Family therapy with Spanish-heritage immigrant families in cultural ...

FAMILY T H E R A P Y WITH S P A N I S H H E R I T A G E IMMIGRANT FAMILIES IN C U L T U R A L T R A N S I T I O N D a v i d A. B a p t i s t e , J r .

A B S T R A C T : Increasing numbers of Spanish-heritage immigrant families in the United States are beginning to seek therapy for family conflicts related to their adapation to the new country/culture. This paper focuses on the difficulties experienced by these families and presents issues specific to therapy with them. Effective therapy with these families requires that therapists focus on clarification of the differential adaptation rates of family members and facilitate a resolution of the family's transitional conflicts(s). Six cases involving such families are presented.

"One never reaches home but wherever friendly paths intersect the whole world looks like home for awhile"(Hermann Hesse, Demian, 1919) Each year millions of people leave their country and culture of nativity and emigrate to the United States of America for a variety of reasons. Some do so as individuals, others as family groups, and still others as organized aggregates fleeing from political persecution or natural cataclysms. Revision of a paper presented to the International Round Table for the Advancement of Counseling, A n n u a l Conference, Utrech, The Netherlands, July, 1985. The author expresses appreciation to J u d i t h Landau-Stanton for her helpful review of an earlier draft of this paper. David A. Baptiste, Jr., PhD, is a Psychologist and Marital and Family therapist in the counseling center at New Mexico State University and in private practice, Las Cruce, NM. Reprint requests should be directed to the author at the Counseling and Student Development Center, New Mexico State University, Box 3575, Las Cruces, NM 88003. Contemporary Family Therapy 9(4), Winter 1987 O 1987 Human Sciences Press

229

230 CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

In the past, because United States immigration regulations favored Western European nationals, a majority of the immigrants were Western Europeans. Recent changes in immigration regulations governing Western Hemishpere nations have lead to a significant increase in the number of Spanish-heritage immigrants, from South, Central, and North America (Mexico). Unlike Western European immigrants whose culture and ethnicity tended to be more in harmony with the culture and peoples of the United States the new immigrants tend to be more removed from the culture of their adopted country. As a result, many of these people experience difficulties specific to their status as immigrants and the fact that they are in cultural transition. Many difficulties experienced by the new immigrants result from feelings of personal loss and the resulting grief as well as from the different rates at which individual family members adapt to the new culture. Frequently, it is the children, who tend to be more malleable and impressionable, rather than the adults, who immediately assume "American" behaviors, attitudes, values, and habits which are different from the usual ones expected for adults and children in the family's native country. As a result, variation in the adaptation rates tends to be more evident between the parent/child(ren) and or the grandchild(ren)/grandparent subsystems. This "difference" often creates stress and conflict between the parental and child(ren) subsystems because parents tend to employ more strict and rigid rules for the children in their attempts to recreate a bit of the "old country" and gain some measure of control of their children and, by extension, their own lives. Characteristically, because of a need to maintain control of their children, parents often idealize the old country and demand that children speak their native language at home, dress in the manner usual for their native country, and generally reject the adopted culture. Children, especially adolescents and young adults, often perceive identification with their native culture to be a disadvantage to "making it" in the United States. This frequently results in polarization of the family and problems for which some families seek therapy because some m e m b e r s - - o f t e n the younger ones--enthusiastically embrace the American culture while others reject it. The major purpose of this paper is to: (1) describe some common features of Spanish-heritage immigrant families in cultural transition, (2) present issues specific to therapy with such families (and couples), and (3) offer recommendations for effective therapy. Other issues

231 DAVID A. BAPTISTE, JR.

related to Spanish-heritage families' adjustment to the immigration process are also presented. Ruiz (1981) has noted that the term "Hispanic" is gradually replacing many terms such as Latino, Latin American, Chicano, Spanish origin, Spanish speaking, Spanish surname, and Spanish American as the generic label to describe all people of Spanish origin and descent (p. 197). The term "Spanish-heritage" is used in this paper because in working with them the author has found that family members individually and collectively identify themselves in terms of their national origins (e.g., Chilean or Bolivian) and are often offended when referred to as Hispanics, or worse, as Mexican-Americans. A majority freely acknowledge a common "Spanish-heritage" which links them with the Mexican-American/Hispanic communities in the United States, but remain fiercely nationalistic and openly reject "Hispanic" as an identifying label.

CASE REPORTS

The Perez Family The Perezs' (ages 38 and 35 respectively) and their four children, two males (ages 17 and 7) and two females (ages 16 and 14) came to therapy five years after arriving in the United States from Chile. At the initial interview the father complained that Maria (age 16) was: disrespectful (of her parents), failing in school, dressing inappropriately (punkishly), staying out past 9:00 pm with her Anglo boyfriend, and was not motivated to attend college (like her brother)." Mr. P. also suspected Maria of smoking marijuana and thus was afraid she would be influenced to engage in sex premaritally. He admitted not wanting his children to date or m a r r y Anglos. Although he did not think much of Mexican-Americans, a boyfriend or husband from that group was preferred to an Anglo one. Ideally, he prefered that his children marry Chileans since "They were Chileans and nothing else!" (The entire family, self-identified as Chileans and vehemently rejected other labels such as Hispanic.) Mr. P. emphasized that the family came to the United States for a better life, especially for the children. He lamented that the United States was not a good place in which to rear children--"too much going on!" Furthermore, parental and religious authorities were not as important to the children in the United States as in Chile. As a result,


he seriously considered returning to Chile but postponed the decision because of the possible economic and material loss to the family. Mrs. P. emphatically disagreed with Mr. P.'s assessment of the family's problems and his negative perceptions of America. Having attended high school in the United States for two years, she was not worried that the children would lose their cultural identity and become Americans; her primary concern was Maria's failing grades. However, for peace's sake she suppressed her enthusiasm for America, half-heartedly supported Mr. P.'s rules of conduct for the children but often covertly sabotaged his efforts. Mr. P vented his anger at Mrs. P., accused her of turning the children against him and "trying to make them Americans." He complained of feeling uncared for and misunderstood by his wife and children and lamented his estrangement from his children "iEllos son mi vida!" (they are my life!) He said, "Reina and the kids are happy in America so they think I should be happy." In later interviews, it became clear that much of the family's difficulty was the result of Mr. P.'s dissatisfaction with his life since arriving in America. Initially, he had expected much from America. Five years later, he was frustrated and dissatisfied because he was not as economically well off as he had hoped. Consequently, he withdrew from all but essential interactions with the culture, became depressed, and perceived a return to Chile as a solution for his disappointment.

The Paz F a m i l y Three years after arriving in the United States from Mexico, Mr. Paz (age 55) and Mrs. Paz (age 52) and their children (Raul, age 19 and Elena, age 15) sought therapy because of Elena's running away from home. The family's difficulties began in California when Elena, then age 14, began a romantic relationship with Manny, a 20-year-old Mexican-American man. Her parents objected to the relationship because (1) Manny was Mexican-American (Chicano), and (2) the family came to the United States for a better life for the children and, Mr. P. feared that if the relationship led to marriage "Elena will not make anything of herself." Despite parental objections, the relationship continued. The parents physically punished Elena and severely restricted her activities. The conflict escalated! Since the efforts to end the relationship failed, the P.s' moved to New Mexico. Following the move, however, the conflicts worsened; Elena ran away from home twice in three months and threatened to do so again. Elena perceived her parents to be old fashioned, inflexible, and rejecting of her friends, her music, and her mode of dressing. She complained that, "They want me to dress like una vieja (an old woman)."


She also complained that her parents denied her requests to visit friends in California; they feared she would see Manny. She emphatically denied any intent to see Manny! She only wanted to see friends-"We don't have a phone; they think I will call Manny. They dislike him because he is not Mexicano (A Mexican male)." The parents admitted disliking Manny (a dish washer), in part, because he was not Mexicano and in part, because they perceived him to be unambitious to improve himself. Mrs. P. emphasized that Elena's actions negatively reflected upon her and Mr. P.'s abilities as parents. She said "Elena is too American! She don't speak Spanish at home any more, we don't speak English good." She reiterated the family's reason for moving to the United States and expressed the feeling that Elena was unappreciative of the parental efforts to give her a better life.

The Lopez Family Mr. Lopez (age 43) and Mrs. Lopez (age 39) and their three children (two boys, ages 16 and 10, and a girl age 15), came to therapy three years after moving to the United States from Honduras. Mrs. L.'s father (age 65) and mother (age 60) also lived in the home. The initial interview focused on intergenerational conflicts involving all three generations. The family's conflicts resulted from the in-laws' (grandparents) dissatisfaction with America and their usurpation of parental authority. Mr. L. and his family had been excited about leaving Honduras, but his in-laws who lived with them had not been; they disliked leaving their extended family and believed they were too old to "start over." Mrs. L., an only child, used her parents' attachment to her own children to entice them to move with the family despite her husband's objections. Initially, the family, including the in-laws, had been excited and enthusiastic about being in the United States. When the teenagers, especially the girl, began dating without a chaperon, dressing modishly, playing pop rather than Spanish music, speaking English at home as a first language, and not catering to the grandparents, the grandparents criticized them and their parents and agitated for greater parental control of the children. At first the parents ignored the grandparents' complaints. Later, to appease her parents, Mrs. L. imposed stricter restrictions upon the children and requested Mr. L. do likewise. The children rebelled and appealed to Mr. L. for relief. As a result, the subterranean conflicts between Mr. L., his wife, and his in-laws became explicit. Mrs. L. expressed feelings of being caught in the middle and divided in her loyalty. She said, "I know children behave differently in

234 CONTEMPORARY FAMILY T H E R A P Y

America than they do in Honduras. He don't understand, I give in to my parents' because they are older and I feel guilty for bringing them here." Since arriving in America, her parents had not made friends (they left the house only with the family), had not made an effort to learn English (the other family members were fluent in English prior to emigrating), and depended upon the grandchildren to translate whenever they visited a physician or other places of business. The children resented the dependency upon them and often agreed in jest with their grandparents when they threatened to return to Honduras.

The Montero Family Mr. Montero (age 39) and Mrs. Montero (age 37) and their children Sergio (age 19) Carmen (age 17) came to therapy four years after iramigrating to the United States from Costa Rica. The initial interview focused on conflict between Sergio (a college freshman) and his mother. Mrs. M. vehemently complained that Sergio drank too much, smoked marijuana, dated Anglos, and seemed uninterested in school. Mrs. M. said that she felt betrayed by the children since both were openly disrespectful of her and Mr. M. She blamed American television and culture for changing them. Both parents emphasized that they moved to America for a better life for the children. During the initial as well as subsequent interviews, Mrs. M. openly expressed regret for coming to America and a longing to return to her mother and Costa Rica. She said, "The worst part about coming to America was leaving my mother and family behind," and blamed Mr. M. for "Talking me into leaving Costa Rica." In Costa Rica, Mr. M. had worked for his mother-in-law. A primary motive for emigrating was to escape her domination and be his own boss. In America he managed his own restaurant. He said, "My wife is too dominating of Sergio. To avoid problems I agree with her in front of the children." Sergio revealed that the family had begun planning to emigrate at least five years prior to the move. At that time, the children were enrolled in an English language (only) school and the parents began to improve their own English language fluency. Once in the United States, however, the children were forbidden to speak English at home because Mrs. M. did not want them to forget Costa Rica. Furthermore, although the family chose to live in New Mexico because of its large Hispanic population, Mrs. M., in particular, disliked Mexican-Americans and openly objected to the children having Mexican-American friends. Sergio said, "They wanted to come to America but they don't like Americans. My mother is afraid Carmen and I will become Americans, so she tells us which music and TV shows to like, who to date,


and how to dress; I feel like a prisoner! My mother keeps talking about going back to Costa Rica after Carmen and I finish college, but I know Dad is not going back. I don't know why the big deal about being Costa Ricans. We are in America, we should be Americans!"

The Rosada Family Two years after immigrating to the United States from Colombia Mr. Rosada (age 26) was referred for therapy because of depression and persistent headaches which had begun approximately one year after the move. At interview, Mr. R. reported that he and his wife, Julia (age 24), came to the United States without their three children, twin boys (age 7) and a girl (age 4). His headaches and depression initially appeared about the time Julia began night school preparation in California for the high school equivalency examination. Mr. R. reported that Mrs. R. made friends easily and was invited to many social affairs. Encouraged by her new found popularity, "she behaved like a [sic] American woman." These behaviors sharply contrasted with Mr. R.'s expectations for her. As a result, he severely restrict her behaviors. For example, he forbade her to associate with Yolanda, his unmarried American born niece whom he accused of leading Julia astray. Yolanda had introduced Julia to the friends whom Mr. R. perceived to be negatively influencing her. Unable to "control" his wife in California he moved to New Mexico upon advice of his brother. In an individual interview Mrs. R. appeared as a self-confident woman. Her enchanting beauty contrasted with her husband's ordinary appearance. She vehemently complained that her husband treated her like a child much like his parents did in Colombia. In Colombia, Julia, her husband, and children had lived with her in-laws who controlled their lives with an iron hand. For example, they unilaterally imposed the decision that the children should remain in Colombia and ignored Julia's objections. Julia believed that her in-laws kept the children to force her and Mr. R. to return to Colombia--she declared that she did not plan to return permanently! According to Julia, in Colombia, Mr. R. enjoyed a social life, she stayed home. "That was what his parents wanted." The move to the United States reversed their situation. Since arriving in the United States, Mr. R. had made no friends (in L.A. or New Mexico) and was not involved in activities beyond work. His English fluency was still poor, thus he only watched Spanish language TV. He did not like being in America! Julia believed that Mr. R. did not like Yolanda because, "She show me how to be different." During this and subsequent interviews it was clear that Julia had become much more Americanized, in dress, behavior and attitude, than Mr. R. and had made personal changes which challenged his con-


trol of her (he feared losing her to another man). His headaches, then actual and figurative, as well as his depression were the results of his failed attempts to maintain the status quo.

The SantiUana Family Mr. and Mrs. Santillana (ages 41 and 39 respectively) and their five children (two females, ages 20 and 19, and three males, ages 18, 16, and 12) came to therapy 18 months after arriving in the United States from Bolivia. The initial interview focused on Mrs. S.' complaint that Mr. S was planning to return the family to Bolivia because of problems with the girls, Isabel and Beatriz. In Bolivia the girls unquestioningly obeyed their father's directives, but here they openly challenged him. For example, they stayed out later than he recommended, wore slacks and shorts, and dated Mexican-American men despite paternal objections. Mrs. S. disagreed with her husband's assessment of the problem. She believed that the girls were only trying to be like American girls their age. Laughingly, she said, "My husband forget how to be young!" Mr. S. was not amused; Isabel and Beatriz were disrespectful! He emphasized that he came to America to give his children a "better life;" he was disappointed with his daughters' behavior. He was also concerned that Carlos and Paco, the two older boys, would emulate the girls' behaviors. He had sacrificed to get his children to America; if they did not want to do better, he would return to Bolivia. In a separate interview with the children, the girls accused Mr. S. of not understanding the difference between the American and Bolivian cultures. They pointed out that the family in actuality came to the United States so that the boys could become engineers, something Mr. S. was personally unable to do in Bolivia. Beatriz and Isabel argued that they were old enough to select their own friends and learn to drive, which Mr. S. had forbidden. Carlos suggested that his parents, especially his father, missed Bolivia much more than the children; neither parent was involved in activities beyond work and church despite opportunities to do so. Mrs. S. had accepted some social invitations from coworkers. Mr. S. did not report receiving any and frequently influenced Mrs. S. to reject invitations she received. Unlike their parents, the children were involved in the culture in a variety of ways.

S P A N I S H - H E R I T A G E IMMIGRANT FAMILIES: SOME COMMON F E A T U R E S It is clear that there are a variety of problems which can be associated with and are experienced by Spanish-heritage immigrant fami-

237 DAVID A. BAPTISTE,JR.

lies. However, there are some common features which differentiate the immigrant families who successfully cope with the usual loss, grief, stress, and crises of immigration and acculturation to an adopted country and culture from those who do not cope successfully, resist acculturation, and experience family crises. In the cases reported, the author found: 1. Characteristically, family members were unaware that migration and acculturation would be stressful experiences which could result in family conflicts. Furthermore, since the conflicts often occurred after a lapse of time (for some families as much as five years) following their arrival in the United States, most families tended not to ascribe any importance to the move itself as having contributed to their problems. Instead, they blamed American culture for corrupting the children and creating the problem(s). 2. Individuals in all families, even those active in the new culture, experienced a sense of loss and concomitant grieving for the "old country" whether or not they were consciously aware of doing so. 3. In five of the six cases cited (the exception was the Rosada's), conflict was introduced into the family through the children, primarily teenagers, who tended to assume "American" behaviors, attitudes, values and habits much more rapidly than their parents, thus threatening the family's value system. 4. In most families, the behaviors of females, (children and adults) were more closely regulated and deviations more harshly sanctioned than were similar behaviors by males. 5. In all cases, at least one family member tended to have unrealistic expectations for life in the adopted country. When initial expectations were unfulfilled or when family members felt threatened by the new culture, a common response was to withdraw from interaction with the culture and demand that other members do likewise. 6. In all cases, at least one family member could be identified as being "responsible" for the move from the home country to the United States. 7. As a group, parents perceived the opportunity for a "better life" for the children as the primary reason for coming to the United States. 8. In all cases, at least one family member was directly or indirectly "anchored" in the "home" country and thus experienced


loyalty conflicts between the adopted country and the country of nativity. 9. Many families experienced difficulty in adapting their old family functioning rules or were unable to adopt or develop new family rules conducive to effective functioning in the new country.

T H E R A P Y I S S U E S OF I M M I G R A N T F A M I L I E S IN C U L T U R A L T R A N S I T I O N Each of these families presented its own unique circumstances and issues related to its inability to cope adequately with the usual loss and stress associated with migration. Clinical experiences with these families, however, showed that there are some common issues which can be expected in therapy. These include failure to mourn the loss of the country of nativity, fear of losing the children to the new culture, loss of extended family support networks, discrepancy between the family's pre-immigration expectation for the new culture and the reality of living in the new culture, development of new family functioning rules, and isolation of adult family members.

Failure to Mourn the Loss of the Country of Nativity Whether they openly admit to feeling so initially, virtually all immigrants experience a sense of loss at having left their country of nativity with its "safe" and familiar ways which were an important part of their individual and collective identities. This tends to be true whether or not the decision to leave was a voluntary one, or forced by the decisions of others (e.g., political) or by natural disaster (e.g., faroine or earthquake). Often, because the family collectively may have attributed a positive motive to the move (e.g., making a better living), the euphoria attendant to being in the United States as well as the need to satisfy basic survival and adaptation needs in the months immediately following their arrival, tend to either dilute, obscure, and/or repress any feelings of loss or longing for the "old country." Consequently, since migratory stress tends not to be felt in the weeks or even months immediately following migration, a majority of these families manage to establish and maintain a relative moratorium on longing for the "old country" and the problems attendant to such feelings. Predictably, however, the apparent calm (which frequently is a product of


denial and which for some families can extend well beyond the first year of residence) tends to give way to an era of major family disorganization and crisis in which the stressful nature of the migratory experience, its cumulative impact and the long range responses to migration takes place (Sluzki, 1979). It is at this point in the migratory experience that the lack of skills necessary to cope adequately with adaptation to the new culture can trigger massive crises of family disorganization or multiple symptoms of maladaptive behaviors.

Fear of Losing the Children to the New Culture Like most families seen in therapy, immigrant families experiencing transitional conflicts generally come to therapy through the children rather than through the marital couple. Unlike other conflicted families, however, an important issue and a potent fear of immigrant families is the potential loss of the family's children to the adopted culture since it is the children who move more rapidly than the parents along the transitional pathway to acculturation (Landau, 1982). Indeed, it is the children who frequently adapt to the new culture (e.g., language and values) while their parents remain cautious about changes and/or reject outright the new culture and attempt to maintain their culture of origin at all cost. This conflict of direction precipitates and unleashes a clash of values and styles between subsystems, a clash which strikes at the heart of the family's value system and the myth of parental control. Unfortunately, in attempting to cope with the stress resulting from the conflict and to protect their children and their traditional values, these families tend to become progressively more enmeshed and close both their ranks and boundaries to external systems. Enmeshment is often manifested as increased restrictions and rigid imposition of traditional values designed to retard the children's Americanization. For example, parents often demand that children dress in ways reflective of the "old country,"reject the usual music of their peers, become more involved with religion, reject specific types of friends, and speak English as a second rather than a first language. The clash of values and styles places children in an impossible bind. A majority of these families migrated in search of a better life. Consequently, in order for the children to fulfill that dream and show their appreciation to their parents, they need to achieve in the new culture. In order to achieve, they need to let go of some of their native culture and make new friends, improve their English, and become accul-


turated. To do so, however, is to risk alienation from the family. On the other hand, rejection of the new culture assures that acculturation will not be achieved or at best be delayed.

Loss of Extended Family Support Networks Although most immigrant families in therapy present as nuclear families, they invariably report that in their"home" country they were an integral part of an extended family. Extended families fulfilled a variety of mutual aid and support functions including help in resolving intrafamilial conflicts. The move to America results in a loss of that support. Consequently, when these families experience intrafamilial conflicts which they are unable to resolve within the nuclear family, they begin to feel a sense of incompetence and doubt their individual and collective abilities to cope effectively with the new culture. The need to turn to a surrogate extended family (the therapist) to resolve the family's conflict is often perceived by the family as additional proof of their incompetence and as such is severely threatening to the family's sense of personal power and self worth. Loss of the extended family support is severely felt since it occurs at a time when the family feels most vulnerable in the new culture.

Discrepancy Between the Family's Pre-Emigration Expectations for the New Culture and the Realities of Living in the New Culture Landau (1982) has observed that a family's satisfactory adjustment, or lack of it, to a new environment depends on the extent to which its original expectations for the migration compares with its reality. For many immigrant families, the discrepancy between the original expectations for life in the United States and the reality of living in the United States is a central issue for therapy. Without exception, these families come to America in search of a better life. Consequently, many family members individually and collectively initially express positive expectations and optimism with regard to life in the new country. However, as they become involved in the new culture, and encounter difficulties in attempting to understand the specifics of the culture, they soon realize that their initial expectations might not be fulfilled. Realization of this fact often leads to frustration which, in turn, leads to loss of respect and admiration for

241

DAVID A. BAPTISTE, JR.

the new country and idealization of the old country. Characteristically, the family's frustration is externalized by one member who expreses negative attitudes about the new culture and against whom the other members must defend the new culture. At this point, the family experiences severe crisis and conflict which is manifested as either one or all of the following transitional problems which may require therapeutic intervention: unbearable stress, greater enmeshment (characterized by closed family ranks and fierce loyalty to the old country and its ways), and individual psychosomatic complaints (e.g., headaches). If, on the other hand, the reality of life in the new country meets or exceeds the family's expectations in terms of the advantage derived, the family usually negotiates the adjustment process with minimal difficulty which rarely, if ever, requires therapeutic intervention.

Development of New Family Functioning Rules It is an axiom of immigration that the rules governing family functioning in the indigenous culture may not apply in the new culture. For some immigrant families, rules governing family functioning in the old country will be adaptive in the new culture and need not be changed. For other families, rules which were adaptive in the old country will undergo significant changes if they are unadaptable in the culture and circumstances of the adopted country. Invariably these families discover that behaviors which elicited the "desired results" in their native country (e.g., verbally forbidding or physically disciplining children) are, in the new culture, no longer effective or bring different results (e.g., children running away). A new culture often brings with it new value systems and different role expectations which challenge and disturb the family's reality and rules for interactions. Selvini-Palazzoli, Cecchin, Prata, and Bsocolo (1978) have observed that families are self-regulating systems controlled by their own rules. Consequently, a way to eliminate conflicts in a family is to change the rules. However, although many immigrant families need to change their old rules, such changes are not easily made. In order for a family to change its styles and rules, the family must activate delicate and complex rules about changes of rules (Sluzki 1979). In many cases, immigrant families have not previously established these rules about rules and must face the still more difficult task of developing them for the first time in and unfamiliar environment. Under benevolent circumstances, most families are capable of


adapting their old rules and developing new ones which in effect are also the development of a new family identity. Because of the disequilibrium resulting from the stress attendant to migration, however, it appears that many immigrant families experience significant difficulty in learning the meta rules of the new culture and subsequently reworking their old rules so that they are compatible with the new culture, thus ensuring greater adaptation.

Isolation of Adult Family Members One measure of a family's successful adaptation to a new environment is the degree to which the family individually and collectively interacts with that environment. For immigrant families who simultaneously must learn a new language and value system and deal with loss of the "safe and familiar" and of extended family support networks, interaction with the new culture is, at best, severely threatening and, at worse, debilitating. Consequently, in response to the potential threat implicit in the challenge of change, some family members will cling to the past rather than risk the insecurity of the unknown. Those members become isolated, not only from the new community, but from the more adaptive younger family members as well. Younger members tend to move more rapidly along the transitional pathway in adapting to the new environment while older members tend to be very wary of change or outright reject it. Isolation occurs at two l e v e l s - - t h e past and the p r e s e n t i a n d is full of paradoxes. Isolation in the new culture tends to be more severe because the family member is also isolated (not merely cut off by distance) from relatives and friends in the old country. Consequently, transition from old to new culture is abrupt rather than gradual. Many adult immigrants are unlettered in Spanish, although they are able to speak the language and can read at an elementary level. As a result, they are unable to keep in touch by mail and, since they also tend to be uncomfortable with the phone, must depend upon children or grandchildren to write and read letters from friends and relatives in the old country. Initially children cooperate but later complain of being burdened by the task. As children become more involved in the new culture, they often cease to perform such tasks, thus disrupting the connection between older family members' links to the past. In the author's experience, isolation from the past often manifests as depression and/or mourning for the past. However, because the parent(s) came to America for a better life, they experience severe conflict

243


between the need to mourn the loss of the past and feeling that mourning is inappropriate. The conflict is resolved, in part, by clinging more to the past and to the children, who, in turn, often feel dragged down by the situation and increase their disengagement from the parent(s) and or grandparent(s). Isolation in the new culture tends to be, in part, an attempt to deal with the feelings of disloyalty resulting from the loss of the past. Families and/or individuals less familiar with American culture tend to feel more threatened than families familiar with the culture. As a result, they withdraw from meaningful interaction with the culture and become isolated within the family. Either in reaction to the threat they perceive or because they truly are threatened, many immigrants will assume an air of superiority toward Americans (e.g., dislike of Mexican-Americans). Paradoxically, these persons will acknowledge that they want to be in America at the same time they feel threatened by America and dislike Americans. They often will convey an unspoken but yet perceptible attitude that America and Americans are decadent. For many of these families, their life in America may not have substantially improved compared to life in the old country. Furthermore, not only have the rules of interacting with the wider society changed, but rules for intrafamilial interaction may also have changed (e.g., a daughter dating whomever she wants without input from her father). Dissatisfied and fearful of being engulfed by the new culture, the disaffected member frequently will suggest that the family return "home" but not really wish to do so (e.g., he/she will take no action to return the family "home.") The isolated member is often faced with divided loyalties, wanting the rewards the new culture has to offer but being compelled to decide between clinging to the past and coming to terms with the present. The consequences of isolation are many, but greater idealization of the "old country" and its ways, overt expressions of negative attitudes and feelings about the adopted culture, and imposition of rigid restrictions on children are frequent responses.

RECOMMENDATIONS

FOR THERAPY

Experience in working with immigrant families of the type described here has resulted in an appreciation of some of the pitfalls that therapists may encounter in working with such families and the recognition that therapeutic interventions with them can be successful.

244

CONTEMPORARY FAMILY THERAPY

With such families the first task of therapy is understanding the family's system and the specific point(s) around which the family's conflicts are centered. Equally important is an understanding of the importance of resettlement for the family as individuals and a group. For example, the motives for emigrating are usually established by the parents without input from the children. Once the family arrives in America, there tends to be a significant discrepancy between what the parents want for children and what children want for themselves. To be effective with these families, therapists need to clarify the differential adaptation rates of family members and facilitate a resolution of the family's transitional conflicts (Landau, Griffith, & Mason, 1981). Therapists also need to be moderately fluent in Spanish or consider use of an interpreter. Despite the limitations of this approach, an interpreter who is not a member of the family and who is familiar with the family's native culture can help bridge the linguistic, cultural, and even social class gaps between the therapist and the family. In many cases therapy sessions may be conducted both in Spanish and English since many families feel much more comfortable expressing some intense emotions in Spanish. Because of the number of Spanish-heritage families migrating to the United States, many family therapists will at some time encounter an immigrant family in transitional conflict. The following recommendations are offered. . Accept the problem in the way the family frames it and in the manner in which they wish to approach it. Most immigrant families are unfamiliar with and fearful of the therapeutic process. As a result, they often request and reject therapy simultaneously by presenting two levels of messages. One message expresses, either directly or by implication, a wish for change. The other is best expressed with the words, "We dare you to change us" (Watzlawick, Beavin & Jackson, 1967). The family frequently presents to the therapist a much more positive assessment of its functioning than is true. Members often dismiss with a wave of the hand the concerns of the referring party(ies). Frequently the therapist is told that, "all is well," or "the situation has been corrected," or "the priest is helping us" (when in fact they may have spoken with the priest only once), or at the extreme the family will solve the problem by returning "home." Unless the therapist recognizes these statements as expressions of the family's unfamiliarity with

245


and fear of the therapeutic process, he/she may erroneously accept as fact the family's positive assessment of its functioning. For many of these families entering therapy is a painful reminder that all is not perfect in a country to which they came to improve their lives. Contrary to their assessment, however, the family often is still experiencing significant psychological and or physical distress and as a last resort was referred to therapy because members seemed unable to relieve the distress on their own. Because these families fear and are uncomfortable with the therapeutic process, therapists need to modify their usual approaches when working with them. Here therapy will involve much more teaching and information giving. A strucrural/strategic approach in conjunction with behavioral and or transitional techniques (cf. Landau, 1981) has been effective. The author has on many occasions found it necessary to conduct therapy with immigrant families while not being perceived by them to be doing so (cf. Aguilar, 1976 and Landau's link therapy, 1981). For example, when a family reports that the problem(s) for which it was referred no longer existed, but the therapist's observation confirms continuation of the problem, the therapist will engage the family in an ostensibly social conversation similar to the kind in which one engages with friends. Such conversations allow the therapist to engage the family in therapy by supporting its protective homeostasis (i.e., accepting the way in which the family frames and approaches the problem). Additionally, such conversations psychologically disarm the family, allay their fears, and reassure them that they are still in control of their lives. Most families entering therapy are usually frightened by the possible loss of homeostasis and become strongly invested in maintaining it regardless of how maladaptive it may be (Selvini-Palazzoli et al., 1974). Fear of losing their homeostasis can cause immigrant families to be especially sensitive to having their inadequacies pointed out since this could result in loss of feelings of pride, personal power, and competence, or having to accept a less-than-perfect life situation in America. The conversations also allow the therapist to assess the family's readiness and willingness to proceed farther. If the family is unwilling to engage in a social conversation or to

246


agree to return for another hour, that would signal the end of any therapeutic intervention by the therapist. If, however the family agrees to return, the therapist can accept that as a signal of their willingness to open their boundaries and proceed farther. 2. Identify the current phase of the family's migratory process. Sluzki (1979) has described five stages of the migration process: (1) preparatory stages, (2) act of migration, (3) period of overcompensation, (4) period of decompensation, and, (5) transgenerational phenomena--each one having distinctive characteristics which trigger different types of family coping mechanisms and unchain different types of conflicts and symptoms. Because each family presents for therapy at its own stage along the continuum of the migratory process, it is very important in the initial interview for the therapist to establish the phase of the migratory process the family is currently in and how they have dealt with the vicissitudes ofprevious stages (Sluzki, 1979). Identification of the appropriate stage of the migratory process in which the family is experiencing difficulties allows the therapist to respond appropriately to the family's specific needs. Inappropriate interventions by the therapist can have negative consequences for the family (e.g., exacerbate the already stressful situation) and can contribute to early termination of therapy. 3. Give the family permission to mourn the loss of the old country. Most immigrants arrive in America with much optimism and great expectations for life in the adopted country. Despite these positive feelings, however, they have left behind some very important linkages to their identity. As noted, after the initial euphoria and novelty subside many individuals begin to experience feelings of loss and longing for the old country. The intensity, direction (i.e., positive or negative), and expressions of these feelings are mitigated to the extent to which the family's original expectations for life in America are met, exceeded, or violated. Paradoxically, even families whose expectations have been exceeded experience feelings of loss. As a result, when these families present for therapy some members will represent the old country and others the new country. Despite individual members' expressed allegiance to the adopted country, it is important to remember that on a basic


level all members are likely to mourn the loss of the old country. Indeed on might suspect that the more vehemently a member rejects the old country the more intense is the loss. Thus, either over rejection of or hyperinvolvement in the new culture may be a defensive maneuver designed to repress the feelings of loss since it is felt that one "should" not long for that which is left behind. Under such circumstances, it is important that the therapist have more than a cursory understanding of the many forms of loss and reactions to loss. This can increase his/her capacity to comprehend the situation of the immigrant families, legitimize the feelings of loss and rootlessness, and allow ventilation of feelings in therapy. The family's inability to mourn the loss of the old country and all it represents often contributes to the intensification of the loss and may extend the longing with negative results thus making adaptation to the new country more difficult. The family can resolve its loss only by actively grieving! For some families excessive mourning for the old country is the central issue. The therapeutic task, then, is to help these families to constructively integrate their mourning into a blend of old and new rules, models, and habits that constitute their new reality. 4. Resist ethnocentric biases. Therapists working with immigrant families need to be continually aware of their own socialization and values and the possible negative effects of these on therapeutic outcomes with Spanish-heritage families. It is also important to recognize that, as a part of society, therapists are aware of and affected by the society's xenophobia with regard to Spanish-heritage immigrants and maintain their personal impressions of such individuals and families. Moreover, the interaction of values of family and therapist is a crucial parameter for the therapist's attention. Therapists who, for whatever reasons, are unable to overcome their biases should refer the family to a therapist better suited to work with them. 5. Avoid "pseudo-insight." It is important that therapists avoid the pseudo-insight of attributing to culture what is actually an expression of individual personality or idiosyncrasies (e.g., the case of Mr. Rosado's difficulties with his wife) (Bolman, 1968). Therapists must recognize that many of these families'

248


problems may be unrelated to the change of countries/cultures but are instead problems usual to all families at a particular stage in the life cycle; migration may only have hastened their appearance or may have exaggerated them within context of the move. Similar behaviors occurring in the old country were governed by different rules for expressions and thus were manifested differently. 6. Learn about the family's culture from the family. Although there are m a n y features common to these families, each family's dynamics must be considered unique. Each Spanish speaking country has a distinct culture with its own rules for family roles, values and relationships. Thus, families from different cultures have dissimilar basic values which affect the interpersonal relationships and roles of family members (e.g., Chileans and Mexicans). Consequently, to the extent that these values differ from the therapist's values, they must be accounted for in the therapy siutation. The therapist must be willing to learn from the family about their particular culture, especially in terms of family roles, values, and relationships. This can lessen the therapist's chances of mistakenly interpreting as pathological the usual behaviors for a particular culture. Otherwise, the therapist may unwittingly be contributing to the family's feelings or worthlessness, thus increasing the stress between the family and the external systems. This can contribute to increased family conflict, as well as to therapeutic resistance and even premature fermination. 7. Guard against overidentifying with, advocating for and~or being more empathic with any one family member. A recurrent problem for therapists working with these families is the possibility that the therapist's feelings may be more emphatic with one member or subsystem (parental or children) because of the therapist's perceived value congruency with the particular member or subsystem. This presents a significant problem for the therapist since his/her role as changer of the status quo may be more congruent with the values of the favored subsystem (usually children) and a threat to the disfavored subsystem (usually parents). This could result in competition between the two subsystems for the therapist's favor or even premature termination of therapy. As with family therapy generally, it is important that the


therapist be preceived as an impartial professional and curb his/her zealousness to defend/protect either side. 8. Assist the family to increase its support networks. Loss of the extended family support networks is one of the many prices individuals and families pay for migrating. In the old country, such support networks provided a variety of assistance including help in adapting to new situations and in resolving conflicts both inside and outside the family. Absence of such networks in the new country severely hinders the family's ability to satisfactorily adapt to and cope with new demands. Consequently, when the family attempts to cope with the unprecedented stress confronting it in the new country members can only draw upon their own resources since they often have not replaced the support networks left behind in the old country. Because of the networks' importance to the family's functioning it is important that the therapist assist the family to replace lost networks. Acquisition of a new network can be accomplished through increased involvement in the culture such as making new friends at work and church, accepting invitations to social events, involvements with children's school, and improvement of English fluency. The new network (i.e., kin surrogate) can help the family acquire specific information about the culture and, depending upon the intimacy developed, can also help the family in resolving the various transitional and other conflicts. 9. Help the family deal with discrepancy between what was originally expected and the realities of life in the new country. Experience with these families has shown that this transitional conflict is rarely presented directly. Rather it is presented as problems with the children or some other dysfunction. Often the disaffected member expresses dissatisfaction by charging that the other family members are disloyal to the old country. Upon closer investigation, however, the therapist soon discovers that the charges are, in fact, an expression of the member's unmet needs with regard to the extent of the advantages derived from the migration. The therapist needs to help the disaffected member as well as the family as a whole to reassess the goals for coming to the new country in terms of what was expected compared to the reality of the situation. If the family has developed a new support network, the therapist can involve members from


that network to help the family with its adaptation to the realities of life in the new country. 10. Be guided by the family's sense of need. Therapy should be guided by the family's sense of need and not be redefined from the therapist's own value position. Therapy should emphasize the inherent assets of the family's relationship rather than become overabsorbed with the "pathology" of either the family or its problem(s). As much of the therapeutic effort must be directed to dealing with an interpretation of the differences between the cultures as with the transitional conflict(s). Dealing only with the precipitating transitional conflict is not enough. Therapeutic stratgies must include an ability to identify and deal with cultural dimensions such as rules for behaviors, values, meaning, and belief as well as individual intrapsychic issues.

SUMMARY Many Spanish-heritage immigrant families in the United States are seeking therapy because of family problems resulting from transitional conflicts specific to their status as immigrants and because their different subsystems adapt to the new country at different rates. However, despite their problems, many, if not most, immigrant families do successfully negotiate the transition from one country to the other. To be effective with such families, therapists need to focus on the clarification of the differential rates at which family members adapt to the new country and culture, and facilitate a resolution of the family's transitional conflict(s).

REFERENCES Aguilar, I. (1979). Initial contacts with Mexican-American families. In F. Turner (Ed.), Differential diagnosis and treatment in social work (2nd ed.) (pp. 512-517). New York: Free Press. Bolman, W. (1968). Cross-cultural psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychiatry, 124(9), 1237-1244. Landau, J. (1981). Link therapy as a family therapy technique for transitional extended families, Psychotherapeia, 7(4), 14-18. Landau, J. (1982). Therapy with families in cultural transition. In M. McGoldrick, J. Pearce, & J. Giordano (Eds.). Ethnicity and family therapy. (pp. 552-572). New York; Guilford Press.


Landau, J., Griffith, J., & Mason, J. (1981). The extended family in transition: Clinical implications, Psychotherapeia, 7(4), 370-381 Ruiz, R. (1981). Cultural and historical perspectives in counseling hispanics. In D. Sue (Ed.), Counseling the culturally different (pp. 186-215). New York: John Wiley. Selvini-Palazzoli, M., Boscolo, L., Cecchin, G., & Prata, G. (1974). The treatment of children through brief therapy of their parents. Family Process, 13, 429-442. Selvini, Palazzoli, M., Cecchin, G., Prata, G., & Boscolo, L. (1978). Paradox and counter paradox. New York: Jason Aronson. Sluzki, C. (1979). Migration and family conflict, Family Process, 18, 379-390. Watzlwick, P., Beavin, J., & Jackson, D. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication. New York: Norton.