|
| "Martin Bohn" |
08:33 |
08/06/2007 |
|
Great ramble though
Martin
----Original Message----
From: michael.harker@ntlworld.com
Date: Jun 7, 2007 23:33
To: "Martin"
Subj: {SPAM?} [members] thoughts please
Hi all
This is my first posting to this list, so hi everyone! This is a very
interesting dialogue and I find my thoughts echoing those of Evan,
Craig and
Paul. I agree with Craig that there is a difference between 'solution
focused approaches' and SFBT. It is possible to take a SF approach to
most
things, but this is not SFBT. In my training I began to spend more and
more
time on SF Assumption/Thinking, as well as technique. Every action
flows
from these assumptions. (This is interesting because SFBT arose from a
very
pragmatic look at what worked in therapy and was not built 'a priori'
from
assumptions). Also I agree with Evan that certain ways of working are
inconsistent with SFAs and SFBT. eg those taking an 'expert' stance,
or
requiring the therapist to interpret. This is clearly, not to say that
other
models are not helpful.
I have begun to use the term 'solution oriented' in my work (I am an
ed
psych for a LA). I see SO work as a post-modern approach to helping
which
fits with a social constructionism way of thinking. I see SFBT,
Narrative
Therapy, Possibility Therapy, and other approaches as 'solution
oriented'
variants of a post modern approach to helping. I know many workers who
are
solution oriented in their thinking and who use a range of approaches
while
staying 'in the same room as the person' and being very person
centred.
'Person-centred' approaches can also be solution focused, and they may
not
be eg if the thrapist has an a priori assumption in their head that
the
client must get in touch with emotions. These 'post modern approaches
might
be contrasted with 'modernist' ways of helping which are expert led,
and
tend to adopt specific technique based on theory. The real danger is
that
SFBT might be applied in a 'modernist' as opposed to a 'post modern'
way if
it is applied without keeping to basic solution oriented assumptions.
All the above is really to help me make sense of things. The client
doesn't
care. Lamberts 'common factors' research seriously influenced my
thinking
here. Also Bill O'Hanlons thinking. We can discuss techniques and
models
till the cows come home, but at the end of the day it is relationship
and
what happens in the clients life which are reported to have the
biggest
impact on outcomes (hope I've got this right ). I think SF/SO
approaches
work because they lead to positive relationship and orient therapy and
the
person to real world situations. If they don't do this, they may be
less
effective.There is also the glorious paradox leading from the
assumption,
'if it works do more of it, if it doesn't do something different'
which
could mean don't enter into a SF dialogue at all. What should we do
then?
...ask our client what question would it be helful to ask next.
Anyway, enough of the ramble, its too late...stuff to do.
Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "craig osment"
To: "Michael"
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: [members] thoughts please
> Hi all,
> I have been reading some of the interesting posts about combining
models.
> I think there is a big difference between having a solution focused
> approach and doing solution focused brief therapy. I spent this
morning
> discussing behaviour with primary teachers. We had a discussion
about what
> they had done that had worked with a particularly difficult class.
They
> came out with lots of ideas, from their own experience, different
models,
> strategies etc that had been useful. I of course encouraged them to
> continue doing the things that had worked, many of which wouldn't
> necessarily be very solution focused, but they were right for them
and
> they had got there through a solution focused conversation.
>
> I think it is quite unique that SF has this almost philosophical
side to
> it, I have heard things like 'oh thats very solution focused' when
people
> discuss how they would like things to go well.
>
> I think it is possible to become solution focused in your approach
to work
> without doing solution focused brief therapy, but combining models
would
> be attempting to create something entirely different that may work
but
> wouldn't be solution focused brief therapy.
> (I think i know what i mean!)
> Craig
>
> laura freeman wrote:
>> HI Brenda, Paul and everyone, I just wanted to reply to your posts
as I
>> sometimes use SFT in a pure way but also often use CAT when
clients have
>> requested this way of working as they are really struggling to make
sense
>> of their experiences (I normally give them a choice, by outlining
the
>> different ways of working, and trying out some of the different
>> technqiues to see what way of working seems to fit best with them)
- when
>> I do use CAT though, i often try to combine it with sf ideas and i
guess
>> it changes the kind of questions i might ask or the kind of
reflections i
>> might make on what the clients says; eg I'd look for exceptions to
>> unhelpful childhood patterns quite early on, comment more on their
>> strenghts at surviving difficult childhood experiences, and
helpful
>> patterns that they learned despite difficult experiences, i use a
version
>> of the miracle question to help the person clarify goals and
identify
>> signs of change already happening, etc etc... I guess I tend to
start
>> off focusing on CAT ideas, but then become more solution-focused
once we
>> have built a formulation.
>>
>> i do agree with the point though that using sf in anything other
than a
>> pure way is not really sf - however, surely the basic underlying
>> principle of sft is doing what works - and for some people there
may be
>> other models of therapy or elements from these that fit better with
their
>> personality style, ways of thinking or their goals for therapy, so
i do
>> think that it's possible (and important) to be flexible, and as
long as
>> you're checking back that it's working for them, then sometimes the
most
>> sf thing to do for a person might involve working in a non or not
wholly
>> sf way (if that makes sense?!)?
>>
>> As an example, in my (albeit very limited!!) experience, there seem
to be
>> some people who have led very chaotic and traumatic lives that need
to be
>> able to piece the bits of their experiences together and feel that
they
>> have a hold on the things that happened to them, and that another
person
>> has been able to tolerate hearing about what's happened to them
and
>> understand and accept why they might have done what they have done
(I
>> work in a medium-secure forensic setting where people are likely to
have
>> commited a range of serious offences). I think that some but not
all of
>> this could be achieved through using SFT. I don't know, I like to
think
>> that I take my cue for the way of working from the client, but
maybe I'm
>> just not experienced enough at using sft or dont always persevere
with it
>> enough. Maybe in my efforts not to be solution-forced, I'm not
being
>> solution-focused enough! I'd be really curious to hear all your
ideas on
>> this, as i really respect the opinions of the people on this forum,
and i
>> guess these are issues that i have been struggling with both during
and
>> since finishing my clinical psychology training!
>>
>> best wishes to you all and sorry for such a long post!
>> Laura
>>
>>
>>> From:
>>> Reply-To: members@ukasfp.co.uk
>>> To: "laura"
>>> Subject: [members] thoughts please
>>> Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 00:11:11 +0100
>>>
>>> Hi Brenda
>>>
>>> Interesting points about SFBT and CAT combinations. I assume from
the
>>> way
>>> you wrote "i'd welcome a response to this because i realise it
starts
>>> with
>>> my interpretation of the problem and may be very un-SFT.", that
you
>>> might be
>>> interested in other approaches that might be more on SFBT rather
than
>>> CAT.
>>> The others who have responded have said some great stuff.
>>>
>>> Some other things occur to me that I have found useful to my
clients. If
>>> someone says to me that a situation is 'unfair', and that they
want to
>>> look
>>> at this with me in order to change it, the MQ is obviously a way
of
>>> doing
>>> that. A 'what will be different?' question is a big wide open one
that
>>> helps
>>> the person to clarify what they want rather than this unfairness.
Part
>>> of
>>> that could be about 'people treating me fairly' which may lead us
later
>>> to
>>> do a scale on confidence of that happeing. If their answer is low,
which
>>> I
>>> am guessing Paul's client's answer may be, then we can look at 'So
while
>>> you
>>> are waiting for the world to treat you more fairly, and you are
telling
>>> me
>>> you may have a long wait (we often laugh at this point), what else
would
>>> need to happen for you to be able to say that things are better
for you
>>> in
>>> this situation?" I find that this often leads the person to decide
that
>>> what
>>> they have control over is how they respond to that 'unfairness'
by
>>> thinking
>>> differfently about it etc.
>>>
>>> I really do love the assumptions of 'client is the expert' , that
>>> there's no
>>> need to interpret, that there is always a solution (problem and
solution
>>> being two sides of the very same coin), and that following these
>>> assumptions
>>> tends to work.
>>>
>>> CAT might see that a person is repeating a pattern of relating to
life
>>> based
>>> on an unhelpful or limitting belief. From the perspective of that
model
>>> that makes complete sense to me. If we can help the person
recognise the
>>> patterm, where it comes from, that insight can help the person
break the
>>> pattern. Once again, from that perspective it makes complte sense
to me.
>>>
>>> For me SFBT can cover the same ground, but in a very different
way. I
>>> think
>>> the early part of the 'Problem to Solution' book, by the great
guys at
>>> BRIEF, talks about how when people start noticing what they are
doing
>>> well,
>>> and what is working for them, they they start to think differently
about
>>> who
>>> they are, and thus 'change creates change'. The end result can be
>>> similar to
>>> a CAT approach - the pattern is not happening any more and they
are
>>> happier.
>>> I think CAT is a great model, and so is SFBT - what I particulary
like
>>> in
>>> SFBT is its simplicity - What does the client want and what works?
