AFT CONFERENCE 2013 Think Family Systemic and Psychodynamic Safeguarding Practices

1. AFT CONFERENCE 2013Think Family Systemic and Psychodynamic Safeguarding Practices Gary Robinson Karen Johnson Steve Edgeley

2. Aims 1 Share Thinking and Practice Introduce Think Family Pilot project Include the voices of families we work with Learn from each other Stimulate ideas and creativity Embrace/Observe Confidentiality and Respect

3. It’s a very remarkable thing that the unconscious of one person can act upon the other without passing through the conscious Freud 1916

4. Aims 2 Share ideas about: Exploring, Managing and Utilising Therapists Differences: Conscious and Unconscious Processes Splitting, Mirroring, Projection Parallel Processes Relational Reflexivity Gender Style/Theory: Now or Tomorrow

5. Plans 1.30 Introductions and Sculpt 1.45 Context: Drivers 1.55 Strategy 2.10 Theory & Practice 2.20 J’s Family & Team: DVD’s 2.45 Discussion & Feedback 3.00 End

6. Introductions and Sculpt Safeguarding Co-ordinated Management of Meaning: Safety and Risk Systemic Psychodynamic

7. Context Think Family Munro and Hackney Serious Case Reviews Political and Economic Drivers

8. Strategic Direction Organisational commitment Approved Therapies Partnership in education Meeting the needs of complex families – multi agency intervention Think family and safeguarding children and adults Supervision in practice

9. Clinical Quality Committee Safeguarding Board and Groups Systemic Training Programme Tuesday Family Therapy Team Think Family Training DAFT Couples Project Systemic Supervision Training

10. Model of Containment Mirroring Predictability Reliability Boundary and Space Donald Winnicott:1964

11. Supervision Multi agency Consultation and Supervision Boundary and Space The Maturational Process and the Facilitating environment Family Therapy Team Individual or Family

13. Towards Positions of Safe Certainty Safe Safe Uncertainty Safe Certainty Certainty Uncertainty Unsafe Certainty Unsafe Uncertainty The team aims to offer Safe Uncertainty in relation to practice, supervision, consultation and training. We aim to safely challenge unhelpful defensive practices and premature certainty in promoting manoeuvrability and collaboration Unsafe (Mason 1993)

14. James’s Genogram 2012 2002 M J 11 14 11 A J H

15. Family Referral Safeguarding Concerns ADHD and ASD Assessment Physical Health Issues Bereavement Child & Adult Mental Health Issues

20. Systemic Psychodynamic Safeguarding Medical

24. DVD 1: Meeting Family Sept 2013 Whilst watching the excerpt consider: What are you noticing about, systemic, psychodynamic and safeguarding issues? What might you be noticing about the key issues? What might you consider doing in the session or in the space between, or next time?

25. DVD 2: Post session Sept 2013 Talk with you partner: How are your ideas being affirmed and challenged? What new ideas are emerging? What feedback might you be able to offer the family and/or team?

26. Super vision Seeing the whole picture

27. Rejected psychiatrist NHS Rejected CAMHS practitioner Rejected social worker Local Authority Therapist NHS

28. Working alliance NHS psychiatrist CAMHS Practitioner Good therapist(s) SW – Working alliance

29. Feedback for Mum J: Experiences Positives Negatives Reliability Inconsistency Trust Mistrust Regard Shaming Listening Confronting Advising Instructing Neutrality Blaming Interest/ Curiosity Judgement

30. Exercise in Pairs Discuss a current, recent or past safeguarding or risk issue where you experienced tensions, stress or polarisation between colleagues or professionals. Explore the primacy of thinking and practice in relation to systemic, psychodynamic and safeguarding ideas.

31. Feedback and DiscussionRevisit Sculpt Safeguarding Co-ordinated Management of Meaning: Safety and Risk Systemic Psychodynamic

32. So What & Project Blue Print So what……What has this workshop offered you which you may use? What elements need to be included and described within a model blue print or manual? Key questions for teams?

