Assignment Description
In this assignment, you will complete a model description for the modern model of therapy selected in the Unit 3 assignment. Examine the potential implications of using the model with your case; analyze how the attributes and assumptions of the model would shape your conceptualization and treatment considerations for the case. Please review your course project information and the Modern Model Description and Case Analysis scoring guide to fully understand the requirements of this assignment.
Note: Only the requirements for the Model Description and Case Analysis need to be included in this assignment. The Case Study from the Unit 3 assignment is not required for this assignment, and as such is absent from the scoring guide. If you choose to include the Case Study from the Unit 3 assignment, it will not contribute to the page counts required for this assignment.
In six or more pages, provide a brief overview of the history of the selected model and its founders. Discuss essential ideas of the model, including assumptions and methods of the approach, as well as how these aspects factor into potentially conceptualizing and working with your case. Expand fully on the initial fit between the case and model that was touched upon in the Unit 3 assignment. Explore how the presenting issues in your case might be understood with your chosen model as well as how the model might be beneficial in working with the case. Cite professional and academic sources (textbooks, peer-reviewed articles, books by original theorists), and be sure to address the following topics and implications for your case.
In your Model Description (four or more pages) and Case Analysis (two or more pages) be sure to discuss:
History, Founders, and Essential Ideas
History, development, and founders of the approach.
Essential ideas of the model.
Model Characteristics
Include analysis of how these requirements are conceptualized in the model.
Role of the therapist.
Theory of change.
The target of intervention. Examine what or who is being targeted to effect change when the model as a whole is being used to intervene in a case.
Assessment.
The model’s ideas of normalcy, health, and pathology.
How the model might work with and be sensitive to the cultural and diversity factors.
How the underlying assumptions and tenets of this model align with it being a modern approach to therapy. Analyze whether this is a strength-based or deficit-based model and provide a rationale for your selection.
Examples of intervention from this approach.
Case Analysis
What are the benefits of the chosen model with this case?
How the case would be conceptualized according to the model.
Analyze how specific interventions from the model might impact the case.
When looking at the model chosen for your case, how do you attend to and account for the diversity and cultural factors?
Note: Incorporate the model characteristics into your case analysis as needed. A successful paper will demonstrate that you understand the main ideas of the approach as well as the underlying assumptions implicit in the model.
Modern Model Description and Case Analysis
Introduction
This analysis focuses on the family systems model and its application in the case study involving Jane and her family. Most notably, Jane exhibits aggressive behavior after some significant changes occur in her family structure, such as her mother Gloriana moving in with her boyfriend, and her grandmother starting to work overtime and spending less time at home. This analysis delves into the history, attributes, and assumptions of the family systems model and establishes how the model can help structure the conceptualization of the case and shape treatment consideration, such as collaborative therapy and positive behavior support, which would foster an effective solution for Jane and her family.
History and Founders
The family systems model dates back in the years after world war II when a psychiatrist, Murray Bowen, began an exploration of the relations between schizophrenic patients and their families. At first, the theorist focused on the concept of “undifferentiated family ego mass,” followed by the nuclear and extended family emotional system (Titelman, 2014). The theory developed over two decades, after which Bowen established eight interlocking concepts that span emotional relationships among family members, namely differentiation of self, triangles, nuclear family emotional system, family projection process, multigenerational emotional process, sibling position, societal emotional process and emotional cutoff (Alzoubi, 2018). Fundamentally, the model was founded by Bowen and developed over time with first attempts to understand the relationship between people with behavior disorders and their families. Today, the model is progressively being integrated into the contemporary clinical setting in the context of patients with emotional and behavioral issues.
Essential Ideas of the Model
The essential idea in the family systems model is family as a cohesive emotional unit that impacts the behavior of its members. Most notably, Bowen’s theory established the family as an emotionally interrelated system, whose change in the functioning of one-part leads to changes in the whole system (Alzoubi, 2018). Simply put, the model assumes that the members of each family, despite the variation in personalities, values, and beliefs across different families, are intensely connected emotionally, thus creating a specific pattern. Therefore, when the patterns are altered negatively, they can affect the emotions and behavior of the members, especially those that are highly dependent on the system.
