Structural Versus Strategic Family Therapies

whinny

document6.pdf

Home >Nursing homework help >Structural Versus Strategic Family Therapies

Low-Income Families With Potential Adolescent Gang Involvement: A Structural

Community Family Therapy Integration Model

SHARDE’ N. MCNEIL Marriage and Family Therapy, Department of Family and Child Sciences, Florida State

University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA

JENNIFER K. HERSCHBERGER Pendleton Juvenile Correctional Facility, Liberty Behavioral Health Corporation, Pendleton,

Indiana, USA

MARY N. NEDELA Marriage and Family Therapy, Department of Behavioral Sciences, Purdue University

Calumet, Hammond, Indiana, USA

The purpose of this article is to propose a community structural intervention for low-income families who present to therapy with the concern of an adolescent at risk for gang involvement. Families are affected by multiple interacting systems. In congruence with systems theory, changing a part of the system will essentially af- fect the interrelated parts of the system. The proposed intervention utilizes structural family therapy and community family therapy as a model to impact change at the family system, its interrelated systems, and the system at which the family is embedded.

Marriage and family therapists, along with a myriad of other professionals, focus on promoting social change; therefore, family therapists not only have a responsibility to the family system but the system in which the family is embedded. According to Minuchin (1985), the major principles of systems theory are 1) any system is an organized whole; objects within the system are necessarily independent; 2) the whole is greater than the sum of its parts; 3) systems are composed of subsystems; 4) patterns in a system are circular rather than linear; 5) complex systems are composed of subsystems;

Address correspondence to Sharde’ N. McNeil, Department of Family and Child Sciences, College of Human Sciences, Florida State University, 225 Sandels Building, Tallahassee, FL 32306-1491. E-mail: [email protected]

110

Structural Therapy and Gangs 111

6) systems are homeostatic mechanisms that maintain stability of their pat- terns; 7) evolution and change are inherent in open systems. Understanding these ideas in relation to families as a subsystem of a larger environment, will allow family therapists to induce a larger and more sustained change in families.

The system also includes interactions between any of the parts of the system. When conceptualizing the family as a part, the relationship of the family with other parts such as the community, peers and socioeconomic status are important for intervention. Based off of the basic tenets of systems theory, any change to one part of the system will consequently change other parts of the system (Minuchin, 1985). All parts of the system are interrelated. Any change to the family will impact the other systems related to that family thus changes the larger family context. Although this can be done just by working with the family, we believe family therapists can sustain change by collaborating with other interrelated systems.

For the purpose of this article, the authors propose an intervention for family therapists seeking to help low-income families presenting with the risk of adolescent gang involvement. This intervention is rooted in the the- ories of structural family therapy (Minuchin, 1974) and community family therapy (Rojano, 2004). It is intended to empower families to focus on their strengths and move away from the limitations imposed by poverty. Although Ruble and Turner (2000) identify three different types of gangs—social, delin- quent, and violent—we believe the intervention will work for any type of gang the family thinks is a problem in their context. This intervention also seeks to reach beyond the family unit to the greater systems that affect the lives of children and families, including the greater community structure in which violence and poverty may be entrenched.

FAMILIES AND GANG INVOLVEMENT

Adolescence is a period of time in which individuals explore different roles, personality traits, and belief systems in order to develop their personal iden- tities (Erickson, 1963). An appropriate aspect of this exploration is the devel- opment of a peer group. However, it may be concerning to families if their adolescent children involve themselves in rigid peer groups that promote antisocial values such as gangs. An adolescent may seek involvement with a gang in order to feel the security of belonging to something greater than oneself (Clark, 1992).

In order to recognize why families may be concerned about their ado- lescent’s involvement with gangs, it is important to understand the demo- graphics and structure of gangs. Studies from the Seattle Social Development Project show that adolescents join gangs between the ages of 13 and 18, the majority of gang members are male, and gangs are derived from diverse racial

112 S. N. McNeil et al.

and ethnic backgrounds (Hill, Howell, Hawkins, & Battin-Pearson, 1999; Hill, Lui, & Hawkins, 2001). Risk factors for joining gangs can be found in the neighborhood (e.g., low neighborhood attachment), family (e.g., one-parent household), school (e.g., low academic achievement), or peer group (e.g., association with friends who engage in problem behaviors; Esbensen, 2000; Hill, Lui, & Hawkins, 2001). One of the strongest risk factors for involvement in gangs is the association with delinquent peers (Esbensen, 2000). Multiple risk factors that are prevalent in adolescents may bring attention to possible gang involvement and therefore warrants therapeutic intervention.

