Vol.4, No.1

2014

National Foundation ofBrief Therapy
August, 2014

	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
 

International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family ScienceVol. 4, No. 1, 2014
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
 

CONTENTS
Original Papers (Research and Experiment) :Siblings’ Involvement in Parental Subsystems, and Parental Role Expectations and Role Behaviors
MORIKAWA, N.

……………. 1-10

Family Structure and Ownership of a Dog
ZHANG, X., KOZUKA, T., and WAKASHIMA, K.

……………. 11-18

Psychological Support for Children from Families of International Marriages
SATAKE, S. ……………. 19-27

Original Papers (Practice) :Solution-Focused Group Therapy Program for Repeated-Drug Users
YOKOTANI, K., and TAMURA, K.

……………. 28-43

International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science2014 Vol. 4, No.1, 1-10
< Original Paper: Research and Experiment >Siblings’ Involvement in Parental Subsystems, andParental Role Expectations and Role Behaviors
Natsuno Morikawa1)*
1)

Graduate School of Education, Tohoku University

ABSTRACT. This study compared the parental roles of siblings in high functioning families with those in low functioning families.
The study was conducted with students from universities A and B in the Tohoku region (N = 374; males = 239, females = 130,
gender unknown = 5). The average age of the respondents was 19.72 (SD = 1.30). The results yielded two significant findings. First,
for high functioning families, significant correlations were observed between role expectations of the participants and their siblings.
Furthermore, marginally significant correlations were observed between participants’ self role expectations and siblings’ role
behaviors. Second, for low functioning families, significant correlations were observed between participants’ self role expectations
and behaviors, as well as between the siblings’ role expectations and behaviors. Significantly higher correlations were observed
between participants’ self parental role expectations and behaviors for low functioning families compared to high functioning ones.
KEY WORDS: Siblings, Role expectations, Role behaviors, Parental subsystems

Introduction

information is kept between the mother andA family is an organized, structured systemfather, and they adopt a flexible approach toconsisting of members such as the father,care for their children. In contrast, when themother, and children. It also has specificboundary is broken and one of the siblings isfunctions, such as organized communication

involved in the parental subsystem, problem

and role patterns, among its members. The

behaviors tend to arise. In other words, theinteractions among family members define thefamily system functions well when children canboundaries of the family system and its

interact in both the parent-child subsystem andsubsystems. Minuchin (1974) suggested thatthe sibling subsystem, but not when thewhen a “clear boundary” is maintained between

children’s interactions are limited to thethe parental and sibling subsystems, the overall

parental subsystem.

family system functions well. Therefore, in a

The psychological state of children involved

system with a clear boundary, certainin the parental subsystem has been investigatedbyassessing“parentification”

CORRESPONDENCE TO MORIKAWA, Graduate School(Boszormenyi-Nagy, 1973) and the children’sof Education, Tohoku University, 27-1 Kawauchi, Aoba-ku,

feeling of being involved in that subsystem

Sendai-city, 980-8576, JAPAN.

(Byng-Hall, 2002; Kawashima et al., 2008;

E-mail: Morikawa.72no@gmail.com

Hooper & Wallace, 2010). The aforementioned
studies have indicated that the mental health of1

MORIKAWA

2children involved in parental subsystems isestablished among siblings through mutual role

impaired. Jurkovic, Morrell, and Thirkield

expectations. Sibling relationships are expected(1998)

Parentification

to be maintained by performing role behaviors

Questionnaire, but it only assesses the behavior

following the rules, which generates additional

patterns and feelings of children, and not therole expectations. This type of family systemoverall family state. Therefore, these studies

has clear boundaries between the generations

have not indicated the best available methods toand is therefore considered to be functioning

conduct clinical interventions. The parental

properly. On the other hand, when one of thesubsystem is considered to be the condition in

siblings is involved in the parental subsystem,

which organized communication and role

the aforementioned pattern is not observed,

patterns are maintained between one of the

because one of the children attempts tochildren and one of the parents. Therefore, inmaintain a relationship with one of the parents,

order to develop a more comprehensive

generating a different series of patterns in theanalysis of the family unit, the interactions

parent-child relationship. Therefore, this typewithin this subsystem require examination.

of family system has no clear boundaries

createdAccordingtotheGross,

andbetween generations and is not expected to

McEachern (1958), the main concept of the role

function properly. Examining the conditions

in a family unit is “behaviors of individuals

described above would help quantitatively

corresponding to expectations, depending on

analyze how conflicts between siblings are

their social positions.” In other words, rolecreated by the involvement of one of thepatterns are a series of behaviors corresponding

siblings in the parental subsystem, acting as ato people’s expectations performed within

pseudo-parent (Siewierska, 2010).

interpersonal relationships. Previous studies

A comparative study was conducted thathave indicated that self-cognition is partly

examined the parental roles of siblings in highdefined by role expectations (Kodaira, 2000),functioning families and in low functioning

self-presentation is restrained (Matsumoto,families. First, the role expectations and role

2002), and role performances that match role

behaviors of children were examined using the

expectations lead to intimate and long-term

Family Role Scale (Morikawa, 2013). Thisfriendships

scale(Shimotomoai,

Mason,

2000).

These

alludestothe

Parentification

findings indicate that role expectations restrain

Questionnaire (Jurkovic et al, 1998) for

individual

behaviors,

implicitaremeasuring parentification and asks questions

eventuallydeveloped,

andinterpersonal

about parental and children’s role factors. The

systems are maintained when people follow

former includes items that ask about boththose rules.

emotional and instrumental parental roles

In the sibling subsystem, a specific series ofplayed by children. The questions about thepatterns

instrumental

areexpected.

First,

rules

rules

are

parental

roles

includeitems

3

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN SIBLINGS

inquiring about children’s obedience to their

could not be established (Tamura, 1994;

parents. This scale was considered suitable for

Tateyama, 2006). Other studies reported thatthe purpose of this study because it has

when cohesion and adaptability scores were

demonstrated internal consistency in previous

high, the satisfaction levels for relationships

studies (parental roles: α = .723, children’s

between husbands and wives, and the overall

roles: α = .738). Furthermore, confirmatory

mental health and psychosocial development offactor analysis has indicated the factorialchildren were also high (Green, Harris, Forte,

validity of the scale has sufficient fitness to the& Robinson, 1991; Vandvik & Eckblad, 1993).

data

2

(χ (34) = 76.93, p <. 001, GFI = .966,

These findings suggested that the higher the

AGFI = .946, RMSEA = .054, AIC = 118.931).

participants’ cohesion and adaptability scores,

Moreover, its construct validity was previously

the higher their family functioning.

examinedusing

A sibling assuming a parental role has been

Relations

Questionnaire

the

EICA

Parent-Child&regarded as a problem in previous studies.

Yamamoto, 1976). The results from that study

However, it is possible that if all siblings in afound significant positive correlations between

familythe“identification,”subsystem will be maintained, and they would

which suggested that children may play bothnot be involved in the parental subsystem.

the emotional and instrumental roles of parents

Therefore, this study attempted to distinguishand have equal status with their parents. On thethis condition from the condition wherein onlyother

one of the siblings assumes a parental role by“parental

hand,roles”(Tsujioka

and“children’sroles”

showedplay

parentaltheevaluating

which suggested the presence of vertical

expectations and behaviors, as well as byparent-child relationships, wherein children

observing their natural role patterns.

always obey their parents. In this study, in

Based on these previous findings, twoorder to focus on the parental roles of siblings,

research hypotheses were proposed:

only the parental role factors of this scale were

H1. Correlations between role expectations

used. FACES Ⅲ

and role behaviors among siblings would be

Cohesion

Evaluation

Scales- Ⅲ )(Olson,participants’

selfsiblingsignificantly positive correlations with “control,”(Family Adaptability andtheroles,

role

higher for high functioning families compared

Portner & Lavee, 1985) was also used in orderwith low functioning ones.

to measure family function scores. This scale

H2. In low functioning families, significant

was

that

correlations between role expectations and role

independent cohesion and adaptability are

behaviors would be observed with one of thecurvilinear. In the Japanese version of the scale,siblings, compared with high functioning

however,families.

developed

the

on

the

concepts

hypothesisofcohesionandadaptability were not clearly defined, and thebasic hypothesis of the Circumplex Model

Methods

1

MORIKAWA

4
Survey period and proceduresfrom you?” and “How much do you meet their

The questionnaire survey was conducted fromexpectations?” Participants responded on a

SeptemberThefour-point scale, ranging from 1 (not at all) to 4

questionnaires (N = 520) were distributed in(very much). Participants were also askedclass and 477 were returned (response rate =“How much does your family expect from your92%). Before the survey was administered,siblings?” and “How much do your siblings

participants were informed that the survey

meet these expectations?” When participants

would be conducted anonymously, in an

had many siblings, the sibling whose age was

open-ended style, and that the results would beclosest to theirs was selected as the subject ofprocessed statistically. The same information

the questionnaire.

was included on the first page of the

The Japanese version of FACESⅢ (Olson etquestionnaire. The survey was conducted withal, 1985; Kusata & Okado, 1993) was used tothose that agreed to the conditions. This

assessquestionnaire was approved by the Ethics

Family functions, consisting of two factors,

Committee of Tohoku University.

cohesion and adaptability, were assessed using

toDecember

in

2012.

the

participants’familyfunctions.

20 items. Participants responded to each item
Participants

using a six-point scale ranging from 1 (not at

The study was conducted with undergraduateall) to 6 (very true).

students of universities A and B in the Tohoku
region (N = 374; males = 239, females = 130,

Results

gender unknown = 5), with only a few missing

Correlations between roles of each siblingvalues for some of the questions. The average

In order to see the general tendencies in theage of the respondents was 19.72 (SD = 1.30).

data, correlations between the roles of eachAmong them, those that could self-report theirsibling were examined (Table 1). The results

own and their siblings’ family relationships andindicated a medium correlation between self

had relatively stable parent-child relationships

role expectations and role behaviors (r =.697, p(Ochiai & Sato, 1996) were analyzed.

< .001), and a strong correlation between
sibling role expectations and role behaviors (rConstruction of the questionnaire= .790, p < .001). Furthermore, weak toFirst, data for participants’ genders,ages, family structures, and lifestyles
were recorded. Family roles of themedium correlations were observed between

participants and their siblings were assessedp < .001).

self role expectations and behaviors and siblingrole expectations and behaviors. (r = .358–.463,

using the Family Role Scale (Morikawa, 2013).
Participants

were

asked

the

followingquestions: “How much does your family expect

Correlations between roles of each sibling inhigh and low functioning families

5

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN SIBLINGS

The differences in correlations between thelow (low group, N = 36) (see Tables 2, 3, androles of each sibling in high and low

4). Since strong correlations were observed infunctioning families were examined. When theboth groups, the differences in correlation

mean value of cohesion and adaptability was

coefficients were calculated using the absolute

over +ISD, the family function was consideredvalue of the z scores (see Meng, 1992 forhigh (high group, N = 37), and when it was

details of the statistical process).

under -ISD, the family function was considered

Table1 C orrelations	
 betw een	 one’s	
 ow n	 roles	 and	 a	
 sibling’s	
 roles
R ole
R ole
	
 R oleexpectations
behaviors
expectations(oneself)(oneself)(sibling)
R ole.697***.463***
expectations(oneself)
R ole	 behaviors.371***(oneself)	
 R oleexpectations(sibling)	 	 	
 R olebehaviors(sibling)***

p <.001

Table2 C orrelations	
 betw een	 one’s	
 ow n	
 role
expectations	 and	
 role	 behaviors	
 in	
 high	 and	
 lowfunctioning	 groups
R ole	 behaviors	
 (oneself)
R ole
expectations(oneself)
***

**

H igh

Low

z

.385*

.782***

z=-2.6599***

p <.001, p <.01, p <.051	 	
 R olebehaviors(sibling).358***.399***.790***-MORIKAWA

6

The results indicated that there were significant(r= .691, p < .001; r = .846, p < .001), whereas

differences in the correlations between the highsignificant differences were not observed inand low groups regarding the relationships

correlations between high and low groups.

between self role expectations and behaviors

Finally, for the relationship between self and a(z= -2.659, p < .01). When it came to thesibling, a significant correlation was found only

sibling scores, significant correlations werein the high group between self role expectations

observed

and sibling role behaviors (r = .303, p < .1).

betweenrole

expectations

andbehaviors in both the high and low groups,

Table3 C orrelations	
 betw een	 a	 sibling’s	
 role
expectations	 and	
 role	 behaviors	
 in	
 high	 and	
 lowfunctioning	 groups	
 R ole	 behaviors	 (sibling)H igh	
 R oleexpectations .691***(sibling)
***

Low

z

.846***

n.s.

p <.001

Table4 C orrelations	
 betw een	 one’s	 ow n	 roles	 and	 a	
 sibling’s	
 roles	 in	 high	 and	
 lowfunctioning	 groups

R ole
expectations(oneself)
R olebehaviors(oneself)*	
 R ole	 expectations	 (sibling)
H igh
Low
z

	
 	
 R ole	 behaviors	 (sibling)
H igh
Low
z

.344*

.330*

n.s.

