When dealing with couples there are multiple ways to approach issues. Two of them are the conjoint and the concurrent therapies. Each of these can be applied in a sex therapy situation, and each offers its own unique approach. Though the outcomes tend to be the same, getting there will depend on the needs of the clients. This paper will compare, contrast, and describe these therapeutic approaches and the theories upon which they are founded, and provide a situation in which they would each most be appropriate.
Conjoint therapy is commonly used in family therapy. The concept underlying this approach is that it joins the two partners (the husband and wife in most instances) under a single therapeutic plan. Essentially, conjoint therapy can be used for a range of issues that impact partners in a relationship. For instance, Zitzman and Butler (2005) show that it can be used to marital therapy to address sex addiction where the husband is addicted to Internet pornography: together, the husband and wife receive the therapy and counseling needed to ensure that the partnership is able to overcome this issue and deal with it effectively and positively.

Concurrent therapy is where two or more individuals are being treated for the same issue that is affecting them but they are seen individually instead of at the same time (Nichols, 2010). This therapeutic approach is helpful in isolating the individual issues of the individual family members or relationship partners and addressing them one-on-one instead of all together in unison with the other family members or partner. It offers a more personalize approach to therapy whereas conjoint therapy offers a more communal approach.

Thus, the main difference between conjoint therapy and concurrent therapy is that in the former the two clients share the same session and receive the therapeutic intervention together at the same time. In the latter, the two are seen separately and receive the therapeutic intervention individually, one-on-one with the therapist. Conjoint is communal whereas concurrent is individual (but every member of the family or relationship is receiving the same therapy—just not at the same session). For some patients, the conjoint approach will be preferred; for others, the concurrent approach will be preferred. Conjoint therapy focuses on relationships and supportiveness. Concurrent therapy focuses on individual needs.

Hefner and Prochaska (1984) have shown that there is no significant difference in terms of outcomes when using either conjoint or concurrent therapy in marital counseling. They studied...…is not as common and it is less of an imperative for them to do concurrent before conjoint.

A situation in which there is no communication barrier between a husband and wife that is leading to hurt feelings and isolation would best be served by the conjoint approach. The two would be open to communicating together and working on their relationship together. The problem could be something like an affair or negative feelings about sexual intimacy. A situation in which there are communication barriers between partners that prevent them from being open towards one another and receiving criticism without fear is one in which concurrent therapy would be best applied. This would allow issues to be addressed individually so that there are no blow-ups due to the stress of the other partner being present and voicing dissatisfaction.

In conclusion, therapy for individuals or partners is available through the concurrent or conjoint approaches. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages and has to be discerned by looking at the clients and assessing their needs. Sometimes the best solution is to apply both, first concurrent and then conjoint to ensure that all aspects of the situation—the individual and the relational—have been addressed.