and reach thousands of daily visitors
13 JANUARY 2010
NO 1528
The in-between
Relational Child and Youth Care (CYC) practice exists in the in-between (Garfat, 2007) the in-between between self and other. There is no place else it can be. For without our presence in the in-between, there is no opportunity for a co-created, connected experiencing to occur. The co-creation of the in-between between us is central to Relational CYC practice.
While it may seem early in this chapter to pause and reflect, it is essential to do so, for the comments in the opening paragraph set the foundation for all that is to follow. Let us linger for a moment over these reflections.
Where is the in-between?
It may seem strange to wonder about "where" it is, before discussing
"what" it is, but it is appropriate because in many ways the rest makes
more sense once we discover the "where."
In contemporary Child and Youth Care
practice we find constant reference to such concepts as engagement
(Gannon, 2001), connection (Krueger, 1994) and being together (Fewster,
1990; Krueger, 2004) in moments of rhythmic harmony (Fulcher, 2004;
Maier, 1992). Inherent in these concepts is the idea that there is a
joining together of self and other (Charles and Garfat, in press;
Fewster, 2004; Krueger, 1998; Ricks, 2001). It is this joining together
that creates the in-between between us. It is in this area of joint
connectedness where Relational CYC practice occurs.
Imagine for a moment standing inside a small circle and facing another
person who is also standing inside his or her own small circle. Now
imagine another circle between the two of you that touches each of your
independent circles. That central circle represents the in-between
between self and other.
As our relationship with the other develops and we become more familiar, more secure, more intimate, and more vulnerable, the space between us changes. The in-between changes as we "step into the in-between," as we see in the diagram below. Gradually, the in-between becomes composed of us. We become a part of the interpersonal in-between while still maintaining our selves.
Instead of just imagining this in the abstract, stand in front of another person – preferably one with whom you are not intimate. Move back and forth until you find a distance from one another that is comfortable for both of you. Look at the space between you. This, the space between you that allows you both to be comfortable, is also the in-between. While it is not, really, a physical space, it is a space defined by the momentary boundaries of comfort for each of you. As your relationship changes, so might this space. Notice in your life, for example, how with some people you feel safe when close, and with others you only feel safe with distance. This physical representation mimics the experiential boundaries of self in relation with other. It is only a metaphor; treat it as such: interpret it for what it means in terms of non-physical interpersonal relations.
THOM GARFAT
Garfat, T. (2008). The inter-personal in-between: An
exploration of relational Child and Youth Care practice. In
Bellefueille, G. and Ricks, F. (Eds.) Standing on the precipice.
Edmonton, Canada. MacEwan Press. pp. 8-9.
REFERENCES
Charles, G. and Garfat, T. (In press). A history of Child and Youth Care. In P. Share and K. Lavor (Eds.). Social Care. Dublin, Ireland.
Fewster, G. (1990). Being in child care:A journey into self. New York. Haworth.
Fewster, G. (2004). Editorial. Relational Child and Youth Care Practice, 17, 3. pp.3-5.
Fulcher, L. (2004). Programmes and praxis: A review of taken-for-granted knowledge. Scottish Journal of Residential Child Care, 3, 2. pp. 34-44.
Gannon, B. (2001).
Engagement: Making it happen. CYC-Online
, 33.
Retrieved from
https://www.cyc-net.org/cyc-
Garfat, T. (2007). My shelled self. Relational Child and Youth Care Practice, 20, 3. pp.29-31.
Krueger, M. (1994). Rhythm and presence: Connecting with children on the edge. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Problems, 3, 1. pp. 49-51.
Kruger, M. (1998). Interactive youth work practice. Washington, D.C.Child Welfare League of America.
Krueger, M. (2004). Interactive youth and family work. In T. Garfat (Ed.) A Child and Youth Care approach to working with families. (pp.55-65). New York. Haworth.
Maier, H. (1992). Rhythmicity: A powerful force for experiencing unity and personal connections. Journal of Child and Youth Care Work, 8. pp. 7-13.
Ricks, F. (2001). Without the self
there is no other. CYC-Online
, 27. Retrieved from
http/www.cyc-net.org/CYC-Online
/cycol-1401-ricks.html
