Have you been getting stuck with internal family systems therapy?
Chances are, whether you are new to this approach and healing yourself with it, or even if you’ve been working with a therapist for years – or if you are a therapist – there are some beliefs you hold that are simply not true.
Hi, I’m Lucille Aaron Wayne, and I’m on a mission to help people like you become your own inner healer.
I’m a Certified IFS therapist, a Jungian, and an art therapist.
It’s taken me over a decade to identify these seven critical truths about IFS, and you’re gonna learn them all over the next few minutes.
We’ll start with three specific false ideas that you can apply right now and replace with something more accurate.
And keep watching to the end to find out exactly what IFS can and can’t tell you.
I think you might be surprised.
Our first myth is: There are a set number of parts inside of us.
This is not true, but let’s start with how we get this idea.
When we first learn that we have different parts and that that’s normal, many of us are so excited that we scurry to write down all of our parts.
So maybe it’s, this part is my little girl inside that loves singing, and this part is the part of me that likes to plan ahead and makes a schedule for the whole day.
And this part is the one who wants to scare people off if I feel threatened and acts really angry.
It’s quite gratifying to identify these different parts of ourselves, their feelings, their memories, their jobs inside of us, their motivation.
And over time the number of parts tend to mushroom.
So it might start out with this many, and then the list gets longer and longer until maybe it fills a binder or even maybe this big.
I’m exaggerating a little bit here, but I – what I find is people tend to get discouraged as they discover more and more parts, and there can be a feeling of, “Oh my God, I have so many parts.
What’s going on here?
It seems like there’s more and more and more every time I work with my system.”
The reason it can be harmful to believe that we have a set number of parts is it sets us up for disappointment and worrying that maybe something’s wrong with us.
It can make us feel like we’re never gonna heal because there are 300 parts inside of us!
In addition, if we think that we just need this list and need to go down it, it gives us a sense of bravado and a real directing and controlling attitude towards our healing.
It can give us the impression that if we simply make a list of all of our parts – like this one – then that is our blueprint for healing.
We simply need to work with these parts, and then once we’re done, we are fully healed and self-actualized and that’s that.
So let me tell you how it really is.
We actually have an unlimited number of parts, and the way I like to think about this is neural networks.
Research has been validating the natural multiplicity of the mind that IFS has known about for decades.
If we think of parts as different neural networks that get activated, then I’m sure you can imagine how there are an unlimited number of combinations of neurons that can fire together, of memories and feelings that can come up.
And just as there is an innumerable number of combinations of neural networks, there are an innumerable number of potential parts.
But the good news is we don’t have to heal the parts one by one by one.
As we heal one that healing does sink into the other parts.
It takes off this responsibility of having to track, remember, and individually heal every single part.
The healing that we do with one part is going to affect the others.
And any parts that are ready for healing and want our attention right now are going to appear in the phase of life when they need you.
It’s not something that you have to dig and get out that list and check: “How is part number 52 doing?”
I hope this brings relaxation to you and now you know that as you discover more and more parts when you do IFS, that is completely normal and it doesn’t create a longer to-do list for you.
Our second myth is the idea: all parts have names.
That is not true.
If you have made a list of your parts or simply encountered a part, you might have had the temptation to ask the part its name.
And if the part has not said its name very openly and easily, we might push the part to tell us its name, and I want to discourage you from doing that.
I’m gonna tell you a personal example.
When I first trained in IFS, the very first day of our training – this was back in 2011, 2012 – we had done a lesson and then we went on our own with pieces of paper to get to know parts inside of ourselves.
And the part that I saw was a little girl who had pigtails and she was playing in the garden, climbing on the jungle gym.
She was having a great time.
And I went up to her and I encountered her and I said, “What is your name?”
And she was more interested in just playing, maybe having me watch her, um, be with her.
But not knowing how important it was to follow her lead, I kept insisting that she tell me what I should call her.
So finally, kind of like a kid would do, she just sort of shrugged and said, “Okay, Lizzie.”
So that was her name.
I wrote it down and I still remember that name today.
But you know what?
I have never encountered the Lizzy part since that very first day.
And the reason for that is our parts, if we are healthy – or if they are parts that are in a healthy section of our psyche – they change.
They are not static and brittle and always the same every single day from week to week, month to month, year to year.
If there is health and we’ve healed from trauma, our parts are going to be developing.
They’re gonna be fading in and out, and they may be taking different forms and fitting different names when they come to our consciousness.
