UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA



UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SW 663

SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK SPRING 2010

Dr. Helen Land

Rm 335, 213-740-0299

323-462-4890 (residence)

email: land@usc.edu

CLINICAL PRACTICE WITH COUPLES

COURSE DESCRIPTION

Why is the divorce rate in the United States over 50%? What do so many couples experience difficulty in their relationship? This course is designed to provide students with clinical skills to work with couples from premarital engagement through divorce and remarriage. We will examine major models of couple’s therapy most of which are evidence-based. We begin with the FOCCUS test for premarital work. Additional models we examine include Sager’s contract model, Gottman’s Sound Marital House, Emotion-focused, Attachment & Object Relations, Structural/Strategic, Social Learning & Cognitive approaches, Solution Focused, and Conflict Focused. In each model, we examine relationship formation, assessment, and beginning, middle, and ending phases of treatment. We will also address sticking points in couple’s treatment. Because we live in Los Angeles, we will see couples with diverse backgrounds; therefore, in this course we will be including content on couples who are married, remarried, cohabitating, gay and lesbian, young, middle-aged and seniors, who may live in cross-cultural/racial relationships, and who are from a variety of socioeconomic classes and religions. We will apply models of intervention noted above to common presenting problems that couples experience including jealousy and infidelity, financial troubles, chronic discord, separation & divorce, domestic violence, sexual problems, substance abuse, and couple conflict due to personality disorders. We will also address the use of the therapeutic relationship across schools of intervention and across the phases of treatment. In addition, we will examine the impact of culture and spirituality, gender, and class and the use of client value systems in the many aspects of the treatment process.

COURSE OBJECTIVES

Upon completion of this course, the student should:

1. have greater awareness of differential partner needs which may be associated with gender, sexual preference, ethnicity and race, socioeconomic status, age, class, or religion.

2. have a beginning competence in providing services to a variety of couple forms.

3. demonstrate an awareness of diverse intervention strategies appropriate to common presenting problems of couples.

4. demonstrate an awareness of therapeutic issues associated with the use of the relationship between the couple, and the social work clinician across the phases of treatment.

CLASS FORMAT

Please come to each class with at least one burning question you have from the readings and from seeing couples in the field or with whom you interact in everyday life- -write it down so that you don’t forget it and I will entertain these questions at the beginning of class so that I may answer as many as possible during that class session. This is an effective learning tool for you and for me to learn about you and what is helpful for you.

Both didactic presentations of material and experiential exercises will comprise class format. Exercises may include role play and modeling, small group discussion, case analysis, film, music analysis, and guest lectures. Please come to class ready to discuss assigned readings and to participate in class. Students are advised to begin seeing couples in the field as soon as possible. Please note that we take a supportive, cooperative approach to learning in this classroom rather than a competitive one. Please do not hesitate to ask questions, raise issues, or comment. Feel free to call me at my home whenever you can not reach me at school. Office hours are by appointment with me.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION (attached at end)

Mid-term Assignment: 35% (see end of syllabus)

Final Assignment: 45% (see end of syllabus)

Class Participation: 10% (see below for evaluation standards including exercises)

Reading cards 10% (summary & reaction on 4x6 index card)

REQUIRED TEXTS

Jacobson, Neil and Gurman, Alan (2008). Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy. 3rd edition.

New York: Guilford.

Weeks, G.R., Odell, M. & Methven, S. (2005). If Only I Had Known: Avoiding Common

Mistakes in Couples Therapy. New York: Norton.

Readings and assignments are due on the session indicated. We will be reading new and classic

readings. Recommended readings are available at the end of each section; they are not required. Feel free to ask me for other readings on topics that interest you.

Recommended Texts:

Johnson, S. M. (2004). The Practice of Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy (2nd ed.)New York:

Brunner Routledge.

Weeks, G. & Treat, S. (1992). Couples in treatment: Techniques and approaches for effective

practice. New York: Brunner/Mazel latest version

Harvey, J., Wenzel, A.& Sprecher, S. (2004). Handbook of sexuality in close relationships.

N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

School of Social Work Grading Policy

Within the School of Social work, grades are determined in each class on standards established by the school as follows. 1) Grades of A or A- are reserved for student work which not only demonstrates very good mastery of content but also shows that the student has undertaken a complex task, has applied critical thinking skills to the assignment, and or has demonstrated creativity in the approach to the assignment. The difference between these two grades is determined by the degree to which these skills have been demonstrated. 2) A grade of B+ will be given to work which is judged to be very good. This grade denotes that the student has demonstrated a more-than-competent understanding of the material. 3) A grade of B will be given to student work which meets the basic requirements of the assignment. It denotes that the student has done adequate work on the assignment and meets basic course expectations. 4) A grade a B- denotes that a student’s performance was less than adequate on the assignment, reflecting only moderate grasp of content or expectations. 5) A grade of C reflects minimal grasp of the assignment, poor organization of ideas and/or several significant areas requiring improvement. 6) Grades between C- and F denote a failure to meet even minimum standards, reflecting serious deficiencies in all aspects of a student’s performance on the assignment.

N.B.: Please contract with me if you think you will miss a deadline. Failure to adhere to contractual agreements on paper deadlines will result in a lowered grade. You may choose to do a presentation, audio or DVD rather than papers, if you negotiate this assignment with me. Also, I will read a draft of your paper if you get it to me in a timely manner.

Class participation is defined as students’ active engagement in class related learning. Students are expected to participate fully in the discussions and small-group activities that will be conducted in class. Students are expected to contribute to the development of a positive learning environment and to demonstrate their learning through the quality and depth of class comments, participation in small group activities and experiential exercise and discussions related to readings, lectures, and assignments. Class participation should consist of meaningful, thoughtful, and respectful participation based on having completed required and independent readings and assignments prior to class. When in class, students should demonstrate their understanding of the material and be prepared to offer comments or reflections about the material, or alternatively, to have a set of thoughtful questions about the material.

Guidelines for Evaluating Participation including participation in Experiential Exercises

10 Outstanding Contributor: Contributions in class reflect exceptional preparation. Ideas offered are always substantive, provides one or more major insights as well as direction for the class. Challenges are well substantiated, persuasively presented, and presented with excellent comportment. If this person were not a member of the class, the quality of discussion would be diminished markedly. Exemplary behavior in experiential exercises demonstrating on target behavior in role plays, small group discussions, and other activities.

9 Good Contributor: Contributions in class reflect thorough preparation. Ideas offered are usually substantive, provide good insights and sometimes direction for the class. Challenges are well substantiated, often persuasive, and presented with excellent comportment. If this person were not a member of the class, the quality of discussion would be diminished. Good activity in experiential exercises demonstrating behavior that is usually on target in role plays, small group discussions, and other activities.

8 Adequate Contributor: Contributions in class reflect satisfactory preparation. Ideas offered are sometimes substantive, provides generally useful insights but seldom offer a new direction for the discussion. Challenges are sometimes presented, fairly well substantiated, and are sometimes persuasive with good comportment. If this person were not a member of the class, the quality of discussion would be diminished somewhat. Adequate behavior in experiential exercises demonstrating adequate understanding of methods in role plays, small group discussions, and other activities.

7 Infrequent Contributor: Contributions in class reflect infrequent preparation. Ideas offered are infrequently substantive, provides some insights but seldom offer a new direction for the discussion. Challenges are sometimes presented, and are sometimes persuasive with adequate comportment. If this person were not a member of the class, the quality of discussion would be diminished slightly. Behavior in experiential exercises is occasionally sporadically on target demonstrating uneven understanding of methods in role plays, small group discussions, and other activities.

6 Inadequate Contributor: This person says little or nothing in class. Hence, there is not an adequate basis for evaluation. If this person were not a member of the class, the quality of discussion would not be changed. Does not participate actively in exercises but sits almost silently. Does not appear to be engaged.

5 Non-participant. Attends class only.

0 Unsatisfactory Contributor: Contributions in class reflect inadequate preparation. Ideas offered are seldom substantive; provides few if any insights and never a constructive direction for the class. Integrative comments and effective challenges are absent. Comportment can be poor. If this person were not a member of the class, valuable air-time would be saved. Is unable to perform exercises and detracts from the experience.

NB: A note on lap top computer usage in class. Recently, there have been instances of some students checking email, cruising the net, etc. There is never an excuse for this activity. If you understand the discussion or lecture, you need to be asking further questions, giving examples, writing marginal notes to yourself, practicing active listening, or otherwise deepening your knowledge of the material in some way. If I suspect that there is inappropriate computer usage going on, you are not consciously active, and therefore, not present in class. The involved student will receive a zero for the day and be marked as absent. You will loose your right to use a computer in my classroom. Absences accrue on your letter grade and on the class participation grade. If this behavior occurs more than once, it will affect your final grade by as much as one letter grade dropped, e.g. a B becomes a C.

School of Social Work Attendance Policy

Students are expected to attend every class, to arrive on time for class, and to remain in class for the duration of the session.  Failure to attend class or arriving late may impact your ability to achieve course objectives which could affect your course grade.  Students are expected to notify the instructor by telephone or email of any anticipated absence or reason for tardiness.

