Journal of Family Therapy最新文献

This paper highlights the question, often asked, why does racism persist despite the many attempts to eradicate it? The paper provides some answers, first for social relations generally and second for systemic psychotherapy. Central to the answers is an acknowledgement of the obstacles in both spheres to address the structures, systems, organisation and processes which lie behind conceptualisations of race, racism, identity and relationships. It is in these structures and systems that the suffocating and inevitable effects of racism originate. The paper suggests that, if we want to begin to eradicate racism, we need to look in those places (mostly White) where we least suspect it, the places which seem ‘natural’ and therefore foundational. It concludes that we cannot teach race and equity, because by singling out this topic without looking behind it, we perpetuate a violence through which the very relations we want to eradicate are produced. This does not mean, however, that we should ignore the topic.

Practitioner points

For this qualitative study, four family therapists were interviewed about the significance of White privilege to their therapeutic practice. The interview data were analysed using Foucauldian discourse analysis. The study highlights the relevance of White privilege to systemic family therapy as a historically contextualised social reality, manifested in unequal experiences, outcomes and relationships. Constraints to addressing White privilege are identified in the form of alternative discourses, such as ‘colour blindness’, which problematise the naming of race and contribute to ‘race anxiety’. ‘Talk-about-talk-about-race’, acknowledging the contradictions and uncertainty inherent to dialogue around race, may help overcome the mutually negating imperatives of these discourses. Acknowledging White privilege requires ‘relational risk-taking’ (Mason 2018); to neglect this task risks complicity with the maintenance of White privilege, which, “depends for its power on silence” (Berndt 2008: 190).

Practitioner points

Open Dialogue is an alternative approach to service provision for people experiencing mental health problems. Training and implementation of dialogical ways of working require that professionals disposition themselves as experts and ‘unlearn’ traditional therapeutic relations. This study explored trainees’ discussions of their expectations of Open Dialogue as they commence their training. Four focus groups, two in Australia and two in Denmark, were analysed thematically. We generated the theme ‘shared concern’ with four sub-themes: (1) ‘A democratising alternative’, (2) ‘Waiting and listening’, (3) ‘Acknowledging many kinds of expertise’ and (4) ‘Personal participation’. Rather than learning a therapeutic technique, ‘shared concern’ in dialogical practices emphasised a collaborative approach to manage ubiquitous uncertainty and a political commitment to addressing inequities in service delivery. This variance from usual reasons to undertake training has implications for course design and delivery that have yet to be considered.

Practitioner points

This study explores the views and experiences of young people, adopted and in the care of a local authority who had received a therapeutic intervention from an NHS Attachment and Trauma Specialist Agency. Three children were interviewed, aged between 10 and 14 years, using semi-structured interviews. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). The analysis of the results met with the findings in the literature that young people want to have access to non-judgmental therapy which both meets their needs and is creative. Recommendations for clinicians include giving adequate preparatory information and ensuring on-going collaboration with young people receiving therapeutic interventions through the use of on-going feedback about what works for them.

Practitioner points

Adults and children with gender variance (GV) face misunderstanding and discrimination, sometimes leading to mental health difficulties. Family support has been found to buffer these difficulties or to compound them when lacking (Westwater et al., 2019). However, little is known about how GV is considered in the context of families. In the current study, online story completion elicited forty-five narratives of family life where a protagonist discloses their GV. The older the protagonist, the more seriously their disclosure was taken. All family members were depicted as being impacted by the disclosure, and social stigma and bullying were often the expected consequence. Heteronormative and gender-binary thinking dominated the stories both in the descriptions of the protagonist's transition from one gender to another, and in the descriptions of the gender-typical behaviour of the other family members. Non-binary genders were rarely considered, and a dysphoric view of GV was often held.

Treatment Foster Care Oregon (TFCO) is one of a number of systemic, therapeutic ‘family focused’ models brought from the USA to Europe in recent decades. This paper looks at a large-scale implementation of TFCO and how its systemic principles sought to positively impact the ‘looked after children's’ sector within the UK. However, following a 15-year government-driven nationwide implementation initiative, only one UK TFCO site remains, despite the efforts of many skilled and dedicated workers striving to sustain it across the country. This paper explores some of the factors that contributed to the rise and fall of TFCO in Britain, outlining implementation challenges and the learning gained through the UK implementation of TFCO.

Practitioner points

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had implications for all of us. For those of us studying on clinical psychology doctorates, and similar psychotherapeutic training courses, this pandemic has led to some particular challenges. This article explores the experiences of a group of clinical psychology trainees, who are also completing intermediate systemic qualification, during the COVID-19 pandemic using a systemic case study approach. We consider the challenges we faced in relation to systemic theory and the intervention we would have used if we were clients in a family therapy clinic. This enabled us to reflect on the importance of self-reflexivity and self-care during these challenging times.

Practitioner points

The Reflecting Team (RT) has been a common companion of systemic practitioners since Tom Andersen first described its use (Andersen, 1987). Despite the widespread acceptance of such ideas in modern Systemic Practice, there is limited research into the RT method. We hoped to contribute to the broader research aim of exploring how and why reflecting team conversations lead to change by addressing the following question: is it possible to reliably categorise the utterances of the RT to form a framework? We used a content analysis to analyse and categorise over three hours of reflecting team conversations from four different clinical teams. This resulted in the identification of eleven discrete categories including: ‘they asked a question to you as a family’, ‘they highlighted something positive and they commented on their own emotions’. We go on to discuss potential applications of this Reflecting Team Utterances Framework and our reflections on the process.

The purpose of the current study was to examine the validity and reliability of the fifteen-item Systemic Clinical Outcome and Routine Evaluation (SCORE-15) Turkish version. The suggested three-factor structure was confirmed with a total sample of 327 participants including both community and clinical samples. The results of factorial invariance tests demonstrated that the structure of the scale was consistent across both gender and community/clinical groups. Furthermore, discriminant validity was supported by negative correlations with marital satisfaction, life satisfaction and general family functioning as lower scores in SCORE-15 reflect better adjustment. Furthermore, results showed that SCORE-15 has good internal consistency reliability and significantly differentiates between community and clinical samples. Overall, these findings indicate that the Turkish version of SCORE-15 is a valid and reliable instrument that can be used for assessing family functioning in routine clinical practice and family therapy research.