In a 2- to 3-page paper, address the following:
Summarize the key points of both structural family therapy and strategic family therapy.
Compare structural family therapy to strategic family therapy, noting the strengths and weaknesses of each.
Provide an example of a family in your practicum using a structural family map.
Structural versus Strategic Family Therapies
The structural family therapy is a treatment that addresses patterns of interaction that create problems within families. Mental health issues are viewed as signs of a dysfunctional family, therefore, the focus of the treatment is on changing the family structure rather than changing individual family members. This therapy is limited because it only involves members of an immediate nuclear family. Strategic family therapy, on the other hand, is a form of family therapy that seeks to address specific problems that can be addressed in a shorter time frame than other therapy modalities. It is one of the major models of both family and brief psychotherapy. This therapy is not a simple-to-follow recipe, rather, it is an advanced clinical model that requires the counselors who use it to have considerable skill. Structural family therapy models assert that relational interactions become altered by focusing on changing the dysfunctional family structure, whereas strategic family therapy models state that family structure sill change organically once the relational strategies become modified.
Douglas Haig, British Commander-in-Chief of France and Flanders, 2nd Dispatch”, 2). The Germans had a strategic position because they were situated on the high ground of the Somme watershed and the Allies were situated in the depressions and lower regions looking up at the Germans. The Germans also had a heavily fortified system of defenses with two systems of trenches several lines deep, bomb-proof shelters, and deep cellars. The British strategy was to coordinate a surprise attack with the French consisting of three phases in order to exploit the salient in the German line and push them back to gain territory. The French would attack simultaneously from the South and the British would attack from the North end of the Somme valley. The attack opened with a large daily artillery barrage and gas attacks against the German forces. This tactic was successful because the Germans were caught off-guard and disorganized, so it forced them to take a defensive position during the course of the battle. Then, the infantry assault was launched with British soldiers sent up over the top of the trenches and marched shoulder-to-shoulder through No Man’s Land to the enemy’s trenches with machine guns, essentially enacting the frontal assault. This tactic, while allowing for the success of gaining territory, caused a significant loss to the British of over 50,000 men in one day of fighting. One may argue that this extreme, bloody loss of life was not effective enough to constitute the small gain. By the end of Phase One, the British had captured the second main system of German defense and gained possession of the southern crest of the main ridge in the Somme valley (“Sir Douglas Haig, British Commander-in-Chief of France and Flanders, 2nd Dispatch, 12). Phase One was so successful because the Allies surprised the Germans, attacked quickly, and fought valiantly by push