Response to "Are Trustworthiness and Fairness Enough? Contextual Family Therapy and the Good Family"

By Boszormenyi-Nagy, Ivan | Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, April 1997 | Go to article overview

Response to "Are Trustworthiness and Fairness Enough? Contextual Family Therapy and the Good Family"


Boszormenyi-Nagy, Ivan, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy


I was glad to accept Douglas Sprenkle's offer to respond to this article even though, as the reader will see, I disagree with many of the opinions expressed by its authors (I base my response on a draft of the article presented to me without the actual authors' names). The reason for my interest is my valuing any effort at discussing relational ethics as a courageous endeavor, even when this leads to erroneous conclusions.

It was Helm Stierlin, now of Heidelberg and then of Washington, DC, who, as a critical reader of Invisible Loyalties, commented on my approach (1972) and stated that it would need at least 10 years before the field of therapy would be ready to understand the importance of relational ethics: Classical family therapists used to see a Freudian orientation in my approach, and Freudian analysts tried to categorize my ideas as moralizing and misunderstood filial loyalty as crippling for the child.

Twenty-five years after Helm Stierlin's comments, I can see that people still struggle to grasp the leading concepts of my approach. I welcome the opportunity that has been given to me by the editor of the JMFT to discuss some common misconceptions about relational ethics and contextual therapy.

The origins of contextual therapy go back to my life-long search for an effective therapy of mental dysfunctions, including schizophrenia. Both a review of the literature on intensive individual psychotherapy and my empirical search for effectiveness criteria in my clinical work led me to the discovery of the importance of trust, first in the therapeutic relationship and later in family relationships. From there the road to the conceptual chain of trustworthiness, justice, fairness, and ethics was essentially an empirical search and not a philosophical, psychological, religious, or epistemological investigation.

The term ethics can be confusing and may lead to a conceptual departure into a value ethic of moralizing and judgmental type. Hence come the notions of value systems as criteria of merit, whereas contextual therapy has developed a merit criterion based on an interpersonal, relational foundation. Giving and receiving between persons and, ultimately, between a person and mankind as a whole, constitute the essence of relational ethics.

Cognitive efforts at defining ethical values are only tangentially relevant to the requirements of contextual therapy and relational ethics. This ethics concerns the dialectic of responsible caring within the relational dialogue rather than a cognitive consensus between partners. In this sense the interpersonal balance of fairness involves the subjectivity of two sides, each being anchored in the polarity of the respective self-interest of the two partners.

This critique's insistence on cognitive solutions to what moral positions should be are intellectually appealing and important, and its ideas about what a family should be are interesting but they don't as such lead to clinical relevance whether or not they claim ethical value.

I would like to make a similar comment about the clinical example discussed: It pertains much more to a description of the marital decision-making process on practical issues rather than to the discussions of matters that would have a direct ethical relevance. In addition, the authors state that according to the contextual approach, "The only good in family life is trustworthy relations." Where does this come from?

The authors of the critique share a common misunderstanding about the goal of contextual therapy, assuming that it claims a capacity for restoring and preserving justice among family members. This grandiose claim is neither made in my writings nor, fortunately, expected from any school of therapy. There are good reasons for the therapist to limit his or her therapeutic goals to the family members' own definition of their individual needs and claims to fairness and to avoid asserting a knowledge of what is "the good in family life. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Response to "Are Trustworthiness and Fairness Enough? Contextual Family Therapy and the Good Family"
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.