l-

--.
l_
UjLJ
81

ffi_
!!Jr.J 9:*=1-1.:!I9l_t"_ ial_gvls approach, but keep in mind.
"9,t_lit_
ffi_ t}g! tlg *co_p_rI i ct- 3 s-_t_tyggl-e_ _Lr:eslrg1 -qtj"gbs_r*p_eJ?9n_,
. *-=. l-g_t
.ill!-J
but rather a st,ruggle to be t,he one who conLrols the
W_
-il.J
definition of the relationship.
liu-
l-
H
For Haley, schizophrenics avoid defining any
H
relationship, and they do this by denying/disqualifying their
M_
JEJ

M
JLJ
messages through their thought-disordered communication.
logic igi since *L_"_"gication def ines a relationship, then
The

ru[
)t!-J
in order to deny the
'.t"rr;;;;;;;;"-;"=;;."o
one's communications. So, for example, the schizophrenic
lil_
)r-J
denies or disqualifies his/her communication by stating .ft's
M w.-/
,ilililll
not me who said that - I'm Napoleon/fhe Messiah/the voices in
,ill_
.,illlL___-t
my head etc'"

t!l[
-JL-J
The problem is that, since you cannot not communicate (as
,,Wllll- you will recall from above), even this denial/disgualification
)U of your communication is a communication ('I,m denying my
lw_ communication') ! So the schizophrenic must even deny the
tW
W_ denial-! And this is cal-led 'schizophrenia'.
.V

[il_
H

il_
-H

n-
H

n-
rH
This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus

t_
l-
4

H
I
 -

82

As a resul-t of his work with Milton Erickson (a rat.her

unconventional hlipnotherapist), Haley (and the others in the
Palo Alto group) developed the paradoxical approach to
treatment (which we'11 discuss in more detail in the next
section) . Erickson's stance as a therapist also influenced
Haley's methodology, including the idea that the therapist
should be pragmatic and flexible to meet the uniqueness and
diversity of clients, and the idea that problems have more
!
than one solution (countering t.he client's sense of
'stuckness'), and the solution should be tailored to fit the
specific client. The therapy was to be carefully planned,
brief, and aimed at symptom removal, with the (powerful and
>-
directive, and perhaps 'manipulative') therapist assuming fuI1
responsibility for the outcome. !-
L

In addition, Haley made use of Erickson's notion of the >-

E
family life cycle as a framework for understanding symptomatic
>-
behaviour (courtship, marriage, childbirth, dealing with young L

kids, middle marriage, weaning the kids from the parents, and l-

retirement and o1d age): slrmptoms were seen as likely to occur >i

at certain, points 9f lransition between the d,eyqlopme.1ttq! .

Er
stages, when families were not able -to make the neces9a{f :_
G

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston Cily Campus
-

-83
adjustments to al1ow for this t,ransiti.oq-a44 .to.q4aster the
= necessary tasks required for the next st,age in the life-cycIe.
-
Later on in Haley's career he was heav-i-Iy_ f_Af_!ueflq_e4__hy _
-
the work of Minuchin, changing from an individual to a family
--,,)
_
rh=rapy/systems perspective and emphasising the hierarchical
url\

structurg f?T11y_,-and the triad as the unit of family

"J !!.
-= therapy that maintains family stability (this period of his
work is presented in his book 'Probl-em-Solving Therapy' from
--,
the 1-970's) .

Haley began using the structural view of family

: )
organisation as the context within which to apply his
strategic techni-ques. In particular, he took on the idea that
-
'-nilies
Id.t are rule-governed systems that are best understood in
-
- context; that the presenting problem serves a function within
the family; and that diagnosis of 'stuck' families requires an

analysis of boundaries, coalitions, hi-erarchy, power, the

-
f amily l-ife cycle and triangles.
- In particular, Haley's idea was that pathology results
when coalitions occur between different levels of the family
hi-rarchy (cross-generationaL coal-itions, such as between
II+ U.

-
father and son against mother), and especially when these

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus
 84

coaLitions are covert and are denied by the members, rn this

I

sense, symptoms aie clues (communications) that the

Eieryr.l'_isel_"_llggt_qlg or_ !l€_|gs!y_ig-go-3Jgg9g_"!+.+y.9_1*y"i_*g
p"-tlr-g]-o.S*g*a1-g:e-4gJJ:i**gj:""F.1*s"*_q*ps-"S:_:gat_r*9"_t_"*r]39_;

Further, sj-nce all behaviour is a communication of one's

view of that relationship ('this is the tlpe of relationship
that we have'), and since all communications have megsage-
value (wilI influence the other person to respond), in
pathological families there is a constant (covert/secret)
struggle about the correct definition of the relationship, and

about who is to be the one to define that relationship. So

Haley would view family dysfunction in Lerms of covert power

struggles, always involving the interaction of at l-east 3

persons (involving a coal-ition of at least 2 family members

against a 3td) , in other word,s, in terms of triadic

interactions.

vo r s t e r, i n ttig*-pqgl. _l E
=yglg Eq q!If9_4elg!Egr-1_Egtnme5!g e s__

the followinq techniques utilised by Hal-ey:

Directives and homework tasks, which were used to

break inappropriate sequences of behaviour: these are ways to
get the family to behave differently and thus to have new

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus
J
-t

J
- -t 85

J--J elq)eriences; they are ways to enhance the therapeutic

> relationship (by involving every member of the family and by

J
-t
fol-rowing the directives, the family is complying with the
J therapist) ; and the family's response to t,he directive yields
-

lb
J
-t
EleFSl]gg-_gf _*LeF*{e.Tt}*nerwh_rqh.pf !e_5.e__.-r-!p_"Jgs+}.r.e
J different
- ' view of the presenting problem, allowing t,hem to
JA think differently in a new 'mental context, (we'11 discuss
-
this later in detail).
J
- -- Empowerment, involves emphasising that, because the
J
- 1 problem j-s not worse than it actually is, the family must, have
been doins somet_hi1g_. f"igblr ?4d trep-_.!_hs +h+_1_+;ly__!.g*._q_e_4efjpp*
=
r-- their coping skil-ls and redirg,ct_,.th_91"5_..--e-f.f"gf!.*g..*.
J
Providing the illusion of alternatives/choj-ces, is a
J--
- wsy=eE_[elgg"LLs_:g]i-g+t "rq_s_ig_t-+199_
b-y- e!fefr_+s__ _tbg.t[- a _g.Lr-q.t9e__

J-- between_ tgo a1!S:rnativeF_:_i!__r_fr.gy_ e_ither of these, the

- ?_c_c-g.p_!

cop'trof. .t-9 --in- "!"!.9 t4sra.pi.g-F*iF-- bg-n*-"r* F--arlq9* -they---+r *sprp-Jy+^+9-

- -- with his/her directive"
J
- -' The devil's pact involves building up the family,s

-- motivation to perform the d.irective by telling them that you

I
- -t

4
1--

This study gtide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus

J
--
J
- -
I
-
 >

86

have a sure-fire solution but that you wiII not tel1 them what
it is until they agree to carry it out.
i, :.) s!_Ig1Shtforward di.rectiv_eg (p9gf"q1-y,e_ _-c_9_-qp-e--f,a!-+.'v.e
F
tasks) involve using what you have learned about the family
during the session as a means for persuading them to do the
task.
(
\,4., Metaphorical tasks involve speaking in metaphors that
symboliqe_ t]19 lqfily._.pr.obl9.1n, in such- ? wey ,!haL the seeds of
change are planted without actually explicitly giving them a

directive (!!:9 .-+_? " .lypr:tic .teghniquel .

i. 5 1 Paradoxical directives are most useful (at least for

Haley) in dealing with resistance and an uncooperative stance"
!Ve'l-I see examples of t,hese later in the section on the MRI

group. These include -Sgframing !F9 pfoblem in posit j-ve. terms >.
(as one that j-s needed by the family) , prescribing the s)zmptom
>
(asking them to do more of the present,ing problem) and
restraining change (discouraging or denying the possibility
that they can change, or caut,ioning them about the dangers of
improving too rapidly) .

