Issues relating to the use of forgiveness in counselling and psychotherapy

British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, Vol. 29, No. 4, 2001 Issues relating to the use of forgiveness in counselling and psychotherapy WILLIAM WEST Education Support and Inclusion, Faculty of Education, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK ABSTRACT This paper explores forgiveness, which is a key component of spiritual pastoral care. Encouraging forgiveness is also one of the spiritual interventions most frequently used by psychotherapists. However, although forgiveness has been explored as an element in psychotherapy, the models generated have had little impact on research and practice. Recent research into forgiveness in therapy is considered, including several models put forward for its use. Some of the implications of the use of forgiveness in therapeutic practice are examined and guidelines for the use of forgiveness in psychotherapy are put forward based on the work of the Forgiveness Project at the University of Manchester. Introduction `Maybe the reason it seems hard for me to forgive others is that I do not fully believe that I am a forgiven person. If I could fully accept the truth that I am forgiven and do not have to live in guilt or shame, I would be really free. My freedom would allow me to forgive others seventy times seven times. By not forgiving I chain myself to a desire to get even, thereby losing my freedom. A forgiven person forgives (Nouwen, 1989, p. 27). `The act of forgiveness as a therapeutic intervention remains a mystery (Sells & Hargrave, 1998: 32). Although counselling and psychotherapy as practised in Britain are largely secularised, they have their roots in religious forms of soul care (McLeod, 1998; West, 2000). Indeed, pastoral counsellors in Britain played a key part in the establishment of the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy as the professional body for counsellors and counselling (West, 1998a). However, in this secularisation of counselling and psychotherapy it is felt in many quarters that ISSN 0306± 9885/print/ISSN 1469± 3534/online/01/040415± 09 2001 Careers Research and Advisory Centre DOI: 10.1080/03069880120085000

416 William West something has been lost and that clients spiritual needs are not always being effectively addressed within the talking therapies (Thorne, 1991, 1998; West, 2000). Indeed, counsellors in training want more of a focus on spirituality (Davy, 2001; Swinton, 1995). Therapeutic techniques drawn from pastoral forms of care have not always been transferred effectively, if at all, to secular counselling. Therapists often do effectively address clients spiritual needs but the competence of any individual therapist in this area can vary according to the school of therapy they were trained in and their own inclinations (Rowan, 1993). One key example of this is in the use of forgiveness. Forgiveness is a key component of pastoral care (Jeff, 1987; Leech, 1994; Lyall, 1995). Indeed Leech (1994), a Church of England minister writing on soul care, insists that confession and forgiveness lie at the very heart of the Christian experience. Similarly McCullough et al. (2000, p. 122) claim that `in principle, mainline Protestant beliefs place great emphasis on the power of God s grace and forgiveness. Forgiveness is a key feature of Christianity and it is explicitly addressed in many other religious traditions including Judaism, Islam and Hinduism (Rye et al., 2000). In Judaism, in the Amidah, the sixth of the 19 blessings used in the synagogue service begins, `Forgive us, our father, for we have missed the mark (quoted in Dorff, 1998, p. 30). Indeed `all the theistic world religions teach that people should forgive those who have harmed or offended them and seek forgiveness for wrong doings (Richards & Bergin, 1997, p. 212). In addition in recent years we have seen the emergence of secular forgiveness expressed through popular self-help books on managing shame, guilt, grief, depression and non-religious uses of forgiveness by health professionals (Thorsen et al., 1998). Even though forgiveness has been increasingly explored as an element in counselling and psychotherapy, especially in the USA (Richards & Bergin, 1997, 2000), the models generated have had little impact on research and practice so far (McCullough & Worthington, 1994); and reports which describe interventions based on current theories remain relatively absent (Sells & Hargrave, 1998). Arguably one of the key limitations of the largely secular practice of counselling and psychotherapy is their lack of recognition of the key role of forgiveness in psychological healing. Richards and Bergin (1997), drawing on their own and other research, suggest that this consists of: (a) positive changes in affective well-being, (b) improvements in physical and mental health, (c) restoration of a sense of personal power, and (d) reconciliation between the offended and the offender. However, forgiveness is not an easy psychological or religious task to accomplish. Thorsen et al. (1998, p. 164) observe that `learning to forgive someone who has hurt you may be one of life s most demanding, yet meaningful, tasks. Despite the truth of this statement we find that within the USA forgiveness is not generally taught as a coping skill within education: `children and youth almost never provided the basics of forgiveness as a coping skill (Thorsen et al., 1998, p. 185). Indeed this whole issue of how we acquire the ability to forgive remains a key research question (see Enright & Coyle, 1998, p. 139). There is a danger that those involved in therapeutic or pastoral work may prematurely guide their clients towards forgiving others (Enright & Coyle, 1998;

The use of forgiveness in counselling 417 Richards & Bergin, 1997). `The one-hour forgiveness intervention is an oxymoron for healing long-lasting, deep-seated injustices and for substantially reducing psychological symptoms of a clinical nature (Enright & Coyle, 1998, p. 157). There is an opposite danger, I believe, of the reluctance of some therapists to engage in therapeutic forgiveness work with religiously minded clients, and McCullough and Worthington (1995) report from two studies with students that clinical interventions, even when brief, can encourage forgiveness. In seeking to define forgiveness Enright and Coyle (1998) insist that forgiveness is an interpersonal process, and that in genuine forgiveness, one who has suffered an unjust injury chooses to abandon his or her right to resentment and retaliation, and instead offers mercy to the offender. They make the following points: (1) the injured one is able to recognise an actual injustice; (2) the injured one chooses willingly and without coercion to respond with mercy rather than what could be justifiable retribution; (3) forgiveness is decidedly moral, concerned with the good of human interaction. In this way they suggest forgiveness can perhaps be distinguished from pardoning, condoning, excusing, forgetting, and denying. They see forgiveness as voluntary and unconditional. Enright (1996) suggests that we examine forgiveness in three aspects: forgiving others, forgiving self, and seeking forgiveness. With colleagues (Enright & Coyle, 1998) he has developed a 20-step process model of forgiveness that has cognitive, behavioural and affective aspects that can be summarised in four major phases (see Table 1). It is important to note that this model is not to be taken in a rigid step by step approach but as `a flexible set of processes with feedback and feed-forward loops, leaving room for much individual variation within the model (Enright & Coyle, 1998, p. 147). They refer to four published studiesð with elderly females, college students, female incest survivors, and males whose partners had abortionsð in which this model was applied. They conclude that these four studies taken as a whole `suggest that forgiveness may be taught and learned and that the outcomes can be quite favourable (Enright & Coyle, 1998, p. 154). In contrast to Enright s model, Worthington (1998) regards forgiveness as a motivational experience based on developing empathy and has developed a five step REACH model: (1) Recall the hurt; (2) Empathise with the one who hurt you; (3) (offer the) Altruistic gift of forgiveness; (4) (make a) Commitment to forgive; (5) Hold on to the forgiveness. Two studies using this model that both show encouraging results are discussed in McCullough et al. (1998). The first study (McCullough & Worthington, 1995) showed that even a brief one-hour psychosocial programme can lead to increases in

418 William West TABLE 1. Enright s 20-step process model of forgiveness Unit Uncovering phase 1 Examination of psychological defences 2 Confrontation of anger; the point is to release, not harbour, the anger 3 Admittance of shame, when it is appropriate 4 Awareness of catharsis 5 Awareness of cognitive rehearsal of the offence 6 Insight that the injured party may be comparing themselves with the injurer 7 Realisation that one may be permanently and adversely changed by the injury 8 Insight into a possibly altered `just world view Decision phase 9 A change of heart/conversion/new insights that old resolution strategies are not working 10 Willingness to consider forgiveness as an option 11 Commitment to forgive the offender Work phase 12 Reframing, through role taking, of who the wrongdoer is by viewing him or her in context 13 Empathy and compassion towards the offender 14 Acceptance/absorption of the pain 15 Giving a moral gift to the offender Deepening phase 16 Finding meaning for oneself and others in the suffering and in the forgiveness process 17 Realisation that one has needed others forgiveness in the past 18 Insight that one is not alone (universality, support) 19 Realisation that one may have a new purpose in life because of the injury 20 Awareness of decreased negative affect and, perhaps, increased positive affect, if this begins to emerge, toward the injurer; awareness of internal, emotional release various aspects of forgiveness which are maintained over time. The second study (McCullough et al., 1997) suggests that empathy is likely to play a key role in promoting forgiveness. Some research has indicated that the frequency of use of forgiveness may not correlate with the spiritual beliefs of the therapist involved (Di Blascio & Proctor, 1993). Indeed they found that therapists religious beliefs were weakly or completely unrelated to their attitudes about the importance and usefulness of forgiveness in therapy. However, we know from other research into the use of spiritual intervention in therapy that lack of religious faith of the therapist involved does not prevent them working effectively with spiritual interventions with religiously minded clients (see e.g. Payne et al., 1992, who present a useful summary of research into the use of spiritual interventions in therapy). As ever, further research is needed to back or contradict these interesting findings. After thoroughly examining the research into forgiveness and psychotherapy already undertaken, Thoresen et al. (1998) draw the following conclusions:

The use of forgiveness in counselling 419 (1) the value of cognitive± behavioural and interpersonal therapy with depression, anxiety, anger and marital problems suggest their relevance for forgiveness; (2) clinical trial methodology when used exclusively is not well suited to create effective interventions for the diversity of people suffering from a particular problem such as needing to forgive; (3) process-orientated studies have been sadly lacking. From a practitioner perspective, Jacobs (1991) draws our attention to the possibility of a shadow side to forgiveness: `Forgiveness, acceptance, and the generosity of care can be very powerful means of exerting a hold or pressure over another person, especially if we do let the other forget what we have done for them, nor how selfless we have apparently been. Forgiveness can be a type of revenge (1991, p. 10). Jacobs (1991) relates a fascinating story of a client he calls Brenda who took `revenge on her step father by treating him exceptionally well when he was dying. There is not space here to explore such constructive revenge in any detail or even revenge in its more destructive forms, but it is worth noting that some acts of forgiveness may in fact be a form of constructive revenge. The research discussed below (Purcell-Lee & West, 2000) also focused on the issue of polarity between forgiveness and revenge and how both are often present. This challenge to deal with the issue of revenge and the difficult feelings that need to be faced before forgiveness becomes possible is well illustrated by an experience described by Marie McNeice (1996), a religious sister in Belfast. She vividly describes her experience when a friend of hers, Joe, was murdered in front of his wife and three young children, whilst on their way to church in Belfast in 1987. She writes: `Joe s wife pleaded for no retaliation and talked about forgiving those who had murdered him. She turned to God for consolation and guidance, while I struggled to contain my anger, even going so far as to fantasise about how I could kill Joe s murderers myself. This desire for revenge seemed to be in direct conflict with gospel values and threw me into fear, confusion and guilt. I questioned my faith, values and beliefs and experienced a gap between them and the feelings of anger and revenge surging within me. The scripture challenge to ª love your enemyº and ª turn the other cheekº left me guilty about having such thoughts. It was as though in order to forgive I must turn away from everything I was feeling. A choice had to be made, to accept these feelings or to deny them, and I couldn t make it. `With hindsight my spirituality was somewhat less than integrated, but the experience did lead me to question whether ª turning the other cheekº necessarily meant denying feelings of anger and revengeð normal human emotions and responses. I came to the conclusion that, while forgiveness

420 William West TABLE 2. Themes emerging from the data in the forgiveness project (Purcell-Lee & West, 2000) Counsellors Spiritual directors Catharsis/abreaction/insight/healing Completing incomplete Gestalten (unfinished business) Narrative reconstruction/story repair (coming to terms with one s history) Internal object repair and relationship repair Christocentric/theistic injunction (penitents and sacrament of reconciliation Self-acceptance IS forgiveness Past participle of the verb to forget Burying the past but not the consequences Rogers core conditions Mutative metaphor for therapy process Buddhist concept of harmony/disharmony A quality of mercy, acceptance, love Shadow side of therapist/healer as charlatan seeking power Greek admonition to know thyself (Gnosis?) Hebrew concept of Teshtevah and inclusion Prisoners: remorse, forgiveness reparation I± Thou/I± It relationship I± Thou/I± It relationship involves going beyond our feelings, it also means acknowledging and owning them, not covering them up or escaping into nicer and more acceptable ones in an effort perhaps to make them more respectable (McNeice, 1996, p. 12). McNeice invites us to explore such difficult feelings as part of a healing process akin to bereavement with forgiveness not just the first step but final target in an ongoing process of reconciliation that will involve integrating such turbulent feelings. A one-year research study at the University of Manchester has recently been completed into practitioners views of the use of forgiveness in counselling and pastoral care relationships (Purcell-Lee & West, 2000). Twelve counsellors or psychotherapists and 12 spiritual directors were interviewed about the use of forgiveness in their work with clients. The 12 counsellors or psychotherapists were from a wide range of therapeutic orientationsð psychodynamic, humanistic, cognitive± behavioural and integrative, among others. The spiritual directors were mainly Christian Ð Church of England, Catholic, Quaker, etc. but also included a Buddhist and a Rabbi. The interviews were of a semi-structured nature aiming at an open dialogue. These data were analysed using an heuristic phenomenological approach (Moustakas, 1990, 1994; West, 1998b) and the key themes/categories that emerged from both sets of practitioners are summarised in Table 2. It will be apparent that there is much overlap between the themes produced from these two groups despite a difference in languages. Three other key findings that emerged from the study were:

