Families Under Stress

A Psychological Interpretation

Tony Manocchio, William Petitt

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9781317487425
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Mental Health in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

The family is perhaps the most important single institution in everyone's life. What happens in such an intense group? How does it develop over time? What happens when stress is placed upon it, whether generated from inside or outside the family? Originally published in 1975, when the late Tony Manocchio was one of the leading practitioners of family therapy in Britain and Scandinavia, this title, written with his colleague William Petitt, is a lively study of communication within families, revealing the universal problems common to all.

The authors demonstrate and illuminate the application of communication principles by analysing healthy and 'unhealthy' family systems in six major plays – The Winslow Boy, Riders to the Sea, Hamlet, A Long Day's Journey into Night, Death of a Salesman and A Delicate Balance. As part of this analysis they examine the difficulties family members have in allowing for differences, in sharing secrets and the ease with which a whole family can scapegoat a single member. They give a number of short case histories and examples from other plays which further illustrate the importance of communicating clearly.

The book will still be of value to all those interested in the uses of family therapy, and also to students of literature for the human insight it offers into the texts discussed.

1 Two Families

Introduction

In the following chapters we will look at patterns of disturbed communication. At this point we feel it would be valuable to examine the way a 'healthy' family behaves. In much the same way as Maslow, the authors feel that to content themselves with the discussion of pathological symptoms is to lose sight of the whole picture. Health is a dynamic drive, as is sickness — we can learn at least as much from healthy people as unhealthy ones.

This is a problem faced by the therapist — he is usually called in only at a time of crisis. If we pursue this line of thought, we might see society as a family that only has mediocre expectations for its children — as long as they stay out of trouble and conform to certain standards, then everything is fine. We make very little attempt to work with the individual's potential.

If we think about industry for a moment we can see this idea exemplified. Very often change can only be brought about by the precipitation of a crisis or occasionally the other way round. This is like saying 'We will stay as we are until it is no longer possible'. If we indulge our fantasies for a moment, we might see that it is possible to have a different dominant ethic; one which would encourage every individual to attempt to live at the highest level possible. The ethic might be 'We will continue to strive for different means of expression and self-fulfilment'. This is the way a good family therapist must work: he would strive to use a health model rather than a disease model. His primary expectation would be that everyone has the potential for growth. He will strive for the closed family to become more open, the affectionless family to become more loving, for the rigid and uncompromising family to allow for differences.

The authors have been among the loudest complainants that too often the social scientist falls for the myth that his subject is value-free. By so doing he perpetuates the fantasy of the 'truly objective' social scientist who is 'morally neutral' and the 'completely impartial' observer. When we carry this idea of objectivity to its natural conclusion in the social sciences the results are terrifying. Roszak captures them very well (1968):

I can perceive no more than your behavioural façades. I can grant you no more reality or psychic coherence than this perception allows. I shall observe this behaviour of yours and record it. I shall not enter into your life, your task, your condition of existents. Do not turn to me or appeal to me or ask me to become involved with you. I am here only as a temporary observer whose role is to stand back and record and later to make sense of what you seem to be doing or intending. I assume that I can adequately understand what you are doing or intending without entering wholly into your life. I am not particularly interested in what you uniquely are; I am interested only in the general pattern to which you conform. I assume I have the right to use you to perform this process of classification. I assume I have the right to reduce all that you are to an integer in my science.

Inherent in the theory of family therapy that we are discussing in this book are a number of values. It is posited that it is important that the family possess certain qualities or values if its members are to achieve maximum growth potential. These qualities include the open display of feeling – which includes the sharing of such opposite emotions as extreme anger or love. The individual must feel free enough to act spontaneously and talk honestly. This automatically precludes secrets or taboos, as these place limits on the interaction of members. Taboos are difficult as these are culturally determined – for example death and incest. But the question 'Why' remains – cultural mores do change.

A further value inherent in this model is that people are allowed to be different. This is one of the more helpful ways in which the individual can be encouraged to find self-expression and realize his own identity. Allowing and encouraging family members to be different has certain consequences. This assumes that independence and its corollary self-responsibility will be encouraged and stressed.

It is important that we have high expectations in all areas. If we agree that no one is working at their fullest potential then it is not unreasonable to assume that they can do better than they are doing. This principle must also operate in families, if members are to grow.

The Winslow family: The Winslow Boy by Terence Rattigan

List of characters

Ronnie Winslow	John Watherstone
Arthur Winslow	Desmond Curry
Grace Winslow	Miss Barnes
Dickie Winslow	Fred
Catherine Winslow	Sir Robert Morton
Violet

Synopsis of the plot of the play

Ronnie Winslow, fourteen years old, is expelled from Naval Cadet Training School after being found guilty by secret Court Martial of stealing a five-shilling postal order. His father refuses to accept the verdict of guilty, but fails in any attempt to make the inquiry public.

In attempting to clear his son's name, the father embarks on a social crusade. It is a long battle, lasting almost two years. Most of the family money is lost, the daughter loses her fiance because of pressure of public ridicule, and the eldest son is forced to leave university. The father, too, pays a heavy price, for his health rapidly deteriorates.

But the son is finally cleared and thus the family sacrifices take on a greater meaning, for in this legal reversal on the part of the Navy is contained the whole myth of David and Goliath, an enormous societal triumph gained by such a small but resolute and strong group of people.

The proud family

The Winslow family is at once both very ordinary and extremely remarkable. In their war with the State they have many personal battles which have to be triumphed in. The ordinariness is in their feelings for each other, the way they talk, the beliefs they hold. The extraordinariness they possess lies in the fact that they live their values, and fight for their beliefs.