I
.j
e "l_,."_9fd.qJ _t-_ee-Lini_qlie.F,_ 1_5rfoJve placing the clients in a

position that !hey',.!ipd morg_. stressfuL than the presenting

p*r9blern, _!o*rci4g- tbgm t9 abandon th.e. Fy1nptom;.,

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus
u

I
 87

vorster finally notes the following procedures used by

I{aley in his work with f amilies:

o The entire family was seen (a1lowing the therapist to

better control the therapy and to see patterns, infer
structure and involve all the members in the process).
( z.\ only one therapist would be present (a1lowing him/her
\J
to establish control quickly), but a second therapist (or team
of therapists) would observe the family from behind a 1- -way
mlrror, serwing as consultants - this also aIl-ows the
therapist to maintain conErol (through the help of the
observers' objective perspective and' suggestions for
directives) .

The first interview was to be conducted in an

inflexible, invarj-ant manner, including the following 5

stages: engage the family socially (confirm the importance of

each member, helping them to feel at ease); definition of the
pioblem (therapist sets the rule that all conversation should
be directed toward him,/herseIf, explaining why all family
members were asked to attend, introducing him/herself and
-his/her role; asking each member to present their own

perspective on the problem, and then redefining the problem as

one that is shared by all the members); interact,ion stage

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus
 F

88

(directing the members to discuss the problem amongst

themselves, while refusing to be 'sucked into' the discussion, >

allowing for the revealing of family patterns and structures);

l>

def initiog 9€ l"glglins the soal for

-tr-r_9_*+-99"+Ig9_gJ,=*g-"_q_

therapy in behavioural terms, allowing for a specific focus ,>

for the therapy); and ending the interview with a directive >
and scheduling the next interview.
!

-**'--**1 i-
coNrf,orJ
t

For Hale,vl- lh"Iapy w3s 11-1 abgl!__p_"_y:"T'e1t{_ggl!_I_"1., and L

how to wrest power from the family members through

b
manipulation - forcing the clients into. e 9gl-lg,I..f 5om which
they could escape only by giving up their slrmptoms. Haley
punct,uated relationships as being a struggle for control, with
power and control- being a useful metaphor to describe family
b
interacLional patterns. (Vorster is of the opinion that
lr
manipulation is not the same thing as exploitation - this is
not so simply dismissed as Vorster wouLd like, and we'11 b

discuss the idea of manipulation and exploitation l-ater on).

In any event, many therapists gave up this approach after
b
being repelled by the calculated shrewdness and
manipulativeness of the model. !

This sudy guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus

t
J)

>
J
-- 89

D
J rt shourd be noted on this point, that Harey and Bateson
-t
>
(who we'11 discuss later) were in dispute over this use of the
J
t
concept of power, which led to the splitting up of the
D
J
-- original Palo Alto group. Bateson's point was that in a
D
J cY!-e-r1?!-19-rrs-!9t_n-g 9lg p,q5! o!- !"119 svg*L-es -99t g-grl-t-r-ot ^qrrv
--

J -- "_t!gM.t,gll_c_9_r,'gII__p.aI!i"_1gt=9_tggltr.gte{_yl!Lr_e_yery,
-
other part - in other words, the very idea of such
J --
- control/pgy".f is anti-systgmic and . an ep*is!e-po1gg1ce_1- _Ff_89E1-
J
- -t o_r a pathological conc_epti. . n q{$i.!ioa, .for BeFe,qo'F_.--t_he
attempt to establish unilateral- control wouLd only resul_t in
J
- -{
higher order problems, with additional- alteinpts at coqtrg!ring
J t
- regultilg 1n destructive behayi9u{'._ 9n the other hand, you
J -- should know that Bateson's argument j-s not very popular with
-
rts
I
ieminist thinkers, who see his statement as a dangerous d,enial-
-
of the power inequalitj-es in relatj-onships, ?s we,Lr discuss
---
J
- Iater.
I .D Another reason for the sprit (noted by vorster) is that
-
J Bateson preferred to focus on the receiver of communicatj-on
.tL

processe:._.(lg.y individuals perceived and learned, which are

J t
not directly observable), whereas the others (Haley and
4 interested in the cybernetic metaphor
- .- Weakl-and) were more an4

J on observable behaviour among family members.