University of Southern California policy permits students to be excused from class, without

penalty, for the observance of religious holy days. This policy also covers scheduled final examinations which conflict with students’ observance of a holy day. Students must make arrangements in advance to complete work which will be missed, or to reschedule an examination, due to holy days observance.

Evaluation of class participation includes frequency and quality of participation, including active listening, discussion, on time attendance, and involvement in experiential exercises. Please come to class ready to discuss readings and their application to practice. Regular participation in class is an expectation of this class. Please notify me of your absence.

EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION

To receive information, call main number (213)740-2711, press #2. “For recorded announcements, events, emergency communications or critical incident information.”

To leave a message, call (213) 740-8311

For additional university information, please call (213) 740-9233

Or visit university website;

If it becomes necessary to evacuate the building, please go to the following locations carefully and using stairwells only. Never use elevators in an emergency evacuation.

University Park Campus City Center

MRF – Lot B Front of the building (12th & Olive)

SWC – Lot B Orange County Campus

WPH – McCarthy Quad Faculty Parking Lot

VKC – McCarthy Quad Skirball Campus

Front of building

Do not re-enter the building until given the “all clear” by emergency personnel.

UNIT I: Models of Couple’s Treatment

Session 1 – Introduction: The FOCCUS test, Couple Contracts objectives 1,3

A. Introductions and Course Overview

B. Application of family theory to couple therapy

C. The forces of gender, age, sex role, race, ethnicity, religion and class on couple therapy

D. The FOCCUS test for pre-marital work

E. Couple contracts: emotional and legal

Readings

Falicov, C. (1995). Training to think culturally: A multidimensional comparative framework.

Family Process, 34,4, 373-387.(classic)

Sager, C. (1991). Couples therapy and marriage contracts. In A.S. Gurman and D.P. Kniskern.

Handbook of Family Therapy. N.Y. : Brunner/Mazel. (classic)

Sant Rita, E. (2005). Pilipino Families. In M. McGoldrick (ed). Ethnicity and Family Therapy,

New York, Guilford, 324-332.

Session 2: Gottman’s Sound Marital House: obj. 1,3,4

A. Gottman’s Sound marital (couple) house model, a research-based approach

B. Application to diverse couple groups

C. Demonstration

E. dvd

Readings

Read your course outline from beginning to end.

Gottman, J., Driver, J. & Tabares, A. (2002). Building the sound marital house: An empirically

derived couple therapy. In A. Gurman & N. Jacobson (eds). Clinical Handbook of Couple’s Therapy. N.Y.:Guilford, pp. 373-399.

Moore, P. & Boyd-Franklin, N. (2005). African American Families. In M. McGolderick (ed).

Ethnicity and Family Therapy, New York: Guilford, 66-84.

Snyder, D.K., Castellani, A.M., & Whisman, M.A. (2006). Current Status and Future Directions

in Couple Therapy. Annual Review of Psychology. 37, 317-344.

Symonds, D. & Horvath, A.O. (2004). Optimizing the Alliance in Couple Therapy. Family

Process. 43.4, 443-455.

Dattilio, F.M. (2002). Homework Assignments in Couple and Family Therapy. Journal of

Clinical Psychology. 58.5, 535-547.

Session 3: Solution-Focused and Cognitive -Behavioral Models obj. 1,2,3,4

A. Theoretical underpinnings and interventions.

B. The use of solution-focused & task-centered models with differing couple parameters (e.g. cultural/ethnic/racial background, gender, marital status)

C. Video: Solution-focused couple treatment / CBT couple treatment

Readings

Hoyt, M. (2002). Solution-Focused Couple Therapy. In Gurman, A. & Jacobson, N. Clinical

Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford,335-372.

Weeks (2005) Ch1. “Battling for Structure,” 22-50.

Baucom. D., Epstein, N. & LaTaillade, J. (2002). Cognitive-behavioral couple therapy. In A.S

Gurman & D. P. Kniskern (eds) . Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy. N.Y.: Guilford,

26-58.

Leung, P. (2005). Vietnamese Families. In M. McGoldrick. Ethnicty and Family Therapy.

New York, Guilford, 295-306.

Burton, L.M., Winn, D.M., Stevenson, H. & Clark, S.L. (2004). Working With African

American Clients: Considering the “Homeplace” in Marriage and Family therapy Practices. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 30.4, 397-410.

Kim, E. & et al. (2004). Do General Treatment Guidelines for Asian American Families Have

Applications to Specific Ethnic Groups? The Case of Culturally-Competent Therapy With Korean Americans. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 30.3, 359-372.

