The document summarizes the development of family therapy from the mid-1980s to the present. It discusses the shift from constructivism to social constructionism as the main theoretical framework. Social constructionism emphasizes that problems are shaped by language and wider social and cultural contexts rather than just family dynamics. It also focuses on how meanings are jointly constructed through conversations and interactions. The role of the therapist became less about expertise and more about facilitating collaborative conversations. Research studies explored topics like therapeutic processes, outcomes, and comparisons between family therapy and other treatment approaches. The document concludes by connecting the different phases and approaches in family therapy and considering possible future developments.

2. B O O K R E P O R T E R
Third phase- mid-1980s to
The present day.
Chapter 3,5&6
By Laurenildo
Couple & Family Counsulling
School
Worcerst 2014 South Africa.

3. The third phase looks at shift from constructivism to social constructionism.As
the main theoretical frame work for the field, this phase is called twenty. First
century characteried both by a great integration between different approach to
family therapy. Also the third phase there´s a growing of the cultural contexts
that shape both,families and therapist´s beliefs. There was a movement in this
phase articulated by ken Gergen, Lynn Hoffman and others from USA. In france
by Michel Foucault and in Australia by Michael White. The seeds for this
movement came from therapists inspired by feminist perspectives and outside
of family therapy, the roots of social constructionism and feminism in the USA.
In this phase as well there was some critiques of family therapy and it lead to a
realization that family life including the development of problems was shaped
by language. There was a think that the power of conversation in families to
create experience. Social constructionism proposes that commonly seen
patterns of actions in families are produced not just by the idiosyncratic
dinamics of each family,but is necessitated by the demands of the wider society
wthin a family is located. The pattern of family behaviour so frequently
encountered by family therapists, that of the “over involved” wife/mather and
husband/father, suddently appears in a new light: As a necessary form,that
necessity derives from its ability to reproduce the personality
characteristics,relationship patterns and behavioural orientations that are
functional for continual operation of the contemporary social formation.
Despite social changes women are still more likely than men to carry the burden
of care for the children and to be more centred around the home. This is not
simply a personal choice but one shaped by a variety of economic and practical
necessities dictated by the society they live within, however associated with any
given society is a web of discourses or ideologies, such as that women are
naturally maternal since they are seen to be more emotionally
responsive,nurturing,no-competitive and so on.In this way a set of rules and
beliefs about family life are reproduced across the generations.
The production of dominant systems of ideas and meanings ideologies is
regarded in social constructionism as shaped and maintained according to

4. distributions of power,this include an anphases on context and interpersonal
processes in creating joint actions and mutually constructed meanings. Strategic
interaction,an acknowledgement of the importance of power and on the
exchange of ideas or feedback. Social constructionism argues that meanings are
jointly created through the dynamic processes of conversations. Rather than
focusing on individual characteristics, on traits,the focus is on how individual
experience is fundamentally social and interpersonal,also the social
constructionism emphasize that interactions are invariably connected to
power,and that language use defines power. Both systemic theory and social
constructionism emphasizes the importance of the contexts and how these are
internalized into the dynamic of family interactions. Perhaps systemic theory
has paid less attention to the wider social and cultural context, though the
importance of the wider social context and family dinamics. For me it´s so fanny
the view of this phase. The view was,the dynamics is not that cause the
problems,but more that the problem saturated ways of talk about difficulties
can produce problems.
The problem determined system (Anderson and Goleshean) the reflecting
team,the work of Michael White and David Epston with Narrative therapy and
the just therapy groups provide a frame work for understanding developments
in theory and practice during this third phase. Also the social constructionism is
interested in developing theories about links between individual experience and
society. One of the most vivid metaphors used was that of the looking glass self.
This metaphor was used to propose that our identities,our sense of self was
constructed from the social interactions in which we take part in these
interactions others act like a mirror in presenting us with images of our
self,people are seen as fundamentally social. Without others with who to
interact we can not have a self. Social constructionism shares with systemic
theory an anphases on the centrality of relationship.We only became people
through being involved in a social world of meanings through our interactions
with others. An important difference between constructivism and social
constructionism is that the latter takes as it central point that there are social
realities.It´s not simply suggested that there is a real objective world “out there”

5. but that there are dominant beliefs,explanations,ways of thinking about the
world. The third phase is much less characterized by techniques of family
therapy as much as orientations to work with families. However a number of
what might be described as techeniques or approach include.
- Reflecting team process- Brief solution focused
- Narrative therapies- Writing therapy
- Externalizing problems
- Interviewing the internalized other
- Writing
- Feminist approach
The role of the therapist in third phase continues to be of a non-expert. This
third phase also is a conection of the all three phase of the development of
systemic therapy. Also the approach can be seen to be an awareness that
problems and negative interactional patterns are held in places by
constroctive patterns of beliefs. Trypically families descrive problems in all or
nothing terms,such as always,never only and nothing which serve to narrow
thinking and produce a kind of tunnel vision “Dallos 1991”. Termed these
pre-emptive constructs and Similarly Beck in his cognitive theory of the
pression saw them as rigid and constraining cognitive shemas. Exploring
exception serves to challenges these rigid beliefs and allows some new ways
of seeing the relationship and the problem(Eron and Lund 1993). From these
new perseptions it´s is possible generate further new solutions or exceptions
this idea of exceptions is also evident in most contemporary approach. White
and Epston´s enphasis on unique outcomes or families stories showing
execptions of competence to their dominant stories of incompetence.

