Videos

LISTEN TO THE PODCAST delivered by Maria Borcsa & Valeria Pomini on the last EFTA Book « Handbook of Online Systemic Therapy, Supervision and Training« 

On 29 May 2026, Edgar Morin passed away in Paris at an advanced age, just short of his 105th birthday. He was born Edgar Nahoum on 8 July 1921 in Paris, the son of secular Jewish immigrants from Thessaloniki, and himself lived a complex biography: a fighter in the Résistance, a member of the Communist Party until 1951, then expelled from the party and a lifelong dissident vis-à-vis any orthodoxy. At the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), which he joined in 1950 and where he became research director, he worked at the intersection of sociology, philosophy, ethnography and biology. He received honorary doctorates from 38 universities worldwide.

Morin’s intellectual life’s work is concentrated in the six-volume La Méthode (1977–2004), whose first volume, La nature de la nature, sets out the programme: order, disorder and organisation are not to be conceived as opposites but as inseparably interwoven dimensions of reality. In critical engagement with Ludwig von Bertalan_y’s general systems theory, Norbert Wiener’s cybernetics and Claude Shannon’s information theory, Morin developed an independent position. He adopted the concept of the open system, but radicalised it: no system, he argued, is completely open, and none is completely closed. Every system requires openness towards its environment and closure for selfpreservation – a tension he does not resolve but understands as constitutive of all systems. The core concept is complexity – and Morin emphasised that complexus in Latin means “woven together”. Complexity is for him not a property of di_icult subject matters but an epistemic attitude: the attempt to deal with the interplay of part and whole, subject and object, order and perturbation, not through reduction but through a form of thinking capable of withstanding the tension between these poles.
One of the basic assumptions of systemic perspectives is well known: one cannot intervene in living complex systems in a directive-instructional manner; they can only change through self organisation. Living complex systems include families, couples, groups, but also, for example, the brain, the climate or the human being as a complex biopsychosocial system – Morin referred to these as hypercomplex machines. One of his particular achievements was to develop complexity-scientific and interdisciplinary
reflections on the structure and dynamics of such systems (above all in his major work La nature de la nature). For Morin, the “driving forces” of self-organised processes of change in living, complex systems are disorder, “noise” and error/mistake (Morin, 1974, pp. 137f.), whereby by disorder he means all internal and external “perturbations” of the system’s existing organisational schemata, and by error/mistake everything the system produces that does not correspond to a previously defined intention.
A further important element of these considerations is what he formulated as the “law of systemic antagonism” (Morin, 1981, p. 119), which posits polarities and ambivalences as central to the dynamics of living, complex systems. He marks as immanent to the system, and as stimulating change, both the antagonistic relations among the components and elements of a system and the system’s constant confrontation with contradictions from
the environment – that is, with alternatives that contain equally desirable or equally repellent possibilities (Morin, 1974, p. 138).
This “law” aptly explains why systemic practitioners are so fond of ambivalences: they require the tension associated with ambivalences, antagonisms and polarities as the
“fuel” for self-organised processes of change. This “law” also helps explain why antagonisms and oppositions appear constitutive for the maintenance of systems. Systemic thinking in Morin’s sense therefore means always “co-thinking” the counterpole to one’s own position as constitutive of the system and, in this sense, according it
recognition – and this applies to the micro-, meso- and macro-levels of living complex systems, such as cellular metabolism, families or society. It also protects against naïve
and undercomplex interventions at all of these levels and instead invites us not to adopta one-sided position, but always to include the antagonistic element in our perspective in order to arrive at a reflective understanding of dynamics and structures that meets the demands of systems and complexity theory.
With Edgar Morin, the intellectual world loses one of the last thinkers of the 20th century who sought to counteract the fragmentation of scientific knowledge into countless individual disciplines with a passionate plea for complexity and transdisciplinarity.
Tom Levold and Matthias Ochs
References:
Morin, E. (1974). Das Rätsel des Humanen. Grundfragen einer neuen Anthropologie.
München/Zürich: Piper.
Morin, E. (1981). Method. Towards a study of humankind. Vol. 1: The nature of nature. New
York: Peter Lang.

It is with sorrow that I announce the death of Edgar Morin, the 29^th of May at 104 years. It is with responsibility that I wish to pay a tribute to him. A researcher, an irreverent thinker, the father of complexity. I’ve met him many times – in Roma, Milano, Naples and abroad –  and studied his books whenever I could. I became interested in him in the early 1980s, intrigued by the concept of complexity (1977), which we still consider the mandate of those who define themselves as systemic practitioners in mental health. Proposing a new way of thinking about humanity, the world, and knowledge, Morin considered the composite nature of reality—every theory is according to him local—pushing toward a multiplicity of positions and definitions: « Complexity presents itself as difficulty and uncertainty, not as clarity and an answer. »

Complexity in psychotherapy becomes the proposal for an interconnection between languages and between professional figures; it considers the complementarity of descriptions and the composition of knowledge as a possible method for « reading » the question brought to us. Multiverse, reflective polyphony, hypothesis, intricate hierarchies in constant flux, allow not only new rules of the game but also space for the discovery of questions and problems, redefined in a new way. Complexity has blurred disciplinary boundaries, making it clear that every discipline is contained within every other. The challenge Morin proposes is to seek new metaphors, new styles of thought, new strategies of knowledge: the uncertainty of hypothesizing replaces the certainty of explanations.

