Existential Health White Papers
White Paper No. 11: Existential Health Case Formulation
About the Existential Health White Papers
The Existential Health White Papers are a series of foundational publications introducing Existential Health as an emerging interdisciplinary field. Together, they define its central concepts, clarify its object of inquiry, and explore human flourishing through the enduring conditions of being human.
White Papers No. 1 through No. 9 established the conceptual foundations of the discipline, examining its theoretical framework, domains, practices, developmental model, professional applications, and the capacities through which human beings learn to inhabit existence with increasing honesty, freedom, wisdom, compassion, and love.
This tenth and final paper in Volume One turns toward the future, exploring the research agenda, methods of assessment, institutional foundations, and scholarly infrastructure needed for the field to mature as a rigorous academic and professional discipline.
With the completion of Volume One, the work now enters a new phase. Future efforts will focus on research, education, professional formation, interdisciplinary collaboration, institutional development through the Institute for Existential Health, and the continued refinement of the discipline through critical inquiry, empirical investigation, and practical application.
These papers mark not the conclusion of a project, but the beginning of a much larger conversation about what it means to become fully human.
Thank you for being part of this journey.
📄 White Paper No. 1, 📄 White Paper No. 2, 📄 White Paper No. 3, 📄 White Paper No. 4, 📄 White Paper No. 5, 📄 White Paper No. 6, 📄 White Paper No. 7, 📄 White Paper No. 8, 📄 White Paper No. 9, 📄White Paper No. 10
White Paper No. 11: Existential Health Case Formulation
A Framework for Understanding the Person’s Relationship with Being Alive
This paper concludes Volume One because case formulation represents a point of integration within the emerging practice of Existential Health. The preceding papers have developed the field's foundational concepts, domains, methods of inquiry, and approaches to practice. Case formulation brings these elements together around a single professional task: developing a disciplined understanding of how a particular person is relating to being alive. In this sense, case formulation is not simply another component of practice. It is where much of the field’s conceptual architecture becomes visible in relation to an actual life.
Introduction
Every helping profession develops a way of understanding the people it serves. Medicine develops diagnoses. Psychology uses assessment and case formulation to understand psychological distress and the processes contributing to it. Social work situates the person within relational, social, cultural, and structural contexts. Coaching often organizes its work around goals, obstacles, strengths, and desired outcomes. These approaches do more than provide professional tools. They reveal what a discipline has learned to notice, what it considers significant, and what kind of understanding it believes is necessary before meaningful practice can begin.
Existential Health requires its own approach because it begins with a different object of concern: the quality of a person’s relationship with being alive.
An Existential Health Practitioner may encounter someone who has lost the religious framework that once organized their life, a successful professional who has achieved what they were taught to want but no longer finds it meaningful, a person confronting mortality after the death of someone they love, a young adult trying to construct an identity amid competing cultural and digital pressures, or someone whose life appears functional from the outside while feeling increasingly disconnected from within.
None of these experiences necessarily constitutes a disorder, and none can be understood fully by identifying a problem and determining how to solve it. They may involve anxiety, depression, grief, confusion, loneliness, or distress, but they may also reveal a more fundamental disruption in how a person understands themselves, inhabits their life, and relates to the conditions of existence.
Understanding such experiences requires a particular kind of attention. The practitioner wants to know how the person experiences themselves and what gives their life coherence; where they locate authority and how they make meaning; how they relate to uncertainty, mortality, freedom, responsibility, belonging, identity, love, embodiment, and time. The practitioner also wants to understand what structures have helped this person survive, where those structures may now be constricting life, what sources of vitality remain available, what capacities are already present, and what possibilities may be emerging.
Taken separately, these are pieces of information. Collectively, they begin to reveal the architecture of a person’s relationship with existence. The task is therefore not simply to accumulate biographical facts, identify areas of distress, or catalogue existential themes. It is to understand how these dimensions interact within the particular history and present reality of a particular life.
This is the purpose of Existential Health Case Formulation.
Case formulation occupies a central position within professional practice. The Existential Health Interview gathers the person’s story and lived experience. Assessment identifies the domains, contexts, resources, capacities, and areas of strain that appear most relevant. The process then moves beyond identification toward integration, asking how these elements belong together and what larger pattern they reveal. Practice planning translates that understanding into priorities and practices, while ongoing review allows the formulation to change as the person, their circumstances, and the practitioner’s understanding develop.
The sequence can be expressed as Interview → Assessment → Case Formulation → Practice Plan → Review.
These are not isolated procedures but movements within an ongoing process of understanding and practice. The interview gives us the story. Assessment helps us recognize what is present. Formulation asks what it means when those elements are considered in relationship. Practice planning asks what might support development, and review returns us to the person’s lived experience to discover what has changed and what may need to be understood differently.
Case formulation is therefore the interpretive bridge between knowing pieces of a person’s story and understanding how those pieces belong together. It does not seek a final explanation of the person, nor does it position the practitioner as the authority who determines what another person’s life means. It creates a disciplined, provisional understanding that practitioner and client can examine together.
At the center of that process is the question that distinguishes Existential Health Case Formulation: How is this person relating to being alive?
1. Why Case Formulation Matters
Information alone does not produce understanding. A practitioner may know that someone recently left a religious community, struggles with uncertainty, feels lonely, has difficulty making decisions, fears disappointing others, and longs for a greater sense of purpose. Each observation matters, but taken separately they remain fragments. Case formulation asks how those fragments belong together and whether they reveal a larger pattern that cannot be seen by considering each concern in isolation.
Consider the experience of leaving a religious community. What has been lost may extend far beyond theological belief. A religious world can organize identity, belonging, moral orientation, authority, purpose, relationships, rituals, interpretations of suffering, expectations about the future, and even a person’s understanding of reality itself. When that world becomes untenable, several structures through which life previously made sense may destabilize at once. What appears initially to be a crisis of belief may therefore be a much broader disruption in the person’s relationship with existence.
Seen within this larger context, experiences that initially appear unrelated begin to illuminate one another. Difficulty making decisions may be connected to a history of outsourced authority in which important questions were answered by scripture, doctrine, community expectations, or trusted leaders. Loneliness may involve the loss of an entire social world rather than simply insufficient social contact.
Anxiety about uncertainty may reflect years within a framework that associated certainty with safety, faithfulness, or belonging. A loss of purpose may be inseparable from the collapse of an inherited narrative that once explained what life was for and what one’s particular life was supposed to mean.
This is the difference between collecting information and developing a formulation. A list can tell us what is happening. A formulation attempts to understand how what is happening belongs together. It moves the practitioner from isolated observations toward an integrated account of the relationships among biography, existential concerns, social and cultural context, survival architecture, existing capacities, sources of vitality, and emerging developmental possibilities.
Without this integrative movement, practice can easily become fragmented and reactive. Loneliness becomes a problem of social connection. Uncertainty becomes something to manage. Loss of purpose becomes an exercise in identifying new goals. Difficulty making decisions becomes a matter of increasing confidence. Each response may have value, but each may also miss the deeper pattern connecting these experiences. The practitioner may inadvertently treat manifestations of a larger existential transition as separate difficulties requiring separate solutions.
Case formulation makes another kind of understanding possible. The practitioner may recognize that the person is living through the dissolution of an inherited architecture of meaning and attempting, perhaps for the first time, to develop a more self-authored relationship with identity, authority, belonging, uncertainty, and purpose. What initially appeared to be several disconnected problems can then be understood as different expressions of a shared transition in the person’s relationship with being alive.
This does not mean reducing every concern to a single explanation. Human lives are rarely that simple, and formulation should resist the temptation to make them so. Its purpose is to identify meaningful relationships without forcing coherence where none exists. A good formulation holds complexity while making enough of the pattern visible to guide practice.
Case formulation matters because how a practitioner understands what is happening shapes what happens next. The formulation influences which questions are asked, which capacities receive attention, which resources are recognized, which practices are considered, and what kind of development becomes imaginable. Before deciding what might support a person, the practitioner needs the clearest possible understanding of the life in which that support will occur.
The purpose of formulation is therefore not simply to organize information. It is to develop a coherent, provisional understanding of how the person’s history, present circumstances, existential concerns, adaptations, resources, and capacities are interacting within their current relationship with existence. That understanding becomes the ground from which responsible Existential Health practice proceeds.
2. The Central Question
Every form of professional practice organizes attention around certain questions. Medicine may ask what physiological process is producing illness and what treatment is indicated. Psychotherapy may ask what psychological, relational, developmental, or environmental factors are contributing to distress and what processes maintain it. Coaching may ask what a person wants to accomplish, what stands in the way, and what resources might help them move forward.
These questions are not exhaustive descriptions of their respective professions, but they illustrate an important principle: the questions a practitioner brings to another person’s life shape what becomes visible.
Existential Health Case Formulation begins with its own organizing question: How is this person relating to being alive?
The simplicity of the question should not obscure its scope. It directs attention beyond any single symptom, problem, goal, or life event toward the person’s broader relationship with existence. The practitioner becomes interested in how this particular person encounters meaning and meaninglessness, mortality and limitation, freedom and responsibility, uncertainty and change, identity and belonging, love and solitude, embodiment and time, spirituality and transcendence, agency and participation.
These are not abstract philosophical categories imposed upon a life. They are dimensions of existence that become concrete through decisions, relationships, losses, commitments, fears, hopes, identities, bodies, communities, and the passage of time.