6. CHAPTER 5 –Research and evaluation
This chapter talk about the relationship between system family therapy and
researchers. How it has been interesting also it´s talk about the conclusion
that they had by the observed during this era,that therapist and a research
were of the same species(atthough the therapist had more second class
status) there was a fascinating range of studies based on the analysis of
transcripts therapy sessions. With the advent of video recording. These
studies expanded to inclui observations of the interrelationship between
models of communication. Some importants topics from the chapter five that
I would like to mention are;
-Science, research and systemic therapy.
There was a criticism that systemic family therapy has lacked rigorous
research.Compatibility with scientific method can readily be seen both in
terms of the process and the practice of family theraphy. Systemic family
therapy is not only compatible with the principles of natural sciences but
more so with the profound devolapments in the social sciences.
VARIETIES OF RESEATCH-
There is an assumption among trainus and is many experienced family
therapists that research involves a choice between giving families a variety of
questionnaires or tests or alternatively interviewing them in some way.
-EVALUATION RESEARCH.
A much respeated critique of family therapy has been that there has been
inadequate research designed to evaluate its effectiveness in comparison to
other treatments and in terms of types of problems and family variables.

7. GROUP COMPARISON EVALUATIVE STUDIES.
Comparison of systemic family therapy to others forms of therapy such as
cognitivetherapies also comparisons effectiveness of systemic therapies for
different tippes of disorder. The therapeutic alliance , the relationship between
the family and the therapist and haw this relates to the affectiveness of
different types of interventios, how changes occurs, differents stages in therapy,
changes in family dynamics, family believfs and emocional dynamics. There was
others comparison like the efficacy of Milan family therapy for dis turbed
children and their families, also the clenical and theorical impact of a controlled
trial of family therapy in anorexia nervosa, and using the partner in the
psychosocial treatment of schizophrenia a multiple single case design.
OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES AND QUESTIONNAIRE AND SEF-REPORT STUDIES.
Observational studies have been highly important in systemic family therapy,
they laid the basis for ideas regarding family dynamics. An example of the use of
observational measueres has been the work on expressed emotion. Most
observational studies have involved such structured observation and have
adopted a quantitative approach. In addition the researchers also commented
on their own reactions possible influences they may reactions possible
influences they may have had on the family and so on. Such studies though
making strong claims for scientific objectivity measures in that family members
in completing tests and questionnaires are offering self-reports their view of
how they fell and of the family dynamics.Questionnaires vary in their design but
most contain a balance of closed vs open-ended questions. In addition
questionnaires may include a range of open-ended questions which invite
participants to offer their own views in their own words. It is possible to phrase
these in the format of circular questions.

8. The aim of process studies is not simply to produce evaluations of therapy in
terms of outcome but to reveal more about the nature of the therapeutic
process the active ingredients of therapy. Many therapists write about what
works and why , may not closely match what, for exemple, families perceive to
be helpful.
CHAPTER 6- CONNECTING THE THEADS.
In this final chapter we can see differents approaches in systemic therapy but
also some connections to others therapies and to consider possible
developments in the twenty first century. I can see that chapter 6 is a review
and summary of the whole book. The authors made a summary of all phases.
They show us the beginning of the curiosity of the therapists and amongmental
health professionais also the developemment in the three phases .The second
phase with a emphasis on the subjective and unique nature of family and
perspectives drawn from the third phase. We saw in the chapter 3 contempory
approaches are much inspired by social constructionist theories , and the
developments of interest in language conversation and a collaborative approach
to therapy. The third phase puts much les emphasis on techniques and more on
the process of family therapy as a collaborative conversation.This approaches
exist alongside solution focused therapy which is inspired by strategic
approaches in the third phase. Social constructionism in some ways turn the
clock back,alerting us that family life can be predictable and rulebound,but with
the recognition that these tendencies are not simply, this may be one of the
most positive legacies that social constructionism brought, and that it allouws to
regard various approaches as different discourses or ways of explaining
problems without getting caught in unhelpful debates about which is correct.
The research into how psychotherapies work has been revealing a number of
common factors, such as the importance of therapeutic alliance. The book´s
authors finalise this chapter with this words, our hope is that this book will be
used both as a resource for people new to the field and that mor experienced
practitioners will see themselves and their ideas in these pages and be
simulated to continue to develop innovative practice in the field of family
therapy and systemic practice. Words counted 1880