Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:18:02.757Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trauma and Bowen Family Systems Theory: Working with Adults Who were Abused as Children

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 November 2012

Linda MacKay
Linda MacKay*
Affiliation:
The Family Systems Institute, Neutral Bay, Sydney
*
Address for correspondence: lmackay@thefsi.com.au
Get access

Abstract

Working with survivors of trauma is mostly challenging, exhausting, long-term and often ‘messy’, when interventions that ‘should’ work, don't, or the unexpected arises. Nevertheless, explanations that speak to recovery from trauma more and more rely on neurobiological concepts to account for any positive change. Combining the family systems approach of Murray Bowen and recent research on the brain and trauma, post trauma symptoms are viewed as part of the ‘family emotional process’ even when traumatic events have emanated from outside the family system itself. Variations in responses to trauma, including dissociation and self-harm are discussed in relation to chronic anxiety and ‘differentiation of self’.

Keywords

child abuse traumaanxietydissociationBowen family systems theorydifferentiationneuroscience
Type
Articles
Information
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy , Volume 33 , Issue 3: Trauma and Systemic Therapy , September 2012 , pp. 232 - 241
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bowen, M. (1978). Family Therapy in Clinical Practice. New York: Jason Aronson.Google Scholar
Brown, J. (1999). Bowen family systems theory and practice: Illustration and critique. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 20 (2), 94–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. (2012). Growing Yourself Up: How to bring your best to all of life's relationships. Wollombi, NSW: Exile PublishingGoogle Scholar
Cozolino, L. (2002). The Neuroscience of Psychotherapy: Building and rebuilding the human brain. New York; London: W.W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
Gilbert, R. (2005). Erosion of Bowen theory 3: Incomplete understanding of theory. Family Systems Forum, 7 (1), 1–15.Google Scholar
Hans Meyer, P. (1987). Patterns and processes in a therapist's own family work: knowledge required for excellence. In Titelman, P. (Ed.). The Therapist's Own Family: Toward the differentiation of self. Northvale, New Jersey; London: Jason Aronsen Inc. pp. 43–69.Google Scholar
Kerr, M. E. (2008). Why do siblings often turn out very differently? In Fogel, A., King, B. J., Shanker, S. G. (Eds.). Human Development in the Twenty-first Century, pp. 206–215. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kerr, M. E., & Bowen, M. (1988). Family Evaluation. New York, London: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
MacLean, P. D. (1978). A mind of three minds: Educating the triune brain, In Education and the Brain, The National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Papero, D. (2011). Responsibility to self. In Bregman, O. C., & White, C. M. (Eds.). Bringing Systems Thinking to Life: Expanding the horizons for Bowen family systems theory. pp. 67–73. New York, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Porges, S. W. (2011). The Polyvagal Theory: Neurophysiological foundations of emotions, attachment, communication, and self-regulation. New York, London: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Smith, W. H. Jr. (2003). Emotional cutoff and family stability: Child abuse in family emotional process. Titelman, P. (Ed.). Emotional Cutoff: Bowen family systems theory perspectives. New York, London, Oxford: Haworth Clinical Practice Press.Google Scholar
Wright, J. (2009). Self-Soothing — A recursive intrapsychic and relational process: The contribution of the Bowen theory to the process of self-soothing. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 30 (1), 29–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar