No description available.

Genograms are a widely used tool, well grounded in systemic theory. However the claims made in the literature regarding the therapeutic use and effects of the genogram have not been empirically explored or verified. This study therefore aimed to examine the extent to which the use and effects of genograms in clinical practice reflect the claims made in the literature. This study asked: what therapeutic tasks the genogram is used for, the specific pathways the genogram facilitates those tasks, and the mechanisms salient to the genogram that adds to clinical practice. Ten qualified Family Therapists participated in semi-structured interviews discussing their experiences. A Thematic Analysis was conducted. Five themes were identified: therapist-family joining; systemic exploration; therapist hypothesizing; family perturbation through cognitive change; family perturbation through experiential and behaviour change. This study found that genograms were used in some of the ways described in the literature: engagement, information gathering, hypothesizing and intervention aimed at cognitive change. The usefulness of the genogram was found to extend beyond ‘engagement’ and ‘information gathering’ to ‘therapist-family joining’ and ‘systemic exploration’ respectively. However, this study did not find the genogram was used to explore emotions, nor as an intervention aimed directly at behaviour change; instead, change at the experiential level was reported. The pathways the genogram facilitates therapeutic tasks are delineated, as are the mechanisms salient to the genogram that adds to clinical practice. Recommendations for further research were made. This included repeating this study with therapists from different training backgrounds, as well as undertaking a quantitative study examining genogram outcomes in terms of a measurable change in presenting problems.

Self-disclosure and storytelling have been part of Adlerian family therapy and counseling since Adler's public work with families and educators in Austria. The benefits of both—as well as the cautions for use—have been well documented in the literature. Still, those who are recently trained and/or new to the profession often seem reluctant to engage clients in the kind of human, person-to-person (and person-revealing) conversations that let clients know they are not alone in the world and that encourage them to be imperfectly human. The use of self-disclosure and storytelling occurs less in training programs that put a premium on "taking a professional stance" and with practicum/internship students who are still unsure of how to use themselves in the therapeutic process. The authors describe the purposes and constructions of effective self-disclosure and storytelling in Adlerian family therapy and suggest guidelines for therapeutic decision-making and use.

No description available.

No / Tom Andersen's Reflecting Team approach is widely (and creatively) employed in family therapy. Despite continuing enthusiasm for the practice, however, there are few journal articles reporting empirical research and only one (now dated) review of the literature. After defining reflecting team processes through practices that are embedded in particular approaches to knowledge construction and theoretical interpretation, we offer an overview of the empirical research found in our search of the literature. In the second half of this article we ask why there is so little existing research in this area. Various possible explanations are explored and future directions proposed. We conclude that a dialogue around the complex interweaving of practice, theory and research (that is, praxis) would be a helpful overall stance to adopt in relation to future work in this area.

This study compared the differences in treatment length, cost, cost effectiveness, dropout, and recidivism between a biomedical, talk therapy, and a collaborative mental health model for outpatient psychotherapy insurance claims. A biomedical model was the most cost effective with fewer sessions, but had a significantly higher dropout rate. Collaborative care had the least dropout, but also had higher costs and recidivism rates. Within collaborative care, differences between modality type, diagnosis, and provider type combinations were also examined. Within collaborative models, mixed modes of therapy had the lowest dropout, but at significantly higher costs and recidivism rates. Family therapy had the lowest recidivism and cost, with the highest dropout rate. In terms of specific problems, eating disorders had significantly more sessions and were significantly less cost-effective than any other diagnoses, followed by mood disorders. Relational disorders had the fewest sessions, best cost-effectiveness, and lowest recidivism rates. Finally, the MD/MFT provider type combination had the lowest dropout and recidivism rates, with the lowest cost, and a significantly better cost effectiveness than the MD/psychologist combination. The MD/psychologist combination had a significantly higher recidivism rate, and the MD/MSW combination had the highest dropout. No significant differences were found for any RN/talk therapy combination. Implications of the findings are discussed, along with limitations and future directions for research.

