FAMILY THERAPY

Journal of Family Therapy (2010) 32: 169185 0163-4445 (print); 1467-6427 (online)

J O U R N A L

O F

Discovering forgiveness through empathy: implications for couple and family therapy

E. Wayne Hilla
This article explores the concept of forgiveness in the context of couple and family therapy. Forgiveness is described as a complex psychological and relational process that is more a discovery via understanding and empathy than an act of will. Empathy is related to emotional intelligence, and the developmental and relational benets of both are discussed. A rationale for viewing forgiveness in a contextual (family of origin), historical and relational attachment paradigm is offered. Relevant clinical cases illustrate the process of forgiveness as discovery in the context of an empathic relational environment where ambivalence is anticipated and respected. Keywords: attachment theory; couple and family therapy; discovery; emotional intelligence; empathy; forgiveness.

Introduction
Vignette one: Struggling for years with alcoholism, a male client reported nding it very difcult to ask for his wifes forgiveness, even when he undeniably wished to do so and strongly felt that forgiveness would be granted. When the client spoke of the detrimental consequences of his drinking and his guilt for disappointing and hurting his wife, he reported strong feelings of shame around his behaviour. It became increasingly clear that the difculty was not in asking for forgiveness per se, but in reawakening and reliving the shameful feelings that the request for forgiveness invariably inicted. Vignette two: A female client felt humiliated by her husbands reaction when she received a speeding ticket as she raced to get a babysitter less than a mile from their home. She and her husband had been working on wallpapering a room and their toddler son needed some attention so that they could nish what had become a frustrating project. When the therapist conrmed the hypothesis that her rush to
a Professor, Department of Child Development and Family Relations, 266 Rivers Building, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC 27858, USA. E-mail: hillea@ecu.edu.

r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

170

E. Wayne Hill

return home was in an effort to assist him with the wallpapering, he became much more empathic and understanding. She became more empathic of his anger as she came to realize that he was anxious and apprehensive because she was late returning home, thus igniting his fear that something unfortunate had happened. Understanding the origin and context of each others distress allowed relational healing. The following is a description and discussion of the role of forgiveness in such clinical situations and a guide to therapists about how to promote forgiveness. In a recent review of the forgiveness literature, Legaree and colleagues (2007) propose that there are three main dimensions to forgiveness which have relevance for therapists. The rst dimension has to do with whether forgiveness is essential, and thus helpful. The second dimension deals with whether or not forgiveness is an intentional (willed) decision, and the third dimension examines the benets of forgiveness. In their concluding comments they leave therapists with an important ethical question: How can the therapist be responsible to her own position on forgiveness, yet also be sensitive to the clients values, ideals and ethics regarding forgiveness? Without a doubt therapists and clients alike must decide, at some point, about their own personal position on forgiveness as every human being eventually and unequivocally faces the need to be forgiven and to forgive. Aponte (1998) suggests that love is the spiritual wellspring of forgiveness and asserts that the reason forgiveness is so powerful is because it is a direct product of unconditional love. Speaking from a psycho-physiological perspective, molecular biologist Candice Pert (1997), who has researched neuropeptides (the molecules of emotion), suggests that forgiveness not only parallels and reects love but is also a key body/mind concept (here the view is that the body is inseparable from the mind) that should be integrated into Western medicine. From this perspective, forgiveness is both essential and benecial.

The importance of forgiveness

Forgiveness may well be one of the most crucial psychological and relational processes for ameliorating estrangement and alienation between and among individuals. Although a complex and often arduous process, forgiveness stands at the forefront of human relational, emotional and spiritual healing. As Archbishop Desmond Tutu (1998) implored, forgiveness is an absolute necessity for continued
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Discovering forgiveness through empathy

171

human existence (p. xiii). Walrond-Skinner (1998) suggested that forgiveness enables conicted intimate relationships to be renewed because the process itself has a restorative and salutary impact. In essence, forgiveness provides a rare and valuable portal for estranged individuals to enter where hostilities and resentments can be overcome, allowing a process for personal and relational healing. Although many theoretical frameworks and presuppositions related to the concept of forgiveness may be found in the literature, Enright and North (1998), Hargrave and Sells (1997), and Sells and Hargrave (1998) all suggest that there has been little empirical research. McCullough and colleagues (2000) also acknowledged the paucity of research in the social sciences, particularly prior to 1980. However, in more recent years there has been more intense and serious interest in the concept of forgiveness and research into it, predominantly due to funding assistance from the Templeton Foundation (Legaree et al., 2007; McCullough et al., 2000). In their review of the forgiveness literature, Hargrave and Sells (1997) and Sells and Hargrave (1998) as well as McCullough et al. (2000) found evidence for the benets of forgiveness for difculties originating from anger, anxiety, depression, family-of-origin issues, sexual abuse and compulsions, personality disorders, guilt, drug abuse, broken marital relationships, and mental health in general. Some studies were also found that linked forgiveness and moral development. More recent studies have found signicant effects of forgiveness training for a variety of psychosocial factors such as anger, reduced feelings of hurt, malice and estrangement, reduced hypertension, as well as reduced physical symptoms of stress. These studies suggested that skills-based forgiveness training may prove effective in reducing anger as a coping style as well as reducing perceived stress and physical symptoms, thereby assisting immune and cardiovascular functioning in daily living and thus reinforcing the bodymind connection (Harris et al., 2006; Luskin et al., 2005; Tibbits et al., 2006).

Conceptualizing forgiveness
One of the most difcult issues facing scientic research on forgiveness is the lack of consensus on how to dene it. According to Sells and Hargrave (1998), the most common understanding of forgiveness has to do with letting go via the release of anger, revenge, shame, resentment or a record of wrongs. McCullough et al. (2000) suggested
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

172

E. Wayne Hill

that currently there is no consensual denition of forgiveness. They point out that researchers have sought to differentiate it from concepts such as pardoning, condoning, forgetting, denying, or even reconciling. They view forgiveness as a psychological construct with relational implications, and dene it as intra-individual, prosocial change toward a perceived transgressor that is situated within a specic interpersonal context (p. 9). This premise is supported from a sociological perspective by Tavuchis (1991) who afrms the essential inter-actional/relational nature of apology and forgiveness. Hargrave (1994) also conceptualized forgiveness from a relational/ contextual perspective as reected in the work of Boszormenyi-Nagy. From a contextual family therapy perspective, issues of trust and justice are believed to be critical concepts of a relational ethic which allow family members to feel that relationships are reciprocal, balanced and trustworthy. When justice and trust issues are violated in families, the victims are left with the painful realization that those on whom they are most dependent cannot be fully trusted. Such experiences lead to feelings of rage and shame which in turn lead to behaviours of over-control or chaos. Such dynamics inevitably get played out in the intergenerational crucible of the family. Thus working with forgiveness offers an opportunity for the restoration of balance, the release of blame, and reconciliation.

Forgiveness as discovery via empathy

Regardless of how forgiveness is dened, it is unquestionably a concept which conveys complex cognitive, emotional and relational processes. Karen (2001) suggests that one critical issue is that of agency. Does an individual possess authority over his actions related to the ability to forgive? Certainly ones capacity or inability to forgive may reveal ones willingness or ability to recognize and accept the humanity of another. This is demonstrated in the second vignette above: the couple were able to accept each others failings. Nevertheless, to suggest that one can simply will to forgive another does not do justice to the intricacies and complexities of human beings and relationships. Karen (2001) declares, When forgiveness becomes the battle cry of moral and emotional health, we are no longer respectful of peoples wounds and peoples struggles (p. 14). Patton (1985) clearly embraces the complexity of forgiveness by suggesting that forgiveness is not an act but a process of discovery: human forgiveness is not doing something but discovering something
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Discovering forgiveness through empathy

