Search

I denne artikkelen drøftes status og utfordringer vedrørende grunnlagstenkningen for kunnskap og vitenskap innen systemisk praksis. Bakgrunnen er en bekymring for at vårt fagfelt i hovedsak er inspirert av teorier hentet fra ideologi og filosofi på bekostning av eksisterende empiri. Vi drøfter mulige årsaker til en slik skjevhet, som har blitt ekstra tydelig i de senere års akademisering av familieterapifeltet, noe som innebærer høyere krav til vitenskapelige kunnskapsreferanser. Artikkelen påpeker at deler av fagfeltet har en preferanse for kunnskap fra kvalitative studier framfor kvantitative. Dette problematiseres, dels begrunnet med metodelæren, dels ut fra den skjevhet dette innebærer for kunnskapstilførsel til studenter og systemiske praktikere. Følgen av en slik preferanse kan være at den systemiske praktiker mangler vesentlig kunnskap, det stimuleres ikke til å gjennomføre eller delta i kvantitative studier, og en risikerer at faget sett utenfra ikke blir tatt på alvor. Dette problemet aktualiserer et skjerpet fokus på fagfeltets grunnlagstenkning og sentrale politiske, etiske og faglige føringer. Som svar på dette presenterer artikkelen interaktiv konstruktivisme og kritisk realisme og foreslår disse som det styrende paradigmet for systemisk praksis. Vi argumenterer for at dette kan fjerne en ideologisk begrunnet dikotomi mellom typer kunnskap og forskningsdesign og redusere avstanden mellom forsker og kliniker.

This paper focuses on two cohorts of Norwegian young men whose behaviour in childhood and adolescence caused serious concern to their parents, teachers, social workers and, in some cases, the police, Despite having been identified as ‘at risk’, they made transitions to positive adult masculine identities in two different historical contexts; the 1980s and 2000s. The paper analyses the difference that historical context makes to these young men’s lives, their gendered identity work and their perspectives on their past, present and future. In particular, it identifies the ways in which supportive intergenerational relationships and significant others serve to produce positive turning points and, over time, help the young men to develop resilience and potentially happy and successful futures.

As a corrective to an unbalanced focus on children’s problem and diagnoses, this study addresses the importance of recognizing the place of parenting within the context of clinical social work. Sixteen parents of children with or without behavioural problems were selected according to parents’ appraisal of the child-rearing situation, children’s problems and ages, parents’ marital status. The main finding was the seriousness of the situation for parents who have other problems in addition to a child’s behavioural problems. Knowledge of variations in family structures and normal family processes are important to prevent clinical cases from always being seen as deviant.

This article challenges the use of the concept of avoidance as dysfunctional in parenting, and questions research on parental coping practices in isolation from context. Sixteen parents with children with more or less behaviour problems were selected for analysis. The concept avoidance strategy constituted the analytical theme in situations associated with stress, and parents’ meaning making was the focus of analysis. Parental coping is not only related to internal processes, but also to the risk or opportunities in the social systems. All parents use avoidance actions in various ways, which may also be seen as adaptive and proactive actions. The meaning of age, gender, living conditions, social support, and the parents’ resources are significant in the framing of family life. It is significant to stretch the concept ‘normality’ to include more variation and diversity. By bringing in knowledge from ‘normal’ parenting processes into clinical practice, clinical cases may not always seem clinical.

This study examined the effects of child characteristics and parent coping practices on parenting stress, based on a sample of parents of 64 boys with behavioural problems and a comparison group with parents of 128 boys. All parents completed questionnaires about stress, length of education, child characteristics, social support, sense of coherence and coping practices, in addition to interviews in their home about daily activities and relations with the child. A hierarchical regression model for predicting parenting stress was tested, and the results showed that having a child with behavioural problems predicted 57% of the variance in parenting stress. Social support and parental resources and strategies added to the prediction of parenting stress after controlling for family demographics and child characteristics. The parents in the clinical group (with boys referred to psychiatric units) were more often single parents with lower education, more often unemployed, less content with social support, and had lower scores on comprehensibility. These parents were significantly more stressed than parents in the comparison group. All these risk factors might be barriers against establishing a protective frame around a child. These parents, with a difficult child-rearing situation, who perceived less support and had fewer material benefits, seemed to be more vulnerable. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

In child psychiatric work strategies for engaging the family in strengthening the child’s coping should be included as part of the treatment plan. As family members experience the reality of the family differently, information from each family member provides a broader picture of the family. Clinicians can help the family achieve insights into relationships and roles by using a figure placement technique, the Kvebaek Family Sculpture Technique (KFST). We examined distances in KFST figure placements made by mothers, fathers and adolescents in order to explore closeness and distance, or family cohesion. We found that families often perceived changes in the perception of distance between family members following family therapy. Assessments by family members, as well as by clinicians, are needed to catch the complexity of family cohesion. A dialogue with the family about the various perspectives presented by family members contributes to a new understanding of family interaction.

We measured the informants' experience with the Kvebaek Family Sculpture Technique (KFST), a symbolic figure placement technique, by administering a questionnaire to 28 adolescent inpatient families and 35 adolescent families participating in an epidemiological study of mental health in the general population. We asked whether configurations reflected feelings between family members, whether informants were significantly influenced by the situation in which the technique was administered, and whether the configurations were stable in terms of showing typical family relationships. The findings support the impression that the KFST is reliable in its use with both clinical and normal population samples. In general, informants in both samples confirmed that the instrument reflected feelings between family members. However, the differences between the samples show that subjects probably behave differently in a test situation, depending on the amount of psychiatric problems. Further research is warranted, to add...

The aim of this study was to explore the construct validity and reliability of the Nijmegen Child-Rearing Situation Questionnaire (NCSQ) section one entitled 'Subjective parenting stress'. This is composed of subscales measuring relational and situational stress. The possibility of using subscales with both dimensions in the same study gives the opportunity to explore parenting stress from both a relational and situational perspective. The NCSQ was administered to parents of two groups of boys, 6-12 years old. The clinical group consisted of 64 parents of children reporting behaviour problems who were recruited from seven child and adolescent clinical psychiatric units. A group of 128 parents of children reporting no specific behavioural problems were recruited from 12 schools. Six boys in each class grades 1-7 were randomly selected from the class rosters. Both samples were recruited from Oslo and surrounding eastern counties. The suggested factor structure of the construct parenting stress was tested with data from both groups. First, a separate confirmatory analysis of the items in each factor was tested. Then testing was carried out with one- and two-factor analysis using the sum scores from each subscale, to further explore whether parenting stress was a one-dimensional general or a two-dimensional construct. Results showed an unacceptable model fit of the pleasure subscale in the clinical group. The instrument is not relevant for normal populations due to the skewed responses found in the acceptance and pleasure subscales, the low internal reliability found in the acceptance and relation subscales, and the unacceptable factor loading and model fit found for the managing subscale in the comparison group. Further studies are needed to test the construct validity and reliability of the scale. Although the instrument is intended for clinical populations, hopefully with further revisions and research, it might be used as a clinical tool to define dimensions of parenting stress in everyday life.