Community-Based Group Therapy for Troubled Youth: A Review

Introduction

Literature has shown group psychotherapy to be an effective way of improving the mental health outcomes of multiple populations, including adolescents and young children. Today, community-based psychotherapy groups are among the most common platforms for dealing with troubled youth, helping them avert the risk of falling into delinquency, substance abuse, and other antisocial tendencies. I participated in one such group in my local community. The group served as both an intervention and a preventive measure to help local youth lead responsible lives, free of delinquency and antisocial tendencies.

The subsequent sections evaluate the effectiveness of this program based on my experience as a participant. The paper provides insight for therapists seeking to design community-based groups for young people, outlining best practices as well as areas for improvement in designing effective group programs for troubled youth in the community.

Group Composition

The group comprised 12 members — all self-referred — aged between 15 and 18, from low- to middle-income families. Of the 12 members, four were Black, three were White, and the remainder were of Chinese, Japanese, Indonesian, and Russian backgrounds. The rich cultural diversity was one of the group's strongest aspects. Personally, I felt that it exposed participants to a broader array of views and perspectives, and presented ample opportunities to learn about other cultures and cultural values. This knowledge helped participants test the validity of common stereotypes and provided a valuable basis for understanding why people behave as they do (Corey, Corey, & Corey, 2010).

The group essentially served as a support framework, assisting families with the task of raising young people who may be at risk for antisocial tendencies owing to social and environmental factors. Participants engaged one another on issues including diversity, gangs, drug and substance use, and dating. The sessions were geared primarily toward instilling positive behaviors, improving interpersonal communication skills, building pride and self-esteem, promoting dialogue, and establishing a sense of belonging.

Group Organization and Activities

The group met twice a week — on Thursday and Saturday afternoons — and sessions ran between two and two-and-a-half hours, over six consecutive weeks. The setting was a formerly abandoned room in a quiet area of town, which had originally served as the local gym. Members had to do some cleaning to make the space suitable before therapeutic sessions could begin, reflecting how uncommon such groups were in the area at the time. The group facilitator made several adjustments to the room, including bringing in a temporary writing board, to make it appropriate for the group's activities. While the setting served the group's purpose effectively, it would not have been adequate for other populations — for example, young children who have experienced abuse, or teens dealing with anger-management issues — for whom additional equipment such as therapeutic toys and punching bags would be needed.

Through its motto, "There's Always a Better Alternative to Hood Life," the group strived to make participants more responsible and productive members of their families, schools, and communities. The facilitator was diligent in ensuring the group adhered to its timeline and met consistently. Provisions were made to compensate for sessions missed when participants were on weekend vacations with their families, which went a long way toward instilling the concept of self-discipline — a fundamental aspect of both productivity and civic responsibility.

Group members collectively agreed on the rules and norms that would govern operations throughout the program. The guiding principle was to always treat others as you would wish to be treated. Participants were expected to abide by this and other agreed principles in the interest of safety, cohesion, and effective group functioning. This helped instill in participants the concept of living by institutional norms, whether in the family or organizational setting. Sessions primarily involved open discussions, outdoor activities, role-playing, viewing of videotaped material, and open forums featuring guest speakers — including local community leaders, business owners, and politicians — who served as positive role models.

Among the activities I found most beneficial were the following:

Open Discussions: Today's youth face multiple social and environmental risk factors for delinquent behavior. The situation is compounded by changing family dynamics, which have increased the role of women in the workplace and made the traditional stay-at-home parent model less common (Yalom & Leszcz, 2008). With both parents working outside the home, young people have fewer outlets for expressing their concerns. I found that forums such as these are highly beneficial, allowing participants the opportunity to openly discuss issues around fashion, music, gangs, careers, family relations, sexuality, drug use, and dating in the company of a willing and attentive listener. Open discussion also allows participants to identify with peers who share the same problems and concerns, enabling them to develop a sense of identity.

Outings and Community Activities: Hikes, community clean-up activities, and outdoor trips were an integral part of group life. Outdoor activities allow young people to recognize and act on their opportunities. They make real to participants the idea that there are numerous constructive activities available in their environment that can benefit both themselves and their community. It became apparent within the group that a primary reason young people engage in self-destructive activities is the absence of positive and constructive platforms for channeling their energy.

Interactions with Community Role Models: Young people need role models they can look up to and identify with. The group provided role models to assist with topics such as career choices, dating, self-esteem, and drug and substance abuse, serving as a source of motivation and affirmation for participants. A particularly memorable milestone was when the group marched alongside political figures in the neighborhood in protest of local violence and criminal activity.

Conclusion

Group psychotherapy is increasingly recognized as an effective alternative to individual therapy. Community-based groups for troubled youth have become more common across community settings, and generally serve to equip young people with the knowledge and skills needed to move away from delinquent behavior and antisocial tendencies, and to become productive and responsible members of their families and communities. Literature supports the effectiveness of such groups, particularly when they make thoughtful use of secondary stakeholders — including local politicians and business leaders — as positive role models.

Overall, however, effectiveness could be enhanced by keeping group sizes small and by incorporating a greater number of real-life examples and case scenarios to demonstrate the practical value of skills learned in the program. These considerations should inform the design of future community-based group interventions for at-risk youth.

References

Corey, M., Corey, G., & Corey, C. (2010). Groups: Process and Practice (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Yalom, I. D., & Leszcz, M. (2008). The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy (5th ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.