Adolescents may be interested in joining gangs because of its supportive features. For example, gangs can offer a sense of confidence, individuality, and connection to something greater than oneself. Gangs also provide a structure similar to that of a family. Gangs can have an organized structure where there are smaller systems interrelated with particular boundaries just as families have subsystems with particular boundaries (Ruble & Turner, 2000). Gangs may provide the adolescent with the protection and support that adolescents lack in the home. As a result, it is important to ensure the structure of the family is functionally stable so that adolescents will not feel the need to go elsewhere.

Adolescents who involve themselves in gang activity are at a risk for several factors that may affect their psychological well-being and family in- volvement. For instance, research shows that African-American adolescent involved in gangs have lower social problem-solving skills, lower family involvement, decreased family communication, diminished parental moni- toring, more likely to be exposed to and victims of violence, and have more distressed symptoms when compared to non-gang members (Li, Stanton, Pack, Harris, Cottrell, & Burns, 2002). Families who are aware of the risk factors of gang involvement and the psychological impact on the adolescent and family may seek therapy as a preventative measure. Therefore, it is im- portant that family therapists have some knowledge of these outside systems that may affect families.

THEORETICAL UNDERPINNINGS

Structural Family Therapy

Structural family therapy (SFT) emerged from working with families with poverty-related stress (Minuchin et al., 1967) and therefore fits well with the population discussed in this paper. Structural family therapy is character- ized by the emphasis on family structure and organization. Dysfunctional families within this framework are ones that are organized by inappropri- ate hierarchies (Minuchin & Fishman, 1981). The main tenets of SFT are subsystems, boundaries, hierarchies, alliances, coalitions, and triangles. The therapist may utilize these concepts to facilitate change within the family structure, especially for low-income families affected by gangs.

Structural Therapy and Gangs 113

Community Family Therapy

Community Family Therapy (Rojano, 2004) is an approach that has devel- oped in response to a need for effective interventions for low-income urban families at high risk for mental health problems and family disruptions. The model emerges with an understanding of several family therapy theories, including structural, strategic (Haley, 1976), and systemic (Boscolo, Cecchin, Hoffman, & Penn, 1987) approaches. It is based in an awareness of vari- ables that impact these families such as limited access to resources, a lack of positive experiences, ongoing exposure to stressful environments, disen- gagement from the greater community, and family and individual underde- velopment. It requires intervention that is sensitive to the specific family’s needs and facilitates the development of more adaptive coping strategies on behalf of individuals and families (Rojano, 2004).

The first level of engagement involves individual and family therapy. Therapy goals include developing healthier paradigms, unlearning hopeless- ness, developing plans to take charge of one’s life, and enhancing strengths. The second level of family engagement involves a holistic approach to net- working, including developing nuclear and extended resource networks, taking advantage of opportunities for upward mobility, reducing social stres- sors, and meeting basic needs. The final level of engagement requires the development of leadership and civil engagement. This involves developing self-advocacy and leadership skills, engaging in civic life, and helping to solve greater community problems. All of this is based in an ethic of fair- ness, a focus on strengths, and the development of a sense of community, individual, and family responsibility. Community Family Therapy includes a focus on the individual, family, and community factors that must be ad- dressed in order to improve family functioning and improve functioning of the greater community (Rojano, 2004). This perspective, with a focus on multiple systems, may be useful in treating low-income families affected by gangs.

STRUCTURAL COMMUNITY FAMILY THERAPY INTEGRATION MODEL

Due to the variety of risks for gang involvement it is important to have a broad perspective for prevention. We propose that the interventions fam- ily therapists use to effectively treat impoverished youth involved in gangs should be macro-systemic. Problematic behavior should be conceptualized in the larger system in which the family is embedded (Schwartzman, 1985) therefore if gangs are presented as a dysfunctional component of the family those systems acting on the family should be explored. The systems that we will examine in our intervention of gang involvement should include but not

114 S. N. McNeil et al.

be limited to the family, school, and community systems. This intervention proposes an ongoing development of a therapist resource network, in addi- tion to three stages of therapy that serve to impact the systems relevant to the client population of interest.

Therapist Resource Network

The development of a “therapeutic resource network” between therapist and community service providers and leaders is a critical aspect of this proposed intervention. Cultural competence and credibility may be developed when a therapist becomes immersed into the community for an extended period of time (Rojano, 2004). When a therapist develops relationships with school and neighborhood leaders and community service providers, in addition to other systems that may be prominent in the community, there is a development of a deeper understanding of and appreciation for the strengths, needs, and characteristics of the community. For example, a therapist might volunteer in the school to help develop activities for students or facilitate a neighborhood service project. This intervention proposes that a therapist become a “citizen therapist” (Rojano, 2004).

