Hi Renee,
I didn't see any feedback on your handouts. What do the clients in the group think of them? We have run a few FAP based depression groups and pain groups, but we generally didn't use extensive handout material. When we did, there seemed to be a strong inverse relationship between the length of the handout and the use clients made of it. For our clientele, the CRB lists would be to long to have much influence. I am curious about the use clients make in-session of the way CRB's are formulated in your lists. Do they adopt the proposed language or do they use their own vernacular?
Luc
Renee Hoekstra <pharlap14@...> escreveu:
Renee Hoekstra <pharlap14@...> escreveu:
Hi fellow FAP people,
I am working on a project for a FAP group
(interpersonal process group according to FAP). This
is my research project/ treatment development for my
post-doc. We are planning to implement the group for
our Stage 2 and 3 DBT clients sometime after the New
Year.
I have developed a few things to structure and format
the group, and am open to feedback if people want to
look them over. For the purposes of this study, I will
not be the individual therapist for the majority of
the clients, and I will not have the opportunity for
case conceptualization prior to the group beginning.
Thus, my interest is mainly the application of FAP for
groups.
CRB1 List- This is a list of descriptions of behaviors
that occur in groups that may be targeted for the
treatment. My goal was just to generate descriptions
of what people do and to possibly share it with
clients as a way to put words on CRB1's in a
non-judgemental way. This list includes things that
can happen in groups that don't necessarily happen in
individual therapy. Goal is to get clients to do this
with themselves and other so that they can increase
competency and accuracy in a non-pejorative way about
what they see occurring in front of them.
CRB2 Working Group- I was recently challenged (thanks,
Christeine) to come up with a CRB2 list. What happened
is this brainstorm of thinking about what a working
group looks like- one in which CRB1's occur
considerably less. This may be at some point a
measure, which also may be part of my research study-
in any case, see what you think. I looked at the FIAT
and thought about putting it into assessment
categories, but the one difference is that I was
aiming to just get a description rather than function.
Session by Session Doc: These are handouts for clients
that I am thinking of using to implement/ orient how
this group is going to work.
Handout A: Screening questionnaire for group members
Handout B: CRB1 List (Introduction to CRB's)
Handout C: Group goals
Handouts 1-3: Session by session format for first
three groups
Handout 4: Observe the impact of your behavior on
other group members, and observe the impact of their
behaviors on you.
Handout 5: Group Process Question List
Handouts 6: (DBT list of emotion words)-this is not
actually included, but the idea is to put all the DBT
emotion words on one piece of paper in order to get
client's to validate self and other- taking emotional
"guesses" of what group members are feeling.
I hope this is clear. I actually have an IRB proposal
in the process and am still working on a few pre/post
measures. I am having a hard time hunting down
measures of group cohesion/ group alliance, (and Irvin
Yalom has not been helpful), if anyone has suggestions
on how to get them...that would be nice.
Abra sua conta no Yahoo! Mail, o único sem limite de espaço para armazenamento!