{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01671583087512291, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0009832841691248771, 'mean_word_length': 5.741721854304636, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Primer on the Evolution of Therapeutic Engagement in MFT: Understanding and Resolving the Dialectic Tension of Alliance and Neutrality. Part 1—Retrospective: The Evolution of Neutrality

Alliance and neutrality are the two fundamental constructs defining therapeutic engagement. Although both are critical to positive clinical process and outcome, they become much more difficult to effectively balance in relational therapies. In many ways they coexist in an unrecognized dialectic tension. A history of the evolution of neutrality in relational therapies is provided. Evolutionary iterations of relational therapy have experimented with different formulations of the neutrality-alliance mix. We critique these hybrid conceptualizations of neutrality as they relate to the therapeutic alliance. In a second paper, we propose multipartiality and enactments as a dynamic, engaged neutrality that represents a fully realized relational advocacy. Together, the papers provide a primer on therapeutic engagement in MFT.