What is the Virginia Satir Methodology?

[Sherita Searcy]

I am such a newbie and I would love to learn more about the formation of this network. If someone could kindly explain the Virginia Satir Network methodology?

[Ralph Poupore]

Well, I guess I'll go first. Speaking in all honesty (as is the best way to speak), I don't really know. However, one aspect that I observed is that Satir provides a way of observing and characterizing behaviors to evaluate whether they are effective, appropriate, counterproductive, false/masking. This is not new, but it seems to be very effective in groups that are familiar with the characterizations.

I think a lot of the benefit is from the tools to define, describe, and interplay these behaviors. Developing skills in predictive outcome, refocusing, objectively identifying, suggesting alternatives could be a powerful outcome of practice.

On the other hand, I may be oversimplifying, overstating, crossblending my own observations. But I'm a newbie too! I look to more knowledgeable others to respond and recraft.

[Sherita Searcy]

Thanks Ralph... I have to dissect all you have said. Maybe I need to experience it as well to understand even more.

Ralph Poupore said:

Well, I guess I'll go first. Speaking in all honesty (as is the best way to speak), I don't really know. However, one aspect that I observed is that Satir provides a way of observing and characterizing behaviors to evaluate whether they are effective, appropriate, counterproductive, false/masking. This is not new, but it seems to be very effective in groups that are familiar with the characterizations.

I think a lot of the benefit is from the tools to define, describe, and interplay these behaviors. Developing skills in predictive outcome, refocusing, objectively identifying, suggesting alternatives could be a powerful outcome of practice.

On the other hand, I may be oversimplifying, overstating, crossblending my own observations. But I'm a newbie too! I look to more knowledgeable others to respond and recraft.

[Sherita Searcy]

So are her philosophies taught in group sessions? How does the concepts promote personal growth?
Stephen Buckbee said:

She was a teacher above all else. She started as a teacher and her life long interest was about human beings. Her methods are the tools she used in helping people disrupt patterns that no longer fit them. She could apply her models to just about any context in a universal fashion. "THE NEW The Satir Model: Family Therapy and Beyond" has a wonderful outline of her process models.
She was a person who believed that we are on the edge of huge societal change as we become more aware of ourselves and the possibility to change.
Best ideas, Sculpting, icebergs, mandalas, temperature reading, and the process of change.

[Nynke Etk Fokma]

Sherita, Hi :-)

In group processes, and she also had a private practice and did one-on-one or couples work. So do many of her students and students' students.

Besides the Five Freedoms that I posted on the frontpage and you thought were powerful, the "I am me, and I am Okay" gives yet another powerful description:

I am me and I am Okay

“I am Me. In all the world, there is no one else exactly like me. Everything that comes out of me is authentically mine, because I alone chose it -- I own everything about me:
my body,
my feelings,
my mouth,
my voice,
all my actions,
whether they be to others or myself.

I own my fantasies,
my dreams,
my hopes,
my fears.
I own my triumphs and successes,
all my failures and mistakes.
Because I own all of me,
I can become intimately acquainted with me.

By so doing,
I can love me and be friendly with all my parts.
I know there are aspects about myself that puzzle me,
and other aspects that I do not know --
but as long as I am friendly and loving to myself,
I can courageously and hopefully look for solutions to the puzzles and ways to find out more about me.

However I look and sound,
whatever I say and do,
and whatever I think and feel at a given moment in time is authentically me.

If later some parts of how I looked,
sounded,
thought,
and felt
turn out to be unfitting,
I can discard that which is unfitting,
keep the rest,
and invent something new for that which I discarded.

I can see,
hear,
feel,
think,
say,
and do.

I have the tools to survive,
to be close to others,
to be productive,
and to make sense and order out of the world of people and things outside of me.
I own me,
and therefore,
I can engineer me.

I am me,
and I am Okay.”

-- Virginia Satir

What we have already on the site in Satir tools/processes are Temperature Readings, and Parts Parties . More is to follow. Will let you know.

