An Experiential Approach Key Figures Virginia Satir (Human Validation/Satir Model) Carl Whitaker (Symbolic Experiential Therapy) Greenberg & Johnson (Emotion Focused Therapy)
Virginia Satir MSW, First female pioneer of MFT 1955: Illinois Psychiatric Ins=tute 1959-66: Mental Research Ins=tute (MRI) 1964: Conjoint Family Therapy 1966: Director of Training, Esalen Ins=tute 1970: Interna=onal Human Learning Resources Network 1972: Peoplemaking 1977: The Virginia Sa=r Network 1988: The New Peoplemaking 1991: The Sa8r Model: Family Therapy and Beyond
Key Assumptions People are good, unique, make meaning internally, and trend toward growth when present focused (Humanistic) People need self-esteem, self-awareness, personal responsibility, and clear communication of the authentic self to be known (Existential, MRI) People live in systems that adapt to change but choose familiarity over comfort during stress (coping and communication styles learned in family of origin; GTS, MRI) (Sa=r, Gomori, & Gerber, 1991)
Function / Dysfunction Systems Individuals Self aware Authentic Congruent Good self esteem Checks for meaning Responsible for choices Moving toward growth Talk candidly Listen to each other Encourages authenticity Genuinely caring Accepts differences Checks for meaning Promotes self esteem Promotes member growth Seek comfort and creativity Egalitarian Lacks awareness Inauthentic Incongruent Poor self esteem Assumes meaning Blames others Blocked growth Opaque messages Do not understand each other Use defensive communication Have love but low empathy Not accepting of uniqueness Assumes meaning Damages self esteem Limits member growth Seek familiarity Dominating (Guise, 2009; Satir, 1983, 1988)
Therapist s Role Model Leveler Supporter Resource Person Official observer (Satir, 1993) Communication Stances
Satir s Change Model (Smith, 2010; Sa=r et al, 1991))
(Satir, 1983; Piddocke, 2010) I will deny reality to be safe
Treatment Plan Work with what clients bring to session and create opportunities for a transformative idea (authentic, client centered, creative) Bernard s Days Joan s Days Modeling: Illustrate authentic, congruent communication of self to others (use of metaphor) Family of Origin: Address family of origin models for gender norms and relationships to account for experiences with others Parts Party: Encourage discussion and reflection on the fractured parts of the system, focus on integration Boundaries: Safe levels of autonomy and responsibility foster good self esteem Modeling: Illustrate authentic, congruent communication of self to others (use of metaphor) Family Sculpting: Address protective communication and lack of safety to be authentic Checking In: reflect on experiences to encourage growth Boundaries: Safe levels of autonomy and responsibility foster good self esteem
Contextual Issues Advantages Promotes egalitarian relationships Promotes gender equality Promotes individualized growth Easily accommodates spirituality Unconditionally accepts difference Techniques are culturally adaptive Values uniqueness and transparency so differences can be explored openly Disadvantages Difficult for low functioning and not useful if basic needs have not been met Criticized for not acknowledging social barriers and nontraditional coupling/ parenting (GLTB, single parents, etc) Can be viewed as blaming the victim Does not address domestic violence or substance abuse specifically Promotion of self awareness and personal responsibility can be construed as insensitive to collectivism (Bermudez, 2008)
