Forgive me from starting with the end, but let’s first look
at the outcomes of crises. When a crisis hits, as unexpectedly and harshly as
the word implies, several things may happen, but—regardless of all the details
and variables—eventually the moment of crisis is passed. Individuals and
families may experience one of three general outcome: the individual or family
may emerge from the crisis with (1) a return to the level of well-being before
the crisis through effective coping, (2) reduced level of well-being through
poor coping, or (3) increased well-being through positive coping. This concept
should not be new. After all, most of us have experienced hardship that left us
either worse off, better off, or roughly the same as we were before.
The fascinating thing about these types of outcomes is that
each one of them may be experienced as a
result of the very same crisis. You
might consider this example as an illustration: Three families’ homes are
damaged by a flood. One family does nothing to repair damages and suffers from these
severely reduced living conditions. The second family decides to rebuild their
house and regains the type of living conditions they enjoyed before the flood. The
third family takes the opportunity to rebuild and make additional improvements,
adding a room here and changing the layout there, to better fit their needs. In
this (simplified) example we can see how the same crisis yielded three
different results.
Perhaps even more interesting, is that the very same crisis
can lead to different outcomes in the very same individual or family. So there
clearly must be more to determining the outcome than just what type of individual
or family which the crisis hits.
The “ABCX model” is useful for helping us interpret crises
and their outcomes. In this model, the A represents the actual event or crisis.
The B is our resources and response. The C is our definition of the crisis and
the situation overall. And the X represents the outcome of A, B, and C.
A visual representation of this model may be helpful to
illustrate the relationship between the elements. The actual event influences
both what resources we may have available to respond to it, as well as how we
choose to respond, as well as influencing our perception or definition of the
crisis, and directly affecting the outcome of the crisis. Our resources and
response may influence our definition of the crisis, and vice versa.
For instance, if a family member is seriously injured in a
car accident, but we have the medical resources and financial resources to get
them the needed care, we are not likely to define the car accident as the same
type of crisis we would if the car accident occurred in a remote area far away
from the nearest hospital or if we simply didn’t have the money to cover
medical expenses.
Our individual perception of the crisis, as well as the
means we have available and the way we respond to the crisis, all affect the
outcome we experience. But how is it that some families are driven apart by
crisis while others pull together and their family unit even becomes stronger
from the experience? The difference is often found in the direction family
members turn when crisis hits. If we seek to rely on and build family
relationships, avoid placing blame on each other, work together to seek
solutions and carry out effective coping methods, focus on creating a positive interpretation
of the crisis by looking for what good can come out of it, and support one
another, it is far more likely that the family will be strengthened despite—and
perhaps because of—the crises we face.
Roots and Branches: Remember, it’s Divide OR Conquer. Working
together I know we can make it through and even be strengthened through crises
and challenges.
No comments:
Post a Comment