Two hearts, one beat

Robert Falconer and Steve Roof hosted a webinar this summer on the intersection of Nonviolent Communication (NVC) and Internal Family Systems (IFS). They identified the potential power of incorporating both modalities to facilitate better relationships and inner wellbeing. Their conversation is paraphrased here, supplemented by my observations.

Both IFS and NVC are inherently respectful and curious, though each takes a unique approach to accessing Self. Generally speaking, IFS can augment NVC by helping people get clear on their Parts; NVC can augment IFS by helping people relate deeper and more safely with each other. I am personally struck by the simple genius of this association. Though I am neither an IFS practitioner/therapist nor a certified NVC trainer, I have studied both modalities in depth. I appreciate their uniquely practical value in helping to establish—and maintain—emotional wellbeing.

IFS and NVC both delineate very clear, step-by-step processes that are unmistakably effective. By utilizing them in tandem, I am better resourced (IFS) and better partnered (NVC). In their webinar, Falconer and Roof emphasized that these two traditions are both underpinned by Self and that both challenge the myth of the mono-mind. They stated and celebrated their shared belief that multiplicity of mind is the emerging new paradigm.

—
Adherents of each modality can benefit by sharing expertise with each other and by infusing common language with Self-led inquiry. Both modalities are “systems approaches” that allow for working inside people and inside relationships. If the IFS perspective proposes that “healing” is the reconciliation of Parts and Self, the NVC model proposes that by factually acknowledging the impacts of behaviors and words (ours and others’) we can state our feelings and emotional needs more clearly, in order to create solidarity and trust in our personal and professional relationships.

Falconer and Roof also acknowledged that when you’re exploring new territory, you’re going to be wrong. (Falconer joked that it’s important to try and be “usefully wrong.”) Pushing forward with new ideas and conversations like this should lead to the next proposition, the next paradigm. Neither presenter made any claim to being right about how IFS and NVC overlap or how best to utilize them. They presented their ideas as inquiry in the spirit of healing. They created a “theoretic box” in order to “climb on top and see what’s next.”

—
NVC can be defined as “externally focused.” It’s designed to help people remain centered and connected while in conflict, in particular. It helps people attend to the feelings and needs of both parties and to find the safe middle ground of shared experience (Self!). As most readers know, IFS is more “internally focused.” It’s designed to help people remain centered and connected, while in conflict with oneself (with one’s Parts). And just like there’s a self-awareness aspect to NVC, Self leadership is relational, with qualities like curiosity and compassion (listening without judgment and without taking things personally). Both theses modalities direct us to become our own primary caretakers. Blaming others is a barrier to this self-accountability and a barrier to Self.

Judgments are the tragic expression of unmet needs. We meet these needs and remove judgments by witnessing ourselves (IFS) and our partners (NVC). Both IFS and NVC acknowledge that expressing needs—and the feelings that underpin them—helps diffuse judgments of ourselves and others. This process of vulnerability (of retracting blame and adopting self-accountability) helps people to access the Self. In relationship, this becomes the shared experience of Self. We all have Self and can experience its universal expression. Safety and trust are created by recognizing and cultivating this fact. A stronger connection with Self makes for better connection with others, arguably our ultimate goal as social animals.

To be conscious of one’s Self means being aware of the thoughts and feelings that arise from stimulus and pausing before responding. IFS helps attune consciousness to this process, and NVC helps articulate it.

—
Marshal Rosenberg (1934–2015), who developed NVC, was a family therapist and mediator. He identified that judging others is perhaps the most common reaction to and perpetuator of conflict. He urged people to separate from this fear-based, controlling impulse by communicating what’s alive in them instead: our observations, feelings, and needs.

NVC, at its core, is basically a form of emotionally grounded asking. By front-loading the asking with clean observations about “what happened” and disclosures of feelings, we abandon self-protection—the shadow-goal of judging others. We create safety in conflict by showing vulnerability first then asking for what we need. This radical honestly disarms our “opponent” and makes them our ally. It makes for a win-win, as both parties can be “right.” Grievances can be addressed head-on from this common ground.

—
The Basic Steps of NVC—”stating your perspective, while rooted in Self”

Observation

Feeling

• Fear. Pain. Joy. Lust. Love. Disgust. Shame. Guilt. Sadness. Grief.
• Feelings are universal—experienced by everyone. The people in our lives provide the stimuli that drive us toward specific emotions (and feeling deeply in general).
• Related read: “The Archaeology of Mind: Neuro-evolutionary Origins of Human Emotions,” by Jaak Panksepp, PhD and Lucy Biven (W.W. Norton, 2012)
• The feeling of disgust is rooted in concepts of purity and arguably associated with conservatism (or at least white nationalism), according to sociologist Jonathan Haidt.

Need

Request

—
NVC and IFS are both explicitly language-based. They harness the power of structured language (methodology) into action, which is how the results are generated. NFC makes the connection to Self by ownership and accountability; IFS takes it further by clearing the path to Self. Both are basically telling us to be courageous enough to empathize with our Self—and the Self of others, thereby creating a spiritual union of sorts. These modalities challenge us to “have the conversation about having the conversation,” which sets up the safety necessary for vulnerability to emerge.

What are your Parts afraid of? What are the real fears behind the needs? That you won’t get what you need? Then what? Observe the process without judging, without labeling. Listen to the inherent need of the Part and/or of your partner. Listen for the feelings underneath the needs, because connection is experienced in these feelings, which are common to everyone on Earth. Learning is related to play, and both these modalities are playful in their exploration. Allow the dialogue to bounce back and forth. This helps identify the shared truth and settle on a course of action. Stay connected in the face of conflict! Address the shame.

The connection between personal healing and global movements is often ignored. By interweaving NVC and IFS, we highlight and celebrate this intersection. The personal is political. We heal the world by healing ourselves. We create communities and strengthen the fact of global interdependence by accepting full responsibility for ourselves (IFS) and to others (NVC). May this work have positive impact.