Family Systems Theory

Family systems theory (Kerr and Bowen, 1988) is a theory of human behavior that
defines the family unit as a complex social system, in which members interact to
influence each other's behavior.

From: Comprehensive Clinical Psychology (Second Edition), 2022

Related terms:

Family Functioning, Psychotherapy, Mental Health, Obesity, Family Therapy, Child

Parent Relation, Family Conflict

View all Topics

Family Systems
W.H. Watson, in Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (Second Edition), 2012

Family Systems Theory

Family systems theory is an approach to understand human functioning that focuses
on interactions between people in a family and between the family and the context(s)
in which that family is embedded. Family systems theory has been applied to a wide
variety of areas including psychotherapy in general and family therapy in particular
(working from a systems framework with emotional, behavioral, or relational symp-
toms in individual, couples, and families); school systems; community problems
(e.g., working with polarized disputes and facilitating ‘difficult conversations’ as in
the Public Conversations Project, peace studies, nonviolence training); organizations
(consulting, leadership training, coaching); and health care (medical family therapy
– tracking the emotional dynamics of illness and facilitating collaboration among
patients, families, providers, and health care systems).

According to a family systems perspective, an individual's functioning is determined

not so much by intrapsychic factors as by a person's place in the system(s) in which
he or she finds himself or herself, subject to the pushes and pulls of the sys-
tem, including competing emotional demands, role definitions and expectations,
boundary and hierarchy issues, coalitions and collusions, loyalty conflicts, family and
institutional culture and belief systems, double binds, projective identifications, and
systemic anxiety. In addition, self-correcting and self-reinforcing feedback loops in
a system can either facilitate or hinder pathology or health, breakdown or resilience.

A thorough understanding of family systems theory requires an elucidation of the

foundational contributions of systems theory itself.

Systems theory is a field that informed and inspired the founders of the family
therapy field and upon which family systems theory is based in many important
respects. Unfortunately, as the field of family therapy has developed, the important
contributions of systems theory to the theoretical foundations of the field have
too often been neglected, undervalued, or only dimly understood. The following
discussion will review the key concepts of systems theory that are most relevant to
family systems theory and family therapy, followed by a description of the primary
schools of family therapy and enduring family systems concepts and family therapy
techniques. The concepts throughout will be illustrated with both actual and hypo-
thetical clinical case examples.

> Read full chapter

Psychopathology, Models of
P.K. Kerig, in Encyclopedia of Adolescence, 2011

Family Systems Theory

Family systems theory also arose in the late 1950s (a time ripe for theoretical innova-
tions in psychology) and staked its unique claim by proposing that psychopathology
does not reside in the individual, but rather in a disturbed system of family relations.
As with psychoanalysis, family systems theory actually refers to a collection of rather
disparate formulations, but all systemic schools of thought share this fundamental
underlying assumption that where there is a patient, there is a troubled family
system. Salvador Minuchin exemplifies this approach with his innovative argument
that he did not treat youth with anorexia, but rather anorexic families. In Min-
uchin's conceptualization, called structural family theory, psychopathology arises as
a function of poor boundaries among family members. In the families of those who
came to him for treatment, he observed children who were parenting their par-
ents (termed role reversal), parents who were coping with unacknowledged marital
problems by focusing their attention on the child (termed detouring), and families
in which certain family members had joined forces to scapegoat others (termed
triangulation). Minuchin also believed that families, like any dynamic system, sought
stability and so the system would resist change. This homeostasis, as he termed it,
existed in part because the system worked: the fact that one family member was
symptomatic served a function for the family. For example, one function might be to
distract attention from problems that family members felt to be more threatening
– such as a crumbling marriage – and therefore more difficult to face. Only by
reinforcing appropriate boundaries and clearing the communication channels could
psychopathology in the family be alleviated.