The danger of forcing a part to tell us its name, of insisting on that, is:
First of all, it may damage the part’s trust in us, and that could indicate that we are in a Self-Like Part that’s more caring about doing IFS “right” – like a good student – than actually being with the parts.
Another danger is if we push our parts to have a name we may be discouraging them from their natural healthy dynamism and changing.
We may be trying to squish them into a box.
And finally, if we take the naming as a mandate, we could get ourselves into a state of worry.
For example, I might have easily thought, “oh no, I can’t find Lizzie. I’ve lost a part of me. Maybe something’s wrong with my system.”
And it’s – that’s not true.
That’s not the way it unfolded.
It was just natural that some parts don’t particularly care for names and we can honor that.
We can trust that when a part wants us to know something, whether it be a name or some other piece of information, if it’s important to the part, it is going to present that and make sure that we are aware.
Bottom line is: if parts want a name, they’re gonna tell us “I am so and so.”
And We can always check with a part, “is it okay if I call you the pigtail part?”
But we don’t need to hold that name as something inalienable, something of the part’s essence like it might be for a person on the outside.
All right, I hope this helps you just, you know, be a little bit more flowy with the model and trust that when part wants something from you or wants you to know it in a certain way, it’ll tell you.
Let’s talk about the next myth because it relates.
Our third myth is the idea that IFS must follow a certain script to work.
IFS is more susceptible to this idea of right and wrong and a certain, maybe, rigidity about how it’s applied, because it is unusually dialed in – more so than most other therapies in terms of the sequence of how to do it.
And that is because the exact precise wording has been developed with a lot of care to unlock more efficiently and more precisely what is needed for healing.
But the danger if we think that we have to follow a particular script to the letter is that we stop being authentic with our parts.
Or if you are a therapist with your clients and the real healing place and energy that happens with internal family systems and parts work is from a place of true openness and true, genuine presence.
So if we are pushing a particular script or worrying that, “Oh no, the healing is not gonna be going well, the session is off the rails because we’ve stopped following the script!” then that is an unnecessary worry.
And that stress may actually be detracting from your session.
So what are the questions that follow the script?
They are things like when you notice the part: How do you feel towards that part?
What does the part look like?
The fact is depending on the part or the person, you may not see the part visually.
What colors or textures or physical sensations come with the part?
You may not have an answer to that.
You might, but you might not.
And if you don’t, that is okay.
They’re simply questions.
Some more classic IFS questions are: What is the part’s job?
When did it get that job?
What is it afraid would happen if it wasn’t doing this job?
Those are all important questions, and it’s okay if you’re not following them in the exact sequence that they’re traditionally taught.
Just remember the person who developed IFS, Dick Schwartz.
He was a pioneer and he was able to help his clients heal through not having a script.
He had to develop this this particular set of questions, and what he did was he was simply present and really paying attention to his clients.
And that is – again – that is the baseline, that is the most healing thing you can do.
The truth you can replace this false idea with is: authenticity is key.
Authenticity is more important than asking any particular question or following any particular sequence.
And if you have that authenticity, you are on the right track.
Even if a particular question doesn’t have an answer or you don’t remember to ask it.
Okay, let’s talk about the fourth myth, and this is what I promised you.
It is: What exactly can IFS tell you and what can’t it?
Here’s the myth: IFS is a complete map of psyche.
All right, raise your hand in the comments below if you have believed this at some point or if you still believe it.
IFS is a very useful map and it’s almost like it has this key.
You know how maps have symbols and they will say, you know,
“This thing means mountain.”
And then when you look on the map, you’ll see that symbol and you know what it means.
We can use IFS like that.
So the key will say, “If you encounter this thing, it means it’s likely a Firefighter part.
If you encounter this thing, it means it’s likely an Exile that has huge feelings.”
It’s so important to have these maps and I want to challenge you to hold it as one map among several you can take out of your back pocket when it feels helpful and when it feels right.
And we can think about it like this: cartographers, people who make maps, focus on different layers, different dimensions, different angles of information.
So there might be a topographical map that talks about the elevation in a landscape.
There might be a map that shows the ocean currents.
There could be a map that shows relative temperatures at different times in the year.
All of these maps would be relating to the same object, Earth.
And similarly, we have all these different maps that we get to use as resources for Psyche.
In fact, there is not any one model that can give us insight into every aspect of human behavior, of our brains, of our development, of our feelings.
Our psyches are so complex and we need a mixture.
