Download Global Family Therapy - BEING WHILE BECOMING

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FAMILY THERAPY
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2016.1275067
An Introduction to Global Family Therapy: Examining the
Empirical Evidence of Terror Management Theory Within
the Family and Social System
Lucas Arthur Volini
Graduate School of Health & Human Services, Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
ABSTRACT
Terror Management Theory (TMT) endorses that individuals
manage fears of mortality by establishing a coherent cultural
worldview and earning self-esteem by meeting cultural
worldview standards. Global Family Therapy (GFT) examines
these constructs within family and social systems. Aims of GFT
include the development of a culturally-fluid worldview that
earns self-esteem across various resources. Barriers to this
process include GFT’s concepts of systemic cultural worldview
discrepancies, systemic disproportions of resources for selfesteem, and symbolic immortality’s multigenerational process.
By emphasizing the role of cultural worldviews, GFT expands the
concept of culture from being a component of family therapy to
being the emphasis of family therapy.
Terror Management Theory (TMT) is a well-established conceptual framework
rooted in the social sciences. Empirical findings from TMT endorse Ernest Becker’s
(1971) existential claim that death anxiety permeates various forms of human
behavior and motivation on a daily basis (Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszczynski,
2015). Empirical evidence from TMT find that individuals manage this death anxiety through the establishment of a coherent cultural worldview and earning selfesteem (Solomon et al., 2015). According to TMT, individuals earn self-esteem by
meeting the cultural standards established by the dominant worldview of their
social system (Harmon-Jones et al., 1997). When individuals experience a sense of
belonging to a shared cultural group while simultaneously living up to cultural
worldview standards, death anxiety is effectively managed. Despite the strong theoretical presence of culture and relationship to others at the core of TMT, these
findings have yet to be examined in the clinical literature on family and social systems. As cultural worldviews are largely influenced by the family and social system
(Solomon et al., 2015), potential applications of TMT to inform an existential
approach to individual, couple, and family therapy are promising.
CONTACT Lucas Arthur Volini
© 2017 Taylor & Francis
[email protected]
20 West Main Street, Waconia, MN 55387.
2
L. A. VOLINI
This article introduces the theoretical foundation of Global Family Therapy
(GFT), a conceptual approach to individual, couple, and family therapy that is
grounded in the empirical findings of TMT. Examining the constructs of cultural
worldviews and self-esteem within and between family and social systems, GFT
expands culture from being a component of therapy to being the emphasis of therapy. Current literature from TMT will be reviewed prior to introducing their clinical application to the family and social system.
TMT
TMT understands the human condition by identifying ways in which humans
respond to, defend against, and manage the cognitive awareness of mortality and
its potentially debilitating terror (Solomon et al., 2015). Documenting more than
500 studies across more than 20 academic disciplines (Harvell & Nisbett, 2016),
TMT found this terror at the core of several human motivations and behaviors.
TMT also found the primary terror management strategy to be each individual’s
affirmed cultural worldview and state of contextually-earned self-esteem (Arndt,
Greenberg, Solomon, Pyszczynski, & Simon, 1997; Solomon et al., 2015).
Cultural worldviews
Cultural worldviews are the subjective beliefs created to explain the nature of reality (Solomon et al., 2015). Not only do they provide a sense of meaning, but Solomon et al. finds them to answer the more abstract, existential questions of living
(e.g., the origins of the universe, valued conduct on earth, immortality). Essentially,
cultural worldviews are the manner in which individuals prescribe meaning to
their existence to defend against the terror of inevitable death, achieved through
the promises of literal and symbolic immortality.
Literal immortality
Literal immortality is the belief that existence continues eternally in one form or
another beyond the body’s physical death and decay (Solomon et al., 2015). The
evolution of society offers countless paths toward literal immortality. From reincarnation to an eternal heaven, the cosmic recycling of spiritual energy to moving
on to another dimension, society is inundated with beliefs that humans are literally
immortal. With the purpose of bringing comfort to the perpetual terror of death,
worldviews are often created around a literal immortality system (Solomon et al.,
2015).
Symbolic immortality
TMT identifies symbolic immortality through the ways in which individuals experience being a part of something greater than themselves (e.g., culture or family)
that will carry on long after they die (Solomon et al., 2015). This creates a sense of
permanence in the world, that prescribed meanings of life will remain for centuries
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FAMILY THERAPY
3
to come, and that an individual’s existence will be remembered. Pathways of
achieving symbolic immortality often include leaving a lasting impact on the
world, passing genes on to future generations, and memories held by others
(Solomon et al., 2015).
Varying modalities of literal and symbolic immortality allow individuals to transcend death through the prescription of meaning, experience of significance, and
the promise of an eternal existence. Ultimately, immortality systems protect individuals from the possibility of being purposeless animals ceasing to exist after
death (Solomon et al., 2015).
