Cessation as Difference

There is a different way to address human difficulties, an alternative to produce enduring problem solving and relational change through the cessation of action, as opposed to the introduction of a new action.  

This involves an individual or a relationship ceasing something they currently do, think, feel or believe, by removing something from the repetitive cycle of interaction between the people in that relational system.  

Cessation can make a significant difference and that difference may, at times, be similar, in terms of its change effect, to the difference made by introducing something new.  

The cessation of a behaviour, affect, belief or cognition can be taken unilaterally, and does not usually require the agreement, cooperation or participation of others. One person alone can make a decision to cease something that may produce enduring change.  

For example, the cessation of aggressive and angry verbal utterances by one person in a relationship may occur when that person directly ceases the abusive behaviour, or the other person ceases accommodating the abusive behaviour. The unilateral decision by one person to cease the behaviour is relatively unusual. Ceasing to accommodate abusive behaviour is more common and different to persuading or negotiating a cessation of the other person’s abusive behaviour. Whilst all problems imply cessation, most approaches propose action by one person to produce cessation in another. 

When accommodation and negotiation fail to produce change, unilateral cessation may be appropriate.  

This challenges a long-standing therapeutic belief that change between people, and in relation to problems, occurs through discussion, communication and negotiation. The common experience is that this is not true. A person in a committed relationship with someone with an alcohol problem may make a unilateral decision about an action to take when the partner is drinking. Couple relationships can change when one partner ceases to accommodate something the other person does or believes. 

Sometimes it is appropriate for one person to take responsibility for ceasing a behaviour, affect, meaning or belief and to not implicate anyone else in that decision. The decisions a parent makes about a young child may be taken without the child’s knowledge, involvement or consent.  

The important proposition is that someone takes action to cease something integral to their life or their collective lives as a couple or family. 

The What, Who and How Of Cessation

The following are a set of propositions about the cessation of behaviour, affect, cognition and belief by individuals and in relationships. These propositions are premised upon the family therapy and systemic practice ideas set out above, that cessation is not a trivial matter and has implications for the individual and relational system. 

Clients Want Their Problems and Symptoms To Cease

A problem or symptom is a difficulty the client wants to cease experiencing as part of their individual or collective lives. The generic ‘request’ and ‘service delivery’ contract is for the therapist to help the client stop the problem, or help them minimise the negative experience associated with that problem. This is what the practitioner generally agrees to do for the client. The common ideas about turning a problem to good effect, or seeing it differently and in a positive light, are appropriate in relatively minor matters but are difficult to apply to major mental health issues, violence, substance abuse, physical abuse, paedophilia, and sexual exploitation and abuse. 

Difference Causes People and Problems To Change  

Difference, as a cause, can be created in two ways: 

• By one or more people doing something new; and
• By one or more people ceasing something they are currently doing

Both approaches can have a similar transformative effect. ‘Doing’ in this context means behaviour, affect, cognition and belief. The distinction between doing and cessation is not trivial. The mathematical metaphor is the difference between one and zero in division. Doing something new in this context is designed to introduce a new behaviour into the repeated, circular loops of relational interaction with the avowed aim of extinguishing the problem through cybernetic redundancy. Removing something from the repeated circular loops of relational interaction is designed to create a dissonant effect in an emotional, cognitive and behavioural vacuum, with the avowed aim of extinguishing the problem through cybernetic redundancy. 

Cessation as Difference Must Be ‘Recognised’ In The Relational World Of The Client

Cessation creates a difference that is not always immediately or consciously ‘recognised’ by the people who constitute the client’s relational world. Cessation is almost always first ‘recognised’ by the one or more people ceasing behaviour, affect, meaning or belief. Cessation may be ‘recognised’ by others later. ‘Recognition’, in this context, is not restricted to consciousness, and includes ‘recognition’ outside the conscious awareness of a person or family but is reflected in their behaviour, affect or cognition. 

Clients ‘Know’ What They Must Cease To Make A Difference In Their Own Lives But Don’t Know How To Do So

Some clients, individually or collectively, know (or at least believe that they have some idea) what it is that they must cease in order to make a difference in their own lives. Ordinarily the client cannot cease the problem. Alcohol, drugs, anger and violence are straight forward examples of this. Most people do not know how to go about ceasing the behaviour, affect or cognition that most troubles them. If they knew how to do this they would have done so before consulting a practitioner. Either they don’t know what it is they have to cease, they don’t know how to cease it or they don’t know where to start. Many will have already tried and failed.  

