A Review of Conjoint Family Therapy and the Theories of Virginia Satir
balance in relationships through the use of repetitious, circular, and predictable
Over sixty-five years ago, Virginia Satir began therapeutic work with people,
first as a school teacher, and later as a social worker. Through years of work in
the field of psychology, she developed her own approach of working with
families. Namka (2003) described Satir as warm,brilliant, and knowledgeable
of the pain of being human. According to Namka, Satir steered the mental
health field away from the concept of pathology and toward the notion of
people as a product of negative family patterns.
Family Theory
Satir (1983) rationalized that the primary goal of the family therapist is to deal
with family pain. According to Satir, family pain manifests itself in the
symptoms of one family member but extends itself to all family members in
some shape or form. Satir distinguished the family member who carries the
predominant symptom as the "Identified Patient," or "I.P.".
Satir (1983) believed that a pained marital relationship is likely to result in
dysfunctional parenting patterns. In effect, the Identified Patient is the family
member who is most affected by the pained marital relationship and most
subjected to dysfunctional parenting. Satir defined the Identified Patient's
symptoms as an "SOS" regarding his parents' pain and the resulting family
imbalance.
Satir (1983) described the family as an interacting unit that strives to achieve
communication patterns. This phenomenon is known as family homeostasis.
Satir described the spousal mates as the architects of the family and
contended that the marital relationship is the axis around which all other family
relationships are formed. Thus, family homeostasis is directly influenced by the
marital relationship.
Satir (1983) defined a person with low self-esteem as having a great sense of
anxiety and uncertainty about himself. Thus, individuals suffering from low self-
esteem tend to be more concerned with what others think of
them and less concerned with how they feel about themselves
Satir contended that this lack of self confidence results in a dependence on
others and cripples personal autonomy and individuality.
Satir (1983) contended that there are no accidents in the selection of a mate.
According to Satir, an individual suffering from low self-esteem has high hopes
about what he can expect from others but is also ready to expect
disappointment and to distrust people. In effect, each individual sees
something in his significant other which seems to fit his high expectations, as
well as something which seems to corroborate his fears and distrust. For such
individuals, Satir describes marriage as an effort to "get." Satir believed that
each mate desires the other's esteem of him, as well as the other's qualities
which he feels he lacks. In addition, each mate finds in the other an extension
of himself which allows for feelings of completeness and success.
Different-ness and Disagreements
Satir (1983) believed that when two people get married, they do not realize that
they will have to give as well as get. This is directly related to self-esteem, as
individuals suffering from low self-esteem feel they have nothing to offer and
should not be expected to give. According to Satir, married couples who
posess high self-esteem are better able to trust each other and to feel
confident in their abilities to give to each other. This freedom to give results in
the appreciation of individuality, or different-ness, and the ability to use this
different-ness as an opportunity for growth.
Problems with different-ness arise when the married couple begins to see in
each other "the twenty-four-hour-a-day characteristics which do not usually
show up during courtship and do not fit each mate's expectations of the other"
(Satir, 1983, p. 13). Satir explained that when individuals begin to sense that
they are different in ways that detract from their images rather than add to
them, different-ness begins to look bad. In effect, different-ness is identified as
a major source of disagreement.
The Introduction of Children
to "get."
The introduction of children into the marital relationship creates an
environment rich with mutually-reinforcing functions. Through the birth of a
child, the marital unit is "contributing to the continuity of the race by producing
and nurturing children and transmitting culture to the children by parental
teaching" (Satir, 1983, p. 26). Satir further explained that the introduction of a
child contributes to the division of labor between the adults and the child and
serves as a means of eventual care of the parents by the child.
