ORI GIN AL PA PER

Systemic Family Therapy in Greece: Polyphonyand Diversity

Eleftheria Tseliou

Published online: 1 March 2013� Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Abstract The paper aims at presenting the state of the art regarding systemic/family

therapy in Greece, in relation to practice, professional and accreditation issues and training.

It is argued that systemic/family therapy in Greece constitutes a lively and diverse terrain

with roots in the 1960s and a rapid dissemination of the approach following the mid 1980s.

The field’s development in Greece is out-sketched by means of ‘data’ collected from a

variety of sources, like web sites of associations and training centers, published articles and

informal and semi-structured interviews conducted with seminal figures. First, a concise

historical overview of the birth of systemic/family therapy is presented in relation to the

wider socio-political context and the attempt for the reform of the psychiatric system in

Greece during the 1980s. Second, a brief sketch of the existing associations as well as of

the contexts where systemic/family therapy is practiced is outlined in relation to issues

regarding accreditation and statutory regulations. Third, a non-exhaustive list of currently

existing training programs is reviewed in respect of axis, like their content and structure,

accreditation issues, entry requirements, etc. The paper concludes with inferences

regarding the existing state of the art including future potential directions, whilst hinting to

research ventures, which could enrich our understanding of both the history and the

potential of the field in the Greek context.

Keywords (4–6) systemic family therapy � Greece � Historical overview � Training �Professional and accreditation issues

Introduction

My initial response to the invitation to write about systemic/family therapy in Greece was a

mixture of excitement and fear. I have been lucky as I had the chance to meet and work

together with seminal figures regarding the history of the field in Greece. Nevertheless, the

E. Tseliou (&)Department of Early Childhood Education, University of Thessaly,Argonafton & Filellinon str., 38 221 Volos, Greecee-mail: tseliou@uth.gr

123

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243DOI 10.1007/s10591-013-9245-7

venture of attempting to narrate the story of past and present developments, somehow,

seemed daunting. I decided to accept by approaching the task as both a challenge and also a

chance for a journey back in time, reflecting on my own meeting with the terrain of

systemic/family therapy practice in Greece, upon my arrival from the UK, following my

studies there in the mid 1990s.

At that time, I became gradually acquainted with what seemed as a colourful texture

with contrasts and different shadings. The polyphony of the field, originally established in

Greece in the early 1960s, was expressed across several, diverse, independent, but in

certain cases also interconnected, seminal settings. These were mostly located in the two

larger Greek cities, Athens (South) and Thessaloniki (North) but also in other areas, like

for example in the island of Crete (South). This polyphony seemed to entail variable

preferences in relation to epistemological perspectives, theoretical underpinnings and

respective choices in relation both to clinical practice, training methodologies and the

handling of issues regarding professional accreditation. Nearly two decades later, what

seems different is perhaps only the magnitude of the terrain, as systemic/family therapy in

Greece appears to have spread significantly. This was possibly the aftermath of the multi-

year operation of many training institutes and the development of many generations of

systemic family therapists. Systemic/family therapy is currently flourishing in Greece.

Despite the uncontestable liveliness of the field, however, and like the rest of psycho-

therapeutic approaches in Greece, systemic/family therapy practice is still struggling with

issues regarding professional accreditation.

In this paper, I will attempt to draw a sketch of the current state of the art by locating

issues regarding practice settings, training trends and professional/accreditation issues in

the context of the historical development of the field as well as of psychological/psychiatric

practices overall. Up to date, sparse relevant accounts do exist (Avdi 2011; Haritos-

Fatouros and Hatzigeleki 1999; Kaftantzi 2000; Papadioti-Athanasiou and Softas-Nall

2006; Softas-Nall 2003, 2008). However, no previous comprehensive report simulta-

neously addressing history, training and professional issues, is available.

The existing accounts constitute valuable testimonies of both the history and the state of

the art of the field. Some focus on presentations of certain settings, thus inevitably leading

to lack of information in respect of others (Softas-Nall 2003, 2008) or entail a partial

account due to their different focus (Avdi 2011). Others seem unclear in respect of the

adopted methodology regarding either the process of collecting information or the process

of presentation (Haritos-Fatouros and Hatzigeleki 1999; Kaftantzi 2000; Papadioti-A-

thanasiou and Softas-Nall 2006). The task is, indeed, neither easy nor straightforward due

to the multitude of the existing clinical or training contexts and the lack of any official data.

This makes the project of collecting the necessary information in a methodologically

systematic way particularly demanding. Without claiming to have faced the challenge

satisfactory, I will attempt a systematic synthesis of both existing and newly gathered

information. In doing so, I will make explicit my ‘method’ of both collecting and pro-

cessing information, nevertheless without claiming of presenting neither an exhaustive nor

a ‘faultless’ or an unbiased account.

A Note on Method

‘Data’ regarding the information presented in this paper were collected from October untill

December 2012. A multiplicity of sources was used including, published relevant texts or

reports, web sites of associations and training institutes, informal contacts (by e-mail,

224 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

telephone or in person) with key informants, e.g., program directors of training institutes.

Furthermore, five semi-structured interviews with key figures of the field were additionally

conducted via skype and recorded upon permission.1 The interviews explored the inter-

viewees’ accounts in relation to the historical roots and the development of the field, the

relationship between systemic/family therapy and mental health services, issues regarding

training and professional accreditation as well as their vision considering the future of the

field.

All ‘data’ were thematically processed with the aim to come up with concise and as

accurate as possible accounts, as regards the constitution, aims and membership criteria of

associations and the constitution, content and structure, accreditation issues and entry

requirement criteria of the training programs. The process entailed a careful search and

processing of the available information in relation to certain themes/categories that I had

devised beforehand. For example, in respect of the existing associations I decided to focus

my presentation on the date of constitution, the membership criteria, the number of

members and their aims/scope. I then searched for their constitutional acts and decided to

present the relevant information by staying as close as possible to their original texts. As

regards information on the existing training centers and respective programs, I devised a

method of cross-checking. First, I decided upon the themes/categories, then I gathered

information available on their web sites and finally I contacted the settings asking them to

verify or update both the registered information and my account.

Finally, in order to narrate the historical development of the field including the rela-

tionship of systemic/family therapy with medical and social services as well as issues

regarding professional accreditation, I mostly relied on published texts. I then cross-

checked certain information with information derived from informal contacts and the

interviews. The latter provided me with further inspiring narratives, which I have mostly

chosen to use as resources for eloquently told metaphors or sayings, some of which I

decided to include verbatim in certain parts of this paper.

Systemic Family Therapy in Greece

A Beginning: ‘The Rhizome of the Vassiliou Family’

Lynn Hoffman speaks about the rhizome, I think this is what it was, a little seed, a

rhizome you did not know where an how it would spread…(K. Polychroni, interview 3, December 21, 2012)

Historically, the roots of the field of systemic family therapy in Greece have been

reported as interweaved with the foundation of a private setting in Athens, the Athenian

Institute of Anthropos (A.I.A.) by George and Vasso Vassiliou, in 1963 (Haritos-Fatouros

and Hatzigeleki 1999; Kaftantzi 1996; Katakis 2004; Papadioti-Athanasiou and Softas-Nall

2006; Protopsalti-Polychroni and Gournas 2004). According to a frequently narrated story

(Papadioti-Athanasiou and Softas-Nall 2006; Softas-Nall 2003; Vassiliou 1990, 1997), in

1 My special thanks to Fany Triantafillou and Frosso Moureli, founders of the first state Community CareMental Health Centre operating exclusively with systemic principles in Thessaloniki, Greece, Sofia Hat-zigeleki, systemic therapist and trainer, member of the first state committee for the delineation of criteriaregarding professional accreditation issues, Kyriaki Polychroni, president of EFTA and senior clinicalassociate of the Athenian Institute of Anthropos and Mina Polemi-Todoulou, president of ETHOS, theHellenic Federation for Systemic and Family therapy.

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 225

123

the 1950s George and Vasso Vassiliou had the chance to meet and work with pioneers of

the field both at the Ackerman Institute and at the Mental Research Institute in Palo Alto,

like Virginia Satir, Milton Erickson, Nathan Ackerman, Don Jackson and Paul Watzla-

wick. In 1970, they founded the first training program in A.I.A. In Ng’s (2005) register of

the historical development of systemic family therapy across several countries, only Italy is

reported to have experienced such an early beginning, following Palazzoli’s return from

the States in the 1960s.

Until nearly the mid 1980s, the A.I.A., later on re-named as Athenian Center for the

Study of Anthropos, was the main setting, offering training, practising systemically ori-

ented group therapy and simultaneously experimenting with original research and theory

development considering the Greek family and its contemporary evolution from the tra-

ditional era towards modernity in relation to the wider cultural context (e.g., Vassiliou

1968; Vassiliou and Vassiliou 1973). Furthermore, a series of well-known symposia, the

Delphi symposia were organised by the Vassiliou and provided the space for an exchange

of ideas with pioneers of the field (Vassiliou 1997).

Overall, the A.I.A. epistemological and theoretical approach has been reported as

synthesizing a systemic perspective with a humanistic one, entailed in ancient Greek

philosophy (Kaftantzi 1996). It has also been termed as ‘dialectic-systemic… a multi-focal,

multi-level model of intervention’ (Protopsalti-Polychroni and Gournas 2004, p. 11), with

a preference for an emphasis on experiential, group processes (Polemi-Todoulou et al.

1998).

A great number of therapists ‘grew up’ in the context of the ‘Vassiliou extended family’

subsequently ‘spreading the seeds’ of the approach in various settings all over Greece.

Perhaps, just like the Greek family that they extensively studied, the ‘Vassiliou extended

family’ gradually gave its place to nuclear forms, with elements of differentiation but also

of interconnectedness in between them. Petros Polychronis and Kyriaki Protopsalti-Poly-

chroni, the current president of the European Family Therapy Association (EFTA), along

with colleagues have been leading figures in the development of A.I.A. onwards.

1980s: Differentiation, Expansion and ‘Reform’

It was an era of change…people wanted to do things, at that time psychiatric hos-

pitals were still asylums… (F. Triantafillou, interview 1, December 11, 2012)

The 1980s denoted an era of significant developments regarding systemic/family

therapy in Greece, along with important shifts considering the whole context of psychia-

tric/psychological practices. Until the 1980s, the latter were dominated by the institutional

psychiatric establishment (for a concise report see Avdi 2011. See also, Blue 1993 for an

insight from anthropology; Hatzaras 2010; Karastergiou et al. 2005). Nine state psychiatric

hospitals of an asylum type (Madianos 1999) existed along with nearly forty private ones

(Karastergiou et al. 2005), denoting the dominance of drug-based treatments. Psycho-

therapy was offered only on a private basis (Ierodiakonou 1983) and was kept marginal,

despite its emergence nearly two decades ago, like in the case of systemic family therapy

(Potamianos 2003).

As regards the wider context, the early and mid 1980s signified an era of socio-political

changes for Greece. In 1981, the country became a member of the European Union (EU)

and experienced a number of ‘urges’ for reforms so as to better fit the European context,

including the quest for reform of the psychiatric system. In 1982, the newly elected

government asked for financial support from the EU in order to proceed with the reform

226 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

(Hatzaras 2010) and in 1983 the Greek National Health System was established. In 1984,

the adoption of the European Council Regulation (815/84) signalled the beginning of an

effort to reform the existing psychiatric system towards the aims of decentralization and

the provision of de-institutionalized care. This was ‘translated’ into the attempt to establish

Community Centers for Mental Health and psychiatric departments in General hospitals

with the aim to facilitate prevention-oriented forms regarding the provision of mental

health care, basically community-located (Hatzaras 2010; Madianos 1999). Psychotherapy

and settings outside the psychiatric asylums were thus economically and ideologically

supported as alternatives toward progress and change in the overall context of an era,

whose main motto was ‘change and reform’ (Triantafillou 1996; see also Potamianos 2003

for an interesting analysis of the relationship between psychology/psychotherapy and the

Greek Left). However, the attempted shift was not without hardships, due to a number of

factors including the lack of resources in trained staff and facilities, or the ambivalence on

behalf of the Greek health professionals towards de-institutionalization (see Hatzaras 2010

for an extensive report). Unlike the rapid, almost violent transformation of the Greek

family from its traditional form to a modern/postmodern one (see Dragonas and Tseliou

2009 for an extensive account on the transformations of the Greek family), the move of the

psychiatric system from asylum forms towards de-institutionalization was very slow

(Haritos-Fatouros and Hatzigeleki 1999).

In this context, several settings of systemic/family therapy in Greece began to appear. In

1983, Charis Katakis, one of the first trainees in A.I.A. founded another private setting in

Athens, the Laboratory for the Study of Human Relations, and started creating her own

distinctive approach in the field, with contributions to training, research, theory and

practice both on a national and international level (e.g., Katakis 1976, 1990, 2004). She has

denoted her approach as an integrative one, in which ‘family-oriented group therapy with

individuals is the central axis’ (Katakis 2004, p. 6) (Katakis 1997; see also, Softas-Nall

2008 for an interview with Charis Katakis). In 1984, in Thessaloniki, Fany Triantafillou, a

psychoanalyst and Frosso Moureli a group analyst, undertook the task of organising a

Community Center for Mental Health, exclusively on the basis of a systemic perspective,

influenced by their meeting with systemic/family therapy in the context of their studies in

London, UK and their commitment to the ideal of community psychiatry (Triantafillou

1996). The setting pioneered the introduction of systemic/family therapy into the public

sector (Haritos-Fatouros and Hatzigeleki 1999) whereas throughout its operation, a series

of well-known key figures of the field, like Gianfranco Cecchin, Lynn Hoffman, Harlene

Anderson, etc. were invited as trainers and ‘mentors’. Starting with the first in 1990, the

Center’s team took the initiative to bring together the systemic/family therapists of the era

in the context of a series of Panhellenic Scientific Meetings for systemic/family therapy

and became one central, pioneering pole for the development of the field.

By 1990, systemic/family therapy was ‘instilled’ in the public sector, both in the mental

health services and in University contexts. Indicatively, one can register among the first

settings, the Community Center for Children’s Mental Health in Athens, which was the

first setting considering child psychiatry (Sigalas et al. 2012), the unit for couple and

family therapy at the University of Athens (Psychiatric clinic, Aiginition Hospital) founded

by Vlassis Tomaras and Valeria Pomini, which was the first university setting (see

Tomaras and Pomini 2004 for a very informative and interesting account of the challenges

entailed in the effort to apply systemic family therapy into public mental health services)

and many others, like for example, the Community Center of Mental Health of North-West

Sector in Thessaloniki and the introduction of systems thinking in a University setting in

Iraklion, Crete, by Nikos Paritsis (see also, Table 1).

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 227

123

1990s Onwards: Towards Becoming a ‘Revolutionary Establishment’?

the psychiatric establishment will change by the people who get trained in the

systemic approach…it will be eroded (F. Moureli, interview 4, December 23, 2012)

From 1990 onwards, the spread of systemic/family therapy was rapid all over Greece.

Kaftantzi (2000) presents a valuable testimony of the settings which were ‘contaminated’

by systemic/family therapy until 1997, where one can count nine private and twenty-six

public sector settings in Athens, Thessaloniki, Crete and smaller cities like Ioannina, Volos

Table 1 Systemic/family therapy in the public and private sector (up to 1995): the beginning

Setting

State Private

1985: Community Center for Mental Health (WestSector), Thessaloniki (F. Moureli, F. Triantafillou)

1963: Athenian Institute of Anthropos, Athens(George and Vasso Vassiliou)

1985: Community Center for Mental Health (CentralSector) Thessaloniki (T. Karastergiou andS. Liappa)

1983: Laboratory for the Study of HumanRelationships, Athens (Ch. Katakis)

1985: National Organization for Social Care(Th. Mousterakis and P. Polychronis)

1984: Human Relations (C. Eystathiou,M. Tsagarakis, F. Ververidou

1987: Community Center for Children’s MentalHealth of National Foundation for Social Security,Athens (D. Karagiannis)

1986: Institute of Family Therapy, Athens(Psychoanalytic orientation) (I. Tsegos)

1988: Community Center for Mental Health (North-West Sector), Thessaloniki (F. Moureli)

1991: Institute of Family Therapy, Thessaloniki(S. Hatzigeleki, F. Moureli, A. Tsafos)

1988: University of Athens, Psychiatric Clinic,Aiginition Hospital (V. Tomaras and V. Pomini)

1995: Center for the development of children, adultsand the family, Iraklion, Crete (Batsalias,Theodoraki)

1989: Psychiatric Hospital of Thessaloniki(Addictions) (Th. Andreadaki, G. Grigoriou: 1992)

1995: Institute of Systemic therapy, Ioannina(Katsanou, Maragoudaki, Toli, Mouzas)

1989: Organization against drugs (OKANA)(D. Sakkas)

1989: Peripheral University Hospital, Iraklion, Crete(N. Paritsis)

1990: Center of Mental Health, Ioannina(O. Mouzas)

1992: Psychiatric Hospital of Thessaloniki,Thessaloniki (F. Moureli)

1994: Psychiatric Hospital, Family Medical Center,Chania, Crete (A. Prokopiou and M. Digrintakis)

1994: Psychiatric Hospital of Attiki, Family therapyunit (K. Charalambaki and F. Kotsidas)

1995: Community Center for Mental Health,A’ University Psychiatric Clinic, AristotleUniversity of Thessaloniki, (V. Kaftantzi)

1995: Psychiatric Hospital of Attiki, Detox Unit,Department of family counseling and therapy(Th. Balatsos)

The settings are presented in chronological order and the list is non-exhaustive. Information is derived fromHaritos-Fatouros and Hatzigeleki (1999) and Kaftantzi (2000)

228 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

and Patras. Furthermore, in their recording of settings where systemic/family therapy was

practiced in 1999, Haritos-Fatouros and Hatzigeleki (1999) argue that these include, both

institutional state settings (like e.g., psychiatric hospitals, general hospitals, university

clinics), non-institutional state settings (like, e.g. community centers for mental health) as

well as private settings. Based on these two reports, Table 1 presents a non-exhaustive,

indicative recording of key settings linked with the development of systemic/family

therapy in Greece both in the public and the private sector until 1995. Softas-Nall (2003)

report includes a slightly more updated register. Unfortunately, a current up-to-date survey,

which could register the current spread of settings, is still lacking and was beyond the

scope of this paper.

