Internal Family Systems Therapy

Jungian therapy and IFS both recognize multiplicity in the psyche, but conceptualize and work with it differently:

Similarities:

• Both approaches recognize the psyche as naturally multiple
• Both acknowledge the unconscious dimensions of psychological life
• Both value integration rather than elimination of aspects of self
• Both see shadow material as containing important resources for wholeness

Differences:

• Jung's archetypes are more collective and universal, while IFS parts are more individualized
• IFS has a more structured methodology for accessing and transforming parts
• Jungian work often emphasizes symbolic and dream interpretation, while IFS focuses more on direct dialogue with parts
• IFS explicitly identifies the Self as distinct from parts, while Jungian psychology views the Self as the center of the psyche that integrates all aspects

Both approaches contribute valuable perspectives to understanding the multiplicity of the psyche, with IFS offering a more structured protocol while Jungian psychology provides greater emphasis on archetypal and collective dimensions.

Voice Dialogue, developed by Hal and Sidra Stone, shares significant conceptual overlap with IFS:

Similarities:

• Both recognize the psyche as composed of multiple subpersonalities or "selves"
• Both involve direct dialogue with these aspects of personality
• Both aim for integration rather than elimination of parts
• Both identify a witnessing consciousness (called the "Aware Ego" in Voice Dialogue)

Differences:

• Voice Dialogue emphasizes polarities between primary and disowned selves, while IFS has a more differentiated understanding of managers, firefighters, and exiles
• IFS includes a specific unburdening process for healing wounded parts that Voice Dialogue does not articulate
• Voice Dialogue places greater emphasis on the facilitator embodying and giving voice to different selves
• IFS has a more developed framework for understanding protective strategies in the internal system

Schema Therapy, developed by Jeffrey Young, shares some common ground with IFS while approaching parts work from a different angle:

Similarities:

• Both identify different "modes" (Schema Therapy) or "parts" (IFS) that become activated in various situations
• Both recognize childhood origins of problematic patterns
• Both aim to strengthen a healthy adult presence (Healthy Adult Mode in Schema Therapy, Self in IFS)
• Both work with vulnerable child aspects of the personality

Differences:

• Schema Therapy is more structured and directive, with specific protocols for different personality disorders
• IFS places greater emphasis on the wisdom of all parts and their positive intentions
• Schema Therapy integrates cognitive-behavioral techniques more explicitly
• IFS has a more developed understanding of the internal family as a system with relationships between parts

Ego State Therapy, developed from the work of John and Helen Watkins, shares the concept of working with different aspects of self:

Similarities:

• Both work with distinct subpersonalities or ego states
• Both understand these states as developing from life experiences, particularly in childhood
• Both utilize internal dialogue between aspects of self
• Both aim for greater internal cooperation and harmony

Differences:

• Ego State Therapy often utilizes hypnosis to access ego states, while IFS uses mindful awareness
• IFS has a more differentiated understanding of protective parts (managers and firefighters)
• Ego State Therapy emerges from a psychodynamic tradition, while IFS has roots in systems theory
• IFS places greater emphasis on Self-leadership as distinct from parts

The Theory of Structural Dissociation, particularly relevant for dissociative disorders, shares some conceptual overlap with IFS:

Similarities:

• Both recognize fragmentation of the personality in response to trauma
• Both identify protective parts (called "apparently normal parts" in structural dissociation) and wounded parts (called "emotional parts")
• Both aim for integration and internal cooperation rather than elimination of parts
• Both recognize the impact of developmental trauma on internal fragmentation

Differences:

• Structural Dissociation emerges from a neurobiological understanding of trauma, while IFS has roots in systems theory
• Structural Dissociation focuses specifically on trauma-generated fragmentation, while IFS views multiplicity as natural
• Structural Dissociation uses a more medical model approach, while IFS is more humanistic
• IFS has more applications beyond trauma, addressing wider aspects of psychological functioning

Internal Family Systems differs from other approaches in several key ways:

