Ø Centro per lo Studia Della Famiglia – early publishings around 1978
Ø Group splits up (Pallazoli, Cecchin, Prata, Boscolo) circa 1984
Ø Centro Milanese per lo Studia della Famiglia – Boscolo & Cecchin teach
Ø The Nuovo Centro per lo Studia Della Famiglia
Ø Boscolo & Cechhin = co create new story through questions
Ø Stimulate a new way of thinking
Ø Palazzoli & Prata – more concerned with systemic functions that hold homeostasis. Searches for observable and classifiable patterns
Ø Schismogensis - ? something about change occurs when restraining elements are removed
Ø See Bateson 1958 – re Iatmul Tribe
Ø Original group maintain cohesion due to complimentary differences (Palazzoli energetic vs Boscolo coolness)
Ø Positive feedback which yielded more of the same behaviour created distance and change (instability, change in equilibrium) and therefore the team became further separated.
Ø Colapinto 1985 – Boscolo, Cecchin are too indifferent and will maintain status quo if remain this way
Ø Palazzoli and Prata – too authoritive, negatively connote families
Ø Exploration rather than research.
This is Elas Jones' take on the Milan team. I like the way she applies Batesonian ideas around schismogensis, complentarity, change, disequilibrium to explain how and possibly why the Milan team went different ways.
I'm not sure how others are to see the Milan team - is it assumed their differences led to a falling out? Are they in touch? Do they respect each others work? Are they in direct opposition? Either way, Elsa Jones views it in the perspective of systemic work being ever changing alla the ethos of systemic work and the team being one stepping stone amongst many.
No comments:
Post a Comment