Thinking and Working Relationally: Interviewing and Constructing Hypotheses to Create Compassionate Understanding

In the initial interviews of family therapy sessions, the therapist faces the challenge of obtaining and organizing the information that is most relevant toward understanding the essential concerns that families and couples bring to therapy. This article describes the process of clinical interviewing and case conceptualization used in training family therapists at the Ackerman Institute for the Family. This approach helps the therapist bring forward, and organize, specific information into relational hypotheses, or systemic‐relational conceptualizations, that allow both family members and the therapist to understand presenting problems within their relational contexts. While always provisional, relational hypotheses help anchor the therapist in a systemic‐relational frame and provide a conceptual through‐line to guide the ongoing work of the therapy. The process of interviewing and the construction of clear and complex conceptualizations of presenting problems are illustrated through case examples.     

Intersubjectivity and the creation of meaning in the analytic process

By means of a clinical illustration, the author describes how the intersubjective exchanges involved in an analytic process facilitate the representation of affects and memories which have been buried in the unconscious or indeed have never been available to consciousness. As a result of projective identificatory processes in the analytic relationship, in this example the analyst falls into a situation of helplessness which connects with his own traumatic experiences. Then he gets into a formal regression of the ego and responds with a so‐to‐speak hallucinatory reaction—an internal image which enables him to keep the analytic process on track and, later on, to construct an early traumatic experience of the analysand.     

The Philosophical Role of Illness

This article examines the philosophical role of illness. It briefly surveys the philosophical role accorded to illness in the history of philosophy and explains why illness merits such a role. It suggests that illness modifies, and thus sheds light on, normal experience, revealing its ordinary and therefore overlooked structure. Illness also provides an opportunity for reflection by performing a kind of suspension (epoché) of previously held beliefs, including tacit beliefs. The article argues that these characteristics warrant a philosophical role for illness. While the performance of most philosophical procedures is volitional and theoretical, however, illness is uninvited and threatening, throwing the ill person into anxiety and uncertainty. As such it can be viewed as a radical philosophical motivation that can profoundly alter our outlook. The article suggests that illness can change the ways in which we philosophise: it may shape philosophical methods and concerns and change one's sense of salience and conception of philosophy.     

“FILL AND SUBDUE”? IMAGING GOD IN NEW SOCIAL AND ECOLOGICAL CONTEXTS

While the social and ecological landscape of the twenty‐first century is worlds away from the historical‐cultural context in which the biblical myth‐symbols of the image of God and the knowledge of good and evil first emerged, Philip Hefner's understanding that Homo sapiens image God as created co‐creators presents a plausible starting point for constructing a second naïveté interpretation of biblical anthropology and a fruitful concept for envisioning and enacting our human future.     

Germline Manipulation and Our Future Worlds

Two genetic technologies capable of making heritable changes to the human genome have revived interest in, and in some quarters a very familiar panic concerning, so-called germline interventions. These technologies are: most recently the use of CRISPR/Cas9 to edit genes in non-viable IVF zygotes and Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy (MRT) the use of which was approved in principle in a landmark vote earlier this year by the United Kingdom Parliament. The possibility of using either of these techniques in humans has encountered the most violent hostility and suspicion. However it is important to be aware that much of this hostility dates back to the fears associated with In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) and other reproductive technologies and by cloning; fears which were baseless at the time concerning both IVF and cloning the use of both of which have proved to be highly beneficial to humanity and which have been effectively regulated and controlled. This paper argues that CRISPR should by pursued through researh until it is safe enough for use in humans but there is no reason to suppose at this stage that such use will be unsafe or unethical (Collins 2015).     

Diagnoses,Relational Processes and Resourceful Dialogs: Tensions for Families and Family Therapy

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM‐5), given its psychiatric focus on mental disorders in individuals, presents families and family therapists with challenges. Despite considerable controversies over its adoption, the DSM‐5 extends a process of standardizing a language for human and relational concerns. No longer a diagnostic language of professionals alone, its use is medicalizing how mental health funders and administrators, as well as clients, respond to human concerns. For family therapists who practice systemically, particularly from poststructuralist and strengths‐based orientations, many tensions can follow when use of the DSM‐5 is expected by mental health administrators and funders, or by clients who present concerns about themselves or a diagnosed family member. In this paper, I explore how such DSM‐5 related tensions might be recognized, navigated, and negotiated in the practice of family therapy with clients, and with administrators and funders.     

If We Build It,They Will Come: Exploring Policy and Practice Implications of Public Support for Couple and Relationship Education for Lower Income and Relationally Distressed Couples

Over the past decade, public funding for Couple and Relationship Education programs has expanded. As program administrators have been able to extend their reach to low‐income individuals and couples using this support, it has become apparent that greater numbers of relationally distressed couples are attending classes than previously anticipated. Because psychoeducational programs for couples have traditionally served less distressed couples, this dynamic highlights the need to examine the policy and practice implications of more distressed couples accessing these services. This paper reviews some of the most immediate issues, including screening for domestic violence and couple needs, pedagogical considerations, and the potential integration of therapy and education services. We also make suggestions for future research that can inform policy and practice efforts.