Search

Romantic relationships are more satisfying and fulfilling when power is balanced relatively equally between partners (Leonhardt et al., Journal of Family Psychology, 34, 2020, and 1). Yet, few couples therapy models explicitly outline how to confront relational power issues (Knudson‐Martin & Huenergardt, 2015, Socio‐emotional relationship therapy: Bridging emotion, societal context, and couple interaction, Springer). Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT; Johnson, 2020, The practice of emotionally focused couple therapy, Routledge) is a well‐established, evidence‐based therapy modality that many therapists use with couple clients, yet despite its effectiveness, it does not provide direction for explicitly addressing and treating power differentials in couple relationships. In this paper, we explore the integration of EFT with Socio‐emotional Relationship Therapy (SERT), a model overlay that acknowledges the impact of social discourse on enactments of power in intimate couple relationships. We first address the importance of understanding power in couple relationships, addressing power in couples therapy, and provide a brief overview of SERT and EFT. We then introduce an integration of the models intended to help therapists balance power, increase connection, and secure attachment bonds between romantic partners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Family Process is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Family Process is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The integration of theories and techniques is part of family therapists' daily practice, raising the need to understand which resources are used in this professional's clinical actions. Our aim is to reflect on the use of theoretical and technical resources by family therapists in their daily practice. We developed an inquiry process inspired by collaborative action research and social constructionism. Couple and family therapy sessions were conducted by two family therapists, and we developed subsequent dialogs with them focused on describing theoretical and technical inspirations for their actions. Next, we named four categories of actions in this process: exploratory actions, actions for the construction of relational visions, actions for the construction of communication, and actions for family orientation. The therapists‐participants referred to many theoretical and technical resources that inspired their practice. For them, the choice of using one or another resource was based on the demands of the interactive moment, which involves their relational and embodied responses to what was experienced in the sessions. We argue that epistemological coherence is not something that guides the therapist's practice a priori, but something that can be achieved by talking about and reflecting on their actions. This article can contribute to clinical practice and training in family therapy by presenting an interesting reflexive process that can be useful to enhance practice in couple and family therapy (FAPESP, Process n. 2015/21316–1). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Family Process is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Family Process is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)