12 hugs a day,

Nynke

[Stephen Buckbee]

The concepts can be taught in many ways. I think that incorporation of her ideas are taught by example, how one lives, how congruent are they? Does the inside match the outside?
In regard to how they are taught, I would say that most of my work is a mix of model information and group application in an experiential fashion. For example I use a process model like the Mandala but I will taylor the idea to meet the needs of the group with whom I am working. The presentation piece is fluid in many ways. I know the model but I need to know the hopes and wishes of the group before I present an idea. Currently I am planning a program with a group in Mainland China that wants to take some of these ideas into the corrections field. We will build a two day program looking at self care and stress in the system. We are also talking about how to use some of these ideas can be used by jail psychologists and counselors. I will decide what fits best for the context I am working in. I know that I will start with the dimension of being human, because I want to start and stay with universals throughout the presentation, I will then use the process of change and then look at resources needed to cope. That will be my frame. I will spend a lot of time on making contact before I move deeper. How deep one goes for me depends upon how much time I have and the context that I am in.
All of the models can be used at a micro level or a macro level. I think of her ideas as the unifying theories for human beings.

Sherita Searcy said:

So are her philosophies taught in group sessions? How does the concepts promote personal growth?
Stephen Buckbee said:

She was a teacher above all else. She started as a teacher and her life long interest was about human beings. Her methods are the tools she used in helping people disrupt patterns that no longer fit them. She could apply her models to just about any context in a universal fashion. "THE NEW The Satir Model: Family Therapy and Beyond" has a wonderful outline of her process models.
She was a person who believed that we are on the edge of huge societal change as we become more aware of ourselves and the possibility to change.
Best ideas, Sculpting, icebergs, mandalas, temperature reading, and the process of change.

[Sherita Searcy]

I see that her ideology is so self reassuring. In looking at her point of view ..i can see how people will move from viewing themselves as just another person in the world ...to actually moving toward a new realm of self love.

Nynke Etk Fokma said:

Sherita, Hi :-)

In group processes, and she also had a private practice and did one-on-one or couples work. So do many of her students and students' students.

Besides the Five Freedoms that I posted on the frontpage and you thought were powerful, the "I am me, and I am Okay" gives yet another powerful description:

I am me and I am Okay

“I am Me. In all the world, there is no one else exactly like me. Everything that comes out of me is authentically mine, because I alone chose it -- I own everything about me:
my body,
my feelings,
my mouth,
my voice,
all my actions,
whether they be to others or myself.

I own my fantasies,
my dreams,
my hopes,
my fears.
I own my triumphs and successes,
all my failures and mistakes.
Because I own all of me,
I can become intimately acquainted with me.

By so doing,
I can love me and be friendly with all my parts.
I know there are aspects about myself that puzzle me,
and other aspects that I do not know --
but as long as I am friendly and loving to myself,
I can courageously and hopefully look for solutions to the puzzles and ways to find out more about me.

However I look and sound,
whatever I say and do,
and whatever I think and feel at a given moment in time is authentically me.

If later some parts of how I looked,
sounded,
thought,
and felt
turn out to be unfitting,
I can discard that which is unfitting,
keep the rest,
and invent something new for that which I discarded.

I can see,
hear,
feel,
think,
say,
and do.

I have the tools to survive,
to be close to others,
to be productive,
and to make sense and order out of the world of people and things outside of me.
I own me,
and therefore,
I can engineer me.

I am me,
and I am Okay.”

-- Virginia Satir

What we have already on the site in Satir tools/processes are Temperature Readings, and Parts Parties . More is to follow. Will let you know.

12 hugs a day,

Nynke

[Jan Lelie]

I find questions regarding methodology - the 'logic' of the 'methods'- dificult to answer. In my view it is a meta-question, a question about questions. In Dutch 'question' sounds like 'kwestie', which means something like case or problem or situation. It can also be translated into queeste, search. What are you searching, what's your queeste, kwestie, question? What do you need? What do you need to learn?