Session 3: Structural and Strategic Models(optional), obj. 1,2,3,4

A. Structural models: assessment and intervention

B. Strategic models: assessment and intervention

C. The use of systemic models with differing couple parameters

(e.g. ethnic/racial background, gender, marital status)

D. The use of systemic models for common presenting problems in

outpatient and inpatient services

E. Role play

Required Readings

Keim, J. & Lappin, J. (2002). Structural-Strategic Marital Therapy. In N.S. Jacobson & A.S.

Gurman (eds). Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy. New York: Guilford, pp.86-117.

Weeks (2005). Ch. 2, “Confidentiality Traps, 51-70, “Alliances and Coalitions,” 70-86.

Jalali, B. Iranian Families. In M. McGoldrick (ed). Ethnicity and Family Therapy, New York,

Guilford, 347-363.

Dattilio, F.M. & Epstein, N.B. (2005). Introduction to the Special Section: The Role of

Cognitive-Behavioral Interventions in Couple and Family Therapy. Journal of Martial and Family Therapy. 31.1, 7-13.

Recommended Readings

Coyne, J.C. (1994). Strategic Marital Therapy for Depression. In N.S. Jacobson & A.S. Gurman

(eds) . Clinical Handbook of Marital Therapy. New York: Guilford, pp.495-511.

Session 4: Bowen & Narrative Models obj. 1,2,3,4

A. Differences and similarities of dynamic approaches

B. Indications/contraindications for use (age, ethnicity, core values, affective and intellectual style)

C. Experiential exercise: assessing our own families where are we as therapists. Integrating theory and practice

D. Continuum of care

Required Reading

Freedman, J. & Combs, G. (2002). Narrative couple therapy. In Gurman, A. & Jacobson, N.

Clnical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford, 308-334.

Rosenbaum, R. (1995). Integrating self and system: An empty Intersection? Family Process,

34, 21-43.

Weeks (2005) Ch. 4: “Overemphasizing the Past or the Present,” 86-96.

Roberto-Forman, L. (2002). Transgenerational Marital Therapy. In A. Gurman & N. Jacobson

(eds). Clinical Handbook of Couple’s Therapy. 3rd edition. N.Y.: Guilford, 118-147.

Hernandez, M (1996). Central American Families. In M. McGoldrick (ed). Ethnicity and

Family Therapy, New York, Guilford, 214-226.

Recommended Readings

Land, H. (1998). The feminist approach to clinical social work.. In Zuckerman, R. (ed).

Paradigms of Clinical Social Work . New York: Brunner Mazel.

Rosen, H. (1998). Meaning making as a metaframework for clinical practice. In Zuckerman, R.

(ed). Paradigms of Clinical Social Work . New York: Brunner Mazel.

Bowen, M. (1978). Family Therapy in Clinical Practice NY: Jason Arson,, pp. 147-182, 467-

549.(primary source, classic)

Session 5, 6 & 7: Psychodynamic & Integrative Models: Object Relations Emotion-focused & Conflict-focused models obj. 1,2,3,4

A. Object-Relations:Theoretical underpinnings and interventions

B. Emotion-focused models & conflict-focused models

C. The use of psychodynamic models with differing couple parameters (e.g. ethnic racial background, gender, marital status)

D. The use of psychodynamic & integrative models for common presenting problems in outpatient services

E. Experiential exercises: Role play, guest speaker

Required Readings

Weeks (2005) Ch. 5 “Lapses in Careful Listening,” 97-110, Ch. 7, “Overlooking Process

Considerations,” 126-144, Ch. 6 “Inadequate Assessments, Mismatched or Mistimed Interventions,” 111-125.

Hendrick, C. & Hendrick, S. (2004). Sex and romantic love: Connects and disconnects. In J.

Harvey(ed). Handbook of sexuality and close relationships, N.J.:Lawrence Earlbaum.

Feeny, J. & Noller, P. Attachment and sexuality in close relationships . In J. Harvey(ed).

Handbook of sexuality and close relationships, N.J.:Lawrence Earlbaum.

Johnson, S. & Denton, D., in Jacobson, A. and Gurman, N. (2002). Emotion-focused couple

treatment. In Gurman, A. & Jacobson, N. Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford,221-250

Middleberg, C. (2002). Projective identification in common couple dances. Journal of Marital

and Family Therapy, 27, 3, 341-343.

Scharff,J. & Bagnini, C. (2002). Object Relations Couple Therapy. In Gurman, A. & Jacobson,

N. Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford, 59-85.

Blavier, D.C., Glenn, E. (1995). The Role of Shame in Perceptions of Marital Equity, Intimacy,

and Competency. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 23(1), p. 73.

