Terry L. Cross, MSW, ACSW, LCSW
On our globe today, there are two predominant worldviews—linear and relational. The linear worldview is rooted in European and mainstream American thought. It is very temporal, and it is firmly rooted in the logic that says cause has to come before effect. In contrast, the relational worldview sees life as harmonious relationships where health is achieved by maintaining balance between the many interrelating factors in one’s circle of life. Understanding these worldviews and how they relate to Indian child welfare work can serve to enhance an ICW worker’s ability to meet his or her community’s needs.
“Worldview” is a term used to describe the collective thought process of a people or culture. Thoughts and ideas are organized into concepts. Concepts are organized into constructs and paradigms. Paradigms link together to create worldviews. This article will summarize both the linear and relational worldviews and show how family functioning can be understood from the relational worldview perspective.
The
linear worldview finds its roots in Western European and American thought. It
is logical, time oriented, and systematic, and has at it’s core the
cause-and-effect relationship. To understand the world is to understand the
linear cause-and-effect relationships between events.
In human
services, workers are usually taught that if we can understand the causes of a
problem by taking a social history, then we will better know how to help.
Interventions are targeted at the cause or symptom, and the relationship
between the intervention and the symptoms is measured. Yet, the linear view is
narrow. It inhibits us from seeing the whole person. It is not good or bad. It
simply is, and in the U.S. it is dominant. Indian child welfare workers need to
be able to understand this thinking, because they will encounter it in the
mainstream system. Historically, however, Indian peoples have not used linear
cause-and-effect thinking. Rather, the approach could be called a relational or
cyclic view.
The
relational worldview, sometimes called the cyclical worldview, finds its roots
in tribal cultures. It is intuitive, non-time oriented and fluid. The balance
and harmony in relationships between multiple variables, including spiritual
forces, make up the core of the thought system. Every event is understood in
relation to all other events regardless of time, space, or physical existence.
Health exists only when things are in balance or harmony.
In the
relational worldview, helpers and healers are taught to understand problems
through the balances and imbalances in the person’s relational world. We are
taught to see and accept complex (sometimes illogical) inter-relationships that
can be influenced by entering the world of the client and manipulating the
balance contextually, cognitively, emotionally, physically, and/or spiritually.
Interventions
need not be logically targeted to a particular symptom or cause but, rather,
focused on bringing the person back into balance. Nothing in a person’s
existence can change without all other things changing as well. Thus, an
effective helper is one who gains understanding of the complex interdependent
nature of life and learns how to use physical, psychological, contextual, and
spiritual forces to promote harmony.
The
relational worldview model for assessing family problems can best be
illustrated with a four-quadrant circle. The four quadrants represent four
major forces or sets of factors that together must come into balance. These
quadrants represent context, mind, body, and spirit. The mind includes
our cognitive processes, such as thoughts, memories, knowledge, and emotional
processes such as feelings, defenses, and self-esteem. The body includes all
physical aspects, such as genetic inheritance, gender, and condition, as well
as sleep, nutrition, and substance use. The context includes culture,
community, family, peers, work, school, and social history. The spiritual area
includes both positive and negative learned teachings and practices as well as
positive and negative metaphysical or innate forces.
These
four quadrants are in constant flux and change. We are not the same person at 4
p.m. that we were at 7 a.m. Our level of sleep is different, our nutrition is
different, and our context is likely different. Thus, behavior will be
different, feeling will be different, and what we think about will be
different. The system is constantly balancing and re-balancing itself as we
change thoughts, feelings, our physical states, or our spiritual states. If we
are able to stay in balance, we are said to be healthy, but sometimes the
balance is temporarily lost. We have the capacity as humans to keep our own
balance for the most part, yet our different cultures provide many mechanisms
to assist in this process. Spiritual teachings, social skills and norms,
dietary rules, and family roles are among the myriad of ways we culturally
maintain our balance.
Death is
an example of an event that threatens harmony. When we lose a loved one, we
feel grief emotionally; physically, we may cry, lose appetite, or not sleep
well. However, spiritually, we have a learned positive response, a ritual,
called a funeral. Usually such events are community events, so the context is
changed. We bring in relatives, friends, and supporters. In that context, we
intellectualize about the dead person. We may recall and tell stories about him
or her. We may intellectualize about death or be reminded of our cultural view
of that experience. Physically, we touch others, get hugs and handshakes; we
eat, and we shed tears.
These
experiences are interdependent and play off each other in multi-relational
interactions that, if successful, allow us to resolve the grief by maintaining
the balance. If we cannot, then, in a Western sense, we are said to have
unresolved grief or, in some tribal cultures, to have a ghost sickness or to be
bothered by a spirit. Different worldviews often use different conceptual
language to describe the same phenomenon.
