Scholars argue that with family systems theory, we can only understand a family by looking at it as a whole. The theory was drawn by scholars from general systems theory. The general systems theory has various applications not only on families but also social systems.  Families are systems since they are composed of interconnected objectives. Additionally, families portray coherent behavior, regular interactions and are independent (Bergman, Cairns, Nilsson & Nystedt, 2000). This essay will analyze tenets of the family system theory by focusing on its relationship with the psychopathology. Also, it will examine how therapy techniques facilitate healing, and the rationale behind the therapeutic techniques and interventions

The family system has different tenets, which include the following. First, they are interrelated structure and elements. The system’s elements are the family members. These elements have characteristics and relationships between them. However, the relationship works in an interdependent manner (Lewis & Rudolph, 2014), which creates a structure.

Second, the family system interacts in patterns, which are predictable. These repetitive cycles assist in maintaining the equilibrium of the family and provide hints on the functioning of the elements identified.

The third tenet is about boundaries of the systems, which can be observed on a continuum. Besides, every system can include or exclude the elements. This makes the line within and outside the system distinct. Fourth, there is the composition law. The family system has individual elements, which results in a whole system and reflects the family themes and images (Wood, Klebba & Miller, 2000). Fifth, systems use rules and messages to shape members. This is because they are prescribed: hence limits the behavior of the family members over a period.  They are repetitive in nature, hence redundant.  The messages and rules not only give power but also limit actions and induce guilt.

Lastly, the family system has subsystems that contain other small groups, which is usually composed of 2-3 individuals. The relationships between the individuals are called coalitions, alliances or subsystems. It is possible for subsystems membership to change over time.

Psychopathology also referred to as psychological or mental disorder entails patterns of emotions, thought and behavior which is disruptive, maladaptive or uncomfortable for the affected individuals or other parties concerned. The family relational processes and roles are associated with psychopathology (Scott, 2010). Examining the family and intimate relationship in pathogenic context is relevant in the psychopathology and other approaches linked to the family system theory. Citing Sullivan and McHale (2007), unhealthy relationship patterns have undermined the potential of individuals to develop in addition to increasing the risk of mental and physical illness.

The family system theory has different assumptions on the relationship processes in the family. It holds that people within the family are connected to one another. Therefore, experiences in one section of the system interfere with others. All effects are considered to be as a result of multiple different causes, and in turn, they impact the causal pathways (Rothbaum, Rosen, Ujiie & Uchida, 2002). Another key theoretical assumption is the communication forms, family structures regulation, via implicit and explicit information, rules and feedback. The theory avoids categorizing behavior as bad or good instead it emphasizes on the role of the behavior within the system (Rabstejnek, 2012)

In the clinical practice of treating problems such as anxiety, models such as multigenerational have been adopted. The model is based on the influences of the past experiences to the present, and holds that patterns relating to the past might continue in the family system. Therefore, the therapist utilizes questions to encourage the patient to take part and relate their present problems with how the past generations have handled same relationship issues. For instance, if the symptom was due to death in the family, then the therapist will inquire how grief had been tackled by the previous generation. The aim of the questions would be to uncover the family’s belief system and the manner in which the relationship change due to loss. Exploring different related themes or tracking clinical symptoms for at least three family generations makes it challenging for members to blame one another for identified individual deficiencies. Citing Kaplan, et al. (2013), the ability to effectively act on the awareness of the family relationship process without blaming other contributes to a reduction in chronic activity and emotional reactivity.

Grief and anxiety due to death can be treated through detriangling. Detriangling is the major technique in the Bowenian treatment therapy. The patient has the responsibility of recognizing not only the obvious but also the subtle ways that other people have used to triangle them (Kaplan, Arnold, Irby, Boles & Skelton, 2013). The therapist adopts the questions strategy with the objective of facilitating the awareness (Bavelas, & Segal, 1982). The awareness focuses on the roles they played in the family triangles.  Simple questions are formulated with the objective of assisting the clients to be detectives in their own systems (Von Klitzing, Simoni & Burgin, 1999).  In most cases, it is challenging for the family members to know the triangles they are involved in. Therefore, at times, the affected formulate ways to detour anxiety. For instance, a client who is finding it difficult and has negative attitude towards her/his mother (Freedman & Combs, 2006). When the therapist includes the role of the father in developing hatred, the client discovers that her view towards her mother was due to her father’s position and the role in a triangle.  As her father’s ally in the identified triangle, the client views her mother an inadequate wife who left her father.

After identifying the triangles, it is possible to assist family members. This will enable them to play roles and come up with different ways of communicating their neutral positions to other members (Walsh, 2012). The objective is for the members to identify a position that is less reactive to one’s anxiety (Wood, Klebba, & Miller, 2000).

Regarding the treatment of the patient on negative attitudes towards the mother, the treatment strategy might fail, particularly if it does not account for the systematic context. This is because the approach might limit the first-order of the patient, and fail to change the second one. In the family system theory, first-order change is treated at the surface-level (Kerig, 1995), and it involves the modification of some behavior. However, the underlying systematic dynamics may be constant. For example, if the treatment is applied to the situation, there is a possibility of the client developing new communication skills, but still detest the mother (Cox, & Paley, 2003).   Therefore, treating the negative emotions of the patient towards the mother should involve examining the father’s role (Kerig, 1995).

In conclusion, it is evident that problems of any given member of the entire family are important in the psychopathology treatment. The system has focused on the interaction of family members in solving long-standing personal issues. Also, the system has been used in the development of family therapies by using the multidirectional and holistic view of not only pathological behavior, but also treatment.

References

Bavelas, J. B., & Segal, L. (1982). Family systems theory: Background and implications. Journal of Communication, 32(3), 99-107.

Bergman, L.R., Cairns, R.B., Nilsson, L., & Nystedt, L. (2000). Developmental science and         the holistic. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cox, M. J., & Paley, B. (2003). Understanding families as systems. Current directions in psychological science, 12(5), 193-196.

Freedman, J., & Combs, G. (2006). Narrative therapy: The social construction of preferred           realities. New York: Norton.

Kaplan, S. G., Arnold, E. M., Irby, M. B., Boles, K. A., & Skelton, J. A. (2013). Family systems theory and obesity treatment applications for clinicians. ICAN: Infant, Child, & Adolescent Nutrition, 6(1), 24-29.

Kerig, P. K. (1995). Triangles in the family circle: Effects of family structure on marriage, parenting, and child adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology, 9(1), 28.

Lewis, M., & Rudolph, K. D. (Eds.). (2014). Handbook of developmental psychopathology. Springer Science & Business Media.

Rothbaum, F., Rosen, K., Ujiie, T., & Uchida, N. (2002). Family systems theory, attachment theory, and culture. Family process, 41(3), 328-350.

Rabstejnek, C. V. (2012). Family Systems & Murray Bowen Theory. Retrieved from http://www.houd.info/bowenTheory.pdf

Sullivan, M. & McHale, P. J. (2007). Family systems. Handbook of clinical psychological. Retrieved from http://www.californiaparentingcoordinator.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/mchale-sullivan-family-systems.pdf

Scott, J. (2010). Family system theories. Retrieved from http://www.familytherapy.vt.edu/Family%20Systems%20Theories%20–%20Johnson%202010.pdf

Von Klitzing, K., Simoni, H., & Bürgin, D. (1999). Child development and early triadic relationships. The International journal of psycho-analysis, 80(1), 71-89.

Walsh, F. (2012). Clinical views of family normality, health, and dysfunction. Normal family processes: Growing diversity and complexity, 28-54.

Wood, B. L., Klebba, K. B., & Miller, B. D. (2000). Evolving the biobehavioral family model: The fit of attachment. Family process, 39(3), 319-344.

 
Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?