Our rituals for training, supervision and competence assessment which once relied on in‐person interaction are rapidly becoming influenced by the digital creativity which surrounds them. Our training models have to be diverse and considerate of the multiple contextual shifts with which systemic practitioners are contending, and the current context is complex for student, supervisor and families alike. The aim of this paper is to consider how digital practices might reshape our systemic training, supervision and competence evaluation, considering issues for student and trainer as they move to digital delivery of training and supervision. This paper explores the historical context of online learning, enhancing online presence, and the ethical and practical implications of teaching and supervising digitally. It concludes with a discussion about how competence frameworks are influenced by the shift to digital practice and suggests digital skills required for systemic practice going forward. Practitioner Points Consider how digital practices might reshape your systemic training delivery, with attention to enhancing online presence. Pay particular consideration in live supervision to trainee’s skills in attentiveness and attunement to family and couple interactions and emotional responses. Consider the differing processes of competence evaluation online and the need to attend to specific digital skills.

No abstract

This paper considers how ideological dilemmas that arise in therapy can be analysed usefully for therapeutic practice. The focus is on the particular situation of kinship care families where family or friends are caring for children without birth parents being present. In the process of family members negotiating the entitlement to care and to be cared for, multiple possibilities about family constructions and authorities throw up many dilemmas for therapists and families. Based on the author's research study with kinship care families, a method for linking discourse theory and therapeutic practice through the use of discourse analysis and positioning theory is explored, with reference to the hierarchical method of the Co‐ordinated Management of Meaning model. The paper contends that a consideration of ideological dilemmas in conversation is a core part of any therapeutic encounter, which needs to be recognized and considered in order that those involved in therapy may reflect on several possible futures and so open up the space for future decision‐making.

No abstract