Self-esteem
Establishing and affirming a cultural worldview is only one vital resource for managing the terror of death; individuals also need to view themselves as significant
(Solomon et al., 2015). The second pillar of TMT measures the individual’s feelings
of personal significance and value within his or her cultural group, referred to as
self-esteem. This feeling of significance and value is in relation to the dominant
cultural worldview. For example, in more individualistic societies an individual
may achieve self-esteem through wealth and glamor. In collectivist societies an
individual would more likely achieve self-esteem through compassion, generosity,
and selflessness. When there is a disconnect between an individual’s worldview
and his or her perceived value within that particular culture, death anxiety intensifies as self-esteem no longer serves as an effective buffer (Abeyta, Juhl, &
Routledge, 2014; Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszczynski, 1991).
Macrosystemic dynamics and TMT
Dynamics identified in the TMT literature not only help to understand human
behavior from the perspective of the individual, but also explain macrosystemic
dynamics between cultural groups with opposing beliefs. Cultural worldviews are
understood as symbolic constructs and as such do not exist in the physical world.
Thus, confrontations between groups carrying opposing belief systems challenge a
cultural belief system’s effectiveness as a psychological defense against death anxiety (Solomon, Greenberg, & Pysczcynski, 2003). This threat may prompt cultural
groups to take extreme measures, including genocide and war, to affirm the primacy of their worldview over others (Solomon et al., 2003). This dynamic is evident throughout the countless experiences of one culture’s conquest over another.
These findings suggest global applications of GFT to assist with understanding and
resolving conflict between cultures.
Clinical applications of TMT
Although findings from TMT span more than 20 disciplines (Harvell & Nisbett,
2016; Solomon et al., 2015), only two articles have identified potential clinical
4
L. A. VOLINI
applications. Lewis (2015) and Major, Whelton, and Duff (2016) offer conceptual
propositions of applications based primarily on the individual. However, considering that cultural worldviews and self-esteem are developed, maintained, and measured within a relational context, utilizing a systemic approach to therapy may
better utilize TMT’s empirical findings in clinical practice. Without acknowledging
the systemic dynamics of cultural worldviews and self-esteem between individuals,
the potential applications of TMT in the clinical realm will be limited. As TMT
research continues to emphasize the significant role of culture in everyday living
(Harvell & Nisbett, 2016), its inclusion in the family therapy literature is timely.
Accordingly, GFT introduces the first systemic approach to individual, couple, and
family therapy informed by the empirical findings of TMT.
Theoretical foundation of Global Family Therapy
GFT’s theoretical foundation examines the empirical findings of TMT within and
between the family and social system. By examining the systemic functioning of
death anxiety, cultural worldviews, and efforts toward earning and maintaining
self-esteem, GFT outlines a new framework for the assessment and intervention of
familial discord. The following concepts are original to GFT and newly introduced
to the family studies literature.
Culturally-fluid worldviews
Culturally-fluid worldviews refer to one of GFT’s general aims of therapy. It is
important to understand the concept of culturally-fluid worldviews prior to exploring GFT’s concepts of systemic cultural worldview discrepancies, resources for selfesteem, and symbolic immortality’s multigenerational process. TMT identifies how
individuals adhere to cultural worldviews to prescribe meaning to existence
(Solomon et al., 2015). As an individual’s worldview is largely influenced by the
family and family’s cultural group, one’s cultural understanding of the world can
be limited to themes endorsed by those surrounding the individual throughout
development. This could include the family, community, various organizations,
and faith institutions, among other ecological systems. As self-esteem is dependent
upon living up to the cultural worldview standards in one’s family and social system, turning to other cultural influences puts the developing individual at risk for
losing self-esteem. Accordingly, cultural worldviews may become rigidly tied to
the individual’s immediate cultural group throughout early development and limit
the ongoing experience of his or her self, others, and the world over time. As selfesteem becomes more dependent upon the individual’s chosen cultural worldview,
the drive to protect the cultural belief system intensifies. Thus, individuals with
rigid cultural worldviews are not only less tolerant of others with opposing worldviews (Greenberg et al., 1992), but also have fewer resources for earning selfesteem.
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FAMILY THERAPY
5
For example, consider an individual growing up within a Christian family that
denies any other explanation for the origins of existence and affirms a certainty in
an after-life. The affirmation of this belief system may be actualized through
demeaning other religions and remaining close-minded to any epistemology
incongruent to Christian teachings. In order for the developing youth to earn selfesteem from the family and family’s social system, he or she must embrace the
same cultural worldview. As this may earn the developing youth self-esteem from
the family, over time he or she will remain limited to earning self-esteem through
relationship to others identifying with similar Christian-based views.
