Module 6
Solution Focused Therapy
a. The Postmodern Revolution
To better understand postmodernism, compare it with the earlier modernist
perspective. For a modernist, the world is simply out there, available for
observation (Gergen, 2001). Although modernists appreciate the endless
perspectives one could take in understanding the world (think of Picasso’s cubism
or Freud’s unconscious), the knowability of the world, however challenging, was
not a question. Postmodernists, on the other hand, argue that what we call reality
is not an exact replica of what is out there but is socially constructed through
language.
One cannot hope to fully know an elusive truth; one only continually
constructs and reconstructs it. This concept touches upon the very essence of
human understanding and perception. Our grasp of truth is not static or absolute; it
is dynamic, continually evolving as we interact with the world and with each
other. The idea that we can ever achieve a complete and unchanging
understanding of truth is a fallacy, one that disregards the inherently fluid nature
of human experience and knowledge.
As Freedman and Combs (1996) so astutely observe, "A central tenet of the
postmodern worldview in which we base our approach to therapy is that beliefs,
laws, social customs, habits of dress and diet—all the things that make up the
psychological fabric of 'reality'—arise through social interaction over time." This
perspective underscores the importance of recognizing that our realities are not
pre-existing entities waiting to be discovered but are instead continually shaped
and reshaped through our interactions and engagements with the world and with
each other.
The beliefs we hold, the laws we abide by, the social customs we follow, and
even the habits of dress and diet we adopt are not static elements handed down to
us in an unaltered form. They are the products of ongoing social processes,
continuously influenced by the myriad interactions and negotiations that occur
within society. Over time, these elements evolve, reflecting the changing
dynamics and complexities of human relationships and societal structures.
In other words, people, together, construct their realities as they live them.
This construction is not a solitary endeavor but a collective one, rooted in the rich
tapestry of human interaction. Each conversation, each shared experience, each
moment of collaboration contributes to the ongoing creation and re-creation of our
shared realities. As we navigate through life, our understanding of truth and reality
is constantly being influenced by the people we meet, the communities we are part
of, and the broader societal context in which we exist.
This postmodern view challenges the traditional notion of objective reality,
suggesting instead that what we perceive as reality is inextricably linked to the
social processes that give rise to it. It invites us to consider the ways in which our
perceptions and understandings are shaped by our social contexts, and to
recognize the fluid and constructed nature of reality. This understanding has
profound implications for how we approach therapy, education, and indeed, any
field that seeks to understand and engage with human behavior and thought.
In therapy, for example, this perspective encourages therapists to recognize the
client's reality as a construct that has been shaped by their unique social
interactions and experiences. It calls for an approach that is collaborative, one that
acknowledges and values the client's perspective and works with them to explore
and reconstruct their understanding of their experiences. This collaborative
process is not about uncovering an objective truth but about helping the client to
construct a reality that is meaningful and empowering for them.
In summary, the notion that one cannot fully know an elusive truth, but instead
continually constructs and reconstructs it, highlights the dynamic and interactive
nature of human understanding. As Freedman and Combs (1996) elucidate, the
realities we live are not fixed or immutable; they are continually shaped and
reshaped through our social interactions. This perspective invites us to embrace
the fluidity of reality, recognizing that it is through our collective engagement
with the world that we construct the truths by which we live.
Postmodern thinkers emphasize that our beliefs about the world—what
constitutes reality—are social inventions, not a reflection or map of the world;
they evolve from conversations with other people. Through the interactive process
of language (not merely words but gestures, facial expressions, vocal inflections,
and silences), people connect and construct their shared views of reality. The
development of knowledge, then, is a social and cultural phenomenon, mediated
through language, and not determined by an objective condition of reality. The
concept of adolescence, for example, was not considered a specific period of
human development until recently. Did that period suddenly appear, or did people
begin within the last century to sort out their perceptions into types or classes
based on chronological ages? Obviously, the latter explanation makes more sense.
Recall of adolescence, emerging adulthood, and early adulthood. Whereas in the
past, we considered only adolescence and adulthood, we now have additional
categories. It is important to realize that we have not just added labels to a static
condition of human development. Instead, the experiences of people have
changed, and the language with which we describe and understand those changes
has changed.
Indeed, in this case, the back and forth between language and experience
reflects how reality and language mutually influence each other in an ongoing
process that defies final meaning. This dynamic interplay is fundamental to the
human condition, where our experiences shape the language we use, and
simultaneously, the language we employ frames and influences our experiences.
Language is not merely a tool for describing reality; it is a medium through
which reality is constructed and understood. Each word we choose, each phrase
we utter, carries with it a history of interactions, cultural contexts, and personal
significances. When we speak, we are not just communicating our thoughts but
also shaping our perception of reality. For example, the way different cultures
describe emotions can affect how people in those cultures experience and
understand their own emotions. In some languages, there are words for specific
emotions that do not exist in others, suggesting that language can both limit and
expand the realm of what we can experience and understand.
Conversely, our lived experiences constantly feed back into and modify our
language. As we encounter new situations, meet new people, and engage with new
ideas, our language evolves to accommodate these experiences. This is evident in
the way slang, jargon, and new terminologies emerge and become integrated into
everyday language. Technological advancements, social movements, and cultural
shifts all contribute to this evolution, reflecting the ever-changing nature of our
reality.
This mutual influence creates a loop of continuous transformation. For
instance, the terminology used in digital technology, like "internet," "tweet," or
"selfie," was non-existent a few decades ago. As these technologies became
integral parts of our lives, new language emerged to describe these experiences.
These new terms, in turn, shape how we think about and interact with technology.
The language of social media, with its hashtags, likes, and shares, has redefined
how we communicate and perceive social connections. This example illustrates
how language and reality are interwoven, each continually reshaping the other.
Furthermore, the inherent limitations and possibilities within any given
language mean that our perception of reality is always partial and mediated. The
words available to us in our native tongues can both reveal and obscure aspects of
our experiences. Certain concepts may be easily expressed in one language while
remaining elusive in another. This linguistic relativity suggests that there is no
singular, definitive way to describe reality. Instead, multiple, overlapping
interpretations coexist, each offering a different perspective shaped by the
language through which it is expressed.
The ongoing process of constructing meaning through language and
experience also highlights the fluidity and temporality of our understanding. What
we take to be true or real at one moment can change as our language and
experiences evolve. Historical shifts provide a clear illustration of this. Consider
how the understanding of mental health has changed over centuries. Terms and
concepts like "melancholia" in the past or "hysteria" have evolved into modern
understandings of depression and anxiety. These changes in terminology reflect
deeper shifts in societal attitudes and scientific knowledge, demonstrating how
language and experience continually influence each other in shaping our collective
reality.
In the realm of personal identity, the language we use to describe ourselves
and others plays a crucial role in shaping our self-conception and how we are
perceived by society. Terms related to gender, sexuality, and ethnicity, for
instance, have undergone significant transformation over time, reflecting broader
social changes and movements towards greater inclusion and understanding. The
emergence of terms like "non-binary" or "intersectionality" reflects a growing
recognition of the complexities of identity that were previously overlooked or
inadequately described.
This evolving language allows individuals to articulate their experiences more
accurately and claim their identities more confidently, thereby reshaping societal
perceptions and norms. The interaction between language and experience in this
context is a powerful example of how reality is continually reconstructed through
the words we use and the meanings we ascribe to them. As individuals and
societies, we are in a constant state of flux, perpetually negotiating and
renegotiating our understanding of ourselves and the world around us through the
interplay of language and experience.
In summary, the back and forth between language and experience is a dynamic
process that underscores the complexity of how we construct reality. This ongoing
interaction ensures that our understanding of truth and meaning remains fluid,
adaptable, and perpetually open to revision. It is through this ceaseless dialogue
between language and lived experience that we navigate the complexities of our
world, continuously shaping and reshaping our perceptions of reality in a process
that defies final meaning.
Gergen (2015) calls attention to such modern concepts as “romantic love” or
“maternal love” as invented social constructions. In our times, “codependent” or
“adult child of alcoholics” or “gay” or “straight” or “bipolar” or “borderline” or
“normal” also are invented terms—social constructions— that we reify, that is,
convert or regard as something concrete. In the postmodern view, each term is
simply an invented label that clients and therapists alike bring to therapy. This is a
useful, in fact inevitable, way of communicating.
But it also can have a dangerous consequence, as de Shazer (1991) maintains,
because as therapists, we run the risk of reifying cybernetic concepts (such as
homeostasis) and describing families as though families really possess those
concepts. This danger arises when abstract theoretical constructs are treated as
concrete realities, rather than as useful metaphors or frameworks for
understanding complex human behaviors and relationships.
Reification, in this context, refers to the process of treating an abstract idea or
theoretical construct as if it were a real, tangible entity. In the realm of family
therapy, concepts like homeostasis, feedback loops, and systemic balance are
valuable tools for conceptualizing how families function and interact. However,
when these concepts are reified, there is a risk that therapists might overlook the
unique, lived experiences of individual family members in favor of fitting their
behaviors into predefined theoretical molds.
For example, the concept of homeostasis in family systems theory refers to the
tendency of families to maintain stability and resist change. While this can be a
helpful way to understand certain patterns of behavior within families, it can
become problematic if therapists begin to view all family dynamics through this
lens. This can lead to a rigid interpretation of family behavior, where deviations
from the perceived norm are pathologized, and the dynamic, evolving nature of
family relationships is overlooked.
Moreover, reifying these concepts can result in a deterministic approach to
therapy, where the therapist assumes that families will inevitably behave in certain
ways based on these theoretical constructs. This can limit the therapist's ability to
see the full complexity of the family's situation and to recognize the potential for
change and growth. For instance, if a therapist is overly focused on the idea of
homeostasis, they might miss important signs of resilience and adaptability within
the family system.
The consequences of such reification are not merely theoretical; they have
real-world implications for the therapeutic process and the well-being of clients.
When therapists impose rigid frameworks on their clients, they risk alienating
them and undermining the therapeutic alliance. Clients may feel misunderstood or
misrepresented if their experiences are forced into narrow theoretical categories
that do not fully capture the richness and diversity of their lives. This can lead to a
breakdown in communication and trust, which are essential components of
effective therapy.
Furthermore, reifying cybernetic concepts can obscure the socio-cultural
context in which families exist. Families do not operate in a vacuum; they are
influenced by a wide range of social, economic, and cultural factors. By focusing
too narrowly on internal family dynamics, therapists may overlook these external
influences and fail to address important contextual issues that impact the family's
functioning. For example, issues such as poverty, discrimination, and social
injustice can profoundly affect family dynamics, but these factors might be
neglected if the therapist is overly focused on maintaining homeostasis within the
family system.
In addition, the reification of theoretical constructs can stifle creativity and
innovation in therapy. When therapists adhere too rigidly to established theories,
they may become less open to new ideas and approaches. This can limit their
ability to tailor their interventions to the specific needs of their clients and to
incorporate new insights from emerging research and practice. It is important for
therapists to remain flexible and open-minded, using theoretical frameworks as
guides rather than as rigid prescriptions.
Ultimately, while theoretical concepts like homeostasis can provide valuable
insights into family dynamics, it is crucial for therapists to use these concepts
judiciously and to remain aware of their limitations. By recognizing the potential
dangers of reification, therapists can avoid the pitfalls of deterministic thinking
and maintain a more nuanced and flexible approach to therapy. This involves
staying attuned to the unique experiences and perspectives of each family,
considering the broader socio-cultural context, and remaining open to new ideas
and approaches.
In conclusion, the interplay between language, experience, and theoretical
constructs in therapy is complex and multifaceted. While concepts like
homeostasis can be useful tools for understanding family dynamics, they must be
used with caution to avoid reification. As de Shazer (1991) cautions, therapists
must be mindful of the risks of treating abstract concepts as concrete realities and
strive to maintain a balanced, flexible approach that honors the uniqueness of each
family's experience. By doing so, therapists can better support their clients in
navigating the complexities of their relationships and fostering positive change.
Postmodern thinkers coined the term constructivism to emphasize the
subjective construction of reality. That is, each of us constructs a sense of the
world based on our own previously held dominant beliefs, which in turn largely
reflect (but are not identical with) the dominant beliefs of society (meaning
making includes idiosyncratic experience and creativity). Those beliefs are kept
alive and passed along through stories or narratives that we share with one
another. Moreover, these narratives help organize and maintain our view of life.
People organize their experiences and their memories into self-narratives—
personal and family stories, myths about family characteristics or circumstances,
reasons for doing or not doing something—to gain a sense of order, continuity,
and meaning in their lives.
Our identities require the organizing capacities of language. Language is not
merely a tool for communication; it is the very foundation upon which we
construct and understand our sense of self. Through language, we categorize and
make sense of our experiences, shaping our identities in the process. This intricate
relationship between language and identity underscores the profound impact that
the words we use and the narratives we create have on our self-perception and on
how we navigate the world around us.
We view the world "through the lens of a succession of stories—not only a
personal story, but gender, community, class, and cultural stories." These stories
serve as the framework through which we interpret our experiences and
understand our place in the world. Our personal story, which encompasses our
individual experiences, memories, and aspirations, is just one layer of this
complex narrative tapestry. It is deeply intertwined with the broader stories that
are shaped by our gender, community, class, and cultural backgrounds.
Our gender story, for instance, involves the roles, expectations, and identities
that are associated with our gender within our specific cultural context. This story
influences how we perceive ourselves and how we are perceived by others. It
informs our understanding of what it means to be male, female, non-binary, or any
other gender identity, and shapes our experiences in profound ways. The
narratives surrounding gender can empower us, but they can also constrain us by
imposing societal norms and expectations that may not align with our true selves.
Similarly, our community story is woven from the collective experiences,
values, and traditions of the groups to which we belong. Whether it is a family, a
neighborhood, a religious group, or a social organization, our community shapes
our identity by providing a sense of belonging and shared purpose. The stories we
share within our communities help to reinforce our values, beliefs, and social
norms, while also offering support and a sense of continuity.
Class stories are another significant component of our identities. These stories
are influenced by our socioeconomic status and the opportunities and challenges
that come with it. The narrative of class shapes our worldview, our access to
resources, and our interactions with others. It affects our education, career
prospects, and even our health and well-being. Understanding the impact of class
stories allows us to see how economic factors play a crucial role in shaping our
identity and life experiences.
Cultural stories, which encompass the traditions, customs, and values of the
larger cultural or ethnic groups we identify with, are also pivotal in shaping our
identities. These stories connect us to our heritage and history, providing a sense
of continuity and identity that spans generations. They influence our language, our
customs, our food, our celebrations, and our ways of thinking. Cultural stories
help us understand where we come from and how we fit into the broader tapestry
of human history.
The interplay of these various stories creates a rich and multifaceted sense of
identity. Each story contributes a different perspective, enriching our
understanding of ourselves and our place in the world. However, this multiplicity
of stories also means that our identity is never fixed or static; it is always evolving
as we encounter new experiences and integrate new narratives into our existing
framework. The stories we tell ourselves and others can change over time,
reflecting shifts in our personal development, our social circumstances, and our
broader cultural context.
Moreover, the stories that shape our identities are not solely our own creations.
They are influenced by the larger societal and cultural narratives that surround us.
Media, literature, education, and public discourse all play a role in shaping the
stories that define our identities. These external narratives can either reinforce or
challenge our personal stories, leading to a dynamic and ongoing process of
identity construction.
In conclusion, our identities are deeply rooted in the organizing capacities of
language. Through language, we construct and make sense of the succession of
stories that define who we are. These stories encompass our personal experiences
as well as the broader narratives of gender, community, class, and culture. Each
story adds a unique layer to our identity, creating a complex and ever-evolving
tapestry. Understanding the role of language in shaping our identities allows us to
appreciate the richness and diversity of human experience and the profound ways
in which our stories define our sense of self.
A postmodern social construction outlook challenges some types of systems
thinking, especially the first-order cybernetic type, by examining the assumptions
clients make about their problems rather than conceptualizing their difficulties in
terms of interactional behavior and feedback loops. Collaboratively helping clients
seek new meaning through mutual inquiry replaces the therapist as outside expert.
In this view, the therapist walks alongside the clients toward an unknown
destination of new meaning and action (Anderson, 2012) rather than directing the
couple or family with any preconceived notions.
Clients make sense of their world, gain knowledge, attribute meaning to their
experiences, and create a sense of their reality through language. Language serves
as the primary medium through which individuals interpret and articulate their
inner and outer worlds. It allows clients to express their thoughts, feelings, and
experiences, providing a framework for understanding and navigating the
complexities of life.
Through language, clients can organize their experiences into coherent
narratives. These narratives help them make sense of past events, understand their
present circumstances, and envision their future. By putting their experiences into
words, clients can process and reflect on what has happened to them, identifying
patterns and making connections that might not be immediately apparent. This
process of narrative construction is essential for developing a cohesive sense of
self and a stable identity.
Language also enables clients to gain knowledge about themselves and the
world around them. It is through conversation, reading, and writing that clients
learn new information, acquire skills, and develop insights. Language facilitates
the exchange of ideas and the dissemination of knowledge, allowing clients to
expand their understanding and broaden their perspectives. This cognitive
engagement with language is critical for personal growth and self-improvement.
Moreover, language plays a crucial role in how clients attribute meaning to
their experiences. The words and metaphors they choose can shape their
emotional responses and influence how they interpret events. For example,
describing a challenging experience as a "battle" or a "journey" can frame it in
different ways, affecting how clients perceive their ability to cope and overcome.
The meanings clients attach to their experiences are deeply embedded in the
language they use, which in turn shapes their emotional and psychological
responses.
Creating a sense of reality through language involves more than just
describing what happens. It includes interpreting, evaluating, and assigning
significance to those events. Clients use language to construct their realities,
drawing on their cultural, social, and personal contexts to create a meaningful and
coherent world. This constructed reality is not a mere reflection of objective
events but a dynamic and subjective interpretation that gives their lives structure
and purpose.
In therapy, the language clients use is of paramount importance. Therapists
listen carefully to the words and stories clients share, helping them to explore and
possibly reframe their narratives. By engaging in therapeutic dialogue, clients can
gain new insights and perspectives, which can lead to shifts in their understanding
and interpretation of their experiences. This process can be transformative, as
clients develop new ways of seeing themselves and their situations.
For instance, a client who views themselves as a "victim" of circumstances
may, through therapeutic conversations, begin to see themselves as a "survivor" or
even a "thriver." This shift in language can have profound implications for their
self-esteem, resilience, and overall well-being. It illustrates how language not only
reflects reality but also has the power to shape and transform it.
Language also allows clients to communicate their needs, desires, and
boundaries to others. Effective communication is essential for building and
maintaining healthy relationships. By articulating their thoughts and feelings,
clients can better understand themselves and others, fostering empathy and
connection. This relational aspect of language underscores its importance in both
personal and interpersonal contexts.
Furthermore, the symbolic nature of language allows clients to engage with
abstract concepts and complex emotions. Through metaphors, analogies, and
storytelling, clients can explore and express aspects of their experiences that might
be difficult to convey through literal language. This symbolic use of language
enriches their self-exploration and enables deeper understanding and insight.
In educational and developmental contexts, language acquisition and usage are
critical milestones. From early childhood through adulthood, the ability to use
language effectively is linked to cognitive development, academic success, and
social integration. Language learning is not just about acquiring vocabulary and
grammar; it involves learning to think, reason, and communicate in increasingly
sophisticated ways.
In summary, clients make sense of their world, gain knowledge, attribute
meaning to their experiences, and create a sense of their reality through language.
This intricate process involves organizing experiences into narratives, gaining
insights through cognitive engagement, attributing meaning through linguistic
choices, and constructing a coherent reality that is both personal and culturally
informed. Language is a powerful tool in therapy and everyday life, shaping how
clients perceive themselves and their world, influencing their emotional and
psychological well-being, and enabling them to communicate and connect with
others. Through the therapeutic use of language, clients can transform their
narratives, develop new understandings, and create more empowering and
meaningful realities.
b. Postmodernist Constructions
Postmodern therapists reject the features central to a modernist, problem-
focused, objective orientation to human problems. They do not focus on blocked
impulses or unconscious conflicts, flawed family structures, emotional
incapacities, distorted cognitions, or dysfunctional personality traits. Nor are they
interested in maintaining the conventional barrier between therapist and client. In
Gergen’s (1993) view, “that sacred distance between objectivity, neutrality, and
reason on one side, and subjectivity, bias, and passion on the other” is no longer
relevant to psychotherapy (p. ix).
Despite education or expertise, a therapist’s prejudgments cannot be
considered objective or unbiased and must not determine the goals toward which
the family therapy should be directed. Indeed, labeling families as dysfunctional
or interventions by the therapist to change the way a family operates run the risk
of imposing a conventional or socially sanctioned view of what constitutes a
normal or stable or happy family.
The notion of “normality” is particularly thorny. Despite an appreciation of the
difficulty in determining what is “normal,” modernists tended to assume that a
condition called “normality” did exist and could be defined and used as a kind of
measure against which experience could be understood. From the postmodern
perspective, however, one cannot meaningfully talk about what constitutes
socially determined views on normality because all views on these subjects are
themselves multiply constructed. Even within social or cultural systems, there is
no agreement about what constitutes normality.
Postmodern notions affect the way postmodern therapists understand diversity
and culture and their relationship to the family. Therapists with a postmodern,
constructivist, or social constructionist outlook argue that preconceived views of
what constitutes a functional (or dysfunctional) family are “correct” only to the
beholder. Rather than imposing a single standard for determining a family’s
functional level, consideration of ethnicity, culture, gender, sexual orientation,
type of family organization, and so on must also be considered. The personal
experiences and viewpoints of individual family members must be included and
the family’s interaction with larger systems (schools, social agencies) addressed.
All views of events and relationships are valued equally, irrespective of
gender, social class, cultural background, or sexual orientation. This principle
underscores the importance of inclusivity and respect for diversity in
understanding human experiences and interactions. Recognizing the equal value
of different perspectives is essential in fostering a more empathetic and just
society where every individual's voice is heard and respected.
When we assert that all views are valued equally, we acknowledge the unique
experiences and insights that each person brings to the table. This includes
recognizing that individuals from different genders may have distinct ways of
perceiving and interpreting events and relationships due to their unique
experiences and societal roles. For example, a woman may experience certain
social interactions differently than a man due to gender-based expectations and
pressures. By valuing her perspective equally, we ensure that her experiences and
insights are given the attention and respect they deserve, leading to a more
comprehensive understanding of events and relationships.
Similarly, social class plays a significant role in shaping an individual's
worldview. People from different socioeconomic backgrounds encounter varying
challenges and opportunities, influencing their perceptions and interactions. For
instance, a person from a lower socioeconomic class may have a different
perspective on issues like education, healthcare, and employment compared to
someone from a wealthier background. Valuing these views equally helps to
highlight the systemic inequalities that exist and fosters a more nuanced
discussion on how to address these disparities. It also ensures that policies and
solutions are inclusive and considerate of the diverse needs and experiences of all
social classes.
Cultural background is another critical factor that influences how people view
events and relationships. Culture encompasses a wide array of elements, including
traditions, languages, values, and customs. Individuals from different cultural
backgrounds may interpret the same event in vastly different ways based on their
cultural context. For example, a celebration or ritual in one culture may be
understood and valued differently in another. By valuing all cultural perspectives
equally, we promote cross-cultural understanding and appreciation, allowing for a
richer and more diverse tapestry of human experience. This approach also helps to
counteract cultural biases and stereotypes, fostering a more inclusive environment
where cultural diversity is seen as a strength rather than a barrier.
Sexual orientation is another dimension that significantly impacts an
individual's view of events and relationships. People who identify as LGBTQ+
often navigate a world that can be both affirming and challenging in different
ways compared to their heterosexual counterparts. Their experiences of love,
family, and community can offer valuable insights into the human condition. By
valuing their perspectives equally, we affirm their identity and contributions,
promoting greater acceptance and understanding. This inclusive approach also
helps to combat discrimination and prejudice, creating a more supportive and
equitable society for everyone, regardless of their sexual orientation.
In professional and academic settings, valuing all views equally enhances the
richness and depth of discussions and analyses. Diverse perspectives lead to more
innovative and comprehensive solutions to problems, as they incorporate a wider
range of experiences and insights. In therapy and counseling, for example,
acknowledging and respecting the diverse backgrounds and experiences of clients
is crucial for effective and empathetic practice. It ensures that the therapeutic
process is tailored to meet the unique needs of each individual, fostering a more
supportive and empowering environment for healing and growth.
Moreover, valuing all views equally is essential for fostering social justice and
equity. It challenges the power dynamics and hierarchies that often privilege
certain perspectives over others. By promoting equal value for all viewpoints, we
work towards dismantling systemic biases and ensuring that marginalized voices
are heard and respected. This approach is fundamental to creating a more inclusive
and fair society where everyone has the opportunity to contribute and be
recognized.
In educational settings, this principle encourages a more inclusive curriculum
that reflects the diverse experiences and histories of all students. It helps to create
a learning environment where students feel seen and valued, promoting a sense of
belonging and engagement. Teachers and educators who embrace this principle
can better support their students' diverse needs and foster a more inclusive and
supportive classroom culture.