- --
J t
- This study gvide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus

J
- -
1
-
.
-
 I
L

90

83 (iii) : STRATEGIC THERAPY: THE BRIEF THERAPY

MOVEMENT/ MENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE (MRI) CNOUP

This approach utilises many of the principles we,ve

=-
covered so far. The basic assumptions are that the solutions
th*.!- p9oplg ggg y-I_e,n atlempting to get rid of a problem ofren =-
cause the problem to be maintaine$ or even to get woFp-g,
=-
Problems, in other words, arise and endure because of the
>_
mishandling of normal, everyday difficulties in our 1ives,
>-
resultlng in bigger problems. To undersLand this more

clearIy, we must first distinguish between two types of

change:
>-

TWO TYPES OF CIIANGE:

--__
not to be confused with first-order )-

cybernetics) is the type of change that occurs within a gj-ven h--

EyE!9IL -_yh"i_+ :!q9.1"1 .I-e"T?llg. q":l*p"g:*": ." rr is nor . real'

>-
change; it's more like reshuffling a deck of cards, rather
l-
than using a new deck of cards. For example, if the child is E-

being naughty, the parents try to discipline him by shouting -

at him; this doesn't work, so they try grounding him; this 4
>i
also doesn't work, so they try speaking to him as an adult;
this too doesn't work, so they try, again unsuccessfully, to >

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus
=

=
-1-t

-{
- 91

-- iiscipline him by beating him. AII of these attempted

-
J
sorutions for the problem of the boy's behaviour do not work,
- and in fact each of these attempted sorutions only serves to
--.- increase the boy's bad behaviour. So i-t becomes a vicious
I .- circle, or a positive feedback cycle between the attempted

1 solutlon and t.he bad behaviour, or as MRI put it 'A Game

-
Without, End; More of the Same; The More Things (seem to)
.-1
-- Change, the More They Stay the Same' This type of change (eg
z-t from shouting t,o grounding to speaking to beating) are not
real changes, they are merely different members of the same
--I
class/different items grouped under the same category (This
-14
class/category is entitl-ed 'Trying to make the boy stop
.-1
.- behaving badly' ) ,_. _ra!-her than a change of the class/category

I- itself (as we'11 see below). So they are internal changes

without reaIly changing the structure of the system.
I-
Another example: A depressed individual tries to change
.J (get rid of) her depression by focussing on happy thoughts"
--

-.1 But this doesn't work, so she tries to cheer hersel-f up by

zt

going to a movie, but this doesn't work. So she tries to rid

--
- herself of her depression by having casual sexual encounters,
1
-- but this too fails. Not only do these various changes (happy
thoughts, movies, sex) not alleviate her depression (since
- .-

-/ -
This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazobow under the auspicu of Boston City Campus
I
--
1
-
/
 =

t
92

feelings are not controllabIe, they occur spontaneously), but >

in fact they make i-t worse (now she feels depressed and dumb
for not being able to get rid of her depression) i so again we

have a positive feedback cycle/vicious circle.

Th9 idg? here is that the symptom j-s maint,ained by the !

feedback cycle - ie it is embedded in a circular pattern of !

interaction involving t.he attempted sol_utigli:_._,., .

I'-.
LSECOND-ORDER CIIENGE [(not t,o be confused with Second-order
!
cybernetics) is a change of the system/categoryf c1-as.=_1!::.If
_11gt jy."t of members of the same cIass. This is a change in !
the way one is changing (second-order change). what does such
;
change look like? Well, this is going to sound strange and
paradoxical, which is why it forms a basis for what,s call_ed l-

