Coping with Crisis

A Counsellor's Guide to the Restabilization Process

Jim Burtles

• Publisher: Loving Healing Press
• Year: 2007
• Print ISBN: 9781932690415
• eBook ISBN: 9781615999262
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Psychotherapy Counselling
• Index: Psychology

In the wake of a catastrophic event, the witness may discover or experience unsettling emotions which can trigger subsequent behaviors. These reactions can lead to a number of consequences, some of which are unproductive.

Restabilization is a practical means of addressing these reactions and the resultant issues. It is a four-step process of self-discovery guided, but not led, by a counselor; aimed at restoring someone's confidence and improving their capability to deal with life's problems. The person is encouraged, and enabled, to view the event as a learning experience with an opportunity to improve their performance in relation to unexpected problems.

The four stages of the process are described in detail, together with examples of model sessions and rules of engagement which serve to ensure the effectiveness of the process. There are also some Communication Exercises designed to ensure unemotional but sympathetic communication between the counselor and their client.

In addition, the Dark Serpent Dilemma and Technique offers a pragmatic way of approaching and solving the problems which life throws at all of us from time to time. Once the concept is understood it can be applied as a way of ensuring the optimum reaction to any significant event or situation.

About the Author

For several years, Jim Burtles was Principal Consultant with Safetynet PLC, where he taught business executives how to cope with, and plan for, minor emergencies, disasters and absolute catastrophes. Safetynet was a pioneering disaster recovery and business continuity company which specialized in dealing with business emergencies. Such events might range in scale from a faulty air-conditioning system to the aftermath of major earthquakes or terrorist attacks.

The original concept of Safetynet was centered on the complex computer-based operations of the modern business. However, experience soon taught Safetynet's founders that the whole of the business environment had to be taken into account. Therefore, personnel problems and many other aspects needed to be taken into consideration.

Jim acquired his expertise in disaster recovery and emergency management through direct exposure to dozens of real-life disasters, almost a hundred emergencies and countless problem situations. He also benefited from the indirect experience of many more, gained from talking to, and working with, victims of various crises.

In his current role, as a Director of Total Continuity Management, he is now working with senior executives of international corporations and government departments to help them develop complete emergency response plans and processes which include appropriate counseling and training programs to cope with emergency

1

Discovery of Emotions

From my observations, there seem to be five common reactions to a severe crisis. I think of these as the “Five Discoveries of Stress’” Four of them are, in effect, a discovery about “oneself in crisis” and the fifth is a kind of discovery of what is regarded as unknowable.

They are the discovery of:

• Fear,
• Excitement,
• Capability,
• Chaos, and
• Unknowable Numbness.

Each of these reactions eventually led to similar consequences. The victims distanced themselves from the scene to some extent: mentally, physically, or both. Although not everyone fits neatly into one category or the other, the point is to give us a basis for discussing the most common reactions you are likely to encounter in those who happen to be particularly afflicted.

Discovery of Fear

When people suddenly find that they are unable to control the situation around them, they experience fear of the unknown. Often this perceived inability to control is simply a matter of less control than before. Bear in mind, some of us are not in full control of the scene where we normally operate. Most of us have learned to cope with a certain amount of mystery and confusion around us, as part of our regular environment.

This discovery of fear is accompanied by a realization that fear is a most unpleasant or uncomfortable experience. Thus, when things have returned to normal, the subconscious reaction is to regard the once comfortable place of work as a place where life can become most uncomfortable. The victim will seek to change to a safer place of work, one that does not retain the ghosts and shadows of bad memories, or anything which reminds them of those bad memories. Another point worth mentioning is that for many individuals, a repeating pattern begins to emerge and with each repetition they become more firmly locked into the pattern and its effects.

Discovery of Excitement

A very few individuals will react to the crisis in a totally different way. For these, the event seems exciting and dramatic and they enjoy all this random activity around them. When everything is back to normal, these people feel let down and seek further excitement, which they will either create or find. To create it they might in rare cases do something as extreme as setting a fire or they may simply be less cautious, leaving windows and doors open or taking risks in some other way. If they do not create the danger that leads to excitement, they will take up alternative employment in the hope that things might go wrong and hence recreate this feeling elsewhere. What is more, they may subconsciously set out to become a contributory factor to the next “exciting” event. Again a pattern can emerge and become self–perpetuating.