The use of forgiveness in counselling 421 (1) forgiveness is more often a process than a one-off event; (2) forgiveness includes self as well as others; (3) although the spiritual directors in the study made frequent and overt use of forgiveness within a religious context, their secular counterparts found forgiveness to be a key feature in many of their clients therapies, albeit implicitly. Based on this research we have developed the following guidelines for the use of forgiveness in therapy with the key proviso that forgiveness should benefit the forgiver. These guidelines remain provisional and in need of further testing and research and the author would appreciate feedback from practitioners as to their usefulness: (1) Forgiveness is a key feature of most, if not all, religions and has been increasingly used in secular therapy settings and in self-help books and groups. True forgiveness has health benefits to the forgiver. (2) Forgiveness is a powerful technique that, when used appropriately, can be of great benefit to clients in therapy. However, it needs to be used in a sensitive way that reflects the therapeutic needs of the clients. Premature or clumsy attempts to introduce or even to force forgiveness on a reluctant client will prove to be less than helpful and may well have harmful effects on the client. (3) Forgiveness is a process rather than necessarily a one-off event and may need to be returned to many times as differing facets of the underlying issue are explored. This process may never end and indeed for some people may never start. (4) Timing around the use of forgiveness is crucial and an invitation to a client to consider forgiveness should be offered tentatively if, in some cases, at all. Indeed, there may need to be many months or even years of therapy before this point is reached, depending on the therapeutic needs of the client. (5) Resentment, anger, hurt and fear need to be faced and explored before true forgiveness is possible. (6) Forgiveness is not the same as reconciliation, although it might lead to it. (7) Forgiveness may involve empathy on the part of the forgiver for those needing forgiveness. (8) Forgiveness should benefit the client whether they are seeking to forgive others, forgive self, or seeking forgiveness. The use of forgiveness and other forms of spiritual interventions in counselling and psychotherapy remains an area of some controversy and of increasing research and practitioner interest especially in the USA. With clients spiritual and religious beliefs remaining important to them, however challenging they may be to their practitioner, it remains essential for the counsellor or psychotherapist to work effectively within their clients belief systems. The therapeutic use of forgiveness holds great promise to aid the effective healing of many clients and therapists need to inform themselves of how best to use it within their clinical practices.

