peter108 wrote:

Looking back all my best work has been when I was not there, but very much there in an UC sense.
To explain my point, if you are building rapport and concentrating on doing it, your not in it. When your thinking about what to do next , your not in a rapport state that will guide you via your UC.
This is frightening to some people who want the answers up front and don't like to work in real time on the fly.
Peter

Forgive the late reply Peter, I just saw the thread.

This is very good - a very clear description of an important and often unknown process. Cheers.

2c worth

D

NinaM wrote:

As it turned out it was only liquids - but that is besides the point - the point is that there was a rejection to a message "am I supposed to swallow that" and a lack of willingness to resolve the underlying issue - just do the treatment (so I don't have to deal with the real problem of telling someone something... ) and the guided fantasy I believe where the underlying issue could have been resolved in the mind through rep systems, it being okay, I believe would have had the most far reaching beneficial effects on the persons life and ability to handle other such similar situations - as in it is okay to express rejection to a message that you don't want to hear, it is okay to feel and express feelings relating to that message.

Nina, It has been great following this thread and well done you for bringing a resolution to the problem being presented.

I am left wondering (as Michael says NLPers are inquisitive) who would have benefitted more from being able to treat the underlying issue?

I have interpreted the way you have posted as being from your frame of reference and not client focussed.

I have experienced clients who don't want to address root causes or underlying issues as much as I may be willing to continue they do not. I have learnt to accept this even though it is sometimes frustrating it is inevitable in some cases.

NinaM wrote:

A note - we did future pacing three times, and he could not get the problem back - he couldn;t do it in the future pace - yet he still turned to me to ask me if the problem was gone (?) here is where my confusion came in, and writing this actually illustrates me doing my convincer and him asking for his convincer (you tell me that is how I know) ... hmmm... I think I just had an aha moment...

This was just about convincer wasn't it... not about the acutal changework...?

In terms of my convincing - I only want one thing. I don't care if they believe it or not - I just want to know that the change has been done. When it really has been done you can't act in contradiction to the change.

From my understanding reading the posts the client is quite young and is, in all probability still externally referencing as most children do until they just learn to trust your own feelings on this matter and know that something has changed for the better.

NinaM wrote:

Example my friend played with me and did like to dislike with beer. I love beer! No matter though, everytime I think of it I feel disguisted - it won't pass my lips now. It's really annoying!

My point is I can't act in contradiction to that change. That's what I want from my changework an inability to act in contradiction to it.

Can't?

Why do you want to limit the client only to the change that you have facilitated, seems a bit too controlling or prescriptive for my liking and again this is your frame of reference and not the clients.

Would it not be better to view the change as a positive choice. You facilitated a session in which you offered the client choice and they did choose to change their behaviour which hopefully will enhance their life in some small way.

You chose to change your like of beer and you can change it again if you so choose. It is only a one way street if you don't choose to follow the signs.

NinaM wrote:

I should have brought him for a pizza. :0)

and a drink to wash it down with because after the session with you, he could...