COLLABORATIVE THERAPY Sylvia London with Reflection by Harlene Anderson The basic principles of collaborative language systems are

summarized elsewhere (citation); here I (London) will present one image of how they might appear in practice. During the initial phone call with Mary, we talked about who would be important for her to include in the first meeting and why. As Mary talked, she indicated that she was struggling with a number of issues, some of them included her husband, others her mother and most of them her son Johnny. As a therapist I do not know which issue will be the most important for the client to choose as the topic for our first meeting; it is important for me that the client has the freedom to choose who she wants to invite to the first meeting, who the important participants in the conversation are. I do not assume that the family needs therapy, that therapy is the best way to address their particular problem, of that I am the best fit for the family First meeting To help the reader to experience a sample of a possible conversation between a collaborative therapist and Mary, I will present a made up conversation. Please keep in mind that this is only one of the possible conversations that could have happened between Mary and me. Ill pretend that Mary said wasnt sure if she would come to the session alone or if Johnys father or all three of them would come. I am prepared to meet with whoever comes and trusts that Mary and the family know what is best. Mary arrives to the session alone. After greeting her and having small conversation to help us feel comfortable in this first encounter, I might tell her: In our phone

conversation you were worried about a number of issues and did not know which was the best way to begin to talk about them, then you decided to come to this first session alone, do you mind telling me how did you make that decision? Mary: After our conversation I decided there were some ideas I had to clarify for myself before inviting Fred and Johny who were not very eager or happy to come here, I thought it will be easier to come by myself. I might ask her: What do you think will be important for me to know regarding your family in order to be able to help you think about your situation (As a collaborative therapist I see myself as a visitor in my clients life, the client is the one who decides what is important for him or her to share in the session, At the same time the client is a guest in my office and my responsibility as a therapist is to create a space where the client feels safe and free to talk about what it is important for them. I see my work as a professional who creates the kind of conversations and relationships that invites all the participants (clients and therapist) to access their creativity and develop possibilities where none seem to exist before). Mary said she had specific questions regarding therapy and how helpful therapy could be in a situation like the one they were living in her house. She was worried about Johny and she shared those worries with her mother, who agreed with her. On the other hand, she did not think her husband was as worried about Johnny as she was and she had been experiencing severe headaches. She wanted to sort out by herself the best option before she invited her husband to join in. She did not know what to do about Johnny and was not sure he would agree to come. At this point in the conversation I did not know where Mary wanted to go or how she wanted to use the time. We had been talking about three topics and I asked her: So far, we have been talking about your worries regarding

Johny, your roles and differences as parents and your headaches, which one of these subjects would you like to continue to address?(Following a collaborative philosophical stance I do not know what is important for the client to talk about and I ask them to make sure we are using the session the way the client wants to use it and we are talking about the issues that are important for the client).Mary tells me she is confused and that she thinks the three issues are related to each other and she does not know how to proceed, she is very worried about Johnny, but she also feels stuck in her conversations with Fred regarding their ideas about the best way to parent Johnny now that he is a teenager. She is not sure if Johnny has a problem or the problem is related to the difference they are encountering; some days she believes Johny will get into a lot of trouble and some other days she thinks that she might be exaggerating and the only thing they need to do as parents is to be firm and set limits, but she is not sure how to do it. She thinks Fred might be too strict and she is afraid he might hurt Johnnys feelings. I found Marys description of the situation somewhat confusing; I was interested in knowing some more about Freds and Johnys position regarding the situation and I asked her. Mary said that she thinks Fred might that say she is exaggerating that there is nothing wrong with Johnny, he is just being a typical teenager that needs limits and that we as parents are having a hard time and are afraid to set limits on him. She goes on to say: He would say we do not need to be wasting our time in therapy talking about something that is very simple to solve by just punishing the boy and that he will learn right from wrong if there are consequences to his behavior. He might also add that I am making everything complicated by my fears of losing Johnny and the fights that are happening between us because we cannot agree

Mary, when you listen to yourself talk from Freds perspective what do you hear? I hear that he has some clarity I do not have and I hate to acknowledge it, but on the other hand I am afraid that by punishing Johnny he will resent us and move away from us, or that he might become even more rebelliousso Fred could be right and have good intentions in the way he would like to parent Johnny, but I am afraid and do not know what is the best thing to do in a situation like this?At this point I am curious to know more about the relationship and the interactions between Mary and Fred when they try to discipline Johnny. The curiosity comes from Marys description and questions about what to do and I ask her: What do you tell Fred?

I usually try to stop him from setting limits because I am afraid he will be too harsh on
Johnny What happens to Fred when you stop him? He gets very angry at me; we end up arguing and fighting instead of being able to talk about our differences. And Johnny? Johnny goes to his room or leaves the house; he hates to see us fighting. I am thinking that it might be a good idea to invite Fred to join me in a conversation here with you; you might help us have a different kind of conversation. This could be more useful to us than bringing Johnny to therapy. During the conversation Mary thinks about the kind of conversation that could be more useful for her in the situation and together we can look at the next possible step. I ask her: What makes you think that inviting Fred to the conversation can be useful?

The kinds of questions you have asked me today have helped me think about the differences between us; my confusion and his clarity. I realize we have only been arguing about our differences and not discussing them maybe that is what we need to do. Do you think you can have that conversation at home? I am not sure, I am afraid that I will go back to blame him for being too harsh Do you think he will accept the invitation to come to a therapy session? How would you invite him? Fred knows I came today to see you, he did not want to come but he had no problem with me coming. I can talk with him about what happened in the session and tell him I thought it would be a good idea to come together. I really think it would be important for us to talk about our different styles. So, the next step would be to invite Fred Yes Opening possibilities: This pretend session and dialogue helps me illustrate one of the possible conversations Mary and I could have given the number of issues she was interested in talking about. From a collaborative perspective I try to be respectful of the topics the clients chooses and at the same time allow space for my questions as a way to express my curiosities that help me learn more about the client and their situation and at the same time might help the client listen to his or her own story in a different way. In this particular situation the conversation helped Mary look at Freds parenting style from a different

perspective. This new understanding might create the possibilities for a different kind of conversation between them. The conversation itself evolved to the idea of inviting Fred. Harlene Andersons Reflections How can our practices have relevance for peoples everyday lives in our fast changing world, what is this relevance, and who determines it? is a persistent question for me in my work with clients whether in a therapy room, classroom or boardroom. My response to this question has evolved over the years through a reflexive process of theory and practice. My current work, referred to as Collaborative Practice, is one among similar therapy approaches referred to as conversational, dialogue, open dialogue, reflecting and postmodern therapies - all largely based in the ideas of philosophers such as Bakhtin and Wittgenstein about language and dialogue. Distinctive to Collaborative Practice is the philosophical stance and its principles, which serve as action-orienting sensitivities (Anderson, 2011) for the therapist. This suggests that Collaborative Practice is not an approach populated by techniques and strategies but is informed by a way of being with another. As Lynn Hoffman and John Shotter suggest, it is a withness rather than an aboutness approach to practice. Sylvias hypothetical and pretend phone call and first session illustrate one way that a collaborative therapist prepares and meets with their clients in a manner characterized by a natural and spontaneous way of responding in the moment rather than being guided by, for instance, formulaic pre-structured steps and questions. Preparing and meeting refers to being poised to respond in the moment. Her responses stay respectfully close to the mothers utterances, eliciting and honoring the mothers expertise on her situation and its

unique needs. Sylvia connects and constructs with the mother through engagement with her in a collaborative relationship and dialogic conversation, referring to the metaphorical space and the polyphonic process in which transformation is generated. In other words, transformation occurs in the dynamics of the relationship and the conversation. The direction of the conversations, and the newness in meanings, understandings and actions that come to be cannot be pre-determined ahead of time. References Anderson, H. (2011). The philosophical stance: The heart and spirit of collaborative practice. Plenary paper presented at the World Psychotherapy Congress, August 26, 2011, Sydney, Australia. Anderson, H. (1997). Conversation, language and possibilities: A Postmodern approach to psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books. Anderson, H. & Gehart, D. (2007). Collaborative Therapy: Relationships and Conversations that make a Difference. New York: Routledge. Anderson, H. & Goolishian, H. A. (1988). Human systems as linguistic systems. Preliminary and evolving ideas about the implications for clinical theory. Family Process. 27(4): 371-393. www.harleneanderson.org www.talkhgi.org www.collaborative-practices.com www.collaborativecertificate.org