The Fair Trial-Counteracting Shame
One of the Projective Drawing
Strategies developed by Dr Crenshaw is The Fair Trial (Crenshaw, 2004, Crenshaw & Mordock, 2005).
This
intervention is designed to challenge shame-based beliefs so prevalent
in aggressive children and impulsive kids who frequently get into
trouble. Often these kids view themselves as simply “bad kids.” I
subscribe to the philosophy expressed by a valued colleague, Charles
Applestein, that “there is no such thing as a bad kid.”
The negative messages these children receive, often from an early age,
due to their problems with affect and impulse regulation, are often
encoded with strong emotional intensity. As a result, calm, logical,
reasoning with the child does little to dislodge such beliefs. The goal
as Beverly James
states is to match the emotional intensity of the negative message that
you are attempting to counteract. This requires some creativity and
ingenuity on the part of the child therapist. It should also be noted
that longitudinal research has concluded that guilt, defined as
condemnation of a specific act, is a healthy and constructive emotion,
while shame, defined as condemnation of self is a destructive emotion
associated with a wide range of psychopathology including aggression and
violence.
Thus, it is crucial for child therapists to find effective ways to
challenge and dispute shame-based beliefs.
One of my favorite interventions with shame-based
beliefs in youngsters with impulse-disorders is The Fair Trial.
I wait for harsh condemnation to arise in the symbolic play scenarios of
these children. Invariably, one of the play characters does something
to get into trouble and often is given a harsh sentence: “He is going to
jail for the rest of his life, with no visitors, and no chance to ever
come out!” Or, even more severe, is the death sentence; “He is to die
in the electric chair tonight at midnight!” At that point I intervene,
“Whoa, hold on here. Your honor, I am the attorney for the defense and I
think there is a rush to judgment here. I would like to request the
opportunity to present my case.” If the judge permits, (if not I file
an appeal) I present my case identifying some of the redeeming qualities
of this fellow who seems always to get into trouble. An example
follows: “Your honor, I have known this young fellow, Tommy, for some
time now, and I am here to say that by no means, no way, is he simply a
bad kid. Lots of people think he is a bad kid and he believes he is a
bad kid. But let me tell you what I know about him. I know that he
stands up for little kids who are being bullied by bigger kids. There
are a lot of younger kids in the school he goes to who look to him for
protection. I also know he is very kind to animals. Just last week he
found a stray kitten, took it home, and took care of it until his mother
was able to find the kitten a good home. Does that sound like a bad kid
to you Judge? I know he sometimes gets excited and he does not always
control his temper, and sometimes he goes overboard in the things he
does. He sometimes doesn’t listen to his parents or teachers, but who
ever heard of putting a kid away for life or sending them to an electric
chair? This is a terrible mistake, Judge. When people take the time to
get to know Tommy they find out that he is a kid with a good heart, a
big heart, and he deserves our support, not our harsh punishments. I
appeal to you, Judge, with all my heart, Tommy is not a bad kid, in
fact, he is a good kid. He just doesn’t know it. I rest my case.”
If the judge denies my argument, I ask for adjournment so I can present
new facts and work on making my case even stronger. Eventually, after
modeling my advocating for the so-called “bad kid,” I suggest that we
switch roles and have the child be the defense attorney and make the
case for the redeeming, good qualities in the “bad kid.” When the child
is able to make the case with some emotion and conviction behind it, I
know that we have made progress in modifying the harsh self-condemnation
of self portrayed in the handing out of harsh and unforgiving
punishments of the play characters who, like him or her, are frequently
in trouble.
|