>>>
>>> Hope this helps.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> Mike Roarty, chartered MCIPD
>>> Professional and Executive Coach, Trainer, Consultant
>>> Master NLP Practitioner
>>>
>>>
>>> Director
>>> People Potential and Performance Ltd
>>> Email: mike@coach-ppp.co.uk
>>> TEL: 0845 4585087 (local call rate)
>>> Mob: 079 58318309
>>>
>>>
____________________________________________________________________________
>>> ______________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _____
>>>
>>> From: members@ukasfp.co.uk [mailto:members@ukasfp.co.uk] On Behalf
Of
>>> Brenda
>>> Billinghurst
>>> Sent: 06 June 2007 17:17
>>> To: Mike
>>> Subject: [members] thoughts please
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I am new to SFT and guess this is definitely not SFT but CAT -
cognitive
>>> analytic therapy, which i am trying to combine with SFT.
>>>
>>> I hadn't picked up on the fact that he was doing things for
neighbours
>>> for
>>> free and becoming possibly the 'community saint'.
>>>
>>> In CAT i would want to check out if his sense of injustice is to
do with
>>> him
>>> doing things for others and then feeling put upon when people do
not act
>>> in
>>> the same way towards him.
>>>
>>> This links to Sarah's point about a sense of powerlessness because
it is
>>> about feeling he needs to do things for others to be liked,
accepted. I
>>> think there are then SFT ways out of this pattern.
>>>
>>> Could also be seen as a sort of 'fair world' issue, because he
does
>>> believe
>>> the world is/should be a certain way and it feels all wrong when
people
>>> do
>>> not act as he does. If he acts in accordance with this and
thenothers
>>> do
>>> not that must seem very unjust.
>>>
>>>
>>> i'd welcome a response to this because i realise it starts with my
>>> interpretation of the problem and may be very un-SFT.
>>> Best wishes
>>> Brenda
>>>
>>> Paul Hanton wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sarah.............you have reminded me that he mentioned maybe
>>> working
>>> for himself at one point, as he could make sure he 'did things
>>> right'............I will definitely check in and see where he is
with
>>> this
>>> idea, I had clean forgotton about that, thanks.
>>>
>>> paul
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Sarah Head
>>> To: Paul
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:53 PM
>>> Subject: [members] thoughts please
>>>
>>> Hi Paul
>>>
>>> Having spent the past seventeen years in NHS complaints, my heart
always
>>> sinks when people talk about "justice", because, to me, there is
no such
>>> thing (even though I now work within the medico-legal field!)
>>>
>>> I know some SF people have difficulty with asking the question
"What's
>>> better" or "what's different" in subsequent sessions, but I've
always
>>> found
>>> it a useful question, even when the client turns round and says
>>> "nothing" or
>>> "it's worse". From what you've already told us, this man has made
many
>>> changes, so I'd be tempted to go with the Brief way of asking
"what
>>> else?"
>>> after everything for the next 15 or so questions (or however many
you
>>> can
>>> cope with!). Sometimes clients have found it helpful when I have
>>> summarised
>>> all the things which I have noticed which are different from when
they
>>> first
>>> came to see me, many of which they may have either forgotten or
>>> discarded.
>>>
>>> I know this probably is nowhere near solution focused, but I have
>>> noticed
>>> that the people who talk most about justice and making others
>>> accountable
>>> for their actions, are those who feel the most powerless. Once
they are
>>> empowered in some way, they are able to let go of "having to have
>>> justice".
>>> I was just wondering how much control of his circumstances and
abilities
>>> to
>>> act your client has. I'd be really curious to know his interests
and
>>> hopes
>>> and dreams and how much of those he can move forward with outside
of the
>>> paid employment scenario if the latter is not going to be an
option. If
>>> he's
>>> already doing odd jobs for neighbours, he could turn into the
local
>>> "community saint" - that's often how they start!
>>>
>>> Best wishes
>>>
>>> Sarah
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/834 - Release Date:
>>> 05/06/2007
>>> 14:38
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/834 - Release Date:
>>> 05/06/2007
>>> 14:38
>>>
>>> _____
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/832 - Release Date:
>>> 04/06/2007
>>> 18:43
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _____
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less,
sign
>>> com/mail/winter07.ht
>>> ml> up for your free account today.
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Could you be the guest MSN Movies presenter? Click Here to
Audition
>> http://www.lightscameraaudition.co.uk
>>
>>
>
>
..
..
)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
