Abstract
This article explores the integration of creativity into relational-cultural therapy (RCT) with couples, emphasizing the potential for creative interventions to enhance clients’ understanding of self and others while promoting relational growth. RCT, rooted in the acknowledgment of chronic disconnection as a source of human suffering, focuses on meaningful interdependence and connection as essential for well-being. Despite the documented benefits of creative techniques in couples therapy, there is a gap in the literature regarding the use of creative interventions within RCT couples counseling. The article argues that incorporating creativity within RCT couples counseling facilitates the development of a common language and understanding of RCT concepts among couples. It provides an overview of RCT concepts, discusses the rationale and research supporting the integration of creativity with RCT and couples work, and offers five creative RCT-based interventions: Reflecting on the relationship, creating a context constellation, honoring strategies of disconnection, visualizing relational images, and exploring shame and authenticity. Each intervention is designed to align with RCT principles, encouraging clients to explore their identities, relational dynamics, and strategies of disconnection in a creative and experiential manner. The article emphasizes the importance of creating a safe and non-judgmental therapeutic space, where clients and counselors can collaboratively engage in these creative activities. Overall, the integration of creativity into RCT couples counseling aims to promote vulnerability, mutual empathy, and strengthened connection within the therapeutic relationship and the couple's dyad.
Creativity has been described as an integral component of counseling which facilitates openness and expression while deepening the counseling relationship (Duffey et al., 2009). In concert with relational-cultural therapy (RCT), creative interventions can enhance clients’ understanding of self and others, while promoting relational growth. Incorporating creativity within RCT encourages a range of counselor responses in the present moment from spontaneity to attunement, particularly as it relates to couples counseling. The use of experiential techniques and artmaking has been found to be beneficial within the context of couples therapy for decades (Hinkle et al., 2015); yet there is a lack of documented use of creative interventions within RCT couples counseling. The authors assert that integration of creativity within RCT couples counseling allows for the development of a common language and understanding about RCT concepts with couples. The authors will overview what the literature says about RCT concepts and couples counseling integrated within the concept of creativity. Finally, we provide five creative RCT-based interventions to use with couples to enrich and enhance what RCT calls growth–fostering relationships.
Relational-cultural Therapy
RCT, first outlined in Jean Baker Miller's A New Psychology of Women (1976), posits that chronic disconnection is the primary source of human suffering. In contrast to traditional models of counseling which promote movement towards autonomy and self-sufficiency as markers of psychological health, RCT calls attention to the basic human need for connection (Walker & Rosen, 2004) and promotes well-being through meaningful interdependence with others. To start it seems important to overview the concepts that are central to this theory; therefore, we will address the following RCT concepts—central relational paradox, strategies of disconnection, mutually growth–fostering relationships, shame, authenticity, and relational images. From here we will address existent literature related to RCT and couples counseling.
At the center of RCT is the central relational paradox, the idea that humans desire connection and are also terrified of the necessary vulnerability to make deep connections (Jordan, 2018). According to Lértora and Starkey (2021), this conundrum is described as “a proverbial tug-of-war between protection and connection that leaves the person cut off from their authentic self and the connections they desire with others.” The central relational paradox is amplified even more so in those who have endured significant relational traumas. For example, relational traumas are things such as domestic violence, bullying, childhood abandonment, divorce, or death. Miller (1986) noted that people want to be close but worry they will not be liked especially when they have experienced the relational traumas noted above.
Walker and Rosen (2004) further noted that as a person hides parts of themselves disconnections will occur. Additionally, when a person is misunderstood, invalidated, or injured by another person or group further disconnection happens and if these disconnections are addressed and reworked, they are not problematic. However, when individuals repeatedly encounter nonempathic responses, they learn to continually hide themselves, their needs, and their feelings to stay in connection (Walker & Rosen, 2004). These ways of hiding the most vulnerable parts of oneself, referred to by RCT as strategies of disconnection, provide a sense of safety and control while paradoxically contributing to feelings of isolation.
RCT acknowledges that the antidote to disconnection is the opportunity to practice and participate in meaningful and mutual growth–fostering relationships. This can happen in the context of the counseling process. Day-Vines et al. (2007) suggested that effective counselors ensure that clients do not blame themselves for experiences of oppression by internalizing these experiences. For example, from an RCT perspective, counselors make explicit the cultural context and sociopolitical factors contributing to client suffering including the power dynamics of the therapeutic relationship. An RCT approach aims to build a holistic understanding of clients’ distress, depathologizing their symptoms, and shifting the clients’ perspective from shame and self-blame towards greater self-compassion.
