Structural
Family Therapy: Case Analysis
As
a practitioner, it is imperative to analyze, diagnose, and treat clients in a
favorable manner. One of the most
critical components to such therapeutic processes is the ability to select and employ
an applicable method of therapy.
Considering the given scenario concerning John and Mindy’s family, the
implementation of structural family therapy (SFT) is quite appropriate. This system allows the practitioner to examine
the family’s organizational framework and interactions from a comprehensive approach
consisting of the existing subsystems and boundaries which explicate role
expectations and enduring patterns (Nichols, 2010). As the family’s dysfunction is addressed, the
therapy “is directed at altering family structure so that the family can solve
its problems” (Nichols, 2010, p. 176).
In effort to offer advantageous diagnosis and treatment, the following
analysis provides an overview of the symptoms that suggest a problem within the
family system, positive and negative familial interactions, the application of
SFT, and strategic modifications.
In
regard to the symptoms which perpetuate various issues within John and Mindy’s
family, job loss, alcohol abuse, impatience, avoidance, lack of affection,
delinquent behavior, insolence, and unproductive arguing are apparent stressors. First, John was laid off from a factory
position. This alone may be the cause of
his impatience and frequent consumption of alcohol. Early in the process, the practitioner should
question John and his family as to whether or not these conditions existed
prior to the job loss. Next, Mindy’s
avoidance and lack of affection towards John is a problematic factor as well. These symptoms exemplify disengagement yet
simultaneously encourage constant bickering which enables the couple to vent
without realizing a constructive resolution (Nichols, 2010). Again, John’s recent job loss may have been a
trigger for these behaviors. Lastly,
poor conduct and delinquent behavior among the children are a direct result of
the parents fighting. All of these
indicators promote the negative tension on varying levels within the family
system. Each individual’s behavior is
caused by and adversely influences the family as a whole.
Along
with the recognition of the symptoms afflicting this family, the positive and
negative interactions must be acknowledged as well. From a positive perspective, it appears that
Mindy, a part-time preschool teacher, is more hands-on with the children and astute
to the fact that therapy may be beneficial in particular for Mitch. However, John is under the impression that
Mindy is too lenient. This suggests that
he is either the disciplinarian or completely refrains from disciplining the
children leaving the responsibility to his spouse. This promotes negative interaction between
the couple as they argue about role expectations. Additionally, their avoidance of one another
and the family’s distressful issues is another form of negative interaction.
Now, as
the practitioner analyzes the case utilizing SFT, he or she must keep in mind
that the goal is to restructure or shift the organizational framework of the
family in effort to relieve their problems (Nichols, 2010). As the assessment occurs, the practitioner
will join the family in a leadership role in order to establish an alliance
with each family member and promote an environment in which the family may interact
through a series of enactments in which the practitioner may observe their
communication firsthand. In such
instances, “the therapist may elicit an enactment either for the sake of
assessment or as an intervention” (Simon, 1995). Each family
member’s input is required as the practitioner pinpoints prevalent and
underlying issues. Furthermore, as the
practitioner identifies the primary issue, he or she must examine the family’s
response to it (Nichols, 2010). In this
case, the foremost concern is the relation between John and Mindy. Their communication and behavioral patterns
must improve in order for their children to conduct themselves
accordingly. The children are quite young
and impressionable, consequently mirroring their parents’ actions and increasingly
acting out.
In
effort to modify family structure, the practitioner must implement various
strategies. These include structural
mapping, highlighting and modifying interactions, boundary making, unbalancing,
and challenging unproductive assumptions (Nichols, 2010). First, the practitioner may employ structural
mapping by ascertaining the desired family structure as issues are
addressed. Second, highlighting and
modifying interactions may be achieved by pinpointing the circular causality of
the parents’ negative behavioral patterns which perpetuate the children’s poor
conduct. It should be duly noted that
transformation “seems to occur when dysfunctional sequences are disrupted
through a change in behavior or perceptions” (Fish & Piercy, 1987). Thus, the practitioner may begin to alter the
family’s communication and demeanor through the use of intense and direct
dialogue. Third, boundaries must be
set. Again, addressing the rules of the
household and the imperativeness of authoritative respect are vital for the
children to understand and comply with.
Next, unbalancing is a necessary component of the relations between John
and Mindy in particular. The
practitioner should initially side with John and reiterate the fact that Mindy
should not avoid him, yet display attention and affection instead. Then the practitioner should side with Mindy
and express that John should refrain from drinking heavily, become more
involved with the children, actively seek employment, and work on improving his
patience. Finally, the practitioner must
defy unproductive assumptions by rephrasing statements and reestablishing role
expectations which are evident to each party.
In conclusion, considering
John and Mindy’s familial issues, SFT would serve as an advantageous
method. This process would enable the
practitioner to effectively assess the situation and assist them in achieving
positive results beneficial to each member of the family.
References:
Fish, L.S. & Piercy, F.P.
(1987). The theory and practice of structural and strategic family
therapies.
Journal of Marital & Family Therapy,
13(2), 113-125.
Nichols, M. P. (2010). Family
therapy: Concepts and methods (9th ed.). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
Bacon.
Simon, G.M. (1995). A revisionist
rendering of structural family therapy. Journal
of Marital &
Family Therapy, 21(1), 17-26.
No comments:
Post a Comment