1. What are the basic tenets of this approach to therapy?
The basic tenets of the strategic approach to therapy are being a solution-focused model, time sensitive, and engaging in a type of reverse psychology in order to guide the client/patient to effect change in their lives. Where the goal is to identify what the chief complaint/problem is, and focus on how best to solve that issue without exploring the client/clients on a deeper level.
2. How does this approach understand health and pathology?
This approach understands pathology as whatever the maladaptive pattern is, comes from an individual needing something from a relationship with another. When they are not getting what they need, they act out or engage in a maladaptive behavior in
…show more content…
order illicit what they are missing from the relationship. This occurrence, of course, is inadvertent or an unconscious happening. Usually the attention they get back from their maladaptive behavior isn't what they were looking for, but it provides them a type of control over the relationship. By that, every time they engage in the maladaptive behavior, the other person in the relationship will react to that behavior. This is turn is the causation of the maladaptive pattern those involved in the relationship find themselves in. 3. How does this approach understand individual, couple and family dynamics? From a couples and family standpoint, this approach understands that relationships are labeled as "symmetrical" or "complimentary" and may become competitive 4. What are the core therapy techniques? There are paradoxical interventions such as reframing, relabeling, prescribing the symptom, retraining, offering prescriptions, offering descriptions, predicting a relapse, or declaring hopelessness. How does this theory compare and contrast with the other theories you read this semester? In comparison to Bowen, his and Minuchin's theories have many similarities while having one or two major differences.
When examining the similarities, both theories present the same concepts while using different terminology. For example, Minuchin describes "detouring" as an inclusion of a third party into a relationship in hopes of maintaining equilibrium and harmony; as described by Bowen, this is referred to as "triangulation." Essentially, both theorists excessively describe the importance of looking at the context of the family opposed to solely the individual. Contrastingly, while Bowen's theory is transgenerational and encourages the clinician to look at recurring themes or connections across generations, Minuchin's theory is stationary and solely looks at the family as is. He believes that exploration of past transgenerational patterns is not important for the work he intends to do within the family, here and now. Lastly, Minuchin adopted a very "hands-on" perspective and felt the need to wholly immerse himself in the family to make the necessary changes. Minuchin and Fishman state, "Therapy is the process of taking a family who is stuck in the developmental spiral and creating a crisis that will push the family in the direction of their own evolution" (1981, p. 27); this describes the perfect scenario for a structural theorist to become willingly immersed in a family and their problems. Opposingly, Bowen preferred to "intellectually distance himself from the …show more content…
family in order to remain differentiated" (Awosan, 2015). What is the interface between this theory and gender, class, race, sexual orientation, religion/spirituality, and culture? What are your thoughts about the lack of this interface with the theory? Considering the cultural context of the family is imperative when using the concepts of this theory, especially diffused and rigid boundaries. Unlike Bowen's theory that hardly touched upon gender, race and culture, Minuchin's theory highlight the importance of a family's culture and the ways in which it affects how its members engage with one another. For example, as seen from Ashton's example of "The Godfather," the big, Italian family in which the movie is focused on portrays extremely enmeshed and diffused boundaries, alliances, and coalitions. Conclusively, a collectivistic culture is more apt to exhibiting enmeshed and diffused boundaries while an individualistic culture is more apt to exhibiting rigid and disengaged boundaries. Thus, examining the cultural context of a family has the potential to account for very much of how and why members interact the way they do. Due to the lack of interface between gender, class, race, sexual orientation and religion in this theory, it is extremely important for a clinician to still take these contexts into account. By exploring the familial importance of these circumstances, a clinician may be more inclined to understand how and why a family interacts the way in which it does. Although Minuchin failed to incorporate these into his theory, as a clinician, it would be highly recommended to always examine all contextual factors of a given family unit. What are your reactions to the theory? What have you learned from this theory that may help you clinically? How do you imagine using this theory in practice? Personally, upon first observing this theory, I found it rather confusing and hard to follow; because I so strongly identified with Bowen's theory and his theoretical concepts, it was rather difficult for me to process similar ideas with different terminology.
In addition, I disagree with his idea of the clinician inserting his/herself into the family; at the end of the day, the clinician does not get to go home with the family and will not be there to navigate through certain scenarios with them. I also strongly disagree with not looking at the transgenerational patterns and connections of a family; in doing so, it can more accurately explain to the individual, family, and clinician where changes need to be made in order to break the mold of prior generations. Although I grew an appreciation for concepts that were foreign to me such as boundary permeability, enmeshment, and disengagement, I seem to more so align myself and my beliefs with Bowen's transgenerational
theory. From a clinical standpoint, Minuchin's theory will be useful in practice when the cultural context of the family seems to ignite controversy and misunderstanding. Interpreting the boundaries and subsystems within the family will more accurately allow me to assess and plan a form of treatment for the individual or family. Although I will not utilize all concepts of Minuchin's theory, such as inserting myself into the family and only looking at the present family structure, I do intend on incorporating some of his terminology and ideas into my clinical work.
According to Murray Bowen’s family systems theory, the family subsists in a system where as the individuals are inseparable from their network of relationships, but continue to strive to be individualized. Consequently, various forms of these networks are grounded in the domestic structure and the “normal” or “ideal” family and development derives from the interaction of the family members when they remain differentiated, unease is minimal, and partners have beneficial emotional communication with their own family members (Nichols, 2014). The concept of achieving individuality while remaining in a cohesive family unit may cause stress. Concepts such as differentiation of self, triangulation, emotional cutoff, and anxious attachment may aid in the elucidation of the family system. This theoretical concept along with these coinciding terms will be explored through one episode of the television series The Goldbergs called Rush.
For Bowen, the family is the unit of observation and the emphasis is put on emotional forces that are common to all families, this helps to reduce the significance of which family member is causing the problem. Bowens approach to change is understood within the context of striving to understand life’s forces, the very principal that gives coherence to Bowens approach to therapy. (Friedman, 1991). When attempting to achieve change within a client the source of the issue is less important, but rather trying to locate the systematic forces within a family as well as those that are transmitted from generation...
According to smith and Hamon (2012), Families are considered as a whole in society. However, they believed that couples have many components in which makes up the family, if one component is missing, the family as a whole can get unbalance (Smith & Hamon, 2012). In the Brice’s family, communication was the component that was missing. The couple was not able to communicate their differences, which was what caused Carolyn and David to verbally insult each other. Smith and Hamon (2012), also explain that a person who expresses his or her feeling is considered as someone who is breaking the functions of their family system; especially if the person is focusing on the individual who is causing the problem, rather than the problem itself. In the Brice family, Carolyn could be considered the one that cause the dysfunction in the family structure because she was focusing on David as the problem of their marriage, rather than focusing of the elements that are causing their problems. Smith and Hamon (2012) explain that individuals should focus on how to solve a problem, rather than trying to find who is causing the
My theory will include both directive and non-directive approaches, focusing on building a supportive client-therapist relationship, a full lifestyle assessment and understanding of the client’s belief system, as well as engaging in a strength based, goal-oriented practice which focuses on changing thoughts and choices, through education to the client and building self-regulation within the
Napier provides a crucial exploration of the therapy of a family struggling with battles for the structure of their family and battles to define and grow their relationships with one another. Napier and Whitaker seamlessly and purposely work with each family member, educating and
Furthermore, “the central premise of this theory is that one must resolve all emotional issues with the family of origin, rather than reject reactively or accept passively that family, before one can become a mature and healthy individual” (Charles, 2001, p. 280). Bowen believed that the change in the self occurred through the change in relationships with others, so he encouraged the client to reconnect with the nuclear family members and resolve all emotional issues with them. This is because Bowen believed that unresolved conflicts with the family of origin would catch up with the client and affect his or her present relationships. Also, conflicts do not exist in the person, but in the family system. The necessary changes must take place in the self as well as in the larger system.
