By Jane F. Gilgun and Samantha Hirschey, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, USA
In this blog, we propose a program of relationship-based interventions designed to result in a circle of trusting relationships. We show how relational interviews and relationship-based group work builds circles of trust. They can also help young people transition into more formalized interventions for their aggressive behaviors when they have multiple risks and few resources that help them cope with their risks.
Relationship-Based Interventions
Our primary focus is on relationship-based interventions. We chose relationship-based interventions for four reasons.
- Research on attachment shows that individuals who have secure attachment relationships, which by definition are based on trust, engage in prosocial behaviors and have good executive function and self-regulation skills.
- Social work has long held that effective practice is based on relationships. More than 50 years ago, Helen Harris Perlman taught that relationship based on trust are the foundations of empathy, warmth, and safety that service users require for them to identify and work through issues associated with problematic situations.
- An accumulation of research evidence that shows relationships are the second most important factor in social services outcomes.
- Research has shown that external factors have the largest influence on outcome. There are systems issues. Research also shows that changing problematic systems begins with building relationships with persons who compose these systems. Only through relationships are systems changes possible.
We begin our discussion of relationship-based interventions with descriptions of procedures that lead to positive outcomes. The procedures themselves can become stand-alone interventions or they can be adapted to work within other programs.
Relational Interviews
We recommend that work with young people with aggressive behaviors begin with one-on-one conversations called relational interviews. These conversations take place when young people are in regulated states; that is, when they are in a calm state and not stressed and dysregulated. The purposes of the interviews are to encourage persons to talk about what matters to them. In doing so, relationships of trust develop.
Those conducting the interviews have skills in asking open-ended questions, have active listening skills, and capacities for empathy while at the same time they maintain their own analytic stances. Principals, vice principals, school counselors, school social workers, mentors, child protection social workers, and other service providers are candidates for engaging young people in relational interviews.
The interviews are based on open-ended questions, take place in private settings, and are non-coercive. Non-coercion means interviewers inform young people that they do not have to answer any questions they do not want to. Interviewers understand the line between respect for privacy and desire to get to know other persons.
The interview begins with open-ended questions that ask young people about activities they enjoy. Examples are “How’s it going?” “What kinds of things did you do over the weekend?” “How did you learn to dance so well?” or some other question that asks young people to talk about something that is meaningful to them. These conversations can be relatively brief.
Moving into issues related to aggression requires a period of transition, where adults can tell young people what the purpose of the meeting is. The following is an example, “A few days ago, you got into it with other students. I’m wondering what was going on for you.”
Then interviewers listen. Examples of other open-ended questions are “What was going on for you when you told Alicia she couldn’t sit with you?
Follow up questions depend upon what the young people say but the kinds of questions that might be helpful are “What do you think about this now?” “Have you seen other people do this?” “Has this been done to you?” “What did you hope to get out of these behaviors?” “Have you thought about how the other person might feel?” “What do you think other people are feeling?” What questions to ask, comments to make, and the timing of questions and comments are a matter of judgment.
Well-done interviews are contingently responsive, meaning that interviewers are attuned to the girls and interact in ways that keep them connected to what is happening for the girls. When relationships are contingently responsive, people feel accepted and understood. Relationship-based social work and attachment theory have long shown that feeling accepted and understood has many benefits. Among them are self-compassion, compassion for others, awareness of the effects of one’s behaviors on others, and mindfulness.
Relational Interviews and Listening
In relational interviews, adults listen and say little. Through such interviews, adults discover not only what the behaviors mean to young people but also the beliefs and emotions that lead to the behaviors. In the course of showing interest, not judging, and listening well, adults provide a safe haven for the young people who may slowly begin to trust the adults. These trusting relationships then become the basis of further work with the young people, such as drawing them into more formalized group interventions and providing guidance for how to conduct themselves in situations that trouble them.
Questions to Consider
Please feel free to leave a comment on today’s blog. As you think about the blog, we wonder how you are responding to the ideas we presented. What, for example, do you think we left out? Was there anything in this blog that helped you think more deeply about your cases?
- Do you see possibilities that relational interviews might be helpful to you in your work?
- Mullet (2014) uses the term “minichat” for interviews with young people who have committed acts of aggression. Do you prefer this term over the term “relational aggression” or do you see advantages and disadvantages of both terms. Explain your answer. Why or why not?
- Do you see how attachment theory is part of relational interviews? For example, contingent responsiveness, safe havens, and trust are important concepts in attachment theory. How helpful do you think relational interviews and attachment theory are to your work?
Next Blog
The next blog will show how the principles of relationship-based social work can be applied to group work with young people.
About the Authors
Jane F. Gilgun, Ph.D., LICSW, is a professor, School of Social Work, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, USA. She was a child welfare social worker for more than eight years and has taught courses and done qualitative research on high-risk children and families for many years. A special focus of her research is factors associated with good outcomes when children have experienced complex trauma. Professor Gilgun’s articles, books, and practice manuals are widely available on the internet. Many of them are free.
Samantha Hirschey is a second year master’s student at the School of Social Work, University of Minnesota, USA, and Professor Gilgun’s research assistant. She did her first year internship at the St. Paul Public Schools and her second internship will be at the Community-University Health Care Center that provides mental health services to residents of the inner city of Minneapolis. She has worked in a variety of social service agencies including with children, teens, and adults with mental illnesses and developmental disabilities. She has a special interest in the promotion of integrated behavioral health in children and families.
References
Brown, Kirk Warren, Richard M. Ryan and J. David Creswell (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry 18 (4), 211-237.
Cameron, Mark, & Elizabeth King Keenan (2010). The common factors model: Implications for transtheoretical clinical social work practice. Social Work, 55(1), 63-73.
Drisko, James W. (2004). Common factors in psychotherapy outcome. Families in Society, 85 (1), 81-90.
Fonagy, Peter, George Gergely, & Mary Target (2007). The parent–infant dyad and the construction of the subjective self. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 48 (3/4), 288–328.
Gecan, Michael (). Going public. Boston: Beacon.
Gilgun, Jane F. (2011). Children with serious conduct issues: A case study, a NEATS assessment, and case planning. Amazon Kindle.
Lambert, M. (1992). Implications of outcome research for psychotherapy integration. In J. Norcross & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy integration (pp. 94-129) NY: Basic.
Mullet, Judy Hostetler (2014). Restorative discipline: From getting even to getting well. Children & Schools, 36 (3), 157-162.
Perlman, Helen Harris (1957). Social casework: A problem-solving process. Chicago: University of Chicago.