The Problem of Strategy Within the Systemic Therapies*

Held, Barbara S.

doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.1992.tb01734.x

Cited by 20 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, the formal content in psychoanalysis is repressed complexes. Informal content, on the other hand, refers to clients' idiosyncratic assumptions about problem causation (Held, 1992). The process/content distinction shows that in any given counseling or psychotherapy model, formal content subsumes and reexplains clients' informal content.…”

Section: Problems and Changementioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Solution-Focused Counseling for Clients With Religious and Spiritual Concerns

Guterman

Leite

2006

Counseling and Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Problems and Changementioning

confidence: 98%

“…Two levels of content have also been defined by Held (1992): formal content and informal content. Formal content refers to the counselor's assumptions about problem causation that are addressed across cases (Held, 1992). For example, the formal content in psychoanalysis is repressed complexes.…”

Section: Problems and Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Solution-Focused Counseling for Clients With Religious and Spiritual Concerns

Guterman

Leite

2006

Counseling and Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…

To imagine a language is to imagine a form oflife.

Wittgenstein-Philosophical InvestigationsMuch can be commended in the excellent papers by Duncan (1992) and Held (1992). For example, we strongly support Duncan's suggestion that relationship variables such as empathy, warmth, and acceptance are central to therapy.

…”

mentioning

confidence: 61%

Some Afterthoughts on Reading Duncan and Held

Goolishian

Anderson

1992

J Marital Family Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To imagine a language is to imagine a form oflife. Wittgenstein-Philosophical InvestigationsMuch can be commended in the excellent papers by Duncan (1992) and Held (1992). For example, we strongly support Duncan's suggestion that relationship variables such as empathy, warmth, and acceptance are central to therapy. Held holds out promise for commonalities, clarity, and organization to assist us through the chaotic diversity and the atmosphere of crisis that have beset our field as the systems era disintegrates.There can be little doubt, as Duncan (1992) implies, that the most overlooked and yet most consistently found variables relating to therapy outcome are often lumped together under the rubric oftherapist relationship variables. Patterson (1984) suggests that relationship variables such as warmth and genuineness are more related to what happens in therapy than all other variables combined. The role of interpretation, suggestion, reeducation, instruction, specific interventions, and other therapist-induced intrusions pale, according to Patterson, when compared to the role and importance of relationship variables. Patterson (1984) also suggests (as Duncan implies) that somehow the relationship in therapy extends to the broader interpersonal context and that this is what makes for system change outside the therapy context. The specific definition, application, and role of these important issues and variables, however, are quite unclear in the therapy literature.Held (1992) reminds us that the philosophical implications of our theories are central to their clinical application. Her attempts to find common characteristics across the broad spectrum of family therapies rest heavily on her use of the concepts of realism and antirealism. It appears to us that the convergence in practice posited by Held may have more to do with the futility of therapy than it does with any other single issue. We would agree with her apparent conclusion. The distinction and import of this realist/ antirealist dimension collapses in the enactment ofthe dramas oflife and psychotherapy. It truly makes little practical difference in terms of what happens. As Duncan (1992) also implies, it is the import of the meaning that counts in therapy not the truth or realism ofthe meaning. Held (1992) reduces the importance of therapeutic and relationship variables to this realist/antirealist dimension. In accomplishing this reduction, she finds congruence and commonality across disparate positions.However, more importantly for us, her definition of antirealism is close to that commonly accepted by family therapists as radical constructivism and second-order cybernetics. This constructivist position is widely held in the family therapy community. It has serious limitations and constraints. It is a cognitive view that describes meaning as existing only in the head of a single person. It is a theoretical stance that seems very close to the earlier perspective of symbolic interaction (Mead, 1934). The symbolic interactionist perspective considers perso...

show abstract

“…Use of a ''clandestine'' therapeutic stance Some have criticized the covert or opaque approach suggested by strategic therapy as being manipulative and even unethical (Duncan, 1992;Held, 1992;Wendorf & Wendorf, 1985). Such concerns should not be taken lightly or dismissed as invalid, as some research suggests clients may prefer a clinical process that is more inductive and accommodative and less directive (e.g., Butler & Bird, 2000;Butler & Wampler, 1999).…”

Section: Directives and Interventions As Perturbationsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…During the mid-1980s and early 1990s strategic family therapy was sharply criticized as being covert, manipulative, and even unethical in its practice (Duncan, 1992;Held, 1992;Wendorf & Wendorf, 1985). Noteworthy debates were held during conferences and in the pages of scholarly journals (e.g., Dell, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconceptualizing Strategic Family Therapy: Insights from a Dynamic Systems Perspective

Gardner¹,

Burr²,

Wiedower³

2006

Contemp Fam Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As one of the more mature marriage and family therapy (MFT) models, strategic family therapy has a distinguished and colorful history. Part of that history includes an era when strategic therapy was considered by some to be manipulative and even unethical. Recent advances in our understanding of the behavior of complex natural systems via dynamic systems theory may shed new light on the process of strategic family therapy and help us understand more fully the underlying purposes of the preferred therapeutic stance and clinical interventions of this model. We briefly review the theoretical and empirical literature associated with strategic therapy, followed by a detailed description of dynamic systems theory concepts. We conclude by linking the theory and practice of strategic therapy to the science of dynamic systems as a means of understanding why strategic therapy is an effective form of brief therapy.

show abstract

The Problem of Strategy Within the Systemic Therapies*

Cited by 20 publications

References 28 publications

Solution-Focused Counseling for Clients With Religious and Spiritual Concerns

Solution-Focused Counseling for Clients With Religious and Spiritual Concerns

Some Afterthoughts on Reading Duncan and Held

Reconceptualizing Strategic Family Therapy: Insights from a Dynamic Systems Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About