173

that I am more like those who have hurt me than different from them (p. 16). The process of forgiveness, as Worthington (1998) suggests, requires the humility to see oneself as fallible and as needy as ones offender. Such cognitive and affective empathy forms the core emotional vortex for embracing and discovering not only our shared humanity but forgiveness as well. Again something of this discovery is reected in the two opening vignettes. This process points to the requirement for therapists to promote a gentle sharing that may lead to a forgiveness process. However, such empathy may not be readily possible nor warranted from the vulnerable and powerless who have been unquestionably exploited and victimized. Walrond-Skinner (1998) speaks of collusive forgiveness which can be a means of avoiding conict, consequences or opposition where injustice blatantly remains, such as an abusive parent who begs the childs forgiveness after each act of abuse only to repeat the behaviour. One must consider those situations and circumstances where children and the defenceless have been subjugated by those who clearly possess greater power or so-called authority (e.g. Verco, 2002). True forgiveness and empathy demands a consciousness of circumstances and contexts not possible for young victims, the helpless or those who have been disenfranchised. In the absence of valid peer relationships the process of forgiveness and empathy becomes far more convoluted and difcult. Again these aspects of forgiveness should act as a caution for therapists not to seek forgiveness in certain clinical situations. None the less, an empathic discovery process seems to encompass a willingness to embrace the negative emotions that are invariably involved in our relational wounds and wounding, particularly the emotion of shame. Karen (2001) described this process poignantly in the context of a parentchild relationship. According to him the childs tantrums annoy the parent who loses her temper and reacts to the child harshly and unjustly. Now the parent feels terribly guilty and wants to amend what has happened but cannot accept blame. The shame would be too overwhelming. Thus she does not adequately soften, and thus fails to soothe and comfort the distraught child. The move towards asking for forgiveness requires the courage to re-experience the shame (as in Vignette One) but, in doing so, discovering that this is healing and not toxic. It appears that the inability to acknowledge shame is what makes it most toxic. Shame that is expressed facilitates the discovery of wholeness and relational healing which is the epitome of forgiveness. Certainly this is not only
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

174

E. Wayne Hill

true for intimate partners, but also for parents who have said or done hurtful things to their children. For these people forgiveness is actually a kind of discovery about themselves, their relationships and their emotional life. Acknowledging the wrong and facing the shame may be agonizing, but the benets are manifold. Thus vulnerability becomes an asset and not a liability. Writing from a sociological perspective, Tavuchis (1991) conrmed this view when he suggested that apology is always laborious and painful and yet, when accomplished, becomes a transforming, miraculous gift: the more so because the gesture itself reiterates the reality of the offence while superseding it (p. 8). Some rather startling research connects this process to recovery from abuse. Kurtz and Ketcham (1992) reported ndings that for victims who harbour no resentment for abuse/pain suffered, the work of forgiveness was not a specic act, but rather a self-discovery of having forgiven. In fact, these individuals reported that direct efforts to forgive failed. They could not force forgiveness, and the harder they tried to forgive, the more resentment they felt. Success came when they stopped trying to forgive and began to just sort of let go. Over time came the astonishing discovery that the resentment had abated and that somehow they had already forgiven. Augsburger (1981) echoed this theme of letting go in the forgiveness process by suggesting that the root meaning of forgiveness refers to releasing or letting go. Forgiveness involves the art of relaxation, or relaxing ones grip on pain and gently releasing ones resentments held against oneself or another. Letting go is a journey of many incremental steps. It involves recognizing and accepting the full humanity of the person who has offended us (Smedes, 1996). It centres on authentically working through the anger, sorrow, betrayal and loss of trust, and releasing bitterness and hostility until one gradually but authentically discovers forgiveness. Kurtz and Ketcham (1992) asserted that forgiveness is spiritual: it is one of those realities that cannot be willed, that becomes more impossible the harder one tries to will it. Forgiveness, in fact, becomes possible only when will is replaced by willingness; it results less from effort than from openness (p. 216). Interviews with research respondents revealed that forgiveness is not a willed act but an internal transformation involving two discoveries. Participants seem to have rst discovered their own empathic sense of being forgiven, which somehow made it possible for them to make the second discovery of having also forgiven.
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Discovering forgiveness through empathy

175

A powerful connection appears to exist between the experience of being forgiven and ones capacity to forgive. Patton (1985, p. 148) embraced this view when he proposed,
forgiveness is discovered not in trying to forgive, or in being instructed about the process of forgiveness, but in the larger process of reconciliation which is concretely expressed in human life through overcoming ones shame and discovering who one is beyond the experience of injury and brokenness. The person who concentrates on whether he or she can forgive is unlikely to do so.

The social, intra- and interpersonal context of forgiveness

People certainly do not live or forgive in a vacuum. They grow and learn in various contexts, and have varied and complex relational/ emotional experiences which set the stage for their ability or inability to experience forgiveness. Like any complex psychological/emotional process there are a variety of stages that must be worked through for healing and wholeness to be accomplished. These stages are not unlike those of the grieving process. The basic tasks of grief provide interesting parallels to the work of forgiveness: acknowledging the reality of the loss (or injustice or injury); experiencing the pain (or working through ones shame or the emotions preceding forgiveness); making needed adjustments; and reinvesting emotional energy from grieving to living with hope (letting go, reconciliation). Each task or theme needs to be carefully formulated, articulated, and critically processed (Hill and Mullen, 2000; Kubler-Ross and Kessler, 2005). In addition, forgiveness must be viewed in a larger social, cultural, ecological and historical context. Factors such as gender, race, education, socioeconomic status, early attachment experiences, family relational/developmental forgiveness patterns, self-esteem, and spiritual, emotional and physical well-being components constitute context variables which are essential in determining a persons ability to discover forgiveness in relation to the self and to others. For example, Osmond and Thorne (1993) as well as Schaef (1981) propose that gender and race are indeed organizing constructs in our society; thus gender and race would constitute different contexts for the experience and discovery of forgiveness as would other variables. One particular dimension or context being explored as having an important impact upon the forgiveness process is early attachment experiences (Mazor et al., 1998; Firestone and Catlett, 1999; Hill and
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

176

E. Wayne Hill

Mullen, 2000; Hill, 2001). The quality of early attachments forms the foundation for a childs social, cognitive and emotional development, which would have developmental implications for how individuals experience or process any signicant psychological/relational dynamic including forgiveness (Bowlby, 1977, 1988; Guidano and Liotti, 1983). Karen (2001), for example, asserted that the internal organizing patterns, dramas or blueprints which children develop in early attachment relationships are not only complex and contradictory but may reect the kinds of expectations anticipated from others. Karen (2001, p. 93) declares:
If you do not feel entitled, then anyone may be the depriver who was once your dad. If youre guilty, then anyone may be the jailer that was once your mom . . . . If you must save those who are in distress, then anyone can become your burden. If youre the less loved sibling, then anyone may be seen as playing favourites.

In other words, early relational attachment disruptions and dysfunctions create various levels of anxiety out of which children grow and develop and for which they develop defences to protect themselves, making it difcult for them to comprehend their own needs or the needs of others. Without the ability to comprehend or recognize emotional needs in others, which is the essence of empathy and secure attachment, caring and compassion become thwarted. Empathy requires and develops self-awareness. The more aware and discerning one is towards ones personal emotions, the more skilled one is in reading and responding to the emotions of another. Goleman declared that failure to register anothers feelings is a major decit in emotional intelligence, and a tragic failing in what it means to be human. For all rapport, the root of caring, stems from emotional attunement, from the capacity for empathy (Goleman, 1995, p. 96). This perspective is also supported by the work of Gottman and DeClaire (1998), who asserted that emotional intelligence is important to a childs overall development. Indeed, they suggest that emotional intelligence is a good predictor of how children will do in life. They found evidence to suggest that emotionally intelligent children can soothe and calm themselves more effectively, have higher academic achievement scores in maths and reading, have fewer behaviour problems, better physical health, and more meaningful relationships with people in general. They also reported that emotional intelligence appears to be a buffer against certain types of stress. Embedded in
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Discovering forgiveness through empathy

177

their views on emotional intelligence is the essential role that parental empathy and attunement (emotional synchronicity) play in a childs learning to monitor her emotions and to recognize and respond to the emotions of others. This is relevant to the process of therapy because empathic attachment processes can help facilitate healing in adult relationships. For example, Kohut (1984) spoke of the need for corrective emotional experiences in the therapy context where empathic mirroring is experienced, barriers of shame are diminished, self-soothing is increased, and healing begins to occur. This could more accurately be described as corrective relational experiences that have emotional, cognitive and relational consequences. Healing in each dimension would thus promote the empathic capacity to discover forgiveness as given and received. Empathy clearly provides the catalyst for experiencing forgiveness as discovery. Worthington (1998) references an incident in the life of Corrie Ten Boom that aptly illustrates this dynamic. Corrie and her family experienced the horrors of the Nazi concentration camps during the Second World War. She was the sole survivor of her family, and following the war toured the world sharing a message of forgiveness. On one occasion she encountered an old man who confessed to being a guard in one of the prison camps. He extended his hand and asked Corrie for forgiveness on behalf of those whom he had harmed. She recognized the man, unknown to him, as one of the guards where she had been a prisoner. Her rst reaction was rage and resentment. She thought of her sister who had died in the camp. How could she dismiss this sisters slow, horrible death with a mere handshake? Corrie then had a different reaction prompted by a reective and empathic internal dialogue. She genuinely recognized her own sinfulness and need for forgiveness again and again, and could not in good conscience withhold her forgiveness. She took his extended hand and said in complete sincerity, I forgive you, brother, with all my heart (Ten Boom and Buckingham, 1974, p. 57). Via empathy and humility Corrie was able to extend forgiveness to the former prison guard. Other authors see forgiveness as a crucial human quality. Karen (2001) reminds us that the need to forgive is an authentic aspect of being human; however, we are not always willing to forgive because to do so requires feeling painful emotions. Nevertheless, in order to grow we may need to be reminded of the importance and benets of forgiveness. From a clinical perspective, to focus on forgiveness as the
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