• Non-pathologizing: Unlike therapies that focus on diagnosing disorders, IFS views symptoms as attempts by protective parts to manage a burdened internal system.
• Self-led healing: IFS emphasizes your innate capacity for self-healing through accessing your core "Self" rather than relying primarily on the therapist's expertise or techniques.
• Systems perspective: Where many therapies focus on changing specific thoughts, behaviors, or emotions, IFS addresses the entire internal system and the relationships between parts.
• Direct access: Rather than talking about feelings or behaviors, IFS involves direct dialogue with the parts generating these experiences, creating deeper transformation.
• Unburdening process: IFS offers a specific methodology for releasing the emotional burdens and beliefs carried by parts, rather than just managing symptoms.

The duration of IFS therapy varies considerably based on your specific circumstances, goals, and the complexity of your internal system. There is no standardized timeframe as with some more structured therapies.

Short-term IFS therapy (8-20 sessions) can be effective for addressing specific issues with relatively recent origins, working with parts activated around particular life transitions, learning the IFS model, and beginning to develop Self-leadership.

Longer-term IFS therapy may be appropriate for complex trauma with multiple exiled parts needing attention, long-standing patterns involving many protective parts, systems with high levels of polarization between parts, and cases where access to Self-energy is initially limited and develops gradually.

Many clients experience significant relief and insights within the first few sessions, even while deeper work continues. Your therapist will collaborate with you to assess progress and determine the most beneficial duration for your unique situation.

No special preparation or background knowledge is needed to benefit from Internal Family Systems therapy. While IFS has a distinct framework and terminology, your therapist will introduce these concepts gradually as they become relevant to your work together.

What can be helpful as you begin IFS therapy:

• Openness to internal exploration: A willingness to turn attention inward and notice different aspects of your experience
• Curiosity: An attitude of interest toward your internal experiences, even difficult ones
• Patience: Understanding that developing a relationship with your internal system is a process that unfolds over time
• Honesty: Being truthful about your experiences, even when they seem confusing or contradictory

Some clients find it helpful to read about the IFS model before or during therapy, while others prefer to learn experientially. Either approach can work well.

Yes, many aspects of Internal Family Systems therapy can be practiced between sessions, and this self-work often accelerates and deepens the therapeutic process. As you become familiar with the model, your therapist may suggest practices like:

• Parts Check-Ins: Taking time daily to notice which parts are active and acknowledging them with curiosity and compassion
• Self-Leadership Practice: In triggering situations, pausing to notice which parts are activated and attempting to respond from Self-energy
• Parts Journaling: Writing from the perspective of different parts to deepen understanding of their concerns and roles
• Self-to-Part Conversations: For parts you already know well, having internal dialogues to maintain and strengthen these relationships
• Self-Nurturing: Activities that help you maintain connection with Self-energy between sessions

There are also excellent self-help resources for learning more about the IFS model. While deeper unburdening work is best done with a trained therapist, especially initially, many aspects of the IFS approach can become life-long self-healing practices.

Internal Family Systems offers a distinctive approach to trauma that differs from many other trauma therapies in several key ways:

• Titrated Exposure: Rather than directly confronting traumatic memories, IFS works first with the protective parts that guard these experiences, proceeding only at a pace the system can tolerate.
• Witnessing vs. Reliving: IFS facilitates a process where the Self witnesses traumatic material carried by exiled parts without becoming overwhelmed by it, creating healing without retraumatization.
• Honoring Protectors: Instead of trying to break through defenses, IFS acknowledges and appreciates the protective parts that have kept the system functioning, working with their cooperation rather than against their resistance.
• Unburdening: Beyond exposure or processing, IFS offers a specific methodology for releasing the emotional charge, beliefs, and energies associated with traumatic experiences.
• Internal Attachment Repair: The relationship between Self and wounded parts creates an experience of secure attachment that helps heal attachment injuries often at the core of developmental trauma.

This gentle yet profound approach makes IFS particularly valuable for complex trauma and for clients who have found other trauma approaches overwhelming or incomplete.