Analysis of Group Role Play

The Family Teens Group is intended for teens living in non-traditional households. It is s a non-mandate group. They meet for one hour every Saturday at a local community school to discuss any internal or external issues in their families. The demographics and cultural backgrounds of the group’s members are varied. There is a five-dollar fee for attending the group. All group members are currently going to different schools and do not know each other. The purpose of the group setting is for the members to speak about peer pressure and harassment issues. The role of the facilitator is to establish and maintain group boundaries, to foster an atmosphere of free and open communication, and to offer comments to individuals and the group as a whole. The facilitator will maintain an attitude of supportive and non-intrusive interest but will encourage communication and integration of the group. The facilitator gently persuades, while understanding that the decision to change is the client’s.

MEMBERS OF THE GROUP

Nancy is white, sixteen years old, upper-middle-class, and transgendered. She lives with just one gay mom. She agreed with Drew’s emotions and is always reminding others about the group rules. Nancy calls herself vulnerable and feels judged by members of the group. She has expressed concern about her mom’s dating habits and has no male role models. The facilitator tries to remain sensitive to her responses and emotions. Nancy does not cope well with people’s comments about having a gay parent, and she fears people will think she is also gay. Nancy feels like she can connect with others in the group, and is always grateful for their support.

Dulcinea, or“D,” is white, fifteen years old, upper-middle-class, and gender-fluid (she is not transgendered, but feels two genders.) She lives with two dads, calls herself introspected, and confessed in the last session that for the first time she will be celebrating Thanksgiving. She also confessed to not being ready to have a sexual relationship. Dulcinea took responsibility for her own learning process. In the last session, she expressed her desire to continue contacting each member of the group by having a blog that will assist in their continuing to help and support each other. Dulcinea is troubled by confusion.

Jasmin is white, fifteen years old, middle class, and confused about her sexuality. She lives with her grandparents as her parents died in a car accident, and she has younger siblings. She does not want to be in the group and refuses to communicate. When the group session ends, she always declines to discuss how she is feeling. Jasmin expresses sighs of relief, tiredness or sadness a few times during the group sessions. She does not start to open up until the end. In the last group session, she shared with the group that she is a lesbian. Jasmin feels shame due to her having to keep her sexuality secret. She has no one to confess her to secret to as her grandparents are very conservative and old fashioned. She also confessed that she lied about the reasons she was absent from the group in the past. Jasmin was in the hospital after cutting her wrists. She also says that she is seeing someone right now.

Drew, or “Draco,” is white, seventeen years old, upper class, and straight. He lives with two dads. Drew is hostile and argumentative, interrupts others all the time, rolls his eyes, and covers his ears. He says that he is always tired, and does not want to participate when directed or asked by the facilitator. In the last group session, he opened up and confessed hateful feelings towards his parents due his fear that he could be called gay as well. Drew wants to hurt his parents and feels angry. He confessed that he still smokes marijuana.

Sara is of mixed race. Her dad’s family is Chinese. She is sixteen years old, upper-middle-class, straight, and female. She lives with two dads. Sara finds she has compatibility with issues with other members, takes center stage, calls others names, and argues with “Draco” about her stance and opinion. In the last session, she confessed that she is promiscuous and that she had sex at a young age. Sara also said she is feeling hopeful. Although she recognizes that there is a lot of work to do with her parents, she is willing to continue to speak with them.

Betina is African-American, fifteen years old, middle class, and heterosexual. She lives with her sister. Her father is in prison, and her mother died. She has been referred to the group for the purpose of integrating counseling psychology. Betina came late to the first group session and is ignored when bullied. She is quiet most of the time but participates in group conversations. In the last session, she confessed that the group was helpful by giving her strength. Betina confessed that her sister’s boyfriend comes onto her. The sister ended up kicking him out and took Betina’s side by supporting and believing her words.

