My purpose in conducting the intakes was twofold: first, to establish rapport with the family members and second, to gather information. I conducted the intakes separately, believing this would be my best chance to get each family member to open up. If I did the intakes together, I feared that different family members might be less talkative, perhaps because they did not want to concede a point to another family member, perhaps because they were intimated. I asked each family member a question of difference and a miracle question, types of questions which I will explicate later in this paper.
After conducting the intakes, I represented the Evans family and some related subsystems in a series of structural maps (Nichols, 2011, p. 128), which can be found in the document attached to this paper. As I looked at these maps, the first thing that jumped out at me was that Fiona was disengaged from many subsystems, from her family of origin, her husband’s family, her children’s school, and the local community center. She was also disengaged, although not as severely, from her two younger children. It seemed clear that her widespread disengagement was causing or exacerbating many of the family’s problems. For example, her refusal to go to the community center was likely causing her to remain unemployed, which was in turn hurting the family economically and also adding to its stress level; her refusal to engage her children’s school was likely allowing Shireen and Lewis’ misbehavior to continue; her refusal to allow her in-laws into her family’s life was likely preventing her family from receiving some extra support that they could desperately use.
I wanted to understand why Fiona was disengaged from others. I again read through my notes and saw the following clues: Fiona said she did not want to go to the community center because she would feel “daft going there on [her] own”; she said she did not go to the children’s school because “all the teachers look down their noses at us”; Steve said that Fiona would not allow his family into their lives “because she thinks they look down on her.” These clues lead me to believe that Fiona might have Avoidant Personality Disorder, as the DSM-5 states that individuals with this disorder often avoid interpersonal contact because they are “preoccupied with being criticized or rejected” and that they are “unwilling to get involved with people unless certain of being liked” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 673). I wondered if Fiona’s disengagement might have been caused by bad experiences she had with outsiders in the past. For example, she had told me, “My mom made the mistake of telling our business to the school and the social workers and it didn’t do her any good—I ended up in care as a kid and I don’t have anything to do with my family now.”
I quickly developed a two-pronged strategy for helping the Evans family. Since Fiona’s actions seemed to be the source of so many of the family’s problems, I wanted to engage her in one-on-one therapy. I decided that my approach here would be psychodynamic, an approach that has been shown to work with individuals who have Avoidant Personality Disorder (Rettew, 2006, p. 38). I wanted to plumb Fiona’s past. I knew that she had had a difficult childhood and was currently estranged from her parents, and I believed that this past was influencing the way she currently related to others. I hoped that this process would help Fiona to better understand her own actions and in so doing make positive changes in her and her family’s life.
Given Fiona’s intense distrust of outsiders and her possible Avoidant Personality Disorder, I knew I needed to treat her with unconditional positive regard. The DSM-5 states that individuals with Avoidant Personality Disorder are capable of forming “intimate relationships when there is assurance of uncritical acceptance” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 672), and this is exactly the kind of acceptance that unconditional positive regard offers (Cheung & Leung, 2008, p. 182). My decision to approach Fiona in this manner was further supported by research showing that compassion-focused therapy—which aims to show clients that they are valuable and worthy of compassion (Leaviss and Uttley, 2015, p. 929)—can help individuals with social anxiety to increase their self-compassion and reduce their shame, self-criticism, and social anxiety (Bersmea, Hakanson, Salomonsson, & Johansson, 2015, p. 94).
Along with this individual therapy, I decided to engage the entire family in solution-focused family therapy. This type of therapy seemed appropriate given Fiona’s distrust of outsiders and her possible Avoidant Personality Disorder. My reasoning here was that Fiona and possibly other family members would react negatively to an outsider coming in and focusing on the family’s problems and suggesting changes they needed to make. Given that Fiona was sensitive to outside criticism and had spent much of her life resisting outside help, I reasoned that I would be more effective if I employed a therapy that affirmed the family’s strengths and its ability to solve its own problems. I knew that the other family members might respond better to some of the more traditional approaches espoused by the Mental Research Institute, but the fact remained that Fiona was the de facto leader of the family—Steve said she “deals with all the family stuff and the school stuff”—and consequently reaching her seemed like the best way to reach the rest of the family.