Ringstrom, p. (1998). Competing selfobject functions: The bane of the conjoint therapist.

Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 62,3, 315-324.

Recommended Readings

Rosen, E. (2005). Jewish Families. . In M. McGoldrick (ed). Ethnicity and Family Therapy, ew

York, Guilford, 631-637.

Lansley, M.R. (1991). Shame and Fragmentation in the Marital Dyad. Contemporary Family

Therapy, 13(1).

Vatcher, C.A. & Bogo, M. (2001). The Feminist/Emotionally Focused Therapy Practice Model:

An Integrated Approach for Couple Therapy. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy. 27.1, 69-83.

Wachs, K. & Cordova, J.V. (2007). Mindful Relating: Exploring Mindfulness and Emotion

Repertoires in Intimate Relationships. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 33.4, 464-481.

Kirby, J.S.& Baucom, D.H. (2007). Treating Emotion Dysregulation in a Couples Context: A

Pilot Study of a Couples Skills Group Intervention. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 33.3, 375-391.

Johnson, S.M. & Greenman, P.S. (2006). The Path to a Secure Bond: Emotionally Focused

Couple Therapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 62.5, 597-609.

Naaman, S., Pappas, J.D., Makinen, J., Zuccarini, D. & Johnson-Douglas, S. (2005). Treating

Attachment Injured Couples With Emotionally Focused Therapy: A Case Study Approach. Psychiatry. 68.1, 55-77.

SESSION 8 & 9: Issues of Culture, Gender, Class & Sexual Orientation in Couple Therapy obj. 1,2,3,4

A. Gender issues

B. Therapy with sexual minority couples

C. Issues of culture and class

D Religious divergence in couple’s therapy

E. Experiential exercise: film “Rebecca” “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner”

Readings

Rampage, C. (2002). Working with gender in couple’s therapy. In Gurman, A. & Jacobson, N.

Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford, pp. 533-545.

Weeks (2005) Ch. 8, “Pitfalls of Anger and Conflict,” Ch. 12 “Overlooking or Inadvertently

Imposing Spirituality” 218-243.

Green, R. & Mitchell, V. (2002). Gay and Lesbian couples in therapy. In Gurman, A. &

Jacobson, N. Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford, pp. 546-568.

Hardy, K., Laszloffy, T. (2002). Couple therapy using a multicultural perspective. In Gurman,

A. & Jacobson, N. Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford, pp. 569-596.

Pearlman, S.F. (1996). Loving across race and class divides: Relational challenges and the

interracial lesbian couple. In Couples therapy, feminist perspectives, New York: Hayworth Press. 25-35. (classic)

Peplau,L. (2004). Sexuality in the relationships of lesbians and gay men. In L. Harvey, A.

Wenzel, S. Sprecher (eds.), Handbook of sexuality in close relationships. N.J. : Lawrence Erlbaum.

Walsh, F. Spirituality and Family Therapy. (2000). N.Y. Free Press.

Butler, M.H., Harper, J.M. (1994). The Divine Triangle: God in the Marital System of

Religious Couples. Family Process, 33(3), p. 277.(classic)

Almeida, R. (2005). Hindu, Christian and Muslim Families. . In M. McGoldrick (ed). Ethnicity

and Family Therapy, New York, Guilford, 395-426.

Kim, B. (2005). Korean Families in McGolderick,(ed). Ethnicty and Family Therapy, New

York: Guildford, 281-294.

Spitalnick, J.S. & McNair, L.D. (2005). Couples Therapy with Gay and Lesbian Clients: An

Analysis of Important Clinical Issues. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy. 31.1, 43-56.

SESSION 10, 11 & 12: Ruptures in the Relational Bond obj. 1,2,3,4

A. Knowing when divorce is the agenda & helping couples to separate

B. Effects on the clinician.

D. Jealousy and Extra Marital Affairs

E. Violence in Couples

F. Sexual issues in couple therapy & the effects of sexual abuse in couples and treatment

Readings

Glass, S. (2002). Couple therapy after the trauma of infidelity. In Gurman, A. & Jacobson, N.

Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford, pp. 488-507.

Wenzel, A. , Jackson, L., & Brendle, J.(2004). Psychopathology, sexuality, and the partner

relationship. . In J. Harvey(ed). Handbook of sexuality and close relationships, N.J.:Lawrence Earlbaum.

Vos, K., Catanese, R. & Baumeister, R. (2004). Sex in “His” and “her” relationships. . In J.

Harvey(ed). Handbook of sexuality and close relationships, N.J.:Lawrence Earlbaum.