From a RCT lens, shame is seen as a major source of pain for the clients. Shame is the belief that if one was known more fully by others, they would be rejected (Walker & Rosen, 2004). As Hartling et al. (2000) explained, past experiences of violation, ridicule, and humiliation can lead people to keep important aspects of their experience out of connection with others. Simply put, when shame is present in the client's experience, representing oneself fully in relationship does not feel safe. The opposite of shame is authenticity. Jordan (2018) described authenticity as “the ability to represent oneself as fully as possible in relationship” including one's real experience, feelings, and thoughts. In growth–fostering connection, all parties feel safe to bring their whole selves into the relationship.
Transitioning from the notion of authenticity as the antithesis of shame, it is crucial to recognize that growth–fostering connections hinge on the ability to recognize the impact of family of origin. According to RCT, humans develop relational images early in life and carry these with them from one relationship to another (Jordan, 2018). Relational images can be defined as one's expectations of relationships and what they must do to find connection. For example, if a young girl was ridiculed by her father each time she expressed anger, she may come to believe that she must be good-humored and agreeable to be respected by men. These images are shaped by interpersonal interactions as well as by greater societal forces and values. As Jordan (2018) explained, when relational images are rigid and overgeneralized, they can anchor clients in a relational past and prevent full participation in the actual relationships at hand.
RCT counselors strive to create a safe environment where clients may bring their full selves into therapy (Jordan, 2018). Despite the therapist's good intentions, this arrangement may feel threatening to clients who have learned to keep parts of themselves out of relationship to survive (Hartling et al., 2000). Working from an RCT perspective, counselors aim to provide a corrective relationship by offering the clients empathy and radical respect where eventually, new relational templates can be formed.
RCT with Couples
Literature on using RCT with couples is extremely limited and stems primarily from Jordan and Carlson's (2013) seminal book—Creating Connection: A Relational-Cultural Approach with Couples. The authors outlined eight primary goals of RCT couples therapy including (a) communicating with mutual empathy, (b) demonstrating authenticity, (c) practicing “good conflict”, (d) expressing respect through appreciation and gratitude, (e) prioritizing the needs of the other and the relationship, (f) establishing and developing gratitude for a “we” connection, (g) supporting each other's individual growth, and (h) using humor and lightness respectfully (Leopold & Swank, 2020; Jordan & Carlson, 2013). While research supports the use of RCT with specific populations including lesbian couples experiencing fertility issues (Rausch & Wikoff, 2017), couples facing a breast cancer diagnosis (Kayser & Acquati, 2019), couples suffering from sex addiction (Vogel, 2008), and couples with at least one partner from a single-parent household (Leopold & Swank, 2020), more generalized applications of RCT with couples have yet to be published.
Despite a dearth of literature, RCT's placement of relationships as the basic building blocks of well-being (Jordan & Carlson, 2013; Lértora & Starkey, 2021) make it a natural fit for working with couples in counseling. The theory's conceptual shift from the individual to the relationship (e.g., the “me” to the “we”) helps move clients away from the power and control struggles which afflict many relationships, instead encouraging a mindset of interconnectedness and mutual empowerment. From this perspective, RCT counseling encourages good conflict or conflict where differences are respected and clients can move towards new and mutually beneficial resolutions (Lértora & Starkey, 2021).
Additionally, the “we” identity allows for greater understanding and depth of discussion of cultural messages embedded within the couple's relationship (Leopold & Swank, 2020). Cultural messages may include family of origin, race, class, gender roles, gender identity, affectual orientation, sexual identity, able-bodiedness, age, education, and immigration status (Mirkin & Geib, 2013). Couples who understand each other's cultural identity have more multidimensional understanding of the intersectionality of culture in the couple relationship (Leopold & Swank, 2020). Moreover, Leopold and Swank characterize the connection between the relational aspects of RCT and culture as the relational images. Together the couple finds meaning that inform expectations they have of themselves and each other, as well as understand the disconnection they may be experiencing.