Despite the lack of official data, on an anecdotal level it is widely known that a great

number of professionals who have been and are being trained in systemic/family therapy, are

currently working both in the public and the private sector all over Greece. Despite the fact

that psychotherapy is still practiced mostly in private settings, systemic family therapy seems

to constitute an exception (Avdi 2011). In addition to psychiatric services, systemic/family

therapy ideas seem to have spread in fields like education and drug prevention services

(Polemi-Todoulou, interview 5, December 27, 2012). As regards University settings, one can

identify either seminars or elective courses in the context of undergraduate or postgraduate

studies in psychology (e.g., see Georgas 2006 for the program in Panteion University),

following earlier introductions, like, e.g. by Papadioti at the University of Ioannina or by

Tseliou at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. However, no graduate degree in psy-

chotherapy exists in University settings (Avdi 2011), including systemic/family therapy.

Currently, two Greek systemic/family therapy Journals are published. The first, Met-

alogos, published in Greek by the Systemic Association of North Greece recently cele-

brated its 10th anniversary, whereas the second, Systemic Thinking and Psychotherapy,

published both in Greek and in English, has just released its first issue on-line (http://www.

hestafta.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1&Itemid=101). Furthermore,

two publication series the one launched by Charis Katakis and the other by Violeta

Kaftantzi have significantly contributed to the ‘dissemination’ of the approach, by means

of publications of national and international landmark texts.

The spread of systemic/family therapy across different geographical locations and

contexts also signified a diversity in respect of theoretical preferences and epistemological

perspectives between the ‘Northern’ (Thessaloniki) and the ‘Southern’ (Athens) camp

(Triantafillou, 1990). For example, the first has been reported as retaining a closer affili-

ation with the Batesonian/systemic and later on constructivist tradition in the field

(Moureli, interview 4, December 23, 2012). The spread has also possibly signified attempts

for autonomy and differentiation within each ‘camp’ or even ‘rivalry’ both in between and

within different settings. Perhaps, this could be seen as suggested by the fact that Greece

was the only country ‘represented’ by three different articles in the Context special issue on

European Family Therapy (Vetere and Papadopoulos 2004) and five different associations

in the European Family Therapy Association (EFTA) until the recent formation of the

Hellenic Federation for the Systemic and Family therapy in Greece, in 2005.

Current Legislation Context and Professional Organizations

I believe the fight that ones gives to unite different pieces makes it possible for one to

change the level of description to a higher order one and makes it possible for new

qualities to emerge… (M. Polemi-Todoulou, inteview 5, December 27, 2012)

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 229

123

Despite the rapid growth and spread of systemic/family therapy and psychotherapy

overall, the move towards professionalization is a very recent story for Greece (Avdi

2011). For example, the state licence for independent practice was issued for psychology

graduates in 1993. As regards psychotherapy, up to date, no legislation regulating training

and practice has been put into force, despite a number of attempts. In 1998, the Ministry of

Health (Central Council for Health) appointed a committee with the task to propose actions

to be taken towards the professionalization of mental health practices. In 2000, an

appointed subcommittee undertook the task to come up with criteria considering training

courses and their accreditation as well as with a proposal regarding the registration of

individual psychotherapists. The committee filed its report in 2003 but it has never been

taken into account or put into effect, up-to-date (Avdi 2011; Hatzigeleki, inteview 2,

December 20, 2012).

Therefore, like in other European countries (e.g., Carr 2013), no state licence for

psychotherapists exists, meaning that anyone who simply holds a state licence to practice

as a psychologist or counselor can actually practice psychotherapy. Furthermore, there is

no official register of systemic/family therapy practitioners. Most choose to register either

with international or national associations, without anyone, however, holding a statutory

accreditation.

As regards professional associations, the Greek systemic family therapy community is

currently experiencing a recently (2005) successful attempt to form a National Association,

the Hellenic Federation for Systemic and Family therapy (ETHOS), following an urge to

do so by the EFTA and an early unsuccessful attempt in the beginning of the 1990s

(Hatzigeleki, inteview 2, December 20, 2012; Moureli, interview 4, December 23, 2012).

The first recorded interdisciplinary systemic association, the Hellenic Group of Systems,

though, is reported to have been founded in 1983 by M. Dekleris and N. Paritsis (Papadioti-

Athanasiou and Softas-Nall 2006). In the late 1990s, the field witnessed the birth of four

different associations, and later on, of a fifth one. Tables 2 and 3 present an overview of

details of the currently existing associations, which include information on the year of their

constitution, the criteria for membership and their aims. Some of the associations accept as

their members professionals trained in systemic/family therapy who hold a first degree in

mental health professions, whereas others further accept professionals holding degrees in

social and human sciences, provided they have additional studies in mental health. Two of

them further require the possession of state licence to practice as a mental health pro-

fessional. A careful study of the associations’ aims shows a variety of areas in which they

aim at intervening. These include the dissemination of systems thinking in areas like

research, training and therapy, with two of them actually providing training, the advance of

their members’ interests, the contribution towards the promotion of ethical standards

considering the practice of systemic/family therapy and the pursuing of the regulation of

accreditation issues, in two cases.

Training and Accreditation Issues in Context

Just like the rest of European countries, Greece witnessed a great expansion in respect of

training programmes in psychotherapy from the mid 1980s onwards (Avdi 2011; for an

overview considering each European country, see also Sultz and Hagspiel 2011). This wide

spread seems closely related with the establishment of psychology departments (Hat-

zigeleki, inteview 2, December 20, 2012; Polychroni, interview 3, December 21, 2012;

Potamianos 2003), which was significantly delayed for Greece, although the first psy-

chological laboratory was established in Athens in 1926 (Georgas 2006). Thus the first

230 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

Ta

ble

2O

ver

vie

wof

Gre

ekas

soci

atio

ns

for

syst

emic

/fam

ily

ther

apy

Ass

oci

atio

ndet

ails

Cri

teri

afo

rfu

llm

ember

ship

Mem

ber

sno

19

98:

Hel

len

icA

sso

ciat

ion

of

Sy

stem

icT

her

apy

(HE

LA

SY

TH

),A

then

shtt

p:/

/ww

w.e

lesy

th.g

r/D

egre

ein

men

tal

hea

lth

scie

nce

so

rin

soci

al/h

um

ansc

ien

ces

incl

ud

ing

add

itio

nal

un

iver

sity

stud

ies

inm

enta

lh

ealt

h4

yea

rtr

ain

ing

insy

stem

icth

erap

y(i

ncl

usi

ve

of

theo

ry,

pra

ctic

ean

dp

erso

nal

ther

apy)

1y

ear

sup

erv

ised

pro

fess

ion

alp

ract

ice

18

4

19

98:

Hel

len

icS

yst

emic

Th

ink

ing

and

Fam

ily

Th

erap

yA

sso

ciat

ion

(HE

.S.T

.A.F

.T.A

.),

Ath

ens

htt

p:/

/ww

w.h

esta

fta.

org

/D

egre

ein

psy

chia

try,

chil

dp

sych

iatr

y,

psy

cho

log

yo

rso

cial

wo

rkT

rain

ing

insy

stem

ico

rfa

mil

yth

erap

y(d

ura

tio

nan

dty

pe

of

psy

cho

ther

apeu

tic

pra

ctic

ear

eta

ken

into

con

sid

erat

ion

ina

no

n-

spec

ified

man

ner

)

12

7

1999:

Syst

emic

Ass

oci

atio

nof

Nort

hG

reec

e(S

.A.N

.G.)