Holtzworth-Munroe, A. et.al. ( 2002). The assessment and treatment of marital violence: An

introduction for marital therapists. In Jacobson and Gurman. Clinical Handbook of Couple therapy. New York: Guilford. 317-339.

Olson, M. , Russel, C. Higgins-Kessler, & Miller, r. (2002). Emotional processes following

disclosure of an extramarital affair. J. of Marital and Family Therapy, 28,4, 423-434.

Penn, C.D., Hernandez, S.L., Bermudez, M.J. (1997). Using a cross-cultural perspective to

understand infidelity in couple’s therapy. American J. of Family Therapy, 25,2, 169-185.

Emery, R. & Sbarra, D. (2002). Addressing separation and divorce during and after couple

therapy. In Gurman, A. & Jacobson, N. Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford, pp. 508-532.

Holtzworth-Munroe, A. et. Al. (2002). Intimate partner violence: An introduction for couple

therapists. In Gurman, A. & Jacobson, N. Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford, pp. 441-465.

Compton, J. & Follette, V. (2002). Couple therapy when a partner has a history of sexual abuse.

In Gurman, A. & Jacobson, N. Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, 3rd ed. N.Y.:Guilford, , pp. 466-487.

Walsh, F et.al. Facilitating the healthy divorce process, In Jacobson & Gurman (2002) p.340-

365.

Sutton, C. (2005). American Indian Families. In M. McGoldrick, Ethnicity and Family

Therapy. New York, Guilford, 45-56.

O'Farrell, T.J. Marital Therapy in the Treatment of Alcoholism. In N.S. Jacobson A.S. Gurman

(eds) . (2002).Clinical Handbook of Marital Therapy. New York: Guilford, pp. 513-535.

Snyder, D.K. & Doss, B.D. (2005). Treating Infidelity: Clinical and Ethical Directions. Journal

of Clinical Psychology. 61.11, 1453-1465.

Gordon, K.C., Baucom, D.H. & Snyder, D.K. (2005). Treating Couples Recovering from

Infidelity: An Integrative Approach. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 61.11, 1393-1405.

Blow, A.J. & Hartnett, K. (2005). Infidelity in Committed Relationships II: A Substantive

Review. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 31.2, 217-233.

Bird, M.H. (2006). Sexual Addiction and Marriage and Family Therapy: Facilitating Individual

and Relationship Healing Through Couple Therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 32.3, 297-311.

SESSION 13: Treating Remarried Couples obj. 1,2,3,4

A. The family boundary dilemma

B. Family loyalty issues

C. Role issues

D. DVD

Readings

Whitsett, D. and Land, H. (1992). Role strain, coping, and marital satisfaction of stepparents,

Families in Society, 73,2,79-92

Dagirmanjan, S. (2005). Armenian Families. In McGoldrick (ed). Ethnicity and Family

Therapy, New York: Guilford, 364-375.

Weeks (2005) Ch. 9 Mistakes in Dealing with the Partners’ Different Perceptions, 167-179.

Xiaohe, X., Hudspeth, C.D. & Bartkowski, J.P. (2006) The Role of Cohabitation in Remarriage.

Journal of Marriage and Family. 68.2, 261-274.

SESSION 14: Couple Treatment for Borderline & Narcissistic Disorders obj. 1,2,3,4

A. Establishing an empathic connection

B. Issues in transference & countertransference

C. Treatment combinations

D. Guest speaker

Readings

Lansky, M. (2005). Marital Therapy for Narcissistic Disorders. In N. S. Jacobson & A - S.

Gurman (eds.). Clinical Handbook of Marital Therapy. N.Y.: Guilford, pp.557-574.

Lansky, M.R. (1981). Treatment of the Narcissistically Vulnerable Marriage. In M.R. Lansky

(ed). Family Therapy and Major Psychopathology. N.Y.: Grune and Stratton.(classic)

Weeks (2005) Ch.10, “ Faulty Interpretations and Reframes, “ 180-195

Links, P.S. & Stockwell, M. (2002). The Role of Couple Therapy in the Treatment of

Narcissistic Personality Disorder. American Journal of Psychotherapy. 56.4, 522-538.

Links, P.S. & Stockwell, M. (2001). Is Couple Therapy Indicated for Borderline Personality

Disorder? American Journal of Psychotherapy. 55.4, 491-506.

SESSION 15: : Substance Abuse in Couple Relationships obj. 1,2,3,4

A. Assessment of couple discord, dependence and the role of substances

B. Common obstacles and goals for treatment

C. Stabilizing change in the relationship, treating relapse

D. The influence of culture and gender on couple patterns

Readings

Epstein, E. & McCrady, B. (2002). Couple therapy in the treatment of alcohol problems.

