This article presents a case study that involves the treatment of two limiting states. One dynamic involved the process of self-criticism and the other regarded the state of low self-worth. The client in this case, we’ll name him Bruce, is a professional male who is in his mid forties. He is well educated and has had held a professional position for many years.

Bruce came to me for treatment saying that he was tired of living with his intense self-criticism and his feelings of very low self-worth. He described these limiting states as not always being active. They only appeared under certain circumstances. These limiting states would become active and associated into by Bruce when he made mistakes on what he considered to be important projects. He also realized that his self-criticism was the result of his felt low self-worth. So at the primary level, Bruce would make a mistake on a major project which would then trigger the meta-level frames of self-criticism and low self-worth. These were clearly powerful issues for Bruce and likely with deep roots.

History

Treatment started by collecting some history about these limiting states. When did they start? How did he perform them? The self-criticism was reported as being fully active by the time he was four years old. This indicated that the low self-worth was already in place before then because the “self-critic” came out of the low self-esteem frame. Questioning revealed that Bruce’s mother taught him how to attach identity statements such as “you are bad” to Bruce when he misbehaved. For Bruce’s mother, behavior indicated identity.

Bruce also described the different parenting style of the neighbors who had a child his age. At the neighbors house the behavior was bad but the boy was not bad- what a contrast! Bruce’s mother disagreed with the parents of his neighbor for his mother told him that the neighbors were wrong. For, according to Bruce’s mother, “if you misbehave then you are bad.” So, like any normal child, Bruce believed his mother? His bad behavior meant he was bad.

We can now see when and how these limiting identity statements began and how they could interfere with positive self-worth. When Bruce did not perform as he desired on an important task, the self-critic would then kick in and find fault with Bruce which reinforced his sense of low self-worth. So, Bruce had a nasty dynamic duo of a negative identity statement about self-worth opening the door and holding it for self-criticism to come in and wreak further havoc.

Bruce described this process as lasting for a few hours up to a couple of days. Bruce would stop this self-criticism only after he just gave in to these statements and decided to just go on abut his business. He did this in spite of believing that he was “being a complete idiot’ and believing that he was worthless. Actually, considering the limiting beliefs that Bruce had about himself, he had been quite resourceful over the years in accomplishing as much as he did.

Treatment

By reversing the focus to suggest that he notice the excluded factors, I came up with this question for Bruce, “What do you have to 'ignore' in order to get into a state of worthless?” When Bruce processed this, his face lit up. He shifted his focus to notice everything else in his life that was positive. From this new awareness, we then identified resources that he had used for meaningful achievements in his life. Bruce identified four powerful resource states: competence, confidence, belief in all things being possible and trust that he possessed resources enough to do any job. We then applied these resources to the old feeling of worthless (meta-stating process). Bruce said that when he added these resources up, there was “no hole of worthlessness” for him to go into.

The next set of interventions used included the “Drop Down Through” (states) technique to shift states. I learned this technique in my master practitioner training from Bob Bodenhamer who learned it from Tad James. Bob has added some meta-stating patterns to the technique which makes it even more powerful.

The first thing we did was to identify the limiting state that was the “problem”. We worked with the self-critic part first. I elicited the physical sensation associated with criticizing self. Bruce described this sensation as constricting and indicated this constricting feeling was around his chest.

I asked Bruce to drop down through the constricting feeling to find what state was underneath. Bruce identified freedom as existing under the constricting feeling.

“And what emotion do you find underneath the freedom?” I asked.

“Peace”.

“And underneath the peace you find what?” I prodded.

Bruce said he experienced God under the peace.

I asked him what word described this feeling of being in God’s presence.

Bruce said that he experienced a sense of “oneness.”

I then asked Bruce what he experienced in this “one” feeling.

He said that he felt support for experimenting and exploring.

I then asked Bruce what happened to his mother. I wanted to reconfigure or reframe the old source through new resources. He said that God (Bruce was still in the state of “oneness.”) pulled her in and set her straight about behavior and worth. He could see God giving his mother “a talking to.” This actually created another ally. His mother was then seen as free of her worth issues and able to add to Bruce’s support and encouragement.

The next step in this treatment process was to find out if Bruce had any unconscious objecting frames that might undermine the progress we had made. When I asked Bruce if he had any concerns about using this new awareness, state and resources, he said he did experience some discomfort. Bruce said that when he was in certain social situations that he felt discomfort. In particular, he said he felt a pressure to “get it right”. Of course he knew that “right” was an arbitrary reference with no definitive answer. But his believe that he had to get it (social interaction) right led to feeling that constricted feeling again.

We dealt with this state the same was as with the constricted feeling that came with the self-critic and worthless feeling. First, I asked Bruce to identify what he thought would happen if he did not “get it right”. He said that others would not like him. “And if others don’t like you?” I asked. Bruce said that then he’d “be no good, worthless”. These identity statements showed up again, this time associated with social interactions

We used the Drop Down Through technique applied to the set of states and beliefs connected to worthless. I asked Bruce to drop down through the feeling of worthless. He did and said that he experienced a state of emptiness. Dropping down through the emptiness, Bruce then said he felt rejected and isolated. Going further, through this last state, Bruce came to a state of fear. I asked him to drop down through the fear and he came to a state of peace. Now we were getting to the resource states. When I asked Bruce to drop down through the peace he said he came to the presence of God. We then used this ultimate meta-state as the resource to reconfigure the old limiting beliefs and identity statements.

From Bruce’s associated position in the resource of “God’s presence”, I asked him what he now thought about the idea of worthlessness. Bruce said that he realized “it is completely impossible to be worthless”. He went on to say that he knew “no matter what I do or don’t do it is impossible to be worthless”. I asked Bruce what this new awareness felt like to him. He said that it was a very humbling experience, to know that it is impossible to be worthless and that he can only be worthy. From this new resource state, Bruce did some future pacing through several situations that used to evoke the old concepts. He said he felt clear, strong and eager to begin using this new way of thinking about himself and that it renewed his belief that all things are possible.

Summary

In summary, we identified the structure of the “problem” that the client presented. In the process of doing this we found that this and probably most problems are just limiting states that were superimposed over original resource states, blocking access to resources. Oddly it seems, limiting states form as a “protective covering” in response to emotional trauma. The limiting state serves to supposedly protect the resource-state from harm. But in actuality, the limiting state sets a restrictive governor, limiting resourcefulness.

By utilizing a couple of methods, sleight of mouth and meta-stating, we pierced though the limiting states to allow access to resource states. We then applied the “new” resources to situations in which they’d been left out. This created new outcomes and sets up a positive, self-perpetuating loop. Confidence, belief in all possibilities and self-worth leads to behaviors and outcomes that beget more confidence, possibilities and self-worth. Now that’s worth knowing.