Proponents of social constructionist family therapy and narrative therapy theorize that these forms of treatment are better suited to treating families that do not fit the two-parent "nuclear family" mold than are earlier theories such as structural or strategic family therapy (e.g., a gay couple with an adopted child that is affected by the stress of an extended-family system that does not fully support their immediate family unit). Do you agree with this viewpoint? Why or why not? Do you see ways to combine any of these approaches in order to take advantage of the strengths of these different models, and/or to compensate for their weaknesses? Please include a valid reference article thanks.
Personally, I feel that the type of family therapy used depends on the family itself. It does not make a difference if the family consists of two mothers, two fathers, a father and a mother, a step parent, grandparent as guardian, or adopted parents. In social constructionist family therapy a therapist would encourage family members to reflect on and express the significance or meanings of what their problems are (2). ...
The expert discusses the view of social constructionist family therapy and narrative therapy in today's families. References included.