What do you think?
Rate this book
Internal Family Systems Therapy
This book has been replaced by Internal Family Systems Therapy, Second Edition , ISBN 978-1-4625-4146-1.
248 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1994
About the author
Richard C. Schwartz
41 books409 followersRichard Schwartz began his career as a family therapist and an academic. Grounded in systems thinking, Dr. Schwartz developed Internal Family Systems (IFS) in response to clients’ descriptions of various parts within themselves. He focused on the relationships among these parts and noticed that there were systemic patterns to the way they were organized across clients. He also found that when the clients’ parts felt safe and were allowed to relax, the clients would experience spontaneously the qualities of confidence, openness, and compassion that Dr. Schwartz came to call the Self. He found that when in that state of Self, clients would know how to heal their parts.
A featured speaker for national professional organizations, Dr. Schwartz has published many books and over fifty articles about IFS.
A featured speaker for national professional organizations, Dr. Schwartz has published many books and over fifty articles about IFS.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 100 reviews
June 29, 2022
This is content heavy. It might be a 5-star book, otherwise, given that the writer created an entire theory and practice of therapy. I preferred his view of parts and systems when applied to current society rather than the individual, but just because it was less interesting to read doesn’t mean I wasn’t scrolling through a list of IFS therapists in my area.
I thought this was interesting:
“Dominant groups seek to control the narrative of normality, in which all deviation becomes fodder for social control.”
I thought this was interesting:
“Dominant groups seek to control the narrative of normality, in which all deviation becomes fodder for social control.”
June 18, 2016
You are divided. You must have noticed this when you’re trying to decide whether to have that chocolate cake, or stick to your diet; when you rise, groaning from your bed, despite how comfortable that pillow looks; when you want to tell your boss to shove it, but instead say, Yes Sir. It’s like, up there in your mind, you have a boardroom with an array of directors all around the table. Your mother’s voice is heard sometimes. Also your father, your big brother, who called you a spoiled brat, and your little sister, who told everyone you were mean. There’s that coach who said you’d never `mount to nothin’ and that teacher who believed in you. There’s the you that your wife knows, another you that goes to church, and still another that’s not afraid to sing Karaoke when you’ve had enough beers. All your feelings are represented on the Board. There’s a miniature version of your spouse, a trusted friend, and a wise counselor sitting there. You can consult with them, even if the real person is not around. Your Board of Directors is always meeting, always talking, and always making affiliations with each other; vying for dominance at the table and secretly in cloakrooms, backstage.
The relationships between these characters follow the same rules and fall into the same patterns as relationships between actual people. You have some who dominate others. Some who are immature, angry, or caring. Some get really excited and over-react. Polarization is found here, just as in the US Congress; so are triangles, the love variety and otherwise. You have the same splendid complexity within as without. This gives you the same advantages that any group of people have (two heads are better than one), as well as disadvantages (sometimes all you do is go to meetings and never get anything done).
Many psychological theories have recognized this multiplicity, but they all have divided it up differently. Freud had his Id, Ego, and Superego. An updated version of Freud, Transactional Analysis, has Child, Adult, and Parent. There’s the Inner Child of John Bradshaw. Jung had a rich cast of characters. But no theory has done so much with the phenomena of multiplicity as that of Richard Schwartz’s, Internal Family Systems Therapy (IFS).
Schwartz’s special contribution has been the recognition of three classes of inner characters and the relationship between them. First there are the disavowed parts called the Exiles. These are the memories you would rather not think about and the behavior you swore you would never do again. These are the feelings that threaten to take you over. These are the characters that you have wrapped in duct tape, hidden in the attic. Well, they’re getting pissed, and, whenever they get the chance, they bust out of their cells and raise hell.
The second class of inner characters is devoted to seeing to it that the Exiles never return. These are the Managers: the parts that, well, manage your life so the horrible things don’t happen. For instance, if you were obese as a child and got picked on a lot for it, then the part of you that gets you to the gym is a manager; so is the part that calls you a fat pig when you have a chocolate sundae.
Then there are the Firemen. This is the class of inner characters who responds to emergencies. What emergency? The Exiles escaping. Like firemen in the real world, who have license to bust down your door with an axe, go to the bed of a sleeping child, carry her out, and soak your living room couch with water, these Firemen go to extremes to keep the Exiles under wraps. In the case of the formerly obese child, every now and then she goes to a bar and sleeps with any man who will sleep with her. She’s looking for affirmation, emergency affirmation. That’s one of her Firemen doing that, so that the Exile, the shame-filled obese child, is kept under control.
You can imagine that when these three classes of characters gets going, the person feels very divided. The morning after the formerly obese woman goes to the bar, there are a whole slew of managers getting into the act, reprimanding her for being such a slut. This threatens to let lose some other Exiles and then, more Firemen to keep them wrapped up and more managers to repair the damage made by the Firemen.
Isn’t there a better way?
Yes, says Schwartz, there is a better way; his Internal Family Systems Therapy is all about finding it.
In Internal Family Systems Therapy, there is one character who is always hidden, but is crucial to the success of the whole. Schwartz confusingly calls this character the Self. Now, many would call the whole system the self, but, to Schwartz, the Self is a special entity.
He compares the whole system to an orchestra and the Self is the conductor. You don’t directly hear the conductor. He plays no instrument but his baton, but his role is crucial in bringing all the parts together in harmony. When the parts are in disharmony, they are paying no attention to the conductor. Maybe they don’t know he exists. Maybe awful things have happened that the Self was powerless to stop. Maybe they, consequently, don’t trust its leadership.
A therapist, in Internal Family Systems Therapy, spends a lot of time helping the client take inventory of the parts and identifying them as Exiles, Managers, or Firemen. Special care is accorded to honoring all, especially the Firemen, for their contributions. Managers are respectfully asked to step aside so that the Exiles can be addressed directly. The IFS therapist is always negotiating with the parts on behalf of the Self, so that the Self can be put in charge.
There is a fair amount of resistance to Internal Family Systems Therapy. Clients almost always think that being divided is less desirable than being whole. They worry that, if the therapist recognizes their parts, the parts will take over. There is a fear of Multiple Personality Disorder and the fractured state of Schizophrenia. Schwartz takes great pains to reassure that is it normal, even desirable, to have multiple parts, as long as they are under the direction of the Self. Multiple Personality Disorder is disunion taken to an extreme, he says, but we all have multiple personalities.
When I started to read Internal Family Systems Therapy, I thought I would like it. My Master’s Thesis started off to be about Multiple Personality Disorder, so, I was familiar with multiplicity. I’ve been comfortable leading clients on role plays with ambivalent parts of themselves and with introjected parents. I know how I am divided. However, the more I read Internal Family Systems Therapy, the more uneasy I got. I attended a workshop on it. Still, something wasn’t right. I watched a number of YouTube videos showing the techniques in action. Something was wrong and I couldn’t put my finger on it. As Schwartz would say, I had parts that were drawn towards it and other parts that were skeptical.
It took me a while to identify the problem, but now I think I understand and am ready to share. I think Schwartz and his followers have lost touch with the obvious.
Multiplicity isn’t real. It is normal. It is desirable to certain point. But it ain’t real.
Yes, that’s right. I didn’t think I would ever say this, but I don’t think people really are multiple. It just looks like they are.
Reality is important to me, even though I am aware of how hard it is to grasp. Perhaps, it is because it’s so hard to define, that I don’t want to let it go when I find it.
Also, I have an image of being a practical, no-nonsense, kind of therapist to uphold. A certain kind of underserved clientele flock to me because they think the mental health world is glutted with flakiness. Can I really be telling them that they are inhabited by legions and get them talking to themselves? I, personally, don’t have a problem talking to myself, but I would feel partly responsible if a client left my office saying, “I knew it. They’re all the same. These shrinks are nuttier than their patients,” and went back to drinking and beating his wife.
Still, I understand the value of Internal Family System’s Therapy and want to find a way to make it easy for my clients to swallow and digestible for myself. This is what I came up with.
You know how a meteorologist will program a simulated climate into a computer? She will tweak this and that just to see what the effect might be. She’ll punch a few numbers in that indicate increased carbon emissions, run the program, and see the result on the Arctic ice cap. That’s what’s going on inside you. You have created, based on what you know, a simulated world in your mind. All the people you know are in it; along with all the possible versions of you. Then you run different scenarios.
For example, you’re starting a career in public speaking. You learn pacing, diction, and what to do with your hands. You practice in front of a mirror when no one is around, simulating a performance. Then the day comes and, while you are waiting to go on stage, you experience stage fright. Stage fright is essentially a simulated version of what you think will happen if you get tongue-tied. You imagine going on stage and not being able to speak, everyone laughing, and you running off in humiliation. That is a simulation of both you and the audience.
The practiced version comes along to counter the stage fright. It says, you’ll be fine, you practiced this. It also says, the audience won’t mind if you trip up on a couple words. The practiced version is a Schwartzian Manager. You decide that, if you back out now, you will be humiliated anyway, so you decide to throw the tongue-tied simulation away. It’s important to realize that the stage fright was there all along, only it wasn’t always problem; it’s what motivated you to prepare. When you’re about to go on stage, it’s not needed anymore. It already did its work by motivating you to be better prepared. It becomes an Exile.
Time goes on and your career as a public speaker grows. You speak in larger venues. You still have the simulation of being tongue-tied. It continues to motivate you to be better prepared. You write better speeches. You learn to use a teleprompter. Then you get your big break. You’re scheduled to appear in TedTalks. The moment comes and the simulation of being tongue tied is still there; only again, it’s not useful anymore. You can hardly be better prepared. You develop a new simulation, based on how, in the past, when you’ve had a few drinks, you felt calm. Therefore, on your way to your speaking engagement, you stop at a bar and throw back a couple of shots of whiskey. That simulation was your Fireman, in action. Only, I guess I would call it a security guard.
For a simulation to be effective it needs to fulfill certain criteria. It has to be an accurate representation of how you could be in the real world and an accurate simulation of the real world. It has to know whether you can pronounce certain words, for instance, and what the effect of alcohol would be. A simulation also has to seem to have a will of its own so you can accurately project how it will behave. It does you no good, when you run a simulation of the behavior of an audience, to tell it how you want it to behave. You need it to behave as an audience would behave, as if it had a will of its own. Similarly, both the practiced version and the tongue-tied version also seem to have wills of their own. That’s why it can be hard to talk yourself out of stage fright. Simulations do not go away quietly.
