Satir Transformational Systemic Therapy
The Healing Therapy of Virginia Satir
Virginia Satir was born in 1916 and lived until the age of 72. She was considered a progressive mind at the time, and one of the leading therapists in family therapy (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014). She began working with families, as opposed to individuals, in 1951; this was considered a provocative and daring move in the field of psychology at the time (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014). Virginia is considered and internationally renowned family therapy and the fifth most influential counselor in the field of psychology (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014; Thwaites, 2010).
Satir’s family systemic counseling approach has been given different names, one of which is the Satir Transformational Systemic Theory, or STST. Virgina’s model has also been referred to as the Human Validation Model and is considered to fall under an experiential framework (Brubacher, 2006). Transformation is defined as lasting change in behavior, as well as the client’s intrapsychic world of thoughts, feelings, feeling about feelings, self-esteem and inner-congruence (Brubacher, 2006). Transformation also impacts how a client communications within his or her family of origin, and other outside relationships (Brubacher, 2006). Because Satir was an advocate of experiential psychology, how a client interacts with his or her body/mind connection and the here and now are also determining factors for long-term transformation change (Brubacher, 2006).
Virginia Satir’s Iceberg Model is a cornerstone to her legacy, techniques and theoretical framework (Morrison & Ferris, 2002). Satir’s model and theory revolve highly around her seemingly innate ability to exact change within her clients and families. She differed again from her peers in that she took a systems-oriented approach, rich with empathy and emotional connection to her clients, as opposed to a psychoanalytic, cognitive or behavioral approach (Sayles, 2002).
Virginia was on the forefront of the positive psychology movement, which differed from her peers who mostly took a pathological worldview of their clients (Morrison & Ferris, 2002). Another interesting aspect of Virgina Satir, and her theory, is that she truly was not into writing and creating formal theories, unlike many of her peers in the field (Banmen, 2002; Brubacher, 2006). Although the reason she was voted the fifth most influential therapist of all time, is because the impact she had on her clients and families was considered almost magical (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014). Virginia’s methods and beliefs were brought together and developed rigorously into formal theory mainly by those who followed her posthumously (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014). Even though the Satir model has not fully been accepted into mainstream psychology, her seemingly magical methods have been supported by neuroscience and quantum physics, postulating that they even influence gene expression at the molecular level (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014, Innes, 2002).
According to Banmen (2002), Satir’s Transformational Systemic Theory can be applied in three stages: the intrapsychic stage, the interactive stage and the family-of-origin stage. The intrapsychic stage is considered an examination of the internal psychological state of the client. Satir’s assumption was that transformation could only occur if a client could learn to effectively tap into his or her internal states (Morrison & Ferris, 2002). Virginia’s methods differed from the behavioral model, which is mostly technical, focusing on external changes in behavior to promote internal change (Morrison & Ferris, 2002). Satir has actually been labeled as purposefully non-technical in her approach (Brubacher, 2006). Satir stands apart from the psychoanalytical approach used by her peers in which the counselor waited, detached, for the client to project and transfer, believing that the individual and his or her healing stood apart from outside relationships and family of origin (Morrison & Ferris, 2002, Sayles, 2002).
The intrapsychic process trains the therapist to down play the details of a clients story, or behavior, for the belief that it is really a client’s coping skills and feelings about the story that need to be deeply investigated (Banmen, 2002). Sayles (2002) states that Satir’s point of shifting a client beyond his or her story or history is so he or she can identify the internal impact of the experiences. Processing on a deep, intrapsychic level can then free a client to reframe his or her story and create new core beliefs, new perceptions, new self-talk and lasting transformation occurs (Sayles, 2002).
Satir’s iceberg metaphor is used in the intrapsychic stage to also evaluate the client’s feelings about his or her feelings, perceptions, expectations, desires and core beliefs about self (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014). Satir believed that working with the identified intrapsychic areas below the tip of the iceberg (behavior) was how a client could experience transformational change within oneself and externally with his or her family or origin and other outside relationships (Banmen & Maki-Banemen, 2014). Once this process begins, the therapist then can begin to set goals with the client.
Satir’s second phase of therapeutic intervention is called the interactive stage (Banmen, 2002). The interactive stage is the interpersonal, or communications approach, and it largely focuses on a stance (functional or dysfunctional) one takes when in relationship with others (Innes, 2002). In her systemic approach, Satir not only takes into consideration the interaction or interpersonal communication patterns between self and other, but also puts equal importance on the context of such interactions (Innes, 2002). Known as the survival coping stances – placating, blaming, super-reasonable and irrelevant were identified as dysfunctional ways of relating (Innes, 2002).
