Clients sometimes bring their own materials — photo albums, hand-drawn family trees, family papers. What does that mean? How do you handle it professionally?

A rarely discussed situation

It happens in some sessions: the client places something on the table. A photo album. A hand-drawn family tree. A box of old letters. Sometimes even a digital genogram they have built themselves on a free website.

This situation is methodologically under-lit. Most genogram textbooks assume that the genogram emerges in the session — jointly, in dialogue. What do you do when the client brings it already made?

What it means

Engagement. Anyone who arrives with their own materials has prepared. That is a sign of investment in the process — and of the client taking the topic seriously.

A need for control. Own material lets the client present their family on their own terms — before the counsellor asks their own questions. That can be healthy (self-efficacy) but can also be defensive (avoiding depth).

A possible attempt to define the frame. "This is my family, the way I see it." The client sets up a frame in which certain topics are inside and others stay out.

Which of the three readings applies can only be clarified in conversation. The most important question is: "What was it like for you to put this together?" The answer reveals the function of the material.

Value: what own material adds

Depth without interrogation. Photos often carry stories that would not be asked about in session — a pose, an item of clothing, a gesture reveals more than a direct question.

Other generations come to life. Where the spoken genogram leaves grandparents abstract as dates, a photo can make them concrete. "That's what my grandmother looked like when she was my age" — sentences like these open up reflective spaces.

Pride and dignity. Some clients bring material because they want to show their family, not just problematise it. That deserves recognition — and can correct the counselling setting, which is often too deficit-oriented.

Risks

Idealisation. Photo albums in particular often show a curated version of the family. The difficult places — conflicts, illnesses, taboos — are rarely documented. Counsellors must be careful not to be misled by the imagery.

Displacing the work. Spending 40 minutes of the session looking at photos leaves no time for systemic work. The material can become avoidance.

Data protection. If the client brings digital material (e.g. a shared family tree from a genealogy platform), it often contains data on third parties — uncles, aunts, cousins who have not consented to being part of the counselling. That is GDPR-relevant. Such material does not belong in the file, not even as a copy.

Handling it in counselling — four steps

1. Acknowledge. "It's nice that you brought this." No assessment of the material, but appreciation of the gesture.

2. Clarify the function. "How did it come about that you have it with you?" The client articulates themselves why they are showing it. That is diagnostically valuable.

3. Use it sparingly. I don't look at the whole album. I ask the client to pick out three photos that are particularly important to them. The selection is itself information.

4. Material stays with the client. Nothing is copied, photographed or transferred into the file. I note in the process log that and what material was shown, nothing more.

Practice vignette

Client, late 40s, comes to the second session with an A4 sheet: a hand-drawn family tree, very carefully done, with years of birth going back to the great-grandparents. To my question "How did this come about?" she says: "I couldn't sleep after our last session, so I did it all night."

That answer changes everything. The material is not a neutral preparation document but an attempt at processing. We talk in the session less about the family tree itself, more about the movement that produced it. She takes the sheet back home with her at the end.

When the material seems problematic

With strongly idealised or strongly accusatory material, caution is needed. A client who presents an album of only happy photos and says, "My family was perfect," produces a signal — possibly defence. The methodical response: do not confront directly, but ask circularly. "Who in the family would not have spoken that sentence so easily?"

With accusatory material, similarly: "Who would be most likely to disagree?"

Practice vignette 2

A client brings an electronic genogram file that he created on a commercial website. Four generations, very detailed, professional-looking. To my question what it was for him: "I didn't want to look stupid in front of you." The function is protection of self-worth. We set the file aside and work on what lies behind that sentence.

Further reading