Vogel (2008) described the remedy to disconnection as engagement in nurturing, growth–fostering relationships in which all involved parties experience positive psychological growth. Authentic relationships are characterized by experiences of zest, productivity, clarity of self and others, increasing self-worth, and a yearning for further connection (Miller, 1986). In these relationships, mutual empathy is present, in which individuals know and experience the effect they have on one another (Leopold & Swank, 2020).
In a couple's counseling setting, the counselor increases awareness and builds relational competence in real time. The counselor creates a safe space for couples to express themselves authentically and practice responsiveness. Jordan (2018) described relational resilience as the capacity to move back into connection when disconnection occurs. As obstacles to mutuality occur in session, the counselor validates the pain of disconnection and helps clients rework these relational failures. As repairs take place, relational resilience is strengthened, vulnerability is fostered, and intimacy is deepened.
From an RCT lens, the counselor conceptualizes the dyad as one subsystem within a greater community, whose dynamics and functioning are affected by larger social, political, cultural, and economic forces (Walsh, 2006). Identifying cultural factors for each partner such as race, class, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, abilities, age, education, immigration status, education, trauma history, and messages and attitudes received in the family of origin can provide important context for understanding relational impasses (Leopold & Swank, 2020; Mirkin & Geib, 2013). The utilization of a systems approach creates a more comprehensive, non-pathological understanding of client struggles. Furthermore, the addition of creative interventions within an RCT theoretical framework builds even greater awareness and connection.
Creativity and RCT Couples Counseling
There are many benefits and intersections between RCT concepts and experiential creative techniques. Using metaphor and visual representations to make sense of complicated thoughts and feelings, clients gain a deeper understanding of each other's internal worlds (Currin et al., 2020). In those moments, RCT concepts of mutuality and connectedness are cultivated. Through the experiential process of creating and sharing, clients are invited to display relational courage—encountering fear and finding support to work through these feelings (Jordan, 2018)—in the counseling room. Concurrently, experiential visual exercises may enable counselors to gain a more intimate understanding of their clients’ lived experiences such as the cultural factors that couples may not initially share or be aware of.
Stiver et al. (2010) described creative moments in RCT as “occasions when something new and growth-fostering occurs.” In these moments, both counselor and clients tend to be active and authentic, requiring counselors to relinquish some of their control and engage from a place of openness and authenticity (Stiver et al., 2010). For both counselors and clients, the use of creative interventions can reduce stress and promote risk-taking and self-awareness (Deaver & Shiflett, 2011; Lasinsky, 2020; Purswell & Stulmaker, 2015).
By using creative approaches to introduce key tenets of RCT, counselors and clients develop a common language and understanding of foundational theoretical concepts. With shared reference points, counselors and clients are then able to relate more easily, thus enhancing treatment and connection (Currin et al., 2020). From an RCT viewpoint, counselors keep creative techniques open-ended which aligns with a more egalitarian approach to counseling, empowering clients to direct the creative experience (Lértora & Starkey, 2021). Clients should always be given a choice to participate, thus emulating the approach to power that RCT embodies.
Combining traditional talk counseling with creative interventions offers clients new and creative perspectives to explore their concerns (Metzl, 2020) and access information which they may have trouble verbalizing (Bruhn et al., 2006). Gottman and Silver (2015) note that playful activities can be used as a mechanism to build and cultivate friendship in couple relationships when little foundation seems existent. A creative counseling approach can make difficult feelings more accessible, visual, and concrete. By the time couples often come to counseling they are often at an impasse or when awareness or insight seems to be minimal; therefore, sand tray interventions can be especially useful (Mason, 2022). A critical component of couples counseling is the ability to see multiple perspectives, yet that reality for some couples who have waited to come to counseling can be difficult. This is where a creative approach can assist the couple to express themselves visually, relax the defenses, and provide an immediate emotional experience and connection.
While engaging in experiential interventions, couple dynamics are exposed in the present moment thus simulating experiences outside the counseling session. For example, through experiential interventions, the counselor notes who speaks first, who is more dominant, how communication occurs, what types of messages get communicated, the quality of interaction, and how the couple responds to change (Hinkle et al., 2015, Mason, 2022). While research supports the benefits for using creative interventions with couples more broadly, there is limited existing research on the use of creativity in couples counseling using an RCT approach. In concert with RCT, the use of creative interventions promotes vulnerability, facilitates mutual empathy, and strengthens connection within the dyad as well as within the therapeutic relationship. Furthermore, the use of creative interventions offers new perspectives and deepen awareness of their relational dynamic.