Schwartz notes that the behavior of parts of the inner world matches the behavior of an individual within families. You have the same polarization and the same triangularization inside as out. Is it any wonder, if the inner world is meant to be a simulation of the actual one?
Thus, the better a simulation is, the more easily it can also be confused with your actual self and the actual world. If you do confuse them, then that’s because you’re a good author and have developed rich, well-drawn characters that seem real.
You can hear this confusion when you talk. You say, as you’re about to go on stage, “I’m afraid.”
No, you are not afraid. You’re running a simulation that’s afraid. You created a character, meant to resemble you. If you confuse this character with you, then you did a good job creating it; but it’s not you. You are the creator. You are the person directing, watching, and listening to the show.
So, now that I have figured out why I felt so uncomfortable with Internal Family Systems Therapy, where does that leave me? Can I no longer work with clients who believe they are multiple? Do I have to stop conversing with the parts of myself? Can I no longer lead clients in role plays with their parts and introjected parents?
Not at all. In fact, my insight makes me feel a whole lot better about using Internal Family Systems Therapy, or, at least a version of it. You see, Schwartz and I are in agreement with the character of the most important component of the system: the Self. The Self is the meteorologist running the simulated climate program. The Self is the creator of all the simulations. A creator who has made his creation in his own image. An almighty god, who can cast his creations into hell, where they cry and gnash their teeth; or extend grace, mercy, and redemption to a broken inner world that matches the broken actual world.
I believe it is necessary, though, to say that these parts are not real. This gives the Self authority over the parts. If the Self knows it has authority, then it has strength. It knows it can afford to be flexible, compassionate, and curious. It can take leadership over its creation and not confuse the real world with the notions of the mind.
Keith R Wilson writes about mental health in his blog, Madness 101.
The relationships between these characters follow the same rules and fall into the same patterns as relationships between actual people. You have some who dominate others. Some who are immature, angry, or caring. Some get really excited and over-react. Polarization is found here, just as in the US Congress; so are triangles, the love variety and otherwise. You have the same splendid complexity within as without. This gives you the same advantages that any group of people have (two heads are better than one), as well as disadvantages (sometimes all you do is go to meetings and never get anything done).
Many psychological theories have recognized this multiplicity, but they all have divided it up differently. Freud had his Id, Ego, and Superego. An updated version of Freud, Transactional Analysis, has Child, Adult, and Parent. There’s the Inner Child of John Bradshaw. Jung had a rich cast of characters. But no theory has done so much with the phenomena of multiplicity as that of Richard Schwartz’s, Internal Family Systems Therapy (IFS).
Schwartz’s special contribution has been the recognition of three classes of inner characters and the relationship between them. First there are the disavowed parts called the Exiles. These are the memories you would rather not think about and the behavior you swore you would never do again. These are the feelings that threaten to take you over. These are the characters that you have wrapped in duct tape, hidden in the attic. Well, they’re getting pissed, and, whenever they get the chance, they bust out of their cells and raise hell.
The second class of inner characters is devoted to seeing to it that the Exiles never return. These are the Managers: the parts that, well, manage your life so the horrible things don’t happen. For instance, if you were obese as a child and got picked on a lot for it, then the part of you that gets you to the gym is a manager; so is the part that calls you a fat pig when you have a chocolate sundae.
Then there are the Firemen. This is the class of inner characters who responds to emergencies. What emergency? The Exiles escaping. Like firemen in the real world, who have license to bust down your door with an axe, go to the bed of a sleeping child, carry her out, and soak your living room couch with water, these Firemen go to extremes to keep the Exiles under wraps. In the case of the formerly obese child, every now and then she goes to a bar and sleeps with any man who will sleep with her. She’s looking for affirmation, emergency affirmation. That’s one of her Firemen doing that, so that the Exile, the shame-filled obese child, is kept under control.
You can imagine that when these three classes of characters gets going, the person feels very divided. The morning after the formerly obese woman goes to the bar, there are a whole slew of managers getting into the act, reprimanding her for being such a slut. This threatens to let lose some other Exiles and then, more Firemen to keep them wrapped up and more managers to repair the damage made by the Firemen.
Isn’t there a better way?
Yes, says Schwartz, there is a better way; his Internal Family Systems Therapy is all about finding it.
In Internal Family Systems Therapy, there is one character who is always hidden, but is crucial to the success of the whole. Schwartz confusingly calls this character the Self. Now, many would call the whole system the self, but, to Schwartz, the Self is a special entity.
…everyone has at the core, at the seat of consciousness, a Self that is different from the parts. It is the place from which a person observes, experiences, and interacts with the parts and with other people. It contains the compassion, perspective, confidence, and vision required to lead both internal and external life harmoniously and sensitively. It is not just a passive observing state, but can be an actor in both inner and outer dramas…I cannot see my Self because it is the me that is doing the seeing, and in that sense it is invisible to me. For these reasons, people are likely to be identified with their parts and unaware of their Selves…Once clients become aware that their Selves rather than their parts are at their core, and they experience their differentiated Selves, they feel better about life. One major goal of the model, then, is to help each client differentiate the Self as quickly as possible so that it can regain its leadership status. (Schwartz, Richard C. (2013-10-14). Internal Family Systems Therapy (The Guilford Family Therapy Series) (p. 40). Guilford Publications. Kindle Edition.)
He compares the whole system to an orchestra and the Self is the conductor. You don’t directly hear the conductor. He plays no instrument but his baton, but his role is crucial in bringing all the parts together in harmony. When the parts are in disharmony, they are paying no attention to the conductor. Maybe they don’t know he exists. Maybe awful things have happened that the Self was powerless to stop. Maybe they, consequently, don’t trust its leadership.
A therapist, in Internal Family Systems Therapy, spends a lot of time helping the client take inventory of the parts and identifying them as Exiles, Managers, or Firemen. Special care is accorded to honoring all, especially the Firemen, for their contributions. Managers are respectfully asked to step aside so that the Exiles can be addressed directly. The IFS therapist is always negotiating with the parts on behalf of the Self, so that the Self can be put in charge.
There is a fair amount of resistance to Internal Family Systems Therapy. Clients almost always think that being divided is less desirable than being whole. They worry that, if the therapist recognizes their parts, the parts will take over. There is a fear of Multiple Personality Disorder and the fractured state of Schizophrenia. Schwartz takes great pains to reassure that is it normal, even desirable, to have multiple parts, as long as they are under the direction of the Self. Multiple Personality Disorder is disunion taken to an extreme, he says, but we all have multiple personalities.
When I started to read Internal Family Systems Therapy, I thought I would like it. My Master’s Thesis started off to be about Multiple Personality Disorder, so, I was familiar with multiplicity. I’ve been comfortable leading clients on role plays with ambivalent parts of themselves and with introjected parents. I know how I am divided. However, the more I read Internal Family Systems Therapy, the more uneasy I got. I attended a workshop on it. Still, something wasn’t right. I watched a number of YouTube videos showing the techniques in action. Something was wrong and I couldn’t put my finger on it. As Schwartz would say, I had parts that were drawn towards it and other parts that were skeptical.
It took me a while to identify the problem, but now I think I understand and am ready to share. I think Schwartz and his followers have lost touch with the obvious.
Multiplicity isn’t real. It is normal. It is desirable to certain point. But it ain’t real.
Yes, that’s right. I didn’t think I would ever say this, but I don’t think people really are multiple. It just looks like they are.
Reality is important to me, even though I am aware of how hard it is to grasp. Perhaps, it is because it’s so hard to define, that I don’t want to let it go when I find it.
Also, I have an image of being a practical, no-nonsense, kind of therapist to uphold. A certain kind of underserved clientele flock to me because they think the mental health world is glutted with flakiness. Can I really be telling them that they are inhabited by legions and get them talking to themselves? I, personally, don’t have a problem talking to myself, but I would feel partly responsible if a client left my office saying, “I knew it. They’re all the same. These shrinks are nuttier than their patients,” and went back to drinking and beating his wife.
Still, I understand the value of Internal Family System’s Therapy and want to find a way to make it easy for my clients to swallow and digestible for myself. This is what I came up with.
You know how a meteorologist will program a simulated climate into a computer? She will tweak this and that just to see what the effect might be. She’ll punch a few numbers in that indicate increased carbon emissions, run the program, and see the result on the Arctic ice cap. That’s what’s going on inside you. You have created, based on what you know, a simulated world in your mind. All the people you know are in it; along with all the possible versions of you. Then you run different scenarios.
For example, you’re starting a career in public speaking. You learn pacing, diction, and what to do with your hands. You practice in front of a mirror when no one is around, simulating a performance. Then the day comes and, while you are waiting to go on stage, you experience stage fright. Stage fright is essentially a simulated version of what you think will happen if you get tongue-tied. You imagine going on stage and not being able to speak, everyone laughing, and you running off in humiliation. That is a simulation of both you and the audience.
The practiced version comes along to counter the stage fright. It says, you’ll be fine, you practiced this. It also says, the audience won’t mind if you trip up on a couple words. The practiced version is a Schwartzian Manager. You decide that, if you back out now, you will be humiliated anyway, so you decide to throw the tongue-tied simulation away. It’s important to realize that the stage fright was there all along, only it wasn’t always problem; it’s what motivated you to prepare. When you’re about to go on stage, it’s not needed anymore. It already did its work by motivating you to be better prepared. It becomes an Exile.
Time goes on and your career as a public speaker grows. You speak in larger venues. You still have the simulation of being tongue-tied. It continues to motivate you to be better prepared. You write better speeches. You learn to use a teleprompter. Then you get your big break. You’re scheduled to appear in TedTalks. The moment comes and the simulation of being tongue tied is still there; only again, it’s not useful anymore. You can hardly be better prepared. You develop a new simulation, based on how, in the past, when you’ve had a few drinks, you felt calm. Therefore, on your way to your speaking engagement, you stop at a bar and throw back a couple of shots of whiskey. That simulation was your Fireman, in action. Only, I guess I would call it a security guard.
For a simulation to be effective it needs to fulfill certain criteria. It has to be an accurate representation of how you could be in the real world and an accurate simulation of the real world. It has to know whether you can pronounce certain words, for instance, and what the effect of alcohol would be. A simulation also has to seem to have a will of its own so you can accurately project how it will behave. It does you no good, when you run a simulation of the behavior of an audience, to tell it how you want it to behave. You need it to behave as an audience would behave, as if it had a will of its own. Similarly, both the practiced version and the tongue-tied version also seem to have wills of their own. That’s why it can be hard to talk yourself out of stage fright. Simulations do not go away quietly.