The engagement of a therapist in the community is crucial at several levels. As a therapist performs a task with an attitude of competence and optimism, this modeling may shift clients’ perspectives on their own abilities to accomplish something positive. The instillation of hope in clients who feel isolated and victimized is one of the most important interventions that a therapist can provide. Particularly in the case where a socioeconomic or class difference exists between therapist and client, the therapist may be in danger of feeling superior or somehow “different” from the clients. A therapist’s immersion into the community serves to minimize this risk and develop a more personal appreciation of and deeper connection to that community.

As therapists develop a network of peer leaders in the community, they will be able to develop the rapport and understanding with those leaders needed to facilitate the macro-systemic intervention with the family. For example, as school leaders develop knowledge of and a positive working history with a therapist, they may be more willing to meet with the therapist and assist with the therapeutic process. The therapist’s positive relationship with significant others in the community including other professionals will facilitate the collaboration necessary to best serve clients. Additionally, ther- apists’ knowledge of the resources that exist in the community allows them to more effectively assist their clients as they access these resources.

This intervention proposes that therapists work directly with community members through volunteer or civic engagement tasks. This direct interven- tion at a macro-systemic level, whether in the educational, neighborhood, or other system, is therapeutic to clients (and likely to the therapists). Frequently

Structural Therapy and Gangs 115

the communities in which families in poverty live are also lacking resources. Funding and hopeful energy tend to be lacking in these communities. As- sistance that a therapist offers naturally serves to improve conditions in that community, contributing to a more positive community or neighborhood efficacy, and developing positive change.

Stage One

The initial stage of family therapy of this model involves direct therapeutic intervention of the family structure. This requires building the relationship, assessing, and restructuring the family. Building a relationship with the family requires that the therapist meet with the members to join with them. It is crucial for the therapist to develop an understanding of the culture within that specific family and how its members are impacted by greater societal forces. For instance, understanding the parent who is concerned with their child’s gang involvement may entail the therapist to inquire how gangs affect their particular community. This should be done by curiously asking questions of the family members while communicating a belief in that family’s inherent worth and its ability to solve its own problems (Minuchin, 1974). Poverty may inflict a sense of hopelessness on families and individuals. It is perpetuated by the impression that people are not strong enough to assert themselves and meet their own needs. Therefore it is critical that therapists in this situation communicate their beliefs in the strength of the family to empower them to move past a mindset of oppression into a more positive “life space” (Rojano, 2004).

A family may present to therapy identifying the adolescent at risk of gang involvement as being the cause of the problem. While therapists must not negate this position as being the family’s truth, there may be a benefit from viewing the problem as existing within dysfunctional family transac- tions. The interactions between family members provide the therapist with information regarding the family’s organizational structure. A therapist may use enactments in session, such as encouraging the family members to talk to each other, to make an assessment of the current pattern of interaction and in order to develop a hypothesis about what alternative structure may be beneficial for the family (Minuchin & Fishman, 1981). For example, if a two-parent family presents to therapy with the concern of an adolescent son who is getting into trouble at school and spending time with peers with a known gang affiliation, the therapist may instruct the parents to talk to the son about their concerns in the initial session. If the therapist notices that one parent interacts more combatively with the child while the other parent says little, the therapist may hypothesize that the family has a triangle that is contributing to the son’s problem behaviors.

The therapist’s use of space in the treatment room may also facilitate an accurate assessment of family structure. For example, if the parents choose to

116 S. N. McNeil et al.

sit far away from each other in session, it may signify a rigid boundary within the spousal subsystem. If one parent sits especially close to the adolescent, it may indicate the existence of a coalition between those two family members (Minuchin, 1974).

It is important to place the parent(s) as being in charge of their ado- lescents’ behavior. The use of in-session enactments may be helpful for therapeutic intervention in trying to align the parental subsystem as lead- ership in the family. In the above example, a therapist may direct the son to temporarily leave the session so that his parents have time to talk about “adult” issues with the therapist. The therapist could then facilitate a dis- cussion between the parents about what specific expectations they have for their son’s behavior, and how they plan to enforce these expectations. As the parents work together to develop a plan for their adolescent, the boundary between generations is reinforced (Minuchin, 1967).

