Resonance-based therapy and counseling can be particularly helpful if you…

​​​

• feel under intense pressure to constantly perform.

• are very critical of yourself and feel you have little room for your own emotions.

• repeatedly experience similar patterns in relationships, such as conforming or withdrawing.

• feel stuck in certain roles that are difficult to break out of.

• are constantly exhausted, even though from the outside you actually appear capable and “functional.”

• think a lot about yourself but feel little emotional connection to yourself.

• long for more meaningful connection with yourself and others.

​
People who come to see me in my practice often function well on the surface; they see themselves as responsible, thoughtful, and goal-oriented. However, this is usually accompanied by increased psychological pressure, exhaustion, or a feeling of being stuck. Systemic therapy assumes that such tensions do not arise in isolation “within.” They arise where people, in relationships, roles, and specific situations, consistently perform, endure, or regulate more than is good for them.

​​​
For which life issues does individual counseling or therapy make sense? 
 
Typical occasions are phases of crisis-like change and transition. Examples include: 
​​

• Feeling less self-determined in certain areas of life and the difficult emotions and thoughts that accompany this. 

• Being challenged more than usual in dealing with difficult feelings such as fear, sadness, loneliness, or anger, especially in crises, grief, and loss. 

• The perception that distraction, withdrawal, or waiting does not bring improvement or is counterproductive. 

• A feeling that you are stuck in your professional/private life or cannot find your way forward. 

• Repetitive, unfavorable patterns of behavior and thinking that lead to conflicts with other people.

 

In my work, systemic therapy does not mean analyzing problems in isolation from their context and culture, or uncritically optimizing solutions. It means bringing roles and relationship patterns to light and making new avenues for action tangible. This happens on three levels:

 

​​​​

1. The relationship with oneself​​

What is often missing is the sense of what truly feels right or overwhelming on the inside.

Many people today are not exhausted simply because they work too much. They are exhausted because they constantly have to be a certain way—competent, confident, resilient, available. And this pressure often extends not only to their jobs but also to their homes, their relationships, and even the way they try to relax. When peace and quiet feel like failure, a pattern of meaning is at work—not a performance deficit. Systemic work helps to recognize and change these inner dynamics.

Here we use methods from schema therapy and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT; more on this below).

​​​​

2. Relationships with Others​

In partnerships, families, or work contexts, fixed roles often emerge: the responsible one, the sensible one, the stable one. These roles ensure a sense of belonging—but often come at the cost of closeness, vitality, or clarity. Systemic therapy not only makes these patterns understandable but also changeable by allowing new perspectives and forms of contact and communication to be experienced.

In many everyday conflicts, there is more going on than meets the eye. The roles you create together—such as the judge and the rebel, the manager and the passive one—are not personality types. They are forms that depend on one another.

We don’t ask here: Who is the problem? We ask: What is the dynamic that you maintain together—and what would happen if both of you addressed the role or stepped out of it for a moment? Here, I work with an emotion- and attachment-focused approach (EFT), among other methods, to uncover the deeper needs—such as for security, closeness, and recognition—that lie beneath the surface of conflicts.​​​

 

3. The Relationship to the World​

Professional demands, pressure to perform, care work, societal expectations—all of these factors impact relationships and the self. Many clients experience exhaustion not because they are “too weak,” but because they have permanently adapted to systems that allow for little rest, connection, or resonance. Systemic therapy helps clients see these external conditions more clearly, distinguish themselves from them internally, and deal with them more consciously—rather than automatically internalizing them. In my systemic work, the focus is not on optimization, techniques, or normatively “correct” behavior*. ​​​​

 

​​​​

What Defines Culturally Sensitive Therapy

 

Whether it’s schema therapy, ACT, or emotion-focused therapy - in my practice, these approaches are united by a systemic perspective and dynamic: experience is culturally mediated and sustained. The patterns of meaning, the roles, the inner voices, the ideas of who you should be - all of this is not created solely by the individual. It is transmitted: through families, institutions, cultural spheres, the media, digital environments, etc. 

In my experience, making this visible is neither destabilizing nor demotivating. It provides relief. Because it opens up the possibility of not only measuring yourself against a single image of yourself - but discovering that more than one interpretation is available. Not a better one. Not a more authentic one. Simply, for now: more than one.