Asking this question does not mean treating every difficulty as an existential issue. Distress and symptoms remain important, particularly when they indicate conditions requiring clinical assessment or treatment. Trauma, physical health, economic circumstances, relationships, discrimination, social structures, cultural location, institutional power, and material conditions may profoundly shape a person’s experience.
A person facing economic precarity does not simply need a different relationship with uncertainty. Someone experiencing discrimination is not merely confronting an internal problem of belonging. A person with a serious mental health condition may require forms of care beyond the practitioner’s scope. A formulation that ignores these realities would not deepen understanding; it would distort it.
The distinctive concern of Existential Health is therefore not that everything can be explained existentially, but that human beings inevitably develop ways of relating to the conditions of being alive. We develop relationships with uncertainty, authority, belonging, freedom, limitation, and ourselves. Those relationships influence how we interpret what happens to us, what we believe is possible, what we avoid, what we pursue, what we can tolerate, and how fully we participate in our lives.
These relationships do not develop in isolation. Long before people consciously construct a philosophy of life, they are being formed by families, communities, religions, cultures, schools, institutions, economic systems, technologies, relationships, and historical circumstances. These environments communicate assumptions about what makes a person valuable, where authority resides, which emotions are acceptable, what constitutes success, who belongs, what should be feared, how suffering should be interpreted, and what gives a life meaning. Over time, these assumptions can become so familiar that they are experienced less as interpretations of reality than as reality itself.
Some of what we inherit sustains us. Some of it constrains us. Much of it does both. A religious tradition may provide belonging while limiting self-authorship. A family identity may provide continuity while making certain forms of individuality difficult. Achievement may create agency and opportunity while becoming the primary measure of personal worth. Independence may protect against disappointment while restricting intimacy. The task of formulation is not to sort these influences into simplistic categories of healthy and unhealthy, but to understand how they have participated in shaping the person’s present relationship with existence.
The central question therefore opens into a fuller formulation inquiry. The practitioner begins with How is this person relating to being alive? and then asks: How has this relationship been formed, what currently sustains or constrains it, what resources and capacities are already present, and what capacities might allow a fuller participation in existence?
This is the distinctive orientation of Existential Health Case Formulation. It does not begin by deciding what a person should believe, who they should become, or what their life should mean. It seeks to understand the relationship with existence they are already living, how that relationship came to take its present form, and what possibilities may now be available within it.
3. Defining Existential Health Case Formulation
Existential Health Case Formulation is the disciplined process of developing an integrated understanding of how a person is currently relating to the fundamental conditions and possibilities of being alive, including the existential concerns they are navigating, the contexts and survival architectures that shape their responses, the resources and capacities already available to them, and the developmental possibilities emerging in their life.
The word formulation is important. A formulation is neither a diagnosis nor a personality profile, and it does not claim to provide a definitive explanation of why someone is the way they are. It does not determine whether a person is living correctly, prescribe what their life should mean, or give the practitioner privileged authority over the interpretation of another person’s existence. Formulation is an act of disciplined understanding. It gathers what has been learned about a person’s lived experience and asks how the significant elements of that experience may be related.
This requires interpretation, but interpretation must be distinguished from pronouncement. Human lives do not arrive with their meanings already arranged into professional categories. The practitioner inevitably notices patterns, considers relationships, develops hypotheses, and brings conceptual frameworks to what they hear. Existential Health does not pretend that interpretation can be eliminated from this process. It insists instead that interpretation remain accountable to the person’s lived experience and capable of being corrected by it.
For this reason, an Existential Health Case Formulation is best understood as a provisional, collaborative map of the person’s current relationship with existence. Each of these terms carries an important methodological and ethical commitment.
The formulation is provisional because a person’s life cannot be captured once and for all. What appears central during an initial conversation may look different several months later. New experiences may expose patterns that were previously invisible. A loss may change what matters. A relationship may reveal a capacity the person did not know they possessed. Something initially interpreted as avoidance may later be understood as protection, discernment, exhaustion, or resistance to a situation that genuinely required resistance. A responsible formulation therefore represents the best understanding available at a particular moment while remaining open to revision as reality discloses more of the person’s life.
The formulation is collaborative because the person is not merely the object of professional observation. They are a participant in the process of understanding their own life. The practitioner may recognize patterns, introduce language, notice tensions, and make connections that the person has not yet considered, but these interpretations are offered for exploration rather than delivered as verdicts. The person’s own knowledge of their experience remains indispensable, including their capacity to say that an interpretation does not fit. In this sense, formulation should contribute to self-understanding and self-authorship rather than replacing one form of outsourced authority with another.
The formulation is a map because it is necessarily selective. No interview, assessment, professional framework, or written document can contain the totality of a human life. A map becomes useful precisely by identifying features relevant to the terrain being navigated.
In Existential Health, those features may include a person’s relationship with uncertainty, freedom, responsibility, embodiment, spirituality, love, and time; the social and cultural worlds that have formed them; the survival architectures through which they have maintained coherence and safety; the capacities and resources already available to them; and the developmental possibilities becoming visible in their present circumstances.
Like any map, a formulation can also be wrong. It can emphasize the wrong feature, overlook important terrain, mistake an inherited interpretation for the person’s own understanding, or impose coherence where life remains unresolved. The professional skill involved in formulation therefore includes not only the ability to construct an intelligible account but also the willingness to revise or relinquish that account when it no longer corresponds to the person’s experience.
This distinction is especially important for Existential Health because the field concerns questions that have historically attracted powerful systems of interpretation. Religion, psychology, philosophy, culture, and ideology have all offered accounts of what a person is, what constitutes a meaningful life, and how human beings ought to live. The field should not become another interpretive system that asks people to exchange one external authority for another. Its professional frameworks should increase a person’s ability to understand and participate in their own life rather than diminish it.
The practitioner therefore holds the formulation with both discipline and humility. Discipline requires enough conceptual clarity to recognize patterns, distinguish observations from interpretations, and develop an understanding capable of guiding practice. Humility requires remembering that the formulation remains an interpretation of a life rather than the life itself. It should be coherent enough to illuminate the terrain, useful enough to guide the work, and open enough to be changed by what reality reveals.
4. Principles of Existential Health Case Formulation
Existential Health Case Formulation rests upon several principles that shape both what the practitioner notices and how that understanding is held. These principles are not simply philosophical commitments surrounding the methodology. They influence how information is interpreted, what enters the formulation, what remains outside the practitioner’s scope, and how professional authority is exercised.
The Person Is More Than the Presenting Concern
People often seek support because something has become difficult. They may be grieving, lonely, burned out, questioning a religious worldview, struggling with identity, confronting mortality, experiencing the end of a relationship, or moving through a transition that has unsettled what once seemed stable. The presenting concern matters because it tells us something about where life has become difficult, disrupted, or newly visible. It does not, however, define the person.
A person experiencing a crisis of meaning still has relationships, memories, commitments, capacities, contradictions, pleasures, responsibilities, hopes, and ways of participating in the world. Someone struggling with loneliness may also possess a profound capacity for intimacy. A person undergoing religious deconstruction may be losing one structure of meaning while discovering new forms of curiosity, freedom, or spiritual experience. A formulation therefore places the presenting concern within the larger ecology of a life, asking not only what is difficult but how that difficulty exists alongside everything else that constitutes the person’s lived world.
Distress Is Not Automatically Pathology
Human beings suffer for many reasons, and the presence of suffering does not by itself tell us what kind of suffering we are encountering. Some forms of distress arise from psychological or medical conditions that require clinical assessment and treatment. Existential Health Practitioners must recognize those possibilities and remain attentive to the boundaries of their competence and scope of practice. Other forms of suffering emerge through encounters with realities that belong to existence itself.
Grief may hurt because someone irreplaceable has died. Anxiety may accompany freedom because choices carry consequences and no decision comes with complete certainty. Disorientation may follow the collapse of an identity because a structure that once organized the person’s life no longer holds. Mortality awareness may unsettle someone because they have grasped more fully that their life is finite. Loneliness may reveal an unmet need for belonging rather than a disorder requiring correction.
The task is not to romanticize suffering or interpret pain as inherently meaningful. It is to resist prematurely translating every difficult human experience into pathology. Existential Health Case Formulation asks what the distress is, what conditions surround it, what it may be communicating, and what forms of response are appropriate to it.
Context Is Part of the Formulation
No relationship with existence develops in isolation. People learn what life means and how to inhabit it within families, cultures, religions, communities, institutions, economies, technologies, relationships, and historical circumstances. These environments shape what people expect from themselves, where they locate authority, what they consider possible, what they fear losing, how they understand success and failure, and where they imagine belonging can be found.
Case formulation therefore resists explanations that locate every difficulty solely within the individual. A person’s struggle may involve capacities that need development, but it may also represent an understandable response to conditions that are alienating, coercive, precarious, discriminatory, isolating, or incompatible with flourishing. Someone experiencing chronic economic insecurity cannot be adequately understood through their capacity for uncertainty alone. A person marginalized within a community may not primarily have a problem with belonging; the community may have failed to make belonging possible without self-betrayal.
Internal and external realities frequently interact. The work of formulation is to understand that interaction rather than automatically assigning the source of difficulty to either the person or the environment.
Adaptations Should Be Understood Before They Are Changed
Patterns that constrain a person’s life in the present often have histories that make them intelligible. Perfectionism may have secured approval in an environment where mistakes threatened belonging. Certainty seeking may have provided stability amid chaos. Hyperachievement may have created identity and recognition. Emotional withdrawal may have reduced exposure to relational injury. Ideological dependence may have provided coherence when ambiguity felt impossible to bear.
