A beginner's guide to the problem-oriented first family interview

The large volume and diversity of family therapy resources can often confuse trainees who are in need of more abbreviated guidelines for managing their clinical responsibilities. This paper presents a structured outline of a problem-oriented first family interview for the family therapy supervisor and the beginning family therapist. We view the first interview as an integrated process including the important tasks preceding and following the initial family meeting. After the goals that shape the work of the first interview are described, a step-by-step guide to the twelve phases of the interview is presented: telephoning; forming hypotheses; the greeting; the social phase; identifying the problem; observing family patterns; defining goals; contracting; checklist; revising hypotheses; contacting the referral person; and gathering records. This approach to the first interview integrates a variety of structural and strategic procedures. The guide, intended for use in conjunction with close supervision, may serve as a foundation on which beginning therapists can build their unique styles.     

A systemic view of family therapy ethics

A critical review of the literature on family therapy ethics is used to develop the proposition that a more systemic analysis is needed, one that includes the levels of therapist and society as well as patient (family). These ideas are discussed through reexamining the issues of family secrets, therapist deceptiveness, and therapist advocacy of personal (feminist) values.     

The Relative Effectiveness of Three Compliance Techniques in Eliciting Donations to a Cultural Organization

To compare the relative effectiveness of three compliance techniques during a museum fund-raising drive, 89 individuals were asked to contribute $1 to the museum after having been exposed to an initial request according to one of the following conditions: (1) in the foot-in-thedoor condition, individuals were first asked to sign a petition in support of the museum; (2) in the door-in-the-face condition, they were initially asked for a $5 contribution; (3) in the. low-ball condition, they were asked to contribute 75 cents and then to increase this amount by 25 cents in order to support the children's program: and (4) in the control condition, subjects simply received the target request for $1. The groups differed significantly in terms of the number of individuals who donated, and in the amount of their contributions. The low-ball condition was generally the most effective, especially with respect to the amount of money contributed. This was followed in turn by the door-in-the-face and control conditions, with the foot-in-the-door condition the least effective in virtually every comparison. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for the experimental analysis of compliance, as well as the development of more effective fund-raising programs.