.303✝

.216

-

.053

.207

-

.283✝

.201

-

p <.05, ✝p <.10

7

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN SIBLINGS

Discussion

It has also been observed in sibling subsystems

In this study, the roles of siblings in high andthat having role expectations and mutually

low functioning families were compared. In

performing role behaviors might improve thehighrelationship between siblings. This finding

functioning

correlations

observedsignificant
rolecoincides with clinical research indicating that

expectations of participants and their siblings.

when families are high functioning and

Furthermore,generation boundaries are maintained, siblingcorrelations

werefamilies,

betweenmarginallyweresignificant

observed

betweenrelationships

areusuallymore

intimate

participants’ self role expectations and sibling(Siewierska, 2010).

role behaviors, as well as between participants’

On the contrary, in low functioning families,

self role behaviors and those of their siblings.

significant correlations were observed between

The

role

the participants’ self role expectations andexpectations and behaviors were interrelated,

behaviors, as well as between sibling rolethus supporting H1. In Japan, cohesion and

expectations

adaptability are not clearly defined (Tamura,higher correlations were observed between the

1994; Tateyama, 2006), and the degree of bothparticipants’ self parental role expectations andcohesion and adaptability have been found tobehaviors in low functioning families comparedhave linear relationships with satisfaction inwithmarital relationships and the psychologicalparticipants’development of children (Green, Harris, Fortecorrelated with sibling role expectations, there& Robinson, 1991; Vandvik & Eckblad, 1993).

were no other significant correlations observed

This suggests that families with high cohesion

between the roles of siblings, thus supportingand high adaptability function well while

H2. For this type of family, the correlation

maintaining clear boundaries between the

between the roles of siblings was weak,generations (Minuchin, 1974). In such families,

whereas the correlation between parental role

the sibling subsystem is maintained and the

expectations and behaviors was strong, whichroles of each sibling are correlated. In othersuggests that only parent-child relationships

words, even though siblings are expected towere maintained through role expectations andboth play parental roles and conduct parental

behaviors. In this condition, only one of therole behaviors, they are also supposed to share

siblings was involved in the parental subsystemthose roles and cooperate with each other.

and played a parental role. This child isFurthermore,hasconsidered to be the “parentified” child in theindicated that in order for children to performfamily (Boszormenyi-Nagy, 1973; Minuchin,role behaviors to meet role expectations, it is1974), and may be more likely to experience

necessary for them to maintain friendship while

depression and anxiety. Moreover, this may

establishing deeper connections with each other.

hinderresults

indicatedthat

Shimotomoai

sibling(2000)

1

high

their

and

behaviors.

functioning
self

role

attachment

Significantly

ones.

Thoughexpectations

to

their

were

parents

MORIKAWA

8(Byng-Hall, 2002; Hooper & Wallace, 2010).

behaviors are different for men and women

Self-cognition is partly developed through role

(Takami, Sato, & Shiwaku, 2009). Therefore,

expectations (Kodaira, 2000), and by increasing

there could be gender differences in the level ofself-confidence (Kuramoto & Daibo, 2010).

involvement in the parental subsystem. It is

Therefore, children who perform parental role

recommended that future studies take thebehaviors to meet parental role expectations

number of siblings and their gender intoview themselves as playing parental roles. The

account. Furthermore, clinical problems in thisparent-child relationship is usually re-examinedfield

in adolescence (Miyashita, 1996), but it may be

examining both the mental health of children

difficult for these children to re-examine theirand conflicts between siblings in conditions

relationship, which might lead them to continue

where one of the siblings is involved in the

being involved in the parental subsystem afterparental subsystem.

shouldbefurther

investigatedbyadolescence. In this case, their current mental
health may be damaged and future problems

References

might

Boszormenyi-Nagy, I., & Spark, G. (1973).

develop,such

asdifficulties

inestablishing independence from the originalInvisible

family structure and conflicts between the newintergenerational family therapy. Oxford:

family and the original family.

Harper & Row.

Different situations where children playloyalties:

Reciprocity

Byng-Hall, J. (2002). Relieving parentified

parental roles were comparatively examined,children’sburdensinand the interaction in situations where one of

insecure

attachment

patterns.

the children was involved in the parental

Process, 41(3), 375-388.

subsystem

were

also

investigated.

infamilies

with
FamilySince

Green, R.G., Harris, R.N., Forte, J.A., &characteristic role patterns were observed in

Robinson, M. (1991). Evaluating FACES

this study, it is possible to intervene by

III and the Circumplex Model: 2,440

changing role behaviors of children in order tofamilies. Family Process, 30(1), 55-73.

change relationships. However, this study did

Gross, N., Mason, W.S., & McEachern, A.W.

not measure the total number of siblings in the(1958). Explorations in role analysis:families because it only included the siblings

Studies of the school superintendency role.

that were closest in age to the participants. For

Oxford: Wiley.

example, if there were three siblings in a

Hooper, M.L., & Wallace, A.S. (2010).

participant’s family, the ones that were

Evaluatingexcluded from the survey might still bequestionnaire: Psychometric properties andinvolved

psychopathology correlates. Contemporary

in

the

parental

subsystem.

Furthermore, it has been indicated that thepsychological effects of assuming parental rolethe

Family Therapy, 32, 52-68.

parentification

9

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN SIBLINGS

ごとカテゴリーの分析を通じて. 性格心理

Jurkovic, J.G., Morrell, R., & Thirkield, A.
(1998).

Assessmentof

学研究, 8, 113-124.)

childhoodparentification: Guidelines for researchersandclinicians.

In

Chase,

N.

Kusada,(Ed.),

O.

&

Okado,

Kazokukankeisateihou.

T.

(1995).

(Assessmentof

Burdened children: Theory, research, andfamily relationships). Okado, T. (EDs)treatment of parentification (pp.92-113).

Basics of Clinical Assessment (pp573-581).

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Tokyou: Baifukan.	
 [in Japanese] (草田寿Kawashima, A., Maeshiro, K., Sugawara, M.,子・岡堂哲雄. (1995). 家族関係査定法.

Sakai, A., & Ito, K. (2008). Adolescents’

岡堂哲雄:編, 心理検査学 (pp573-581).

appraisals of their parents’ marital conflicts

東京：垣内出版.)

and

their

Japaneseown

depressive

Associationofsymptoms.

Matsumoto, Y. (2002). The effects of role

Educational

expectations

upon

self-presentational

Psychology, 56(3), 353-363. [in Japanese]

behaviors: Gender-role expectations and(川島亜紀子・眞榮城和美・菅原ますみ・

avoidance of success. Bulletin of the

酒井厚・伊藤教子 (2008). 両親の夫婦間

Graduate Division of Literature of Waseda

葛藤に対する青年期の子どもの認知と抑University, 48, 39-52. [in Japanese] (松本うつとの関連. 教育心理学研究 , 56(3),芳之 (2002). 役割期待が自己呈示行動

353-363.)に及ぼす影響：性役割期待と成功回避.

早稲田大学大学院文学研究科紀要 , 48,

Kuramoto, T., & Daibo, I. (2010). The effect ofrole

expectationfromotherson

Japanese

JournalofMeng, X.L., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D.B.

Interpersonal and Social Psychology, 10,(1992). Comparing correlated correlation

169-177. [in Japanese] (倉元俊輝・大坊郁

coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 111(1),夫 (2010). 他者からの役割期待が自己172.

self-evaluation.

39-52.)

認知にもたらす影響. 対人社会心理学研

Minuchin, S. (1974). Family and family

究, 10, 169-177.)

therapy. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press. 山根常男:監訳. (1984). 家族と家

Kodaira, H. (2000). What are the differences族療法. 東京：誠信書房.

between the ideal and ought selves in theJapanese: An analysis of trait terms andMiyashita, K. (1996). Ningenkakei no hattatsu

categories in self-state representation bytocollegeofpersonal relationships and interpersonal

Personality Psychology, 8, 113-124. [inemmotions). Saito, S. (EDs). Ningenkankei

Japanese] (小平英志 (2000). 日本人にとno Hattatsushinrigaku: 4 Seinenki noって理想自己と義務自己はどのように異Ningenkankei.

(The

なる自己なのか：大学生が記述する属性

Adolescence).

(pp.109-133).

students.

Japan

Societytaijintekikanjyou.

(Development

relationshipsofinTokyou:Baifukan.	
 [in Japanese] (宮下一博. (1996).

1

MORIKAWA

10

人間関係の発達と対人的感情. 斎藤誠一

adolescents. Japan Society of Nursing(編), 人間関係の発達心理学：4

青年

Research, 32(2), 55-63. [in Japanese] (高期の人間関係 (pp.109-133). 東京：培風

見三奈・佐藤幸子・塩飽仁 (2009). 親の館.)

役割受容と親役割行動が子どもの評価す

Morikawa, N. (2013). Development of anfamily role scale and its reliability andth

る家族機能と精神的健康に与える影響.

日本看護研究学会雑誌, 32(2), 55-63.)

validity. 30 Japan Association of Family

Tamura, K. (1994). Adaptability and cohesion

Therapy. [in Japanese] (森川夏乃. (2013).

for Japanese families: Reliability and家庭内の役割尺度の作成とその信頼性・

validity of FACES-Ⅲ and FACESKGⅡ.

妥当性の検討, 家族研究・家族療法学会

Bulletin of Tokyou Gakugei, 45, 135-145.

30 回大会.)[in Japanese] (田村毅 (1994). 日本人家族

Olson, D. H., Portner, J. & Lavee, Y. (1985).
FACES Ⅲ :の適応力と凝集性に関する予備研究:

andFACES－Ⅲと FACESKGⅡの信頼性と妥

Cohesion Evaluation Scale. St. Paul:

当 性 の 検 討 . 東 京 学 芸 大 学 紀 要 , 45,

Family135-145.)

FamilysocialAdaptability

Science,

UniversityofMinnesota.

Tateyama, K. (2006). One of the studies of the

Siewierska, A. (2010). The significance andreliability and validity of FACE Ⅲ forrole of siblings in family therapy. Archives

Japanese. Bulletin of the Graduate Divisionof Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, 1, 5-13.

of Soka University, 28, 285-306. [inShimotomoai, A. (2000). Research on salience

Japanese] (立山慶一. (2006). 家族機能測of satisfaction-dissatisfaction and conflict

定尺度 (FACESⅢ) 邦訳版の信頼性・妥in

当性に関する一研究. 創価大学大学院紀close

relationshipprocess:An

examination based on the discrepancy
between expectation and fulfillment of the

要, 28, 285-306.)
Tsujioka,Y.

&Yamamoto,Y.

(1976).

role behaviors. The Japanese Journal of

Oyakokankei

shindanExperimental Social Psychology, 40, 1-15.

(Development of the EICA parent-child[in Japanese] (下斗米淳 (2000). 友人関

relations questionnaire). Bulletin of of

係の親密化過程における満足・不満足感

Kansai University, 7(2), 221-233. [in及び葛藤の顕在化に関する研究：役割期

Japanese] (辻岡美延・山本吉廣. (1976)．

待と遂行のズレからの検討. 実験社会心

親子関係診断尺度 EICA の作成. 関西大

理学研究, 40, 1-15.)

学社会学部紀要, 7(2), 1-14．)

shakudo.

Takami, M., Sato, Y., & Siwaku, H. (2009).

Vandvik, I.H., & Eckblad, G.F. (1993). FACES

The influence of parental role-acceptance

III and the Kvebaek Family Sculpture:and parental role behavior to family

Technique as measures of cohesion andfunctioncloseness. Family process, 32(2), 221-233.

and

the

mentalhealthofInternational Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science2014 Vol. 4, No.1, 11-18< Original Paper: Research and Experiment t>

Family Structure and Ownership of a Dog
Xinhe Zhang1), Takahiro Kozuka2) and Koubun Wakashima1)
1)

Graduate School of Education, Tohoku University

2)

Faculty of Human and Culture, Sakushin Gakuin University

ABSTRACT. The aim of this research is to exploratorily determine how keeping a dog alters family structures. From samples
collected through questionnaire papers and on the internet, 313 dog-owning families were selected as the subject for this analysis.
We performed a single-factor analysis of variance (single-factor ANOVA) with the three periods of time; "Before ownership","Immediately after ownership", and "Present", as the independent variables, and the subscales of family structure; "cohesion"
between the parents, the father and children, and the mother and children, and the bidirectional "power" in each relationship as thedependent variables. We found that there was an alteration in the family structure between the time period "before ownership" andthe two time periods after ownership, with a noticeable difference in the father's power over children. We discuss the relationshipbetween the act of keeping a dog and the structure of the family.
KEY WORDS : Family structure, Dog, Pet.	
 Introduction

2002). The dog is not a mere pet, but a member

To have a dog as a member of the family hasof the family that becomes a target of affection

a significant role in family life. The number ofand attention. In Japan, with the declining

dogs kept in Japan reaches 10872, the number

birthrate and ageing population, the role of thesuggesting that 15.8% of all families in Japandog in the family is thought to become more

have a dog (Japan Pet Food Association, 2013).

prominent.

This number is predicted to increase to 26.8%

Positive effects evoked by the ownership of aand it has been said that the number of people

dog on the physiological, psychological, andwilling to own a dog reaches double thesocial states of the owner have been suggested

number of people who currently have a dog(Yokoyama, 1996). Furthermore, Wakai and(Japan2013).

Matsui (2006) suggest that owners who do not

Furthermore, over 85% of dog-owners treat

recognize a mutual affection between the dog

their dog as a member of the family (Cohen,

and themselves reap little positive effect from

Pet

Food

Association,

the ownership of the dog. This suggests that
CORRESPONDENCE TO ZHANG, Graduate School ofmere act of keeping a dog is not sufficient, and

Education, Tohoku University, 27-1 Kawauchi, Aoba-ku,

it is the favorable relationship between the

Sendai-city, 980-8576, JAPAN.

owner and the dog that evokes the positiveE-mail: guhong15_qiaoxinka@yahoo.co.jp

effects on the owner. We consider what choices
for the environment and the breed of the dog

11

12	
 

ZHANG, KOZUKA and WAKASHIMA

are important in creating a good relationshipthe family, taking into consideration basic

between the owner and the dog.

information such as the number of dogs owned,

The ownership of a dog most often calls forthe breed, the environment in which the dog is

cooperation between family members, and it iskept, the family member responsible for the

expected that this will have an impact on eachdecision to own a dog, and the main care takermember of the family in various forms. Cainfor the dog.

(1983) suggests that pets act as "glue" in thefamily, bringing together family members andMethods

strengthening the bonds between each member.

Procedures and participants

Froma (2009) suggests that raising a pet, as

A questionnaire survey was conducted onwith raising children, is related to variables

385 dog-owning families nationwide. The

such as rules and roles in the family, power intarget for this investigation is the typical family

the

of

who keep dogs as a pet, not professionals who

communication and problem solving; thus

specialize in one breed, such as dog breeders.

providingan

Of the responses from the 385 families, data

opportunity for learning and change. Paul andwith a high number of missing values were

Serpell (1996) report that compared to children

excluded and taking the homogeneity of theof families without a dog, children of families

families into consideration, 313 families with

who own a dog receive more visits from friends

children under 18 were chosen as the target forand members of those families partake inthe analysis. The questionnaire was distributed

leisure activities more. In Japan, according toon the internet and through veterinary clinics

the ”Survey on Animal Welfare" conducted byacross the Tohoku region and data was

the Cabinet Office in 2010, when asked thecollected by mail. In addition, we requested

positive outcomes of owning a dog the mostordinary families to complete a survey andchosen response was "Nourishment and peacecollected the data by mail.

familystructure,thefamilyborders,

systemclaritywithin family life" at 61.4%, followed by "A calmer
home environment" (55.3%), "Enrichment of

Measuresemotional well-being for children" (47.2%),

1. Basic information"Enjoyment of raising a dog"(31.6%). It can be

Age and gender of the participant, family

deduced from these results that owning a petmembers living together, form of residence

has a positive effect on family relationships.

(house, apartment, flat), area of residence

However, there is little research on how family(suburbs,

relationships are altered through raising a dog.

number of dogs owned, breed and age of the

Our aim in this research is to comprehensively

dog, number of dogs owned in the past, keeping

discuss what changes are observed in theenvironment (indoors or outdoors), the familyfamily through the introduction of a dog into

member who decided to own a dog, the main

housing

districts,

city

centers),

FAMILY AND DOG OWNERSHIP

care taker for the dog.

	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  13

nuclear families living in houses in housing
districts or suburbs.

2. ICHIGEKI (Noguchi, Kozuka, Usami, &Wakashima, 2009)

87%of the families owned one dog, 64%
owned small-breed dogs and 25% owned

Assessment of the relationship between

medium-breeds. 72% of the families had only

family members (between parents, father andowned one dog until present, 81% of thechildren, mother and children) as single items.

families kept their dog indoors. Keeping

In our research, out of the four factors

small-breed dogs indoors was the general trend

suggested in ICHIGEKI,;"cohesion", "interests

for the participating families.

in relationship", "power", "openness", weadoptedforsimplicity

the

two

For 71% of the participating families, thefactors;family member responsible for the decision to"cohesion" and "power" as the main factors in

own a dog included the mother or the father,

the assessment of family relationship.

the person completing the survey (applicablefor families with members other than the

Results

person completing the survey). 29% of the

Basic information

participants completing the survey respondedFirst we will describe the general trend in thethat it was a different family member's decision

basic information about the family, residence

to own a dog. For 75% of the families, theand the dog.

participant in the survey, the mother or the

The average age of the participant was 43.06

father, was the main care taker for the dog(SD= 5.70). 105 participants (34%) were male(applicable for families with members other(the father), and 208 participants (66%) werethan the person completing the survey). 25% offemale (the mother). 87% of the participants

the participants responded that another family

were in their thirties and forties. The average

member was the main care taker for the dog. As

age of the eldest child was 13.72 (SD= 3.56),

a general trend, the decision to own a dog was

140 (45%) were male, 173 (55%) were female.

made by the participant, the father or theThis indicates that the eldest children aremother, or a number of family members

primarily adolescents.

including the participant, and that same person

Regarding the family structure, 85% were
nuclear families. 48% had four family members
livingtogether,

27%

with

three

familymembers. As the form of residence, 78% of thebecame the main care taker for the dog in thefamily.
Table 1 indicates common breeds of dog
owned by each family.

participants lived in houses, making up the
majority. 60% of the participants live inChanges in family structure

housing districts, 26% in the suburbs. This

To consider how introducing a dog into theshows that the general trend for this sample wasfamily changes family structure, We performed

14	
 
a

ZHANG, KOZUKA and WAKASHIMA
single-factor

analysisofvariancep<.01), power of the father over children(single-factor ANOVA) on 313 families. The(F(2,624)=186.50, p<.001), power of the motherindependent variables were the three timeover the father (F(2,624)=10.13, p<.001), power

periods; "Before ownership", "Immediatelyof the children over the father (F(2,624)=16.30,

after ownership" and "Present". The dependent

p<.001), power of the children over the mothervariables assessed in this analysis were(F(2,624)=27.64, p<.001). Multiple comparisons"Cohesion" between the subscales of family(Bonferroni method) revealed that cohesion

structure; parents (mother and father), father

between the father and children, cohesion

and children, and mother and children, and the

between the mother and children, power of thebidirectional "power" between the parents,

father over the children and power of thefather and children, and mother and children

mother over the father are greater for both time

(Table 2).

periods "immediately after ownership" andIn the results, a significant difference was"present" compared to the time period "before

observed in the following items; cohesion

ownership". The power of the children over the

between the father and children (F (2,624) =14.06,

father and the power of the children over thep<.001), cohesion between the mother andmother are greater immediately after ownershipchildrenthan before, and greater in the present than the(F(2,624)=7.51,

p<.01),

cohesion

between the mother and father (F(2,624)=6.55,

time immediately after ownership.

Table 1	  Common breeds of dog owned by each family
Breed

N

Mix Breed (Mongrel)

43

Miniature Dachshund43

Toy Poodle

35

Shiba Inu

31

Chihuahua

30

Papillon

14

Labrador Retriver

9

Pomeranian

9

Shih Tzu

8

Miniature Schnauzer

8Long-coat Chihuahua

7

	
  15

FAMILY AND DOG OWNERSHIP

Discussion

member. The power of the children overIn this research, to consider the changes inparents, of the mother over children and mostfamily structure evoked when introducing a dog

notably the power of the father over children

into the family, we conducted a survey on 313

showed significant increase.

families who raise dogs and assessed the

The reason for the change in family structure,

alterations in family structure caused by theconsidering the keeping environment, we canownership of a dog, with consideration of basic

assume the influence of the location; theinformation such as keeping environment, theenvironment of the housing district, withfamily member who decided to have a dog andinterrelationshipthe main care taker for the dog. Results showcommunity, and houses as the form ofthat introducing a dog into the family

residence indicating the abundance of living

strengthened the cohesion between each family

space.

Table 2	
 

with

the

surrounding

Results for the single-factor ANOVA of family structure for three time periods
BeforeOwnership(BO)

Immediately
after

Present

Ownership

(P)

F

(IO)

Multiple
Comparison

M

SD

M

SD

M

SD

Father-child Cohesion

6.45

1.87

6.73

1.78

6.73

1.91

14.06***

BO＜IO，P

Mother-child Cohesion

7.22

1.61

7.39

1.53

7.39

1.54

7.51**

BO＜IO，P

Marital Cohesion

6.45

1.77

6.64

1.71

6.61

1.93

6.55 **

BO＜IO

5.20

0.86

6.56

1.71

6.54

1.73

5.76

1.75

5.90

1.74

6.05

1.67

16.30***

6.77

1.41

6.84

1.36

6.77

1.42

n.s.

5.86

1.53

6.00

1.57

6.18

1.51

27.64 ***

6.17

1.72

6.25

1.71

6.21

1.75

n.s.

6.33

1.59

6.44

1.58

6.52

1.59

10.13 ***

Power of the Father
over Children
Power of Children overthe Father
Power of the Motherover the Children
Power of Children over
the MotherPower of the Father
over the MotherPower of the Motherover the Father*p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

BO＜IO，P
186.50 ***PO＜IO＜P

BO＜IO＜P

BO＜IO，P16	
 

ZHANG, KOZUKA and WAKASHIMA

A large portion of the participating families

development and active interaction between

owned one dog kept indoors, and this was thefamily members are thought to contribute to thefirst dog the family had owned. From this, we

increased power of the children in the family.

can deduce that interaction between family

Here we will discuss the results that show themembers became active, with the dog as thesignificant increase of the power of the father

medium, resulting in a significant change inover the children. In general, it has been notedfamily relationships. Moreover, the samethat there is less interaction between the father

family member whose decision it was to own aand his children during adolescence than there

dog became the main carer for the dog,

is between the mother and her children or theindicating that the integrity of the attitude of themother and the father (Sohgon Akao, 2003).

person who decided to own a dog becoming

Imai (1986) compiled the basic factors of social

responsible to care for the dog is an important

power in a parent-child relationship. Factors

contributing factor to the changes observed ininclude referent-expert power which depends

family relationship.

on the intellectual ability and the wealth ofRegarding the reason for the increase of theexperience of the influencer and identifying

children's power over the parents, in most cases,

oneself with influencers who possess thoseit can be assumed that the dog is of common

qualities, and attraction power which depends

interest for family members, and becomes theon affectionate emotions towards the influencer

topic

communicationor the sustenance of relationship with the

Meanwhile,

influencer. Noguchi (2007) indicates that there

collaboration of family members are promoted

is a positive correlation between the recognition

throughdog-walking.

of the father's referent-expert power andMoreover with regard to the effect of theattraction power by his adolescent children andexperience caring for a dog has on thean open, honest communication between thedevelopment of children, Mallon (1992) statesparent and child. Through caring for a dog, the

that

are

father gained the opportunity to interact withalleviated through caring for an animal, andhis children, and we can assume that as a result

theydevelopof frequent communication with the dog as the

responsibility in their actions. Hayashi (1999)

medium, the increase in the father's influence

states that through interaction with animals

was observed.

of

conversation

betweenfamilyactivities

children's

recognizeinmembers.

suchemotions

asoffriendshipsolitudeandsuch as dogs, children "gain the ability to

We have shown in this research theunderstand the pain of others" and "develop

alterations observed in family structure such as

self-esteem

Throughcohesion and power through the ownership of ainteraction with their dog, children learn manydog. However, it is not merely the act ofthings such as being responsible for their

keeping a dog that results in changes in family

actions. This opportunity for growth andstructure, factors such as the environment in

andperseverance".

	
  17

FAMILY AND DOG OWNERSHIP

which the dog is kept need to be taken into

1，35-41.).

consideration for assessment. Moreover, this

Mallon, G. P. (1992). Utilization of animals as

research had only one member of the family

therapeutic adjuncts with children and youth:

participating, the mother or the father, with noA review of the literature. Child and Youthconsideration from the other family members'

Care Forum, 21, 53-67.

perspective. Following research should target

Cabinet Office (2010). Doubutsuaigo nikansuru

perspectives of multiple members of the family

Yoronnchousa.（The public opinion survey ofto assess the state of family structure withanimal welfare）.［in Japanese］（内閣府

regard to the ownership of a dog.

（2010）．動物愛護に関する世論調査．）.
Retrieved

Acknowledgements
This

study

was

January

16,

2014,

from

http://www8.cao.go.jp/survey/h22/h22-doubsupportedby

DOG

FRIENDLY CORP.

utu/index.html.
Noguchi, S. (2007). The study of social powerand communications in parent-adolescent

References

relationship. The Japanese Journal of Family

Cain, A. (1983). A study of pets in the family

Psychology, 21, 95-105.［in Japanese］(野口system. In Katcher, A. & Beck, A. (Eds.),

修司 (2007)．青年期の親子関係における

New

with

社会的勢力とコミュニケーションに関す

72-81).

る研究．家族心理学研究，21，95-105.).

Perspectives

Companionon

Animals

Our

Lives

(pp.

Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania
Press.

S.

Kozuka,T.

Usami,

T.

&

Wakashima, K. (2009). Development andCohen, S. P. (2002). Can pets function as
familyNoguchi,members?

Western

Journalof

Nursing Research, 24, 621-638.

examination of validity for a new family
structure assessment scale “ICHIGEKI”.
Tohoku University Graduate School of

Froma, W. (2009). Human-animal bonds II:

Education Annual Research Report, 58,

The role of pets in family systems and family

247-266.［in Japanese］(野口修司・狐塚貴

therapy. Family Process, 48, 481-499.

博・宇佐美貴章・若島孔文（2009）．家族

Hayasi, Y. (1999). Kennshou Animal Therapy.

構造測定尺度―ICHIGEKI―の作成と妥(Verification

当性の検討．東北大学大学院教育学研究ofanimaltherapy).

KODANSHA. ［ in Japanese ］ ( 林 	  良 博

科研究年報，58，247-266.).

(1999). 検証アニマルセラピー．講談社.).

Paul, E. S. & Serpell, J. A. (1996). Obtaining a

Imai, Y. (1986). The bases of social power in

new pet dog: Effects on middle childhood

the parent-adolescent relationship. Japanesechildren and their families. Applied Animal

Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 35-41.［inBehaviour Science, 47, 17-29.

Japanese］ (今井芳昭 (1986)．親子関係にJapan Pet Food Association. (2013). Heisei

おける社会的勢力の基盤．社会心理学研究，

25nenn Zennkoku Inunekoshiiku Jittaichousa

18	
 

ZHANG, KOZUKA and WAKASHIMA

Kekka. (The National survey results of dog

親子関係．発達研究，17，1-23.).

cat breeding in 2013).［in Japanese］(ペットYokoyama, A. (1996). Animal Therapy toha

フード協会 (2013)．平成 25 年全国犬猫飼

nanika. （ What is animal therapy ） . NHK

育実態調査結果.). Retrieved January 16,

BOOKS.［in Japanese］(横山章光（1996）．

2014,

from

アニマル・セラピーとは何か．NHK 出版.).

http://www.petfood.or.jp/topics/img/140101.

Wakashima, K. & Matsui, H. (2006). The 23th

pdf.

Annuual Conference of Japan Academy ofSogon, S. & Sogon, Akao, Y. (2003). How

Family Psychology, Program & Abstracts,

Youth Evaluates Parents-child Relationships

51-52.［in Japanese］(若島孔文・松井博史

DuringHuman（2006）．家族としての犬―飼い主と犬とDevelopmental Research, 17, 1-23. ［ inの関係について―．日本家族心理学会第Japanese］(荘厳舜哉・荘厳（赤尾）依子

23 回大会抄録集，51-52.).

Their

SchoolAge.

(2003)．子ども期の回想にみる現代青年のInternational Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science2014 Vol. 4, No.1, 19-27< Original Paper: Research and Experiment >Psychological Support for Children from Families of International Marriages
Sachi Satake1)
1)

Center for Clinical Practice in Education, Aichi University of Education

ABSTRACT. This study has the objective to discover the family relationships and support that should exist within families ofinternational marriages. I used the analytical method of extracting, for the purpose of presenting my cases, the portions from theresponses of each of the subjects in the three interviews conducted on him/her, portions that applied to the two aspects of support tothe children from international marriages --(1) the family relationships within the international marriages, and (2) the support given
to the children from international marriages. The results of my study brought to light that in such family relationships, the roles ofparents and children had reversed. Furthermore, with respect to the ideal way of support, the children of international marriages,
found it difficult to discuss matters with their parents, suggesting the necessity for the supporters to take into consideration theworries and the reality that those children were unable to bear. Furthermore, with respect to the kind of support that should be
provided, children from international marriages did not know whether the complications between their parents were those that
occurred in ordinary families in Japan. From these circumstances, I perceived the significance in normalizing such situations of thechildren by having supporters provide them with the help in the form of psychological education.
KEY WORDS : Families of international marriages, Support, Family relationships, Psychological education

Introduction

communication alone between members of

The number of international marriages in thesuch families must be difficult, not to mention

sixteen years between 1990 to 2006 has

how great daily pressure and stress could be.

increased by approximately 1.7times. Along“Kuwayama (1995) indicates that in a family ofwith the increase in international marriages, allinternational marriage, the couples do not speakkinds of problems have been revealed which

the same native language, the husband and theirwere not apparent in Japanese married couples.

family have no interest in the culture of theSano(1998) makes the following inference:

wife which causes pressure and stress, etc.

“Cross-cultural families, specifically being

Precisely because of this kind of families ofbi-cultural in nature, have a sense of values

international marriages that a great deal of

based on different languages and customs, so

problems have emerged. Murry et al.(2001)
verifies that the parents' expectations of the

CORRESPONDENCE TO SATAKE, Center for Clinicalroles to be played and the methods ofPractice in Education, Aichi University of Education, 1

socialization(the way how the individuals

Hirosawa, Igaya-cho, Kariya, Aichi, 448-8542, JAPAN.

acquire the norm, the sense of values, theE-mail: 963me.gusta.bailar@gmail.com

behavior patterns that were required of themembers of the group to which they belonged),

19

20

SATAKE

stress and the awareness of discrimination, etc,

support in schools.

influence the development of personality

In this study, the word “children” is notcharacteristics of the children of minority

limited for children who are under age, but as afamilies. Based on these circumstances, it iscommon name for “children/offspring” ofsupposed that the children of international

international marriages. Moreover, the word

marriages are influenced to some extent by the“half” is used in this study to define a child,sense of values and the background of their

one of whose parents is of foreign nationality.

parents' culture. Furthermore, given the factthat the “identity problem” has been indicatedMethods

in the psychological maladjustment to an

Participants

environment of foreign culture, the children of

One male and two female in their twenties

international marriages are also confronted withresiding in Japan. Each one has a parent who istheir “identity problem”. As the support for theafamilies and the children who are dealing

introduced to the author by a friend.

closely

with

such

foreignculture,foreignnational. These

subjects werethecounseling to deal with foreign cultures is

Proceduresconsidered. Moreover, with the number of

Semi-structured interviews were conductedchildren from international marriages on theon the participants. They were questioned

increase in the educational setting, I believe

chiefly on their family relationships, languages

that it is vital to examine what such support

and cultures from the perspective of identity

should be. As apparent from the above,formation.

researches have been done dealing with the

The interviews were conducted from August

marital relationship of international couples andto December in year X. Three interviews wereresearches dealing extensively with the support

carried out on each subject, with each interview

given to foreign cultures. However, not many

lasting from 50 minutes to 90 minutes. The

studies have been conducted from the clinicalinterviews were separated by one month. Withand psychological perspectives on the concrete

the consent of the subjects, all interviews were

methods of support and family relationships forrecorded on IC recorder.

the children of international marriages.

At the beginning of the interviews, theGiven this situation, this study has the

subjects were asked to sign the consent form,

objectives to examine the family relationships

after having received the explanations on thein international marriages, as perceived by theirobjectives of this study, its significance and thechildren, along with which, the examination ofprotection of privacy. Moreover, from the

3 cases, focusing on what is desired for theperspective of protecting the privacy of thechildren of international marriages--the support,

individuals, the text of the recorded “word forthe counseling for varied cultures and theword” responses of the subjects will not be

SUPPORT FOR FAMILIES OF INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE

published in its entirety.

21

register, I had to go to get it. I guess you cansay that our home was propped up by only half

Analytical Plan

the support that it needed. “ However, he

Due to the fact that the responses of thewished that his mother could speak more

subjects were extremely revealing of their

Japanese, “You see, part of me couldn't help

individuality and their peculiarities, being thatwishing that if she spoke and understood more

the topic was on such minority matter asJapanese, she could have read this and sheinternational marriages, I believe that it iscould have done that and I didn't have to takeappropriate that they be examined in thecare of things for her the way I did....

context of research cases. The objectives of this“ Regarding his feelings toward his mother, hestudy are: 1) the family relationships withinsaid, “I dare say Mom was always somewhat

international marriages; 2) the support to thenervous....” He also said that he could not tellchildren from international marriages, so, as thewhether his worries were caused by his

analytical method of this study, I extracted themother's inability to speak Japanese or whether

portions from the responses in the threethey were the worries shared by the parent andinterviews for each subject that applied to 1)

child in a regular Japanese household.

and 2) and present them as “cases”, followed

Moreover, to the question-- <Have you everby their examination.

consulted anyone on your worries?> heanswered that he had consulted friends about

Case Presentation

them, but not for once a parent. “Even if I tried

The semi-structured interviews, conducted

talking to Mom, she wouldn't understand foron three different occasions on each subject

sure and what's more I don't expect her toconstituted a “case”. In presenting these cases,

understand. These worries of mine... She is a

the responses of the subjects are given within

total foreigner.” Words such as these indicated“” , while the words of the author will be given

how he felt as a “half”, knowing that there waswithin < >.

no way that his worries could be understood by
his foreign parent. On looking back, hisCase 1

greatest concern was to try to somehow

Participant: A, a 26-year old malesurmount the difficulties with which he was

Family structure： father (Japanese)， motherconfronted. A, added that even though he was(Honduran) younger sister and older brother.

