a whole range of things, which was creative and adapting to the needs at the moment. Imagine a time when you were creative
personally or professionally: • What do you think was the turning point that led to you being able to do what you did?
• What were the steps that you took to get to that point?
• Who was around? • Was this event unusual or have there been times when you’ve done this sort of thing before?
• What emotions and feelings did it evoke? The feedback from this exercise was
that people had connected to their creative sides, which already existed, sometimes born out of dilemmas, but that people sometimes struggled to bring into therapy in the moment. Other feedback was that, by considering this within the approach, method and technique framework, it was more likely that practitioners would be able to hold on to these practices.
Techniques One of the techniques presented
at the workshop that fits in with what we have shared above was the ‘collaborative helping map’ (Madsen, 2011). The framework is a tool that helps practitioners and clients think their way through complex situations and provides a structure to support constructive conversations. The framework draws on narrative therapy, appreciative enquiry, solution-focused therapy, motivational interviewing and signs of safety. The framework is very similar and has lots of overlap with Burnham’s (2012) problems, possibilities, resources and strengths. Instructions on how you would use the
‘collaborative helping map’: • Initially start by enquiring about the vision with the family.
• T en move on to the challenges/obstacles. • T e support section should stack up more than the obstacles if the vision is ever going to happen.
• Finally, you devise a plan based on the discussion. We explored the use of the map within
the workshop by covering the above steps, and then by showing it in action through a video recording of a session with a family, played by actors. The family’s feedback was that this technique
22
Vision Safety, permanency and wellbeing What are your hopes for your children? What kind of family would you prefer to be? Obstacles/challenges
What gets in the way of your vision for your family?
Supports
Who and what support you in obtaining your vision for your family? What is working well?
Plan
On a scale of 0-10, how safe are the children? What needs to happen?
How can we draw on supports to address obstacles to ensure safety, permanency and wellbeing?
Madsen, 2011 – Collaborative helping map
allowed them to feel that change was possible. Also, they found it helpful in not only showing the issues but in also identifying solutions in a contained manner.
Summary How we teach, how we work and
how we live have so much overlap that this process of doing the workshop and following it with an article has helped us to take stock of all that we do and privilege. In our busy working environments, it doesn’t always feel possible to think enough about our approach-method-technique but, by taking opportunities to take the time, whether in supervision, peer discussion or training, can help to re-invigorate our thinking and also to connect with others in building our communities in supporting each other, and the people that we work with.
References Afuape, T. (2011) Power, Resistance and Liberation in Therapy with Survivors of Trauma: To Have our Hearts Broken. London: Routledge. Bruner, J. (1986) Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Burnham, J.B. (1992) Approach, method, technique: Making distinctions and creating connections. Human Systems: Journal of Systemic Consultation and Management, 3: 3-26. Burnham, J. (2012) Developments in social GRRRAAACCEEESSS: Visible-invisible and voiced-unvoiced. In I-B. Krause (ed.) Culture and reflexivity in systemic psychotherapy: Mutual perspectives. London, England: Karnac. De Shazer, S. (1984) The death of resistance. Family Process, 23: 11-17. Fanon, F. (1963) The Wretched of the Earth. (C. Farrington Trans.). New York: Grove Press. Freedman, J. & Combs, G. (1996) Narrative
Therapy: The Social Construction of Preferred Realities. New York: Norton. hooks, b. (2003) The oppositional gaze: Black female spectators. In: A. Jones (ed.) The Feminism and Visual Culture Reader. New York: Routledge. Madsen, W. (2007) Working within traditional structures to support a collaborative clinical practice. The international Journal of Narrative Therapy & Community Work, 2: 51-61. Madsen, W. (2011) Collaborative helping maps: A tool to guide thinking and action in family centered services. Family Process, 50: 529-543. McNamee, S. (2004) Promiscuity in the practice of family therapy. Journal of Family Therapy, 26: 224-244. Mason, B (1993) Towards positions of safe uncertainty. Human Systems: The Journal of Systemic Consultation and Management, 4: 189-200. Minuchin, S. (1982) Reflections on boundaries. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 52: 655- 663. Nasseri, D. (2019) Co-construction of Professional Identity. Progression Point 2. Unpublished Thesis. Professional Doctorate in Systemic Practice (candidate). University of Bedfordshire. Pallazoli, M.S., Boscolo L., Cecchin, G. & Prata, G. (1980) The problem of the referring person. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 6: 3-9. Reynolds, V. (2012) An ethical stance for justice- doing in community work and therapy. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 31(4): 18-33. Said, E (1978) Orientalism. New York: Vintage. Schön, D.A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Aldershot: Ashgate. Shotter, J. (2010) Social Constructionism on the Edge: ‘Withness’-Thinking and Embodiment. Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute Press. Sprenkle, D.H., Davis, S.D., & Lebow, J.L. (2009) Common factors in couple and family therapy: The overlooked foundation for effective practice. New York: Guilford. Watt-Jones, D.T. (2011) Location of self: Opening the door to dialogue on intersectionality in the therapy process. Family Process, 49: 405-420. White A.J. (2014) Navigating Postmodernism and Critical Theory in Family Therapy. Loma Linda University Electronic Theses, Dissertations and Projects. 185.
Context 169, June 2020
Engaging clients through re-engaging ourselves
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