Five Creative RCT Interventions
The following section outlines a set of five creative RCT couples’ counseling interventions: reflecting on the relationship, creating a context constellation, honoring strategies of disconnection, visualizing relational images, and exploring shame and authenticity. The activities below are centered around the key tenets of RCT described earlier in this article: central relational paradox, disconnections, mutually growth–fostering relationships, shame, authenticity, and relational images.
While the use of RCT terminology may be beneficial with certain clients, these ideas can also be introduced using colloquial language. The counselor must determine appropriate delivery, timing, and use of these tools and to evaluate safety in the relationship before engaging in these activities. The underlying belief of RCT is that humans heal in safe, growth–fostering relationships. When using creative intervention, counselors create a non-judgmental therapeutic space characterized by radical respect, empathy, and curiosity (Jordan, 2018). In addition, the counselor recognizes their own power and privilege within the counseling relationship, working towards a collaborative “power with” model of therapy (Jordan, 2018). For example, the counselor may frame the activities as an invitation rather than a requirement, offering various media choices, providing options when giving instructions, co-creating activities based on client needs and responses, and asking for client feedback. When relational failures occur, the counselor should model mutuality and relational competence by working through these with the clients.
With each activity potential process questions are provided; however, the instructions are designed to allow for flexibility and spontaneity in the counselor's approach. Counselors should observe and process the couples’ experience throughout their engagement in these activities rather than focusing on final products (Metzl, 2020). RCT prioritizes creating a humanistic, non-pathologizing environment—one in which both partners and the counselor can bring their authentic selves to the table. If time runs out to ask process questions, focus on the process (there was a shift/playfulness), noting and naming what's happening in the moment.
Reflecting on the Relationship
This two-part activity can be used early in the counseling process to shift clients’ mindsets from an individual to a relational perspective and encourage reflection on the relationship's evolution over time. As noted earlier in this article, couples often wait to come to counseling until it is so difficult to see the other partner's perspective. This activity's purpose is to allow for time and an iterative process to create a foundation of connection with the couple which is a key attribute of RCT. It is likely this intervention may take place over a couple of sessions, or an alternative option for this intervention would be to provide instructions for clients to complete these activities as homework between meetings. The materials needed for this technique are markers, crayons, colored pencils, and paper.
In part one of this exercise, the counselor invites the couple to work together to create a timeline of their relationship using words, symbols, and drawings. This collaborative process allows for observation of the couples’ current relationship dynamics. The counselor should provide art supplies and prompt the clients using the following questions:
How old is the relationship? When did it come to life? What milestones, events, circumstances, impactful conversations, or small moments have impacted the relationship? Include points of struggle and growth. How has the relationship evolved over time?
When the couple has completed part one to their satisfaction, the counselor should facilitate processing of the experience before proceeding to part two.
Process Questions for Part One
What are your initial reactions to this activity? How was it to create together? What felt good? What was frustrating? What was happening for you individually throughout the process? Did anything surprise you about what your partner added to the timeline? What do you notice looking at your creation? What is missing? Would you like to add anything?
In part two, the counselor instructs clients to divide their relationship into chapters. This portion of the activity is done individually. The counselor may use the following explanation: “Imagine your relationship as a book with chapters. On your own, divide your book into however many chapters you would like. Give each chapter a title. Under each chapter, write three descriptive words or feelings that represent that chapter of your relationship. If you would like to create a title for the book, you may do that as well.” When both partners have finished, invite them each to share their book and reflect on the process.
Process Questions for Part Two
How was this activity for you? What surprised you about your partner's chapters? What similarities and differences do you notice? Looking to the future, what chapters would you like to add? What have you found most beneficial about this activity?
Creating a Context Constellation
This second activity explores the social context in which couple relationships evolve and where and how from an RCT perspective disconnections occur. The counselor aims to shed light on the clients’ identities and cultural environment and understand the couple within a larger social system. RCT counseling recognizes that clients’ values, beliefs, and goals are all influenced by their context. For this activity the following materials are needed: large sheet of paper, markers and miniatures.
In this activity, the clients will build a context constellation (see Figure 1). This tool can be viewed as a form of assessment, allowing the counselor to better conceptualize the couple's concerns within their environment. Based on both RCT and Bronfenbrenner's bioecological model of development (Brofenbrenner, 1979, 2005 as cited in Broderick & Blewitt, 2014), clients will use concentric circles to illustrate various levels of influence on their system as shown in Figure 1.
