On February 22, 2019, I presented some early family of origin work in my keynote address on Death and Chronic Illness at the Clinical Application of Bowen Family System Theory Conference. This blog post addresses a key question raised during the discussion that followed my presentation.

In 1972, after a consultation with Dr. Bowen regarding my efforts to define a self in my family of origin, I returned to Montana for my first solo trip back as a married adult.  Dr. Bowen had advised me that the most productive effort I could make would be to develop a relationship with my mother’s brothers’ wives.  Several people asked me to explain the theory behind how that would have been useful.  I have no idea what was in Dr. Bowen’s mind when he gave me that suggestion.    However, I can make some guesses that I have developed in my study of Bowen theory.   He had written about the importance of open relationships in the family.   I had little to no relationships with these family members since I left Montana at 18 in 1960 for college, Peace Crops, and marriage.

I told him that I usually experienced much anxiety talking to my mother on the phone, but I had no real factual information to understand what I now see as “unresolved attachment” and how it was playing out.

My mother was the only daughter of her mother living in Montana, and thus the only sister of the 7 brothers in the area.  Given how interlocking triangles work, my making a connection with my mother’s sisters-in-law would influence the relationship she had with them.  It would also loosen the connection I had with my mother by activating that triangle in which I would have my own one on one relationship with other adult women in my family.  All of these women were also connected to my grandmother, and a relationship with them would provide more information about her and how the family process operated in that generation.

Because of some of my high school achievements, I was somewhat over valued by this side of the family. A real relationship would normalize their view of me and make for a more realistic connection.  This would help me respond to the projection process of my mother’s need to have an “accomplished daughter”. This meant I could define myself by myself and for myself, and not for my mother and her expectations.   All this doesn’t happen in one visit but over time, and would help me achieve a more solid sense of self, i.e. differentiation.

Dr. Bowen once said that getting a real relationship with your family could help you “grow up” more than anything he knew.  Bridging the distances created by education, values, experiences and projections means one has to manage oneself and one’s reactivity in a very honest, respectful and thoughtful way.   Knowing the stories of how women in my family with very different skills and challenges had survived, married, raised children and created lives for themselves was a bonus for me, reinforcing the notion that variability in a family can be one of its greatest strengths.  It helped me in the process of accepting and respecting differences in my clinical families and even in my husband’s family.

As it turned out, that visit was the beginning of several lifelong friendships.

Did Bowen, knowing my grandmother had died, suspect a hidden “shock wave” that I wasn’t aware of? Maybe.  Of course, by spending time with my mother’s family, this shock wave soon became known to me.   My connection with my extended family provided useful information about the context in which my parents had grown up.  This information helped me understand them better and appreciate the multigenerational patterns that I could see in my family of origin and that I was reproducing in my nuclear family, giving me a bit more choice of how I managed myself.

The post How I Understand Suggestions Dr. Bowen Gave Me appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

Why do humans dominate the planet? Not, as often assumed, because of individual intelligence according to science writer, Matt Ridley. Not because we have big brains. Having smarter, cleverer people is not what makes societies work better. He proposes that:

Human achievement is entirely a networking phenomenon. It is by putting brains together through the division of labor--through trade and specialization--that human society stumbled upon a way to raise the living standards, carrying capacity, technological virtuosity and knowledge base of the species. ...Human achievement is based on collective intelligence--the nodes in the human neural network are people themselves. By each doing one thing and getting good at it, then sharing and combining the results through exchange, people become capable of doing things they do not even understand. (Ridley 2011, italics in original)

Ridley notes that Adam Smith understood this phenomenon, and so did Charles Darwin. I believe that Murray Bowen understood it very well, and took it a step further. The concept of collective intelligence becomes all the more intriguing when you put it in the context of Bowen’s concepts of the emotional system and differentiation of self.

Dr. Bowen used the term, “collection of individuals,” to describe a high-functioning organization. This collection of people looks like a group, but functions differently. In a group, emotional process is operating to greater or lesser degree, and emotional process will always do somebody in, or if it gets intense enough, will do in the whole operation. Thus groups are vulnerable to disruption or disintegration. In contrast, a collection of individuals is relatively free of emotional reactivity, and thus free to support individual functioning, to spur each member to go further than he or she might go alone. The difference between a group and a collection of individuals is understood in terms of the balance of togetherness and individuality, which in turn is understood as a result of the level of anxiety and the level of differentiation of the members. The difference can be described along a continuum:

GROUP ←———→ COLLECTION OF INDIVIDUALS

Togetherness overrides individuality ←→ Togetherness/individuality balance

Tension level high ←→ Tension level low

Lower level of differentiation ←→ Higher level of differentiation

The “group” end of the continuum is what people often recognize as their organization. The combination of togetherness pressure and emotional reactivity plays out in a thousand ways: focus on others, comparing self with others, status sensitivity, low tolerance for differences, avoidance of subjects that risk conflict, or escalating disagreement into conflict, pressure on leaders to take charge but undermining them when they do. In a climate of tension, thinking, planning, finding common ground, maintaining a focus on goals, and working collaboratively are compromised. Emotional intensity is like a tax on the resources of the group; it can take a group to a state of collective chaos or collective collapse, the antithesis of collective intelligence.

The “collection of individuals” end of the continuum is what people often recognize as what they would like their organization to be: calm, flexible, with a defined mission, focus on goals, and a climate of thoughtful collaboration. The staggering accomplishments of human civilizations give witness to the fact that humans have risen to this level of functioning many times. I submit that this does not happen without considerable effort and perhaps only under reasonably favorable conditions.

Dr. Bowen founded the Family Center at Georgetown University in 1975 and headed it until his death in 1990. He was well aware of the pitfalls that could undermine the Center:

This is the kind of an administrative system that is most vulnerable to becoming involved in all kinds of emotional alliances and intense emotional processes that would make it more like a family. A good percentage of such organizations do not continue for many months or years before there are major splits and disruptions in the central organization.

He used his knowledge and experience from family research, theory, and the practice of family therapy to provide the kind of differentiated leadership he believed in:

It has been a fascinating challenge to me to find a way toward a reasonable level of differentiation among professional colleagues, who are far more important to me than most employees would be in other situations. ...The goal is to be as much of a “self” as is possible for me, and to permit the others as much latitude as possible toward developing their selfs. (1978, 462)

Matt Ridley’s wonderful essay on collective intelligence resonates with the concept of differentiation of self. The level of differentiation of self of the members of the collective, and their efforts to work on functioning at their best, joined with the specialized knowledge and quality of thinking that each brings to the mission, unleashes human capital and allows the powerful potential of collective intelligence to be realized.

Ridley concludes that complex tasks are beyond what a single person can do; the knowledge needed for the task is distributed in society among many people. “That is why central planning never worked; the cleverest person is no match for the collective brain at working out (how to get things done).” Going a step further with this thinking, we also see that the functioning of its individual components--”the nodes in the human neural network”--would have everything to do with the functioning of the collective brain. Better differentiated “nodes” are a decisive variable in the ability of the collective brain to function productively, effectively, and creatively.

References
Bowen, M. 1978. Family Therapy in Clinical Practice. New York: Jason Aronson
Ridley, M. Collective Intelligence. www.edge.org/q2011/q11_8.html#ridley

Siblings

By Grace Kelton Butler

We are on that river, the Colorado whose mud still stains my clothing.  We are deep in the canyon sitting beneath a waxing moon.  The old man I have been icy to, the rusty guide, looks from my brother to me and back again.

He asks, “What do you do with a sister like that?”

Simon pauses and says, “Get out of her way.”

The old man laughs.

All at once I don’t know whether to rise from my chair to knee Simon or to hug him because his words mean vastly different things to him and this gray-bearded guide.

I take a swig from my beer, I slouch and look as surly as possible.  I grin at Simon because there we were, not in each other’s way, neither of us lagging behind.  Side by side under the burgeoning stars we were two siblings, our hair stiff with river silt, looking through similarly tinted lenses to the world.  A glint of home in this foreign place.

The Bridge

By Dorothy Moffatt

The way I walk

I see my mother walking.

My feet secure

And firm upon the ground.

The way I talk

I hear my daughter talking

And hear my mother’s echo

In the sound.

The way she thought

I find myself now thinking.

The generations linking

In a firm continuation of mind

The bridge of immortality

I am walking—

The voice before me echoing behind.

The post Bowen Theory Concepts Reflected in Poetry appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

Clare: Can you tell us about the history of this book and what inspired you to write and edit it?

Sydney:  Four years ago, I approached Peter with a title, Family Reaction to Death (later renamed Death and Chronic Illness in the Family), for his 6^th book.   I felt that the Bowen theory perspective on the emotional process in the whole family at a time of heightened anxiety such as a death, diagnosis of a serious illness, or a chronic illness was a view that wasn’t present in much of the mental health, pastoral care or the medical communities.  Bowen theory provides a broader understanding of the grief response, and it also helps individuals and professionals track the sources of anxiety in the family that might lead to symptoms in an individual after an important loss.  Peter said he would take the project on if I agreed to co-edit the collection.