If you use only a map that showed you the elevation, that might get you into trouble when you need to know that you’re about to cross the border into a different country – you would need a different type of map there.
In my IFS Mastermind where you learn how to do parts work on yourself, we talk in depth about what to do when it seems like the IFS framework – or those questions, or that script – are not showing us what to do.
We talk about how to take out other maps, like Jungian analysis.
You can also take out a map of cognitive behavioral therapy, if that’s feeling useful in the moment, or a “map” of laughter therapy.
Do you remember when that was a thing?
The good news is that we’re not losing anything by holding IFS in its rightful place, its rightful size as one map – one very useful, one of many.
It actually enriches this process and I find it wonderfully inspiring that our inner worlds are so complex, we’re never gonna understand it all.
It really does take the pressure off and it brings in this excitement and this discovery, which keeps life interesting.
And it keeps this healing journey exciting because we don’t know exactly where it’s gonna go.
So now that we’ve busted these myths of thinking there’s a set number of parts, trying to force your parts to all have names, trying to follow the exact script and trying to make everything fit the IFS map, let me know in the comments below: Which of these four myths has held you back the most?
But you know what?
We’ve left out something very important.
That is: Who you are and how you hold yourself when you’re healing with parts work.
Go ahead and click on the link to part two and we’re gonna bust some more myths around this.
See you soon.
The Biggest Myths About IFS Therapy You MUST Know (Part 1/2)
Or anyone like me reading this article, I feel the IFS failure is what’s on the other side of parts discovery.
IFS does a great job of uncovering memories and traumas; what it does not do is help the person doing the uncovering gain any kind of closure.
Hi Suzanne, thanks for your comment. It makes me think of something I hear too often from clients of IFS therapy, that therapists are not facilitating unburdenings. Unburdenings are the entire point of uncovering the memories and traumas because you’re right – it’s not helpful to uncover that painful stuff and just leave it there! My guess, based on my work assisting at official IFS Institute training, is that a surprising number IFS therapists are uncomfortable with this process. However, that’s a failure of the therapists or follow-up to the trainings. The IFS model itself CENTERS unburdenings – which are the healing and closure process. These are supposed be taking place.
Thanks for the reply, and I agree. That said, I think the more appropriate criticism is that IFS does not do coping skills.
It’s my understanding that Richard Schwartz himself has not and does not intend to include coping skills as part of the IFS model. So, when I encountered my six-year-old molestation victim, I shut down. Because what else could I do? I had not been taught good coping skills to deal with these tremendous memories.
I *hate* IFS! Because I wish I could go back to not knowing. Seeing is painful. I almost quit except I didn’t know how to fix my hurt. I didn’t quit & my IFS therapist helped me through it. IFS is hard. And painful. (Understatement of the century. It’s the most agony I have ever felt.) But it’s helped me. I love my parts. They were my superheroes. And now we are evolving together. So fine, whatever, IFS works. Damn thing.
Hi Lucille, I am a therapist in my 70s and have done parts work with myself and clients for years. Recently I looked more deeply into IFS and immediately found a couple of parts that had been having a battle for 60+ years. It was very helpful. My question is, what might you recommend reading or listening to that could help me work on a few things without taking endless courses or paying a therapist a ton of money? I have a strong Buddhist/somatic practice that keeps me grounded in presence. Thanks, James
Hi Lucille,
I am so grateful I came across your videos and your website. Until I found them I thought I was going crazy. Some things just weren’t adding up and I began to have serious misgivings and doubts.
I recently began using IFS techniques and was finding them very helpful as a means to lighten the load of my psyche and start to understand some of the intrusive thoughts OCD throws at me. I wanted to learn a bit more so I decided to give “No Bad Parts” a listen. A part of me, no pun intended, wishes I hadn’t.
After No Bad Parts, I think a lot of misunderstandings come straight from Dick Schwartz. In the book, he basically implies that IFS is a complete way of looking at the world and can even be a substitute for religion. And if only everybody did IFS and discovered their Self, we’d have world peace.
I’m not sure why IFS can’t just be a means to unburden a worried or fearful mind so that the healed, mature mind can emerge. Instead, it has to be a means to achieve union with the soul or Buddhahood or Christ-consciousness. There are plenty of other established traditions that aim to do that, but they very clearly make a distinction between an unencumbered wise mind and union with the divine. Judging from a lot of online commentary I’ve seen, this gives it culty vibes – as does the fact that few people seem to be willing to question him on this or anything he says.
