My friends who are wheelchair users know this all too well. They need to advocate for special accommodation when the reality is that the world around them is specifically disregarding their needs and limiting their ability to participate. A few months later, at the same gym, for amped-up reasons, I have a full-blown panic attack--thankfully, the only one I've ever experienced. It feels like I'm having a heart attack, as if I'm about to die. Joyce has an iceberg belief that Everyone has the potential to succeed if they work hard. This fuels her to be an inspiring educator with the highest graduation rate in her district. That iceberg serves her in that setting. However, the reality is that any academic performance is a combination of talent and hard work. Some kids just don't have the same level of talent. If one of Joyce's students was not succeeding no matter how much motivation she threw at him or her, then she would likely make judgments about that student (or herself) that might be unfair, such as This student isn't working hard enough or I haven't come up with the right incentive yet, because her iceberg is inaccurate. She is well-meaning, but this belief may cause problems for students who don't match it--or for herself if she doesn't meet her own expectations. Attempting to incentivize improvement in a student who is already doing the best she can by working on motivation when the problem really is poor study habits is a waste of both her time and the student's. There are some circumstances in which her iceberg serves her and some in which it does not. Some icebergs are not at all useful or even accurate, such as I must never show my feelings or People will always let you down. Probably no one who has tried consistently to carry on individual psychotherapy with an orientation that is essentially client-centered has failed to think about the possibility of applying this philosophy to group leadership and organizational administration. Staff members carrying on therapy at the Counseling Center at the University of Chicago have persistently raised the question whether such factors as acceptance, understanding, and permissiveness would have effects equally therapeutic for groups as for individuals. Would it be feasible to try a therapeutic approach in situations outside of the clinic office? What would be the effect upon a group if its supervisor tried consciously to create an accepting atmosphere in which its members could work? Can you be therapeutic in your relations with those for whom you are boss, leader, administrator? What would be the impact upon a group of teachers in a high school if the principal used procedures that encouraged them to express openly their feelings of frustration and discouragement, their criticisms of administrative policy, as well as their more positive feelings?

What might be the effect upon an industrial organization if a consultant hired by management acted on the conviction that his role was to get the organization to learn to solve its own problems with the resources within the organization itself? Such questions have puzzled, provoked, and challenged us, and this article will be devoted to their consideration. There will be an attempt to formulate certain propositions concerned with the nature of groups and an attempt to construct a tentative definition of a social therapeutic approach -- a group-centered approach -- in leadership and administration. There are many reasons why it was inevitable that interest would develop in the application of the principles and philosophy of client-centered psychotherapy to supervision and administration of groups. The panic attack is not solely the result of the particular incident. It's the culmination of a history of misgendering, kind of like the icing on the stress cake. I am trained as a psychotherapist, physiologist, nutritionist, and researcher. For thirty-plus years, I have used this training professionally and personally. I have worked to heal myself of drug abuse and an eating disorder. I have a loving partner who is herself a psychotherapist. I have resources, and I use them. Even so, I am not immune. Having the tools doesn't protect me from the trigger and the response. It's biologically wired into me. They might be flat-out wrong, or just outdated. It's normal for a child to develop the belief of I need to be taken care of at all times, but you can imagine that belief might not lead to the most successful adult relationships. WHEN ICEBERGS COLLIDE: Have you ever felt pulled hard in two different directions? Inner conflicts are often a result of competing icebergs crashing into each other. For instance, if you hold the belief I should always be there for my family along with I need to excel at everything I do, you can see how easily stress can erupt at 6:00 p. The fact is, iceberg beliefs tend to hold us to impossible standards and, in doing so, make us more stressed.

