\

MICHAEL WHITE'S NARRATIVE APPROACH WITH i
RESILIENT MALE ADULTS WHO EXPERIENCED
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

t
~

t

L

by
Liana F. Grant
B.Ed., The University of Victoria, 1988

THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF EDUCATION

m
EDUCATIONAL COUNSELLING.

© Liana Grant, 1996
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA
May 1996
All rights reserved. This work may not be
reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopying or
other means, without the permission of the author.

s..

--

ii

ABSTRACT
Michael White, an Australian family therapist, has used his narrative approach
successfully with individuals and families suffering from problems such as eating
disorders, schizophrenia, encopresis and sexual abuse. White's questioning process
accesses how clients have escaped the impact of their problems. This study examines
how White' s narrative approach helped two male adults uncover the resilient capacities
that enabled them to overcome their child sexual abuse.
The purpose of the study was threefold. The first purpose was to explore two
resilient adults' lived experience of child sexual abuse through the use of Michael
White's approach. The second was to examine the impact of Michael White's
questioning protocol on the participants' awareness of their own personal resiliency
characteristics. The third was to explore how the research process changed the
participants' dominant view of self.
Data were gathered through semi-structured interviews which were audiotaped
and transcribed verbatim. A content theme analysis was used to identify how, over time,
these two men managed to overcome their abuse. Three themes were identified: Living
in Balance, Reclaiming the Freedom to Choose and Being Open to Learning. These
themes describe the participants' inherent resilient capacities. The degree to which these
resilient capacities were mobilized and amplified were influential in determining the
degree to which they had surmounted their abuse.
The results of this study indicate the ways in which Michael White's narrative
approach allow the counsellor and participant to access resilient capacities and
characteristics. The resilient capacities and characteristics identify how the two men

lll

reclaimed their personal agency, that is, how they experienced a capacity to be active
agents in their lives. Becoming aware of how they took back control of their lives
convinced them that they could be active agents again by mobilizing their newly
recognized inner strengths and resources.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract

11

Table of Contents

IV

Acknowledgments

VI

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Statement of Hypothesis and Research Questions
Design of the Study
Limitations
Overview of the Chapters

1
4
4
5
6

CHAPTER 2 A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Core of Constructivism
Narrative Method
Philosophy ofMichael White's Therapy
Cultural Context

7
8
9
11
14
16
17
17
18
21

Summary

Resiliency
Definitions
Internal and External Characteristics
Resiliency and Sexual Abuse
Conclusion
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH
Participants
Setting
Tape Transcriptions
The Interviews
Phase I
Phase II
Phase III
Role ofResearcher
Analysis of Data
Data Analysis of Phase I
Data Analysis of Phase II
Data Analysis of Phase III
Issues of Ethics and Rigor

24

25

26
27
27

28
28

29
29

30
31
32
33
34
34

v

CHAPTER4 THE DOMINANT STORY
The Dominant Story
Introducing Jeff and Paul
Jeff's Story
Paul' s Story
Recruitment Into Experience
Repercussions of the Abuse
Restraints
Restraints Reinforced Through Society
Mapping the Influence of the Problem
Summary

36
37
38
39
40
42
45
49
53
54
59

CHAPTERS ALTERNATIVE STORIES
Relative Influence Questions: Part II
Exploring Alternative Stories
How Jeff and Paul Reclaimed Their Personal Agency
Living In Balance
Reclaiming the Freedom to Choose
Being Open To Learning
Reclaiming Personal Agency Takes Time
Personal Resiliency Characteristics
New or Confirmed View of Self
Discussion
Summary

61
62
64
66
67
71
75
78
79
80
81
83

CHAPTER6 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND BEYOND
Characteristics and Capacities of the Resilient Adult
Michael White' s Narrative Approach
Conclusion
Implications for Future Research in Counselling Practice
References

84
87
90
95
96
97

Appendix A

Copy of Informed Consent for Adults

103

Appendix B

Semi-Structured Interview Guide

104

Appendix C

Notations Used In The Quotations In The Text

109

AppendixD

Sample Interview Transcript

110

I

VI

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I have been on an incredible journey of learning and personal growth. This
unforgettable rite of passage would not have been possible without the unconditional love
and support from my soul mate and husband, Duane, my parents, Mathew and Gerda
Korolek and my two precious children, Erica and Austin.
Entering into the lives of my two participants has shown me how a shattered
world filled with fear and pain can be overcome by accessing the resilient characteristics
and capacities inherent in all. I would like to thank my participants for their openness
and trust in this research study.
Planning and completing a research thesis involved four hard working individuals
whose never ending encouragement and support helped me through the long and rigorous
process. Thank you to my supervisor and editor Dr. Ron Lehr, who got me off to a great
start with a great idea. Thank you to Dr. Martha MacLeod who came on board in the
middle of my research. She challenged my thinking, questioned my motives, stretched
my being and never once let my down easy. I will be forever grateful. To Dr. Bryan
Hartman and Professor Glen Schmidt whose dedication and rigor improved the quality of
my research.
Finally I would like to acknowledge my new found Masters friend, Patty Toma
who supported me and laughed with me throughout the entire research experience.

-

-----

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
The therapeutic world has shifted from a focus on client problems to a focus on
client competence. Resiliency, a concept that emerged at the outbreak of the new wave in
therapy, focuses on an individual's ability to recover or adjust easily to adversity.
Resiliency is increasingly seen as an important component in an individual's ability to
overcome the effects of sexual abuse. Reports of sexual abuse in both females and males
are reaching epidemic proportions (Geffner, 1992). Learning from those who have
surmounted their sexual abuse may provide valuable information which may help others
in similar circumstances. Michael White' s narrative approach focuses on how, at times,
people manage to have more influence over their problems and therefore experience a
capacity to intervene and be proactive in their lives. His approach uncovers clients'
resilient characteristics and competencies that enabled them to recover balance and
control into their lives. In this study, the use of Michael White' s approach to interview
two resilient adults who surmounted their childhood sexual abuse uncovered how they
managed to reclaim their lives.
Michael White, a family therapist from Australia has used the narrative method
with individuals and families in many different contexts and is well known nationally and
internationally for his research methods and techniques (Tomm cited in White & Epston,
1990). White has studied the self narrative that dominated people's actions and ways of
being. The self narrative is composed of events and meanings associated with those
events that defined how a person interpreted their lived experiences. White believed that

2

the interpretation of experience was influenced by set cultural standards in society. He
found that people came into therapy with a problem that dominated the story they told.
This dominant story in therapy became known as the family ' s or individual's ' problem
saturated story' . White is known for his psychotherapy technique of externalizing the
problem. Externalizing the problem engages the client in a verbal separation of the
problem from the person thereby enabling clients to talk about their problems as if they
were distinct entities apart from themselves. This enables the client to view his/her
problem from a new perspective and therefore engages the client in finding different ways
of solving the problem by accessing his/her strengths and resources. White uses the
externalizing technique to map the influence of the problem in the individual' s or
family ' s life and then to map the influence of the individual or family over the problem.
Mapping the times when the family/individual had more influence over the problem
enables the clients to experience a sense of personal agency, a sense ofhaving the self in
control. Externalizing the problem and mapping out the influence enables clients to
"break from their performance of their stories and experience a capacity to intervene in
their own lives and relationships" (White & Epston, 1990, p. 16). I used White' s
narrative approach to interview two resilient male adults who believed that they had
overcome their child sexual abuse without suffering any long term effects.
According to 0 ' Connell Higgins ( 1994) who studied resilient adults,
"resilience implies that potential subjects are able to negotiate significant
challenges to development yet consistently ' snap back' in order to
complete the important developmental tasks that confront them as they
grow. Unlike the term ' survivor', 'resilient' emphasizes that people do
more than merely get through difficult emotional experiences, hanging on
to inner equilibrium by a thread" (p.xii).

3

0' Connell Higgins based her study on the resilient adult and she defined resilient as
"individuals who exemplify and amplify resilient capacities that inhere in us all" (p.xii).
I chose to draw on O'Connell Riggin' s definitions because her focus closely resembles
my study. Currently, there are many studies on resiliency, but comparing studies is
difficult because no standard definition exists.
Most of the academic literature on resilience has focused on the traits of resilient
children. Very few studies have focused on resilient adults. 0' Connell Higgins ( 1994)
noted that "resilience is a cumulative process, not a product and it is open to all in some
measure" (p.7). Slagle (1990) recommended that to access the core of how persons were
resilient was to access their thoughts and feelings through life narratives. The interesting
feature of the resilient is not that they are invulnerable, for they too have normal human
shortcomings, but that somehow they are able to call on their resilience to help them beat
the odds (O' Connell Higgins, 1994).
In my clinical experience in counselling, I have encountered many children and
adults who have suffered from the repercussions of childhood sexual abuse. However,
research studies indicate that about 20-25% of those who were abused do not suffer any
long term effects (Cahill, Llewelyn & Pearson, 1991). I chose to study this particular
area in hopes of understanding how some adults who were sexually abused as children
are able to overcome this trauma. Much of the sexual abuse literature focuses on the
pathological characteristics of the sexually-abused female. Very few studies have
researched sexually-abuse males and of the few studies that have, the focus is on the
psychological impact and symptomatology of the male victim. Morrow and Smith

4

(1995) encouraged future research to focus on the resiliency features rather than on the
pathology of survivors of childhood sexual abuse.
Based on my understanding of resiliency, I was curious to know if applying
White's narrative approach, which focuses on strengths and competencies of individuals,
could be an effective means of retrieving the personal resources of resilient individuals in
order to understand how they surmounted their child sexual abuse. White's narrative
approach provides a useful theoretical model to understand how two resilient adults, over
time, negotiated their adversity with coherence and competence that led to the
surmounting of the abuse.
Statement of Hypothesis and Research Questions
Hypothesis
The questioning protocol of Michael White will increase people's perception of
their own resiliency.
Research Questions
1. How does one de_rive understanding of a lived experience through the use of Michael
White's approach?
2. What is the impact of Michael White's questioning protocol on the participants'
awareness of their personal resiliency characteristics?
3. How has the research process changed the participants' dominant view of self?
Design of the Study
The researcher used a single-case research design with a qualitative analysis
procedure for exploratory and descriptive purposes to access an individual's lived

5

expenence. Single case research designs are used to study an individual's personality and
to understand individual dynamics, thus increasing the depth of understanding
developmental phenomena (Kazdin & Tuma, 1982). Yin (1989) supports using a case
study strategy "when the focus is on a contemporary phenomenon within some real life
context" (p.1 ).
The participants in the current study were two adult males who experienced child
sexual abuse. Child sexual abuse was defined as any sexual activity involving a child
under the age of 18 with an adult who is at least five years older. The participants,
through self report measures, identified themselves as relatively well-adjusted in adult
life. They acknowledged the trauma of child sexual abuse but reported that they have
escaped long- term distress.
Using Michael White's questioning protocol, the participants engaged with the
researcher in a three-phase process consisting of semi-structured interviews that were
audiotaped for the purpose of transcription. A content-theme analysis was used to
analyze the data which involved an ongoing, systematic, comprehensive and reflective
process that divided data into relevant units. These units were categorized into an
organizing system that compared data to discover patterns which result in a synthesis of
patterns and themes.
Limitations
The limitations of the study concern the generalization to larger populations and
the credibility of qualitative analysis. A common concern stated by Yin (1989) is to avoid
generalizing from single cases, just as from a single experiment. The value here is to

6

look at general theoretical possibilities as derived from the content of the descriptive data
instead of generalizing to populations or groups. The goal of the researcher using case
studies is one of analytic generalization as appropriate and not of statistical
generalizations. Patton (1990) stated that rigorous data-gathering techniques, the
researcher's credibility as well as an overall appreciation of qualitative methods accounts
for the credibility of qualitative methods.
Overview of the Chapters
This chapter has provided background to the study, the stated research problem,
and limitations of the study. A detailed review of the literature follows in Chapter 2.
Chapter 3 outlines the qualitative methodology used throughout the study. Chapters 4
and 5 reveal the results of the study and Chapter 6 concludes the study with a summary,
conclusion and implications for future research and counselling practice.

7

CHAPTER2
A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Current developments in family therapy have shifted from first-order cybernetics
to post-modem, second-order cybernetics (Parry, 1991). The second-order is based on
the belief that, "there is no privileged position or neutral vantage point from which to
observe or practice" (Parry, 1991, p.39). All reality is subjective as expressed by clients.
The second order requires a separation from the scientific labeling and classification of a
client's experience to a narrative paradigm which challenges the hierarchy in family
therapy and works with the stories as described by the client.
O'Hanlon (1994) suggested that the therapeutic world was on its third wave of
change. The first wave focused on pathology, the second wave focused on problems and
the third wave, beginning in the 1980' s, focused on competence. Therapies based in
Constructivism appeared to be the new fashion (Speed, 1991). Coale (1992) described
constructivism as a therapy which emphasized a "non-instrumental linguistic 'cocreation' of new meanings in ' problem-determined' systems" (p .45). Minuchin (1991)
perceived the new movement as an evolution of new meanings based upon the narratives
told in the therapeutic conversation.
Narrative, one method under the constructivist umbrella, as well as other related
methods, appeals to therapists because of the focus on client solutions and strengths
(O' Hanlon, 1994). Michael White, a family therapist from Australia, has been viewed as
one of the main developers of the narrative method. White has utilized the narrative

8

approach with many different contexts and is highly respected nationally and
internationally for his methods and ideas. White was interested in the self narrative that
dominates actions and ways of being due to the meaning ascribed to lived experiences
that have been influenced by set cultural standards in society. Relative influence
questions externalize problematic parts, thus opening conceptual space for the problem to
be viewed differently, and reduce the impact the problem has over people. Separating the
person from the problem empowers the individual and leaves him/her with a sense of
personal agency; a sense ofhaving the self in control.
The current literature review integrates Constructivist and Narrative ideas relevant
to Michael White' s therapy and it highlights how White's therapeutic approach may be
successful in eliciting personal resiliency characteristics from adults who were sexually
abused as children. The review begins with an overview of the Constructivist and
Narrative approaches and it describes the philosophical underpinnings of Michael
White' s therapy, including the influence of Michel Foucault's thoughts on cultural
discourses. The literature review on Michael White's therapy is descriptive because the
proposed research is based in White's therapeutic context. The literature on resiliency
and sexual abuse is also reviewed.
Core of Constructivism
Compared to an objectivist view that believes knowledge exists outside of the
individual's personal experience (Whitman, 1993), constructivist theorists believe that
human beings alone and together co-constitute the meaning of their world (Neimeyer,
1993; Speed 1991) and are therefore able to participate in the deconstruction and

9

reconstruction of new meanings (Master, 1991). A therapeutic environment, based on
Constructivist theory, is viewed as neutral, non-directive and subjective because of the
belief that "language makes, rather than reflects reality, and that all truths are socially
consensual inventions" (Minuchin, 1991 , p.48). Conversation allows the old belief
system to be perturbed, thereby introducing new meaning which allows the client to
perceive their situation in many ways that are conducive to solutions of the problem they
bring to therapy (Coale, 1992). These ideas form the basis of constructivism and within _
this structure lies the Narrative method.
Narrative Method
Holland and Kilpatrick (1993) defined narrative as the stories that people tell of
their life experiences. Narratives are structures of meaning and power that are
constitutive and interpretive (Bruner, 1987). Narrative structures organize and give
meaning to experiences in coherent sequences through time. These structures generate
directionality and connectedness among otherwise isolated events (Gergen & Gergen,
1984). Holland and Kilpatrick suggest that events or stories are organized and meaning is
attached based on the plots and themes that reflect cultural values. Culturally-constructed
meanings determine the significance of choices through the life course of an individual.
Problems occur when past events are not meaningful in and of themselves and
new narratives are necessary to explain a new reality (Bruner, 1986). Generating new
narratives opens up new spaces and possibilities for change by releasing people from past
assumptions, judgments and interpretations (Holland & Kilpatrick, 1993). This is
achieved by examining ignored events in the old narrative. This examination enables

10

persons to recognize other ways of understanding a situation. New perspectives allow for
the construction of new patterns of meaning in more coherent and satisfying ways of
coping. This empowers persons to return to being active authors in their own lives.
Integrating the theme of narrative into the therapeutic setting has been both
criticized and supported. Fish (1993) described the narrative approach as a fashionable
trend that is being oversold and embraced without interrogation. O'Hanlon (1994) stated
that there is little empirical research for the narrative approach but its effectiveness is
supported with anecdotal evidence. O'Hanlon referred to one narrative empirical study
that found "White's patients stayed an average of only 14 days in the hospital compared
to a matched control group who received standard psychiatric care that stayed an average
of36 days" (p.28). Besa (1994) empirically assessed Narrative Therapy's effectiveness
for resolving parent/child conflict and concluded that five of six families (88%-98%)
showed a decrease in parent/child conflict.
Although empirical research is limited using the Narrative method, anecdotal and
clinical evidence does support success with a wide range of problems. To prevent
Narrative Therapy from becoming a trend, O'Hanlon (1994) believed that one must truly
believe in it's philosophy; the person is not the problem. The problem is the problem. In
addition, Cohler (1991) emphasized the life story concept as being important for
understanding and making sense of the continuity and change within lives over time
especially with persons who overcome adversity.
There are several different varieties of constructivist experiences, narrative being
only one type. Evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of constructivist ideas is not the

II

current purpose. Rather it is to provide an overview of constructivist philosophy with a
narrative focus as a means for understanding the work of Michael White. The next
section integrates the constructivist/narrative ideas with Michael White's therapy.
Philosophy of Michael White' s Therapy
In developing his Narrative theory, White found reinforcement and support from
the writings of Gregory Bateson and Michel Foucault. White believes that we live in a
real world that socially and physically impacts our constructed reality. This stands in
contrast to the radical constructivist view that reality is constructed solely by the
individual (White, 1995). White insisted that in order to understand the meaning ascribed
to the experience, the narrative metaphor must include the issues of power, social
structures and developmental history that have allowed cultural constructs to survive.
How meaning is attached to experiences is based upon the interpretation of the
experiences. White adopts the idea of the interpretative method as defmed by the social
sciences.
"Social scientists refer to the interpretive method when they are studying the
processes by which persons make sense of the world" (White, 1989, p 6). It is the
understanding that persons are unable to view reality objectively; therefore, all
understanding is based on interpretations of life experiences and "any act of interpretation
requires the ascription of meaning" (p.2). Viewed from White's therapeutic perspective,
the interpretive method would suggest that meaning attached to events determines
behavior. The meaning of experience is derived through the stories people tell about their
lives and "a story can be defined as a unit of meaning that provides a frame for lived

12

experiences " (Epston & White, 1992, p.80). Stories contain events and meanings plotted
in sequences across time. Through this connection process, persons make sense of their
lives (White, 1989). This self narrative provides coherence, continuity and meaning
necessary for putting order in our daily lives and for interpreting any new experiences.
Life contains many, inany stories. However, White contends that we live our life
according to one story that dominates what we think and what we believe to be true. Substories or alternative stories are often never expressed because they do not fit with the
dominant story. White views the dominant story as shaping a person's life because
meaning is attributed to experience and experiences are purposely selected because they
match the dominant view.
Persons enter therapy when their ways of being and thinking of themselves and
others contradict their dominant narrative. The dominant narrative is viewed by White as
the problem-saturated description of a client's lived experience (White 1989). Meaning
of the client's experiences is judged by their own subjective interpretation of reality, not
by an external objective reality. Therefore, White' s interest in therapy is in the meaning
that people have attributed to events and how this meaning has impacted their lives.
White utilizes a technique called "externalization" to achieve a separation of the problem
from the person.
Externalization is a verbal separation of the problem from the identity of the client
by objectifying or personifying the problem (Tomm, 1989). Externalization enables
persons to disconnect from their problem-saturated life story by opening conceptual space
to explore new ways of solving problems and identify previously ignored aspects of lived

13

experience that were not a part of the dominant story. This is achieved through relative
influence questions that distinguish the influence the problem has on a person and the
influence a person has on the problem. Relative influence questions ascertain
information that contradicts the dominant story and assists a person in identifying
personal resources and competencies (White, 1989). By altering the story, the client is
able to shift meaning around the events that surround the problem. This process of
externalizing the problem using relative influence questions creates for the person a sense
of having the self in control versus a sense of self under control. Therefore, a person is
able to become proactive, take responsibility, make new choices in life and pursue new
possibilities.
Searching for unique outcomes follows the externalizing process. Unique
outcomes are lived experiences that have been previously neglected and propose to
challenge or contradict the dominant story (White & Epston, 1990). Unique outcomes
free a person from unitary knowledge that dominates one's life (Neimeyer, 1993) and
bring forth an awareness of one's strengths and capabilities (Tomm, 1989). Unique
outcomes are plotted into an alternative story. Significant alternative stories produce new
meaning that alters a client's view of his/her relationship with problems. Questions are
pursued to acquire a complete picture of the actions or behaviors that have occurred in the
unique outcome. The questioning highlights gaps in a person's knowledge of self, others
and relationships. The purpose of therapy is to fill in gaps and discover the landscape of
action in the dominant story as well as in alternative stories.