Context constellation.
The counselor may demonstrate an example before talking clients through the activity.
To begin, invite clients to consider their own identities. These may include race, class, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, abilities, age, education, and immigration status (Mirkin & Geib, 2013). Encourage clients to reflect on the ways their identity impacts how they view the world. Next, begin to walk clients through the following steps, taking time to process at each stage of the process:
Instruct each partner to choose a miniature or create a drawing to represent themself and the identities they hold. Have them place these in the center of a large sheet of paper. Draw a circle around them. Invite clients to add direct influences such as family members, friends, institutions, or others key factors which impact their everyday life. Draw a circle around these. Now include additional influences which may not be direct as the previous circle but still impact the relationship. Consider economic circumstances, abilities and disabilities, life transitions, sociocultural environments, political structures, generational trauma, etc. Draw a circle around these. Lastly, add any societal messages, beliefs, norms, values, expectations, and attitudes which impact their relationship (i.e., beliefs about relationships, expectations based on gender roles, etc.)
Process Questions
Looking at your constellation, what strengths or areas of resilience do you notice? Looking at your constellation, what stressors do you notice? Of these stressors, which are most impactful? For instance, which ones do you feel, “We can deal with this” versus “This really impacts us?” Circle the stressors that feel most impactful. How do you feel about the balance between strengths and stressors? How might you join together as a couple against your stressors? Have each partner select a different-colored marker. Looking at the messages in the outermost circle, circle the ones that belong to you or come from your family. If a message is shared between both partners, both partners can circle it. What roles does power play in this system? How have these influences shifted over time? Did anything surprise you that your partner included? What changes would you like to make? How was it to create this representation together?
As a follow-up activity, the counselor may facilitate a deeper exploration of the messages in the outermost circle. To do this, invite each partner to select a different-colored marker. Then have each person circle the messages that belong to them or come from their family. If a message is shared between both partners, they can both circle it. Have the clients use a third color to circle any messages that come from society at large. Discuss the impact of these messages on the relationship.
Honoring RCT Strategies of Disconnection
The third activity introduces and explores the couple's strategies of disconnection. The counselor can begin by providing an example of a strategy of disconnection. For example, the counselor may ask clients to imagine a young boy who gets yelled at and then ignored by a caregiver each time he cries. This child will likely learn to hide his sadness to stay in connection with his caregiver. In this case, emotional suppression or denial would be the child's strategy of disconnection. These methods can also be viewed as means of self-protection or ways a person hides certain parts of themself to stay in connection. For this activity, the required materials are index cards, markers, clay, or playdough.
Prior to the session, the counselor should write the following strategies of disconnection out on pieces of papers: withdrawal, isolation, armoring, people-pleasing, defensiveness, pushing others away, intimidation, retaliation, lashing out, sarcasm, self-denigration, disengagement, dissociation, minimization of one's experience, overgenerosity, and emotional suppression. The counselor should communicate that this is not an exhaustive list and the couple may add their own.
This activity begins with a short visualization exercise. Counselors may prompt the couple to close their eyes and imagine, “You are feeling disconnected or let down by your partner or feel like they are not available to connect with. Perhaps think of a time you have felt hurt in your relationship recently. What is this like? How does this feel? What strategies do you use to maintain a sense of control?” The counselor will ask clients open their eyes and identify one or two methods they use the most often to hide and protect themselves and select those cards. Using clay or playdough, clients will then create a symbolic representation of each of these strategies, placing the card next to the symbol. For example, Figure 2 represents what this might look like when working with clients. In this visual, the client noted minimization as a strategy of disconnection.
Honoring strategies of disconnection.
The use of images in counseling can help the couple access thoughts and emotions which they may not be able to verbalize (Currin et al., 2020). Partners should work independently and be given ample time to create. When processing, the counselor should explore the familial and societal conditions that created a need for self-protection and honor the necessity of each person's strategies of disconnection at one point in their life. The counselor can then invite the couple to consider the ways these strategies may be hindering their current relationship.
Process Questions
Share your creations and tell us about what it represents. When did your strategies of disconnection originate? Are they new or old? What conditions created the need for self-protection? What triggers you to use these strategies? How do your strategies of disconnection impact your relationship, positively and negatively? (e.g., benefits and costs) What would greater vulnerability look like in your relationship? Would you like to manipulate your clay in any way? How was it to hear your partner share?