Model Characteristics
Besides several case studies proving its applicability in clinical contexts, an analysis of the model also reveals that it conceptualizes the most common characteristics of scientific models. Specifically, various scholars suggest that one of the features of a model is that it is always related to a target and is designed for a particular purpose (Valk, Driel & Vos, 2007). This requirement is conceptualized by the existence of a subject of research in the model- patients and their immediate family members. Furthermore, the element of “designed for a special purpose” is fulfilled by the fact that the family system models the dynamics of a system, in this case, a family, and elucidates factors that can be applied to other family settings to solve individual problems and dysfunctional families.
Furthermore, the underlying assumptions and tenets of the model align with a modern approach to therapy. Most notably, one of the primary principles of the family systems theory is that communication helps solve problems. This tenet aligns with the modern approach to therapy, which is primarily based on talking therapies. Today, psychotherapy is widely used, whereby patients speak about issues that face them while the therapist helps the former put the problems into perspective.
When the model is used to intervene in a case, the therapist plays the primary role in establishing a connection between a patient’s dysfunctional behavior and underlying family factors. For example, in our case study, it is the therapist’s role to develop a link between Jane’s behavior and the family’s situation, and subsequently, coach the latter to help eliminate the issue. Overall, the therapist is obliged to coach and foster new or initial functional interactions within the system.
Fundamentally, the most crucial target of intervention when the model is used in a given case is the family as a system and the maladaptive behavior. Most notably, for change to be effected, the therapist must target the underlying system in the case. These systems may include parental and sibling relationships. Also, the maladaptive behavior that affects the original pattern of the system is a target of intervention when the theory is applied. Notably, the therapist must establish the connection between the existing problem and the behavior of other family members. In essence, the essential target of intervention when the model as a whole is in use is the family system and the existing maladaptive behavior.
Assessment
Unlike other traditional therapies, which establish an individual’s inner psyche as the root cause of their maladaptive behavior, the family systems model analyzes normalcy, health, and pathology in a different lens. Most notably, the model suggests that self-correcting and self-reinforcing feedback loops in a system can either facilitate or hinder pathology or health, breakdown or resilience (Watson, 2012). In other words, the model views normalcy and health as the outcome of a negative feedback loop within the system, which creates a stable and homeostatic family. On the other hand, pathology is viewed as an outcome of amplified deviation from the normal functioning of a family, or a positive feedback loop.
The family systems model may work and be sensitive to cultural and diversity factors if culturally expansive elements are integrated into the model during an intervention. It is worth noting that each client case may differ depending on the latter’s culture and diversity, and such factors can significantly influence the anticipated change during therapy. For this reason, culturally expansive factors such as gender, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, history, values, and beliefs that surround a family system should be considered during the intervention.
Overall, the family systems theory is a strength-based rather than a deficit-based model because of its nature and approach towards solving problems. As opined by McCaskey, the deficit-based model assumes that ones a problem has been understood, an expert can be identified to analyze it and find a prescription to fix it (cited by Hammond & Zimmerman, n.d.). Arguably, the model focuses primarily on the weakness identified in the individual or group of people. Conversely, the strength-based model holds the perspective that individuals and their families have strengths and the ability to recover from adversities (Hammond & Zimmerman, n.d.). Similarly, despite the family systems theory exploring the problems that create pathology in a family, its primary focus is identifying the strengths and resources within the system that can help the family to recover. The model also involves a series of interventions such as collaborative therapy and positive behavior support (PBS).