Existential Health uses the term “survival architecture” to describe the constellation of adaptations through which a person has learned to preserve safety, coherence, identity, belonging, or control. The concept shifts the practitioner’s attention from asking what is defective about a pattern to asking what function that pattern has served within the person’s life.
Understanding survival architecture does not require preserving it indefinitely. What once protected a person may eventually constrict them. A strategy that created belonging in one stage of life may require self-erasure in another. Certainty that once provided stability may later prevent honest contact with reality. Achievement that once generated agency may eventually become the only available measure of worth. The practitioner’s task is to understand what the architecture protected, what it made possible, what it has cost, and whether it continues to serve the life the person is now attempting to inhabit.
Health Includes the Regenerative Dimensions of Existence
Existential thought has often given sustained attention to anxiety, death, isolation, absurdity, meaninglessness, freedom, and finitude. These are genuine dimensions of existence and remain important within Existential Health. They are not, however, the whole of the human condition.
People also encounter love, beauty, wonder, creativity, friendship, humor, curiosity, play, service, nature, intimacy, imagination, embodiment, spirituality, and belonging. These experiences are not merely pleasant additions to an otherwise difficult existence. They are among the realities through which people experience vitality, connection, meaning, renewal, and participation in life.
Existential Health Case Formulation therefore attends to what might be called the regenerative dimensions of existence. The practitioner asks where the person’s life is already capable of renewing itself, where vitality appears, which relationships enlarge their world, what awakens curiosity, where beauty reaches them, what they love, and what forms of participation return them to a fuller experience of being alive. A formulation concerned only with distress would provide an incomplete map.
Capacity Matters
Existential Health is concerned not only with what people believe, know, achieve, or are capable of doing, but with what they are able to encounter, hold, integrate, and participate in without requiring themselves or reality to become smaller. This is the domain of existential capacity.
Capacity becomes visible in the way a person inhabits the conditions of existence.
Can they remain present to uncertainty without urgently manufacturing certainty?
Can they grieve without requiring grief to resolve on a predetermined schedule?
Can they exercise freedom while accepting that no choice eliminates risk?
Can they experience solitude without automatically interpreting it as abandonment?
Can they participate in intimacy without surrendering selfhood?
Can they encounter perspectives that challenge their worldview without experiencing difference as annihilation?
Can they revise an inherited identity when reality no longer supports it?
Can they remain in meaningful contact with life when explanation is incomplete?
Capacity should not become another instrument for ranking people according to an imagined hierarchy of existential development. These abilities arise unevenly, develop within particular contexts, and may expand or contract under different conditions. A person may be well equipped to hold grief while struggling with uncertainty, or demonstrate extraordinary relational depth while finding self-authorship difficult. The relevant question is not whether someone measures up according to an abstract standard, but whether their present capacities are sufficient for the realities their life is asking them to encounter.
This makes capacity a developmental rather than diagnostic lens. The practitioner is not searching for deficits to label but for the places where a person’s existing way of inhabiting life is meeting a threshold that may require something more.
The Person Retains Interpretive Authority
Case formulation inevitably involves professional interpretation. Practitioners notice patterns, bring concepts to experience, consider possible relationships, and develop hypotheses about what may be happening. Pretending otherwise would obscure rather than eliminate the practitioner’s influence. The ethical question is therefore not whether interpretation occurs, but how interpretive authority is exercised.
Case formulation must not become another system through which an expert claims superior knowledge of what another person’s life means. This is particularly important in a field concerned with self-authorship, meaning, identity, spirituality, and authority. A methodology intended to strengthen a person’s relationship with their own life would undermine itself if it required them to surrender interpretive authority to the practitioner.
The practitioner can see things the person does not see. Professional training matters precisely because disciplined attention can reveal patterns, connections, and possibilities that may otherwise remain obscure. But these insights are offered as hypotheses to be explored rather than truths to be imposed. The person remains capable of saying, “That does not describe my experience,” “There is something missing,” or “I understand this differently.” Such responses are not resistance to the formulation. They are information that should change it.
Professional expertise and personal authority therefore need not be opposites. The practitioner brings skill in listening, inquiry, conceptualization, pattern recognition, and existential understanding. The person brings an authority no practitioner can possess: the lived knowledge of being the one whose life is under consideration. Existential Health Case Formulation requires both.
The formulation exists to illuminate the person’s life, not to contain it. The map serves the person; the person does not serve the map.
5. The Process of Existential Health Case Formulation
Existential Health Case Formulation can be organized into seven movements: gathering the story, identifying the primary existential themes, recognizing sources of health and vitality, understanding survival architecture, assessing capacities, constructing an integrative formulation, and identifying the developmental edge. These movements provide a disciplined structure for formulation without turning the process into a rigid protocol.
Human lives rarely disclose themselves in orderly sequence. A practitioner may recognize an important theme while gathering the story, discover a survival pattern while exploring a source of vitality, or revise an earlier interpretation after understanding the person’s developmental context more fully. The seven movements describe the work that formulation requires, even when the actual process moves back and forth among them.
Step One: Gather the Story
Formulation begins with listening. Before the practitioner can identify patterns or construct interpretations, there must be sufficient contact with the person’s lived world to understand what is happening from within it. The Existential Health Interview provides the primary context for this encounter, inviting the person to describe what has brought them to this moment, what has changed, what feels difficult, what matters, what has been lost, what they fear, what they hope for, and how they currently understand their situation.
The practitioner listens for more than a chronology of events. Attention is given to what repeatedly appears, where emotion or energy changes, which experiences receive considerable detail and which are passed over quickly, what questions are difficult to answer, and what language the person uses to describe themselves and their life. The practitioner may begin to notice places where the person’s story feels deeply their own and others where it seems to have been inherited from a family, religion, culture, profession, relationship, or social expectation. Attention also extends beyond difficulty toward what generates vitality, what seems absent, what the person longs for, and where life appears to be opening or closing.
This kind of listening requires restraint. The practitioner will inevitably begin forming hypotheses, but early recognition should not become premature explanation. The purpose of gathering the story is to encounter enough of the person’s world that subsequent interpretation remains accountable to lived experience rather than forcing that experience into categories the practitioner expected to find.
Step Two: Identify the Primary Existential Themes
As the person’s story develops, certain dimensions of existence may become especially prominent. The task is to recognize which of these are genuinely active in the person’s present life and how they are being experienced. The purpose is not to conduct an exhaustive inventory of existential themes or to demonstrate that every domain is somehow present. Almost any human experience could be interpreted through several categories if the practitioner searched hard enough.
The more disciplined question is which dimensions of existence are especially active in this person’s life now and how they are being experienced. Someone approaching retirement may be confronting time, identity, meaning, and mortality simultaneously. A person leaving a religious community may be negotiating belonging, authority, uncertainty, spirituality, identity, and purpose. Someone grieving the death of a partner may be encountering the reality of death through loss while also experiencing profound changes in identity, belonging, daily meaning, embodiment, and the imagined future.
Identifying the primary existential themes gives the practitioner a way of recognizing the terrain the person is navigating without reducing their experience to the categories themselves.
Step Three: Identify Sources of Existential Health
Formulation should not begin from an assumption of deficiency. Even during periods of significant distress, people often retain relationships, practices, places, commitments, experiences, and qualities through which life continues to reach them. These sources of existential health deserve deliberate attention because they reveal where connection, vitality, meaning, and participation are already occurring.
The practitioner explores what the person loves, what sustains them, which relationships allow them to feel known, where they experience beauty or wonder, what awakens curiosity, what forms of creativity remain available, and what activities create a sense of participation rather than mere performance. Nature, friendship, humor, service, artistic expression, spirituality, movement, learning, community, work, ritual, solitude, family, and ordinary experiences of pleasure may all function as sources of existential health.
The practitioner also listens for less obvious resources. Curiosity during a crisis of belief may indicate that uncertainty contains possibility as well as fear. Anger may reveal that something important has been violated. Grief may disclose the depth of attachment. A person’s refusal to continue inhabiting an inherited identity may indicate an emerging commitment to reality even when they cannot yet articulate who they are becoming.
Sources of existential health are therefore more than protective factors added to a list of problems. They reveal where life retains regenerative possibility and often provide the ground from which further development can occur.
Step Four: Identify Survival Architecture
The practitioner next considers how the person has learned to preserve safety, coherence, identity, belonging, and control within the environments that formed them. Over time, these adaptations become organized into a survival architecture that continues to shape how a person meets the world.
Survival architecture may involve perfectionism, people pleasing, hyperachievement, certainty seeking, emotional withdrawal, ideological dependence, intellectualization, spiritual bypassing, compulsive productivity, conflict avoidance, rigid self-sufficiency, or reliance upon external validation. The presence of such a pattern does not by itself establish its meaning. Similar behaviors can serve very different functions in different lives. Formulation therefore requires understanding the adaptation within the person’s particular history rather than assigning meaning to it from a predetermined list.
Three questions are especially useful: What did this pattern protect? What did it make possible? What does it cost now? Perfectionism may have protected belonging in a family where approval depended upon achievement. Self-sufficiency may have developed when dependence repeatedly resulted in disappointment. Certainty seeking may have provided coherence within an environment where doubt threatened identity or community membership. Understanding these functions allows the practitioner to recognize survival architecture as adaptation before considering where it may have become constraining.
The final question, what does it cost now, introduces the developmental dimension. A structure can remain intelligible while no longer being adequate. The issue is not whether the person should have developed differently in the past, but whether an architecture built under earlier conditions can support the life they are now attempting to inhabit.
Step Five: Assess Existential Capacities
Once the practitioner has developed a clearer understanding of the person’s current terrain, sources of health, and survival architecture, attention turns more deliberately toward capacity. Existential capacities concern what a person is presently able to encounter, hold, integrate, and participate in within the conditions of their life.
Relevant capacities may include the ability to hold uncertainty, ambiguity, grief, self-authorship, intimacy, solitude, dialogue, meaning-making, responsibility, mortality awareness, belonging, discernment, reality contact, and participation. These should not be treated as fixed traits or converted into a generalized score of existential health. A person’s strengths may vary significantly across domains and circumstances. Someone may tolerate profound intellectual uncertainty while finding relational ambiguity almost unbearable. Another person may navigate grief well while struggling to exercise freedom when important choices cannot be externally validated.
Capacity assessment is therefore contextual and developmental rather than competitive or diagnostic. The practitioner is not asking where the person ranks against an idealized model of existential maturity. The relevant question is whether the person is adequately equipped for the realities they are currently being asked to encounter.
This can be expressed through a central formulation question: What does this person’s life currently require them to hold, encounter, or participate in that they may not yet be fully able to meet? The gap between present reality and present capacity is not evidence of defect. It may identify the developmental threshold around which meaningful practice can be organized.
Step Six: Construct the Integrative Formulation
This is the movement in which assessment becomes formulation. Up to this point, the practitioner has gathered information, identified relevant existential themes, recognized sources of health, explored survival architecture, and considered capacities. Formulation begins when these elements are brought into relationship and an intelligible pattern starts to emerge.
The practitioner asks how the person’s history illuminates the presenting concern, how survival architecture interacts with the existential realities currently active, which capacities are already supporting the person, where existing capacities are being stretched, and where inherited structures are coming into tension with present reality. The practitioner considers what has changed, what has become unsustainable, what continues to provide coherence, and whether several apparently separate difficulties may be different expressions of a shared transition.
An integrative formulation should be capable of telling a coherent story without pretending that coherence is complete. It might recognize, for example, that a person’s anxiety, indecision, loneliness, and loss of purpose following religious deconstruction are not four unrelated problems but interconnected consequences of losing a system that previously organized authority, belonging, identity, certainty, and meaning. It might also recognize that the person’s curiosity, relationships, creativity, and growing capacity for self-authorship represent resources through which another way of inhabiting life is already developing.
The quality of a formulation can therefore be tested by asking whether it reveals relationships that were less visible when the information remained separate. A formulation that merely restates the assessment in paragraph form has not yet accomplished its task. The practitioner should be able to articulate what appears to be happening in this person’s relationship with existence, how it has taken its present form, what sustains or constrains it, and what possibilities are becoming visible.
Step Seven: Identify the Developmental Edge
The integrative formulation eventually brings the practitioner to another question: What is life asking of this person now? This question should be held carefully. It does not imply that life contains a predetermined developmental agenda that the practitioner has special authority to discover. It is a way of asking what the person’s present circumstances appear to require that their previous ways of inhabiting life may no longer provide.
The developmental edge concerns what may need to become more possible. For one person, this may involve developing greater capacity for uncertainty after a lifetime organized around certainty. For another, it may mean constructing a more self-authored identity after years of living through inherited expectations. It may involve grieving what cannot be recovered, discovering forms of belonging that do not require conformity, developing a different relationship with mortality, relinquishing an inherited role, becoming more available to intimacy, or returning to meaningful participation in community.
The developmental edge should arise from the formulation rather than from the practitioner’s preferred vision of human flourishing. It is explored collaboratively and remains subject to correction by the person whose life is being considered. Its purpose is not to determine who the person should become, but to identify where their current relationship with existence appears to be meeting the limits of an older way of living and where new capacities or forms of participation may be needed.
At this point, formulation has reached its natural boundary. It has gathered the story, identified the existential terrain, recognized sources of health, understood relevant survival architecture, considered capacities, integrated these elements into a coherent account, and identified the developmental edge. The next question is no longer primarily What is happening? but What forms of practice might support what is trying to develop? That question belongs to Existential Health Practice Planning.
Keeping this boundary clear is essential. Case formulation develops the map. Practice planning determines how practitioner and client will begin navigating the terrain together.
6. A Visual Model of the Formulation Process
The professional practice sequence can be represented as:
EXISTENTIAL HEALTH INTERVIEW
↓
Story and lived experience
↓
EXISTENTIAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT
↓
Domains • Context • Resources • Capacities • Survival Architecture
↓
CASE FORMULATION
↓
Patterns • Relationships • Integrative Understanding
↓
DEVELOPMENTAL EDGE
↓
What is asking to emerge?
↓
PRACTICE PLAN
↓
Priorities • Practices • Participation
↓
REVIEW AND REFORMULATION
The process is iterative rather than strictly linear.
Practice generates new experience. New experience changes understanding. Changed understanding may require reformulation.
The formulation therefore remains alive throughout the practitioner relationship.
7. Components of an Existential Health Case Formulation
The previous section described the process through which a case formulation is developed. The present section addresses a different question: What should a completed written formulation contain? Although the precise form may vary according to context, a comprehensive formulation can be organized around eight primary components: the presenting concern, existential context, life context and formation, survival architecture, sources of existential health, existential capacities, patterns and integrative understanding, and the developmental edge.
These components should not be treated as boxes to complete mechanically. Their purpose is to discipline attention and ensure that important dimensions of the person’s experience are considered. Some components may require considerable development in one formulation and only brief attention in another. The quality of a formulation depends less upon giving equal space to every category than upon identifying what is genuinely significant in this particular life.
Presenting Existential Concern
The formulation begins with what has brought the person to Existential Health practice at this point in their life. The presenting concern should be described as closely as possible to the person’s lived experience rather than reduced prematurely to a professional label.
A practitioner might record “burnout,” for example, but the word alone reveals very little. One person’s burnout may involve physical and emotional exhaustion after years of unsustainable work. Another may have achieved many of the goals around which they organized adulthood and now experience those achievements as strangely empty. Someone else may discover that relentless productivity has functioned as a way of securing worth, avoiding grief, or maintaining an identity they no longer know how to inhabit.
Phenomenological description asks what the experience is actually like for this person. What has changed? What feels difficult or unfamiliar? What has become impossible to ignore? Why has this concern become significant now? The goal is not merely to name the problem but to understand how it is being lived.
Existential Context
The formulation then identifies the fundamental dimensions of existence that appear especially active within the person’s present situation. Rather than surveying every possible domain, it focuses on those that are most consequential for understanding the person’s life now.
These domains should illuminate the person’s experience rather than become categories into which experience is forced. A person approaching retirement, for example, may initially describe concern about what they will do with their time. Further exploration may reveal questions of identity, usefulness, mortality, purpose, belonging, and the meaning of a life no longer organized around professional achievement. Naming these existential dimensions allows the formulation to recognize the depth and interconnectedness of what might otherwise appear to be a practical problem of transition.
The formulation need not mention every existential domain. It should identify those that meaningfully contribute to understanding the person’s current relationship with being alive.
Life Context and Formation
A person’s relationship with existence has a history. The formulation therefore considers the environments, relationships, institutions, events, and cultural worlds through which the person’s understanding of themselves and life has developed.
Relevant influences may include family systems, religion, culture, community, education, work, economic circumstances, migration, significant relationships, social expectations, institutions, technology, experiences of inclusion or exclusion, major losses, and life transitions. The purpose is not to construct an exhaustive biography but to identify formative influences that help make the person’s present experience intelligible.
This component also protects against treating the person as an isolated psychological unit. Beliefs about worth, authority, success, belonging, gender, work, family, spirituality, independence, suffering, and purpose are rarely created by individuals alone. They are learned, reinforced, resisted, revised, and sometimes abandoned within social worlds. Understanding those worlds is essential to understanding how a person has learned to inhabit existence.
Survival Architecture
The formulation identifies the structures and strategies through which the person has learned to preserve coherence, safety, identity, belonging, or control. These may include perfectionism, people pleasing, certainty seeking, hyperachievement, emotional withdrawal, compulsive productivity, intellectualization, ideological dependence, conflict avoidance, rigid self-sufficiency, or reliance upon external validation.
The purpose is not simply to identify a pattern but to understand its function. The written formulation should therefore make clear what the adaptation appears to have protected, what it made possible within the person’s earlier circumstances, and what consequences it carries in the present.
A formulation might recognize, for example, that hyperachievement provided a person with recognition and a stable sense of worth in an environment where affirmation was otherwise scarce. The same architecture may now make rest feel threatening and ordinary existence feel insufficient. What once supported survival or coherence can become restrictive without ever having been irrational.
Survival architecture should therefore be described with historical understanding rather than judgment. The question is not simply what needs to disappear, but whether structures built for previous conditions remain adequate for the life the person is now attempting to inhabit.
Sources of Existential Health
A comprehensive formulation identifies where life is already generative. Even during periods of profound disorientation, people frequently retain relationships, experiences, commitments, practices, places, and qualities through which meaning, vitality, connection, or participation remain available.
These sources may include love, friendship, beauty, wonder, creativity, humor, curiosity, nature, spirituality, service, artistic expression, embodiment, learning, community, solitude, ritual, meaningful work, or experiences of being deeply known by another person. Their significance lies not simply in making someone feel better but in revealing where the person’s relationship with existence is already sustaining or renewing itself.
The formulation should therefore ask where the person becomes more fully present, what enlarges rather than constricts their world, what reconnects them with themselves and others, and where they experience life as worth participating in. These existing sources of existential health may become important resources for development, but they are also valuable in their own right as expressions of a life that cannot be understood solely through its difficulties.
Existential Capacities
The formulation considers the capacities most relevant to the person’s current circumstances. These may include the ability to hold uncertainty, ambiguity, grief, self-authorship, intimacy, solitude, dialogue, responsibility, meaning-making, mortality awareness, belonging, discernment, reality contact, and participation.
Capacities should not be converted into another pathology inventory in which the practitioner identifies what the person lacks. Nor should they be treated as fixed traits. A person may possess considerable capacity in one context and struggle in another, and capacities may expand, contract, or become more available as circumstances change.
The relevant question is relational: What does this person’s present reality require them to encounter, hold, integrate, or participate in, and how adequate are their existing capacities for doing so?
A formulation may therefore identify capacities that are well developed, capacities currently under strain, and capacities beginning to emerge. This produces a more dynamic picture than a binary distinction between strength and deficit. The person is understood as someone whose ways of inhabiting existence continue to develop in relationship with the realities life presents.
Patterns and Integrative Understanding
This component is the heart of Existential Health Case Formulation. The preceding components provide important information, but information becomes formulation only when the practitioner begins to understand how the elements relate.
The integrative narrative asks what becomes visible when the presenting concern, existential context, formative history, survival architecture, sources of health, and capacities are considered together. It looks for relationships among experiences that may initially have appeared separate and asks whether a larger pattern makes them more intelligible.
A person may report loneliness, difficulty making decisions, anxiety about uncertainty, and loss of purpose after leaving a religious community. A formulation does more than place each concern beneath a separate heading. It may recognize that the former religious world simultaneously organized belonging, authority, certainty, identity, and purpose. Its loss therefore destabilized several dimensions of existence at once.
Difficulty making decisions may reflect the unfamiliar demands of self-authorship; loneliness may involve the loss of a community that once confirmed identity; uncertainty may feel threatening because certainty previously carried moral and existential significance; and purposelessness may arise because an inherited narrative about what life was for has become unavailable.
This is the work of formulation. It does not merely summarize what has been learned. It develops an account of how the parts illuminate one another.
The integrative narrative should remain concise enough to guide practice, comprehensive enough to represent the significant features of the person’s situation, and provisional enough to remain open to correction. Its value lies in explanatory coherence, not explanatory totality. A strong formulation makes more of the person’s experience understandable while leaving room for what remains unknown, contradictory, unfinished, or resistant to interpretation.
Developmental Edge
The final component identifies where the person’s current relationship with existence appears to be reaching the limits of an established way of living and where another capacity, relationship, understanding, or form of participation may be becoming necessary.
The developmental edge may involve learning to inhabit uncertainty without immediately replacing it with certainty, grieving something that cannot be recovered, developing a more self-authored identity, discovering belonging without conformity, relinquishing a role that once provided coherence, becoming more available to intimacy, developing a different relationship with mortality, or returning to forms of participation from which the person has become estranged.
The phrase developmental edge should be held with humility. It does not imply that the practitioner knows the person’s proper destination or possesses a universal blueprint for human development. The developmental edge is a collaborative hypothesis about what the person’s present circumstances appear to be asking them to encounter or develop. It should emerge from the formulation rather than from the practitioner’s preferred image of what a flourishing person should become.
This component brings the formulation to its boundary with practice planning. The formulation identifies the terrain and makes the developmental edge visible; it does not yet prescribe the practices through which that edge will be explored. That work belongs to the Practice Plan.
Taken together, these eight components transform a collection of observations into a disciplined account of the person’s present relationship with existence. The presenting concern identifies where the inquiry begins. Existential context identifies the terrain. Life context and formation reveal how that terrain has been shaped. Survival architecture explains how the person has learned to navigate it.
Sources of health identify where life remains regenerative. Existential capacities clarify what the person can presently hold and inhabit. Integrative understanding reveals how these dimensions belong together. The developmental edge identifies where the person’s existing way of living may be meeting the possibility, and necessity, of something more.
8. A Complete Worked Case Example
The following fictional case illustrates how the components of Existential Health Case Formulation can be brought together in practice. Maria is not intended to represent a typical experience of religious deconstruction, nor should her situation be interpreted as a model against which other clients are measured. The purpose of the example is methodological: to demonstrate how information gathered through interview and assessment can be integrated into a coherent, provisional understanding of a person’s relationship with being alive.
Maria is a forty-three-year-old secondary school teacher who seeks Existential Health support approximately eighteen months after leaving the religious community in which she spent most of her adult life. When asked what has brought her to the conversation, she says, “I don’t know who I am anymore.”
Maria entered the community when she was seventeen and describes it as the place where she “became an adult.” She met her spouse there, raised her children within the community, developed most of her closest friendships through it, and spent many years volunteering in leadership and service roles. Her religious world provided a framework for understanding morality, relationships, suffering, vocation, death, and the purpose of life. She remembers those years with considerable ambivalence. There are teachings she now regards as harmful and forms of authority she no longer accepts, but she also remembers genuine friendship, shared purpose, meaningful rituals, and periods when she felt deeply connected to something larger than herself.
Her departure did not occur through a single dramatic event. Questions accumulated gradually until she could no longer affirm beliefs she had once regarded as certain. She initially experienced leaving as liberation and expected that greater freedom would bring relief. Instead, she describes the past year as increasingly disorienting. “I spent years wanting permission to think for myself,” she says, “and now that nobody is telling me what to think, I don’t trust myself.”
Her marriage remains intact, although her spouse continues to participate in the religious community. They generally avoid theological conversations because both fear where those conversations might lead. Several close friendships have become distant, while others remain cordial but feel different to Maria because she is no longer certain how much of herself she can reveal. She misses the familiarity of being part of a community where people knew her history and where weekly life followed recognizable rhythms.
Maria also reports periods of loneliness, increased anxiety about death, and difficulty making decisions that previously would have been guided by religious teachings or trusted leaders. She frequently worries that prioritizing her own judgment is selfish. Questions that once had clear answers now remain unresolved, including what she believes about death, whether spirituality still has a place in her life, and what ultimately gives life meaning.
Her life is not defined entirely by this disorientation. Maria remains deeply engaged with her students and describes teaching as one of the places where she still feels “completely myself.” She has begun hiking regularly and often experiences a sense of connection with the natural world that she finds difficult to describe but does not feel compelled to explain. She recently returned to painting, something she loved when she was younger but largely abandoned during the years when family, work, and religious responsibilities consumed most of her time.
She has a close relationship with her sister, who does not share her religious background and has become one of the few people with whom Maria feels able to speak freely. She has also begun reading philosophy and writing privately about questions of meaning, mortality, and spirituality.
Presenting Existential Concern
Maria describes her primary concern as a loss of identity following religious deconstruction. Her statement that she no longer knows who she is appears to involve more than uncertainty about theological belief. The religious world she left had provided an organizing structure for identity, belonging, moral authority, relationships, spirituality, purpose, and interpretations of mortality. Her present disorientation appears connected to the destabilization of several of these dimensions at once.
It would be premature, however, to assume that religious deconstruction explains every difficulty Maria is experiencing. The formulation treats this as a central working hypothesis rather than a comprehensive explanation of her life.
Existential Context
Several existential dimensions appear particularly active in Maria’s current experience: identity, belonging, uncertainty, freedom, responsibility, mortality, meaning, spirituality, authority, and self-authorship.
Freedom has become especially complicated. Maria wanted greater freedom from an authority structure she no longer trusted, but the experience of possessing greater interpretive and moral freedom has not been straightforwardly liberating. Decisions that once had external reference points now require her to determine what she believes, values, and chooses without the assurance that a recognized authority can validate those decisions.
Belonging is similarly complex. Maria has not simply lost social contact. She has lost participation in a shared world of language, rituals, assumptions, relationships, and collective meaning. Her questions about mortality have also intensified as previous beliefs about death and an afterlife have become uncertain. These concerns appear interconnected rather than independent.
Life Context and Formation
Maria entered her religious community during late adolescence, a developmental period in which identity, values, relationships, and independence were taking shape. The community therefore participated significantly in her formation as an adult. It provided friendship, moral guidance, identity, purpose, ritual, explanations of suffering, expectations for family life, and a framework for making consequential decisions.
Within that environment, authority was understood primarily as something received through scripture, religious teaching, and trusted leaders. Maria describes personal desire as something she learned to approach cautiously because wanting something did not necessarily mean it was right. Important decisions were frequently evaluated through prayer, scriptural interpretation, community expectations, and consultation with people regarded as spiritually mature.
This formation appears to have cultivated genuine strengths. Maria developed considerable capacities for commitment, service, loyalty, responsibility, and participation in community. At the same time, she appears to have had fewer opportunities to develop confidence in forms of discernment that did not depend upon external validation. Her present difficulty trusting her judgment may therefore be understood partly within this developmental history rather than simply as low confidence.
Survival Architecture
Certainty seeking and reliance upon external authority appear to be significant elements of Maria’s survival architecture. Within her former religious environment, these patterns provided more than answers to theological questions. They offered coherence, moral orientation, belonging, identity, and a reliable framework for navigating uncertainty.
Their function should not be reduced to dependence. Maria’s willingness to trust a shared framework enabled commitment, relationships, community participation, and a coherent sense of purpose for many years. The architecture carried genuine goods as well as limitations.