Solution-Focused Therapy: Introduction
Theoretical Underpinnings
Solution-focused therapy asks clients to choose the goals of therapy. This therapy assumes that clients know the answers to their problems, even if they do not realize that they know the answers; it further assumes that clients have the ability to solve their problems themselves. Insoo Kim Berg, one of the therapy’s founders, describes the therapy’s basic assumption by way of metaphor, stating that clients have “all the necessary bricks and lumber, somewhere lying around but they don’t know how to put it together” (Yalom & Rubin, 2003). The goal of therapy is to help clients discover the answers to their problems, and it assumes that once they have the answers they will be able to implement the necessary change. This therapist goes about helping clients make these discoveries by asking them different questions, which are intended to get them to start talking and thinking about ways to resolve their problems. Berg continues with her metaphor: “I think that talking to me helps them figure out how to put it together. Not only create the blueprint, but which lumber goes where, which piece goes where” (Yalom & Rubin, 2003).
Effectiveness
Bond, Woods, Humphrey, Symes, and Green (2013) reviewed 38 studies regarding the effectiveness of solution-based therapy when used with children and families and concluded that, although there is a paucity of “high-quality” studies, there is nonetheless “preliminary support” for the use of this therapy with “children presenting with internalizing and externalizing problems in both school settings and with their families” (p. 720). Bond et al. (2013) further found that solution-focused therapy is “most effective as an early intervention where problems are at a mild-to-moderate level” and slightly more effective with girls than boys (p. 720). Gingerich and Peterson (2013) reviewed 43 studies and found that 74 percent of them reported “significant positive benefit” from solution-focused therapy and 23 percent reported “positive trends” (p. 279). Gingerich and Peterson (2013) further found that clients in solution-focused therapy seemed to benefit as well as clients receiving alternative therapies but that the clients in solution-focused therapy benefited after fewer therapy sessions (p. 279). These findings largely corroborated a 2006 literature review which found that, although solutions-focused brief therapy “does not have a larger effect than problem-focused therapy, it does have a positive effect in less time and satisfies the client’s need for autonomy more than do traditional forms of psychotherapy” (Bannink, 2007, p. 90).
Solution-Focused Therapy: First Session
Small Talk
I plan to begin my family therapy session with small talk. My intention here is to help the family members relax and to build rapport with them. Macdonald (2011) writes that this time of “problem-free talk” can help clients who “appear unsure of what they want from the session” and that allowing them to talk “about something they enjoy or a skill that they possess allows them time to think about what they want” to accomplish in the session (p. 11).
Pre-session Changes
I might next tell the family, “Our clients often tell us that between the time they call to make an appointment and the time they actually meet with us, some things are already different. What have you noticed about your situation?” (Taylor, 2008, p. 29). Macdonald (2011) notes that “[c]oming to see a clinician is usually a result of attempts to solve the problem, not the first step taken in problem solving” (pp. 13-14). Since setting up a therapy appointment is a major attempt at solving the problem, this action was probably accompanied by other attempts to solve the problem, some of which might have been at least partially successful. Reiter (2010) points out that this first question sends three important messages to clients: first, it is normal and in fact expected that change will occur; second, since the change happened before meeting with the therapist, the clients brought it about themselves; and third, they should expect more changes to come (p. 137). These messages might bolster the confidence of clients and in turn make them more likely to effect change.
Question of Difference
I will next ask, “What do each of you hope to get out of this session? What needs to happen in this session to make it worth your time?” (Taylor, 2008, p. 30). My goal here is to get the family to describe their problem to me. I must be sure to focus on the family’s primary problem and save secondary problems for later. Macdonald (2011) writes that “it is important to work with only one problem at a time” because it can “be difficult for the client and therapist to make progress” if “the focus shifts back and forth between different problems” (p. 12).
Miracle Question
Once the clients’ primary problem has become clear, I will ask what has become known as the miracle question: “Let’s imagine that tonight you go to bed and while you’re sleeping a miracle happens. The result of this miracle is that you wake up tomorrow morning and all the problems you’ve come here about are solved. How would you know, what would you notice happening differently?” (Turnell & Hopwood, 1994, p. 44). I can either ask the family to come up with an answer to this question together or I can ask each member to answer it individually (Trepper et al., 2008, p. 8). I want them to answer this question in some detail, and so I will probably ask them to elaborate upon their initially answers and keep telling me else would be different if the miracle occurred (Turnell & Hopwood, 1994, p. 44). I ask the miracle question to help families determine what goals they would like to work on, as their answers here “can usually be taken as the goals of therapy” (Trepper et al., 2008, p. 8). I also ask this question to encourage them “to think about possibilities that they might not have previously,” knowing that imagining these possibilities can in turn engender hope and motivate them to work towards solutions (Reiter, 2010, p. 141). For an example of how I would conduct this part of the session, see Appendix A.
