This article describes the form of brief therapy developed at the Brief Family Therapy Center. We have chosen a title similar to Weakland, Fisch, Watzlawick, and Bodin's classic paper, "Brief Therapy: Focused Problem Resolution" (20) to emphasize our view that there is a conceptual relationship and a developmental connection between the points of view expressed in the two papers.

The authors examine the social constructionist nature of solution-focused therapy. The therapy's components are illustrated through the presentation of a first-session conversation between Insoo Kim Berg as therapist and a 19-year-old mother, who states that she is “stressed out and depressed.” As the conversation develops, the young mother's sense of herself changes and the integration of the therapy's components become apparent. Next, existing outcome research is reviewed. Although descriptive in nature and limited in scope, research suggests positive outcomes for diverse clients and presenting problems. Finally, several connections are made between solution-focused procedures and social constructionist theory: the social construction of reality, language as the medium and substance of meaning, client change through the construction of new meanings, the client as expert, taking a collaborative stance, reflexivity, drawing on client strengths, and solutions as co-constructions.

aThis special issue on research aspects of Solution-Focused Brief Therapy is timely and needed. We are pleased that the Journal of Family Therapy decided to embark on this endeavour. Because the model developed deductively, that is, first try something, then see if that worked, try to describe it in detail, etc., the approach can be described as experimental and research orientated from the beginning. Years later, when we read what Lincoln and Guba (1985) wrote about 'naturalistic inquiry', we saw that what we were doing was sufficient in itself as a research endeavour.We started out by seeing clients in our living room with the video camera (and operator/team member) on the landing of our stairs; the consulting break was taken in one of the upstairs bedrooms. We were interested in finding out what differences made a difference and we were not at all interested in proving anything to the outside world. Now that the approach is becoming more accepted by academia, including those with scientific minds and backgrounds in traditional research methods, it is coming under the same kind of scrutiny as other approaches and is being measured by the standard ways of assessing effectiveness. We not only lacked the resources to undertake such studies, but the basic assumptions and premises of the two worlds clashed. Being clinically orientated, we were more than satisfied with our naturalistic research projects.Although Solution-Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) began to develop in 1980 and we gave it its name in 1982, research into the approach -other than our own exploratory/experimental, model/theory construction research projects (de Shazer, 1985(de Shazer, , 1988(de Shazer, , 1991(de Shazer, , 1994 and our own follow-ups -has been minimal. Primarily this is due to BFTC's having been a teaching-and trainingfocused endeavour. We and our clients were busy inventing a rather radical approach to 'therapy'. We were interested in 'searching' for

This paper is written for non‐Asian family therapists who must deal with an increasing number of Asian‐American client families. Unlike some writers in fthe field who advocate that client and therapist have the same ethnic background, the authors belive that cultural sensitivity can be learned. Several culturally important values are described, and suggestions on how to orient treatment to fit this client population are offered. A Detailed case example illustrates the treatment issues involued.

No abstract