422 William West Acknowledgements This article is based on a paper presented to the Society for Psychotherapy Research (International) Annual Conference, Chicago, USA, 23 June 2000. The Forgiveness Research Project referred to in this paper was funded by the University of Manchester Research Support Fund and the Faculty of Education, University of Manchester Research Development Fund. References DAV Y, L. (2001). A Study of Counsellors Attitudes towards Spirituality and Well Being, and Spiritual Awareness in Counsellor Training. MA thesis, Manchester: Faculty of Education, University of Manchester. DIBLASC IO, F.A. & PROCTOR, J.H. (1993). Therapists and the clinical use of forgiveness. American Journal of Family Therapy, 21, 175± 183. DORFF, E.N. (1998). The elements of forgiveness: a Jewish approach. In E.L. WORTH INGTON (Ed.), Dimensions of Forgiveness: Psychological Research and Theological Perspectives (pp. 29± 55). London: Templeton Foundation. ENRIG H T, R.D. (1996). Counseling within the forgiveness triad: on forgiving, receiving forgiveness, and self-forgiveness. Counseling and Values, 40, 107± 126. ENRIG H T, R.D. & COYLE, C.T. (1998). Researching the process model of forgiveness with psychological interventions. In E.L. WO RTHINGTO N (Ed.), Dimensions of Forgiveness: Psychological Research and Theological Perspectives (pp. 139± 161). London: Templeton Foundation. JACOBS, M. (1991). The therapist s revenge: the law of talion as a motive for caring. Contact, 2, 2± 11. JEFF, M. (1987). Spiritual Direction for Every Christian. London: SPCK. LEECH, K. (1994). Soul Friend. London: Darton, Longman & Todd. LYALL, D. (1995). Counselling in the Pastoral and Spiritual Context. Buckingham: Open University Press. MCCULLOUGH, M.E. & WO RTHINGTON, E.L. (1994). Models of interpersonal forgiveness and their application to counseling: review and critique. Counseling and Values, 39, 2± 14. MCCULLOUGH, M.E. & WO RTHINGTON, E.L. (1995). Promoting forgiveness: a comparison of two brief psychoeducational group interventions with a waiting-list control. Counseling and Values, 40, 55± 68. MCCULLOUGH, M.E. & WORTH INGTON, E.L. & RACHAL, K.C. (1997). Interpersonal forgiveness in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 321± 336. MCCULLOUGH, M.E., EXLINE, J.J. & BAU M EIST ER, R.F. (1998). An annotated bibliography of research on forgiveness and related concepts. In E.L. WORTH INGTON (Ed.), Dimensions of forgiveness: Psychological Research and Theological Perspectives (pp. 193± 317). London: Templeton Foundation. MCCULLOUGH, M.E., PARGAMEN T, K.I. & THO RESEN, C.E. (Eds) (2000). Forgiveness: Theory, Research, and Practice. New York: Guildford. MCLEOD, J. (1998). Introduction to Counselling (2nd edn). Buckingham: Open University Press. MCNEICE, M. (1996). Premature forgiveness. Self & Society, 24, 11± 13. MOUSTAKAS, C. (1990). Heuristic Research: Design, Methods and Applications. London: Sage. MOUSTAKAS, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. London: Sage. NOUW EN, H.J.M. (1989). Seeds of Hope. London: Darton, Longman & Todd. PAYN E, I.R., BERGIN, A.E. & LO FTUS, P.E. (1992). A review of attempts to integrate spiritual and standard psychotherapy techniques. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 2, 171± 192. PURC ELL-LEE, C. & WEST, W.S. (2000). A comparative study into the use of forgiveness in counselling and pastoral care. Poster presentation at Society for Psychotherapy Research (UK) Annual Conference, Ravenscar. RIC HARD S, P.S. & BERG IN, A.E. (1997). A Spiritual Strategy for Counseling and Psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. RIC HARD S, D.S. & BERG IN, A.E. (Eds) (2000). Handbook of Psychotherapy and Religious Diversity. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

The use of forgiveness in counselling 423 ROWAN, J. (1993). The Transpersonal: Psychotherapy and Counselling. London: Routledge. RYE, M.S., PARGAM ENT, K.I., ALI, M.A., BECK, G.L., DORFF, E.N., HALLISEY, C., NARAYAN N AN, V. & WILLIAM S, J.G. (2000). Religious perspectives on forgiveness. In M.E. MCCULLOUGH & K.I. PARGAM ENT (Eds), Forgiveness: Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 17± 40). New York: Guilford Press. SELLS, J.N. & HARGRAV E, T.D. (1998). Forgiveness: a review of the theoretical and empirical literature. Journal of Family Therapy, 220, 21± 36. SW IN TON, V. (1995). A Study of the Attitudes to the Exploration of Spiritual Awareness in Counselling Training. MA thesis, Department of Applied Social Studies, Keele University. THO RESEN, C.E., LUSKIN, F. & HARRIS, A. (1998). Science and forgiveness interventions: reflections and recommendations. In E.L. WORTHINGTON (Ed.), Dimensions of Forgiveness: Psychological Research and Theological Perspectives (pp. 163± 190). London: Templeton Foundation. THO RNE, B. (1991). Person-Centred Counselling: Therapeutic and Spiritual Dimension. London: Whurr. THO RNE, B. (1998). Person-Centred counselling and Christian Spirituality: the Secular and the Holy. London: Whurr. WEST, W.S. (1998a). Therapy as a spiritual process. In C. FELT HAM (Ed.), Witness and Vision of Therapists (pp. 158± 179). London: Sage. WEST, W.S. (1998b). Passionate research: heuristics and the use of self in counselling research. Changes, 16, 60± 66. WEST, W.S. (2000). Psychotherapy and Spirituality: Crossing the Line between Therapy and Religion. London: Sage. WO RTH IN GTON, E.L. (Ed.) (1998). Dimensions of Forgiveness: Psychological Research and Theological Perspectives. London: Templeton Foundation. (Accepted 6 September 2001)