Beth is white, sixteen years old, middle class, and a gay female. She lives with two moms. Beth shares her experiences well, shrugs her shoulders, and talks about coping with outside influences. In the last session, she told the group that she is a lesbian. Beth supported Jasmin’s decision to confess her sexual preferences. She said that the group helped her to realize that although her moms are lesbians, they are still her family.

Jason is biracial, sixteen years old, lower middle class, and heterosexual. He lives with two moms. Jason does not want to be in the group, and he says this group serves no purpose to him. He had problems in school due to marijuana use. He was expelled, got arrested a few times for smoking marijuana and trespassing, and confessed in the last session that he may be gay. Jason feels he does not have the emotional or mental strength to tell his mom about feeling gay. He said that he will break his isolation after going back to school, and he will be confessing he is gay after apologizing to his mom.

Evelyn is Latina, seventeen years old, middle class, and heterosexual. She lives with her dad, and her mom died when she was young. Evelyn wants to be a part of something, and views the group as her family. In the last session, she confessed to being bisexual and feels she can relate with others in the group. She was both a learner and a teacher in the group.

STAGES AND CHARACTERISTICS OF GROUP DEVELOPMENT

The first session included introductions and a discussion of rules for the group. The objectives of the group were specified, and a room was arranged. Also included in this session was a discussion of background information, family relationships, and an understanding of group goals. There was no second session as the objectives of the second session were covered during the first session. The third session was oriented towards understanding feelings, ways in which an individual’s actions can be hurtful or helpful, the process of making amends, and here and now interventions. The fourth session covered the use of assertive communication, the use of “I” statements, understanding and empathy, and respectful communication. Some members opened up and began sharing experiences. The fifth session involved members of the group expressing their feelings about attending the group. The group members were happy that one member opened up and began to express common feelings or sentiments that many of the group’s members likewise share.

The sixth session started with a reminder of the group’s rules, about speaking respectfully and using “I” statements. Members were warned against using other topics to distract from the real issues. Almost every member of the group expressed feelings of being annoyed. Some members found value in what Sara was sharing in the group. The members began acknowledging each other's values, learning from each other and indicated they were beginning to share feelings. By the seventh session, the group started to feel like a family. The members were expressing feelings of trust, and learning from each other’s experiences. All members of the groups were paying attention to other members’ comments and said they were feeling some connection. The members were sharing their strengths and making meaningful comments.

By the eighth session, the group began to notice changes in some of the members and missing those members that were absent. There was no more hostility among members. All members were talking about conservative families and their impact on their lives. They were sharing previous Thanksgiving experiences with their families. Some members were calling their parents names due to their sexual preferences. There was no ninth session as all of the issues scheduled for the ninth session were covered during the eighth session. During the tenth session, the facilitator made some clarifications about this being a twelve session group as some members thought it was a longer group with more sessions. This was disappointing to some members. Some members were reminded of the group’s rules. “Draco” opened up to the group after the group pressured him about his behavior, and calling out others but not sharing his experiences. The members discussed how they are coping and addressing issues with their families. The group members agreed to remain in contact after the group is finished.

There was no eleventh session as the material was covered in the final session. The twelfth session included last-minute confessions and brought out a lot of concerns due to the group’s termination. These concerns were expressed both individually and as a group. The members went around and shared what they took from the group. The group was dismissed upon completion. The facilitator announced the completion of the task and the break up of the team. The members showed appreciation for each other and the group’s experiences. The group discussed efforts to meet again, either on Facebook or a blog. The termination of the group was also characterized by sadness, anxiety, and recognition of each other’s support. The process of saying goodbye involved paying much attention to unfinished business in the group.

GROUP RULES AND THE ROLE IN THE GROUP BY MEMBERS

The group members were expected to make “I” statements, and to respect each other’s opinions. There was to be no name-calling, and only one person was to speak at a time. Members were expected to be on time, no more than ten minutes late for any session, and to contact the facilitator if they were going to be late. In the group, some issues were not effectively addressed. These included the fact that no one ever spoke with Jasmin about her not opening up in the group. There was no discussion of the fact that Betina and Jasmin were the only members not having LGBT households. Everybody seemed sad in the last session and promised to keep in contact with each other. Yet the group seemed to disband with this feeling of sadness not yet being resolved.

Nancy was the standard-setter, expressed the standards of the group, and set limits concerning acceptable behavior between members. She was the information and opinion giver, placing emphasis on what she believed should be the group’s views on pertinent values, even if these were not really relevant to the facts. Dulcinea was the energizer and stimulated the group. She was the compromiser. She offered to compromise by yielding her status, admitting her errors, and disciplining herself to maintain group harmony. Dulcinea came “halfway” in maintaining pace with the general progress of the group. Jasmin remained isolated as the group evolved, and a group member negatively referred to her as “the silent one.”

Drew (“Draco) was the aggressor. He was consistently deflating the status of others, and expressing disapproval of the values, acts, or feelings of others. He would criticize others in the sessions, or the issues they were dealing with. He would do so by failing to take the topic of the sessions seriously, acting in an uncooperative manner, and teasing other group members with petty insults. Drew was the dominator, and he tried to assert authority or superiority in manipulating the group or certain members of the group. He would also assert a superior status or right to attention by attempting to give directions authoritatively, or interrupting the contributions of others.

Sara was the summarizer. She would point out departures from previously agreed upon directions or goals within the group and raise questions about the direction in which the group discussion was heading. She was overly quick to fit others into her own experiences. Betina was the follower and would go along with whatever the rest of group collectively thought. She was also the scapegoat, with everyone blaming her when they wished to get away with something (“Because she came late and the facilitator didn't take any action!”).

Evelyn was the contributor and proposed original ideas or different ways of approaching group problems or goals. She was the energizer and worked to concentrate the group's energy on forward movement. Evelyn would challenge and stimulate the group to take further action. She was an initiator and would suggest or propose new ideas to the group. Evelyn would often offer a novel point of view concerning problems, procedures, goals, or solutions. Jason was the information seeker. He would frequently ask for clarification of suggestions made in terms of their factual adequacy, and for authoritative information and facts pertinent to the problem being discussed. Beth rationalized the complex world from which other members were speaking.

GROUP DYNAMICS AND OBSERVATIONS

Throughout the progress of the group, it was observed when members were engaged at the appropriate stage of change, and members would receive support for change efforts. The facilitator would explore choices and their consequences with the clients. The facilitator attempted to honestly and openly communicate care and concern for the group’s members, and point out the clients’ competencies. As the members individually and collectively began stepping toward positive change, this process was noted within the group, and further encouragement would be provided. The members were physically present, emotionally available, and open to change. The members had sufficient self-generated willingness to commit themselves to meet and involving themselves in each other's care. The members also had the ability to understand and work towards understanding the process (Callahan, 2004). The members have the ability to reflect on the evolving history being played out within the context of the group.

CATEGORIES OF THERAPEUTIC FACTORS AND THE ROLE OF THE FACILITATORS IN GROUPS SESSIONS

Irvin D. Yalom has identified multiple factors that contribute to the therapeutic process (Yalom, 2005). Perhaps the most important of these is altruism or the giving of one’s self to help others. Therapy allows the client to experience catharsis, the process of relieving emotions by expressing one's feelings. This process is bolstered by universality, the recognizing of shared feelings and the process of coming to an understanding that one's problems are not unique. The next step is for the client to consider existential factors, such as accepting the fact that responsibility for change comes from within one’s self. The first part of this acceptance comes from self-understanding, whereby one discovers and accepts unknown parts of the self.

As self-understanding begins to develop, the problems troubling the client can often be better comprehended through a process of family reenactment and understanding what it was like growing up in one's family through a group experience. At this stage, the client is becoming prepared to accept guidance by accepting advice from other group members. By receiving guidance, a process of identification begins that includes learning how to benefit from the imitation of positive behaviors of other group members. This is followed by the installation of hope that comes with experiencing optimism through observation of improvement of others in the group. Lastly, there is the process of interpersonal learning. The client learns by receiving feedback from group members regarding one's behavior (input) and learning successful ways of relating to group members (output).

The facilitator’s role for each of the twelve sessions can be broken down as follows: In session one, the facilitator described specific objectives of the group, explained the cooperative goal structure and task. She also involved every member, helped them to avoid misunderstandings, and aimed to educate members. Also, the facilitator intervened to teach needed group skills, encountering some disagreements due to less conformity and increased conflict. In session three, the facilitator brought everyone together to clarify shared goals, and discussed areas of improvement. In session four, the facilitator set or brought forward group member ideas, identified members that were willing to resolve conflicts, and directed conversations with somewhat strategic questions. She tried to establish trust. In session five, the facilitator revisited the group’s norms to ensure that they were able to follow them. The development of ideas was encouraged because the group was not clear, or could not identify the nature or cause of conflict. She missed the opportunity to address the fact that one member was not participating or sharing her feelings.

In session six, the facilitator helped members to evaluate the effectiveness of the group. Members were able to engage in a problem-solving decision making conflict resolution when confronting other members. In session seven, the facilitator acted as the negotiator and psychologist. She identified power struggles and made suggestions. In session eight, the facilitator ensured that responses remained positive, grounded, specific and sensitive to all members. She looked for opportunities to help others to understand and appreciate differences in each other. Also, the facilitator encouraged members to take on responsibilities and to understand the complex relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed. In session ten, the facilitator once again clarified the process of ending the group. Conflict was less pronounced. Also, the facilitator continued to find opportunities to encourage and recognize members’ achievements. In session twelve, the facilitator helped the group to absorb the fact that the group was ending, with a temporary setback due to members expressing feelings of connection with one another. Every member exhibited high morale, and the facilitator acknowledged milestones. During their informal time together after the group ended, and at formal one-on-one meetings for support, all members shared a high level of performance and connection.

STAGES OF GROUP DEVELOPMENT EVIDENT IN THE ROLE PLAY

The first stage in the development of the group involved the process of forming. Members attempted to become oriented to the tasks as well as to one another. To grow from this stage to the next, each member must relinquish the comfort of non-threatening topics and risk the possibility of conflict. Frequent complaints were made about participating in the group. Some members were unable to focus on any discussion or on any relevant task. Other members were silent in the meeting, and there was little or poor interaction between members. The next stage in the process involved storming. Individuals had to bend and mold their feelings, ideas, attitudes, and beliefs to suit the group organization. Because of "fear of exposure" or "fear of failure," there was an increased desire for structural clarification and commitment. There were wide swings in members’ behavior based on emerging issues of competition and hostility. Because of the discomfort generated during this stage, some members remained completely silent while others attempted to dominate. The facilitator noticed a lot of arguments between group members (Tuckman, 1965). Members complained about the validity of the group and questioned the knowledge or skills of other members. There was a lot of defensiveness among members.

The next stage involved norming. In Tuckman’s (2005) norming stage, interpersonal relations are characterized by cohesion. Group members are engaged in active acknowledgment of all members’ contributions, community building and maintenance, and solving of group issues. Members are willing to change their preconceived ideas or opinions on the basis of facts presented by other members, and they actively ask questions of one another. The major task function of stage three is the data flow between group members: They share feelings and ideas, solicit and give feedback to one another, and explore actions related to the task. The facilitator noticed that members were becoming used to working together, and conflict was less obvious (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977). Members had established ground rules for working together as well recognizing some milestones.

