Second book report cfcs   filo
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Second book report cfcs filo

on

  • 130 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
130
Views on SlideShare
130
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Second book report cfcs   filo Second book report cfcs filo Document Transcript

  • B O O K R E P O R T E R Third phase- mid-1980s to The present day. Chapter 3,5&6 By Laurenildo Couple & Family Counsulling School Worcerst 2014 South Africa.
  • The third phase looks at shift from constructivism to social constructionism.As the main theoretical frame work for the field, this phase is called twenty. First century characteried both by a great integration between different approach to family therapy. Also the third phase there´s a growing of the cultural contexts that shape both,families and therapist´s beliefs. There was a movement in this phase articulated by ken Gergen, Lynn Hoffman and others from USA. In france by Michel Foucault and in Australia by Michael White. The seeds for this movement came from therapists inspired by feminist perspectives and outside of family therapy, the roots of social constructionism and feminism in the USA. In this phase as well there was some critiques of family therapy and it lead to a realization that family life including the development of problems was shaped by language. There was a think that the power of conversation in families to create experience. Social constructionism proposes that commonly seen patterns of actions in families are produced not just by the idiosyncratic dinamics of each family,but is necessitated by the demands of the wider society wthin a family is located. The pattern of family behaviour so frequently encountered by family therapists, that of the “over involved” wife/mather and husband/father, suddently appears in a new light: As a necessary form,that necessity derives from its ability to reproduce the personality characteristics,relationship patterns and behavioural orientations that are functional for continual operation of the contemporary social formation. Despite social changes women are still more likely than men to carry the burden of care for the children and to be more centred around the home. This is not simply a personal choice but one shaped by a variety of economic and practical necessities dictated by the society they live within, however associated with any given society is a web of discourses or ideologies, such as that women are naturally maternal since they are seen to be more emotionally responsive,nurturing,no-competitive and so on.In this way a set of rules and beliefs about family life are reproduced across the generations. The production of dominant systems of ideas and meanings ideologies is regarded in social constructionism as shaped and maintained according to
  • distributions of power,this include an anphases on context and interpersonal processes in creating joint actions and mutually constructed meanings. Strategic interaction,an acknowledgement of the importance of power and on the exchange of ideas or feedback. Social constructionism argues that meanings are jointly created through the dynamic processes of conversations. Rather than focusing on individual characteristics, on traits,the focus is on how individual experience is fundamentally social and interpersonal,also the social constructionism emphasize that interactions are invariably connected to power,and that language use defines power. Both systemic theory and social constructionism emphasizes the importance of the contexts and how these are internalized into the dynamic of family interactions. Perhaps systemic theory has paid less attention to the wider social and cultural context, though the importance of the wider social context and family dinamics. For me it´s so fanny the view of this phase. The view was,the dynamics is not that cause the problems,but more that the problem saturated ways of talk about difficulties can produce problems. The problem determined system (Anderson and Goleshean) the reflecting team,the work of Michael White and David Epston with Narrative therapy and the just therapy groups provide a frame work for understanding developments in theory and practice during this third phase. Also the social constructionism is interested in developing theories about links between individual experience and society. One of the most vivid metaphors used was that of the looking glass self. This metaphor was used to propose that our identities,our sense of self was constructed from the social interactions in which we take part in these interactions others act like a mirror in presenting us with images of our self,people are seen as fundamentally social. Without others with who to interact we can not have a self. Social constructionism shares with systemic theory an anphases on the centrality of relationship.We only became people through being involved in a social world of meanings through our interactions with others. An important difference between constructivism and social constructionism is that the latter takes as it central point that there are social realities.It´s not simply suggested that there is a real objective world “out there”
  • but that there are dominant beliefs,explanations,ways of thinking about the world. The third phase is much less characterized by techniques of family therapy as much as orientations to work with families. However a number of what might be described as techeniques or approach include. - Reflecting team process- Brief solution focused - Narrative therapies- Writing therapy - Externalizing problems - Interviewing the internalized other - Writing - Feminist approach The role of the therapist in third phase continues to be of a non-expert. This third phase also is a conection of the all three phase of the development of systemic therapy. Also the approach can be seen to be an awareness that problems and negative interactional patterns are held in places by constroctive patterns of beliefs. Trypically families descrive problems in all or nothing terms,such as always,never only and nothing which serve to narrow thinking and produce a kind of tunnel vision “Dallos 1991”. Termed these pre-emptive constructs and Similarly Beck in his cognitive theory of the pression saw them as rigid and constraining cognitive shemas. Exploring exception serves to challenges these rigid beliefs and allows some new ways of seeing the relationship and the problem(Eron and Lund 1993). From these new perseptions it´s is possible generate further new solutions or exceptions this idea of exceptions is also evident in most contemporary approach. White and Epston´s enphasis on unique outcomes or families stories showing execptions of competence to their dominant stories of incompetence.
