摘要:

It is no secret that Gregory Bateson was often disturbed by interpretations and translations of his ideas by pragmatically oriented therapists. In his later years Bateson and I occasionally discussed the strategy of connecting ecosystemic epistemology to clinical contexts. One of his last letters to me proposes the form of how he thought the “battle,” as he called it, should be carried out. A part of this letter is shared with the reader as one of Gregory's final metaph

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00001.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00003.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

Misconceptions concerning the existence and scope of the legal privilege for communications in therapy are considered. Basic limitations on the protection afforded by the privilege are treated, as are some major specific exceptions and waivers, particularly as they raise special difficulties for the therapist who works with groups, couples, and families. Practical suggestions for the therapist and directions for policymaking by the helping professions are presented.

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00011.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

A review of theoretical mechanisms underlying paradoxical interventions is undertaken in an effort to classify them into three broad types: redefinition, symptom escalation and crisis induction, and redirection. A list of individual and family patient characteristics and problems particularly applicable to each type of paradoxical intervention is presented along with contraindications for use. Last, implications for training and cautions as to their use are presented.

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00025.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

There is currently great interest in the use of paradox in psychotherapy. Unfortunately, there is also considerable confusion and misunderstanding of paradox, owing, in part, to the lack of a comprehensive theory that explains the role of paradox in human problems. This paper does not address itself to such theory but explores some cultural and epistemological components of therapists' misperceptions and misattributions of “paradox

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00037.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00042.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00044.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00045.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00047.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

Connie Hansen participated in my project, “Methodology for Studying Family Interaction,” in the mid 1960s. One of the purposes of that project was to compare several groups of families, including “normals.” Connie suggested that it might provide a rich source of data if she were to “live in” with a few of the “normal” families and observe them day to day on their own territory. (A year or so before, Dr. Jules Henry had given a talk to the MRI staff about living‐in with “schizogenic” families, and I believe that Connie had discussed her idea with him.)Connie was an experienced family therapist — she was one of Virginia Satir's first students — and a most perceptive observer. She lived with three “normal” families for a week each during 1966–67; she was excited by the wealth of material and exhausted by the experience. She tried to develop a group of central themes from her data and gave me a preliminary draft of a paper in 1969. It clearly contained a number of important observations about the complexities and subtleties of family systems and some beginning attempts at conceptualization. She struggled for years to clarify and elaborate on her material. Several times she sent me portions and fragments of new drafts, each with additional insights, but she was never satisfied with her efforts.It seems a fitting tribute to Connie — she died early in 1979 — to attempt to put together her various drafts. We wanted to publish this very important material in a readable form and yet still preserve the immediateness, enthusiasm, and vividness of her observations. I hope, that if she were to read it, she would not be overly critical of this final draft.JULES RISKIN, M.D.It is a special privilege for me to participate in this posthumous publication of Connie Hansen's unique contribution to the further knowledge of family interaction. She died before the material could be published.I feel particular gratitude to the young woman who entered my first training program in 1961 at the Mental Research Institute. This was a time when such training seemed “far out” and was regarded as “probably only a fad.” She was willing to face the risks inherent to her professional standing by choosing to do this training.It was this same courage together with her imagination and curiosity and her willingness to document her experience without judging it that resulted in the article now being published.Farewell, Connie, and thank you f

ISSN:0014-7370    

DOI:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1981.00053.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1981

数据来源: WILEY