Stage four is performing, and this is marked by interdependence in personal relations and problem-solving in the realm of task functions. By now, the group should be most productive. Individual members have become self-assuring, and the need for group approval is past. Members are both highly task-oriented and highly people-oriented. There is unity: group identity is complete, group morale is high, and group loyalty is intense. The task function becomes genuine problem solving, leading toward optimal solutions and optimum group development. There is support for experimentation in solving problems and an emphasis on achievement.

In Tuckman’s (2005) final stage, adjourning involves the termination of task behaviors and disengagement from relationships. A planned conclusion usually includes recognition for participation and achievement and an opportunity for members to say personal goodbyes. The most effective interventions in this stage are those that facilitate task termination and the disengagement process. It was not easy to absorb changes and bounce back quickly, but every member exhibited high morale. While some changes with members opening up to one another created a temporary set back, they quickly returned and emerged to say goodbye to each other (McDermut, et. al, 2000). The facilitator aimed to encourage expression of feelings associated with saying goodbye.

For a group to develop properly through the stages of group development, it needs to rotate the responsibility of group facilitation. The purpose and mission of the group must be clear to all members, and the purpose and mission should be periodically revisited. The ground rules should be established and monitored. The facilitator should help the group understand that “conflict” (conflict in a positive way) is a normal and perhaps necessary part of group development. The group should be reminded to “listen” to each other. The wrap-up at the end of each session was comprised of meaningful and constructive comments relative to the group process (Yalom, 2005). Every member and the facilitator contributed and worked to make the group a “learning team.”

Features of the group that contributed to its success included using peer support and collaboration in the pursuit of the group’s goals, along with confidentiality surrounding personal sharing which was integral to safe group process. The willingness of group members to try on other member’s ideas or to take risks was enhanced if they were not alone in the process. The members were better able to work collaboratively after building confidence, and feeling safe within the group. The members learned how to help each other to understand the benefits of some ideas. Members were pitted against each other periodically, but out of their strong mutual identity came acceptance of the idea that it is okay to disagree, but not acceptable to blame or attack other members (Yalom, 2005). The members learned to take responsibility for their own learning process.

Several core values emerged from the group’s experiences. One was group cohesiveness. This is about the process of establishing an atmosphere of trust, warmth, empathy, understanding, and acceptance. This is not merely desirable. It is essential for a successful outcome. Group cohesiveness is a function of the individual group members' relationships with the counselor, with other members, and with the group as a whole. Universality is important to counteract a member’s feelings of being alone, or unique in their struggle. Human deed and thought lies inside the experiences of other people, and teasing this out through sharing and embrace of common humanity builds a therapeutic setting. Disclosure is used primarily to promote feelings of universality, and relief that deep-seated secrets are more common and prevalent than previously experienced

The group is a social microcosm. Given time, group members will begin to be themselves, interacting with the group as they would their social sphere, creating in the group the same interpersonal universe they have always inhabited (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005). Over time, members will automatically start to show their maladaptive interpersonal behavior in the therapy group. Members shape their own microcosm, which in turn pulls characteristically defensive behavior from each. The therapist or group members may feel angry toward a member, or any other strong emotions. These feelings represent data or a hint of truth about the other person and should be taken seriously by the therapist.

References

Callahan, K (2004). A review of interpersonal-psychodynamic group psychotherapy outcomes for adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 54 (4): 491-519.

McDermut, W. et al. (2001). The efficacy of group psychotherapy for depression: A meta-analysis and review of the empirical research. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 8, 98-116.

Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin,63, 384-399.

Tuckman, B. & Jensen, M. (1977). Stages of small group development. Group and Organizational Studies, 2, 419-427.

Yalom, I.D. (2005). Interpersonal learning. In The theory and practice of group psychotherapy(pp. 19-52). New York: Basic Books.

Yalom, I.D. (2005). The therapeutic factors. In The theory and practice of group psychotherapy(pp. 1-18). New York: Basic Books.

Yalom, I. D., & Leszcz, M. (2005). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (5thed.). New York: Basic Books.