Discovery of Chaos

For many people, who have always led and sought a stable, comfortable lifestyle, their first experience of chaos comes as a rude shock. What they have always feared and avoided has now invaded their own personal territory. Suddenly, they have been confronted by a situation in which there was very little to cling to. Now everything seems to be mobile and insubstantial. All the familiar soothing noises of normal activity, the comforting souvenirs and pictures of the family seem to have been replaced by a noisy whirlwind of activity, in which nothing stays still long enough to become familiar. Next, we’ll quickly examine two typical subtypes of chaos response.

“Suddenly there was a deafening silence—nothing can ever be the same again.”

After being burgled, many people say they feel invaded and unhappy rather than robbed. They have feelings of guilt—guilty of being a victim!

They will have acquired some new knowledge from this unexpected experience. This new knowledge needs to be evaluated; its intrinsic value and relative truth have to be weighed against existing knowledge. Wherever there is a conflict between existing and new information, the mind will tend to come down heavily in favor of the old knowledge, on the basis that it has proved workable in the past. Even if the old knowledge proved unworkable, at least the degree of unworkability is known and can be allowed for. Familiarity breeds a kind of comfort, which is preferable to the uncertainty always brought about by any significant change. Changes of attitude, viewpoint or behavior are always very difficult; much more difficult than a change of position, location or working environment.

Cognitive dissonance is a psychological term describing the uncomfortable tension that may result from having two conflicting thoughts at the same time, or from engaging in behavior that conflicts with one’s beliefs, or from experiencing apparently conflicting phenomena.

In simple terms, it can be the filtering of information that conflicts with what you already believe, in an effort to ignore that information and reinforce your beliefs. In detailed terms, it is the perception of incompatibility between two cognitions, where “cognition” is defined as any element of knowledge, including attitude, emotion, belief, or behavior. The theory of cognitive dissonance states that contradicting cognitions serve as a driving force that compels the mind to acquire or invent new thoughts or beliefs, or to modify existing beliefs, so as to reduce the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions. Experiments have attempted to quantify this hypothetical drive. Some of these have examined how beliefs often change to match behavior when beliefs and behavior are in conflict.

Social psychologist Leon Festinger first proposed the theory in 1957 after the publication of his book When Prophecy Fails, observing the counterintuitive belief persistence of members of a UFO doomsday cult and their increased proselytization after the leader’s prophecy failed. The failed message of earth’s destruction, purportedly sent by aliens to a woman in 1956, became a disconfirmed expectancy that increased dissonance between cognitions, thereby causing most members of the impromptu cult to lessen the dissonance by accepting a new prophecy: that the aliens had instead spared the planet for their sake.

“Better an end with tears than no end at all.”

The normal conclusion for this type of person will be, “It is obviously possible to survive chaos, but it is most unpleasant.” We all require a certain amount of chaos around us for the sake of learning and to avoid boredom. The problems begin to occur when the amount of chaos exceeds our own personal threshold. Different individuals will have differing degrees of tolerance to disorder or chaos. Clearly, there are those who seem to thrive on chaos and there are those whose well ordered lives are an attempt to limit, or eliminate chaos.

For the latter type of person, the sudden discovery, or perhaps rediscovery, of the effects of chaos will be an unpleasant experience—otherwise they would have been wrong to avoid chaos in the past. The mind will resist all attempts to make it seem to have been wrong. Being wrong is unpalatable and unacceptable to our subconscious mind, it must prove itself to be right—no matter how devious the proof.

Having revisited and reinforced the decision that chaos must be avoided at all costs, this seeker of a stable environment will now see the current situation as potentially unstable and therefore to be avoided. One way of avoiding the place is to get sick; another is to find a new job. An even more effective combination is to get sick and find another job. In my experience, this person can be expected to have, at least, a cold or flu after a traumatic event. In the extreme they will even go so far as to get run over by a bus rather than return to the “scene of madness”.