Gurman and Kniskern text, pp. 597-628.

Weeks (2005), Ch. 11. “Failing to Foster Commitment,” 196-217.

Epstein, E. & McCrady, B. (1998). Alcohol behavioral couples therapy: Current status and

innovations. Clinical Psychology Review, 18, 689-711.

Lammers, S. et al. (1995). Submission and rebellion: Excessive drinking of women in

problematic heterosexual partner relationships. International Journal of Additions, 30, 901-917. (classic)

Cavacuiti, C. (2004). You, Me…and Drugs—a Love Triangle: Important Considerations When

Both Members of a Couple Are Abusing Substances. Substance Use & Misuse, 39.4, 645-656.

Midterm Paper Guidelines for SW 699: Couple Assessment & Implications of Treatment obj. 1,2,3

Due Session 8

1. Using a couple with whom you are working or a film, select a model that has been covered in

class. Use this as a title for your paper.

2. Insert a genogram or other graphic to visually present relationship dynamics and major

events.

3. Briefly describe the situation with the couple and include sociodemographic information.

5. Using one couple treatment model, briefly discuss the presenting symptoms or reason

for needing help applying the model to your assessment. Include how the model sees the role of the clinician in relationship with the couple. You may include supportive information from 1 other model if it is appropriate, but focus on one model of couple treatment.

6. Develop treatment goals that derive from the assessment and is based in the couple

treatment model.

7. Discuss treatment interventions based on the model.

8. Although some citation is necessary (use APA style), heavy documentation and use of lengthy

quotes is unnecessary.

8. The total paper should not exceed 10 pages, double spaced.

Possible films

Reality Bites

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolfe?

Cat on a Hot Tin Roof

Breaking the Waves

Annie Hall

Bridges of Madison County

The Notebook

Jules and Jim

Like Water for Chocolate

When a Man Loves a Woman

The Painted Veil

No Reservation or Mostly Martha

Desk Set

Adams Rib

Woman of the Year

Funny Face

Bell Book and Candle

High Fidelity

About Schmit

Reflections in a Golden Eye

Autumn Sonata

Shop around the Corner

Terms of Endearment

Bachelor Mother

There’s Something About Mary

The Graduate

Something’s Got to Give

You Me and Dupree

Failure to Launch

Hanna and her Sisters

Manhattan

Green Card

April Fools

Accidental Traveler

You’ve Got Mail

Revolution Road

GUIDELINES FOR THE FINAL LIBRARY RESEARCH PAPER obj. 1,2,3,4

Students: I advise that you use this sheet as a check list before you turn in you paper.

1. Select a disorder or special population that deals with couple problems. Select a couple treatment model to apply to it. This should be the title of your paper. Begin with an introduction that describes the problem and how couples residing in our complex urban environment cope or fail to cope with the issue at hand [ ]

2. Applying the theoretical model to the problem area, examine couple intervention strategies using one or more practice models from engagement to follow-up (engagement [ ], assessment [ ], contracting [ ], core phase [ ], termination [ ], evaluation [ ], follow-up [ ]). You may use one or more than one treatment model but you must tell me why, when, and how you will activate the intervention based on need. Discuss life cycle and other diagnostic issues where appropriate (e.g. in the assessment phase, in the introduction, etc.) Do not just reiterate a published model for couples (e.g. Fairburn’s model for jealousy and extramarital affairs).

Caveats

1.Use an approach suitable for work with couples and their support systems, not individuals or group therapy. [ ]

2. Remember that your assessment should be based in practice [ ]. Your intervention in core phase should derive from your assessment [ ]. Tell me why you doing what you are doing. The core phase should represent the bulk of your paper.[ ]

3. Do not present case material with no explanation of your model’s method for assessment intervention strategies. This assignment is not just a case study. You may use cases as illustrative material. You may discuss issues in countertransference where appropriate. See also # 4 below.[ ]

4. Remember to include content on diversity throughout the paper, do not just put one paragraph at the end of your paper on this material. For example, how might you engage a couple who has a problem with gambling from a certain ethnic group? What issues come up with regard to the clinician’s own values, ethnicity, gender, class, religious values, etc. [ ].