Text in Afrikaans / The development of the person of the therapist is increasingly being highlighted in systemic therapeutic training. This emphasis on the person of the therapist can be traced back to the rise of constructivism. Constructivism represents the viewpoint that reality is created rather than discovered. As a result the therapist's contribution to the therapeutic process is considered cardinal. The personal style of the therapist is once more placed under the limelight. Exactly how this variable must be handled to ensure optimal efficiency is still unclear. Suggestions in this regard are mostly related to some therapeutic model. The objective of this study, on the contrary, is to determine the value of a more general approach. A procedure developed by the University of South Africa, accentuating the person of the therapist, has been evaluated. / Opleiding in sistemiese terapie word al hoe meer gekenmerk deur die ontwikkeling van die persoon van die terapeut. Die beklemtoning van die persoon van die terapeut kan veral na die opkoms van die onstruktivisme teruggevoer word. Hierdie denkrigting verteenwoordig die standpunt dat die werklikheid eerder geskep as ontdek word. Gevolglik word die terapeut se bydrae tot die terapeutiese proses as van deurslaggewend beskou. Die persoonlike styl van die terapeut word dus opnuut onder die soeklig geplaas. Hoedat hierdie veranderlike egter hanteer moet word om optimale effektiwiteit te verseker, is egter nie duidelik nie. Meeste voorstelle hou direk verband met een of ander terapeutiese model. Met hierdie studie is daar egter gepoog om die waarde van 'n meer algemene benadering te peil. 'n Prosedure wat met verloop van tyd aan die Universiteit van Suid-Afrika ontwikkel is, is gevolglik verder - en wei vanuit die gesigshoek van die terapeut - ondersoek. / M.A. (Voorligtingsielkunde)

Despite wide agreement in the systemic field that therapists should take a non-blaming stance, historically there has been little exploration of how this stance is achieved in practice. The difficulty in knowing how to put ‘non-blaming’ into practice is further heightened by competing models of intervention with families affected by psychosis. This study contributes to a body of literature that is concerned with how complex issues of morality are achieved dialogically by considering how family therapists manage the tension of intervening to promote change whilst maintaining a multi-partial, non-blaming stance. Two therapies carried out with families affected by psychosis are analysed using the methods of Conversation Analysis (CA) and Membership Categorization Analysis (MCA). In both therapies the sequences examined are drawn from the second session of therapy where explicit blaming events occur. By examining blaming events chronologically through the course of a session the study shows how the rules about the way blame is talked about are achieved interactionally. The analysis demonstrates that systemic theory’s emphasis on the importance of being non-blaming is grounded in a sophisticated understanding of the threat blame poses to co-operation and agreement. In both therapies, the delicacy and ambiguity with which blame is treated serves to enable the conversation to continue without withdrawal. However the cost of ambiguity is a possible misunderstanding of the intent of the speaker. The resulting misalignment, where it continues over several turns and sequences, leads to explicit blame becoming relevant as a solution to a redundant pattern of interaction. The findings indicate that the management of blame requires both the exploration of blame and its interruption when emotions and conflict run high. The former enables understanding and movement towards therapeutic goals while the latter is necessary to promote therapeutic and family alliances. An unintended consequence of the injunction to be non- blaming might be the premature closing down of topics, militating against problem resolution. The study concludes that CA and MCA offer a wealth of knowledge about mundane conversational practices that can be applied fruitfully to systemic therapy process research, teaching and supervision.

The Common Factors Model was introduced in 1992 by Michael Lambert suggesting that four factors that exist in all forms of psychotherapy are what account for positive therapeutic outcomes. The four common factors posited by Lambert include: Extratherapeutic Factors, The Therapeutic Relationship, Hope and Expectancy and Specific Factors. Marriage and family therapy is one form of psychotherapy that has taken an interest in The Common Factors Model and dedicated various amounts of research to understand connections between the two philosophies. Despite the efforts to understand common factors that exist in marriage and family therapy, very little research has been done studying the relationship between the common factor Hope and Expectancy, and marriage and family therapy. The current study aimed to fill that gap, by exploring the relationship between marriage and family therapy, and the common factor hope and expectancy through the lens of Snyder’s Hope Theory. In this study, a mixed methods sequential embedded designed was implemented to examine the relationship that exists between marriage and family therapy and the common factor Hope and Expectancy. The results indicated that levels of hope and expectancy were high in parents/guardians who were going to start participating family therapy with their child. The high levels of hope and expectancy were likely due to the activation of an interaction between extratherapeutic factors and hope and expectancy. Some of the extratherapeutic factors involved in the interaction were specific to marriage and family therapy, while others can be found in all forms of psychotherapy.

Much has been written about family therapy training and supervision from the perspective of teachers and supervisors. However, the perspective of family therapy trainees is not well represented in the literature. Research employing student responses is common, but results are offered from the perspective of the trainers of family therapy and the subjective experience of students is frequent ly left untapped . One area of training and supervision, basic therapy skills, offers no perspectives from family therapy trainees. This research examined trainee perspectives concerning basic family therapy skills and made comparisons to trainer perspectives regarding the same skills. The findings indicate that some differences exist in those skills valued as most important to students when compared to the same skills evaluated by their instructors. Students place value on self attributes and joining skills whereas teachers and supervisors value professional ethics and the students ' knowledge base when ranking skills.