Discovery of Capability

When someone is suddenly plunged into a situation where the old rules no longer apply, they are often given, or assume, a higher degree of responsibility. Then they discover their capability to exercise more control, or make decisions, or make things happen or whatever. In short they discover their true worth, or at least get closer to it.

When all the fuss has died down, they are then expected to continue doing the same job as before. Gone is all the excitement and sense of power or control. Feeling deprived their new role, this person now seeks more responsibility and will begin to look elsewhere to find it. In my experience, they are unlikely to apply for promotion or expansion in their current environment; they will automatically assume that where there has been no growth in the past, there will be no growth in the future. This is of course, a perfectly rational and often valid assumption.

Having outgrown their current position, they will be keen to move to a place where they feel they may get the recognition and appreciation they need, want and probably deserve.

Subconsciously, they might not have been fully motivated for some time. They may have felt slightly frustrated with a rather mundane job which held few challenges. This type of person needs to be stretched to feel alive and is often summarized on a personnel report form as “Works well under stress,” “Unflappable” or “Capable, but lazy.” The last comment reflects a situation where the reporter had not observed the person working happily and purposefully under pressure.

Unknowable Numbness

There is a type of person who is, literally, dumb–struck by a traumatic event. They become petrified with an apparently irrational fear—their fear is far greater than the situation seems to warrant. Their basic underlying fear is the fear of knowing (or experiencing) the unknown.

It is a fear of being afraid. They have always assumed they would be unable to cope in a situation where they were truly afraid. This assumption gets proved right because the person mentally retreats and will not confront the situation they suppose they cannot cope with.

This numbness, of course, reinforces the certainty that their mind cannot cope. As this has happened every time they have been exposed to an unusual situation, the reinforcement has conditioned them to respond with “instant incapability” in the event of a crisis.

They will now regard their old working environment as a place that is “too dangerous”. They will not feel comfortable there again, unless the place is altered out of all recognition, literally.

Post–Crisis Exit Effect

As we have seen, almost everybody will revise their viewpoint of both the job and its surroundings after experiencing a major crisis. For many of them, it will lead, in due course, to a subconscious need to move. This move will be to a new type of work, a new place of work or a combination of both.

Because they are compelled by an unidentified, subconscious desire, their conscious mind will need to invent some kind of rational explanation for the urge to seek change. The social veneer level of “thinking” will be saying something like “I feel like a change, don’t want to be stuck in a rut” or “Perhaps I should spend more time with my ageing parents, young kids, puppy dog, fishing rod or aunt i Australia.” As some of these “excuses” may seem rather weak, they may be consciously restructured to be more acceptable. A whole fabric will be woven around the invented excuse to make it seem more plausible by giving it a complete context. They will soon develop a watertight explanation for themselves.

The end result is a high proportion of the staff resigning for all sorts of apparently unconnected reasons. Much of this subliminal thinking may take weeks to surface and further days, weeks or months to implement. Thus there is such a lag between the true original cause (the crisis) and the eventual consequence (job change) as to disguise the connection. I call this phenomenon the Delayed Physical Exit.

Not everyone will respond to their subliminal thinking by a full–scale departure—at least, not on the physical level. For some individuals, these pressures will only cause them to depart from the scene in a mental sense, a large part of their attention will be focused elsewhere. They will while away the hours, and make themselves feel more comfortable, by day–dreaming about their ageing parents, young kids, puppy dog, fishing rod ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Explorations in Metapsychology Series
• Table of Contents
• Table of Figures
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Preface
• Chapter 1 - Discovery of Emotions
• Chapter 2 - Crisis Intervention: Returning People to Normal
• Chapter 3 - The Process in Detail
• Chapter 4 - Guidelines for the Counselor
• Chapter 5 - The Personal View of Crisis
• Chapter 6 - Opportunity Meetings
• Chapter 7 - Essential Counseling Skills
• Chapter 8 - A Code for Counselors
• Chapter 9 - The Dark Serpent Dilemma and Technique
• Chapter 10 - Restabilization and CISD: A Brief Comparison
• Glossary of Terms
• Appendix
• Bibliography
• Index