'paradoxical therapy'. In our example of the parents trying b

b

to discipline the child to no avaiI, w€ said that all of their

b
attempted solutions were part of the same category, ,Trying to
b
stop the boy from behaving badly., We also saw that the -
problem is being maintained by the positive feedback cycle in L
-
which: the more they try to solve it using those attempted
)
-
solutions, the more the behaviour persists. _So fgg+g_qi"!,?!9!
)-
_t_heq, _t_bg! Fg-_g_gJ_v-e'._the pqob_I9m you have to break that cycle
i;1. oJher wo1{sr }o,u have to STOP your attempted solutions, or

Thts study guidepreparedby Dr M Mazabow under the auspica of Boston City Campus
I

t
 93

mo

using items that fa]l under the category 'Trying to stop the
boy from behaving badly,. This means that you should try
something that is J-80 degrees different from the attempted
soJutions/the .practice, this means asking rhe
_=:9"_9"_o_g:*_ T3
parents to operate under the category 'The boyts behaviour is
actually a good thing for you/him/someone e1se, and so you
should stop trying to restrain this behaviour and instead you
should encourage this 'bad' behaviour,. I warned you this
would sound paradoxical, if not erazy, but if you think about
it a bit, you'11 realise that it is based on sound logic:*.F_y__
changing their perception of this behaviour ('reframirrg, the
behawiour, we'l1 see bel-ow), you thereby change Ehe category
under which thelir atteinpted solutions sit. And if you change
thei r . atF,e_r_nqt e9_ sqlut ions- break the feedback cycle which
is maintaining the problem behaviour.
If the depression is being maintained by her very
attempts to solve it (as we assume they are, at least in some

cases of depression), then you can only get rid of the

depression by disrupting the attempted solution. And since
her attempt,ed solutions are all consistent with/fo11ow from
the heading/category/context 'Depression is a bad thing; it

This snily guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow uniler the auspica of Boston City Campus
 94

must be gotten rid of' , we need to change the way she

P-e-I_c*9,ty:e-.:--.1--**:p-:9-:F-l-9-+-("43-+g:fi-ercatesory/her
interpretation/de.finition) fr9m .,p9p{g-1"-i9n. i9 ba-dl .!o
'D-_g.p-res-sion is actually a go9-d thing for me right. now,.
Fol-lowing from the new category/contextldefinition (or
'reframe') cjf the depression, she'11 STOP trying to fight the
depression, ie she'11 stop trying the attempted solutions
which have held the behaviour in place. And by stopping the
attempted solutions (breaking the feedback cycle) the
depression will no Ionger be maintained.
For the MRI glgrpl problems.are actually caused (or
retle_f maintained) by the attempted solutions which we

institute in order to get.rid of the problem" These

unsuccessfullproblematic attempted solutions include trying to

f orce sen.9!_b,ttg.-_!-11a_!_=.9_an...9,"n-1,y.""9_-c-s-u.r__s.p..anEaae'o_u_sl.V ._(like in our
case of depression in which her attempts to get rid of it in
facL prevent the spontaneous resolution of the depression) .

Another example of this would be insomnia, in which the

attempted solutions (count sheep, read., watch TV, mediLate)
are all from Lhe same category (fnsomnia is a bad t,hingl Force
yourself to sleep), and these in fact maintain the insomnia
you can't force sleep; the more you try the less it works. A

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus
.J
-l

J
- 95

J
-l
Second order change solution would involve trying to force
yourself to stay awake (based on the reframe that insomnia is
J
- functi-onal-/a good thing right now), which breaks the feedback
J
- cycle which is actually maintaining the insomnia.
-.- _+"9!h91 _q_ory9n_ 9_eg99__9f_ pr_o_b1__e_TF_ i"__!_5y'_t'-g (_!!_f"gg_b__y-our
-
J __1t!9*pted, solutions) to.avoid. a feared event. wit! .th9 -eq{-
-ta
result being that youl very attempt .to avoid.!!at e.v9nt.
J
- actually bringq on tlrat event. For example, in the case of
J
-t anticipatory anxiety in which he is afraid of giving a

J
public speech because he fears that he will blush and stammer.
-
His attempted solution is to forcibly control his blushing and
1
- stammering, which merely serve to focus his attention on it
I and which in fact make him more like1y to stammer" So a
-
I second-order change soLution for him would involve asking him
--
to deliberately bring on the stammering and blushing before
--- the speech (offering him a good reframe which would convince
1 him to try this, of course). This would break the
-
.1 anticipatory anxiety cycle in whieh the very attempt to not
-l

blush/stammer is exactly what, is causing him to blush/stammer.