Case Analysis
Benefits of the Chosen Model with this Case
One of the most significant benefits of the chosen model in connection with the case study is its ability to foster a more comprehensive view of the issues involved in a specific case, and in turn, facilitate the application of an effective intervention. According to Larson (2007), the family systems model equips the therapist with a broader perception of the client’s problem. In this context, the application of the model can help a therapist have a broader view of the underlying issues that cause Jane’s aggressive behavior, which include the transitions happening in her family. In turn, the availability of a diverse view of the problem can help the therapist implement interventions that reinforce non-aggressive behavior in the patient.
Conceptualization of the Case
Jane’s case scenario can be conceptualized according to the family systems model. Most notably, this conceptualization may begin with an understanding of the patterns in the family, including the emotional connectedness among the members. Thereafter, the patterns can be used to comprehend the alteration in the system, which results in the existing pathology in the patient. Eventually, a negative feedback loop can be reinforced by the therapist to foster family homeostasis and emotional stability as established by the model’s idea of normalcy and health.
Impact of Specific Intervention on the Case
Different interventions from the model, among them, PBS can be implemented to help promote non-problematic behavior in the patient. As the literature suggests, PBS is an evidence-based approach that demonstrates effectiveness in supporting adaptive behavior and addressing behavioral challenges (Hieneman & Fefer, 2017). Hieneman and Fefer (2017) also add that PBS has multiple features, including lifestyle management and comprehensive support plans such as strategies for teaching and management. In particular, the PBS can be used as an intervention, in this case, to teach Jane about the ongoing situation in the family, and enlighten the family on ways in which to re-establish the family relationship.
Besides PBS, collaborative therapy can also be implemented in the case to help strengthen the family relationship and control Jane’s aggressive behavior, which appears to root from the unresolved conflict in the family. Most notably, collaborative therapy involves an active dialogue between the therapist and the client. This intervention can help the therapist understand Jane’s perspective on the ongoing issue and, in turn, facilitate the development of customized solutions that will help re-establish the family ties.
Attending to and Accounting for the Diversity and Cultural Factors in the Case
As noted, client families may be diverse in terms of cultural orientation, beliefs, and other factors, which may either hinder or promote the success of therapeutic interventions. For example, certain practices such as involving parents and children in an open conversation and promoting decentralization of power during therapy, may not be acceptable in all cultures; thus, hindering the family’s recovery process. Therefore, it is essential for a therapist to attend to and account for the diversity and cultural factors to foster the success of the established interventions.
One way to attend to and account for the diversity and cultural factors of the patient and their family is through dialogue. Most notably, indulging in a conversation can help the therapist identify the client’s background, including the latter’s cultural orientation, before introducing an intervention. In this case scenario, dialogue can help the therapist identify that Jane belongs to a marginalized community, and thus develop interventions that consider the client’s diversity.
References
Alzoubi, N.A.F. (2018). Nuclear family emotional system and family projection process in Tennessee William’s period of adjustment. American Studies Journal, 64(2018). doi: 10.18422/64-02.
Hammond, W., & Zimmerman, R. (n.d.). A strengths-based perspective. Resiliency Initiatives. Retrieved from https://www.esd.ca/Programs/Resiliency/Documents/RSL_STRENGTH_BASED_PERSPECTIVE.pdf
Hieneman, M., & Fefer, S. (2017). Employing the principles of positive behavior support to enhance family education and intervention. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(10), 2655-2668. doi: 10.1007/s10826-017-0813-6
Larson, J.H. (2007). The use of family systems theory to explain and treat career decision problems in late adolescence: A review. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 23(4), 328-337. doi: 10.1080/01926189508251363
Titelman, P. (2014). Differentiation of self: Bowen family systems theory perspectives. New York, NY: Routledge
Valk, T.V.D., Driel, J.H.V., & Vos, W.D. (2007). Common characteristics of models in present-day scientific practice. Research in Science Education, 37, 469-488. doi:10.1007/s11165-006-9036-3
Watson, W.H. (2012). Encyclopedia of human behavior (2nd ed.). Burlington, USA: Academic Press.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