As parent(s) develop a sense of control over their child’s behavior, they increase their sense of efficacy in a leadership position. When an agreement is reached on specific rules and consequences for the son, the therapist could reintroduce the adolescent into the therapy session. The therapist might arrange the room so that the parents are seated closely together, having the son’s chair placed an equal distance from the two. This would reinforce the idea of parents as joint leaders of the family as they offer guidance to their child who is in his separate child subsystem (Minuchin, 1974). When parents provide consistent rules with sensitivity to their children, children who are surrounded by the influences of gangs are better able to explore the world with the confidence that their needs are relevant and will be met by the caregivers upon which they are depending.

Stage Two

The second stage of the proposed intervention seeks to go beyond the family’s inherent strengths. The goal of the first stage is to empower the family to utilize the resources within the family to solve problems and protect them against outside stressors. Within the second stage, the family is encouraged to seek out resources from the community. The therapist works with the family to enable them to look for these resources available in many areas. The therapist resource network discussed above is essential in this process. The family should not be left without guidance from the therapist, and instead should be used as the first resource outside of the family system. The therapist can point the family in certain directions. For instance, if the therapist is aware of any youth programs in the community that will foster healthy peer relationships as opposed to the relationship sought after in gangs, then the therapist would know the necessary information to give to the family. This is meant to be a foundation for the family. At that point the family should continue to find more resources from the community.

Structural Therapy and Gangs 117

Encouraging the family to locate these resources by themselves will further promote the efficacy of the family, as well as their sense of empowerment.

The family can also be encouraged to find and utilize resources from other extended family members and close friends. Rojano (2004) refers to this resource as the “nuclear network.” Furthermore, the family can create a social network consisting of co-workers, peers, church members, and other relevant individuals. This collective network allows the family to extend their support system and again use the individuals in each area for resources when needed. Expanding the support system will increase the resources possible and therefore ensure the family of help when needed.

Additionally, in this stage we believe the therapist should be searching out resources for the family at the same time. For example, the therapist can reach out to the school in order to ensure the teachers and administration are receiving adequate support as well as giving support to the family. It has been shown that there is a relationship between adolescent poor academic per- formance and possible gang involvement (Dishion, Nelson, & Yasui, 2005) therefore collaboration with the family, school, and therapist is essential to the success of therapy in this instance. Without going to the school, the ther- apist will not have information that may be essential to understanding the overall situation. Wetchler (1986) proposed a macro-systemic approach to family therapy in the case of school-focused problems utilizing a structural framework. In this view, a three-step process is utilized to separately alter the dysfunctional sequences of interaction in each system (the family system, the school system, and the family-school interactional system). As in Wetchler’s second step, the therapist may need to reach out and treat the school system in order to facilitate greater cooperation for the child’s benefit and in order to join the family with the school.

Just as dysfunctional triangles can occur within the family and within the family-school interaction system, they can exist within the school. An inter- vention at this level may take the form of therapists meeting with school staff who are leaders in that specific child’s environment, helping them develop and communicate a plan of enforcement for boundaries and consequences for the problematic behaviors that may be gang-related. It is important to empower the staff, with the therapist taking a “one-down” position to the staff so that the school personnel are able to take responsibility for solving their own problems (Wetchler, 1986).

Once the family and the school have developed their own systems of open communication, the therapist should help to develop a working alliance between the family and the school. In doing so, the therapist would create a temporary family/school/therapist interactional system, possibly by setting up a meeting between the family and the school. The therapist would facilitate this meeting, and then would take a step back so that the two systems can work together effectively. Throughout the process, the therapist must communicate respect for all parties and the belief that they are fully

118 S. N. McNeil et al.

capable of handling their own affairs, thus increasing their sense of efficacy to solve their own problems (Wetchler, 1986).

Stage Three

The third and final stage of this intervention focuses on putting the family, as well as the therapist out in the community. The therapist’s role of facilitating activism is made easier when the therapist is engaging in similar work. The therapist can model this leadership to clients, and continue to work along- side clients as both parties develop a more hopeful attitude toward their environments and toward their future. The goal of this step is to continue the efficacy of the family by giving back to the community and allowing the members to feel a part of the bigger picture. There is evidence that higher neighborhood violent criminal activity was related to the community’s low perception of collective efficacy (Duncan et al., 2003). This means that in communities where there is violent criminal activity, members of the com- munity are less likely to feel connected with one another and therefore be less likely to help one another. For that reason, a stronger collective effi- cacy is needed in communities with a high-risk for gang involvement. By volunteering in the very neighborhoods engulfed in high crime and gang involvement, the family portrays the message that the violence is unaccept- able. The therapist and family can then volunteer as a team in this program, making sure to share their resources and strengths explored in the previous two stages. This further empowers the family to take a stand against the negative influences present in the community.