Culturally-fluid worldviews encourage the individual’s development of a worldview based upon his or her particular desires in ways that are tolerant—and, potentially appreciative of—the cultural worldviews of others. Such a tolerance and
appreciation for the cultural worldviews of another would require a fluid identification to one’s subjective worldview. As much as individuals come to understand
their own prescriptions of meaning, they equally come to understand that others
will likely have subjective beliefs of their own largely influenced by their culture of
origin. GFT facilitates the client’s exploration of his or her relationship to this existential reality. Defensive and judgmental feelings are explored while maintaining
an emphasis on the universal experiences that connect all members of the global
family. Through this cultivated awareness of humanity’s subjective nature of phenomenological being, interactions of opposing worldviews are more likely to be
met with openness as opposed to hostility.
Culturally-fluid worldviews create more opportunity for connection with others
while maintaining space for growth as the individual continually experiences the
world throughout their lifespan. Instead of clinging to a rigid and closed cultural
worldview, individuals maintain the capacity to expand the ways they understand
themselves and the world. This is actualized through the language individual’s use
in relation to a culturally-fluid worldview. For example, instead of saying “I am a
Republican,” GFT welcomes clients to consider saying, “I identify with many conservative views on politics.” Now, this culturally-fluid identification allows the
individual to also agree with some Democratic stances on particular issues without
a loss of identity and maintained self-esteem. Individuals are able to maintain ties
of togetherness with others sharing their cultural worldview without limiting
themselves as individuals. Cultural worldviews move from an either-or stance to a
more fluid, both-and stance. Individuals are no longer objectively defined by the
dominant culture and experience the freedoms of individuality along with the
comforts of belonging.
By adapting to a more culturally-fluid worldview, individuals are more vulnerable to anxieties associated with ambiguity and meaninglessness. A primary component of maintaining culturally-fluid worldviews rely upon the individual’s
tolerance for ambiguity. The process of GFT draws in and out of confrontations
with ambiguity, preparing clients for the uncertainties of daily living. Theoretically,
GFT looks to universality to help tolerate this ambiguity.
6
L. A. VOLINI
Universality
Universality refers to particular realities of being that are experienced by all individuals. Accordingly, the existential realities of death, isolation, freedom, meaninglessness, and suffering (May, 2015; Yalom, 1980; van Deurzen, 2015) that
transcend the cultural constructs that categorize individuals as different. Particular
differences may include race, ethnicity, religion, or tax brackets. As focus on cultural particulars promote togetherness with worldview sharing others, it may do so
at the expense of separatism from those with opposing belief systems (McGregor
et al., 1996). Universality reminds individuals of what makes them the same, having enormous implications for culturally-fluid practices and healing through connection with others.
Universality reminds clients that all others must tolerate the uncertainty of life’s
most meaningful questions. This universal connection results in a meditative tool
that clients learn to harness as anxieties arise. As GFT focuses on collaborating
with anxiety as opposed to relieving it (S. Wright, personal communication,
December 15, 2015), the therapeutic process prepares clients to live amidst the
existential realities of being throughout each day.
Assuming that clients or client systems entering therapy have more rigid cultural worldviews, GFT assesses for systemic cultural worldview discrepancies,
resources for self-esteem, and dynamics of symbolic immortality’s multigenerational process. The state of these dynamics at the time of assessment inform each
individual’s and system’s development of a culturally-fluid worldview.
Systemic cultural worldview discrepancies
Considering the role that cultural worldviews play in everyday living—identified in
the findings from TMT—professionals come to understand the significance of conflicting worldviews in relational systems. Accordingly, GFT expands the role of culture from being a component of therapy to being the emphasis of therapy. As
cultural worldviews determine how individuals achieve self-esteem, self-esteem is
earned through engagement with cultural worldview sharing others. If individuals
in a couple or family system have opposing cultural worldviews, the system will
not serve as a resource for self-esteem and risks becoming a reserve of existential
distress (Cox & Arndt, 2012). In this case, individuals seeking to earn self-esteem
must look outside the system, thereby maintaining or exacerbating any disconnection already experienced in the family system. Systemic cultural worldview discrepancies are influenced by both microsystemic and macrosystemic dynamics, likely
fueling several symptoms of relational discord.
GFT aims to support couple and family systems in establishing a shared cultural
worldview. When a system identifies a shared cultural worldview, individuals experience the system as a rich resource for self-esteem. GFT hypothesizes that clients
and client systems enter therapy with systemic cultural worldview discrepancies
while lacking a shared cultural worldview (Wright, 1985).
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FAMILY THERAPY
7
Worldview discrepancies begin with the individual. Each individual experiences
cultural worldviews in both the microsystem and macrosystem. Self-esteem is
achieved based upon the standards and values of both the family system and social
system. GFT hypothesizes that individuals with high levels of self-esteem are likely
earning self-esteem from both the family and social system. Culturally-fluid worldviews allow for varying degrees of belonging across cultural groups while maintaining individuality. As culturally-fluid worldviews are a goal of GFT, it is assumed
that majority of individuals, couples, and families entering therapy are experiencing systemic worldview discrepancies.