14

White (1995) proposes that stories have dual landscapes; the landscape of action
and landscape of consciousness. The landscape of action provides the structure of stories
that contain the experiences of events all connected together through time and in relation
to specific plots. The landscape of consciousness is the interpretation or meaning given
to the events. Exploring the landscape of action helps to locate, generate or resurrect
alternative stories that will make sense of the unique outcome. The client derives new
meaning from the alternative stories in the landscape of action which leads to new
possibilities. New possibilities lead to new narratives that free the person into being an
active author in his/her life once again.
Cultural Context
White's philosophical underpinning suggests that our actions and thoughts are
impacted due to cultural knowledges that influences our constructed reality. Stories are
framed by historically-constructed, dominant, cultural knowledges within the context of
specific institutions and social structures that are developed within a community of
people (White & Epston, 1990).
Externalizing the problem encourages persons to separate from their problem and
look at it objectively. This challenges persons to question cultural practices that may be
oppressive. It is here that White blends his thoughts on externalization with Foucault's
ideas on modern history and the objectification of persons. Madigan (1992) summarized
Foucault's philosophy as it pertained to White's views on culture by suggesting three
modes in which human beings are objectified. The first is called dividing practices
whereby persons are excluded through negative labeling. Second is scientific

15

classification which classifies persons according to scientific labeling; e.g. DSM IV and
the third is subjectification in which human beings take a passive position; a sense that
the self is under control due to their interpretation of set cultural norms.
According to Madigan's (1992) interpretation of Foucault, these three modes of
objectification are constitutive dimensions of power and knowledge whereby "all
discursive practices (all the ways a culture creates social and psychological realities) are
interpretations embedded in specific cultural discourse, where the subject is considered
created by, and creating of, the cultural discourse" (p.269). Furthermore, "once an
individual becomes part of society's discourse, certain cultural 'truths' are then integrated
and privileged, thereby restraining the construction of alternatives" (p.270). "These
'truths' act to set standards of 'normalization' and influence how people are to shape their
lives" (p.270).
There is at present a debate in the family therapy field between those who support
and those who criticize White's interpretation of Foucault's philosophy on cultural
discourses and the use of power. Fish (1993) believed that White and Epston's
interpretations of Foucault's analysis of stories and discourses were "selective and
flawed" (p.222). He added that their interpretation of Foucault's meaning of power was
"severely skewed" (p.224). Redekop (1995) described Fish's evaluation of White and
Epston's view of Foucault's story, discourses and power and disagreed with his
interpretations. Redekop argued against Fish's characterization of White and Foucault
and provided supporting evidence for the similarities between the ideas of the two men.
He concluded that "there are too many alternative stories to be elicited" (p.317). The

16

debate about how well White interpreted Foucault's work seems to depend on which end
of the Constructivist/Objectivist spectrum one is sitting.
Summary
Based on White and Epston' s ( 1990) belief about culture and subjugating
knowledges, externalizing the problem through conversations enables persons to identify
private stories and cultural knowledge that make up their identity. Externalizing the
problem allows persons to separate from unitary knowledges that are making them
passive agents in their lives. This helps them to challenge the truths that specify their
lives. Externalization acts as a counter practice to the adoption of cultural norms that
objectify persons and their bodies. The therapeutic process opens conceptual space for
persons to re-author their lives and relationships according to alternative stories. These
alternative stories empower persons and give them a sense of personal agency (Tomm,
1989). White's ultimate purpose is to "challenge the techniques that subjugate persons to
a dominant ideology" (p.29) by identifying a "person's problem within the sociopolitical
language context in which they live"(Madigan, 1992, p.278).
White's narrative approach is a method used to access the life story of an
individual to ascertain the meanings attributed to experiences which impact behaviors.
White's approach has been used successfully with individuals to help them overcome
complex problems including depression, paranoia, suicide risk and eating disorders. One
characteristic of resilient individuals is their ability to construct new meanings for events
to enhance understanding. Applying White's narrative process could be an effective
means to retrieve personal resources of resilient individuals. White's therapy fosters an

17

awareness of personal agency, times when the client was an active agent in their life and
this awareness may highlight the characteristics of resilient adults that enable them to
"snap back" when faced with adversity.
Resiliency
The construct of resiliency has gained recognition in the last two decades in
developmental psychology (Cicchetti & Garmezy, 1993). Resiliency research has
included persons from infancy to adulthood; the majority of the literature is about
childhood resiliency. Topical areas of study have included resiliency in relation to:
poverty, discrimination, psychosis, maltreatment, neglect, family stress, divorce, wars
and Holocaust survivors.
Definitions
Researchers have defined resiliency in many different ways although all have
captured a similar concept. Werner (1984) defined resiliency as" the ability to recover
from or adjust easily to misfortune or sustained life stress" (p. 68). Egeland, Carlson &
Sroufe (1993) used the concept of resiliency to refer to one's capacity to adapt
successfully despite high risk status through use of internal and external resources.
Fonagy, Steele, Steele, Higgitt and Target (1994) viewed resiliency as a combination of
social and intra-psychic processes that occur through time with consideration of personal
attributes, family, social and cultural environments.
Research supports the idea that people are resilient at different periods in their life
(Cicchetti & Garmezy, 1993; Herrenkohl, Herrenkohl & Egolf, 1994) depending on
individual factors, environmental conditions and developmental tasks (Rutter, 1987;

18

Zimmerman & Arunkumar 1994; Egeland et al., 1993). O' Connell Higgins (1994) stated
that all people have resilient capabilities within, some just exemplify and amplify their
capabilities more than others.
Internal and External Characteristics of Resiliency
Resiliency research has focused heavily on the internal and external factors that
contribute to one's ability to overcome stressful life events. A summary of the internal
resiliency attributes in children and adults in comparison to their vulnerable counterparts
includes: being active when solving life' s problem with a feeling ofhaving control over
their lives versus being passively subjected to it (Werner, 1984; Cowen, Wyman, Work

& Parker, 1990; Valentine & Feinauer, 1993); having an internal locus of control
(Herrenkohl et al, 1994; Werner & Smith 1982; Valentine & Feinauer, 1993; Luthar,
1991 ); the ability to construct new meanings for events in order to enhance understanding
(Valentine & Feinauer, 1993; Werner, 1984 ); having a higher intelligence and therefore
better academic achievement (Radke-Yarrow & Brown, 1993); and, having
temperamental characteristics that invite a positive response from others (Garmezy, 1991;
Radke-Yarrow & Brown, 1993). In a review of the resiliency literature, Fonagy et. al.,
(1994) summarized many ofthe same resilient characteristics in children's psychological
functioning as mentioned above and added: super coping skills, task-related self-efficacy,
higher self worth, interpersonal awareness and empathy, willingness and capacity to plan,
and a sense ofhumor.
External attributes included actively participating in extracurricular activities, e.g.
hobbies and creative interests (Werner & Smith, 1982), being well liked by others

19

(Gannezy, 1983; Werner & Smith, 1982), and having support either within the family or
outside of the family (Egeland et al., 1993; Valentine & Feinauer, 1993; Herrenkohl et
al., 1994).
Research to date has focused heavily on the 'what' factors that contribute to
resiliency whereas research explaining 'how' the resilient surmount their trawna appears
to be lacking (Masten, Best & Gannezy, 1990; O'Connell Higgins, 1994). Herrenkohl et
al., (1994) stated that the internal and external characteristics do not explain the driving
force of resiliency and that a more in-:-depth look into an individual' s life through the
revealed stories is necessary.
O'Connell Higgins (1994) studied the process by which resilience develops. She
believes that resilience is a cwnulative process and not a product. Her study involved 40
adults, 23 female and 17 male, with 58% experiencing physical and/or sexual abuse. She
discovered the resilient adults to have a locus of hope whereby they recruited surrogates
early in childhood and adolescence to fulfill the love they needed and hope for a better
life. The resilient adult also displayed faith and vision in how they want their lives to be
and how they do not. Lastly O' Connell Higgins found that the resilient adult pursues
his/her life as social and political activists to help heal the pathways for others.
Beardslee (1989) conducted three studies using an in-depth life-history approach ·
to access resilient individuals' self-understanding in relation to their particular context;
war, cancer, and children whose parents had serious affective disorders. He believed that
the best place to start understanding resiliency was by interviewing the individual directly

20

versus using external measures to assess one's resiliency. The results concluded that selfunderstanding played a crucial role in one's resiliency.
Although Beardslee (1989) studied resiliency using an in-depth life-history
approach, many of the empirical studies used other means of obtaining data. Resiliency
was researched using checklists (Egeland et al., 1993; Radke-Yarrow & Brown, 1993;
Cowen et al., 1990), life events scales (Luthar, 1991; Herrenkohl et al., 1994; O'Connell
Higgins, 1994), peer and teacher ratings (Luthar, 1991; Cowen et al., 1990), assessments
(Egeland et al., 1993; Radke-Yarrow & Brown, 1993), interviews (Egeland et al., 1993;
Radke-Yarrow & Brown, 1993; Cowen et al., 1990; Herrenkohl et al., 1994; Luthar,
1991; Valentine & Feinauer, 1993; 0 'Connell Higgins, 1994), intelligence tests (RadkeYarrow & Brown, 1993; Egeland et al., 1993) and observations (Egeland et al, 1993).
These studies concluded that resiliency was dependent on the number and degree of risk
factors relative to the number and degree of protective factors present at the particular
time that determined one's ability to cope.
Slagle (1990) stated that resiliency is often measured by cognitive and behavioral
skills and by the amount of external social support. She discussed how this means of
operationalizing resiliency was deficient because resiliency was a process that changed
over time depending on the risk factors impacting the individual. Slagle outlined how
internal factors of thoughts and feelings were often neglected. She believed that to get at
the heart of resiliency, accessing personal experience obtained through life narratives
would provide the most valuable data. The interviews performed in the empirical studies,
mentioned in the previous paragraph were not accessing a life narrative but asked

21

questions about external information; e.g., What is your relationship with your parents?
Slagle concluded that questioning subjects' affective and cognitive processes would
heighten awareness of how individuals turned trauma into triumph.
Although resiliency research has highlighted the protective factors that enhance an
individual' s chances of overcoming stressful life events, the majority of the research has
concerned children. There are very few studies on the resilient adult and few studies on
the area of resiliency and sexual abuse.
Resiliency and Sexual Abuse
There is a gap in the literature regarding how adults who were sexually abused as
children managed to challenge their trauma and live effectively in their adult life. A
review ofthe sexual abuse literature concluded that 54-75 per cent of victims reported
the trauma as having a damaging effect on their lives (Baker & Duncan, 1985). In a
review of the literature, Cahill, Llewelyn and Pearson (1991) compiled a list of long-term
effects of sexual abuse that occurred in childhood which included: negative selfperceptions; relationship problems; sexuality problems; difficulties in social functioning;
depression; lower self-esteem; substance abuse; feelings of isolation; and, post-traumatic
stress disorder.
Based on a review of sexual abuse, Geffner (1992), concluded that childhood
sexual abuse was reaching epidemic proportions. The occurrence of sexual abuse in
Canada and the United States was approximately one in five girls and one in ten boys.
However, he indicated that statistics were probably low due to research difficulties that
accompany this type of abuse. Geffner stated that research studies have found child

22

sexual abuse to have created social and family problems that manifested themselves in
substance abuse problems, depression, suicidal behaviors, eating disorders, dissociative
disorders and teenage pregnancies.
Lisak ( 1994) studied 26 adult male survivors of childhood sexual abuse through
autobiographical interviews. The content analysis revealed 15 themes that described the
psychological impact the abusive experience had on their subjects. The 15 themes were:
anger; betrayal; fear; isolation; legitimacy; loss; self blame/guilt; shame/humiliation as
well as issues surrounding homosexuality; helplessness; masculinity; negative childhood
peer relations; negative schemas about self; and sexuality. Lisak stated that the increased
recognition of men who have been sexually abused has led to increased research in the
areas of prevalence and long-term effects. Studies researching the personal resiliency
characteristics of men who have overcome childhood sexual abuse are scarce.
Long & Jackson ( 1993) studied coping strategies of adult females who were
sexually abused as children. They were interested in two forms of coping, emotionfocused and problem- focused. With emotion-focused coping, the women believed they
had little control of stopping the abuse and regulated emotions or distress through actions
of denial, dissociation or minimization. With problem-focused coping the women
believed they had control and attempted to stop the abuse. The majority of the women
used the emotion-focused coping strategy and they were also identified as being high in
symptomotology. Long and Jackson concluded that optimal adjustment was dependent
on the victim's appraisal of the event as being seen as helpful or harmful, feeling in
control or being controlled.

23

Briere (1989) stated that symptom and construct approaches are the two methods
for understanding childhood sexual abuse. Research has focused heavily on the
symptom-oriented approach to childhood sexual abuse (Morrow & Smith, 1995).
Morrow and Smith focused their research on understanding the resiliency features of
adult females who have survived and coped with the abuse. Their findings were similar
to those of Long and Jackson's (1993). Survivors coped using emotion and problemfocused methods. Their findings were also similar to the resiliency literature that
discussed the external and internal factors that contributed to resiliency.
Several studies highlighted the fact that degree of coping was dependent upon the
meaning associated with the sexual abuse. Silver, Boon and Stones (1983) discovered
less psychological distress and higher self-esteem with adult female incest survivors who
found meaning to their experience. Draucker (1989) also found that female incest
survivors who were coping well had already achieved some satisfactory understanding of
the trauma.
Hazzard ( 1993) performed a pilot study with adult female sexual-abuse survivors
using Finkelhor's traumagenic dynamics model and Taylor's cognitive adaptation theory
to identify trauma-related beliefs. The results indicated that the beliefs about personal
powerlessness and vulnerability were linked to subjects with low self esteem and an
external locus of control.
Morrow and Smith (1995) recommended future research focus on the strengths of
survivors of childhood sexual abuse rather than on their pathology. Similarly, Geffuer
(1992) concluded that more research was needed in order to understand who emerged

24

unhanned from a childhood sexual abuse experience and what factors contributed to such
resiliency.
Conclusion
This chapter reviewed the literature on Michael White's therapy, resiliency and
sexual abuse. Because White's approach accesses a person's self narrative and the
personal strengths and resources that enabled him/her to have more influence over his/her
problems, it is argued that White's narrative approach can access how two resilient adults
managed to surmount their abuse. I will use White's narrative questioning protocol to
access the participants' self narrative and identify their individual strengths as well as the
cognitive and behavioral processes that enabled them to tum trauma into triumph. the
methodology for this approach will be described in Chapter 3.

25

CHAPTER3
METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH PROCEDURES
The current study employs a deductive, single-case approach to examine the
impact of Michael White's Narrative questioning with two adult survivors of childhood
sexual abuse. A single-case research design was employed to perform an in-depth
investigation of two individuals' lived experience that could not be accessed otherwise.
Kazdin and Tuma (1982) stated that single-case research designs are "useful for applying
unique therapeutic techniques" (p.16) and that they also "yield extraordinarily valuable
information" (p.20). The intention of the research was to explore how one derived
understanding of a lived experience and to elicit personal resiliency characteristics using
semi-structured interviews. A content-theme analysis was undertaken with the
transcribed notes. The qualitative analysis produced three themes that describe the
resilient capacities the participants used to help them overcome their abuse.
The research involved the participants in a series of semi-structured, in-depth
interviews following the approach outlined by Michael White (1989). The interviews
were conducted in three phases. Phase I explored their dominant story, Phase II explored
their alternative stories and Phase III examined the impact the research process had on the
participants' awareness of their personal resiliency characteristics. The first two phases
followed Michael White's narrative questioning. The process was semi-structured to
·prevent excessive information and to extract comparable findings between participants,
yet flexible enough to accommodate each individual's personal account of his lived
experience. I have used pseudonyms to refer to both participants in this study to protect

26

their identities. The following sections outline, in detail, the rigorous procedure applied
throughout this study.
Participants
I used purposive sampling to investigate the unique stories of two adult men who
were sexually abused in childhood. The criteria for selection involved being an adult male
who had been sexually abused under the age of 18 and claimed to have overcome the
trauma without having suffered any long-term distress as a result of the abuse. I had
known one participant as a result of a previous counsellor/client relationship. His story
matched the criteria for my study. I approached him and asked if he would be interested
in being a subject for my research. I explained the purpose of the research and believed
that he would be a good candidate because of our established rapport. This participant
willingly agreed, hoping that his story would help others in a similar situation.
A friend, who had been aware of my research and my quest to fmd one more
subject, introduced me to the second participant. I met with this man, explained the
purpose of the research, clarified any questions he had, and investigated to see if he met
the criteria for my study. He did meet the criteria and was open and willing to share his
story with the hope that he could benefit from the research process.
One participant, Jeff, is 43 years old, has been married for 18 years and has three
children. He has obtained two baccalaureate degrees and a certificate. He works full
time as a social worker. He enjoys weight lifting and reading and states that he feels
confident in his life right now. The second participant, Paul, is 35 years old, is separated

27

from his spouse and has two children. He is a certified electrician, works full time and
runs a small part-time business.
Both participants were open, honest, and articulate as well as trusting of both the
research process and me as the interviewer. They were both flexible in their time
schedules and they both persevered through the rigorous questioning. They maintained
their enthusiasm and even enjoyed a laugh every now and again.
Setting
All interviews with Jeff took place in my home. Paul' s interviews took place at
his home. The choice of location for the interviews suited both the participants and me.
Each participant and I spent the first ten to thirty minutes of each meeting talking about
general topics. That was followed by the interviews which lasted 60 to 90 minutes.
Following the interviews, a debriefing took place that lasted from ten to thirty minutes.
The total time per session with each participant ranged from two to three hours.
The interviews were audiotaped. The equipment consisted of a tape deck and a
standing microphone. The equipment made one participant uncomfortable for the first
five minutes of the first interview but there was no difficulty after that time. All
interviews took place in the kitchen with the participant and me sitting kitty comer to
each other. I asked participants to avoid loud movements with chairs or hands on the
table in order to reduce any noises that would interfere with sound quality.
Tape Transcriptions
Transcribing the tapes was easily accomplished due to good quality equipment.
The voices came out very clear. All tapes were transcribed verbatim (see Appendix D for

28

an example of the transcription). Four tapes were transcribed by a paid professional and
three were transcribed by me. All transcripts were reviewed to ensure all appropriate
commas, pauses, and periods were used effectively. Morse (1994) stresses the
importance of these factors to maintain the speaker's expression.
The Interviews
During the first meeting, I discussed the research process with the participants.
This first meeting lasted about one hour. I explained the research and answered their
questions. I had them fill out the consent form and we spent some time getting to know
each other. I did not use this first meeting in the analysis. Following the initial meeting,
the research interviews began which took the participants through a three-phase process.
Following is a description of each of the three phases.
Phase I. In the first phase of the research process, I asked participants to describe
their dominant story. This involved accessing information about their life, beginning
with their current living situation and going back in time to explore the abuse. Next, I
explored the events leading up to the abuse, how they were recruited into their experience
and what beliefs or assumptions about self, others and the world were formed as a result
of the abuse. These questions are based in White's philosophical framework. We then
continued moving up chronologically from the past to where they are today. After
gaining access to their dominant story, I identified, externalized and explored their
restraints and the role these restraints played in their lives and continue to play in their
lives today.