Morin fundamentally redefined the game of knowing and psychotherapy, as well as training. According to him social sciences had to change their assumptions and proposed practices. What does it mean to respect complexity in psychotherapy? It means primarily making complexity visible, not flattening oneself with reassuring simplifications, embodying it, riding it, allowing it to emerge; simultaneously it means respecting singularities, seeing the particulars and the whole at the same time; keeping ever more levels in mind, adopting a multiple stance to open up possibilities. It means questioning the very concept of truth, which becomes, as von Foerster argues, « the invention of a liar« . It implies choosing a complementary perspective and generating multiple descriptions. Knowing how to deconstruct preconceived ideas and, to do so, using abductive and divergent thinking; demonstrating irreverence and curiosity in order to allow oneself to be amazed. It means feeling connected, resonating with the capta (Laing 1967) we choose to abduct from the background, overcoming the subject/object dualism, to shift the analysis to the pattern that connects them. And much more.

All this he explained and at the same time lived every minute of his life: irreverence, curiosity, being out of the nine dots, looking at what happened with irony and amazement, with gratitude.

For clinical systemic practice to become the “best” practice, we must take care of the treatment process, that is, subject it to constant, second-order recursive evaluation. Every therapy, regardless of its model, should respect complexity: it should propose operations upon operations. In the recursive position, the practitioner—accessing information about difference and considering themselves an integral part of the ongoing process—observes their own participation in the process they are co-constructing, seeking isomorphisms that repeat identically across different dimensions, as in a fractal. As clinicians, we analyze each question brought to us, interrogating the system that shares the problem (which may include a pediatrician or an elderly aunt), and we consider the symptoms within the organization of the systems in which they appeared, as an attempt to raise the level of complexity of the system itself.

Together with Marco Bianciardi, I wrote a book on therapy as a second-level, recursive operation (2014). We wrote about the ability to use oneself to investigate oneself in relation to others. We wrote about the Morinian necessity of changing attitudes, tolerating doubt, accept the unsaid, and getting one’s hands dirty with action. Participation becomes a privileged postulate as Morin taught us, he, the king of entering any situation in front of him. Together with Pietro Barbetta (2021), I wrote another article for the international journal Family Process,  in which we insist on the need to overcome universalist abstraction, by placing epistemology alongside ontology: epistemology allows us to reflect on the lenses and maps through which we interpret the world; there is then a level at which we consider the contexts in which we act and the stories we are told, an ethnographic descriptive positioning that allows us to pay full attention to the essence of the other and their singularity within multiplicity. Taking this into account means allowing the subjects we work with to express who they are, neutralizing the danger that our premises lead us to ride our prejudices and our knowledge, seeing what we think is the Other. Morin was a curious man, he tried every minute to connect with your essence, to start from your story to get to the common interests.

Personally, I believe that it is precisely maintaining complexity in our work, this polyphony of levels of attention and action, that allows us to access the political dimension of our work; I believe that Morin has been and will continue to be the one to guide us in the ethics, aesthetics, and politics of our work as psychotherapists. Now he does it from his own space, in a dimension we do not reach, trough the books he wrote and the conferences he did, always with extreme generosity.

Umberta Telfener

Barbetta P., Telfener U., 2021, The Milan Approach, History and Evolution, Family Process, Vol 60, N°1, pp.4-16.
Bianciardi M., Telfener U., 20014,  Ricorsività in psicoterapia, riflessioni sulla pratica clinica, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino.
Laing R., 1961, The Self and Others, Tavistock, London.
Morin E., 1977, Il metodo. Ordine, disordine, organizzazione,  Feltrinelli, Milano 1980.

Chers membres et futurs membres de l’EFTA – chambres CIM, NFTO et TIC.
L’objectif de l’EFTA est d’obtenir la reconnaissance de la thérapie familiale et systémique en tant que forme distincte et scientifiquement fondée de pratique thérapeutique, et de garantir des normes rigoureuses en matière de formation et de pratique professionnelle dans toute l’Europe.
À cette fin, l’EFTA a achevé le processus de mise à jour périodique de ses normes de formation, conformément à l’évolution des différents cadres réglementaires et professionnels européens.
Les nouvelles normes de formation s’intitulent « Normes minimales de formation de l’EFTA 2025 ».
Vous trouverez ICI les normes de formation pour les thérapeutes familiaux et systémiques au niveau européen, ainsi que les niveaux de formation requis pour l’adhésion à la Chambre des instituts de formation de l’EFTA (TIC) et à la Chambre des membres individuels de l’EFTA (CIM).

Les nouvelles normes de formation de l’EFTA 2025 doivent être mises en œuvre dans tous les programmes de formation destinés aux étudiants qui entament leur formation de quatre ans à partir de 2027.
Les anciennes normes resteront en vigueur pour tous les autres étudiants ayant commencé leur formation avant 2027.
Les diplômés qui commenceront leur formation en 2027 devront choisir de s’inscrire soit dans le parcours 1, soit dans le parcours 2 d’ici 2031.

L’EFTA prévoit d’organiser des séances d’information et de discussion en 2026. Les chambres individuelles prendront également contact avec leurs membres pour leur fournir des informations sur les nouvelles normes.

The European Family Therapy Association (EFTA) congress was organized in collaboration with Relates (The European and Latin American Network of Systemic Schools), an association of Spanish-speaking therapists. Local partners included DIPHE (Développement, Individu, Processus, Handicap, Education) research unit for disabled and vulnerable people, and Université Lumière Lyon 2, whose university teaching and research focuses on the arts, literature and languages, law, economics and administrative sciences, humanities and social sciences, and health sciences and technology.

The theme of the congress was « Confluences and Controversies in Systemic Practice, Theory and Research, » which can be loosely translated as the convergences and contradictions of systemic theory, practice, and research. This is a timely theme in the current global situation, and it was emphasized in the congress’s joint program. We were all invited to do our part in bringing about systemic change so that we could build mutual understanding and peace worldwide. Creating and strengthening good connections was a common thread throughout the congress.

The congress began with an impressive and moving program number, in which Greek musicians and therapists Vassilis Charalambopoulos, Antonis Adoniou, and Nikos Kaitsas played and sang Sting’s song « Fragile. » The performance was accompanied by a video showing glimpses of world-shaking conflicts (this part of the opening ceremony can be viewed on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X6hBQoE2mI). At the end of the performance, there was a moment of silence so that everyone could reflect on how the performance had affected them. Next, participants were asked to consider what they needed or wanted to achieve from the congress. They reflected on these with those sitting nearby and were encouraged to arrange a meeting with a new acquaintance during the congress in order to establish connections with other participants. Participants were also asked to let go of any unnecessary fears and prejudices during the congress so that we could learn from each other and create something new together.

There were about 1,600 participants from 66 different countries, representing all inhabited continents. 87% were from Europe, 13% from Latin America; 60% from Western Europe, 39.5% from Eastern Europe; a few people from Asia/the Middle East, North America, and North Africa. There were 505 presentation proposals, comprising 300 sessions. There were eight invited keynote speakers. The largest number of participants came from France, Greece, and Italy, with over 100 participants. For the first time, the congress had a space where professionals offered work supervision and a space where participants could watch and share videos related to the themes.

The Finnish Association for Family and Couples Therapy was represented by the authors, who met six other Finns at the congress. It was a wonderful and memorable experience to be together with such a large group of family therapists and systemic therapists. In Europe and around the world, there is a lot of talk about family therapy as systemic therapy. Connections between participants were also created through numerous informal discussions, coffee breaks, lunches, and dinners.

Power and responsibility as therapists

After this, EFTA President Umberta Telfener opened the congress by talking about the social role of systemic therapists/family therapists: « We must give ourselves and our colleagues permission to feel vulnerable and fragile. We need to know where we stand. We need to take a stand on ethical issues. We need to become activists. » From our professional role, we must take responsibility, address injustices, and work to eradicate them. She encouraged us to take a multi-perspective approach to complex issues and situations, as there is no such thing as absolute truth. Telfener referred to Mason (1993) when talking about people as complex systems. The situations we encounter cannot be predicted in advance; they depend on history and processes. As systemic therapists, we represent « safe uncertainty, » ethical relativism, and cultural reflexivity. Through reflexivity, we can reach different perspectives and layers when we engage in an interactive dance with our clients. Telfener also quoted Foucault as saying: « Knowledge is not understanding, it is taking a position. Taking a position is inevitable when producing or using knowledge. » By acting as an activist, the chair meant utilizing professional skills, credibility, and one’s own position to promote justice, social change, and practices that improve the well-being of individuals and communities, while adhering to ethical practices. Issues related to social justice and solidarity are close to the chair’s heart. Reynaldo Perrone of Relates chaired the opening session, highlighting the basic pillars of systemic thinking together with Marcelo Ceberio. The discussion was further expanded by keynote speeches from Alexandra Vassilou and Eva von Redecker, who addressed the profound social, global, and planetary crises facing our society that require action. They called on all of us to take responsibility for the state of our world and our planet, highlighting Arne Mindel’s thinking on deep democracy as one perspective. Deep democracy is a concept of conflict resolution and community building based on awareness that goes beyond traditional political democracy by integrating the perspectives of marginalized and minority groups whose voices are not heard. It is a process of recognizing and valuing all voices, thoughts, and feelings, even those that are difficult or disturbing, in order to transform group conflicts and create more conscious and sustainable communities. In this context, there was also much talk about maintaining a sense of security—a feeling that should belong to everyone, but often the sense of security of the privileged is more important and valued than that of minorities.

