Culture and Reflexivity in Systemic Psychotherapy

This research investigated complex relationships between parents and professionals involved in care proceedings, through detailed observations of network meetings – a practice developed in a Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service to engage with families and professionals in adversarial contexts. These take place at the border between the domain of court, often dominated by structural preoccupations, and the clinic valuing experience and relationships. Six meetings were recorded and observed by the researcher in the room. The methodology drew on a number of epistemological traditions to capture the complexity and multi-layered nature of knowledge and experience. The study evolved into an ethnography-inspired exploration of structures, relationships and emotions emerging in meetings and the adversarial context of care proceedings. Successful meetings managed tensions between a structure-dominated domain and the experience-near domain of the clinic while avoiding being dominated by either

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating a space to think in adversarial contexts: researching network meetings in statutory childcare interventions

Mandin¹

2017

“…In the systemic psychotherapy field, particularly in work on the therapeutic relationship, and the therapeutic alliance, there has been continued debate about how therapists can most ethically and effectively position themselves in relation to power issues arising. The emphasis has been on therapists being reflexive about their positioning and prejudices to achieve this (Burnham, ; Donovan, ; Fruggeri, ; Krause, ; Malik and Mandin, ). Zimmerman (, p. 221) argues that therapists ‘ought to acknowledge power rather than to ignore it or to conceal their power simply by calling their therapy collaborative’.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Krause (, p. 15) argues that dialogue in therapy is not free from conflict, particularly ‘when the social context is laden with it in the form of racism, sexism, class differences, and other types of discrimination’. Types of discrimination also relevant in this context might be prejudices about people who potentially neglect or harm children, or who suffer mental ill health and struggle to make and maintain relationships.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Jointly created authority: a conversation analysis of how power is managed by parents and systemic psychotherapists in children’s social care

Watson¹

2018

Social care settings provide a complex landscape for systemic psychotherapists, particularly in relation to issues of power that are particularly pervasive. Conversation Analysis (CA) was used as a research method to understand the detail of how systemic psychotherapists and parents work together in the safeguarding context. The study aimed to examine the power issues arising, and how they were being managed. CA literature, seen as a reminder of the centrality of ‘talk as action’, is used as a lens through which to present the findings, and the concept of authority as joint action is introduced. The findings of the study showed how systemic approaches, put to use through systemic techniques, can uniquely contribute to safeguarding work in contexts where issues of power prevail, with a particular emphasis on the importance of the concept of self‐reflexivity. Practitioner points Notice and work with the complex circular ways that power issues arise in relationships in social care settings Use the concept of Jointly Created Authority to provide a relational frame for managing issues of power Revisit the concept of self‐reflexivity which is of primary importance to effective working in this context Develop understanding of how, using reflexive practice, adjusting responses in the moment can invite agency in clients

“…Drawing on dialogical therapy ideas, Bertrando () similarly argues that it can be helpful for the therapist to express an opinion, as it is only then that a true dialogue can take place in which his ideas are put into play with those of the client. This, in effect, could be seen as a less colonizing starting point as both the client and therapists take a subjective position (Krause, ). We do not wish, though, to oversimplify or suggest that changing deeply held cultural beliefs is easy, and no doubt the pressure of the child protection context placed greater pressure on this particular family, but with a good alliance and engagement this can be possible.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenging core cultural beliefs and maintaining the therapeutic alliance: a qualitative study

Yon

Malik

Mandin³

et al. 2017

Engaging black and minority‐ethnic (BME) individuals in therapy and maintaining a positive therapeutic alliance can be a complex task, especially when challenging a family's core belief system. This study examines how therapists working within a specialist cultural service in London, UK were able to question a family's core cultural belief system whilst building and maintaining a strong therapeutic alliance. Video‐assisted semi‐structured interviews were carried out with two family members and their two therapists, and analysed using thematic analysis. The findings suggest that core beliefs can be effectively challenged within the context of a strong therapeutic alliance if topics are approached in a sensitive and respectful manner, by trusted therapists who have a degree of knowledge and awareness of their own cultural positioning, as well as an understanding of their clients’ culture. We propose that engaging with culture in this way can strengthen alliance and facilitate positive change. Practitioner points Core cultural belief systems can be effectively challenged by therapists within the context of a positive therapeutic alliance Topics need to be approached sensitively with a degree of authenticity, curiosity and respect Respectfully challenging core beliefs while being aware of one's own cultural construction and positioning, can strengthen the therapeutic alliance and promote positive change