Schwartz notes that the behavior of parts of the inner world matches the behavior of an individual within families. You have the same polarization and the same triangularization inside as out. Is it any wonder, if the inner world is meant to be a simulation of the actual one?
Thus, the better a simulation is, the more easily it can also be confused with your actual self and the actual world. If you do confuse them, then that’s because you’re a good author and have developed rich, well-drawn characters that seem real.
You can hear this confusion when you talk. You say, as you’re about to go on stage, “I’m afraid.”
No, you are not afraid. You’re running a simulation that’s afraid. You created a character, meant to resemble you. If you confuse this character with you, then you did a good job creating it; but it’s not you. You are the creator. You are the person directing, watching, and listening to the show.
So, now that I have figured out why I felt so uncomfortable with Internal Family Systems Therapy, where does that leave me? Can I no longer work with clients who believe they are multiple? Do I have to stop conversing with the parts of myself? Can I no longer lead clients in role plays with their parts and introjected parents?
Not at all. In fact, my insight makes me feel a whole lot better about using Internal Family Systems Therapy, or, at least a version of it. You see, Schwartz and I are in agreement with the character of the most important component of the system: the Self. The Self is the meteorologist running the simulated climate program. The Self is the creator of all the simulations. A creator who has made his creation in his own image. An almighty god, who can cast his creations into hell, where they cry and gnash their teeth; or extend grace, mercy, and redemption to a broken inner world that matches the broken actual world.
I believe it is necessary, though, to say that these parts are not real. This gives the Self authority over the parts. If the Self knows it has authority, then it has strength. It knows it can afford to be flexible, compassionate, and curious. It can take leadership over its creation and not confuse the real world with the notions of the mind.
Keith R Wilson writes about mental health in his blog, Madness 101.
September 15, 2022
tl;dr: maybe the true self was all the friends we made within the brain
Takes key insights from Janet (dissociation is protective at the time of trauma, but destructive in the present state), Reich (trauma is carried in the body), Bowlby (unmet needs during childhood lead to dismissive, anxious, and fearful attachment styles), Perls (consciousness is multiple and may be integrated through the dramatic enactment of our unconscious aspects), and filters them through modern neuroscience (consciousness is divided into multiple personalities that take control in different situations) and complex systems theory (living systems move towards homeostasis through negative feedback loops, and spiral out of control through positive feedback loops). In short, maladapted coping mechanisms are transformed from unconscious compulsions into distinct personalities with their own needs, goals, rationales, and emotions, whose relationships with one another drive the psyche towards either harmony or chaos.
It divides these personalities into three main categories: exiles, managers, and firefighters. Exiles are the vulnerable parts of us who have been shut away, because their needs were not met by a figure of love (due to neglect or abuse). They are shut away by managers, who proactively try to cope with the pain of exiles by dismissing their needs as weak, worthless, and pathetic (acting as the superego, in Freudian terms). This repressive relationship swings between intense anxiety and numbness. When exiles break free from the control of managers, their emotions set off firefighters. Firefighters move the system from risk management to damage control. The pain of exiles is so overwhelming that firefighters will do anything to dampen it through impulsive, addictive, and distracting behaviours (self-destructive coping mechanisms). They are reactive to the pain of exiles. The fallout is intense shame, as managers berate both exiles and firefighters for letting things get so out of hand. They clamp down harder, making exiles resist more, and firefighters dampen worse.
Essentially, an out of control internal family system cycles through 1) depressive/preventative/inhibiting (managers), 2) anxious/lonely/desperate (exiles), 3) impulsive/reactive/disinhibiting (firefighters). This explains the catch-22 of shame very well.
The goal of internal family system therapy is to transform our interior relations from various sets of polarisation, to one of harmonious integration. Rather than rid the self of these multiplicities, it desires to unite them, to make them comprehendible to one another, and to unburden them from the various traumas that drive their divisive and extreme behaviours. This is one of the strengths of IFST: it de-pathologises coping mechanisms, grants them agency, as well as knowledge. All the parts that compose us are believed to be trying to relay information about potential needs, desires, and fears. None of them are believed to be actively trying to hurt us. Rather, they are thought to be protecting us from greater threats. In such a way, IFST humanises the things we are most ashamed and frustrated of, as well as destructive towards. Dissociation, depression, anxiety, rage are often depicted in popular discourses as other, as forces that take over and wreck havoc on our lives. IFST attempts to narrativise their behaviours, to approach them in good faith, and, in doing so, to give them voice. I really like this aspect of IFST. Previously intrusive and critical voices become sites of wisdom and protection.
However, I don't think IFST realises how postmodern it is. It tries to be scientific, presenting these personalities as objective discoveries in the psyche of patients. It doesn't seem to realise that it constitutes them into being through narrativisation. Yes, we have various nonconscious behaviours, but their transformation into discretely bounded beings is one that occurs through address and redress. IFST is an attempt to reorganise the self into a new ontology.
And this is the contentious part. IFST believes there is a true self, who is capable of mediating all its parts through calmness, curiosity, compassion, connectedness, confidence, creativity, courage, and clarity. It believes these are essential qualities of the self that everyone is born with. It believes that, no matter your upbringing, your self can become the secure attachment to all your parts. That you, alone, can integrate your trauma into security. In fact, IFST therapists are advised to step back and let the patients self-lead.
Despite IFST's intended goal of letting the self lead, the therapist is, ultimately, the judge of who the true self is. They encourage a certain aspect of being to become the arbiter of psychic arrangement. The language in this book is telling; at times, it's written like a management book. The self is a leader who unites the squabbling neurotics under its employ, towards the betterment of the whole system. This leader is perfect in every way, able to discern with objectivity its wants, as well as the wants of its underlings. It is the knowing subject who will bring balance to the market.
But autopoietic systems have no leaders. In designating a certain subject, the subject who knows (or at least, thinks it knows), as the ideal leader, IFST sneaks in various normative assumptions about what is best for you, for your community, and for the world at large. Parts are understood as best managed through the self, but this designation (of self from parts) occurs through the therapist. This is not a neutral process; it's a performative manoeuvre that carries an assemblage of ideological assumptions: that calmness is better than anger, that connectedness is better than disgust, that confidence is better than fear. Yes, healing requires openness, but negative emotions are warnings that, for some communities, have saved them from death at the hands of imperialist soldiers, cops, landlords, and abusers. I just don't believe a calm, collected, (dare I say) middle-class self, is the true self of all human beings, across historical time, race, gender, and class lines. Honestly, I'm not even against the attributes IFST assigns to the self (calmness, curiosity, compassion, connectedness, confidence, creativity, courage, and clarity); I'm against its belief that this self is somehow more essential or transcendental than any other part.
I have friends who have psychopathy, who have parts that, no matter what they do, tell them that they're worthless, and that they should kill themselves. These are parts that don't seem to relay any (useful) information to the self. They don't react to particular situations, they just repeat the same thing, over and again, unchanging and eternal. One of these friends had a fantastic childhood. They had no issues with their upbringing. If they were told by IFST that every aspect of them was actually positive, they'd probably feel worse, unable to bridge that psychopathic voice in their head to the rest of their internal family system. This is the limit of IFST's humanism. It assumes all aspects of the psyche are life-affirming. In doing so, it creates a new pathology: the self who, no matter what, can't bring all its parts together. Its optimism conjures as much pessimism into those who are fragmented without the possibility of harmony.
This is still one of the most innovative psychotherapy books I've ever read. It explains how I could feel jealously one minute, then rage the next, then anxiety, then shame. By understanding these movements as a dramatic enactment by various parts, I can disentangle what would otherwise be a stream of undifferentiated and overwhelming feelings. In my jealousy, I can see the fear of losing a loved one (what if they're talking to all their friends but me?). In my rage, the terror that this jealousy will drive me to possessiveness (I can't stand clingy people, can you? If you reach out, you'll make things worse). In my anxiety, an aching for contact (I need them, I love them so much). In my shame, the belief that if I withdraw I'll hurt less people (you're pathetic, nobody wants you). I can see all these parts as arising out of a care for both myself and the person I love. An attempt to stop pain, even if it denies joy. To be able to speak this is life changing. It's the precondition for honesty and love; the affirmation of both desire and fear.
(I actually did reach out about my jealous anxieties and they were lovely about it. Turns out they'd been turtling too, and that's why they hadn't reached out. The source of my jealously was imaginary, but the desire for connection was real. And we connected :3)
—
2022 Edit: There's a really fascinating chapter near the end of this book where IFST is deployed to understand how the material histories of the United States have generated the ideological polarisations of its citizens. It touches on how centuries of slavery, patriarchy, and capitalism have led to intense intergenerational trauma; how individualism enforces the managerial control of exiles (both internal and external) whose vulnerabilities are understood as individual failures to attain the American Dream; how the dispossession of a previously white middle-class population due to 40 years of neoliberalism has led to an intense reactionary desire for an authoritarian manager (Trump) to plaster over such wounds and provide scapegoats in the form of immigrants and foreign powers. This chapter was insane. I would love to read more historical/ideological analyses through such a framework.
Takes key insights from Janet (dissociation is protective at the time of trauma, but destructive in the present state), Reich (trauma is carried in the body), Bowlby (unmet needs during childhood lead to dismissive, anxious, and fearful attachment styles), Perls (consciousness is multiple and may be integrated through the dramatic enactment of our unconscious aspects), and filters them through modern neuroscience (consciousness is divided into multiple personalities that take control in different situations) and complex systems theory (living systems move towards homeostasis through negative feedback loops, and spiral out of control through positive feedback loops). In short, maladapted coping mechanisms are transformed from unconscious compulsions into distinct personalities with their own needs, goals, rationales, and emotions, whose relationships with one another drive the psyche towards either harmony or chaos.
It divides these personalities into three main categories: exiles, managers, and firefighters. Exiles are the vulnerable parts of us who have been shut away, because their needs were not met by a figure of love (due to neglect or abuse). They are shut away by managers, who proactively try to cope with the pain of exiles by dismissing their needs as weak, worthless, and pathetic (acting as the superego, in Freudian terms). This repressive relationship swings between intense anxiety and numbness. When exiles break free from the control of managers, their emotions set off firefighters. Firefighters move the system from risk management to damage control. The pain of exiles is so overwhelming that firefighters will do anything to dampen it through impulsive, addictive, and distracting behaviours (self-destructive coping mechanisms). They are reactive to the pain of exiles. The fallout is intense shame, as managers berate both exiles and firefighters for letting things get so out of hand. They clamp down harder, making exiles resist more, and firefighters dampen worse.
Essentially, an out of control internal family system cycles through 1) depressive/preventative/inhibiting (managers), 2) anxious/lonely/desperate (exiles), 3) impulsive/reactive/disinhibiting (firefighters). This explains the catch-22 of shame very well.
The goal of internal family system therapy is to transform our interior relations from various sets of polarisation, to one of harmonious integration. Rather than rid the self of these multiplicities, it desires to unite them, to make them comprehendible to one another, and to unburden them from the various traumas that drive their divisive and extreme behaviours. This is one of the strengths of IFST: it de-pathologises coping mechanisms, grants them agency, as well as knowledge. All the parts that compose us are believed to be trying to relay information about potential needs, desires, and fears. None of them are believed to be actively trying to hurt us. Rather, they are thought to be protecting us from greater threats. In such a way, IFST humanises the things we are most ashamed and frustrated of, as well as destructive towards. Dissociation, depression, anxiety, rage are often depicted in popular discourses as other, as forces that take over and wreck havoc on our lives. IFST attempts to narrativise their behaviours, to approach them in good faith, and, in doing so, to give them voice. I really like this aspect of IFST. Previously intrusive and critical voices become sites of wisdom and protection.
However, I don't think IFST realises how postmodern it is. It tries to be scientific, presenting these personalities as objective discoveries in the psyche of patients. It doesn't seem to realise that it constitutes them into being through narrativisation. Yes, we have various nonconscious behaviours, but their transformation into discretely bounded beings is one that occurs through address and redress. IFST is an attempt to reorganise the self into a new ontology.
And this is the contentious part. IFST believes there is a true self, who is capable of mediating all its parts through calmness, curiosity, compassion, connectedness, confidence, creativity, courage, and clarity. It believes these are essential qualities of the self that everyone is born with. It believes that, no matter your upbringing, your self can become the secure attachment to all your parts. That you, alone, can integrate your trauma into security. In fact, IFST therapists are advised to step back and let the patients self-lead.
Despite IFST's intended goal of letting the self lead, the therapist is, ultimately, the judge of who the true self is. They encourage a certain aspect of being to become the arbiter of psychic arrangement. The language in this book is telling; at times, it's written like a management book. The self is a leader who unites the squabbling neurotics under its employ, towards the betterment of the whole system. This leader is perfect in every way, able to discern with objectivity its wants, as well as the wants of its underlings. It is the knowing subject who will bring balance to the market.
But autopoietic systems have no leaders. In designating a certain subject, the subject who knows (or at least, thinks it knows), as the ideal leader, IFST sneaks in various normative assumptions about what is best for you, for your community, and for the world at large. Parts are understood as best managed through the self, but this designation (of self from parts) occurs through the therapist. This is not a neutral process; it's a performative manoeuvre that carries an assemblage of ideological assumptions: that calmness is better than anger, that connectedness is better than disgust, that confidence is better than fear. Yes, healing requires openness, but negative emotions are warnings that, for some communities, have saved them from death at the hands of imperialist soldiers, cops, landlords, and abusers. I just don't believe a calm, collected, (dare I say) middle-class self, is the true self of all human beings, across historical time, race, gender, and class lines. Honestly, I'm not even against the attributes IFST assigns to the self (calmness, curiosity, compassion, connectedness, confidence, creativity, courage, and clarity); I'm against its belief that this self is somehow more essential or transcendental than any other part.
I have friends who have psychopathy, who have parts that, no matter what they do, tell them that they're worthless, and that they should kill themselves. These are parts that don't seem to relay any (useful) information to the self. They don't react to particular situations, they just repeat the same thing, over and again, unchanging and eternal. One of these friends had a fantastic childhood. They had no issues with their upbringing. If they were told by IFST that every aspect of them was actually positive, they'd probably feel worse, unable to bridge that psychopathic voice in their head to the rest of their internal family system. This is the limit of IFST's humanism. It assumes all aspects of the psyche are life-affirming. In doing so, it creates a new pathology: the self who, no matter what, can't bring all its parts together. Its optimism conjures as much pessimism into those who are fragmented without the possibility of harmony.
This is still one of the most innovative psychotherapy books I've ever read. It explains how I could feel jealously one minute, then rage the next, then anxiety, then shame. By understanding these movements as a dramatic enactment by various parts, I can disentangle what would otherwise be a stream of undifferentiated and overwhelming feelings. In my jealousy, I can see the fear of losing a loved one (what if they're talking to all their friends but me?). In my rage, the terror that this jealousy will drive me to possessiveness (I can't stand clingy people, can you? If you reach out, you'll make things worse). In my anxiety, an aching for contact (I need them, I love them so much). In my shame, the belief that if I withdraw I'll hurt less people (you're pathetic, nobody wants you). I can see all these parts as arising out of a care for both myself and the person I love. An attempt to stop pain, even if it denies joy. To be able to speak this is life changing. It's the precondition for honesty and love; the affirmation of both desire and fear.
(I actually did reach out about my jealous anxieties and they were lovely about it. Turns out they'd been turtling too, and that's why they hadn't reached out. The source of my jealously was imaginary, but the desire for connection was real. And we connected :3)
—
2022 Edit: There's a really fascinating chapter near the end of this book where IFST is deployed to understand how the material histories of the United States have generated the ideological polarisations of its citizens. It touches on how centuries of slavery, patriarchy, and capitalism have led to intense intergenerational trauma; how individualism enforces the managerial control of exiles (both internal and external) whose vulnerabilities are understood as individual failures to attain the American Dream; how the dispossession of a previously white middle-class population due to 40 years of neoliberalism has led to an intense reactionary desire for an authoritarian manager (Trump) to plaster over such wounds and provide scapegoats in the form of immigrants and foreign powers. This chapter was insane. I would love to read more historical/ideological analyses through such a framework.
April 18, 2022
Internal Family Systems Model (IFS) is model of psychotherapy that conceptualizes human psychology as a system of “parts” that can have differing agendas, and which can compete for dominance within the psyche of an individual.
When you feel as if PART of you would like to eat cake, but another PART of you would rather you didn’t. And it’s almost like a little boxing match between PART1 and PART2.
This is what IFS is getting at.
Everyone experiences this type of intrapsychic conflict from time to time (or maybe even all the time).
Examples abound:
PART of you wants to flip-off (do you hyphenate this word?) that douche bag driver, and another PART of wishes you wouldn’t.
PART of you wants to tell your boss to go fuck himself, and another PART of you wants to keep the paychecks coming.
PART of you wants to yell TRUMP SUCKS at the Ventura county fair, and another PART of you wants to live.
PART of you wants to stay up all night and drink Chardonnay, and another PART of you wants to spend all day the next day drinking Chardonnay.
We’ve all done that right?
Anyway.
According to IFS, generally speaking, there are four basic categories of parts: 1. Exiles, 2. Managers, 3. Firefighters, and 4. Core Self.
Exiles are the “suppressed” wounded child part of our psychology, comprised of childhood trauma and other awkward, shameful thoughts, feelings and memories.
Managers take on a preemptive, protective role, and attempt to keep the person from harm, in part by preemptively suppressing exiles.
Firefighters distract attention away from exiles if/when they do break through, and manifest in impulsive and/or inappropriate behaviors like drug use, over eating, over working, over spending and Chardonnay for breakfast.
The Core Self is that part of you that represents the seat of consciousness. The witnessing awareness. That “big mind” part of you that is curious, open accepting and loving, and which exudes wisdom, equanimity, and compassion.
The Core Self is the part of you that mindfulness (and just about all other spiritual practices) clarifies and strengthens.
IFS asserts that Exile, Manager, Firefighter, and Core Self parts compete for dominance within the individual, and behave similar to a family system, which as we all know, can be VERY unpleasant and dysfunctional at times.
Self Leadership is when the Core Self part is in charge. IFS (more or less) attempts to strengthen and empower the Core Self.
I’m a therpaist, I read WAY too many therapy books, and I’m kind of burnt out on them at this point.
So please take it with a grain of salt when I give this one a 4/5 stars 🌟
It takes A LOT to get me excited in this space.
And given all that.
This book kept my attention.
I learned some great things.
I have been using it in the work.
It has been effective.
It’s good stuff.
So if you’re so inclined.
Go ahead and read it.
And if you’re still feeling conflicted about it after reading all of this.
Than definitely read it.
When you feel as if PART of you would like to eat cake, but another PART of you would rather you didn’t. And it’s almost like a little boxing match between PART1 and PART2.
This is what IFS is getting at.
Everyone experiences this type of intrapsychic conflict from time to time (or maybe even all the time).
Examples abound:
PART of you wants to flip-off (do you hyphenate this word?) that douche bag driver, and another PART of wishes you wouldn’t.
PART of you wants to tell your boss to go fuck himself, and another PART of you wants to keep the paychecks coming.
PART of you wants to yell TRUMP SUCKS at the Ventura county fair, and another PART of you wants to live.
PART of you wants to stay up all night and drink Chardonnay, and another PART of you wants to spend all day the next day drinking Chardonnay.
We’ve all done that right?
Anyway.
According to IFS, generally speaking, there are four basic categories of parts: 1. Exiles, 2. Managers, 3. Firefighters, and 4. Core Self.
Exiles are the “suppressed” wounded child part of our psychology, comprised of childhood trauma and other awkward, shameful thoughts, feelings and memories.
Managers take on a preemptive, protective role, and attempt to keep the person from harm, in part by preemptively suppressing exiles.
Firefighters distract attention away from exiles if/when they do break through, and manifest in impulsive and/or inappropriate behaviors like drug use, over eating, over working, over spending and Chardonnay for breakfast.
The Core Self is that part of you that represents the seat of consciousness. The witnessing awareness. That “big mind” part of you that is curious, open accepting and loving, and which exudes wisdom, equanimity, and compassion.
The Core Self is the part of you that mindfulness (and just about all other spiritual practices) clarifies and strengthens.
IFS asserts that Exile, Manager, Firefighter, and Core Self parts compete for dominance within the individual, and behave similar to a family system, which as we all know, can be VERY unpleasant and dysfunctional at times.
Self Leadership is when the Core Self part is in charge. IFS (more or less) attempts to strengthen and empower the Core Self.
I’m a therpaist, I read WAY too many therapy books, and I’m kind of burnt out on them at this point.
So please take it with a grain of salt when I give this one a 4/5 stars 🌟
It takes A LOT to get me excited in this space.
And given all that.
This book kept my attention.
I learned some great things.