In summary, valuing all views of events and relationships equally, irrespective
of gender, social class, cultural background, or sexual orientation, is a cornerstone
of inclusivity and respect for diversity. It acknowledges the unique and valuable
perspectives that each individual brings, promotes cross-cultural understanding
and appreciation, and fosters social justice and equity. This principle enhances
professional, academic, and personal interactions, leading to more innovative
solutions, supportive environments, and a fairer society. By committing to this
inclusive approach, we affirm the dignity and worth of every person and work
towards a more just and empathetic world.
Social constructivists note the importance of cultural diversity on the
therapeutic experience itself. By minimizing multicultural influences, modernist
therapists ran the risk of judging ethnically unfamiliar families by their own
standards of what “objectively” constitutes a functional family life. The
postmodern view rejects such so-called objective knowledge, questioning its
certainty and universality. Truth, rather than being immutable or absolute, is
simply the best-informed understanding for which there exists a high degree of
consensus among people. Thus a Western postmodernist might find herself
challenged in working with a family from a culture in which patriarchal values
dominate family experience.
She cannot impose her Western values on their experience, nor should she shy
away from recognizing the value of her experiences and values. This delicate
balance is crucial in maintaining both cultural sensitivity and personal
authenticity. Imposing her Western values would mean disregarding the rich
tapestry of beliefs, customs, and practices that shape their lives. It would involve a
form of cultural imperialism, where one culture's norms and values are seen as
superior and are forcibly applied to another culture, leading to misunderstanding
and potential harm.
In practice, avoiding the imposition of Western values requires a deep
commitment to understanding and respecting the cultural context of the people she
is working with. It involves actively listening to their stories, learning about their
traditions, and appreciating the ways in which their cultural background
influences their worldview and daily lives. This approach fosters mutual respect
and creates a more inclusive and empathetic environment where individuals feel
valued and understood.
However, this does not mean that she should completely disregard her own
experiences and values. Her experiences and values are integral parts of who she
is and can offer valuable perspectives and insights. Recognizing the value of her
own experiences allows her to bring her unique perspective to the table, enriching
the dialogue and fostering a more comprehensive understanding of the issues at
hand. It is important to acknowledge that everyone brings their own cultural
baggage into interactions, and being aware of this can help in navigating the
complex interplay of different cultural perspectives.
One way to achieve this balance is through cultural humility, a lifelong
process of self-reflection and self-critique. Cultural humility involves recognizing
one's own cultural biases and limitations while being open to learning from others.
It requires an understanding that one's own cultural perspective is not the only
valid one and that there is much to learn from the experiences and values of
others. This approach fosters an environment of mutual learning and respect,
where different cultural perspectives are seen as complementary rather than
conflicting.
In practical terms, she can approach her interactions with a mindset of
curiosity and openness. Instead of viewing her values as a standard to be imposed,
she can share them as part of a broader dialogue, inviting others to share their
perspectives as well. This creates a space where different values can be discussed
and understood in a respectful and non-judgmental manner. For example, if she
comes from a culture that highly values individualism, she can explain how this
shapes her approach to certain issues, while also being open to understanding and
appreciating cultures that place a higher value on collectivism.
Moreover, it is essential for her to be aware of the power dynamics at play. In
many contexts, Western values have historically been imposed through
colonialism and globalization, leading to a legacy of inequality and mistrust.
Being sensitive to these dynamics involves acknowledging this history and being
mindful of how her actions and words may be perceived. It also means being
willing to step back and give space to voices that have been marginalized or
silenced.
In addition, she can seek to build bridges between her values and the values of
those she is working with. This involves finding common ground and identifying
shared values that can serve as a foundation for collaboration and mutual
understanding. For instance, while the specific expressions of respect may vary
across cultures, the underlying value of respect for others is often universal. By
focusing on these shared values, she can create a more inclusive and cohesive
environment.
Ultimately, the goal is to create a dialogue where different cultural
perspectives can coexist and enrich each other. This approach not only enhances
her ability to work effectively across cultures but also promotes greater
understanding and cooperation in an increasingly interconnected world. It is
through this process of mutual respect and learning that we can move towards a
more inclusive and equitable global society.
In summary, she cannot impose her Western values on their experience, nor
should she shy away from recognizing the value of her experiences and values.
Balancing these aspects involves a commitment to cultural humility, an openness
to learning from others, and an awareness of power dynamics. By fostering mutual
respect and understanding, she can create a more inclusive and empathetic
environment where diverse cultural perspectives are valued and integrated. This
approach not only enriches her own understanding but also contributes to a more
just and interconnected world.
Postmodern therapists take a “not knowing” stance (Anderson, 2012) that
replaces any predetermined view of how a family should change with a
collaborative posture in which all participants examine the belief systems by
which the different family members and the therapist view “reality.” The therapist
follows leads as openings develop rather than imposing some predetermined
scheme or framework for uncovering patterns. After each family member has
considered his or her own assumptions about the world that form the basis for the
meanings given to events, the family and therapist come together in a
“conversation” to co-construct new views of the family’s “reality” and develop
new options its members might pursue. Instead of concentrating on the origins of
problems, the therapist turns, together with family members, to finding workable
solutions.
In the process, the family may be helped to clarify and revise some of the
central themes of its personal narratives or stories about its members. This process
is integral to family therapy and plays a crucial role in fostering understanding,
healing, and growth within the family unit. Families often operate based on shared
narratives that shape their interactions, beliefs, and roles. These narratives can be
influenced by cultural, societal, and personal factors, and they significantly impact
how family members perceive themselves and each other.
Clarifying and revising these central themes involves delving into the stories
that families tell about themselves. These stories might include how they handle
conflicts, support each other, and deal with external pressures. By bringing these
narratives to the forefront, family members can gain insight into how their shared
stories shape their dynamics. This process allows them to see patterns that may
have been previously unnoticed, such as recurring conflicts or roles that
individuals play within the family.
Therapists can facilitate this process by creating a safe and supportive
environment where family members feel comfortable sharing their perspectives.
Through guided discussions, family members can express their thoughts and
feelings openly, which can lead to a deeper understanding of each other’s
experiences. For example, a family might uncover that a narrative of a "strong
provider" has placed undue stress on one member, while another might feel
overlooked or undervalued due to an unspoken story of being the "caretaker."
As these narratives are clarified, the family can begin to see which aspects of
their stories are beneficial and which may be hindering their growth and well-
being. This awareness is the first step towards revising their narratives. Revising
these stories involves reinterpreting past events, changing harmful patterns, and
developing new, more empowering narratives. For instance, a family that has
always seen itself as "struggling" might begin to reframe its story to one of
resilience and overcoming challenges, thereby shifting the collective mindset
towards a more positive and hopeful outlook.