The interactive, or interpersonal communications stage is about learning to engage in intimate relationships, especially when under stress, in healthy, open and internally congruent ways (Banman & Maki-Banmen, 2014). Virginia believed that our very survival depended on communication (More & Kramer, 2016). Healthy communication, according to Satir, meant that metacommunication was congruent with verbal communication (Banman & Maki-Banmen, 2014).
Satir acknowledges the challenges of maintaining a congruent and clear communication stance in the midst of stress (Banman & Maki-Banmen, 2014). She believed that a mature person with healthy communication can take full charge of him/herself, and not be washed away by the threat of differentiation (Vanderheyden, 1999). When one engages in incongruent communication, he or she cannot genuinely ask for needs, or be vulnerable (Moore & Kramer, 2016).
Incongruent communication, namely the well-rehearsed patterns present in family of origin relationships, contains hidden agendas, camouflaged messages and is manipulative by nature (Moore & Kramer, 2016). One of the many magical qualities of Virgina Satir was her ability to create an experiential here and now situation so she could connect with her clients in a way that gave her access to his or her preferred incongruent communication stance, and then work in the moment to alter this negative coping behavior using intrapsychic techniques (Banman & Maki-Banman, 2014). By experiential, Satir means that the client is triggered to experience the impact of a past even in the current moment, with the therapist (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014). The therapist then can help guide the client to change negative core-beliefs, reframe perception, identify feelings and feelings about feelings, etc. (Banmen & Maki-Bamen, 2014). Satir believed it was these moments where negative affect or experience collided with positive that true intrapsychic transformation occurs (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014).
The third aspect of Satir Transformational Systemic Therapy model is family of origin work. As a pioneer of family therapy, Virginia Satir knew that an individual’s functioning was not created or healed in a vacuum. We are intelligent, relational, highly communicative beings, in need of healthy attachment and rich intimacy to reach our full potential spiritually, emotionally and mentally. Satir believed that peace within one’s family of origin begins with finding inner-peace within oneself (Neil, 2004). She was an advocate of family reconstruction and had a dynamic understanding of how mindfulness of family of origin patterns can lead to lasting and positive change (Neil, 2004).
Satir differed in many ways from her peers at the time, considered one of the first eclectics; she did not completely reject other prominent theories of the time. She instead incorporated certain theories such as psychoanalytic into her family therapy approach (Innes, 2002; Neil, 2004). She was a proponent of family mapping as another way to identify family of origin patterns with the goal of using congruent communication and intrapsychic awareness to improve upon family of origin relations (Neil, 2004). Satir’s work with family genogramming was a technique utilized to reclaim positive family of origin resources and resolve the negative impact of intrapsychic issues from childhood (Banmen, 2002). She also focused on unearthing childhood rules and roles that are often conveyed with metacommunication in the family of origin (Neil, 2004).
The Satir model believed that having a positive and resolved relationship between parents and their adult children was preferable if at all possible (Banmen, 2002). Identifying dysfunctional family patterns such as enmeshment, disengagement, boundary issues or triangulating are located with the intention of addressing and transforming these destructive ways of relating (Neil, 2004). If these incongruent family of origin patterns can be successfully changed, intimacy can be attained within the family of origin (Neil, 2004). Satir defined interpersonal intimacy as a freedom to respect the space within relationships, instead of invading it without an invitation (Neil, 2004).
Virginia Satir believed that for a therapist to be truly effective, he or she personally must do the very work that is asked of the clients (Lum, 2002). If a therapist teaches and promotes congruence, he or she must be congruent as well (Lum, 2002). The notion of counter-transference would be minimal, according to Satir, if a therapist truly has been committed to his or her personal growth and resolution (Lum, 2002). She believed inner-peace was necessary to resolve challenging family of origin wounds, for a therapist to successfully support a client he or she must model the healing and healthy functioning that Satir promotes (Lum, 2002).
Spirituality and Healing
Virginia Satir was not a self-identified Christian, but in a time where spirituality and psychology was a dirty pair of words, she was not afraid to incorporate a strong spiritual aspect into her model and interventions (Innes, 2002). Maybe she was an agnostic, maybe she was into new age or Buddhism, it wasn’t really clear in the articles if she had a specific religious theoretical orientation. Her views on spirituality and all humans having a spiritual life force (Tam, 2006) make an easy integration between her model and those coming from a Christian worldview.