When
performing an assessment of an Indian family, the worker needs to look not only
for linear cause-and-effect relationships to isolate the causal factors; he or
she should also ask, “What are the holistic and complex inter-relationships
that have disrupted the balance in the family? What factors can come into
harmony and allow a family not only to survive but to grow strong?” The nature
of our strengths and challenges becomes evident as we examine families from the
relational perspective.
The
context within which Indian families function is filled with strength-producing
or harmonizing resources. Oppression, for all its damage to us, creates an
environment where survival skills are developed and sharpened. We learn to have
a sixth sense about where we are welcome and where we are not. We teach our
children to recognize the subtle clues that may spell danger. We sit with our
children at the movies or in front of the TV and interpret to cushion the
assaults of the mainstream media. We learn how to cope with the dynamics of
difference and pass our strategies on to our children.
The richness of our
histories and heritages provide anchors for our identities. Our relations,
relatives, and kin often form systems of care that are interdependent and
system-reliant. Healthy interdependence is the core of the extended family. It
does not foster dependence and does not stifle independence. Rather, it is a
system in which everyone contributes in some way without expectation of
reciprocity. I give my cousin a ride to the store, and, while at the store, my
cousin buys some items for our grandmother. Our grandmother is home watching my
brother’s children who are planning to wash my car when I return home. No one
person is paying back another, and yet the support and help cycle within the
family.
The
community provides additional influences. From church to social organizations
to politics, we are all affected by the events in the world around us. Family
resilience is supported by role models, community norms, church structures, and
the roles of elders and natural helpers or healers. However, we struggle with
negative forces in our environments: poverty, oppression, substance abuse,
unemployment, crime, trauma, or any of hundreds of negative influences.
Together, these influences contribute to the balance of who we are and how we
cope.
Two
predominant worldviews—linear and relational—exist in North America. The linear worldview is rooted in European
and mainstream American thought. It is very temporal, and it is firmly grounded
in the logic that says cause has to come before effect. In contrast, the
relational worldview sees life as harmonious relationships where health is
achieved by maintaining balance between the many interrelating factors in one’s
circle of life.
“Worldview” is a term used to describe the collective
thought process of a people or culture.
Thoughts and ideas are organized into concepts. Concepts are organized
into constructs and paradigms. Paradigms
linked together create a worldview.
This is the second of a two-part article that continues the discussion
of how family functioning can be understood from the relational worldview.
The relational worldview, sometimes called the cyclical
worldview, finds its roots in tribal cultures.
It is intuitive, non-time-oriented, and fluid. The balance and harmony in relationships between multiple variables,
including spiritual forces, make up the core of the thought system.
The relational worldview model can best be illustrated
with a four quadrant circle representing four major forces or sets of factors,
which together must come into balance. These quadrants are context, mind,
body, and spirit.
The context within which Indian families function is one
filled with strength-producing or harmonizing resources. Oppression, for all its damage to us,
creates an environment where survival skills are developed and sharpened. (A fuller description of the contextual
quadrant appeared in previous issues of
Pathways.)
In the mental area, the Indian family is supported
intellectually by “self talk” and by the stories we hear about how others have
managed. Sitting around the kitchen
table or on the front steps, we learn strategies for interacting with the world
or how to use resources. In passing on the stories of our lives, we pass on
skills to our children, and we parent for resiliency. We instill the values of relationships, of getting by, of not
needing, and hard work for little return.
Storytelling is, perhaps, our greatest teaching resource for
communicating identity, values, and life skills. The stories also let us know
who our people are and what they stand for and provide role models and subtle
expectations.
Emotionally, we learn a variety of ego defenses that
allow us to deal with overwhelming odds.
Denial, splitting, disassociation, and projection are each useful in
their own way as mechanisms for surviving oppression. Functionality can only be understood in context. For example, many of our families know real
pain and endure grief almost beyond the comprehension of mainstream America,
and yet they give back to their communities.
Because of oppression, substance abuse, or poverty, many have learned
not to need, not to feel, and not to talk about it; yet, they still help out at
the church or at school or by giving sister a break from the kids. These are kindnesses that bring life-sustaining
energy, which flows from auntie’s approving looks, from a child’s laugh, or
from a pat on the back.
Other emotions rob people of their resources—rage,
depression, anxiety, grief and jealousy, among others—and are likely to
contribute to a lack of harmony. Our
people have experienced generations of loss from which we are only know
beginning to recover. This sense of loss and the inter-generational grief that
is a part of it are strong elements that affect the balance of our families.
While, for the individual, we think of the physical area as concerning the body, it also refers to the family structure and roles. Kinship expressed in how we relate to our kin, how we act as a system, and how we sustain each other will greatly influence the balance in our lives.
The role of fathers is part of the balance and one that
can contribute strength to the family system whether the father is present in
the home or not. In a recent study of
American Indian families that looked at child neglect and the factors that
either contributed to or helped prevent it, the role of fathers was found to be
central. When the father was involved
in the family, child neglect was much less likely to be present. The father did
not have to be present in the home for the positive effect to be felt. He only had to remain a contributing member
of the family and to maintain relationships with his children. Non-custodial dads take note: your
continuing relationships with your children contribute to positive outcomes.