CONCLUSION

It has been indicated that family variables such as low household income, a decreased presence of parental figures in the home, and poor family man- agement are all significant predictors for adolescent gang membership (Hill, Howell, Hawkins, & Battin-Pearson, 1999). Given the stressors that poverty brings to families, parents may need support and guidance in order to pro- vide a sense of stability to their children. Structural family therapy helps fam- ilies to shift their organizational structures so that parent figures are placed in a position of leadership for their children (Minuchin, 1974). A structural therapeutic intervention at the levels of the family and at the macro system may be instrumental for families who present to therapy with concerns about their child’s involvement in gangs.

It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss at length the numerous variables that may impact the family, such as race, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, or varying family composition (such as a single versus a dual parent family). The present intervention is intended to be adapted to the specific needs of families with careful consideration to these greater systems

Structural Therapy and Gangs 119

and dynamics that are of impact. In the proposed intervention, therapeutic boundaries must be flexible. Because this model works outside of the tra- ditional therapy office environment, therapists must carefully consider their roles in relation to current and former clients. Additionally, the tenants and limitations of client confidentiality in the context of community involvement must be clarified through an appropriate process of informed consent. For example, therapists may continue to interact with former clients throughout both parties’ activism in the community. These issues can be managed by therapists through frequent consultation with supervisors and co-workers. It is imperative that the therapists always act with sensitivity to the specific needs of the families and communities that they seek to impact, which is facilitated by their engagement in the community.

The proposed intervention goes beyond traditional interventions by fam- ily therapists impacting multiple systems at which the family is affected. First, the family therapist works with the family to alter the family structure, plac- ing the parental figures in a position of leadership in the family. Second, the therapist intervenes with the greater systems in which the child exists, such as in the school or in the neighborhood community, in order to facilitate the development of boundaries for the child with which the parents can coop- erate and feel empowered. Third, the therapist’s and clients’ interventions into the community to facilitate positive change impact the greater systems of oppression and poverty that pose limits on these families of focus. The therapeutic focus on the multiple interacting systems allows for a broader and more holistic solution to the challenges faced by low-income families affected by gangs. The focus on individual family empowerment crystallizes this change at these multiple levels in a way that is consistent with the theory of structural family therapy. This multi-systemic focus is one that can extend itself into other interventions.

REFERENCES

Boscolo, L., Cecchin, G., Hoffman, L., & Penn, P. (1987). Milan systemic family therapy: Conversations in theory and practice. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Clark, C. M. (1992). Deviant adolescent subcultures: Assessment strategies and clin- ical interventions. Adolescence, 27(106), 283–294.

Dishion, T., Nelson, S., & Yasui, M. (2005). Predicting early adolescent gang involve- ment from middle school adaptation. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 34(1), 62–73.

Duncan, T., Duncan, S., Okut, H., Strycker, L., & Hix-Small, H. (2003). A multilevel contextual model of neighborhood collective efficacy. American Journal of Community Psychology, 32(3), 245–252.

Esbensen, F. (2000). Preventing adolescent gang involvement [Bulletin]. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.

120 S. N. McNeil et al.

Haley, J. (1976). Problem solving therapy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Hill, K., Howell, J., Hawkins, J., & Battin-Pearson, S. (1999). Childhood risk factors

for adolescent gang membership: Results from the Seattle social development project. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36(3), 300–322.

Hill, K. G., Lui, C., & Hawkins, J. D. (2001). Early precursors of gang membership: A study of Seattle youth [Bulletin]. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.

Li, X., Stanton, B., Pack, R., Harris, C., Cottrell, L., & Burns, J. (2002). Risk and protec- tive factors associated with gang involvement among urban African American adolescents. Youth & Society, 34(2), 172–194.

Minuchin, P. (1985). Families and individual development: Provocations from the field of family therapy. Child Development, 56(2), 289–302.

Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Minuchin, S., & Fishman, H. C. (1981). Family therapy techniques. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Minuchin, S., Montalvo, B., Guerney, B. G., Rosman, B. L., & Schumer, F. (1967). Families of the slums. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Rojano, R. (2004). The practice of community family therapy. Family Process, 43(1), 59–77.

Rotter, J., & Boveja, M. (1999). Family therapists and school counselors: A collabo- rative endeavor. The Family Journal, 7(3), 276–279.

Ruble, N. M., & Turner, W. L. (2000). A systemic analysis of the dynamics and organization of urban street gangs. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 28, 117–132.

Wetchler, J. L. (1986). Family therapy of school-focused problems: A macrosystemic perspective. Contemporary Family Therapy, 8(3), 224–240.

copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.