Clare: Why did you choose to root the book in Murray Bowen’s family systems theory?

Peter: We chose to write our book on death and chronic illness within the approach to Bowen’s family systems theory in contrast to many books that describe the individual’s experience of chronic illness or death. Death and chronic illness are the most significant nodal events that can shake the equilibrium of the family as an emotional unit. The levels of chronic anxiety, stress, and differentiation of self (maturity) of the individuals in the family as well as for the family as a whole, play a large part in the way families—nuclear and extended—manage death along a continuum of emotional stability in the family.

Clare: What does it mean to be “present and accounted for” when a family member is facing illness or death?

Sydney: Being present and accounted for means showing up for important family events such as funerals, weddings, holidays.  It also means staying in relationship with the ill person or family members who are anxious and upset by what is happening.  At times of heightened stress, family members are a bit more open, although more emotional, providing the opportunity to make a more personal and meaningful connection.  Watching the emotional process in the family is instructive regarding the patterns in the family of which one is a member.

Clare: What makes some individuals or families more resilient when responding to chronic illness and death, than others?

Peter: The two most important variables that impact the multigenerational family emotional system are the levels of chronic anxiety and the differentiation of self in the family along the human continuum.

Clare: Can you tell us a little bit about the contributors involved and the variety of perspectives they bring to the book?

Sydney: The contributors to this book come from a variety of professions: social work, nursing, ministry, and psychiatry.  All have been trained in Bowen Family Systems theory and bring their own clinical experience and perspective to the specific cases that they report.

Clare: Could you share a couple of ideas with us that will be useful for professionals working with families facing chronic illness or the death of a family member?

Peter: Bowen’s approach is to accept mortality directly and hopefully the physician, psychologist, or other mental health clinicians will find this useful. Bowen was among the first in psychiatry and medicine to address chronic illness and his patients who were dying.  He wrote:

“An ‘open’ relationship system is one in which an individual is free to communicate a high percentage of inner thoughts, feelings and fantasies to another who can reciprocate. No one ever has a completely open relationship with another, but it is a healthy state when a person can have a relationship in which a reasonable degree of openness is possible… The ‘closed’ communication system is an automatic emotional reflex to protect self from the anxiety in the other person, though most people say they avoid the taboo subject to keep from upsetting the other person…This is the point at which a trained professional can function as a third person to work the magic of family therapy toward opening a closed system’’. (Bowen, 1978, Family Therapy in Clinical Practice p.322)

We hope the clinicians reading the book will take away the approach of the “open relationship system” between the clinician, the patient, and the family.

Clare:  To sum up the book in one sentence

Sydney: These chapters by Bowen family theory professionals provide guidelines to follow in order to manage oneself in a way that allows for an optimum family outcome by staying connected to other members without becoming reactive to the behaviors of conflict, distance, blame and the need to fix others that often are activated by death and/or chronic illness.

Sydney Reed’s keynote presentation at the upcoming CFC Winter Conference, Clinical Applications of Bowen Family Systems Theory: 21^st Annual Day of Workshops on February 22, 2019 will cover ideas from the book Death and Chronic Illness in the Family.

The post An Interview with the co-editors of the book “Death and Chronic Illness in the Family” appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

My introduction to Bowen theory happened around 1996 at the University of Wisconsin’s Madison campus. I attended an all-day seminar exploring emotional process, triangles and anxiety. Initially, I was uncertain of what to make of triangles and emotional processes. But I intuitively understood anxiety and how it travels between people. For twelve years I tried to rise above the anxiety around me. I focused primarily on being non-anxious, achieving limited success. I then worked at defining a self to my family and I watched my level of functioning and confidence rise.

There is no secret sauce or master receipt for differentiation of self. It does include key ingredients: a determination and motivation to understand the world through science, a coach who appropriately challenges one to step up, and Bowen theory – a framework for understanding human behavior. The Center for Family Consultation integrates all three.

As I step into the role of executive director I have three primary objects. The first objective is to build upon the theoretical rigor and teaching legacy of our founding members and current executive board: Stephanie Ferrara, Leslie Fox, Carol Moran, Sydney Reed, and Bob Noone who have led the organization for over 40 years. I’m grateful to Bob for his efforts to facilitate a successful transition and for his desire to see me and the organization flourish.

The second objective is to promote Bowen theory as an asset to both families and communities. I plan to meet with mental health clinics, universities, community centers, and businesses to better understand how Bowen theory and CFC might be a resource. I’m interested in learning where Bowen theory is being taught and used in Chicagoland, how CFC can be a resource to families, community organizations and businesses, and where there might be new opportunities to teach Bowen theory and its application.

The final objective is to work collaboratively with the vibrant international network of Bowen centers. Most have a virtual online learning component. What does online collaboration look like in the 21st century and post-pandemic? How might CFC partner with other centers to influence the evolutionary trajectory of human beings towards thinking systems?

The Center for Family Consultation consists of talented, thoughtful and motivated individuals dedicated to advancing Bowen theory in the world. Our success as an organization is based on their efforts. In addition to the executive board I’m grateful to our faculty members Lisa Friedstein, Cecilia Guzman, Jennifer Howe, Kelly Matthews-Pluta, Lisa Moss, Terri Pilarski, and Patty Sheridan. I’m honored to be the executive director and to collaborate with these individuals.

I look forward to discovering how CFC and Bowen theory can be a resource to you.

John Bell

Dr. Murray Bowen (b. 1913 – d. 1990) was a psychiatrist and professor of psychiatry at Georgetown University in Washington, DC.  He was one of the pioneers of family systems theory.

A Search for Scientific Understanding

Early in his career as a psychoanalyst, Bowen sought to understand human behavior and functioning in a way that would be more scientific and objective than the prevailing views of his time.  He thought that the basic principles governing the behavior of other life forms must also govern human functioning.

As such, Bowen family systems theory (or Bowen theory) views human beings as part of the natural world of living organisms. And though Bowen worked professionally in the field of psychiatry, he wanted his theory to help understand human behavior in all areas of life.  He developed his theory of human functioning from years of clinical work with individuals and families, as well as from research, in which he tested and refined his ideas about how symptoms are related to the functioning of the larger family field.

Bowen’s Early Research

In the mid-1950s, Bowen began to hypothesize that the functioning of schizophrenic patients was related to the interactions of the other members of their families.  So he pursued this hypothesis in a research project funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) in which he hospitalized small numbers of schizophrenics along with their immediate family members. This allowed him to move from a conceptualization of schizophrenia as an individual problem (i.e. having its roots in one person) to seeing schizophrenia as something to do with the mother-child relationship and then to concluding that schizophrenia was related  to the functioning of the whole family unit. Without blaming the family for the schizophrenia, he began to articulate a theory that described how the social existence of human beings, in family groups, affects the functioning of each individual member across the spectrum of healthy and symptomatic behavior.

Developing a Systems Perspective

In Bowen’s time, human functioning was seen primarily in terms of the individual’s behavior and psychology.  Bowen, however, recognized that human family groups have evolved over millennia and that the human individual is primarily a social creature.  As such, he believed individual behavior could be better understood in terms of the group—that is, arising from the dynamics of the larger family emotional and relationships systems.

Bowen’s theory appears to be consistent with modern scientific thinking about life.  For example, when we consider ecosystems, we understand that one organism can only be understood in terms of its relationship to other organisms in that system.   We also understand molecular activity, chemical processes, and the motion of planets in this interdependent, interactive way.  Yet a similarly systemic view of human functioning has been remarkably hard to achieve.

The Individual in the System

Bowen theory starts with the premise that the family context must be the basic unit of study for understanding human beings.  After years of observing family interactions, Bowen became aware that individual behavior often seemed determined less by individual choice and more by the individual’s relationship context, by the shifting flow of anxiety and emotionality between and among family members.  He thought that each family member actually derives his or her identity largely from involvement within the family relationship system.

Based on these observations, Bowen concluded that the ability to change individual behavior first required gaining awareness of how the individual’s choices are affected by current and historical family behavior.  In this view, “family” would include the immediate people with whom the individual lives, the extended family of relatives and friends, including prior generations, as well as the community at large.  In short, we come to know ourselves by knowing our families.

Key Ideas from Bowen Theory

1. Human functioning is governed by principles common to all life forms.

2. Human life is guided primarily by emotional, instinctive forces that can be regulated to some extent by an individual’s ability to think. Human emotional forces and behavior are influenced by the interplay among instinctual, biological, genetic, psychological, and sociological factors.

