Null

u05a1-Interview Project-COUN5220-Sec.7-Intro.
to Marriage and Family Therapy- (Andre Judice)-

Nichole Oster-Feb.14th, 2010
Google Doc-(https://docs.google.com/Doc?
id=dqkfptf_493ddv3qqhm&btr=EmailImport) (http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dqkfptf_4924v66x8dv)
or published
at http://docs.google.com/View?id=dqkfptf_4924v66x8dv
o SEE PUBLISHED POST AT:
Project Content
The following written components of the project should be delivered in one final paper, due in Unit 5.
Questions for the Interview:
1.
Provide the set of interview questions that you developed.
2. Explain your rationale for your choice of each question. Include all 12–16 questions
o (6–8 questions based on an individual linear perspective, and 6–8 questions based on a
systemic perspective).
Reflection Paper:
1. Write a 4–5 page paper reflecting on the interview process and experience.
o Articulate the themes and content that emerged with each set of questions you asked (both
linear and systemic).
2. Compare and contrast the themes and content that emerged from both the linear questions and
systemic questions.
3. Reflect on your role in the interview process by responding to the following questions:
• How was taking a stance as an observer for the linear questions different from taking the
stance of an observer-participant for the systemic questions?
• How did each approach (the two different sets of questions) influence the kind of
relationship you developed with the interviewee?
o What other differences did you notice resulting from each approach?
• Were you aware of the influence of multicultural or diversity issues regarding race, gender,
ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or other considerations?
• Assess your ability to be curious. How did the curious stance influence the interview?
• Describe what you did in the interview that you liked, and what you would like to have
done differently.
• Comment on what you learned through this project about yourself and the therapy
profession.
o How might your experience with this project inform your professional work?
Project Requirements
To achieve a successful project experience and outcome, you are expected to meet the following
requirements.
• Research and references:
o Include at least 2 references in your reflection paper analysis, to support your

statements or reasoning.
(References from materials studied in this course are appropriate sources.)
• Formatting: Use APA, 5th edition formatting, including:
o Correct in-text citations.

o Proper punctuation.
o Double-spacing throughout.
o Proper headings and subheadings.
o No skipped lines before headings and subheadings.
o Proper paragraph and block indentation.
o No bolding.
o No bullets.
Refer to the APA Style and Formatting module in Capella’s Online Writing Center on iGuide
for more information.
Written communication: Establish precise written communication that focuses on the

specific goals of the course project.
1. Include a set of linear and a set of systemic questions, and demonstrates a strong
understanding of both concepts. (3 points)
2. Describe the themes and content that emerged with each set of questions, both linear and
systemic. (3 points)
3. Compare and contrast the themes and content that emerged from the linear questions and
systemic questions. (3 points)
4. Reflect on own role as the interviewer in the process. (3 points)
u05a1-Interview Project-COUN5220-Sec.7-Interview Questions for Lashon Jenkin

Download the original attachment
Linear questions:
1. What specifically makes you feel like you are not appreciated at work?
Often, there are times where I don’t feel appreciated by my agency. Their focus most of the time is on
the numbers and procedures and they are not sensitive to the needs of the employees. In other times, the
agency will try to show the employees how much they are appreciated by planning mini treats which
consist of a day doing something other than working (during working hours) with co-workers. The
agency will also plan an Employee Appreciation Week for the entire company. The celebration starts
on a Monday and runs through Friday. Each day is a different theme for fun to show the employees
how valuable they are to the agency and the families they serve. This time only occur once a year and
this is why the appreciation is not felt during the other times of the year. As a seasoned worker in this
field, I consistently focus on why I choose this field and how the families (most of them) are helped
because of what I do. This gives me some feeling of appreciation from a different a source.
2. When you think about the possibility of changing careers, what thoughts come to mind? On your
way to work, what feelings do you experience or thoughts do you have?
The interviewee has been thinking about this for several months now. Thoughts about changing careers
are very exciting. The interviewee realized that changing careers would provide new and challenging
experiences. The interviewee feels that she is at point in her life that change will provide growth in
what she loves doing most which is helping people. Another thought that come to mind is how
changing careers could be better for her family. Before entering into the field of service services, the
interviewee wanted to became a counselor. As a single parent the interviewee feels that she could have
more flexibility to ensure that she could provide more time with her family.
As the interviewee travels to work, there are many thoughts running through her mind. Many of them
are a list (often very long) of tasks that need to be completed that day with a goal of completion.
Sometime thinking about that list of tasks could be “overwhelming”. Many of those daily tasks are time
sensitive with deadlines. Meeting those deadlines often comes with a stressful feeling. But, for the most
part the interviewee’s day starts off with positive feelings until that list of daily tasks starts to fall
apart.
3. How do you feel when you wake up in the morning on a day in which you go to work?
The interviewee loves what she does. In the morning her feelings are positive about helping and
making a change in someone’s life. However, her day can’t start until she has some Starbucks coffee.
This helps to provide an alert feeling. There are not many days where the interviewee doesn’t feel like
going to work. Her attendance is good and rarely is she out sick. There are some occasions when she
goes into her office while she is on vacation because she needs to complete a task that could not wait
until she return.
4. How does this differ from days in which you are not required to go to work?
Like mentioned before, the interviewee has to learn how to enjoy vacation time off and not think about
work. The interviewee sometimes is unable to take full advantage of her vacation because she worries
about the things that need to be completed. She worries about the fact that the families whom she
works with would not be able to reach her when she is out of the office on vacation. The interviewee
has feeling of obligation to the families she serves and some sense of possessiveness about her case
load. The interviewee had to learn how to “leave the office at the office” and enjoy time off away from
the office. She learned that it required discipline.
5. In what way do you derive satisfaction from doing your job well?
This job comes with many challenges and doing well if often a challenge in itself. The satisfaction that
comes from doing this job is the knowledge that the services and help provided made a difference. For
example, the interviewee feels satisfied when the family she helped is able to successfully complete all
the requirements of their case to regain custody of their children.
6. What types of relationships do you have with your co-workers?
There are many co-workers that the interviewee has close friendships with and some who are friends
outside of the office. The interviewee feels that for those co-workers who she has worked with for
several years, they are like extended family members. Working with the same people for many years
you start to share certain life events, such as, weddings, births, and even death of family members.
Many of these events bring us closer together as co-workers. When we look at it most of our day is
spent with co-workers.
7. How do you feel your boss values the work that you do, and how much respect does your boss have
for the work that he or she does?
The interviewee feels that she has a good relationship with her immediate supervisor. She and her
supervisor start at the company around the same time. They have experienced the many changes within
agency and supported each other through those changes. The interviewee feels that her supervisor and
others in higher positions values the work she does. However, the interviewee sometimes feel the other
in higher positions don’t show enough concern about individual feels when they struggle with their job.
Some co-workers often feel that they are “disposable” and the agency could quickly replace them.
The interviewee has a tremendous respect for those in higher positions, including her supervisor.
However, the interviewee is very critical of the supervisor’s expertise. The interviewee feels that those
in higher positions should possess qualities greater than her. Those in higher position should be able to
assist in the professional growth of those in positions that they oversee. The interviewee have not
allows had a respect those who did not appear to the ability to guide others when they were in a
supervisory position. For example, the interviewee had an incident with a prior supervisor where she
disrespected her in the presence of other co-workers. The interviewee did not feel that the supervisor
know all of the facts of particular situations. Therefore, she disrespectfully corrected. That incident
was a teaching lesson for her. She felt really bad about the behavior she displayed and apologized to
the supervisor. She realized that she still needed to respect her position as a supervisor even though she
disagreed with her. She also learned that she does not comply well with change because this was new
supervisor to her at the time.
8. For what length of time have you felt this way about your job? Do you recall when these feelings
began or what events triggered them?
No. As things changed with the agency so will her feeling about the work she does. The interviewee
feels that she would always want to help people. The level of frustration about the best way to help her
families changed over time. As the years went by, her feeling for the people she helped grew deeper.
The family became the main focus and not the system. The system could be so overbearing sometimes
that your loss focus of the family’s needs. For example, the interviewee’s job consists of a lot of paper
work. This paper work includes reports to the courts, case plans, assessments, referrals for services, and
case documentation. All these things are required by the agency and; therefore, take away from
spending time and developing a better relationship with the families being served.
9. In what way has your job lived up to your expectations (are you doing what you thought you would
be doing)?
Not at this time. Mainly for the reasons stated before. The agency is always trying to find new ways to
provide better service to the families in the system. For example, the CEO of the agency developed a
new program to concentrate on providing services to families before their issues turn into an abusive
situation. His vision is to have more case managers providing this level of intervention and not have
many cases that require the courts intervention. The interviewee feels that there are more families
needing court intervention than those who don’t because most abusive behaviors are learned. The
interviewee feels that the intervention starts at birth for many. The interviewee understands his vision
and thinks it is a good one, but feels that this sort of intervention would take several years in the
making to live up to what is expected.
10. How do you feel you are compensated for the work that you do?
Often there is time when the interviewee feels under paid for amount of time and work put into making
sure that her job is done. The job is a salary position, but the hours worked are far more that the
standard work week.
THEMES AND CONTENT EMERGING FROM THE LINEAR QUESTIONS:
Systems Theory questions:
1. What is your boss like; can you describe him or her?
The interviewee’s boss is very passive and likes to please everyone. She often has a difficult time being
stern. She is very committed to the work she does and she too like helping others.
2. What is the dynamic like between you and your current boss?
The interviewee gets alone with her supervisor very well. They each have a mutual respect for each
other.
3. What is the overall environment like at your place of your employment?
The interviewee’s office building consists of several different programs. These programs provide
different services to the children and their families depending on their need or the reason the agency
became involved with them. Some of the programs are adoption specialists, case management, data
support, and prevention programs. The office environment is usually up beat and everyone gets alone
with each other.
4. Can you provide me with a brief description of your workplace?
The building is made up of several cubicles and some offices. The offices are for the supervisors and
the case managers have cubicles. There are several conference rooms in the building for staffing and
meetings.
5. What is the dynamic like between employees at your workplace?
Due to different personality types there is sometimes tension between employees. There are some times
when new workers entering into this field and not fully understand what it involves. This could cause
tension when they don’t respond well to their job. For example, many workers complain about the
amount of time they find themselves working during any given work week. The supervisory staff is not
always sensitive to their concerns; they just want the work completed in a timely manner. The tension
could be mostly seen between staff form the corporate office and the case managers.
6. What sort of tension or hostility that you have towards work spills over into your home life?
There are times when the frustration from work takes away from the interaction with family members.
The interviewee is a single parent of a little boy. He is very active and loves to go. The stress and
frustration from the job makes the interviewee exhausted physically and mentally.
7. Who or what in particular adds to these difficulties you are currently experiencing at work? (i.e. is
there any particular person you work with or client that makes your life particularly difficult)?
I would say that it is mainly the clients I work with that make my life difficult. There are some clients
that make my ability to provide effective case management difficult. They are the clients who feel that
the agency is harassing them and nothing is wrong. They refused to corporate with service providers
and they give the case managers a hard time. They compliant about everything, but yet want others
(and other agency programs) to take care of them.
THEMES AND CONTENT EMERGING FROM THE SYSTEMIC QUESTIONS:
COMPARE AND CONTRAST LINEAR AND SYSTEMIC THEMES THAT EMERGED:

REFLECT ON YOUR ROLE IN THE INTERVIEW PROCESS:
• How was taking a stance as an observer for the linear questions different from taking the
stance of an observer-participant for the systemic questions?
• How did each approach (the two different sets of questions) influence the kind of
relationship you developed with the interviewee?
o What other differences did you notice resulting from each approach?
• Were you aware of the influence of multicultural or diversity issues regarding race, gender,
ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or other considerations?
• Assess your ability to be curious. How did the curious stance influence the interview?
• Describe what you did in the interview that you liked, and what you would like to have
done differently.
• Comment on what you learned through this project about yourself and the therapy
profession.
o How might your experience with this project inform your professional work?
Course Materials -COUN5220-Sec.7-Intro.to Marriage and Family Therapy- (Andre Judice)-[1/11-

3/19/2010]
Course Materials
Required
The materials listed below are required to complete the learning activities in this course. Unless noted
otherwise, the materials are available for purchase from the Capella University Virtual Bookstore. To
purchase these materials, visit the bookstore and select your school and course ID.
Books
Becvar, D. S., & Becvar, R. J. (2009). Family therapy: A systemic integration (7th ed.). Boston:
Pearson, Allyn, and Bacon. ISBN: 9780205609239.
Rambo, A. H., Heath, A. W., & Chenail, R. J. (1993). Practicing therapy: Exercises for
growing therapists. New York: W. W. Norton.
Coursepack
These required readings are in a coursepack available for purchase from the bookstore. Within 24 hours
of purchasing your coursepack, MBS Direct, the bookstore’s online partner, will send you an e-mail
that contains an access code and instructions for downloading these articles. In some cases, you will
receive a hard copy of the articles.
Anderson, H. (1994). Rethinking family therapy: A delicate balance. Journal of Marital and
Family Therapy, 20, 145–149.
Fleuridas, C., Nelson, T., & Rosenthal, D. (1986). The evolution of circular questions: Training
family therapists. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy, 12, 113–127.
Hoffman, L. (1990). Constructing reality: An art of lenses. Family Process, 29, 1–12.
Scheflen, A. E. (1978). Susan smiled: On explanation in family therapy. Family Process, 17,
59–68.
Tomm, K. (1987). Interventive interviewing: Part II. Reflexive questioning as means to enable
self-healing. Family Process, 26, 167–183.
Tomm, K. (1988). Interventive interviewing: Part III. Intending to ask lineal, circular, strategic
or reflexive questions. Family Process, 27, 1–15.
Articles
Library
The following required readings are provided for you in the Capella University Library. Ask a
Librarian for assistance with any of these resources.
Becvar, R. J., & Becvar, D. S. (1994). The ecosystemic story: A story about stories. Journal of
Mental Health Counseling, 16(1), 22–32.
Carlson, T. D., & Erickson, M. J. (2001). Honoring and privileging personal experience and
knowledge: Ideas for a narrative therapy approach to the training and supervision of new
therapists.
Contemporary Family Therapy, 23(2), 199–220.
Cheon, H. S., & Murphy, M. J. (2007). The self-of-the-therapist awakened: Postmodern

approaches to the use of self in marriage and family therapy. Journal of Feminist Family
Therapy, 19(1), 1–
17.
Chinman, M. J., Allende, M., Weingarten, R., Steiner, J., Tworkowski, S., & Davidson, L.
(1999). On the road to collaborative treatment planning: Consumer and
provider perspectives.Journal of
Behavioral Health Services & Research, 26(2), 211–218.
Hawley, D. R. (2000). Clinical implications of family resilience. The American Journal of

Family Therapy, 28(2), 101–116.
Miller, S. D., & Duncan, B. L. (2000). Paradigm lost: From model-driven to client-directed
outcome informed clinical work. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 19(1), 20–34.
Rober, P. (2005). Family therapy as a dialogue of living persons: A perspective inspired

by Bakhtin, Voloshinov, and Shouter. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31(4), 385–397.
Singh, R., & Clarke, G. (2006). Power and parenting assessments: The intersecting levels of
culture, race, class and gender. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 11, 9–25.
Sprenkle, D. H., & Blow, A. J. (2004). Common factors and our sacred models. Journal of
Marital and Family Therapy, 30(2), 113–129.
Web Sites
Please note that URLs change frequently. While the URLs were current when this course was designed,
some may no longer be valid. If you cannot access a specific link, contact your instructor for an
alternative URL. Permissions for the following links have been either granted or deemed appropriate
for educational use at the time of course publication.
American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT). (2002). American
Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. Retrieved April 16, 2009, from
http://www.aamft.org/
American Counseling Association (ACA). (2009). American Counseling

Association. Retrieved April 16, 2009, from http://www.counseling.org/
IAMFC. (2002). International Association of Marriage and Family Counselors. Retrieved April
16, 2009, from http://www.iamfc.com/
Audiovisual Media
Chadha, G. (Producer/Director). (2003). Bend it like Beckham [Motion picture]. Great Britain:
20th Century Fox.
Optional
The following optional materials are offered to provide you with a better understanding of the topics in
this course. These materials are not required to complete the course.
Optional Books
Use ebrary and netLibrary to see if the library has access to the full text of a book. If the full text is not
available, try using Interlibrary Loan to obtain a copy. You will receive interlibrary loan books in 7–10
business days. Ask a Librarian for assistance.
Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.
Bronowski, J. (1978). The origins of knowledge and imagination. New

Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Fisch, R., Weakland, J. H., & Segal, L. (1982). The tactics of change: Doing therapy
briefly. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings. New York:
Pantheon Books.
Gergen, K. (1999). An invitation to social construction. London: Sage.
von Foerster, H. (1981). Observing system. Seaside, CA: Intersystems.
Watts, A. (1972). The book. New York: Vintage.
Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J., & Fisch, R. (1974). Change: Principles of problem formation
and problem resolution. New York: Norton.
White, M. (1997). Narratives of therapists' lives. Adelaide, Australia: Dulwich Centre
Publications.
Optional Articles
Library
Use Journal Locator to see if the library has access to the full text of an article. If the full text is not
available, try using Interlibrary Loan to obtain a copy. You will receive interlibrary loan articles in 3–5
business days. Ask a Librarian for assistance.
Becvar, R. J., Becvar, D. S., & Bender, A. (1982). Let us first do no harm. Journal of Marital
and Family Therapy, 8, 385–391.
Bograd, M. (1992). Values in conflict: Challenges to family therapists' thinking. Journal of

