Running head: FAMILY THERAPY IN AN ECO-SUSTAINABLE AGE
1
Panel Presentation: It’s not easy becoming green: Student-therapist perceptions of family therapy
in an eco-sustainable age
Haley McCormick, Christina Vier, and Allison Block
Loyola Marymount University
Psychology and Sustainability
FAMILY THERAPY IN AN ECO-SUSTAINABLE AGE
2
Summary of:
Blumer, M. C., Hertlein, K. M., & Fife, S. T. (2012). It’s not easy becoming green: Studenttherapist perceptions of family therapy in an eco-sustainable age. Contemporary Family
Therapy: An International Journal, 34(1), 72-88.
Within this study, researchers wanted to look at the family environment and family
therapy in regards to ecologically based therapy. There are many outdoor-based therapy tactics
used to reduce depression and other mental health issues. To help bring awareness to families
about how to reduce theses issues in their lives, focusing their belief systems to be one of
sustainability would allow M/CFT’s to have a ecologically based therapy system. M/CFT’s are
said to help families achieve their maximum potential therefore this study conducted used
M/CFT trainees to address sustainability practices with their clients. This qualitative study was
done using 11 first year masters-level students (10 female and 1 male) and 14 graduate students
of other disciplines that were enrolled in a “Family Systems Theory” course at the southwestern
metropolitan university (Blumer, Hertlein, and Fife, 2012). The students were asked to read an
article by Laszloffy (2009) and write a reaction to it. This article talked about the systemic levels
that M/CFT’s pay attention to and that the families would be a part of. It talks about the
chronosystemic level of systems in the context of bioecological theory. Students were then asked
to be recorded in class about their discussion of the bioecological context levels. Each student
was then asked to form concentric circles representing the bioecological levels. After completing
this, students were asked to answer questions regarding how going “green” is affecting families
and what the role of M/CFT’s are in this movement. The studies definition of sustainability is
one that enhances the human and natural resources needed by future generations to have a
quality of life that is better or equal to the current lifestyle (Blumer, Hertlein, and Fife, 2012).
According to the study, the planets well being and sustainability can help that families and
individuals way of life and perspectives. The researchers gathered the data from the discussion
posts and the verbal discussion and coded them, looking for common phrases and themes
associated with the phrasing. Data triangulation and peer examination were done to ensure
credibility. Different researchers and authors looked at the coding and reviewed the themes and
began the thematic coding.
There were four descriptive themes: ecosystemic connectedness, therapeutic fit, practical
considerations and application in treatment, and barriers to eco-informed therapy. These themes
were the main highlights of the participant’s views. Regarding ecosystemic connectedness, the
participants expressed awareness of being connected to the environment – being connected to the
earth and that we need to be sustainable. They also expressed that recognition of virtues and
benefit is important to sustainability. One participant noted, ‘‘[it is important for us to be] more
connected, spend more time outside within the environment, maybe that can be an instinctual
experience...[and can help us know] the right thing to do’’ (Blumer, Hertlein, and Fife, 2012).
They also mentioned the problem with loss/ absence of virtue. “When families do not take the
time to go out, take a walk, or go hike, calm down, you know...connect to each other...all they do
is just think of the problems.’’ Another stated: ‘‘...as our lifestyles...are...based on what’s
convenient, it has come with compromises to our family life...all this builds up, not only with
waste products and things that are bad for the environment...it also starts to break apart the
family’’(Blumer, Hertlein, and Fife, 2012). Therapeutic fit with clinicians and clients is all about
whether or not he or she is able to allow eco-friendly practices to resonate and match a person’s
values. The participants focused on the idea that some people have more of an environmental
FAMILY THERAPY IN AN ECO-SUSTAINABLE AGE
3
connection than others. The goal of the therapist would be to integrate sustainable ideas into the
client in a way that would match up with the client’s values.
Participants in this study were unsure about how this new treatment would be used in
practice. They were also concerned with how effective this new treatment would be. An
argument was that not everyone is connected to nature enough to want to implement a change
when it is brought up in therapy. The participants were also concerned about when the therapist
would bring it up, how, if it would need to be suggestive, and how third parties would feel about
the practice. This once again came tied down to connecting it to a person’s values.
Many participants brought up different point to consider in this form of therapy. The
therapist could help point out to families that just because they do not see the horrors of our
world collapsing does not mean that it does not exist and that as a family they can make them
work together at the systemic level as a family and become more in touch with nature. They also
pointed out that families need to work together as a whole to help be sustainable, not just
individually. For example, seeing how much water they could save every month, or how much
they could recycle. Participants, in general, pointed out the many benefits that this ecoinformation would have on families and their future generations. It makes a much bigger
difference to say that it is impacting one’s own kin, rather then people they do not know. Getting
people to work together ties them to the larger system that we are all a part of. It is crucial to
inform families together of implications we are all dealing with and that everyone needs to work
together as one.
The presence of barriers was discussed between the participants. These barriers were
biophobia, disinterest or non-recognition of ecological sustainability, the politicization of
conversations around ecological sustainability, uncertainty of clinical application, and ambiguity.