3. The family is a single emotional unit made up of interlocking relationships existing over many generations.

4. An individual’s behavior across the life span is best understood as being closely related to the functioning of her or his family of origin.

5. When the individual is seen in her/his family context, we can move beyond simplistic cause-and-effect thinking to a more comprehensive understanding of the multiple factors that interact across time to produce problems or symptoms.

6. People are able to modify their automatic, emotional responses by studying patterns of automatic behavior in themselves and their family of origin, and developing greater objectivity in their appraisal of situations and their felt responses.

The post Bowen Family Systems Theory appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

People often comment, almost in awe and incredulity, that my ex-husband and I are not only cordial and supportive co-parents, but actively share family and social gatherings together. When I mention that my ex, his wife and son came for dinner last night, I can almost predict the expression of horror, quickly disguised as awe that will come over her face.  People like to believe it requires some super human power to allow our frontal cortex, rather than our archaic limbic system, to make decisions that serve the best interests of our families. The decision to nourish and foster a relationship that is the bedrock of my child’s life was a “no brainer”, albeit accompanied by some very strong physical/emotional responses.

Research suggests that the most well-adjusted children of divorce are those in which parents avoid “conflictual” relationships with each other and adapt well themselves to divorce.  Unfortunately conflictual in this context is frequently only applied to overt displays of anger or disagreement. The undercurrent of rage and hurt that drives much of divorce behavior and parenting goes unexamined.  Despite an outward appearance of calm in the divorced relationship, fissures can often be seen in the ways members of the family begin to show symptoms; depression, isolation, anxiety, acting out, difficulties with intimacy, etc.  If you take a longitudinal look at these families, the responses to the cut-off are usually explicit over the course of a life.

The most typical response in divorce is this “emotional cut-off”; an instinctual response we use to escape pain; a range of responses from flagrant disregard and hostility, to a makeshift show of compliance and agreeableness; a show of communication and contact, where no real effort has been made to understand and acknowledge one’s part in the conditions of the relationship and its current incarnation. Blame and anger continue to simmer under the spectacle of child-focused communication. This is understandable. Divorce is devastating, especially with children in tow. The desires and hopes to escape and begin anew are immediately dashed, if one is paying attention. Once the realization that the children still hold one unavoidably close to the emotional process that one hoped to escape, despair and frustration can set in.

In our case, we had four years where the anger and blame fueled many of our interactions. Despite our best efforts, our anger was always just slightly under the surface. At some point, after much thought and research, I realized that it was my responsibility to create the type of relationship I wanted with my ex-husband. I had contributed to creating the distrust and anger he felt towards me and I wanted to change my part in that dynamic. I knew I couldn’t change him but I saw there was plenty I could do to change myself.

The first years were tense and awkward. My ex begrudgingly agreed to my invitations, for shared dinners and events involving our daughter, but he lost no opportunity to communicate his hostility. I’d frequently leave these gatherings to cry at home alone. It hurt to feel so reviled and rejected, but I knew I had played my part in creating that dynamic and I was committed to remaining trustworthy, kind, and respectful. I knew this was my job, no matter how he responded to me and I hoped one day he would see that I was sincere in my efforts.

Our daughter is 21 years old, and it has taken about that long to get to a place where I believe my ex, his wife and I genuinely trust and love one another. It hasn’t been the easiest choice, and it certainly did not provide quick results but I can rest in the knowledge that my daughter can focus her energies on navigating her own life course, rather than being blindly caught up in the unacknowledged anger of her parents. It’s the toughest job being a parent, even tougher when you are still fighting your ex. When people “ooh and aah” over our ability to be calm, compassionate adults in the parenting of our child, I think it is simply their way of saying, “I’m not willing to do the hard work of being a grown-up”. If we believe that using our intellect to overcome uncomfortable emotions is a super human power, maybe it’s time we all don a cape?

The post Learning To Be an Adult in a World That Loves Children appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

Volume 10 Number 4 | Summer 2026

The Secret: The Special Way that Michael Kerr Focused on the Science of Human Behavior

Stephanie Ferrera’s book review of Bowen Theory’s Secrets: Revealing the Hidden Life of Families, by Dr. Kerr, is a well-written, concise overview of the history of Bowen Theory and the special way that Dr. Kerr focused on the science of human behavior as a living systems theory. Kerr and Bowen continued to develop theoretical insights in light of new discoveries in the life sciences; they suggested changes to, or additions to, Bowen family systems concepts, or new applications of the theory to non-family groups. I am reminded of, or learn something new, every time I delve back into this rich book about Bowen theory. For lifelong learners, it is a gift that keeps on giving.

Bowen Theory’s Secrets: 
Revealing the Hidden Life of Families

Written by Michael E. Kerr
Reviewed by Stephanie Ferrera

For five years, 1954 to 1959, at the National Institute of Mental Health, psychiatrist Murray Bowen conducted a most unusual research project, focused on schizophrenia. Adult patients and their parents were hospitalized together for observation and treatment. The intensity of the emotional process in these families—the sensitivities, reactivity, and the profound influence of family members on one another’s functioning-came into view. Like a powerful undercurrent, this emotional system was guiding family interaction but was largely out of the awareness of the members. It is aptly called “the hidden life of families.”

In the 1960s, Bowen had developed the core concepts of his theory and was teaching at Georgetown University School of Medicine. In a department of psychiatry focused primarily on individual intrapsychic dynamics and rooted in psychoanalytic theory, Bowen represented a radically different view: the family, not the individual, was the emotional unit in which psychiatric illness would best be understood. In a department where family relationships were considered the cause of emotional problems, “so it is the last place you want to go to try to work out these problems” (p. 175), Bowen was coaching residents to engage their families directly as the best place to observe their own emotional functioning and develop greater maturity.

Into this department came Michael Kerr as a young resident. In his first encounters with Dr. Bowen, Kerr was struck by how the ideas made sense. For many who discover this theory, the first thing that captures interest is how well it describes one’s own family experience. Kerr began clinical supervision with Bowen in May 1969. Six months later, Kerr’s older brother, who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia, committed suicide. Bowen became a crucial resource for Kerr in dealing with this tragic event and in his effort over the years to see it in the context of his own multigenerational family system.

The relationship between Drs. Bowen and Kerr evolved from a mentorship to a close and fruitful collaboration. Kerr pursued his own study of science, with special focus on biology, evolution, neuroscience, and medicine. His knowledge of theory deepened as he made presentations and wrote numerous articles and book chapters. In 1988, his first book, Family Evaluation, was published. It is an overview of Bowen theory placed in the context of the natural systems in which the human family is embedded. It quickly became a key resource for clinicians and other learners. Kerr’s part of Family Evaluation is followed by Dr. Bowen’s Epilogue, his last major writing in which he reflects on the theory and his “odyssey toward science.” In October 1990, two years after the publication of Family Evaluation, Bowen died. Kerr succeeded him as Director of the Bowen Center for the Study of the Family.

Now, thirty years later, Kerr offers this remarkable book, revealing the “secrets” of Bowen theory in a way that only he could. My first impression was that the book is all-encompassing, meaning that it contains the full depth and breadth of what Kerr knows from years of immersion in systems thinking, science, clinical practice, and life experience. Here are a few highlights:

• A review of the theory’s core concepts, enriched by many references from the natural sciences, many examples of the parallels between emotional process in humans and emotional process in other species;

• A comprehensive, nuanced, detailed presentation of the process of differentiation with all of its complexities and its pitfalls;

• Kerr’s investigation into “families in the public eye,” four case studies of people who manifested extreme emotional and behavioral disturbance: three who committed heinous murders and one who was a genius mathematician while suffering with schizophrenia from which he eventually recovered. Using the available public records to construct the family data, Kerr traces the family emotional process in each case. One comes away with a far more comprehensive and complex understanding of seemingly inexplicable behavior than is possible with a narrower focus on individual characteristics and pathology.

• Unidisease: a proposed new concept in Bowen theory. Kerr’s interviews with cancer patients and their families, plus his extensive study of the biology of cancer and several other diseases, led him to see the number of physiological processes they have in common. The unidisease concept describes the continuity between chronic anxiety generated in the family and the chronic-anxiety-driven stress response involved in most illnesses. Kerr cites many findings in medical research that are consistent with the unidisease hypothesis, but notes that “the toughest issue remains, which is proving the link between chronic anxiety in a family system and psychological and physiological processes of individual family members.” (p. 321)

Bowen theory is not an “ivory tower” set of abstractions, but a living theory with a level of usefulness that can be life-changing. Kerr demonstrates that usefulness with clinical vignettes to illustrate particular points in the theory, with a composite in-depth clinical case study, and most importantly with the study of the family he knows best—his own. He refers to his own family at many points and ends the book with an epilogue, “Applying Bowen Theory to My Own Family.” The reader might be curious about Kerr’s decision to do this, but it proves to be a most effective way of teaching the theory and the way theory guides the effort toward differentiation, maturity, and responsibility. As one follows his thinking, one sees how objectivity and blame-free neutrality emerge as one gains a broader understanding of chronic anxiety as it plays out across generations through repeating patterns, impacting the emotional functioning of each member to different degrees. As he learned more, Kerr saw more clearly the total family involvement, including his own part, in the emotional process that led to his brother’s impairment and suicide. With this perspective, one can only respect the power of the family emotional system.