In some circumstances, the ways individuals earn self-esteem within the family do
not align with earning self-esteem outside of the family. Consequentially, earning
self-esteem grows increasingly complicated and relational conflicts become more
likely. For example, a child may receive sufficient amounts of self-esteem based upon
positive regard earned from members in his or her family, but if the same level of
regard is not reinforced in the social system via peers at school, self-esteem is threatened. Similarly, a child receiving frequent positive regard from the school social system while feeling devalued in the family also risks a loss of self-esteem.
Individuals may grow torn between competing resources for self-esteem. Adhering to values and behaviors within one system risks rejection from the other. For
example, consider adolescent children growing up in America within a family
whose parents immigrated from a different country. The parents have maintained
cultural worldviews informed by alternative ethnic traditions, hoping to instill
those beliefs into their children. To earn self-esteem within the family, children
must exhibit behaviors and values congruent to the family’s cultural worldview.
However, these norms may not align with the children’s social world comprised of
American Midwesterners. In hopes of being accepted by their peers, the children
insist on wearing trendy clothes, playing on-line video games, and chatting with
friends through social media. As these cultural norms are unfamiliar to the parents,
they maintain expectations of working five evenings a week and spending the
weekends with family and others in their community. Driven by a systemic cultural worldview discrepancy, children experience resistance between two primary
resources for self-esteem, resulting in family disconnection and distress for both
the system and the individuals within.
In the previous example, worldview discrepancies occurred between the generations of children, parents, and grandparents. Systemic worldview discrepancies in
families may also occur within the generations between siblings or couples. When
siblings experience opposing cultural worldviews, the family system may struggle
in serving as a resource of self-esteem for each child. This may cause disproportions in earned self-esteem, which in turn may drive several systemic conflicts. A
similar conflict may also occur between the parents and particular children who
resist exhibiting the behaviors and qualities valued by the family’s worldview. This
dynamic accounts for children who experience low levels of self-esteem after
repeatedly hearing comparative comments such as, “why can’t you be more like
8
L. A. VOLINI
your sister?” In this situation, the child is compelled to conform to the behaviors
demonstrated by the valued sibling at the expense of his or her individuality. In
hopes of earning self-esteem while maintaining individuality, the child may either
seek self-esteem outside of the family system or not experience self-esteem at all.
When there are discrepancies in worldviews between parents, both the relationship and children are likely to struggle. Ultimately, the partner or spousal relationship will fail to serve as a resource of self-esteem for each individual.
Consequently, each individual partner may experience low self-esteem, which in
turn leaves their children susceptible to lower self-esteem. As the parent relationship is unable to establish a shared cultural worldview, the family lacks a coherent
worldview to inform each child’s development. Thus, children have no sense of
what values and behaviors earn self-esteem. Particular behaviors deemed desirable
from one parent may earn shaming and punishment from the other. GFT hypothesizes that this systemic dynamic makes children susceptible to developing dangerously low levels of self-esteem. This may be actualized through the development of
depression, anxiety, eating-disorders, or other pathological symptoms.
GFT assesses for systemic discrepancies between each individual’s cultural
worldview. When individuals experience worldview discrepancies, resources for
self-esteem become threatened as worldview beliefs are challenged. As a result, psychological defenses are weakened and the individual’s resulting distress influences
or maintain relational discord. GFT aims to help families and couples establish a
shared cultural worldview that honors each individual’s culturally-fluid worldview.
In cases where individuals within a system have opposing beliefs, GFT draws
awareness to universality, transcending differences through shared experience.
Individuals within systems learn to appreciate the origins of one another’s cultural
worldview while adhering to a shared worldview that grows from the universal
connections between each individual.
Ultimately, cultural worldviews serve as the resource for earning self-esteem—
the second pillar of TMT and primary component of GFT. When individuals experience discrepancies between competing cultural worldviews, self-esteem is threatened. According to TMT, self-esteem is the second primary component of
effectively managing death anxiety. Thus, threats to self-esteem result in threats to
psychological well-being. To further examine the systemic dynamics of cultural
worldviews in relation to self-esteem, GFT assesses for each individuals’ accessibility to resources for self-esteem.
Resources for self-esteem
In GFT, resources for self-esteem include any engagement in relationships, groups,
activities or individual achievements that reinforce an individual’s feelings of value
and significance. GFT posits that multiple resources for self-esteem increase experiences of individuality and fulfillment. When individuals experience multiple
resources of self-esteem, less dependency and psychological pressure to manage
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FAMILY THERAPY
9
death anxiety is placed upon each particular systemic resource and more individuality is experienced. As multiple resources for self-esteem is encouraged, it is
important to assess for worldview congruencies and worldview discrepancies
between the various systems. The role of cultural worldviews in relation to achieving self-esteem has already been identified. GFT posits that individuals should first
focus on the development of a culturally-fluid worldview prior to exploring various
resources for self-esteem. This will prevent any recurrences of cultural worldview
discrepancies. Furthermore, there should be a balance between each individual’s
number of resources for self-esteem with an emphasis on quality over quantity.
Disproportion of resources for self-esteem
In cases where individuals in systems do not experience discrepancies between
worldviews, it is still important to assess for each individual’s number of resources
for experiencing self-esteem. Conflict and distress is more likely experienced in
systems of individuals experiencing a disproportion of resources for self-esteem.
For example, a couple system may share cultural worldviews pertaining to beliefs
on marriage, religion, partner roles, and child rearing. In this case, the relationship
likely serves as a resource for self-esteem for both partners when behaviors reflect
these beliefs. However, if the relationship is the only resource for self-esteem for
one or both of the partners, conflict is likely. This dynamic puts the relationship at
risk for crumbling under the pressure to serve as the sole resource for self-esteem.
For example, if one partner earns the entirety of his or her self-esteem from the
relationship, there will likely be a disproportion of meaning attributed to events
occurring within the relationship. Consider a husband and wife dynamic where the
wife stays home to raise the children while the husband gains outside employment
to financially support the family. Following the demanding and exhausting days
with the children, over time the wife disengages with many of her hobbies and social
interactions. Although she continues to experience a depth of meaning from her role
as a mother—reflected to her regularly by her children’s healthy development and
affection from her husband—the family becomes the sole source for her self-esteem.
The husband gains a similar degree of self-esteem through his role as a father,
husband, and provider which is also reflected to him by his children’s healthy
development and wife’s affection. However, the husband earns additional selfesteem from his profession—he is a pediatrician and receives meaning for helping
families and young children achieve greater levels of health. Further, he has developed relationships with his colleagues that he socializes with throughout the day.
The husband earns self-esteem through his children, his wife, his professional
identity, his patients, and his close friends at work. The husband is thus far less
reliant upon the family system to meet all of his needs for self-esteem.
As the husband has multiple resources for self-esteem at his disposal, he is able
to better cope when the relationship experiences conflict or distress. The wife, on
the other hand, experiences relational discord far more significantly. In her experience, if the relationship fails she will lose a primary resource for self-esteem,
10
L. A. VOLINI
leaving her to rely solely on parenting her children as a single mother. This fear
drives the wife to attribute greater meaning to seemingly common couple discord,
such as a disagreement over what to watch on the television one evening. As the
husband experiences a broader sense of meaning, he grows impatient with tending
to his interpretation of a meaninglessness over-reaction and withdrawals by engaging in work (i.e., another resource for earning self-esteem). This intensifies the
wife’s fear of losing her sole resource for self-esteem, resulting in more excessive
reactivity to every day struggles—thus creating a relational cycle of conflict stemming from a disproportion of resources for self-esteem.
Just as too few resources for self-esteem may likely influence distress, an overproportion for self-esteem may also be problematic. If individuals over-compensate for feelings of insignificance through an over-engagement in resources for
self-esteem, they risk a loss of meaning. Individuals over-extending themselves
through taking on too many jobs, hobbies, relationships, or projects pursue selfesteem in quantity over quality. Although individuals may earn an excess of experiences, they may not be fulfilled. Resources for self-esteem must be pursued mindfully in order to benefit psychological well-being. Pursuit of too many resources
for self-esteem may serve as a distraction from mindfully acknowledging the realities of one’s existential situation.
For instance, consider the same husband and wife just discussed in the previous
paragraph. The more distressing the relationship grows over time, the more the
husband invests in establishing multiple resources for self-esteem. He takes on a
part-time job, joins an athletic club, and decides he wants to write a novel. Resources for self-esteem thus become distractions from acknowledging the disappointment of his marriage. It may be hypothesized that the distress from the struggling
marriage is tied to a deeper existential anxiety driving the husband’s pursuit of distractions as opposed to investing in repairing and nurturing the marriage.
Although he is keeping busy and likely experiencing varying degrees of joy, lacking
self-esteem from a primary relationship suggests that he may still lack a more
meaningful fulfillment.
Systemic cultural worldview discrepancies and resources for self-esteem identify
the relational processes between cultural worldviews and self-esteem in systems.
Symbolic immortality’s multigenerational process acknowledges the multigenerational dynamics of these concepts over time relative to the achievement of symbolic immortality.
Symbolic immortality’s multigenerational process
Symbolic immortality’s multigenerational process examines how the dynamics of
symbolic immortality in one generation influences the next. As cultural worldviews
are primarily influenced by the family and social system, self-esteem is achieved
through both family and culture. Symbolic immortality reflects how individuals
will be remembered in the physical world. Largely, symbolic immortality is a
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FAMILY THERAPY
11
lasting reflection of the individual’s actualization of self-esteem while they were still
alive. Individuals that earned self-esteem through being valued by others in their
family or social system will be remembered in ways that reflect those values.
