THE FEMINIST CRITIQUE IN EPISTEMOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: QUESTIONS OF CONTEXT IN FAMILY THERAPY

Family therapy's neglect of social context as a factor in its continuing distortion of women's issues has led feminist critics to wonder if systems-based psychotherapy truly serves women. Rather than heralding the demise of family therapy, however, the feminist critique is here taken to open up concerns central to the epistemological discussion underway in the field. At first, these have to do with the functions of "punctuation,""boundary" and "closure" in systemic epistemology. Later, the central question becomes that of the place given to context in systems epistemology generally, as well as family therapy in particular. Several implications of a more lively interest in context for family therapy's work are explored. These are discussed with respect to women's issues, clinical epistemology, and the challenge to raise novel questions in family therapy.     

THE NEW EPISTEMOLOGY AND THE MILAN APPROACH: FEMINIST AND SOCIOPOLITICAL CONSDDERATIONS*

While the new epistemology and related models of therapy are claimed to have radical social implications, the Milan approach is in ill repute amongst feminists who see it as conservative in relation to women's issues. This paper explores the sociopolitical implications of the new epistemology and the Milan approach, concluding that, while second order cybernetics has greater potential to incorporate a radical social analysis, it has, nevertheless, failed to do so. The application of second order cybernetics in family therapy appears to be constrained by the sociopolitical conservatism of its proponents.     

Quality and quantity: Reconstructing feminist methodology

Many feminist sociologists have rejected quantitative in favor of qualitative methods, a position which might seem justified by feminist critiques of positivism. This paper examines both quantitative and qualitative methods in light of two major themes in radical feminist epistemology, the critique of objectivity and the politics of the research process, and finds both classes of methods vulnerable. We argue that underlying the argument against quantitative methods is a rejection of abstraction and a dichotomization of methodologies, both of which are inconsistent with feminist insights. We call for a reconstruction of methodology that transforms both quantitative and qualitative techniques in ways informed by feminist epistemology and builds research agendas that integrate both approaches. Her main research interests are in the development of social measures of gender and in the study of the impact of gender and class on consciousness. Her research concerns medical knowledge, social organization, and the health and well-being of women.     

ON THE BRINK OF DECONSTRUCTING SOCIOLOGY: Critical Reading of Dorothy Smith's Standpoint Epistemology

Contrasting Dorothy Smith's critique of sociological discourse with one proposed by post-structural feminists, I argue that Smith's standpoint epistemology based on women's experiences, although an important contribution, is limited as a critique of sociological discourse. This is because it fails to reflect on sociology as itself a dominant discourse of experience.     

Frameworks for Practice in the Systemic Field: Part 1 — Continuities and Transitions in Family Therapy Knowledge

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.     

WHAT'S IN A NAME? SOME CONFUSIONS AND CONCERNS ABOUT CONSTRUCTIVISM

As discussions about so-called 'epistemology' have receded within family therapy, discussions about te doctrine of constructivism have emerged to carry on the underlying impulse of those earlier discussions. This article contends that a constructivist epistemology is not a new doctrine in family therapy, but, rather, reflects a shift in emphasis in that discipline from a nontraditional use to the traditional use of the term "epistemology" uses that coexisted during the 'epistemology' debates of the early 1980s and that were the source of many confusions and logical contradictions. The articale also demonstrates how recent articulations of cosnstructivism have resulted in the same logical contradictions tht were committed during the earlier 'epistemology'; debates. The logic and utility of applying constructivism in particular, and epistemological analysis in general, to the practice of psychotherapy are questioned and considered.     

CRITIQUING THE NEW EPISTEMOLOGIES: TOWARDMINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR A SCIENTIFIC THEORY OF FAMILY THERAPY*

The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze the structures of the new epistemologies. Epistemology is a technical term within the field of scientific philosophy. When it is used looselyby family therapists, confusion results. The central argument of the present author is that the new epistemologies are, in fact, weak theories. It is suggested that the practice of using the term “epistemology” to denote theory or paradigm, be discontinued. A more limited and narrowly defined use for the term “epistemology” is proposed. Specifically, this paper presents: (a) a discussion ofthree areas of philosophy that serve as foundations for the construction of scientific theory, (b)a critical analysis of the new epistemologies, (c) a logical structure for scientific family therapy theory, and (d) minimum requirements for a scientific theory of family therapy.     

Using interpretive sociology to explore workplace skill and knowledge

Drawing on original research, this paper considers the value of interpretive sociology for exploring clerical skill and knowledge and the role of the clerical function in organizations. It offers a critique of both the received view on clerical skill and knowledge and the epistemology generating such a view, and presents an examination of the notion of ‘common sense’. The paper draws to a close by demonstrating how an interpretive methodology can generate fresh insights to clerical work, skill and knowledge and to the clerical function.     

Teaching Family Policy

Abstract

Preparing students to engage in family policy education and advocacy is a challenge and opportunity for departments that teach family studies and family policy courses. Students not only need to know theoretical implications of family policy and how research enhances the theory, but also understand the policy process and how research-based information about family can inform policymaking. These students also need to acquire advocacy skills in order to work effectively in different policy arenas. This article illustrates how university family policy educators can structure curricula to provide students with both knowledge and skills vital to effective participation in family policy formation, analysis and critique.     

Integrating Reflective Practice in Family Therapy Supervision

This paper discusses how to integrate reflective practice in the family therapy supervisory relationship. This enables family therapists to think creatively, be insightful, and develop a range of perspectives regarding systemic formulation and practice. It encourages review of the past and promotes understanding in the present with the aim to improve therapists work with families in the future. Reflective practice encourages independent thinking and learning and helps therapists to develop a systemic process of critical enquiry to investigate and critique their own practice. It encourages therapists to be self‐reflective and develop confidence to think hypothetically regarding change. This allows them to pose questions for exploration, construct a new lens to conceptualise therapy and the therapeutic relationship and develop awareness of the personal as well as the professional self.     

