Case analysis using ABCX model

Student’s name

Department of affiliation

Course

Instructor

Date

Introduction

Family stress is one of the issues most people have to go through. This is because factors and conditions bring themselves, and a person has to think of a way to deal with them. Sometimes family issues break a person while other times they make a person become better after going through the challenges. Therefore there is no fixed outcome, and there are no selected solutions to the problems we face in our families day by day since most of them have not been experienced before by the person going through them. Therefore, in this work, the suggestions are given even though hoped to work if it was a real situation; there is no complete assurance for them to bring to a standstill the problem at hand. Using the ABCX formula, I will be able to develop the most suitable suggestions of what should be done about the issue at hand. I will discuss the second case study whereby the mother has breast cancer and is uninsured while the father has a work-related injury. Therefore ill look deeply into this case study, analyse it and suggest the possible ways for the family to get out of this troubling issue. I will use both the ABC formula and the double ABCX model for this analysis.

ABCX and double ABCX models

Reuben Hill came up with this model in 1949 though he never labelled them as ABCX until 1958. This is a model to explain “the crisis-proneness and freedom from crisis among families” (Hill, 1958). Boss (2002) refers to the hill as the father of family therapy because he is the person who came up with the very first model, which tried to help solve the challenges of most families. Even though his theory and model mainly focus on the pre-crisis situation, it still has a role to play in explaining the problematic family experiences.

After hill developed this in 1949, Joan Patterson and Hamilton McCuban developed it, and they came up with the double ABCX model that focused on the pre-crisis and focused on the post-crisis. Therefore this became very important because families needed this even more rather than the pre-crisis explanation which never gave them the solutions but helped them focus on the issues at hand and the issues before the crisis came to be. Therefore this model allows them to understand the issue at hand and helps them make decisions on where to look for assistance so that this problem does not make them unable to do anything constructive.

The ABCX is a term whose letters stand for different issues in the family. A represents the crisis precipitating event. This can be viewed as something which comes up, and the family was not prepared or was not even aware that it will happen (Hill, 1958). In the case study 2, this issue is that the mother who is Mary is almost sacked by her hours being reduced in the place where she was working. In this case study, multiple crises, precipitate events, and all of them affect this family. Apart from Mary having her hours reduced at the place she was working, she also gets diagnosed with stage three breast cancer. This, in any instance, can shutter anyone who goes through it. Even more devastating is the condition of Joe who gets an accident at the place where they had been working and therefore cannot go out anymore to work as they used to do before. This is a challenging situation for the family, and consequently, they have to find a solution. All of these explained are crisis precipitating factors.

The B in the model stands for the family’s crisis meeting resources, and therefore in the case of Joe and Mary, there is a family crisis meeting resources condition. This s the fact that Mary’s mother is mentioned and she still lives close to them. Therefore this is a solution for a short term period. This is because if she was not there, they could get into crisis. We can also assume that Mary and Joe have been saving some amount of money and that their savings at this time are another crisis meeting resources condition. Therefore it is these two conditions which make them not get into crisis immediately. Otherwise, if the two states were not available, they could get into trouble very fast.

The C in the model stands for the definition of A by the family. Whatever the family defines as A is what determines their level of suffering and crisis. A family can see A as an enormous challenge; this may make them begin suffering emotionally even before the crisis comes. Another family may see A as a time for them to grow; this is because some families will see challenges as a time of growth and learning how to deal with different things which happen to them in their lives. Therefore, what Mary and Joe define their multiple crises precipitating events is what determines if they suffer very much or suffer less.

D represents what the family thinks and says the event taking place is. Therefore, if the family sees it as a big challenge, it will be a big challenge to them. However, if they see it as an opportunity to get out of their comfort zones and go out to the world and look for solutions, then that means they will not suffer very much. Therefore, Mary and Joe have the responsibility of making sure that they make of this event the most positive concept in their minds and thus ease the level of crisis they might have to meet.

The X in the model signifies the crisis. This means that Mary and Joe’s lives will have to change at this time for some time before they get back to normal. According to Hill crisis results into “slowed up affectional and emotion-satisfying performances”. Therefore at this time, they may have to do anything to be satisfied emotionally and not have the affectionate intimacy they may have enjoyed before.

This is the pre-crisis condition, and it is always challenging to go through. Now focusing on post-crisis, there is a possibility of preventing some things from happening. The double ABCX model focuses firstly on the causative factors of the situation at hand, and in the case of Joe and Mary, these are not many because their problems come instantly and they have to face them.

The coping option is always tricky because to some extent the injury of Joe is so bad he will have to live with that for the rest of his life, and he can’t change that, but he has to cope and adapt to it. On the side of Mary, she may have to learn how to live with cancer for some time before she gets chemotherapy, and she heals.

Plan of action

In their anguish, there are still things they can do to make sure that the event or the issue at hand does not affect them adversely. There are these suggestions in the double ABCX model, and employing them may make the family live happily once again. The possible things to do for the family include:

The family to ask Mary’s mother for support and financial assistance at present.

The family to use their savings wisely.

The children to transfer to public schools if they were in private school and as well the public schools where the cost of their education is l

The family moved to a new smaller house to avoid significant sums of money spent on paying for the home of other services.

The family to engage more spiritually if they are spiritual.

The family to engage in more positive activities and try to be positive and avoid stressing over any issue but think of all possible solutions.

Conclusion

Therefore, with the above discussion, it is okay to state that challenges even though faced in our families we are the people who decide and determine where the effects and the issues concerned with the challenges end up. Even though it is always difficult to be calm and keep a positive mind, people should do so that at the end of the day they do not remain in the problem but find a solution and change how they handle what they are going through.

References

Hill, R. (1986). Life cycle stages for types of single-parent families: Of family development theory. Family Relations, 19-29.

Hill, R. (1958). Sociology of Marriage and Family Behaviour, I945-56. Current Sociology, 7(1), 1-33.

Bickel, J. (2011). Families & Change: Coping With Stressful Events and Transitions. Journal of Family Strengths, 11(1), 28.