5. This is a social work assignment. What makes our intervention different from other helping professions? Discuss the possible need for use of adjunctive resources pertinent to intervention with couples residing in an environment typical of L.A. [ ]

6. Use APA style. Use 12 pt. Times font. APA style includes the use of headings and subheadings. Remember to start with an introduction and end with a conclusion. Do not use lengthy citations, or listing with bullet points; rather, paraphrase material to make your point. When you quote directly, you must include pagination. If you are unclear about APA style, please consult the manual or see me. [ ]

7. Use a variety of citations. Do not rely solely on one or two texts or solely on classroom readings, or one article. [ ]

8. Check and recheck to make sure that you are not unconsciously plagiarizing. Do not just change one or two words to make the thought your own. [ ]

9. Proofread and spell-check your paper for errors. (e.g. Read it out loud for errors in grammar and sentence structure.)

10. Length should be between fifteen and twenty double-spaced pages. [ ]

l1. Please contact me if you have any questions at all. I would be happy to take a look at a draft of your paper.

12. If for some reason, you are unable to turn in your paper on time, please contact me. Together, we will negotiate a solution to the problem.

Good luck.

Family Content Continued for your reference

Experiential Assessment techniques:

1) Family genogram (development assessment and ego based assessment-life model)

2) Family sculpting (indication/contraindications- -cultural and ethnic issues regarding availability of affect, dominance patterns in families)

3) Family puppet interview, family art drawing, family photograph (age appropriateness, diagnosis technique), sand tray

4) Differential presentation of symptomatology along racial/ethnic, gender, religious and class lines

Required Readings

Hardy, K. (1995). The cultural genogram: Key to training culturally competent family

therapists. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 21,3, 227-237.

Onnis, L., Di Gennaro, A., Cespa, G. (eds.) (1994). Sculpting Present and Future: A Systemic

Intervention Model Applied to Psychosomatic Families. Family Process, 33(3), p. 341.

McGolderick, M., Pearce, J. K. & Giordano, J. (1996). Ethnicity and Family Therapy. N.Y. : Guilford. Select 2 chapters that represent your ethnic background. -

Sherman, R., Oresky, P. and Roundtree, Y. (1991). Solving Problems in couples and family

therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 26-44.

Lantz, J. (1995). Art in existential psychotherapy with couples and families. Contemporary

Family Therapy, 17, 3, 331-343.

Structural Family Therapy

A. Indications/contraindications for use: ethnic/cultural affective style of family, core values, membership patterns

B. Application to common presenting problems: psychosomatic disorders; child behavior problems; adolescent emancipation issues; death in the family.

C. Experiential exercises: Student case present, role play, and critique. Integrating theory and practice.

D. Continuum of care

E. The effects on the worker

Required Reading

Brown, J. E. (1997). The question cube: A model for developing question repertoire in training

couple and family therapists. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 23, 27-40.

Colapinto, J. (1991), Structural family therapy, In A. Gurman Handbook of Family Therapy,

N.Y.: Guilford, 417-433.

Sherman, R., Oresky, P. and Roundtree, Y. (1991). Solving, Problems in couples and family

therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel1-25, 45- 159.

Luepnitz, D.A. (1991). The Family Interpreted: Feminist Theory in Clinical Practice. N.Y.:

Basic, Ch. 5: Salvador Minuchin.

Walsh, F. (1991). Promoting healthy functioning in divorced and remarried families. In A.

Gurman Handbook of Family Therapy, N.Y.: Guilford, 525-545.

Soto-Fulp S. & DelCampo, R.(1994). Structural family therapy with Mexican-American family

systems. Contemporary Family Therapy, 16,5, 349-362.

Griffith, T. (1986).Employing the God-family relationship in therapy with religious families.

Family Process, 25, 4:609-618. (classic)

McClean, P. & Taylor, S. (1994). Family therapy for suicidal people. Death studies, 18,4, 409-

426.

Calvocoressi, W. et al, (1995). Family accommodation in obsessive compulsive disorder.

American Journal of Psychiatry, 152,3, 441-443.

Land, H.(1992). Stress and Coping in AIDS Caregivers: Partners Families and Friends. in Land,

H. (ed.). AIDS: A Complete Guide to Psychosocial Intervention. Milwaukee, PSA Press.

Madanes, C. (1991). Strategic family therapy. In A. Gurman (ed). 396-416. Handbook of

Family Therapy, N.Y.: Guilford,

James, P. (1991). Assessing change in family functioning as a result of treatment. Journal of

Marital and Family Therapy, 17,3, 295-311.

Onnis, L. et al. (1994). Psychosomatic families. Family Process, 33,3, 341-356.

Further Reading

Guerin, P. & Fogarty, T. (1996). Working with Relationship Triangles: The one two three of

psychotherapy. N.Y. Guilford.

Minuchin, S.(1974).Families and Family Therapy , Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Ch. 6,

7, 8. (classic)

Minuchin, S. (1981) . Family Therapy Techniques. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,

Chapters 12, 13, 15 and 16.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download