Expert taken from 'Where's the Family in Narrative Therapy' Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
Volume 24, Issue 4, pages 397–403, October 1998.
"Practitioners
share a penchant for a therapy of questions, on the assumption that questions
are more respectful of the patient’s own framework than are comments,
interpretations, or prescriptions. The social concern for liberating people
from the dominant discourses that marginalize them leads these therapists to
minimize therapists’ statements of expertise - to
taking a stance of “not knowing.” Paralleling the social constructionist
acceptance of diversity and multiculturalism, their interventions are oriented
toward increasing diversity in the internalized voices of the patients. Unfortunately, in my view,
that focus decreases attention to the patterns of interaction presently being
played out by family members. "
Minuchins view
here is fundamentally that contemporary approaches are missing the interactions
between family members. The title of the article leads me to question more
about how family interactions are indeed considered in todays therapeutic
culture.
As a framework, deconstructing beliefs
and cultural constraints etc is a sound approach - yet in my view, practically
more applicable in a quiet, reflexive, patient manner and not in a volatile
risk covert home or clinic based situation.
Minuchin & Structural therapy weighs
in with lots of ideas that 'reality' does not exist and instead clients should
be walked to alternative patterns of thinking & behaving - nothing new in
our contemporary approaches then.
My view is it is the job of the therapist
to judge what is required. It seem heretic to apply just a hermeneutic approach
to all clients. A therapist working with a client 'taking with out consent' or
'joyriding' on a weekly basis may find themselves judging that a family need
re-balancing before being curious about what holds them to their beliefs.
Perhaps "first order" CHANGE
has been lost as the second order and third order APPROACHES come in to play.
Many will have been tempted to offer solutions based on their 'common sense'
(..or considering family of origin, aspects of self, inner dialogue etc etc),
yet careful not to direct their 'power' on to others. Having worked in services
that value first order changes, I can vouch for richer conversations about
experiences rather than fear of experiences,
Having just read part of a CMM article, I
like the following piece.
"Practical
theories are intended to inform patterns of practice that make life better and
are judged according to the pragmatic criterion of utility as opposed to an
epistemic criterion of truth "
Barge,
K. Articulating CMM as Practical Theory. Human Systems: The Journal of Systemic
Consultation & Management.Volume No 15, issue X, 2044
Contemporary
approaches....or perhaps the students, practitioners and trainees of..... have
seemed to move in to this 'not knowing' position which in itself seems to hint
at a criterion of truth....."I cannot assume....I must seem curious...I do
not understand their experience" for instance. Following the above musing
by Barge, I am more comfortable than ever to work in a systemic way and use
some counter cultural approaches to guide my work, whilst reflexively using my
work to inform my approaches - surely one of the most important tenants of
systemic practice.