The concept of happiness is the corner stone of the assumptions of positive psychology. Happiness is characterised by the experience of more frequent positive affective states than negative ones as well as a perception that one is progressing toward important life goals (Tkach & Lyubomirsky, 2006). Identifying factors that contribute to happiness has proven to be challenging. Interestingly though, one thing that does stand out in the research to date is that the attainment and pursuit of pleasure may not always lead to happiness.

Certain kinds of environmental factors or conditions have been found to be associated with happiness and include such things as: individual income, labour market status, health, family, social relationships, moral values and many others (Carr, 2004; Selim, 2008; Diener, Oishi & Lucas, 2003).

Ultimately, in the pursuit of understanding happiness, there are two main theoretical perspectives which focus on addressing the question of what makes people feel good and happy. These are the hedonic and eudaimonic approaches to happiness (Keyes, Shmotkin, & Ryff, 2002).

Hedonic well-being is based on the notion that increased pleasure and decreased pain leads to happiness. Hedonic concepts are based on the notion of subjective well-being. Subjective well-being is a scientific term that is commonly used to denote the ‘happy or good life’.  It comprises of an affective component (high positive affect and low negative affect) and a cognitive component (satisfaction with life). It is proposed that an individual experiences happiness when positive affect and satisfaction with life are both high (Carruthers & Hood, 2004).

Eudaimonic well-being, on the other hand, is strongly reliant on Maslow’s ideas of self actualisation and Roger’s concept of the fully functioning person and their subjective well being. Eudaimonic happiness is therefore based on the premise that people feel happy if they experience life purpose, challenges and growth.  This approach adopts Self-Determination Theory to conceptualise happiness (Keyes et al., 2002; Deci & Ryan, 2000). Self determination theory suggests that happiness is related to fulfilment in the areas of autonomy and competence.

From this perspective, by engaging in eudaimonic pursuits, subjective well being (happiness) will occur as a by product. Thus, life purpose and higher order meaning are believed to produce happiness. It appears that the general consensus is that happiness does not result from the pursuit of pleasure but from the development of individual strengths and virtues which ties in with the concept of positive psychology (Vella-Brodrick, Park & Peterson, 2009). The differences between eudaimonic and hedonic happiness are listed below.

Hedonic (Subjective Wellbeing) 

1. Presence of positive mood
2. Absence of negative mood
3. Satisfaction with various domains of life (e.g. work, leisure)
4. Global life satisfaction

Eudaimonic (Psychological Wellbeing)

1. Sense of control or autonomy
2. Feeling of meaning and purpose
3. Personal expressiveness
4. Feelings of belongingness
5. Social contribution
6. Competence
7. Personal growth
8. Self acceptance

Positive Psychology views happiness from both the hedonistic and eudaimonic view in which they define happiness in terms of the pleasant life, the good life and the meaningful life (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). Peterson et al., identified three pathways to happiness from the positive psychological view:

1. Pleasure is the process of maximising positive emotion and minimising negative emotion and is referred to as the pleasant life which involves enjoyable and positive experiences.
2. Engagement is the process of being immersed and absorbed in the task at hand and is referred to as the good life which involves being actively involved in life and all that it requires and demands. Thus the good life is considered to result from the individual cultivating and investing their signature strengths and virtues into their relationships, work and leisure (Seligman, 2002) thus applying the best of self during challenging activities that results in growth and a feeling of competence and satisfaction that brings about happiness.
3. Meaning is the process of having a higher purpose in life than our selves and is referred to as the meaningful life which involves using our strengths and personal qualities to serve this higher purpose. The meaningful life, like the good life, involves the individual applying their signature strengths in activities, but the difference is that these activities are perceived to contribute to the greater good in the meaningful life. 

Ultimately, it is a combination of each of these three elements described above that positive psychology suggests would constitute authentic and stable happiness (Vella-Brodrick, Park & Peterson, 2009; Carruthers & Hood, 2004).

Source: www.mentalhealthacademy.com.au

Tweet This Post Digg This Post Share on Facebook

A child’s earliest experiences with emotion most often occurs in the family setting. Consequently, the family plays an important role in the development of emotional understanding, particularly interactions between parents and children. For example, children who possess secure attachments with their parents show greater emotional understanding than those children who do not possess secure attachments (Laible & Thompson, 1998).

