反思含攝文化下的 Bowen理論及其運用在華人文化中

Reflection on Culture-inclusive Concept of Bowen Theory and Practice in Chinese Culture

本研究在探索西方文化發展下的Bowen家族治療理論如何含攝到華人文化中，其中介紹Bowen家族治療 理論的哲學觀及其焦慮與自我分化的基本概念。接著探討國內對Bowen理論相關研究，並根據研究後 的反思，在含攝文化下對此理論提出建議。其中論及關係中的焦慮是普世的概念，但自我分化卻不 是，因此在華人文化治療中應將降低焦慮為處遇的方向，並不一定著重於提升個體的自我分化程度。 其次個體的分化程度，在本土文化中並不能完全推論其建立關係的運作好壞。分化程度為個體差異的 參考，不是失功能的判定。重新建構本土化之自我分化量表，基於分化的理論要義，以本土化的語言 建立量表問句，並建立本土分化常模，以呈現集體社會文化下個體分化程度的樣貌。最後西方個人主 義下所建構之Bowen理論含攝到集體主義的華人文化中，需要再多走一里路，除了照顧好自己的焦慮 外，也要照顧好他人的焦慮，特別在孝道的文化中，要協助照顧父母的情緒，以符合本土文化中孝道 的倫理。最後筆者建議，家族治療理論的進展，應該開始發展以儒、釋及道三家本土文化為基礎，建 構本土的家族治療理論，以符合本土文化的需求。

 

The present research examined how Bowen’s family therapy theory, developed under the Western culture, could be culture-inclusive in the Chinese culture. The research introduced the philosophy and concepts of selfdifferentiation and anxiety in Bowen’s family therapy theory. Reflecting on Bowen theory through a cultureinclusive process, this study provided three suggestions. Bowen’s family therapy theory offered a different perspective in understanding family relationships in the context of the Taiwanese culture through illuminating the emotional projection processes. In addition, the researcher reviewed domestic studies conducted in relation to Bowen theory, and found that concepts of the theory could be applied to the Chinese Culture. However, some of the domestic studies suggested that the techniques of Bowen theory should be modified and cultural issues should be considered in practice. Finally, this study attempted to provide culture-inclusive suggestions toward the theory. First, the anxiety aspect in the relationship is a universal concept, but the differentiation of self is not. In Western culture, self-differentiation was based on individualism, whereas collectivism was developed in Eastern culture; these two represent different cultural norms. Thus, the practice of this family therapy approach in Chinese culture should focus on decreasing the anxiety level, and not necessary on increasing the individual’s differentiation of self. Second, from the perspective, an individual’s differentiation level cannot fully predict whether the relationship is healthy or unhealthy. The differentiation level serves only a reference for individual differences, and cannot be used to determine dysfunction. A person’s differentiation level might not be high, but that could facilitate the fulfillment of cultural expectations and maintain a good relationship with other family members. Thus a person’s differentiation level can only represent his/her own individual status, not good or bad. A Differentiation of Self Scale should be constructed that incorporates the theory of differentiation and adapts to the localized language of the Chinese culture. If possible, the definition of self-differentiation should be modified to reflect Chinese culture and some items in the scale should be edited. Furthermore, a localized norm needs to be established to illuminate the aspects of differentiation among individuals in the collectivist culture. Constructed using an individualism perspective, In addition to taking care of one’s own anxiety, it is also critical to take care of the anxiety of others. In respect to the cultural importance of filial piety, taking care of the parents’ emotions is an imperative aspect according to the theory of filial piety. Lastly, family therapy theories have been adopted from the Western culture for almost forty years, and there is not a single family therapy theory that has been developed in the Chinese culture so far. The author suggests that the development of family therapy theory needs to incorporate localized research as a foundation geared towards the needs of the Chinese culture. It is important have a family therapy theory that is based on Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism for our own culture.