,T

hes

salo

nik

ih

ttp

://w

ww

.sy

stem

icas

soci

atio

nn

g.g

r/S

tate

lice

nce

top

ract

ice

asa

men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ion

alC

om

ple

tetr

ainin

gin

syst

emic

psy

choth

erap

yA

tle

ast

1y

ear

of

pro

fess

ion

alex

per

ien

ce

54

2001:

Soci

ety

for

Syst

ems

Ther

apy

and

Inte

rven

tion

inin

div

idual

s,fa

mil

ies

and

larg

ersy

stem

s(S

O.S

Y.T

.I.)

,C

rete

htt

p:/

/ww

w.s

osy

ti.g

r/in

dex

.htm

l

To

be

eith

ersy

stem

icth

erap

ists

(tra

inin

gin

syst

emic

psy

cho

ther

apy

)w

ith

stat

eli

cen

ceto

pra

ctic

eas

psy

chia

tris

ts,

do

cto

rs,

psy

cho

log

ists

,so

cial

work

ers

and

nurs

esor

syst

emic

counse

lors

,w

ho

are

men

tal

hea

lth

scie

nti

sts

or

pro

fess

ional

so

rE

FT

Am

emb

ersh

ip

31

20

05:

Hel

len

icF

eder

atio

nfo

rS

yst

emic

and

Fam

ily

ther

apy

(ET

HO

S),

Ath

ens

mpo

l-t@

ote

net

.gr

To

be

afa

mil

yth

erap

yas

soci

atio

nw

ho

sem

emb

ers

are

eith

erfa

mil

yo

rsy

stem

icth

erap

ists

inac

cord

ance

toth

ecr

iter

iasp

ecifi

edb

yth

eF

eder

atio

n,

i.e.

am

inim

um

of

3y

ears

trai

nin

gin

fam

ily

ther

apy,

incl

udin

gth

eory

,cl

inic

alpra

ctic

ean

dsu

per

vis

ion

and

per

sonal

ther

apy

(psy

choth

erap

yo

rfa

mil

yo

fo

rig

inw

ork

,i.

e.,

use

of

gen

ogra

ms)

5as

soci

atio

ns

43

2in

div

idual

mem

ber

s

Hel

len

icS

oci

ety

of

fam

ily

and

mar

ital

ther

apy

(H.S

.E.M

.T.)

,A

then

sL

ack

of

avai

lab

ilit

yo

fin

form

atio

n3

6

Ass

oci

atio

ns

are

pre

sente

din

chro

nolo

gic

alord

er,

star

ting

wit

hth

eold

est.

Info

rmat

ion

isder

ived

from

thei

rw

ebsi

tes,

from

info

rmal

tele

phone

con

tact

san

dfr

om

thei

rco

nst

itu

tio

nal

acts

avai

lab

leat

thei

rw

ebsi

tes,

exce

pt

for

the

case

so

fE

TH

OS

(per

son

alar

chiv

e).

Iam

also

ind

ebte

dto

the

pre

sid

ent

of

ET

HO

S,

Min

aP

ole

mi-

To

do

ulo

u,

wh

op

rov

ided

me

wit

hin

form

atio

nre

gar

din

gth

en

um

ber

of

the

mem

ber

so

fth

eas

soci

atio

ns

(dat

aco

llec

tio

nd

ate:

28

/4/2

01

2)

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 231

123

Table 3 Overview of aims of Greek associations for systemic/family therapy

Aims Associations

HELASYTH HE.S.T.A.F.T.A. S.A.N.G. H.S.E.M.T. SO.SY.T.I. ETHOS

Issues regarding theory andpractice

To advance systems thinking/

epistemology, theory and

(professional) practice

X X X X

To advance research and training

in systemic/family therapy

X X X X X

To cooperate/link with equivalent

national and international

associations so as to promote

systemic therapy

X X X X X

To contribute to prevention and

therapy in the mental health field

X

To provide training in systemic

therapy

X X

To undertake the implementation

of programmes funded by

national or international settings

X

Accreditation issues

To delineate criteria regarding the

professional identity and

training of the systemic therapist

X

To cooperate with the Greek state

and/or with national and

international academic and

mental health settings/

associations towards the

formation of rules and

legislation considering

professional practice of

psychotherapy

X X

To contribute towards the

professional accreditation of

systemic therapists

X X

Advance of high standards in

systemic therapy practice

X

To take care of the scientific

identity of the systemic/family

therapy practitioner in respect of

statutory organizations in

Greece and abroad

X

Members’ interests

To advance cooperation between

members

X X X X

To advance/defend members’

scientific/professional interests

X

To contribute to the liason

between systemic practitioners

in public and private settings

and to the liason between mental

health practitioners overall

X X

232 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

department was established in 1987 in Crete, whereas today four in total exist (Potamianos

2003) accepting approximately 800 students per year (Georgas 2006). Given the lack of

postgraduate studies in psychotherapy and the existence of only two postgraduate programs

in Clinical Psychology (Avdi 2011), psychology departments constitute a ‘source’ for

potential trainee candidates.

Training programs in systemic/family therapy outnumber those in other approaches,

while the first training program in psychotherapy offered in Greece was the one by the

A.I.A. in 1970 (Avdi 2011). Table 4 present a non-exhaustive overview of training

Institutes, which offer full training programmes in systemic/family and couple therapy.

Most of the settings were founded in the late 1990s or early 2000s. Training programs in

couple therapy are a minority and their existence does not necessarily reflect what seems to

be the case for the USA, where marriage/couple and family therapy are considered dif-

ferent domains with rivalry existing between associations (Kaslow 2000). Training in

systemic/family therapy is offered almost exclusively on a private basis, like in any other

psychotherapeutic approach (Avdi 2011, Christodoulou 1997), with the fees ranging from

4000 to nearly 9,000 euros for a full course, usually lasting from 3 to 4 years with a total

amount of 400 up to 1,500 h. These include theory, clinical practice and personal devel-

opment, with variations as to whether the latter includes personal therapy or work with

genograms. Clinical practice includes indirect supervision in all cases and may also include

direct supervision and/or observation as a team member behind a one-way screen. In most

cases, the theoretical part includes seminars or workshops, with a varying emphasis on

experiential modes of teaching. Only two of the programmes require the owning of a state

licence to practice as a mental health professional in their entry requirements. In other

cases, professionals holding a degree in social or human sciences are also accepted,

Table 3 continued

Aims Associations

HELASYTH HE.S.T.A.F.T.A. S.A.N.G. H.S.E.M.T. SO.SY.T.I. ETHOS

To sensitize/disseminate

knowledge to mental health

practitioners and to the public

regarding systemic/family

therapy and its potential for

prevention and therapy

X X X X X

Dissemination of the systemic

approach in Greece

X

Ethics

To contribute towards the

development of a code of ethics

X X X

Ensurance of conditions for free

expression of members’ ideas

X

To represent and coordinate the

existing national associations

providing respect of their

autonomy and differentiation

and to represent them in national

and international scientific and

professional organizations

X

Information is derived from the associations’ constitutional acts available at their web sites. An effort was made to preserve

the original statements as intact as possible. Data regarding H.S.M.E.T. was not available

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 233

123

Tab

le4

Over

vie

wof

Gre

ektr

ainin

gIn

stit

ute

san

dtr

ainin

gpro

gra

mm

esin

syst

emic

/fam

ily

ther

apy

Det

ails

of

Inst

itute

sS

etti

ng

fees

Len

gth

,st

ruct

ure

/conte

nt,

staf

fA

ccre

dit

atio

n/a

ffili

atio

nE

ntr

yre

quir

emen

tsT

ype

of

cert

ifica

te

1963:

Ath

enia

nIn

stit

ute

of

Anth

ropos,

akm

a@ote

net

.gr

Ath

ens,

GR

*

Pri

vat

e

Fee

snot

spec

.

Up

to7

yea

rs

Cli

nic

al

part

:su

per

vis

ion,

per

sonal

(gro

up)

ther

apy

Theo

reti

cal

part

:w

ork

shops

(exper

ienti

alap

pro

ach)

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:non

spec

ified

Gro

up

of

train

ers

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICfu

ll

mem

ber

)

Pro

fess

ional

sin

men

tal

hea

lth

Deg

ree

inso

cial

/hum

an

scie

nce

s(i

ntr

oduct

ory

cours

e)

Cer

tifi

cate

of

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

1980:

Open

Psy

choth

erap

yC

ente

r

(Inst

itute

of

Fam

ily

Ther

apy)

ww

w.o

pc.

gr

Ath

ens,

Thes

salo

nik

i,

Ioan

nin

a,G

R*

Pri

vat

e

200e

per

month

4yea

rs

Cli

nic

al

part

:cl

inic

alpra

ctic

e

(1,6

35

h),

super

vis

ion

(indir

ect)

(400

h),

per

sonal

(gro

up

anal

yti

c)th

erap

y(5

60

h)

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars,

sym

posi

a(2

84

h)

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:3

short

essa

ys,

dis

sert

atio

n

Gro

up

of

train

ers,

com

munit

yed

uca

tional

pra

ctic

e

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICfu

ll

mem

ber

)

Affi

liat

ion:

H.S

.E.M

.T.