Visualizing Relational Images
The fourth activity explores relational images. As a reminder, relational images are one's collection of ideas about relationships based on past experiences (Jordan, 2018). One way to explain this concept simply to couples may sounds like the following: “Relational images are the ways you expect people to respond to you based on how people have responded in the past.” Providing an example from the couple's experience may be useful. For example, “If your needs have not been taken seriously by past romantic partners, you might make the assumption that your current partner will also not take your needs seriously.” This creative exercise may be planned ahead of time or transpire spontaneously during a session when the counselor notices a relational image emerge which seems to be limiting relational possibilities. For this activity, the required materials are a sand tray and miniatures.
As the counselor, instruct one partner to choose a miniature to represent this image, placing it in the sand tray and creating context around the image. Figure 3 shows an example of a sand tray representing a relational image; however, no two sand trays will look alike. Individuals should be encouraged to take their time when selecting figures. The counselor would then invite the client to describe their creation, exploring where the image came from, how long it has been around, if it has a name, what it looks like and sounds like, and how it impacts the couple's relationship. Once the relational image has been clarified, include the partner in the discussion by instructing them to add their own miniatures to show how they are impacted by this relational image.
Visualizing relational images.
This activity may increase client's anxiety especially if the client has experienced relational trauma. Throughout this activity, the counselor should check in with client, encourage bodily awareness, and help the client regulate anxiety as needed to create a sense of safety. Should the client become overwhelmed, the counselor may decide to shift the focus to the other partner. Once the sand tray is set up, the counselor may invite clients to walk around the tray to explore it from different perspectives.
Process Questions for Partner 1
Tell us about your sand tray. How does it feel to externalize this relational image? What meaning does this image hold? How might this image impact participation in the relationship at hand? Can you identify any exceptions to this dominant relational image? (e.g., times when someone did not respond in the way you expected them to) What might a more flexible image look like? Would you like to make any changes to the sand tray? How was it to engage in this activity?
Processing Questions for Partner 2
What surprised you? What is it like to interact with this relational image? In what way has your understanding of your partner shifted? How was it to engage in this activity?
Exploring Shame and Authenticity
The fifth and final activity is therapeutic mask-making. Therapeutic mask-making has been used by counselors to address various client populations and concerns (Lasinsky, 2020). Counselors may choose to use papier-mâché masks, fabric masks, or construction paper for this activity; however, it is advised that counselors avoid using masks or molds that already convey an emotion or cultural expression, as this may influence the clients’ message (Lasinsky, 2020). Counselors should consider the cultural implications of this activity when working with certain client populations and are encourage client collaboration in designing the activity. For this activity, the following materials are needed: masks, construction paper, paint, paintbrushes, markers, magazines, sequins, and feathers.
This activity connects to the ideas of shame and authenticity; however, the counselor can present the activity without using this language which may feel unfamiliar and intimidating to clients. To begin, the counselor should ask clients to think about the parts of themselves that they let others see. What characteristics, attributes, desires, goals, do they share with their partner and the people closest to them?
In part two of this exercise, the clients will identify the parts of themselves they have a hard time accepting or do not feel safe to share with others. Clients will then decorate the others inside of their mask (or create a separate mask) to represent these parts of themselves which they believe they must keep hidden. Clients should be given ample time to create their masks.
When it is time to process, the counselor should communicate to clients that it is their decision how much to share. The counselor should not pressure clients to share their entire mask if they are not ready. Regardless of how much is voiced outwardly, this activity can still be effective.
Process Questions
Tell us about your mask. How can we honor the parts of yourself that are already being shared? How do you typically present outwardly to hide other parts of yourself? How does hiding these parts prevent authentic connection? Where does shame come from? How has it been internalized? How is it to share this with us? What is one step you might take towards greater vulnerability in your relationship? How can your partner support you in this goal?
While processing, the counselor may decide to introduce the words shame and authenticity to familiarize clients with these terms. The counselor may also discuss relational courage in the context of sharing one's mask, acknowledging the vulnerability of this activity.
Recommendations and Future Research
In light of Jordan's (2018) assertion that all humans inherently seek connection and growth, particularly within the context of intimate relationships, the authors present the integration of creativity within RCT for couples. Emphasizing the potential benefits of incorporating creative interventions, the authors underscore how such approaches can deepen clients’ understanding of themselves and their partners while facilitating relational growth.