This revision process is not about denying or ignoring past difficulties but
about finding new ways to understand and integrate those experiences into a
healthier family identity. It allows families to let go of limiting beliefs and adopt
more constructive and supportive views of each other. For example, if a family
narrative includes a story of a member who is "always causing trouble," revising
this story might involve recognizing the underlying reasons for this behavior and
acknowledging the strengths and positive contributions of that member.
Therapists can use various techniques to help families revise their narratives.
Techniques such as narrative therapy, where family members are encouraged to
rewrite their stories in ways that promote healing and growth, can be particularly
effective. This might involve creating alternative stories that highlight strengths,
achievements, and positive qualities of family members, thus fostering a more
balanced and appreciative view of the family as a whole.
Another important aspect of this process is addressing the impact of external
influences on the family’s narratives. Cultural norms, societal expectations, and
historical contexts can all play a role in shaping family stories. By exploring these
influences, families can gain a broader perspective on their narratives and
recognize the external factors that may have contributed to their current dynamics.
This understanding can empower families to challenge and change narratives that
are not truly reflective of their values and experiences.
The process of clarifying and revising family narratives can also enhance
communication and strengthen relationships within the family. As family members
share their stories and listen to each other, they can develop greater empathy and
compassion. This improved communication can lead to more effective problem-
solving and a stronger sense of unity and support within the family.
In addition, revising family narratives can have long-term benefits for
individual family members. It can help them develop a more positive self-concept,
improve their mental health, and foster a sense of agency and empowerment. For
example, a child who has been labeled as "shy" might begin to see themselves as
thoughtful and introspective, qualities that can be strengths rather than
weaknesses.
Ultimately, the process of clarifying and revising family narratives is about
creating a more accurate, supportive, and empowering story for the family. It
allows families to move past negative patterns and embrace a narrative that
reflects their strengths, values, and potential. By doing so, they can build a
healthier and more resilient family dynamic that supports the well-being of all its
members.
In summary, in the process of family therapy, families may be helped to clarify
and revise some of the central themes of their personal narratives or stories about
their members. This involves understanding the existing narratives, identifying
harmful patterns, and developing new, empowering stories. Through this process,
families can improve their communication, strengthen their relationships, and
create a more positive and supportive family identity. This work not only benefits
the family as a whole but also supports the individual growth and well-being of
each member.
Here is a good opportunity to compare a familiar modernist concept in
psychotherapy with a postmodernist one. In comparison with Anderson’s not-
knowing stance, consider Freud’s so-called “even hovering attention,” which
describes the nonjudgmental way analysts should listen to their patients’ free
associations designed to free the participants from familiar meanings and
culturally imposed inhibitions. The patient’s verbal productions were, however,
eventually interpreted within the Freudian schema (itself a construction). Today,
postmodern therapists (including psychoanalysts) recognize the shifting contexts
that inform the way people understand themselves and their own changing lives.
c. Postmodern Therapeutic Outlooks
Postmodern-oriented therapists attempt to collaborate with family members as
self-creating, independent participants. There is an assumption of a shared
expertise among all participants. The therapist is no longer a detached, powerful
outside observer or sole expert but rather a partaker, with his or her own set of
prior beliefs, ready to play a role with family members in constructing the reality
being observed. No longer giving directives as sole expert, the therapist works
with the clients to retell and relive stories and to co-construct possible alternative
stories or new outcomes. This requires therapist responsiveness, sensitive
reciprocal adjustments with clients to achieve goals, and persistence, sustained
focus on exploring new ideas with clients, ideally expressed in “responsive
persistence,” a commitment to sustained negotiation of meaning. The therapist
engages in dialogue with family members, helping them shake loose from a fixed
account of their lives (a story from which they often see no escape) so that they
might consider alternatives offering greater promise.
A therapist might help a person who struggles with alcohol see that he is more
than a person with a drinking problem, for example. This process involves shifting
the focus from a singular, often stigmatized aspect of the individual’s identity to a
more holistic and positive self-concept. The goal is to help the person recognize
and appreciate the diverse facets of their identity, strengths, and potential beyond
their struggles with alcohol.
The therapist begins by creating a safe and non-judgmental environment
where the individual feels comfortable exploring their thoughts and feelings. In
this supportive setting, the therapist can encourage the person to talk about their
life experiences, interests, achievements, and values. By doing so, the therapist
helps the individual uncover aspects of their identity that have been overshadowed
by their drinking problem. For instance, the therapist might explore the person’s
career accomplishments, hobbies, relationships, and personal values, highlighting
the multifaceted nature of their identity.
This process often involves narrative therapy techniques, where the therapist
helps the individual re-author their life story. Instead of seeing themselves solely
through the lens of their addiction, the person is guided to construct a more
balanced and empowering narrative. For example, they might begin to see
themselves as a dedicated professional, a loving family member, a creative artist,
or a resilient individual who has faced and overcome various challenges. This re-
authoring helps to counteract the negative self-perception that often accompanies
addiction and fosters a more positive and holistic self-view.
The therapist might also help the individual identify and build on their
strengths and resources. This could include recognizing their perseverance,
empathy, problem-solving abilities, and any other qualities that have helped them
navigate life’s difficulties. By focusing on these strengths, the therapist helps the
person see themselves as capable and resilient, rather than solely defined by their
struggles with alcohol. This strengths-based approach can be empowering and can
motivate the individual to pursue recovery and personal growth with renewed
confidence and determination.
Additionally, the therapist might work with the individual to set goals that
align with their broader interests and values. These goals could be related to career
aspirations, educational pursuits, creative projects, or personal relationships. By
helping the person envision and work towards a future that reflects their full
potential, the therapist supports the development of a more positive and future-
oriented self-concept. This forward-looking perspective can be particularly
motivating for individuals in recovery, as it shifts the focus from past difficulties
to future possibilities.
Furthermore, the therapist can assist the person in developing healthier coping
strategies and routines that align with their new narrative. This might involve
exploring activities and practices that bring joy, meaning, and a sense of
accomplishment, such as exercise, mindfulness, volunteering, or creative pursuits.
By integrating these positive activities into their daily life, the individual can
reinforce their new self-concept and reduce the reliance on alcohol as a coping
mechanism.