This hidden emotional system, with its comforts and its constraints, is what we live in every day, instinctively knowing its presence and feeling its pressures, but lacking the perspective to bring it into focus and awareness. Murray Bowen’s elegant theory poses a challenge to those who would discover its secrets. It requires one to develop the discipline of systems thinking in a world that operates largely on cause-and-effect thinking and to acquire the knowledge needed to see human nature in the context of evolution. For those who are up for the challenge, Michael Kerr’s masterful presentation of Bowen theory offers serious, essential, and most trustworthy guidance.

This review was originally published in the Family Systems Forum, Vol. VXXI, Number 3.

What are CFC Faculty Reading and Viewing?

Lisa Friedstein, MSW recommends Time and Water, a feature documentary directed by Sara Dosa.

Time and Water is much more than a climate documentary. The film follows Icelandic writer Andri Snær Magnason as he weaves together family archives, stories of his grandparents, Icelandic folklore, and the disappearance of his country’s glaciers. Rather than focusing only on environmental data, the film explores how memory, identity, and meaning are transmitted across generations. As Magnason reflects on the loss of both beloved family members and ancient glaciers, viewers see the powerful connection between individual lives, family history, and the larger emotional system in which people exist.

From a Bowen family systems perspective, the multigenerational transmission process and the importance of emotional connection across time is a prominent theme. The glaciers function almost like a family archive, carrying the accumulated history of generations, just as families transmit stories, values, anxieties, and resilience. The film illustrates Bowen’s idea that individuals cannot be understood apart from the broader systems in which they are embedded. Magnason’s effort to preserve family memories while witnessing profound environmental change reflects the challenge of maintaining connection to the past while adapting to an uncertain future. How one attempts to stay thoughtfully connected to family, culture, and the natural world without being overwhelmed by fear, grief, or reactivity might be seen as one’s level of differentiation.

The film offers a poignant reminder that both families and societies are emotional systems extending across generations, and that understanding our place in these larger systems may be essential for responding thoughtfully to the challenges of our time.

view trailer >

Kelly Matthews-Pluta, LCSW is listening to “Robin Nusslock: How Stress Gets Under Our Skin.” an episode of The Mind & Life Podcast

Neuroscientist Robin Nusslock explores how stress affects the brain, emotions, and body; how people learn patterns of threat and safety; and how early adversity, family relationships, and broader social conditions can shape health across generations. The conversation also brings neuroscience into dialogue with Buddhist thought, meditation, neuroplasticity, and the possibility of change.

The episode offers several points of connection with Bowen family systems theory. Its attention to the effects of chronic stress, early family experience, intergenerational patterns, and family-level intervention is consistent with a systems view of emotional functioning. While Bowen theory focuses on the family as an emotional system and on the role of differentiation in managing reactivity, this conversation adds a neuroscience perspective on how stress and relationship processes may become embodied. It may be of particular interest to listeners curious about the intersection of family systems, biology, and contemplative practice.

“Biology is very dynamic. The more I study the biology of the human brain and body, the more I really begin to appreciate that it’s molded and sculpted by experience, much more than I initially thought.”

listen >

Upcoming CFC Programs and Conferences

2026 Summer Conference

Staying Curious in an Impatient Culture: 
How Systems Thinking Sparks Creativity and Flexibility in Relationships. 
Scheduled for Friday, July 10, 2026, this year’s event will be held virtually (online only), featuring Dr. Kathleen Smith as the guest presenter.
learn more >

Post Graduate Training Program in Bowen Theory

A continuous, immersive program from September 2026 to June 2027.
Monthly sessions (first Fridays, 9:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Central Time) via Zoom.
Includes lectures, videos, discussions, case studies, and family of origin consultations. Deadline for applications is August 1, 2026
learn more >

Bowen Family Systems Theory 101

The program is designed to provide participants with a general overview of each concept of Bowen Family Systems Theory. Meets 8 consecutive weeks on Zoom, on Thursdays from 10 to 11 a.m. CST. October 1 – November 19, 2026.
learn more >

Volume 10 Number 4 | Summer 2026
CFC News published quarterly
by the Center for Family Consultation

Founding Editor: Leslie Ann Fox
Managing Editor: Lisa Friedstein
Production and Design: Justin Reed

Murray Bowen, MD developed the concept of differentiation and societal emotional process. The basic idea is that emotional forces in families correlate to emotional forces in society. This process can be progressive or regressive with individuals and families at the lower level of differentiation being the most vulnerable to environmental influence.  As anxiety increases and individuality decreases, functioning lowers and symptom severity increases. Broader societal processes and the stressed emotional fields created can have a debilitating effect on individuals and the social functioning of some segments of society.

This post is a summary of the presentation, given at the 31st Annual Midwest Symposium, May 2 – 3,2014. The presentation began with family diagram and family evaluation of three individuals: an ambitious psychiatrist, Cornelia Wilbur M.D., an imaginative journalist, Flora Schreiber and a very willing “patient” Shirley Mason. All three collaborated to produce the book Sybil that was published in 1973. Society was eager to receive it.

The main character Sybil (Shirley Mason) was diagnosed by Dr. Wilbur with Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD), to whom she revealed extensive sexual abuse by her mother. The process of a book being ranked by the NY Times as among the 10 best-selling nonfiction books of the year to being categorized as fiction over time was examined.  In addition, the rates of MPD diagnosis and the perception of the validity of the diagnosis was traced from 1973 to the present.

Emotional process is spread through interlocking triangles. The basic molecule of emotional systems is the triangle. The emotional process, fusion and interdependency between these three individuals was described as well as the interlocking triangles they created that influenced the broader professional environments of the mental health, legal and publicity fields. These professional fields simultaneously moved on fiction, perception and emotion immaturity, not fact.

Bowen family systems theory can make a contribution to the understanding of societal process and the fluctuation of symptoms in society. Does emotional reactivity and cause and effect thinking prevent society from knowing what is in front of it? From “knowing what it knows” as Murray Bowen, M.D. asked during the course of his research.  Knowledge changes constantly and inconsistencies  and contradictions need to be examined, thought through and tested with robust discussion to see if the concepts holdup over time. The mental health field will stay vulnerable until it is based in the reality of science or “knows what it knows”.  Perhaps the continued development of Bowen family systems theory and efforts to continue to be in contact with the sciences will lead to the further development of the science of human behavior. This might work against societal regression and the suffering it brings.

Margaret Otto, LSCSW
motto@kcfamilysystems.org

The post Fiction as a Regulator of the Mental Health Field: The Case of Sybill appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

Associate Faculty, Family Therapist, The Bowen Center for the Study of the Family, Washington, D. C. Adjunct Faculty, The George Washington University, Counseling and Human Development

Movements toward resolving immature emotional attachments with one’s parents affords the opportunity to develop mature beliefs, feelings, and thoughts. An increase in differentiation of self sets  the stage for seeing self in the parental triangle and moving forward to secure a more mature adult to adult relationship. Gaining more neutrality in the parental triangle positively impacts one’s differentiation of self, marital relationships, and parent-child relationships.

During Bowen’s 1967 conference he describes his shifting focus onto the parental triangles and the impact on one’s differentiation of self. Bowen (1978) states, “there was a different emphasis on the triangle between self and parents, which is the most important primary triangle in life, and the one in which a person develops the triangle relationship patterns that remain relatively fixed in all relationships” (p. 531).

Shifting one’s priority to his/her parental relationships is not the easiest venture. Much of one’s effort is focused on marital, friend, sibling, and/or colleague relationships while the parental relationships remain stuck in unresolved emotional attachments. Above and beyond being a great parent, spouse, and colleague, parental relationships are the most valuable to the family emotional unit and in differentiation of self. The opportunity for maturation and development of self in the family exists in one getting more neutral and realistic in the parental relationships. Increasing one’s differentiation of self with his/her parents will secure a lasting impact on the family emotional unit.

The post Living in the Triangles: Learning from Our Parents Over a Lifetime appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

One fall not long ago I joined a group of family systems colleagues from around the country at our first in-person, weeklong Transcendental Meditation retreat at a spa in Iowa. From about the second day, my mind settled down. I experienced the streaming silence that has become second nature to me. But I felt the most notable result during the week that followed, which I spent in Boston with my grieving younger brother and his family.

My sister-in-law had just passed. Ten days of sad yet precious grieving and funeral planning were interspersed with long talks with my brother, my niece, and my niece’s boyfriend in the light-filled house my sister-in-law had renovated. The rich simplicity of her sense of design supported us even as her absence was palpable. We touched the curtains and pillows she had crafted at her cluttered sewing table in the living room, where abandoned scraps of lush fabric lay scattered, pieces of a tapestry forever unfinished.

My sister-in-law was born in 1960 to working-class parents, part of a close-knit family in a small Boston suburb. On the way home from elementary school, she would often stop at her grandparents’ house for cookies. When she grew up, she bought a home a short walk up the hill from the humble split-level where she had shared a tiny room with her sister. When her parents passed away, a favorite cousin of hers bought their house. Her brother’s and sister’s homes are a few blocks away.

After her marriage to my brother in 1996, my sister-in-law often seemed uncomfortable in our geographically scattered family of psychotherapists, and the three of us siblings who were children of divorce. For all involved, it could be an itchy connection, adding distance to the already wide orbit my brother has occupied in the solar system of our family since he was a teenager. As the family scholar Peg Donley has noted, evolution has shaped a husband’s primary dependency to tend toward his wife, whereas the wife’s tends toward her children. I once asked my brother’s old friend how he viewed my brother’s marriage. “She is his bride,” was his reply. He was right.

Charged by my Bowen mentors to function as a family leader, I made efforts to meet her on her own turf over the years. I developed relationships with her parents even though my brother told me I would be embarrassing myself if I dropped by to visit them. My heart was in my throat as I pulled into their driveway unannounced, but I kept going, and they welcomed me inside with tea. Her Irish father was disabled by then and seemed to enjoy sitting with me for half an hour. I made the drive from Vermont to attend their funerals. When my sister-in-law began her own decades-long struggle with serious health issues, her strong sense of privacy tightened her circle.

But my years of trying to build connection helped me hold fast to an image of the generous and relaxed sister-in-law I had encountered in her own territory. And it softened another image that sometimes invaded my mind, of someone who had once pushed against my wife in a way I found hard to take.

My slow but steady efforts paid dividends when my sister-in-law died. My parents and siblings knew I was the one who should go and stay with the family. My brother wanted me there.

During these days there were tears when my brother got loving texts from his tennis pals and lots of stupid jokes from me. As I took care of the flowers that poured in daily, we recalled our florist grandmother, whom he was named after. I kept people fed, too, insisting that my exhausted brother have lunch. I cleaned up the basement after the plumbing explosion that resulted from my brother’s accidentally flushing wipes during his weeks of round-the-clock care for his wife. You should have heard the gorilla cry that rose from the basement when my brother discovered dirty water pouring from a pipe two days after his wife’s death—and the self-deprecating humor in his sigh when the plumber diagnosed the cause.

I reminded him how skilled he was at giving speeches and was the first to read the draft of his eulogy. After asking me to review it, he left the house to go shopping. He didn’t want to see my face as I read it, but he let me serve as his copy editor in the following days as he polished it. He practiced it aloud with me seven times. “Slow down,” I advised. “Let them savor this.”

All week I asked him, “What do you want to do now?” We played pickleball, took fast walks, raked leaves, and watched the Celtics with my niece’s equally NBA-obsessed boyfriend of three years. I made sweet tea for my sweet niece. I asked my brother questions to help him think through some in-law politics. He let me teach him a bit of yoga.

I will always remember hearing him stir at 5 o’clock each morning. I kept him company while he made his coffee, to talk for as long as he wanted before I meditated. Sometimes we talked for two hours.

In the process of deciding to leave our retreat experiment, traveling to Boston, and taking care of my brother’s family in the days that followed, I felt an unmistakably expanded sense of personal flow.

In the ancient Indian meditation tradition that TM emerges from, the term smooth is often used to describe progress in human development, when an orderly inner stillness starts to infuse the waking mind. I found myself using this word, smooth, whenever my wife and I checked in by phone while I was with my brother.

What was I describing? It was, like that of my sister-in-law, another distinct absence. But this was an absence of friction in my mind. This smoothness was as thick and all-encompassing as the mist that hung in the morning air, yet it lasted longer. Rather than appearing in momentary glimmers as it used to, after the retreat the mental smoothness seemed to stretch for hours.

Where was it located? It was within. Smooth was the lens through which I looked at the grieving world. And by some intimacy between what we see and how we see it, smoothness was without as well. Smoothed were the falling yellow leaves, the face of a grieving elderly neighbor, the testy group decisions, and tearful mourning. Smoothed was my nervous fear of change.

In the Bowen wisdom tradition, the word presence has a special place. We speak of being “present and accounted for during key family transitions.” We speak of “simply being present” as more helpful than giving anxious advice. We speak of the ability of presence to infuse strength into the systemic relational field. The retreat honed my ability to live these principles, enriched by this smoothness.

Perhaps the most notable example of this newfound capacity was in my relationship with my niece’s shy boyfriend. Just as I had wanted to become closer to my sister-in-law, I was also determined to know my brother’s daughter as well as I do my other nieces and nephews. Multigenerational connectedness is another practice of Bowen theory. It predicts diminished risk of serious symptoms in future generations.

Each day I stayed in my brother’s house, the young man opened to me a bit more, and by day five we were friends. He talked about his favorite colleagues, shared his careful politics, and laughed with me in a way my brother said he hadn’t seen before. I wondered if our time together augmented his confidence in a potential future union with my niece. They are coming to visit us in January for the first time as a couple.

When I look at the impact the Vermont Center for Family Studies’ meditation retreat had on how I related to my family system when it was under pressure, I am convinced that we have found an efficient pathway to differentiation of self. Even the moments when I was called on to be authoritative were strengthened, as when I quietly informed an occasionally intimidating family member that I could not reassure him about the timing of post-funeral gatherings.

THE SCREEN BEHIND THE STORY IN THE HOUSE OF GRIEF

As I tried to shape this immaterial smoothness into words, the metaphor of a movie screen satisfied me. The unmoving screen is part of every movie. Yet it is flat and colorless. It has no story and every story. It has no character and every character. It has no setting yet is there, on time, at every location. It shimmers diamond white. Its corners are precise, a geometric abstraction behind our flickering story frames.

The screen wins no Oscars. It gets no reviews, has no promotional budget, is absent from the cast list. Plainly visible before the projector rolls, it makes moviegoers impatient for the coming attractions.

Lost in the show, we forget our silent screen. The screen of consciousness itself is silent, transcendental. There has never been a show without it, nor will there ever be. It unifies all dramas. During the practice of silence, we come to better know our screen as the differentiated, universal self. As we learn to rest there, our storyline briefly disappears. In rushes the peace of differentiation from our story. We discover our vastness. We are not our endless cliffhangers. As it intrigues us more and more, the fullness of our screen awakens. It glistens even during grief.

Did you know that only 10% of the cells in our bodies are mammalian—that 90% are bacteria? When someone can think in evolutionary ways all the way back to when all life on earth was bacteria, and see that we humans are still primarily bacteria, it really gets you thinking differently about your family history…but I will leave that for another day.

At the 31^st Annual Midwest Symposium in Wilmette, IL on May 2^nd and 3^rd, 2014, Charles Raison, MD presented his thinking on Fractal Compassion: Bugs, Immunity, and the Tribal Mind. Dr. Raison’s knowledge across a broad range of scientific disciplines reminded me of how Dr. Murray Bowen approached his early work in developing Bowen family systems theory.  Dr. Raison is a broad thinker—combining knowledge from his studies of medicine, microbiology, evolution, anthropology, ethnology, and Buddhism to find and research new methods of treating patients suffering from depression. From the results of research on hyperthermia treatments to compassionate meditation learned from the practices of the Tibetan Monks, his presentation stimulated my thinking about the relationship of inflammation, stress and depression, about how all three are deeply rooted in our evolutionary past. Of course, I now have more questions than answers.

For example, in ancient times, to survive past infancy or childhood, humans required protection from death caused by predators, or infections from injuries by predators. Parents and the tribal group protected the infant as it grew to maturity.  And, for the first 6 months of life the immunity passed on at birth by the mother helped protect it from infections. The stress response took over where the parents left off in avoiding predators, but what about protection from infections? Does the stress response to an advancing predator included initiating the inflammatory process in preparation to help recover from possible injury or infection?

If injury was avoided, the inflammatory response was no longer necessary and stopped. Today, living in an over-crowded, polluted, noisy, frenetic, and over connected world, there isn’t enough time for inflammation to turn off between threatening events. Thus we see the presence of inflammation in the modern-day chronic diseases that plague our society—such as cancer, cardio-vascular disease, diabetes, etc. However, Dr. Raison’s research also suggests a connection between inflammation and depression. That was a new one for me to consider and certainly would resonate with systems thinkers.