Com

pli

ance

wit

hcr

iter

iaof:

EF

TA

,E

AP

Pro

fess

ional

sin

men

tal

hea

lth,

med

icin

e(c

hil

d),

educa

tion

Cer

tifi

cate

of

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

1983:

Lab

ora

tory

for

the

study

of

Hum

an

Rel

atio

ns

htt

p:/

/ww

w.

ergas

tiri

o.e

u/

def

ault

.php?L

ang=

2

Ath

ens,

Thes

salo

nik

i,

GR

*

Pri

vat

e

8800e

4yea

rs(1

,482

h)

Cli

nic

al

part

:pra

ctic

e

(obse

rvat

ion

beh

ind

one-

way

scre

en,

par

tici

pat

ion

astr

ainee

ther

apis

tin

did

acti

cgro

up

ther

apy)

(674

h),

super

vis

ion

(200

h),

per

sonal

(gro

up)

ther

apy

(min

imum

300

h)

Theo

reti

cal

part

:le

cture

s,

sem

inar

s,w

ork

shops

(308

h)

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:ora

l

and

wri

tten

pre

senta

tions

(cas

e

study)

Gro

up

of

train

ers

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICfu

ll

mem

ber

)

Nat

ional

Org

anis

atio

nfo

r

Psy

choth

erap

yof

Gre

ece

(mem

ber

)

Affi

liat

ion

wit

hH

EL

AS

YT

H

Deg

ree

inpsy

cholo

gy,

psy

chia

try,

soci

alw

ork

Deg

ree

inso

cial

scie

nce

s/

hum

anit

ies

(pro

vis

ional

acce

pta

nce

)

Cer

tifi

cate

insy

stem

ican

d

fam

ily

ther

apy

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

234 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

Tab

le4

con

tin

ued

Det

ails

of

Inst

itute

sS

etti

ng

fees

Len

gth

,st

ruct

ure

/conte

nt,

staf

fA

ccre

dit

atio

n/a

ffili

atio

nE

ntr

yre

quir

emen

tsT

ype

of

cert

ifica

te

1992:

Univ

ersi

ty

Res

earc

hIn

stit

ute

of

Men

tal

Hea

lth

htt

p:/

/ww

w.e

pip

si.g

r/

educa

tion/

Synex

izom

eni_

ekpai

dey

si/1

_

3B

.php

Ath

ens,

Gre

ece

Publi

c

Fee

snot

spec

ified

4yea

rs(6

40

h)

2tw

oyea

rin

dep

enden

tci

rcle

s

Cli

nic

al

part

:pra

ctic

e(m

ember

of

ther

apeu

tic

team

(4m

onth

s),

live

(under

takin

gof

5ca

ses

inco

-ther

apy)

and

indir

ect

super

vis

ion

(80

han

d3

mar

athons)

,per

sonal

dev

elopm

ent

gro

up

(40

h)

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars,

work

shops

(128

h)

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:C

linic

al

pap

er

Gro

up

of

train

ers

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICfu

ll

mem

ber

)

Sta

teli

cense

topra

ctic

eas

psy

chia

tris

t,ch

ild-p

sych

iatr

ist,

clin

ical

psy

cholo

gis

t

Cli

nic

alex

per

ience

Cer

tifi

cate

of

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

1993:

Anti

stix

i

htt

p:/

/ww

w.

onsi

te.c

om

.gr/

anti

stix

i2.g

r/

Ath

ens,

GR

*

Pri

vat

e

250e

per

month

5yea

rs(1

60

hper

yea

r)

2tw

oyea

rin

dep

enden

tpro

gra

ms

Cli

nic

al

part

:co

-ther

apy,

indir

ect

super

vis

ion,

per

sonal

(gro

up)

ther

apy

(5yea

rs)

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars,

work

shops

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:es

says

(lit

erat

ure

revie

ws,

gen

ogra

man

alysi

s)

No

of

train

er(s

):not

spec

ified

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICfu

ll

mem

ber

)

Com

pli

ance

wit

hcr

iter

iaof:

EF

TA

,H

EL

AS

YT

H,

HE

ST

AF

TA

,E

TH

OS

Men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ional

s

(psy

chia

tris

ts,

chil

d

psy

chia

tris

ts,

psy

cholo

gis

ts,

soci

alw

ork

ers)

Per

sonal

ther

apy

and

pro

fess

ional

exper

ience

inm

enta

lhea

lth

pra

ctic

e

Cer

tifi

cate

of

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

1994:

Fam

ily

Ther

apy

Unit

,P

sych

iatr

ic

Hosp

ital

of

Att

iki*

Publi

c

No

fees

3yea

rs(3

73

h)

plu

s2

yea

rsof

super

vis

ion

(100

h)

Cli

nic

al

part

:pra

ctic

e(c

ase

pre

senta

tion,

indir

ect

super

vis

ion,

obse

rvat

ion

as

mem

ber

of

ther

apeu

tic

team

beh

ind

one-

way

scre

en),

per

sonal

dev

elopm

ent

(gen

ogra

mw

ork

)

Theo

reti

cal

part

:le

cture

s,se

min

ars,

work

shops

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:es

says

(lit

erat

ure

revie

ws,

gen

ogra

man

alysi

s)

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICfu

ll

mem

ber

)

Men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ional

s

(psy

chia

tris

ts,

psy

cholo

gis

ts,

soci

alw

ork

ers,

occ

upat

ional

ther

apis

ts,

nurs

es)

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 235

123

Tab

le4

con

tin

ued

Det

ails

of

Inst

itute

sS

etti

ng

fees

Len

gth

,st

ruct

ure

/conte

nt,

staf

fA

ccre

dit

atio

n/a

ffili

atio

nE

ntr

yre

quir

emen

tsT

ype

of

cert

ifica

te

1996:

Soci

ety

for

Syst

ems

ther

apy

and

Inte

rven

tion

htt

p:/

/ww

w.s

osy

ti.g

r/

educa

tion.h

tml

Irak

lion

Cre

te,

Ath

ens,

Ioan

nin

a,G

R*

1996–2010:

Univ

ersi

tyof

Cre

te

2010–:

pri

vat

e

sett

ing

5760e

4yea

rs(7

00

h)

4sh

ort

indep

enden

ted

uca

tional

circ

les

Cli

nic

al

part

:pra

ctic

e(u

nder

takin

gof

case

s,obse

rvat

ion,

indir

ect

super

vis

ion),

per

sonal

dev

elopm

ent

(gen

ogra

mw

ork

,gro

up

ther

apy)

Theo

reti

cal

part

:le

cture

s,se

min

ars,

work

shops

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:w

ritt

enan

d

ora

lex

ams,

essa

ys,

clin

ical

pap

er,

under

takin

gan

dco

mple

tion

of

ther

apy

inone

case

Gro

up

of

train

ers

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICfu

ll

mem

ber

)A

ffili

atio

nw

ith

SO

.SY

.TI.

Doct

ors

,psy

cholo

gis

ts,

pro

fess

ional

sin

hea

lth,

educa

tion/h

um

anit

ies

Cer

tifi

cate

of

com

ple

tion

(dip

lom

aof

syst

emic

ther

apis

tfo

rdoct

ors

/

psy

cholo

gis

ts,

dip

lom

aof

syst

emic

counse

lor)

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

1998:

Syst

emic

Cen

ter

for

Tra

inin

gan

d

Psy

choth

erap

y

htt

p:/

/skep

sys.

com

.gr/

el/p

rogra

mm

es/

spec

iali

zati

on-i

n-

syst

emic

-ther

apy/

Ath

ens,

GR

*

Pri

vat

e

Fee

snot

spec

.

4yea

rs(o

ver

1.4

00

h)

Cli

nic

al

part

:pra

ctic

e(o

bse

rvat

ion

of

fam

ily

ther

apy

sess

ions

beh

ind

one-

way

scre

en,

par

tici

pan

tobse

rvat

ion

ingro

up

ther

apy

sess

ions,

under

takin

gof

case

sin

fam

ily

and

gro

up

co-t

her

apy,

mem

ber

ship

inre

flec

ting

team

form

at),

dir

ect

and

indir

ect

super

vis

ion

(incl

.