[Jean McLendon]

Nynke Etk Fokma said:

Sherita, Hi :-)

In group processes, and she also had a private practice and did one-on-one or couples work. So do many of her students and students' students.

Besides the Five Freedoms that I posted on the frontpage and you thought were powerful, the "I am me, and I am Okay" gives yet another powerful description:

I am me and I am Okay

“I am Me. In all the world, there is no one else exactly like me. Everything that comes out of me is authentically mine, because I alone chose it -- I own everything about me:
my body,
my feelings,
my mouth,
my voice,
all my actions,
whether they be to others or myself.

I own my fantasies,
my dreams,
my hopes,
my fears.
I own my triumphs and successes,
all my failures and mistakes.
Because I own all of me,
I can become intimately acquainted with me.

By so doing,
I can love me and be friendly with all my parts.
I know there are aspects about myself that puzzle me,
and other aspects that I do not know --
but as long as I am friendly and loving to myself,
I can courageously and hopefully look for solutions to the puzzles and ways to find out more about me.

However I look and sound,
whatever I say and do,
and whatever I think and feel at a given moment in time is authentically me.

If later some parts of how I looked,
sounded,
thought,
and felt
turn out to be unfitting,
I can discard that which is unfitting,
keep the rest,
and invent something new for that which I discarded.

I can see,
hear,
feel,
think,
say,
and do.

I have the tools to survive,
to be close to others,
to be productive,
and to make sense and order out of the world of people and things outside of me.
I own me,
and therefore,
I can engineer me.

I am me,
and I am Okay.”

-- Virginia Satir

What we have already on the site in Satir tools/processes are Temperature Readings, and Parts Parties . More is to follow. Will let you know.

12 hugs a day,

Nynke

[Anjez Winkler]

Hi All,


Yes, this is interesting and very true:


I own my fantasies,
my dreams,
my hopes,
my fears.
I own my triumphs and successes,
all my failures and mistakes.
Because I own all of me,
I can become intimately acquainted with me.



But i was wondering: how about sharing while "owning"?


Does anyone have a... sentient... insight about this? At first it feels like
contradictory to me (like "owning" versus "sharing"), but it may be i am staring into some blur, so maybe
there is someone who has more experience in this from within herhimself?


I am looking forward... to any insightful reply.


:-)
.Anjez.*

[Stephen Buckbee]

.Anjez.*

When Satir wrote "I own everything about me" I think she was using the word Owning as taking responsibility for ourselves and the choices we make.

Sharing is letting the light shine or giving something with a wide range of possible motivations.

When one owns their mistakes and their success they can move, things change. When one acknowledges a physical limitation, does not define themselves by it but adds on in a new way, that is owning.
The past may influence the future but it does not determine it. We have the ability to change and add on. We can not undo the past but we can add new information and bust up old patterns.

Own means knowing that you are a complex creature with many dynamic and confusing parts. You own your backside but you have only seen it in a mirror or a video, there are parts that you own but have never seen.

We will make mistakes, part of a normal learning process. Owning means taking charge with out dis-empowering others.

You can share when it fits for you and be safe when you need to. Sharing is good but one needs to take care. If sharing is dis-empowering one might want to look at what stops change from happening.

If sharing is given without condition, without expectations of getting something back we often call it unconditional love.

Sharing is necessary in healthy systems, but, the style of how information is shared is also very important. All systems have secrets and they are secrets for a reason.
The manner and content of sharing can be produce chaos. One needs to OWN the choice they make without invoking a dysfunctional coping stance.

Just a thought,

Loved the question.

[Anjez Winkler]

Hi Friends,


Well, look where this "discussion" is going, Sherita...
;-)


Thank you Stephen Buckbee:


When one owns their mistakes and their success
they can move, things change.
When one acknowledges a physical limitation,
does not define themselves by it but adds on
in a new way, that is owning.
The past may influence the future
but it does not determine it.



