discussion question  
Post a comparison of the termination process between treatment groups and family sessions. Explain how you would evaluate readiness to terminate group and family treatment, identifying similarities and differences between the evaluation of the two types of treatment. Describe the techniques you would use to terminate a treatment group and how these may be the same or different than the techniques you would use to terminate a family intervention.
POST
 London, M. (2007). Performance appraisal for groups: Models and methods for assessing group processes and outcomes for development and evaluation. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 59(3), 175–188. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1037/106…
Toseland, R. W., & Rivas, R. F. (2017). An introduction to group work practice (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.Chapter 13, “Ending the Group’s Work” (pp. 395-416)The ending stage, a critical part of group work practice, has been given little attention in the literature since a special issue of the International Journal of Group Psychotherapy was published in 1996. The skills workers use in the ending stage determine, in part, the success of the entire group experience. In this stage, workers and members form their lasting impressions of the group. An otherwise satisfying and effective group can be ruined by a worker who is not skillful at ending the group’s work.During the ending stage, the group’s work is consolidated. In task groups, the decisions, reports, recommendations, and other products of the group as a whole are completed, and consideration is given to how the results of the work can best be implemented. In treatment groups, the changes made by individual group members are stabilized, and plans are made for maintaining these gains after the group ends. In groups in which members’ self-disclosure has been high, it is necessary to help members work through their feelings about terminating their relationships with the worker and with each other. It is also a time when workers confront their own feelings regarding ending their work with a particular group. This chapter examines the tasks and skills involved in ending individual group meetings and ending the work of the group as a whole.Factors That Influence Group EndingsEndings vary depending on whether a group has an open or closed membership policy. In closed groups, unless there are unplanned terminations, all members end at the same time. In these groups, the worker can help all members to deal with common issues and feelings that arise as the group draws to a close. Open groups present a more difficult challenge for the worker. Some members may be experiencing reactions to termination, but others may experience reactions common to the beginning stage of the group. In open groups, the worker should individualize work with each member. However, because each member will eventually experience disengagement from the group, the worker can use the reactions of members who are terminating to help members who will experience similar reactions in the future.Endings also vary according to the attraction of the group for its members. In groups that members find attractive, endings may not be viewed as a positive event. Conversely, if group meetings are viewed as something to be endured, news of the last meeting may be received with relief.In addition, endings vary depending on whether the group is a treatment group or a task group. In many therapy groups and support groups, for example, members reveal intimate details of their personal lives. They let down their defenses and become vulnerable as they share concerns and issues that are important to them. In these types of groups, mutual aid and support develop as members deepen relationships with one another and the worker. They come to trust each other and to rely on the therapeutic advice and suggestions given by the worker and fellow members.The Process of EndingIn therapy, support, and growth groups, termination may be accompanied by strong emotional reactions. However, in educational and socialization groups, termination rarely results in the expression of strong emotional reactions.Terminating the relationships that may have influenced the members of treatment groups is quite different from terminating the relationships formed in task groups. In task groups, members’ self-disclosure is generally at a relatively low level. Because the focus of these groups is on a product, such as a report or the development of a plan of action, members often look forward to the end of a group with a sense of accomplishment or with relief that their work is finished. Because they have not let down their defenses or shared their personal concerns to any great extent, there is rarely an intense emotional reaction to ending. Also, members of task groups may work together again on other committees, teams, or councils. Therefore, the endings of task groups do not have the same sense of finality as do endings of treatment groups.In the task group literature, the focus is on the skills the leader uses to end individual group meetings rather than on how the leader ends the entire group experience (Tropman, 2014). This focus contrasts sharply with treatment group literature that generally focuses on ending work with the group rather than ending work in a particular meeting.Planned and Unplanned TerminationAt the beginning of closed, time-limited groups, workers and members decide how many times the group will meet. At the beginning of other groups where there is no fixed number of meetings, terminations can result from a variety of factors that are not under workers’ control, such as when a person leaves an inpatient or residential setting. In other situations, the worker should discuss with members how termination should occur. For example, the worker may ask for a two-meeting notice. The extra week can be used to integrate the changes that are made and to plan for the future. It also discourages members from ending without notice.Member TerminationSometimes members stop attending before the planned ending date. Unplanned termination of membership is a relatively common experience. Review studies have found unplanned termination rates of about 30 percent (Barlow, 2013; Burlingame, Strauss, & Joyce, 2013).Case Example Premature TerminationIn a group for separated and divorced persons, three people did not return to the second group meeting. When they were contacted, it was found that one person lived 40 miles from where the group met and, after driving home on foggy rural roads after the first group meeting, had decided not to return. Another member’s job had unexpectedly ch