Exception Questions
My next step is to ask about times in the present or past when the family’s problem did not exist or existed but to a lesser extent. Turnell and Hopwood (1994) tie the exception question into the miracle question and ask, “Are there any times now when a part of this miracle, even a small part, is already happening?” (p. 44). If the clients can answer yes to this question, I will ask them to talk about these times of exception. I want them to be reminded that they have had some success dealing with the problem in the past. I hope that reminding them of this will strengthen their confidence that they can resolve the problem in the present (Ramish, McVicker, and Seda Sahin, 2009, p. 485). I also hope that reminding them of these exceptions will encourage them to start brainstorming ways to solve the problem. Reiter (2010) writes that, if clients cannot recall when their problem did not existent, therapists should ask coping questions, that is, questions which “focus on what the client is doing to prevent things from getting even worse than they currently are” (p. 142). For an example of how I would ask exception questions, see Appendix B.
Goals
I next plan to ask the family the following scaling question: “On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is the problem at its worst, and 10 is the day after a miracle, where would you say things are right now?” (Taylor, 2008, p. 30). After the family answers this question, I will encourage them to make a goal that will help them actualize the miracle. I want them to focus on just one goal at a time, and I want each goal to be “very small, achievable, [and] realistic” (Yalom & Rubin, 2003). If the goal is “very small, achievable, [and] realistic,” it is more likely that the family will achieve it before the next session, and this success can encourage them as they continue in the therapeutic process. Reiter (201) explains that “[o]nce one small change happens there is the possibility for a ripple effect. When small change happens, hope builds that larger changes can and will occur” (p. 146).
Scaling questions are good because they help clients settle for small goals. To be more specific, such questions help clients to see that change is a process to and that they have not failed if they did not move from 1 to 10 in the course of a week (Macdonald, 2011, p. 18). Scaling questions can also be used to determine if the family’s goal is realistic. For example, I might ask, “On a scale of [1] to 10, how confident are you that you’re going to achieve this goal by the next session?” (Macdonald, 2011, p. 18). If they are not very confident, I will encourage them to start with a more modest goal.
Homework
I might give the family members a homework assignment. If they have taken some responsibility for the problem and have shown a willingness to change, I might ask them to undertake a behavioral change. For example, I might ask them to spend some time acting as if the miracle had in fact happened, or I might ask them to try to change a single behavior that would be different if the miracle had happened (Bannink, 2007, p. 92). If the family members have not taken responsibility for the problem and have not shown a willingness to change, I might ask them to undertake an observational change. For example, I might ask them to spend some time imagining that the miracle has happened or looking for times in which different family members are acting as though the miracle has happened (Bannink, 2007, p. 91).
Compliments
During the session it is important that I compliment the family, both for the steps they have already taken to solve their problems (Bannink, 2007, p. 91) and for strengths I see in them, even if they have not actualized these strengths (Reiter, 2010, p. 143). My purpose here is to strengthen their confidence that they are capable of solving their problems. Reiter (2010) writes that, by complimenting clients, the therapist sends “an implicit message” that they are “worthy and effective” (p. 143). Additionally, I want to compliment the clients to show them “what to continue to do or to do more of, thus enhancing hope because the person knows that he or she has already done this and can do it again” (Reiter, 2010, p. 143).
Language
Writers like Macdonald (2011) and Clarke (2014) stress that therapists doing solution-focused therapy must pay special attention to language. Macdonald suggests that therapists practice language matching, whereby the therapist uses “some of the client’s words or turns of phrase in every response” (p. 9). Macdonald (2011) claims that language matching ensures “that the therapist is not only paying attention to the client’s every word but that this is clearly recognised by the client’ (p. 9). Macdonald (2011) further cautions against labeling the client’s problems with professional terms or jargon, as doing so “devalues their knowledge of the situation” and “gives the impression that they are being contradicted” (p. 10). Similarly, Clarke (2014) argues that therapists can learn much about clients by homing in on the metaphors they use and that the therapeutic relationship can be enhanced when therapists insert clients’ metaphors into their questions (p. 427).