29

Phase II. The purpose of the second phase was to explore alternative stories,
stories that did not get told in the retelling of the dominant story. These stories have been
ignored or forgotten. The goal of searching and exploring alternative stories is to access
the times when Jeff and Paul did not give into their restraints. After identifying the
unique outcomes or times when the restraints or problems had less influence over their
lives, I continued with Michael White's unique account questions, unique redescription
questions and unique possibility questions. Exploring these types of questions has the
effect of plotting the participants' unique outcomes into alternative stories that encourage
reflection. This helps determine new meanings that contradict the dominant stories.
Unraveling the mystery of the alternative stories engaged Jeff and Paul in story-telling
and meaning-making which highlighted ideas of personal agency. Breaking free from
their problem-saturated dominant story and enhancing and building on their alternative
stories encouraged a re-authoring of their lives; " the process of persons entering into
stories, taking them over and making them their own" (White & Epston, 1990, p.l3).
Phase III. The third phase consisted of a debriefing interview that investigated the
impact Michael White's process had on Jeffs and Paul' s awareness of their personal
resiliency characteristics and how, if at all, the research interviews changed their view of
themselves.
The exact number of interviews per participant varied depending upon the time
necessary to complete each phase. Jeff completed the three phases in three interviews.
Paul took two interviews for phase one and one interview for each remaining phase of the
process.

30

I completed the seven semi-structured interviews over a four week period and
obtained 151 pages of transcribed text. Each interview had a specific focus and goal
which was determined by following White's questioning protocol. Prior to each ·
interview, I prepared the questions to ask using Michael White's questioning protocol
within the context of Jeffs and Paul's given information. I decided how to plan and
sequence my questions following White's process and how much detail to elicit. Patton
(1990) emphasizes that well-structured and well-sequenced questions with the researcher _
having knowledge of how much detail to elicit contributes to the quality of the participant
responses.
I extracted Michael White's questioning protocol from his published work. The
interviews, though structured, focused and conducted in the same manner, contained
flexibility. My job remained one of asking specific questions, listening, summarizing and
probing with questions to clarify the participants' meaning or to further explore an
answer for greater understanding. Due to the high degree of structure and focus, I was
able to pick up subtleties and follow leads that enhanced the in-depth investigation.
Morse ( 1994) stated that good researchers are meticulous and well prepared which
enables them to be ready to detect important information. All interviews were intensive,
probing, thorough, and reflective of lived experience.
Role of The Researcher
I viewed my role in the research as a co-author in the process. Although the
participants and I were engaged in a therapeutic conversation, I was not 'counselling'.
Combining my curiosity and in-depth questioning with the participants unraveling of

31

their stories, resulted in Jeff and Paul re-authoring their lives. Jeff and Paul reported
feeling comfortable with me as their interviewer and they felt very open and relaxed in
my presence. This was important for the current research because it allowed a coauthorship of stories. Jeff and Paul agreed that they felt comfortable with a female
interviewer because it enabled them to let down their "male ego shield" as Paul called it,
that protects them from looking weak, and to "wear their heart on their sleeve" and trust
the research process. As the interviewer, I definitely felt as if we were on a trip together,
exploring and unraveling mysteries that had been buried for a long time. The success of
the research process is a result of the co-authorship between interviewer and interviewee.
Analysis of the Data
Following each interview, I filled out a summary sheet reflecting my observations
about the interview. The summary sheet included information such as date, place and
time of interview with the identified participant. The summary consisted of questions
regarding the main issues in the contact, a summary of information received, any salient,
interesting or important points and questions or notes to consider for the next contact.
This idea was borrowed from Miles and Huberman (1984) who believed that the
summary sheet "captures thoughtful impressions and reflections" (p.51). This helped
establish a context containing pertinent information that would be available at any time to
remind me of the salient aspects of each interview.
Data analysis was ongoing throughout the data collection period and beyond.
After each interview, I analyzed the transcribed text prior to the next interview to ensure
all necessary information was collected and my understanding of the story was clear and

32

complete. This process of analyzing one interview before going onto the next fostered
data manageability as well as the establishment of a more extensive and detailed data
banlc Morse (1994) stated that concurrent data collection and analysis helps guide data
gathering so as to let the researcher maintain control and reduce unnecessary information.
I read and reread all transcripts after each interview and repeatedly throughout the
data collection and analysis stages of the study. I made two copies of each transcript. I
left one copy untouched and filed under "Raw Data". I filed the second copy under
"Data Reduction". This 'marked up' copy contained all highlights, margin notes and
coding.
Data analysis of phase I. Following the first phase of the research process, I read
the data through a first time, with marker in hand, to highlight any phrase or word that
popped out as significant to me. I 'went with the flow' on the first reading and looked for
repetitions and connections in the data. The next time through I wrote margin notes.
These consisted of summaries, questions to clarify in interview two and reactions to the
text. I also used descriptive coding in the margins of the raw data to classify text. Miles
and Huberman (1984) define descriptive coding as that which "entails no interpretation,
but simply the attribution of a class of phenomena to a segment of text" (p.56). Initially I
had planned to cut up an entire transcription into its descriptive codes and tape everything
into individual file folders . This was accomplished with the first set of data. When I
received the other participant's data, relating to Phase I, I chose to develop a matrix on
large chart paper for comparison so as to achieve a complete visual representation of
Phase I. The matrix consisted of the descriptive code categories with each cell containing

33

direct quotes from both participants. A number identified where the quote could be
located in the original text. I further classified the matrix sections into three significant
descriptive codes or themes; recruitment, repercussions and the identification of
restraints. These themes and descriptive codes were extracted from White's
philosophical framework
Data analysis of phase II. The second phase of the research process involved
searching for alternative stories·where participants refused to give into their restraints.
The data from this phase consisted of reading the transcripts to highlight the quotations
that described how, at times, Jeff and Paul managed to break free from their restraints. I
rewrote these descriptive quotations on large chart paper. All extracts contained their
identification code so they could be referenced with ease. Explanatory codes were given
to each quote. According to Miles and Huberman (1984), an explanatory code is a word
that indicates a pattern or theme. The initial search revealed four themes; 'Living in
Balance', 'Being Assertive', 'Spirituality' and 'Being Open to Learning'. After
considering the best fit between data and themes, I decided to broaden the rule for the
'Being Open to Learning' theme to include the spirituality quotes. The church, acting as
a role model for Jeff and Paul, opened their eyes to learning a better way to live life. I
also changed the assertive theme to "Reclaiming the Freedom to Choose" because the
quotes in this theme included speaking up for oneself but also for being aware that one
has the freedom to choose to speak up. This phase of analysis generated three themes or
patterns that described how Jeff and Paul, at times, reclaimed their personal agency;
'Living in Balance', 'Reclaiming the Freedom to Choose' and 'Being Open to Learning'.

34

Each quote was then clustered by thematic grouping to help organize and give clarity to
the data to make sure the analysis reflected the generated metaphors.
Data analysis of phase III. All significant information regarding the impact the
research process had on the participants, their awareness of personal resiliency
characteristics and how the process changed their dominant view of self was extracted.
Jeffs and Paul's resiliency characteristics are described and information regarding the
two men's changed self perception is described in Chapter 5.
I doubled checked the transcripts for all interviews to make sure all relevant data
were included and to know why certain data were excluded. Although my two
participants experienced very different stories, common themes were shared between the
two. The intention of cross analysis was to make comparisons without sacrificing each
participant's unique story.
Issues OfEthics And Rigor
I maintained anonymity of participants throughout this discussion as well as in the
following chapters through the use of pseudonyms. The participants were aware that at
any time they had the freedom to withdraw from the research as outlined in their
informed consent forms.
I made a conscious attempt throughout this chapter to provide an 'audit trail'
whereby sufficient detail concerning the conceptual development of the study was
provided so others could reconstruct the process (Morse, 1994). Patton (1990) discusses
the importance of credibility in qualitative research. He stresses rigorous techniques and
methods of gathering high quality data and justifying the credibility of the researcher. I

35

employed a rigorous and credible process in the data analysis. The rigorous techniques
applied consisted of: testing of rival explanations; searching for negative cases; knowing
why data were excluded from a theme; having multiple interviews with the same
individual to gain in-depth rich text; on-going analysis from the onset to the termination
of data collection and beyond; undertaking a study compatible to the skills of the
researcher; and maintaining intellectual rigor by reviewing the data over and over again to
see if it was reflective ofthe themes. In the following chapter, I hope to provide the story
to the first half of our journey.

36

CHAPTER FOUR
THE DOMINANT STORY
The first phase of the research process was to gain a picture of Jeffs and Paul' s
life story. I wanted to obtain information about their life story in order to understand
their interpretation of their lived experience and to understand how the meanings they
attributed to their life events influenced and shaped their lives. The questions used in
Phase I and Phase II are based on Michael White' s text analogy of how problems are
constructed and solved. As explored in Chapter 2, White' s philosophy is based in the
social scientist perspective that proposes "what persons know of life they know through
' lived experience' ...and in order to make sense of our lives and to express ourselves,
experience must be 'storied' and it is this storying that determines the meaning ascribed
to experience" (White & Epston, 1990, p.9). My role as interviewer was to explore many
different aspects of their story in order to piece together how the two men have
constructed their lives.
A conceptual idea in White' s writing is that of a dominant story. In this chapter
we will see how Jeffs and Paul's current life experiences as two adult men with careers,
children, wives and relationships are shaped by their own dominant stories of their abuse.

An exploration of how Jeff and Paul were recruited into their experience, the
repercussions of the abuse, identification of restraints and how the restraints are
reinforced through society provide the context for a mapping of the oppressive practices.
All these pieces provided the broad conceptual base I required to gain an understanding
of the participants' dominant stories.

37

The Dominant Sto:ry
Michael White defines 'dominant story' as the prevailing story people use to retell
their lived experiences. Jeff and Paul described their lived experiences through the
stories they told. Bruner (1986) argued that "life experience is richer than discourse.
Narrative structures organize and give meaning to experience, but there are always
feelings and lived experience not fully encompassed by the dominant story" (p. 143). In
Jeffs and Paul's cases, we talked mostly about their abusive experiences because I
needed to understand them in order to understand how, over time, they managed to
become resilient. Their lives have many more aspects which did not get a chance to be
expressed in the retelling of their dominant story. Often these parts contain experiences
which White refers to as unique outcomes, times when Jeffs and Paul's lives were not
plagued by problems. Plotting these unique outcomes into alternative stories is discussed
in greater detail in Chapter Five.
The two participants chose to select only a few experiences as they told their life
stories. These experiences demonstrated the ways Jeff and Paul viewed their life and
showed how they constituted the shaping of their lives. White (1992) proposes that
"persons' lives are shaped by the meaning they ascribe to their experience, by their
situation in social structures and by the language practices and cultural practices of self
and of relationship that these lives are recruited into" (p. 122). In Phase I of the interview
process, I intended to gain an understanding of how Jeff and Paul were recruited into
their abusive experiences, the impact of the experiences on their beliefs and assumptions
about self, others and society and whether any of their beliefs and experiences were

38

reinforced through cultural practices or social structures. This information represented
the subjugating knowledges that defined the 'truths' that specified the two men's lives.
These truths are based on the oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices that are
reinforced by family members, others and society. Oppressive beliefs, attitudes and
practices became the restraints that restricted Jeff and Paul into a problematic lifestyle.
Mapping the influence of the restraints, and using a therapeutic technique called
externalizing, provided a clear picture for myself and for Jeff and Paul how the problem
influenced or continued to influence their lives and relationships.
Introducing Jeff and Paul
Jeff and Paul are the two participants in this study. Jeff, 43 years old, has been
married for 18 years and has three daughters. He is a social worker who enjoys the
challenges of the job. He feels confident as a person who has had to struggle through life
to reach the plateau he is at now. His hobbies include weight lifting and reading.
Paul is 35 years old, a single parent with two sons. He is a certified electrician
with a small business on the side. He enjoys camping, fishing, skiing and snowmobiling.
After the initial introductions in the Phase I interviews, I asked Jeff and Paul to
go back in time so that I could arrive at an understanding of their abusive experiences. I
asked if they could tell me about the abuse, how old they were, how long it lasted, who
the perpetrator was and any other information they felt comfortable sharing. This helped
provide information which constituted their dominant story. The stories Jeff and Paul
shared retold their childhood sexual abuse experience as they now understand it and can
reflect upon it as grown men.

39

Jeff's Story
There were a number of perpetrators, OK. It started I would have to say now, I
remember it starting or it was an ongoing process when I was at least 3 or 4 years old. (... ]
First of all I was blaming it on my natural father and I said well, this started occurring
with him when I was 7 or 8. OK, maybe 6. But then I started to remember other events
you know. My natural father was not a physically big man. He was short and stocky and
powerful. But I always remember a larger pair of hands and a taller, more menacing
figure, and through analyzing my dreams and thinking and trying to confront it, it turned
out that it was my grandfather. [...]I was scared of my grandfather, always scared of him,
you know. And I hated going to spend time with my maternal grandfather.[ ... ] My
grandfather died in 1963, and I remember that because that' s when JFK was shot- it was
in that time period. And I was happy, because I was scared of him, OK. What he used to
do was he used to take me out into the orchard and into the greenhouse. And what he
used to do was he'd get down on his knees, put his hands on my shoulders, and used to
tell me what a nasty, spoiled little bastard I was, and I deserved everything that happened
to me. And he convinced me you know, and I couldn't get away from him because he
was powerful - his hands were so big and strong. Those wrists, I mean, you know his
arms were unbelievably strong. And he used to pull my pants down, pull my underwear
down and he used to put me up on a - oh platform where they used to put plants on a sill, a big sill and he used to stick needles into my bum. And he used to do it in such a
way that you could see the pinpricks, but nobody ever questioned. [...] And sometimes,
he used to - you know like - take a frozen wiener and insert it up my anus. It hurt - very
cold, OK. And then what would happen is I'd feel guilt and angry and he' d always make
these statements like( ... ] you're always on pins and needles. And that was how he
demonstrated his power and his authority and control over me in front of my parents.
Because they wouldn't know what the hell he was talking about. And he' d always say
that ifl didn't do what he wanted me to do, like he used to use really infantile language
(... ] But what he used to do was he' d say, well, do you love mommy, yes, do you want
anything to happen to her, no, and this is when we'd go through this perverted process.
(...] Well what happened you see, is while this was going on, like my Uncle Fred, who
was my biological father, would take me out on a motorcycle and we'd go shooting and
he would, you know kiss me and he would also sodomize me too (...]This went on until I
was about 12 years old.
Jeffs abuse by his grandfather stopped when he was 8 when his grandfather died.
The abuse by his father continued until age 12 when his father moved away to another
town. At age 16, Jeff visited his father one summer and became embroiled in a physical
fight. Jeff, being taller and stronger, started fighting back and demanded that he was not
going to let his father put him through the hell he did when he was a child. Jeff refused to

40

"sink to his father's level." From ages 17 to 23, Jeff drank heavily and involved himself
in power relationships with men. At age 21, Jeff assaulted seven men and turned himself
into the police so they could put him in jail. The policeman advised Jeff to get
counselling rather than putting him in jail. Jeff took this advice. At this time Jeff also
signed himself into a detox program. When Jeff was in the counselling and the detox
program, he started meeting people who encouraged him to go into social work and
helped him along the path of recovery. Later, Jeff went to university and obtained two
degrees and a certificate. He felt that he had taken control back into his life between age
23 and now, at age 43.
In contrast to Jeffs story which had much violence in it, Paul's story is one of
friendship and intimacy. Although Paul's story may not seem to be obviously one of
abuse, this story of seduction is no less abusive.
Paul's Story
I was 14 years old at the time, and, as a matter of fact, I remember it was 10 days
away from my 15th birthday, so I was almost 15. And I had never had any- I mean I had
had sexual contact, but I had never actually had intercourse with anybody. And myself, I
guess some of the background that I need to put into place is that myself and my three
siblings were all adopted. My older brother, my older sister, and my younger sister. We
were all adopted from separate homes, separate backgrounds. And about a year before
the event, not even a year, maybe even about 6 months because I think she came to live
with us in the summer, so- my cousin came to live with us at the house. And she was
with us for about a year. And she was 21 when it happened. Basically, what happened
was that we got quite close, like we developed a friendship first. And it was quite a close
relationship I felt. Mind you, I'm still thinking in terms of a 14-year old, not having had
any real sexual experience. Certainly not a lot of emotional attachment to any other
person outside the family. And we got to be really good friends. And what happened
was we'd - since I had a bedroom in the basement, she also had one - late at night we
started to talk and she knew I was into writing poetry at the time, and we started giving
each other back rubs in her bedroom, which was at the furthest comer of the house. And
so, like, I' d go to her bedroom and we'd just sit up and talk. I'd actually crawl into bed
with her. And she' d give me a back rub, and I gave her, and this went on for weeks.
And, you know, we read poetry together, and usually the bedroom was lit by candles and
she' d have incense going, and it was quite a heady experience for a 14-year old. [... ] One

41

night, we were laying in bed together, and I guess it was 1 or 2 in the morning. You
know the rest of the house was asleep and she asked me if I'd ever had sex. And the
question kind of surprised me a little and I said, well, no. And she says would you like
to? Just like that, very matter offactly, and I guess my response was just, like, sure!
Because I mean I had a certain amount of desire anyway, and I guess the other thing is,
you know, when you're 14 years old, you don't want to be like, uncool. [...] And I mean
the relationship went on for, oh gosh, for a few weeks anyway, I mean, like sexually. I'm
sure we were probably engaged in sex probably 5 or 6 times. Then I recall that it did start
turning kind of cold, in that she started rejecting me, and I couldn't understand it. I didn't
know what was happening; I didn't know what was going on. But of course, it wasn't
something I could make a big stink about. I certainly couldn't tell my parents about it
because I was in fear of them fmding out anyway - for her and for me because I knew I
would be in deep trouble. So I just kind of went along with it[... ] and after a certain
amount of time it started to dwindle and die.
Prior to age 14, Paul described himself as friendly, non violent, non aggressive,
sensitive, confident, well-liked, and fun loving with a good sense ofhumor. Following
the abuse he developed a temper and kept his feelings to himself. On one occasion
shortly following the termination of his relationship with Claudia, Paul's mother
commented to him about his temper and Paul recalled his mother wondering where this
temper came from. Paul had nobody to talk to about the relationship or his feelings
following its termination. Claudia left the relationship without giving Paul any reason as
to why it ended. This confusion and the necessity to keep it quiet left Paul with no outlet
to release his overwhelming emotions regarding Claudia, and his suppressed emotion
came out in the form of a temper. Paul's way of dealing with Claudia's rejection was to
involve himself in other relationships. Paul married at age 25 and separated almost five
years later. Following his marriage, he continued to have many temporary short and long
term relationships with women.