Marital and Family Therapy, 18, 245–256.
Carlson, T. D., & Erickson, M. J. (1999). Re-capturing the person in the therapist: An
exploration of personal values, commitments, and beliefs. Contemporary Family Therapy, 21,
57–76.
Hayes, H. (1990). Marital therapy—The therapist. Australian and New Zealand Journal
of Family Therapy, 11(2), 96–103.
Penn, P., & Frankfurt, M. (1994). Creating a participant text: Writing, multiple voices, narrative
multiplicity. Family Process, 33, 217–231.
Shotter, J. (2000). From within our lives together: Wittgenstein, Bakhtin, and Voloshinov and
the shift to a participatory stance in understanding understanding. In L. Holzman &
J. Morss (Eds.),
Postmodern psychologies, societal practice, and political life (pp. 100–

129). London: Routledge.
Thomas, V. (1994). Value analysis: A model of personal and professional ethics in marriage
and family counseling. Counseling and Values, 38, 193–204.
White, M. (1988). The process of questioning: A therapy of literary

merit. Dulwich Center Publications, 8–14.
Wong, Y. (2006). Strength-centered therapy: A social constructionist, virtues-based

psychotherapy. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 43(2), 133–146.
Internet
This optional article is available on the Internet. Please note that URLs change frequently. While the
URLs were current when this course was designed, some may no longer be valid. If you cannot access
a specific link, contact your instructor for an alternative URL. Permissions for the following links have
been either granted or deemed appropriate for educational use at the time of course publication.
Brown, J. (1997). Circular questioning: An introductory guide. Australian and New

Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 18(2), 109–114. Retrieved April 21, 2009,
from http://www.anzjft.com/pages/articles/940.pdf
Other Miscellaneous References:
SEE COURSE OUTLINE, SYLLABUS and LEARNER UNITS FOR COUN5220 AT:
Course Outline, Syllabus and Learner Units/Expectations: COUN5220-Sec.7-Intro.to Marriage and

Family Therapy- (Andre Judice)-Nichole Oster-Feb.14th, 2010--
(Google Doc) http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dqkfptf_494hcpxt4d8
OR:
COUN5220-Sec.7-INTRO TO MARRIAGE & FAMILY THERAPY-ANDRE JUDICE-(1/11-

3/19/10)-SYLLABUS-LEARNER UNITS-FACULTY EXPECTATIONS-File: Course Outline-
(HTML-WEBPAGE VIEW_):
file:///C:/Users/Nichole/Documents/COUN5220-INRO%20TO%20FAMILY%20THERAPY-ANDRE
%20JUDICE-(1.11-3.19.10)/COUN5220-Intro%20to%20MFT-Syllabus,%20Learner%20Units%20&
%20Exp-UPDATED!~.htm
Other Miscellaneous References:

References:
Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bavelas, J. B., McGee, D., Philips, B., & Routledge, R. (2000). Microanalysis of communication on
psychotherapy. Human Systems: The Journal of Systemic
Consultation & Management, 11(1), 47-66.
Berg, I. K., & De Jong, P. (1996). Solution-building conversations: Co-constructing a sense of
competence with clients. Families in Society, 77(6), 376-392.
Chenail, R. J. (1990/1991). Bradford Keeney’s cybernetic project and the creation of recursive frame
analysis. The Qualitative Report, 1(2&3). Retrieved May 12,
2006, from http://www.nova.edu./sss/QR/QR1-23/Keeney.html
Chenail, R. J. (1995). Recursive frame analysis. The Qualitative Report, 2(2). Retrieved May 12, 2006,
from http://www.nova.edu/sss/QR/QR1-2/rfa.html
Chenail, R. J., & Duffy, M. (2009). Utilizing Microsoft® Office to produce and present recursive frame
analysis findings. The Weekly Qualitative Report, 2(20), 117-
132. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/WQR/rfa.pdf
Corcoran, J. (2003). Clinical applications of evidence-based family interventions. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Corcoran, J., & Stephenson, M. (2000). The effectiveness of solution-focused therapy with child
behavior problems: A preliminary report. Families in Society, 81(5),
468-475.
De Jong, P., & Berg, I. K. (2002). Interviewing for solutions. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
de Shazer, S., Berg, I. K., Lipchik, E., Nunnally, E., Molnar, A., Gingerich, W., et al.(1986). Brief
therapy: Focused solution development. Family Process, 25, 207-
222.
de Shazer, S., Dolan, Y., Korman, H., Trepper, T., McCollum, E., & Berg, I. K. (2007). More than
miracles: The state of the art of solution-focused brief
therapy. New York: The Haworth Press.
Gale, J., & Newfield, N. (1992). A conversation analysis of a solution-focused marital therapy
session. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 18(2), 153-165.
Gingerich, W. J., & Eisengart, S. (2000). Solution-focused brief therapy: A review of the
outcome research. Family Process, 39(4), 477-498.
Keeney, B. P. (1990). Improvisational therapy: A practical guide for creative clinical strategies. New
York: The Guilford Press.
Lipchik, E. (2002). Beyond technique in solution-focused therapy. New York: The Guilford Press.
McGee, D., Del Vento, A., & Bavelas, J. B. (2005). An interactional model of questions as therapeutic
interventions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 31(4),
371-384.
Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2003). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stalker, C. A., Levene, J. E., & Coady, N. F. (1999). Solution-focused brief therapy: One model fits
all? Families in Society:
The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 80(5), 468-477.

Tomori, C., & Bavelas, J. B. (2007). Using microanalysis of communication to compare solution-
focused and client-centered therapies. Journal of Family
Psychotherapy, 18(3), 25-43.
Trepper, S. T., Dolan, Y., McCollum E. E., & Nelson, T. (2006). Steve de Shazer and the future of
solution-focused therapy. Journal of Marital and Family
Therapy, 32(2), 133-139.
Author Note
Jeffrey Cotton, MS, LMFT, LMHC, is a PhD Candidate in the Family Therapy program at Nova
Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. Mr. Cotton works at
Hollywood Pavilion’s Intensive Outpatient Program.
The author would like to thank Dr. Ron Chenail, Dr. Lisa C. Palmer, and the late Insoo Kim Berg for
their inspiration and collaboration on this research project.
Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Jeffrey
Cotton (http://www.cotton5150.com), E-mail: cotton5150@aol.com
Copyright 2010: Jeffery Cotton and Nova Southeastern University
Article Citation
Cotton, J. (2010). Question utilization in solution-focused brief therapy: A recursive frame
analysis of Insoo Kim Berg’s solution talk. The Qualitative Report, 15(1), 18-36.
Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR15-1/cotton.pd
REFERENCES
Wright, Lorraine M "Calgary Family Intervention Model: One way to think about change". Journal of
Marital and Family Therapy. FindArticles.com. 14 Feb,
2010. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3658/is_199410/ai_n8725421/
* Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.

* de Shazer, S. (1988). Clues: Investigating solutions in brief therapy. New York: W. W. Norton.
* Fleuridas, C., Nelson, T., & Rosenthal, D. ( 1986). The evolution of circular questions: Training
family therapists. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12, 113-
127.
* Keeney, B. (1982). What is an epistemology of family therapy? Family Process, 21, 153-168.
* Lipchik, E., & de Shazer, S. (1986). The purposeful interview. Journal of Strategic and Systemic
Therapies, 5, 88-89.
* Loos, F., & Bell, J. M. (1990). Circular questions: A family interviewing strategy. Dimensions of
Critical Care Nursing, 9(1), 46-53.
* Maturana, H. (1988). Reality: The search for objectivity or the quest for a compelling argument. The
Irish Journal of Psychology, 6(1), 25-83.
* Selvini-Palazzoli, M., Boscolo, L., Cecchin, G., & Prata, G. (1978). A ritualized prescription in
family therapy: Odd days and even days. Journal of Marriage and
Family Counseling, 4(3), 3-9.
* Selvini-Palazzoli, M., Boscolo, L., Cecchin, G., & Prata, G. (1980). Hypothesizing-circularity-
neutrality: Three guidelines for the conductor of the session. Family
Process, 19, 3-12.
* Tomm, K. (1984). One perspective on the Milan systemic approach: Part II. Description of session
format, interviewing style and interventions. Journal of Marital and
Family Therapy, 10, 253-271.
* Tomm, K. (1985). Circular interviewing: A multifaceted clinical tool. In D. Campbell & R. Draper
(Eds.), Applications of systemic family therapy: The Milan
approach (pp. 33-45). London: Grune & Stratton.
* Tomm, K. (1987). Interventive interviewing: Part II. Reflexive questioning as a means to enable self-
healing. Family Process, 26, 167-183.
* Tomm, K. (1988). Interventive interviewing -- Part III. Intending to ask lineal, circular, strategic, or
reflexive questions? Family Process, 27, 1-15.
* Tomm, K. (1989). Externalizing the problem and internalizing personal agency. Journal of Strategic
and Systemic Therapies, 1(1), 54-59.
* White, M. (1986). Negative explanation, restraint and double description: A template for family
therapy. Family Process, 25, 160-184.
* White, M. (1988-1989). The externalizing of the problem and the re-authoring of lives and
relationships. Dulwich Centre Newsletter, 3-21.
* White, M. (1988). The process of questioning: A therapy of literary merit. Dulwich Centre
Newsletter, 8-14.
* White, M., & Epston, D. (1989). Literate means to therapeutic ends. Adelaide, South Australia:
Dulwich Centre Publications.
* Wright, L. M., & Watson, W. L. (1988). Systemic family therapy and family development. In C. J.
Falicov (Ed.), Family transitions: Continuity and change over the
life cycle (pp. 407-430). New York: Guilford.
References:
COUN5220-ASSIGNMENT-u05a1-Google Doc-http://docs.google.com/Doc?
docid=0AWK4511jK8f5ZHFrZnB0Zl80ODJmand2dmh0OA&hl=en
Interview Responses from Lashon Jenkins: assignment unit 5.doc-

https://mail.google.com/mail/?
ui=2&ik=807e355980&view=att&th=126c94b7b9acc849&attid=0.1&disp=vah&zw
Assignment unit 5.doc-