Japanese, he looked foreign, so those aroundA said, “Father was usually not home. Only

him made fun of him. In the beginning, he

the three of us, Mom, my younger sister anddisliked being made fun of, but gradually heI, were home. Almost always, I was the one

came to accept it as an amusement.

who had to go to the Ward Office to take care

Case 2of things. When we needed a copy of the family

Participant: B, a 24-year old female

22

SATAKE

Family structure：father (Japanese-Brazilian),a choice in getting born into this situation...

mother (Peruvian), younger sister and older

Before I realized it, it was so.” B said over andbrother.

over again that she had no way out being a

The environment of B's family is quite“half” for good, no matter how much she crieddifferent from that of other Japanese families inabout it or laughed about it. Being aware of herthat both her parents can neither speak nor

situation, B concluded that there was no use

write Japanese. Therefore, B often took care oftalking about it to her parents, nor did shethings in the place of her parents. Ever sinceconsulted other people about it. “I guessher elementary school days, she has been

everything comes from my resignation thatsomehow relying on herself, not on her parents.

even if I tried speaking to them, they wouldn't“When my parents received letters from school,

understand.... When it comes to speaking

they couldn't read them, so I simply read themJapanese, I wanted to convey not just theand took care of what was required, relying oncontents but also the nuances, but that was not

my judgement.” “For example, before goingpossible with them. Probably because of that, I

swimming with our teacher, the consent form

have never discussed matters with them. “＜Isrequired the fixture of seal to indicate parental

it faster to take care of things yourself? ＞

consent and to confirm the state of my body

“Well, yes, it's kind of resigning to the facttemperature. I took care of that myself. Kids

that it was just that way.” Moreover, B

around me were envious of me.” She added,

stated that it might be better to have a specialistthat even now, she is taking care of matters at(school counselor) in elementary school andhome and outside of home, matters whichjunior high school. “I think that kids like meshould be done by her parents--going to her

could find the peace of mind needed, if they

younger sister's high school as her substitute

had someone who was concerned about them.

guardian, taking her to the hospital andGetting none at home, the school is the only

circulating the neighborhood bulletin board, etc.

other place to get such attention. “ She felt

“ “My family considers me indispensable, youthat in elementary school, “it would be nice if

know. That is, as long as we are in Japan. You

the teacher could look after such kids and do sosee, I've got to handle our lives in Japan, as

casually. I think there are kids who can't say

well as to play skillfully the role of .... ＜they needed some attention, even though they

the role of forming the connection with yourwanted to get help.”

mother?＞ “That's it. That's why I guess I am
indispensable.”“Ever since I was quite young,

Case 3

it's been that way, so I'm exhausted. I've had toParticipant: C, a 23 year old female

try so hard....”.”I guess I'm resigned to the fact

Family structure: father (Japanese) and motherthat there is no way out of this situation for me(half of Spanish and Filipino)because it's my fate. Besides, it's not that I had

C’s father is “a stubborn father of the Showa

23

SUPPORT FOR FAMILIES OF INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE

era” and he is the one who scolds C and her

she was bearing what she couldn't talk to hermother is the one who pacifies the situation.

parents rather than understanding logical things.

Her mother doesn't understand the language“After all, I think I want to feel secure like you(Japanese: a note from translator) sufficiently

are okay as you are. It’s not unnatural that I get

and C assists her in English. “It seems sheannoyed here.” Ms. C herself didn't have ansuffers

doesn'topportunity to consult anybody. As a result,understand what was spoken in Japanese” C

she was repeatedly hospitalized and released

said. Also C says that her mother is like her

several times for unknown reasons and she

friend. “It has been 22 years since she lived

often went to the public health center. “Youhere likewise it has been 22 years since I live

should provide a place where people feel safe.

here. That’s why we feel like we can hang in

Especially if we don’t feel relieved when we go

this country together. We are somewhere in an

home. Like I feel I have a sea of worries” sheevenhanded position. Because I started fromsaid.

severestresswhen

shezero since I was born and she started from zero
since she started learning Japanese. We canDiscussions

share hard times and joyful times” says C. To C,

Family Relationshipher mother is in an evenhanded position and her

Apparently as A, B, and C have beenfather is embedded in the Japanese culture. As

supporting their foreign mother culturally anda whole family “Racially mixed families are

linguistically since they were children, it istotally in a different position” says C. Her

difficultfather is Japanese, her mother is a foreigner andmarriages to play a role as a child. As Carter

herself is mixed breed. Apparently even when aand McGoldrick (1980) says “During the

problem occurs, each member overcomes itchildcare period, as the secondary change

by himself most of the time rather thanwhich is essential to the family, first by adding

solving the problem among family members.

a child to the couple system leads to a new“I know that each member has an obstacle

boundary and role. Especially it is important towhich they want to overcome for sure”. As adevise ways of functioning both the couple andresult, C has been trying to overcome

parent systems. Second, to obtain parental

problems without consulting her family. She

roles--- father’s role for husband and mother’s

says although she could overcome as manyrole for wife is expected. Third, including

issues as possible by herself, she still wanted tomother’s

have a professional (school counselor) who

reconstitute the relationship with their parents

would understand her situation as a raciallyis expected”, they mention the family process

mixed person when she was in elementary andabout the family relationship development

middle school. What she strongly wanted in aduring the childcare period from three different

counselor was that s/he would understand thatperspectives. From these perspectives, it seems

for

role

childrenorfrominternational

grandparent’s

role,

to

24

SATAKEto be crucial for both parents to obtain theirconsulting their parents, as a result they haveparental roles and set a boundary between

replaced things they couldn't’ carry with otherparents

things when counselors were involved withandchildrenforthechildren’sdevelopment. In context therapy, the concept ofthemparent-child relationship reverse phenomenon

Moreover Kurihara (2004) says “In crossis named “surrogate parental role”. “Surrogate

cultural counseling, it’s necessary to further

parental role” is the relationship that parents

consideration to give or receive messages andgive and children receive is reversed from aunless they don’t understand the client’s culture

young age and children try to comfort

or habit, it’s difficult to build trust and solve

themselves and care for their parents as if the

problems with them”. Like B and C mentioned,

parent-childreversed”

they feel relieved if supporters are under a(Nakagama, 2010). We suppose that the family

similar situation or clients can share theirenvironment is prone to the “surrogate parental

culture so we need to consider the clients’role” in international marriages. Especially as

culture carefully when providing counseling.

the culture and language are different between

And depending on circumstances, as Inoue

husband and wife, it’s difficult to adjust the gap(1998) suggests, psychological education

and additionally father is busy at work or

should promote awareness, knowledge

mother doesn't have enough vitality to live inand skills in cross-cultural settings as aJapan thus it’s difficult for her to play a role ofpart of essential support in multi-cultural

mother and their children end up with taking

counseling,

the role of “surrogate parental role”. And as themeaningful to provide support for themroles of parent and child are not distinctive, theincludingboundary between parents and children is likely

education. Furthermore it should be effective

to become ambiguous.

when we give messages by normalizing (as arelationship

were

in

school

it
this

or

counseling

would
view

appearofsettings.

tobepsychologicalquantitative problem at normal condition)
Support(Hasegawa, 1987). Like cases 1 and 3,

From this case, it has become clear that theychildren of international marriages have

have overcome the difficulties by themselves

doubts on whether the conflicts among

without being able to consult their parents fromtheir parents occur also among Japanesea young age. They have taken measures infamilies, or whether the reason why theirorder to overcome the difficulties by such asproblems and struggles arise is because

converting to laughter, thinking it’s their

they are racially mixed or if even people

destiny, or expressing in the way they dress.

in a similar situation have similar

Supporters need to think of support andproblems. Supporters can give them aunderstand that children from international

sense of security by normalizing theirmarriages are prone to have difficulties

questions in psychological education.

25

SUPPORT FOR FAMILIES OF INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE

Additionally, like Okado (1989) says “Thesuggestions for the whole family and children

foundation for emotional development ofthat can lead to support. In terms of support, we

school-age children exists within the familyfound their needs of cross-cultural counseling

relationship. The more calm and warm theand normalization in educational settings andfamily relationship is, the more stable thethe importance of knowing how necessary it ischildren become. Adversely, if there are fights

to understand the clients’ cultural background.

constantly in the family and the family

In addition, from the perspective that cultural

relationship is not working out, the children’s

differences within international marriages exist,

emotions become unstable. Basically the family

we could characterize the family relationship.

is structurally stable, open communication is

However, we couldn't view the wholetaken place, and the absorptive capacity of theperspective

family is strong; these are the necessary

background at this time. Therefore further

conditions for emotional development”, hediscussion will be required in future research.

describes the importance of the family support
for school-age children. When we support
children from international marriages, we needto see the big picture of the family. Namely wemight need to not only see the family dynamics
of international marriages but provide support
to the father and mother now and then.
Morikawa (2009) says “Children frominternational marriages were typically born andraised in Japan so they don’t have linguistic
problems thus they can be ignored”. Like Case2, there are children who can’t say “Help!”
therefore teachers’ care and to place counselors
who have developed expertise in cross-cultural
counseling in schools should be considered.

Conclusions
In this study, we discussed the family
relationship from international marriages andsupport. As a result, we discovered that the roleof parent-child relationship is reversed and theconflict and family dynamics are revealed due
to international marriage families, we obtained

based

on

ethniccultural

26

SATAKE

References

dynamics

2010inJapan).

Carter, E.A. & McGoldrick, M. (1980). The

http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/List.do?lifamily life cycle：A framework for Family

d=000001082331. [in Japanese] 厚生労働

Therapy. New York. Gardner Press.

省. (2010). 平成 22 年度日本における人Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: youth and crisis.

口

動

態

の

概

要

.

New York. W.W. Norton. (岩瀬庸理 (訳).

http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/List.do?li(1973). アイデンティティ－青年と危機

d=000001082331

金沢文庫).

Morikawa, Y. (2009). The Voices of Children

Hasegawa, K. (1987). Kazokunai paradokkusu

from Intercultural Families. Category,(The Paradox in the Family). Saikosyobou

Ethnicity, Identity, Osaka City University,[in Japanese] 長谷川啓三. (1987). 家族内

The journal of human rights, 9, 67-75. [inパラドックス. 彩古書房.

Japanese] (森川与志夫. (2009). 国際結婚

Inoue, T. (1998). Tabunkajidai no kaunseringu

家族の子どもたちの「声」. -カテゴリー，

riron. (The counseling theory for the

エスニシティ，アイデンティティ, 大阪

multicultural epoch). Gendai no espri: 377,

市立大学,人権問題研究, 9, 67-75.)

30-40. [in Japanese] 井上孝代. (1998).多Murry, V. M., Smith, E. P., & Hill,E. N. (2001).

文化時代のカウンセリング理論. 井上孝

Race, Ethnicity, and Culture in Studies of

代（編）. 現代のエスプリ, 377, 30-40.

Families in Context. Journal of Marriage

Kurihara, M. (2004). Ibunkakankaunseringu

and Family, 63, 911-914.

wo jissensuruuedeno ryuuitenn-kikokujidou

Nakagama,

Y.

(2010).

Kojinryouhou

toseito heno rinnsyou wo toosite. (Attention

kazokuryouhou wo tunagu-kankeisikou nopoints for practicing intercultural counselingjissenteki tougou (The 	  String Individual-through the clinic returnee children and

Therapy to Family Therapy :Practicalstudents –). Intercultural study, 20, 11-19.

Unification of Intention Pro-relations ). A

[in Japanese]. 栗原真弓. (2004). 異文化

publishing company of Tokyo university.

間カウンセリングを実践するうえでの[in Japanese] 中釜洋子. (2010). 個人療法

留意点-帰国児童生徒への臨床を通して.

と家族療法をつなぐ ― 関係系志向の実

異文化間研究 (20), 11-19.

践的統合. 東京大学出版会.

Kuwayama, N. (1995). Kokusaikekkon to

Okado, T. (1989). Kazokukankei no hattatu tosutoresu (The International marriage and

kiki.

(The

Development

stress). Akasi syoten.[in Japanese] 桑山紀

Relationships

and彦 (1995). 国際結婚とストレス. 明石書

Douhousyasyuppann. [in Japanese] 岡堂哲店.

雄. (1989). 家族関係の発達と危機. 同朋

Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. (2010).
Heisei22nendoniokeru
gaiyou.

(The

jinkoudoutai

Summaryofof

FamilyCrisis).

舎出版.

noSano H. (1998). Ibunka familii no kaunseling

population(Counseling of intercultural family). Gendai

SUPPORT FOR FAMILIES OF INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE
no espri, 377, 156-164. [in Japanese] 佐野
秀樹. (1998)：異文化ファミリーのカウン
セリング. 井上孝代（編）. 現代のエス

プリ, 377, 156-164.

