Both SFT and NT are postmodernist approaches to therapy, which means that their techniques are built on the idea that reality is relative and people’s experiences are influenced by everything around them. Therefore, the role of the therapist is in assisting the client and helping them understand more about themselves and their views on the world, as opposed to being an expert with all the answers. SFT is rooted in the idea that a therapist can help the client see the gaps in their goal setting and achievement practices to enhance their wellbeing. The notion of NT was developed by Michael White and David Epston and is based on the story metaphor (Metcalf, 2018). This paper will discuss the two differences between NT and SFT, the pragmatism, and mental health issues that each approach can address.
The goals of the two therapies are different, as SFT uses a more pragmatic approach and emphasis finding a solution to pressing issues immediately. SFT’s tools are helpful for people from pragmatic cultures because this therapy is focused on finding solutions over the curse of quick sessions (Metcalf, 2018). Through these sessions, the client can better understand the gap between their goal and the current citation and set objectives that will help them achieve this goal. However, unlike the NT, the SFT approach is focused on the immediate problems and is not suitable for the exploration of deep personality issues (Metcalf, 2018). Hence, the briefness of the SFT makes it useless when applying for the treatment of deep-rooted issues, such as substance abuse and personality disorders. Moreover, the pragmatic of SFT also results in the fact that with this approach, the client is in charge of the therapy process, and they are the ones finding solutions to their immediate concerns. With the NT, the therapist asks the client questions to understand their construct of reality and the stories they develop around their lives. Hence, there is no need to set immediate goals with the NT and find solutions at each of the sessions.
As opposed to the pragmatic approach that is the basis of SFT, NT is focused on allowing the client to build their own narratives that are rich and meaningful. Hence, the main difference between NT and SFT is their orientation on the pragmatic and non-pragmatic objectives. With NT, the client can create rich and meaningful stories, which will help them address some of the deep-rooted issues and concerns, while SFT is helpful for addressing immediate problems that a client is struggling with. Therefore, this method can be helpful when working not only with some immediate problems but also with deep-rooted mental health issues and concerns.
Although SFT and NT are drastically different, these approaches offer a unique set of benefits for the client. Metcalf (2018) describes a combination of SFT and NT that allows the client to take responsibility for telling their own story and, therefore, empowers them to find solutions to the pressing issues. This shows that the differences between these therapies discussed above, in fact, can be very helpful when combining SFT and NT and can allow the therapist to help the client reach better results. In summary, the main differences between SFT and NT are the pragmatic orientation and mental health issues that can be addressed by each of these therapies.
Reference
Metcalf, L. (2018). Marriage and family therapy (2nd ed.). Springer Publishing Compan.