Psychology and the Aging Revolution: How We Adapt to Longer Life Edited bv ).m Honn Qtulh and Normal Aheles 2000 326 pages. Hardcover

No abstract

This article presents the cognitive and emotive uses of forgiveness as a psychotherapeutic technique which enables patients to release anger without inflicting harm on others. The benefits, process, and preventive uses of forgiveness in psychotherapy as well as obstacles encountered to relinquishing anger are discussed.The treatment of anger is one of the most important areas in psychotherapy, and its management is essential for both the emotional wellbeing of the individual and for the good of society. The number of reports (U.S. Department of Justice, 1981) on the increased expression of anger and violence against children, teachers, spouses, and others indicates that significant numbers of people in our society do not know how to deal appropriately with their anger.When anger develops, there are three mechanisms available for dealing with this emotion. These are denial, expression, and forgiveness; that is, the surrender of one's desire for revenge.

As we have seen throughout this book, a clear definition is important for good therapy and assessment to commence. If therapists are to help a patient forgive, they must have an adequate understanding of what forgiveness is and how people go about forgiving (Enright, 2012). If therapists are interested in getting an initial assessment of the degree to which a person has forgiven someone, then they need to have a good scale that accurately reflects the definition of forgiveness. After all, if a patient shows, through a screening assessment, that he or she is deeply unforgiving toward, for example, a parent, then therapy will start at a different point than if the patient shows some degree of forgiveness toward the parent.Our purpose here is to review the five measures of interpersonal forgiveness that we have developed for clinical purposes. Four of these are for adults and adolescents. The fifth measure to be described is for children. The first to be described is our gold standard measure of forgiveness, the Enright Forgiveness 13 MEASURES OF INTERPERSONAL FORGIVENESS

EXHIBIT 4.1 The Phases and Units of Forgiving and the Issues Involved Uncovering Phase1. Examination of psychological defenses and the issues involved (Kiel, 1986) 2. Confrontation of anger; the point is to release, not harbor, the anger (Trainer, 1984) 3. Admittance of shame, when this is appropriate (Patton, 1985) 4. Awareness of depleted emotional energy (Droll, 1985) 5. Awareness of cognitive rehearsal of the offense (Droll, 1985) 6. Insight that the injured party may be comparing self with the injurer (Kiel, 1986) 7. Realization that oneself may be permanently and adversely changed by the injury (Close, 1970) 8. Insight into a possibly altered "just world" view (Flanigan, 1987) Decision Phase 9. A change of heart/conversion/new insights that old resolution strategies are not working (North, 1987) 10. Willingness to consider forgiveness as an option (Enright, Freedman, & Rique, 1998) 11. Commitment to forgive the offender (Neblett, 1974) Work Phase 12. Reframing, through role-taking, who the wrongdoer is by viewing him or her in context (M. Smith, 1981) 13. Empathy and compassion toward the offender (Cunningham, 1985; Droll, 1985) 14. Bearing/accepting the pain (Bergin, 1988) 15. Giving a moral gift to the offender (North, 1987) Deepening Phase 16. Finding meaning for self and others in the suffering and in the forgiveness process (Frankl, 1959) 17. Realization that self has needed others' forgiveness in the past (Cunningham, 1985) 18. Insight that one is not alone (universality, support; Enright, Freedman, & Rique, 1998) 19. Realization that self may have a new purpose in life because of the injury (Enright, Enright, Freedman, & Rique 1998) 20. Awareness of decreased negative affect and, perhaps, increased positive affect, if this begins to emerge, toward the injurer; awareness of internal, emotional release (Smedes, 1984) Note. This exhibit is an extension of Enright and the Human Development Study Group (1991). The references at the end of each unit here are the pioneering efforts and thus represent prototypical examples or discussions of that unit.