> Read full chapter

Family Therapy
V. Thomas, J.B. Priest, in Encyclopedia of Mental Health (Second Edition), 2016

Family Systems Theory

Family systems theory is derived from the fields of biology and cybernetics going
back to the 1940s and 1950s. Bertalanffy (1950), an Austrian biologist, attempted
to integrate systems thinking and biology into a universal theory of living systems.
Early family therapists (Speer, 1970) applied von Bertalanffy’s ideas to family systems
focusing on the interactional patterns among family members using concepts such
as equifinality (i.e.,the ability of a family) to reach a given final goal in many different
ways), morphostasis (i.e., forces that stabilized the family’s structure), morphogene-
sis (i.e., forces that support the family’s ability to grow and change). These concepts
are in line with von Bertalanffy’s idea that families are open systems that interact
with their environment. Furthermore, they derive from the idea that a system is
larger than the sum of its parts. Applied to FT this means that family therapist not
only work with the ‘parts’ of the family or its individual members, but also with the
interactions or relationships among family members (the addition to the ‘sum of its
parts’). The second major influence of family systems theory was Cybernetics, the
study feedback mechanisms in self-regulating systems (Wiener, 1948). The idea of
positive and negative feedback loops was applied to families to explain how they
use information and communication to maintain a sense of stability over time and
develop mechanisms to adapt to changes in their environment. The ‘traditional
approaches’ to FT as discussed below are based on the notions of family systems
theory as derived from Wiener’s and von Bertalanffy’s ideas.

The 1970s and 1980s introduced new theoretical ideas to the field of FT. In addi-
tion to internal adaptive mechanisms and interactions families face, the discourse
expanded to include how family members’ beliefs affect their interactions and how
cultural forces shape these beliefs. Constructivist theorists (e.g., von Foerster, 1981;
Maturana and Varela, 1980) suggested that nothing is perceived directly, but filtered
through the mind of the observer. The meaning that is derived from what family
members observe in mutual interactions influences their interactions in significant
ways. Thus, the use of language became a crucial part when working with families.
Social constructionist theorists (Gergen, 1985) went a step further by suggesting
that families’ experiences are shaped by the social context in which they live and the
meaning they develop from interacting within their social context. Some of these
‘postmodern approaches’ to FT are discussed below.

> Read full chapter

Foundations
Simone Pfeiffer, Tina In-Albon, in Comprehensive Clinical Psychology (Second Edi-
tion), 2022

1.10.4.1 Bowen's Family Systems Theory

Family systems theory (Kerr and Bowen, 1988) is a theory of human behavior that
defines the family unit as a complex social system, in which members interact to
influence each other's behavior. Family members interconnect, allowing to view the
system as a whole rather than as individual elements. Any change in one individual
within a family is likely to influence the entire system and may even lead to changes
in other members. Many interventions designed to promote behavior change in
children are directed at the parent-child unit, although according to Kerr and Bowen
(1988) it may be more beneficial to focus on the family as a whole. Family systems
theory recognizes that the family plays a key role in both emotional and physical
well-being across the life course since most individuals have contact with their family
of origin through their entire lives. Families often influence day-to-day lives; families
come together to both celebrate and help each other through crizes. Family systems
theory emphasizes the idea that families are continuous entities, with rules, beliefs,
and values that shape members over time. A family system framework influences
professionals to not only support the individual with mental health problems, but
also to focus on the family as a whole, while acknowledging the many subsystems
within a family that emphasize family interactions. Family dynamics (e.g., structures,
roles, communication patterns, boundaries, and power relations) impact human
relationships, such as what draws people together, drives them apart, and considers
any conflict and intergenerational transmission. Family functions change over time
but could include daily care of a family member with disabilities, community involve-
ment and advocacy, economic support or guidance for any members, and spiritual
and social encouragement, to illustrate a few of the endless possibilities that depend
on individual and family preferences, interests, and resources. Family systems theory
places primary focus on exchanges of behavior that take place in a given moment
of interaction between members of the family. The theory states that patterns of
interaction between family members create, maintain, and perpetuate both prob-
lem and nonproblematic behaviors. Nonpathology-oriented, family system theory
seeks to identify and generate reconstitutive behavioral exchanges between family
members. Emphasis is placed on identifying and interrupting repeating sequences
of behavioral exchanges of which the problem behavior is a part. According to this
theory, the problem behavior dissipates and the treatment is complete, when these
problem-perpetuating patterns are successfully interrupted.

> Read full chapter

Advances in Child Development and

Behavior
Alice C. Schermerhorn, E. Mark Cummings, in Advances in Child Development and
Behavior, 2008

8 Family Systems Theory

Family systems theory emphasizes the interdependent nature of subsystems within
families (Cox & Paley, 1997; Minuchin, 1985), conceptualizing families as organized
wholes (Cox & Paley, 2003). These notions gave rise to our views of families as
hierarchically organized, consisting of multiple family members and relationships.
Families are capable of both self-regulation and self-reorganization (Cox & Paley,
1997). Self-regulation involves stabilizing interaction patterns; for example, there
may be rapid changes in family conflict followed by self-regulation back to the
family's typical low levels of conflict. Self-reorganization refers to adaptation to the
environment. For example, a downturn in the economy may cause a father to lose
his job, which may prompt the family to reorganize itself around new roles, such as
the mother becoming the primary source of income.

Similarly, Bretherton (1985) discussed links between children's internal representa-

tions of multiple family relationships, and McHale and Fivaz-Depeursinge (1999)
called for an examination of families as wholes, rather than as a group of individuals
or dyads. Moreover, they described the notion of a family's personality as the family's
tendency toward certain emotions and behaviors. For example, one family may have
a warm and expressive personality, whereas another family may tend toward a cold,
detached personality. Thus, these notions of families as hierarchically organized
wholes with their own personalities, and of multiple pathways of influence play an
integral part in our conceptualization of transactional family dynamics.

> Read full chapter

Children & Adolescents: Clinical For-

mulation & Treatment
Michael S. Robbins, ... Jamie Miller, in Comprehensive Clinical Psychology, 1998

5.07.2.1.5 Reciprocal vs. linear causality

Family systems theory assumes reciprocal as opposed to linear causal explanations.
Linear causality is based on the traditional stimulus–response behavioral view that
one event “A” causes some response “B.” This type of reductionistic thinking fails
to capture the interdependence of individuals in any system. While it may be
appropriate to highlight microanalytic sequences within the family (e.g., parents
allow their adolescent daughter to stay out after curfew to avoid a confrontation with
her), limiting our focus on these sequences fails to capture the true complexity of
family interactions.

Circular causality assumes that any behavior in an interaction is simultaneously

influenced by and influential on other behaviors in the interaction. In other words,
causality is bidirectional. Thus, in the example of parents allowing their daughter to
stay out after curfew to avoid a confrontation, a circular view of this sequence would
begin with a recognition that the parent's behavior (e.g., avoiding confrontation)
not only influenced the daughter's immediate likelihood of not being angry, but
it also influenced the probability of her staying out beyond curfew in the future.
Such a parental response may be the result of previous interactions in which the
daughter responded with intense anger to the parent's confrontation. As a result,
the parents' avoidance of confrontation in the current interaction may also influence
the likelihood that the daughter will respond with intense anger to future parental
confrontations of the daughter's behavior.

As is evident from this description, circular causality is informed by combinations of

sequences of behavior. In this example only one particular sequence was highlighted.
From a systemic perspective, however, it is not possible to understand a sequence
outside of the context in which it occurs. Thus, to fully understand the mutual
influence of parents and the adolescent in this example, the family systems therapist
must also address other factors within the family (i.e., the parent's may not agree on
basic rules within the house; consequently, they are unable to present a unified front
to their daughter) or outside the family (i.e., the daughter may be associating with
friends that foster an attitude of parental disrespect).

> Read full chapter

A review of the literature on siblings of

individuals with severe intellectual and
developmental disabilities
Caroline L. Roberts, in International Review of Research in Developmental Disabili-
ties, 2021

1 A review of the literature on siblings of individuals with severe

intellectual and developmental disabilities
Family systems theory posits that the family is a single emotional, interdependent
unit (Bowen, 1966). The needs and abilities of one family member will affect all
family members. The interactions of subsystems between parents, between parents
and children, and between children affect each individual and influence the whole
(Turnbull, Turnbull, Erwin, & Soodak, 2006). A robust body of research exists on
the specific importance of the sibling subsystem (Lamb & Sutton-Smith, 1982;
Sutton-Smith & Rosenberg, 1970). The sibling relationship is often the longest
relationship of an individual's life, and in cultures around the world, siblings play
central roles in each other's lives across the lifespan (Cicarelli, 1995; Whiteman,
McHale, & Soli, 2011).