Dr. Raison suggested depression may have played a role in ancient times to help the larger group survive—the injured (infectious person) self-isolated from the group, a common behavior associated with depression. The behavior didn’t necessarily help the individual survive, but it was in the best interest of the larger group. Do the unrelenting threats, and almost continuous stress experienced in modern societies jump-start the ancient human physiological adaptive response—including the inflammatory process and accompanying depression that we don’t know how to turn off?

So how do we turn it off? That’s where compassion meditation training comes in. You can hear Dr. Raison explain that himself.

Leslie Ann Fox

The post Connecting Inflammation, Depression and Compassion Meditation Training appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

At the Annual Midwest Symposium on Bowen Theory, May 2 -3, 2014, Dr. Kerr presented on his longstanding interest in the relationship between health, illness, and the family emotional system, and has done extensive research with cancer patients and their families.  In this presentation, he gave an overview of the systems thinking that researchers are bringing to the study of cancer, and showed how this fits with the systems thinking in Bowen theory.

Dr. Kerr began his presentation with the idea of an “open relationship,” defined by Murray Bowen as one in which each partner can communicate innermost thoughts and feelings to the other without fear of hurting the other.  Kerr notes that such a relationship is ideal; it is health promoting.  However, such a relationship depends on the emotional maturity of partners, their ability to manage their own anxiety and feelings, not intruding, demanding, caving, or avoiding others.  With increasing chronic anxiety, family relationships move toward greater reactivity and less openness.  Kerr refers to this process as emotional regression:  “If chronic anxiety escalates in a relationship system, the system becomes dominated by less thoughtful and more reactive ways of interacting that are older in an evolutionary sense than the advanced complex behaviors of a well-functioning relationship system.”

Dr. Kerr traced the multigenerational process that generates variation in emotional functioning among members of a family, and that leads to some members becoming vulnerable to absorbing a disproportionate amount of anxiety.  He concluded:  “Chronic anxiety can disturb that person’s homeostasis which manifests as a disturbance of organ or tissue functioning somewhere in the body.”

He went on to cite a number of scientists who are looking at cancer at the larger organismic level and who are seeing regression as a disturbance “at the cellular relationship level that renders some tumors highly aggressive.”  One cancer researcher, Dr. Minna Bissell, makes this striking point:  “Cells keep each other in line. They receive many cues from the environment about how to behave.  Cancer is not a problem of growth, as the entire field believes. It’s a matter of context.  Place a cancer cell in a normal environment and it becomes normal; place a normal cell in a cancer environment and it becomes cancerous.”  One cannot miss the parallel with family emotional process.

Another scientist whose ideas on cancer fit with the regression theory is Dr. Paul Davies. He sees the mechanisms of cancer as deep-rooted in evolutionary history.  Cancer cells are our own body’s cells, not foreign viruses or bacteria.  Cancer is the result of the proliferation of misregulated cells.

While covering a wide range of complex data and ideas, Dr. Kerr “connected the dots” in a clear and highly organized way.  He followed his presentation with a clinical videotape of a family that was remarkably astute in observing their own emotional process over many years, a story that included a diagnosis of cancer in one member.  Dr. Kerr’s presentation elicited great interest and thoughtful comment from the Symposium guest scientist, Dr. Charles Raison.

Stephanie Ferrera

The post “Toward a Systems Theory of Cancer”, Summary of a presentation by Michael E. Kerr, M.D. appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

The “self-evident truth” that “all men are created equal” is a cornerstone of American democracy, and an ideal toward which our society strives.  We hold individuals to be equal under the law; we legislate equal rights for all to access opportunities and participate in society.  However, despite the talk of “a level playing field,” progress toward equality has come slowly and only with concerted, organized effort.

Biologists have an explanation for the difficulties.  According to Edward O. Wilson, the dominance hierarchy is “a general trait of organized mammalian societies.” (Wilson, E. O., 1998.  Consilience, p. 259) That includes us.  We are like other mammals in our sensitivity to rank and our instinctive tendencies toward dominance and subordinance.

The study of chimpanzees offers unvarnished examples of hierarchical behavior.  In a rank competition between two males who are closely matched in size and strength, one takes a dominant posture—hair-raising, stomping, barking—and the other a submissive posture—bowing and pant-grunting.  Displaying rank in this way makes it unnecessary for them to actually fight.  However, the winning male needs more than bluff and bravado to hold the alpha position.  He needs the support of allies as well as intelligence and social skill.  Frans de Waal in his classic Chimpanzee Politics describes the intricate alliances and shifting triangles involved in chimpanzee social life.  His concept of triadic awareness refers to the level of social awareness that one must develop to navigate a system based on coalitions.  This includes awareness of one’s own relationships and relationships between others, as well as awareness of kinship, rank, close association, and alliances.  “One must constantly keep track of the presence or absence of allies as well as the presence or absence of the opponent’s allies.”  (de Waal and Embree, “The Triadic Nature of Primate Social Relationships.”  Family Systems, Vol. 4, No. 1)

The ways in which human social life is like that of chimpanzees is quite obvious, although we try to be more subtle about it.  What is different about humans is the far greater size and complexity of our societies and the level to which we have taken the social hierarchy.  We produced SES:  socioeconomic status.  Robert Sapolsky considers this “the most permeating form of status any primate has invented.”  And further:  “When humans invented material inequality, they came up with a way of subjugating the low ranking like nothing ever before seen in the primate world.”  (Sapolsky, 2018, Behave, pp. 441-2)

Murray Bowen was keenly observant of the fact that resources, opportunities, and advantages are distributed unequally in families and societies.  He was clear about the emotional processes that operate automatically to the advantage of some at the expense of others.  We can use this knowledge to manage our own hierarchical behavior and make the systems we live in fairer for all.

Social status cannot be ignored.  There are extensive studies showing that a person’s place on the socioeconomic ladder (SES) is a significant factor in his or her health and longevity, as well as stress levels and quality of life.  What also matters, as importantly or more so than material security, is subjective socioeconomic status, how people think and feel about their status.  According to Sapolsky, “subjective SES predicts health at least as accurately as objective SES, meaning that it’s not about being poor.  It’s about feeling poor.”  (Sapolsky, 2017 Behave, p. 441)

Given the reality of the permeating influence of social status on our lives, what choices do we have about living with this fact without being overly anxious and preoccupied with it?  Bowen theory is full of ideas on this question.  For starters is the concept of differentiation of self.  Asked whether increasing level of differentiation is equated with power, Dr. Bowen explained the difference.  Power has to do with “exerting control and domination over others.  The concept of differentiation has to do with self and not with others.  Differentiation deals with working on one’s own self, with controlling self, with becoming a more responsible person, and permitting others to be themselves.”  (Bowen, 1978, Family Therapy in Clinical Practice, p. 409)

One can work on differentiation by awareness of the natural, automatic tendency to dominate others and managing that tendency within self.  It may be expressed with aggression and coercion, or with seduction or force of personality, or lining up allies (aka triangling).  Hierarchies work well when rank is based on merit, on the level of contribution one makes and responsibility one takes toward the welfare of the family or community.

One can work on differentiation by awareness of the natural, automatic tendency to take a subordinate position.  When under threat, it is hard not to do this.  The impulse is to defer to others, let someone else make the decision and take the responsibility.  It is expressed by going silent, or retreating, or leaning on others rather than thinking for self.  Hierarchies work well when members step up and take the lead in areas where they have knowledge and expertise.  Do not deprive your family or group of your best thinking.

One can work on differentiation by awareness of the triangles and projection process that operate in all families and societies.  It takes careful observation to see these powerful, instinctual mechanisms that result in undermining the functioning of some members, and, further, to recognize and stop one’s own participation in these patterns.

Human societies reflect the groupiness of human nature.  We form groups for every conceivable purpose.  One can be less defined by social class and more defined by self by joining with others on common ground of shared interests, values, and principles.  Status is based on being a respected contributor to the group.  David Sloan Wilson writes:

“In any animal or human society, social status can be achieved in two ways:  by physical intimidation or by cultivating a reputation as a cooperator.  Status is taken in the first case and bestowed in the second case.  In most animal societies, status is mostly of the taken variety.  In most hunter-gatherer societies and many other small-scale human groups, status is mostly of the bestowed variety. …Unsurprisingly, societies where status is bestowed work much better than societies where status is taken.  In fact, the human ability to bestow status and resist having it taken is arguably our most distinctive quality and a precursor…to all forms of cooperation.”  (Wilson, D.S., 2017 “Sexual bullying and the power of norms” in The Evolution Institute Newsletter)

The post The Ups & Downs of Social Status appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

I named this essay “The Extraordinary Human Capacity for Nurturance” because that idea was such an important takeaway for me from listening to Dr. Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, the guest scientist at the Center for Family Consultation’s 43^rd Annual Midwest Symposium. Dr. Hrdy is known for her original work as a primatologist and evolutionary anthropologist. In 1999, she published Mother Nature, a comprehensive study of motherhood in humans and other species. She followed this in 2009 with Mothers and Others, in which she traces the deep biological roots of cooperative breeding and how it has led to our capacity for empathy and mutual understanding. New research on the nurturing potential of fathers inspired Dr. Hrdy to write Father Time: A Natural History of Men and Babies, published in 2024.

