Free Emotionally Focused Couples Therapy Toolkit: Cycle Maps, Session Notes, Case Conceptualization, and Treatment Plans
Eight editable templates for emotionally focused couples therapy, each with a completed example for an invented couple, free to use with any couple.
Last updated: November 11, 2026
Free Therapist Training›EFT Couples Therapy Toolkit
Emotionally focused couples therapy (EFCT) asks the therapist to hold a lot at once: each partner's position in the negative cycle, the emotions underneath it, the attachment needs it leaves unmet, and where the couple is in the three stages. These eight templates put that work on paper. Each follows the stages and steps Susan Johnson described (Johnson, 2020), comes with a completed example for one invented couple, Marcus and Lena, and can be downloaded as a PDF or copied as an editable document.
The toolkit comes from the Sentio MFT program, which teaches EFCT among the therapy models in its curriculum, and pairs with its free Deliberate Practice in EFCT webinar and the rest of its free therapist training.
These templates are the Sentio MFT program's own, written for you to adapt. They are not ICEEFT materials. For EFT training and certification, see ICEEFT.
What Is in the Toolkit?
| Template | Use it for | When |
|---|---|---|
| Negative cycle map | Each partner's trigger, perception, reactive emotion, action, underlying emotion, attachment fear and longing, joined into one loop, with a version the couple fills in between sessions | Stage 1, steps 2 to 4 |
| Session note | A record of each couples session: the cycle, the emotions reached, interventions, enactments and the safety check, with a DAP version | Every session |
| Case conceptualization | The problem in each partner's words, the cycle, attachment histories and injuries, strengths, a safety and fit screen and goals | End of assessment |
| Treatment plan | Goals, measurable objectives, interventions and measures for each stage | End of assessment; reviewed throughout |
| Stages and steps quick reference | The three stages and nine steps, the signs each step is complete, and a progress tracker | Throughout |
| Intake and safety screen | The joint and individual assessment sessions, a safety screen with each partner alone, and when to refer instead | First sessions, before joint work continues |
| Consent and secrets policy | Who the client is, how information from individual sessions is handled, recordings and records, with California notes | Before the first session |
| Recording review form | A supervisor's rating of observable EFCT behaviors on a recorded segment, and the skill to rehearse next | Supervision |
Negative Cycle Map
The cycle map lays out each partner's side of the negative cycle, from the trigger to the attachment longing underneath, and joins the two sides into one loop. Use it in Stage 1 to track and reframe the cycle, and give the couple's version as homework so each partner maps it in their own words. The negative cycle worksheet page explains each part.
These are some items to consider when you map a couple's negative cycle. Use what fits the couple and your setting. It is not an official form, just some helpful ideas from the Sentio MFT program.
Download the PDFMake an editable copy
Part 1. Each partner's side of the cycle
| Item | Partner A | Partner B |
|---|---|---|
| Position in the cycle | Pursues / Withdraws | Pursues / Withdraws |
| Trigger: what sets it off | ||
| Perception: what I tell myself it means | ||
| Reactive emotion: what shows on the surface | ||
| Action: what I do next | ||
| Underlying emotion: what is underneath | ||
| Attachment fear: what I am afraid it means about us | ||
| Attachment longing: what I most need from my partner |
Part 2. The cycle as one loop
Partner A does
Action:
What Partner B makes of it
Perception:
Underneath:
Partner B does
Action:
What Partner A makes of it
Perception:
Underneath:
| Item | Entry |
|---|---|
| Pattern | One pursues, one withdraws / Both pursue / Both withdraw |
| The cycle in one sentence | The more ___, the more ___; and the more ___, the more ___. |
| How a typical round ends | For example: someone leaves the room, it goes quiet for a day, someone apologizes |
| A name the couple uses for the cycle (optional) |
Part 3. The couple's version, to fill in between sessions
Each partner answers on their own, then you compare answers in the next session.
- What usually starts it for me?
- What do I tell myself it means in that moment?
- What do I feel first, on the surface?
- What do I do next?
- What might I be feeling underneath?
- What am I most afraid it means about us?
- What do I most need from you when this happens?
- What do I see you do, and how might my move set off yours?
- Our cycle in one sentence.
Describe the cycle so either partner could read it without feeling blamed. The cycle is the problem the couple shares; neither partner is the problem.
See the completed example for Marcus and Lena
| Item | Marcus | Lena |
|---|---|---|
| Position in the cycle | Pursues | Withdraws |
| Trigger | Lena's short or late replies to his texts; Lena going to her phone or to bed after the children are asleep; her flat expression when he talks | Marcus's sharp tone when she walks in; "We need to talk"; his sigh; comments about her phone |
| Perception | "I don't matter to her. I'm last on her list." | "I've failed him again. I can't get it right." |
| Reactive emotion | Anger, frustration | Numbness, irritation; "I'm fine" |
| Action | Criticizes, raises his voice, follows Lena from room to room to keep talking, brings up the night at the hospital | Goes quiet, explains herself in a flat voice, leaves the room, says she is tired, scrolls her phone |
| Underlying emotion | Loneliness and hurt; fear of losing her | Shame and fear of failing him; overwhelmed |
| Attachment fear | "I'm alone. She doesn't want me." | "I'll never be enough for him. If I show him how I feel, he'll find more that's wrong with me." |
| Attachment longing | To know he matters to her and that she wants to be close | To know she is enough as she is and that it is safe to come close |
Marcus does
Criticizes, raises his voice, follows Lena to keep talking.
What Lena makes of it
"I've failed him again."
Underneath: shame, fear of not being enough.
Lena does
Goes quiet, leaves the room, picks up her phone.
What Marcus makes of it
"I don't matter to her."
Underneath: loneliness, fear of losing her.
| Item | Entry |
|---|---|
| Pattern | One pursues, one withdraws: Marcus pursues, Lena withdraws |
| The cycle in one sentence | The more Marcus pushes to reach Lena, the more she shuts down to keep the peace; and the more she shuts down, the harder he pushes, until both are alone in it. |
| How a typical round ends | Lena goes to bed or to the guest room; they act as if nothing happened the next morning |
| A name the couple uses for the cycle | "The chase" |
Session Note
The session note records the cycle as it showed up during the week and in the room, the emotions each partner reached, the interventions used, any enactment and how each partner responded, the safety check and the plan. A DAP version follows for settings that require one. The progress note page explains what each field documents.
These are some items to consider when you write the note for a couples session. Use what fits the couple, your setting and your employer's record rules. It is not an official form, just some helpful ideas from the Sentio MFT program.
Download the PDFMake an editable copy
EFCT session note
| Item | What to record |
|---|---|
| Couple | Codes or initials only |
| Session number, date and length | |
| Format | Joint / Individual with Partner A / Individual with Partner B |
| Mode | In person / Video |
| Safety check | Since the last session: any pushing, hitting, threats or fear of the other partner; any risk to self or others; what you asked and what each partner said |
| Stage and step | Stage 1 (steps 1 to 4) / Stage 2 (steps 5 to 7) / Stage 3 (steps 8 and 9), and the step you worked on |
| The cycle between sessions | What set it off, what each partner did, how it ended, any repair |
| The cycle in session | When it showed up in the room and what each partner did |
| Emotions accessed | Partner A: reactive emotion, then underlying emotion. Partner B: reactive emotion, then underlying emotion. |
| Interventions used | Reflection of emotion / Validation / Evocative questions / Heightening / Empathic conjecture / Tracking and reflecting the cycle / Reframing in terms of the cycle and attachment needs / Enactment / Other: |
| Enactment | What each partner was asked to share, and how the other partner responded |
| Signs of change | For example: a partner names the cycle, a softer tone, reaching for the other, acceptance of the other's experience |
| Agreements between sessions | |
| Plan for the next session | |
| Measures, if used | Name, score, date |
| Therapist | Name, license or registration, signature |
DAP version, for settings that require one
| Section | What goes in it |
|---|---|
| D: Data | What each partner reported and what you observed, with short quotes: the week, the cycle in session, the emotions accessed, the interventions used and how each partner responded, the safety check |
| A: Assessment | Stage and step, how far the couple is from the end of the stage, progress on the treatment plan goals, and any risk |
| P: Plan | Focus of the next session, agreements between sessions, referrals, date of the next session |
Write the note about the cycle, not about either partner's faults, so either partner could read it. Follow your employer's policy on whether the couple shares one record or each partner has a separate record.