The experiences of the typically developing siblings of individuals with intellectual

and developmental disabilities (IDD) require special consideration in light of the di-
verse impact that a child with disabilities can have on the family system. As described
by one mother: “Our family as a whole is so important to the quality of life of my son,
but my son's disability also has a strong influence on the quality of life of the rest of
us in the family” (Brown & Brown, 2003, p. 173). Diagnoses of IDD are increasing in
the United States, and this is accompanied by an increasing number of individuals
growing up with a sibling with IDD (Tudor & Lerner, 2015). Additionally, the lifespan
of people with disabilities is increasing; as a result, typically developing siblings
sometimes care for their siblings with disabilities into old age (Heller & Arnold,
2010). Besides potentially playing the crucial role of guardian later in life, siblings
report that they play many other roles beyond sibling throughout the lifespan, such
as friend, caregiver, advocate, service coordinator, legal representative and leisure
planner (Hall & Rossetti, 2018). Considering these diverse roles, supporting positive
outcomes for siblings will benefit more than just the siblings themselves, but could
enhance person-centered care for the individual with disabilities as well as family
quality of life (Brown & Brown, 2003).

There is an established literature on typically developing siblings, with earlier lit-

erature focusing on negative impact and more recent literature acknowledging
positive outcomes such as character strengths (Heller & Arnold, 2010). Within this
literature, siblings of individuals with IDD are identified as an at-risk population;
they receive less parental support, have more responsibilities, and have a variety
of psychological vulnerabilities such as increased risk for depression, anxiety, or
other psychopathological symptoms (Barr & McLeod, 2010; Goudie, Havercamp,
Jamieson, & Sahr, 2013; Hannah & Midlarsky, 2005). In more recent research,
positive or neutral effects have been identified; siblings are more likely to have
character strengths like resilience, empathy, compassion, and independence, to
choose a helping profession such as medicine, education, or allied health fields, and
to have positive self-concepts and higher internal loci of control (Burton & Parks,
1994; Cox, Marshall, Mandleco, & Olsen, 2003; Dyke, Mulroy, & Leonard, 2009;
Macks & Reeve, 2007). Research-identified factors that differentially affect outcomes
include characteristics of the family, culture, reference sibling's disability, and the
siblings themselves (Macks & Reeve, 2007).

This literature is, however, incomplete. The majority of the existing research de-
scribes siblings of individuals with mild to moderate disabilities of high incidence
(Rossetti & Hall, 2015). There is reason to hypothesize that some of the experi-
ences and needs of the subpopulation of siblings of individuals with severe or
profound disabilities are unique. Functional abilities are significantly correlated
with increased caregiving provided by the sibling, and individuals with more severe
disability are more likely to need support throughout the lifespan (Heller & Arnold,
2010; Lee, Burke, & Arnold, 2019). Increased caregiving responsibility is negatively
related to sibling wellbeing as a result of maladaptive internalizing, externalizing,
and asocial behaviors (Lee, Burke, Arnold, & Owen, 2019). At any age, the nature
of the sibling relationship will be different when one sibling has communication
differences or adaptations are required for siblings to participate in shared activities
(Moyson & Roeyers, 2012).

This review surveys the literature that exists on the subpopulation of siblings of
individuals with severe or profound IDD with the purposes of (1) characterizing the
state of the literature on this subpopulation, (2) identifying evidence for differential
impacts and needs in this subpopulation as compared to the umbrella population
of siblings of individuals with IDD, and (3) identifying future directions researchers
should take to determine the implications of these differential impact(s), should they
exist.
Theses purposes are primarily framed by a special education lens (in accordance
with the researcher's background). In special education, disabilities are categorized
as severe disabilities, high incidence disabilities, and early childhood disabilities.
This structure is not adopted by most sibling researchers, which will be addressed
in both the method section and the limitations section. Further, this review surveys
literature pertaining to the full sibling lifespan, but the distinction between being
the sibling of a child or an adult with severe disabilities is an important one, and will
be referenced throughout.

> Read full chapter

Case Conceptualization and Treatment:

Children and Adolescents
Patrick S. Tennant, ... Samantha Miller, in Comprehensive Clinical Psychology (Sec-
ond Edition), 2022

