Nurses' experiences of core phenomena in the supervisor training programme
John R. Cutcliffe, Kristiina Hyrkäs, John Fowler in Routledge Handbook of Clinical Supervision, 2010
Forgiveness is present in the relationship between and reciprocal actions of the supervisee and supervisor. Reconciliation is defined as a process that takes place within a person. Both forgiveness and reconciliation have a deep religious meaning but are present in everyday situations. They can also imply healing, since reconciliation concerns wholeness, integration and acceptance. It is essential to address feelings of discouragement and dissatisfaction in supervision in order to be able to integrate the goodness and evil within each individual. In the context of nursing supervision, it is important that the supervisees’ experiences of weakness are not concealed, but accepted and given space to exist, since it must be possible to be weak and at the same time strong and competent.
Spirituality
Anne L. Strozier, Joyce Carpenter in Introduction to Alternative and Complementary Therapies, 2013
It is important to delineate between forgiveness and reconciliation. The latter implies that the offending party has apologized for what he or she has done and that a relationship between the two parties is restored. Reconciliation thus requires actions on the part of both the offender and the person who has been hurt. Forgiveness, on the other hand, can occur even when the other party is not aware of this process. Thus forgiveness and its possible healing are not held hostage to the actions of the offending party. Freedman (1998), as cited in Frame (2003), describes four options that can be discussed with clients in this regard: “(1) forgive and reconcile, (2) forgive and not reconcile, (3) not forgive and interact, (4) not forgive and not reconcile” (p. 195). While people can be educated about the price one has to pay for living without forgiving, such a decision is naturally that of the client and further exploration of issues may well be needed. Forgiveness is also not forgetting. While one can let go of the anger, it may still be important to recognize the danger in the situation and to exercise self-protection. A spouse who has experienced domestic violence and left the scene of the abuse may in time be able to forgive the abusing partner. At the same time, if the partner has not changed, it is crucial that she remember the danger and avoid placing herself at risk again.
Healing the Wounds of Infidelity Through the Healing Power of Apology and Forgiveness
Fred P. Piercy, Katherine M. Hertlein, Joseph L. Wetchler in Handbook of the Clinical Treatment of Infidelity, 2013
The following article presents one means of doing so, specifically through a comprehensive, interactive process of reconciliation focused on apology and forgiveness. The steps or “tasks” of the processes of forgiveness and apology as outlined here have been developed over the past 10 years through a combination of a detailed review of literature on forgiveness done for my doctoral dissertation, and clinical experience as a full-time therapist in private practice. Key literature regarding the conceptualization of forgiveness as a process includes Donnelly (1966), Rosenak and Harnden (1992), Smedes (1983), Hargrave (1995), Enright (1989), and Simon and Simon (1990).
Relational Social Justice Ethics for Art Therapists
Published in Art Therapy, 2018
It also is important to understand that reconciliation is not a conflict-free peace. Disagreements will occur. To disagree while still remaining in relationship, however, requires an ability to hold and work through tensions (Samuels & Warnecke, 2016). Williams and O’Donnell (2016) maintained that true dialogue across diverse perspectives needs to be perceived as an open-ended process in which the long-term benefits outweigh short-term pain: “Becoming a person of dialogue helps us to all live lives beyond the margins” (p. 287). To arrive at this point, the parties involved must maintain a balance between educating versus indoctrinating, listening versus silencing, and instigating discomfort versus intimidating through cultivation of reflective humility, open-mindedness, and sympathetic attentiveness that is alert to understanding why individuals believe what they do (Hytten, 2015). Continuous and difficult dialogue eventually might convert conflict into deeper understanding and communal transformation.
Forgiveness: protecting medical residents from the detrimental relationship between workplace bullying and wellness
Published in Stress, 2021
Ross W. May, Frank D. Fincham, Marcos A. Sanchez-Gonzalez, Lidia Firulescu
Forgiveness has been conceptualized as a coping behavior and has been shown empirically to operate as such in the context of interpersonal transgressions (Ysseldyk & Matheson, 2008). In this regard, it is important to note that forgiveness is conceptually unique from constructs such as denial, condoning, pardon, forgetting, and reconciliation (Fincham, 2015). Although limited research has shown cross-sectional relationships between forgiveness and bullying (e.g. see research in school children by Ahmed & Braithwaite, 2006; Ogurlu & Saricam, 2018), a novel aspect of this research is the establishment of forgiveness as a potential coping mechanism in the workplace to ameliorate the negative effects of bullying. This finding points to forgiveness as a potentially effective intervention point (Enright & Fitzgibbons, 2015). A large body of research has demonstrated the feasibility and utility of implementing standardized forgiveness interventions, even in group settings (see Fincham, 2015).
Restorative Justice Practices in Forensic Mental Health Settings – A Scoping Review
Published in International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 2023
Krystle Martin, Sayani Paul, Erin Campbell, Korri Bickle
Similar to restorative justice practices in other settings, the majority of the documents in this review (Cook, 2019; Cook et al., 2015; Power, 2017; Quinn & Simpson, 2013; van Denderen et al., 2020) mentioned that a case would be appropriate for restorative justice intervention when either of the parties were willing to participate and perceived restorative justice intervention as a step forward. In this respect, the documents reviewed did not indicate that this step was any different than other restorative justice applications. Only one study (Cook et al., 2015) mentioned that in addition to the willingness of both the parties, the complexities associated with planning restorative justice interventions for index offenses should also be determined. For example, in this study, a forensic patient with an index offense of stalking was considered an inappropriate candidate for restorative justice intervention because of the unanticipated risk involved. Similarly, another offender with an index offense of intimate partner violence was denied a restorative justice conference due to concern about any unanticipated risk for the victim (Cook et al., 2015). One study highlighted the need for established protocols for staff, as well as patients, to understand when face-to-face reconciliation could be used as an option to recover and heal (Cook et al., 2015).
Related Knowledge Centers
- Aggression
- Assertiveness
- Cooperation
- Empathy
- Prosocial Behavior
- Thought Suppression
- Trust
- Frustration
- Outline of Counseling
- Personal Grooming