Denham, Zoller, and Couchoud (1994) examined family relationships and the discourse they hold around emotions. It was found that maternal emotional discourse is especially salient in a child’s development of emotional understanding. Specifically, mothers who explain their emotions to their children help to promote proficiency in their child’s emotional understanding. Furthermore, children who are exposed to negative maternal emotions, such as anger, appear to be at a disadvantage in understanding the emotions of others and their own.

Peers also have a significant influence on the child’s emotional development. As children interact with their peers, they create peer cultures in which to carry out the complex processes of making friends, gaining access to play groups, and facilitating shared action (Cosaro & Eder, 1990). Because of the intimate nature of friendship, emotional competence is attained in the context of peers sharing their emotions with each another (Denham et al., 1994).

Dunn and Cutting (1999) also found that four-year-olds who showed emotional understanding had a more positive interaction with their friends, including cooperative shared pretend play, low frequency of conflict, and successful communication when compared to those who did not exhibit emotional understanding.

Other studies confirm that friends who engage and share in conversation about emotion they experienced more cooperative interactions with each other (Brown, Donelan-McCall, & Dunn, 1996). Conversely, children who miss important emotional messages or misinterpret them are at a disadvantage in social situations. This leads to disrupted social interactions, negative social relationships, and possibly inappropriate behaviour (Holder & Kirkpatrick, 1991).

Child rearing styles also contribute to the development of emotions in children. For example, a child of authoritarian parents (i.e. a parenting style that tends to make most of the decisions for the child and can appear cold and rejecting tend to be more anxious, unhappy with low self esteem and tend to react with hostility when they are frustrated (Berk, 2007).

Conversely, an authoritative parenting style (i.e. a parenting style that tends to be warm, attentive and sensitive to the child’s needs) is more likely to encourage happier children with high self esteem. Permissive parenting adopts a warm and accepting style yet uninvolved. Such parents will tend to engage in very little control over their child’s behaviour. As a consequence, the child of such an approach will tend to be impulsive, disobedient and often rebellious (Berk, 2007).

Erickson described a psychosocial process of development across the lifespan that examined the interplay between intrapersonal needs and interpersonal relationships and the key emotional responses this interplay might typically evoke within the person at key milestones of development throughout their life. For example, an infant’s relationship with their primary caregiver will influence their level of trust in others and the world.  The more established this sense of trust becomes the more hopeful a person will feel throughout their life.

Another example can be seen in a preschooler who may be discouraged to take initiatives in tasks and activities whereby they are made to feel guilty for trying things out but getting it wrong or making mistakes. Such feelings of guilt, as opposed to feeling a sense of motivation and pride in giving things a go, could inhibit the child from taking initiative throughout their life.

The examples of Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development above offer an overview of how long term emotional dispositions can develop and impact the individual throughout their entire life through important psychosocial interactions. Table 1 below offers further detail of Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development and the emotions considered to be developed as a consequence of the interactions contained within it.

Table 1. Erickson’s Psychosocial Developmental Stages

References

1. Berk, L. (2007). Development through the lifespan (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
2. Brown, J. R., Donelan-McCall, N., & Dunn, J. (1996). Why talk about mental states? The significance of children’s conversation with friends, siblings, and mothers. Child Development, 67, 836-859.
3. Cosaro, W., & Eder, D. (1990). Children’s peer cultures. Annual Review of Sociology, 16,197-220.
4. Denham, S. (1998). Emotional development in young children. New York: Guilford Press.
5. Holder, H. B., & Kirkpatrick, S. W. (1991). Interpretations of emotion from facial expressions in children with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 170-177.
6. Laible, D. J., & Thompson, R. A. (1998). Attachment and emotional understanding in preschool children. Developmental Psychology, 34, 108-1045.

Source: www.mentalhealthacademy.com.au

Tweet This Post Digg This Post Share on Facebook

Preceding posts:

1. The Psychology of Unresolved/Complicated Grief
2. Types of Unresolved/Complicated Grief

Psychological factors

Anger and guilt can often be a key source of adjustment difficulties in the process of grief. Guilt can inhibit the grief process if mourners are unable to confront the guilt that arises when reflecting on their life with the person that died. Guilt may encourage the mourner to be anxious or afraid of their grief because it may surface negative feelings or acts they have directed to the bereaved. It is also common for individuals going through grief to experience feelings of anger.