It is not hard to believe that the family grows closer in a tolerance and understanding of itself as the months drag on. For at no time is the impossible or the impractical course demanded; here is merely the resolute pursual of an eminently reasonable but difficult goal. For no one in this family is coerced or gagged or even confused by what is happening. There is a clarity, even in the suffering of each individual.

But of course there is a price. In every battle soldiers must die. And while the individual has to face later decisions – which will hopefully be forever – there will have to be a restricting and some voluntary giving up of some valued alternatives. Such battles can never be easy, and should not be. But it is maybe only in such battles, voluntarily but firmly accepted, that the human spirit is tempered.

We trace four major themes in this section: decision-making, crisis, communication, and a new and very important topic, that of the relationship between physical and mental health. We close this section with a discussion of the open family system.

Decision-making

The major decision in the Winslow family is a unilateral one – and all else follows from this first decision. Bearing in mind the historical material we have already discussed, this could have been a quite normal state of affairs for the time. The young son Ronnie, age fourteen, returns from Naval School unexpectedly. He has been dismissed after being charged and found guilty of stealing a five-shilling postal order. The family fights the case, but it would seem a pretty safe assumption that the final decision was made by the father. His decision is motivated by two factors – the belief in his son's innocence and a strong sense of social justice.

Once committed to the decision the consequences are pretty drastic. The eldest son has to leave college, the family finances are severely depleted, the daughter loses her fiance, and the father's health is undermined. Only at one point is there talk of dropping the case. This is an important point because it gives us great insight into the qualities of the relationships in this family. A letter arrives whilst the father, Catherine and Sir Robert, the barrister, are discussing the case. After reading it the father drops a bombshell:

SIR ROBERT We were discussing how to proceed with the case –

ARTHUR The case? (He stares, a little blankly, from one to the other.) Yes. We must think of that, mustn't we? (Pause.) How to proceed with the case? (To Sir Robert, abruptly.) I'm afraid I don't think, all things considered, that much purpose will be served by going on –

(Sir Robert and Catherine stare at him blankly. Catherine goes quickly to him and snatches the letter from his lap. She begins to read.)

SIR ROBERT (with a sudden change of tone) Of course we must go on.

ARTHUR (in a low voice) It is not for you to choose, Sir. The choice is mine.

SIR ROBERT (harshly) Then you must reconsider it. To give up now would be insane.

ARTHUR Insane? My sanity has already been called in question tonight – for carrying the case as far as I have.

SIR ROBERT Whatever the contents of that letter, or whatever has happened to make you lose heart, I insist that we continue the fight –

ARTHUR Insist? We? It is my fight – my fight alone – and it is for me alone to judge when the time has come to give it up. . . .

Catherine My father doesn't mean what he says, Sir Robert.

SIR ROBERT I am glad to hear it.

CATHERINE Perhaps I should explain this letter –

ARTHUR No, Kate.

CATHERINE Sir Robert knows so much about our family affairs, Father, I don't see it will matter much if he learns a little more. (To Sir Robert.) This letter is from a certain Colonel Watherstone who is the father of the man I am engaged to. He goes on to say that unless my father will give him a firm undertaking to drop this whining and reckless agitation – I suppose he means the case – he will exert every bit of influence he has over his son to prevent him marrying me.

SIR ROBERT I see. An ultimatum.

CATHERINE Yes – but a pointless one.

SIR ROBERT Your daughter seems prepared to take the risk –

ARTHUR I am not. Not, at least, until I know how great a risk it is –

SIR ROBERT How do you estimate the risk, Miss Winslow? (Pause. Catherine, for all her bravado, is plainly scared. She is engaged in lighting a cigarette as Sir Robert asks his question.)

CATHERINE (at length) Negligible.

(pp. 69-71)

The father is prepared to drop the case for the sake of his daughter, he is not prepared to sacrifice her happiness. She, on her part, is remarkably level-headed and clear, and is obviously prepared to risk her engagement for the sake of what she believes is right. As we see later, her fiancé does in fact break off the engagement because of the case and all its publicity. The price that the Winslow family pays is indeed a heavy one.

To make decisions we have to be clear about what our priorities are. Shortly after the fight to clear Ronnie's name is begun, money becomes rather tight. Some economies have to be made. One of them directly involves Dickie, the eldest son, who is a university student. (At this period of time, students had to pay their own college fees and expenses.) The father opens the discussion:

ARTHUR Very well, (He stares at him for a moment.) What do you suppose one of your book-maker friends would lay in the way of odds against your getting a degree? (Pause.)

DICKIE Oh, well, let's think. Say – about evens.

ARTHUR Hm. I rather doubt if at that price your friends would find many takers.

DICKIE Well – perhaps seven to four against.

ARTHUR I see. And what about the odds against your eventually becoming a Civil Servant?

DICKIE Well – a bit steeper, I suppose.

ARTHUR Exactly. Quite a bit steeper.

(Pause.)

DICKIE You don t want to have a bet, do your

ARTHUR No, Dickie. I'm not a gambler. And that's exactly the trouble. Unhappily I am no longer in a position to gamble two hundred pounds a year on what you yourself a...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Original Title
• Original Copyright
• Contents
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
• INTRODUCTION
• 1 TWO FAMILIES
• 2 THE ROYAL FAMILY
• 3 THE TYRONE FAMILY
• 4 THE LOMAN FAMILY
• 5 THE ALBEE FAMILY
• SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING
• SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY