Comparing & Contrasting Systemic Therapy @Myassignmenthelp.com

Question - Compare and contrast systemic theories, methods, and models from your own core model, demonstrating the differences between the two models? Answer - Comparing and contrasting systemic Therapy Systemic therapy can be defined as a form of family therapy. It does not follow the earlier forms of therapy. They address the people not at the individual level like the traditional forms of therapy. They deal with the interaction of the individual between the various groups. The patterns of interaction and the dynamics are related in this technique. It considers the systemic relationships and the interpersonal relationships between the groups. The groups can be couple or members of the family (Child Trends, 2013). The relationship between the groups is identified in case of diagnosis of a therapy that is related to the problems of psychology. The foundation of this theory is known as the systematic Meta theory. It was developed by Ludwig Von Bertalanffy. It is valid model that has been accepted universally. According to this theory, the system is made of number of elements. There is interaction between the various elements. There is internal order in each system. The internal order maintains the equilibrium level of the system. If the internal order is disrupted then the level of equilibrium is altered. Apart from the systemic therapy there are other approaches to counseling. They are the behavioral therapies, psychoanalytical, psychodynamic therapies and the humanistic therapies. The therapies related to behavior focus on the ways in which an individual does behave. The psychoanalytic therapies focus on the patterns of behavior that develops from the childhood. They are unconsciously developed during the childhood. The thoughts and behavior developed during childhood affect the individual in their adult life. The humanistic therapies are related to human behavior and they focus on the growth, development and the various responsibilities of the human beings. The strengths and weakness of the individuals are identified by the counselors. They seek help for the development of self esteem (systemis.ch, 2015). Systemic treatment is a type of psychotherapy (Stanton Welsh, 2012). It addresses conduct and mental manifestations inside the connection of individuals' normal lives and interpersonal relations and associations. The key controlling rule in systemic treatment is the concentrate on the framework as opposed to the single person (Winek, 2010). The systemic crew treatment methodology sees challenges and issues as emerging in the connections, collaborations, dialect and conduct designs that create between people inside a family framework, instead of in the people themselves. It serves to avoid the long haul antagonistic effect of anxieties and weights of way of life changes, such as formative clashes for kids and youths, through perceiving and supporting kids and families amid move and change (Woolfe, 2010). Other long haul changes for kids and families, coming about because of systemic help have been reported including, reinforcing family working and connections, advancing sound family structure and correspondence examples, enhancing flexibility and encouraging strong systems, frameworks and the assets of the individuals (taeterinnen.org, 2008). The traditional rule created through systemic family treatment additionally sees the couple's relationship (as the littlest framework), the family framework and organization hierarchical frameworks as assets (Achouri, 2015). The individual parts can create capacities and qualities additionally behavioral unsettling influences. On the off chance that a part of a gathering showcases mental or behavioral aggravations, this individual is viewed as the side effect transporter for the whole framework (Hedges, 2015). This individual is regularly avoided from the gathering/framework or the reason for all troubles and clashes may be ascribed to them (Beckinstitute.org, 2015). For this situation, the individual no more has free get to the greater part of their assets for the improvement they could call their own identity. Rather, these are certain to the useful unsettling influence and the work that this has for the entire framework (Bor, 2015). Inside the connection of alleged reframing the u ndertaking is to reinterpret experience, activities, snags, errors or lacks in a way that permits them to be depicted as assets (qualities) and to be effectively utilized (Schultheiss, 2015). This includes setting them in an alternate connection (outline). The components of systemic treatment and advising fuse general comprehensive contemplations. The advisor (or mentor) perspectives concerns and circumstances connected with clash from distinctive relationship levels. Contingent upon the position, a few "right" answers may be found to the same inquiry. Here, the framework characterizes the position, the component and its connections to the different components (West, West Bubenzer, 2015). Systemic help and directing makes it feasible for those includes to identify side effects and their capacities and perceive new and formerly obscure viewpoints. It gains an understanding of the mentality of the other included members in the framework. It analyzes examples of correspondence and col laboration. It participates in proper intercession measures for change. It accepts the obligation regarding their own particular activities and develops the hypothesis holistically. There are various approaches to psychotherapy. The approach used on the patient depends on the problem faced by the patient. The style or personality of the Therapist has major influence on the method of psychotherapy used. There are psychologists who use one approach for treating the patients and there some psychologists who use more than one approach for patients treatment based on the need of the patient and the symptoms (Counselling-directory.org.uk, 2015). There is overlap amongst the various approaches theoretically although they are often considered to be distinct. The results are sometimes limited if the psychotherapist sticks to one approach. The psychodynamic approach focuses on analyzing the problem of the patient and identifies the symptoms of the problem. Attachment theories of psychotherapy have become popular recently. The researcher of Psychotherapy has developed this new approach. The approach has been based on neurobiological research. The problematic relationship styles can be understood by this approach (Society for the Advancement of Psychotherapy, 2008). The issues in case of adult relationship can be predicted from the pattern of relationship of the parent with their children. The unconscious psychological problems can be healed by this approach. There will be development of the biological processes of the brain. This will help to develop higher capacity level of the individuals (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2015). The major difference of this approach with the systemic approach is that the systemic approach is that the problem of the patients is understood in a contextual framework. Like the attachment theory it tries to find the relationship between the various dynamics of the families and friends (Worden, 2015). But the systemi c theory is based on certain rules that exist in the system (Counselling-directory.org.uk, 2015). But the attachment theory is not based on any particular rule. In the psychoanalytic approach the thought processes which are mal-adaptive have to be altered with new enriching feelings. It helps to identify the ways in which the thought process is handled. The dysfunctional habits are changed (Rcpsych.ac.uk, 2015). This breaks the cycle of the dysfunctional habitual behaviors. The entire process changes the way of thinking of the patients and makes them optimistic towards life (www.dittoditto.com, 2015). This approach is different from the systemic theory as this approach does not identify the pattern of relationship of the patients with their family or friends. It is a changes the thought process of the individual (Corey, 2013). The interpersonal approach helps to identify the self defeating patterns in a relationship. They try to identify the grass root level of a particular problem. The particular context of a situation is identified by the individuals (Yeo, 2015). They are counseled so that they develop the healthier working habits. The main focus of this approach is to identify the root cause of problems in a relationship. On the other hand, systemic approaches address the problems in the contextual framework. The changes in the current dynamic of the relationships, relationship with the family members and work settings. The roles played by the people in their family are determined. The unspoken rules of the system are identified (Rennie, 2015). The interaction with the various members is investigated. The change in any part of the family system is the main route that gives rise changing symptoms and the various dynamics of change (Brown and Lent, 1992). The approach has been useful when one member of th e family is resistant to the therapy and the change. This will open up new avenues for innovation (Kriz, 2013). The core model that has been chosen is the psychoanalytic therapy. It has been compared and contrasted with the systemic therapy. The psychoanalytic therapy has come from the famous psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud. The psychoanalytic therapies are insight driven. It analyses the past events which has potential effect on the present events of the individual. The sessions provided in the therapy vary according to the course of the individual. On the other hand the systemic therapy is a family centered therapy in which the family members are closely related bring the change in the problems of the individuals. The interaction between each member of the family is observed which brings the change in the individual. The relationship among the individuals in the family can become strenuous as a result of difficulties and differences among the family members. In psychoanalysis the client will talk freely with the therapist. The therapists will advice in a non judgmental environment. According to the psychoanalytic therapy, it is believed that the unconscious feelings and the events of the childhood play an important role in the mental distress of the individual (J, 2015). The psychoanalytic therapy and the systemic therapy differ widely. But the similarity between the two therapies is that it involves a change of frame. The frame of the family therapy is the system whereas the frame of the analytical therapy is unconscious. Despite the two basic differences in approach, the two models of the therapy are reflective and directive form of therapies and each contains the elements of both. Psychoanalytic therapy has ambivalent relationship with the systemic family therapy. The family therapy known as the systemic therapy developed with the commitment to view the behavior of the individual in the terms of relationship with the family members and therapeutic leverage of interpersonal is used rather than intrapersonal process (Flaskas, 2005). In psychoanalysis the analyst tries to help the patient to discover and interpret the unconscious beliefs that interfere with the daily functioning of the individual. The belief of the individual creates symptoms which are painful like depression, anxiety or compulsion disorders. The patient is encouraged to talk freely to the therapist so that all the negative emotions can be eradicated and a new frame of mind can be developed. The main aim of psychoanalysis is to discover the unconscious process that is undergoing in the mind of the individual. However the other psychotherapies are quite different from psychoanalysis. But the family therapy understands the patient on the context of their relationship with the patient. In case of psychoanalysis the psychologist has to complete several years of coursework and has to undergo personal analysis of the patient. In case of family therapy, the social and family dynamics might influence the psychological difficulty of the individual (sagepu b.in, 2015). Apart from difference in the nature of treatment between the psychoanalytic treatment and the systemic therapy there is cultural difference between the two treatments. The systemic world is more openly confiding and it is less formal. The therapists use the life experience explicitly when they are working with the families. It is quite different from the approach of psychoanalysiss. The family therapist tend to indentify and act as challengers of the prevailing orthodox of class , power, gender and medical model that exist among the families and has adverse impact on the individuals. The cultural baggage of the therapist is acknowledged. The therapist adopts the psot modern ideas related to the relativity of discourses and the social construction of the identity via language. The systemic therapy is a collaborative style and addresses the use of own language by the family and acknowledge the limitations of the experience of the individuals with the family members. Unlike the systemic therapy the psychoanalytic therapy arose from the Freuds ideas. It is a combination of the extraordinarily provocative ideas such as infantile sexuality with the conventional lifestyle of the individual. It has no inhibitions in expressing his ideas. The most important paradox of the psychoanalytic theory is that it is based on Freuds work which at some areas and parameters unacceptable and unthinkable. It is sexually disinhibited and violent in nature. According to the psychoanalytic therapy, the individual experience underlie the cultural difference which includes experience of rejection , experience of being left out which can be done by the parents , friends. One of the major ideas of Sigmund Freud which is unacceptable is that there is existence of negative feelings in an individual to an extreme level which creates hatred in the individual, murderous hatred and envy. These negative feelings can be acknowledged safely with continuous session with the therapis t. The negative feelings about the individual can decrease. The negative feelings arise in the individuals as a result of the real life experiences. The systemic view is the symptom of presenting the problem that has been brought by the family or the couple. The solution of the problem is attempted by interaction with the family members. In this therapy the solution i.e. the symptom becomes the problem. The problem of the individual that lies within the family is often seen to be located in one individual within the family. It is a reflection of the interpersonal process which creates the problem. The systemic approach is non blaming and tends to bring a positive change in the individual. On the other hand the analytic approach identifies the symptoms via identifying the mental experiences of the patients that distress and therapists analyze the symbolic and unconscious meaning of the symptoms of the individual. Bertrando (2002) , contrasted the psychoanalytic and the systemic therapy and removed one of the concrete difference that exists between the two therapies (Flaskas and Pocock, 2009). According to him in the psychoanalytic al therapy the relationship of the individuals with the third parties end up being subsumed by transferential relationship in which the individuals become a part. In the systemic therapy the client is taken by the therapist in a metamorphic manner by the hand to the clients families. The systemic therapy is considered to be more open, politically correct and less elicit and flamboyant in nature.An assessment of the self help is given consequently 'let this stand as a heading from the experience of the most hopeless of all conditions on the planet, that we might dependably find in it something to solace ourselves from, and to set in the depiction of great and shrewd, on the credit side of the accept.' This is one of the examples of behavioral therapy that has been applied on an individual (Flaskas and Pocock, 2009). One example of the systemic therapy can be illustrated from the case of Amy P. The process of interview with the therapist shows how the interview with the therapist provided a wider overview of the problem of the therapist. Amy P had eating disorder. Amy would deliberately diet and lose weight. Amy was looked after by her mother as his father used to stay abroad due to business trips. The therapist invited the whole family of Amy to dinner to his place. The main reason behind the invitation was that the problem has to be discussed. The dilemma was addressed by the therapist by finding the root cause of the dilemma in relation with the people who are involved with the life of Amy P. This approach is different from the one to one psychodynamic relationship (Jenkins Asen, 1992). Systemic therapy involves family treatment is a treatment for negative feelings that joins approaches from other family helps to treat broken groups of youths. Techniques utilized as a part of treatment incorporate improving engagement with help, concentrating on correspondence and critical thinking aptitudes, and recognizing broken conduct designs. An exploratory assessment of the system found that for members in systemic conduct family help, the decrease of advisor appraised depressive side effects was slower