​

Below, I present two approaches in more detail that play a major role in my integrative, culturally sensitive work. ​​​​​​​

 

​​​

Schema Therapy and Relationship Work

​

Schema therapy (according to J. Young) works with deeply ingrained patterns of experience and relationships, known as schemas, which developed early in a person’s life story and often continue to influence them later, often unconsciously. Typical schemas include, for example, the feeling of not being good enough (inadequacy), the expectation of being abandoned (abandonment), or the internal demand to always have to function (excessive standards).

​

Schema therapy distinguishes between different modes—internal states or “sides” that are activated in specific situations: the vulnerable child, who feels small and helpless; the punishing or demanding critic mode, which judges and drives; the detached protector, who shuts off emotions; and the healthy adult, who enables compassion, guidance, and the ability to act.

​

In our practical work, we use perspective-taking methods, inner dialogues, and experiential exercises to make these modes tangible—not merely as concepts, but as living inner dynamics that can be observed, shaped, and transformed in the moment.

 

​​​​​

The Inner Critic as Omnipresent Self-Observation​

​​

Most concepts of parts work treat self-criticism as the inner critic or the superego (Transactional Analysis). That is, as something that resides within and exerts influence—for example, an internalized parental image, a “part,” or even a kind of mini-personality (Internal Family Systems). A part that is shaped by biographical experiences and can thus be adequately described on its own. Regardless of the resulting open questions about personality and identity, this is often extremely helpful from a pragmatic and clinical standpoint. But in my experience, it does not capture the whole story when one invites and allows the factor of culture into the picture.

The usually invisible, but sometimes very powerful player in the inner team.

​

The voice that says “You’re not good enough” or “Pull yourself together” or “Others manage this without any trouble” is often not just the parental voice. It is also the echo of a cultural field—certain expectations regarding competence, productivity, gender, emotional regulation, conformity, and success—that are conveyed through the family but were not invented by it, nor are they maintained solely there in behavior and experience. “The Critic” does not speak only for the parents. It speaks for a more or less nuanced system of rules and expectations practiced daily, which becomes deeply ingrained in one’s experience, so that it sometimes feels completely natural—or even like one’s own inner voice. ​ In our expanded work, we therefore ask not only:

​​

“What is the Critic saying or demanding right now?” But also:

 

“Who does he demand that I be for him?”, “For whom else?” and “How does this version of me become visible, legible?”

​

Here, in addition to rules and order, it is primarily about social identity and performativity: ​

 

The Competent One – The Resilient One – The Strong One – The Caring One – The Stoic One, etc. ​These roles are not a disorder. They may well be the system’s best possible solution - to be acceptable and legible in the relevant fields. Your family has rewarded certain versions and punished others.

​

Your school promoted certain ways of being and ignored others. Your work environment, in turn, demands specific displays of competence, resilience, and confidence. And these demands are not merely external - they are deeply ingrained in your body, extending even to the way you hold yourself, breathe, speak, and move.

​

What this changes: When the critic becomes visible not merely as an inner voice but as a culturally mediated observation and its effects, the therapeutic work shifts. It may then no longer be solely about strengthening a comforting inner voice that counters the critic. It becomes about examining the entire logic: Which rules are at play here? Whose standards are being applied? Which cultural norms actually determine what is “enough” or “right”?

​​

This is therapeutically relieving precisely because it interrupts the attribution of individual pathology. It shifts, for example, from “What is wrong with me?” to “Who am I expected to be?” and “at what cost?”

 

​​​​

The “Healthy Adult” in Parts Work

​​​

In schema therapy, the “Healthy Adult” mode also plays a central role: a mode that is compassionate, grounded, and capable of taking action. It is a therapeutic goal—the inner authority that treats the vulnerable child with empathy and sets boundaries for the Critic.

This is clinically valuable. At the same time, it’s worth taking a closer look: What kind of “healthy adult” is actually being promoted here?