This gives me deep reflection; at first sight
i guess when one cannot "own" (in the way meant)
one cannot share, so owning comes first; well:
this is what comes first to my mind reading
your reply.


So this requires 'honesty' with oneself, i guess,
first of all, and no "running away" or such more.
So that i guess now, is about 'owning' as meant
here (if i understand well). Then integrity can
follow... and i guess after that... sharing.



And so it requires to be fearless. Because
else one would have a "reason" to "run away"
and not be fully capable of 'owning'; this
is what i see now. And so perhaps here,
in case of fear, i guess could come in "the past",
some whatever past, as you said:


The past may influence the future
but it does not determine it.




Yes, that is interesting.



We will make mistakes, part of a normal learning
process. Owning means taking charge with out
dis-empowering others."




So that we will make mistakes, accepting that,
kills any "perfectionism" and keeps the creativity
ongoing instead, i guess, this is true.



Owning means taking charge with out
dis-empowering others."



So i guess it in fact means: stay true to oneself ("yourself").




So basically, i see it is "the owning process" that is
most... crucial, because it so seems to...
determine... the ability of sharing
at all...



You can share when it fits for you and be safe when you need to.



I guess sharing sort of inevitably includes risks,
so that risks may be sort of "part of the deal";
this is how i see it now at least.




So just not exclude the risk rather than looking for safety,
i would say. I mean: i feel i just have to risk.



(Or perhaps it is actually 'more true' somewhere
between risk and safety? I am not sure now.)



If sharing is given without condition, without expectations of getting something back we often call it unconditional love.


That is what i like. :-)



So we could focus on people perhaps by trying to
"invoke" our "very own" unconditional love within,
so we expect any whatever or nothing, both; so
we will not be overwhelmed if a reaction would
not be how we like or simply hurtful, yet so
perhaps we still then can be effected, so who knows
even "unconditional love" does not protect us from
being hurt, yet it is worth a try i guess.



Sharing is good but one needs to take care.
If sharing is dis-empowering one might
want to look at what stops change from happening.



So i feel it is all a non-stuck "balance" between
risk, safety and... being prepared and not share
when dis-empowerment is sure (though this
is about experience, i suppose).



Sharing is necessary in healthy systems, but, the style of how information is shared is also very important.



Yes, in healthy systems sharing is natural; i see; but it so
requires love.



(So maybe unhealthy systems are "marked by" non-sharing...)



All systems have secrets and they are secrets for a reason.


Hence some 'particular' system, i suppose.



The manner and content of sharing can be produce chaos.
One needs to OWN the choice they make without invoking
a dysfunctional coping stance.





So there is no force.
So that means there must be love.
I really believe now love is the basis,
somehow..., and so maybe that love is only
unconditional, in 'owning' as well
as in 'sharing'. (I mean: i simply guess that
when there is love, there so is no conflict,
so "owning" and "sharing" then are
like a pair... going together; perhaps so this
is to be practised in all relations..., "no matter
what".)




Just a thought,

Loved the question.



Thank you very much.
:-)


For me the "dis-empowerment" feels a... warning
i may need (as well so as "empowerment")
in the "owning" and "sharing"... flow.


Thanks very much for this reply.



(Perhaps this even was
an example of Satir "methodology"
Sherita was looking for?)


.Anjez.*

[Anjez Winkler]

p.s.: just after i had posted my reply,
i wonder... but what is the reality of
unconditional love..., where we seem
to be also "prey" to conditional love...


Maybe also this deals with "owning"
(as meant) first of all?


Now it seems to all require self knowledge
(Know Thyself)...



I do not mean anyone be discouraged to share...

;-P


I really feel the risk is involved somewhere
between "owning" and "sharing" and cope
with the risk, perhaps let go of "failure or success"
notions too?

.Anjez.*