Against the Grain: Decentering Family Therapy

Abstract

This paper is an interpretive polemic. It has two aims: (a) to clarify the concept of “system” as it is employed in family therapy, and, by doing so, to undermine and call into question the practice that follows from, or is contained within, a systemic perspective,1 (b) it will offer several suggestions towards the development of an alternative perspective which preserves the idea of system in a social network/diachronic framework. With respect to the first aim, an argument will be made that there are severe and insurmountable problems in attempting to maintain a systemic perspective, that the methodology of analysis is fatally flawed, and that the results of analysis imprisons the therapist in a framework, which though extremely powerful interpersonally, must be rejected as overly authoritarian and overly restrictive in the range of perceptions of social situations allowed. A position will be adopted advocating a move of decentering family therapy to a more peripheral space within a social network perspective. What immediately follows is a redefinition and repunctuation of what can only be considered as a highly problematic paradigm.

The Tyranny of Therapeutic Dialogue

“…Yet, therapeutic discourse is relatively silent about class, gender, race and other differences between and among therapists and clients (some notable exceptions include James & McIntyre 1983;Hare-Mustin 1987;Erikson 1988;Luepnitz 1988;Saba et al 1989;Hoffman 1990;Goldner 1991). Reproduced, instead, are generic categories of therapists and clients (James & McIntyre 1983), the speci® c form of which underscores classical liberal humanism; namely, White, bourgeois, rational, patriarchal.…”

Integrating Constructivist and Systemic Metatheory in Family Therapy

“…In light of the above, Erickson's (1988) charge that family therapists have adopted a model of family change that empowers therapists before their clients is not altogether unfounded. He asserts that power differentials are reinforced by techniques such as the use of the one-way mirror, stating "narrative content is enacted on one side and the meaning produced on the other" (1988, p. 231).…”

“…Unless constantly reminded of the 'as if' quality of the expression, users of the term may treat the figure as a literal expression" (Sarbin, 1986, p. 5). Not only had the system become a real object, but it also became invested with human qualities (Dell, 1982;Erickson, 1988;Guttman, 1991). And as the system became real, the real person was lost or marginalized.…”

Recente ontwikkelingen in de gezinstherapie: Epistemologie, constructivisme en tweede–orde–cybernetica

“…Lowe (1990) herkent in de visie van Anderson en Goolishian een belangrijke nieuwe evolutie in de gezinstherapie in het algemeen. Heel wat gezinstherapeuten zijn ontgoocheld over het systeemdenken (onder anderen Erickson, 1988) en in het bijzonder over de metafoor 'gezinssysteem'. Aanvankelijk leerde de metafoor 'gezinssysteem' therapeuten te kijken naar aspecten van de werkelijkheid die vroeger verwaarloosd werden (bijvoorbeeld gehelen, interacties, …) Nu blijkt echter hoe langer hoe meer dat de metafoor 'systeem' ook belangrijke aspecten van de werkelijkheid verbergt (bijvoorbeeld ongelijkheid, persoonlijke verantwoordelijkheid enzovoort).…”