Biophobia was a major barrier discussed meaning the fear of nature or the repulsion or it ending
up with alienation from nature (Blumer, Hertlein, and Fife, 2012). The second barrier of
disinterest showed that many of the participants thought that the clinicians could go overboard
being green if the clients did not understand the purpose of sustainability. The third barrier
relating to politicization of ecological sustainability recognized that going green may take a
negative spin due to the notion that some families could have been laid off by non-eco-friendly
businesses due to the new eco friendly business coming about. This could leave that family with
a negative feeling towards the politics of the lay offs and the business having to do budget cuts,
therefore going “green” is looked at as a bad thing. Most participants shared their common
feeling that connecting to the families, as clients with regards to becoming more sustainably will
be a hard battle. The society today is very dependent on technology and the clinical application
of presenting this as a problem might have an adverse reaction because families probably wont
come in specifically because they feel as if they are not helping their environment enough
(Blumer, Hertlein, and Fife, 2012). The way the participants connected eco-based therapy and
families is to have the families do something together as a unit that will also help the
environment such as trash pick up or find a quiet place in nature to heal together.
The ending discussion ended with the participants believing that if this type of therapy
fits with you, then it works yet if the therapist looks as if they are imposing their beliefs on others,
then the therapy doesn’t seem right. Some ambiguity between participants about what it means to
go green and be sustainable was shown. Ambiguity was shown and complicated by the fact that
some families might show little to no incentive to participate in this ecologically based practice
or that there was a lack of action between the family. It was agreed that there needed to be a
bigger system to educate the families and individuals about what it means to be sustainable and
FAMILY THERAPY IN AN ECO-SUSTAINABLE AGE
4
green. People aren’t properly educated therefore they wont understand why this pertains to them
or how they can help without feeling the ambiguity or the lack of incentive.
First, This M/CFT practice is not well represented in all M/CFT. Secondly, this is a
degree program and it is hard to incorporate eco-informed therapy practices because the students
are focused on learning material to pass the licensing exam, come the end of their terms. Third,
the phenomenon “going green” is ambiguous and can be interpreted in different ways to different
people. Students were also unclear on how to implement these eco-friendly behaviors into
practice.
Some people argue that with the growing need for other clinical issues there is not
enough time to learn this new approach to eco-practice in therapy. One concept would be to have
certain family members certain tasks to all work together in sustainability. A second concept
would be to have the therapist input their own views on sustainability and possibly have the
client adopt the same views. (Even though in the past therapists have been advised to steer away
from adding their own viewpoints to the client) This approach may help with the “value theme”
stated earlier. Within this topic families need to discuss their own views and work together to
take actions (i.e. recycling in the household).
“Given what we learned from our participants, we offer several thoughts on how to
integrate eco-informed practices in one’s work with clients. The first is that the therapist assesses
how the family’s environment at the larger levels like the macro or chronosystemic levels contributes to the family functioning—in other words the mesosytemic affect between the external
levels and macrosystemic levels. This is merely an extension of what a family therapist naturally
does—namely identifying how other levels in the client system are contributing to or
maintaining the problem. Next, the therapist has to be diligent in helping the family connect to
the environment with their family dynamics and processes. This might include facilitating a
discussion among family members about what it means to go green. It could also include
processing with the family what ways they are able to connect with the external levels in order to
improve their overall health and well-being. For example, exposure to nature and exercise in a
natural environment results in improved mood for men, as well as improved self-esteem in both
women and men” (Blumer, Hertlein, and Fife, 2012).
Families also need to look at themselves individually and see how being connected to
nature helps overall well-being, psychological health, emotional health, and mindfulness. The
therapist can plant ideas into the family members and have them come to realize the benefits.
This may have them come together to work on their sustainability actions. This will help the
environment and strengthen the connections of the family members together.
They should hike together, carpool, take walks together, recycle…etc (Blumer, Hertlein, and Fife,
2012).
Genogram or green-o-gram is another tactic used. This allows the therapists and clients to
look at their own patterns over the generations and lets them develop a better awareness of the
behaviors in regards to being sustainable. (They are looking at the family behaviors and their
own individual behaviors) The therapist may ask questions like:
“Do you have friends or other family that are involved in conservation or sustainability efforts?
How do you feel about it? Does it influence you in any way? Describe how”, “Would you
characterize your family-of-origin as consumers or frugal? What about yourself?”,” What is
your definition of ecological sustainability? Has it influenced you now or in the past? Why or
why not?” (Blumer, Hertlein, and Fife, 2012). This increase of cohesion between family
members does help with sustainability efforts and helping one another do it. Families should
FAMILY THERAPY IN AN ECO-SUSTAINABLE AGE
5
work on a service project together (planting a tree/ garden, picking up trash); they can take a
carbon footprint quiz as a family, and find other ways to help be sustainable as a cohesive group.
M/CFT have more control than they believe in helping families become more eco-aware.
