Skip to main content
Case Study Graduate 2,872 words

Structural and Transgenerational Family Therapy Treatment Plan

~15 min read
Abstract

This paper presents a clinical case study and treatment plan for a family experiencing multiple psychosocial stressors, including grief, mental health challenges, and interpersonal conflict. Using a DSM-IV-TR multiaxial diagnostic framework, the paper identifies major depressive disorder, social phobia, and paranoid personality disorder in the primary client. The treatment plan employs the Family Sense of Coherence (FSOC) and Family Adaptation Scales (FAS) to assess family functioning. Structural Family Therapy is selected as the primary intervention model, with Transgenerational Family Therapy incorporated as a complementary approach. Key therapeutic strategies—including joining techniques, reframing, genogram use, and differentiation of self—are outlined alongside cultural competency considerations and grief-focused objectives.

Key Takeaways
  • Diagnostic Statement and DSM-IV-TR Multiaxial Assessment: Client profile and five-axis DSM diagnosis
  • Treatment Assessment Tools: FSOC and FAS: Family coherence and adaptation measurement instruments
  • Structural Family Therapy Model: Theoretical foundations of structural family therapy
  • Goals and Objectives of the Treatment Plan: Grief, self-image, and employment-related treatment goals
  • Therapeutic Interventions and Strategies: Joining, reframing, genogram, and multicultural strategies
  • Summary and Conclusion: Rationale for combined therapy model selection
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples

What makes this paper effective

  • The paper integrates a formal DSM-IV-TR multiaxial diagnosis with a practical family therapy treatment plan, demonstrating how clinical assessment translates into therapeutic strategy.
  • It draws on multiple theoretical frameworks—Structural Family Therapy and Transgenerational Therapy—and explains how they complement each other in addressing the family's presenting problems.
  • The inclusion of specific therapeutic techniques (joining, tracking, mimesis, reframing) grounds abstract theory in actionable clinical practice, making the paper useful for applied learning.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper effectively uses extended quotation and paraphrase from primary theoretical sources (Antonovsky & Sourani; Colapinto; Ruiz) to build a theoretical scaffold before applying concepts to a specific case. This technique—theory-to-application sequencing—is standard in graduate-level clinical case study writing and helps readers understand how abstract models are operationalized in real therapeutic contexts.

Structure breakdown

The paper follows a logical clinical structure: it opens with a diagnostic statement, moves through multiaxial DSM-IV-TR assessment, introduces the measurement instrument (FSOC/FAS), presents the chosen therapy model with extensive theoretical grounding, states treatment goals, details specific interventions and strategies, and closes with a summary. This progression mirrors the format of an actual clinical treatment plan, making it a practical model for students studying family therapy or counseling.

Diagnostic Statement and DSM-IV-TR Multiaxial Assessment

The primary client is obese and reports feeling anxious and depressed. She has gained 15 pounds, does not sleep well, and has low concentration and forgetfulness. She has a social phobia and exhibits some signs of paranoid schizophrenia. In addition, she has a back injury that contributes to her general feeling of ill health and prevents her from getting the exercise she needs. She is a chain smoker and feels that she has lost control of her life. Her son has asthma, and her husband appears to suffer from some type of behavioral disorder consistent with mild intellectual disability.

The DSM-IV-TR (2000) multiaxial assessment includes analysis across five axes:

Axis I – Clinical Disorders: 296.xx Major Depressive Disorder; 301.0 Paranoid Personality Disorder; 300.23 Social Phobia (generalized).

Axis II – Personality Disorders and Intellectual Disability: Relevant personality disorder features and possible intellectual disability in the husband.

Axis III – General Medical Conditions: Obesity; back pain due to injury.

Axis IV – Psychosocial and Environmental Problems: Husband does not maintain stable employment; problems with an adopted teenage daughter; 12-year-old son exhibiting behavioral problems at school. This axis is used for reporting psychosocial and environmental problems that may affect the diagnosis, treatment, or prognosis of mental disorders.