The difficulty is that the framework that once supported this architecture is no longer credible to her. Maria continues to feel the need for authoritative answers while simultaneously distrusting systems that claim the authority to provide them. She sometimes moves rapidly among books, podcasts, philosophical perspectives, and spiritual frameworks searching for something that will “finally make sense of everything.” This may represent an attempt to reproduce the certainty of her previous worldview in a new form.
The emerging question is therefore not simply whether Maria can find a better framework, but whether she can develop a relationship with uncertainty that does not require any framework to eliminate it.
Sources of Existential Health
Maria’s life already contains significant sources of vitality, meaning, connection, and participation. Her relationship with her sister provides an experience of being accepted without ideological agreement or the need to defend her changing beliefs. Teaching remains meaningful and gives her a context in which competence, care, contribution, and relationship are available without reference to her former religious identity.
Her experiences in nature appear particularly important. Hiking gives Maria a sense of connection that she describes as spiritual while remaining reluctant to define it metaphysically. This may provide a context in which she can experience wonder and transcendence without first determining what those experiences mean.
Painting represents another emerging source of existential health. Its return coincides with a period in which Maria is beginning to ask who she is outside the roles and expectations that previously organized her life. Creative practice may therefore represent more than recreation; it may be one place where a less externally prescribed relationship with herself is already becoming possible.
Her curiosity is also significant. Uncertainty frightens Maria, but she is not only frightened by it. She reads, questions, writes, explores, and remains interested in possibilities she does not yet understand. The same uncertainty that produces anxiety is also creating space for exploration.
Existential Capacities
Maria demonstrates substantial capacities for relationship, commitment, reflection, service, curiosity, and meaning-making. Her decision to leave a community that had organized much of her adult life also suggests an existing capacity for reality contact: when her inherited framework no longer corresponded to what she could honestly believe, she eventually became unwilling to maintain coherence by pretending otherwise.
Other capacities appear to be under greater strain. Her relationship with uncertainty is developing but remains closely connected with anxiety and a desire for replacement certainty. Self-authorship appears emerging rather than absent. She is increasingly capable of exercising her own judgment but often experiences guilt after doing so, particularly when her choices depart from expectations she previously regarded as morally authoritative.
Grief may also require attention. Maria has spoken extensively about what she no longer believes but considerably less about what she has lost. The end of her former religious life involved the loss of friendships, rituals, identity, certainty, shared language, community rhythms, and an imagined future. Her initial framing of deconstruction primarily as liberation may have left some of these losses insufficiently acknowledged.
These observations remain hypotheses rather than measurements of fixed traits. Further conversation may complicate or revise them.
Patterns and Integrative Understanding
When these dimensions are considered together, Maria’s current struggle appears to involve a broader existential transition rather than a crisis of religious belief alone. Her former religious world functioned as an integrated architecture of meaning, identity, belonging, moral authority, spirituality, community, and metaphysical certainty. As that world became intellectually and morally untenable, several structures through which Maria had learned to inhabit existence destabilized simultaneously.
The resulting disorientation appears especially pronounced around authority and self-authorship. The external structures that once guided consequential decisions are no longer credible to Maria, while her confidence in forms of discernment independent of those structures remains relatively undeveloped. Greater freedom is therefore experienced ambivalently. It represents something Maria wanted and fought to claim, but it also places demands upon capacities that her previous environment gave her fewer opportunities to exercise. Her guilt when relying upon her own judgment may reflect the continuing influence of an authority structure she no longer consciously endorses.
Her increased mortality anxiety may be related to the loss of metaphysical certainty rather than constituting an isolated concern. Similarly, her loneliness appears to involve more than diminished social contact. Maria has lost participation in a community that provided shared language, ritual, recognition, identity, and a sense of location within a larger story. Her longing for that belonging can coexist with her conviction that returning to the former system would require her to violate what she now understands to be true.
At the same time, Maria’s life contains substantial sources of existential health that complicate any account of her situation as simple loss or decline. Teaching, nature, creativity, intellectual curiosity, and her relationship with her sister provide contexts in which meaning, connection, agency, wonder, and participation are already available without dependence upon the comprehensive worldview she left. These experiences suggest that another relationship with existence is not merely a future possibility; elements of it are already present.
Maria’s situation can therefore be provisionally understood as a transition from a predominantly externally organized architecture of coherence toward a more self-authored relationship with meaning, authority, belonging, spirituality, and uncertainty. This transition includes genuine expansion but also genuine loss. Development does not require Maria to dismiss the world she left as wholly harmful. Part of the work may involve grieving what cannot be recovered while recognizing that some of the goods she valued within that world, including community, ritual, spirituality, service, and shared meaning, may eventually take other forms.
Developmental Edge
Maria’s developmental edge does not appear to require determining immediately what she now believes or constructing another comprehensive worldview capable of replacing the one she lost. The more immediate developmental possibility concerns learning to inhabit a life in which uncertainty can remain present without automatically being experienced as failure, danger, or evidence that she has not searched hard enough for the correct answers.
Self-authorship is closely connected to this edge. Maria may need opportunities to exercise discernment, make consequential choices, and discover through experience that trusting her own judgment does not necessarily constitute selfishness or moral abandonment. This does not mean replacing external authority with radical self-sufficiency. A more developed form of self-authorship can remain relational, receptive to wisdom, open to correction, and capable of participating in communities without surrendering responsibility for one’s own discernment.
Grief also appears significant. Maria may need space to acknowledge that leaving her religious world involved losing things she genuinely loved. Mourning those losses does not invalidate her reasons for leaving, nor does gratitude for what the community once provided require returning to it. The capacity to hold both realities may be part of the transition itself.
Her emerging experiences of spirituality in nature, creativity through painting, meaningful participation through teaching, and non-ideological belonging with her sister suggest additional possibilities. Rather than beginning by constructing a new philosophy of life, Maria may be learning that meaning, belonging, spirituality, and participation can be encountered through lived experience before they are organized into a comprehensive explanation.
The formulation stops at this threshold. It does not yet prescribe the practices Maria should undertake or determine the person she ought to become. Those decisions belong to collaborative Practice Planning.
What the formulation provides is a disciplined and provisional map: Maria is not simply losing religion, struggling with anxiety, or searching for new beliefs. She appears to be renegotiating some of the most fundamental relationships through which she has learned to inhabit existence: her relationships with authority, uncertainty, identity, belonging, mortality, spirituality, and meaning. At the same time, new forms of self-authorship, connection, creativity, and participation are already becoming visible within her life.
That is what Existential Health Case Formulation is intended to make visible.
9. Relationship to Other Forms of Case Formulation
Existential Health Case Formulation does not emerge in opposition to psychology, psychotherapy, counseling, social work, coaching, spiritual direction, or other helping professions. It develops within a much larger history of attempts to understand people in ways that can guide responsible care. Existential Health shares concerns, concepts, and practices with several of these traditions while organizing its attention around a distinct professional question.
Psychological and psychotherapeutic case formulation encompasses a wide range of approaches rather than a single model. Depending upon theoretical orientation, formulation may consider developmental history, cognition, emotion, behavior, relationships, attachment, personality, social context, patterns of avoidance, protective factors, and the processes contributing to or maintaining psychological distress. Unlike diagnosis, which places experiences within established classifications, formulation typically attempts to develop an individualized account of why particular difficulties may have emerged and what continues to sustain them.
Trauma-informed approaches contribute another important perspective by understanding many behaviors and responses as adaptations to experiences of threat, injury, instability, or overwhelming circumstances. Attention may be given to safety, attachment, emotional regulation, relational patterns, bodily responses, and the enduring consequences of traumatic experience.
Existential Health shares with trauma-informed practice an interest in understanding adaptations within the conditions that made them intelligible. Its concept of survival architecture extends this attention into a broader existential inquiry concerning how people construct safety, coherence, identity, belonging, certainty, and control.
Social work brings particular attention to the person within social and environmental systems. Material conditions, family and relational networks, institutions, economic circumstances, community resources, culture, inequality, and structures of power may all be necessary for understanding what a person is experiencing. This perspective provides an important corrective to any helping model that locates difficulty exclusively within the individual. Existential Health similarly understands that a person’s relationship with being alive is formed and lived within environments that can support, constrain, include, exclude, humanize, or diminish them.
Coaching encompasses diverse approaches but commonly gives attention to goals, strengths, obstacles, choices, behavior, performance, accountability, and desired change. Existential Health may share coaching’s interest in agency, possibility, and movement, but it does not assume that the person arrives with a clearly identifiable goal or that progress necessarily takes the form of achievement. There are periods of life when the central task is not accomplishing something but learning how to inhabit uncertainty, mourn a loss, relinquish an identity, reconsider what success means, or remain present to a question that cannot yet be resolved.
Spiritual direction offers another neighboring tradition. It may attend to spiritual experience, discernment, sacred meaning, contemplative life, vocation, transformation, and a person’s relationship with what they understand as God, the sacred, or ultimate reality. Existential Health shares an interest in meaning, transcendence, depth, and the ways people encounter dimensions of life that exceed ordinary instrumental concerns. Its scope, however, does not require a religious or metaphysical framework. Questions of spirituality and transcendence can be explored while leaving open how, or whether, a person interprets those experiences theologically.
The relationship with existential psychotherapy deserves particular attention. This therapeutic tradition has long explored mortality, freedom, responsibility, isolation, meaning, anxiety, authenticity, choice, and the conditions of human existence. Existential Health stands in genuine intellectual kinship with this tradition and should not claim novelty for questions that philosophers and psychotherapists have investigated for generations.