27

International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science2014 Vol. 4, No.1, 28-43< Original Paper: Practice >Solution-Focused Group Therapy Program for Repeated-Drug Users
Kenji Yokotani1) and Katsuhiro Tamura2)
1)

Graduate School of Clinical Psychology, Niigata Seiryo University

2)

Treatment Sector, Niigata Prison

ABSTRACT. Solution-focused approach was an effective treatment for drug abuse. Solution-focused therapy at the individual level
showed treatment effects on drug users, but the therapy at the group level did not. On the basis of systemic therapies, we developed
a solution-focused group therapy program for repeated-drug users in a Japanese prison. Our program was constituted of 12 sessions,
all of which aimed to help achievement of clients’ personal goal and development of clients' motivation to change their lifestyle.
The program included collaborative structures to manage clients’ aggressive behaviors. Our therapist’s manual facilitated clients’solution talk and minimized their problem talk in group therapy. The program contents were also discussed from intrapersonal
perspectives.
KEY WORDS : Repeated-Drug User, Solution-Focused Approach, Group Therapy, Solution talk.

Introduction

could facilitate spread of illegal drugs andDrug-related offense was a severe problem.

illegal groups. Therefore, effective treatment

Around 60 % of the drug-related offenses were

was essential not only to maintain theircommitted by repeated-drug users in Japan

individual mental health, but also to build a(Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare,peaceful and safe society.

Pharmaceutical and Food Safety Bureau,

Traditional treatment programs focused onCompliance and Narcotics Division, 2010).

problems of drug users. Therapist confronted

They suffered from severe mental healthclients’ problems and made them “hit the

problems

Acierno,bottom”. Although these programs became very

Saunders, Resnick, & Best, 2003) and bought a

popular, treatment effects of the programs werelarge volume of illegal drugs, which became ain doubt. Actually, recent study pointed out thatmajor fund source of illegal groups (Curtis &therapist’s

Wendel, 2000). Ineffective treatment for themnegatively predicted clients’ cessation of drug

(Kilpatrick,Ruggiero,confrontationincounselinguse (Miller, Benefield, & Tonigan, 1993).
CORRESPONDENCE TO YOKOTANI, Niigata Seiryo

Alternative treatment for drug-related users

University, Room 5210, Suidocho, 1, 5939,

was Solution-Focused Approach (SFA) [BergChuo district, Niigata city, Niigata prefecture,& Reuss, 1998]. SFA aimed to construct951-8121, JAPAN.

solutions in collaboration with the client (DeE-mail: yokotani@n-seiryo.ac.jp

Shazer et al., 1986). SFA focused on theclient’s resources and emphasized on what each

28

29

SOLUTION-FOCUSED GROUP THERAPY

client had already done something useful (Kiser,

Similarly, the 37 university students with

Piercy, & Lipchik, 1993; Miller & Shazer,

drinking problems were randomly assigned to2000). SFA’s non pathological approach,

one of three groups: 1) one motivational

utilization of clients’ resources, and validationinterviewing group session with feedback mailof clients’ motivation were consistent withon their drinking; 2) mail feedback only; 3) nomotivational interviewing methods, which wastreatment (Walters, Bennett, & Miller, 2000).

also popular in the treatment for drug abuse

Result showed that mail feedback group(Lewis & Osborn, 2004).

recovered better than those who received the

SFA also showed treatment effects for druggroup session or no treatment. These findings

users. The 60 offenders, including drug users,

did not support the treatment effects for drug

were randomly assigned to SFA and control

users at the group level.

groups (Lindforss & Magnusson, 1997). The

MillerandRollnick(2002)

reviewed

control group, which did not receive any

previous findings of motivational interviewing

treatment, committed a new offense after 12group therapy and clarified three limitations ofmonths of their release more frequently than

the group therapy. First, group therapy cannot

the SFA group. In the same line, 105

take enough time for clients’ talk. Clients’ talkcocaine-dependent outpatients were randomly

about quitting drug predicted their actual

assigned to motivational interview and control

cessation of drug use (Amrhein, Miller, Yahne,

groups (Stotts, Schmitz, Rhoades, & Grabowski,

Palmer, & Fulcher, 2003), so the limited time2001).

The

receivedboth

for their talk might weaken treatment effects.

interview

andSecond, clients also felt difficulties to express

detoxication program showed only 18 % of

their emotion in group, even though therapist’s

relapse rate, whereas those who only received

validation of their emotion was a key todetoxication program were 36 %. These

motivate clients to quit drug (Miller & Rollnick,findings supported that individual SFA was an2002). Hence, group therapy might not treat

effective treatment for repeated drug users.

their emotion adequately. Third, therapist felt

individual

patients

who

motivational

Still, we did not know whether treatment

difficulties

tomanagegroup.

Becauseeffects of individual SFA were generalizable tosubstance use was positively correlated withgroup SFA. For example, the 38 substanceaggressive behavior, hostility (McCormick, &abuserstoSmith, 1995) and even antisocial personality

Solution-Focused Group Therapy (SFGT) anddisorder (Robins, 1998), many repeated-drug

control groups (Smock, Trepper, Wetchler,

users were aggressive and ganged up to attack

McCollum, Ray, & Pierce, 2008). Participants

other group members and therapist skillfully.

who received 6 sessions of SFGT were not

Their mass attack was often too strong for thesignificantly different from those who received

therapist

6 sessions of purposeless individual counseling.

Collaboration with them in group session could

were

randomly

assignedtocollaborate

with

them.

YOKOTANI and TAMURA

30
be

more

difficultthancollaborationinindividual session.

1967; Watzlawick, Weakland, & Fisch, 1974),
Milan Approach (Palazzoli, & Burt, 1990), andAlthough treatment effects of SFGT were not

Collaborative

Approach(Anderson&

confirmed in previous findings, development ofGoolishian, 1992). The structure and manuala SFGT program had academic and practicalshould help therapist to corroborate with clients.

values.

Next

SFA

was

regardedaseffective

section,we

presented

collaborative

treatment program for drug users (Berg &structure and manual. Then we offered theReuss, 1998), but empirical evidence of SFA

program contents of our SFGT. Lastly, we

was limited (Gingerich, & Eisengart, 2000).

discussed our program from intrapersonal

Development of SFA program could advance

perspectives.

validation of SFA. Furthermore, group therapy
was

more

cost-effective

treatment

thanindividual therapy. Effective group therapy

Collaborative

structure

andtherapist’s

manual to work with repeated –drug users

program could increase the opportunities for
drug users to receive effective treatment.
The present study proposed a new SFGT
program for repeated-drug users in a Japaneseprison.

Our

programovercame

Collaborative structure from physical andsocial perspectives
Many repeated-drug users were aggressive

previous(McCormick, & Smith, 1995; Robins, 1998), so

limitations of the group therapy. First, we took

therapist needed structure that could manage

12 sessions to conduct SFGT: The number of

their aggressive behaviors. Our group therapy

group sessions was twice of the previous study

had two structures (Figure 1). At the former(e.g., Smock et al., 2008). The long duration ofhalf,group therapy secured enough time for clients’

individual answer to program handouts. This

talk. Meta-analysis of previous findings also

structure helped them to be ready to talk aboutsuggested that the number of session positively

themselves, rather than other drug users.

affected treatment outcomes of drug users

Furthermore, the structure also minimized(Rubak, Sandbæk, Lauritzen, & Christensen,clients’ mindless babble. The structure also2005). The increased number of session should

helped therapist to talk to each client personally.

improve treatment outcomes of SFGT. Second,

Therapist’s validation of their emotion andour program also ensured clients’ personal talkfacilitation of their solution-focused thinking

with therapist. Clients’ emotion was facilitated

was effective treatment during personal talkand validated during personal talk. Third, we(Miller & Rollnick, 2002).

groupmembers

wrote

down

their

developed collaborative structure and manual

In the latter half, group members formed abased on systemic therapies, such as Mental

ring and talk about their writings voluntarily.

Research Institute Approach (Hasegawa, 1997;

This structure had both positive and negative

Watzlawick, Bavelas, Jackson, & O'Hanlon,

aspects. From positive aspects, group members

31

SOLUTION-FOCUSED GROUP THERAPY

Former half

Writing Table

CL

CL

CL

CL

CL

Th

CL

CL

Latter half

CL

Talk inTh

publicCL

CL

Figure 1 Two structures of Solution-Focused Group Therapy for repeated drug user
Note: Th: Therapist, CL: Client, group therapist maximized continuous lines and minimized dotted
lines

could facilitate solution-focused talk with eachintervention, their discussion could be escalated

other. From negative aspects, they might

into a nonverbal fight, which was irrelevant

facilitate problem-focused talk or get into fight.

with their solution (Watzlawick et al., 1967).

To prevent their problem-focused talk and fight,

Figuretherapistgroup

minimized interaction among members. To

communication with care and skill. For

prevent escalation of their aggressive behaviors,

example, when one member whispers during

therapist needed to intervene in their aggressive

another members’ talking, therapist needed tointeraction at the preliminary stage.

intervene in the one as the manager of group

To manage client’s aggressive behavior, group

communication. Furthermore, some member

therapy also needed rules. Our programs had

might communicate nonverbally to the talking.

four rules (See table 1). Therapist should bringFor example, some member shoots anotherclients into compliance with these rules.

member a teasing glance. At this time, therapist

Therapist’s defense was allowed only if theyneeded to intervene in their teasing. Without

attacked the rules. Basic explanation wasneededtomanage1suggests

that

both

structures

YOKOTANI and TAMURA

32

following: To make group therapy safe, all

Therapist’smembers should not attack other members

perspectives(Rule 1). To talk in a safe place, all members

manualfrom

psychological

Based on these collaborative structures,

should respect other’s talking (Rule 2). Totherapist

secure each member’s turn to talk, respect yoursolution-focused talk in group therapy. Our

and the other member’s turn (Rule 3). To makemanual had three principles. The first principle

the talk meaningful, talk honestly, but do not

was to maximize clients’ solution talk. Clients’

need to talk everything (Rule 4).

solution talk included clients’ benefits ofWithout these rules, a member directly
attackedothermembers,

which

had

a

manualtofacilitatechange, cost of the unchanged, optimistic

harmedattitudes to change, and commitment to change

collaboration in group. Listening with half an(Hoyt & Berg, 2006; Miller, & Rollnick, 2002).

ear to a speaker was regarded as relational

From social construction perspective, solution

aggression to some speaker. When the speaker

talk constructed clients’ solvable reality (deperceived the aggression from the listener, theShazer et al., 1986; White & Epston, 1990).

speaker harmed the listener in retribution.

Actually, clients’ solution talk in counseling

Cycle of retribution easily destroyed groupcollaboration.

Furthermore,group

therapypositively

affected

theiractualsolution(Amrheinet2003),

but

therapists’al.,needed to ensure each member to talk. Without

encouragement to change was not (Mahrer,

clear turn, some could talk but others could not.

Gagnon, Fairweather, Boulet, & Herring, 1994).

The treatment effects for those who could not

Therapist’s

talk could be weakened. To focus on clients’facilitated clients to talk about the theme

actual solution, clients’ solution needed to be(Bavelas, Coates, & Johnson, 2000; 2002), sobased on actual experience. Fake story had littles/he should maximize their solution talk

impact on their actual solution, so fake story

through showing her (his) interest (Figure 2).

would weaken solution-focused talk.

interests

tospecifictheme

The second principle was to minimize

Table 1. Rules of Solution Focused Group Therapy for repeated-drug users

1

2

Rules

ExampleDo not attack the other members

Warn when a member attacked another member verbally orand staffs

nonverbally

Respect other’s talking

Warn when someone did not listen to another member’stalking (nonverbally).

3

Respect one’s and other’s turn

Warn when someone (verbally) interrupt another member’s
turn.

4

Talk honestly

Appreciate honesty (verbally)

33

SOLUTION-FOCUSED GROUP THERAPY

Solution talk

Maximize the talkShow interests in the talkMinimize the talk
Validate client’s emotion
Clients’ talk

Problem talk

(Normalization)
Reframe the talk(Counterparadox)

Minimize the talk
Aggressive talk

Reframe the role set(Not knowing position)

Figure 2. Therapist’s manual on Repeated-Drug Users’ talkproblem talk, but appreciated and reframed it.

treatment (Miller, & Rollnick, 2002), so

Problem talk involved clients’ costs of change,

therapist minimized their problem talk.

benefits of the unchanged, pessimistic attitudes

However, their problem talk reflected their

to change, and commitment to the unchanged

emotion about their drug use. Their emotional(Hoyt & Berg, 2006; Miller & Rollnick, 2002).

expression was a key to enhance theirTheclients’motivation to quit drug, so therapist needed toproblematic reality (de Shazer et al., 1986;

validate their emotion. Normalization to theirWhite & Epston, 1990). Actually, clients’

response was a way to validate their emotion.

problem talk in counseling affected their

For example, when client said that “I cannot

relapse of drug use (Amrhein et al., 2003).

stop using drug”, therapist replied that “Your

Furthermore, one problem talk affects anotherfeeling is exactly right. Many clients have yourproblem talk in group therapy (Miller, &feeling when you try to quit drug. It takes aRollnick, 2002). For example, clients easily

long way, so take your own time.”

found joy in competition for getting high.

