

• the first phase of confrontation is the I-message about the feelings that this behavior of the initiator of influence causes;
• the second phase of confrontation is the strengthening of the I-message;
• The third phase of confrontation is the expression of wishes and requests.
• the fourth phase of confrontation is the imposition of sanctions;
• the fifth phase of confrontation is the implementation of sanctions. The recipient of the impact must refuse any interaction with the initiator. Break off relations with him if there is no other choice.

Confrontation or competition in conflict resolution is a style that involves efforts to impose a preferred solution on the other party. In its focus, it is aimed at, acting actively and independently, achieving one’s own interests without taking into account the interests of other parties directly involved in the conflict, or even to the detriment of them. Those who use this style of behavior seek to impose their solution to the problem on others, rely only on their own strength, and do not accept joint actions[11].

In psychotherapy, confrontation has two key meanings[14]:

1) opposition, clash, confrontation of opinions, people or groups. In this socio-psychological sense, the term can be used to describe the process of group or family psychotherapy;

2) in psychotherapy - one of the main technical techniques: presenting to a patient or group unconscious or ambivalent attitudes, attitudes or behavioral stereotypes with the aim of realizing and working through them.

Confrontation can be carried out both in a direct (hard, verbal) form, and in a hidden form - using psychotherapeutic metaphors and non-verbal techniques[14].

There are three main cases of confrontation in psychological counseling[5; 8; 9]:

1. Inconsistencies in the client's behavior: The counselor draws the client's attention to inconsistencies in his behavior, thoughts, feelings, or contradictions between the behavior demonstrated and the feelings experienced. The purpose of using confrontation in this case is to help the client see the contradiction itself, which he is not aware of, has not been aware of before, or does not want to be aware of at the moment.
2. Contradictions in the situation: the consultant draws the client's attention to the fact that the situation is not what he is trying to imagine it to be, trying to satisfy his needs or maintain a sense of security. The purpose of using confrontation is for the client to realize the inadequacy of his perception of the problem or situation that worries him, and to form an adequate view.
3. The client’s avoidance of discussing any important issues and topics: the consultant draws the client’s attention to his avoidance and reluctance to discuss important, significant or painful topics, issues, events, etc. for him. The purpose of confrontation is to bring the client to an awareness of the defense mechanisms he uses , as well as immersing the client to work with the deeper layers of his personality.

To use the confrontation technique correctly, it is important to know and understand its limitations. There are rules for using the confrontation technique. Several main cases can be distinguished[8; 9]:

1. Confrontation should not be used to punish a client for unacceptable behavior.
2. Confrontation is not intended to destroy clients' psychological defense mechanisms. Its purpose is to help clients recognize the ways in which they are protecting themselves from awareness of reality.
3. Confrontation should not be used to satisfy the counselor's needs or self-expression.

The use of confrontation techniques in the counseling process must be justified by certain rules [9, P. 125]:

• it is necessary to carefully characterize the content of the client’s inappropriate behavior and its context, but you should not express everything at the same time; It should not be forgotten that this is not a matter of presenting a case analysis to colleagues;
• it is necessary to explain in detail to the client the consequences of contradictory behavior, including during the counseling process;
• It is necessary to help the client find ways to overcome his problems.

In addition to the listed rules, it must be especially emphasized that confrontation with the client should in no case be aggressive in nature or be categorical in form. When using confrontation, it is advisable to use phrases more often: “it seems to me”, “please try to explain”, “if I’m not mistaken”, which express certain doubts of the consultant and soften the tone of the confrontation [8; 9].

Although, there may be exceptions in eclectic models of providing psychological assistance (for example, in provocative therapy, the confrontation technique can develop into a procedure)[16]

Traditionally, the psychological literature notes that a necessary condition for using confrontation is the presence of strong contact in the relationship between the psychologist and the client [3; 6; 13; 14]. Due to its versatility of functionality, this technique can be used at all stages of providing psychological assistance, but only after contact has been established between the consulting psychologist (therapist) and the client.

Confrontation is used for therapeutic purposes depending on the theoretical approach of psychotherapeutic interaction. The technology of using confrontational methods is intended both for working with growth and change, and for working with client resistance. You need to work with this technique very carefully and carefully (the technique is very powerful in its impact). The misuse of confrontation can result in an explosion of unbridled emotions, the destruction of respectful and trusting relationships, an overly negative reaction on the part of the client, and negative transference to the therapist.