33. References Psychodynamic GiacomoRizzolatti and MaadelenaFabbriDestro (2008) Mirror Neurons. Scolarpedia, 3(1): 2055 Donald Winnicott, (1965) The Child the Family and the Outside World Brodie, F., & Wright, J. (2002) Minding the gap not bridging the gap: Family therapy from a psychoanalytic perspective. Journal of Family Therapy, 24, pp. 205-221 Donald Winnicott, (1965) The Maturaltional Process and the Facilitating Environment Donald Winnicott, (1965) Home is where we start from Sue Gerhardt, (2004) Why Love Matters, How Affection Shapes a Babies Brain Ed Tronick, (2007) Neurobehavioural and Social Emotional Development of Infants and Children Donald Kalsched (1996) The Inner World of Trauma

34. References Safeguarding Every Child Matters (2003) HM Government Working Together (2006) HM Government Munro Review (2011) Department for Education Beyond Blame (1993) Peter Reder and Syvia Duncan

35. References Systemic Anderson, H. Goolishian (1992). The Client as the Expert: a Not knowing Approach to Family Therapy. In McNamee,s. and Gergen,K. (eds) Therepy as Social Construction. Sage. London. Berg, Insoo Kim. (1999) Family Preservation: A Brief Therapy Workbook. BT Press, London. Cade, B. (2009) Some further bits and pieces about double bind. Context (2009) 102:15-16. Cecchin, G. (1987).Hypothesizing, circularity and neutrality revisited: an invitation to curiosity. Family Process, Vol 26, p405‑413. Cronen, V. E. and Pearce, W. B. (1985) Toward an explanation of how the Milan method works: an invitation to a systemic epistemology and the evolution of family systems. In: Campbell, D. and Draper, R. (eds), Applications of Systemic Family Therapy: The Milan Approach. London: Grune and Stratton. Cullin, J. (2009) Double bind: much more than just a step toward a theory of schizophrenia. Context (2009) 102:8-13. Goldner, V. Penn, P. Sheinberg, M. Walker, G. (1990) Love and Violence: Gender Paradoxes in Volatile Attachments. Family Process: 29, p. 343-364. Hoffman Lynn (1990)Constructing realities: An Art of lenses. Family Process 29:pp1-12,

36. References Systemic Jones, E. (1993) Family Systems Therapy: Developments in the Milan Systemic Therapies, Chapter 1 Family Systems Therapy. Chichester, Wiley. Kelly, A. McKillop, K. (1996). Consequences of Revealing Personal Secrets. Psychological Bulletin. 120. 3: 450-465. Lang, W. Little, M. Cronen, V. (1990) The Systemic Professional: Domains of Action and the Question of Neutrality. Human Systems. 1.1 pp34-49. Mason, B. (1993). Towards Positions of Safe Uncertainty. Human Systems. 4: 189-200. Mason, B. (2005). Relational risk taking and the therapeutic relationship. In C.Flaskas, B.Mason, and A.Perlesz (eds) The Space Between: Experience, Context and Process. Reimers,S. (2006). Family Therapy by default: developing useful fall-back positions for therapists. Journal of family Therapy. 28: 229-245. Roberts, J. (2005). Transparency and Self-Disclosure in Family Therapy: Dangers and Possibilities. Family Process. 44.1: 45-63. Robinson, G. Whitney, L. (1999). Working Systemically Following Abuse: Exploring Safe Uncertainty. Child Abuse Review Vol 8. 264-274. Selvini, M. Boscolo, L. Cecchin, G. Prata, G. (1980). Hypothesizing, circularity, neutrality: three guidelines for the conductor of the session. Family Process, Vol 19, p3-12. Stratton, P., Bland, J., Janes, E. and Lask, J. (2010), Developing an indicator of family function and a practicable outcome measure for systemic family and couple therapy: the SCORE. Journal of Family Therapy, 32: 232–258.

37. Please contact usgary.robinson@derbyshcft.nhs.uk01332 623700 Ext 33261 karen.johnson@derbyshcft.nhs.uk 01332 888080 Stephen.Edgeley@derbyshcft.nhs.uk 01332 623776

38. Thank You for participating