350

hof

super

vis

edpra

ctic

ein

acl

inic

al

or

equiv

alen

t,af

fili

ate

or

non-a

ffili

ate

sett

ing),

per

sonal

ther

apy

(indiv

idual

or

gro

up),

inte

ract

ional

ple

nar

ym

eeti

ngs

bet

wee

ntr

ainee

s,tr

ainer

san

d

super

vis

ors

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars,

exper

ienti

al

work

shops

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:4

essa

ys,

5

clin

ical

pap

ers,

final

gro

up

pro

ject

(pre

senta

tion

inple

nar

ym

eeti

ng)

Gro

up

of

train

ers

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICfu

ll

mem

ber

)

Com

pli

ance

wit

hcr

iter

iaof:

EF

TA

,H

EL

AS

YT

H,

ET

HO

S,

EA

P

Men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ional

sC

erti

fica

teof

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

236 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

Tab

le4

con

tin

ued

Det

ails

of

Inst

itute

sS

etti

ng

fees

Len

gth

,st

ruct

ure

/conte

nt,

staf

fA

ccre

dit

atio

n/a

ffili

atio

nE

ntr

yre

quir

emen

tsT

ype

of

cert

ifica

te

2006:

Inst

itute

of

Syst

emic

Thin

kin

gan

d

Psy

choth

erap

ya

htt

p:/

/ww

w.s

yst

emic

.gr/

Thes

salo

nik

i,G

R*

Pri

vat

e

8000e

4yea

rs(8

00

h,

dir

ect

conta

ctw

ith

staf

f)

1st

yea

rin

dep

enden

tpro

gra

m:

200

hper

yea

r

Cli

nic

al

part

:li

ve

(350

h)

and

indir

ect

super

vis

ion

(50

h),

per

sonal

dev

elopm

ent

gro

ups

(60

h)

Theo

reti

cal

part

:le

cture

s,se

min

ars,

work

shops

(340

h)

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:2

essa

ys,

1

clin

ical

pap

er

Gro

up

of

train

ers

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICfu

ll

mem

ber

)

Com

pli

ance

wit

hcr

iter

iaof:

EF

TA

,S

.A.N

.G.)

Sta

teli

cence

topra

ctic

eas

men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ional

(psy

cholo

gis

ts,

psy

chia

tris

ts,

soci

alw

ork

ers,

psy

chia

tric

nurs

es)

Cer

tifi

cate

of

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

2006:

Syst

emic

Inst

itute

of

Thes

salo

nik

i

htt

p:/

/ww

w.s

yst

imik

i.gr/

Thes

salo

nik

i&

Ath

ens,

GR

Pri

vat

e

4040e

3yea

rs(4

50

h,

dir

ect

conta

ctw

ith

staf

f)

3in

dep

enden

tci

rcle

s(1

50

hper

yea

r)

Cli

nic

al

part

:in

dir

ect

super

vis

ion

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:non

spec

ified

Sin

gle

train

er

Com

pli

ance

wit

hcr

iter

iaof:

IGS

T,

S.A

.N.G

.

Deg

ree

inpsy

choso

cial

pro

fess

ion

Tw

oyea

rsof

pro

fess

ional

exper

ience

Work

sett

ing

wit

hpote

nti

alfo

r

the

pra

ctic

eof

fam

ily

ther

apy

Pre

vio

us

exper

ience

in

psy

choth

erap

yor

fam

ily

ther

apy

Cer

tifi

cate

of

atte

ndan

ce(n

o

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

2009:

Erg

asti

rion

of

Syst

emic

Thin

kin

gan

d

Tra

inin

g

htt

p:/

/ww

w.

ergas

yst

imic

is.g

r/

hom

e.as

p

Irak

lion

Gre

te,

GR

*

Pri

vat

e

5000e

4se

min

arcy

cles

(750

h,

dir

ect

conta

ct

wit

hst

aff)

Cli

nic

al

part

:pra

ctic

e(o

bse

rvat

ion

beh

ind

one-

way

scre

en,

dir

ect

and

indir

ect

super

vis

ion,

under

takin

gof

case

sin

co-

ther

apy),

per

sonal

dev

elopm

ent

gro

up/

ther

apy,

par

tici

pat

ion

ingro

up

super

vis

ion

of

men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ional

s

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:es

says

or

case

studie

spre

senta

tions

Sin

gle

train

er

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICas

soci

ate

mem

ber

)

Men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ional

sC

erti

fica

teof

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 237

123

Tab

le4

con

tin

ued

Det

ails

of

Inst

itute

sS

etti

ng

fees

Len

gth

,st

ruct

ure

/conte

nt,

staf

fA

ccre

dit

atio

n/a

ffili

atio

nE

ntr

yre

quir

emen

tsT

ype

of

cert

ifica

te

2010:

Inst

itute

of

Syst

emic

Appro

ach

and

Fam

ily

Ther

apy

ww

w.s

yst

imik

iskep

si.g

r

Thes

salo

nik

i,G

R*

Pri

vat

e

4800e

4yea

r(9

50

h)

2tw

oyea

rin

dep

enden

tci

rcle

s

Cli

nic

al

part

:dir

ect

and

indir

ect

super

vis

ion,

per

sonal

dev

elopm

ent

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars,

work

shops

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:ca

se

study

pre

senta

tion

Gro

up

of

train

ers

Com

pli

ance

wit

hcr

iter

iaof:

EF

TA

,S

.A.N

.G.

Pro

fess

ional

sin

men

tal

hea

lth,

soci

al

work

and

educa

tion

Cer

tifi

cate

of

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

Inst

itute

of

Fam

ily

Consu

ltat

ion

and

Syst

emic

Ther

arpy

htt

p:/

/ww

w.s

yst

emic

-

inst

itute

.gr/

Chan

iaC

rete

,G

R

Pri

vat

e

Fee

snot

spec

.

5yea

rs(1

.000

h)

Indep

enden

tci

rcle

sof

sem

inar

s

Cli

nic

al

part

:pra

ctic

e(m

ember

of

ther

apeu

tic

team

and

indir

ect

super

vis

ion),

per

sonal

ther

apy

(gro

up

ther

apy,

exper

ienti

al

gro

ups)

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars,

work

shops

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:non

spec

ified

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICas

soci

ate

mem

ber

)

Men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ional

sC

erti

fica

teof

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

2011:

Tra

inin

gan

d

Res

earc

hIn

stit

ute

for

Syst

emic

Psy

choth

erap

y

htt

p:/

/ww

w.

logopsy

chis

.gr/

Def

ault

.asp

x?t

abid

=

782&

languag

e=en

-GB

Ath

ens,

GR

*

Pri

vat

e

8680e

4yea

rs(1

.440

h,

dir

ect

conta

ct

wit

hst

aff

plu

sin

dep

enden

t

study)

2tw

oyea

rle

vel

s

Cli

nic

al

part

:pra

ctic

e(3

70

h),

super

vis

ion

(liv

ean

din

dir

ect:

260

h),

per

sonal

ther

apy

(310

h

min

imum

)

Theo

reti

cal

part

:le

cture

s,

sem

inar

s,w

ork

shops

(500

h)

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:

Short

pap

ers,

clin

ical

work

port

foli

o,

gro

up

assi

gnm

ents

,

dis

sert

atio

n

Gro

up

of

train

ers

Euro

pea

nF

amil

yT

her

apy

Ass

oci

atio

n(T

ICas

soci

ate

mem

ber

)

Com

pli

ance

wit

hcr

iter

iaof:

HE

LA

SY

TH

,A

FT

(UK

),

EF

TA

,E

AP

Fir

stdeg

ree

inpsy

cholo

gy,

med

icin

e,

soci

alw

ork

and

inhum

anit

ies/

soci

alsc

ience

spro

vid

edco

mple

tion

of

post

gra

duat

eco

urs

ein

men

tal

hea

lth

Cer

tifi

cate

of

com

ple

tion

(no

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

238 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

Tab

le4

con

tin

ued

Det

ails

of

Inst

itute

sS

etti

ng

fees

Len

gth

,st

ruct

ure

/conte

nt,

staf

fA

ccre

dit

atio

n/a

ffili

atio

nE

ntr

yre

quir

emen

tsT

ype

of

cert

ifica

te

2004:

Inst

itute

of

Syst

emic

Ther

apy

of

Thes

salo

nik

i

htt

p:/

/ww

w.i

stt.

gr

Thes

salo

nik

i,A

then

s,

GR

*

Pri

vat

e

1300e

1yea

r(1

44

h)

Cli

nic

al

part

:

obse

rvat

ion

of

ther

apy,

indir

ect

super

vis

ion,

self

-know

ledge

gro

up

pro

cess

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:

pre

senta

tion

of

two

case

studie

s

Sin

gle

train

er

Not

spec

ified

Men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ional

s

(psy

chia

tris

ts,

chil

d-p

sych

iatr

ists

,

psy

cholo

gis

ts,

soci

alw

ork

ers)

