Music Again

Music Again

This post is a sort of dialogue with a podcast interview about music therapy. I provide the link here and encourage anyone who reads this blog with any interest, to listen to the podcast. The interview is really more about the creation of therapeutic space, but it also economically exemplifies what I have called “Therapeutic Attitude” and has added to my own conception of it.

Philippa Derrington is a Senior Lecturer within the Division of Occupational Therapy and Arts Therapies at Queen Margaret University in Edinburgh and leads the MSc Music Therapy course there. Here she is interviewed by Luke Annesley, a jazz musician and music therapist who produces the British Association for Music Therapy podcast series Music Therapy Conversations.

Music Therapy Conversations. Episode 25. Philippa Derrington

In this interview, Philippa describes setting up a music therapy space in a school, in the corner of a garage, and using large instruments (to occupy and therefore command space) and anything she could salvage from the school skip. In doing this she demonstrates beautifully one aspect of therapeutic attitude, which is taking responsibility for the space.

Therapy is exploration and, as such, requires a secure base (1,2). The therapist is as responsible for this aspect of therapy as any other. If a therapist is lucky enough to be able to totally control the physical environment, then they can (and should) do so creatively. But it may be that significant aspects of the environment are fixed and out of the physical control of the therapist. When this is the case the therapist can make sure that, when in the room, they “extend themselves to its boundaries” (3).

When I have managed to put an idea into words and another practitioner from a different discipline expresses something similar, I find it hugely affirming. As I listened to this podcast I found myself thinking over and over again, “this is Therapeutic Attitude!”

Take, for example:

PD: “Respect takes first place for me in work with any adolescent” (16m00s)

– and compare with –

AW “A crucial aspect of therapeutic work with children is the forming of a respectful relationship with them: discussing, offering genuine choices, and relating to them as valid, motivated humans with a right to, and the potential for, a life of their own, rather than simply existing as a product and part of the lives of others.” (BWSG p 151)

Or:

PD “A most important element is being able to get alongside the young person” (18m40s)

compare…

AW “…my position is alongside the child, looking at the conundrum, as though to say, “Is this what you would like us to think about?” (p12)

And:

PD “…the importance of not-knowing, and staying with that.” (20m09s)

compare…

AW Chapter Four on Uncertainty which leans heavily on D. W. Winnicott’s “..contain conflicts…. instead of anxiously looking around for a cure” (4) and John Keats’ concept of Negative Capability (5).

I am excited enough by the similarities, but here is a point of divergence or extension which gives me pause for thought. Luke and Philippa have a conversation (14m08s) about how in the school she is “always a music therapist, but not always doing music therapy”. This is really interesting. I wrote a section (p11) “Being a Psychiatrist” in which I contrasted being a psychiatrist with doing psychiatry, but I wanted to make a different point and distinguish between (in the frame of virtue ethics) being a psychiatrist as opposed to performing a set of tasks which constituted psychiatry but which might as well be alien (being versus doing). I still think that my point is an important one, but Phillipa and Luke’s point is also, and they complement one another . A therapist must have therapeutic attitude when “doing therapy” but the attitude is also important when in one’s professional role – being a therapist – but not actually in session. Philippa clearly protects the sessions in betweenwhiles, but only to the extent that each client requires. This is a form of “holding in mind”. The attitude extends beyond the session and becomes part of the professional person; Perhaps even the person.

Have a listen!

refs:

  1. Bowlby, J. (1988). A Secure Base: Clinical Applications of Attachment Theory.
    London: Routledge.
  2. Byng-Hall, J. (1995). Creating a secure family base: Some implications of
    attachment theory for family therapy. Family Process, 34: 45–58.
  3. Being With and Saying Goodbye. Cultivating Therapeutic Attitude in Professional Practice p89.
  4. Winnicott, D. W. (1971b). Therapeutic Consultations in Child Psychiatry. London: Hogarth & The Institute of Psycho-Analysis. p2.
  5. Gittings, R. (1966). Selected Poems and Letters of John Keats. Oxford:
    Heinemann Educational. p40-41.

Return to Home Page

Advertisements

A new home in free musical improvisation

A new home in free musical improvisation

I do have concerns, though, about those children who have been taught to play a sport, a musical instrument, or a complex board game, to the exclusion of playing which is the freer, more creative, and developmental activity.  = Being With and Saying Goodbye, Ch 5 Thinking

I joined Oxford Improvisers in 2018 because I am a musician as well as a clinician and was in need of stimulation and a new direction. This turned out to be a brilliant move, and further explanation is perfectly relevant to Therapeutic Attitude.

In Oxford Improvisers I found myself immediately welcomed, and at home. Home, of course, is a secure place from which one can venture.

Exploration requires a secure base, as attachment theory has taught us, but there is no certainty* in terms of the anticipated outcome. The confidence shown by the clinician, then, must be a confidence in process coupled with an optimistic acknowledgement of the uncertain future” (BWSG Ch 4).

In that chapter, which is on Uncertainty, I consider “an appropriate analogy [for the practising clinician] to be that of the improvising musician who uses landmarks and artistry, and is confident that the result will be music whilst not being at all sure what will actually come next”. I was already describing clinical work in child and adolescent mental health as improvisation, though I had little experience of musical improvisation at the time.

The picture above, taken by Gabriele Pani and tweeted for @OX_Improvisers , shows overlaid objects; a piano (barely visible in this version), toy piano, guitar, watch, plastic spoon, drum sticks and mallets. What moves me about this picture is that each of these objects is taken seriously and lightly at the same time. The same is true of participation.

The difference between participants is respected; indeed this difference is essential to the activity. At the same time participants are valued equally; valued to the same extent, but for different reasons or qualities.