These families must come together to balance their current happiness (way of life) and the future
happiness and well being of their families in the future. The goal is to make the future way of
living as good or better than it is now. With the help of new approaches in M/CFT we may be
able to make more people aware of sustainability
Outline and Test Questions
1. Introduction:
• Exponential rise in world human population serves as impetus for heightened interest in
incorporating eco-informed language into everyday therapy practices concerning the
individual and the family
◦ American Psychological Association (APA) Task Force on the Interface between
Psychology and Global Climate Change -Established to: report on interface
between psychology and global climate change; generate recommendations for
research; outline policy recommendations
◦ Identification of six individually based psychological barriers to addressing
climate change: 1. Uncertainty regarding evidence of climate change 2. Mistrust
of those vocalizing climate change 3. Denial of a climate problem 4.
Undervaluing environmental risks 5. Lack of control over complexity 6.
Counterproductive habits
◦ M/CFT theory and ecological theory share related concepts including circularity
and reciprocity
▪ Little public discussion of incorporating both ideologies perhaps due to
highly politicized nature of topic
2. Method:
 Participants: 25 graduate students enrolled in “Family Systems Theory” course
 Data collection: Gathering of student question and answer responses to article on
extended environmental systems
o Lecture activity arranged students in groups of concentric circles with each circle
representing one of Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological contextual levels
 Students asked to respond to questions about the “go green movement” and their impetus
to introduce these ideas into their future practice
 Data analysis: Researchers coded common themes discussed by the students and included
them in a Microsoft Excel document
3. Findings: four overarching descriptive themes of participants:
 Ecosystemic connectedness: participants overall shared awareness of being connected to
the environment; second, participants identified extent to which sense of ecosystemic
connectedness in regards to values and personal morals served an importance
 Therapeutic fit: Concerns regarding the integration of client therapy with the personal
values of the therapist versus that of the family unit
o Students failed to reach a consensus
FAMILY THERAPY IN AN ECO-SUSTAINABLE AGE

6
Practical considerations: Students expressed general uncertainty about practical
application of eco-informed ideas into their future practice
o Mixed emotions ranging from anxiety to excitement regarding the appropriateness
of eco-informed practice implementation
 Application to treatment:
o Presence of barriers to practice of eco-informed therapy including: biophobia,
disinterest of ecological sustainability, politics, uncertainty of importance in lives
of family and their well-being
4. Discussion:
 Implications for training:
o Ecology not well-represented in M/CFT practice
o Many degrees focus on curriculum relevant to licensing exam which does not
necessarily involve ecological practices
 Definition of going green ambiguous
 Implications for practice:
o Therapist assessment of environment on the larger scale overlaps with the internal
functioning of the family unit
o Focus on the interconnection between the micro and macro structures of the
environment
o Therapist diligent in providing opportunities for families to connect with
environment
o Therapist promotion of family activities in nature
Test Questions
1. In correlation to the theory of bio-ecological contextual levels postulated by Brofenbrenner
(1986), to which level would the family as a unit belong?
A. Exosystemic
B. Microsystemic
C. Mini-microsystemic
D. Macrosystemic
2. Eco-psychology courses are already included as part of the standard curriculum for most
M/CFT graduate programs. T/F
3. A green-o-gram is another tactic that therapists use to have clients look at their own
patterns over the generation and lets them develop a better awareness of their behaviors
in regards to being sustainable. T/F
4. Which one of these is NOT a barrier presented in the article?
A. Political controversy
B. Ambiguity
C. Biophobia
D. Access to nature
FAMILY THERAPY IN AN ECO-SUSTAINABLE AGE
7
5. The participants in this study were unsure about how this treatment would be used
within practices. T/F
6. What type of study was this?
A. Quantitatve
B. Qualitative
C. Experimental
D. Non-experimental
Answers:
1. B
2. F
3. T
4. D
5. T
6. B
Critical Review
Agreement:
 Nature has a very therapeutic benefits therefore implementing nature into therapy
programs could help families. The study talked about how being in nature and just
walking together as a family can create a connection to nature and to the family.
 Having more of a ecologically sustainable outlook could carry over into having a more
sustainable family unit. By adopting the sustainable outlook individually, it allows the
family to understand and adopt the outlook as well. By doing so, the family can become
connected through being sustainable.
 The study is awareness of the biases that the therapist could impose regarding the ecovalues. We thought it was interesting how they incorporated this notion into the study
because this could be a problem when clinicians try to inform clients of how they should
change their actions.
Disagreement:
 The study observed and only coded the most popular phrases from the participants. We
didn’t agree that they only selected the most popular and disregarded the others. We
believe that every theme could be a potential possibility to help inform families of these
practices.
 Eco-based therapy wasn’t correlated enough into how specific family problems would be
addressed. Families specifically go into therapy for serious issues and not specifically
because they aren’t being sustainable enough. We didn’t believe that the researchers
addressed this problem enough.
 Based on opinions of “going green”, there were no specific ways the researchers gave of
how they would actually implement this