Family Therapy Training: The Institutional Base

The papers that follow present the findings of three surveys of the institutional base for training in family therapy. ¹ 1 Names and addresses of all facilities known to provide education in this field as of 1980 are available at a charge of U.S. $10.00; checks are to be made out to Family Process.
The surveys were initiated and conducted independently. To some extent they overlap. This is particularly true of the Bloch and Weiss effort in that it does not limit itself to a sector of the training process bounded by a single discipline, as do the other two papers. Despite some overlap, each paper stands independently; of particular interest are the varied analyses and special emphases each provides. We hope that their publication will stimulate similar studies in the years to come, so that family therapy can take advantage of the observation of its own growth and development. We are accustomed to including ourselves in the field of observation, so far as the family system is concerned; it seems reasonable to extend these perspectives to the more macroscopic field of the institutional development of family therapy. Of particular importance to us, and I believe to science generally, is the opportunity to observe a paradigmatic shift taking place with the development of this new field and the adoption of its associated epistemology by the senior professions of social work, psychology, and psychiatry. Family systems theory and practice have implications that extend beyond their own borders; they can make a significant contribution to the systems revolution that is taking place in science generally. These studies should be of use to practitioners, teachers, and students alike. It seems to me that their implications are clear: that training in family therapy at a sophisticated level is now to be a regular part of the future training of psychiatrists (possibly all physicians), psychologists, social workers, and psychiatric nurses and that, in addition, as a second distinctive career line, there is the new profession of family therapist, with its own entry point and academic pathway. My view is that society will support both lines of career development as far into the future as one can reasonably hope to see. The only logical ending to this will be a shift in the medical model from its present linear definitions of illness and treatment to an ecosystemic, biopsychosocial definition. These describe a historical crosssection through that process.