​​​

In practice, I observe that the image of the “healthy adult” is often culturally shaped—more so than it appears at first glance. In therapeutic discourse and practice, the healthy adult is expected to be compassionate, yet clear. Vulnerable and accepting, yet assertive and capable of taking action. Mindful yet productive. Authentically honest, yet also socially adept and competent. This combination sounds balanced—and is at the same time a demanding ideal that brings its own set of standards. Discourses on health—whether therapeutic, popular science, or digital—always convey images of how a “healthy person” behaves, feels, and relates to themselves. Vulnerability as a strength. Authenticity as a virtue. Self-care as a duty. Mindfulness as a skill. These images are not wrong. But they are culturally mediated—and if they serve as unquestioned benchmarks, they can create a new form of pressure to perform: one is not only expected to function, but also to be authentic, vulnerable, and mindful in the process.

​​

In my work, we therefore also look at the “healthy adult” with humorous lightness and distance, with friendly curiosity: What cultural expectations are embedded in this image? Does it motivate, guide—or does it subtly judge?​ Is the “Healthy Adult” sometimes just another critic, albeit one with a friendlier tone?

​

The goal is not to deconstruct or dismantle the Healthy Adult. The goal is to be able to see *it* as a culturally constructed figure—one that is helpful and often necessary, but not neutral, rather idealized.

 

And thereby to gain the freedom not only to measure oneself against therapeutic ideals, but to find a relationship with oneself that is truly one’s own—even if it comes across as somewhat imperfect, stubborn, or skewed, gruff, or otherwise all too human.

​

​

Acceptance & Commitment Therapy (ACT)

​​

ACT, as developed by Steven Hayes, is another evidence-based, behavioral therapeutic approach that does not aim to eliminate difficult thoughts and feelings, but rather to enable a more flexible way of dealing with them. The basic idea: It is not the content of our inner experience that is the problem, but the way we relate to it—in particular, avoidance, fusion with thoughts, and the loss of contact with what is truly important to us.​

 

ACT works with six core processes:

 

• Acceptance (allowing inner experience rather than fighting it)

• Cognitive defusion (recognizing thoughts as thoughts, not as facts)

• Mindfulness (staying in touch with the present moment)

• Self-as-context (not confusing oneself with the content of the experience)

• Values (clarifying what really matters) and

• Committed action (acting in a values-oriented way)

​​​

In practice, ACT proves to be an enormously helpful framework—especially for people who have already reflected deeply and realize that insight alone does not change their patterns. The approach suggests: First, accept your inner experience without trying to change it. This is the crucial step away from instrumental self-relationship—away from the attempt to analyze, control, correct, or optimize feelings.

​​​

What ACT, in and of itself and as applied, does not systematically address is this: what one accepts is often not just the “difficult feeling.” One accepts or grapples with a cultural pattern of meaning—a process of making sense that helps determine what the feeling means in this context.

​​

Accepting fear as such is an important step. But if the interpretation “fear = weakness = helplessness” remains unquestioned, one sometimes accepts this entire “bundle of fear” while simultaneously feeling ashamed of it. In therapeutic practice, therefore, the goal is also to accept the emotion and to make visible and understandable the process of meaning-making that is taking place—the very process that makes the experience so difficult and unbearable. So not just: “I can be present with my exhaustion.” But also: “I see that exhaustion = failure is a learned pattern—not an inescapable fact.” The thought “I am a failure” is not merely a context-free thought. 

​

It is a culturally mediated translation that transforms a bodily signal (exhaustion) into an identity statement (failure) via a culturally mediated role (the competent one). This alters the nature and framing of acceptance: from an internal struggle and conflict to a shifted frame of reference.

​​​

Read more about the applied integrative approach

 

You are also welcome to learn more about my consulting approach* in a non-binding information meeting. 

​

​

*Important note: A systemic counseling and therapy offer is not to be equated with comprehensive psychotherapy (covered by the german health insurance GKV). For diagnostic clarification and acute treatment of complex clinical disorders such as severe depression, anxiety disorders, addiction and trauma, combined treatment by a psychiatrist and licensed psychotherapist is usually necessary. An exclusively systemic therapy is no substitute for this. Please understand that in individual cases I refer to the appropriate places, e.g. if psychotherapeutic care is more urgent or more comprehensive at the current time. Please inform yourself here on my website about possible questions and occasions or contact me by phone/e-mail.