Accordingly, symbolic immortality can be used as leverage to assist clients in establishing a more intentional lifestyle toward meaning and fulfillment
GFT examines the generational processes of symbolic immortality from the perspective of each individual. Family groups are a primary influence of cultural
worldviews developed by children. From a young age, the family system teaches
children what behaviors are valued by offering praise and continued belonging as
well as what behaviors earn punishment and potential for rejection. As children
develop and begin to experience the world at large, the social macrosystem exposes
them to cultural worldviews of its own. Considering the link between self-esteem
and symbolic immortality, both the family and society serve as primary influences
in guiding each individual’s pursuit of symbolic immortality. GFT assesses for multigenerational transmission processes throughout client systems.
Beginning with the family, GFT hypothesizes that symbolic immortality is most
meaningfully earned within the family system. One of the most common ways
individuals earn symbolic immortality includes passing genes onto children.
Knowing that one’s genetic DNA continues to live on in the physical world results
in feelings of permanence. Children not only provide biologically achieved symbolic immortality, but are also an avenue to socially achieved symbolic immortality. Parents will live on through the memories and stories of their children. As this
process occurs systemically, the nature of the symbolic immortality is dependent
upon the quality of the relationship between parent and child.
If children remember their parents harshly, it is less likely that their legacy will
live on outside of the child demeaning them to others or never speaking their
name again. Symbolic immortality is still socially achieved, as the deceased’s existence remains psychologically present in the physical world, but lives on in undesirable ways. On the other hand, children grateful for the quality of relationship to
their parents are more likely to share fond memories with others, keep pictures of
them throughout their home, and utilize other pro-social ways of keeping them
alive symbolically. From this perspective, symbolic immortality serves as leverage
to live more fully in ways that individuals hope to be remembered. There are many
dynamics that complicate the assessment of an individual’s accessibility to symbolic immortality within a family system.
Children experience the multigenerational process of symbolic immortality in
relation to their own pursuit for self-esteem. Because children earn self-esteem
largely based upon the cultural worldview imposed by the family and social system
in which they participate, the relationship between the parent’s pursuit of symbolic
immortality sets the stage for the process of the children. When parents have failed
to establish any sense of pro-social symbolic immortality, children are left to find
their own way at the risk of being rejected by the parent. On the other hand,
12
L. A. VOLINI
parents who have established an abundance of symbolic immortality may also
leave children distressed at the challenge to meet similar standards.
Consider children growing up with remarkably successful parents. The mother
is a notable cardiovascular surgeon and the father a brilliant lawyer and professor.
They met their freshmen year of high school and dated ever since. To a large
degree, their life reflects a fairytale most could only dream of—the love story,
wealth, beautiful home, the right cars, one son, and one daughter. Their marriage
experiences varying degrees of conflict but they remain equally invested in one
another, largely influenced by their conservative values. At the surface, this may be
interpreted as a privileged environment in which to grow up. Despite the success,
happiness, and investment from parents, both children are struggling—one with
chemical dependency, and the other with depression.
Taken in light of symbolic immortality, both children identify with feeling an
impossible pressure to replicate a life of such success. In their minds, anything less
than providing for their children in ways their parents have for them would be a
failure. Crumbling under the pressure, each child struggles to earn self-esteem due
to unrealistic expectations. Instead of exploring their own means for happiness,
they decide that symbolic immortality is inaccessible for them and succumb to
despair. Considering contemporary times, this dynamic may grow increasingly
prevalent. With shifts in the economy and expectations for advanced education,
coming generations may find the success achieved by their parents to be far less
accessible than prior generations. As such, individuals may develop a fear of failing
to achieve sufficient levels of symbolic immortality in ways their parents have,
actualized through an absence of self-esteem, psychological distress, or overinvolvement in the social system as the primary resource of self-esteem.
Symbolic immortality’s multigenerational process is a method of both assessment and intervention. Systemic conflicts and individual struggles may be conceptualized through the ways symbolic immortality is transmitted across the
generations. When common systemic struggles—such as those identified above—
are understood through this lens, the process guides effective intervention aimed
at nurturing each individual’s actualization of self-esteem as a means toward symbolic immortality. Dysfunctional generational processes are disrupted and families
learn to establish a cultural worldview that makes self-esteem accessible for each
member based upon their particular personality traits.
As GFT identifies culturally-fluid worldviews as a means to experience selfesteem across several resources—guiding the multigenerational processes of symbolic immortality—the presence of ambiguity becomes increasingly evident. To
aid in the client’s development of better tolerating and appreciating ambiguity,
GFT looks to the concept of absurdity.