The distinction lies primarily in professional location and scope. This form of psychotherapy is practiced within a clinical or therapeutic relationship and concerned with psychological suffering and change. Existential Health develops these concerns within a broader framework focused on the ongoing quality of a person’s relationship with being alive, including contexts in which no mental disorder or need for psychotherapy is present.
A person may seek Existential Health support while navigating retirement, questioning inherited beliefs, confronting mortality, reconstructing identity after leaving a community, searching for meaning after professional success, developing a more self-authored life, exploring non-religious spirituality, or attempting to participate more deeply in relationships and community. Such experiences may sometimes coexist with psychological conditions requiring treatment, but they are not inherently clinical problems. They belong to the wider developmental and existential work of being a person.
Existential Health therefore overlaps with neighboring disciplines without being reducible to any of them. Its distinctive contribution lies in the organizing object of its attention: the quality of the person’s relationship with being alive. The practitioner seeks to understand how the person relates to meaning, mortality, identity, belonging, uncertainty, freedom, responsibility, embodiment, love, spirituality, time, and participation; how those relationships have been formed; what survival architectures shape them; what sources of health and vitality remain available; and what capacities may be required by the person’s present circumstances.
This orientation can be described as understanding the person-in-relation-to-existence. The phrase does not imply that diagnosis, symptoms, goals, relationships, social conditions, or spiritual beliefs are unimportant. Any of them may be essential to understanding a particular person. Rather, these realities are considered insofar as they illuminate the person’s larger way of inhabiting existence.
Distinctiveness also requires clear professional boundaries. Existential Health Case Formulation is not a substitute for psychological diagnosis, medical assessment, psychotherapy, trauma treatment, or other forms of specialized care. Existential Health Practitioners do not diagnose mental disorders or provide services outside their training and professional scope unless they hold separate qualifications that authorize them to do so.
A practitioner encountering symptoms or circumstances that may require medical, psychiatric, psychological, or other specialized assessment has an ethical responsibility to recognize the limits of their professional scope and to pursue appropriate referral, consultation, or collaboration.
The reverse distinction is equally important. The fact that an experience is painful does not automatically make it clinical. Grief, mortality awareness, loss of meaning, religious deconstruction, identity transition, uncertainty, loneliness, and questions of purpose can involve profound distress while remaining intelligible responses to the conditions and transitions of a human life. Existential Health provides a professional framework for accompanying these experiences without requiring them first to become disorders.
These boundaries should encourage collaboration rather than competition. A person may work simultaneously with a psychotherapist and an Existential Health Practitioner, just as people sometimes receive support from physicians, counselors, spiritual directors, coaches, educators, and community practitioners for different dimensions of their lives. Responsible practice requires clarity about which questions belong within one’s competence and when another form of expertise is needed.
A new profession does not establish its legitimacy by claiming that existing professions have failed or by attempting to absorb their functions. It becomes credible by identifying a genuine domain of concern, developing rigorous methods appropriate to that domain, establishing clear standards of competence and ethics, and learning how to work responsibly alongside neighboring disciplines. Existential Health Case Formulation is intended to contribute to that development.
Existential Health adds another lens to the wider ecology of human care: a disciplined way of understanding people not primarily as diagnoses to be classified, symptoms to be reduced, goals to be achieved, or beliefs to be corrected, but as persons continually developing a relationship with the realities and possibilities of being alive.
10. Case Formulation as a Living Document
A human life does not remain still long enough to be captured permanently by a formulation. People change, relationships change, circumstances shift, and experiences acquire meanings that could not have been anticipated when they first occurred. Previously invisible patterns become recognizable. Capacities develop. Old strategies loosen their hold. New losses alter the landscape. Questions that once seemed urgent recede while others move to the center of a person’s life. Any formulation adequate to this reality must be capable of changing with it.
An Existential Health Case Formulation should therefore be understood as a living document rather than a settled account of who someone is. It represents the best understanding available at a particular moment, developed from what the person and practitioner have been able to see together. Its value lies partly in its coherence, but coherence should never harden into certainty. The moment a formulation becomes something that must be defended against new experience, it has ceased to serve its purpose.
A practitioner might initially understand someone’s difficulty with intimacy primarily as a form of self-protection. Months of conversation may reveal something more complicated: throughout the person’s life, belonging has repeatedly required accommodation, concealment, or self-erasure. What first appeared to be fear of intimacy may also contain an understandable resistance to forms of relationship in which closeness has historically carried the threat of losing oneself. The earlier formulation was not necessarily careless or mistaken. It reflected what could be understood at the time. The formulation changes because the person’s life has disclosed more of itself.
The same process occurs as people develop. Someone initially overwhelmed by uncertainty may gradually discover that unanswered questions no longer produce the same urgency. A person whose identity depended heavily upon external recognition may begin making choices that require less validation. Someone who once experienced solitude primarily as abandonment may develop a relationship with solitude that includes restoration, creativity, or freedom. As capacities change, the formulation must register not only what remains difficult but what has become newly possible.
Review and reformulation should therefore be built into Existential Health practice rather than reserved for moments when something has gone wrong. Practitioner and client can periodically reconsider the map they have created together, asking whether it still corresponds to the person’s experience, what has changed, what may have been misunderstood, which capacities have developed, what new questions have emerged, and what concerns no longer occupy the place they once did. They can also ask where life has opened, because development is revealed not only by the disappearance of difficulty but by the appearance of possibilities that previously could not be inhabited.
This ongoing revision has ethical significance. Practitioners can become attached to their interpretations, particularly when an interpretation is elegant, conceptually satisfying, or appears to explain many features of a person’s life. Professional language can intensify this temptation by making provisional understandings sound more certain than they are. A formulation may become so coherent that the practitioner begins interpreting new information through the formulation rather than allowing new information to challenge it.
Existential Health practice requires the opposite posture. When lived experience contradicts the map, the map must change. When the person’s understanding develops beyond the practitioner’s interpretation, the interpretation must loosen. When a concept that once illuminated the person’s experience begins to obscure it, the concept has reached the limits of its usefulness. The practitioner does not protect the formulation from reality; the practitioner continually exposes the formulation to reality.
This is why reformulation should be understood as a sign of methodological strength rather than failure. A living formulation remains responsive to the person it was created to serve. It offers enough coherence to orient the work without pretending that a life can be permanently contained within an explanatory framework. The practitioner remains willing to revise what seemed certain, relinquish what no longer fits, and recognize what has newly become possible. In Existential Health Case Formulation, the map remains accountable to the territory, and however useful the map may become, reality retains the final word.
11. Implications for Professional Practice
A shared approach to case formulation has implications beyond the relationship between an individual practitioner and client. If Existential Health is to develop as a coherent professional field, practitioners need more than a common vocabulary of existential ideas. They need disciplined methods for gathering information, interpreting what they encounter, communicating their understanding, examining their assumptions, and determining what responsible practice requires. Case formulation provides one structure through which these professional capacities can develop.
Training
Professional formation in Existential Health should teach practitioners not only what concepts such as meaning, self-authorship, survival architecture, belonging, mortality, uncertainty, and existential capacity mean, but how to recognize their relevance within the complexity of an actual life. Knowing the vocabulary of a field is different from knowing how to practice within it. A practitioner may understand the concept of survival architecture intellectually while still struggling to distinguish an adaptive pattern from a personality judgment, or recognize the importance of self-authorship while prematurely assuming that greater independence is what a particular person needs.
Case formulation creates a bridge between conceptual knowledge and professional judgment. Training can include fictional and composite cases, formulation exercises, observed interviews, written formulations, peer consultation, comparative formulations, and supervised practice with actual clients where appropriate. Practitioners can learn to distinguish what a person explicitly reported from what the practitioner observed, what can reasonably be inferred, what remains hypothetical, and what is simply unknown. They can also learn to recognize when a compelling interpretation exceeds the available evidence.
Competence in formulation therefore involves more than learning a template. It requires developing disciplined attention, interpretive restraint, contextual awareness, conceptual precision, and the capacity to hold uncertainty while enough understanding develops to guide responsible practice.
Supervision
Case formulation provides practitioners and supervisors with a shared object for professional reflection. Rather than discussing a case only in terms of what occurred during a session or what the practitioner should do next, supervision can examine the understanding that is shaping the practitioner’s choices.
A supervisor might ask whether the formulation remains sufficiently grounded in the person’s lived experience, whether interpretations have been confused with observations, whether contextual or structural factors have been neglected, and whether the practitioner is imposing assumptions about meaning, spirituality, independence, belonging, or flourishing. Supervision can also examine how the practitioner’s own biography, worldview, unresolved concerns, and preferred concepts may be influencing what they notice or fail to notice.
The developmental edge deserves particular scrutiny. Because it points toward what may need to become possible in a person’s life, it can easily become a place where the practitioner’s values are mistaken for the client’s development. A practitioner who highly values autonomy may interpret dependence as something to overcome. Someone who values community may overemphasize belonging. A practitioner with a particular spiritual orientation may perceive transcendence where the client experiences none. Supervision provides a setting in which these interpretations can be examined before they quietly become prescriptions.
In this sense, supervision does more than improve the formulation. It protects the person from the unexamined authority of the practitioner.
Documentation
A common formulation framework can also support the development of professional documentation standards for Existential Health. Documentation should preserve enough information to support continuity, accountability, supervision, and responsible decision-making without reducing a person’s life to clinical shorthand or recording speculative interpretations as established facts.
