My broad take on circularity was exposed as I read in increasing detail the philosophical view of circularity. My usual style of 'circular questioning' succeeded in having family members comment on other relationships or action, but has not had the deeper understanding of a circular process. My aims are now to take this forward with gusto! I intend to sit back and have that circular posture, that there are moments of information that a therapist can spot and re-feedback in to the therapist/family system. These 'blips' as I refer them as, are moments of offerings the family give a therapist ("I think my son punches my daughter because....." and moments of offerings from a therapist to a family (" who would be able to make a best guess to why you punch your sister?". It is far more skill full than I have given it credit for. Having transcribed 10 minutes and spent up to 20 hours analysing it, I formed very creative questions....something I worry about as I need to do it almost immediately preceding a 'blip' within session.
The Milan team made a quick shift to social constructionism, something I was not familiar with. Particularly Cecchin (Cecchin, G. (1992). Constructing therapeutic possibilities. In Therapy as social construction(ed. S. McNamee, Gergen, K.J.), pp. 86-95. Sage: London). This chapter is well worth a read and I want to give it more time myself rather than taking key bits for the purpose of my assignment. Briefly, Cecchin described how the movement in to co-constructing different perspectives gradually occurred. Their adherence to systems theory and strategic interventions disappeared as they placed emphasis on content and communication.
Currently my knowledge of CMM is poor, but I guess the Cecchin paper is alluding to the higher levels of communication that occur in families. More to come on that...!
Another assignment down. Maybe a short weekend break then best keep on top of this work.
No comments:
Post a Comment