Bitter (1998) reported that Satir focuses on the relationship of the parents and
the self-esteem exhibited in that relationship. According to Bitter, children are
extremely reactive to parental influence, and when a couple's relationship is
marred by disappointment, the experience is often dealt with through the use
of incongruent communication and defensive posturing. In effect, the spousal
relationship thrives on communication that is altered by low self-worth, and the
couple's overwhelming defensiveness is a product of the difficulty of existing as
an independent individual in an interdependent relationship. Bitter further
explained that the child, having a continual need to survive, is forced to adjust
to whatever the parents are willing to give. Satir (1983) stated that, "When
dissention between the parents increases, a child's deviant behavior may be a
functional response to a dysfunctional system" (p. 48).
Effects of Marital Disappointment
Satir (1983) believed that married couples who are plagued by low self-esteem
will inevitably create a dysfunctional family environment. In effect, a great
indication of how a couple will fare as parents is the way in which the couple
views its child. In a dysfunctional family, the parental unit views the child as a
"vehicle for representing its worth in the community and for maintaining esteem
about self and family" (Satir, 1983, p. 36).
extension of the self. In effect, both spouses expect the child to want the same
things as them, to see the same things as them, and to do what they want
when they want it done. According to Satir, problems arise when either parent
challenges the other parent's expectations for the child.
Marital Discord and Triangulation
Satir (1983) posited that when parents find themselves in divergence, the child
simultaneously finds himself stuck between conflicting demands. Satir
explained that in such situations, each parent begins to view the child as a
potential ally against the other mate, as a messenger through whom
communication can occur, and as a pacifier of the other mate. In effect, each
parent's controlling desire for an extension of himself results in the confusion of
individual parenting motivations with marital conflict.
Satir (1983) stated that "If the mates have low self-esteem and little trust in
each other ... the child will be expected to serve crucial pain-relieving functions
in the marital relationship"
(p. 57). According to Satir, there is no such thing as a relationship between
three people, rather there are only shifting two-person relationships with the
third person in the role of observer. As a result, over-developed parent-child
relationships are likely to occur.
Satir (1983) defined a family triangle as a situation in which "the wife fears that
her husband will be less interested in her, the husband fears that his wife will
be less interested in him, and the child fears that he will not be the center of his
parents' world" (p. 73). Such family triangles can be functional or dysfunctional.
Satir (1983) contended that in the functional family triangle, the mates are
confident in the strength of their own marital relationship and are unthreatened
by the child's fear of being left out. This type of triangle breeds healthy father-
child and mother-child relationships and makes it obvious to the child that he
can never be included in the spousal unit. Bitter (1988) contended that parents
who function appropriately with each other have the resources to be the
leaders of the family. Bitter explained that the child in this type of environment
will grow, gain an identity and a place in the world, and develop a belief in the
stability of relationships.
his unfulfilled needs. According to Satir, the child is then forced to side with
one parent and to lose the other. In effect, the child who is identified as the I.P.
is burdened with the responsibility of living for his parents.
Communication Theory
Satir (1983) attributed human survival to communication, whether verbal or
non-verbal, conscious or unconscious. Mishlove (1995) reported that one of
the points Satir made regarding communication is that we very often fail to
communicate what we are feeling inside. In effect, we are compelled to believe
that other people should be able to read our minds. According to Satir, "If you
love someone and you don't read their minds, they believe it's because you
don't love them, because if you did, you would know ahead of time" (Mishlove,
1995, p. 143).
Satir (1972) described communication as "a huge umbrella that covers and
affects all that goes on between human beings" (p. 30). In effect,
communication plays a large part in determining what types of relationships an
individual will have and what happens in the world around him. Satir believed
that all communication is learned and referred to communication as "a film
camera equipped with sound ... that works only in the present, right here, right
now, between you and me" (p. 31). As a result, Satir felt that individuals who
cloud their minds with regret for the past or fear for the future engage in little to
no growth or change.