Satir believed that a congruent therapist could tap into his or her connection to a life force that was a spiritual portal to intuition and inner-wisdom (Banmen & Maki-Banmen, 2014). Satir believed that spirituality is an essential part of the therapeutic process because it is our connection to the universe and our own existence (Innes, 2002). From a Christian worldview, one believes that there is more to us than this life. Satir believed in the 12-step literature that requires individuals to call upon a power greater than oneself, recognizing our spirit nature, and a need for divine intervention, in order for healing to occur (Innes, 2002).
According to Tam (2006), the Satir model for family therapy is not at odds with Christianity for one because of the importance that is placed on the unique value of each human being. Satir believed that each person is divine in nature, a living and breathing spiritual being (Tam, 2006). Satir also taught that to reach our full potential and healing, individuals needed to accept and create a relationship with a spiritual power greater than ourselves (Tam, 2006). She began her workshops by centering her clients via meditation (Tam, 2006).
Virginia Satir also believed that she could see the light of her client’s spirit, that was cloaked in darkness of internal wounds, pain and isolation (Tam, 2006). Satir believed that a healthy self-esteem and self-worth are key to living out a life of love, healing and full potential (Tam, 2006). She felt that all humans have an innate self-worth because of their spiritual nature.
Satir also believes that a person or client should never be seen as a problem, the problem is the problem; the person is suffering. Written in 424 B.C. by St. Augustine, “cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum” which basically translates into love the sinner and hate the sin. Satir seems to have an innate belief that humans all struggle, and that creating a positive relationship and core-belief in oneself and with God, then can create positive relationships with others (Tam, 2006).
Virginia Satir was a therapist who contained an innately positive human spirit, connection to God and belief in the human potential to rise above adversity, trauma and negative experiences. She was a trail-blazer, a woman in a man’s world, fearless and yet compassionate beyond belief. She had the personal resolve and humility to both combine the prominent psychological theories of the day into her own budding model, and yet stand on her own to try new and bold ways individual clients and families alike. She brought in and advocated for a richly spiritual integration during a time when God was seen as a fraudulent concoction of the human imagination, spiritual skepticism ran high and many were struggling with the question of how religion or spirituality was relevant in a post-modern society.
For those who knew Virginia Satir, they often described her interventions as magical. Virginia Satir’s magic can be found in her way of loving her clients unconditionally and holding them up when they were broken and hopeless. She was a counselor who modeled genuine empathy and compassion, creating a safe and secure experience where her clients could heal from a range of personal struggles.
References
Banmen, J. (2002). The Satir model: Yesterday and today. Contemporary Family Therapy, 24, 1, 7-22.
Banmen, J. & Maki-Banmen, K. (2014). What has become of Virginia Satir’s therapy model since she left us in 1988? Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 25, 117-131. doi: 10.1080/08975353.2014.909706
Brubacher, L. (2006). Integrating emotion-focused therapy with the Satir model. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 32, 2, 141-152.
Innes, M. (2002). Satir’s therapeutically oriented educational process: A critical appreciation.Contemporary Family Theory, 24,1, 35-55.
Lum, W. (2002). The use of self of the therapist. Contemporary Family Therapy, 24, 1, 181-196.
Moore, M. & Kramer, D. (2016). Satir for beginners: Incongruent communication patterns in Romantic Fiction. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 56, 4, 429-436. doi: 208.95.48.254
Morrison, A. & Ferris, J. (2002). The Satir model with female adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Contemporary Family Therapy, 24, 1, 161-179.
Neil, S. (2004). The family chess board and projective genogramming: Two tools for exploring family systems. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 5, 1, 173-186. doi: 10.1300/J085v15n01_13
Sayles, C. (2002). Transformational change – based on the model of Virginia Satir. Contemporary Family Therapy, 24, 1, 93-109.
Tam, E. (2006). Satir model of family therapy and spiritual direction. Pastoral Psychology, 54, 3, 275. doi: 0031-2789/06/0100-0275/0
Thwaites, J. (2010). Strands of meaning [Review of the book Conjoint family therapy: A guide to Theory and Technique by Virginia Satir]. ETC: A Review of General Semantics.
Vanderheyden, P. (1999). Religious addiction: The subtle destruction of the soul. Pastoral Psychology, 47, 4.
