Feeling Understood in Family Therapy

Abstract

a This paper attempts to highlight a common experience, but neglected topic, in family therapy: that of feeling understood. Aspects of postmodernism and contemporary psychoanalysis are revisited to create a theme of understanding as a fully relational activity -making sense together through language of that which lies beyond language. Some ideas on preparing to try to understand are discussed.

Containment, curiosity and consultation: an exploration of theory and process in individual systemic psychotherapy with an adult survivor of trauma

“…Contracting in this way helps to initiate the therapeutic relationship, a psychological ‘container’ for the client's healing process. Research suggests that the therapeutic relationship is twice as significant as therapeutic technique in clients' views of what is helpful in treatment (Pocock, 1997). Who would be able to talk freely if they did not feel comfortable, especially when a conversation is intensely personal, guilt‐ridden or shameful?…”

Looking again at the team dimension in systemic psychotherapy: is attending to group process a critical context for practice?

“…Speed (1997), in her editorial to a special edition of the Journal of Family Therapy , poses such a question when she writes: ‘How far should we draw on existing analytic models, or should we take a fresh look and construct our own which might be just as adequate?’ (p. 235). Pocock (1997), in the same issue, reminds us of the role that psychoanalysis has played for family therapy as an ‘oppositional and disregarded other’, while Donovan (2003) has argued that there exists a ‘potentially impoverishing effect on the wider therapy field by reducing opportunities for cross‐fertilization’ (p. 117).…”

Border Crossing and he Integrity of Frameworks

“…Of course, it is true that these discussions have emerged within the context of a historical opposition (and even hostility) to psychoanalysis in family therapy discourse. David Pocock (1997) argues that psychoanalysis has functioned as the oppositional and discredited 'other' for mainstream family therapy. However, Pocock also makes the point that while this oppositionality has been the dominant story about the relationship of systemic therapy to psychoanalysis, there is a less visible history of family therapists who have been doggedly nomadic in moving from the systemic territory across the border of psychoanalysis, and others who have strayed in and out of psychoanalysis in more specific and strategic ways.…”

“…Consequently, in the recent border crossing group, we find work which shows a critical appreciation of Comment 223 postmodernist ideas, and which intersects particular psychoanalytic understandings, allowing them to sit side-by-side systemic thinking. From Britain, I will name as one example Pocock's work on understanding (Pocock, 1995(Pocock, , 1997, and from Australia, Glenn Larner's work on narrative in child psychotherapy and the resonance of notknowing as an idea in psychoanalysis and family therapy (Larner, 1996(Larner, , 2000. My own work belongs in this group, and has addressed quite specifically the therapeutic relationship (Flaskas, 1994(Flaskas, , 1996(Flaskas, , 1997.…”

“…In his discussion of the relationship of systemic therapy to psychoanalysis, Pocock (1997) queries the role and function of borders in therapy frameworks, and the relationship of borders to establishing and protecting professional identities, and to defending territories. However, if we are to aim for a self-consciousness about territorial acts of border defence, we should also aim for some self-consciousness about the practices of border crossing.…”