The therapeutic process also includes addressing and challenging the societal
stigma associated with addiction. The therapist can help the individual understand
that their struggles with alcohol do not define their worth or potential. This
involves educating the person about the nature of addiction, the impact of societal
attitudes, and the importance of self-compassion and self-acceptance. By fostering
a more compassionate and informed perspective, the therapist helps the individual
break free from internalized stigma and embrace a more positive and empowering
self-view.
Moreover, involving the individual’s support network can be beneficial.
Family members, friends, and loved ones can play a crucial role in reinforcing the
new, more holistic narrative. The therapist might facilitate family sessions or
support groups where the individual’s broader identity is acknowledged and
celebrated. This collective recognition can provide additional support and
validation, helping the person to sustain their new self-concept and navigate the
challenges of recovery with the support of their loved ones.
In summary, a therapist might help a person who struggles with alcohol see
that he is more than a person with a drinking problem by guiding him to recognize
and appreciate the diverse aspects of his identity. This process involves creating a
safe environment, using narrative therapy techniques, focusing on strengths and
resources, setting meaningful goals, developing healthier coping strategies,
challenging societal stigma, and involving the support network. Through these
efforts, the therapist helps the individual construct a more balanced and
empowering narrative, fostering a positive self-concept and supporting their
journey towards recovery and personal growth.
Postmodern therapists are interested in the shared set of premises of reality a
family attaches to a problem that perpetuates its behavior. Together, as a unitary
therapist–family observer system, therapy becomes a cooperative undertaking in
which new meaning and understanding are jointly constructed rather than imposed
by the therapist. With new outlooks, family members (and therapists!) develop
more empowering stories about themselves and find new ways of coping with
their difficulties. Shunning the traditional barriers often erected between therapist
and clients, Doherty (1991) encourages therapists to engage in a subjective but
liberating dialogue with family members: “Their goal is to enable clients to find
new meanings in their life situations and to “restory” their problems in ways that
free them from the mesmerizing power of the dominant culture” (p. 38).
Social constructionists (Gergen, 2015) think that the assumptions about reality
that we make are not objective mirrors of reality but arise through communication
—language and conversation with others—so that any knowledge we have
develops out of a social context that has been mitigated by language. More than
the mere outward expression of inner thoughts and feelings, language shapes and
is shaped by human relationships. If reality is conditional and contextual, then
each of us creates reality by observing, making distinctions about these
observations, and sharing our perceptions with others through language. As
Campbell, Draper, and Crutchley (1991) contend, “language is a process of
consensual agreement between people and is, therefore, the basis of one’s view of
reality” (p. 336).
d. Social Constructionist Therapies
In this, we offer four social constructionist therapeutic approaches in which
the language and meaning given events take precedence for the therapist over
attending to behavioral sequences or family interactive patterns. These therapists
are intent on engaging families in conversations calculated to facilitate changes in
family members’ perceptions of their problems, empowering them to restory and
actively redirect their lives. These family therapists urge a shift in attention away
from an inspection of the origin or the exact nature of a family’s presenting
problems to an examination of the stories (interpretations, explanations, theories
about relationships) family members have told themselves that account for how
they have lived their lives. The family that considers itself to be a “winning”
family, for example, may have a very difficult time coping with a member who
does not live up to expectations. To them, the narrative about being winners may
seem unalterable.
People often become convinced that their stories are reality or the truth; in
effect, they have confused their personal map of the world with the territory the
map is intended to represent. This notion that “the map is not the territory” was
first proposed by Alfred Korzybski (1942) and was adopted by Bateson (1972) to
indicate that the conceptual frame we bring to the analysis or interpretation of a
situation is just that—a personal point of reference—not to be confused with the
way the situation really is. Many possible explanations or interpretations could be
assigned to the identical experience. Social constructionist therapists are
particularly interested in expanding clients’ rigid and inflexible views of the
world. Members of the “winning” family, for example, might feel great relief if
they can rewrite their story to allow for imperfection or defeat. Unspoken
resentments or harshly competitive feelings may dissolve once the premise of
“winner” is deconstructed. Client views are mirrored in the language they use in
constructing their takes on reality. Language—conversation—in turn becomes the
therapeutic vehicle for altering old behaviors by considering new explanations
leading to new solutions.
Among today’s most popular and influential family therapies, solution-focused
brief therapy (SFBT) is concerned with change rather than with assessing why the
family developed its problems. Solution-focused therapists insist that families,
right from the start of therapy, join them in therapeutic conversation as they
examine their troublesome situation. Discouraging families from speculating
about why a particular dilemma arose or looking for underlying family pathology,
solution-focused therapists listen to the language used as families describe their
situations and the conflict resolution they hope to achieve.
If, as social constructivists assert, numerous realities exist, with each reality
being arbitrarily and subjectively based on personal constructions or stories of
what’s out there, then what we agree to call reality is nothing more than consensus
about our perspectives shared through language. The solution-based therapist
helps families, by means of solution-talk, to come to believe in the truth or reality
of what they are talking about together with the therapist and to construct
solutions consistent with those consensually validated perceptions. Workable
solutions result from redescriptions of themselves—in effect, the family creates
new, empowering stories about themselves. If successful, clients achieve a
cognitive change, reconstructing their sense of their own ability to resolve,
control, or contain the presenting problem.
De Shazer’s (1985, 1988) overall contribution was to provide the family with
“skeleton keys”—interventions that work for a variety of locks. Such keys do not
necessarily fit a complex lock perfectly; they only need to fit sufficiently well so
that a solution evolves. That is, in constructing a solution, the therapist does not
need to know about the history of the problem or what maintains the complaint.
Nor is the therapist particularly interested in the details of the complaint,
preferring to attend instead to developing with the family expectations of change
and solution. By limiting the number of sessions (typically 5 to 10), the therapist
helps create the expectation of change, making the achievement of goals appear
more attainable. (It also endears SFBT to managed-care organizations that
continue to pressure therapists to reduce the length of therapy.)
Another theoretical view that sets SFBT apart from the MRI model is the
rejection of the idea that clients who come asking for change are at the same time
resisting change. Solution-focused therapists contend that clients really do want to
be cooperative and to change. They resist interpretations or other interventions
from the therapist only if these do not seem to fit. To promote cooperation, the
therapist compliments clients (“You seem to be really trying to be a good mother
under difficult circumstances”), focusing on client strengths or past successes
(Seedall, 2009). Once family members sense that the therapist is on their side, he
or she is in a position to make suggestions that they try something new that might
make them feel better. Typically, therapists encourage small changes that, once
achieved, lead to further changes (“Marie seemed to like it when you sat and
talked to her on Wednesday. Do you think you could try to do the same thing two
nights next week?”).