I have been using it in the work.
It has been effective.
It’s good stuff.
So if you’re so inclined.
Go ahead and read it.
And if you’re still feeling conflicted about it after reading all of this.
Than definitely read it.
January 3, 2009
This psychotherapeutic model really resonates with me and all of my parts.
June 2, 2019
I learned about Internal Family Systems Therapy in van der Kolk's landmark reference book on trauma "The Body Keeps the Score". Based on this and a podcast interview with Schwartz, I began to intuitively use ego states work in my clinical process and found the approach extremely useful. In going back to Schwartz' original book I very much appreciate the genius in this model. Schwartz' introductory book on his method is wonderfully easy to read and filled with excellent case examples from his work with bulimic patients. I found these particularly relevant as I work with this population, but don't be fooled, Schwartz' model is a potent tool for any mental health condition. Schwartz provides a short but excellent history of ego state approaches and then introduces his particular technique which allows deep work in a relatively short time frame and is a respectful and powerful way to work with stubborn defences that are typically resistant to other approaches. As an extra bonus Schwartz also describes his approach to family work and a way of understanding cultural influences that I found refreshing and easy to digest. I highly recommend this book to any therapists interested in making their work more powerful and effective. I plan on continuing to explore Schwartz' future publications and have already ordered my next book.
April 26, 2008
For the more advanced seeker. This book provides an applicable theory to how emotions work and why we make the decisions we make. It has changed my whole world view and is a tool that has allowed me to learn how to have more grace toward myself and as a result, I have more grace to give to others.
February 3, 2021
I would like to recommend an introduction to IFS by Kaj Sotala: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5gfqG...
Sotala approaches IFS with an artificial intelligence analogy, which might make the model lucid to especially people who have more background in thinking such as required in programming rather than psychotherapy and emotional work. Although I studied psychology, this introduction helped me a lot too.
###
Brief comment on the 2nd edition: I really like the model, find it highly useful, like how it seems applicable in a range of contexts, has in its novelty a lot of cultural background to refer to, and how the writers don't shirk from attempting to answer some hard questions about human nastiness. But honestly, it seems like a disaster waiting to happen to claim that this view has hit on hard truth of how the mind, fundamentally and universally, works, and people have just failed to notice it. Either we grow some humility and accept that not everyone perceives or, more importantly, is willing to perceive the mind as a fractal collection of subminds, or await a painful polarisation between this view and whatever other well mapping theories and useful interfaces for the mind come into prominence.
Sotala approaches IFS with an artificial intelligence analogy, which might make the model lucid to especially people who have more background in thinking such as required in programming rather than psychotherapy and emotional work. Although I studied psychology, this introduction helped me a lot too.
###
Brief comment on the 2nd edition: I really like the model, find it highly useful, like how it seems applicable in a range of contexts, has in its novelty a lot of cultural background to refer to, and how the writers don't shirk from attempting to answer some hard questions about human nastiness. But honestly, it seems like a disaster waiting to happen to claim that this view has hit on hard truth of how the mind, fundamentally and universally, works, and people have just failed to notice it. Either we grow some humility and accept that not everyone perceives or, more importantly, is willing to perceive the mind as a fractal collection of subminds, or await a painful polarisation between this view and whatever other well mapping theories and useful interfaces for the mind come into prominence.
November 4, 2011
I love parts work big-time. I just wished it didn't focus so heavily on eating disorders. However, it is well worth a read for its richness, it's depth and it's clear explanation of the way in which the multiplicity of self can be honored in therapy and attended to in the service of healing.
March 8, 2022
Psychology is such a curious field. It seems to be stuck in its pre-paradigm phase. People can cobble together fascinating networks of ideas that seem self-consistent and to explain big chunks of that perpetual question, "why do we do what we do?" and yet these ideas are, if not absolutely mutually contradictory, at least radically separated from each other. There are people living in the boundary areas between two or three of these proto-paradigms, translating concepts from one to the other, sorting through the actual contradictions and concrete strategies, but the whole vast landscape seems nowhere close to unification.
I found myself thinking more than once during this audiobook about my experience, or lack thereof, with EMDR. I listened to that theory's founder's book, got excited about it, saw a therapist, got nowhere. I find myself just as excited about IFS, but if I stop and think about it, I get pretty pessimistic about the prospects of actually getting anywhere. In EMDR, the images and thoughts just won't come up for processing, and I expect that I'll get stonewalled trying to actually talk to my parts. It just seems too good to be true. In both cases, in IFS terms I suspect I have way too many managers whose kung fu is way too sophisticated to ever let me feel my feelings, contact my exiles, see my buried memories, etc.
Still, it's a fascinating book, even with the penitential stretches where I had to listen to this unregenerate old hippie burden me with his pseudo-anti-Western claptrap.
I found myself thinking more than once during this audiobook about my experience, or lack thereof, with EMDR. I listened to that theory's founder's book, got excited about it, saw a therapist, got nowhere. I find myself just as excited about IFS, but if I stop and think about it, I get pretty pessimistic about the prospects of actually getting anywhere. In EMDR, the images and thoughts just won't come up for processing, and I expect that I'll get stonewalled trying to actually talk to my parts. It just seems too good to be true. In both cases, in IFS terms I suspect I have way too many managers whose kung fu is way too sophisticated to ever let me feel my feelings, contact my exiles, see my buried memories, etc.
Still, it's a fascinating book, even with the penitential stretches where I had to listen to this unregenerate old hippie burden me with his pseudo-anti-Western claptrap.
January 1, 2022
I decided to learn more about IFS after reading “The Body Keeps the Score” -- Bessel van der Kolk’s widely recognized and approachable study of Trauma published in 2014. The final chapters of TBKtS are spent on a discussion of modern therapies, many of which I had heard of (like EMDR) but others like IFS I had not. IFS sounded particularly interesting and provocative due to its theory of ‘multiple independent parts’ within the mind, and the theatrical approach van der Kolk described of naming and arguing with inanimate objects in order to give shape to those hidden inner dialogues.
Review
3 stars. Interesting, and worth skimming. Written as a reference for practitioners, and so can be a bit dry for laymen reading; but the case-studies are illuminating. Author Richard Schwartz is the founder of IFS.
If short on time these two posts on Farnam Street are more bang for buck.
→ book-summary-unlocking-the-emotional-brain
→ building up IFS
Summary Take-aways
1. Your mind has multiple discrete psyches called “parts”. Those parts can clash and interfere with each other, much like human relationships would in any closed-group setting. Therapy consists of identifying your distinct parts, normalizing that multiplicity, and then treating the system as a ‘family unit’ using many of the same techniques applied for years to actual small-group and family therapy practices.
2. Schwartz treats Parts as highly independent egos, even going so far as to personify and name them. I think for many readers that mental model strains credulity, but simply viewing Parts as “strong and recurrent emotional states that are inconsistent with each other” is sufficient. The important thing is that they are discrete and internal.
Multiplicity is not a bad thing, it is inherent to everyone. And normalizing that fact can be advantageous. It can give you some breathing room and help you acknowledge and examine embarrassing or controversial feelings without the burden of full ownership.
Many Parts have their emotional roots in childhood, and shape our perspective into adulthood.
3. A core premise of IFS is that each Part has positive intent, even the ones that seem counterproductive or toxic. The challenge is that parts all exist in an ecosystem with each other, and without a strong leader they can fall subject to standard relational anti-patterns. Polarization, triangulation, self-reinforcement, etc.
Rather than ‘fight’ or ‘coerce’ these parts, the IFS goal is to find harmony between them.
4. The leader these Parts need is the Self. The true, rational, inner consciousness. Think of the Self as flow, mindfulness, groundedness. Confidence, Curiosity, Compassion, Calm. You know it when you feel it!
5. The first step of IFS is to access the core Self (often achieved through physical grounding exercises and breathing), then use curious introspection to identify and begin to label the varying Parts that pop up and cause anxiety/depression. Can be just a few, or 20+.
6. The hallmark of IFS is its three-party categorization:
Exiles are packages of psychological trauma, often from childhood, defined by shame, denial, revulsion, guilt, or fear. Importantly, these source memories are not limited to what we might call ‘serious trauma’... even minor childhood upsets can be rooted here. The point is you felt overwhelmed, and as a result that memory and intense emotional state are split off from the rest of your psyche, forming a Part that is frozen in time/maturity and never fully integrated. When triggered later in life, exiles tend to flood the mind with these historical negative feelings and as a result you do whatever you can to suppress them.
Managers are patterns of thought and behavior meant to keep exiles pushed away and under the surface. They play a *proactive protective* role. Think: career or gym addiction.
Firefighters emerge when Exiles are triggered. They play a *reactive protective* role. They work to divert attention away from the Exile's hurt and shame, which leads to impulsive, inappropriate, numbing behavior. Think: binge eating, drug use, fighting.
The final key to this framework is the idea that the relationships between these parts follow the same patterns as relationships between actual people. They play off of each other, and can get stuck in reinforcing spirals of polarization, which is the cause of untenable mental dissonance.
7. Usually patients are self-loathing and resistant of their Firefighting Parts in particular, due to those Parts’ destructive behavior. A big step of IFS therapy is learning to acknowledge and thank these Parts for the role they play in trying to protect your Exiles, and then asking them to ‘temporarily step aside’ so you can access and dialogue with your Exile Parts directly. You cannot fight Firefighters/Managers, you must earn their trust and work through them.
8. Once you have access to the root Exile, the goal is to re-integrate it. The tactic for this is to trigger and hold the visceral memory and emotional state in your mind, while simultaneously rationalizing a more mature and empowered conclusion. Effectively you want to rewire the trigger away from your ‘immature’ original response, and to a more rational/stoic response.
Once the exile is settled, the downstream firefighters and manager patterns will fade away.
Rinse, wash, repeat!
Strong healthy relationships can help you constantly modulate, tune your parts, and re-integrate bad memories. But as with attachment theory, if you haven't had strong healthy relationships in your childhood you may be 'stuck' and need therapy to model healthy introspection to help you unlock this inner process.
Review
3 stars. Interesting, and worth skimming. Written as a reference for practitioners, and so can be a bit dry for laymen reading; but the case-studies are illuminating. Author Richard Schwartz is the founder of IFS.
If short on time these two posts on Farnam Street are more bang for buck.
→ book-summary-unlocking-the-emotional-brain
→ building up IFS
Summary Take-aways
1. Your mind has multiple discrete psyches called “parts”. Those parts can clash and interfere with each other, much like human relationships would in any closed-group setting. Therapy consists of identifying your distinct parts, normalizing that multiplicity, and then treating the system as a ‘family unit’ using many of the same techniques applied for years to actual small-group and family therapy practices.
