Napier and Whitaker (1978) say, “every member is important,” and when families "elect" to attend therapy without a particular family member, they are not only deciding to go against the therapist’s request, they are also sending a subtle (or not so subtle) message to the missing member: The missing member will wonder, "Do I matter?" The battle for structure is, in essence, the decision over who will attend the therapy meeting. This “battle” between family therapists' attempt to manage who attends therapy and the family's discomfort with meeting together is the battle for structure. 10), and they present obstacles to meeting together, as a result. According to Napier and Whitaker, families know that if they come to therapy together, “their whole world would be exposed" (p. Napier and Whitaker (1978) posit that when family members request therapy, and the therapist requests they bring their entire family to therapy, the response is resistance (discomfort, fear, etc.). While family therapy has moved beyond these views of the therapist-client relationship, there are still ways in which family therapists can use Napier and Whitaker's "battles" to inform and enhance their work. In their now classic family therapy text, The Family Crucible (1978), Napier and Whitaker outline two main “battles” between therapists and clients: The battle for structure and the battle for initiative.Īt the time of their writing, concepts of resistance and unconscious processes were accepted within the family therapy field this may have been due, partly, to the fact that many family therapy pioneers were trained as psychiatrists.
0 kommentar(er)