Anger may be due to feelings of frustration and a sense of helplessness that may end up being directed at either the deceased or deflected onto others. If the anger is not directed at the deceased and it is not displaced onto someone else, the anger may be turned inward and manifest as depression (Worden, 2005).

The difficulties associated with unresolved grief have also been attributed to a previous insecure attachment to the deceased. Insecure attachments of any kind can encourage distorted perspectives on the meaning of the relationship thereby complicating grief as the mourner grieves from a distorted perspective of the deceased and the meaning they have given to the relationship.

Due to the insecure attachment, the mourner may be afraid to grieve in order to avoid the distorted perceptions of what has been lost and the accompanying feelings of intense helplessness, fear of loneliness and other related overwhelming feelings that can often surround the loss of an insecure attachment figure. 

One overwhelming feeling often experienced with such cases is a deep sense of abandonment within those who have lost their insecure attachment figure. It is such feelings of abandonment that could have some individuals reluctant to grieve because the grieving reawakens the painful and very profound sense of being left all alone to fend for them selves in the world.

Multiple losses can also hinder the normal grieving process. Those who experience multiple losses over a short period of time may experience difficulty in grieving because the combined losses are too overwhelming to contemplate and deal with all at once.

People with severe ego impairments (e.g. personality disorders) are often unable to adequately complete the grief process. Such people may have difficulty successfully engaging normal grief processes and instead experience feelings of intense hopelessness, frustration, anxiety and depression resulting in complicated grief (Williamson & Shneidman, 1995; Freeman, 2005) For example, individuals who suffer Borderline Personality Disorder may have difficulty in mastering the grieving tasks before them as they may not be able to fully understand and express their emotions accurately or appropriately. 

It is common for some individuals to deny themselves the opportunity to grieve because of their beliefs about what it means to grieve. For example, some individuals may deny themselves the opportunity to experience the full extent of their grief because they may fear losing control or may perceive such intense emotional expression as “weak”. Others may not want to give up the pain of the loss because they believe it binds them closer to the deceased resulting in chronic grief.

Those individuals with a history of depression are also at risk of developing complicated grief (Mitchell, 1999).  Such issues, and others, that may interfere with the normal grief process need to be addressed for the individual to successfully work through it.

Social factors

Social connections provide the bereaved with an opportunity to find support, comfort and encouragement in their grief. However, in some instances, these social connections can prohibit the mourner from experiencing and expressing their grief well. Previous literature has identified three social factors that contribute to complications in the grieving process. These factors are 1) When the loss is socially unspeakable; 2) When the loss is socially negated or 3) When there is no social support.

Socially unspeakable loss refers to the loss that is “unspeakable” thereby making members of the social system redundant in being of any assistance to the bereaved (e.g. when the loss is the result of suicide, drug overdose and other potentially ‘unspeakable’ things). In this type of loss, the social network tends to shy away from the bereaved out of ignorance of what to say to console the mourning person.

The social negation of loss refers to when the loss is not socially defined as loss (e.g. abortion, miscarriage, loss of a very old parent, etc). Although the mourner may experience grief, there is often inadequate or nonexistent social support.

No social support refers to when the individual is either away from their social support network at the time of mourning or there is no social support available, thereby making grieving difficult. Geographic distance is becoming increasingly common as individuals become more mobile therefore making the absence of social support in times of grief a very real factor contributing to complicated grief (Freeman 2005, Williamson & Shneidman, 1995).

Society norms and expectations also play a role in the grief work of an individual. Every society has rules regarding what is socially significant and what loss may be recognized. The rules almost dictate who, how long and to whom an individual has a recognized right to grieve. Often these social morays around grieving can overlook the nature of human attachment, the sense of loss and the personal experience and meaning of the grief.

Complicated grief can also be encouraged in the very young and the mentally disabled due to them being perceived as unable to comprehend death therefore are often excluded from the mourning rituals of their society. This often results in disenfranchised grief.

Having the role of the strong one has also been implicated in key social factors that can contribute to complicated grief. In some situations and families, there are certain people who are designated to be “strong” by those around them. They are usually called upon to make all the funeral arrangements, offer support to others and show no emotions. As a result, individuals in this social role could miss an opportunity to deal with their own grief resulting in delayed grief and other forms of complications (Freeman 2005, Williamson & Shneidman, 1995).