Webpage Preview via Gmail Message: (https://mail.google.com/mail/?

ui=2&ik=807e355980&view=att&th=126c94b7b9acc849&attid=0.1&disp=vah&zw)
NOTES AND REFERENCES:
Lashon’s feedback, in response to Berg’s systemic questions, entails what needs to
be different for her thus establishing reciprocity of solution talk. A few of the many
exemplars of Robin’s feedback based upon the notion of what needs to be different are
listed below:
(002) Probably, um, helping me realize that, you know, a lot of things that, that go on are just normal
everyday life.
Um, you know, that, that I'm no different than anybody else. My experiences are all the same.
(006) It gives me piece of mind.
(014) I’d be much more calm.
(050) He'd say that nothing gets to me. He'd be surprised that nothing gets to me.
Berg’s SFBT questions of difference allow for the understanding of the contextual
nature of how the questions themselves serve as interventions for the client within
specific moment of therapy talk and create a context for change (McGee et al., 2005). The
outcome of Berg’s questions of difference entails what would be helpful for Robin as
noted by the galleries. In addition, Wing 1 depicts how Berg engages the client and builds
momentum that continues the solution talk as noted in the second wing.
The client, self-control, and picking battles
The second wing, “Robin, self-control & picking battles,” portrays Robin’s
exceptions as punctuated by Berg throughout the transcript as displayed in linear form.
FROM: SFBT-INSOO KIM BERG'S SOLUTION TALK: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR15-

1/cotton.pdf
Calgary Family Intervention Model: One way to think about change

Marital and Family Therapy. http://FindArticles.com. 14 Feb,
Calgary Family Intervention Model: One way to think about change.

Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, Oct 1994 by Wright, Lorraine M, Leahey, Maureen
Retrieved from:
Marital and Family Therapy.
FindArticles.com. 14 Feb, 2010. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3658/is_199410/ai_n8725421/
Calgary Family Intervention Model: One way to think
about change.
This article defines and describes the Calgary Family Intervention Model (CFIM). CFIM is an
organizing framework conceptualizing the intersect between a particular domain (i.e., cognitive,
affective, or behavioral) of family functioning and a specific intervention offered by a health
professional. Examples and discussion of interventions such as storying the illness experience,
encouraging respite, and asking interventive questions are presented. CFIM is one way that health
professionals can conceptualize about change.
In our clinical teaching and supervision with health professionals, we have often observed a
phenomenon we refer to as monocular focusing. Specifically, health professionals learning family
therapy generally err in one of two ways: either too much focus on family dynamics or too much focus
on interventions. The inability to employ binocular focusing (i.e., not focusing on both the family and
the intervention) frequently results in little or no change. To offer a balanced conceptualization of
family functioning and interventions that would enhance the possibility of change, we developed the
Calgary Family Intervention Model (CFIM). This model emphasizes a "fit" between the interventions
offered by the health professional and the domain of family functioning. The model also offers specific
ideas for interventions in particular domains of family functioning and the fit between them.
In this article we will define and describe the CFIM. The use of interventive questions to perturb
change in family functioning is discussed and examples of questions are given. Interventions to effect
change in families in particular domains of family functioning are also presented and discussed.
Although our trainee population is primarily health professionals, we believe that other trainees could
be taught the model and would find it clinically useful.
'
Definition and Description
Once a comprehensive family assessment has been completed and family intervention is indicated, the
health professional needs to conceptualize where it is desirable to perturb change. The CFIM was
developed as a companion model to the Calgary Family Assessment Model (Wright & Leahey, in
press). However, CFIM can be utilized following assessment regardless of the family assessment
model and/or instrument utilized. CFIM is an organizing framework conceptualizing the intersect
between a particular domain of family functioning and the specific intervention offered by the health
professional. That is, does the intervention effect change in the desired domain or not? Table 1 offers a
visual portrayal of the fit between a domain of family functioning and a particular intervention. (Table
1 omitted) The elements of CFIM are interventions, domains of family functioning, and fit or
effectiveness. CFIM focuses on promoting, improving, and/or sustaining effective family functioning
in three domains: cognitive, affective, and behavioral. We identified these domains in Nurses and
Families: A Guide to Family Assessment and Intervention (Wright & Leahey, 1984) but now have
incorporated them into CFIM.
Interventions can be targeted to promote, improve, or sustain functioning in one or all three domains of
family functioning, but change in one domain will have an impact on another domain. One intervention
can target cognitive, affective, and/or behavioral domains of family functioning simultaneously.
However, we believe that the most profound and sustaining change will be that which occurs within the
family's beliefs (cognition). Change in the affective or behavioral domains is also mediated through
cognition. A significant determining factor of whether change occurs is if the intervention is selected as
a trigger (perturbation) for potential change by the family. We believe health professionals can only
offer interventions to the family. Whether the family opens space for an intervention depends on their
genetic make-up and their history of interactions (Maturana & Varela, 1992). It is also profoundly
influenced by the relationship between the health professional and the family (Thorne & Robinson,
1989) and the health professional's ability to invite the family to reflect on their health problems
(Wright & Levac, 1992).
Second-order cybernetics and the work of Maturana (Maturana & Varela, 1992) have influenced our
ideas about effecting change. With regard to interventions, we believe it is unwise to attempt to
ascertain what is "really" going on with a particular family or what the "real" problem is. Recognizing
what is "real," whether it be the problem or the intervention, is always a consequence of our social
construction of the world (Keeney, 1982). Keeney further states that since family clinicians join their
clients in the social construction of a therapeutic reality, the clinician is also responsible "for the
universe of experience that is created" (1982, p. 165). Maturana (1988) presents another twist on this
critical notion of reality by submitting that individuals (living systems) draw forth reality-they do not
construct it, nor does it exist independent of them. This has implications for health professionals'
clinical work with families in that what we perceive about particular situations with families is
influenced by how we behave (our interventions) and how we behave dependson what we perceive.
Therefore, one way to change the "reality" that family members have drawn forth is to assist them in
the development of new ways of interacting. The interventions we use in this endeavor are focused on
changing cognitive, affective, or behavioral domains of family functioning. As family members'
perceptions and beliefs about each other and their health problems change, so will their behavior.
Interventions that are directed at challenging the meanings or beliefs that families give to behavioral
events also have an impact on decreasing or eliminating physical/emotional symptoms and suffering
(Watson, Bell, & Wright, 1992; Watson & Nanchoff-Glatt, 1990; Wright, Bell, & Rock, 1989; Wright
& Nagy, 1993; Wright & Simpson, 1991; Wright & Watson, 1988).
Interventions
Interventions represent the core of clinical practice with families. There are myriad interventions that
health professionals could choose, but interventions should be tailored to each family and to the chosen
domain of family functioning. Particular interventions will vary for each family although there may be
occasions when the same intervention is used for several families with differing problems. However,
we wish to emphasize that each family is unique and that even though labeling particular interventions
is useful, it does not represent a cookbook approach. The interventions we have listed are examples of
interventions that could be utilized and are not intended to be inclusive. We have also given examples
of interventive questions that have emerged from our clinical practice and research that have been
found to be very useful. The interventions that we cite are based on several important theoretical
foundations: systems, cybernetics, communication, and change theories.
There are several factors which enhance the likelihood that interventions will perturb change in the
desired domain of family functioning. These factors are outlined in Table 2. (Table 2 omitted)
First, interventions should be related to the problems that health professionals and the family have
collaborated and contracted to change. Second, interventions should be derived from health
professionals' hypotheses about problems and domains of family functioning. Third, interventions
should match the family's style of relating. Fourth, interventions should be linked to a family's strengths
and previous useful solution strategies. We believe families have inherent resources and that the health
professional's responsibility is to invite families to use these resources in new ways to tackle problems.
Fifth, interventions should be consistent with a family's ethnic and religious beliefs. Sixth, the health
professional should devise a few interventions so that their relative merits can be considered. For
example, are these new interventions for the family or are they "more of the same" solutions the family
has already tried? We do not believe that there is one right intervention, but several useful or effective
interventions. In our experience, we have found that health professionals sometimes reach an impasse
with families when they persist in either using the same intervention over and over or switching
interventions too rapidly.
We must also keep in mind the element of timing with regard to interventions. Interventions do not just
begin within a particular intervention stage of family work. Rather, they are an integral part of family
interviewing, spanning engagement to termination. Normally, interventions used during family
interviewing are based upon the health professional's assessment of the family. Adequate engagement
and assessment of the family will generally increase the effectiveness of the interventions.
CFIM is not a list of interventions nor is it a list of family functioning. Rather, CFIM provides a means
to conceptualize a fit between domains of family functioning and interventions offered by the
interviewer. It assists in determining the predominant domain of family functioning that needs
changing and what is the most useful intervention that will effect change in that domain. Through
therapeutic conversations, the family and health professional collaborate and co-evolve to discover the
most useful fit. We use the qualitative term fit in a slightly different way than de Shazer (1988) as we
emphasize whether or not the interventions effect change in the presenting problem. Fit involves a
recognition of reciprocity between the health professional's ideas/opinions and the family's illness
experience. Therefore, determining fit may involve some experimentation or trial and error. It also
entails a belief by health professionals that each family is unique and has particular strengths.
INTERVENTIVE QUESTIONS
One of the simplest, but most powerful, interventions for families experiencing health problems is the
use of interventive questions. Interventive questions are intended to effect change in any one or all
three domains. Health professionals conducting family interviews should remember, though, that
knowledge of when, how, and to what purpose to pose questions is more important than simply
choosing one type of question over another (Lipchik & de Shazer, 1986).
Linear versus Circular Questions

