[“The most frequent mistake likely to be made by the therapist is to give up in the face of the protector’s silence, resistance, or devaluing of the client or the therapy, rather than reframing these responses as natural, normal, and protective in intent. The other common error results when client, therapist, or both “demonize” the protector parts: that is, see them as an interference in therapy rather than as part of the work.
When the therapist urges the client to push through the objections of the fight parts or try to ignore them, it further polarizes them and reinforces their distrust. When the therapist expresses respect, gratitude, and understanding of the fight and flight parts’ actions and reactions, and encourages the client to do the same, protector parts begin to be more open to collaboration. And as client and therapist persist in their efforts to make contact with the fight part, no matter how often rebuffed, it sends an important nonverbal message, one that might make even the most hypervigilant protector more curious, that they are committed and willing to have that commitment tested.
Researchers have noted that one of the characteristics of mothers who promote secure attachment in their children is the ability to resonate to the baby’s state, modulate their own states to avert infant distress or enhance positive affect, and simultaneously mirror both states back to the child (Kim et al., 2014). The mirroring of the infant’s state along with the mother’s corresponding feelings of concern, enjoyment, empathy, or warmth seems to have the effect of communicating “I understand” but also “and I can help.” If the mother simply mirrors the infant’s state, both appear stuck in the same distress. They “blend” as does the normal life self with parts in distress. If the mother reflects back only her different, more positive state, there is no comforting sense of being “gotten.” It is more like an empty reassurance: “I don’t get it, but don’t worry—you’ll feel better soon.” The literature on secure attachment suggests that both resonance and repair are equally important aspects of what has been called “attunement.”
This concept can be applied to the relationship between parts and normal life self. Just as with mothers and infants, “blending” with the feelings of a part simply leaves that child alone with the distressing emotions, as do disembodied words of reassurance or hope. Not only is it crucial for parts to feel a visceral sense that the normal life “gets” how scared, ashamed, angry, or hurt they are but also to feel the effect of the latter’s curiosity, compassion, calm, strength, and protectiveness. But because these are traumatized parts, the need for an adult self to consistently provide “attunement” in this sense will take time and persistence.”]
janina fisher, from healing the fragmented selves of trauma survivors: overcoming internal self-alienation, 2017