Furthermore, their problem talk needed to be

These talks were regarded as adverse effects on

reframed as facilitator of group therapy rather

problemtalkconstructedYOKOTANI and TAMURA

34

than impediment of the therapy. Showing

Goolishian, 1992). The attitudes came fromrespect to clients’ honesty was the best way toassumption that therapist did not know many

validate their emotion and reframe the problem

things about clients’ problem, so therapist

talk (Figure 2). For example, when client said

needed to learn from the client who was thethat “I get high when I use drug. Why not use?”,expert of the problem (Anderson, & Goolishian,therapist responded like that “You are very1992). Hence, therapist needed to say “I cannot

honest. Your honesty was very important forunderstand your problem fully. The person whotherapeutic treatment, because your actual

can understand your problem is you.” “Talking

feeling is a key to understand your actualis very weak in anyway, but some members say

situation.”wasthe talking has very strong impact on theircounter paradox (Palazzoli, & Burt, 1990). If

problem. Still, I do not know exact effects,

the client had talked his problem, he would

actually.” These responses made group freecommit to group therapy. If the client hadfrom debate about the authority of therapist.

Thistherapist’s

response

stopped talking problem, the therapy could

Clients’ aggressive talk also presumed that

focus on solution talk. The group proceeded

the therapist was an expert to solve their drug

whether he would talk problem or stop talking

problem and they did not know how to quit

problem. Most clients stopped talking problem,

drug. Therapist not-knowing position changed

when therapist responded with the counter

their presumption, because the responses

paradox.

implied clients’ role as an expert speaker about

The

third

principle

wastominimizedrug use and therapist role as a listener about

aggressive talk, but reframed it (Figure 2).

the drug use (Anderson, & Goolishian, 1992).

Aggressive talk included client’s attack to

These implied role set decreased their challenge

therapist, therapy, and other group members.

to therapist’s authority, because authority of

Many group members tried to challenge

their problem was not therapist but clients.

therapist’s authority. For example, “Are you

Furthermore,

repeated-drug user? (Therapist says no). You

collaborative communication between clientscannot understand our problem.” “Talking in a

and a therapist.

these

role

sets

facilitatedprison is ineffective because drug use occurred
outside of the prison”. Therapist’s defense

Program Contents of Solution-Focused Groupagainst group member was the worst way to

Therapy for Repeated-Drug Users

solve

these

aggressive

talking.

Actually,

With collaborative structure and therapist’s

therapist’s defense was ineffective on treatment

manual, our program offered 12 sessions, all of(Miller et al., 1993).

which aimed to help achievement in clients’

The best way was “not-knowing position”.

concrete goal and to enhance their motivation

Not-knowing position was therapist’s learning

to change their current situation. Every session

attitudes to the clients’ problem (Anderson, &included individual feedback mails from

SOLUTION-FOCUSED GROUP THERAPY
Solution-Focused Group 35
Therapy 1

3. Life style when clients quit drug
4. Coping style when clients quit drug

2. Goal Setting

5. Social resources that help clients inachievement of their goal

9. Personal knowledge about safe and risky
situation
10. Ways to overcome risky situation

11. Ways to overcome relapse

6. Social resources that motivate clients to

1. Motivation
to changechange7. Benefit of change (Cost of status quo)
V.S. Benefits of status quo (cost of change)

8. Commitment to change V.S.
Commitment to the unchanged

12. Clients’ resolve and policy for future

Figure 3. Solution Focused Group Therapy program for repeated-drug users

YOKOTANI and TAMURA

36

therapist to them (Walters et al., 2000). The

experience to stop using drug was the mostmails focused on their personal solutions.

powerful

Figure 3 shows the schema of all sessions. The

explore clients’ experience in detail. The

cores of our program were clients' concrete

detailed description of their lifestyle revealed

goal

their

their concrete methods to detach themselves

motivation. Figure 3 shows that all sessions

from drug. The 4th session focused on theirwere linked either of the two cores. Still,

coping behavior. Emphasis was on what eachconcreteclients’client had already managed to cope with drug

motivation and vice versa (Kiser, Piercy, &using. The coping behavior should be derived

Lipchik, 1993), so all sessions linked with bothfrom each client’s experience. Therapist needed

goal setting and motivation practically. We

to keep not-knowing position. The 9th session

described achievement in clients’ goal first andasked exception when they did not use drug inenhancement of their motivation next.

spite of risky situation. Therapist needed tosettingandgoaldevelopment

settingofaffected

extract
Achievement in client’s goal

resources.

exception

Therapistfromneededeach

toindividual

experience. The 10th session focused on

Clients’ goal was defined by their ideal

client’s personal processing, so their exception

lifestyle after a few years of their release. The

was smaller than the exception on 9th session.

goal should neither be limited in drug use nor

The smaller their exception is, the more theyin their jail time. Drug use was regarded as a

could use easily (Hasegawa, 1997; Watzlawick

lifestyle problem (McLellan, Lewis, O'Brien, &et al., 1974). Hence, therapist collaborated with

Kleber, 2000), so their goal needed to be set

clients to find their smallest exception. The

within their daily activity in society. Their goal

11th session asked coping behaviors of relapse.

also need to be concrete, which could beThis session focused on client’s personalevaluated by them and therapist (De Shazer etexperience how they stopped relapse.

al., 1986). The 2nd session asked their ideal
goal after the release. The question covered aEnhancement of client’s motivation

wide variety of daily activities (Table 2). Their

Drug use was a lifestyle problem (McLellangoal was also utilized to scale their current

et al., 2000), so their motivation to change theirsituation (Table 2).

current lifestyle was the most important factors

Furthermore, achievement in concrete goals
requiredconcretemethods.

to prevent their drug abuse (e.g., Miller &Therefore,

Rollnick, 2002). To enhance their motivation,

following sessions facilitated them to find their

therapist needed to focus clients’ “solution talk”

concrete methods which they had already(Hoyt, & Berg, 2006), because their desire toutilized [Table 2] (Miller & de Shazer, 2000).

change could be socially and linguistically

For example, the 3rd session asked duration

constructed

while they did not use drug. Their accumulated

communication (Miller, & Shazer, 2000).

throughsolution-focused

SOLUTION-FOCUSED GROUP THERAPY

37

Table 2. Program Contents of Solution Focused Group Therapy for repeated-drug users
Session

Key questions

1

1-1.Tell me the reason why you join the group?
1-2.Tell me anything that you tried to stop drug?

2

2-1.After a few years from the release, how you like to be? (Living place, Friend,
Family, Job, Hobby, drug, other)
2-2.After a few days from the release, how you would be?(Living place, Friend,
Family, Job, Hobby, drug, other)
2-3.Make sure the differences of lifestyle between 2-1 and 2-2 and the things you liketo do.
2-4.Scale your situation between 1(the worst situation) to 10 (the best situation like
2-1).

3.

3-1.Tell me the longest duration while you stopped drug use.
3-2.How you carry out your daily life at that time(Living place, Friend, Family, Job,
Hobby, drug use, drug dealing, weekdays, weekends )?
3-3.How you carry out your daily life when you use drug (Living place, Friend, Family,
Job, Hobby, drug use, drug dealing, weekdays, weekends )?
3-4.Make sure the differences between 3-2 and 3-3 and the things you like to do.

44-1.Tell me the longest duration you stopped drug use.
4-2.Because drug affect your body, your body abruptly induces you to use drug. Tell me
the situation you are induced (scene, time, place, people, drug, antecedents).
4-3.How you managed to stop using drug, even though you were induced?

5

5-1.Tell me a person who you have contact via mail or meeting (exclude prisoners).
5-2.Tell me concrete helps from the person which facilitate the achievement of yourgoal.
5-3.Lets’ draft a letter to the person.

6

6-1.Tell me your very important person, with whom you have or had affectionate bonds.
6-2.How the person lead your life? Please explain concretely.
6-3.If you talked with the person about your drug use, how the person respond to you?
Please write down your imagined response from the person.

7

7-1.Tell me the benefits to use drug.
7-2.Tell me the costs to stop drug.
7-3.Tell me the costs to use drug.
7-4.Tell me the benefits to stop drug.
7-5.Let's discuss the pros and cons of the drug use (You are the cons).

38

YOKOTANI and TAMURA

8

8-1.Tell me your attitudes toward taking drug (e.g., I cannot stop taking drug).
8-2.Tell me the evidence that support your attitudes.
8-3.Tell me your attitude toward stopping drug (e.g., I like to see my grandchildren in“clean”).
8-4.Tell me the evidence that support your attitudes.
8-5.Let's discuss the pros and cons of the status quo (You are the cons).

9

9-1.Tell me the most frequent situation you use drug (Time place, person).
9-2.Although you were in the most frequent situation, you did not use drug. What’s thedifference? (Big differences, middle differences, small differences)
9-3.How you utilize these differences?

1010-1.Tell me the situation a long while ago you use drug.(time place, person, thought,
emotion, behavior, drug)
10-2.Tell me the situation a short while ago you use drug (time place, person, thought,
emotion, behavior, drug)
10-3.Tell me the situation an instantly short while ago you use drug (time place, person,
thought, emotion, behavior, drug)
10-4.Although you were in the most frequent situation, you did not use drug. What’s thedifference? (Big differences, middle differences, small differences)10-5.How you utilize these differences?

1111-1.When you had been released from the prison, how long days (months or hours) you
did not use drug?
11-2.Tell me your life style at that days. (Living place, Friend, Family, Job, Hobby, druguse, drug dealing, weekdays, weekends )11-3.After you used the first drug, how long days you did not use drug?
11-4.Tell me your life style at that days. (Living place, Friend, Family, Job, Hobby, druguse, drug dealing, weekdays, weekends )11-5.What are differences between 11-2 and 11-4.
11-6.How you utilize these differences.

1212-1.How will you carry your daily life after the release?
12-2.Tell me your effective methods to stop drug use. (Living place, Friend, Family,
Job, Hobby, drug use, drug dealing, weekdays, weekends, time place, person, thought,
emotion, behavior, drug)
12-3.Scale your current situation from the perspective of your ideal goal.

39

SOLUTION-FOCUSED GROUP THERAPY

Furthermore, their desire to change was morewith the member to take opponent role. The

powerful predictor of their actual change than

discussion

their reasoning of the change (e.g., Amrhein etattitudes: They wanted to stop the drug,al., 2003). Hence, therapists needed to validate

whereas they like to use drug (Miller &their emotion to facilitate their emotional

Rollnick, 2002). Furthermore, they could talk

expression, including desire. Following session

their solution (Hoyt & Berg, 2006). The 12th

mainly focused on validation of their emotion

session asked their plan to carry out their daily

and facilitation of their solution talk.

life and scale their current situation. Members

could

revealtheirambivalent

For example, the 1st session asked their

could project their own voice to stop drug use.

reasons why they join group therapy. The mostFacilitation of their voice was the mostimportant thing was validation of their reasons.

effective way to enhance their motivation

Any reasoning could be a signal of their(Amrhein et al., 2003).

emotion. Therapist’s validation of their emotion
facilitated clients’ emotional expression (Kiser,
Piercy,&Lipchik,

1993).

Furthermore,

Discussion
Our

program

was

based

on

systemic

personalization of their reason was also

therapies (Anderson & Goolishian, 1992;

important.

helpedHasegawa, 1997; Palazzoli, & Burt, 1990;

clients to notice their personal emotion. The 6th

Watzlawick, Bavelas, Jackson, & O'Hanlon,

session asked their social resources who

1967; Watzlawick, Weakland, & Fisch, 1974),

motivated them to quit drug. Especially, theirso the program could be described well fromsignificant other, such as grandmother andinterpersonal perspectives because systemic

children were very effective to express their

therapies

desire to quit drug use. Actually one offendercommunication. Still, the program might not be

said that “I cannot stop the drug for myself, but

described well from intrapersonal perspectives.