178

E. Wayne Hill

most critical issue or to push family members to adopt an intentional or immediate forgiveness stance might meet with resistance. Thus the clinician may want to respectfully assess childhood experiences and family members willingness to forgive, while still seeking to provide a corrective relational and emotional experience within the therapy process that would be more likely to provide the relational and empathic context for the unfolding discovery of forgiveness for self and other.

Facilitating corrective emotional/relational experiences that foster forgiveness as discovery

For people who have become estranged, forgiveness is one of the most critical processes for facilitating restored relational and emotional well-being. However, as suggested, forgiveness is not a simple issue of willpower or merely letting go but rather a complex process that when fully experienced can usher in a deep healing process within and among persons. Bringing an awareness of the forgiveness process as discovery into the therapeutic environment cannot be separated from the therapeutic process in general. Forgiveness is a fundamental element in human relationships, regardless of context. In addressing the attributes of healthy couples, Beavers (1985) suggested that when relational mistakes are inevitably made, healthy couples do not translate obvious human frailty and imperfections into evil and perversity. This allows couples to disagree and err without fear of isolation or abandonment. Human beings make mistakes. The truly important issue is not whether errors will be made, but how families cope with them when they occur. The issue of emotional intelligence and the ability to bring an empathic understanding are critical, and as Beavers (1985) has suggested, a tolerance for ambivalence is essential. He asserted that respect for ambivalence in family members is foundational for understanding and for resolving intimate relationship conicts. Beavers (1985, p. 71) declared,
You dont love me is a frequent response to the pain produced by a spouse. Of course I love you; I was just (stupid, careless, drunk, absentminded), is often the retort. It is both useful and reassuring to know that people are indeed ambivalent about anything that is nite and yet needed such as loved ones, jobs, support systems. Ambivalence can be resolved but not eliminated. Healthy couples know this and tolerate

r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Discovering forgiveness through empathy

179

outbursts of bad feelings from spouse and children without using such negative experiences to prove evil intent.

Since human imperfection is a given and the experience of ambivalence is normal and expected in intimate relationship systems, empathy becomes essential for facilitating a process of forgiveness. Thus, therapists who work with family members to facilitate an empathic relational environment where ambivalence is openly acknowledged and respected will be more likely to facilitate not only a therapeutic process in general but also enhance the discovery of forgiveness (Hill, 2001).

Models for creating empathy and forgiveness in therapy

In addressing the issue of forgiveness as a process in marital and family therapy, Coleman (1998) and Gordon et al. (2000) suggested two different yet similar process models for facilitating forgiveness. The importance of attending to and enhancing empathic relational experiences and understandings was implied in each model. Coleman (1998) declared that all hurts involve loss, and he described three types: (1) loss of love by death or break-up; (2) loss of self-esteem, and (3) loss of control or inuence. The process of forgiveness begins when the person is able to identify the specic loss that has occurred. The second phase of the process of forgiveness encompasses what he called confronting the one who injured you in order to conrm that you were deeply hurt and to make clear that the offence cannot be ignored (p. 89). The third phase is what he addressed as wrestling with the question why? and thus making sense of the suffering. This often encompasses a dialogue between the offending party and the injured party. It is in this dialogue that critical empathic experiences can be facilitated, thus augmenting the forgiveness as discovery process. Coleman (1998, p. 91) asserted:
The dialogue to understanding sometimes reveals to the injured person that he or she too was hurtful and played a role in the relationship problem that led to his or her being deeply hurt by the other family member. Such a discovery does not excuse the behaviour of the injurer, however. But it might make the injured party a bit more understanding and lead to a better idea of what changes each party needs to make to heal the relationship.

The fourth phase in Colemans model was forgiving which he described as renewing trust in the relationship. The nal phase is
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

180

E. Wayne Hill

what he called letting go of the pain of resentment, which he described as an arduous process that will eventually lead to discovering possibilities open to the relationship as a direct result of the suffering. In a similar vein, Gordon et al. (2000) conceptualized forgiveness as a response to interpersonal trauma. These authors viewed forgiveness as emerging in stages in the context of dealing with the trauma. Stage one concerned the impact or consequences of the trauma. Stage two encompassed the search for meaning and a new understanding of self and other in relationships. Stage three involved progressing with ones life with a renewed set of relationship beliefs. Embedded in both of these models is an implicit understanding and appreciation for how grief and loss created by injury or trauma must be confronted if forgiveness is to be discovered. In addition, it is also clear that a corrective, empathic, relational experience between the injured parties is crucial for facilitating relational healing and forgiveness. This process can only be facilitated in a therapeutic context where the parties feel safe and secure in exploring their relationship amid the grief and loss created by the violation. Hill (2001) suggests that it is this emphasis which is critical to the forgiveness as discovery process.

Embracing grief and enhancing forgiveness as discovery

Most models of forgiveness in the context of therapy embrace an implicit understanding that grief and loss are closely connected with the forgiveness process. Since grief and forgiveness are closely aligned, identifying these emotional tasks or themes would also assist in understanding and facilitating the grieving and forgiveness processes. Anecdotal data from clinical experience suggest that the emotional tasks which accompany grief and forgiveness resolution are intertwined. The emotional struggles, tasks, themes and defences that appear, disappear and reappear are varied. Providing a therapeutic environment where personal histories can be explored, injuries and wounds shared, and empathy encouraged can usher in a resolution process that facilitates forgiveness as discovery. This discovery proceeds in the process of hearing the stories of all parties concerned. It is just as important to hear the experience of the offending person as it is to hear the story of the offended person. Hurts and injuries on both sides need to be shared and heard in an empathic historical context while focusing on the themes of common
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Discovering forgiveness through empathy

181

humanity that inevitably emerge in the sharing. Only in this way can reciprocal emotional attunement be fostered and experienced. The following vignettes describe some of these processes. Vignette three: A middle-aged man came home stressed by workrelated issues and sought comfort in a glass of cold milk. He opened the refrigerator door and discovered that only about an ounce of milk was available in the milk container. He became angry and threw the container across the kitchen, spilling the milk on to the oor. His wife walked into the kitchen curious about the upheaval at which point he promptly and irately scolded her for not purchasing an adequate supply of milk. Normally this interaction would have escalated into an all-out uproar. His wife would have been incensed by his behaviour and accusation, thus initiating an attack-and-defend posturing. However, their previous work in therapy had attended to this cycle of anger and retaliation before. The couple had worked with their therapist to understand the contexts which inuenced this interactional cycle, including how they could forgive lapses in loving behaviour. Thus on this occasion the wife did not defend herself but responded with an observation/inquiry: It seems to me that there is something else going on that doesnt have to do with, Got milk?! Whats bothering you? Did something happen at work? He was startled by her clearly differentiated and caring response and thus began to share with her the events of his day. He had had an unpleasant encounter with his supervisor that had left him feeling frustrated, devalued and angry. His indignation regarding the milk was the proverbial straw breaking the camels back. He subsequently acknowledged and apologized for his inappropriate tantrum and asked for her forgiveness while simultaneously cleaning up the spilled milk. Consequently they had a helpful and meaningful conversation that was mutually benecial. She felt signicant satisfaction in staying calm under attack. As she came to understand his day and to empathize with his distress, she also became more amenable to forgive his tantrum. He experienced her empathy and understanding as an invitation to acknowledge his vulnerability and lead to a sharing of his feelings created by a distressing work experience. Thus they discovered in each other a very authentic and human connection which strengthened their bond and enhanced their level of intimacy. Vignette four: Of course facilitating forgiveness is much easier when the hurts are not so overwhelming or deep. The scenario of a husband who is discovered having an affair with his wifes best friend is exceedingly more problematic. Some hurts run so deep that healing
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

182

E. Wayne Hill

and forgiveness take much more time, effort and patience. However, the process is the same. The author was once consulted on a case in which a middle-aged husband acknowledged to his wife that he had been having an affair when she confronted him about an unexplained hotel charge on their credit card. His father had died six months prior to the affair. He had never had an affair in the twenty years of their marriage. Her pain, loss and sense of betrayal were acute and understandable. He felt shameful and was very remorseful and asked her to forgive him, but it was not an easy process for either of them. It was only when she was able to hear the context of her husbands grief in the light of his family background that she was able to move towards the forgiveness process. It was discovered that when his father died unexpectedly (his rst major loss), he felt truly lost and sought comfort for his grief outside his marriage as he had often done as a child when he felt hurt or abandoned. In the context of his family of origin, he had learned that comfort is not to be found within but outside the family (here explanations must be understood as not excuses). When his wife saw his sense of shame and his pain related to his unresolved grief, within this historical context, she was able to empathize with him. She subsequently made the comment that it had helped her to understand that what had happened was more about him and his history and not her failure as a wife. Thus she was able to embrace his humanity and move towards forgiveness. He, on the other hand, was enabled to acknowledge his shame and to empathize with her pain, and to understand how she had experienced the hurt as a statement about her worth and value as a person and as a wife. Consequently, they both genuinely touched each others humanity in ways that enhanced their empathy as well as intimacy, thus facilitating forgiveness. Vignette ve: Forgiveness does not always require the active or even living presence of the other. A man in his early thirties was distraught by the unexpected death of his mother. He had been alienated from her for years and yet had always hoped that there would be some reconciliation process in the future. Now, this hope had died with her. Upon the suggestion of his therapist he began to investigate the details of his mothers life from childhood. His grief was ameliorated only after talking with her siblings and former friends and discovering for the rst time many of the hardships his mother had endured during her childhood and early adult years. Slowly through empathy with his mothers life circumstances, he began to respect and understand her. He came to the realization that his mother was probably
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Discovering forgiveness through empathy

183

doing the best she could given her history and that he had failed to understood the depth of her pain and she had not understood the pain she had caused him. Embracing their common humanity through understanding and empathy undoubtedly enabled him to begin the forgiveness process, even though his mother had died.

Conclusion
Relational healing and forgiveness emerge on the common ground of shared human experiences. One certainly cannot excuse behaviours that violate boundaries or wound with word or deed. However, couple and family therapists can draw on these ideas about forgiveness as a process that is affected by childhood experiences, as a valuable aspect of human life which itself might play a role in healing the wounds of trauma and pain, and as a vital aspect of human relationships, to provide a space in therapy where forgiveness can be discovered. Given the nature of the forgiveness process, family therapists in particular can invite forgiveness in their language and by adopting a curious stance towards its value in particular clinical situations. They can choose to give precedence to a model of forgiveness that sees it as a discovery of empathy and shared human connection within relationship systems which can create a setting for a personal and a systemic healing process.

References
Aponte, H. J. (1998) Love, the spiritual wellspring of forgiveness: an example of spirituality in therapy. Journal of Family Therapy, 20: 3758. Augsburger, D. (1981) Caring Enough to Forgive. Scottsdale, PA: Regal Press. Beavers, W. R. (1985) Successful Marriage: A Family Systems Approach to Couples Therapy. New York: Norton. Bowlby, J. (1977) The making and breaking of affectional bonds. British Journal of Psychiatry, 130: 201210. Bowlby, J. (1988) Developmental psychiatry comes of age. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 145: 110. Coleman, P. W. (1998) The process of forgiveness in marriage and the family. In R. D. Enright and J. North (eds) Exploring Forgiveness (pp. 7594). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Enright, R. D. and North, J. (1998) Introducing forgiveness. In R. D. Enright and J. North (eds) Exploring Forgiveness (pp. 38). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Firestone, R. W. and Catlett, J. (1999) Fear of Intimacy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Goleman, D. (1995) Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