2. Schwartz treats Parts as highly independent egos, even going so far as to personify and name them. I think for many readers that mental model strains credulity, but simply viewing Parts as “strong and recurrent emotional states that are inconsistent with each other” is sufficient. The important thing is that they are discrete and internal.
Multiplicity is not a bad thing, it is inherent to everyone. And normalizing that fact can be advantageous. It can give you some breathing room and help you acknowledge and examine embarrassing or controversial feelings without the burden of full ownership.
Many Parts have their emotional roots in childhood, and shape our perspective into adulthood.
3. A core premise of IFS is that each Part has positive intent, even the ones that seem counterproductive or toxic. The challenge is that parts all exist in an ecosystem with each other, and without a strong leader they can fall subject to standard relational anti-patterns. Polarization, triangulation, self-reinforcement, etc.
Rather than ‘fight’ or ‘coerce’ these parts, the IFS goal is to find harmony between them.
4. The leader these Parts need is the Self. The true, rational, inner consciousness. Think of the Self as flow, mindfulness, groundedness. Confidence, Curiosity, Compassion, Calm. You know it when you feel it!
5. The first step of IFS is to access the core Self (often achieved through physical grounding exercises and breathing), then use curious introspection to identify and begin to label the varying Parts that pop up and cause anxiety/depression. Can be just a few, or 20+.
6. The hallmark of IFS is its three-party categorization:
Exiles are packages of psychological trauma, often from childhood, defined by shame, denial, revulsion, guilt, or fear. Importantly, these source memories are not limited to what we might call ‘serious trauma’... even minor childhood upsets can be rooted here. The point is you felt overwhelmed, and as a result that memory and intense emotional state are split off from the rest of your psyche, forming a Part that is frozen in time/maturity and never fully integrated. When triggered later in life, exiles tend to flood the mind with these historical negative feelings and as a result you do whatever you can to suppress them.
Managers are patterns of thought and behavior meant to keep exiles pushed away and under the surface. They play a *proactive protective* role. Think: career or gym addiction.
Firefighters emerge when Exiles are triggered. They play a *reactive protective* role. They work to divert attention away from the Exile's hurt and shame, which leads to impulsive, inappropriate, numbing behavior. Think: binge eating, drug use, fighting.
The final key to this framework is the idea that the relationships between these parts follow the same patterns as relationships between actual people. They play off of each other, and can get stuck in reinforcing spirals of polarization, which is the cause of untenable mental dissonance.
7. Usually patients are self-loathing and resistant of their Firefighting Parts in particular, due to those Parts’ destructive behavior. A big step of IFS therapy is learning to acknowledge and thank these Parts for the role they play in trying to protect your Exiles, and then asking them to ‘temporarily step aside’ so you can access and dialogue with your Exile Parts directly. You cannot fight Firefighters/Managers, you must earn their trust and work through them.
8. Once you have access to the root Exile, the goal is to re-integrate it. The tactic for this is to trigger and hold the visceral memory and emotional state in your mind, while simultaneously rationalizing a more mature and empowered conclusion. Effectively you want to rewire the trigger away from your ‘immature’ original response, and to a more rational/stoic response.
Once the exile is settled, the downstream firefighters and manager patterns will fade away.
Rinse, wash, repeat!
Strong healthy relationships can help you constantly modulate, tune your parts, and re-integrate bad memories. But as with attachment theory, if you haven't had strong healthy relationships in your childhood you may be 'stuck' and need therapy to model healthy introspection to help you unlock this inner process.
May 7, 2021
Great intro and explanation of how IFS works.
August 12, 2019
I took a really long time to read it and didn´t really finish it. I used the 70% rule. It´s good, but feels like an overcomplicated ego-state therapy. I already read the self-therapy version of this approach and I suppose it makes more sense in that case... but in real therapy, I get the use of around 50% of it. The rest seems like over doing it.
October 23, 2011
This model seems to make a lot of intuitive sense. Well-laid out. I would've liked the chance to look at a single-parent situation. I also expected a less simplified analysis of societal/cultural burdens...
June 18, 2020
Incredible updated version. Highly recommended to anyone who wants to go for a deep dive into the Internal Family Systems therapeutic modality. IFS is a game changer and truly remarkable tool for healing.
January 7, 2008
About how we internalize and deal with pain. Really insightful.
July 30, 2015
Sehr aufschlussreich und nützlich. ich habe mich in den Beispielen oft wieder gefunden.
November 5, 2023
This is a good intro and I'd want more guidance--which would likely have to come in practicums and actual application with real people to practice with. Almost like a textbook style of writing, but not too academic so that most people who aren't necessarily studying psychology or therapy can absorb the concepts. I'm still a little uncertain how to get in touch with my parts and how to label them and talk to them or have them show me who the managers, protectors, and exiles are. I have an idea of how to go about it, but it seems like I'm "doing it wrong." I think in another book there's a practice on how to find your parts.
“Internal Family Systems (IFS) therapy is a synthesis of two paradigms: the plural mind, or the idea that we all contain many different parts, and systems thinking. With the view that intrapsychic processes constitute a system, IFS invites therapists to relate to every level of the human system—the intrapsychic, familial, communal, cultural, and social—with ecologically sensitive concepts and methods that focus on understanding and respecting the network of relationships among members. IFS therapy is also collaborative and enjoyable. And because we view people as having all the resources they need rather than having deficits or a disease, it is nonpathologizing. Instead of seeing people as lacking resources, we assume people are constrained from using their innate strengths by polarized relationships, both within and with the people around them. IFS is designed to help us release our constraints and, in so doing, also release our resources.” pg. 4-5
“What if destructive parts actually intended to help? What if they didn’t like the extreme roles they had been forced into? What if all of us in the field of mental health were mistakenly encouraging vicious cycles within clients and families? What if, the more we lectured, drugged, and tried to banish or control parts like this one, the harder they would fight to protect our clients? Maybe we were scapegoating impulsive, compulsive parts just the way my early teachers—the acting-out adolescents on the inpatient unit in Chicago—had been scapegoated in their families. What if we could simply help these parts with their fears? Could they be liberated from extreme roles in the same way adolescents were liberated in family therapy? Could the inner world of parts reflect the outer world of families and vice versa?” pg. 14-15
“In response to danger, the individuals in human systems at all levels take on roles that can be categorized by three groups. One group tends to be highly protective, strategic, and interested in controlling the environment to keep things safe. In IFS we call the members of this group managers. A second group contains the most sensitive members of the system. When these parts feel injured or outraged, mangers will banish them for their own protection and the good of the whole system. We call them exiles. Finally, a third group tries to stifle, anesthetize, or distract from the feelings of exiles, reacting powerfully and automatically, without concern for consequences, to their distress as well as to the overinhibition of managers. In IFS we call the member of this group firefighters because they fight the flames of exiled emotion.” pg. 31
“Since our culture is patriarchal, many managers appear in gender stereotypical ways, and it would be interesting to study their appearances (male, female, or neither) according to the client’s gender identity. Women are often socialized to rely on a manager who is perfectionistic about appearance and behavior. This manager believes she must be perfect and please everyone or she will be abandoned and hurt. Many women are also socialized to rely heavily on a caretaking manager. Extreme caretaking parts push women to sacrifice their own needs continually for others, and will criticize a woman as selfish if she asserts herself. Men, on the other hand, are often socialized to rely on an entitled or competitive manager who encourages them to get whatever they want, no matter who is wronged by their actions. Other common managerial roles include the hyperaroused worrier (or sentry) who feels in constant jeopardy and is on continuous alert for danger. This manager will flash worst-case scenarios in front of a person when she contemplates risk. And then there is the dependent manager, who tells the person he is a victim and keeps him appearing helpless, injured, and passive to ensure that other people will take care of him. Managers have many behavioral options.” pg. 33
“The flow state of mind is characterized by confidence, deep concentration, and a lack of concern for reward beyond the activity itself, along with the sense of mastery and well-being, of stepping out of the constraints of time, of losing self-consciousness, and, finally, of transcendence.” pg. 44
“Where as empathy involves feeling with another person, compassion involves feeling for another person, which motivates concern and the desire to help. While exploring compassion and empathy, neuroscientist Tania Singer made a surprising discovery. Having expected to find that these two emotions use the same neuropathway in the brain, they found instead that compassion uses reward circuitry whereas empathy (the experience of feeling with) uses pain circuitry. Although empathy can therefore overwhelm us with pain, a proportional dose enriches compassion. As a result, in IFS we don’t ask parts to stop feeling strongly, but we do ask them to separate enough so that they don’t overwhelm us with their strong feelings. When we are not able to attend to our exiles, we find it hard to tolerate the suffering of others. But when our exiles separate and communicate rather than overwhelm, the Self is present, protectors don’t get activated, and we have compassion for our own parts as well as for other people who are suffering.” pg. 53
“In addition, I have been using IFS successfully with patients on a wide variety of medical problems for 20 years. I’ve worked with patients who had cancer, lupus, or pain of all varieties, among other illnesses. If parts were involved in the creation or maintenance of the illness or its symptoms, the patient improved, often to the point of remission.” pg. 67
“Although these findings surprised the researchers, they validated what we in the field of mental health have long intuited about trauma and the body. The findings also suggest that the reverse might be true: If a wounded psyche can injure the body a restored psyche might help to heal the body.” pg. 68
“Options for Exploring the physical Symptom as a Part
1. Guide the client to focus on a physical symptom, be curious, and listen.
2. Use direct access to speak directly to the sympton as a part.
3. If no parts are involved with the symptom, guide the client to ask if any part has information about the symptom.
4. Ask if any parts who hate or fear the symptom are influencing the client’s body or medical compliance.
5. Guide the client to ask for parts who know how to heal the body, either in general or in this particular area.” pg. 69
“In general, parts can give the client a headache, stomach pains, muscle clenching, back pain, nausea, exhaustion, the urge to sleep, a pounding heart, chills, numb hands and feed, and much more. They can also send intrusive thoughts and images into the client’s consciousness that cause physical responses. But when we ask them to be direct about their wants and needs rather than hurting the client physically or taking him out mentally, and when they believe we will pay attention to their concerns if they stop, dramatic shifts can take place.” pg. 79
“Thus, primary responsibility for change is not placed on the therapist as it is in some therapies, nor is it placed on the client as it is in others. Instead, in IFS the Selves of client and therapist act as co-therapists, sharing responsibility. They collaborate to harmonize the client’s inner system and relationship to the external world. In the case of fearful, resistant protectors, the co-therapy of Selves in client and therapist simply develops more gradually, as the therapist earns their trust over time. This collaborative stance offers the IFS client the opportunity to feel cared for and accompanied throughout therapy.” pg. 84
“Some Initial Direct Access Questions for the Target Part
- What do you say (or do) to Marcela?
- Why do you say (or do) that to Marcela?
- What do you make Marcela think (or do)?
- What do you do for Marcela?
- Who do you see when you look at Marcela?
- How do you think Marcela feels toward you?
- What are you afraid would happen if you stopped doing this to Marcela?
- How old do you think Marcela is?
- How old are you?” pg. 119
“One voice, for example, continually pushed her to work, both at her job and at home. If Quinn sat still this striving part would call her lazy and remind her of many things that needed to be done. I guided Quinn to ask the striver what it was afraid would happen if it stopped running her to the point of exhaustion. That part replied that Quinn would get depressed and stay in bed. And, indeed, Quinn reported feeling depressed when she paused, which in turn caused her to stay in her apartment for days on end, withdrawing from work and friends entirely. ‘It’s like the depression catches me when I slow down,’ she said.” pg. 148
“In a polarization even small differences can escalate quickly. The more Quinn excluded her depressed part, the more it pushed the sense of depression and hopelessness; the more depressed that part got, the more the striver strove to exile it, and so on. This ubiquitous feedback loop is central to systems thinking. We can help parts depolarize by introducing them to each other and letting them hear their false assumptions about each other, emphasizing that neither intends harm and both aim to solve the same underlying problem. In this case, the depressed part was a 6-year-old who protected a lonely, scared 5-year-old. The depressed part was trying to get Quinn’s attention for the 5-year-old by pinning her down, while the striver was trying to keep Quinn away from the lonely fears of the 5-year-old and also the depression.
When Quinn introduced the stiver and the depressed part to each other, they softened. But before they could leave their jobs they needed to know that Quinn’s Self was taking care of the 5-year-old. Once the 5-year-old could get the attention, influence, and resources that the young Quinn needed, the sad part and the striver would be able to relax.” pg. 149
“Let’s consider an inner family that includes members of various ages and degrees of vulnerability. In the face of danger the family moves the Self as well as the system’s most vulnerable parts to safety while protective parts step forward. Traumatized clients have taught us that before or during trauma the inner family separates the Self from the sensations of the body to varying degrees (depending on how severe they judge the danger to be)—sometimes pushing it out of the body altogether—and some of the older members take control to protect the system with fight-or-flight responses: lashing out or escaping while more vulnerable parts freeze. These front-line protectors aim to minimize sensations of terror and pain for the system and the Self.
Despite these efforts, the youngest most vulnerable members of the inner family are powerfully affected by traumatic events. They feel injury, abandonment, and betrayal acutely. When the stimulus is intense enough, vulnerable parts freeze in time and experience a kind of endless Groundhog Day repetition of the trauma, complete with all of its sensations and feelings. By contrast, if the Self can stay embodied and offer immediate assistance, the system’s trust in Self-leadership increases, building inner strength and opposing tendencies to polarize, all of which helps injured parts avoid being exiled and instead stay in the stream of time.” pg. 150
“. . . like most couples, had organized their relationship from the beginning around nurturing and protecting each other’s exiles—a setup for trouble. But when exiled parts feel loved by the Self and have been reintegrated internally, protectors can stand down, partners can have ongoing access to their Selves, and recurring conflicts tend to melt away.” pg. 235
“We believe that the following legacy burdens are linked and have been particularly instrumental in shaping the nature of exiling in this county.
- Racism: Used to justify the genocide of Native Americans and the enslavement of Africans, who were abducted from their home.
- Patriarchy: Sprang from European and religious roots.
- Individualism: Produced by the survival struggles of pioneers, individualism fosters contempt for vulnerability and a belief that failure is a personal fault.
- Materialism: Produced in part by the economic and physical hardships suffered by immigrants to the American continent, it is no doubt made worse by the routine, threatening cycles of financial boom and bust that typify capitalist economies.” pg. 241
“A Self-led nation would also shift from thinking in terms of a single mind to a plural mind. The idea of the singular mind leads us to demonize each other as if our most extreme parts define us. Through the lens of multiplicity there are no jihadists, addicts, white supremacists, narcissists, people with borderline personality disorders, and so on. Instead, there are protective parts who, in their efforts to manage pain, shame, and fear, became locked in extreme roles. Through the lens of IFS we see the exiles behind our own scary, destructive protectors, and we also see the exiles behind our worst energy’s protectors. We trust that every person has a Self, even those whose behavior is evil.” pg. 251
“Similarly, we can use relationships with people who continue to activate our parts to find and heal our exiles. These people, whom we call tor-mentors, guide us to deeper healing by activating our parts.” pg. 279
Book: borrowed from NB Branch.
“Internal Family Systems (IFS) therapy is a synthesis of two paradigms: the plural mind, or the idea that we all contain many different parts, and systems thinking. With the view that intrapsychic processes constitute a system, IFS invites therapists to relate to every level of the human system—the intrapsychic, familial, communal, cultural, and social—with ecologically sensitive concepts and methods that focus on understanding and respecting the network of relationships among members. IFS therapy is also collaborative and enjoyable. And because we view people as having all the resources they need rather than having deficits or a disease, it is nonpathologizing. Instead of seeing people as lacking resources, we assume people are constrained from using their innate strengths by polarized relationships, both within and with the people around them. IFS is designed to help us release our constraints and, in so doing, also release our resources.” pg. 4-5
“What if destructive parts actually intended to help? What if they didn’t like the extreme roles they had been forced into? What if all of us in the field of mental health were mistakenly encouraging vicious cycles within clients and families? What if, the more we lectured, drugged, and tried to banish or control parts like this one, the harder they would fight to protect our clients? Maybe we were scapegoating impulsive, compulsive parts just the way my early teachers—the acting-out adolescents on the inpatient unit in Chicago—had been scapegoated in their families. What if we could simply help these parts with their fears? Could they be liberated from extreme roles in the same way adolescents were liberated in family therapy? Could the inner world of parts reflect the outer world of families and vice versa?” pg. 14-15
“In response to danger, the individuals in human systems at all levels take on roles that can be categorized by three groups. One group tends to be highly protective, strategic, and interested in controlling the environment to keep things safe. In IFS we call the members of this group managers. A second group contains the most sensitive members of the system. When these parts feel injured or outraged, mangers will banish them for their own protection and the good of the whole system. We call them exiles. Finally, a third group tries to stifle, anesthetize, or distract from the feelings of exiles, reacting powerfully and automatically, without concern for consequences, to their distress as well as to the overinhibition of managers. In IFS we call the member of this group firefighters because they fight the flames of exiled emotion.” pg. 31
“Since our culture is patriarchal, many managers appear in gender stereotypical ways, and it would be interesting to study their appearances (male, female, or neither) according to the client’s gender identity. Women are often socialized to rely on a manager who is perfectionistic about appearance and behavior. This manager believes she must be perfect and please everyone or she will be abandoned and hurt. Many women are also socialized to rely heavily on a caretaking manager. Extreme caretaking parts push women to sacrifice their own needs continually for others, and will criticize a woman as selfish if she asserts herself. Men, on the other hand, are often socialized to rely on an entitled or competitive manager who encourages them to get whatever they want, no matter who is wronged by their actions. Other common managerial roles include the hyperaroused worrier (or sentry) who feels in constant jeopardy and is on continuous alert for danger. This manager will flash worst-case scenarios in front of a person when she contemplates risk. And then there is the dependent manager, who tells the person he is a victim and keeps him appearing helpless, injured, and passive to ensure that other people will take care of him. Managers have many behavioral options.” pg. 33
“The flow state of mind is characterized by confidence, deep concentration, and a lack of concern for reward beyond the activity itself, along with the sense of mastery and well-being, of stepping out of the constraints of time, of losing self-consciousness, and, finally, of transcendence.” pg. 44
“Where as empathy involves feeling with another person, compassion involves feeling for another person, which motivates concern and the desire to help. While exploring compassion and empathy, neuroscientist Tania Singer made a surprising discovery. Having expected to find that these two emotions use the same neuropathway in the brain, they found instead that compassion uses reward circuitry whereas empathy (the experience of feeling with) uses pain circuitry. Although empathy can therefore overwhelm us with pain, a proportional dose enriches compassion. As a result, in IFS we don’t ask parts to stop feeling strongly, but we do ask them to separate enough so that they don’t overwhelm us with their strong feelings. When we are not able to attend to our exiles, we find it hard to tolerate the suffering of others. But when our exiles separate and communicate rather than overwhelm, the Self is present, protectors don’t get activated, and we have compassion for our own parts as well as for other people who are suffering.” pg. 53
“In addition, I have been using IFS successfully with patients on a wide variety of medical problems for 20 years. I’ve worked with patients who had cancer, lupus, or pain of all varieties, among other illnesses. If parts were involved in the creation or maintenance of the illness or its symptoms, the patient improved, often to the point of remission.” pg. 67
“Although these findings surprised the researchers, they validated what we in the field of mental health have long intuited about trauma and the body. The findings also suggest that the reverse might be true: If a wounded psyche can injure the body a restored psyche might help to heal the body.” pg. 68
“Options for Exploring the physical Symptom as a Part
1. Guide the client to focus on a physical symptom, be curious, and listen.
2. Use direct access to speak directly to the sympton as a part.
3. If no parts are involved with the symptom, guide the client to ask if any part has information about the symptom.
4. Ask if any parts who hate or fear the symptom are influencing the client’s body or medical compliance.
5. Guide the client to ask for parts who know how to heal the body, either in general or in this particular area.” pg. 69
“In general, parts can give the client a headache, stomach pains, muscle clenching, back pain, nausea, exhaustion, the urge to sleep, a pounding heart, chills, numb hands and feed, and much more. They can also send intrusive thoughts and images into the client’s consciousness that cause physical responses. But when we ask them to be direct about their wants and needs rather than hurting the client physically or taking him out mentally, and when they believe we will pay attention to their concerns if they stop, dramatic shifts can take place.” pg. 79
“Thus, primary responsibility for change is not placed on the therapist as it is in some therapies, nor is it placed on the client as it is in others. Instead, in IFS the Selves of client and therapist act as co-therapists, sharing responsibility. They collaborate to harmonize the client’s inner system and relationship to the external world. In the case of fearful, resistant protectors, the co-therapy of Selves in client and therapist simply develops more gradually, as the therapist earns their trust over time. This collaborative stance offers the IFS client the opportunity to feel cared for and accompanied throughout therapy.” pg. 84
“Some Initial Direct Access Questions for the Target Part
- What do you say (or do) to Marcela?
