Family Triangles And The Multigenerational Transmission Process

Family theories help explain the family’s impact on an individual’s wellbeing and offer different approaches to managing one’s health with a family-focused perspective. They provide a foundation for practice and enhance one’s understanding of family processes and dynamics. These theories address the family as the unit of care and enable nurses to empathize, comprehend, and collaborate with the family providing strategies in practice and improving care (Denham, Eggenberger, Young, & Krumweide, 2016). Two family theories that have sparked my interest are the Bowen’s Family Systems Theory (FST) and the Illness Beliefs Model (IBM). This paper will discuss each theory, including the strengths and weaknesses of each. A fictional family case

Family systems theory is useful when working with families who are impacted by an ASD diagnosis. The family systems theory focuses on the shift of an individual perspective to a family systems perspective. Family is the most important support system for a child. Family is looked at as a unit, therefore by using the family systems theory the professionals are able to identify the family’s influences on the individual. The family system impacts a child’s development as family members affect the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of one another (Paylo, 2011).

In today’s world, families are dynamic and interdependent systems. The developmental processes of the children in the family are deeply affected by how the family system operates. However, a family’s structure does not determine whether it is a healthy family system or not. Today, families consist of single parents, stepparents, divorced parents, remarried parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles. They are all able to contribute to a healthy functioning family system by meeting each family member’s needs and encouraging positive communication (Jamiolkowski, 2008). Unhealthy family systems have negative and possibly

According to Minuchin (1985), six basic principles outline the Family Systems theory. Each principle describes the function in which a family and its subsystems operate and the inextricable relationships within the system. The first principle of Minuchin’s (1985) theory implies that each member develops and is enveloped within the family unit, while the second principle states that there is a continuous loop in which each member feeds the behaviours of another. Thirdly, family systems have homeostatic elements which restore the family back to its equilibrium when disarrayed (Minuchin, 1985).

From a Christian world view perspective integrating the pragmatic approach of CBT with the relational methodology prevalent in family systems theories just seems like a sound idea. Christians express that mankind is created in the image of God and exhibit the relational quality found in Him. Therefore, combining the two modalities would benefit clients in that change is sought with CBT from an “outside-in” orientation and with family systems from the “inside-out”. CBT is based on the dynamic formulation of patients’ problems and an individual conceptualization of each patient in cognitive terms (Beck, 2011). However, changing only one part (i.e., the individual) of the whole (i.e., the family unit) may be difficult at best or impossible at worst if the presenting problem is not conceptualized to include how familial relationships, patterns, communication, and behaviors affect both inter- and intrapersonal skill deficits.

Comparing Bowen’s family systems theory and Minuchin’s structural family theory we will outline several fundamental categories for analysis with Goldenberg & Goldenberg (2012) as our guide. We also contrast the history and theoretical orientation of both men to garner a deeper understanding of their theories. Finally we will consider integrating elements of both theories and how this makes us more effective practitioners.

The family structure is made up of individuals living together in intimate groups with the purpose of caring and supporting each other. Rules and boundaries, spoken and unspoken, are developed by the family members. Family rules and boundaries change and shift over time in order to evolve and grow as a family unit. Some changes are subtle, but some events force major change within the family system. This paper applies the concepts of systems theory to the family system in the movie Sweet Home Alabama. Reese Witherspoon (Melanie Smooter) and Josh Lucas (Jake Perry) star in this heart-warming film telling a story of a young woman who flees from Alabama to reinvent herself in New York City as a high fashion designer. She leaves behind

The role of intergenerational patterns is often used when referring to negative behaviors that are profoundly repeated throughout different generation (Birkenmaier, Berg-Weger & Dewees, 2014). Papero (2009) on the other hand, specifically linked the term intergenerational to relationship patterns that are being transmitted from one generation to another. To bring to light the immersion of intergenerational patterns, a brief understanding of Bowen’s Family Systems Theory is imperative. Bowen’s theory comprises of eight concepts and a major variable known as anxiety (Papero, 2014). All seven concepts address the family system while the eighth focus mainly on the social function of the society (Papero, 2014). In fact, one of the eighth concepts in Bowen theory is multigenerational transmission process playing an important role with intergenerational patterns. While conducting a systematic analysis of three generations within Lani family system, specific behaviors that were demonstrated were dysfunctional boundaries, marital outcomes, anxiety and transmission of parenting style.