Solution-Focused Therapy: Subsequent Sessions, Resolution, and Termination
Subsequent Sessions
Subsequent therapy sessions will continue to employ the basic techniques already outlined. I will begin the second session by again asking the family members, “On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is the problem at its worst, and 10 is the day after a miracle, where would you say things are right now?” (Taylor, 2008, p. 30). If the family gives a higher answer than they did the first time, I will congratulate them and ask how they managed to bring the score up (Bannink, 2007, p. 92). I will then ask what life would look like if they brought their score up one more point, from, say, 4 to 5 (p. 92). I will also ask when in the past the family functioned at a 5 and follow with more questions, each intended to get them to think about what they were doing at the time (p. 92).
Resolution and Termination
I consider the family’s problem to be resolved when the family says it is resolved, no matter what score they give to the problem situation. Given that the family sets the goals of therapy, it can be no other way. If a family has resolved one goal, I would ask if they had other goals they would like to work on. If the family felt happy with the work they had done, I would encourage them to have a follow-up session in a month or two. At the follow-up visit, I would again revisit the old problem or problems and see if any new problems had emerged. We could then resume therapy or part ways.
Solution-Focused Therapy: Potential Obstacles
One common obstacle in solution-focused therapy is having a client who is a visitor, meaning they do not see the value of the session and do not want to be there (e.g., someone who was court-mandated to attend the session) (Nichols, 2011, p. 251). If I were dealing with a visitor, I might consider asking the client what the mandating party (e.g., court or parent) “would like to see changed in [their] behavior and to what extent [the client was] prepared to cooperate” (Bannink, 2007, p. 91). I might also want to “look for other goals the client might indeed want to go for—maybe s/he acts as a visitor in relation to one goal, but is interested in another one” (Beyebach, 2009, p. 28).
Another common obstacle is having a client who is a complainant, meaning they see that there is a problem but think that the problem lies entirely with someone else (e.g., a family member with whom they are fighting) (Nichols, 2011, p. 251). Beyebach (2009) recommends employing motivational interviewing with such clients (p. 28). Motivational interviewing, Treasure (2004) writes, responds to client resistance in a gentle manner, persuading clients to seek change by expressing empathy, “sidestepping” their hostility, and reflecting back their behaviors and stated values; by reflecting back their behaviors and stated values, it is hoped that clients will see that they are not living up to their values and will then try to change (p. 331-332). For an example of how I would deal with such obstacles, see Appendix C.
Timeline
Psychodynamic therapy can be a lengthy process, as it can take months, even years, to understand one’s formative influences. It might take Fiona some time to understand her upbringing and see how this upbringing is influencing her current family life. Solution-focused therapy, on the other hand, is usually short. Beyebach (2009) writes that the average family in his clinic has less than five sessions of solution-focused therapy (p. 19). I hope that therapy with the Evans family will be equally brief and that they will make some positive changes quickly. I would like to have a follow-up session with the family a month or so after their last session and consider more sessions if needed. Beyebach (2009) writes that “around three-quarters of [his] cases are successful at follow-up” (p. 19).
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. Washington, D.C. American Psychiatric Association.
Bannink, F.P. (2007). Solution-focused brief therapy. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 37(2), 87-94.
Beyebach, M. (2009). Integrative brief solution-focused family therapy: A provisional roadmap. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 28(3), 18-35.
Boersmea, K., Hakanson, A., Salomonsson, E., & Johansson, I. (2015). Compassion focused therapy to counteract shame, self-criticism and isolation. A replicated single case experimental study for individuals with social anxiety. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 45(2), 89-98.
Bond, C., Woods, K., Humphrey, N., Symes, W., & Green, L. (2013). Practitioner review: The effectiveness of solution focused brief therapy with children and families: A systematic and critical evaluation of the literature from 1990-2010. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(7), 707-723.
Cheung, M., & Leung, P. (2008). Multicultural practice & evaluation: A case appraoch to evidence-based practice. Denver: Love Publishing Company.
