Abstract:The London Depression Intervention Trial (LDIT) was set up in the early 1990s by Professor Julian Leff (Leff et al., 2000, and in this issue) to compare the relative efficacy and costs, in work with depressed adults, of systemic couple therapy, drug treatment and individual cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). The research found that systemic therapy compared favourably with the other modalities in respect of fewer drop‐outs, improvement in measured depression at the end of therapy and on follow‐up after a secon… Show more
“…While writing this paper, I have had a persistent set of 'side thoughts' about the relationship between the conclusions here and some of the current debates about evidence-based practice, and the importance of empirical research and 'research-mindedness' in family therapy practice (see, e.g., Eisler, 2003;Jones, 2003;Larner, 2004). To do justice to this topic would clearly require another paper.…”
This paper explores knowledge and how family therapy relates to its own knowledge. It begins with the identification of particular puzzles that have emerged through the author's involvement in family therapy, and ends with a reflection on these same puzzles following the main theoretical exploration. The exploration first considers the issue of the generation of knowledge in the context of practice disciplines, and then discusses disciplinarity and the dynamics of competitiveness and oppositionality that go alongside this social structuring of knowledge. This discussion paves the way for an exploration of these dynamics in family therapy, including the competitiveness in relation to different models within family therapy, and the tendency for theory development to be represented in terms of discontinuity rather than continuity. The relationship between theory and practice is recast through this investigation, and an argument is made for using a layered epistemology to inform our relationship to knowledge.
“…While writing this paper, I have had a persistent set of 'side thoughts' about the relationship between the conclusions here and some of the current debates about evidence-based practice, and the importance of empirical research and 'research-mindedness' in family therapy practice (see, e.g., Eisler, 2003;Jones, 2003;Larner, 2004). To do justice to this topic would clearly require another paper.…”
This paper explores knowledge and how family therapy relates to its own knowledge. It begins with the identification of particular puzzles that have emerged through the author's involvement in family therapy, and ends with a reflection on these same puzzles following the main theoretical exploration. The exploration first considers the issue of the generation of knowledge in the context of practice disciplines, and then discusses disciplinarity and the dynamics of competitiveness and oppositionality that go alongside this social structuring of knowledge. This discussion paves the way for an exploration of these dynamics in family therapy, including the competitiveness in relation to different models within family therapy, and the tendency for theory development to be represented in terms of discontinuity rather than continuity. The relationship between theory and practice is recast through this investigation, and an argument is made for using a layered epistemology to inform our relationship to knowledge.
“…It was decided that the client should be asked if they would like their views conveyed to the practitioner and if this was their wish, material that may improve practice could be passed on. Jones (2003) has reflected on the consequences for both clients and therapists of participation in an outcome research project.…”
Section: The Personal Challenge For the Clinician Who Is Scrutinisedmentioning
The difficulties associated with conducting valid family therapy research within a clinical practice discourage many potential researchers. This article will describe collaboration between a group of academics, researchers and clinicians who decided to explore the process and efficacy of systemic family therapy conducted within a working private practice. The specific questions we are addressing are, whether the requests clients bring to their first session of therapy can be reliably classified by practitioners, whether these requests change over time, and whether the nature of the request is associated with therapist and client ratings of therapeutic outcome. Additional questions about the form and nature of the therapeutic alliance as experienced by both client and practitioner are also being explored. This paper will map the passage of the work from inception to its current state where over 140 clients are active participants. In doing so attention will be paid to the obstacles encountered: practical, financial and ethical, and the solutions devised to address these.
“…‘In the context of the LDIT the implications [of a systemic perspective], among others, are that the influence of the “designated patient’s” depression on the couple relationship cannot be described in a lineal fashion, nor can the positive changes occurring after systemic therapy be attributed to specific isolated acts on the part of the therapist; that research findings, like diagnosis or change, lie in the eye of the beholder(s), and that the questions asked in part determine the answers received; and that the outcomes of therapy reside as much within the clients’ meaning‐making activity as in the therapist's hope for change.’ (Jones 2003, p. 349).…”
Section: Evidence‐based Practice In Family Therapy and The Practice–rmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…‘As therapists we know, subjectively, that the process of psychotherapy is constituted by a multiplicity of interactions, tentative invitations to change, mutual construction of new and old meanings, explorations of difference, resources, creativities, fears and blocks, feedback from previous communications, and so on into an infinity of complexity for which we have some technical descriptions and some explanations, but much of which still resides outside our capacity to capture it and pin it down.’ (Jones 2003, p. 350).…”
Section: Evidence‐based Practice In Family Therapy and The Practice–rmentioning
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