Mishlove (1995) reported that Satir believed she could demonstrate the
relationship between communication and health and illness, between intimacy
and distancing, between competency and incompetency, and between making
sense and not making sense. According to Mishlove, Satir believed that all of
these things can be understood within the frame of how we interpret our
communications. Moore and Kramer (1999) contended that the lack of clear
communication resides in contradictions. Most often, contradictions occur
between verbal and nonverbal messages. According to Moore and Kramer,
these types of contradictions create a serious difficulty for their receiver, for a
response "appropriate to one layer of the message constitutes an inappropriate
one for another, contradictory layer" (p. 430).
Patterns of Communication
Satir, Stachowiak, and Taschman (1975) identified five ways in which people
handle their communication while under stress. These communication
patterns, or coping stances, are seen as "brave attempts to survive when you
do not believe you can" (p. 48). Satir et al. distinguished four of
these communication patterns as incongruent communications. Moore and
Kramer (1999) defined incongruent communications as communications that
lack true expression regarding what a person experiences and needs and that
contain camouflaged messages that are intended to conceal vulnerability.
According to Mishlove (1999), Satir believed that incongruent communicators
avoid placing themselves in vulnerable positions where they might have to
protect themselves. As a result, people lie most of the time.
Incongruent communication patterns are identified as blamer, placater,
irrelevant, and super-reasonable. Moore and Kramer (1999) described blamers
as people who gain strength and self-esteem through the disparagement of
others. According to Satir (1972), the blamer is a fault-finder, a dictator, and a
boss. In contrast, Satir identified placaters as people who belittle themselves
while simultaneously inflating others. Thus, the placater is a "yes man," who
always tries to please, constantly apologizes, and never disagrees. Moore and
Kramer explained that irrelevant people disregard their own opinions in an
effort to avoid confrontation. As a result, irrelevant communicators lack self-
worth, and their statements often appear completely unrelated to the subject
matter at hand. Satir described super-reasonable communicators as
unemotional and robot-like, possessing a strong desire to control both
themselves and others. According to Moore and Kramer, super-reasonable
communicators receive power from acting as if they know it all while
simultaneously causing their audience to appear ignorant.
Satir, Stachowiak, and Taschman (1975) identified the fifth communication
pattern as congruent. Congruent communication refers to communication that
exhibits no incongruence within its own transmission. According to Moore and
Kramer (1999), congruent communicators "share their thoughts and emotions
about themselves without projecting them onto others and thus avoid
manipulation" (p. 430).
Theory and Practice of Therapy
According to Banmen (1986), Satir's model of family therapy is based on a
general systems theory. Banmen stated, "Satir's system describes a set of
actions, reactions, and interactions among a set of variables essential to a
single outcome and develops an order and a sequence among these
variables to accomplish the desired outcome" (p. 482). In most cases, the
desired outcome involves some form of change. Sayles (2002) reported that
Satir's process of change is a way to aid people in making choices that
increase self-esteem, provide self-accountability or responsibility, and move a
person toward congruence between the self and others.
View of People
Smith (2002) reported that Satir saw people as having three births. According
to Smith, the first birth is the union of sperm and egg. This union serves as a
manifestation of the life force. In effect, Satir held that individuals serve as the
co-creators of their lives in conjunction with the life force. Smith contended that
the inclusion of the life force is a spiritual foundation of the Satir model.
Smith (2002) described the second birth as the physical emergence from the
womb. During this time, individuals enter into a pre-existing family system and
are totally dependent upon their caregivers for survival. In effect, Satir believed
that an individual's beliefs regarding reality are entirely constructed through his
interactions with his family of origin.
Smith (2002) identified the third birth as the moment at which an individual
becomes his own decision maker. Satir (1983) contended that the most
important concept in therapy is that of maturation, or the state in which an
individual is fully in charge of himself and his choices. Banmen (1986) reported
that Satir believed that family therapy works with enabling dysfunctional
families to become functional by transforming patterns of behavior into patterns
of choice. According to Banmen, Satir felt that self-esteem is a basic element
in family therapy and maintained that low self-esteem affects the entire family
system.