I can stop for my child”. The 7th session asked

In this section, we discussed the programs fromboth benefits and costs of their drug use. The

intrapersonal perspectives.

8th

session

Personalized

also

asked

reasoning

pessimisticemphasizedinterpersonalandoptimistic attitudes to their drug use. After

Clients’ perspective

summarized their answers, the therapist took a

From clients’ perspective, using drug wasrole of supporters to use drug, whereas grouppleasures of the moment. Clients did not thinkmembers took a role of opponents to use.

about future and past at the moment when theyGroup

opponent

used. They just sought present pleasure. In

perspective. Therapist facilitated their opponent

other words, their short-sighted decision could

talk from supporter’s perspective (Miller &foster their drug use. Still, their short-sighted

Rollnick, 2002). When some member took avisionrole of supporters, therapist needed to intervene

long-sighted vision through SFA. This ismembertalked

from

might

be

slightlychangedintoYOKOTANI and TAMURA

40

because SFA facilitated them to view theircounterattack to them, so the confrontation was

future and to notice their successful past

exhalation of therapist’s anger, rather thanexperience (de Shazer, 1986). This approachclients’ one. Hence, the confrontation might bemight help them to make decision not only

effective to therapist’s mental health, but notfrom present perspectives but also from futureclients’ mental health. Although previous

perspectives. When they think about drug use,studies suggested that collaborative relationshipthey could make decision based on their futurewith clients were key to treat them (Berg &plan. Most of them did not want to get into jail

Reuss, 1998; Miller & Rollnick, 2002), theagain and wanted to carry out their daily life

ways how to collaborate with them and how to

outsides of the jail. Hence, their long-sighted

manage their aggressive behaviors in groupvision could be an inhibitor to drug use.

wereMoreover, drug users did not take care about

notdescribed

discussed

well.

collaborative

Our

programstructuresandsignificant others at the moment when they

therapist’s manual to maximize their solution

used drug. They used drug only for themselves.

talk and to minimize their aggressive behaviors

In other words, their decision to use drug was

in group therapy. These structures and manual

made according to their egocentric thinking.

could promote effective group therapy andHowever, their egocentric thinking might beprotect therapist from drug users’ attack.

slightly changed into other person-oriented
thinking through our program. Our program

Limitations

helped them to explore their significant others.

Our study focused on male drug users. Hence,

Most of them did not use drug in appearance ofour program might not apply directly to female

their children and parents. The significant otherdrug users. This is because female drug users

could be deterrent to use drug. Those who

often had specific family roles, such as childalways think about their family might use drugcare (Marsh & Miller, 1985). Programs forless than those who did not.

female drug users needed several sessions
about

Therapist perspective
Repeated-drugcurrent

familyrelationships.

Furthermore, our program cannot apply to drug
aggressive

dealers directly. Because drug dealers make

(McCormick, & Smith, 1995; Robins, 1998)

money through drug, they would lose job if

and ambivalent (Miller & Rollnick, 2002), sothey had stopped drug (Curtis & Wendel, 2000).

therapist felt difficulty to collaborate with them.

Their working styles and environments needed

Especiallyto be considered in future programs.

when

users

their

they

were

attacked

therapist

verbally or they relapsed to use drug, therapist
felt anger and distress. The simple expression

Conclusionof these feeling was confrontation with clients.

Despite these limitations, we developed a

Therapist’s confrontation was a kind ofsolution-focused group therapy program, which

41

SOLUTION-FOCUSED GROUP THERAPY

was currently applied in a Japanese prison.

process: The role of gaze. Journal ofTreatment

Communication, 52(3), 566-580.

effects

of

SFA

was

reportedclinically (De Shazer, 1984; De Shazer et al.,Berg, I. K., & Reuss, N. H. (1998). Solutions

1986), but not empirically (Gingerich &step by step: A substance abuse treatment

Eisengart, 2000). Empirical examination ofmanual. New York and London: WW

SFA was necessary to be utilized as a primary

Norton.

treatment modality in broad areas. Detailed

Brent, D. A. (1995). Risk factors for adolescentdescription of our treatment program could help

suicide and suicidal behavior: mental andto examine the effects of SFA in broad areas.

substance

Empirical

offer

environmental factors, and life stress.

effective treatment for repeated-drug users in

Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior,broad areas and downsize the number of drug25(s1), 52-63.

evidence

of

SFA

could

use in society.

abusedisorders,familyCurtis, R., & Wendel, T. (2000). Toward thedevelopment of a typology of illegal drug

Acknowledgement

markets. Crime prevention studies, 11,

The present study was supported by The
NikkosoFoundation

for

Safe

Society(SZ2014A).

121-152.
De Shazer, S. (1984). The death of resistance.
Family Process, 23(1), 11-17.
De Shazer, S., Berg, I. K., Lipchik, E.,

References

Nunnally, E., Molnar, A., Gingerich, W., &Amrhein, P. C., Miller, W. R., Yahne, C. E.,

WeinerDavis, M. (1986). Brief therapy:

Palmer, M., & Fulcher, L. (2003). Client

Focusedcommitment language during motivational

process, 25(2), 207-221.

interviewing predicts drug use outcomes.
Journalofconsulting

andclinical

psychology, 71(5), 862-878.

solutiondevelopment. Family

Gingerich, W. J., & Eisengart, S. (2000).
Solution  Focused Brief Therapy: A
Review of the Outcome Research. Family

Anderson, H., & Goolishian, H. (1992). The

process, 39(4), 477-498.

not-knowing

Hasegawa, K (1997  Kazokunai Paradox:

approach to therapy. Therapy as social

Gyakusetsu to Koseishugi. [Paradox withinconstruction, 25-39.

family:clientistheexpert:A

Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L., & Johnson, T. (2000).
Listeners

asco-narrators.

Journalparadoxandconstructionism].

Saiko shobo.

of

Hoyt, M. F., & Berg, I. K. (2006). Case studies

personality and social psychology, 79(6),in couple and family therapy. In M. F. Hoyt

941-952.

(Ed.), The  handbook  of  constructive

Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L., & Johnson, T. (2002).
Listener

responses

asacollaborative

therapies:  innovative  approaches  from
leading practitioners.

YOKOTANI and TAMURA

42

Kilpatrick, D. G., Ruggiero, K. J., Acierno, R.,

McLellan, A. T., Lewis, D. C., O'Brien, C. P.,

Saunders, B. E., Resnick, H. S., & Best, C.

& Kleber, H. D. (2000). Drug dependence,

L. (2003). Violence and risk of PTSD,

a chronic medical illness. JAMA: themajorjournaldepression,

substance

abuse/dependence, and comorbidity: resultsfrom the National Survey of Adolescents.
Journalofconsulting

andclinical

psychology, 71(4), 692-700.

integration

solution-focused
MaritalandtheAmerican

Medical

Association, 284(13), 1689-1695.
Miller, G., & Shazer, S. (2000). Emotions insolution  focused

therapy:Are 

examination. Family process, 39(1), 5-23.

Kiser, D. J., Piercy, F. P., & Lipchik, E. (1993).
TheofMiller, W. R., Benefield, R. G., & Tonigan, J.

ofemotionin

S.(1993). Enhancing motivation for change

therapy.

Journalofin

FamilyTherapy,19(3),

233-242.

problem

drinking:A

controlled

comparison of two therapist styles. Journalof Consulting and Clinical Psychology,

Lewis, T. F., & Osborn, C. J. (2004).
Solution  focusedcounselingand61(3), 455-461.
Miller,

W.

R.,

&

Rollnick,S.

motivational interviewing: A consideration

Motivationalof confluence. Journal of Counseling &people for change . Guilford press.

Development, 82(1), 38-48.

Contemporary

therapy
FamilyPreparing

Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare,

Lindforss, L., & Magnusson, D. (1997).
Solution-focusedinterviewing:(2002).

Pharmaceutical and Food Safety Bureau,inprison.

Compliance and Narcotics Division. (2010)

Therapy,19(1),

Yakubutsuranyo no genjyo to taisaku

89-103.

[Current situation and measure of drug

Mahrer, A. R., Gagnon, R., Fairweather, D. R.,

abuse]

Boulet, D. B., & Herring, C. B. (1994).

http://www.mhlw.go.jp/bunya/iyakuhin/yak

Client commitment and resolve to carry out

ubuturanyou/dl/pamphlet_04.pdf

postsession

behaviors.

Journalof

Palazzoli, M. S., & Burt, E. V. (Eds.). (1990).

Counseling Psychology, 41(3), 407--414.

Paradox and counterparadox: A new model

Marsh, J. C., & Miller, N. A. (1985). Female

in the therapy of the family in schizophrenicclients

inSubstance

substance

abuse

treatment.

Use

Misuse,20(6-7),&995-1019.

transaction. Rowman & Littlefield.
Robins, L. N. (1998). The intimate connection
betweenantisocial

personality

and

McCormick, R. A., & Smith, M. (1995).

substance abuse. Social Psychiatry andAggression and hostility in substance

Psychiatric Epidemiology, 33(8), 393-399.

abusers: The relationship to abuse patterns,

Rubak, S., Sandbæk, A., Lauritzen, T., &coping style, and relapse triggers. Addictive

Christensen,

B.

(2005).

Motivational

behaviors, 20(5), 555-562.

interviewing: a systematic review and43

SOLUTION-FOCUSED GROUP THERAPY

meta-analysis.

The

Britishjournalofgeneral practice, 55(513), 305-312.

students: A controlled trial of two brief
interventions. Journal of Drug Education,

Smock, S. A., Trepper, T. S., Wetchler, J. L.,

30(3), 361-372.

McCollum, E. E., Ray, R., & Pierce, K.

Watzlawick, P., Bavelas, J. B., Jackson, D. D.,(2008). SolutionFocused Group Therapy& O'Hanlon, B. (1967). Pragmatics offor Level 1 Substance Abusers. Journal ofhumanmarital and family therapy, 34(1), 107-120.

interactional patterns, pathologies, andStotts, A. L., Schmitz, J. M., Rhoades, H. M.,

paradoxes (Vol. 13). New York: Norton.

& Grabowski, J. (2001). Motivational
interviewing

withpatients:

pilot

A

cocaine-dependent
study.

JournalofConsulting and Clinical Psychology, 69(5),858-862.
Walters, S. T., Bennett, M. E., & Miller, J. H.
(2000). Reducing alcohol use in college

communication:

A

study

of

Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J. H., & Fisch, R.
(1974). Change: Principles of problem
formation and problem resolution. WW
Norton.
White, M., & Epston, D. (1990). Narrativemeans to therapeutic ends. WW Norton &Company.

CALL FOR PAPERS
Publish your paper with us in theInternational Journal of Brief
Therapy and Family Science
The International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science (IJBF) is the official English
language journal of the National Foundation of Brief Therapy, national research institute of brief
therapy and family science in Japan.
Focusing on the clinical practices as well as research and theory, the journal provides an important
forum for practitioners and researchers in brief therapy, family therapy, and family science.
Each issue of IJBF offers broad-based, original researches and experiments, case studies, reviews,
and brief case reports. We especially look forward to brief case reports from clinical practitioners.
The International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science welcomes submissions bypsychologists, teachers, and other related professionals from all over the world.
Submit manuscripts	
  (electronically only — Microsoft Word)
Authors should refer to previously-published issues of the journal for writing format.
Editorial correspondence to: Dr. Koubun Wakashima, Editor-in-chief
International Journal of Brief Therapy and Family Science
Tohoku University, Graduate School of Education 27-1 Kawauchi,
Aoba-ku, Sendai-city 980-8576, Japan.
E-mail: ijbf@nfbt.org
英 文 で の 投 稿 に サ ポ ー ト が 必 要 な 日 本 の 研 究 者 ， 実 践 者 の 方 へ 	 	 英文執筆にサポートが必要な日本の研究者，実践者は，編集委員会にご相談のうえ，和文にて論文を投稿ください。また，英文で執筆される日本の研究者，実践者は，日本語で執筆した原稿も併せて投稿ください。	
 -EDITORIAL BOARDPresident: HASEGAWA, Keizo
Editor-in-chief: WAKASHIMA, Koubun
Editors: L’ABATE, Luciano, SATO, Kohei, SCHLANGER, Karin., SLUZKI, Carlos., and TANG, Yung Lung.
Consulting editor: DECI, Edward
Translation supporting staff: USAMI, Takaaki

44