Structural family therapist have exemplified within the context relational therapies that uncovers stressors in relationship between individuals (Vetere, 2001). Structural family therapy has been known to be called “interventive approach” because of the “intensity” to encourage clients to change (Hammond & Nichols, 2014).
The main theory that has largely influenced my clinical work at my current practicum site is cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). CBT asserts it is an individual’s thoughts and behaviors that directs the individual, so in this case my job would be to help the my client (individual) to find his or her thought that is driving his or her action(s). CBT is a fine dance; it may seem simple, identify the thought and replace the thought with a healthier thought. CBT is quite contrary to being simple, the techniques and timing is a fine juggling and balance act. To elaborate further, after a client has identified his or her thought that has been driving his or her action, they would need to restructure certain things in the their life that will help implement certain behaviors that will lead to a more healthier cognition.
In the industrial age before World War II, when individual psychotherapy was born and thrived, human beings were essentially seen as machines, with broken parts—including the mind—that could be repaired; after World War II, the dawning information technology age brought a paradigm shift in the view of human life from mechanical to relational, and communication and systems theories provided family therapy with increased validity and prominence. (White, 2009, pp. 200-201). The modern family systems theories that grew out of this paradigm viewed families narrowly as functional or dysfunctional according to the delineation of each theory. Today, postmodern theory suggests that no absolute truth governs individuals or families; instead, people are
...p their own solutions to problems. Clients may need some guidance, education, or direction depending on their abilities and how the therapy is going. It is then that I want to be able to help them feel more empowered and recognize that they can make changes with effort on their part.
Irwin G. Sarason and Barbara R. Sara, Abnormal Psychology: The Problem of Maladaptive Behavior,10th ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2002)
Murray Bowen developed family systems theory. This transgenerational model looks at how a family’s history informs their present functioning. Today it is a prominent model used by today’s family and marriage mental health professionals. Derived from psychoanalytic thinking and sometimes called natural systems theory, it posits that families are living and evolving systems shaped by chronic anxiety transmitted through its generations. Anxiety is aroused when individuals attempt to balance their individual identity with being a part of a family. This balancing act inevitably causes anxiety, triggering biological coping responses instead of healthy cognition and reasoning (Goldenberg & Goldenberg, 2012). Erford
Psychopathology is what goes wrong with the mind. It is distress related to mental processes and statistical deviations from the norm. Psychopathology is what clinicians treat and researchers research (quoted in Frances & Widiger, 2012). Psychopathology has many possible definitions because it does not exist in a vacuum—the context affects the definition. Common themes in possible definitions include distress, dysfunction, disability, and dyscontrol, but none of these quite capture the whole picture (Frances & Widiger, 2012). What if a person is not distressed, but their behavior is clearly maladaptive, for example someone with antisocial personality disorder who manipulates others to achieve their goals? Is this person not pathological? Of
I think the major technique is focusing on the person and not the problem which would help the client to achieve independence and allow the client to cope with current and future problem they may face. Another major technique is the client determines the course of directions of therapy. Another technique is the person-centered therapy which is a non-directive which allows the client to be the focus of the therapy session without the therapy giving advice.
This is possible as it contains a step-by-step method that an be taught to the client and further applied outside of therapy sessions. The method can be simplified to follow the small actions of attitude adjustment, problem definition, creating alternate solutions, outcome prediction and fulfilling the chosen path (Dobson, 2009, p. 212). Altering the attitude to being positive about the problem is crucial as it sets the mental state to place in which motivation to solve the problem can thrive. Furthermore, defining the problem realistically is vital as it allows the individual to understand the full scope of what a realistic goal for overcoming the problem may be. From there the client must create alternate possible routes for them to undertake to possibly solve the problem. The Client must then assess the alternate solutions, predict the positive and negative outcomes and pick the best perceived option. Finally, the client must then try out the chosen path. They should monitor the situation and to understand progress. It is important that if the client does not receive a successful outcome that they do not give up. Rather they should repeat the cycle until a positive outcome takes place, considering any additional information gain from this