  • CHAPTER 5 –Research and evaluation This chapter talk about the relationship between system family therapy and researchers. How it has been interesting also it´s talk about the conclusion that they had by the observed during this era,that therapist and a research were of the same species(atthough the therapist had more second class status) there was a fascinating range of studies based on the analysis of transcripts therapy sessions. With the advent of video recording. These studies expanded to inclui observations of the interrelationship between models of communication. Some importants topics from the chapter five that I would like to mention are; -Science, research and systemic therapy. There was a criticism that systemic family therapy has lacked rigorous research.Compatibility with scientific method can readily be seen both in terms of the process and the practice of family theraphy. Systemic family therapy is not only compatible with the principles of natural sciences but more so with the profound devolapments in the social sciences. VARIETIES OF RESEATCH- There is an assumption among trainus and is many experienced family therapists that research involves a choice between giving families a variety of questionnaires or tests or alternatively interviewing them in some way. -EVALUATION RESEARCH. A much respeated critique of family therapy has been that there has been inadequate research designed to evaluate its effectiveness in comparison to other treatments and in terms of types of problems and family variables.
  • GROUP COMPARISON EVALUATIVE STUDIES. Comparison of systemic family therapy to others forms of therapy such as cognitivetherapies also comparisons effectiveness of systemic therapies for different tippes of disorder. The therapeutic alliance , the relationship between the family and the therapist and haw this relates to the affectiveness of different types of interventios, how changes occurs, differents stages in therapy, changes in family dynamics, family believfs and emocional dynamics. There was others comparison like the efficacy of Milan family therapy for dis turbed children and their families, also the clenical and theorical impact of a controlled trial of family therapy in anorexia nervosa, and using the partner in the psychosocial treatment of schizophrenia a multiple single case design. OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES AND QUESTIONNAIRE AND SEF-REPORT STUDIES. Observational studies have been highly important in systemic family therapy, they laid the basis for ideas regarding family dynamics. An example of the use of observational measueres has been the work on expressed emotion. Most observational studies have involved such structured observation and have adopted a quantitative approach. In addition the researchers also commented on their own reactions possible influences they may reactions possible influences they may have had on the family and so on. Such studies though making strong claims for scientific objectivity measures in that family members in completing tests and questionnaires are offering self-reports their view of how they fell and of the family dynamics.Questionnaires vary in their design but most contain a balance of closed vs open-ended questions. In addition questionnaires may include a range of open-ended questions which invite participants to offer their own views in their own words. It is possible to phrase these in the format of circular questions.
  • The aim of process studies is not simply to produce evaluations of therapy in terms of outcome but to reveal more about the nature of the therapeutic process the active ingredients of therapy. Many therapists write about what works and why , may not closely match what, for exemple, families perceive to be helpful. CHAPTER 6- CONNECTING THE THEADS. In this final chapter we can see differents approaches in systemic therapy but also some connections to others therapies and to consider possible developments in the twenty first century. I can see that chapter 6 is a review and summary of the whole book. The authors made a summary of all phases. They show us the beginning of the curiosity of the therapists and amongmental health professionais also the developemment in the three phases .The second phase with a emphasis on the subjective and unique nature of family and perspectives drawn from the third phase. We saw in the chapter 3 contempory approaches are much inspired by social constructionist theories , and the developments of interest in language conversation and a collaborative approach to therapy. The third phase puts much les emphasis on techniques and more on the process of family therapy as a collaborative conversation.This approaches exist alongside solution focused therapy which is inspired by strategic approaches in the third phase. Social constructionism in some ways turn the clock back,alerting us that family life can be predictable and rulebound,but with the recognition that these tendencies are not simply, this may be one of the most positive legacies that social constructionism brought, and that it allouws to regard various approaches as different discourses or ways of explaining problems without getting caught in unhelpful debates about which is correct. The research into how psychotherapies work has been revealing a number of common factors, such as the importance of therapeutic alliance. The book´s authors finalise this chapter with this words, our hope is that this book will be used both as a resource for people new to the field and that mor experienced practitioners will see themselves and their ideas in these pages and be simulated to continue to develop innovative practice in the field of family therapy and systemic practice. Words counted 1880