Interventive questions are usually of two types: linear and circular (Tomm, 1987, 1988). Linear
questions tend to inform the health professional while circular questions are meant to effect change
(Tomm, 1985, 1987, 1988). The important difference between these kinds of questions is their intent.
Linear questions are investigative; they explore a family member's descriptions/perceptions of a
problem. For example, when exploring family members' perceptions of their daughter's anorexia
nervosa, the health professional might begin with a linear question: "When did you notice that your
daughter had changed her eating habits?" "How much does she eat now?" These linear questions, while
informing the health professional of the history of the young woman's eating patterns, also help
illuminate family perceptions of or beliefs about eating patterns. Linear questions are frequently
utilized to begin gathering information about families' problems; circular questions reveal families'
understanding of problems.
Circular questions are directed more toward explanations of problems. For example, the health
professional could ask of the same family, "Who in the family is most worried about Cheyenne's
anorexia?" "How does Mother show that she's the one worrying the most?" Circular questions help
discover valuable information because they seek out relationships among individuals, events, ideas, or
beliefs.
The effect of these questions on families is quite distinct. Linear questions tend to be constraining;
circular questions are generative. Circular question introduce new cognitive connections, paving the
way for new or different family behaviors. A linear form of questioning implies that the health
professional knows what is best for the family; it also implies that the interviewer has become
purposive and invested in a particular outcome. Linear questions are intended to correct behavior;
circular questions are intended to facilitate behavioral change.
The primary distinction between circular and linear questions lies in the notion that information reveals
differences in relationships (Bateson, 1972). With circular questions, a relationship orconnection is
always sought among individuals, events, ideas, or beliefs. With linear questions, the focus is cause and
effect. The idea of circular questions evolved from the concept of circularity and the method of circular
interviewing developed by the originators of Milan systemic family therapy (Fleuridas, Nelson, &
Rosenthal, 1 986; Selvini-Palazzoli, Boscolo, Cecchin, & Prata, 1980; Tomm, 1984, 1985, 1987).
Circularity involves the cycle of questions and answers between families and health professionals that
occurs during the interview process. The health professional's questions are based on information that
the family gives in response to the questions the health professional asks, and thus the cycle continues
(Watson, 1992). The family's responses to the questions provide information for the health professional
and the family. Questions in and of themselves also provide new information/answers for the family. In
these circumstances, they are considered interventions (Fleuridas et al., 1986). Interventive questions
may invite family members to see their problems in a new way and subsequently to see new solutions.
Thus, as the family's answers provide information for the health professional, the health professional's
questions may provide information for the family (Watson, 1992).
Tomm (1987) embellished the types of circular questions utilized by the Milan systemic family therapy
team and identified, defined, and classified various circular questions. Loos and Bell (1990) have
creatively applied the use of circular questions to critical care nursing. Watson ( 1988a, 1988b, 1988c,
1989a, 1989b) demonstrated the therapeutic aspect of circular questions with families experiencing
chronic illness, life-shortening illness, and psychosocial problems. The circular questions identified by
Tomm (1987) that we have found most useful in clinical practice with families are difference questions,
behavioral effect questions, hypothetical/future-oriented questions, and triadic questions. We have
expanded the use of circular questions by providing examples of questions that can be asked to
intervene in the cognitive, affective, and behavioral domains of family functioning. The type of
question, definition, and examples are given in Table 3. (Table 3 omitted)
There are four types of circular questions (i.e., difference, behavioral effect, hypothetical, and triadic)
that can be used to perturb change in any one or all of the domains of family functioning. Table 4
illustrates the intersect of various types of circular questions and the domains of family functioning.
(Table 4 omitted) We wish to emphasize strongly that what is most critical is the
effectiveness/usefulness/fit of the question in perturbing change rather thant the specific question itself.
CASE EXAMPLE
Following is a case example illustrating how to intervene using circular questions in a situation that
health professionals commonly encounter.
Question: How Can Health Professionals Help Families Cope with Chronic Illness?
I have been working with a family in which the wife is experiencing multiple sclerosis. For several
years the couple have coped fairly well. Within the past year, the wife has become progressively more
physically and emotionally dependent. She insists that her husband stay at home every evening and that
they spend every weekend together. He is anxious and told me he feels trapped. He feels more and
more unable to help his wife. Yet he does not want to abandon her or have her permanently
hospitalized. How can I help this couple cope more effectively with the wife's multiple sclerosis?
Discussion
The extent to which a person's illness affects the family often depends on the nature of the illness itself.
If the illness is a prolonged and complicated one, such as multiple sclerosis, it will most likely lead to
differences in family relationships.
In working with a family in which one member has a chronic illness and requires additional care, the
health professional should intervene and explore the family's cognition and beliefs about the illness.
This intervention is aimed at the cognitive domain of family functioning. For example, the health
professional in this instance may ask the husband and wife what they understand about multiple
sclerosis, how the disease progresses, how long the periods of remission are, and so forth. In so doing,
the health professional may be able to clear up misconceptions and provide further information.
When the health professional has established a baseline of the couple's understanding of multiple
sclerosis, then he or she can begin to explore their catastrophic expectations about the progression of
the disease. Circular questions can be asked, such as:
To husband: What is the worst thing your wife fears as her multiple sclerosis progresses?
To wife: What is your husband's most pressing worry for the future?
These types of circular questions can be interchanged for husband and wife. Circular questions aimed
at exploring one person's understanding of the other person's beliefs, expectations, and emotions can
also be asked. These questions could also be asked directly to the patient or spouse. For example, the
health professional could ask the patient, "What is the thing you fear most about your multiple sclerosis
progressing?" By exploring the other person's understanding first, however, the health professional
gains more information. If the husband answers that he thinks his wife fears most that he will have an
affair, then this can be discussed during the interview. This two-step technique of asking the husband
about the wife's expectations and then asking the wife directly about her own expectations is generally
quite helpful in eliciting differences in beliefs.
After catastrophic expectations have been uncovered, they can be discussed realistically. When these
fears of impending catastrophe remain hidden, they tend to impede problem solving and promote
isolation of maladaptive interaction patterns. In this case, if the wife fears that the husband will lose
interest in her as her disease progresses, then this fear needs to be explored further. If the husband feels
trapped and resentful about future care for his wife, then this feeling too needs to be explored. Some
questions that may guide the discussion include:
To wife: How do you show your feelings of fear? What do you do? What effect does this have on your
husband? Is that the effect you would like it to have?
To husband: How do you deal with the extra demands of the illness? How do you show your feelings to
your wife? What effect does this behavior seem to have on her?
These types of circular questions aim at increasing the family's understanding of the present situation.
They provide a focus for the health professional to explore not only the family's cognition but also their
underlying emotional responses. For example, the husband may feel resentful, anxious, and trapped and
may be dealing with these feelings by isolating himself. The wife may be fearful and behave in a
clutching, clingy fashion. Neither person may be aware of the circular nature of the maladaptive
pattern.
When the health professional has helped the couple to recognize the nature of their problem, then the
health professional can help them explore alternative coping strategies leading to new solutions. For
example, the health professional may stimulate the discussion by asking the following questions:
*How can you deal more realistically with the extra demands on both of you?
*What possibilities might work?
*What probably would never work?
*Who might be most in favor, for example, of inviting a volunteer from the church in on Saturdays to
assist with the caretaking?
In summary, the main way the health professional can assist a family with a chronic illness is to help
them remove cognitive and affective blocks to problem solving. If the husband is immobilized by guilt
and a belief that he is losing his wife because of her illness and the wife is immobilized by fear, then
these blocks need to be gently dislodged to permit creative problem solving to take place.
OTHER INTERVENTIONS
To illustrate the intersection of three domains of family functioning (cognitive, affective, and
behavioral) and various interventions, we have chosen several other examples of interventions in
addition to circular questions. These examples are not meant to be an exhaustive list. Rather, they are
interventions we have found useful in our own clinical practice and research. The examples include (a)
commending family and individual strengths, (b) offering information/opinions, (c) externalizing the
problem, (d) validating/normalizing emotional responses, (e) storying the illness experience, (f)
drawing forth family support, (g) encouraging respite, and (h) devising rituals.
These interventions can trigger change in any one or all of the domains of family functioning. For
example, the health professional can use the intervention of offering information to promote change in
cognitive, affective, or behavioral family functioning (see Table 5). (Table 5 omitted)
We will now describe each intervention and offer a case example illustrating its application. We have
chosen to cluster the sample interventions around a particular domain of family functioning. In doing
this, we do not wish to imply that one intervention can only be used to perturb change in one domain of
family functioning. Nor do we want to imply that one intervention is a "cognitive intervention" and
another an "affective intervention." Rather, these are examples of the fit between a specific problem, a
particular intervention, and a domain of family functioning.
INTERVENTIONS TO CHANGE THE COGNITIVE DOMAIN OF FAMILY FUNCTIONING
Interventions directed at the cognitive domain of family functioning are usually those which change a
particular family's perceptions and beliefs about their health problem in order that they can discover
new solutions to their health problems. We offer the following interventions as ways to change the
cognitive domain of family functioning.
Commending Family and Individual Strengths