Source: www.mentalhealthacademy.com.au

Tweet This Post Digg This Post Share on Facebook

There are numerous suggestions made by various counsellors and academics to explain the Indigenous worldview, however, Indigenous counsellor Nyrell Pattel’s (2007) offers perhaps one of the more succinct and accurate explanations.
 
“When Aboriginal people see the world they focus on qualities and relationships, quantities are irrelevant. In addition, the Aboriginal worldview provides for the unity and coherence of people, nature, land and time, thus they see themselves as part of natural order rather than apart from it and having control over it” (2007, p.1).
 
Just what is an Indigenous worldview? Is there a coherent collective worldview for all Indigenous people or are there distinctions that can be defined for every clan? According to Meadows, Randers & Meadows (2004), “A worldview is an internally consistent set of beliefs, attitudes and values –a paradigm, a fundamental way of looking at reality” (p.4).
 
Everybody has a worldview; it influences where we look and what we perceive. It acts as a filter that tends to only allow in specific information that is consistent with our mostly subconscious expectations about the nature of the world. It also leads us to disregard information that is incongruent with our expectations of the world. When people look through a filter, like a pane of coloured glass, they see through it rather than seeing the glass itself. This is so with worldviews.
 
Most people cannot avoid being influenced by their own worldview because it is through it we perceive, interact and respond to the world. A worldview does not need to be described to people who share it, and it is often difficult to describe to people who do not have the same perspectives.
 
The Indigenous Need for Connectedness and Relatedness
 
A large part of an Indigenous worldview is the concept of connectedness and relationships. Writers, Elders, researchers and Aboriginal educators maintain that everything in the Aboriginal world is interrelated and interconnected whereby relationships, connectedness and belonging are at the basis of all Aboriginal people’s well being (Dingo, 1997; Pattel, 2007; Moreton-Robinson, 2000).
 
 In fact, Moreton Robertson (2001) maintains that Aboriginal life experience is underpinned by “intergenerational relationships between Aboriginal women, extended families and communities” (p.1) and “on the other hand they are based on “connections with one’s country and the spirit world… Indigenous people are related by descent, country, place or shared experiences” (p.2). In traditional Indigenous culture, “the spirit world and the accompanying Law created by the spirit beings that inhabit and constitute the world, are an ever present tangible - at times even visible-reality” (Bond, 2004, p.7).
 
 The rules for these intergenerational relationships are set out in Aboriginal Law and each local tribe and clan has its own set of spiritual laws and practices. “The Law encompasses the spiritual pathway of right living, based on complex relationships between people, spirit ancestors, animals and the land” (Bond, 2004, p.92). The Elders see Aboriginal Law as an institution as well as a spiritual practice which was handed down from the Creation or totemic ancestors who created the world to each generation after generations of Elders who are known as Lawmen.
 
Relationships are the hub of correct functioning of the community. Based on the system of Aboriginal Law is “skin” or totemic relationships or relationships which connect a person to the land, plant life, animal life and the spirit world. These components of Indigenous life cannot be disentangled from relationships between people (Bond, 2004).
 
In the Indigenous world, even the urban, non-traditional world everything and everybody is related and connected. The extended family is a central component of traditional Aboriginal social organisation and close links are carried on as much in the urban Indigenous world as in bush and remote Aboriginal townships and communities. Even with colonization the Indigenous family structure has been maintained. This consists of biological extended family; affinal kin who are related by marriage and classified kin or what are otherwise called skin relationships.
 
These skin relationships are complex totemic relationships that relate all people, creatures and beings all over Australia (Bond, 2004). A non-blood relative may be an uncle by skin or totem and therefore have to look after his sister’s children and teach them spiritual knowledge. Sharing and exchange within the Indigenous kinship structure has allowed Indigenous people to survive. In this regard multiple adults, who may or may not live in the household will rear children.
 
Often the eldest child will assume responsibility for assisting with household, financial and child care responsibilities (Pattel, 2007). This flexibility even extends to children being sent to other relatives in time of crisis or to better the child’s life. A grandmother will often share the household and take on the childcare. In this way many men have been and felt disenfranchised as Indigenous women play more active roles in communities, are incarcerated less, have lower rates of suicide and drink alcohol far less.
 
Relationships may even be extended to embrace non-Aboriginal people, because many Indigenous people may feel very uncomfortable dealing with a person they have no defined relationship with. After years working with remote rural Aborigines Willis (1988) claimed that in order to pursue their own agendas many Aborigines have developed a “kind of strategic participation in white enterprise which he called kinship riding” (p.134).