184

E. Wayne Hill

Gordon, K. C., Baucom, D. H. and Synder, D. K. (2000) The use of forgiveness in marital therapy. In M. E. McCullough, K. I. Pargament and C. E. Thoresen (eds) Forgiveness: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 203227). New York: Guilford Press. Gottman, J. M. and DeClaire, J. (1998) Raising an Emotionally Intelligent Child: The Heart of Parenting. New York: Simon & Schuster. Guidano, V. and Liotti, G. (1983) Cognitive Processes and Emotional Disorders. New York: Guilford Press. Hargrave, T. D. (1994) Families and Forgiveness: Healing Wounds in the Intergenerational Family. New York: Brunner/Mazel. Hargrave, T. D. and Sells, J. N. (1997) The development of a forgiveness scale. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 23: 4163. Harris, A. H., Luskin, F. M., Benisovich, S. V., Standard, S., Bruning, J., Evans, S. and Thoresen, C. (2006) Effects of a group forgiveness intervention on forgiveness, perceived stress and trait anger: a randomized trial. Journal of Clinical Psychology., 62: 715733. Hill, E. W. (2001) Understanding forgiveness as discovery: implications for marital and family therapy. Contemporary Family Therapy, 23: 369384. Hill, E. W. and Mullen, P. M. (2000) Contexts for understanding forgiveness and repentance as discovery. Journal of Pastoral Care, 54: 287296. Karen, R. (2001) The Forgiving Self: The Road from Resentment to Connection. New York: Doubleday. Kohut, H. (1984) How Does Psychoanalysis Cure? Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Kubler-Ross, E. and Kessler, D. (2005) On Grief and Grieving: Finding the Meaning of Grief Through the Five Stages of Loss. New York: Scribner. Kurtz, E. and Ketcham, K. (1992) The Spirituality of Imperfection: Story Telling and the Journey to Wholeness. Nashville, TN: Abingdon. Legaree, T. A., Turner, J. and Lollis, S. (2007) Forgiveness and therapy: a critical review of conceptualizations, practices and values found in the literature. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 33: 192213. Luskin, F. M., Ginzburg, K. and Thoresen, C. E. (2005) The effect of forgiveness training on psychosocial factors in college age adults. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations. Special Issue: Altruism, Intergroup Apology and Forgiveness: Antidote for a Divided World, 29: 163184. Mazor, A., Batiste-Harel, P. and Gampel, Y. (1998) Divorcing spouses coping patterns, attachment bonding and forgiveness processes in the post-divorce experience. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 29: 6581. McCullough, M. E., Pargament, K. I. and Thoresen, C. E. (2000) The psychology of forgiveness: history, conceptual issues, and overview. In M. E. McCullough, K. I. Pargament and C. E. Thoresen (eds) Forgiveness: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 114). New York: Guilford Press. Osmond, M. W. and Thorne, B. (1993) Feminist theories: the social construction of gender in families and society. In P. G. Boss, W. J. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm and S. K. Steinmetz (eds) Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods: A Contextual Approach (pp. 591623). New York: Plenum Press. Patton, J. (1985) Is Human Forgiveness Possible: A Pastoral Care Perspective. Nashville, TN: Abingdon.

r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Discovering forgiveness through empathy

185

Pert, C. (1997) Molecules of Emotion. New York: Scribner. Schaef, A. W. (1981) Womens Reality: An Emerging Female System in a White Male Society. New York: Doubleday. Sells, J. N. and Hargrave, T. D. (1998) Forgiveness: a review of the theoretical and empirical literature. Journal of Family Therapy, 20: 2136. Smedes, L. (1996) The Art of Forgiving. New York: Random House. Tavuchis, N. (1991) Mea Culpa: A Sociology of Apology and Reconciliation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Ten Boom, C. and Buckingham, J. (1974) Tramp for the Lord. Old Tappan, NJ: F.H. Revell. Tibbits, D., Ellis, G., Piramelli, C., Luskin, F. and Lukman, R. (2006) Hypertension reduction through forgiveness training. Journal of Pastoral Care and Counseling, 60: 2734. Tutu, D. (1998) Without forgiveness there is no future. In R. D. Enright and J. North (eds) Exploring Forgiveness (pp. xiiixiv). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Verco, J. (2002) Womens outrage and the pressure to forgive: working with survivors of childhood sexual abuse. International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work, 1: 2327. Walrond-Skinner, S. (1998) The function and role of forgiveness in working with couples and families: clearing the ground. Journal of Family Therapy, 20: 319. Worthington, E. L. (1998) An empathy-humility-commitment model of forgiveness applied within family dyads. Journal of Family Therapy, 20: 5976.

r 2010 The Author. Journal compilation r 2010 The Association for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

Copyright of Journal of Family Therapy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.