On Day 10, you'll learn how to reroute your icebergs to avoid collisions and achieve balance in your work and personal life. When we bump up against these, the stress fallout can be huge. It can cause clouded thinking, paralysis, panic, anger, and more. If you have an iceberg belief that things should go smoothly, it will really rock your world if you miss that train or don't hit the mark with your work product, and it may lead you to give up on things that are not easy but important, like that diet or exercise program. Many of us have found it extremely uncomfortable to hold certain therapeutic attitudes about the disturbed client, yet quite different attitudes about the members of a factory group, a faculty, a social-action organization. Was it just a role we were playing in the therapeutic sessions? That did not seem to be true, for with continued clinical experience as client-centered therapists, we have come to develop unusually strong and genuine attitudes about clients' capacities for self-direction and self-initiated psychological recovery. Rather, it seems that attitudes learned in the clinical setting, even though they are genuine, are not easily transferred to other social settings. These attitudes are transferred, apparently, only as we actually experience the effects of trying out a therapeutic approach in each new situation, first with a group of clients, then in a classroom, then with a discussion group, then with a staff group. When we first meet a new interpersonal situation, we are never really sure that the approach will be effective. Consequently it becomes disturbing to discover that as a therapist you feel no need to direct another's life, but as a group leader you frequently do just that. Or you know the effect of a nonthreatening atmosphere on clients, yet find yourself consistently threatening members of your office staff by interpreting their behavior, interrupting their statements, or reassuring them that their concern about their lack of progress is unwarranted. The realization of our own inconsistencies has resulted in some soul-searching on our part. It also has stimulated our thinking about these matters and has led many of us to experiment with a group-centered approach with groups. It's vital to understand that triggers, and our biological responses to them, will always exist. This is somewhat at odds with our body positivity and self-help movements, where there is a wealth of material available about practicing self-love as a panacea of life's ills. I've met many people who've read the blog posts, taken the courses, and joined the movements. They experienced the life-altering epiphany that our culture is fatphobic and that diet culture (my previous work focus) is a problem. They're actively working on revaluing themselves, and because of that, many become convinced that it's necessary to exist in a state of perpetual self-love. Often, they are fine there until something unexpectedly cruel or discriminatory gets lobbed at them.

Sideswiped by astonishment--and disappointment--when something happens that plunges them into a maelstrom of anxiety, fear, and shame, they think such things shouldn't hurt or derail them anymore. I know better, they reason, and I've done the work. Where did I fall short? They're ashamed of being ashamed. Like their namesake, iceberg beliefs can be difficult to steer around and can even sink your ship. By the end of today, you'll know how to easily identify, classify, and navigate around your own iceberg beliefs. Take Action Before you can navigate around icebergs (or melt or keep them . Icebergs come in three different flavors, each of which represents different domains in our lives: achievement, social, and control. The Three Iceberg Domains The Achievement Domain encompasses school, work/career, and official or unofficial roles in our community or organizations. Common achievement icebergs include: Being successful is what matters most. Failure is a sign of weakness. Our early experiences were not wholly successful. Through them, however, it was discovered that individuals in groups responded much the same as clients in therapy. We could see clearly the strong resistances to change, the initial dependence upon the leader for direction and guidance, the effects of evaluation and diagnosis, the inevitable frustration of group members on their own. We could see also the impact of a permissive atmosphere and the force of the leader's understanding and consistent acceptance. In short, it was impressive to observe some of the same psychological forces at work in these groups as had been seen in therapy with individuals. These early experiences, then, did much to stimulate thinking about therapeutic group leadership.

There has been another kind of experience which has contributed to our growing interest in this area. This has been an attempt to try out a new type of administration in our own Counseling Center organization. Over a period of a few years, we have experimented with several different procedures and different organizational structures. The essential element in all of these has been maximum participation of all staff members in matters which concern the total group. They interpret the pain and grief triggered by a dehumanization or microaggression as evidence that they haven't been successful at practicing self-love. If this has ever happened to you, it's not because you failed to love yourself. No amount of self-love could have prevented the situation, or prevented your own physiological response and emotional reaction. Your reaction resulted from two things: a culture that is hostile to your body and targets you for abuse (which, of course, is going to hurt) and your natural, normal biological response to that painful stimuli. It's not you, it's the biology of oppression. When you start experiencing emotional cascades as a result of triggers you thought you'd deactivated or should be immune to, this doesn't mean you've failed to do the work or to move forward. Instead, it means you're human and your brain and sympathetic nervous system are functioning well and doing their jobs. Their job is to keep you safe, and negative emotions are great for that. Scared of snakes? You'll back away and stay alive. I must never give up. I should get everything right. If I can't do something perfectly, I shouldn't do it at all. I must appear professional at all times. People should work hard no matter what job they're doing. I'm meant to be successful/wealthy/influential.