We routinely commend families in each session on the strengths observed during the interview.
Commendations differ somewhat from compliments. De Shazer (1988) describes compliments as
statements from the therapist "about what the client has said that is useful, effective, good or fun" with
the purpose of promoting "client-therapist fit and cooperation on the task at hand" (p. 96).
Commendations are the therapist's observations of patterns of behavior that occur across time (e.g.,
"your family is very loyal toward one another"), whereas a compliment is often an observational
comment of a one-time event (e.g., "you were very praising of your son today"). Families coping with
chronic, life-shortening illness and/or psychosocial problems frequently feel defeated, hopeless, and/or
failures in their efforts to overcome their illnesses or live alongside of them. Commonly, families
coping with health problems have not been commended for their strengths or made aware of them
(McElheran & Harper-Jaques, 1994). The immediate and long-term positive reactions to such
commendations indicate that they are effective therapeutic actions. Families who internalize
commendations appear more receptive to other therapeutic actions that may be offered.
In one family, an adopted son's behavioral and emotional problems had kept them involved with health
professionals for 10 years. The family clinician commended this family by telling them that she
believed they were the best family for this boy because many other families would not have been as
sensitive to his needs and would probably have given up years ago. Both parents became tearful and
said that this was the first commendation given to them as parents in many years.
By commending families' competence and strengths and offering them a new opinion of themselves, a
context for change is created, allowing families to discover their own solutions to problems. By
changing the view they have of themselves, families are frequently able to view the health problem
differently and thus move toward more effective solutions.
Offering Information/Opinions
In our experience, families with a hospitalized member have indicated that a high priority is obtaining
information. Many families have expressed frustration at their inability readily to obtain information or
opinions from health professionals. Health professionals can offer to provide information about the
impact of chronic and/or life-shortening illnesses on families. On the other hand, health professionals
can also empower families to obtain information about resources. We have learned that the latter
approach is more useful in some circumstances.
One clinical example concerns a family of two aging parents and their 34-year-old son experiencing
severe multiple sclerosis. The parents were constant, devoted caretakers but had not had any respite for
several months. The son was asked by the health professional if he would be willing to challenge his
belief about himself as being "helpless." The health professional asked him to take the leadership role
in exploring possible resources for caregivers in order that his parents might have a vacation. As a
result of his search, the son discovered that he was eligible for many financial benefits (e.g., to hire
professional caregivers) of which he had previously been unaware. Shortly afterward, the son made
arrangements for 24-hour in-home nursing care while his parents took a vacation. His parents reported
that they felt much less stressed and that their son was also much happier. He began making efforts to
walk using parallel bars, an activity which he had not done in several months.
In this case example, the health professional offered an opinion to empower the son to change his
cognitive set. The intervention fit the cognitive domain and results also took place in the affective and
behavioral domains of family functioning.
Externalizing the Problem

Externalization of a problem is an innovative intervention developed by Michael White of Australia
(Tomm, 1989; White, 1984, 1986, 1988-1989; White & Epston, 1989). It involves separating the
problem from the personal identity of the client. Instead of viewing the problem as residing in the
person, the problem is externalized and viewed as being outside the person. Rather than a client being
objectified, a problem is objectified (White, 19881989). Externalization can be achieved during a
family interview by introducing questions that encourage family members to map the influence of the
problem in their lives and their influence in the life of the problem. This is called relative influence
questioning (White, 1988). The family is asked, "How much influence do you have over the problem?"
and reciprocally, "How much influence does the problem have over you and your relationship?"
We have externalized chronic pain (Watson et al., 1992), phobias, epileptic seizures (Wright &
Simpson, 1991), and depressions with dramatic positive results with adults. Externalization of the
problem is also particularly useful with children experiencing phobias, encopresis (White, 1994),
enuresis, behavioral problems, and chronic pain. Externalizing the problem has even proven useful with
a teenager who was experiencing depression related to her jealous feelings about a friend who
reminded her of Marilyn Monroe. The problem of jealousy was externalized as "a case of Marilynitis"
and had a very positive outcome (Wright & Park Dorsay, 1989).
INTERVENTIONS TO CHANGE THE AFFECTIVE DOMAIN OF FAMILY FUNCTIONING

Interventions aimed at the affective domain of family functioning are designed to reduce or increase
intense emotions that may be blocking families' problem-solving efforts. Following are examples of
interventions that can change the affective domain of family functioning.
Validating/Normalizing Emotional Responses

Validation of intense affect can alleviate feelings of isolation and loneliness and assist family members
to make the connection between a family member's illness and their emotional response. For example,
following a diagnosis of a life-shortening illness, families frequently feel out of control and/or
frightened for a period of time. It is important for health professionals to validate these strong emotions
and to reassure and offer hope to families that in time they will adjust and learn ways to cope.
Storying the Illness Experience

Too often family members are only encouraged to tell the medical story or narrative of their disease
rather than the story of their experience of their illness (Frank, 1991). Through therapeutic
conversations, health professionals can create a trusting environment for open expression of family
members' fears, anger, and sadness about their illness experience. Having an opportunity to express the
impact of the illness upon the family and the influence of the family upon the illness from each family
member's perspective validates their experience. This is very different from limiting or constraining
family stories to symptoms, medication, and physical treatments. Providing a context for the sharing of
the illness experience among family members legitimizes intense emotions.
Drawing Forth Family Support

Health professionals can enhance family functioning in the affective domain by assisting family
members to listen to each other's concerns and feelings (Craft & Willadsen, 1992).
This can be particularly useful at times when a family member may be dying or has died (Wright &
Nagy, 1993). Through fostering opportunities for family members to express this painful experience,
the health professional can enable the family to draw forth their own strengths and resources to support
one another. This type of family support can prevent families from becoming unduly burdened or
defeated by an illness.
INTERVENTIONS TO CHANGE THE BEHAVIORAL DOMAIN OF FAMILY FUNCTIONING

Interventions directed at the behavioral domain assist family members to interact and thus behave
differently in relation to one another. This change is most often accomplished by inviting some or all
family members to engage in specific behavioral tasks. Some tasks will be given during a family
meeting so that the health professional can observe the interaction; others may be experimented with
between sessions. Sometimes, it is necessary to review with the family what the particular task and
experiment is in order to check their understanding of what the health professional is suggesting.
We offer the following examples of interventions that could change the behavioral domain of family
functioning.
Encouraging Respite
Often, it is very difficult for a caretaking family to allow themselves adequate respite. Too frequently,
family members feel guilty if they need or want to withdraw themselves from the caregiving role. Even
the ill member must disengage himself from time to time from the usual caregiving and accept another
person's assistance. Each family's need for respite varies. The issues affecting respite requirements
include the severity of the chronic illness, availability of family members to care for the ill person, and
financial resources (Leahey & Wright, 1987). All of these issues must be considered before a health
professional recommends a respite schedule. S. Tucker (personal communication, October, 1984)
reports that she advises families to buy a less expensive prothesis and use the extra money for a family
vacation. In this way, caregiving and coping are balanced. Such "time outs" or "time away" are
essential for families facing excessive caretaking demands. Another example is to recommend to a
mother and father with a leukemic child to have grandparents babysit for a day while the couple have
time together.
Devising Rituals
Families engage in many daily (e.g., bedtime reading), yearly (e.g., Thanksgiving dinner at Grandma's),
and cultural (e.g., ethnic parades) rituals. Health professionals can suggest therapeutic rituals that are
not or have not been observed by the family. Roberts (1988) defines rituals as:
Coevolved symbolic acts that include not only the ceremonial aspects of the actual presentation of the
ritual, but the process of preparing for it as well. It may or may not include words, but does have both
open and closed parts which are "held" together by a guiding metaphor. Repetition can be a part of
rituals through either the content, the form, or the occasion. There should be enough space in
therapeutic rituals for the incorporation of multiple meanings by various family members and
clinicians, as well as a variety of levels of participation. (p. 8)
In our clinical practice, we have observed that chronic illness and/or psychosocial problems frequently
interrupt usual rituals. Rituals are best introduced when there is an excessive level of confusion caused
by the simultaneous presentation of incompatible injunctions. Rituals serve to provide clarity in a
family system (Imber-Black, Roberts, & Whiting, 1988). For example, parents who cannot agree on
child-rearing practices often end up giving conflicting messages. This can result in chaos and confusion
for their children. The introduction of an odd-day even-day ritual (Selvini-Palazzoli, Boscolo, Cecchin,
& Prata, 1978) can often assist the family. The mother could be invited to experiment with being
responsible for the children on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and the father on Tuesdays,
Thursdays, and Saturdays. On Sundays, they could behave spontaneously. On their "days off," parents
could be asked to observe, without comment, their partner's parenting. This intervention isolates
contradictory behaviors by prescribing sequence (Tomm, 1984).
CONCLUSIONS
We have found the practice of teaching the CFIM very useful for both beginning and advanced family
clinicians. Beginning clinicians are often overwhelmed by the complexity of family dynamics and
frequently lose sight of their role in helping families effect change. Advanced clinicians, on the other
hand, are often mesmerized by the interventions they have skillfully crafted to enhance family
functioning. When these interventions do not seem to work, the interviewers often either repeat the
same intervention or target the same area of family functioning. With both beginners and advanced
practitioners, CFIM is a useful tool to gain a metaperspective on the fit or usefulness of the intervention
offered by the interviewer and the family's domain of functioning.
Interventions can be straightforward and simple or as innovative and dramatic as the health
professional deems necessary for the health problem(s) presented. Ell and Northen (1990) convincingly
support this statement with abundant research documentation that "interventions intended to promote
health and prevent illness should be based on the assumption that individual health behaviors are
strongly influenced by those around us, and that family general well-being can promote the physical
health of its members" (p. 79). Any interventions should be directed toward the goals of treatment
collaboratively generated by the health professional and the family. As health professionals learn to
engage actively, assess thoroughly, identify problems clearly, and set treatment goals, the
conceptualizing, choosing, and implementing of specific interventions with each family becomes more
rewarding and more effective. The ultimate goal, of course, is to assist family members to change
through discovering new solutions to their health problems through the interventions that are offered.
CFIM is one way we have found useful to conceptualize about effecting change.
REFERENCES

127.
Process, 19, 3-12.
format, interviewing style and interventions. Journal of Marital and ] Family Therapy, 10, 253-271.
Newsletter, 8-14.
References:

Craft, M. J., & Willadsen, J. A. (1992). Interventions related to family. Nursing Clinics of North
America, 27, 517-540.
Ell, K., & Northen, H. (1990). Families and health care. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
127.
Frank, A. (1991). At the will of the body. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
Imber-Black, E., Roberts, J., & Whiting, R. (Eds.). (1988). Rituals in families and family therapy. New
York: W. W. Norton.
Leahey, M., & Wright, L. M. (1987). Families and chronic illness: Assumptions, assessment. and
intervention. In L. M. Wright & M. Leahey (Eds.), Families and
chronic illness (pp. 55-76). Springhouse, PA: Springhouse Corporation.
Maturana, H., & Varela, F. ( 1 992). The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human
understanding (rev. ed.). Boston, MA: Shambhala.
McElheran, N., & Harper-Jaques, S. (1994). Commendations: A resource intervention for clinical
practice. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 8(1), 7-15.
Roberts, J. (1988). Setting the frame: Definition, functions, and typology of rituals. In E.
Imber-Black, J. Roberts, & R. Whiting (Eds.), Rituals in families and family therapy (pp. 3-
46). New York: W. W. Norton.
Process, 19, 3-12.
Thorne, S., & Robinson, C. (1989). Guarded alliance: Health care relationships in chronic illness.
Image, 21(3), 153-157.
format, interviewing style and interventions. Journal of Marital and
Family Therapy, 10, 253-271.
Watson, W. L. (Producer). (1988a.) A family with chronic illness: A "tough" family copes well
[Videotape]. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: The University of Calgary.
Watson, W. L. (Producer). (1988b). Aging families and Alzheimer's disease [Videotape]. Calgary,
Alberta, Canada: The University of Calgary.
Watson, W. L. (Producer). (1988c). Fundamentals of family systems nursing [Videotape]. Calgary,
Alberta, Canada: The University of Calgary.
Watson, W. L. (Producer). (1989a). Families and psychosocial problems [Videotape]. Calgary, Alberta,
Canada: The University of Calgary.
Watson, W. L. (Producer). (1989b). Family systems interventions [Videotape]. Calgary, Alberta,
Canada: The University of Calgary.
Watson, W. L. (1992). Family therapy. In G. M. Bulechek & J. C. McCloskey (Eds.), Nursing
interventions: Essential nursing treatments (2nd ed., pp. 379-391).
Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.
Watson, W. L., Bell, J. M., & Wright, L. M. (1992). Osteophytes and marital fights: A single case
clinical research report of chronic pain. Family Systems Medicine,
10, 423-435.
Watson, W. L., & Nanchoff-Glatt, M. (1990). A family systems nursing approach to premenstrual
syndrome. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 4(1), 3-9.
White, M. (1984). Pseuodo-encopresis: From avalanche to victory, from vicious to virtuous circles.
Family Systems Medicine, 2, 150-160.
Newsletter, 8-14.
Wright, L. M., Bell, J. M., & Rock, B. L. (1989). Smoking behavior and spouses: A case report. Family
Systems Medicine, 7, 158-171.
Wright, L. M., & Leahey, M. (1984). Nurses and families. A guide to family assessment and
intervention. Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.
Wright, L. M., & Leahey, M. (in press). Nurses and families. A guide to family assessment and
intervention (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.
Wright, L. M., & Levac, A. M. (1992). The non-existence of non-compliant families: The influence of
Humberto Maturana. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 17, 913-
917.
Wright, L. M., & Nagy, J. ( 1993). Death: The most troublesome family secret of all. In E. Imber-Black
(Ed.), Secrets in families and family therapy (pp. 121-137).
New York: W. W. Norton.
Wright, L. M., & Park Dorsay, J. ( 1989). A case of Marilynitis or a Marilyn Monroe infection.
Dulwich Centre Newsletter, 7-9.
Wright, L. M., & Simpson, P. ( 1991). A systemic belief approach to epileptic seizures: A case of being
spellbound. Contemporary Family Therapy: An International
Journal, 13, 165-180.
Lorraine M. Wright, RN, PhD, is Director, Family Nursing Unit and Professor, Faculty of Nursing,
University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2N 1N4.
Maureen Leahey, RN, PhD, is Director, Outpatient Mental Health Program and Director, Family
Therapy Training Program, Calgary District Hospital Group, 1035 7 Ave. SW, Calgary, Alberta,
Canada, T2P 3E9.
Reprint requests and/or correspondence about this article should be sent to Lorraine M. Wright at the
above address.
Copyright American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy Oct 1994
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved
Articles and reference for Assignment-u05a1-COUN5220-Interview Project-Feb.14th, 2010-

https://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dqkfptf_486gvph32gw&btr=EmailImport
Here is a link that discusses the difference between systemic and linear therapies...
http://www.psych.ku.edu/dennisk/FamilyRx/N_S_1_8.html
Interesting paper that deals with interviewing children, but it has some insight into framing
questions to get a particular response.
(good one!)
http://jpa.sagepub.com.library.capella.edu/cgi/reprint/26/1/54
Integrating Cognitive and Systemic Perspectives: An Interview with Frank M.