than those in cognitive-behavioral treatment, furthermore the decline of reported toward oneself depressive manifestations was hardly slower than those in cognitive-behavioral help. Members in cognitive-behavioral treatment were additionally more probable than those in systemic conduct family help to have attained to abatement, and those in the cognitive-behavioral treatment condition accomplished reduction sooner than those in systemic conduct family treatment. There were no contrasts between the gatherings on sociality or utilitarian impairment. Psychoanalytic therapy is a type of treatment that concentrates on looking at the connections between aggression, sentiments and practices that has been developed as a result of certain experiences in childhood. By investigating examples of believing that prompt harming toward oneself activities and the convictions that control these considerations, individuals with emotional instability can adjust their examples of speculation to enhance adapting. CBT is a kind of psychotherapy that is not the same as customary psychodynamic psychotherapy in that the advisor and the patient will effectively cooperate to help the patient recoup from their dysfunctional behavior (Watzke et al., 2015). Individuals who look for CBT can anticipate that their specialist will be issue centered, and objective steered in tending to the testing side effects of emotional instabilities. Since CBT is a dynamic intercession, one can likewise hope to do homework or practice outside of sessions. An individual who i s discouraged may have the conviction, "I am useless," and an individual with frenzy issue may have the conviction, "I am in threat." While the individual in trouble likely accepts these to be extreme truths, with a specialist's help, the individual is swayed to test these nonsensical convictions. A piece of this methodology includes survey such antagonistic convictions as theories as opposed to realities and to test out such convictions by "running examinations." Furthermore, individuals who are taking part in CBT are swayed to screen and record the contemplations that pop into their brains (called "programmed musings"). This permits the patient and their advisor to hunt down examples in their reasoning that can make them have negative considerations which can prompt negative sentiments and self-damaging practices. References Achouri, C. (2015). Modern Systemic Leadership: A Holistic Approach for Managers, Coaches, and .... pp.1-50. Beckinstitute.org, (2015). Beck's Cognitive Therapy | Beck Institute. Bor, R. (2015). Counselling in Schools. pp.1-50. Brown, S. and Lent, R. (1992). Handbook of counseling psychology. New York: Wiley. Child Trends, (2013). Systemic Behavior Family Therapy. Corey, G. (2013). Theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy. Australia: Brooks/Cole / Cengage Learning. Coulter, S. (2010). Systemic Family Therapy for Families who have Experienced Trauma: A Randomised Controlled Trial. British Journal of Social Work, 41(3), pp.502-519. Counselling-directory.org.uk, (2015). Behavioural Therapy - Counselling Directory. Counselling-directory.org.uk, (2015). Family/Systemic Therapy - Counselling Directory. Counselling-directory.org.uk, (2015). Introduction to Attachment Theory. Counselling-directory.org.uk, (2015). What are They? Comparing and Contrasting Three of the Main Counselling Approaches. Flaskas, C. (2005).Psychoanalytic Ideas and Systemic Family Therapy: Revisiting the Question 'Why Bother?'. pp.125-134. Flaskas, C. and Pocock, D. (2009).Systems and psychoanalysis. London: Karnac. Hedges, F. (2015). Introduction to Systemic Therapy with Individuals: A Social Constructionist Approach. pp.1-100. J, H. (2015).Family and individual therapy: comparisons and contrasts. - PubMed - NCBI. Jenkins, H. and Asen, K. (1992). Family therapy without the family: a framework for systemic practice. J Family Therapy, 14(1), pp.1-14. Kriz, J. (2013). Person-Centred Approach and Systems Theory. 1st ed. pp.261-276. Mikulincer, M. and Shaver, P. (2015). Attachment in Adulthood: Structure, Dynamics, and Change. pp.400-450. Rcpsych.ac.uk, (2015). Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). Rennie, D. (2015). Person-Centred Counselling: An Experiential Approach. pp.50-85. sagepub.in, (2015).THE HISTORY OF FAMILY THERAPY Conceptual and Clinical Influences. Schultheiss, D. (2015). A relational approach to career counselling : Theoretical Integration and Practical Implication. Society for the Advancement of Psychotherapy, (2008). The Implications of Attachment Theory in Counseling and Psychotherapy Society for the Advancement of Psychotherapy. Stanton, M. and Welsh, R. (2012). Systemic thinking in couple and family psychology research and practice. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 1(1), pp.14-30. systemis.ch, (2015). Family Therapy and Systemic Practice. taeterinnen.org, (2008). Systemic Therapy. Trower, P., Jones, J., Dryden, W. and Casey, A. (2010). Cognitive Behavioural Counselling in Action. London: SAGE Publications. Watzke, B., Ru ddel, H., Jurgensen, R., Koch, U., Kriston, L., Grothgar, B. and Schulz, H. (2015). Effectiveness of systematic treatment selection for psychodynamic and cognitive behavioural therapy: randomised controlled trial in routine mental healthcare. West, D., West, M. and Bubenzer, D. (2015). Counselling Couples By. pp.19-55. Winek, J. (2010). Systemic family therapy. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage. Woolfe, R. (2010). Handbook of counselling psychology. Los Angeles: SAGE. Worden, J. (2015). Grief Counseling and Grief Therapy, Fourth Edition: A Handbook for the .... pp.10-50. www.dittoditto.com, C. (2015). What is Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy?. Yeo, A. (2015). Counselling: A Problem-solving Approach. pp.40-70.