Computing and Library Services - delivering an inspiring information environment

Cause and responsibility: towards an interactional understanding of blaming and ‘neutrality’ in family therapy

Stancombe, John and White, Sue (2005) Cause and responsibility: towards an interactional understanding of blaming and ‘neutrality’ in family therapy. Journal of Family Therapy, 27 (4). pp. 330-351. ISSN 0163-4445

Metadata only available from this repository.


This paper aims to shed light on the ways in which ‘neutrality’ is both produced and resisted by socially competent actors in family therapy sessions. It draws upon recent and previous papers in this journal (Stancombe and White, 1997; Stratton, 2003a, 2003b), which highlight the importance of blame in therapeutic encounters. When families come to therapy, individual members frequently deliver competing accounts about the family troubles and who is to blame for them. This produces particular challenges for the therapist. We examine the practices of therapists in managing accountability in the session and in their own discussions. Family therapists operate with a professional ethic of neutrality, or multi-partiality. This paper is concerned with the linguistic strategies used by therapists to deal with overtly blaming accounts, how these strategies are responded to by family members in talk-in-interaction and how therapists go about crafting accountability-neutral versions. We show that the social and moral context of family work makes the therapist's job of communicating multi-partiality precarious. In producing accountability-neutral versions of families' troubles, therapists are forced to make practical-moral evaluations of competing versions of events. We conclude by arguing for a more explicit engagement with the moral nature of therapeutic practice

Item Type: Article
Subjects: H Social Sciences > HQ The family. Marriage. Woman
H Social Sciences > H Social Sciences (General)
Schools: School of Human and Health Sciences

Anderson, H. and Goolishian, H. A. ( 1992) The client is the expert: a not-knowing approach to therapy. In S. McNamee and K. J. Gergen (eds), Therapy as a Social Construction. London: Sage.
•Atkinson, J. M. and Drew, P. ( 1979) Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings. London: Macmillan.
•Boscolo, L., Checchin, G., Hoffman, L. and Penn, P. ( 1987) Training in systemic therapy at the Milan Centre. In R. Whiffen and J. Byng-Hall, Family Therapy Supervision: Recent Developments in Practice. London: Academic Press.
•Buttny, R. ( 1993) Social Accountability in Communication. London: Sage.
•Buttny, R. and Jensen, A. D. ( 1995) Telling problems in an initial family therapy session: the hierarchical organisation of problem talk. In G. H. Morris and R. J. Chenail (eds), The Talk of the Clinic: Explorations in the Analysis of Medical and Therapeutic Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
•Cecchin, G. ( 1999) Interview: Gianfranco Cecchin gets prejudiced about prejudice. New Therapist (online)
•Clayman, S. ( 1988) Displaying neutrality in news interviews. Social Problems, 35: 474– 492.
•Cuff, E. ( 1993) Problems of Versions in Everyday Situations. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
•Edwards, D. and Mercer, N. M. ( 1987) Common Knowledge: The Development of Understanding in the Classroom. London: Routledge.
•Epstein, E. ( 1993) From irreverence to irrelevance? The growing disjuncture of family therapy theories from social realities. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 12: 15– 27.
•Epstein, E. and Loos, V. E. ( 1989) Some irreverent thoughts on the limits of family therapy. Journal of Family Psychology, 2: 405– 421.
CrossRef, CSA
•Frosh, S. ( 1991) The semantics of therapeutic change. Journal of Family Therapy, 13: 171– 186.
Synergy, ISI, CSA
•Gale, J. E. ( 1991) Conversation Analysis of Therapeutic Discourse: The Pursuit of a Therapeutic Agenda. Volume XLI in the series Advances in Discourse Processes, ed. R. O. Freedle. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
•Goffman, E. ( 1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.
•Goffman, E. ( 1981) Forms of Talk. Oxford: Blackwell.
•Golann, S. ( 1988) On second order family therapy. Family Process, 27: 51– 65.
Synergy, ISI, CSA
•Goldner, V. ( 1991) Feminism and systemic practice: two critical traditions in transition. Journal of Family Therapy, 13: 95– 104.
Synergy, ISI, CSA
•Greatbatch, D. and Dingwall, R. ( 1999) Professional neutralism in family mediation. In S. Sarangi and C. Roberts (eds), Talk, Work and Institutional Order: Discourse in Medical, Mediation and Management Settings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
•Gubrium, J. F. ( 1992) Out of Control: Family Therapy and Domestic Disorder. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
•Heritage, J. C. and Watson, D. R. ( 1979) Formulations as conversational objects. In G. Psathas (ed.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington.
•Kogan, S. M. and Gale, J. E. ( 1997) Decentering therapy: textual analysis of a narrative session. Family Process, 36: 101– 126.
Synergy, ISI, CSA
•Lannamann, J. W. ( 1989) Communication theory applied to relational change: a case study in Milan systems family therapy. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 17: 71– 91.
•McLeod, J. ( 1997) Narrative and Psychotherapy. London: Sage.
•Miller, G. ( 1987) Producing family problems: organization and uses of the family perspective and rhetoric in family therapy. Symbolic Interaction, 10: 245– 265.
•Pomerantz, A. M. ( 1986) Extreme case formulations: a new way of legitimating claims. Human Studies, 9: 219– 230.
CrossRef, ISI, CSA
•Potter, J. ( 1996) Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: Sage.
•Riikonen, E. and Smith, G. M. ( 1997) Reimagining Therapy. Oxford: Blackwell.
•Sacks, H. ( 1992) Lectures on Conversation, ed. G. Jefferson. Oxford: Blackwell.
•Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. and Jefferson, G. ( 1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking in conversation. Language, 30: 696– 735.
•Silverman, D. ( 1997) Discourses of Counselling: HIV Counselling as Social Interaction. London: Sage.
•Soderlund, J. ( 1999) Interview: Gianfranco Cecchin gets prejudiced about prejudice. New Therapist (online)
•Stancombe, J. and White, S. ( 1997) Notes on the tenacity of therapeutic presuppositions in process research: examining the artfulness of blamings in family therapy. Journal of Family Therapy, 19: 21– 41.
Synergy, ISI, CSA
•Stratton, P. ( 2003a) Causal attributions during therapy I: Responsibility and blame. Journal of Family Therapy, 25: 136– 160.
Synergy, ISI, CSA
•Stratton, P. ( 2003b) Causal attributions during therapy II: Reconstituted families and parental blaming. Journal of Family Therapy, 25: 161– 180.
Synergy, ISI, CSA
•Sugarman, J. and Martin, J. ( 1995) The moral dimension: a conceptualization and empirical demonstration of the moral nature of psychotherapeutic conversations. The Counselling Psychologist, 23: 324– 347.
•Taylor, C. and White, S. ( 2000) Practising Reflexivity in Health and Welfare. Buckingham: Open University Press.
•Todtman, D. A. ( 1995) Behind the looking glass: tinkering with the facts on the other side of a one-way mirror. In G. H. Morris and R. J. Chenail (eds), The Talk of the Clinic: Explorations in the Analysis of Medical and Therapeutic Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
•White, S. and Stancombe, J. ( 2003) Clinical Judgement in the Health and Welfare Professions: Extending the Evidence Base. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
•Yearley, S. ( 1981) Textual persuasion: the role of social accounting in the construction of scientific arguments. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 11: 409– 435.

Depositing User: Sara Taylor
Date Deposited: 08 May 2008 16:39
Last Modified: 30 Oct 2008 16:20

Repository Staff Only: item control page

View Item

University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield, HD1 3DH Copyright and Disclaimer All rights reserved ©