Uncertainty is not only accepted; nor even simply embraced; it is encouraged and nurtured. Any “rules” introduced are not to constrain movement, but to provide something to bounce off.

From the conclusion of Chapter 3, The Nature of evidence, I have selected the following points:

  • For the development of an individual existence there must be freedom of movement.
  • If statistics and “facts” are to be used in relation to human growth, they must be understood such that the individual’s room for manoeuvre can be demonstrated.
  • This amounts to an attitude of irreverence towards the apparently immovable.
  • Humour in the clinical setting reveals the creative space between how things are and how they might be.
  • Despite humanity’s constant search for certainty, possibility and hope can only exist where there is uncertainty.

This all contributes to the attitude of clinical practice that evolved through my own working mid-life and that I have come to call Therapeutic Attitude. Small wonder that I found myself a new home with a group of free musical improvisers on retirement from my NHS job. Therapy has to be creative and for therapeutic creativity one requires freedom of movement within a safe space.

♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪

*PS in the lines quoted above I actually wrote “security” but “certainty” gets us closer to what I was thinking.

Back to Home Page

Therapeutic Alliteration

Therapeutic Alliteration

Every argument worth making, it seems, can be summarised in a limited number of words all beginning with the same letter. So here are the Four Ps of Therapeutic Attitude. The last one is A, so I made the middle two either P/A to balance it out.

By the way, the “you” addressed here may be a therapist, but not necessarily. Everyone can bring some therapeutic attitude to the table in whatever relationship they are in. If you are in a position of professional responsibility, then I believe you have a duty to do so. Oh, and first check out Attitude

So here are the four Ps: Position, Posture, Purpose, and Appreciation. That’s P for ‘preciation.

Position

Are you visible? Accessible? Are you in a place in your own life that enables you to park your issues and engage fully in the therapeutic relationship for the allotted time? There is little point in having all the other attributes of a therapist if you are hidden away or beset constantly by other demands. Position can also refer to your “position on issues”. Where are your red lines? I suggest, very simply, “Support the other if you can do so without harming anyone”. If you have read much else of what I have written you will know that I have other red lines; I will not serve the machine, for example. Red lines are relatively static and provide the channels through which Purpose (see below) is directed.

Posture/Appearance

Body posture is both a useful metaphor, and a way to evidence and influence a more internal posture. You need to be upright without being rigid; relaxed without being slumped; alert without being rapacious; responsive without jumping to conclusions or into action. Some aspects of your posture will become evident from your responses. To maintain therapeutic attitude, you need to be located in the real world, but not too subservient to it. Stable, yet poised for movement. How you appear will hopefully inform others as to your position and likely style.

Purpose/ Approach

The purpose of therapy is to enable positive developmental change; enable and encourage, but never force or demand. The agenda arises in – is set and owned by – the other person. Any other would-be influences can be considered part of the environment. If the client has been sent or brought by a third party – then the agenda of that third party is something that you and your patient or client can look at with interest. Someone may come to you with an agenda and that is fine, but you will be curious towards it, and ready for it to change.

Appreciation

Appreciation of the other includes warmth, greeting, acknowledgement (that they are real and valid), acclaim, and humour. There are two keys to appreciation. One is Sensitivity. There is no merit to acclaim, for example, if it is insensitive. Some people are not rewarded by a fanfare, but rather a shy nod. Others will only notice a fanfare and will experience a shy nod as a brush-off or will not notice it at all. The other key to appreciation is genuineness, and it is at the point of appreciation that genuineness is most crucial. It is possible to manufacture Position, Posture, and Purpose and act them out – possibly against the grain, though this will require a good deal of effort – but genuineness must be genuine. Fake genuineness, when detected, simply results in disengagement; if undetected, fake genuineness can be toxic. Therapeutic work, therefore, is a vocation. You do it because you really want to, and because it really matters to you.

TA = P + P(A) + P(A) + A(P)SG . What could be simpler?

Return to Home Page

Nature of Evidence – After the day

Nearly two months after the Nature of Evidence seminar, the buzz of the day has passed and I periodically return to the sound-file. Such richness and diversity of material!

Thirteen people assembled for the day. Each had prepared a brief presentation, and these were delivered in groups throughout the day, separated by open discussion.

I am listening to the sound-file in order to extract themes, but what I am reflecting on right now is the way that people are affected by each other’s positions. There is a quality of respect and attention that contrasts so starkly with what I see so often on Twitter.

Of course this was a group of people who were likely to be respectful of one another’s opinions and sensitivities, but what I particularly notice today is what is said by someone AFTER they have listened to and taken on board other opinions. There is often a softness or slight circumspection that marks these utterances. For example, “This may not apply so much in some of the areas you are working in, but I think that…

So this day was informative through process as well as content. People took care of one another, which is heartening. But I find myself wondering if the validation that opinion can receive from agreement may be less that that which it receives from its ability to demonstrate that it emerges from a process of reflection. For agreement, the message is often simplified, rather as the outcome measures of a quantitative study are simplified. The devil remains hidden in the detail, and the detail has been effaced by the process. Perhaps we are agreeing over that-which-can-be-agreed-upon instead of that-which-needs-to-be-debated.

In this discussion about evidence, there is a difference between the statement “this is about power” and the statement “context is important” (both of which, incidentally, I agree with). It is not that one is convergent and the other divergent, but more that they invite differing qualities of convergence-divergence.

It calls to mind Leonard Cohen’s lyric “There is a war between the ones who say there is a war and the ones who say there isn’t“. If those two groups can work together, then we are really getting somewhere!

When presented with “evidence”, I inspect it for evidence of some reflective process that has been able to listen to contradictory positions and that continues to take them seriously.

Leave a reply below

Return to The Nature of Evidence

Return to Home