Axis V – Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF): The client's functioning is significantly impacted by her home environment, which involves frequent arguments among family members. Her obesity contributes to social phobia, and difficulties coping with the teenage daughter further strain her functioning. The husband presents with features consistent with a delusional disorder.

Family therapy examines the symptoms of the family as they occur within the larger family context. Special techniques include the genogram—a family tree constructed by the therapist to examine past relationships, events, and their impact on current emotional functioning. Systemic interpretation views depression as a symptom of a problem in the larger family system. Communication training focuses on identifying and correcting dysfunctional communication patterns within the family.

Treatment Assessment Tools: FSOC and FAS

The family in this study will be assessed using the Family Sense of Coherence (FSOC) and Family Adaptation Scales (FAS). These instruments measure the sense of coherence and sense of adaptation of families. The FSOC and FAS are jointly developed 26-item and 10-item scales designed to measure the family's sense of coherence and its sense of adaptation to both internal and external environments. Family coherence is defined "as an orientation that expresses confidence that internal and external stimuli are structured and predictable, resources are available to meet demands from those stimuli, and the demands are worthy challenges" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

The underlying theory holds that the higher the family's sense of coherence, the greater its adaptation and satisfaction with its internal and external environments (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988). The FSOC is scored on sliding scales from 1 to 7, with higher scores indicating a stronger sense of coherence. Reverse-scored items are numbers 1, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 13, 15, 18, 21, 22, 24, and 25, so that 7 always represents the highest coherence score. The total scale score is calculated by summing all items after reverse scoring. The reliability of both measures has been reported as having "good to excellent internal consistency" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

Structural Family Therapy Model

Structural Family Therapy is the model chosen for the treatment strategy. Structural family therapy conceptualizes the family as a living open system in which the parts are "functionally interdependent in ways dictated by the supraindividual functions of the whole. As an open system, the family is subjected to and impinges on the surrounding environment. This implies that family members are not the only architects of their family shape; relevant rules may be imposed by the immediate group of reference or by the culture in the broader sense" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

The family as a living system is also in a constant state of transformation, with transactional rules evolving over time as family members negotiate arrangements that are more "economical and effective for any given period in its life as a system. This evolution, as any other, is regulated by the interplay of homeostasis and change" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988). Homeostasis is described as the "patterns of transactions that assure the stability of the system, the maintenance of its basic characteristics as they can be described at a certain point in time; homeostatic processes tend to keep the status quo" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988). When viewed from the perspective of homeostasis, "individual behaviors interlock like the pieces in a puzzle, a quality that is usually referred to as complementarity" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

Change is described as "the reaccommodation that the living system undergoes in order to adjust to a different set of environmental circumstances or to an intrinsic developmental need. Marriage, births, entrance to school, the onset of adolescence, going to college or to a job are examples of developmental milestones in the life of most families; loss of a job, a sudden death, a promotion, a move to a different city, a divorce, a pregnant adolescent are special events that affect the journey of some families. Whether universal or idiosyncratic, these impacts call for changes in patterns, and in some cases—for example when children are added to a couple—dramatically increase the complexity of the system by introducing differentiation" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

The spouse subsystem is reported to coexist with "parent-child subsystems and eventually a sibling subsystem, and rules need to be developed to define who participates with whom and in what kind of situations, and who are excluded from those situations. Such definitions are called boundaries; they may prescribe, for instance, that children should not participate in adults' arguments, or that the oldest son has the privilege of spending certain moments alone with his father, or that the adolescent daughter has more rights to privacy than her younger siblings" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

If one observes the family process over a brief period, one is likely to witness "homeostatic mechanisms at work and the system in relative equilibrium; moments of crisis in which the status quo is questioned and rules are challenged are a relative exception in the life of a system, and when crises become the rule, they may be playing a role in the maintenance of homeostasis" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988). In regard to conflict avoidance, higher levels are seen in enmeshed families, where an extreme sense of closeness, belonging, and loyalty minimizes the chances of disagreement—and, at the other end of the continuum, in disengaged families, where the same effect is produced by excessive distance and a false sense of independence. Family members in these situations often cling to narrow self-definitions, and "when these families come to therapy they typically present themselves as a poor version of what they really are" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

The therapist must determine the position and function of problem behavior, as well as diagnose the structure of the family's perception of the problem. The focus of structural family therapy is the current supportive relationship between the family system and the problem behavior. This model shares with other systemic approaches "the radical idea that knowledge of the origins of a problem is largely irrelevant for the process of therapeutic change. The identification of etiological sequences may be helpful in preventing problems from happening to families, but once they have happened and are eventually brought to therapy, history has already occurred and cannot be undone" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

This therapy model holds that the problems brought to therapy are "ultimately dysfunctions of the family structure" and therefore seeks a therapeutic solution in the modification of such structure. "This usually requires changes in the relative positions of family members: more proximity may be necessary between husband and wife, more distance between mother and son. Hierarchical relations and coalitions are frequently in need of a redefinition. New alternative rules for transacting must be explored" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

The primary goal of structural family therapy is "the restructuralization of the family's system of transactional rules, such that the interactional reality of the family becomes more flexible, with an expanded availability of alternative ways of dealing with each other. By releasing family members from their stereotyped positions and functions, this restructuralization enables the system to mobilize its underutilized resources and to improve its ability to cope with stress and conflict. Once the constricting set of rules is outgrown, individual dysfunctional behaviors, including those described as the presenting problem, lose their support in the system and become unnecessary from the point of view of homeostasis. When the family achieves self-sufficiency in sustaining these changes without the challenging support of the therapist, therapy comes to an end" (Antonovsky & Sourani, 1988).

3 locked sections · 1,060 words
Sign up to read the full analysis
Goals and Objectives of the Treatment Plan220 words
Among the goals and objectives of the treatment plan is the aim for the primary client to accept that she will not be able to work in her former capacity again, and that her husband should be encouraged to maintain stable employment. Her husband was not expected from the beginning of their marriage…
Therapeutic Interventions and Strategies710 words
Structural Family Therapy involves therapeutic change described as a process that "transpires in a special context, the therapeutic system…offers a unique chance to challenge the rules of the family" (Colapinto, n.d.). Colapinto notes that in practice, structural family therapy has been most…
Summary and Conclusion130 words
This study involves a family in which several generations have resided under one roof, with the expectations and assumptions of all individuals integrated into the family's belief system and ultimately into its structure, as reflected in the present functioning of each family member. This family requires therapy to assist them in managing their interactions…
Read the full paper →
Plus 130,000+ examples & all writing tools

References

Antonovsky, A. & Sourani, T. (1988). Family sense of coherence and family adaptation. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 79–92.

Antonovsky, A. & Sourani, T. (1998). Family sense of coherence and family adaptation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 50(1). National Council on Family Relations.

Colapinto, J. (n.d.). Structural family therapy. Retrieved from

Connell, C. (2010). Multicultural perspectives and considerations within structural family therapy: The premises of structure, subsystems and boundaries. Rivier Academic Journal, 6(2).

Cormier, S., Nurius, P. S., & Osborne, C. J. (2009). Interviewing and change strategies for helpers: Fundamental skills and cognitive behavioral interviewing (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Fischer, J. & Corcoran, K. (1994). Measures of clinical practice. Social Science.

Gladding, S. T. (2007). Family therapy: History, theory, and practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Ruiz, M. A. (n.d.). Transgenerational and structural family therapy: An analysis of both schools. Retrieved from

Key Concepts in This Paper
Structural Family Therapy Transgenerational Therapy DSM-IV-TR Diagnosis Family Sense of Coherence Grief and Loss Differentiation of Self Emotional Triangles Genogram Reframing Family Boundaries
Cite This Paper
PaperDue. (2026). Structural and Transgenerational Family Therapy Treatment Plan. PaperDue. https://www.paperdue.com/study-guide/structural-transgenerational-family-therapy-treatment-plan-101848

Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.