Stages of Change
Banmen (1986) contended that Satir looked at change from three possibilities:
(1) change is initiated out of survival needs, (2) change is initiated out of hope,
and (3) change is initiated by acknowledgement of what is already happening.
Banmen further explained that Satir identified four components as necessary
to the continuation of change: (1) the family needs a loving atmosphere, (2) the
family needs a sense of trust, (3) the change contemplated needs to be
believable, and (4) family members need to be in limbo throughout the change
process.
A Tribute to the Most Marvelous Virginia Satir
Lynne Namka, Ed. D. ©2003
"The goal is to be as fully human as we possibly can be…. when we are in
touch with our personal power, we are in touch with our Divinity."
--Virginia Satir
Virginia Satir (1916-1988) was one of the major pioneers in family therapy and
my teacher. She was warm, brilliant and knowing about the pain of being
human. She taught concepts that pulled us out of the dysfunction of our
families into a higher consciousness way of thinking and acting. She took the
mental health field out of seeing people with problems as "pathology"
generated by the psychiatric network of Freud into seeing people as a product
of their negative family scripts which could be changed by learning to
communicate with feelings.
Virginia traveled the world over with her teachings, which were insightful and
inspired, about how to become a fully functioning human being centered in
love. She attracted a following of therapists, business people, leaders and
regular folks who then spread her ideas through their own work and life.
Virginia Satir changed my life completely. Before meeting her, I was narrow
minded, neurotic and physically ill. My family rules were like others at the time-
don't talk about feelings and important things and deny what people in the
family do to hurt each other. During a weekend workshop, she chose our table
(from about 25 others) to sit during lunch. She invited me to study with her at
her month long summer training program and gave me a loan for the tuition.
During her first month long training, I learned so much that I left behind the
fear-laden woman that I had been and became a deeper, wiser version of
myself. At one point she said to me, "Lynne, when you can feel what you feel
and say what you feel, you won't have to turn those bad symptoms into body
symptoms and pain." At that moment I learned to feel my feelings. Perhaps
that is why I write so passionately about getting in touch with your feelings
today.
After taking Virginia's second month training a few years later, I decided her
ideas needed to be more widespread. I incorporated many of her concepts and
techniques regarding straight communication in my first book, The Doormat
Syndrome.
Virginia helped us learn to have authentic communication. She taught
techniques that helped us to be congruent which is a way of acting where what
is being felt on the inside is expressed on the outside. When you are
congruent, you are aware of what you are feelings and thoughts. Your body
language expresses on the outside expresses what you are feeling on the
inside. You state feelings and stay honest and centered as you deal with
conflict.
I am who I am today, partly because of the energetic woman who recognized
the Divinity within me. I can still hear her voice saying, "Marvelous, marvelous!"
I am forever grateful to Virginia Satir and the effect she had my psyche and
subsequently on my life. So I pass some of her wisdom via her quotes on to
you.
Check assumptions rather than acting on what you believe to be true. Check
with others to see what they really mean.
Be straight forward and direct when communicating with others.
Listen to that "Wisdom Box" that you have within you when you seek the truth.
Say what you mean and mean what you say. Ask for what you want but know
you will not always get it.
I can remember when I asked her, "Virginia, do you mean you can really ask
for what you want? (Not in my family, you couldn't!) She slapped her knee and
said, "Honey, you can always ask for what you want!
Be responsible for what you think, say and do rather than projecting it on
others or denying it.
Celebrate "differentness" in people. See differences in others as an opportunity
to learn and explore, rather than as a threat or a signal for conflict
Treat people with how you would wish them to be rather than blaming them.
Identify your "shoulds" or those beliefs that you have grown up with that keep
you caught in craziness that are not necessarily true.
Be open to receiving feedback and listen to it carefully because you might
learn something about yourself from it.
Be gentle and loving with yourself and others.
"I want to love you without clutching, Appreciate you without judging
Join you without invading,
Invite you without demanding,
Leave you without guilt,
Criticize you without blaming,
And help you without insulting.
If I can have the same from you,
Then we can truly meet each other."
"You have learned what you have learned very well. It has helped you survive."
Making Contact
"I believe the greatest gift I can conceive of having from anyone is to be seen
by them, heard by them, to be understood and touched by them."
"The greatest gift I can give is to see, hear, understand and to touch another
person.
When this is done I feel contact has been made."
The Five Freedoms
The FREEDOM to see and hear what is here, instead of what should be, was,
or will be.
The FREEDOM to say what you feel and think, instead of what you should.
The FREEDOM to feel what you feel, instead of what you ought.
The FREEDOM to ask for what you want, instead of always waiting for
permission.
The FREEDOM to take risks in your own behalf, instead of choosing to be only
"secure" and not rocking the boat.
Virginia wrote this in answer to a fifteen-year-old girl's question, "How can I
prepare myself for a fulfilling life?"
"I am me.
In all the world, there is no one else exactly like me. There are persons who
have some parts like me, but no one adds up exactly like me. I have some
parts like others but I don't add up to be exactly like anyone else. Therefore,
everything that comes out of me is authentically mine because I alone chose it.
I own everything about me -- my body, including everything it does; my mind,
including all its thoughts and ideas; my eyes, including the image of all my
eyes behold; my feelings, whatever they may be -- anger, joy, frustration, love,
disappointment, excitement; my mouth and all that comes out of it.... words,
polite, sweet, or rough.... correct and incorrect; my voice, loud or soft; and all
my actions, whether they be to others or myself.
I own all my triumphs and successes, all my failures and mistakes. I own all my
fantasies, my dreams, my hopes, my fears.
Because I own all of me, I can become intimately acquainted with me. Being
very well acquainted with me, I can love me and be friendly with me in all my
parts.
In being well-acquainted with myself, loving myself, and being friendly with
myself, I can then make it possible for all of me to work in my best interests.
I know that there are aspects about myself I do not know, and there are parts
of me that puzzle me.
As long as I am friendly and loving to myself, I can courageously and hopefully
look for the solution to the puzzles and continually look for ways to find out
more about me -- how I look and sound, what I say and do, and how I think
and feel.
No one else looks and sounds, says and does, and thinks and feels exactly
like me.
However I look and sound, whatever I say and do, and whatever I think and
feel at a given moment is me. It is authentic and represents where I am at that
moment in time.
When I review later how I looked and sounded, what I said and did, and how I
thought and felt, parts may turn out to be unfitting and I can discard that which
is unfitting and keep that which proved fitting and learn something new for that
which I discarded.
I am me and I am okay.
I own me and therefore I can engineer me.
I can learn all the new things that I need and discard all the things that no
longer fit.
I can see, hear, feel, think, say, and do. I will then 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."
"Integrity, honesty, responsibility, compassion, love-all flows easily from the
person whose self-esteem is high. He feels that he matters, that the world is a
better place because he is here. He has faith in his own competence. He is
able to ask others for help, but he believes that he can make his own decisions
and is his own best resource. Appreciating his own worth, he is ready to see
and respect the worth of others. He radiates trust and hope."
Books by and about Virginia Satir
Virginia Satir: Her Life & Circle of Influence by Melvin M. Suhd, Laura Dodson,
and Maria Gomori
Changing with Families: Further Education for Being Human, Bandler, Grinder,
and Satir
Conjoint Family Therapy, Virginia Satir
The New Peoplemaking, Virginia Satir
The Satir Approach to Communication: a Workshop Manual, Johanna Schwab,
Michele Baldwin, Jane Gerber, Maria Gomori, and Virginia Satir
The Satir Model: Family Therapy and Beyond Satir Step by Step: A Guide to
Creating Change in Families Michele Baldwin
The Doormat Syndrome, Lynne Namka
For training in Satir concepts, visit The Virginia Satir Network
http://www.avanta.net/
http://www.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/Satirlinks.html
onjoint Family Therapy: A Guide to Theory and Technique.
By Virginia M. Satir. Price, $4.95. Pp 146, with no illustrations. Science and
Behavior, Inc., Palo Alto, Calif, 1964.
Louis L. Lunsky, MD, Reviewer
Arch Intern Med. 1965;115(5):622.
This slim, highly readible volume is an introduction to family therapy. This is a
new parameter in psychotherapy which has added a new dimension to
understanding family dynamics. This text grew out of a course in family
dynamics which the author taught at Illinois State Psychiatric Institute. In this
mode of therapy the entire family is treated at one time.
The author articulates the thesis that the person who seeks therapy is not
necessarily the sickest member nor the person who needs it most. The family
behaves as a unit and acts to achieve a balance. The various members help to
maintain this homeostasis overtly and covertly. The chief axis in this unit are
the parents, upon whom all family relationships are formed. The identified
patient is that family member who is most affected by the "pained marital
relationship and most subjected to dysfunctional parenting."
Don D. Jackson, Viriginia Satir, Murray Bowen, and Jay Haley. These
contributions either generated ground-breaking new ideas or stimulated a line
of thinking that continues strongly to influence contemporary practices. What is
more, we believe these pioneers' contributions are the most representative of
the kinds of conceptual changes family therapy brought to bear on couple
therapy during its "golden age."
Virginia Satir, Self-Esteem, and Congruent Communication: There can be no
doubt that the charismatic Virginia Satir was the most visible and influential
popularizer of family and marital therapy among both professional and lay
audiences from the mid-1960s until about the mid- 1970s. The author of such
mega-sales books as Peoplemaking (Satir, 1972) and Conjoint Family Therapy
(Satir, 1964), she held a unique place in the early history of systems-oriented
therapy, in that she was the only nationally and internationally influential
female clinician in the field. Although the titles of most of her published work
referred to family rather than couple therapy, the lion's share of her systems-
oriented therapeutic contributions, like Jackson's, were about dyads, and
especially the marital dyad.
Satir, like Jackson, was one of the MRI pioneers, arriving there in 1959. Unlike
many of the pioneers of family therapy, Satir was not uncomfortable about her
links to the field of psychiatry, and in fact had established the first formal family
therapy training program in a psychiatric residency program (at the Illinois
State Psychiatric Institute, in 1955). Her clinical attitude of inclusiveness and
acceptance was also manifest in the way she related to her colleagues and to
the mental health professions in general.
Unlike the popular "systems purists" of the day, Satir was not disinterested in
the historical family origins of presenting problems, nor was she mute on the
matter of marital choice, a topic of great concern, of course, to psychoanalytic
marriage therapists. She believed that people chose partners with similar
difficulties and degrees of selfhood (Satir, 1964, 1967). And also unlike
emerging systems theorists in the field, Satir had definite views on what
constituted individual psychological health. These criteria included an ability to
accept oneself and others, comfort in acknowledging such acceptance,
awareness of one's own needs and feelings, the ability to communicate clearly,
and the ability to accept disagreements and others' points of view. Symptoms
in individuals, she argued, "develop when the rules for operating do not fit
needs for survival, growth, getting close to others, and productivity ..." (Satir,
1965, p. 122); and she believed that dysfunctional marriages follow
dysfunctional rules that limited individual growth as well as dyadic intimacy.
Little did Satir know that she was laying one of the cornerstones for later
models of couple therapy grounded in attachment theory (e.g., Greenberg &
Johnson, 1986, 1988; Johnson, 1996; Johnson & Greenberg, 1995).
In all of her thinking, primacy was given to the functioning and experiencing of
the individual, as much as to the individual-in-relational context. For Satir, the
narrow roles people assumed in close relationships (e.g., "victim," "placater,"
"defiant one," "rescuer"), and the dysfunctional communication styles they
exhibited (e.g., "blamer," "placater," "being irrelevant," "being super
reasonable"), while certainly reinforced by pathological patterns of interaction
over time, were fundamentally expressions of low self-esteem and poor self-
concept. Significantly, self-esteem and one's quality of communication were
thought to exist in a circular relationship, so that poor self-esteem leads to poor
communication (of various types), which in turn, leads to poor self-esteem, etc.
Although Satir was always aware of the systemic nature of problem formation popularity among laypeople. Her direct leadership role in the field was also
and problem maintenance, she viewed the couple system rather differently decelerated by a pivotal public debate in 1974 with a leader of the "systems
than did most of the family therapy theorists of this era. Satir focused on one's purist" forces of the field, in which she was criticized for her humanitarian zeal,
perceptions of self and other, how one thinks and feels and shows and felt unappreciated and marginalized by the newer waves of (male) family
("manifests") these experiences, and how one reacts to others. For Satir systems engineers (Pittman, 1989).
(1965), "these three parts form the patterns of interaction that compose the Among the most influential values Satir almost singularly represented, and the
couple's system" (p. 122; original emphasis). In keeping with Jackson's therapeutic stances she adhered to during her heyday, were: the importance of
(1965b) warning about the dangers of reifying systemic constructs, Satir direct, authentic communication and self-disclosure; the importance of
always kept in view what M. P. Nichols (1987) later called the "self in the esteeming both oneself and one's intimates; the salience of relational
system." closeness and security over and above mere problem resolution; the relevance
The overriding ultimate goal of couple therapy for Satir, then, was to foster of having an explicit model of individual and relational health and pathology;
greater self-esteem and self-actualization, to be achieved through such the belief in the restorative potential of committed couple relationships rather
mediating goals as increasing the congruence and clarity of self-expression than the notion that they almost inevitably resist change; and the role of the
about relational needs, self-perceptions, and perceptions of one's partner; therapist as an encouraging, nurturant healer, rather than as either an
increasing self-awareness; removing protective "masks" that shield authentic intellectualizing "analyst" or an uninvolved, yet provocative, problem-fixer.
self-revelation; and accepting and, indeed valuing, differences. These goals Satir died in 1988, leaving no true "school" of couple (or family) therapy with
were toward growth, not stability. As Satir (1965) expressed it, the goal was her name. While she had been seen by many leaders in the field, including
"not to maintain the relationship nor to separate the pair but to help each other some of her very own MRI colleagues, as a "naive and fuzzy thinker" (Nichols
to take charge of himself" (p. 125; emphasis added). & Schwartz, 1998, p. 122), it could be argued that she left a more enduring and
To these ends, a wide variety of interventions and experiential techniques were pervasive legacy for the treatment of couple problems than any of her
used, ranging from verbal methods such as emphasis on the use of "I- pioneering contemporaries.
statements," talking to rather than about one's mate, emphasizing people's
positive motives more than their accumulated resentments, intensifying the
immediacy of one's emotional self-awareness, clarifying communication, urging
direct expression of feelings, encouraging validation of one's mate, and
acceptance of differences: to nonverbal methods such as family sculpting and
even, at times, dance movement, and massage. While the emphasis of Satir's
work was on the present, her "Family Reconstruction" method (Nerin, 1986)
made special efforts to unlock patients from dysfunctional historical patterns
learned in their families of origin. The therapist's roles were multiple, and
included prominently, pointing out unspoken family rules, eliciting conscious
but unexpressed feelings, use of the therapist's self through expressions of
warmth and caring, and serving as a "model of communication" and "a
resource person" who shares her "special knowledge" (Satir, 1965, p. 132).
Satir saw the effective couple therapist as a nurturing teacher, whose aim was
to help orchestrate corrective emotional experiences.
Satir left the MRI in 1966, to become the first director of the famous Esalen
Institute in California. Her increasing involvement in the "human potential
movement" of Rogers, Maslow, Perls, and others took her more and more
outside the mainstream of family and couple therapy, despite her abundant