How to Coach Yourself and Others Coaching Families | Page 164

Transactions
The third dimension of Contextual Theory – Transactions - refers to the interaction patterns in Families that
are reciprocally affected by its members. Although both Contextual and Systemic Approaches agree on
circular nature of relationships, the former sees Families as dynamic self-regulatory systems (Whitchurch &
Constantine (1993) cited by Gangamma, p. 12) in the state of permanent fluctuation of structure, roles and
communication patterns, functioning
to produce change in patterns or to
maintain status quo. According to the
Contextual Approach, every
individual strives for identity and
boundaries. Our identities only exist
in comparison to others. As social
beings we need complementarity in
meaningful relationships in the
Family, when “the other would no
longer be seen as superior or inferior
...”, which produces “...a less rigid
form of identity with which we make
contrast between “us” and “them.”
(Chaplin (2008), p.25) In this context
the fulfilment of goals and needs of
both the individual and the Family
defines a healthy family in the framework of Contextual Approach.

Relational Ethics
Probably the most significant contribution of Böszörményi-Nagy to Contextual Approach is the
development of its forth dimension – the ground breaking concept of Relational Ethics. Böszörményi-Nagy
strongly believed that our evolution, health and even survival depend on quality of human relationships. In
this context Relational Ethics consider mutual Trust, Loyalty, and Sincerity to be the key conditions of
strong relationships and united Families.
Böszörményi-Nagy was among the first Theorists who acknowledged that “Family Therapy and moral
questions are inseparable,” and to locate the “ethical dimension of family life and therapy at the centre.”
(Fowers, Wagner, (1997)) He also contributed to the field of Family Therapy by offering “positive practical
recommendations about the way to approach the moral dimension of Family Therapy.” (Fowers, Wagner,
(1997))

Critics
Some authors see Böszörményi-Nagy's emphasis on universally appealing ideas of Trustworthiness and
Fairness as a limitation rather than a strength, because it “provides a limited view of the good in Family
life.” (Fowers, Wagner, (1997))
When it comes to defining Fairness and Justice, Böszörményi-Nagy leaves it to Families. This allows for
“value-neutrality,” which in our age of “political correctness” is seen by many as a strength of the
Approach. However, Labanyi (2009, p. 22) argues that being a Therapist means to be “willing to extend our
thinking beyond our “safe” and introverted rituals.”
Value - neutrality always raises questions. If Justice can be defined by mutual agreement of Family
members, why the centuries-long debate on it is not yet resolved? Would children, elderly and disabled
have their say in the discussion? Would the negotiation allow for gender equality and split loyalties? The
same applies to Fairness. Their definitions vary in Families and societies of different backgrounds.
Ulitskaya (2007) gives examples of irreconcilable differences in definition of Justice and Loyalty in multi–
cultural immigrant families in Israel in 1960s. Importance of Connectedness and Trustworthiness can be
reduced to zero in favour of other socially accepted va