See the completed example for Marcus and Lena
| Item | Example entry |
|---|---|
| Couple | M.R. and L.R. |
| Session number, date and length | Session 8; Tuesday, October 27, 2026; 50 minutes |
| Format | Joint |
| Mode | In person |
| Safety check | Asked each partner about pushing, hitting, threats and fear since the last session. Both reported none. L. said she feels safe at home. |
| Stage and step | Stage 1; steps 2 and 3 (the cycle; the emotions underneath each partner's position) |
| The cycle between sessions | Tuesday: L. came home after a 12-hour shift; M. said, "Nice of you to answer my texts." L. went upstairs without answering; M. followed and raised his voice; L. slept in the guest room. Thursday: they caught a fight early, called the agreed pause and finished the talk 20 minutes later. Both counted Thursday as a win. Saturday: a fight about weekend plans followed the same pattern as Tuesday. |
| The cycle in session | When we reviewed Tuesday, M.'s voice rose and L. looked at the floor and went quiet. I named the cycle as it happened. |
| Emotions accessed | L.: numbness, then shame and fear of failing him ("I freeze. It's like I'm 12 and I've done something wrong again."). M.: anger, then fear of losing her ("I'm scared she doesn't want to be with me anymore."). |
| Interventions used | Tracking and reflecting the cycle; reflection of emotion; validation of both partners; an evocative question to L. about what happens inside her when M. follows her; empathic conjecture ("part of you is sure you've already failed him"); heightening (slowed down, repeated "already failed him"); enactment |
| Enactment | Asked L. to turn to M. and tell him what she had found. L.: "When you come after me, I freeze, because I'm scared I've let you down again." M., quietly: "I didn't know that. I thought you didn't care." He reached for her hand. L. said she felt "a little lighter." |
| Signs of change | L. named her fear directly to M.; M. responded with curiosity instead of criticism; both used the pause on Thursday |
| Agreements between sessions | Name the cycle out loud when they notice it ("we're in the cycle"); keep using the pause; M. will text "Thinking of you" on shift days instead of asking when she will be home |
| Plan for the next session | Continue accessing M.'s fear underneath the anger (step 3); begin framing the cycle as the problem they share (step 4) |
| Measures, if used | Weekly count of escalating fights: two this week (four a week at intake) |
| Therapist | D.M., AMFT (supervised by R.S., LMFT) |
The same session as a DAP note
| Section | Example entry |
|---|---|
| D: Data | Joint session 8, 50 minutes, in person. Both partners denied pushing, hitting, threats or fear since the last session. Couple reported two escalating fights this week (four a week at intake) and one fight stopped early with the agreed pause. Reviewed Tuesday's fight: M. pursued with criticism and a raised voice; L. withdrew upstairs. In session, L. accessed shame and fear of failing M. ("I freeze ... like I'm 12 and I've done something wrong again"); M. accessed fear of losing L. Enactment: L. told M. she freezes because she is scared she has let him down; M. responded with surprise and reached for her hand. |
| A: Assessment | Stage 1, steps 2 and 3. Both partners can describe the cycle; L. accessed and shared an underlying emotion for the first time; M.'s fear is beginning to emerge. Fewer escalations than at intake. No safety concerns. |
| P: Plan | Session 9: continue step 3 with M.; begin step 4, framing the cycle as the shared problem. Couple to name the cycle when they notice it, keep using the pause, and M. to text "Thinking of you" on L.'s shift days. |
Case Conceptualization
The case conceptualization brings the assessment together: the problem in each partner's words, the cycle, attachment fears and longings, histories and injuries, strengths, a safety and fit screen, and goals in attachment terms. Write it after the joint and individual assessment sessions and revise it as new information comes out. The case conceptualization page walks through each section.
These are some items to consider when you write a case conceptualization for a couple. Use what fits the couple and your setting. It is not an official form, just some helpful ideas from the Sentio MFT program.