The Client Is A Decision Maker, Not An Expert

Asking the client to work out what to cease sets the client up for failure. The client requires a dialogue with a ‘change expert’. Whilst it is fair and reasonable for the client to ultimately decide what must cease, it is incumbent upon the practitioner to engage the client in a dialogue about change and to traverse the wide range of possibilities about difference before the decision is made about what to cease, and who will cease what, when, where and how. The practitioner is responsible for the dialogue about change and the advice to the client about the individual and relational possibilities for creating a difference through cessation. The client is ultimately responsible for the decision about what to cease, when, where and how. 

Cessation Creates Cognitive and Affective Dissonance In The Individual And Relational World Of The Client

Ceasing doing, thinking, feeling or believing something is perhaps more profound than introducing something new. On the face of it, it would appear that either approach should be equally successful. There is, however, a critical distinction to be drawn between the two approaches. Doing something new, often adds something to an already crowded emotional, relational and psychological space; especially a space already skewed and shadowed by a personal or relational difficulty.  

Cessation Creates A Cognitive and Affective Void Into Which Spontaneous Differences Can Occur

Removing something from the personal or relational world of the client appears to open the emotional, interactive, cognitive, and psychological space. It creates a psychological void into which something spontaneous and new may well appear. Spontaneity is highly prized for its authenticity. 

Cessation is Easier For Some People and Relationships than Others

Attachment, differentiation and identity formation are integral to personal and relational development. Ordinary problems appear in individuals and relationships in the ordinary, normative, course of attachment, differentiation and identity formation e.g. separation anxiety, school attendance, parent-adolescence conflict. Unusual problems appear through incomplete or failed processes of attachment, differentiation and identity formation e.g. eating disorders and substance abuse. Problems are produced in conditions that make it difficult to complete the ordinary or culturally normative processes of attachment, differentiation and identity formation e.g. Autism, Aspbergers Syndrome, Acquired Brain Injury, and Psychosis. Problems usually appear with the exploitation of attachment, differentiation and identity formation e.g. sexual abuse. Some behaviour, cognition or affect associated with some conditions is more or less impossible to cease completely. We aim to stop the more unmanageable end of the symptomatic range.  

Enduring Problem-Solving Change Through Cessation Requires A Therapeutic Point Of Commencement

The dilemma facing most client-practitioner relationships is that they agree about where to end the process but do not know where to start. The client and practitioner agree that the cessation of the problem or symptom is the aim of therapy. Where to start and how to proceed is the therapeutic dilemma. 

Enduring Problem Solving Change Commences With Creation Of A Small Difference Through The Cessation Of Something Small

The cessation of a relatively minor behaviour, affect, cognition or belief can act as the commencement point for change. This may be loosely or remotely connected to the social and temporal texture of the problem, as difference at one part of a ‘living system’ can affect another part of that ‘system’. If this difference holds it can be repeated, generalised and amplified. 

Enduring Problem Solving Change Commences When Something Small Is Ceased 100%

For enduring problem solving change to commence, the 100% cessation of something small is required. It is important for the client to decide to cease something where 100% success is possible. It is important for the practitioner to assist and advise the client about this. Most clients’ first move is to attempt to cease something they believe they should cease. This is usually impossible for the client to achieve at the outset, too big, or too open to the requirements for order in their living world. 

The Client (And Their Relational World) Require The Experience Of Ceasing Something 100% In Order To Produce Enduring Problem Solving Change

Usually the client has tried to deal with the problem numerous times in different ways and failed. One aim of this approach is for the client to have the experience of successfully doing something thoroughly and completely. By securing agreement from the client to search for something they can remove 100%, an important difference is created out of the failure laden world of the client. 100% cessation of something provides the client with a different experience or an experience of difference.  

For example, the client with a daily alcohol problem may have tried many times, unsuccessfully, to cease drinking alcohol. By agreeing to cease consuming alcohol (100%) on Tuesdays [n apostrophe] only, a successful point of commencement may be found, especially if the client is restrained from generalising this to other days. Many clients who are 100% successful at ceasing consuming alcohol on Tuesdays find that they also, spontaneously, do not consume alcohol on Monday’s and sometime on Sunday’s. By restricting this to Tuesdays, whatever happens on Monday’s and Sunday’s are spontaneous and not prescribed. Ceasing on Tuesdays may not solve the problem but it is certainly a start that can be developed further by the client.