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FAMILY THERAPY
13
Absurdity
GFT proudly welcomes Albert Camus’s philosophy of the absurd (Camus, 1991)
into clinical practice. The absurd, according to Camus, is a psychological conflict
between the human pursuit of life’s inherent meaning and the inability of humans
to objectively find it. As the world is filled with vast knowledge that no one individual could ever fully consume, along with all that is still unknown about the universe at large, it is impossible to prescribe meaning to the world based in ultimate
certainty. Despite this reasoning, humans continue efforts toward finding an inherent meaning to the world in ways that ultimately fail. As a result, various competing epistemologies and ideologies flood the contemporary human experience. It
seems that the more humans pursue and create meaning, the further away they
move from certainty. Accordingly, absurdity refers to the expectation to discover
life’s inherent meaning, and not its failure to do so. Once humans become conscious of life’s absurdity (i.e., the absence of a certainty to life’s inherent meaning),
they must choose how to best respond.
Absurdity directly ties to the concept of cultural worldviews. Camus (1991)
argues that this world has no inherent meaning and that considering anything otherwise is absurd. Findings from TMT suggest that the individual’s cultural worldview serve as a primary defense against death anxiety (Solomon et al., 2015). The
reconciliation of these seemingly conflicting stances is found in Camus’s resolution
to life’s absurdity. According to Camus, individuals should embrace the absurdity
of existence while simultaneously and somewhat defiantly continuing an ongoing
subjective search for meaning. This philosophy resonates well with GFT’s concept
of culturally-fluid worldviews. Culturally-fluid worldviews aim to establish a sense
of meaning to the world in ways that leave room for uncertainty. This very uncertainty allows individuals to connect more freely with cultural worldview opposing
others and maintain an openness to experience throughout the lifespan.
It is important to note that GFT does not take an atheistic stance on religion,
spirituality, or any other derived means of establishing a cultural worldview.
Instead, it embraces the absence of any observable, indisputable ultimate truth that
would in fact bring inherent meaning to existence. Humans must tolerate the
ambiguity associated with such a predicament. GFT honors each individual’s pursuit of managing this ambiguity, approaching each client’s or client system’s cultural worldview with an authentic openness to the possibility that their cultural
worldview may in fact be an ultimate truth, while tolerating any potential opposition to the therapist’s own cultural worldview.
Absurdity further equips the therapist in preventing the exertion of influence
over the clients’ cultural development. If therapists are able to embrace life’s
absurdity, which asserts that existence carries no inherent meaning, they are less
likely to influence the clients’ cultural exploration in ways that reflect their own
cultural worldview. Instead, the therapist maintains an open curiosity as the client considers ways in which they derive meaning to their existence. This
14
L. A. VOLINI
openness is presented as a critical component of effective therapies (Pandit,
Chen-Feng, Kang, Knudson-Martin, & Huenergardt, 2014). Furthermore, therapists become less threatened and more supportive when clients present conflicting values or beliefs.
The integration of Camus’s philosophy of the absurd concludes the outline of
GFT’s theoretical foundation. The review of principles from existential therapies,
findings of TMT, and integration of the two introduced GFT’s theoretical foundation—fulfilling the scope of this foundational article.
Discussion
Based upon the empirical findings of TMT (Solomon et al., 2015), GFT examines
how couples and families experience conflict stemming from worldview discrepancies between members within the family system, as well as when the family or couple’s worldview is in conflict with an individual member’s social system. When
such cultural worldview discrepancies are present, the family and social systems
are at risk to no longer serve as a resource for self-esteem. As self-esteem and
shared cultural worldviews are essential elements in effectively defending against
the potentially debilitating terrors of mortality awareness, the relational context in
which these concepts are actualized seamlessly integrate with systemic and existential therapies.
Implications for family therapy research
GFT’s induction into the family studies literature is timely in an increasingly
diverse world of intersectionality and various prescriptions of meaning across the
human condition. Ideally, GFT’s concept of cultural-fluidity will evolve the way
therapists and scholars alike approach multiculturalism in clinical practice. This
concept will be expanded upon in future writings. GFT provides a new perspective
on understanding individuals, couples, and families in regard to experiences of distress and relational conflict that places culture at the center of systemic interaction.
By beginning therapy at the core of each individual or client system’s cultural
worldview, the therapeutic discourse evolves from the particular cultural experiences of the client. Accordingly, the processes of GFT fluidly adapt to clients
throughout the global family. Such an approach holds promise for the family studies literature in leading the evolution of multicultural practices. Further, as GFT is
informed by empiricism, the approach paves the way for evidence-based
intervention.