LITERATURE:

1. Bondarenko O.F. Psychological assistance for special needs. – Kharkiv: Folio, 1996. – 237 p.;
2. Brown D. Christesen D. Theory and practice of family psychotherapy. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001. – 352 p.
3. Vaskovskaya S.V., Ermine P.P. Psychological counseling: Situational tasks.-K., 1996.-192 p.
4. Wenger A.L. Psychological counseling and diagnostics. Practical guide. Part 1. – M.: Genesis, 2001. – 160 p.
5. Galustova O.V. Psychological counseling: Lecture notes. M.: Prior-izdat, 2005. - 240 p.
6. Gladding S. Psychological counseling. 4th ed. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2002. – 736 p.
7. Ermine P.P., Vaskovskaya S.V. Theory and practice of psychological counseling: A problem-based approach. – K.: Naukova Dumka, 1995. – 128 p.
8. George R., Cristiani T. Consulting: theory and practice. – M: Eksmo, 2002. – 448 p.
9. Kociunas R. Fundamentals of psychological counseling. – M.: Academic project, 1999. – 240 p.
10. Malkina-Pykh I.G. Age-related crises of adulthood. Handbook of a practical psychologist. – M., 2005.
11. Metkin M.V. Theoretical and practical aspects of conflict resolution / https://dvo.sut.ru/libr/soirl/i119metk/index.htm
12. N.I. Olifirovich Individual psychological counseling: theory and practice. / https://www.klex.ru/ckw
13. Panok V.G. Psychological consultation: theory and practice: nauch.-method. Pos_bnik / V.G. Panok, I.M. Zvarich, Ya.V. Chaplak, O.M. Chernopisky – Chernivtsi: Chernivetsky national. univ., 2011. – 272 p.
14. Psychotherapeutic Encyclopedia / [under the general editorship of B. D. Karvasarsky]. – St. Petersburg: Peter Kom, 1999. – 752 p.
15. Sidorenko E. Personal influence and opposition to other people’s influence. https://mytests.ru/articles/858
16. Chaplak Y.V. Victimization of confrontation in the process of providing psychological assistance / Y.V.Chaplak, O.M.Chernopisky, I.I. Soliychuk / https://yanchaplak.com/ua/vykorystannya-konfrontatsiyi-v-protsesi-nadannya-psykholohichnoyi-dopomohy
17. Chibisova M.Yu. Materials of the course “Psychological counseling: from diagnosis to ways to solve problems”: lectures 1–4. M.: Pedagogical University “First of September” 2011. - 64 p.

Political conflict

Anti-constructive actions caused by differences in the interests of political groups (interest means the totality of interests of group members).

Political conflict is one of the possible options for interaction between political subjects. It can be defined as a type (and result) of competitive interaction between two or more parties (groups, states, individuals) challenging each other's power or resources. The concept of political conflict means the struggle of some subjects with others for influence in the system of political relations, access to making generally significant decisions, disposal of resources, monopoly of interests and recognition of them as socially necessary, for everything that constitutes power and political dominance. Conflicts, reflecting the rivalry of certain subjects (institutions) with some forces, as a rule, express their cooperation with others, stimulating the formation of political coalitions, alliances, and agreements. Thus, political conflicts presuppose a clear formulation of the positions of the forces participating in the political game, which has a beneficial effect on the rationalization and structuring of the entire political process.

The leading role in the emergence of conflicts is played, as recognized by conflict studies, by social factors. Among this type of determinants, there are three main reasons underlying political confrontations:

• various forms and aspects of social relations that determine the discrepancy between the statuses of political subjects, their role assignments and functions, interests and needs for power, lack of resources, etc. These, relatively speaking, objective sources of political conflicts most often determine the contradictions between the ruling elite and the counter-elite , various pressure groups fighting for parts of the state budget, as well as between all other political subjects of the power system. The external orientation of such conflicts, as a rule, can be extinguished quite easily. However, it is possible to eradicate the sources of conflict disposition of the parties involved in various ways in the political struggle only through transformations, either changing the very organization of power in society, or reforming the socio-economic foundations of the political activities of competing subjects;
• differences between people (their groups and associations) in basic values ​​and political ideals, in assessments of historical and current events, as well as in other subjectively significant ideas about political phenomena. Such conflicts most often arise in those countries where qualitatively different opinions about ways to reform statehood collide, the foundations of a new political structure of society are being laid, and ways out of the social crisis are being sought. In resolving such conflicts, finding a compromise is often very difficult;
• processes of identification of citizens, their awareness of their belonging to social, ethnic, religious and other communities and associations, which determines their understanding of their place in the social and political system. Conflicts of this kind are characteristic, first of all, of unstable societies, where people have to recognize themselves as citizens of a new state and get used to non-traditional norms of relationships with the authorities. The same contradictions arise in those countries where tensions in relations with the ruling structures cause people to defend the cultural integrity of their national, religious and similar groups.