De Shazer had worked at the Mental Research Institute (MRI) in Palo Alto
with John Weakland, so early solution-focused theory was closely identified with
the strategic approach. De Shazer (1991, 1994) later turned to the ideas of
linguistic philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein—especially his notions concerning
“language games,” which are conversations people engage in with one another to
determine reality. Today solution-focused therapy is clearly in the social
constructionist camp, emphasizing the central role of language in how clients view
themselves and their problems. Not surprisingly, SFBT shares with the MRI the
notion that dysfunction arises from faulty attempts at problem solution. The
family perceives itself as stuck, having run out of ways to deal with the problem.
However, de Shazer and associates part company with strategists by emphasizing
that the family has developed a faulty or negative set of constructions; as a result,
family members continue to think of the problem using the same language as
before, with few new options (Lipchik, 1993).
Solution-focused therapists aid the family in discovering its own creative
solutions for becoming “unstuck.” In short, while the MRIers try to get clients to
change the behavior that hasn’t worked, the SFBTers try to get them to change
their cognitions in order to open up the possibility of finding new ways to deal
with the problem. The MRI model is problem focused; the Milwaukee model is
solution focused. The former urges clients to do things differently, while the latter
urges them to view things differently (Shoham, Rohrbaugh, & Patterson, 1995).
The assumption here is that clients already know what they need to do to solve
their complaints. The therapist helps them use that knowledge differently. The
overall aim of this approach is to help clients start the solution process. The
solution does not need to be matched to the specific problem to be effective.
Actually, solution-focused therapists believe that the solution process is similar
despite different problems. In describing his approach, de Shazer uses a simple
metaphor: The complaints clients bring to the therapist are like locks on doors that
could open to a more satisfactory life, if only they could find the key. Often, time
is wasted and frustration heightened in trying to discover why the door is locked
when the family should be looking for the key.
SFBT therapists take the position with clients that change is inevitable; the
only issue is when it will occur. This creates expectations that change will occur as
soon as the “key” is found. The therapist might wonder aloud what the client
expects to be different after the presenting complaint is gone. According to de
Shazer, just expecting to get somewhere different, somewhere more satisfactory,
creates the expectation of beneficial change in the client and makes it easier to get
there. Solution-focused therapists have devised various therapeutic questions to
disrupt problem-maintaining behavioral patterns, change outmoded family beliefs,
and amplify exceptions to behavior previously thought of by clients as
unchangeable. Three kinds of questions, often asked during the initial session, are
central to the solution-focused approach: (a) “miracle questions”; (b) exception-
finding questions; and (c) scaling questions.
Future oriented and intended to illuminate a hypothetical solution, this
therapeutic act offers each family member an opportunity to speculate on what
their lives will be like when the problem the family brought to therapy (say,
marital conflict or struggles between parents and adolescents) is solved.
Consideration of a brighter future in which all members change increases its
likelihood to occur, and the solution calls for a consideration of how to reach the
stated goal offered by the family members themselves. Each family member is
also encouraged to reveal differences in his or her behavior that the others will
notice. The idea here is for the therapist to invite the client to gradually construct
an image of a fulfilling, productive, rewarding future with well-formed goals (De
Jong & Berg, 2012). This movement to goals constitutes a “solution” (Fish, 1995).
Solution-focused therapy is largely organized around two activities: creating
well-defined goals and developing solutions based on exceptions (De Jong &
Berg, 2012). Feedback is offered to families at the end of each solution-building
conversational session, and client efforts toward reaching satisfactory solutions
are periodically reviewed. Therapy concludes, usually in a few sessions of
solution-talk, when the presenting complaint is alleviated, and the client, feeling
empowered, reconstructs his or her view of the world. Before commencing
solution-focused conversation, however, therapists attempt to assess the nature of
the therapist–client relationship, categorizing clients as visitors, complainants, or
customers (de Shazer, 1988). Visitors may be there at someone else’s suggestion
or demand, do not describe a clear complaint, do not expect change, and do not
really want to engage in therapy. (The therapist may respond politely but offer no
task or seek no change.) Complainants are willing to describe the perceived basis
for their unhappiness but are not currently willing to work on constructing
solutions, perhaps waiting for their partner to change first. (Here the therapist is
accepting, sometimes suggesting tasks directed at noticing exceptions to the
pattern complained about in the partner.) Customers describe their complaints and
are prepared to take action to construct a solution. (The therapist here may be
more direct in guiding such clients toward solutions.)
An offshoot of SFBT, solution-oriented therapy stresses the importance of
keeping open for clients the opportunities for change as they search for solutions
that work for them. Therapy is a brief, joint undertaking to which both clients and
therapist bring expertise. Clients are experts on their own feelings and perceptions
and provide the data from which the therapist can construct a workable problem
definition, cast in a solution framework. Clients, and not therapists, identify the
goals they wish to reach in therapy. The therapist, careful not to impose any single
“correct” way for a family to live, is the expert at creating a collaborative
solution-oriented dialogue. That conversation is guided by two main principles
(O’Hanlon, 1993)—acknowledgment (that clients are being heard, validated, and
respected) and possibility (keeping alive the prospect for change and solution).
According to O’Hanlon (Hoyt, 2001c), one feature that distinguishes SFBT from
O’Hanlon’s version (which he now refers to as possibility therapy) is the latter’s
validation of the client’s emotions (reflecting the early influence of Carl Rogers on
O’Hanlon’s thinking). In addition, he contends that political, historical, and gender
influences on the presenting problem are more likely to be explored in his
approach.
One final postmodern approach that also relies heavily on therapy as a
conversational and collaborative enterprise comes from Tom Andersen (1993,
1997). Consistent with social constructionist thinking, this approach to therapy
strives to be egalitarian. It calls for less of a privileged subject–object dichotomy
between therapist and family and thus is less hierarchical than most therapies. In
this simple but original technique, a “twoway mirror” has replaced the more
traditional “one-way mirror” so that in the course of a therapy session,
professionals and families reverse roles and observe one another openly, offering
perspectives on the family’s issues. This opens up the therapeutic process between
team members and family, lowers professional-client barriers, democratizes the
undertaking, increases intimacy all around, and lets the client feel all participants
are working together to help (not just sitting behind a one-way mirror and judging
the client’s behavior).
