RCT posits that people grow in connection with one another and that optimal human development is relationally centered (Miller, 1976, 1986). The premise that people grow through relationships rather than through individualist dominance over their environment and others challenged many of the prevailing theories of psychological adjustment and counseling in the 1970s and 1980s. Banks (2015) envisioned growth in connection as differing from growth in separation. Growth in separation means that, as people mature, they adopt a psychologically defensive stance. The purpose of individualistic growth is to eventually “walk away” (Banks, 2015, p. 11) from others. By contrast, growth in connection is described as flexible as “a magician’s linking rings” (Banks, 2015, p. 12). Relationships move and breathe. People experience the freedom of coming closer together at times and moving away at others, yet they are still connected with each other. In these relationships, people experience liberation, safety, nurturance, and vulnerability. These are the very key elements of effective counseling relationships, which robustly predict client outcomes (Wampold, 2015). In the next section, we further detail the major constructs of RCT.
Sidebar 2.2 RCT and Feminist Theory
In her book, Toward a New Psychology of Women, Jean Baker Miller (1986) brought to light the lack of psychological theories that considered how women and other marginalized groups grow and develop throughout their life span. The book subsequently laid the groundwork for RCT. Miller (1986) suggested that many mental health professionals pathologized women, people of color, and marginalized men because they lacked understanding of the contextual and relational experiences of these individuals (Comstock et al., 2008). Chapter 14 further explores the relationship between RCT and feminist theory.
MAJOR CONSTRUCTS
Connection and Disconnection
According to RCT, all people are born with an innate need to connect with others. In fact, contemporary strides in neuroscience research now recognize that biological factors influence a human being’s essential need and desire for connection (Banks, 2015; Jordan, 2018). As RCT scholar and cofounder Judith Jordan describes, human newborns enter the world prepared to connect. Just as plants need food and water to survive, people need others and experience pain in the absence of connection (Jordan, 2018; Jordan & Duffey, 2020). Part of the human dilemma, however, rests with the juxtaposition of a culture that confuses interdependence with a pathologized dependency, one that glorifies lone-wolf independence. Consider the archetype of the rugged individualist who, in spite of much adversity, forges forward, often in isolation, and generally with perceived competency. How might this archetypal figure impact the relational lives of many men? Alternatively, how might this figure influence societally inflicted perceived deficiencies in women?
In contrast to this individualistic model of human development, RCT proposes a model of interdependence. Unlike theories that promote individuation and autonomy as the cornerstones of growth, RCT purports that growth occurs through and within connections. As people become increasingly relationally competent, they flourish (Jordan, 2018; Jordan & Duffey, 2020). In this respect, growth-fostering relationships have the power to help heal immeasurable hurts and provide the motivation to live enriching, productive lives. Counselors who conceptualize client dynamics using a relational-cultural frame expand possibilities for clients to navigate societal, cultural, and power-based complexities and help them make sense of the disconnections that invariably arise in life.
Strategies of Disconnection/Survival
RCT posits that despite people’s desire for connection, they sometimes behave in ways that keep them out of the connection they desire. For example, people may express themselves in ways that hold others at a distance. In ineffective efforts to maintain closeness, people may subjugate their needs to keep others from truly knowing them. Or perhaps they may rage at others when what they really want is to be understood and accepted. RCT refers to these behaviors as strategies of disconnection. These strategies are seen as self-protective mechanisms designed to prevent further wounding and/or to sustain existing connections, however limited.
RCT explains that strategies of disconnection may also be conceptualized as strategies for survival. In other words, while these behaviors may disconnect people from others, people may engage in these strategies because they feared at an early age that the alternative could result in loss, grief, or abandonment. They disconnect from their authentic experience out of fear and/or self-preservation.
Children are particularly adept at hiding their feelings out of fear. However, over time, they may not be able to distinguish between their genuine feelings and needs and the strategies they present to others. Counselors who understand how and why these behaviors develop can honor these limiting strategies for what they are and for what their clients perceive them to provide. When counselors honor these disconnecting strategies, they understand the motivation and context behind them. They provide what RCT refers to as radical respect (Jordan, 2018), or a deepened appreciation for their clients’ functioning and coping strategies. They do so while cocreating a growth-fostering therapeutic relationship that supports what RCT describes as the five good things (Miller, 1986).
The Five Good Things
As we discussed in the Social Justice section, Miller (1986) coined the phrase “the five good things” to describe the conditions in which relationships thrive. Understanding these principles provides a roadmap for what counselors can strive for in their work with clients. These include (a) feelings of zest, (b) increased self-worth, (c) clarity, (d) desire for more connection, and (e) increased desire to act (Jordan, 2018; Miller, 1986). Consider for a moment a relationship that you feel to be especially fruitful. When you are in the presence of this person, do you experience a feeling of zest or energy? In their company, do you feel better about yourself? Do you have a deepened sense of appreciation and self-worth? Are you able to think and see things more clearly? Are you inspired to increase your connection with others? Do you feel increased motivation to act? (Jordan, 2018; Miller, 1986).
Alternatively, can you recall a relationship in which, after some interaction, you felt drained? A relationship in which you feel confused or not worthy? Perhaps you feel a need to withdraw rather than forge more connections? Rather than being moved toward productive action, you feel immobilized or lethargic. These are some signs of disconnection and the antithesis of a growth-fostering relationship (see Sidebar 2.3).
Central Relational Paradox
Absent of a growth-fostering relationship in a person’s life, RCT speaks to the notion of the central relational paradox, a particularly salient concept that helps counselors understand their clients, their clients’ relationship patterns, and their histories (Jordan, 2018). The central relational paradox refers to a dynamic in which clients, in the face of chronic disconnections, may become increasingly afraid of connecting with others in meaningful ways despite their desire to do so. Because of painful relational histories, their interactions are driven by fear and self-protection. They may behave in ways they believe others expect them to behave, and rather than representing themselves and their thoughts and feelings fully, they keep important parts of themselves out of the relationship. For example, they may say they are fine when they are not, or, in their attempt to please, they may accept treatment or conditions they find unacceptable (Jordan & Duffey, 2020). These responses interfere with people’s ability to be authentic and to enjoy a shared mutuality and may result in even more disconnection and an increased sense of isolation.
Sidebar 2.3 Digging Deeper Into the Five Good Things
Think about one of your current relationships. To what extent are the five good things present in this relationship? Do you feel you can be truly authentic in this relationship? How connected do you feel to this person right now? If you feel disconnected,