I also found the constant political and social activist messaging to be off-putting. It begs the question, must all Selves have the same worldview? And other stuff like saying covid was the result of Gaia being upset with us.
He also mentions how he checks several times a day to see if he is in Self. For OCD sufferers, this can lead to compulsion city. I think you address this in one of your videos where you say the goal is not to be in Self all the time – though it seems Dick Schwartz would beg to differ.
It has been difficult for me to separate the wonderful basic concept of IFS and its techniques from the opinions of Dick Schwartz. Are there other people in the IFS community of practice that love and use the technique but disagree with many of his interpretations? Also, do you see much of a parallel between IFS and Jungian shadow work?
Hi Robert, you’ve put this into words so clearly. Yes, yes and yes. (Even for people without OCD tendencies, the constant Self-checking can become a huge distraction – and actually undermine our self-trust in our system’s ability to regulate itself.) To answer your question, many have observed similar problems as you’ve mentioned here. But those with IFS credentials tend to keep their mouths shut. In fact, I don’t know of other official IFS therapists who have similar critiques to mine. I suspect this is out of fear of being ostracised by the IFS Institute. Nevertheless, great you found your way to my work. Your critical thinking is right on, AND you can still use IFS in the ways it DOES work to heal
Hello! I am new to IFS, and have been reading a lot. Still working through what we are, and what it all means. What we can say is this, we woke up, and stopped trying to fight each other. It was like listening to a group of people we didn’t know, all talk over each other at the same time. Everyone’s thoughts jumbled together, and we couldn’t hear the conversation. Now, it’s like hearing each individual perspective, and giving it space to accept what we are trying to do. We argue, and boy does it get heated, but, at the end of the day, we are all me. And that’s been life changing. These perspectives, each one is valid for its own reasons. Pain hurts, Jason doesn’t want to feel that. Life is intricate, Phayon has to take the wheel, grab some coffee and power through. Ninja keeps the defenses tight, even if that means pushing everyone away so we can feel safe. Kiel is the joy, the light and the spark of life we haven’t had in 24 years. This isn’t about which one is the strongest, or loudest, it’s about accepting each perspective from the lense it speaks from. Accepting that each voice is doing it’s best to promote safety and comfort, even if it doesn’t work out that way. I’ve experienced more self compassion since I gave space to myself, each of them, than I ever thought possible. I am all four at the same time, and only when I let all four be themselves have I found cohesion. I keep a journal, where each personality has freedom to express whatever they feel, even if it’s threats to the other personas (mostly Ninja). Family’s fight, they argue, they love hard, and keep each other in line. And my internal family now does the same. When one has a rough moment, the other three pause, and give space for the emotion to be fully expressed now. No more thoughts of “I shouldn’t be this way” or “that thought isn’t correct.” The thoughts are emotion encapsulated and distilled into expression. Therefore, they can’t be wrong. The job now, is acknowledging the emotion, and sitting with it, rather than pushing it down, or hiding it. Anyway, I found out who we were, then learned about IFS, not the other way around. Anyway, that’s my story, and I’m sticking to it, lol, for all my sakes. 😁
Hi Jason et. al,
YES! That happened for me long ago, too, and it’s made all the difference.
The only thing I would add is that these four parts of you are all there, AND there’s also a cohesive you. A sense of integration and being one is necessary to go about much of our day, and it’s a sign of health. It’s BOTH: both multiplicity, AND oneness, at the same time. Having the flexibility to go between these states is key.
This has nothing to do with the myths, this is just how I am personally feeling. I started doing IFS with a therapist about six weeks ago. I was raised by a borderline who hated me. I was an unplanned high school pregnancy. The other parent left when I was conceived. When I talk about some of the abuse I’ve been through, my therapist directs me to start dialogue with me at that age. And invite her to come and stay with me now. Invite her to have a pretty stress-free life living with me now, meet all of her needs, etc.
I’m trying to figure out how to say this and exactly what’s bothering me. I feel like we are trying to train my mind to believe that I had an alternate past. A happy past. That’s what it feels like. And I feel like that negates all the trauma and abuse I endured. There is something about it that reminds me of toxic positivity.
And I also think it bothers me that it seems like we’re training me to believe in a past that is separate from reality. So in my head, I can invite me as a teenager to come and live with me now and imagine stuff we would do here at my house now. But back then, in the 1980s, in reality, sometimes I was homeless because my mother kept kicking me out of the house when she was mad and I did not have supportive people. Best I could do was ask around until I found a parent who would let me stay at their house temporarily.
This is going to sound weird. It’s like I want some kind of credit for being the victim of so many abusive people and going through so many difficult situations. I want validation of my experiences,. And to pretend like none of that happened or to put the idea in my head that none of it happened, it’s almost like a slap in the face to me somehow. Like all that stuff is just supposed to become a figment of my imagination or something.
I don’t know a better way to say it.
Dear Rose, I don’t think your response sounds weird at all. It makes so much sense to me that you’re hesitant to program yourself into believing you had an alternate past, or that things were different than they were. You’re saying you want to stay rooted in the reality of what occurred. That is a very healthy thing to do – and it’s honoring of your younger self. What I’m guessing your therapist had in mind was for you to go to this “part” (the younger you) and first get to know her. Perhaps your therapist got a little ahead of him/herself in the instructions. We need to start from the assumption that this part of you is currently living in this past reality – literally, right now. The first step is to go to her, spend time with her there, and make sure that she’s aware of you being there with her. She needs to feel your presence and your care. That’s where we start with our parts.
When you’re with this part of you: If she/it’s comfortable doing so, she can share with you how awful it is. She can see if she feels like you really get what it’s like for her. Only once she has a strong relationship with you will she feel truly understood. She probably needs to share about her experiences with you. (Even though you know what happened, there’s something special about sitting with a part and having them tell us while they feel our presence.)
After that, perhaps she will ask for you to help her in some way. But any interventions can’t be rushed. Predicting that stage is putting the cart before the horse, and can get us trying to skip ahead over the critical being with. Who knows what possiblities might or might not open up for this younger part of you once she really feels your presence and caring, over time. Whatever unfolds, the key is that this part and her desires are centered. That means you would never do anything that makes her feel her reality is being denied.
If it’s feeling rushed or not right, that’s worth trusting. Time to slow down and really focus on being with.
The fact you’re listening to the voice inside that says “Something is off here” is a strong sign that you have good self-trust – a major building-block for your parts trusting you.
Hope this helps, Rose!
As a naive, grateful believer in IFS, I’m not sure what to think right now.
After 30 years of drug use, 3 suicide attempts and 11 recent visits to the ER because of overdoses, I went into rehab in December 2022 because others begged me to. I couldn’t care less. While there, I read and appreciated Building a Life Worth Living by Marsha Linehan and then watched some YouTube videos about IFS. I then listened to Greater Than the Sum of Parts by Richard C. Schwartz. Linehan’s book gave me hope. I know my therapist hoped I might be inspired by her turnaround and success (and it did somewhat). IFS, however, rang so true to me. Finally, I had an explanation for a lifetime of telling health professionals, “A part of me this and a part of me that…” and not having much more to say about what I meant.
Ten months later, I am sober and doing “so well,” according to those around me and even to myself using objective measures alone. I’m not claiming to know enough to teach or even tell others about IFS (although I do with struggling friends sometimes in layperson language), but I do mentally refer to this model to quieten self-destructive and suicidal tendencies when they rear up AND when I lose sight of a better/happier/truer me (self?) accessible to me.
I was Googling earlier because I was inclined to write about IFS (for a new Substack newsletter I created about my journey in and out of addiction; it’s called Good For Something), and I saw your link. I’ve read most of the above but haven’t watched anything yet, but I will because I want to know more/better/fuller.
But now, part of me (haha) wants to log off and un-remember that a critique of IFS exists because I fear that might unravel what’s working for me. Part of me knows I am a big boy who understands critique is healthy and that I can take what I want from a different point of view. The scariest part is the part of me that stumbles so easily when it comes to self-doubt, and when I say “stumble,” I mean the slightest reason to have my worst thoughts about my broken self confirmed. My solution is an immediate deep dive into suicidal ideation.
I have a therapist and an addiction counselor, but not in IFS therapy treatment. I have discussed it with my therapist, and he has been encouraging about anything I do that works for me.
My question is, how might a person like me who has come across your challenge to what I have been clinging on to do with this now?
Hi Andrew, thank you for sharing – and for courageously being in recovery. These critiques of IFS are really about common misunderstandings around the model. They’re here for people who are getting stuck with IFS, and that doesn’t sound like you! In other words, there is nothing to fear from the info shared here. I hope this helps!
I am in the middle of listening to a podcast about emotional regulation and IFS that says that emotional regulation is (can be?) a way of repressing parts, because parts show up through feelings, and the way to ‘regulate’ is for that part’s story to be told and witnessed. That goes against a boatload of training I’ve had as a therapist. It also doesn’t feel true to what I perceive as my own Self on a lot of levels. I know when self regulation is done properly it helps me tell my story and feel witnessed within myself. It helps me feel into my different parts and have serenity and connectedness. I am just working my way through a 26 hour+ off site training by Dr Frank and guests, so what do I know. I have gone through a few possibilities: 1) I am completely wrong about my own initial starry eyed idealisation of IFS. I’ve idealised other approaches in the past only to find they weren’t the one answer either. My concern here is some of the things I hear therapists say. I get a little concerned it borders on the approaches of the 80s/90s false memories/satanic panic. I don’t want to be wrong the way those therapists were wrong. So I take my concern seriously. 2) I have these doubts that get resolved the way that I was doubtful about evidence based SUD treatment and now I embrace a great deal of it while understanding its nuances and applications/ failures. 3) Its one or more of my parts being critical. Which then becomes some kind of tautology on some level LOL. 4) Its complex. Therapy is complex. We are complex. It just makes my brain hurt. Is that a part? LOL. Thanks for the validation here!!!!!
Hi Wendy, without being there it sounds like some of the ideas (like about emotional regulation repressing parts) can be mistakenly taken or presented as as a blanket statement. Probably these kinds of observations are sometimes accurate and often not accurate – and depend greatly on the context and particular system in question.
Either way, I hear you noticing that idea is contrary to what you feel deeply to be true. That’s exactly the turning inwards to our own inner compass that builds our self-trust … and, ultimately, our greatest healing!
PS – Yes to all the complexity!
Hi Lucille, a few thoughts arising in response to your recent blog posts and the comments here. When one is new to IFS (as a client), how can we discern what is this inner voice/inner compass from what is a part? would it be possible that a part could be insisting that the therapy is not “working”, and could this get mixed up with there being an issue raised from the inner compass? I suppose by listening it would unfold and become clear in time…?
I’m also curious when you say that parts work/IFS stopped working for you, are you referring only to solo IFS work or did you find that working with an IFS therapist ceased to work too? I’m very interested in the dynamics between therapist and client, finding the balance between taking responsibility for one’s own healing, and being able to trust that a therapist knows the model well enough (and hasn’t been led down the garden path of these “myths”) to be a trustworthy guide…. how can we know?
I have to confess that I’m pretty disappointed that the names, maps, “characters” element of parts is possibly a “myth”, as I got pretty excited and very interested in this after reading about it! For example I really enjoyed exploring Michelle Glass’s work. But she is clear about parts not being static, and changing over time, perhaps changing their name or other characteristics as they themselves develop within the system. From what you are saying though, the possibilities seem so infinite that it wouldn’t be helpful to do so much tracking, mapping or journalling? What about “externalisation”, if I’m understanding correctly, where parts are represented by an object or a drawing or something similar?
Thanks for all you do, and for the opportunity to ask questions/share thoughts.
Hi Lucille,
Thank you for opening up authentic discussion about IFS and misconceptions/limitations. I arrived here after a 20 year hiatus from IFS. I recently began a Ketamine program which utilizes the IFS model for those interested or already versed in. So I was delighted to discover my guide has done the work with himself and many many others.
However, we seem to be laser focused on parts work- and after reading your blog and watching your Youtube video, I’m aware of how your identified myths have entered my experience.
1) We approach the parts as static and discreet entities.
2) All inner experiences are cataloged in reference to these.
3) We are approaching it as a one map model.
3) The self is seen as the goal– Heal these discreet parts through the formal sequence to the point they feel safe and integrate harmoniously so that I live in a place of Self all the time.
The first few Ketamine / IFS sessions went well, in that I already knew some Exiles (who seem to have the most consistent identities) and a good familiarity with manager clusters and firefighters. However….
As I don’t dissociate, have visions or “visualize” as many do, my connection with parts is via emotional states and memories. I work with them on a level that doesn’t fit in with the medicine’s stated effect. This led to the question of whether some parts didn’t trust the medicine’s capacity to open me up more. So then we focused on the parts who might be protecting. Then the parts that criticized me for not having the experience as it “should” be. (there’s that “Should”)
Initially I spent time with a primary exile and immediately accessed the ability to witness, compassionately embrace and love her. She began to leave her dark box and sit outside and play. Another exile part allowed me to return to specific instances of trauma and be with her. Again, I had the ability to soothe, re-parent and actually change the scenario so she was protected by love.
But… in my last session, I experienced a totality of emotional pain and no part emerged, no self showed up, and I determined I had to let the excruciating process happen. (I could have sat up and walked away but didn’t). This felt like re-traumatization. And the focus on working with parts locked me in conceptually to enduring this.
Now there’s more questioning concerning what parts were involved with this– when in retrospect and having read your Myths, I think the current approach is actually denying me, and subtly forcing me, to rely on a system which blocks me from responding to my parts needs. ie- that there is only one map and one technique.
There are exiles from physical trauma as an infant who utterly cannot be alone in the dark suffering. But I soldiered on, rather than getting up, self-soothing, creating co-regulation with another human, somatic practice, or using the many other tools I have for working with trauma.
This leads to another Myth embedded in IFS I’m considering. That it has to be done in stillness, that being with pain is a good way to proceed if you can get to the parts that may be keeping it in that state. That relating to parts should be while sitting contemplatively and the only acceptable emoting is a good cry.
This is played out in the ketamine sessions too. I’ve suggested not using eyeshades and sitting up, as is the safe way to proceed and which my exiles need. But noooo, the procedure is to create a state where you can “go in” without distractions.
That one is supposed to work with anything only in a static, passive physical way– just isn’t how a human lives life, nor should we be put in a container of practice (not just a script) which may not suite the needs of parts.
I know the Ketamine element is a wild card. I chose it for the neuro-plasticity and its help with depression. Since I’m old school with Schwartz’s initial techniques, our approach seemed fitting but now I’m realizing this approach has the potential to harm me. If I, the living being who has the intuition to give my parts what they need, is limited to only a certain way of practice, Im denied the very thing which heals.
So a HUGE thanks and I’ll be sending your article to my guide. And yes, I’m going to be taking a different approach!
Hi Kiki, I read your comment with baited breath. Thank you for sharing with everyone and breaking down in detail how these myths are showing up. It sounds like this myth-busting comes at a critical moment – kudos to you for being open to it.
What I really hear is how that inner voice, your inner compass, is functioning properly – and how important it is to you to honor that. You’re not okay with ceding your inner knowing to anything – not even to the model of IFS.
That’s the greatest self-healing lesson we can learn and live.
Go Kiki!
I read your Reddit AMA then came here. It helped me with questions I havr about whether it’s safe to do IFS on my own. Cuz I’ve tried it but it got really big like a whole intense thing. I guess I’m not sure I’m doing it the way were supposed to. I appreciate it’s fine to meet different parts and if there are new parts that’s allright. My question for you is what if IFS used to go places but now every time I try it doesn’t feel like it’s going anywhere. Not meeting new parts even?
Hi Constanzia,
Having solo IFS work great then stop working is a common experience – it happened to me years ago, too! Often this indicates that a Part (usually a Manager) has taken over the solo IFS process. When this happens, other Parts become reluctant to participate. Another possibility is that the prior solo sessions felt too intense to the system and a Protector Part wants to make sure you don’t get overwhelmed, so it shuts down the process. Of course, every situation and system is unique and there’s no one solution. Have you checked out my IFS Mastermind? It’s a weekly program in which I guide you directly in the moment through dealing with these kind of issues – to make IFS your healing tool while honoring your system. We kick off a new virtual retreat the first week of September!
One of the aspects of IFS I have been struggling with is the idea that we are born with all our parts and then they get assigned roles. And then I juxtapose this with the concept that parts can have parts (and sub-parts can have parts too!) Are we born with all of those!? I just don’t have a good concept of where parts actually come from. So I really liked what you said in the video about parts and neural networks–ah parts can be like fleeting thoughts, a network that sparks briefly, or can be like the myelinated highways in our brains that are with us always.
Heather, fabulous that the neuroscience lens lands with you … neuro-nerds unite! 😄 I love the way you describe some parts as briefly-sparked neural networks and others as myelinated highways. That lands with my personal and clinical experience. Parts of parts, yes – for me when IFS concepts start to feel detached from meaning or usefulness, I remember we can hold IFS as a metaphor. No one knows if IFS is literally true. (aka do we literally have parts inside of us? Or is that a metaphor for something that feels like parts?) Regardless, if we act as if IFS is true, it works – at least for matters close to the model. Here’s a litmus test I pull out with IFS and theoretical matters if overwhelm starts to rise: Is this particular conceptualization useful and practical? Or is it intellectually interesting but taking me away from the actual healing (and sense of meaning)? This is getting afield of what you brought up, however! Re. are we born with all of these parts, have you heard Dick say that we’re born with the seeds for these parts, but they arise/develop as we age? Thanks so much for taking the time to comment!
Hmm.. the neuroscience lense actually makes me feel that parts may appear later. We form neural pathways as we grow, so wouldn’t that mean that parts may come and go (in adolescence with pruning)
Great initiative Lucille! IFS needs to have genuine discussion and critique around it so that it can evolve and improve if needed.
I feel that when parts are given too much of an identity, it can become problematic in some ways. For me it can feel like you’re forcing or creating this identity of this part and almost giving it too much power over you. Would be interested to hear your thoughts on the necessity of giving parts such a strong identity. In my experience you can gain their trust as long as you come with Self energy, and they don’t need to be given a whole life and personality of their own. After all, they are a part in your system, a part of you. They don’t necessarily be their whole own person. This seems to be a common thing that people write about on forums, and it feels like something that may be holding a lot of people back.
Is this the fragmentation that the commenter above wrote about?
Hi Martin, your voice is so welcome to this convo.
Right! This can unfold in an IFS session as overly shmoozing with Protector Parts. It’s an art to find the line, but if we spend more time with our Protectors than is necessary (instead of helping the Exiles) we wind up colluding with the system’s natural preference to maintain the status quo.
Good point. Just as we don’t want to overly emphasize Self (my Myths Part 2 video addresses this), overly emphasizing Parts isn’t balanced either. And if there’s a compulsion to do so, we can check: Is another Part trying to make us do this? Maybe a Good Student or IFS Enthusiast Part, or someone else?
This does speak to the fragmentation idea. I view IFS as part (no pun intended) of the healing process, and integration as another. The goal is to be able to feel like a coherent person and not have awareness of our parts prevent that.
Do you want to share an example of what it can look like when there’s an over-emphasis of a part’s life / personality?
The use of the word ‘myth’ itself creates greater disagreements. Another word may be more appropriate.
“Myths are clues to the spiritual potentialities of the human life,” Joseph Campbell
I see if I can come up with a word which would succinctly identify our tendency of wanting to own the truth versus the false.
Hi Gerd, welcome 🤗 Disagreement is welcome, too – we often grow the most from conflict! I’m comfortable with the word myth myself. Are any of the ideas in this list of 7 new for you?
I appreciate your openness, and your willingness to speak up. For me, as you said “IFS wasn’t the problem all along”. It seems to me that it’s partly people speaking for IFS, giving their interpretation as “the real one”, that can sway others into believing things like “I should be in Self all the time” or things like that. Or it is parts of ourselves that figure- well if Self is good, more self is better. I have some concerned parts that with your “this is the truth” statements about the myths, you might play into that also. But that’s for each of the readers and their inner systems to determine for themselves. How is it affecting us? Like you, we all need to determine what feels healthy or unhealthy to take in as beliefs, and examine them sometimes to see if they still hold. PS- I did like most of what you said in the video about your experiences. Just not the tone of “now here’s the truth”
Hi Wondering, I appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts! This kind of critical dialogue is exactly what this comments section is for. Across my work I emphasize people finding their own wisdom and I see your point with the “truth” language. That shows up specifically in my myths series as a counterpart to the word “myth.” Maybe there’s an alternative word – do you have any ideas?
Parts of me had similar thoughts about the “here’s the truth” aspect of countering these myths. I have some parts with names, and at the moment they like their names. So the issue in the myth is not with parts having names, it is with the blanket idea of “all” parts having names. Some do, some don’t.
Awesome you’re replying to Wondering’s comment, Heather. I love this dialogue.
Right, exactly! In some cases, honoring a part’s name can be a significant aspect of building a relationship with that part. There’s no one way it plays out with names. That’s kind of what my truths all say, actually! I’m all for moderation and “it depends.”
Finally some ifs criticism. It’s hard to take things seriously when people are positive all the time. I saw something about about IFS and fragmentation. Can you talk about that?
Hi Mark, I hear you – pretty much everything has positives and negatives. Fragmentation is one of my most passionate critiques of IFS and I’ll cover it in a future post. Basically IFS is very good at differentiation (untangling what’s going on inside, done by identifying parts). But if taken too far we can become one-sided with it and start to feel fragmented. That is, we lose a sense of wholeness because we’re constantly identifying parts. Does that help?