J
- So once again, the attempted solution becomes the
I
- probl em; t9_g glw _tb9_pt9Flep"" t"_q*.bqy_e_!g_ _9F_+s-e t19

1 g!!ggp.t 9 "4-'-F*9.I y t i on .
-

-I -
This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus

J
-
J
-'

-J-
 96

Becvar and Becvar give the following example: a wife

starts to argue with her husband, and he soon starLs to shout
at her. rn order to stop him shouting she decides to shout
back at him. But the more she shouts, Cbe more he shouts, and
the more he shouts, the more she shouts, etc. So shoutj_ng
clearly is not working for her. she then tries to ignore him,
but this too doesn't help her because the more she ignores him
the more he shouts and the more he shouts the more she ignores
him. Thus, shouting and yelling and ignoring are just .more

of the same'ffirsl-order change solutions, which merely

maintain the problem of his shouting. Both of these attempted
solutions follow from the context/category/frame of
b-
reference/assumption: 'Hostj-Iit.y, and Trying To Control Him,.
What she needs is to institute a seqond-order change
.L

solution - she needs to change the way she is changing/she

E
L
needs to change the rules of the game/the context of
lE
hostility. So if she responds to his shouting by standing on L

her head, for example, this is a major change in the context L.

(from Hostility to Silliness), and the pattern is thus broken

L.
s
-he'11 probably respond with surprJ-se or laughing.
>
L

>

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus

,>
 97

With regard to the therapeutic aspects of this approach,

you can already see t,hat it is a minimalist. approach, which
means it involves merely identifying an{ !:he-+. d+qrqp"!+_+g_jh-e_
cycle in which the problem is embedded.,...F-y bl_o_c_Hp,g. the
attempted solution.
You may also be interested to know that3arado4ic_3I
----
ther_ap_r__(,=-.]:lains lhe 'plgscrilittg_ lbe qyqp!_9m1 ep_pfp_e9L*r"_the!
-/ - we've just seen) was pioneered by ,Jackpor-r. .(d-=r.pgussed above)

and was used also by Haley (as a way of gaining control of the
-- -
relationship between therapist and client, as we saw above),
by Minuchin (as a way of introducing positive feedback to the
-
--- rigid homeostatic, negative feedback phase in which the family

--- are stuck), and even by Victor Frank1 (he called it

--.- J
'paradoxical intention', but that'9_ 31_o_th?I_lloryl .

---- 't nsrRAMr_$e__ J_.

---- While we're on this topic, drr important aspect of this

4
which we have seen is important in changing the client's
perceptions about the behaviour/changing the category _g4g"g.E

ii --- which rh"_3__111p!_:g l_"-|".lons s_ir: ._j."r.5 a_nd Bgcyar de!1ne

i

: reframing (in chapter 5) as: 'Takj-ng a situation and lif_ting

ilr-
il

:
ilili !t:

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Carnpus
llllli
-_:
llllllEilir

ffi
tilillElilt

wl_-
rgtlro.J
llMltl
 it. out of its old context/set of rules and placing it into a

new context/.set of rules that def.ines it equally we1lt bJt_

O1ve9 it a lery meaning, to which new respo_nse.1 "?::.

