C is for Coping Questions

If we look for the origins of coping questions in Solution Focused Practice we have to look to the work of Insoo Kim Berg. Steve de Shazer never referenced them but Coping Questions were an integral part of Insoo’s writings from her first book Family Preservation: A Brief Therapy Workbook (1991) and they then turn up again in the book she wrote with Scott Miller, Working with the Problem Drinker (1992) and in Family-based Services (1994). As it happens coping questions have been of secondary import in our work at BRIEF. What has interested us most has been the attempt to develop the most minimal and simple approach to therapy; indeed as far back as 2016 we started talking about ‘straightening the line’ (George, 2016) and the straightest line, it seemed to us, was ‘best hopes, preferred future description, scale question and one point up and then starting the follow-up session with ‘what’s been better?’. So how do coping questions fit in to BRIEF’s practice?

One way that we can think about ‘coping questions’ is as a stepping stone on our way to getting back onto the main track. If, and of course it happens, a client arrives for a first session truly problem-dominated, perhaps distressed, maybe overwhelmed with the difficulties that they have been facing, then BRIEF’s first question ‘so what are your best hopes from our talking together?’ might be a step too far; we might be asking of the client a bigger jump than they feel able to make. The question is too far from their experience. In such circumstances it is expectable that the client will not answer the question but will respond with a description of their troubles. The Solution Focused practitioner might at this point listen, acknowledge the client’s experience ‘it sounds as if things have been really really tough for you recently’ and ask the client again ‘so what are your best hopes from our talking?’. Most clients at this point will answer, beginning the process of the specification of their best hopes – except for those people who do not and who return to their problem elaboration. Clearly the practitioner at this point has a wide range of choices one of which may be to listen further, acknowledge again and to say ‘I hadn’t realised just how tough things have been – it sounds like a nightmare – so I really want our talking to make a difference to you and what would help me to try my very very best to get this right for you is knowing what you want. So what are your best hopes from our talking?’. Obviously by this time virtually everyone is beginning to specify their ‘best hopes’ (George et al., 1990, 1992) but what can we do if they do not. Although this happens very rarely I am tempted first of all to apologise ‘I’m really sorry – I think that I have been trying to move too fast – let’s slow down’. And then we can ask ‘let me ask you this – given that things have felt so tough, almost overwhelming, how on earth have you been coping, been keeping yourself going?’. Now when we ask this question we are focusing much nearer to the problem – the ‘jump’ that we are asking the client to make is much smaller and might in that moment make more sense to the client. As the client begins to talk about what they have been doing that has worked for them we will almost inevitably amplify this strategy narrative by asking ‘what else?’  a number of times and might then move on to a series of ‘identity questions’ (Ratner et al., 2012) along the lines of ‘and as you have been keeping going, getting through, what have you learnt about your qualities, your strengths, the ones that are going to be useful to you in your future living?. Following this conversation we can return to the ‘best hopes’ question and the client is likely now, indeed almost guaranteed, to accept our invitation into the future. What I think that we have done is that we have made the step that the client is being invited to take considerably smaller, ‘problem – coping – best hopes’ rather than the more direct (and quicker) ‘problem – best hopes’. We have created an intermediate stepping stone in the conversation.

Of course ‘coping questions’ are not only relevant at the beginning of a first session; there are many times during the course of a piece of work that a client may choose to revert to discussing ‘directly’ the problems that they are facing – perhaps the problems that brought them to therapy, perhaps new and different ones that they are suddenly confronting. At these times ‘coping questions’ can offer a pathway to possibility. The impact on the client of outlining in detail their difficulty compared with describing how they have been coping is significantly different, serving to change the mood of the conversation, indeed inviting the client to experience themselves differently. Describing problems risks amplifying a narrative of the client as the ‘victim’ of their situation, whilst a narrative of coping is in essence a ‘hero’ narrative. The client is invited into self-complimenting ‘how on earth have you managed to keep yourself going given everything that you have been facing?’. The more that the worker is acknowledging of the problem that the client is facing the greater, implicitly, the client’s achievement in surviving and the more that the client is invited into self-admiration. Following such a conversation, and having made space for the problem-proximate dialogue, we can revert again to ‘so what has been even a tiny bit better even though you have had some tough situations to deal with?’, back on the main track.

Despite referring to ‘coping questions’ throughout these paragraphs as it happens I choose to use the word ‘coping’ itself very infrequently in my work. When someone is having a really hard time if we were to ask ‘I’m sorry things are so difficult – so how have you been coping?’, the word ‘coping’ can sound too functional to the client who very reasonably responds by saying ‘well that’s the thing – I haven’t been coping at all’. Faced with this response the worker is obliged to move lower in terms of functionality ‘goodness it’s been THAT tough – so how have you been keeping going at all?’ or even lower by using either ‘getting through’ or ’getting by’. ‘Keeping going’, ‘getting though’ ‘getting by’ all indicate that the worker has understood just how difficult the situation has been, whilst the word ‘coping’ may leave the client in some doubt. Indeed ‘coping questions’ are best asked from a foundation of acknowledgement. If the client is describing a painful situation and the worker responds with ‘so how have you been coping?’, then the question risks sounding like a minimisation. So the Solution Focused Practitioner is likely to build more slowly ‘from everything that you have been saying the last few months sound like a nightmare – given just how tough it has been how on earth have you managed to keep your feet moving at all?’. The phrases ‘given just how tough’ and ‘how on earth’ indicate to the client that there is no attempt at minimisation, rather the worker is fully accepting the degree of difficulty and the phrase ‘keep your feet moving’ suggests that the worker is recognising that in these circumstances even something as minimal as keeping the feet moving might be an achievement.

‘Coping questions’ therefore serve a useful function in Solution Focused Practice allowing practitioners to get alongside clients in those situations where the client may otherwise feel that they have been left behind.

 

George, Evan (2016) Straightening the line https://www.brief.org.uk/blog/2016/02/02/straightening-the-line/
George, E., Iveson, C. and Ratner, H. (1990; Revised and expanded Edition 1999) Problem to Solution: Brief Therapy with Individuals and Families. London: BT Press   
Ratner, H., George, E., Iveson, C.  (2012) Solution Focused Brief Therapy: 100 Key Ideas and Techniques.  London: Routledge   
Berg, Insoo Kim (1991 and revised 1999) Family Preservation: A brief therapy workbook. London: BT Press.
Berg, Insoo Kim and Miller, Scott (1992) Working with the Problem Drinker: a solution focused approach. New York: Norton.
Berg, Insoo Kim (1994) Family Based Services: a solution-focused approach. New York: Norton.
 

Evan George
London
20^th October 2024