(good one!)
http://tfj.sagepub.com.library.capella.edu/cgi/reprint/9/4/472
(article about interpruting communication during an interview)

Communicating about Communication in a Therapeutic Interview
http://jls.sagepub.com.library.capella.edu/cgi/reprint/15/2/101
References:
Textbook of Family and Couples Therapy: http://www.scribd.com/full/16541828?access_key=key-

2br1wu8oceow1w5876oy
EMBEDDED CODE: (SCROLL): Textbook of Family and Couples

Therapy: http://www.scribd.com/full/16541828?access_key=key-2br1wu8oceow1w5876oy
<a title="View Textbook of Family and Couples Therapy on Scribd"
href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/16541828/Textbook-of-Family-and-Couples-Therapy"
style="margin: 12px auto 6px auto; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,Sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-
variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-
stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none; display: block; text-decoration: underline;">Textbook of Family
and Couples Therapy</a> <object id="doc_243799959880483" name="doc_243799959880483"
height="600" width="100%" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
data="http://d1.scribdassets.com/ScribdViewer.swf" style="outline:none;" > <param name="movie"
value="http://d1.scribdassets.com/ScribdViewer.swf"> <param name="wmode" value="opaque">
<param name="bgcolor" value="#ffffff"> <param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"> <param
name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"> <param name="FlashVars"
value="document_id=16541828&access_key=key-
2br1wu8oceow1w5876oy&page=1&viewMode=list"> <embed id="doc_243799959880483"
name="doc_243799959880483" src="http://d1.scribdassets.com/ScribdViewer.swf?
document_id=16541828&access_key=key-2br1wu8oceow1w5876oy&page=1&viewMode=list"
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"
height="600" width="100%" wmode="opaque" bgcolor="#ffffff"></embed> </object>
Textbook of Family and Couples Therapy: http://www.scribd.com/full/16541828?access_key=key-

2br1wu8oceow1w5876oy
Textbook of Family and Couples Therapy: http://www.scribd.com/doc/16541828/Textbook-of-Family-

and-Couples-Therapy
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks
COUN5220-ASSIGNMENT-u05a1-Google Doc-http://docs.google.com/Doc?
docid=0AWK4511jK8f5ZHFrZnB0Zl80ODJmand2dmh0OA&hl=en
Interview Responses from Lashon Jenkins: assignment unit 5.doc-
Assignment unit u05a1.doc-https://mail.google.com/mail/?

Webpage Preview via Gmail Message: (https://mail.google.com/mail/?

ui=2&ik=807e355980&view=att&th=126c94b7b9acc849&attid=0.1&disp=vah&zw)
Capella University Online Writing Center-
http://www.capella.edu/interactivemedia/onlineWritingCenter/index.aspx?
linkID=24125&Refr=WRITING CENTER: http://www.capellawritingcenter.com/#
DIRECTIONS TO RETRIEVE ANDERSON ARTICLE FOR COURSEPACK IN COUN5220: (under

the "ask your instructor thread for coun5220)
Okay, here's how I found it. It was missing from my coursepack as well:
Try this link first, and then follow step 3:

http://proquest.umi.com.library.capella.edu/login?
COPT=REJTPTFjNWUmSU5UPTAmVkVSPTI=&clientId=62763
If that doesn’t work, follow all the steps below:
1) Go to the Capella library, and look it up under psychINFO. I put "Anderson" and selected the
field "author", and on the second line "Rethinking family therapy" and selected the field "title."
It should come up in the results list.
2) Click on the link for the article, and scroll to the bottom when the next page loads. At the bottom of
this page, click on the link for "Check Article Linker."
3) When the next page loads, choose "ProQuest Education Journals." This will bring you to a new
search engine page. Type in the same info as in step 1, hit "search"
and from there the link to the full-text html article will come up.
FindArticles.com (http://www.findarticles.com)
RSS FEED: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/tn_ref/?pi=rss
Reference Publications:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/tn_ref/
Topic: RSS Feed

Bibliography for: "Calgary Family Intervention Model: One way to think about change"
Copyright American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy Oct 1994
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved
Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
View more issues:

Articles in Oct 1994 issue of Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
• Self-help books -- It runs in my family: Overcoming the legacy of family illness by J.
Barth
by Prest, Layne A
• Professional books -- Family health psychology edited by T. J. Akamatsu, M. A. P.
Stephens, S. E. Hobfoll and J. H. Crowther
by Rolland, John S
• Professional books -- Conversations on therapy: Popular problems and uncommon
solutions by D. R. Grove and J. Haley
by Lappin, Jay
• Professional books -- Mutual causality in Buddhism and general systems theory by J.
Macy
by Murphy, Michael J
• Self-help books -- Last touch: Preparing for a parent's death by M. R. Becker
by Dwyer, Timothy F
• Professional books -- Therapy as a social construction edited by S. McNamee and K. J.
Gergen
by Thomas, Frank N
• In sickness and in health: The impact of illness on couples' relationships
by Rolland, John S
• Videotapes -- Conversation with a Blended Family: A Burning Question; An Interview
with Harry Goolishian
by Joanning, Harvey
• Self-help books -- Things just haven't been the same: Making the transition from
marriage to parenthood by B. E. Sachs
by Limansubroto, Catherine D M
• Videotapes -- Learning Disabilities: A Parent's Guide
by Romig, Chuck
• Working with men in family therapy: An exploratory study
by Dienhart, Anna; Avis, Judith Myers
• Family therapists' response to AIDS: An examination of attitudes, knowledge, and
contact
by Green, Shelley K; Bobele, Monte
• Essential elements of a family psychoeducation program in the aftercare of
schizophrenia
by Keefler, Joan; Koritar, Endre
• Calgary Family Intervention Model: One way to think about change
by Wright, Lorraine M; Leahey, Maureen
• Videotapes -- Sex, Love, and Babies
by Pike-Urlacher, Connee L; Pike-Urlacher, Robert A

Null

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Null

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

u05a1-Interview Project-COUN5220-Sec.7-Intro.

to Marriage and Family Therapy- (Andre Judice)-

• Research and references:

o Include at least 2 references in your reflection paper analysis, to support your

(References from materials studied in this course are appropriate sources.)

• Formatting: Use APA, 5th edition formatting, including:

o Correct in-text citations.

Written communication: Establish precise written communication that focuses on the

u05a1-Interview Project-COUN5220-Sec.7-Interview Questions for Lashon Jenkin

6. What types of relationships do you have with your co-workers?

THEMES AND CONTENT EMERGING FROM THE LINEAR QUESTIONS:

Systems Theory questions:

1. What is your boss like; can you describe him or her?

3. What is the overall environment like at your place of your employment?

4. Can you provide me with a brief description of your workplace?

5. What is the dynamic like between employees at your workplace?

COMPARE AND CONTRAST LINEAR AND SYSTEMIC THEMES THAT EMERGED:

Course Materials -COUN5220-Sec.7-Intro.to Marriage and Family Therapy- (Andre Judice)-[1/11-

Contemporary Family Therapy, 23(2), 199–220.

Cheon, H. S., & Murphy, M. J. (2007). The self-of-the-therapist awakened: Postmodern

Behavioral Health Services & Research, 26(2), 211–218.

Hawley, D. R. (2000). Clinical implications of family resilience. The American Journal of

Rober, P. (2005). Family therapy as a dialogue of living persons: A perspective inspired

American Counseling Association (ACA). (2009). American Counseling

Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.

Bronowski, J. (1978). The origins of knowledge and imagination. New

Gergen, K. (1999). An invitation to social construction. London: Sage.

von Foerster, H. (1981). Observing system. Seaside, CA: Intersystems.

Watts, A. (1972). The book. New York: Vintage.

Bograd, M. (1992). Values in conflict: Challenges to family therapists' thinking. Journal of

Postmodern psychologies, societal practice, and political life (pp. 100–

White, M. (1988). The process of questioning: A therapy of literary

Wong, Y. (2006). Strength-centered therapy: A social constructionist, virtues-based

Brown, J. (1997). Circular questioning: An introductory guide. Australian and New

Other Miscellaneous References:

Course Outline, Syllabus and Learner Units/Expectations: COUN5220-Sec.7-Intro.to Marriage and

(Google Doc) http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dqkfptf_494hcpxt4d8

COUN5220-Sec.7-INTRO TO MARRIAGE & FAMILY THERAPY-ANDRE JUDICE-(1/11-

Other Miscellaneous References:

The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 80(5), 468-477.

* Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.

Download the original attachment

Interview Responses from Lashon Jenkins: assignment unit 5.doc-

Assignment unit 5.doc-

Webpage Preview via Gmail Message: (https://mail.google.com/mail/?

Download the original attachment

NOTES AND REFERENCES:

Lashon’s feedback, in response to Berg’s systemic questions, entails what needs to

(006) It gives me piece of mind.

(014) I’d be much more calm.

The client, self-control, and picking battles

exceptions as punctuated by Berg throughout the transcript as displayed in linear form.

FROM: SFBT-INSOO KIM BERG'S SOLUTION TALK: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR15-

Calgary Family Intervention Model: One way to think about change

Calgary Family Intervention Model: One way to think about change.

Linear versus Circular Questions

INTERVENTIONS TO CHANGE THE COGNITIVE DOMAIN OF FAMILY FUNCTIONING

Commending Family and Individual Strengths

Externalizing the Problem

INTERVENTIONS TO CHANGE THE AFFECTIVE DOMAIN OF FAMILY FUNCTIONING

Validating/Normalizing Emotional Responses

Storying the Illness Experience