Evaluating evidence to family therapy efficacy - Essay Example

Evaluating Evidence to Family Therapy Efficacy Geist et al (2000) report the results of a study that was used to compare family therapy to an alternative solution such as family psychoeducation. The results indicated that there was no much difference between the two with regard to efficacy but the latter was cheaper financially. The advantage of this article is that it proves that both family therapy and family psychoeducation can be effective in enhancing the recovery process of recovery. However, the problem with the article is that it lacks a better comparison of the family therapy model of treatment to other treatment modes such as cognitive behavior therapy. At the same time, this study was a shorter term study where the subjects were observed for only about four months. To really know the actual impact of family therapy, it is necessary to come up with a longitudinal study. Glenny et al (1997) did not just investigate the efficacy of family therapy, they also investigated how this efficacy varies across other variables such as age, gender and type of mental disorder the patient may be having. This article is very important in the study of this topic because it recognizes that while a strategy of therapy can be said to be effective, it cannot be equally effective for all types of patients and for all kinds of situations. This article is necessary in that it helps to bring up the question of the how various variables affect the efficacy of family therapy. The advantage of this article is that it is informed by a study that compared different types of therapy with regard to treating patient with a certain kind of patients. This kind of comparison can be a good way to establish the efficacy or lack thereof of the mode of treatment that is being investigated. The disadvantage of the article is the fact that the law only looks at one type of disorder and how the use of family therapy can be effective in treating this disorder. It is necessary to include the various variables that can affect the efficacy of a therapy mode. Clark and Serovich (1997) also bring in a new dimension to the discussion of the efficacy of the debate. Their concern was not that the family therapy is effective or not, but rather to the fact that it fails to look at the whole picture. It can be deducted that Clark and Serovich (1997) already agreed to the efficacy of the use of family therapy because otherwise they would not be concerned on how this family therapy is applied to modern types of family. The advantage of this study is that it is a longitudinal study that collected data from past studies for the last over forty years. This longitudinal approach makes it easier to come up with more effective way of looking at an issue. However, the problem with this study as a way to study the efficacy of family therapy is that it did not directly investigate the efficacy of family therapy, but rather investigated how this new approach looks at the new kinds of family. This is however important because for family therapy to work, it is necessary to understand what a family is and the dynamics that drive a family. The other disadvantage with the evidence provided in this study is that it is based on secondary data rather than primary data. This can affect the viability of the study. At the same time, the nature of the issue being investigated required that secondary data rather than primary data be used. Just like Clark and Serovich (1997), Hare-Mustin (1987) wanted to investigate how the understanding of the dynamics of modern family is considered with regard to the use of family therapy. She also recognized that the nature and structure of family has changed and that this is likely to affect how family therapy is effective in treating patients. However, instead of looking at the issue of same sex marriages, she looked at changing roles of family members. For instance, in modern life, wives are not any longer just housewives and husbands just bead winners. She argues that this new paradigm of family can affect the way in which family therapy can be effective. The advantage of this study as a way to be used as evidence for family therapy is that it used primacy data and this is very useful. Lezak (1978) also through his study brings more light to the question of how effective family therapy can be. In his study, he investigated how the inclusion of family members can help individual with certain mental disorders. He specifically investigated the issue of characterological defects and how involving the family members of patients with characterological defects into the therapy can aid in helping these patients to not only recover but to also be able to not relapse. This article is important because it reinforced the argument that the use of family therapy increases the efficacy of the therapy. The advantage of this as evidence for the efficacy of family therapy is the fact that the study used primary empirical evidence. However, the study has the disadvantage of not bringing more variables to the study so that more light can be shed on the issue. The study could have benefited more from understanding how other variables affect the efficacy of family therapy. Looking at these studies shows that there is overwhelming evidence that the use of family therapy is effective and probably more that the other types of therapy. They all point to that fact, even those that criticize it for some reasons such as not being able to consider the modern types of family setups. As a result, it can be argued that there is enough evidence that family therapy is effective for treating patients with various psychological and mental disorders. However, what did not get an agreement from everybody is how the use of family therapy is effective for different types of disorders. At the same time, it is necessary to ask whether there were factors that affected the results of these studies. As already discussed, the use of family therapy has come to be accepted by most practitioners as an effective way of providing therapy. This may indicate that the researchers had some bias towards the use of family therapy and that this bias affected the outcome of their studies. At the same time, the way a study is designed can determine what the results will be and this also mean that the results may not necessarily be a representation of reality. Based on the evidence provided in these articles, it is necessary to change the research question from addressing the efficacy of family therapy to addressing the effective of family therapy on various types of patients. It will be necessary for the research question to be able to look at other variables that can affect the efficacy of the use of family therapy. By investigating how various variables affect the efficacy of the use of family therapy, it will be necessary to know why family therapy is effective for some kinds of patients and not the other. This then will open a way to understand the factors that make it less effective for certain patients and this is important in making sure that they can be addressed. Once these factors can be found, it will be possible to know whether it is better to deal with these factors that make family therapy to be less effective for these patients or whether it is better not use family therapy for these kinds of patents. References Clark, W. &. (1997). Twenty Years And Still In The Dark? Content Analysis Of Articles Pertaining To Gay, Lesbian, And Bisexual Issues In Marriage And Family Therapy Journals. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 23, 3 , PP. 239–253. Geist R, H. M. (2000). Comparison of family therapy and family group psychoeducation in adolescents with anorexia nervosa. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie, 45, 2 , PP.173-178. Glenny AM, O. S. (1997). The treatment and prevention of obesity: a systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders : Journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, 21, 9 , PP. 715-737. Hare-Mustin, R. (1987). The Problem of Gender in Family Therapy Theory. Family Process Volume, 26, 1 , PP. 15–27. Lezak, M. (1978). Living with the characterologically altered brain injured patient. . The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 39, 7 , PP. 592-598. Read More