Willis (1988) admitted that “in the context of oppressive colonial regimes, ‘riding’ should be seen as an act of corporate leadership to negotiate the survival and interests of their group” (p.135).
 
Bond (2004) also noted that many educators, linguists and anthropologists would have found their work impossible had they not been invited to form kinship relationships with the Indigenous families who they worked with. The old Aboriginal people still seek to adopt willing outsiders who come to their community.

They “prefer caring, feeling people who come from the heart” (Bond, 2004, p.113). Williams (1987) suggests that, “Once a non-Aboriginal [person] is assigned a kin position other people base their relationship with him or her on it. Behaviour as well as terms of address then follow” (p.23).
 
One can explain adopted skin relationships with an example. Bond asked Elder Kulthangar how she should introduce herself on Aboriginal communities and the reply was:
 
When you’re here on Mornington you should come up with connections so quick.
 
Say hello and when people say, “Who you? You say I call Kulthangar ‘yugud’, my brother in law and Bulthuku my sister.”
 
Then straight away they know you.
 
If it was me and I went over to the Robinson River [in the Northern Territory] people know me there through my grandmother.
 
I would say my skin real quick.
 
So you would say, “I Nimaramaskin.”
 
And they would say, “Oh, call me auntie” (2004, p.75).
 
References

1. Bond, H. (2004). ‘We’re the Mob You Should Be Listening to’: Aboriginal Elders talk about community-school relationships on Mornington Island. Unpublished PhD Thesis. School of Education, James Cook University. 
    
2. Dingo, S. (1997). Dingo: The story of our mob. Milson’s Point, NSW: Random House. 
    
3. Moreton-Robinson, A. (2000). Talkin’ up to the Whitewoman. St Lucia, QLD: University of Queensland Press.
    
4. Moreton-Robinson, A. (2001). Immersed in Whiteness: An Indigenous woman’s journey through the Australian education system. The Gathering of the Voices Conference: The National Ecumenical Gathering for Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander Peoples held at Banyo, Brisbane, Queensland in June, 2001. Retrieved on 6th September, 2009 from here. 
    
5. Pattel, N. (2007). Aboriginal families, cultural context and therapy. Counselling, Psychotherapy and Health, 3 (1), 1-24, May, 2007.

Source: www.mentalhealthacademy.com.au

This article is an extract from MHA’s “Indigenous Counselling” PD course.

Tweet This Post Digg This Post Share on Facebook

Charlotte is 11. She has been brought along to counselling by her mother, Fran. According to Fran, Charlotte has always been a “quiet and shy” girl. Fran remarks that she is not surprised by this as she too was a reserved and anxious child. In recent weeks however, Fran has noticed that Charlotte has become increasingly withdrawn. Charlotte becomes particularly upset before school and cries that she does not want to go. This is a new behaviour for Charlotte, who previously enjoyed school and excelled in class.

Fran is aware that Charlotte has recently become a part of program at school called, “Out of Our Shells”. This series of classes is designed to build children’s self-confidence. This program encourages participants to engage in activities that they would ordinarily shy away from, such as public speaking, approaching new people and standing up for one’s self.

As well-intended as the program may be, Fran is worried that it has pushed Charlotte well beyond her comfort zone and is triggering anxiety.

In counselling you discuss the program with Charlotte and discover Fran’s assumption is correct. Charlotte is so worried about the activities she is expected to do as a part of “Out of Our Shells” that she has become anxious about attending school all together.

Fran is eager for Charlotte to work on her self-confidence and assertiveness. Charlotte too indicates she would like help in those areas, but she begs to be excused from the “Out of Our Shells” program.

Charlotte’s father (Bill) is, however, adamant that Charlotte stay in the program. He feels it will be the quickest, most effective way to build her self-confidence. Charlotte’s teacher also highly recommends Charlotte continue with the program. Both Bill and Charlotte’s teacher are of the opinion that in a short amount of time, Charlotte will feel much more comfortable with the activities and enjoy the sense of accomplishment the program will give.

As Charlotte’s counsellor, how would you proceed?
Share your thoughts!

Enter your comments below or email them to blog@aipc.net.au and we’ll review it for publication at our quarterly newsletter “The Professional Counsellor”. Please include your full name, qualifications and contact details.

Tweet This Post Digg This Post Share on Facebook