Clarke, J.K. (2014). Utilization of clients’ metaphors to punctuate solution-focused brief therapy: A case illustration. Contemporary Family Therapy, 36(3), 426-441.
Gingerich, W.J., & Peterson, L.T. (2013). Effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy: A systematic qualitative review of controlled outcome studies. (2013). Research on Social Work Practice, 23(3), 2660283.
Leaviss, J., & Uttley, L. (2015). Psychotherapeutic benefits of compassion-focused therapy: An early systemic review. Psychological Medicine, 45(5), 927-945.
Macdonald, A.J. (2011). Solution-focused therapy: Theory, research & practice (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Nichols, M.P. (2011). The essentials of family therapy (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Ramish, J.L., McVicker, M., & Seda Sahin, Z. (2009). Helping low-conflict divorced parents establish appropriate boundaries using a variation of the miracle question: An integration of solution-focused therapy and structural family therapy. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 50(7), 481-495.
Reiter, M.D. (2010). Hope and expectancy in solution-focused brief therapy. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 21(2), 132-148.
Rettew, D.C. (2006). Avoidant personality disorder: Boundaries of a diagnosis. Psychiatric Times, 23(8), 38.
Taylor, L. (2008). A thumbnail map for solution-focused brief therapy. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 16(1-2), 27-33.
Treasure, J. (2004). Motivational interviewing. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 10(5), 331-337.
Trepper, T. S., McCollum, E. E., De Jong, P., Korman, H., Gingerich, W., & Franklin, C. (2008). Solution focused therapy treatment manual for working with individuals [pp. 1-16]. Retrieved from http://www.sfbta.org/Research.pdf
Turnell, A. & Hopwood, L. (1994). Solution-focused brief therapy I: A first session outline. Case Studies in Brief and Family Therapy, 8(2), 39-51.
West, J.D., Bubenzer, D.L., Smith, J.M., & Hamm, T.L. Insoo Kim Berg and Solution-Focused Therapy. The Family Journal, 5(4), 346-354.
Yalom, V., & Rubin, B. (2003). Insoo Kim Berg on brief solution-focused therapy. Psychotherapy.net. Retrieved from http://www.psychotherapy.net/interview/insoo-kim-berg
Appendix A
Asking the Miracle Question
Therapist: Steve, I want you to imagine something now. I want you to imagine that “tonight you go to bed and while you’re sleeping a miracle happens. The result of this miracle is that you wake up tomorrow morning and all the problems you’ve come here about are solved. How would you know, what would you notice happening differently?” (Turnell & Hopwood, 1994, p. 44).
Steve: All my problems are solved?
Therapist: All your problems are solved. You wake up, and all your problems are solved. You get out of bed—what’s the first thing you notice that lets you know things are different?
Steve: I have money.
Therapist: All your problems are solved. You wake up, and all your problems are solved. You get out of bed—what’s the first thing you notice that lets you know things are different?
Steve: I have money.
Therapist: Awesome. You have money. What, do you see new objects in your home that makes you realize this?
Steve: [laughing] I just see money. Lots and lots of money.
Therapist: Nice. I like it. Keep going with it. You have money now, lots of money, but all your other problems are gone too, all the other stuff we’ve been talking about. How do you notice that these other problems have vanished?
Steve: Um, I don’t know…Fiona smiles at me.
Therapist: Cool, what else do you see?
Steve: Um, the kids aren’t fighting. They’re playing a video game or something. They’re getting along.
Therapist: Is Liam there?
Steve: [pauses a moment] Yeah, Liam’s there.
Therapist: What’s Liam doing?
Steve: [laughs] He’s doing his homework!
Therapist: And what are you doing? You’re up, you’re out of bed. There are bags of money on the floor. Fiona smiles at you. The kids are playing a video game. Liam’s doing his homework. What are you doing?
Steve: I guess I’m getting ready for work.
Therapist: Are you still at the pizza place?
Steve: God no. No, I’m back at the office doing web design.
Therapist: Tell me more about Fiona. She smiles at you. That tells you that something has changed. Does she do anything else that lets you know there was a miracle?
Appendix B
Asking Exceptions Questions
Therapist: “Are there any times now when a part of this miracle, even a small part, is already happening?” (Turnell & Hopwood, 1994, p. 44).