Rooted in the core tenets of RCT, the authors argue that creative interventions have the capacity to enhance counselor spontaneity, foster present-moment attunement, and ultimately lead to more effective couples counseling. Despite the long-standing use of experiential techniques and art-based practices in couples therapy, a noticeable gap exists in documented applications within the framework of RCT couples counseling. Thus, the manuscript posits that integrating creativity into RCT couples counseling could serve to develop a shared language, deepen comprehension of RCT concepts, and ultimately enhance therapeutic outcomes.
Central to the discussion is the foundational framework of RCT itself, which places chronic disconnection as the primary source of human suffering. Unlike traditional models that prioritize autonomy, RCT emphasizes the fundamental human need for connection and advocates for meaningful interdependence as a pathway to well-being. The narrative highlights the relational paradox inherent within RCT—the simultaneous desire for connection and fear of vulnerability—and proposes creative interventions to address and transform strategies of disconnection within the couples counseling context and emphasizing the importance of counselor flexibility, cultural competence, and ongoing training in effectively implementing these interventions within the RCT framework.
Looking ahead, we recommend further exploration into the effectiveness of creative RCT couples counseling interventions in enhancing relational competence, improving relationship satisfaction, and addressing cultural considerations. Additionally, we advocate for continued research on the role of counselor training and supervision in supporting the integration of creativity within the RCT framework, ultimately advancing the field of couples counseling. To effectively integrate creativity into RCT couples counseling, it is essential to provide counselors with comprehensive training and support. Here are some recommendations for training initiatives aimed at equipping counselors with the necessary skills and competencies
First, counselors would benefit from skill development programs designed to enhance their ability to integrate creativity into RCT couples counseling. These programs could include workshops and training sessions focused on techniques for fostering creativity, facilitating art-based interventions, and cultivating spontaneity in counseling sessions.
Second, it is crucial to incorporate cultural competence training into counselor education programs. This training would ensure that counselors are sensitive to the diverse cultural backgrounds and identities of their clients. By addressing issues of cultural humility, awareness, and responsiveness, counselors can effectively navigate cultural considerations when implementing creative interventions.
Third, supervision and mentorship opportunities are also vital for counselors embarking on the integration of creativity into RCT couples counseling. Ongoing supervision allows counselors to receive guidance, feedback, and support as they navigate the complexities of incorporating creative techniques into their practice. Mentorship from experienced professionals can provide valuable insights and encouragement throughout this process. By implementing these training recommendations, counselors can enhance their ability to effectively integrate creativity into RCT couples counseling, ultimately improving therapeutic outcomes and enhancing the well-being of their clients.
Conclusion
All humans grow through relationships and desire connection (Jordan, 2018) especially couples. The authors explore the integration of creativity into RCT for couples, emphasizing its potential benefits in enhancing clients’ understanding of self and others while promoting relational growth. Grounded in the principles of RCT, we assert that creative interventions can foster counselor spontaneity, attunement to the present moment, and effective couples counseling. Despite the long-standing use of experiential techniques and artmaking in couples therapy, there is a gap in documented use within the context of RCT couples counseling. The manuscript proposes that incorporating creativity into RCT couples counseling facilitates the development of a common language, deepening couples’ comprehension of RCT concepts and improving therapeutic outcomes.
RCT serves as the foundational framework, highlighting the theory's emphasis on chronic disconnection as the primary source of human suffering. RCT diverges from traditional models by prioritizing the fundamental human need for connection over autonomy, promoting well-being through meaningful interdependence. The article underscores the central relational paradox within RCT—the simultaneous desire for connection and fear of vulnerability. Strategies of disconnection, shaped by past relational experiences, are explored, and the manuscript advocates for the use of creative interventions to address and transform these strategies within the couples counseling setting.
The authors provide five creative RCT couples’ counseling interventions, namely reflecting on the relationship, creating a context constellation, honoring strategies of disconnection, visualizing relational images, and exploring shame and authenticity. These interventions are designed to align with RCT principles and enhance couples’ relational competence. The activities, ranging from timeline creation to therapeutic mask-making, offer a blend of art-based and experiential approaches to deepen couples’ awareness, promote vulnerability, and strengthen connections. The interventions emphasize the importance of counselor flexibility, cultural competence, and ongoing training in implementing these interventions effectively within the RCT framework.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