A disciplined documentation system can distinguish among what the client reports, what the practitioner directly observes, what contextual information appears relevant, what interpretations are being considered, what hypotheses remain provisional, what developmental possibilities have been identified, and whether consultation or referral may be appropriate. Such distinctions matter because professional language can easily give uncertainty the appearance of certainty once it enters a written record.
Existential Health documentation should therefore reflect the same epistemic humility expected of formulation itself. Records should be useful enough to support professional practice while remaining clear about the limits of what is known. The aim is not to create an exhaustive account of the person but to document the understanding necessary for responsible practice.
Interprofessional Communication
Clear formulation can also strengthen collaboration with neighboring professions. Existential Health Practitioners may work alongside psychotherapists, physicians, social workers, chaplains, spiritual directors, educators, coaches, and other professionals whose work touches different dimensions of the person’s life. A shared formulation framework gives the EHP a disciplined way of explaining what they are attending to and where the limits of their role lie.
This becomes especially important when referral or consultation is needed. An EHP should be able to communicate that a client is exploring questions of meaning, identity, belonging, or mortality while also recognizing when psychological symptoms, medical concerns, trauma-related difficulties, or safety issues require expertise beyond the practitioner’s scope. Professional credibility depends partly upon being able to articulate both what Existential Health contributes and what it does not claim to provide.
Interprofessional communication also works in the other direction. Information from other professionals may alter an existential formulation. A psychological assessment, medical diagnosis, change in social circumstances, or insight from another helping relationship may reveal dimensions of the person’s situation that the original formulation did not adequately recognize. Collaboration becomes another way in which the formulation remains accountable to reality.
Research
A consistent approach to case formulation creates important possibilities for research. Once a field can describe its methods with sufficient clarity, those methods can be examined rather than merely asserted. Researchers may investigate the usefulness and conceptual validity of existential domains, the development and measurement of existential capacities, the role of survival architecture, agreement and disagreement among practitioners constructing formulations, the relationship between formulation and practice planning, and the ways clients experience the formulation process itself.
Research may eventually reveal that some concepts require revision, that distinctions assumed to be important are less useful than expected, or that new dimensions need to be added to the framework. Such findings should be welcomed. A professional methodology becomes stronger when its concepts are exposed to evidence, criticism, replication, and refinement.
Case formulation should therefore be understood as an emerging methodology rather than a finished system. Its credibility will depend not on protecting its original concepts from challenge but on allowing practice, scholarship, research, and lived experience to reshape them over time.
Professional Identity
Perhaps the deepest implication of case formulation concerns professional identity. Every profession develops characteristic forms of attention. Training changes what practitioners are able to notice. A physician learns to recognize patterns in physical signs that another person might overlook. A psychotherapist learns to notice psychological and relational processes. A social worker becomes attentive to the interaction between individuals and the systems surrounding them. Professional formation involves learning how to see without assuming that one’s particular way of seeing reveals everything.
Existential Health Practitioners develop another disciplined form of attention. They learn to notice how meaning is constructed and lost, how identities are inherited and authored, how belonging can sustain or constrain, how people respond to freedom and uncertainty, how mortality alters what matters, how survival architectures preserve coherence, how capacities expand or contract, where borrowed certainty substitutes for discernment, where life has become constricted, and where participation is beginning to return. They learn to recognize the regenerative presence of love, beauty, creativity, wonder, relationship, service, nature, and spirituality alongside the realities of grief, isolation, anxiety, limitation, and death.
Learning to see in this way does not give the practitioner superior access to another person’s life. Professional attention is valuable precisely when it remains aware of its limits. The Existential Health Practitioner learns to notice patterns without turning people into patterns, to use concepts without mistaking concepts for reality, and to develop interpretations without claiming ownership of another person’s meaning.
This is where case formulation becomes more than a documentation practice or professional technique. It trains a particular kind of disciplined attention to human existence. The practitioner learns to move from fragments toward relationship, from presenting concerns toward context, from apparent deficits toward adaptation and capacity, and from immediate problems toward the larger question of how a person is inhabiting their life.
Without such a methodology, Existential Health risks remaining a compelling collection of ideas about meaning, mortality, identity, belonging, and human flourishing. With it, those ideas begin to acquire a disciplined form of professional practice. Case formulation helps establish what an Existential Health Practitioner is trained to notice, how that understanding is constructed, how it is tested and revised, and how it can responsibly guide what happens next.
12. The Professional Practice Architecture of Existential Health
Case formulation belongs within a larger professional methodology.
The emerging practice architecture can be organized around five connected processes:
Existential Health Interview
The disciplined gathering of the person’s story and lived experience.
↓
Existential Health Assessment
The identification of relevant existential domains, contexts, resources, capacities, and areas of strain.
↓
Existential Health Case Formulation
The development of an integrated understanding of how these elements interact within the person’s current relationship with existence.
↓
Existential Health Practice Planning
The collaborative identification of developmental priorities, practices, experiences, and forms of participation appropriate to the formulation.
↓
Review and Reformulation
The ongoing evaluation of what is changing and whether the existing understanding remains adequate.
Around this central practice cycle sit the broader structures required of a profession:
Professional Competencies • Ethics • Documentation Standards • Supervision • Scope of Practice • Referral Standards
Together, these elements provide the beginnings of a coherent methodology through which Existential Health can be taught, practiced, supervised, evaluated, and researched.
Conclusion: A Map for the Practice of Being Alive
Human beings have always constructed ways of making life intelligible. We inherit and create identities, communities, religions, philosophies, relationships, ambitions, rituals, and stories that tell us something about who we are, where we belong, what matters, and how a life should be lived. Some of these structures carry us for decades and continue to deepen as we do. Others eventually become inadequate to what experience has shown us. Sometimes they collapse through loss, disillusionment, or rupture. Sometimes they loosen so gradually that we recognize only in retrospect that the map by which we have been living no longer corresponds to the territory beneath our feet.
People often seek support at these thresholds. A loss has altered the world they knew. An inherited identity has become impossible to inhabit honestly. Success has delivered what it promised and failed to provide the meaning expected of it. Mortality has moved from abstraction into awareness. A community still offers belonging, but the price of that belonging has become self-betrayal. Greater freedom has arrived before the person feels capable of inhabiting it. The old way of organizing life no longer works, while another way has not yet taken recognizable form.
Such moments can be painful without being reducible to pathology. They belong to the unfinished work of becoming a person in circumstances that continue to change. They expose the structures through which we have maintained coherence and reveal the places where those structures may no longer be sufficient. They can also bring us into contact with questions that ordinary routines allow us to postpone: what we actually believe, what we love, where we belong, how we know what matters, what we will do with our freedom, how we will live with uncertainty, and what it means to inhabit a life we know will end.
Existential Health exists within this territory. Its task is not to provide another comprehensive system that tells people what their lives should mean or to replace one source of external authority with another. It seeks to accompany people in understanding and developing their relationship with being alive, including the realities they cannot control, the meanings they create and inherit, the structures that have carried them, the capacities they possess, and the possibilities that may be emerging within their present circumstances.
Case formulation gives this work a disciplined form. It gathers what might otherwise remain fragmented and asks how the pieces belong together. The person’s presenting concern is considered within the existential realities surrounding it, the contexts that have shaped it, the survival architectures that have made life navigable, the sources of health that continue to sustain it, and the capacities through which the person encounters what life now requires. Formulation does not eliminate complexity. It seeks enough coherence within that complexity to make responsible practice possible.
The map that emerges is necessarily provisional. No formulation contains the person whose life it attempts to understand, just as no professional vocabulary can exhaust the meaning of a life. The formulation may illuminate patterns that were previously difficult to see, but it remains accountable to lived experience and open to revision. When the territory changes, the map must change with it. When the map is wrong, reality must be allowed to correct it. Professional expertise is exercised not by claiming the final interpretation of another person’s life but by bringing disciplined attention to what may be happening while preserving the person’s authority to recognize, question, revise, or reject that interpretation.
This is what distinguishes Existential Health Case Formulation from a collection of existential concepts. It establishes a method through which practitioners can move from listening to assessment, from assessment to integration, and from integration toward practices appropriate to the particular person before them. It provides a framework that can be taught, supervised, documented, examined, researched, and refined while remaining grounded in the irreducible particularity of an individual life.
At the center of the methodology remains a question simple enough to remember and expansive enough to organize an entire professional practice: How is this person relating to being alive? From there the inquiry deepens: What has shaped that relationship, what currently sustains or constrains it, and what capacities might allow fuller participation in existence?
These questions do not tell the practitioner what another person’s life should become. They establish where attention begins. They ask the practitioner to see the person neither as a collection of symptoms nor as a problem to be solved, but as someone whose relationship with meaning, mortality, identity, belonging, freedom, uncertainty, love, embodiment, spirituality, and participation continues to take shape within the conditions of an actual life.
That is ultimately what Existential Health Case Formulation offers the emerging profession: not a final account of the person, but a disciplined way of understanding enough of the terrain to accompany them responsibly through it. The map remains open, the person remains larger than the formulation, and the practice remains answerable to the life it is intended to serve.
Support the Work
Existential Health is being built in public, one article, white paper, conversation, and practice at a time. Paid subscriptions ($50 annually) help make this work possible and support the ongoing research, writing, and development of a field concerned with one of the most fundamental questions we face: How do we develop a healthier relationship with being alive?
If this work contributes something meaningful to your life, I invite you to become a paid subscriber. You will receive full access to my writing while helping support the larger project of developing Existential Health for the people and communities who need it.