Steve: I don’t know. Let me think. Well yeah, there are times when things are better. Sometimes Fiona isn’t all mad at me.
Therapist: Tell me about a time when she wasn’t mad at you.
Steve: Okay, last Saturday. It was Shireen’s birthday, and we all went out. We went to that kid place with the mouse. And, I don’t know, things were just good. We ate, and then the kids went to play this video game, and Fiona and I, we played some—I forget what you call it.
Fiona: Skee ball.
Steve: Yeah, skee ball.
Therapist: You had a nice time, Fiona?
Fiona: Yeah, but then during the drive home Liam started running his mouth again.
Therapist: I want to stick with the skee ball for a minute. You guys were having a good time. Were you laughing?
Fiona: Yeah, sure.
Therapist: What was different about that time?
Steve: We weren’t arguing. She wasn’t all mad because I’m at the bar. It was like old times. It was like when we started dating.
Therapist: Because you weren’t at the bar?
Steve: I guess.
Fiona: It’s not just that. He makes me sound like I’m some awful woman, like I have him on this short leash. It’s not like that. I’m fine if he goes out to the bar. Sometimes I like my space.
Therapist: Okay, tell me what was different about that night, when the kids are off playing games, and you two are playing skee ball.
Fiona: I don’t know, this sounds mean, but he wasn’t whining.
Therapist: He wasn’t whining.
Fiona: He wasn’t going on about his job and on about Liam and all that.
Therapist: What were you guys talking about?
Steve: Just silly stuffy.
Fiona: Yeah, silly stuff. Like he was acting like he was this world-class bowler. You know, he can be really funny.
Therapist: So Steve isn’t complaining. He’s just having fun.
Fiona: Right.
Therapist: And Steve, you just told me that Fiona was happy with you. She wasn’t giving you a hard time. She was just enjoying being with you. She’s laughing at your antics.
Steve: Yeah.
Fiona: He can be a dork.
Therapist: So you guys know how to have a good time. You guys know how to get along. You guys have moments when it sounds that you’re very happy with one another.
Steve: Yeah.
Appendix C
Handling Obstacles
Therapist: “What do each of you hope to get out of this session? What needs to happen in this session to make it worth your time?” (Taylor, 2008, p. 30).
Liam: You need to make him stop drinking.
Therapist: So this will be a good session for you if Steve stops drinking?
Liam: Yeah.
Therapist: Okay, I think that’s something we need to talk about. That’s important, and we’re going to get to that. But I’m wondering if there’s anything you want to work on yourself. Any personal goals you might have, anything you can do to help your mom, help your brother and sister.
Liam: I’m telling you, Steve’s the problem. He’s an alcoholic. He won’t admit that to you, but that’s what he is.
Therapist: What happens when Steve drinks?
Liam: He just gets really obnoxious. He bugs me. He’ll come into my room. My door’s closed, I’m doing my thing, and then he’ll just barge on in. He’s all loud, and he’ll start lecturing me.
Therapist: It sounds like him coming into your room annoys, maybe makes you feel like he’s not respecting your privacy, maybe not respecting you.
Liam: Yeah, definitely.
Therapist: So because Steve is like this, because he’s like this when he drinks, you end up leaving the house.
Liam: Yeah, pretty much.
Therapist: Now earlier you brought up the PlayStation, the PlayStation you took from your friend. [I bring this up as a subtle, non-confrontational way to help Liam see that he too has changes to make.]
Liam: Yeah.
Therapist: Do you think Steve’s drinking played into that?
Liam: What do you mean?
Therapist: You say you leave the house because Steve starts drinking. Was he drinking the night you took the PlayStation?
Liam: I don’t know. I mean, I don’t know.
Therapist: Why do you think you took the PlayStation? What was that about?
Liam: I don’t know. It wasn’t really a big deal.
Therapist: I’m just trying to understand that a little. Because, you know, talking to you right now is really enjoyable. I can just tell that you’re a good person. It just doesn’t seem like something you would normally do.
Liam: So you think it’s Steve fault?
Therapist: No, I don’t think that. I think you stole it, not Steve. I just want to understand the family dynamics here. Doing something like that just seems out of your character. [I’m bringing up that this theft seems incompatible with his personal values, hoping he will see that he has things about himself he would like to change.]
No comments:
Post a Comment