The Milan Principles of Hypothesising, Circularity and Neutrality in Dialogical Family Therapy: Extinction, Evolution, Eviction… or Emergence?

Abstract

The primary aim of the three Milan principles of hypothesising, circularity and neutrality was to proffer an effective methodology for interviewing families, with a secondary aim of casting off the stereotypical personal therapist qualities such as intuition, charisma and concern. The progression of the principles from the original Milan model through to contemporary approaches is intriguing. The following article consists of two sections. First it tracks the progression of the three principles through the Milan, post‐Milan and postmodern approaches to family therapy. Given their recursive nature, they are revealed as responsive to developments in theory and practice, as well as the influence of the wider societal context. The second section of the article explores hypothesising, circularity and neutrality in the contemporary approach of dialogical family therapy. The relevance of the three principles to the therapeutic process, the therapeutic role and the therapeutic relationship is considered. Such an exploration does not seek definitive answers or ‘truths’, but seeks to conceptualise a vague ‘knowing’ that there is continual learning and growth in grappling with the tensions in this field, in remaining ever curious, in asking the questions …

Change is an Ongoing Ethical Event: Levinas, Bakhtin and the Dialogical Dynamics of Becoming

“…In the last decades, relational and dialogical practices have emerged within a contextual approach to mental health (Brown, ; Larner, ; Seikkula, ; Shotter, ). The case we present is drawn from a dialogical practice inspired by Open Dialogue Approach, as developed in Western Lapland, Finland (Aaltonen, Seikkula & Lehtinen, ; Seikkula, Aaltonen, Alakare, Haarakangas, Keränen & Lethinen, ; Seikkula & Arnkil, ).…”

Gender‐related Issues in Couple Therapists’ Internal Voices and Interactional Practices

“…Circularity has also been associated with the therapist's neutrality toward his or her own beliefs and value systems (Selvini‐Palazzoli, Boscolo, Cecchin & Prata, ; Tomm, ). Such a neutral stance on the part of the therapist facilitates the introduction of different internal hypothesising voices (Rober, ) and enhances the therapist's awareness of his or her own assumptions on which these voices are based (Brown, ). The feminist critique of circular causality, on the other hand, points out that these ideas encourage therapists to avoid stance‐taking in situations of inequality (MacKinnon & Miller, ; Walters, Carter, Papp & Silverstein, ), which can lead to equal distribution of responsibility in situations of structural injustice (Kurri & Wahlstromm, ) and to reinforcement of socio‐cultural inequalities in general (Knudson‐Martin, ; Knudson‐Martin & Huenengard, ).…”

Therapeutic moments are the key: foster children give clues to their past experience of infant trauma and neglect

“…However, it is precisely the rarity of breakthroughs that requires the therapist to seek an ‘attitude of constant questioning, an ability to face dilemmas without needing too many certainties’ (Bertrando, , p. 170). A dialogical approach to family therapy in this context requires a response to the child's clues in the ‘realm of the between … as emerging from beyond theory and practice’ (Brown, , p. 262). The therapeutic moments and the questions that emerge offer an increased awareness, sensitivity and attunement to the subtle moments.…”