Tw

oyea

rsof

pro

fess

ional

exper

ience

Work

sett

ing

wit

hpote

nti

alfo

rth

e

pra

ctic

eof

couple

ther

apy/

counse

ling

Cer

tifi

cate

of

atte

ndan

ce(n

o

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

2006:

Syst

emic

Inst

itute

of

Thes

salo

nik

i

htt

p:/

/ww

w.s

yst

imik

i.gr/

Thes

salo

nik

i&

Ath

ens,

GR

Pri

vat

e

1400e

1yea

rC

linic

al

part

:not

spec

ified

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:

Sin

gle

train

er

Not

spec

ified

Men

tal

hea

lth

pro

fess

ional

s

(psy

chia

tris

ts,

chil

d-p

sych

iatr

ists

,

psy

cholo

gis

ts,

soci

alw

ork

ers)

Tw

oyea

rsof

pro

fess

ional

exper

ience

Work

sett

ing

wit

hpote

nti

alfo

rth

e

pra

ctic

eof

couple

ther

apy/

counse

ling

Cer

tifi

cate

of

atte

ndan

ce(n

o

stat

uto

ryre

cognit

ion)

2010:

Inst

itute

of

Syst

emic

Appro

ach

and

Fam

ily

Ther

apy

ww

w.s

yst

imik

iskep

si.g

r

Thes

salo

nik

i,G

R*

Pri

vat

e

1200e

1yea

r(1

60

h)

Cli

nic

al

part

:dir

ect

and

indir

ect

super

vis

ion,

per

sonal

dev

elopm

ent

Theo

reti

cal

part

:se

min

ars,

work

shops

Ass

ignm

ents

for

com

ple

tion

:

pre

senta

tion

of

case

study

Sin

gle

train

er

Not

spec

ified

Pro

fess

ional

sin

men

tal

hea

lth,

soci

al

work

and

educa

tion

Cer

tifi

cate

of

com

ple

tion

(no

form

alre

cognit

ion)

The

Inst

itute

sar

epre

sente

din

chro

nolo

gic

alord

er(y

ear

of

const

ituti

on

of

the

Inst

itute

and

not

of

the

trai

nin

gpro

gra

m),

star

ting

wit

hth

eold

est.

Info

rmat

ion

was

init

iall

yder

ived

from

thei

rw

ebsi

tes,

exce

pt

for

the

case

of

the

Ath

enia

nIn

stit

ute

of

Anth

ropos,

wher

ein

form

atio

nis

bas

edon

the

inte

rvie

ww

ith

Kyri

aki

Poly

chro

ni

(Sen

ior

clin

ical

asso

ciat

eof

the

Inst

itute

,P

resi

den

tof

EF

TA

)an

dth

e

Fam

ily

ther

apy

unit

,w

her

ein

form

atio

nw

asder

ived

by

ane-

mai

lan

dte

lephone

com

munic

atio

nw

ith

Kat

iaC

har

alam

bak

i(C

ours

edir

ecto

r).

Subse

quen

tly,

the

Inst

itute

sw

ere

conta

cted

(by

e-m

ail

or

tele

phone)

and

asked

tover

ify

or

updat

eth

eav

aila

ble

info

rmat

ion.

Those

that

resp

onded

are

mar

ked

wit

han

aste

risk

(*)

aA

vdi

(2011,

p.

71)

inac

cura

tely

pre

sents

the

nam

eof

the

par

ticu

lar

Inst

itute

as‘‘

Inst

itute

of

Syst

emic

Thought

and

Ther

apy’’

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 239

123

provided that they have further clinical experience or hold additional degrees in mental

health. The issues regarding the type of personal development required, the type of entry

requirements and the issuing of accreditation have constituted main poles of differentiation

and opposition among the training programs (M. Polemi-Todoulou, inteview 5, December

27, 2012).

No training program has statutory accreditation due to the overall lack of relevant

legislation. Therefore, in most cases the graduates are granted certificates of attendance,

whereas in few cases they are granted certificates in systemic/family therapy. Despite the

diversity due to the lack of common, state recognised criteria considering the content and

the structure of training programs, most of the Institutes choose to comply with the criteria

of the EFTA, i.e. 700–900 h inclusive of theory, clinical practice and personal develop-

ment [see, EFTA Guidelines (Minimum Training Standards) 2011]. Furthermore, most are

either full or associate members of the EFTA Champer of Training Institutes (TIC) and are

affiliated either with other European associations or with Greek systemic/family therapy

associations. In all cases, training secures eligibility to become member in a Greek asso-

ciation, for their graduates. Nevertheless, the situation is in flux and at times further

perplexed given also the existence of different backgrounds in respect of training between

the first and subsequent generations of systemic/family therapists, who are currently

involved in training. Most of the first do not have either a complete training in systemic/

family therapy or a training to become trainers in systemic/family therapy, whereas the

latter have usually completed their training abroad.

Epilogue: a Glimpse of the Future

…(systemic/family therapy in Greece)…a puzzle that is not yet completed…it is as if

we hold the pieces and we still do not know where to place them so as to come up

with the whole picture…(S. Hatzigeleki, interview 2, December 20, 2012)

In this paper I have attempted to narrate the story of the origins and the current state of

the art of systemic/family therapy in Greece, acknowledging though the constructionist

adherence that the narrator cannot be distinguished from the act of narrating (Gergen

1999).

Systemic/family therapy in Greece comes across as a lively, creative field, which seems

to have been connected with fore-front international developments, starting with the initial

‘Vassiliou’ era and extending to current practices which incorporate the latest develop-

ments in the field, like for example the attempt to apply the Finish Open Dialogue

Approach (Seikkula and Arnkil 2006) in a Community Care Mental Health Center, in

Volos (Tseliou 2009) or the use of a reflecting team format at the Department for psy-

chotherapy and support for the family of the Psychiatric Hospital in Thessaloniki, founded

in 2000 by Frosso Moureli. Futhermore, judging by the existing number of associations and

the number of their members, the current systemically influenced services and practitioners

and the respective training programs, perhaps we could speak of a case of ‘conquer’, as

regards systemic/family therapy in Greece.

In the current era of austerity, any attempt for a glimpse at the future in Greece is at least

challenging, if not hard to make. Systemic/family therapy may need to face a number of

additional challenges. First, it is difficult to judge the extent in which the existing

polyphony and epistemological and theoretical diversity will find a way towards joint

attempts for creativity in the context of the recently formed National Federation. Second,

240 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

the paradox of systemic/family therapy becoming an establishment ‘eroding the psychiatric

establishment’, (see also, Tseliou in press) is at least a worthwhile issue to explore. Finally,

the dilemmas considering professional development and accreditation issues will have to

be faced. Perhaps, the further pursuing of securing state, official accreditation for training

programs may prove beneficial for the practice of systemic/family therapy. On the other

hand, I do sympathize with expressed concerns (Hatzigeleki, interview 2, December 20,

2012; Polychroni, interview 3, December 21, 2012) that it can paradoxically lead to a

‘hunt’ for accreditation, with potentially detrimental effects considering the quality of

training.

In any case, the field might benefit from systematic research, which could both explore

and register its roots as well as the current state of art. Most importantly, it could explore

the ideas, wishes and concerns of systemic/family therapy practitioners, trainers and

trainees but also of family members/service users regarding the questions and dilemmas

posed, thus possibly making ‘a difference that will make a difference’ (Bateson 2000,

p. 459).

Acknowledgments I am indebted to a number of colleagues who were kind enough to provide me bothwith support and with all sorts of necessary information within narrow time limits, while preparing thispaper. In particular I would like to acknowledge: Athena Androutsopoulou, Katia Charalambaki, PanagiotisChrysos, Sofia Hatzigeleki, Virginia Ioannidou, Violeta Kaftantzi, Dimitris Karagiannis, Elena Karkazi,Leto Katakis, Popi Konsolaki, Frosso Moureli, Thalis Papadakis, Nikos Paritsis, Mina Polemi-Todoulou,Kyriaki Polychroni, Fany Triantafillou, Manolis Tsagarakis, Andreas Tsonides.

References

Avdi, E. (2011). Psychotherapy training and practice in Greece. European Psychotherapy, 10(1), 51–80.Bateson, G. (2000) [1972]. Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago, USA: University of Chicago Press.Blue, A. V. (1993). Greek psychiatry’s transition from the hospital to the community. Medical Anthropology

Quarterly, 7(3), 301–318.Carr, A. (2013). Development of family therapy in Ireland. Contemporary Family Therapy. doi:10.1007/

s10591-013-9240-z.Christodoulou, G. N. (1997). Psychiatric training in Greece. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical

Neuroscience, 247(Suppl), S18–S19.Dragonas, Th., & Tseliou, E. (2009). Metashimatismoi tis ellinikis oikogeneias kai nomothetikes allages sto

oikogeniako dikaio [Transformations in the Greek family and legal changes in the family law]. InJ. Muncie, M. Wetherell, M. Lancan, R. Dallos, & A. Cohrane (Eds.), Oikogeneia i meleti kai katanoisitis oikogeneiakis zois [Understanding the family] (pp. 117–174). Athens: Metaihmio.