Download the PDFMake an editable copy
| Section | What to write |
|---|---|
| 1. The problem in each partner's words | Partner A, in a short quote. Partner B, in a short quote. What brought them in now. |
| 2. Relationship history | How they met, the good times, when the distress began, and major events: moves, births, losses, illness, affairs, job changes |
| 3. The negative cycle | The pattern (one pursues and one withdraws, both pursue, or both withdraw); each partner's position, trigger, reactive emotion and underlying emotion; the cycle in one sentence. The negative cycle map holds the detail. |
| 4. Attachment fears and longings | What each partner fears the cycle means about the relationship, and what each most needs from the other |
| 5. Attachment histories | For each partner: family of origin, earlier relationships, losses and trauma, and how that history may shape the position each takes in the cycle |
| 6. Attachment injuries | Specific moments when one partner felt abandoned or betrayed at a time of need, and what each partner says the moment meant |
| 7. Strengths and resources | What still works: shared humor, parenting, rituals, commitment, support from family or friends |
| 8. Safety and fit screen | From the individual sessions: violence or intimidation; fear of the other partner; controlling behavior; an ongoing affair; a partner who has decided to leave; substance use that gets in the way of the work; risk to self or others; individual mental health concerns. Record the result and any action for each. |
| 9. Culture and context | Culture, faith, identities, family expectations, work, money, children and other stressors, and how they bear on the cycle and on the therapy |
| 10. Formulation | Three to five sentences linking the cycle, the emotions underneath it, the attachment needs it leaves unmet, and the history and injuries that keep it going |
| 11. Goals | The couple's goals in their own words, the same goals in attachment terms, and the first target for Stage 1 |
Write the formulation so both partners could hear it read aloud without either one becoming the villain. Revise it when new information comes out, such as an injury neither partner mentioned at first.
See the completed example for Marcus and Lena
| Section | Example entry |
|---|---|
| 1. The problem in each partner's words | Marcus: "We're like roommates. She's on her phone or asleep, and when I try to talk she shuts down." Lena: "Nothing I do is enough. He starts in on me the minute I walk in the door, so I go quiet." Marcus called after a fight in which Lena said she did not know how much longer she could do this. |
| 2. Relationship history | Together 12 years, married 10, two children (Theo, 8; Ruby, 5). Both describe the first years as close and fun. Distance grew after Ruby's birth, when Lena moved to night shifts. Two years ago Marcus's mother had a stroke. |
| 3. The negative cycle | Pursue and withdraw. Marcus pursues: triggered by late replies and Lena's turning to her phone, he feels angry, criticizes and follows her to keep talking; underneath he feels lonely and afraid of losing her. Lena withdraws: triggered by his sharp tone, she goes numb, goes quiet and leaves the room; underneath she feels shame and fear of failing him. The more Marcus pushes to reach Lena, the more she shuts down to keep the peace; the more she shuts down, the harder he pushes. |
| 4. Attachment fears and longings | Marcus fears he is alone and that Lena does not want him; he longs to know he matters to her. Lena fears she will never be enough for him; she longs to know she is enough as she is and that it is safe to come close. |
| 5. Attachment histories | Marcus: his parents divorced when he was 10, and his father called less and less after moving away; he learned that "you have to fight to be noticed," which fits his protest when Lena seems far away. Lena: her mother was exacting and quick to criticize; she learned that staying quiet and getting things right kept the peace, which fits her freezing when Marcus's tone turns sharp. |
| 6. Attachment injuries | The night of his mother's stroke, Marcus waited at the hospital alone while Lena stayed home with Ruby, who had a fever, and texted that she thought he would want space. Marcus: "That night I learned I can't count on her." Lena: she did not know he wanted her there and felt she could not get anything right that night either. Marcus raises it in most fights. |
| 7. Strengths and resources | They still laugh together, especially on trips; they co-parent well; both want the marriage and came to every session; Lena stays calm in crises; Marcus says what he feels; the Sunday pancake breakfast is a ritual they share. |
| 8. Safety and fit screen | Seen alone (Lena, session 3; Marcus, session 4). No pushing, hitting, threats, forced sexual contact or monitoring reported by either partner; Lena is not afraid of Marcus and speaks freely in joint sessions; Marcus once slammed a door last spring; no weapons in the home. No affair reported. Neither has decided to leave. Alcohol: Marcus two or three beers on weekends; no drug use. No suicidal thoughts reported; Lena sleeps poorly in night-shift weeks. Action: proceed with joint EFCT; safety question at the start of every session; agreed 20-minute pause when a fight escalates. |
| 9. Culture and context | Lena's night shifts leave them few evenings together; both work in jobs that ask a lot of them; parenting two young children. Ask both partners what their families and cultures taught them about conflict and closeness. |
| 10. Formulation | Marcus and Lena are caught in a pursue-withdraw cycle that leaves both feeling alone. Marcus's anger is a protest against disconnection, rooted in an old fear of being left; Lena's silence protects her from the shame of failing, rooted in a childhood where staying quiet kept the peace. Each partner's move confirms the other's fear. The night of the stroke is an unresolved injury that Marcus brings up when he feels most alone, which pushes Lena further into withdrawal. |
| 11. Goals | Couple: "Feel like we're on the same team again" (Marcus); "Stop dreading coming home" and say what is going on without a fight (Lena); fewer escalating fights; repair the night of the stroke; two evenings a week together. In attachment terms: de-escalate the cycle so both feel safe enough to show what is underneath; help Lena step in and Marcus ask for comfort from his fear rather than his anger; heal the injury. First Stage 1 target: both partners describe the cycle as the shared problem. |
Treatment Plan
The treatment plan sets goals, measurable objectives, interventions and a measure for each of the three stages, so progress can be checked at each review. The treatment plan page explains how to write objectives that can be observed.