Dr. Hrdy finds the key to cooperative breeding in the “primatologically unique length of human childhood.” The idea that babies, with their appearance of helplessness and total dependency, are not passive recipients but active agents in the process of eliciting care is new to me and quite astounding. It is their very fragility that makes human infants so powerful. Hrdy writes: “The infant would need to be able to monitor and assess the intentions of both the mother and these others and elicit their assistance in ways no other ape ever needed to do before.” (Mothers and Others, 31) From birth, infants begin to engage in face-to-face gazing and reciprocal signaling with a caregiver. This is a step toward mind-reading and the ability to understand the thoughts and feelings of others, to have empathy toward others. As familiar as I am with babies, I had not considered how much is actually going on in those captivating little humans.

The concept of cooperative breeding, found in quite a few species but far more advanced in our ancestral hominins and our own species, is the defining mission of our families. Babies need more care than a mother alone can give. An alloparent is an individual other than the mother who cares for children. Along with fathers, grandmothers are often the first in line to help. Many family members are fascinated by a newborn, and throughout childhood, a host of people will contribute to the child’s care. Parents, and especially mothers, find themselves in the position of gatekeepers, evaluating the competence and quality of help that others have to offer. The level of maturity shapes the trust and cooperation between mother and father, and between parents and alloparents. Both Dr. Hrdy’s concept of cooperative breeding and Dr. Bowen’s concept of the family as an emotional unit highlight the importance of sustaining strong emotional connections within and across generations. The most vulnerable mother is one who is on her own and lacks family support.

How and when did cooperative breeding evolve? To find the origin of the conditions that would pressure creatures into evolving this unusual mode of keeping offspring alive, Dr. Hrdy goes back to “the Pleistocene crucible” with its harsh and unpredictable climate, predation risks, recurring food shortages, and other dangers. She looks at the long line of hominins that preceded modern humans, identifying Homo erectus as one who managed to survive for 1.6 million years. “These large-brained African hominins were our ancestors, giving rise around 300,000 years ago to even larger-brained Homo sapiens. Sometime afterward, between 100,000 and 50,000 years ago, these anatomically modern humans spread out of Africa, and Homo sapiens began its extraordinary expansion around the world.” (Mothers and Others, 18)

Humankind is now at a population of more than eight billion people living on a crowded planet. We live in hyperconnected societies with an almost unfathomable degree of social and economic interdependence. As we grapple with twenty-first-century crises, we would do well to remember the deeply rooted, uniquely human capacity for cooperation, empathy, and nurturing that we have inherited from ancestors who faced even greater dangers than ours. Dr. Hrdy describes the expression of this capacity at its best: “To care about others requires a sense of self along with the capacity to conceptualize others as separate selves with their own mental states and feelings.” (Mothers and Others, 135) In Bowen theory, this describes a person at a high level of differentiation. Individuals and families vary in the degree to which they attain a clear definition of self and the ability to understand and relate to others as separate selves. If indeed the capacity to understand, cooperate, and care for one another has been key to our survival as a species, then it will be those qualities that we most need in a world that is becoming increasingly governed by AI.

The husband had a way of erupting emotionally that led his wife to call him “the volcano.”  He pursued; she distanced; he pursued more rigorously.  Her way of retreating, seemingly impervious to his needs, led him to call her “the sphinx.”  At times of high stress, this pattern left this truly devoted couple in considerable distress, he feeling shut out, she feeling pressured. They found their own language—volcano, sphinx—as a step to observing their reciprocal functioning and eventually to seeing the absurdity and humor in it.

Dr. Bowen observed husbands and wives reacting to one another with an intensity he came to call “emotional fusion.”  Each had a profound influence on the functioning of the other.  It would not take much to set off conflict.  He also saw “striking emotional distance” in some marriages which he called the “emotional divorce.”  Some couples worked out the marital challenges with a pattern of “overadequate-inadequate reciprocity.”  Finding it difficult to make joint decisions, one partner would take charge and make a decision for both while the other became compliant or helpless.  These are three relationship patterns that operate with varying levels of rigidity or flexibility relative to the level of maturity of the partners.  A fourth pattern is the triangle in which a third party, or many third parties, become involved in ways that can relieve or sometimes exacerbate the tension in the marriage.  Bowen called the four patterns “anxiety-binding mechanisms.”  They can reduce tension in the short run, but they do not address the real issues that generate tension in the first place.  The automatic reactivity gets in the way of effective communication, joint decision-making and problem-solving.

Caught in these patterns, not knowing what else to do, couples tend to keep repeating them with the same frustrating results.  For those wishing to change or improve their marriage, knowledge of these patterns can be a key to “knowing what to do.”  With observation of family interaction, one becomes familiar with the version of emotional process that prevails in one’s own marriage.  It then becomes interesting to think about one’s own part.

One wife took on the project of focusing on her own side, and came up with a list:

• Failing to identify my own agendas; assuming my husband will agree without discussion;

• Making unilateral decisions without seeing how they will impact him;

• Reading his responses and guessing what they mean rather than talking;

• Borrowing his thinking on issues rather than thinking for myself;

• Accepting trade-offs in the marriage without identifying or evaluating them;

• Assuming responsibility for jobs he preferred not to do;

• Thereby trying to avoid conflict, but creating a buildup of resentment;

• Anxiously trying to calm him down;

• Communicating for him to the children…and many others;

• And more.

An exercise like this calls for good observation and personal reflection.  It yields many ideas for what one might want to change.  Change, that is, by and for self.  It frees one from the focus on the other and the ongoing futile struggle of getting him to change.

It seems to be in the nature of marriage, and probably all close relationships, that we know quite well from our own experience the challenges of living with that other person.  How to become equally clear about what it is like for that person to live with us is the important question.  To reach that level of awareness could, I believe, be considered a milestone of progress for any marriage.

The post Looking at Marriage: Seeing One’s Own Part appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

Publisher’s note: This is the third in a series of three blogs written by graduates of the CFC Post-Graduate Training Program. Applications for the 2026/2027 program are open. To request an application, please email: revjohnbell@gmail.com

I had little understanding of Bowen Family Systems Theory prior to attending the Winter Conference in 2012, where two faculty members presented on “Getting Ahead At Work.”  They talked about managing self—not other people—and operating from a clear sense of values and principles. The ideas were simple, but also profound and they helped shift my thinking from focus on others to self.  From that time on, I began to question my ideas about work (and family) that I had previously thought of as “dysfunctional or unhealthy,” (thinking I had nothing to do with it) and began instead to understand these ideas as normal functions of a system.  I was intrigued by the application of Bowen Theory to a leadership approach in a faculty member’s business. I also recall my sense of wonder after watching another faculty member present about her family of origin, in which she described asking her parents to record themselves answering questions about family facts.  I marveled about whether my own parents would ever be so supportive.

Seeing both a personal application and another, which had direct relevance to managing self in a professional system, attracted me to learning more about the theory. After participating in a family of origin group, I learned about the Post-Graduate Training Program and I recognized how further study of concepts and application of the theory would help me as I moved forward in my family work as well as my professional evolution.  I am so glad that I enrolled, because I have been able to establish more effective person to person contact with each member of my family of origin and (occasionally) manage my part in active triangles with my parents and siblings. After learning more about my own family facts, and asking my family to help with this, I have been able to experience relating to my parents in a new way that isn’t as anxious or intense.

I am certain that my relationships at work have often been a medium for satisfying emotional needs and I have managed anxiety with over-closeness, triangles, and over/under-functioning. After spending time learning about my family of origin and my place in that family system, I understand now why it felt normal to work in systems where, for example, a dominant authority emphasized “getting along,” over resolving open conflict, much like the emotional process of my family system. In my new role as a manager, I can now manage myself with greater intention and calm when I am clear about my values and understand my role in the emotional systems at play.

The theory has provided me with a truly useful framework for managing myself in my personal life and professional practice.  The training program is an accessible, intriguing and enriching opportunity to learn from professionals who have done their own personal work as well as applied it in effective and supportive ways with their clientele and colleagues.  Not only is this an opportunity to take a deep dive into this unique scientific theory, it also provides space to cultivate self-care and personal development. This program is tremendously helpful, whether for personal growth and learning, or for clinical and professional application.