42

Both Jeff and Paul identified their experiences as ' abuse' when they were in their
thirties. At the time the abuse was occurring, neither man labeled it as abuse. Jeff
suppressed a lot of painful memories that started to resurface after his first daughter was
born. Paul discovered his teenage experience was abuse after discussing his relationship
difficulties with a counsellor friend. Although Paul's abuse is not normally defined as
violent, he is still suffering the repercussions of it.
After gaining access to Jeffs and Paul's dominant stories, I wanted to explore in
more detail the practices of recruitment that brought Jeff and Paul into their experience.
Questions about how Jeff and Paul were recruited into their experiences consisted of:
who had the power to defme their experience; how was this achieved; and, what were the
direct or indirect messages enforced by the perpetrator.
Recruitment into Experience
In abusive situations the perpetrators have the power to define the experience for
their victims through direct or indirect messages. These can be looks, specific words or
tone of voice. Styles of recruitment vary. Jeffs father and grandfather enticed him
through direct and indirect messages that instilled enormous fear. Regardless of their
method, the perpetrators succeeded in meeting their needs at the expense of their victims.
Jeff: "Well first of all my grandfather would do it in a very methodical
manner. He would be stripping me while he was talking to me and I
would be too scared to do anything. [...]My grandfather had the ability to
just exude a kind of hatred through innuendo. Boy- you're on pins and
needles- we'll take you down to the orchard and that'll get the sticklers
out of you. Little phrases like that -little words like that [... ]Now Fred
was different because he was more volatile about it, more emotional. He
would scare me into it.[ ...] He would just go berserk. You know, he'd
start destroying stuff around me, and once he got to me I was too scared to
do anything. Like they were both very scary men.[ ... ] Fred would always

43

try to kill himself, and to kill Mom. Like they both used my mother, you
know, as an instrument to use as leverage against me."
Jeffs grandfather and father used threats, a cold gaze, a specific tone of voice or a
well-known phrase to recruit Jeff into the abusive experience. Their style of recruitment
enforced a fear that controlled Jeffs thinking and behaviors. Jeff was constantly afraid
and often feared for his own life as well as his mother' s life. He believed that his life
must be relegated to whatever these two men decide. Fear was the tool Jeffs father and
grandfather utilized to meet their needs at Jeffs expense. The styles of recruitment
became the oppressive practices suppressing Jeffs freedom. He had no way of
controlling how he would live his life because the fear was too overwhelming. Jeffs
father and grandfather had the power to defme his experience because of their position of
power and authority.
Paul's recruitment, although very different from Jeffs, still had an impact on his
thoughts, feelings and behaviors. Instead of fear, Paul's cousin used seduction to entice
him into the abusive experience. Claudia and Paul developed a friendship, became good
friends, shared poetry and gave each other back rubs in her bedroom late at night. After
the scene was set, Claudia asked the question:
Paul: and she asked me ifi had ever had sex. And the question kind of
surprised me a little and I said "well no". And she says "would you like
to?"
Having spent time together sharing poetry and philosophies, Paul trusted his
cousin. Trust allowed Claudia the power to recruit Paul into the sexual experience. At 14
years old, Paul was at an age where human sexuality was intriguing and interesting to

44

him. She played on his sensitivities and vulnerabilities to seduce him into an experience,
that at the time was positive, yet as Paul stated later, " you're not enlightened enough to
know what the repercussions are, the deep-seated changes that can take effect on a person
after an experience like that."
Claudia controlled when and how the relationship would start and finish. Paul
stated earlier that Claudia started rejecting him and he could not understand why. In the
spring, Claudia moved out and Paul visited her to rekindle what they had. After his
arrival at the house where she lived with her friends, Claudia rejected him again.
Paul: She basically turned off my advances and it hurt me[ ... ] but for me,
at the time, all I felt was really hurt and rejected. [... ] I had tried advances
and she pushed me away. So that's pretty direct rejection. And then she
verbally told me that she didn't want us to do that - and I can't remember
specifically, but I seem to recall that she had said that she just wasn't
interested in that anymore.
Throughout their entire relationship, Claudia had the control and the power to
decide what, how, when, and where. The actual sexual activity did not prove to be
problematic for Paul, but the direct rejection without a reason as to why it ended was the
most painful outcome. This style of controlling and manipulating Paul's life is another
example of how Claudia had the power to define Paul's experience. His interpretation of
this event in his life set patterns for future relationships.
Jeff's and Paul's perpetrators used their position of power and authority to recruit
their victims into the abusive experience. The perpetrators defmed how they would meet
their needs at the expense of their victims. The repercussions of the abuse live on long
after the actual sexual abuse experience has ended.

45

Repercussions of the Abuse
The repercussions of the abusive experience had a direct impact on Jeff and Paul.
Their interpretation of the abuse formulated beliefs and assumptions about self, others
and society. Jeff and Paul regarded these as 'truths' that specified how they would lead
their lives. Their interpretation over the years of the abusive experience constituted their
personal identities. Tomm (cited in White & Epston, 1990) stated that "our personal
identities are constituted by what we 'know' about ourselves and how we describe
ourselves as persons. But what we know about ourselves is defined, for the most part, by
the cultural practices (of describing, labeling, classifying, evaluating, segregating,
excluding, etc.) in which we are embedded (p.vii). Since all stories have a past, present
and future, White and Epston claim that the "interpretation of current events is as much
future-shaped as it is past-determined" (p.l 0). The repercussions Jeff and Paul
experienced with the abuse played a significant role in their attitudes and behaviors
during and following the abusive experience. In the interview, I asked questions to gain a
perspective of the repercussions of the abuse. Some of the questions were: What impact
did the abuse have on your perception of self or world?; What impact did the abuse have
on your feelings, beliefs and experiences?; What beliefs about yourself or the world do
you think have survived and at times today, still have an impact on you?; What beliefs
about yourself and the world do you think had the most impact and played a large role in
your life? This type of questioning attempted to gain an understanding of the
repercussions of the abusive experience and how Jeff and Paul interpreted those events.
Jeff: Well I felt that I wasn't any good, I didn't feel good about myself. I
didn't have any confidence in myself about anything. I didn't feel like I
could make friends because I felt that all relationships were use/use

46

relationships, all right. [... ]I hated the world, OK, it was a scary place, it
was big and it was out of control. [... ]I started reading. Like I could readthat was one thing I did do. And I got a hold of some books that Fred got
from the University Library on the Kinsey Report that was about
homosexuals, OK. And I was 9 when I read it, and I decided that I must
be a homosexual because men liked to sodomize me, so therefore I must
be a homosexual. And I thought that male/female relationships were
perverse. [... ] What happened is I reached the point in my life where I was
saying well, OK, Jeff you can do what your grandfather did, you know.
Because I was going through a very funny phase. Like, I'd see a 6-year
old boy and my inclination would be, OK, can I take him out to the woods,
do what I have to do, and then kill him so he can't tell. That scared me,
you know, that's scared me, and I said I'm not that[ ... ] And it scared me
because, you know, I didn't want to be like that, and I said, you know, I
don't like myself. I don't like what I'm going to become. I don't want to
drag anyone down to this level.
The repercussions from the abuse had Jeff thinking and acting in a way that
reflected the oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices imposed upon him as a child.
Growing up with the beliefs such as, "relationships are just use/use", "I must be a
homosexual because men liked to sodomize me" and "the only joy that could be gained
was by men hurting men" reflected the oppressive beliefs by which Jeff interpreted his
life. These oppressive beliefs restricted Jeff from behaving differently than his father and
grandfather. Although Jeff knew he did not want to impose on other children the abusive
behaviors he suffered, he at times found it difficult not to degrade himself to "the level"
ofhis father and grandfather. These oppressive beliefs subjugated Jeff's personhood. The
repercussions of the abuse left Jeff feeling isolated from others, insecure and tempted to
repeat the abusive behaviors onto others.
Jeff hated the world and felt like it was scary and out of control. In contrast, Paul
viewed the world as a great place to live. Paul viewed the initial repercussions of the
abuse as a positive outcome because the experience taught him about sexuality and how

47

to treat women. However, this hands-on teaching lesson produced overwhelming side
effects after the abuse was over.
Paul: I learned, how to treat a woman in bed.[... ] those were some of the
things I felt pretty good about growing up. I never had a problem with
relationships in that area, you know, ever since then and I thought I've
been lucky.[ ... ] It made me feel more mature. I mean something like that
can't help but empower a person.[... ] It was an amazing experience. I felt
the world was a great place to live. It was like wow, I've got this to look
forward to. I felt good about it. I didn't know any different. Because let's
face it, at that age you're not enlightened enough to know what the
repercussions - the deep seated changes that can take effect on a person
after an experience like that.
After Paul told me about the immediate influence of the abuse, I asked him in
what ways the abuse had an impact on his life now. Paul said that when he continued to
wonder why his relationships with women would not work, he recognized the
problematic repercussions of the abuse. He began to see a pattern.
Paul: I didn't even realize it at the time- but looking back the pattern I see,
and it's almost definitely connected, is my relationships since then, and
you have to understand I had to be very secretive about our relationship. I
felt like I was in love with somebody. Like this was like a first love. It
was the first serious, adult kind oflove. [... ]Not that I wouldn't go out at
all and allow my friends or acquaintances to see my partner, but it felt
uncomfortable. [...] To me it was a thing where, a relationship that isn't
like that - is one even when you think it' s going good, maybe it isn't.
Because at any time, somebody can just push you away and say no. I
don't want this any more. And this is something that I got from Claudia
that I never really understood, but I didn't realize it. All I knew at that
time is that I had to deal with it. And I dealt with it the best that I could.
The initial repercussions of the abuse had Paul thinking that sex and life were
great. He felt well-schooled and competent in the sexual arena. However, in
relationships following the one with Claudia, Paul put too much emphasis on his
competence at performing well sexually and lacked confidence when it came to the social

48

aspect of his relationships. As his life went on, Paul continued to feel a need to keep his
relationships a secret, even though as an adult, engaging in sexual relationships with older
or younger women was allowed.
It was at this point in Paul's interview that I became aware of the taken-forgranted practices that restricted Paul's ability to grow and develop relationships. He did
not know how to be open and honest and share his partners with family and friends. His
interpretation of his experience with Claudia shaped future relationships. Paul's attempt
at recovering from his hurt and rejection pushed him into more female relationships.
These relationships were characterized by women who, at times, treated Paul the way
Claudia did. Paul stated "I was never let down easy with Claudia, I was never given an
explanation as to why it ended and it has happened in relationships since then, where the
person has just walked away." Paul was not aware of what it was about him that seemed
to destroy relationships but each relationship following Claudia never seemed to work out
quite right.
The relationship with Claudia left Paul with insecurities about himself. He built
up a belief that if he could protect his relationship from outside influences it would not
fail. He also built up the belief that even when you think love is good it might not be. He
made it his responsibility to try to keep relationships safe from outside influences by
'isolating his partners. The meaning Paul placed on the events with Claudia became the
means of interpreting future female relationships. In his attempt at finding true love,
'secrecy' and 'isolating his partners from the environment' became the oppressive

49

practices defining how Paul would interpret future events with female relationships.
These practices continued to sabotage future relationships
When I obtained information in the interviews about the repercussions of the
abuse, I became aware of the oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices that required Jeff
and Paul to remain stuck: the restraints that did not allow them to view their lives
differently.
Restraints
According to Michael White, restraints are made up of beliefs and patterns of
interaction called 'vicious cycles.' The beliefs consist of the "normative expectations
about how people should be as individuals and in relationships" (Adams-Westcott &
I senbart, 1990, p. 41) "Vicious cycles include those habitual patterns of interaction that
maintain problematic behaviors. Family members are generally unaware that their
interaction is patterned and perceive themselves as having no choice but to participate in
the vicious cycle" (Adams-Westcott & Isenhart, 1990, p. 41). Jeffs and Paul's takenfor- granted practices and attitudes led to the development of problems. They acted as
restraints.
Beliefs that act as restraints are those rigid, unrealistic, specifications or rules that
are imposed on an individual as truths (Adams-Westcott & Isenhart, 1990). Beliefs about
family loyalty and what is expected can compromise the growth of individual family
members when family loyalty is a first priority. These rigid expectations blind individual
family members to noticing their personal strengths and resources. In the following

50

quote, Jeffs comments depict an example of the beliefs which imposed restraints on him
from developing a sense of self.
Beliefs

Jeff:: I believed all men were like this with their children [... ]"Even when
I was 10 or 11, I understood and thought well, maybe sex is only just to
relieve tension, OK, a certain amount of physiological tension. And that
the only joy that could be gained was by men hurting men. [...]My mother
and Fred and my grandfather discouraged me from pursuing any
relationships with girls as friends because they were weak. Even my
mother reinforced it, you know, you're better off to be with a strong man.
I had a very skewed perception of relationships.
Jeff grew up believing that all fathers were like this with their boys. Family

members imposed their rigid views on Jeff regarding the roles of men and women and
they defined who Jeff should have relationships with. As a result of these rigid beliefs,
Jeff locked himself into a victim lifestyle characterized by feelings of powerlessness. He
developed a picture of himself as having few resources. Based on these unrealistic
expectations, Jeff engaged in patterns of interaction that perpetuated problematic
behaviors.
Patterns of Interactions: The Vicious Cycle
OK. So what happened was that I could not develop relationships with
females. [... ] I started going through a lot of confusion. [... ] I went
through a number of emotional changes where I had some good
relationships, but all of a sudden, you know, the things that happened
between my grandfather and myself seemed to take over. I allowed them
to take over again, and I did become involved in power relationships with
men.[ ...]The relationships with some of the men I had sex with were deep
but it wasn't a balanced healthy kind of relationship.[ ... ] What I would do
is we'd start drinking and then I'd hammer the hell out of him. Like
backhanders, throw him against the wall. [... ]I was not functioning
properly. I was moody all the time and I drank a lot. When I started
drinking that is when I would just hammer the hell out of guys.

51

Jeff depicts a clear example of the restraints that prevented him from escaping his
problematic lifestyle. Although he realized alternative lifestyles existed, Jeff was
restricted into believing he had no choice but to act in the way that was reinforced by the
family with whom he grew up.
Paul also formed some very clear beliefs and patterns of interaction that, up to and
including the research interviews, still had an impact on his life. He was not aware of
what it was that he did in his female relationships, or why relationships failed, only that
they did. Paul was blind to the restraints that controlled his life.
Beliefs

Paul: She taught me respect for your partner, she taught me how to please
your partner, and how it is important to please your partner first.[ ...]
Maybe it manifested itself in being a little bit too important as a part of the
relationship, in other words if I could perform sexually for my partner,
maybe that becomes a little bit too much of a focus. And because my first
experience sexually was such a good one with her, I mean you always
want to do at least as good again, duplicate it or do better.
Paul initially viewed the contact with his cousin as very positive. She was kind,

gentle and understanding. She taught him the 'ropes' and he believed he would be
forever grateful. However, following the termination of his relationship with Claudia,
Paul felt rejected and worthless. In order to be reassured he still had some prowess, he
engaged himself in future relationships and controlled them by placing a large emphasis
on pleasing his partner in hopes he could keep his relationships from breaking up. Paul
stated in the debriefing interview "I placed too much effort into pleasing my partners in
order to gain control with them instead of allowing my partners to love me for who I am."
The belief that being good in bed will keep a relationship together perpetuated mistrust

52

and isolation in Paul's relationships causing relationships to fail. Paul ' s attempts at
controlling his girlfriends by placing too much emphasis in the sexual arena isolated him
from developing a well-balanced relationship.
Patterns of Interactions: The Vicious Cycle
Paul: I had to keep it quiet, I had to hide it. I had to hide it from my
friends. I had to hide it from my parents. I had to hide it from the
environment that I lived in. [... ] Ever since then, I'd always have a
difficult time being very open with my partners. In other words, I found it
difficult to involve my partners in anything other than one on one. [...]It's
like I said, a pattern where I said, if this is going to be a true love of mine
I've got to attend to it and make sure, like I've got to stay on top of it and
make sure that it works. And I can't allow outside interference to damage
it. I was almost secretive about my girlfriends. I never really felt
comfortable.
As a result of his relationship with Claudia, Paul became secretive with future
partners. He kept future relationships quiet, secretive and away from friends in an
attempt to make the relationship feel safe. He believed that if he exposed the relationship
to the ' environment' his partner may just ' go away'. He never wanted to experience the
intense pain and hurt he experienced with Claudia. These restraints bound Paul into a
pattern of behavior that continued to sabotage any relationship he had.
Family and societal rules restrained Jeffs and Paul's growth as individuals. Jeff
and Paul repeated the cycle of behavior they learned in their abusive experience. They
continued to act accordingly following the abuse, because they did not know how to
break free from the oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices that restricted them from
acting differently. These restraints contributed to Jeff and Paul creating a picture of
themselves as having few choices. The beliefs and patterns of interactions prevented

53

them from noticing their strengths. The restraints contributed to the production and
maintenance of abusive behavior (Adams-Westcott & Isenhart, 1990).
Restraints Reinforced Through Society
One helpful component of White's text analogy is that it includes the broader
sociopolitical context of a person's experience. White and Epston (1990) state that the
stories people tell of themselves are framed by a broader sociopolitical context in which
they live. Considering the role society plays in a person's beliefs, attitudes and practices
helps in understanding the consideration of societal 'power' and its effects on lives and
relationships. In Chapter 2, I discussed Foucault's philosophy regarding the issues of
power. He claims that persons are subjugated by the effects of societal 'power' in which
people are divided through practices of isolation, scientific labeling, classification, etc.
Foucault refers to the sense of societal 'power' as shaping of people's lives. The society
in which Jeff and Paul grew up reinforced some of their beliefs and patterns of behavior.
Jeff grew up in a very violent and abusive environment where men ruled the household.
In Phase I, I asked if society played a role in the reinforcement of his beliefs and patterns
of behavior, and this is what Jeff said.
Jeff: "Might makes right."
Jeff believed that using force was normal and natural. There was no compromise,
discussion or interdependence. Power of strength was everything. Paul also grew up in a
society that encouraged men to be cool, lose your virginity at an early age and be a 'real
man'. These beliefs supported Paul in what he did. It gave him a sense of bravado.
Paul: I mean it's taboo to have sex with a member of your family. As far
as feelings of right and wrong, I knew that somebody this young shouldn't

54

be having sex with someone of that age.[ ... ] When you're 14 years old,
you don't want to be like uncool. [... ]I mean you see it on T.V. You
know, the geek gets his first chance with a woman and he chokes right?
And of course, I wasn't going to choke.
The pressures of society as well as what society dictated to be correct or incorrect,
appropriate or inappropriate influenced Paul ' s decision to partake in the sexual activity.
Paul felt a cultural pressure which gave preference to the popular, non-virgin boys over
the uncool, virgin boys. Paul wanted to make sure he belonged to the popular group.
People and societal structures imposed and reinforced both men' s restraints.
These restraints became problematic for Jeff and Paul when they realized that they did
not approve of their own behavior and practices but did not know how to go about
changing them. Jeffs and Paul' s dominant stories revealed the oppressive beliefs,
attitudes and practices that restricted their behavior making them succumb to
passengerhood. They were not in the driver's seat. Their beliefs and cycles of behavior
were driving them. In order to gain an understanding of the impact of the beliefs and
behavior practices, I mapped out the influence the 'problems' or restraints had in their
lives.
Mapping the Influence of the Problem
Through the use of relative influence questions, I was able to engage Jeff and Paul
in a separation of the problem from their lives (White, 1989b). There are two types of
relative influence questions. The type used in the first phase of the interviewing is
described in this Chapter. The second type of relative influence questions is described in
Chapter 5. Relative influence questions invited Jeff and Paul to become aware of their
problem and the influence it had or was having in their lives. In particular, I used

55

White's relative influence questions in Phase I to map the influence 'fear' had in Jeffs
life and ' secrecy' and ' controlling the environment' had in Paul's life.
Mapping the influence of the problems is begun by externalizing the oppressive
beliefs, attitudes or practices that restrict an alternative view of the dominant story, the
prevailing story that Jeff and Paul tell of their life situation. Externalizing is a therapeutic
technique that separates the person from the problem and aids people in challenging the
'truths' that specify their lives (White & Epston, 1990). Externalizing the problem from
the person opens conceptual space for people to take an active stance to escape the
influence the problem plays in their life (Tomm, 1989).
Up to this point in the interview, the predominant theme in Jeffs story was that of
fear. Words describing how scared Jeff felt are easily identified in his transcripts.
Statements like "I was scared, always scared." were frequently heard and seen. Jeff lived
his childhood scared to death. It was this fear that prevented Jeff from taking control
back into his life and leading it the way he wanted. There was a time when Jeff had
mentioned feeling guilty and angry, but he discounted their importance. I explored ' Fear'
as I felt it was of most significance and checked it out with Jeff to see if he felt this was
the case.
LFG: Now we're just going to talk a little bit about the current, the
present now, to see what role these fears, being scared, that seems to be
the largest emotion that overwhelmed you as a child. That was the biggest
thingJeff: It was.
LFG: So what I want to know is, then, in what way has 'Fear' - kind of
externalized this thing, as being a thing on its own - in what way has
'Fear' had an effect on your life?