- Why do you say (or do) that to Marcela?
- What do you make Marcela think (or do)?
- What do you do for Marcela?
- Who do you see when you look at Marcela?
- How do you think Marcela feels toward you?
- What are you afraid would happen if you stopped doing this to Marcela?
- How old do you think Marcela is?
- How old are you?” pg. 119
“One voice, for example, continually pushed her to work, both at her job and at home. If Quinn sat still this striving part would call her lazy and remind her of many things that needed to be done. I guided Quinn to ask the striver what it was afraid would happen if it stopped running her to the point of exhaustion. That part replied that Quinn would get depressed and stay in bed. And, indeed, Quinn reported feeling depressed when she paused, which in turn caused her to stay in her apartment for days on end, withdrawing from work and friends entirely. ‘It’s like the depression catches me when I slow down,’ she said.” pg. 148
“In a polarization even small differences can escalate quickly. The more Quinn excluded her depressed part, the more it pushed the sense of depression and hopelessness; the more depressed that part got, the more the striver strove to exile it, and so on. This ubiquitous feedback loop is central to systems thinking. We can help parts depolarize by introducing them to each other and letting them hear their false assumptions about each other, emphasizing that neither intends harm and both aim to solve the same underlying problem. In this case, the depressed part was a 6-year-old who protected a lonely, scared 5-year-old. The depressed part was trying to get Quinn’s attention for the 5-year-old by pinning her down, while the striver was trying to keep Quinn away from the lonely fears of the 5-year-old and also the depression.
When Quinn introduced the stiver and the depressed part to each other, they softened. But before they could leave their jobs they needed to know that Quinn’s Self was taking care of the 5-year-old. Once the 5-year-old could get the attention, influence, and resources that the young Quinn needed, the sad part and the striver would be able to relax.” pg. 149
“Let’s consider an inner family that includes members of various ages and degrees of vulnerability. In the face of danger the family moves the Self as well as the system’s most vulnerable parts to safety while protective parts step forward. Traumatized clients have taught us that before or during trauma the inner family separates the Self from the sensations of the body to varying degrees (depending on how severe they judge the danger to be)—sometimes pushing it out of the body altogether—and some of the older members take control to protect the system with fight-or-flight responses: lashing out or escaping while more vulnerable parts freeze. These front-line protectors aim to minimize sensations of terror and pain for the system and the Self.
Despite these efforts, the youngest most vulnerable members of the inner family are powerfully affected by traumatic events. They feel injury, abandonment, and betrayal acutely. When the stimulus is intense enough, vulnerable parts freeze in time and experience a kind of endless Groundhog Day repetition of the trauma, complete with all of its sensations and feelings. By contrast, if the Self can stay embodied and offer immediate assistance, the system’s trust in Self-leadership increases, building inner strength and opposing tendencies to polarize, all of which helps injured parts avoid being exiled and instead stay in the stream of time.” pg. 150
“. . . like most couples, had organized their relationship from the beginning around nurturing and protecting each other’s exiles—a setup for trouble. But when exiled parts feel loved by the Self and have been reintegrated internally, protectors can stand down, partners can have ongoing access to their Selves, and recurring conflicts tend to melt away.” pg. 235
“We believe that the following legacy burdens are linked and have been particularly instrumental in shaping the nature of exiling in this county.
- Racism: Used to justify the genocide of Native Americans and the enslavement of Africans, who were abducted from their home.
- Patriarchy: Sprang from European and religious roots.
- Individualism: Produced by the survival struggles of pioneers, individualism fosters contempt for vulnerability and a belief that failure is a personal fault.
- Materialism: Produced in part by the economic and physical hardships suffered by immigrants to the American continent, it is no doubt made worse by the routine, threatening cycles of financial boom and bust that typify capitalist economies.” pg. 241
“A Self-led nation would also shift from thinking in terms of a single mind to a plural mind. The idea of the singular mind leads us to demonize each other as if our most extreme parts define us. Through the lens of multiplicity there are no jihadists, addicts, white supremacists, narcissists, people with borderline personality disorders, and so on. Instead, there are protective parts who, in their efforts to manage pain, shame, and fear, became locked in extreme roles. Through the lens of IFS we see the exiles behind our own scary, destructive protectors, and we also see the exiles behind our worst energy’s protectors. We trust that every person has a Self, even those whose behavior is evil.” pg. 251
“Similarly, we can use relationships with people who continue to activate our parts to find and heal our exiles. These people, whom we call tor-mentors, guide us to deeper healing by activating our parts.” pg. 279
Book: borrowed from NB Branch.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 14, 2022
Fascinating! It got a bit too practical for me to finish as I'm not practicing yet but will definitely return to this book in the future.
January 10, 2024
Very content heavy, and not as efficient as his newer books but there are still many good points within.
May 6, 2022
OMG JUST READ IT
February 7, 2021
This is a life-changing book (second edition, 2020) which offered me a new and exciting way of looking at my life, personality, and experiences in terms of my "internal family." It also applies this systems approach to couples, families, and larger social groups. It is a compassionate, non-stigmatizing approach to achieving personal growth and harmony. Although aimed primarily at professional practitioners, it is accessible to a layman (such as myself) who puts in the effort. A slow read, but well worth the deliberation and effort. I'm just beginning, but will continue to investigate and apply IFS to my life.
December 29, 2020
Definitely a book for therapists using Internal Family Systems, Parts work. I am a trained and certified Brainspotting Therapist, just recently, and have never used Parts work until a training in Brainspotting. When I went into my practicum as the client, WOW, my parts came out and I was overwhelmed at how quickly my younger parts came out and wanted to speak. Absolutely incredible. I decided this year when learning this that I immediately wanted to start using Parts work with my clients. This book, along with the original IFS book by Richard Schwartz and the workbook, are just ingenious and amazing. This particular book helped me to learn all I needed to learn about IFS and parts work in a limited amount of time to be able to immediately start using Parts work in Brainspotting therapy sessions with clients. It made me think back on sessions with clients that their parts were speaking/coming out and I wasn't addressing them. I am so excited to start using IFS/Parts work to allow clients to go even deeper into their psyche to address those deep brain issues that they so want to address. Great book!!!
October 22, 2019
Much I owe to the Land that grew
More to the Life that fed
But most to Allah Who gave me two
Separate sides to my head.
(R.Kipling)
The book's central thesis is that there are not two, but many separate sides within us, and this has nothing to do with a "Multiple Personality Disorder". Like different characters in a play, they behave more or less like real people within a family circle: some dominate, some block what they think is harmful for you, some push you to do bad things, some constantly suffer. Schwartz proposes to address them directly, to let them talk, hoping that this would resolve their incompatibilities. It's an interesting approach, but the book is quite dry, with few real life examples, all about bulimia, therefore it is not clear if it can be used for other types of problems.
More to the Life that fed
But most to Allah Who gave me two
Separate sides to my head.
(R.Kipling)
The book's central thesis is that there are not two, but many separate sides within us, and this has nothing to do with a "Multiple Personality Disorder". Like different characters in a play, they behave more or less like real people within a family circle: some dominate, some block what they think is harmful for you, some push you to do bad things, some constantly suffer. Schwartz proposes to address them directly, to let them talk, hoping that this would resolve their incompatibilities. It's an interesting approach, but the book is quite dry, with few real life examples, all about bulimia, therefore it is not clear if it can be used for other types of problems.
February 17, 2020
Deeply valuable and profound. One of those "if only everyone could read and practice this, we'd have a shot at saving ourselves."
November 28, 2023
Absolutely loved listening to this book. This model makes so much sense to me, and its healing potential so vast. Gets me very excited to start my training!
March 26, 2021
Great introduction to IFS therapy & I look forward to reading more. I enjoyed learning the origin story for IFS therapy's conceptualization & the use of diverse client examplrs throughout. I have a skeptical part that is hesitant to invest in this therapeutic approach as my main modality, yet I am already looking at training & considering IFS therapy for myself in the future. The encapsulation of how external dynamics relate and reflect the internal and vice versa aligns with my understanding of how systems influence our lived lives. Additionally, Self-energy seems like the spiritual side to the neuro-sociologically benefits of therapeutic presence (re: the reward-circuitry of compassion, the somatic responses to stress/trauma, formation of secure attachments). Some explanations seemed repetitive, though I trust that this was to keep ideas clear. Really interested in the future of this approach ☺️
November 18, 2021
I'm conflicted about this model as I find it strangely mechanistic and materialist. I kept struggling with....are the parts metaphors?....but no, Schwartz theorizes we are all of us composed of parts comprised of protectors and exiles, within systems that can nest inside us (in 'fractals'), or even occur externally in actual families, communities, nations etc.
I gave it four stars because the book explains the theory well, and in accessible language.
I just have mixed feelings about the whole theory which seems simplistic to me on the surface, but is also weirdly works well in practice, in my limited experience.
I gave it four stars because the book explains the theory well, and in accessible language.
I just have mixed feelings about the whole theory which seems simplistic to me on the surface, but is also weirdly works well in practice, in my limited experience.
August 3, 2023
Its clear on reading this that America has become a nation separated from the Self. We privilege managerial behavior (productivity, control, emotional suppression) and firefighter behavior (indulgence, distraction, numbing, rage). Being stuck (blended) with these protective parts keeps us from living from and in the qualities of the Self: curiosity, courage, calm, clarity, creativity, confidence and connection. And this is tragic.
When I think of a world that is Self lead, I am deeply moved and when I see the world we live in, I see a vast limiting of human potential and joy.
There is a great and approachable wisdom here.
When I think of a world that is Self lead, I am deeply moved and when I see the world we live in, I see a vast limiting of human potential and joy.
There is a great and approachable wisdom here.
January 5, 2021
It was recommended that I check out some reading material on Internal Family Systems Therapy, so I picked up this book. While it’s now rather outdated (a second edition has been written), it is still a really fascinating and user-friendly book on parts work. While the material is intended and organized for practitioners, it’s well-written and easy for any curious reader to follow. Under this line of therapy, the goal is to minimize the polarizations that exist between our various parts and by doing so, enable the Self to better take control and thereby achieve inner harmony and peace.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 100 reviews