5.07.3.1.3 Transactional Nature

Within the FST framework, special attention is given to the phenomenon of cir-
cular causality: the way in which dyadic interactions between the youth client and
caregiver(s) result in dysfunctional patterns within the family system over time
(Nichols and Davis, 2016). Although the dyadic interactions between elements of the
family system are common treatment targets, clinicians implementing family-based
treatment interventions must be mindful of how transactions between the thera-
peutic and family systems are locked in a circle of mutual influence. Each time the
clinician engages in a dyadic interaction, whether intended to establish or maintain
therapeutic alliance or to intentionally facilitate a shift in an otherwise established
dyadic transaction between family members, the clinician functions as a catalyst for
a feedback mechanism between and within the therapeutic and family systems. As a
result, the system either minimizes deviations and works to maintain stasis (negative
feedback) or promotes variation and facilitates change (positive feedback) (Granic
and Patterson, 2006). For example, when a clinician provides in-vivo coaching to
the caregiver on how to actively ignore a child's yelling behavior while waiting for
the first opportunity to provide the child with positive attention for a more desired
behavior, the clinician induces positive feedback within the family system and fa-
cilitates the emergence of a new transactional pattern between caregiver and child.
Similarly, when faced with poor caregiver engagement in treatment, the clinician's
enthusiasm for increments of increased homework compliance can lead to positive
feedback between the clinician and the caregiver. Given that each member of the
family system can shape clinician behavior, clinicians implementing family-based
treatments are encouraged to seek supervision and consultation, as needed, to best
manage the complex transactional dynamics between and within therapeutic and
family systems.

> Read full chapter

Foundations
Jay L. Lebow, Alan S. Gurman, in Comprehensive Clinical Psychology, 1998

1.16.1 Introduction
The place of family systems theories and couples and family therapies within psy-
chology has vastly expanded in recent years. Once seen as a radical departure from
the more traditional focus on the individual that has typified the mental health
disciplines, family systems viewpoints have now been with us for over 40 years and
gained wide acceptance. Many systemic theories and therapies have been developed,
and couple and family therapies are now among the most widely practiced. Sev-
eral prominent guild organizations supporting the practice of family therapy have
blossomed, including The American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy,
the American Family Therapy Academy, and the Division of Family Psychology of
the American Psychological Association, as have a number of prominent journals
including Family Process, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, and Family Therapy
Networker. The Division of Family Psychology within the American Psychological As-
sociation now has over 6000 members, while the American Association for Marriage
and Family Therapy has over 25 000 members.

The essence of what has driven all this attention lies in the emergence of a broad
recognition of the importance of the family in the life of the individuals within it
and the society made up of families. Whether we consider the impact of a depressed
parent on a child, the role of poor parenting practices as a risk factor for conduct
disorder in children, or the impact spouses have on one another, both clinical experi-
ence and much research point to the enormous influence of the family. Gurin, Veroff,
and Feld (1960) found that 42% of all people who had sought professional help for
psychological problems viewed their problems as related to a marital problem, and
another 17% viewed their problems as pertaining to family relationships.

However, family therapy is truly unified only in the shared belief that relationships
are of at least as much importance in the behavior and experience of people as are
internal processes within individuals or broader social forces. As Gurman, Kniskern,
and Pinsof (1986) have suggested, family therapy includes therapists from many
 professions, has no unified theory, and few techniques that are specific to it. There
are many distinct systemic therapies, which differ enormously from one another.
Some are directed to the treatment of families, some to subsystems within the family
(e.g., couples), and others abandon the specific focus on the family entirely, aiming
at the broader social nexus. In this chapter, we overview basic systems concepts and
the field of family therapy, highlighting both the common threads underlying these
methods and the differences that have emerged across the schools of practice.

> Read full chapter

Children & Adolescents: Clinical For-

mulation & Treatment
Carolyn Webster-Stratton, Carole Hooven, in Comprehensive Clinical Psychology,
1998

5.08.1.5 Contributions from Family Systems Theory

Current PT programs have also been influenced by family systems theory. In this
theoretical perspective, family factors are recognized as the larger context for par-
entndash;child interactions. From a family systems perspective, this means the focus
of concern in PT is enlarged to include such factors as family roles, rules, and
communication patterns, and those factors are conceptualized as family structures
(Minuchin, 1974) and processes (Haley, 1976). A family systems perspective empha-
sizes the impact of these structures and processes on the parent-child relationship
and behaviors. Inherent in the treatment of families from the systems perspective
is an understanding of how family dysfunction (e.g., marital conflict) impacts both
parent and child functioning, and PT targets not just parenting behaviors but
family interaction patterns (including parentndash;child, marital, and sibling rela-
tionships), family perceptions of individual members, as well as parents' memories
of their family of origin and what they learned from that experience.

> Read full chapter

ScienceDirect is Elsevier’s leading information solution for researchers.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect ® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V. Terms and conditions apply.