Independent Co-counselling
Communities. John Talbut
John Heron (25 Dec 96)
Here are some final reflections on independent co-counselling
communities.
They have pioneered their way through some of the very challenging
issues which face 'self-governing peer organisations, exploring ways
of being effective social structures while avoiding all forms of
authoritarian control', to quote the definition above. Here are a
few of the problems (together with their RC counterpart problems),
which have been and are being worked through with a variety of
strategies:
- Impotent and messy democracy in which many people hang back for
fear of being, or being seen to be, too controlling and
directive. (RC has had the opposite problem: oppressive autocracy in
which a few people stay at the top being too controlling and
directive.)
- Open sexuality in which people confuse distress-driven
sexuality with liberated sexuality. (RC has had the problem of
sexual hypocrisy: a stringent rule which prohibits sex between
people who meet in a co-counselling context, a rule which people
break, particularly at the top of the hierarchy, and then
systematically cover up the infringement and abuse, a cover up with
which many collude.)
- Eclecticism without adequate integration: exploring all kinds
of different growth methods, without attending to their effective
interaction with existing co-counselling techniques. (RC has had the
problem of dismissing too many worthwhile growth methods as 'junk'
and as a contamination of limited RC techniques.)
- Theoretical stasis and underdevelopment: the difficult of
sustaining an adequate peer forum for the development and refining
of basic theory. (RC has had the problem of an oppressive central
control of basic theory and its development, e.g. the integration,
after RC had spread to several countries, of early RC theory with
Marxist doctrines underlying the Communist Manifesto of 1848.)
- A general reticence in sustaining outreach, in going out to
lead more people into the freedom of their own autonomous and
co-operative communities. (RC has had the problem of going out and
leading people into pseudo-freedom within an authoritarian
community.)
In dealing with these and other issues, and in their sustained
commitment to human unfoldment, the independent co-counselling
communities within CCI have shown, for over 21 years, that
growth-enriching human love can flow powerfully within
non-authoritarian structures and be conjoined with a spirit of open
inquiry. Those emerging from the RC experience can surely add a very
great deal to this process.
CCI communities have always, to my knowledge, welcomed RC
co-counsellors to their workshops for trained co-counsellors, as
well as, of course, to fundamentals courses. There is a lot of
exciting and liberating and rigorous work we can all do together.
There is much more to be said, but this contribution [...] is
already very long.
email: jnheron@xtra.co.nz (John Heron)
John Talbut (1 Feb 1997)
I have just been looking at JH's notes about Independent
Co-Counselling Communities and I would like to respond as follows:
I think John's notes convey an unduly pessimistic view of CCI. Of
course co-counsellors are human beings and we are not all perfect. If
there were not things about ourselves that we wanted to change then we
would not be co-counselling. So problems do exist, but they do not
outweigh the very positive state of CCI. In fact the existence of
problems and the ways in which we approach them adds much to the
vibrancy of CCI.
These are my impressions from over 12 years of very active involvement
in CCI of the situation with regard to the points that John raised.
- Impotent and messy democracy: My description of the situation is
potent and creative panocracy (rule by everyone). Certainly the level
of activity in the UK and, I think, other parts of the world does not
indicate impotence. I have been impressed by the way in which
gatherings of co-counsellors, sometimes of
- or more people, make
decisions. The process may look messy but it is efficient. It works
because participants take responsibility for their part in the process,
are heard if they want to be and don't then go about blaming other
people or the leadership if they don't get what they want. Frequently
in smaller groups decisions are made with peer facilitation, in other
words there are no nominated facilitators and each participant takes
responsibility for assisting the process. I have seen this work with
groups of 80 or more co-counsellors.
- Open sexuality: I have been involved in running numerous workshops
on sexuality and in exploring sexuality with co-counsellors. On the
evidence I have, and I have a fair amount of evidence, the idea that
distress driven sexual activity is rampant within CCI is a myth. Of
course there are exceptions, but my impression is that generally there
is a high level of awareness and responsibility around sexual activity.
John Heron's guidelines for exploring sexual attractions and RC theories
around sexuality and intimacy are widely shared in CCI. In fact I would
say that one of the things that CCI is very good at is helping people to
learn to enjoy their sexuality in aware and responsible ways.
- Eclecticism without adequate integration: The whole point about "A
Definition of CCI" is that it clearly sets out the boundaries of what is
acceptable in CCI co-counselling. Any technique from any growth method
that can be used within the Definition is acceptable, and nothing else
is. This gives co-counsellors when they are in the client role great
flexibility to use techniques that work for them. In practice this
means that co-counsellors use analytical, behavioral, cognitive,
humanistic and transpersonal method in seamless way, flexible and
effective ways.
- Theoretical stasis and underdevelopment: I think that stasis comes
when you agree on what the theory is. Since CCI neither attempts nor
has any mechanism to control theory it provides a wonderful forum for
theoretical debate. That debate is far more useful than any resolution
since it encourages people to think and develop their own
understandings.
- A general reticence in sustaining outreach: There certainly is a
problem here, although I don't think reticence is the right word.
Rather there is no pressure to do this, there is not a sense in CCI that
people should be going out and helping other local networks to get
going. If people in a new locality want to get involved in CCI there
does not seem to be any reticence in CCI to give help and support and no
shortage of teachers willing to go to new places to teach
co-counselling. What CCI relies on, though, is for people locally to
put in the sustained effort needed to keep organizing and recruiting for
the basic training courses and organizing ongoing activities and
networking.
Also, I don't think John is right about RCers being welcome to CCI
workshops. Maybe the way for me to respond to that is to add another
FAQ:
Can RC co-counsellors attend CCI activities.
In general the answer to this is no. In order to be entitled to attend
activities for CCI co-counsellors someone would need to comply with John
Heron's "A Definition of Co-Counselling". However, the nature of CCI is
such that it is up to the organizers of activities, the people taking
part in them or both to decide who can attend so some CCI activities are
open to RC co-counsellors. There are also occasional activities which
are for co-counsellors of any variety.
John@dpets.demon.co.uk
1 Feb 1997
[
Books
|Mailing Lists
|Organisation
|Websites
]
[Home|Contents]
CCI (UK) Webmanagers and disclaimer
Updated: 16 July 1998