Counselling for change: Is change even possible?

Lupus pilum mutat, non mentem, meaning the wolf changes his coat, but not his disposition, or in Maltese, il-lupu jbiddel sufu imma mhux għemilu, is a widely used handme-down idiom that perpetuates absolute mistrust in the wolf ’s ability to make significant and permanent personal development changes.

Thus, according to this metaphor, wolves lack the ability to change for the better. Yet since humans are fallible, hence typify the wolf by means of repeated maladaptive thoughts, emotions and behaviours at various life junctures, I am not only challenging this prevailing parlance’s legitimacy for portraying a dichotomous world inhibited namely by opposites as well as spreading the idea that so-called wolves cannot benefit from counselling for change, but also wondering whether adopting this fatalist stance actually helps guard against perceived wolf-like conduct or just isolates people from one another.

Prior to moving forward, however, I will delve into the social need and staying power of this idiom. Indeed, idioms sprout from collective emotional experiences and burrow into cultures through repetitive use albeit, in this case, contradicted by personal and vicarious experiences indicating that effective change following maladjusted demeanour is both possible and common. This means that although most of us bare witness and have abundant evidence against this saying’s validity, many continue to use this imported and deep-seated expression with the consequence of it surviving the test of time.

In reflection, however, an underlying reason for its lastingness may be its emergence from and arousal of fear, which is one of humanity’s most primitive and dynamic emotions.

Therefore, today’s article, written from both a Research Support Officer’s and practicing counsellor’s perspectives, invites deep reflection about our cognisant-oblivious affinity to this disempowering message as, in a nutshell, it erodes confidence in counselling for change and concurrently denies the sheer existence of human resilience.

In fact, this expression stands in stark contrast to counselling for change’s underpinnings, positing that humanity possesses inherent capacities to change into more adaptive and fulfilling ways of living.

Thus, to kick start rudimentary consideration, I ask readers to examine whether they unknowingly or knowingly espouse this reductive expression. In other words, is it a belief they heedlessly embrace, or a phrase they thoughtfully articulate? Also, if they have knowingly renounced it at some point.

Next, I ask the endorsing group to examine the evidence that informs their confidence in it. Specifically, if they have adopted this stance to protect the self and loved ones from known alleged wolves or if this is a precautionary bearing. In contrast, for the unsubscribed to examine reasons for ignoring or even rejecting this common saying. Besides this, for both cohorts to deliberate whether it is best to assume an either-or or a both-and position for a heightened sense of personal safety. And, if a both-and stand based on the fact that there can never be a one-approach-fits-all to humanity feels safest, to examine what shapes their perception of non-wolf and wolf-like conduct.

In moving forward I now turn to a longstanding American aphorism, saying and doing have quarrel’d and parted, which loosely translates in the Italian proverb, tra il dire e il fare c’è di mezzo il mare, and into the Maltese saying, bejn ilkliem u l-fatti hemm baħar jikkumbatti, for a possible explanation of why some people seem stuck in their alleged wolf demeanour.

In unison, these allied international sayings acknowledge as well as accurately and succinctly capture the chasm between people’s latent change potential and their ability to effect detectable positive change. This in turn encourages observers to lower erected defences in their regard. Essentially and in support of theory these phrases inform us that humans, notwithstanding to varying degrees, are hardwired for change as without the ability to change and adapt to one’s environment and everchanging set of circumstances one cannot possibly survive. Not all individuals change and adapt at corresponding or even perceived rates. Not all choose to make so perceived positive changes. So, in brief, not all humans cash in their intrinsic change potential for so assessed positive factual change. Yet, what is certain is that all challenges in living, including the wolf ’s, can be explored and mitigated through counselling for change.

In fact, change is possible only when one commits to taking responsibility for the changes one wants to see in one’s life, and subsequently proceeds to taking action to make the necessary changes. Thus, in closing today’s article, I hope to have settled the issue of whether counselling for change is at all possible. Additionally, whether alleged wolves can benefit from counselling for change.

To end with yet another idiom, this time an Arabic one positing

only three things in life are certain: birth, death and change, which besides contrasting the opening vernacular, assures that life itself is synonymous with CHANGE! Whether change is positively or negatively appraised, however, depends on both the change made as well as the perceiver’s assessment of it.

Why not study with the Faculty for Social Wellbeing – come in contact with us on socialwellbeing@um.edu.mt