Addressing Criticisms: Accessible to Gays and Lesbians (Carlock, 2008) Accessible to African Americans (Caston, 2009) Accessible to Hispanics clients (Bermudez, 2008) Adapted for collectivist Chinese culture (Yang & Vivian, 2010; Cheung & Chan, 2002;Yang, 2001) Research Efficacious for: Individuals (Morrison & Ferris, 2002; Yang & Vivian, 2010) Couples (Lee, 2009; Morrison & Ferris, 2002) Families (Seligman, 1981) Groups (Root, 1989; Yang, 2001) Clinical Populations: Caregiver depression (Caston, 2009) Pathological gambling issues (Lee, 2009) Suicidal Thinking (Smith, 2010; Lum 2002) Alcohol dependence with depression (Srikosai, 2008) Sexually abused ( Morrison & Ferris, 2002) Bulimia (Root, 1989) Synthesized with: Adlerian Psychology (Bitter, 1993) Social Constructionism (Cheung, 1997) Adventure Based Therapy (Klien, 2008) EFT (Brubacher & Brubacher, 2006) Cognitive Neuroscience (Baron, 2009);
References Baron, S. (2009). Metaphor And The Sa=r Therapist. Sa8r Journal, 3(1), 49 60. Bi[er, J. (1993). Communica=on styles, personality priori=es, and social interest- Strategies for helping couples build a life together. Individual Psychology, 9 (3,4), 330-350. Bermudez, D. (2008). Adap=ng Virginia Sa=r techniques to Hispanic families. Family Journal, 16(1), 51 57. Brubacher, L., & Brubacher, L. (2006). Integra=ng Emo=on- Focused Therapy with the Sa=r Model. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 32(2),141 153, doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2006.tb01596.x Caston, C. (2009). Using the Sa=r family tools to reduce burnout in family caregivers. Sa8r Journal, 3(2), 39 72. Cheung, M. (1997). Social Construc=on Theory and the Sa=r Model: Toward a synthesis. American Journal of Family Therapy, 25(4), 331 343. Cheung, G., & Chan, C. (2002). The Sa=r Model and cultural sensi=vity: A Hong Kong reflec=on. Contemporary Family Therapy: An Interna8onal Journal, 24(1), 199. Goldenberg, I., & Goldenberg, H. (2004). Family therapy: an overview. Australia; Pacific Grove, CA: Thomson, Brooks/Cole. Guise, R. W. (2009). Study guide for the Marriage & Family Therapy na8onal licensing examina8on. Boston: The Family Solu=ons Ins=tute. Klein, K. (2008). Adventure- based therapy with at- risk youth using the Sa=r Model. Sa8r Journal, 2(3), 76 93. Lum, W. (2002). The use of self of the therapist. Contemporary Family Therapy: An Interna8onal Journal, 24(1), 181. Morrison, A. & Ferris, J. (2002). The Sa=r Model with female adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Contemporary Family Therapy: An Interna8onal Journal, 24(1), 161. Root, M. P. P. (1989). Family sculp=ng with bulimic families. In L. M. Hornyak & E. K. Baker (Eds.), Experien8al therapies for ea8ng disorders. (pp. 78 100). New York, NY US: Guilford Press. Srikosai, S. (2008). Effects of Individual psychotherapy using the Sa=r Model on an alcohol- dependent and depressed pa=ent. Sa8r Journal, 2(3), 5 19. Sa=r, V. (1983). Conjoint Family Therapy: (3 Rev Exp.). Science and Behavior Books. Sa=r, V. (1988). The New Peoplemaking (1st ed.). Science and Behavior Books. Sa=r, V. M., Gomori, M., & Gerber, J. (1991). The Sa8r Model: Family therapy and beyond. Science and Behavior Books. Seligman, L. (1981). An Applica=on of Sa=r s Model to family counseling. School Counselor, 29(2), 133 39 Smith. S. M. (2010). The Sa=r Change Model. Steven M. Smith and Associates, LLC; Accelera8ng Team Produc8vity]. Retrieved from h[p://stevenmsmith.com/ar- sa=r- change- model/ Yang Li, & Vivian, L. (2010). Applying the Sa=r Model of counseling in Mainland China: Illustrated with case studies. Sa8r Journal, 4(1), 24 52. Yang, P. (2001). From caterpillar to buuerfly: An ac8on research of educa8onal program based on the Sa8r model for women in Taiwan (China). ProQuest Informa=on & Learning, US.
Thank You On my journey, I walk with wonderful others that show me who they are but also who I am, what I can achieve, and what makes life meaningful. I thank you all for helping me unlock my potential and achieve this moment. L..