Legends on stage

Maurizio Andolfi and Carlos Sluzki also spoke on the opening day. Sluzki spoke in a charming and humorous way about the appeal of constructing alternative narratives, and said that there were still many things he would have liked to bring to a conclusion in his career, particularly in relation to semiotics and cybernetics. He also asked the audience to consider what constitutes their own therapeutic self: who they have learned from and how (through reading, imitation, etc.) and how different ways of doing things have become internalized in their own therapeutic self. In his speech, he also introduced his late friend and colleague Eliseo Verón, who is better known in Spanish- and French-speaking countries. Andolfi’s theme was familiar: multigenerational family therapy, and in particular the position of children in family therapy. In the extensive program of this congress, only ten titles mentioned children – Andolfi had checked this. He has been highlighting the importance of children’s position in family therapy for 50 years. In his speech, he discussed building cooperative relationships with different family members and ways of making children’s voices heard in family therapy.

This wonderful opening day was followed by the actual congress program, which consisted of over 500 speeches, workshops, panel discussions with guest speakers, research reviews, presentations of working methods and techniques, and roundtable discussions. Work supervision was also offered by volunteer work supervisors. There was also a lot of artistic and creative programming. The opening ceremony featured a half-hour expressive dance performance by young people. The congress program was organized by numerous clinicians, researchers, and living legends, such as 91-year-old Carlos Sluzki, Maurizio Andolfi, who is over 80, and Peter Stratton, who is of the same age. Talks and research were presented on topics such as the effectiveness and creativity of therapy, which was understood in a broad sense in this context.

Finns played their part

Professor Juha Holma from the University of Jyväskylä gave a presentation on couple therapy in the treatment of intimate partner violence. Terhi Kotilainen participated in a roundtable discussion on good reasons why systemic therapists need (or do not need) research. Matthias Ochs from Germany, Ged Smith from the UK, Lucie Hornová from the Czech Republic, and Viola Sallay from Hungary/France participated in the discussion. The audience actively participated in the discussion, and together they considered what would encourage research and what the significance of research is for systemic therapists and educators. The limitations of research were also recognized: research cannot achieve everything, but it increases our awareness and understanding of the theories, themes, perspectives, and methods related to therapeutic work. It was also noted that conducting research facilitates the understanding of research conducted by others. On the other hand, active researchers considered what conducting research achieves in oneself as a reciprocal process. The discussion was attended by several representatives of international professional journals, who also considered how to attract more writers and, on the other hand, how to make articles more interesting to readers. Kotilainen also held a workshop on therapist well-being, professional empathy, and emotional regulation. Approximately 50 people from 22 different countries participated in the workshop.

Choices were made on the association front

For the first time, the congress hosted a joint discussion session for the EFTA chambers – previously, the chambers had operated more as separate units. The topic was the direction in which EFTA should develop in the future. During the congress, the EFTA General Assembly was held, at which the EFTA election results were also announced. Umberta Telfener from Italy will continue as chair. Martine Nisse from France was elected vice-chair. Hans Christian Michaelsen from Norway will continue as the representative of the Nordic countries in the NFTO chamber (chamber of national associations). Ilona Buza from Latvia and Júlia Hardy from Hungary left the chamber. Yara Doumit-Naufal from France and Cinthe Lemmens from Belgium were elected to replace them.

All in all, it was a well-organized congress that left many thoughts and the impression that family therapy is practiced around the world and that family therapy can also play a role in influencing society, not just in the treatment of individual families. At the closing ceremony, participants were asked what they were prepared to do to ensure that we would have no regrets when we meet again in three years’ time at the next EFTA congress. Chair Telfener wanted to engage all congress participants in this, reminding them that everyone must commit to acting differently than before: investing in a small plan, a global issue that they believe they can influence. This must be done together with families, friends, teams, and colleagues.
This year, a manifesto for peace was also created:
https://europeanfamilytherapy.eu/wp-content/uploads/Manifesto_peace_lemmens2025.pdf

written by Terhi Kotilainen and Mia Montonen, Finland (representatives of Finland in NFTO)