Greasing the Wheels

Promoting a Working Alliance with Patients and Families
  • Susan H. McDaniel
  • Thomas L. Campbell
  • David B. Seaburn

Abstract

The relationship between families and their physician is the most powerful vehicle for influencing patients about issues regarding health and illness. Physicians influence their patients and patients influence their physicians. The doctor—patient relationship is an essential subsystem of the biopsychosocial approach to treatment. As such, it deserves special thought and consideration, and careful assessment when this alliance is problematic. The way the physician handles his or her part in the doctor—patient relationship can affect a patient’s sense of well-being and the likelihood that a patient and family will cooperate with any given treatment plan, not to mention the physician’s own sense of job satisfaction. For these important reasons, we will now turn to some pragmatic suggestions for promoting a constructive working alliance with patients and family members. We will focus on the physician’s side of this equation because that is what we can alter. Three fundamental interviewing skills enhance the potential for an effective partnership to develop between physician and family: building rapport, structuring the interview, and converting resistance into cooperation.

Keywords

Treatment Team Family Participation Building Rapport Working Alliance Biopsychosocial Approach 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Minuchin S, Fishman C: Family Therapy Techniques. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Neill J, Kniskern D (eds.): From Psyche to System: The Evolving Therapy of Carl Whitaker. New York: Guilford Press, 1982.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Watzlawick P, Weakland J, Fisch R: Change. New York: WW. Norton and Co., 1974.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Candib L, Steinberg G, Bedinghaus J, Martin M, Wheeler R, Pugnaire M, Wertheimer R: Doctors having families: The effect of pregnancy and childbearing on relationships with patients. Fam Med 1987; 19: 114–119.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crouch M: Working with one’s own family: Another path for professional development. Fam Med 1986; 18: 93–98.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mengel M: Physician ineffectiveness due to family-of-origin issues. Fam Syst Med 1987; 5 (2): 176–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Seaburn D, Harp J: Sequencing: The patient caseload as an interactive system. Fam Sys Med 1988; 6: 107–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McDaniel S, Campbell T, Wynne L, Weber T: Family systems consultation: Opportunities for teaching in Family Medicine. Fam Syst Med 1988; 6: 391–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Balint M: The Doctor, his Patient, and the Illness. New York: International Universities Press, 1957.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McDaniel S, Bank J, Campbell T, Mancini J, Shore B: Using a group as a consultant, in Wynne L, McDaniel S, Weber T (eds.): Systems Consultation: A New Perspective for Family Therapy. New York: Guilford Press, 1986.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan H. McDaniel
    • 1
  • Thomas L. Campbell
    • 1
  • David B. Seaburn
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Medicine and Highland Hospital, Jacob B. Holler Family Medicine CenterUniversity of RochesterRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations