ABSTRACT
The dimension of relational ethics has received very little exploration in the field of psychology (Van Heusden & Van Den Eerenbeemt, 1987), not because there is some conspiracy or ignorance in looking at these issues. It has not been dealt with in depth simply because this dimension poses significant problems when it comes to addressing dysfunction. First, there is the issue of the intergenerational nature of the dimension. If there is indeed a revolving slate that is passed from one generation to the next and the injustices that are experienced in one generation are passed to the next, the pathology is not as simple as designating a “good guy” and a “bad guy.” The reality that victimizers are most often victims first requires our attention. We cannot do individual psychotherapy with an individual who struggles with his or her self-concept or destructive actions by simply blaming things on the immediate previous generation. From a contextual perspective, each generation has claims of entitlements, obligations, manipulation, and threats from the previous generation. Most psychotherapists deal only with the generation of people that consist of their patients, or, at most, they include one other generation in their assessments or interventions. Contextual therapists must constantly look at the formation of individuality, the consequences of actions, and the responsibility for the future through the lens of at least a threegenerational complex. Therefore, the contextual therapist has to be willing to work and make interventions with the past, present, and future in mind at all times. There are victims, just as there are victimizers. But because most of the time these two roles exist in the same individual, we recognize that the intergenerational nature of this dimension demands our partiality and our sensitivity to people and to ledgers of history, as well as to the future.
