Premium
Frameworks for Practice in the Systemic Field: Part 1 — Continuities and Transitions in Family Therapy Knowledge
Author(s) -
Flaskas Carmel
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
australian and new zealand journal of family therapy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.297
H-Index - 19
eISSN - 1467-8438
pISSN - 0814-723X
DOI - 10.1375/anft.31.3.232
Subject(s) - family therapy , dialogical self , context (archaeology) , narrative , postmodernism , epistemology , systemic therapy , sociology , argument (complex analysis) , practice theory , perspective (graphical) , representation (politics) , psychology , social science , psychotherapist , political science , medicine , geography , philosophy , linguistics , archaeology , cancer , artificial intelligence , politics , breast cancer , computer science , law
This is the first of two articles to map the landscape of practice theory in systemic family therapy. In this first article, the representation of knowledge for practice is explored, and an argument is made that while frameworks remain important, the relationship to them is now more conditional and pragmatic. A particular chronology is offered of the development of family therapy practice theory frameworks, beginning with the frameworks that emerged in the 1960s to the 1970s. An analysis is given of the important transitions in the 1980s and three sets of influences in this decade — ecosystemic epistemology, the feminist challenge and postmodernism — are identified. This reading emphasises hidden continuities in the transition, despite the seemingly discontinuous shifts in practice theory from the beginning of the 1980s to the beginning of the 1990s. Context and relationship are identified as the enduring parameters of systemic family therapy knowledge, though understandings of context and relationship have been recast in the contemporary (post‐1990s) practice theory. The second article will explore the four contemporary influential approaches in Australian family therapy — the Milan‐systemic, narrative and solution‐focused frameworks, and the dialogical perspective — and point to intersections in practice ideas and integrative movements.