Tagged: “Enright Forgiveness Process Model”
What is your opinion of brief therapy when it comes to forgiveness therapy?
Short-term forgiveness interventions may be effective for those who are not deeply hurt, are not treated deeply unjustly, and who are not clinically compromised. We have to be very careful in generalizing brief interventions to all people, especially those who are deeply hurting from deeply unfair treatment. Those treated so unfairly will need forgiveness therapy for a longer time than a brief forgiveness intervention.
I am a little confused. The published literature seems to imply that brief forgiveness interventions are as effective as long term forgiveness therapy. Would you please clarify if there is a difference between these two approaches to forgiveness.
Even though brief forgiveness interventions can show statistically significant changes in forgiveness for the participants, this kind of intervention is qualitatively different from longer-term forgiveness therapy, which concentrates more on people who have suffered serious effects from trauma. Even though both kinds of interventions can show statistical significance, we must avoid the serious error of then equating the two, erroneously concluding that each is equally effective for all clients, whether or not they are deeply traumatized or not. In such a case, relying on statistics only can distort what is happening in long-term forgiveness therapy (which can cure the effects of trauma) compared to the more minor psychological adjustments that are occurring with emotionally intact people who have experienced frustration and annoyance. Minor annoyances can be reduced with short-term forgiveness interventions. Deep emotional compromise from profound injustices require more intensive, longer-term forgiveness therapy. In other words, short-term forgiveness interventions are not the same as long-term forgiveness therapy.
You say forgiveness is a paradox in that gift-giving aids the one who gives the gift. Yet, is there no correction of the other’s misbehavior?
To correct the other’s misbehavior is to engage in the moral virtue of justice. Forgiveness and justice should exist side-by-side. If you are being abused by someone, you can forgive if you choose to do so and you can and should seek fairness so that the other stops the unjust behavior.
Your research tends to show that as people forgive, their own self-esteem rises. Why do you think this happens?
It seems to me that as people bear the pain that others caused them, there is a tendency for the forgivers to realize that they are stronger than they previously had realized. They see that they can endure pain and in that pain, they can be good to others, particularly to those who acted unfairly and even cruelly. This shows the forgivers that they are good people and this can lead to an increase in liking the self. Too often, when people are beaten down by others, the victims begin to believe the lie that they are less than they truly are. Forgiving helps to correct this lie.
It seems to me that this “giving of a gift” to those who hurt me is kind of ridiculous. They deserve correction, not admiration. Can you clarify this for me?
As people forgive, they are engaging in a moral virtue. All moral virtues center on goodness toward others for those other people’s sake. Part of the moral virtue of forgiveness is this gift-giving to the one who acted badly, as you point out. This gift-giving, we find in our research is a paradox in that, as forgivers reach out to the offending person, it is the forgivers who are healed.
