christian counseling today
Vol. 20 no. 4
27
especially true of “interpersonal process”
psychotherapy groups. Focusing on
group content consists of concentrating
on what is said in group sessions by
members. Group process focuses on
the “how” and “why” of what is said in
group (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005).
Unlike recovery groups, in psycho-
therapy groups the leader is always
a licensed therapist or professionally
trained facilitator and never an equal
member of the group. Leadership moves
beyond facilitation of discussion to the
more difficult task of focusing on the
“here-and-now” interaction occurring
between and among members for the
purposes of enlightening members to
their maladaptive interpersonal patterns
of behavior (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005).
In addition to these benefits, Yalom
was the first to put a name to the
dynamics that occur in the group setting
that facilitate change in participants. He
identified 11 “therapeutic factors” that
create a group milieu which facilitates
change for group members.
Efficacy
In spite of a non-professional leadership
approach, research shows that recovery
groups are efficacious in improving
the overall well-being of group partici-
pants for a large variety of problems
and concerns, including addictions,
eating disorders, support for mental
illness and medical diseases and condi-
tions, and recovery from trauma and
grief (Burlingame, Strauss, & Joyce,
2013). Part of these documented
outcomes is due to the therapeutic
factors discussed previously. However,
there are several biological and theo-
logical factors also worth mentioning.
First, in more recent years, research in
interpersonal neurobiology (IPNB) has
expanded our understanding of the
impact of interpersonal relationships on
the brain and emotion. Researchers are
finding that relationships affect brain
structure, influence brain neuroplas-
ticity (the ability to create new neural
pathways and synapses), and change
implicit memory templates. In more
simple terms, emotional wounding
occurs in the context of relationship
and emotional healing must also occur
in this dynamic (Badenoch & Cox,
2010; Flores, 2010: Gantt & Agazarian,
2010).
In many ways, the research in inter-
personal neurobiology is proving what
has always been revealed in Scripture:
Human beings, created in the image
of God, are hard-wired for relation-
ship. Further, Christians are called
to community for the purposes of
confession, forgiveness, support and
redemption (Chafer, 1944; Erickson,
2013). The Spirit of God uses the Word
of God and the people of God for the
purposes of redemption regarding all
portions of our being that have been
lost to sin, including emotional, cogni-
tive and neurobiological. This is the
beauty and power of group—that God
chooses to use broken, sinful people for
the redemption of other broken, sinful
people.
Recovery groups have a place in
the ministries of licensed professionals
and the Church. Research shows that
recovery groups are effective for the
treatment of numerous problems and
issues. The therapeutic factors of group
provide a safe place for wounded and
hurting people to find help, hope and
recovery.
✠
Denise Daniel, Ph.D.,
L.P.C., R.N.,
is a Licensed
Professional Counselor and
Associate Professor in the
Center for Counseling and
Family Studies at Liberty
University.
References
Badenoch, B. & Cox, P. (2010). Integrating
Interpersonal Neurobiology with Group
Psychotherapy.
International Journal of
Group Psychotherapy
, 60, 462-481.
Burlingame, G.M., Strauss, B. & Joyce,
A.S. (2013). Change Mechanisms and
Effectiveness of Small Group Treatments.
In M.J. Lambert (Ed.),
Bergin & Garfield’s
Handbook for Psychotherapy and Behavior
Change
(6th ed., pp. 640-689). Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (2005).
Substance Abuse Treatment for Persons
with Co-occurring Disorders: Treatment
Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series
42
(SMA) 05-3992. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
Chafer, L.S. (1944). Anthropology.
Bibliotheca
Sacra
, 101, 264-282.
Erford, B.T. (2011).
Group Work: Process and
Applications
. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson.
Erickson, M.J. (2013).
Christian Theology
(3rd
ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
Flores, P.J. (2010). Group Psychotherapy and
Neuro-plasticity: An Attachment Theory
Perspective.
International Journal of Group
Psychotherapy
, 60, 546-570.
Gantt, S.P. & Agazarian, Y.M. (2010).
Developing the Group Mind through
Functional Subgrouping: Linking Systems
Centered Training (SCT) and Interpersonal
Neurobiology.
International Journal of
Group Psychotherapy
, 60, 515-544.
Gladding, S.T. (2008).
Groups: A Counseling
Specialty
(5th ed.). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson.
Humphreys, K. (2004).
Circles of Recovery:
Self-help Organizations for Addictions
.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Klaw, E. & Humphrey, K. (2004). The Role
of Peer-led Mutual Support Groups in
Promoting Health and Well-being. In
J.L. DeLucia-Waack, D.A. Gerrity, C.R.
Kalodner & M.T. Riva (Eds.),
Handbook of
Group Counseling and Psychotherapy
(pp.
630-640). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lambert, M.J. (Ed.). (2013).
Bergin & Garfield’s
Handbook of Psychotherapy & Behavior
Change
(6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Lieberman, M.A. & Snowden, L.R. (1993).
Problems in Assessing Prevalence and
Membership Characteristics of Self-help
Group Participants.
The Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science
, 29, 166-180.
Lieberman, M.A. & Snowden, L.R. (1993).
Problems in Assessing Prevalence and
Membership Characteristics of Self-help
Group Participants.
Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science
, 29, 166-180.
SAMHSA Announces a Working Definition of
Recovery (2012).
Mental Health Weekly
,
22(1), 8. doi:10.1002/mhw.
White, B.J. & Madara, E. (Eds.). (2002).
Self-help Sourcebook Online
(7th ed.).
Retrieved from
.
net/selfhelp.
Yalom, I.D. & Leszcz, M. (2005).
The Theory
and Practice of Group Psychotherapy
(5th
ed.). Basic Books.