Families are better able to be resilient if they include dads.
One thing that kin often do together is eat. Our special
culture or family foods, our use of foods to mark special occasions, and our
rituals around eating together all contribute to the health of the family.
Spiritual influences in the family include both positive
and negative learned practices. The
positive practices are those we learn from various spiritual disciplines or
teachers: faith, prayer, meditation, healing ceremonies, or even positive
thinking. They are the things we learn
to do to bring about a positive spiritual outcome or to bring positive
spiritual intervention. Negatively
learned practices are things like curses or bad medicine. Even things like sin, promotion of chaos,
and perpetual confusion could be considered learned negative spiritual
behaviors. These are things that people
do to invoke negative spiritual outcomes or negative spiritual intervention.
Here, our teachings and the spiritual institutions play a
great role. Usually, there are learned
positive practices that are meant to counter the negative practices of
ourselves or someone else. Often, what is
considered positive in one person’s faith is considered negative in another’s,
and the lines between the two become blurred by emotion. In Indian communities, the churches and/or
traditional spiritual ways play a significant role in shaping the spiritual
practices of the family.
In the relational worldview, human behavior is also
influenced by spiritual forces beyond our own making. Luck, grace, helping spirits, and angelic intervention are a few
of the terms used to describe getting just the right help at just the right
time. One does not have to believe in
or practice a spiritual discipline to believe in or experience the
phenomenon. Bad luck, bad spirits,
ghosts, the devil, and misfortune are a few of the terms used to describe
things that bother people no matter what their spiritual practices. These forces are often turned back or
controlled through prayer, rituals, or ceremonies.
In the relational view, the casual factors are considered together. It is the consideration of the
interdependence of the relationships among all factors that gives understanding
of the behavior. It is the constant
change and interplay between various forces that accounts for resilience. We can count on the system’s natural
tendency to seek harmony. We can
promote resilience by contributing to the balance. Services need not be targeted to a specific set of symptoms but
rather targeted toward restoration of balance. Family support services are an example of adding to the balance.
It is not, then, our
extended family, church, or survival skills or any other single factor that provides
families harmony. It is the complex
interplay between all of these factors.
Getting in harmony and staying in harmony is the task.
In the Western European linear assessment, we are
taught to examine a problem by splitting the factors into independent linear
cause-and-effect relationships. This
has value in the development of knowledge of each factor and does tend to give
us specific interventions to try.
However, such splitting tends to leave us with incomplete knowledge and services
that fail to acknowledge the spirit. In
the linear view, the person owns or is the problem. In the relational view, the problem is circumstantial and resides
in the relationship between factors.
The person is not said to have a problem but to be out of harmony. Once harmony is restored, the problem is
gone. In the linear model, we are
taught to treat the person, and in the relational model, we are taught to treat
the balance.
Today, the linear model
dominates delivery of family services, yet almost half or more of all Indian
clients hold a relational worldview. In
Indian child welfare, we have an opportunity to work within the relational
worldview, to work with traditional methods of helping and healing that focus
on the restoration of balance and harmony.
The medicine person,
elder, or spiritual teacher usually works in these ways. He or she may work in the realm of the mind,
providing advice or council or story-telling and dream work. He or she may work in the realm of the
physical with herbs, fasting, sweat lodges, or specific diets. He or she may work on the spiritual through
ceremonies, healing rituals, or by teaching.
Always, they become part of the context of the person being helped and
add to the balance with their presence and willingness to help.
It is important for ICW
workers to honor their own cultures with services that seek to intervene,
assess, and attempt to help Indian families.
Terry
Cross is an enrolled member of the Seneca Nation of Indians and is the
developer and founder of the National
Indian Child Welfare Association. He is
the author of the Heritage and Helping, an eleven manual curriculum for tribal
child welfare staff including a volume on working with substance abusing
families. He is also author of the Positive
Indian Parenting curricula, as well as Cross-Cultural Skills in Indian Child
Welfare. He also co-authored
"Toward a Culturally Competent System of Care" published by
Georgetown University, Child Development Center. His life and work in both Indian and non-Indian settings and his
academic background give him unique skills to serve the project. He has 30 years of experience in child
welfare, including 10 years working directly with children and families. He served on the faculty of Portland State
University School of Social Work for 15 years.
He has served on the board of the National Committee to Prevent Child
Abuse and has been an advisor to the American Professional Society on the Abuse
of Children. He has directed the Indian
Child Welfare Association since it’s founding in 1983 and has traveled to make
presentations internationally in relation to child welfare work. Terry is experienced in evaluation design,
and policy related research. He has
organized culturally specific technical assistance programs for over 16 years.