Tracing neutrality in the systemic therapies: Histories of an idea

Abstract

Neutrality is an important theoretical concept in systemic thinking whose meaning and applications have changed over time as the family of systemic therapies has differentiated. Neutrality can be understood as an umbrella term for several ideas, all of which involve the theme of ‘not taking sides’, but which differ in relation to what the relevant ‘sides’ are, and what would constitute ‘taking a side’. This paper charts the development of the concept of neutrality through time and in relation to different models and frameworks for systemic therapy. The clinical relevance of these ideas is explored with particular reference to the use of team practice in therapy.The notion of therapeutic neutrality has a broader resonance with other forms of psychotherapy. For example, the pan-theoretical construct of a positive therapeutic alliance exists in dynamic tension with remaining open-minded, being non-judgemental, balancing ‘helping’ or ‘healing’ against respect for client self-determination and empowerment, empathising rather than sympathising, challenging versus colluding, and so on. Later in this paper, I suggest that neutrality can operate as a construct facilitating the integration or interplay of systemic ideas with other influences on the therapist, including other theoretical models. This may occur as a purposeful and reflexive process, or be unwitting and unacknowledged. This article aims to promote the former.