Coffee on the Porch Before Nine: Solution-Focused Brief Therapy With a Client After Job Loss
Student Name
Psychology Program, Aspen University
PSY530: Advanced Helping Skills
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Coffee on the Porch Before Nine: Solution-Focused Brief Therapy With a Client After Job Loss
Most approaches in this course begin by understanding a problem. Solution-focused brief therapy starts somewhere else: with what the client wants and what is already working. This paper explains the approach's assumptions and techniques, applies them to a session with Teresa, the course's composite client after her layoff, compares it with the problem-focused approaches used earlier, and reviews the evidence.
Assumptions and Techniques
De Shazer et al. (1986) described a brief therapy model that focuses on developing solutions rather than analyzing problems, on the premise that the solution need not be directly related to the problem and that small changes can lead to larger ones. Several techniques follow. The miracle question asks the client to imagine that the problem has been solved overnight and to describe, in detail, what would be different the next day. Exception questions look for times when the problem was absent or less severe. Scaling questions ask the client to rate progress from 0 to 10 and to identify what would move them one point higher. Compliments recognize the client's existing strengths, and between-session tasks usually ask the client to do more of what already works.
The Miracle Question With Teresa
In session six, the counselor asked: "Suppose that tonight, while you're asleep, a miracle happens, and the things that brought you here are resolved. You don't know it happened because you were asleep. What's the first thing you'd notice tomorrow morning that would tell you something had changed?" Teresa was quiet, then said she would wake up rested, make coffee, and drink it on the porch instead of standing at the counter checking email. She would send at least one application before nine. She would call her daughter just to talk, not to check on her. Her husband would notice that she laughed at dinner.
Her answer contains no job offer. What she describes is how she wants to feel and act while she is still looking. That detail matters: it gives the counselor and client goals that are within her reach now, rather than dependent on an employer's decision.
Exceptions and Scaling
The counselor then asked about exceptions: "When in the past two weeks has a little of that morning already happened?" Teresa recalled two days when she had slept through, both after evenings when she stopped at two glasses and had called her sister. On one of those mornings she sent two applications before ten. She had not connected these facts until she said them aloud.
Asked to rate where she was on a scale where 10 is the morning after the miracle and 0 is the worst point after the layoff, she said 3. Asked why not lower, she said, "Because I'm here, and I've had a couple of good mornings." Asked what a 4 would look like, she said, "Coffee on the porch twice this week." The counselor complimented her on noticing what helped and suggested she watch for what she does on the evenings before good mornings, and do more of it. Two sessions later she rated herself at 5.
How It Differs From Earlier Approaches
The cognitive behavioral plan targeted Teresa's belief that her worth depends on providing, and the psychodynamic reading explored its roots in her adolescence, an approach whose effect sizes a major review placed on par with therapies promoted as evidence based (Shedler, 2010). Solution-focused therapy asks about neither. It does not deny that these patterns exist; it assumes that the client already has resources to change and that finding and amplifying them is faster than analyzing the problem. The approaches are not mutually exclusive. The exceptions Teresa identified, calling her sister and limiting wine, align with the behavioral activation and motivational goals already in place, and the solution-focused questions gave her ownership of them.
The Evidence
Gingerich and Peterson (2013) reviewed all 43 controlled outcome studies of solution-focused brief therapy they could locate. Thirty-two, or 74 percent, reported significant positive benefit, and 10 reported positive trends. The strongest evidence was for depression in adults, where four studies found the approach comparable to well-established alternatives, and three studies that examined length of treatment all found it used fewer sessions. The review supports the approach as effective and possibly less costly, although the studies varied in quality and in how faithfully the model was delivered.
Common Missteps
Solution-focused questions are simple to ask and easy to ask badly. Posing the miracle question too early, before the client feels heard, can sound dismissive of her pain; with Teresa, the counselor waited until the sixth session, after the alliance was secure. Accepting vague answers, such as "I'd feel better," wastes the question; the counselor's follow-up, "What would you be doing that tells you that?", is what turns a wish into a behavior. Treating a low scaling number as failure misses the point; the follow-up "Why not lower?" invites clients to name what is already keeping them going. And compliments must be specific and earned, or a client as perceptive as Teresa will hear them as flattery.
Limits for This Client
Solution-focused therapy's brevity and optimism suit Teresa's practical style, but it has limits here. Its emphasis on strengths could lead a counselor to underweight risk, and heavy drinking with low mood still requires the screening and monitoring described in earlier modules. If Teresa's grief about her role proves central, a purely future-focused approach may feel like it skips over something she needs to feel. The counselor should use solution-focused questions as part of an integrated plan rather than as the whole of it.
Conclusion
Solution-focused brief therapy helped Teresa describe a preferred future that did not depend on a job offer, discover exceptions she had overlooked, and measure small progress on a scale that moved from 3 to 5. A review of 43 controlled studies supports the approach, especially for adult depression and brief treatment. For Teresa, it works best alongside the behavioral, motivational, and relational work already under way.
References
de Shazer, S., Berg, I. K., Lipchik, E., Nunnally, E., Molnar, A., Gingerich, W., & Weiner-Davis, M. (1986). Brief therapy: Focused solution development. Family Process, 25(2), 207-221. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.1986.00207.x
Gingerich, W. J., & Peterson, L. T. (2013). Effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy: A systematic qualitative review of controlled outcome studies. Research on Social Work Practice, 23(3), 266-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731512470859
Shedler, J. (2010). The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 65(2), 98-109. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018378
How this PSY 530 Module 6 example is structured
Aspen's catalog describes PSY530 as analyzing theories' techniques and principles and assessing their implementation. Aspen does not publish module deliverables, so check your classroom for the exact prompt. This example defines the model from its originators, demonstrates each technique with the client, differentiates it from other approaches, reports the evidence and evaluates limits.
PSY530 Module 6 questions, answered
What does PSY530 Module 6 usually ask for?
Work in this part of PSY530 often asks you to apply another counseling approach to a client and compare it with those studied earlier. Aspen does not publish module deliverables, so your classroom's instructions govern.
What is the miracle question?
A solution-focused technique asking clients to imagine their problem solved overnight and describe in detail what would be different the next day, which helps define concrete goals.
Is solution-focused brief therapy effective?
A review of 43 controlled studies found 74 percent reported significant benefit, with the strongest evidence for adult depression and fewer sessions than comparison treatments.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.