FAMILY THERAPY RESEARCH AND THE “NEW EPISTEMOLOGY”*

Epistemological critiques of the theory and practice of family therapy recently have also been brought to bear on mainstream strategies and methods of research in family therapy. In this paper, it is argued that standard research methods are the only ethically responsible means presently available by which we can assess the efficacy of family therapy. It is also argued that standard research models have already provided data of practical relevance to clinicians, patients and public policy makers and should not be abandoned in haste. Finally, it is argued that there are insufficient grounds for divorce between the “new epistemology” and standard research, since commonplace research designs and methods are far more compatible with systemic thinking than some observers have suggested.     

Narrative Methods for Differential Diagnosis in a Case of Autism

Diagnosis is rarely a straightforward process. This is especially so in psychiatry, where diagnoses are not based on organic biomarkers (e.g., blood tests). Diagnosis can be particularly complicated for children, whose symptoms must be disentangled from typical developmental processes. In this paper, we examine how clinicians use narrative as a method for differentiating a child's autism from a possible co‐morbid seizure disorder. Our approach is conversation analysis, and we show that narrative is a pervasive and endogenous practice for producing warrantable diagnostic knowledge about patients and, as such, forms part of what we term “the practical epistemology of clinical work.”     

Para-Modern Family Therapy: Deconstructing Post-Modernism

As in the arts and humanities and other social sciences, post-modernism is quickly gaining orthodoxy in family therapy. This paper presents a social-realist and deconstructive critique of recent post-modern thought in family therapy. From the perspective of the French philosopher Jacques Derrida, it suggests that family therapy is neither modern nor post-modern, but both/and these alternatives, that is, para-modern. In deconstructive thought, philosophical dualities like realism/social constructionism, cybernetic/post-cybernetic, systemic/narrative co-exist in an absurd double logic. Like writers of literature, the para-modern family therapy ‘puts forward’ a theory or method not as an ideology of truth, but as a play of irony. She/he works simultaneously inside and outside family therapy discourse, open to a wide range of images and metaphors.     

Postmodernism and the sacred: reclaiming connection in our greater-than-human worlds

This article addresses the many faces of postmodernism and offers the critique that postmodernism taken up in a particular extremist way can tend to sacrifice the sacred, the spiritual, and the recognition of our "greater than human" worlds in a quest for the particular. In response to this critique, I speak to a postmodern family therapy practice that is informed by values of connectedness, community, and communion; enacted through love and pragmatics; and committed to recognition of our obligation to ecological practice.     

(Re)Conceptualizing Family Communication: Applying Deetz’s Conceptual Frameworks within the Field of Family Communication

This article explores trends in metatheoretical approaches to research within family communication studies. In particular, in this work I critique the traditional philosophical perspective, arguing that the isolation of paradigms, and the positioning of research as post-positivist or interpretivist or critical, limits the production and capacity of knowledge, and therefore the field as a whole. As a response, I put forth Deetz’s (2001) discursive orientations as a more inclusive and comprehensive perspective from which family communication research should be conducted, with the crux of the argument being that the fluid nature of Deetz’s orientations positions knowledge as existing between and within, therefore allowing research to be both/and instead of either/or, and subsequently producing knowledge that is inherently more complete and inclusive.     

The feminist/emotionally focused therapy practice model: an integrated approach for couple therapy

Emotionally focused therapy (EFT) is a well-developed, empirically tested practice model for couple therapy that integrates systems, experiential, and attachment theories. Feminist family therapy theory has provided a critique of biased assumptions about gender at play in traditional family therapy practice and the historical absence of discussions of power in family therapy theory. This article presents an integrated feminist/EFT practice model for use in couple therapy, using a case from practice to illustrate key concepts. Broadly, the integrated model addresses gender roles and individual emotional experience using a systemic framework for understanding couple interaction. The model provides practitioners with a sophisticated, comprehensive, and relevant practice approach for working with the issues and challenges emerging for contemporary heterosexual couples.     

THREE APPROACHES TO FAMILY THERAPY: A STUDY OF CONVERGENCE AND DIVERGENCE*

The literature on professional development suggests that the process of segmentation or specialization within a profession logically accompanies the aggregation, dissemination and application of new and expanding bodies of knowledge. The present study empirically examines the extent and dimensions of this process of segmentation within the family therapy movement by comparing the belief and action systems of 1000 experienced family therapists oriented to one of three major models of family therapy. Two theses are suggested which may explain the findings depicting a unique patterning of similarities and differences among the three models; each implying different directives and implications for the continued growth of the interdisciplinary practice of family therapy.     

Frameworks for Practice in the Systemic Field: Part 2 — Contemporary Frameworks in Family Therapy

This is the second of two articles to map the landscape of practice theory in systemic family therapy. The first article gave a particular chronology of the development of family therapy practice theory, beginning with the frameworks that emerged in the 1960s‐1970s and then tracing the transitional decade of the 1980s. The convergences of three sets of influences — ecosystemic epistemology, the feminist challenge and postmodernist ideas — led to the changed landscape of post‐1990 practice theory. This second article picks up at this point, mapping four contemporary influential approaches in Australian family therapy — the Milan‐systemic, narrative and solution‐focused frameworks, and the dialogical perspective. Social constructionist and narrative ideas together constitute the dominant common theory influence in the post‐1990 practice frameworks, although intersected and used in different ways in the different frameworks. Throughout the history of the development of practice theory, context and relationship remain the enduring parameters of the systemic family therapy field.