EFTA Guidelines (Minimum Training Standards). (2011). Available at: http://www.europeanfamilytherapy.eu/content.php?idt=23&idl=eng&idnl=10.

Georgas, J. (2006). The education of psychologists in Greece. International Journal of Psychology, 41(1),29–34. doi:10.1080/00207590444000438.

Gergen, K. (1999). An invitation to social construction. London, UK: Sage.Haritos-Fatouros, M., & Hatzigeleki, S. (1999). The family and family therapy in Greece. In U. P. Gielen &

A. L. Comunian (eds.), International approaches to the family and family therapy (pp. 43-56). Padova,Italy: Unipress.

Hatzaras, K. S. (2010). Programme design and continuity of health care reform: The case of Greek mentalcare. Proceedings of the HaCIRIC10 International Conference, Better healthcare through betterinfrastructure, 42–54. Retrieved from http://scholar.google.gr/scholar?hl=en&q=Hatzaras?program?design?health?care&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp.

Ierodiakonou, C. S. (1983). Psychotherapeutic possibilities in a rural community mental health center inGreece. American Journal of Psychotherapy, XXXVIII(4), 544–551.

Kaftantzi, V. (1996). Apo tin oikogeneiaki therapia sti sistimiki therapia [From family therapy to systemstherapy]. In F. Triantafillou (Ed.), Sistimikes skepseis meta apo 12 hronia leitourgias tou KentrouPsychikis Igeias Ditikou Tomea Thessalonikis [Systemic thoughts following 12 years of operation of

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 241

123

the Mental Health Center of West Sector of Thessaloniki, Greece] (special ed., pp. 21–38). Thessa-loniki, GR: Psychiatric Hospital of Thessaloniki.

Kaftantzi, V. (2000). Apo to 1990 sto simera [From 1990 up to date]. In V. Kaftantzi-Hasta (Ed.), 2ndPanhellenic scientific meeting, Systemic therapy-Family therapy in Greece today (pp. 23–39). Thes-saloniki, GR: Psychiatric Hospital of Thessaloniki.

Karastergiou, A., Mastrogianni, A., Georgiadou, E., Kotrotsios, S., & Mauratziotou, K. (2005). The reformof the Greek mental health services. Journal of Mental Health, 14(2), 197–203. doi:10.1080/09638230500060516.

Kaslow, F. W. (2000). History of family therapy: Evolution outside the U.S.A. Journal of Family Psy-chotherapy, 11(4), 1–35. doi:10.1300/J085v11n04_01.

Katakis, Ch. (1976). An exploratory multi-level attempt to investigate intrapersonal and interpersonalpatterns of 20 Athenian Families. Mental Health and Society, 3, 1–9.

Katakis, Ch. (1990). Coexisting and conflicting self-referential conceptual systems: A model for describingmalfunctioning in the contemporary family implications for therapy. Contemporary Family Therapy,12(4), 339–363. doi:10.1007/BF00890022.

Katakis, Ch. (1997). Oikogeneiaki therapia horis oikogenia [Family therapy without the family]. In V.Kaftantzi-Hasta (Ed.), 1st Panhellenic Scientific two-day conference: Systemic therapy-Family therapyin Greece today (pp. 23-28). Thessaloniki, GR: Psychiatric Hospital of Thessaloniki.

Katakis, Ch. (2004). The lamp that lightens our path. Context: Magazine for Family Therapy and SystemicPractice in the UK, 73, 6–8.

Madianos, M. G. (1999). Preventive aspects of the mental health care system reform in Greece. In G.N. Christodoulou, D. Lecic-Tosevski, & V. P. Kontaxakis (Eds.), Issues in preventive psychiatry (pp.47–54). Basel: Karger.

Ng, K. S. (2005). The development of family therapy around the world. The Family Journal, 13, 35–42. doi:10.1177/1066480704270264.

Papadioti-Athanasiou, V., & Softas-Nall, L. (2006). Oikogeniaki—sistimiki therapia: Vasikes proseggiseis,theoritikes theseis kai praktiki efarmogi [Family systems therapy: Basic approaches, theoreticalperspectives and practical applications]. Athens: Ellinika Grammata.

Polemi-Todoulou, M., Vassiliou, V., & Vassiliou, G. (1998). The grouping process across cultural change.Group, 22(2), 105–119. doi:10.1023/A:1022179613725.

Potamianos, G. (2003). Psychology and the left in Greece: Close encounters of no kind. European Journal ofPsychotherapy Counselling and Health, 6(1), 51–62. doi:10.1080/1364253032000157116.

Protopsalti-Polychroni, K., & Gournas, G. (2004). Inner voices and dialogue in family therapy and systemictraining. Context: Magazine for Family Therapy and Systemic Practice in the UK, 73, 11–12.

Seikkula, J., & Arnkil, T. E. (2006). Dialogical meetings in social networks. London: Karnac.Sigalas, I. M., Trakaki, Th., Alifragi, M., & Karagiannis, D. (2012). Anaptixi enos poliepipedou-polies-

tiakou ekpaideftikou programmatos [Development of a multilevel-multifocal training program].Metalogos, 22, 65–77.

Softas-Nall, V. (2003). Reflections on forty years of family therapy, research and systemic thinking inGreece. In K. S. Nig (Ed.), Global perspectives in family therapy: Development, practice, trends (pp.125–143). New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.

Softas-Nall, V. (2008). A view of systemic therapy in Greece: An interview with Charis Katakis. The FamilyJournal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 16(1), 87–91. doi:10.1177/1066480707309125.

Sultz, K. D. and Hagspiel, S. (2011). Psychotherapy in Europe [Special issue]. European Psychotherapy,10(1).

Tomaras, V., & Pomini, V. (2004). Systemic family therapy in Greek health work. Context: Magazine forFamily Therapy and Systemic Practice in the UK, 73, 9–10.

Triantafillou, F. (1996). Mia eisagogi…se ena eidiko tefhos i stin prospatheia gia psychiatriki metarithmisi[An introduction…to a special issue or to the attempt for psychiatric transformation]. In F. Triantafillou(Ed.), Sistimikes skepseis meta apo 12 hronia leitourgias tou Kentrou Psychikis Igeias Ditikou TomeaThessalonikis [Systemic thoughts following 12 years of operation of the Mental Health Center of WestSector of Thessaloniki, Greece] (pp. 7–17). Thessaloniki, GR: Psychiatric Hospital of Thessaloniki(special edition).

Tseliou, E. (2009). I ekpaidevsi ston Anoihto Dialogo os methodologia metamorphosis enos plaisiou: Toparadeigma ton domon psichikis igias Volou [Training in the Open Dialogue Approach as a meth-odology of a setting transformation: The case of Volos mental health services]. Metalogos, 16, 78–93.

Tseliou, E. (in press). Systemic family psychotherapy. In T. Teo (ed.), Encyclopedia of critical psychology.Springer. Available online at: http://www.springerreference.com/docs/edit/chapterdbid/310557.html.

242 Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243

123

Vassiliou, G. (1968). Aspects of parent-adolescent transaction in the Greek family. In G. Kaplan &S. Lebovici (Eds.), Adolescence: Psychological perspectives (pp. 123–132). NY, New York: BasicBooks.

Vassiliou, G. (1990). I istoria tou Athinaikou Kentrou Meletis tou Anthropou me liga logia [The story of theAthenian Institute of Anthropos in a few words]. Athens: Athenian Institute of Anthropos.

Vassiliou, G. (1997). Apo tin arhi sto simera [From the beginning up to date]. In V. Kaftantzi-Hasta (Ed.),1st Panhellenic Scientific two-day conference: Systemic therapy-Family therapy in Greece today (pp.14–22). Thessaloniki, GR: Psychiatric Hospital of Thessaloniki.

Vassiliou, G., & Vassiliou, V. (1973). The implicative meaning of the Greek concept of ‘philotimo’. Journalof Cross Cultural Psychology, 4(3), 326–341. doi:10.1177/002202217300400305.

Vetere, A., & Papadopoulos, R. (Eds.) (2004). European Family Therapy [Special issue]. Context: Magazinefor Family Therapy and Systemic Practice in the UK, 73.

Contemp Fam Ther (2013) 35:223–243 243

123