56

Jeff: Well, what happened is (pause) that fear became very predominant.
Between my 18th and 22nd year. What happened is - I went through a
number of emotional changes where I had some good relationships, but all
of a sudden, you know, the things that happened between my grandfather
and myself seemed to take over. I allowed them to take over again, and I
did become involved in power relationships with men, OK.
LFG: So it interfered with relationships.
Jeff: Yeah.
LFG: "How does 'Fear' impact your relationships now with family or
wife, job or friends?
Jeff: I guess I'm a strict disciplinarian because I always had this sense of
fear, well I'm going to lose control and that won't happen. But it's just
like sometimes it's there and I don't need to think like that.
LFG: So what does 'Fear' try to make you do, even still in the future.
You say it' s kind of there. What does itJeff: Well sometimes I just get angry, and I just feel like a need or desire
to lash outLFG: So 'Fear' wants you to kind oflash outJeff: Well not fear- I want to do it. Like, out of the sense of fear, I feel
like I want to do it, but I say no, no, come on, come, don' t do this.
I capitalized and put single quotes around 'Fear' in the text to define it as a
separate entity from Jeff. My style of talking in the excerpt above demonstrates the
externalizing technique. This type of questioning provides a broad field of information
from which alternative stories can be found. Externalizing the fear encouraged a
conceptual separation of the problem from Jeff and provided him with a conceptual space
to view 'Fear' differently. However, Jeff did not really accept the externalizing idea as he
has already extensively processed his lived experience. He began reclaiming his

57

personhood at age 23, twenty years ago. Externalizing 'Fear' did not have the impact it
may have had for Jeff because at the time of the interview he was not suffering from his
problem.
The interview with Paul, on the other hand, showed a different level of processing
his lived experience. Shortly after the abuse, Paul viewed his experience as a positive
event. When I asked Paul how the abusive experience impacted his life today, the effects
of the oppressive beliefs and attitudes started to become clear.
LFG: I'm just going to stop you there, because you've said a lot and I am
getting confused. What I hear you saying is, your perception of the abuse
was positive, however, secrecy was enforced. I hear secrecy, and this
secrecy, although you may not have recognized it at the time, secrecy was
enforced because this was a relationship you could not talk about.
Paul: Yes. That was the abuse.
LFG: That was the abuse.
Paul: That was the abuse. Not the sexual contact. The abuse was the
having to keep it quiet and then when I wanted to continue, it was just cut
off from me and I was never, never by her, given an explanation. I was
never let down easy. I was never - and it kills me that it has happened in
relationships since then. Where the person has just walked away. And
what hurts me the most is not getting a why. I mean, if you're going to
walk away, you're going to break up with somebody, at least tell them
why. Don't just leave it. And that was the hardest thing for me. That was
the abuse. It wasn't the relationship itself. It was the how it was cut off
and how it had to be kept quiet.
LFG: How did 'Secrecy' impact your life then, and how does ' Secrecy',
in a sense still impact your life now?
Paul: I've always been very aware of- I guess it's OK to be a little
dishonest ifyou're saving somebody' s feelings. You know, it's kind ofit's brought up issues where I've felt as long as I'm sparing somebody's
feelings- either in a relationship or in a friendship, it's OK to keep quiet
about certain things, you know, if you're sparing somebody' s feelings.
And I've always been one to want to be up front and honest with my
friends.

58

I continued to explore how 'Secrecy' had an impact on any decisions he made.
Since the abusive experience, Paul has always needed structure in his life and he doesn't
like surprises. He described how there is secrecy between this person and that person and
the stress level is unbelievable. 'Secrecy' has sabotaged relationships between Paul and
his partners even though he has desired to be open and honest. When asked what kinds of
things 'Secrecy' had him worrying about lately he said:
Paul: I guess my biggest fear is screwing up again. You know, I'd like to
resolve and rectify any of the responses, negative responses that I've
developed as a result of the abuse. I'd like to have it worked out. Like if
it means I have to go to counselling or seek some kind of professional
help, or just work it out in my mind, rationalize it, put it to rest, put it
behind me so I don't make the same mistakes that I made in the past.
That's probably the biggest fear for the present and the future.
'Secrecy' plagued Paul's relationships. His beliefs about 'Secrecy' and that it is
"OK" to be a little dishonest prevented open and honest communication between Paul
and his partner. The second part of Paul's problematic patterns of behavior was his need
to maintain control over the relationship's environment. This idea was not completely
clear to me until my second interview with Paul. The second interview was still a part of
Phase I, where I was trying to achieve a clear picture of his dominant story. Paul's
second interview consisted of clarifying different points made in interview one. While
gaining clarity in a variety of places, I worked hard to explore what other restraint
restricted Paul from living freely with a partner, without feeling the need to isolate his
partner from outside influences. Michael White stresses the importance of externalizing
those problems the clients view as restricting in their lives. If the client does not agree
with the choice of word or words to be externalized, the therapeutic process will not have

59

the needed impact. I wondered if Paul's major theme was hurt, or rejection, or lack of
trust, fear of being exposed, etc. Then I asked him to clarify those patterns that had
created some difficulties in his life, a piece of text I remembered from the first interview,
and Paul replied " well the big thing is the secrecy and the wanting to control the
environment surrounding my relationship, so that if feels safer." These two points were
revealed as the two major themes that maintained Paul in an oppressive lifestyle
regarding his female relationships. Paul politely accepted the idea of externalizing these
restraints as 'monsters' .
Externalizing the oppressive beliefs, attitudes or practices that restrict Jeff and
Paul and mapping the influence these problems had or still have in their lives provides a
broad, detailed description of their dominant stories. Their stories contain evidence of the
beliefs and patterns of interaction that prevent Jeff and Paul from living free from the
oppressive lifestyles that at particular times still control their life.

Summary
Jeffs and Paul's dominant stories depict a description of their lived experience.
Their stories are based upon their interpretation of their lived experience and those
aspects of their stories they choose to remember and retell. Jeffs and Paul's dominant
stories contain evidence of the styles of recruitment demonstrated by their perpetrators to
control and manipulate them into their abusive experience and the repercussions of the
oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices imposed upon them. Predominant in the stories
are the restraints consisting of beliefs and vicious cycles confining them to a problematic
lifestyle and how these restraints were reinforced through cultural messages. Mapping the

60

influence of the problem using relative influence questioning clarifies the extent to which
the problems interfere in their lives and relationships. The information contained in the
dominant stories do not highlight Jeff's and Paul's strengths or resources that have at
times enabled them to escape the influence of the problems in their lives. Part two of the
relative influence questions are explored in Chapter 5. This line of questioning engaged
Jeff and Paul in a conversation that searched for and explored the unique outcomes and
alternative stories that enabled them to identify previously neglected but vital components
of their lived experience.

61

CHAPTER FIVE
ALTERNATIVE STORIES
Chapter Four provided a descriptive account of Jeffs and Paul's dominant stories.
Their dominant stories contain oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices imposed upon
them as children. These beliefs and patterns of behavior became the restraints restricting
Jeff and Paul to a problematic lifestyle. I externalized the restraints to map the problems'
spheres of influence in Jeffs and Paul's lives and relationships. A thorough mapping of
the presence of the problem in the two men's lives provided a broad field from which to
ascertain unique outcomes that provide the foundation for alternative stories.
I used Michael White's questioning protocol in Phase II. White's questioning
protocol contains four categories of questions called unique outcomes, unique account,
unique redescription and unique possibilities. This questioning involved Jeff and Paul in
verbalizing descriptions of alternative stories. The questioning confronted gaps in their
knowledge of themselves. Phase II questioning encouraged Jeff and Paul to fill in these
gaps by identifying unique outcomes. Unique outcomes are the times when Jeff and Paul
did not give into their restraints.
In this chapter we will see how Jeff and Paul challenged the oppressive beliefs,
attitudes and practices. A thorough investigation of Jeffs and Paul's alternative stories
revealed how they, at times, reclaimed their personal agency. A thorough investigation of
their alternative stories had a direct impact on their self perception and awareness of
personal resiliency characteristics.

62

Relative Influence Questions: Part II
The first type of relative influence questions outlined in Chapter 4, described the
influence the problem had in the two men's lives. The second type of relative influence
questions explores times when Jeff and Paul had more influence over their problems.
Tomm (1989) proposes that this set of questions highlights personal resources in
overcoming the influences of their problems. In the interviews, I invited Jeff and Paul to
describe situations when they took action against their problems. This line of questioning
brought forth an awareness of the times when they had taken back control in their lives.
Tomm comments how an increased sense of personal agency; a capacity to intervene in
one's life, may be achieved in the therapeutic conversation. The conversation can bring a
recognition in the client that options do exist; a choice to either continue to submit to
their problems or to reject the invitations. During the course of this interview, Jeff and
Paul explored new alternatives to their situations. This new awareness opened conceptual
space that enabled them to explore new behaviors, new thoughts and new self
perceptions.
This process of exploring alternative stories begins with a search and exploration
of unique outcomes. Unique outcomes are the times or occasions in the participants' lives
when they did not give into the oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices that specified
how they should live their lives. The types of unique outcome questions I used were:
Was there a time when you could have been stopped in your tracks by (restraint) but you
withstood it instead?; Were there times in your life when you were able to escape
(restraint)?; Can you recall a time when you could have given into (restraint) but didn't?

63

Searching and exploring unique outcomes challenges the restraints that had locked Jeff
and Paul into a problem-saturated description of their life story. Jeffs and Paul's
dominant stories in Chapter 4 depict an example of a problem-saturated description.
In the course of Phase II questioning and following the discovery of a unique
outcome, I asked questions that plotted this event into the context of some pattern of
events that derived at a unique account. "Unique account questions invite family
members to make sense of the unique outcome by locating it within a pattern or class of
events that are linked in time and place. Unique outcomes are plotted into the landscape
of action" (White, 1989, p. 42). Some examples of this type of questioning are: How did
you encourage that strong part of you?; How did you get yourself ready to take this step?;
What preparations led up to it?; What were you thinking at the time?; Have you been
advising yourself differently?; What sort of training did you do to prepare your
relationship to decline the invitation to cooperate with the problem?
The next types of questions are unique redescription questions. "Unique
redescription questions invite family members to ascribe significance to the unique
outcomes and unique accounts through redescription of themselves, others and their
relationships. These questions encourage family members to operate in the domain of
consciousness and to call forth alternative knowledges." (White, 1989, p. 43). Examples
of the type of questions I asked in this category were: What personal qualities could
these achievements indicate?; What difference does realizing this make to how you feel
about and treat yourself?; So what do these things tell you about yourself that the

64

feelings had been hiding from you?; What do these discoveries tell you about what you
want for your life?
The last category of questions is called unique possibility. "Unique possibility
questions invite family members to speculate about the new personal and relationship
futures that are attached to the unique accounts and unique redescriptions." (White, 1989,
p. 44). Examples of these types of questions include: What difference will knowing this
about yourself make to your next step? What new possibilities would open up for you if
you were to side more with this new picture that you have of yourself as a person? What
new possibilities might these changes open up for you?
Searching and exploring unique outcomes, placing them in time, attaching
meaning to those events and exploring possibilities for the future helped Jeff and Paul to
create a new description of their own life stories. As Jeff and Paul broke free from the
performance of their old story, they experienced a capacity to control and influence their
lives and relationships.
Exploring Alternative Stories
Jeff managed to overcome his oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices imposed
upon him as a child. He broke free from the problem-saturated description of his life and
moved into a lifestyle free from restraints. My curiosity revolved around wondering how
Jeff managed to reclaim his personhood and how he managed to break free from the fear
that ruled his life for so long. Phase II of the interview explored Jeffs alternative stories,
a version of the dominant story that did not get a chance to be expressed.

65

Although Jeffs dominant story from age 3 to 23 was a problem-saturated
description of his life story, there were still hints of Jeff attempting to challenge these
notions imposed upon him from family members and societal labeling. In this interview
with Jeff, I was curious to know how Jeff managed to escape isolation, how he managed
to weight train to dissipate anger rather than slipping into old habits; how he, at times,
accounted for his ability to resist his father and grandfather; how he challenged the
training he grew up with regarding women and relationships; and how he encouraged that_
strong part of himself to not bring himself down to the level of his father and grandfather.
As I explored these unique outcomes, I was able to plot them into alternative
stories about how Jeff was able to challenge his restraints. For example, I would ask Jeff
a series of questions: Was there a time when you could have been stopped in your tracks
by fear but you withstood it instead? How do you account for your ability to do this?
What does this tell you about yourself that you didn't realize before? What difference
could these qualities make to your future? Alternative stories do exist even though they
were not part of the retelling of Jeffs dominant story. As a child and young adult, Jeff
ignored the alternative stories because the beliefs and practices in them did not fit with
the problem-saturated description. Exploring these times in Jeffs life where he managed
to challenge the restraints he grew up with, opened up new descriptions of an old story.
Cultivating these new descriptions elicited the awareness in Jeff of his personal agency,
how, at times, he managed to intervene and take control in his life. This exploration of
his alternative stories enabled him to re-author his life and to side more with this new
description of himself rather than the old description of himself.

66

In contrast, searching for Paul's alternative stories took place in the present.
Paul's oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices, the main issues of 'Secrecy' and
'Controlling the Environment' were searched and explored as we talked.
Paul's interview for Phase II was composed of searching for times in his life when
'Secrecy' and 'Controlling the Environment' did not influence his actions and behaviors
and sabotage his relationships. I offered to use the term 'monster' to isolate and make
clear to Paul that the restraints were not part of him. I motioned with my hands and
commented about the 'monsters over here'. Paul agreed to using this terminology for his
restraints. Later, Paul used this term on his own in our conversations. Having Paul use
this word on his own signified to me that talking about his restraints as monsters made
sense to him and it made him feel more in control of his own life.
Paul was suffering from his restraints in the present whereas Jeff had already
overcome his restraints and was leading a well-balanced lifestyle that he believed suited
him. I emphasize this to distinguish why Paul had 'monsters' and Jeff did not. Although
Jeff had reclaimed his personhood many years ago and Paul started to view his life from a
different perspective as we spoke, they showed similar characteristics in how they
reclaimed their personal agency.
How Jeff and Paul Reclaimed Their Personal Agency
Three themes emphasize how Jeff and Paul were able to escape from their
problem-saturated life stories. The themes tend to overlap somewhat and sometimes a
quote may contain aspects of other themes embedded in the quote. The three themes that

67

describe how Jeff and Paul, at times, took back the control in their lives, are: Living in
Balance; Reclaiming Freedom To Choose; and Being Open to Learning.
Living in balance. The theme, 'Living in Balance' consists of two parts. The first
part involves the inner core which is a feeling experienced at the ' gut' level where Jeff
and Paul sensed something was either right, wrong, good or bad. The inner core can be
compared to our intuition. The second part of this theme involves living in balance with
actions and feelings. The occasions when Jeff and Paul managed to escape their restraints
involved incidents where their actions and feelings balanced and a sense of 'this feels
right' was experienced. To live in balance is a challenge for Jeff and Paul for they have
lived with imbalance for a great part of their lives. The following conversation provides
an example when Jeff was living in balance.
I asked Jeff how he learned a new way to dissipate his anger through weight
lifting instead ofbeing violent towards others like his grandfather and father. Although
there were times when Jeff did use violence, there were also times when he did not. I
searched for those times.
Jeff: Well I did not like being hurt. I know how it made me feel. It made
me feel low, it made me feel degraded and I decided that I would never
want to put anyone else smaller than myself in a position like that.
LFG: So how had you the courage to challenge anger in a more positive
form?
Jeff: Well as I said before, I felt that ifl were physically stronger I would
be more confident in myself and I would have more control over myself
and so I just started lifting weights.
LFG: Were there any preparations that led up to it?
Jeff: Well I guess it was a psychological preparation, an accumulative
kind of process where I would see older boys with good muscle tone

68

feeling good about themselves and not being bullies and being calmer and
I started to decide well I want to be like these guys. They are stronger,
they are confident, they work in a garage or a grocery store and they are
good workers, people like them. So I decided to emulate those boys and I
studied hard in school. I decided that ifl read more and started doing
physical things that I would feel better about myself and I started to.
LFG: So did you know this about you or is this something new, that you
chose not to go in the path that you were brought up because you were
influenced by all the other good people in society or the books that you
read [...] and you wanted to be like that and you talked about not wanting
to lower yourself down to someone' s level. So did you know this about
you?
Jeff: Yes I did like, it was an intuitive, visceral feeling that ifl did
something that was going to be destructive towards someone else, I would
end up feeling worse about myself.
Living in balance became very important to Jeff. His actions needed to be
congruent with his feelings and when this happened he felt good about himself. He was
back in the 'driver's seat' of life, if only for a moment. He knew at an instinctual level
what was right and wrong. He began to know that hurting other people would go against
what he believed to be the 'right thing to do'. Jeff worked hard to challenge the
oppressive practices of his childhood. He used other people in society as his role models
of how he would like his life to be. He did not want to lower himself to be like his father
and grandfather. Learning to live in balance with actions and feeling and trusting his
intuition enabled Jeff to begin to take back control in his life.
The following conversation I had with Paul revolved around 'Secrecy'. We were
exploring times when 'Secrecy' did not interfere in a relationship.
LFG: So in any relationships that you've been in, have there been times
when Secrecy has wanted to prevent you from being open with your
partner, but you chose to fight it instead and not give into 'Secrecy'?

69

Paul: Un-hunh. Yes, I'd have to say -.I'd have to agree with that. But
there have been times where it's been difficult as well. Where let's say, if
I've been in a situation where I've had someone who is really important in
my life, and somebody who is not as important, another female friend, say,
came to town or something like that. Whereas I didn't want to tell the
person that I was closest to that this person came into town, because I
knew that they would feel hurt.
LFG: But did you tell them?
Paul: Yes, I did.
LFG: So how did you give yourself priority? At that time, to tell the
person instead of giving into 'Secrecy'?
Paul: How did I give myself priority?
LFG: Right.
Paul: Well basically- my own personal integrity or choice is to be up
front and honest. And I felt it was more important for that than to
sabotage my own ideals of that. It was important and it was a conscious
decision. I had to decide was I going to or not.
LFG: It was important for you to live in balance with what you believed
to be true and how you act.
Paul: Exactly.
We explored a little more about Secrecy and then I asked:
LFG: So what do these discoveries tell you about what you want for your
life and for future relationships?
Paul: I need honesty for myself. I need to be true to myself, I guess. I
have to maybe rather than being so resilient and doing what the other
person wants so much, there has to be a balance, at least in my own
personal life as far as my standards go for myself. And how I conduct
myself in the relationship. I have to be true to myself first and then I can
be - malleable in the relationship. Giving to that person in how they like
me to give - as first of all I am true to myself, and what my own standards
are.

70

Paul is beginning to understand that he needs to live in balance with his actions,
morals of right and wrong, and his inner desires in order to escape the oppressive
practices and beliefs he used in his female relationships. Giving into 'Secrecy' robs Paul
of his personal integrity. Paul was aware of the times when he may 'mingle' with two
women at the same time. Paul knows that he should not, but the strong internalized
restraint of ' Secrecy' he has internalized has become a hard habit to break. Exploring a
time when he did not give into ' Secrecy' exposed a time when he took control of his life
and felt good about his actions. He tells about a time when he was open and honest, a
behavior he sensed at the gut level as a way to be true to himself.
Claudia met her needs at Paul's expense. As Paul engaged in other relationships,
he continued to sacrifice his needs to please his partner first. My questioning highlighted
for Paul his need to take care of himself first and that his actions and feelings must match.
As a result of our conversation, Paul slowly started to generate a new description of
himself and the way that he would like to be. Paul' s description of himself was one that
practiced honesty and openness with female partners, a value he strongly believed in as a
child. This new description expressed balance and integrity and a freedom from
' Secrecy'.
Desires and wants pulled Paul and Jeff forward toward a more balanced life. Old
habits encouraged and pulled them both back into imbalance. What needed to occur for
Jeff and Paul to start living more in balance was for them to realize they had a choice.
They had the power to change old habits and challenge the truths that specified their
lives. This is articulated by the second theme which illustrates how Jeff and Paul started

71

to make their own decisions based on what they wanted to do rather than allowing their
habits, fears and impulses control their lives.
Reclaiming the freedom to choose: Awareness of personal agency. Being
assertive and taking back control in their lives illustrates the second theme. As Jeff grew
older, stronger and smarter he started to reach his own personal threshold where he
refused to take any more abuse. He discovered that he had the freedom to choose how he
would run his life. It became clear throughout Jeff's life narrative, that at times, and in
various developmental stages, Jeff took risks and started fighting back to regain control in
his life. The following examples illustrate how Jeff reclaimed his freedom to choose.
Jeff:
• "Well I just refused to go see my grandfather."
• Well anger, accumulative anger built up inside of me. You know it
was a very long process that I went through and finally I started acting
on it. I started saying no. I am not going to go anywhere with Fred. I
am not going to go anywhere with my grandfather. So I refused to do
it.
• I can remember when Fred wanted me to get on the back on the
motorcycle and I wouldn't get on with him, I just would not, and he'd
pick me up and I was trying to get away from him.
• I refused for the simple reason that he was going to hurt me more than
even I could take.
• Well I ran away from my grandfather.
• Well I was not always going to put up with that.
• Well I started thinking well dammit, I can have a girlfriend and do all
the things that men and women like to do.
• Yes, I started becoming stubborn because it started occurring to me
that if people didn't have enough sense to give me a bit of autonomy
and a bit of peace that I have to fight for it, so that's what I started
doing.
Jeff started to learn how to meet his needs without sacrificing his integrity at the
hands of his grandfather and father. He started to challenge the oppressive practices that

72

imprisoned his spirit. Jeff was aware of what was right and wrong at a visceral level. He
knew, from observing others the inappropriateness of what was happening to him and he
would no longer tolerate it. Reclaiming the freedom to choose was a process that took
time. Jeff appeared to have an inner threshold reference point telling him when enough
was enough. He refused to sacrifice who he was as a human being.
Paul also started to learn to speak up. Following is a conversation we had where
we explored a time when 'Controlling the Environment' had less of an influence in a
female relationship.
LFG: Can you recall another occasion when you could have given into
'Controlling the Environment' but didn't- times when you and your
partner did go out and do things with other people?
Paul: Un-hunh. Yeah, there was a time where I went out with a girlfriend
ofmine, and she was just graduating from nursing school and we'd gone
out to a party. It was early in the relationship- we were still getting to
know one another. And she did something involving drugs which really
shocked me, being a nurse, and I suppose if I was more into Controlling
the Environment, that I wouldn't have allowed myself to see her again
after, because basically, I don't know ifl gave her an ultimatum, but I told
her it was unacceptable, and actually she surprised me and told me she
didn't expect me to call again. And I saw the value and the potential in
her, and I thought well, you know, you take it a day at a time. And I can
make the right decision about things like this. So rather than saying no - I
just don't want any part of this, this isn't where I'm at- I allowed my inner
strength and faith in that maybe there is something here to guide me.
LFG: How was it that you were able to stop yourself from being
completely overtaken by 'Controlling the Environment'?
Paul: I guess the thing is I took my time.[ ... ] I was able to take time away
from her and away from the relationship to think about it - what I wanted
to do. Consider my own desires and I guess that was a lot of it, perhaps in
like this controlling monster, where I want to control the environment.
Perhaps it also generates a feeling of insecurity where you feel you have to
act immediately, you have to do something about it or the consequence of
loss will be there. I'd given myself time to think it through, and deal with

73

it, rather than feeling so emotionally involved, and rushed, and insecure,
that I was able to think it through and do what I felt confident in doing.
From the rejection in his abusive relationship, Paul learned to protect himself in
future relationships and he developed insecurities that they would leave. These
insecurities made Paul react to circumstances immediately without giving the situation
another thought. For example, Paul had stated in a general conversation with me how a
girlfriend of his arrived at his home later than expected and he instantly felt insecure
thinking that maybe she was up to something. In refusing to experience hurt and
rejection again, Paul made a rushed decision and accused her of having an affair. This
perpetuated more insecurities in the relationship. In the interview excerpt described
above, Paul had just begun a new relationship with this nurse and therefore still felt in
enough control to make decisions that were good for him. Choosing to take time out to
think was unusual for Paul in relationships where he became deeply involved. Paul
recognized that on this occasion it was important for him to make decisions that reflected
his values and morals and not be controlled by the ' Controlling the Environment' monster
that instilled insecurities. Paul started to discover he has the freedom to choose to live his
life the way he wants to rather than being passively subjected to it.
In this interview of discovering alternative stories, Paul began to realize his
personal agency, his ability to take back the control in his life if he so chooses.
Following is an example of Paul escaping the influence of ' Controlling the Environment'
monster.
LFG: So what do you think this might tell you about your ability that you
wouldn't have otherwise known?

74

Paul: I don't know, it seems kind of abstract to me now, but perhaps it
identifies that my inner abilities, my inner strengths are stronget than the
monster. And that I do have the ability to change the behavior patterns.
And that the monster is just a pattern and something that I can change, that
I do have the ability to deal with.
LFG: How could you teach your monster that you can appreciate yourself
without taking its side? What can you say to it? What can you teach it?
Tell it something about you that you appreciate in you and that you are not
going to take its side.
Paul: That I appreciate the person that I am. That I have the choice to
make my own decisions. That I don't have to give in to it. That I prefer to
not give in to it and that I would rather empower myself to make positive
choices, rather than give in to its control.
LFG: So what could you do that would prove to this monster that you are
going to be your own person and not a person for it?
Paul: Well I guess the proof is in the pudding. I guess I have to make a
conscious decision not to allow myself that pattern of behavior, and start a
new -like have faith in myself, I guess that I'm going to change the
pattern. That I am going to make sure that I take time to think things
through and not be intimidated and pushed any longer. And I guess I have
to make a conscious decision to do that.
LFG: What does this tell you about yourself that you maybe didn't realize
before?
Paul: I guess the biggest thing is that - is that I have the ability to change a
behavior that I didn't realize was something almost external that was- I
mean it was a pattern, but it was something that was not - is not a part of
me. It's not the way I am. It's not the way I am. It's something that is
changeable, that is something that I can choose to develop the way I want.
At this point in the interview, Paul started to discover his personal agency. Paul
realized he had the power to decide how he wanted to run his life; with or without the
monster. The questioning for Phase II illuminated the alternative stories that are seldom
expressed as part of the dominant story. These counter plots encouraged Paul to give a
new description of his life and what he might want for his future. Paul began to re-author

75

his life in a dominant story free from the restraints that locked him into a problemsaturated description ofhis life story.
Apart from Paul and Jeff discovering the freedom to choose, other people and
societal structures provided role models and possible options in life that Jeff and Paul
could choose to emulate. Jeff and Paul remained open to learning better ways to deal
with their life.
Being open to learning: Finding a better way to be. As Jeff and Paul became
aware of different problematic practices in their lives, they reclaimed their personal
agency by being open to learning and finding a better way to live. Jeff began to notice
other people in his family who acted in the way he preferred. He also tried to live by the
rules of the Bible. Paul began evaluating his own behavior and started realizing that how
he acted was not improving the quality of his relationships. He began opening himself up
to new options and other ways to be.
Breaking old habits is difficult. Only when we desire to be another way, when
we see others out in the world that model what we want to be like, can we then have
something concrete to focus on to make changes. Drawing from Gregory Bateson's
work, Michael White discusses Bateson's notion regarding 'news of a difference.' White
quotes Bateson who says "it is the perception of difference that triggers all new responses
in living systems" (White & Epston, 1990, p.2). Awareness of people, societal influences
like the church, and just being around family members who modeled how Jeff desired to
be, provided Jeff with the ' news of a difference' that opened new doors to learning how
to change.

76

Jeff: It was a sense of me wanting to be like my second cousins on my
father's side. You know normal healthy kids. That was what I wanted
because it made me feel good, it did not make me feel angry, it did not
make me feel worthless [... ] and I knew that I was better than just being
relegated[ ... ] I always noticed that my second cousins parents were nice
to them, they were very relaxed people and at their grandparents they were
very good to me and they weren't sinister like my grandfather and that's
where I started developing the idea that there are normal people out there.
The church also influenced Jeffs life.
Jeff: Like I said at the point it would have been easy to sink to be
degraded[ ... ] there was a parable that the Sunday school teacher used to
tell us that if you chose the high rocky hard road it would lead you to
heaven, if you took the low, easy road it descended to hell. And I guess
that was the paradigm that I pursued, cause I knew that if I was going to
try to normalize my self perception, normalize my relationships with other
people and try and fit within a larger societal kind of context, I knew that I
would have to learn things other parents have already taught their kids.
Interacting with people outside Jeffs immediate family provided information that
taught Jeff about a different way to live. According to Jeff, this new information fit
more with his wants and desires out of life. The importance of having a variety of role
models seemed to be critical in his wanting to change his lifestyle and be somebody
different. Jeff also mentioned earlier how he would emulate confident boys with good
muscle tone. Jeffs acute awareness enabled him to observe different ways of being.
Through books and other people in Jeffs world, he put together a collage of the
characteristics he would like to embed in his own personality and that is what he did.
Paul repeatedly tried to protect his relationships from outside influences in order
to protect himself from feeling extreme hurt and rejection. Slowly, Paul realized no
matter how hard he tried, it was never enough.

LFG: So how were you able to refuse the hold Controlling the
Environment monster had on you?

77

Paul: Well I guess it's come to accepting that relationships are based on
freedom of choice. [... ] It came down to the fact that words can only mean
so much based on the sincerity and the honesty of the people that are
speaking the words. Because actions speak volumes. [... ] It' s a person' s
actions that count, I guess. So the thing is, I came to realize you can't
control the other person. You can have an effect on the environment, but
you can't control it to the extent that the person is going to do, necessarily
what you want.
LFG: So how did you encourage that strong part of you to learn to just let
it go and believe that relationships are based on freedom of choice?
Paul: Well I guess the thing is I realized that the other way was a losing
battle. [...] The same problems kept happening- the same negative
responses kept repeating itself and I felt more exposed and more
vulnerable. I guess for me it became a defense for myself to protect
myself- to say look it, I can't be responsible for another person's actions
or desires.
LFG: So how were you advising yourself differently? Than a time when
Controlling the Environment was more in control?
Paul: Well, I guess my own personal spiritual belief has helped in that
I've had to put my faith in, in I guess in God, or as some people would say
in the universe. And I've had to learn to be less dependent on others, I had
to focus more on my inner strengths and say, I don't need people around
me to be happy. I can be happy on my own. And if I happen to please
someone, if someone sees me as someone they'd like to be with, then
they're going to choose that regardless of what I am doing - trying to
create an environment for them. They're going to love me for who I am.
Breaking free from restraints is hard work. It appeared that Paul had a threshold
point that signaled to him when enough was enough. Paul' s attempt at protecting himself
from being hurt and rej ected, perpetuated his problem of insecurity. However, Paul
reached a point where he realized his behaviors were ineffective. Paul started to break
free from the restraint of ' Controlling the Environment' by being aware of his actions and
discovering his freedom to choose a different way. Having a desire to find a better way

78

to be enabled Paul to slowly start escaping from the oppressive beliefs and practices that
specified his life.
Reclaiming Personal Agency Takes Time
Jeff and Paul both openly admit that breaking free from old habits of behavior and
taking back control in one's life is no easy task.
Jeff: It's taken an active 20 year process to come to where I am today.
Like I say, I am 43 years old and it's taken time to get here there was a
conscious effort on my part to try and develop that.
Paul: I think it's something that you have to develop and work on
continually. I think it's- I don't think you're ever really there. I think that
there's always the possibility like I think you have to set your standards
and then after you set your standards, you have to live by them.
Overcoming childhood sexual abuse proved difficult for both Jeff and Paul. The
experience developed oppressive beliefs, attitudes and practices that restricted Jeffs and
Paul's ability to live their lives freely. Learning to escape the restraints required inner
strengths, and awareness: an awareness of the signals sent from the 'gut level' to live in
balance with actions and feelings; an awareness of their freedom to choose; and an
awareness to learning a better way to be. These three themes described how Jeff and Paul
reclaimed their personal agency, how they challenged the restraints by taking back
control in their lives. Identifying and exploring times when the two men were active
agents in their lives provided insight into their individual strengths which in turn had a
direct impact on how they now view themselves. Following is Jeffs and Paul's feedback
from the debriefmg interview, Phase III, that explored their awareness of their personal
resiliency characteristics and how the research process impacted on how they now view

79

themselves as a result of exploring their alternative stories. The feedback in Phase III
also validated Michael White's Narrative Approach.
Personal Resiliency Characteristics
Phase I and Phase II of the research process took the participants and myself on a
journey through their life stories. Phase I described their problem-saturated dominant
stories and Phase II described their alternative stories. The alternative stories exposed for
Jeff and Paul, times in their life when they had reclaimed control of who they wanted to _.
be as persons. Having Jeff and Paul develop meaning around these alternative stories
invited a re-authoring of their lives which in turn brought forth their personal resiliency
characteristics. The central question I asked to ascertain information regarding their inner
capabilities was: We've gone through the interview process and as a result of the
interviews, what new insights did you gain about your inner capabilities and inner
strengths as a person?
Jeff: "I realize that I am an extremely resilient person with tremendous
intelligence and a zeal to help other people. [... ] I've learned that I had the
ability to not stifle my anger but acknowledge my anger in situations[... ]
and in an open and logical manner be emotionally honest to that person
and stick to my convictions about my beliefs. The questioning reinforced
that I am psychologically a very tough person. [... ] I am a pugnacious
person. Pugnacious means that you are stubborn and you are insistent
upon a point of view no matter how overwhelming the odds are.
Pugnacious means to be tough but also tough and irritating.[... ] I have a
lot more empathy for people than I thought I did.
Jeff identified his personal resiliency characteristics as tremendous intelligence,
ability to deal with anger, psychologically tough, pugnacious and empathic. These
personality characteristics combined with Jeffs ability to reclaim his personal agency

80

enabled him to overcome his childhood sexual abuse. This question for Paul reinforced
that he did all right under the circumstances.
Paul: The questioning showed me that I have a lot of resiliency.[ ... ] I was
able to deal with what I was confronted with and go on and I think be a
fairly respectable human being[... ] and I don't have a bad outlook on life.
I guess one of the biggest inner strengths it has shown me is that my
parents did a great job raising a son that is fairly self-reliant and self
confident and I haven't had to lean on anybody from where I am today,
I've done it myself.
Paul's personal coping style was to bury the abuse and move on. His philosophy
of life was that it was good and nobody owed him anything. His personal resiliency
characteristics reflected an individual who was and is self-reliant and self-confident.
These characteristics combined with Paul's ability to take back control in his life at
different times enabled Paul at times, to overcome his childhood sexual abuse.
New or Confirmed View of Self
The second part of the debriefing interview asked the question "How has your
opinion of yourself changed from the beginning of the interviews to the end of the
interviews?" Exploring Jeffs and Paul's dominant stories and then contrasting those
stories with alternative stories had a direct impact on how they now view themselves.
This view of self may be new or may simply confirm what they had already known.
Jeff: I realized through this process that I am all right. [... ] I was
struggling to find my sense of worth. Like I knew I was worthy and had
value but you know I feel that now that I am a much more confident
person and I am not afraid to stand for my beliefs. [... ] I am a much more
pugnacious individual than I ever thought I was and I have a lot more
empathy for people than I thought I did.

81

Exploring alternative stories engaged Jeff into meaning making which validated
his inner strengths and confirmed that he is "all right". Paul also realized through this
process that he too is "all right".
Paul: I have to admit I feel better about myself now than I did at the
beginning of the research process. [... ] I've almost had reconciliation with
myself. [... ] Now that I've identified these things that get me down, I feel
more relaxed about things now, it's like I can slow down and take it easier
again. I don't feel like its such a treadmill, it feels like a weight has been
lifted. You know like I've been packing around 100 lbs of crap on my
back for so many years and you get used to it. It may make your legs look
great but your back gets sore and it feels good that I am shedding. I mean
I haven't shed it all yet. I realize I have some work to do but just in the
realization, a weight has been lifted and its very helpful and I feel better
about myself because of that. [... ] I feel like I am just a little more
complete now. I am a little bit stronger in those good qualities that I had
thought of myself and I think some of those bad things I had pent up are a
lot less.
As a result of the research process, Paul experienced an insight into his life and
how he was living his life all these years. He became aware of his 'monsters' and this
insight preceded a new description of his childhood story and his life afterwards. The
process has confirmed for Paul that he is "all right", more complete and capable of
putting his life back in order.
Discussion
Jeffs process of achieving what he has today has been a process of two steps
forward, one step back. He would escape his restraints and then slip back into old
patterns. Exploring Jeffs alternative stories reinforced that he is and was a very
determined, stubborn character who refused to be a passenger in his life. Exhaustive
readings, emulating people in society he admired and having strong beliefs of right and

82

wrong, enabled Jeff to overcome and break free from his abusive experience and the
oppressive practices imposed upon him as a child.
Exploring Paul's alternative stories produced in Paul an awareness of his personal
agency. He discovered that he has the choice to live with or without his monsters. Paul
was always aware of a behavior pattern that seemed to sabotage relationships but he did
not know what the pattern was until we started challenging 'Secrecy' and 'Controlling the
Environment' monsters. When I asked Paul what he now wants for his life, this is what
he said.
Paul: Well, that I still want something more positive, I guess. [... ]Living
more in balance and more, let's say closer to what my ideals early on were
and still are. [... ] And I feel better that maybe I can shed some of it now
and get on with the path as I saw it unfolding .. [.. ] that as long as I am
being honest with myself, I am going to be able to be straightforward and
honest with people that are in my life. Also, that I guess the other thing is,
things that have occurred in the past that I felt may have had an impact on
me, but didn't know how much impact it had on me and what had
manifested in my behavior patterns as a result of these things, like the
questioning, I've gotten answers for now. And with the answers come
release.[ ... ] So I'm going to start working at putting it behind me, and
getting into healthier, more productive patterns in my life, rather than the
old, like I can put the wondering and the questioning of how it has affected
me to rest. I can put it to bed.[ ... ] I've learned something new about
myself. [...]My personal virtues are still pretty strong and intact[... ] and I
still strive to pursue a path with those as much as with those things as my
goal.[ ... ] I want to find a partner in my life. And I don't want those things
to interfere any longer. [... ]My future could be a lot better served by
escaping their grasp. Less stress- more honesty. [... ]On a day to day basis,
I would be much more relaxed, emotionally stronger, more self-confident,
for sure.[... ] I'm going to feel more comfortable with myself. Be more
relaxed and more confident that I don't have to question my motives quite
as much. I don't have to worry so much about ifl'm doing the right thing,
as long as I follow my basic beliefs. That you know I've learned are still
there. That as long as I do that, the decisions I make in the future, while
they may not always be the best ones, they are going to be the right ones.
[... ] I think my self-esteem is going to be reinforced- certainly. If you
feel better about yourself, your entire outlook is going to be better. And

83

certainly you can't help but feel better about yourself if you are moving in
a more positive direction.
Through the interview process, Paul has become newly aware that he has choices.
Paul's refusal to submit to the effects of his monsters helped to undermine their power.
Phase II for Paul clarified how he now wants his life to be. However, the hard work is
about to begin. Now that Paul has become aware of his problematic behavior lifestyle, he
needs to put energy into changing it, choosing to be someone he has not been in quite
some time. He is able to clearly articulate the shift in perspective with hopes of it
evolving into a new description of himself.
Summary
A thorough investigation into alternative stories resulted in Jeff and Paul reauthoring their lives, increasing their awareness of their personal agency and gaining a
new perspective to an old story. This chapter is a sharp contrast to the descriptions of
recruitment, reinforcement and restraints as described in Chapter Four. Exploring the
alternative stories exposed how Jeff and Paul at times, reclaimed their personal agency.
In reclaiming their personal agency they recovered balance and control in their lives. The
exploration of new possibilities for Jeff and Paul helped to reinforce their future free from
restraints. The last chapter re-examines Michael White' s theory in light of the findings.

84

CHAPTER SIX
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND BEYOND
So far in this study, the life stories of two adult men sexually abused as children
and their resilient capacities that aided them in the surmounting of their abuse have been
revealed, explored and described. This chapter compares and contrasts the resiliency
literature with the three resiliency themes discovered in this study and critically exams
how Michael White's narrative approach enabled the resurrection and identification of the
resilient capacities inherent in Jeff and Paul. I will begin by recalling the origins of the
research.
As a former elementary school teacher and now as a practicing counsellor, I have
encountered children and adults who have suffered from the devastating consequences of
childhood sexual abuse. My curiosity in this project centered around discovering what it
was about people's belief systems that prevented them from healing from the trauma of
abuse. My supervisor suggested exploring resiliency characteristics, rather than
pathological characteristics, to gain an understanding of what it was about those who had
been sexually abused that has enabled them to cope and live reasonably effective lives.
Resiliency, a new concept to me, was appealing because of its positive focus. With my
supervisor, I decided I would use Michael White's narrative approach with two adult men
who identified themselves as resilient to investigate their resiliency characteristics.
White's narrative approach focuses on how sometimes the personal strengths and
resources of individuals allow them to free themselves from the debilitating effects of
their problems.

85

My research used White's narrative approach to explore how two resilient adults
who were sexually abused as children, managed to overcome these childhood
experiences. As a researcher, I also explored the impact Michael White' s questioning
protocol had on the research participants' awareness of personal resiliency characteristics
and on their self- perception. White' s narrative approach is intended to be therapeutic in
that it provides a structure for individuals to construct a perception of themselves which
may be different from the perception they held prior to the interviews.
At the onset of the research, I assumed White' s process would uncover the
participants' personal resiliency characteristics. However, in the concluding phase of this
research, I discovered, not only did White' s approach uncover personal resiliency
characteristics such as stubbornness, pugnacity, empathy, self-reliance, intelligence etc.
but it also revealed the resilient capacities within Jeff and Paul that allowed them to
recover balance and control in their lives. The utilization of these resilient capacities
became the power they needed to help them surmount their abuse.
Based upon Michael White's narrative approach, I structured Phase I and Phase II
of the study very carefully by following his process. The entire research process engaged
Jeff and Paul in a therapeutic conversation. I accessed Jeffs and Paul' s lived experiences
through their dominant stories in Phase I. The dominant stories described how Jeff and
Paul interpreted their life prior to, during and following their sexual abuse. A content
analysis of the transcribed data revealed evidence of how Jeff and Paul were recruited
into their experience, the repercussions of the abuse and how the repercussions developed
restraints that prevented them from breaking free from their abuse. Phase II involved a

86

search and exploration of the times when the subjects' lives were not plagued by
problems. A content analysis of the transcribed data for Phase II revealed how Jeff and
Paul managed to reclaim their personal agency.
The three themes describing how Jeff and Paul reclaimed their personal agency
identify the resilient capacities within both men. I chose to call ' Living in Balance' ,
'Reclaiming the Freedom to Choose' and 'Being Open to Learning' resilient capacities
because personal agency, as defined by White (1990) is a person experiencing a capacity
to intervene in one's life. Capacity as defined in the Webster dictionary is the potential
for experiencing or appreciating the power to produce, perform or deploy. Therefore, the
types of capacities within the two men are the three themes mentioned above; the
potential to experience balance, freedom, and hope of finding a better way to be by
learning from others. The resilient capacities were a part of both Jeff and Paul. However,
how each man amplified these capacities defined to what degree they were able to
overcome their abuse.
Although I have examined resilient adults who experienced child sexual abuse,
the goals of this study are to understand the nature of lived experience through the use of
Michael White' s approach, how White' s approach contributes to the awareness of
personal agency and to the awareness of personal resiliency characteristics. Researching
resilient adults using Michael White' s approach is critical to understanding how his
approach lends itself to uncovering the resilient capacities and how these capacities can
be mobilized.

87

Although understanding resilient adults who were sexually abused as children
could easily become the main focus of this thesis, it must remain in the background. So
before moving on to the discussion of Michael White' s narrative approach, I will briefly
compare and contrast what the study revealed about the characteristics and capacities of
resilient adults with the literature on resiliency in Chapter 2.
Characteristics and Capacities of the Resilient Adult
My study revealed similar themes to the reviews and empirical reports on
resiliency described in Chapter 2. The academic literature however, focuses primarily on
the internal and external resiliency characteristics of children. Only two studies could be
found that have researched resiliency with adults. Valentine and Feinauer (1993) studied
the resilience factors associated with female survivors of sexual abuse and O' Connell
Higgins ( 1994) researched the resilient adult to find out why some loved well despite
hate. She focused on the process by which resilience develops. Of her 40 subjects, 23
women and 17 men, 58% had experienced repeated sexual or physical abuse, usually
both. I will use these two studies to compare and contrast my fmdings.
A dominant theme in O'Connell Higgins study is the Locus of Hope. This theme
portrays that the resilient children select surrogates, people who act as parental figures,
that provide them the love they need and a vision for a better life. The resilient children
form attachments to the surrogates and internalize the attachments effectively. Valentine
and Feinauer (1993) share a comparable theme called" The Ability to Find Supportive
Relationships Outside the Family". This theme describes how the sexually abused
women sought healthy people and healthy families for support and to act as their role

88

models. These two similar themes parallel my dominant theme of "Being Open to
Learning". Both of my subjects were also open to finding a better way to live by
emulating people in society, family members or the church to provide them with the
surrogate love they needed and as well as information that told them that life can be
different and better.
Another dominant theme in O' Connell Higgins study is described as Faith and
Vision. This theme portrays the resilient people faithfully choosing how to see, faithfully
choosing how to be and faithfully choosing what not to be. These visions were guided
through literature film and the arts. Valentine and Feinauer (1993) identified the theme
"Internal Locus of Control/Recognizing Personal Power." This theme was equated to
subjects realizing they could say ' stop' and subjects believing they could do what they
wanted by taking control of their lives. These themes confirm my theme of "Reclaiming
the Freedom to Choose". Jeff and Paul realized they had options when they started
rejecting what they did not want and started fighting for what they did want which began
the process of both men taking back control into their lives. Resilient persons appear to
have a strong desire to fulfill their visions for a better life by being active agents who are
determined to live out their dreams.
O'Connell Higgins' (1994) ' faith and vision' theme also describe a convictional
knowing arising from Faith Development Theory which describes how people organize
and make sense out of their lives based upon their firmest core understanding of what is
true. Valentine and Feinauer' s (1993) theme of "self- regard" was defined as "the ability
to think well of oneself' (p.220). Their subjects made statements about knowing they

89

were valuable because they had a "gut" feeling and an innate sense that they were worthy.
These themes of Faith as "convictional knowing" and self-regard confirms my theme of
"Living In Balance" whereby it was important for Jeff and Paul to live in balance with
/

their actions and feelings which they experienced, at their core level as being the 'right
thing to do' . O'Connell Higgins states that "we are always involved in an underlying,
ongoing process of making coherent sense of our lives through our deeper convictions,
whether or not these are articulated or conscious" (p.173).
The two studies on resilient adults share extremely comparable findings with my
study. The wording of the themes differ, perhaps due to the approach taken to the study,
but the themes are very similar in nature. Valentine and Feinauer (1993) look at
resilience factors as being partly abilities and partly philosophies. I view my study as
closely resembling O'Connell Higgins (1994) work with resilient adults and the process
by which resilience develops. I view my themes, not as abilities but as capacities
inherent in people that when mobilized, enable people to overcome adversity.
Nevertheless, all studies appear to be speaking a similar language and emphasize
important features of the resilient adult.
The academic literature places emphasis on internal and external characteristics
that enabled people to overcome adversity. 0 ' Connell Higgins ( 1994) believed that
"resilience is a cumulative process, not a product and it is open to all in some measure"
(p.126). In concluding my research I concur with O' Connell Higgins. Both Jeff and
Paul, prior to the research interviews believed they were resilient, meaning they believed
they had recovered or adjusted to their abuse without having suffered any long term

90

effects. The current research process uncovered the same resilient capacities in both men,
however Jeff utilized his resilient capacities regularly throughout his life to recover
balance and control so that he could fulfill his vision of faith and hope for a better life. At
the end of the research process, Paul saw himself as doing very well in many aspects of
his life other than his relationships with women. However, at times, Paul did mobilize
his resilient capacities in his attempt to recover balance and control in his life. Based on
my research with these two men, I believe that both men are resilient but to varying
degrees along a continuum. I also believe that Paul has the potential to increase his
resilience status by amplifying his internal resilient capacities that lie dormant waiting to
become accessed and mobilized. Michael White's narrative approach proved to be a
framework from which to identify and foster resilient capacities in others.
Exploring the resilient adult using Michael White's narrative approach revealed
comparable findings with the other two related studies. So the question remaining,
relates to how White's narrative approach enabled the uncovering and identification of
resilient capacities in Jeff and Paul.
Michael White's Narrative Approach

Engaging Jeff and Paul in a therapeutic conversation using Michael White's
narrative approach successfully led to information regarding the resilient capacities they
employed to set themselves free to recover balance and control in their lives. Although
my original aim was to discover Jeff's and Paul's resiliency characteristics, which both
men identified for me in the debriefing interview, what I discovered as well were the
resilient capacities inherent in both men. When mobilized these resilient capacities

91

propelled personal growth and development towards a better quality life. Following are
the components of White' s approach that enabled the uncovering and fostering of
resilient capacities.
One of the critical components of White' s narrative approach is how he composes
two visual maps that complement each other. One map depicts when the problem has
more influence in a person's life, the problem saturated dominant story. The second map

.

complements the first map by depicting when a person has more influence over the
problem. Exploring times when a person had more influence over their problem(s)
promotes the recognition and identification of resilient strengths and resources of an
individual. Externalizing the problems for Jeff and Paul, and then mapping out the
influence the problem had over Jeff and Paul or the influence Jeff and Paul had over their
problems produced a contrast of stories.
The relative influence questions for the first map allowed the two men to shift the
blame they had internalized against themselves to the responsible parties who hurt them.
For example, it was important for Paul to realize that ' Secrecy' and 'Controlling the
Environment' were a result of the abuse he had suffered from Claudia, as well as
recognizing the powerful influence society played in his beliefs and aSSumptions of self
and what it means to be a man. Placing blame and responsibility where it belongs and
becoming aware ofthe problems' sphere of influence in his life enabled Paul to view his
life events from a new perspective. Establishing how the problems had taken over the
two men's' lives provided contrast to those times when Jeff or Paul had more influence in
their lives. Establishing strong contrasts between the two maps became significant ways

92

in which Jeff and Paul could recognize their resilient capacities that they mobilized when
fighting back.
The relative influence questions used to access information for the second map
identified Jeff's and Paul's competence and resourcefulness in the face of adversity,
thereby exposing the resilient capacities inherent in them. Jeff and Paul experienced a
greater sense of personal agency when exploring the second map because the questioning
allowed them to identify times when they experienced a capacity to intervene in their
lives rather than feeling the self under control. Exploring the second set 9f relative
influence questions brought their resilient capacities to the surface and led to an
awareness and mobilization of these untapped assets. The resilient capacities confirmed
for Jeff what it was that enabled him to surmount his abuse. The questioning for Paul
brought forth an awareness and recognition of how he, at times, had recovered balance
and control in his life. The awareness propelled the mobilization of his resilient
capacities that were dormant most of the time when it carne to female relationships.
Further exploration of the second map promoted the discovery of unique
outcomes. Asking questions regarding the events and meanings surrounding unique
outcomes revealed how the two men interpreted and placed meaning to their events. It is
this meaning making that revealed their resilient capacities. For example, questions that
led to an understanding of how Jeff applied non-violent means to vent his anger were:
How had you the courage to challenge anger in a more positive form?; Were there any
preparations that led up to it?; Did you know this about you or is this something new?.
Exploring the meaning-making surrounding a unique outcome enabled Jeff to reveal how

93

he had used his resilient capacities of"living in balance", "utilizing his freedom to
choose" and "learning from others" to recover balance and control in his life and to
enable him to build towards a vision of hope for a better life. Exploring the meaningmaking process which was associated with times in Jeff's and Paul' s lives when they had
more influence over their problems uncovered their resilient capacities.
0' Connell Higgins ( 1994) stated that to critically examine resilient potential, one
must "explain and amplify the past and present strengths of the traumatized, clarifying the
adaptive strategies that keep them farther from the bottom rather than focusing on why
they are not closer to the top" (p.322). Michael White's process accessed and revealed
Jeffs and Paul's active process of how, over time, they utilized their resilient capacities
to be active agents in their lives. Jeff continually activated his resilient capacities over
time and this enabled him to surmount his abuse. For Paul, his resiliency became
fostered by White's approach of probing his alternative stories and the meanings
associated with these stories which brought to light Paul' s awareness of his resilient
capacities needed to further heal from his abuse. Meaning-making plays a significant role
in the resilient person because understanding how a person interprets their lived
experience and understanding how they connect events together in an attempt to make
coherent sense out of their lives become the truths by which they live their lives. How
people interpret their lived events, combined with how often they amplify their resilient
capacities, defines the degree of resilience.
According to O' Connell Higgins (1994) "like a set of Ukrainian nesting dolls, we
are a collection of selves, simultaneously encompassing all of our previous versions yet

94

understood by the most recent 'us' through the assumptive lens of our current
developmental complexity" (p.70). Michael White' s process celebrates a person' s
resilience by focusing on the capable, strongest and most active of the selves. White' s
process underscores strengths and promotes an awareness of the capacities inherent in all
of us to enable our growth and recover our balance. His process of engaging in a critical
self-examination enabled the resurrection of resilient capacities because he focuses and
elaborates on the strengths people. His process allowed me to see how Jeff and Paul
reclaimed their personal agency to recover the balance and inner security they so
desperately needed in their lives. White's narrative approach was successful in
identifying how Jeff surmounted his tumultuous childhood. Although we were engaged in
a therapeutic conversation, White' s approach was a successful research questioning
protocol to access resilient capacities even though, at the time of the interviews, Jeff was
not currently suffering from any problems. White' s process was also effective in
fostering Paul's resilient capacities. As a result of White's questioning protocol, Paul
became aware of his abusive background and placed blame and responsibility where it
belonged. This began the healing process and identified his internal resilient capacities.
Exploring the unique possibility questions also helped Paul to elaborate and thereby
strengthen his resilient capacities which he may now choose to utilize more often to bring
forth the kind of life he desires. Michael White' s process successfully examined the
wisdom that guided Jeffs and Paul ' s overcoming. His process allowed them to see how
much they struggled but also how much they fought to

~ themselves, even in

---------

--- --

95

minute ways. Overall, I think Michael White' s narrative approach provided a useful and
effective frame through which to view resilient adults.
Conclusion
Michael White' s narrative approach, used as a research tool to interview resilient
adults who had been sexually abused as children, proved to be a successful model in
identifying the resilient capacities that enabled two men to surmount their childhood
sexual abuse. His process also had a direct impact on Jeffs and Paul' s awareness of their
personal resiliency characteristics that helped to keep them from crumbling under the
sheer weight of the effects of their abuse. Overall, White's process and focus on
strengths and times when they were active agents in their lives was an empowering
experience for Jeff and Paul. The process identified their resilient capacities enabling
them to recover from their abuse.
The themes discovered in this study parallel themes found in two related studies.
This is confirming that White' s process is capable of uncovering a person's resilient
characteristics and capacities enabling a person to cope in times of adversity. Based on
past studies on resiliency combined with the current study, I believe all people are
resilient and are made up of resilient characteristics and capacities that help them get
through tough times. However, based on my study, I also believe that people are resilient
in varying degrees. Though most people cope in times of adversity, some people seem to
cope better or more effectively. The strengths and resources appear to rest within each
person. How a person activates and amplifies them determines to the degree to which
they are resilient.

96

Implications For Future Research In Counselling Practice.
Based on this study, I would encourage future research to consider using Michael
White's approach to examine the resilient adult who has experienced another type of
trauma, rather than sexual abuse, in order to compare and contrast the resilient capacities.
At times I found White's questions extremely awkward and complex and my
participants also found them to be very challenging. Based on my experience, I would
encourage people wanting to practice White's approach to modify his questions and his
language style, especially if used with children.
Overall, I believe Michael White's narrative approach has potential and value in
research and practical arenas especially for those in the helping professions.

97

References
Adams-Westcott, J., & Isenhart, D. (1990). Using rituals to empower family
members who have experienced child sexual abuse. In M. Durrant, & C. White (Eds.),
Ideas for therapy with sexual abuse (pp. 37-63). Australia: Dulwich.
Baker, A.W., & Duncan, S.P. (1985). Child sexual abuse: A study of prevalence
in Great Britain. Child Abuse and NeElect. 9, 457-467.
Beardslee, W.R. ( 1989). The role of self-understanding in resilient individuals:
The development of a perspective. American Journal Orthopsychiatric, 59 (2), 266-278.
Besa, D. (1994). Evaluating narrative family therapy using single-system
research designs. Research on Social Work Practice, 4 (3), 309-325.
Briere, J. (1989). Therapy for adults molested as children. New York: Springer.
Bruner, E.M. (1986). Ethnography as narrative. In V.W. Turner, & E.M. Bruner
(Eds.), The anthropolo2y of experience (pp.139-155). Chicago: University ofillinois.
Bruner, J. (1987). Life as narrative. Social Research 54, (1), 11-32.
Cahill, C., Llewelyn, S.P., & Pearson, C. (1991). Long-term effects of sexual
abuse which occurred in childhood: A review. British Journal of Clinical PsycholOEY •

.3Jh 117-130.
Cicchetti, D., & Garmezy, N. (1993). Prospects and promises in the study of
resilience. Development and PsychopatholoEy, 5, 497-502.
Coale, H.W. (1992). Costume and pretend identities: A constructivist' s use of
experiences to co-create meanings with clients in therapy. Journal of Strategic and
Systemic Therapies, 11 (1), 45-55 .