When I consider family systems, I am reminded of a metaphor I heard while in undergraduate school about a mobile. A mobile is used to soothe an infant, normally placed above a crib or basinet. Each of its parts are in balance, when working correctly, however if one section becomes off balance the objects become out of sync. This is true with families. If each member of the family unit is doing their part, there is complete balance or homeostasis (Henson). This balance is viewed as a healthy family system. However, if one part of the unit becomes off balance, it disrupts the whole unit causing an unhealthy response with possible long term consequences. As families grow, each member plays an equally important role in the family unit. Children learn quickly the importance of relationships and adapt quickly to their environment. No one can deny the family unit is the most complex system in existence.

After a thorough review of the textbook and the course material, the specific family system approach that I choose to explore is the Bowenian Approach for this literature review. This specific family system approach is also known as the Bowen Family System Theory as well (D.V. Papero, 2006). The Bowen Family System Theory was established by Murray Bowen, a theorist and psychiatrist who specialized in treating children who were deranged and had schizophrenia (Rockwell, 2010). In the 1950s, Bowen wanted to explore a new venture so he decided that he wanted all of the family members of each child to be involved in an therapeutic process at the same time (Rockwell, 2010).

Family Therapy is a diverse field, so I have decided to highlight The Internal Family Systems Model developed by Dr. Richard Schwartz, who began formulating his theory when he was working as a family systems social worker. Former UW Whitewater professor, Don Norman is certified IFS therapist. Professor Norman and Dr. Schwartz ran a series of certification courses over the span of 18 months at UW Whitewater in the early 2000’s. My rational for my interest in this type of counseling is based on the success my family has had with this theory. IFS draws some of it’s techniques from Freud 's id, ego, and superego, and expands upon Jung’s understanding of the complexity of the psyche. What is shared is the general understanding that

In many ways family systems theory can be seen as a broad field where there many different implications that make up the system, it is a system. A system is a set of objects that are bound together by a relationship, which are based around the attributes of the objects as drawn upon by (Janet.BB, 1982). Family systems theory addresses the many different ideals and values that make up a typical family, these include the roles each member of the family, the power relations either from the male of the family or both parents of the family, the boundaries that are set within the family to ensure that the structure of the family is secure, in both individualistic and collectivist families this can be seen (Fred Rothbaum, 2002).

Murray Bowen's family system theory was one of the first comprehensive theories of family system functioning. It was developed in 1974 and it believed the family can be defined as a set of interacting individuals who are related by blood, marriage, cohabitation, or adoption and who interdependently perform relevant functions through roles. Relevant functions of the family include values and practices placed on health system theory is used to explain patterns of living among the individuals who make up the family systems (Edelmen, 2006).

Murray Bowens family systems theory focuses on ordering and defining relationships and conceptualizes the potential for growth within humans (Metcalf, 2011, p. 39). With this is mind this report aims to explore the history, concepts and principles of Murray Bowen’s family systems theory as well as apply these concepts to a case study regarding the Aleppo family. Firstly this report will explore the historical origins of Bowen’s theory followed by a description of the 8 main concepts and the key principles of the approach of this method. Secondly the report will link the applications of Bowen’s theory to the Aleppo case study and explore how a therapist would interact with this family when utilizing Bowen’s approach. Lastly an evaluation of the strengths and limitations of this approach will be explored.

3. Become aware of the “alive versus the inanimate” and “familiar versus unfamiliar” and develop rudimentary social interaction.