The post CFC Post-Graduate Training Program: Through a Lens of Leadership, Self-Care and Clinical Practice appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

Publisher’s note: This is the first in a series of three blogs written by graduates of the CFC Post-Graduate Training Program. Applications are being accepted for the 2026/2027 program. To request an application, email: revjohnbell@gmail.com

I thought it would be a relatively straight-forward task to describe the impact the training program has had on my life and my clinical practice, but that was foolish, considering Bowen theory requires most of us, and certainly me, to rethink much of what I had learned in my family and professional training.

I came into the training program after about 6 years in one of the Center’s “Family of Origin” groups; these groups consist of monthly meetings where we read and discuss a chapter on Bowen theory, then observe the facilitator work with a member of the group one on one, observing their family process, alternating through members each month. This provided an opportunity to both observe and participate in the process of using the theory to understand our lives and family. In the training program we also participated in this one on one examination of our family process, but this was augmented by the monthly day long focus on the Bowen literature with discussion. After years of the two-hour monthly meeting, it was a distinctive pleasure to devote an entire day to thinking about and discussing Bowen Theory.

What seems so unique to Bowen Theory, and so foreign to most other behavioral perspectives, is the deep respect, curiosity, and most importantly, neutrality about the instinctual, primal drives motivating human behavior.  The unyielding focus on facts and the primacy of the nuclear family to continue to shape our life course, along with the crucial recognition of the place of triangles and the role of emotional contagion, provide a very different way to think about our families and the people we work with. Also, unlike most clinical training, this one requires one to work on one’s self FIRST, realizing that clinicians can never do with clients what they cannot do for themselves and with their own families.

This training, like the theory, provides no easy answers. Bowen theory is not a “how to” technique. You will not leave this with a handy set of protocols to use with your clients. Rather you will leave with a better set of questions.  Bowen theory has provided me a roadmap for working with my clients and family that many of my colleagues never receive. I am immensely grateful that, over and over, this training and this theory guide me towards an ever deepening respect and appreciation for the varied and creative ways we humans make a life for ourselves.  It has given me a way to understand the role of a multitude of variables in the course of a human life. It continues to guide me to stop over- functioning in my family, and with my clients, and provides a theoretical framework that gives me the courage to continue to probe the family and professional areas that scare and challenge me.

The post Reflections on Bowen Theory Post-Graduate Training at Center for Family Consultation appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

Gregory Miller, PhD, gave one of the many interesting presentations from the 54th Symposium on Bowen Theory and Psychotherapy in Washington, DC, on November 4-5, 2017.  Dr. Miller, a professor at Northwestern University in Evanston, IL, discussed his research on Adverse Childhood Events/Experiences (ACES) and physical health in adulthood.  He described experiences in childhood being “sticky” in a biological sense and often showing up later in poor physical health outcomes.  The ACES he outlined were the usual suspects: abuse and/or neglect and low socio economic status (SES).  These hardships in childhood appear to have transferred to the cell make-up.  In adulthood this can translate to impaired immune function, heart disease, stroke, cancer and obesity.  The common thread with these diseases is chronic low level inflammation.  He used the phrase “reactive cells” to illustrate stress response system reacting more and calming down less.  The wear and tear of chronic stress, sometimes low levels, but near constant, appears to deplete the system.  So the rate of shut down, the down regulation after a threat is removed or neutralized, may be more important than how often it is activated.

In addition, his studies show that improvements in SES in adult hood, say from a childhood of low SES, does not always correlate with improvement on physical health.  The cells appear embedded with ACES.  While some groups with low childhood SES and high ACES show some health stabilization in adult hood, people of color do not.  In fact, his findings indicate a person of color, who had a high ACES score and raised their SES in adult hood, would have a higher likelihood of poor health than a similar scoring peer who did not raise their SES.  This outcome is puzzling as it would seem a person with high ACES, who then graduates from college and lives in a higher SES would fare better than a peer who’s SES stays low.  However, if you consider the toll it might take to improve one’s SES and contend with racism, the outcomes become clearer.  To complicate the picture further, Dr. Miller’s work shows better mental health outcomes for the group of college graduates at the same time the physical health outcomes are worse.  The cost of success for people of color, who came from low SES, is high.  The light in this tunnel appears to be relationships.  The one factor that showed better outcomes was if the person of color reported a responsive, available and nurturing caregiver in childhood.

The implications of Dr. Miller’s work fit well with the relationship focus of Bowen Theory.  The difficult and challenging experiences of high ACES and low SES can be managed within a responsive caregiver relationship.  The importance of human relationships and connections is a key piece in Bowen Theory.  The research of Dr. Miller appears to show similar results.

The post Early Stress and Later Disease: Research Shows One Mitigating Factor appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.

Publisher’s note: This is the second  in a series of three blogs written by graduates of the CFC Post-Graduate Training Program. Applications are currently being accepted for the 2026/2027 program. To request an application email: revjohnbell@gmail.com

I participated in the Center for Family Consultation’s Post-Graduate Training Program in Bowen Family Systems Theory while I was completing my doctorate degree in clinical Social Work at Aurora University.  I began the program during the third year of my doctoral studies when it came time to choose two electives that would align with my distinct area of clinical interest. The timing for beginning the training program could not have been more perfect as my cohort had just completed our clinical coursework in families and family therapy.

In the Families course, I was exposed to all the pioneers in the field of family therapy and many contemporary theorists as well.  It was here where I received my first real introduction to Bowen Theory.  Although the information provided during class was intriguing to me, the content was generally an overview of the theory.  I didn’t realize this at the time as to me, what I was learning was fascinating and the professional discussions I had with my professor and classmates left me wanting to learn more.  To this end, I worked with faculty at the University to nest the training program into my doctoral work in order to satisfy the two elective courses necessary to graduate.  It was at this point that I enrolled in the Post-Graduate Training Program at CFC.  I had no idea of all that I would gain from this experience.

Bowen Theory resonated with me immediately.  Having never really studied it before, I had limited insight into how I could apply its concepts to my client’s lives and the concerns they presented in therapy.  As I learned more and more about the theory, I began to understand it in a new way.  I realized quickly that there was no way a multi-theorist textbook could ever teach me fully about Bowen Theory.  As I gained a deeper understanding of how the eight concepts fit together, I began to finally understand from where people’s angst, anxiety, fear, confusion, and frustrations manifested within their relationships as well as the repeating problems and patterns that seemed to surface in some of their lives over time.  I also became acutely aware that as mental health practitioners in today’s society, our focus has been primarily on ameliorating symptoms in clients rather than on learning what has caused those symptoms in the first place.  Nothing in my education or training had addressed the etiology of people’s problems and the anxiety that results from them in quite this way.

The first surprise I encountered upon entering the program was that I would learn from faculty who had trained directly under Murray Bowen.  I had no idea that I would receive first-hand insight into how and why Bowen hypothesized the eight concepts in the way that he did.  Understanding the research behind the theory and learning how to observe each of the concepts in action in both my own, and my client’s lives has been invaluable.  Bowen believed that a clinician’s most effective training ground is his/her own life and therefore, exploration into one’s own functioning is necessary for understanding what clients are dealing with.  Faculty members at CFC teach participants how to conduct the exploration process with themselves and others.

The second surprise was that I would learn as much as I did and become so interested in the science and neuroscience behind the theory.  Learning about others’ research efforts which supported Bowen’s work and the theory in general played a valuable part in turning me into a research-minded clinician.  I find myself turning to the research often as new developments regarding anxiety and its etiology are discovered as these discoveries are supporting earlier hypotheses made by Bowen.

The Post-Graduate Training Program has impacted me both personally and professionally.  The concept, differentiation of self, (something I knew little about prior to this experience), has become an ongoing focus and will undoubtedly, continue throughout my life.  The impact of this shift in thinking has brought me endless opportunities for growth.  Professionally, my work as a school social worker has become more enriching as I have begun to realize the importance of helping children and their families build open relationships with each other and all that this construction really encompasses over the lifespan and across generations. From a systemic perspective, I now also understand why second order change in our public educational system is critical to the ongoing health of both families and public education.

In my private practice, clients often tell me that our work together is different and refreshing after having cycled through numerous clinicians before me.  The non-threatening, collaborative coaching approach that I use in my work with others is as intriguing to clients as it was to me when I first learned about it.  I can appreciate their excitement in learning new ideas that they can apply to themselves and their lives as I too, have walked in their shoes.

Finally, in my work as an adjunct faculty member in the doctoral program from which I graduated, I have taught the Families class in a different way.  As before, the original pioneers in the field of family therapy are explored, as many contributed ideas to the current understanding of systems thinking.  An addition to the class is construction of the family diagram as defined by Bowen along with its use for assessing family functioning.  Students have commented that this is the most gratifying part of the class as they have had an opportunity to apply what they have learned to their own lives as well as using it to guide their clinical work with clients.

The post Post Graduate Training in Bowen Family Systems Theory: A Must Take Opportunity for Any Clinician Working with Families, Individuals, or Children appeared first on Center for Family Consultation.