98

Cohler, B.J. (1991). The life story and the study of resilience and response to
adversity. Journal ofNarrative and Life History. 1 (2&3), 169-200.
Cowen, E.L., Wyman, P.A., Work, W.C., & Parker, G.R. (1990). The rochester
child resilience project: Overview and summary of first year findings. Development and
Psychopathology. 2. 193-212.
Draucker, C.B. (1989). Cognitive adaptation of female incest survivors. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 57 (5), 668-670.
Egeland, B., Carlson, E., & Sroufe, L.A. (1993). Resilience as process.
Development and Psychopathology. 5, 517-528.
Epston, D., & White, M. (1992). Experience. contradiction. narrative and
imagination. Australia: Dulwich Centre.
Fish, V. (1993). Poststructuralism in the family therapy: Interrogating the
narrative/conversational mode. Journal ofMarital and Family Therapy. 19 (3), 221-232.
Fonagy, P., Steele, M., Steele, H. , Higgitt, A., & Target, M. (1994). The
Emanuel Miller memorial lecture 1992: The theory and practice of resilience. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 35 (2), 251-237.
Garmezy, N. (1983). Stressors of childhood. InN. Garmezy, & M. Rutter (Eds.),
Stress. coping and development (pp.43-84). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Garmezy, N. (1991). Resiliency and vulnerability to adverse developmental
outcomes associated with poverty. American Behavioral Scientist, 34 (4), 416-430.
Geffner, R. (1992). Current issues and future directions in child sexual abuse.
Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 1 (1), 1-13.

99

Gergen, M.M., Gergen, K.J. (1984). The social construction of narrative
accounts. In M.M. Gergen, & K.J. Gergen (Eds.), Historical social psychology (pp.173189). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hazzard, A. (1993). Trauma-related beliefs as mediators of sexual abuse impact
in adult women survivors: A pilot study. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse. 2 (3), 55-69.
Herrenkohl, E.C., Herrenkohl, R.C., & Egolf, B. (1994). Resilient early schoolage children from maltreating homes: Outcomes in late adolescence. American Journal
Orthopsychiatric. 64 (2), 301-309.
Holland, T.P., & Kilpatrick, A.C. (1993). Using narrative techniques to enhance
multicultural practice. Journal of Social Work Education. 29 (3), 302-308.
Kazdin, A.E., & Tuma, A.H. (1982). Single case research design. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Lisak, D. ( 1994). The psychological impact of sexual abuse: Content analysis of
interviews with male survivors. Journal ofTraumatic Stress. 7 (4), 525-548.
Long, P.J., & Jackson, J.L. (1993). Childhood coping strategies and the adult
adjustment of female sexual abuse victims. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse. 2 (2), 23-39.
Luthar, S.S. (1991). Vulnerability and resilience: A study ofhigh-risk
adolescents. Child Development. 62, 600-616.
Madigan, S.P. (1992). The application of Michel Foucault's philosophy in the
problem externalizing discourse of Michael White. Journal of Family Therapy. 14, 265279.

100

Masten, A. S., Best, K.M., & Garmezy, N. (1990). Resilience and development:
Contributions from the study of children who overcome adversity. Development and
Psychopathology. 2. 425-444.
Master, S.B. (1991). Constructivism and the creative power of the self.
Individual Psychology. 47 (4), 447-455.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A source
book of new methods. London: Sage.
Minuchin, S. (1991). The seductions of constructivism. The Family Therapy
Networker. 15 (5), 47-50.
Morrow, S.L., & Smith, M.L. (1995). Constructions of survival and coping by
women who have survived childhood sexual abuse. Journal of Counselling Psychology.
42 (1), 24-33.
Morse, J. M. (1994). Designing funded qualitative research. InN. K. Denzin, &
Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.220-235). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Neimeyer, R.A. (1993). An appraisal of constructivist psychotherapies. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 61 (2), 221-234.
O'Connell Higgins, G. (1994). Resilient adults: Overcoming a cruel past. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
O'Hanlon, B. (1994). The third wave. Networker, Nov/Dec, 19-29.
Parry, A. (1991). A universe of stories. Family Process, 30,37-54.

101

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.).
London: Sage.
Radke-Yarrow, M., & Brown, E. (1993). Resilience and vulnerability in children
of multiple-risk families. Development and Psychopathology. 5, 581-592.
Redekop, F. (1995). The "problem" of Michael White and Michel Foucault.
Journal ofMarital and Family Therapy. 21 (3), 309-318.
Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57,316-331.
Silver, R., Boon, C., & Stones, M. (1983). Searching for meaning in misfortune:
Making sense of incest. Journal of Social Issues, 39, 81-101 .
Slagle, E.C. (1990). Resilience and human adaptability: Who rises above
adversity? American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45 (6), 493-503.
Speed, B. (1991). Reality exists O.K.? An argument .against constructivism and
social constructionism. Family Therapy, 13, 395-409.
Tomm, K. (1989). Externalizing the problem and internalizing personal agency.
Journal of Strategic and Systemic Therapies. 8 (1), 54-59.
Valentine, L., & Feinauer, L.L. (1993). Resilience factors associated with female
survivors of childhood sexual abuse. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 21 (3),
216-223.
Werner, E.E. (1984). Resilient children. Young Children, November.
Werner, E.E., & Smith, R.S . (1982) Vulnerable but invincible: A longitudinal
study of resilient children and youth. New York: McGraw-Hill.

102

White, M. (1989). Selected Papers. Australia: Dulwich.
White, M. (1992). Deconstruction and therapy. In D. Epston, & M. White
(Eds. ), Experience. contradiction. narrative, and imagination (pp.1 09-151 ). Australia:
Dulwich.
White, M. (1995). Re-authoring lives: Interviews and essays. Australia:
Dulwich.
White, M., & Epston, D. (1990). Narrative means to therapeutic ends. New
York: Norton.
Whitman, N. (1993). A review of constructivism: Understanding and using a
relatively new theory. Family Medicine, 25, 517-521.
Yin, R.K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage
Zimmerman, M.A., & Arunkumar, R. (1994). Resiliency research: Implications
for schools and policy. Social Policy Report, 8 (4), 1-18.

103

Appendix A
Copy of Letter of Informed Consent for Adults
(NOTE: DATE TO BE INSERTED)
To Whom It May Concern:
As a graduate student at the University ofNorthern British Columbia, I am using
a Narrative approach to study the resiliency characteristics of adults who were sexually
abused as children. This research, I believe, will provide insight into the coping behaviors
of adults who have managed to overcome this stressful life event.
I would like you to participate in my research study titled "Adult Sexual Abuse
Survivors Awareness of Personal Resiliency Characteristics: A Narrative Approach."
The purpose of the study is to gain a better understanding of the personal strengths that
have enabled adults to overcome childhood sexual abuse and to investigate if using the
narrative approach has an impact on the subject's awareness of their personal resiliency
characteristics. If you decide to participate in the study, you will be interviewed
approximately four times; each session will be about 1 to 1.5 hours in duration. The
interview will consist of a semi-structured interview protocol to elicit your life story and
how you were able to overcome childhood sexual abuse. There are foreseeable benefits
from your participation. In particular, the process may increase your awareness of your
personal strengths.
Your participation is completely voluntary and you will be free to refuse or stop at
any time without penalty. All interviews will be audio-recorded for purpose of
transcription. Your identity and all recorded information will be kept strictly
confidential. To further ensure confidentiality, a pseudonym will be used for the purpose
of transcription.
If you have any concerns or require further information, please feel free to
contact the following:
Liana Grant
Mackenzie, B.C.
Phone: 997-5227

below.

Ron Lehr. PhD
Faculty of Health and Human Sciences
University ofNorthern British Columbia
Phone: 960-5572

Please read the following paragraph, and, if you agree to participate, please sign

I agree to participate in the research study as described above. I understand that
any information about me obtained from this research will be kept strictly confidential. I
further understand that I can withdraw from this research at any time without penalty.
Signature
Date
----------------Investigator
Date_________________
Please place your initials here acknowledging receipt of a copy of this consent form.

104

Appendix B
Semi-structured Interview Guide.
Phase 1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Who had the power to define your experience?
How was this achieved? What did the perpetrator say? Do?
How was ( ) enforced?
What direct or indirect messages were you told by the perpetrator that influenced
what you believed to be true?
What messages, if any, were reinforced from society or social context that seemed to
confirm the perpetrators messages?
What were some of the beliefs or assumptions you had about yourself or the world as
a result of the abuse that you believed to be true and acted according to these beliefs
and assumptions?
What impact did the abuse have on your perception of yourself- of the world?
What impact did the abuse have on your feelings, beliefs, experiences etc.
What beliefs about yourself/world do you think have survived and at times today, still
have an impact on you?
What beliefs about yourself and the world do you think had the most impact and
played a large role in your life?
In what way has ( ) had an effect on your life?
What role do these beliefs ( ) ( ) play in your life now?
How does ( ) impact your relationships with family, wife, job, friends, decisions
made, what you think, how you behave, what you do , how you feel, what you think
of yourself?
What influence has (
) had in your life/relationships with people?
When you submit to (
) how does this invite you to
?
In what other areas does (
) have an impact on you?
So how do you think other people view this as a problem?
What are some of the things you believe that you do that contributes to the ( )
being a problem for you?
How was (
) problematic in your lifetime?
How was ( ) encouraged by other people in your life?
How was ( ) enforced?
What are some of the ways that ( ) has pushed you around and interfered in your
life?
In what way(s) is (
) still getting in the way of things you want to do?
How much of what has happened to you influenced your life? How much do you
think it has held you back?
) got you worrying about lately?
What kinds of things has the (

105

Phase II
Unique Outcomes
•
•
•
•
.!

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Was there an occasion when you could have been stopped in your tracks by ( ) but
you withstood it instead?
Have there been times when you have not succumbed to the ( ) pressure, times
when the ( ) could have gotten the better of you but did not, and times when you
prevented it from overwhelming you?
Were there times in your life when you were able to escape ( )?
Can you recall an occasion when you could have given into the problem but didn't?
Given your father's encouragement of secrecy, were there times when you were able
to stand up to secrecy and tell someone about the abuse that was happening to you?
How were you able to do this?
How did you give yourself priority?
How was it that you were able to challenge the (
)?
How had you the courage to be yourself in these situations?
How was it that you defied the ( ) when you disclosed about your father abusing
you?
I'm interested in the fact that you were strong enough to have some clear ideas about
what was right for you ... how do you think you were able to have such a clear idea
about what you wanted and needed?
So, how did you managed to turn the tide, how did you stop yourself from drowning
in all of this?
What does this tell you about yourself that you didn't realize before?
What do you think it is about the events that you have related that tells me that you
still have some influence in the life of the problem?
Can you see how I could be surprised that you made such a contribution under the
circumstances?
Landscape of Action

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

How did you encourage that strong part of you?
When did you start thinking of yourself as a survivor?
How did you get yourself ready to take this step? What preparations led up to it?
What were you thinking at the time? Have you been advising yourself differently?
What did you tell yourself that pulled you through on this occasion?
How did you manage to take this step?
What do you think you might have been doing to get ready to for this step?
What do you think might have gone into your preparation for this step?
What sort of training did you do to prepare your relationship to decline the invitation
to cooperate with the problem?
What do you think you were doing to contribute to this event?
How do you account for your ability to do this?

106

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Is this something that surprised you about yourself... the fact that you were able to
stand up the ( ) in this way?
What about you helped you to be able to do this?
What was different about this situation compared with one when the problem was
more in charge? What was different about you?
I would like to get a better grasp of this development. What did you notice yourself
doing or thinking as a younger person, that could have provided some vital clue that
this development was on the horizon of your life?
What do you think this achievement tells me about new traditions you could be
making for yourself?
What does this step tell you about the nature of your new direction?
If I had been a spectator to your life when you were a younger person, what do you
think I might have witnessed you doing then that might help me to understand how
you were able to achieve what you have recently achieved?
What do you think this tells me about what you have wanted for your life, and about
what you have been trying for in your life?
What do you think this might reveal to me about what you value most?
Landscape of Consciousness

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

What personal qualities could these achievements indicate?
What sides of you do you think are becoming more visible to others?
What difference does realizing this make to how you feel about and treat yourself?
So what do these things tell you about yourself that the feelings had been hiding from
you?
What do you think the ( ) would have found out about you from this?
What ideas might this give you about you? Are there ways you can help yourself to
keep having this idea about you?
Did you know this about you or is this something new?
Let's reflect for a moment on these recent developments. What new conclusions
might you reach about your tastes; about what is appealing to you; about what you are
attracted to?
What do these discoveries tell you about what you want for your life?
What do these developments tell you about what suits you as a person?
Do you think this new picture of you that accompanies this new direction suits your
sort of person more than the old picture did? If so, why does it suit you better?
Which of the realizations that accompany this new picture of yourself appeal to you
most?
What is it that you now know about yourself that makes you want a stronger
connection with this new direction than the old?
Can you see why the fact that you managed to stand up to the ( ) in this way makes
me think you are pretty strong?
Of all those persons who have known you, who would be least surprised that you
have been able to take this step in challenging the problem's influence in your life?

107

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

How do you think this spoke to them of who you are, and about what you believe to
be important?
What difference does knowing this about yourself make to how you fell about
yourself?
What effect does appreciating your resolve not to cooperate with the problem have on
your attitude toward yourself?
If you were looking at yourself through the eyes of that ten ~
old boy right now,
what would he be seeing in you that he would really appreciate?
What is it about the development of you as a person that would be most important to
him?
Noticing this, would he encourage you to try to be someone else, or would he take
you for who you are?
Why do you think he would have liked you for a parent?
What difference do you think it would have make to his life if he'd had you for a
parent?
What could you do to side with this ten year old boy's attitude toward you, rather than
(the abusing adult's) attitude?
What difference would this make in your relationship with yourself to how you would
treat yourself?
Unique Possibilities
What difference will knowing this about yourself make to your next step?
Since you find this new picture of yourself appealing, in what ways could you enlarge
it by siding further with it?
What new possibilities would open up for you if you were to die more with this new
picture that you have of yourself as a person?
What difference could these qualities make to your future?
How will your new future be different to the future of your old past?
What new possibilities might these changes open up for you?
What do you think these realizations tell me about the new directs that are available to
you?
If you were to side more strongly with this other view of who you are, and of what
your life has been about what difference would this make to your life on a day to day
basis?
What difference will taking up some of these new possibilities make to your
relationship with yourself?

108

Phase III
1. We've gone through the interview process and as a result of the interviews, what new
insights did you gain about your inner capabilities and inner strengths as a person?

•
•

What new insights or new awareness about your personal capabilities to overcome
your childhood trauma became evident as a result of the research process?
What new insights did you gain about yourself that either you did not realize before
or you had forgotten, that the questioning seemed to bring out or reinforce?

2.

How has your opinion of yourself changed since the beginning of the interviews to
the end of the interviews?

•

How do you view yourself now as a person versus how you viewed yourself before
the research process began?
What views or opinions about yourself as a person have been added to your repertoire
of how you would now describe yourself?

•

3. What would be the difference in your openness ifl were a male?
4. Is there anything else you would like to add?

109

Appendix C
Notations Used In The Quotations In The Text
Quotations From Interviews
The interviews were transcribed verbatim. For the purpose of clarity and fluidity of
the text, the symbol[ ... ] has been used to denote edited parts from the original
interview transcript. The parts that have been omitted do not sacrifice meaning.

110

AppendixD
Sample Interview Transcript
This original interview excerpt is from Interview 2-3: 4-6.
LFG. is the researcher and S2 is Paul.
S2
So- well, I guess it's come to accepting that relationships are based on freedom of
choice. And I guess a lot of this comes from the controlling that I have experienced being
with Shauna. And that- well, and also there was a relationship with Claudia too. Where
she was kind of sneaking around behind my back. It came down to the fact that words ·
can only mean so much based on the sincerity and the honesty of the people that are
speaking the words. Because the actions speak volumes LFG

OK - so if-

S2
If a person- it's a person's actions that count, I guess. So the thing is, I came to
realize in - with a person, being with a person that expressed her way was the right way like things to believe in, and the actions didn't follow what she was preaching, basically I
guess. I learned, like I say, what you say or do- or anything a person says or does, is not
necessarily going to affect what the other person - you can't control the other person.
You can have an effect on the environment, but you can't control it to the extent that the
person is going to do, necessarily, what you want.
LFG So how did you encourage that sort of strong part of you to learn to just let it go
and believe that relationships are based on freedom of choice? How did you encourage S2

How did I develop it?

LFG

How did you encourage that strong part of you?

S2
Well, I guess the thing is I realized that the other way was a losing battle. I kept when the - not the pattern, but the LFG

Controlling the environment monster?

S2
Yeah - well it - the same problems kept happening - the same negative responses
kept repeating itself, and I felt more exposed and more vulnerable. I guess, I guess for
me it became a defense. It became a defense for myselfto protect myself- to say, look it,
I can't be responsible for another person' s actions or desires.
LFG But that's a strength in you to learn to let it go without having controlling the
environment - trying to hoard and keep close - you learned inside to just let it go and
what will be will be. So how were you advising yourself differently? Than a time when

Ill

controlling the environment was more in control? How had you been advising yourself
differently?
S2
Well, I guess my own personal spiritual belief has helped in that I've had to put
my faith in, in, I guess in God, or as some people would say in the universe. And I've
had to - I've had to learn to be less dependent on others, I guess. I had to focus more on
my inner strengths and say, I don't need people around me to be happy. I can be happy on
my own. And ifl happen to please someone, if someone sees me as someone they'd like
to be with, then they're going to choose that regardless of what I am doing - trying to
create an environment for them. They're going to love me for who I am.
LFG Right. So what do these things tell you about yourself? OK- that controlling the
environment had been hiding from you. Do you understand the question?
S2

No. (Laughs).

LFG OK. What you just told me - first of all, you identified a time when you did not
give in to controlling the environment monster. There were times when you were out
with friends and you trusted that. Then, you also mentioned that what you learned was
you just have to have relationships happen based on freedom of choice. And what you
were telling yourself at the time - how you were advising yourself differently when you
were more in control versus controlling the environment was more in control. You were
advising yourself by just believing in the universe, your spiritual belief that things will
happen as they shall happen. And if someone wants to love me for who I am, they will
do that. OK. So there are two pictures here - one where controlling the environment
impacts you and controls you, but you just mentioned a time when you were in control,
and you- OK. So those are the kind ofS2

When I felt more personal power.

LFG Right, right. So what do these things tell you about yourself that when controlling
the environment is in control, it hides these characteristics from you - these positive
things about yourself. So the question is, so what do these things tell you about yourself
that controlling the environment had been hiding from you?
S2
Oh, I see. Urn, er, well, I guess it's hidden from me a lot of personal strengths,
inner strengths that have been there all along but I didn't have faith in to rely on. I should
have relied more on, I guess, more of my core values. That I shouldn't have been so
fearful of the outcome in relationships because I'm strong enough to get through them
and I should have had more faith in the person that I am, I guess.