Rg:P*kkl*9ele-3-1 : -- -
If you assign an event/behaviour to a particul-ar class of
actions with particular meanings, then it is difficult to see

it as belongj-ng to a different cl-ass and as having a different

m ean i ns . _B.9"_ _f"+n]*A9__qq? ns qla n-g- i !_s* -F h 9 q lg"_s_ s_,g_{ _ ":q he

ey-e"qqlb€h+v+o,g{,--'_9_{ ,c. "L,r-elgl_lg .t-h9_ _qr_e.3gi_ng _9q95!!-9_d _-t_o_ __t!et

*_bgh ni_"*gf*_,.__.F-o_r elample, assume that the problem is that your

kids are fighting all the time, and you've already
unsuccessfully tried to separate them, to lecture them

individually, to lecture them together, to punish them with

method #L, #2, and #3 - and none of these attempted solutions
j have worked, in fact the more you try to solve the problem,
l
\\- the more they f ight. Now, all of these f irst-order -c-bg+.g-e-
attempted solutions follow f rom the. context of 1o..11 yor _1"y"
the k1d9'. F9]t-qtiour: 'Fighting is ? lrd thing/a
_Qqfi"-ned

__p:o!!gm'. As we've seen' ii_yo.-g."gpl""c+erys,llis..g,gnt:T!"r'.y99._

can block the vi-cious cycle of behaviour which maintains the

_qrolJ9m: .lg.:.., i-t. t.]rg. therapist redefines/reframes the problem

as 'Normal sibling _r"iya}5y'_and instructq you to allow this to

This study guide prepared by Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus
 99

occur (giving you an acceptable/believable explanation for why

it is a good thing to al1ow it to occur : for example that

thts is their way of showing love to each other), then this
may be enough to break up the vicj-ous _cyc19 _wtrig! _paintains
the probl-em. .

I should just mention here that second-order change

solutions are only going_-!_o be useful if=tt19*p5,o_bl__eFf"*i_E__-+lfl_e-e_{

being maintained by the attempted solutions, that is if the

system is caught in a Game Without End, in which all first-
order change solutions have been exhausted. In other cases,
the firs,t-order change solution may be enough to get rid of
the probl-em.

ALso, don't forget that first-order chartge and.second-

orq-qr !ey:,:*ol-bll-s -!-9 g?"Jr!-li.-€:rg-t":g-r9et. 9n{J9_99_19

9-h77zse

order cybernetj-cs. Both first- and second- order change are,

p?-'t t-!:- yH -?_p".p^:_?:*:-^:l"*l*itself is part of the First,-
,:I
ord-er cybernetic paradigm or epistemology"

MRI AS FIRST-ORDER CYBERNETIES

It should be clear that this approach fits nicely in the

first-order cybernetic domain: firstly, the belief is that
symptoms do not reside inside the individual, UyI fglltgflhgf__ ,

This study guidepreparedby Dr M Mazabow under the auspica of Boston City Campus
 I
I

-I
100

exist as an aspect of interactj-on; they are behaviours that I

/
areembedf ed-il"p*.:l-''cyl-*s*y*,gr:g*""s.y,*'9-:r--".tu""-il*':-ly.*lg_9--- I
positive feedback loop between symptom and attempted solution.
Also, this model assumes that behavj-our is always reciprocal -I

and-_.!!?t*t_he_context is cruciaL for defining behaviour (ie the )

context defines the rules for behaviour and gives the l

-
behaviour meanj-ng - in this case, the context is the feedback
l
qvcle.-p1itt**4"1.ns*,_!lrs.p-_rg!_lsp_e$_!b9-"I_53TS.-:J
-

L
reference/category maintaining the attempted solutions) . The

Ig9'" g{" -9-1'e+99 hgrq. iq. .gqllX-.tne. 99n_t"9x! i-!f"l5i.il_"ygg L

change Ehe context (eg how the behaviour is perceived, by

L
reframing the behaviour) , yo11 glange FL,r-_e-._fU_1__g.g *f-gt behav_ioql
L
and if these change, the behaviour changes - new actions
be-c- o-rnq .-p=g gF_+__bJS.rI |tjt_!__:?"T g _ 9"9 lr_s_l.s_t e nt w it h t h e new I
-
context/meanings .
I
I

I n addi t i on, we s e e here 9_!cS_- ?g3i"l' _!,b9" _ i_np_oJq"e*g9__91 .

I
process (how the behaviour is maintained by a particular cycle t

of interaction), rather than the content of the behavi-our. . I

a

I
I

I
!

This study guidepreparedby Dr M Mazabow under the auspices of Boston City Campus