Limitations and future research
The aim of this foundational article was to introduce GFT to the academic and
clinical community. As the current framework of GFT remains conceptual in
nature, practical application of these newly introduced constructs in clinical
THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FAMILY THERAPY
15
practice have yet to be measured. The next steps of GFT’s evolution must include a
structured approach to individual, couple, and family therapy. These steps include
a new perspective on etiology and human development based upon circular causality as opposed to linear causality, a less pathologizing lens on the diagnostic categories, an outlined approach to assessment, measurable treatment goals in relation to
common diagnostic categories, and accessible treatment interventions and techniques. These components will be necessary in preparing GFT for outcome-based
measurement while adhering to the demands of managed care.
Finally, a distinctive future direction of GFT includes exploring potential
implications of utilizing the approach as a framework for reconciling conflicts
between and across cultural groups, ranging from religious leaders to political
parties. With such extensive training in macrosystemic dynamics and communicative processes between individuals and groups, family therapists are well
equipped to facilitate growth and change at the macrosystemic level in ways
that mirror a relational therapeutic process. GFT’s developing approach to
intertribal conflict resolution hopes to break ground on this expansion of the
profession. Look forward to ongoing publications outlining these working processes and other future developments mentioned above.
Acknowledgments
I would like to acknowledge the support and wisdom of Bill Forisha, Sara Wright, Pang Foua
Rhodes, and Anthony Mielke in the formulation of these ideas and development of this article. I
would further like to acknowledge and thank the courageous work of the Terror Management
Theorists (Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg, and Tom Pyszczynski) for bringing relevancy and
evidence to the brilliant working philosophy of Ernest Becker.
References
Abeyta, A. A., Juhl, J., & Routledge, C. (2014). Exploring the effects of self-esteem and mortality
salience on proximal and distally measured death anxiety: A further test of the dual process
model of terror management. Motivation and Emotion, 38, 523–528. doi:10.1007/s11031014-9400-y
Arndt, J., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Pyszczynski, T., & Simon, L. (1997). Suppression, accessibility of death-related thoughts, and cultural worldview defense: Exploring the psychodynamics of terror management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 5–18.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.5
Becker, E. (1971). The birth and death of meaning: An interdisciplinary on the problem of man.
New York, NY: The Free Press.
Camus, A. (1991). The myth of Sisyphus and other essays. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Cooper, M., Vos, J., & Craig, M. (2011). Protocol for EXIST review. Glasgow, Scotland: University of Strathclyde.
Cox, C. R., & Arndt, J. (2012). How sweet it is to be loved by you: The role of perceived regard in
the terror management of close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
102, 616–632. doi:10.1037/a0025947
16
L. A. VOLINI
Greenberg, J., Simon, L., Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., & Chatel, D. (1992). Terror management
and tolerance: Does mortality salience always intensify negative reactions to others who
threaten one’s worldview? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 212–220.
Harmon-Jones, E., Simon, L., Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., & McGregor, H.
(1997). Terror management and self-esteem: Evidence that increased self-esteem reduced
mortality salience effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 24–36.
Harvell, L. A., & Nisbett, G. S. (Eds.) (2016). Denying death: An interdisciplinary approach to
terror management theory. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Lewis, A. M. (2015). Terror management theory applied clinically: Implications for existentialintegrative psychotherapy. Death Studies, 38(6), 412–417. doi:10.1080/07481187.2012.753557
Major, R. J., Whelton, W. J., & Duff, C. T. (2016). Secure your buffers or stare at the sun? Terror
management theory and psychotherapy integration. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 26
(1), 22–35. doi:10.1037/a0039631
May, R. (2015). The meaning of anxiety. New York, NY: W W Norton. (Original work published
1950).
McGregor, H. A., Lieberman, J. D., Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., Arndt, J., Simon, L., & Pyszczynski, T. (1996). Terror management and aggression: Evidence that mortality salience motivates aggression against worldview threatening individuals. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74(3), 590–605.
Pandit, M. L., Chen-Feng, J., Kang, Y. J., Knudson-Martin, C., & Huenergardt, D. (2014). Practicing socio-cultural attunement: A study of couple therapists. Contemporary Family Therapy, 36, 518–528. doi:10.1007/s10591-014-9318-2
Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., and Pyszczynski, T. (1991). A terror management theory of social
behavior: The psychological functions of self-esteem and cultural worldviews. In M. P. Zanna
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 93–159). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (2003). Fear of death and human destructiveness.
Psychoanalytic Review, 90, 457–474.
Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (2015). The worm at the core: On the role of death
in life. New York, NY: Random House.
van Deurzen, E. (2015). Paradox and passion in psychotherapy: An existential approach. London, England: Wiley Blackwell.
Wright, S. E. (1985). An existential perspective on differentiation/fusion: Theoretical issues and
clinical applications. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11(1), 35–46. doi:10.1111/
j.1752-0606.1985.tb00589.x
Yalom, I. (1980). Existential psychotherapy. New York, NY: Basic Books.