These are some items to consider when you write a treatment plan for emotionally focused couples therapy. Use what fits the couple, your setting and your employer's rules. It is not an official form, just some helpful ideas from the Sentio MFT program.
Download the PDFMake an editable copy
| Item | Entry |
|---|---|
| Couple, therapist and date written | |
| Diagnosis or reason for services, if your setting requires one | |
| The problem as a cycle | The cycle in one sentence, from the negative cycle map |
| Goals in the couple's words | |
| Session plan | Frequency, format (joint, with any individual sessions), and how often the plan is reviewed |
| Safety plan | Safety question at each session; pause agreement; when you will meet a partner alone |
Stage 1. Cycle de-escalation (steps 1 to 4)
| Goal | Measurable objective | Interventions | Measure | Target date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fewer escalating fights | Escalating fights fall from __ a week to __ or fewer | Tracking the cycle; pause agreement; reframing | Weekly count reported at each session | |
| The cycle becomes the shared problem | Each partner describes the cycle, including their own part, without blaming the other | Tracking and reflecting the cycle; reframing | Observation, recorded in session notes | |
| The emotions underneath come forward | Each partner names an underlying emotion and shares it with the other in session | Evocative questions; empathic conjecture; heightening; enactments | Observation, recorded in session notes |
Stage 2. Restructuring interactions (steps 5 to 7)
| Goal | Measurable objective | Interventions | Measure | Target date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The withdrawing partner steps in | States fears and needs directly to the other partner and stays engaged when the conversation gets hard | Heightening; empathic conjecture; enactments | Observation; both partners' report | |
| The pursuing partner softens | Asks the other for comfort from a vulnerable place, and the other responds | Heightening; enactments; processing the encounter | Observation; both partners' report | |
| An attachment injury is repaired, if there is one | The injured partner describes the hurt and the other acknowledges it, expresses regret and offers comfort; the injury stops coming up in fights | Enactments; heightening; validation | Observation; both partners' report |
Stage 3. Consolidation and integration (steps 8 and 9)
| Goal | Measurable objective | Interventions | Measure | Target date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| New solutions to old problems | The couple works through two recurring practical problems without the cycle taking over | Reflecting and validating new patterns | Both partners' report | |
| The new pattern holds | The couple tells the story of the old cycle and the new one, and plans what to do if the old cycle returns | Reframing; validating the new story | Observation; relationship satisfaction measure |
Measures and review
| Item | Entry |
|---|---|
| Relationship satisfaction measure | Name, scores at intake, at each review and at the end |
| Plan reviewed on | |
| Signatures | Both partners and the therapist, with dates |
See the completed example for Marcus and Lena
| Item | Example entry |
|---|---|
| Couple, therapist and date written | Marcus and Lena; D.M., AMFT (supervised by R.S., LMFT); after session 5 |
| Diagnosis or reason for services | Relationship distress (follow your setting's coding rules) |
| The problem as a cycle | The more Marcus pushes to reach Lena, the more she shuts down to keep the peace; and the more she shuts down, the harder he pushes, until both are alone in it. |
| Goals in the couple's words | "Feel like we're on the same team again" (Marcus). "Stop dreading coming home," and say what is going on without a fight (Lena). Fewer escalating fights; repair the night of the stroke; two evenings a week together, phones in another room. |
| Session plan | Weekly, 50 minutes, joint; individual sessions only if safety or a new concern calls for one; plan reviewed every six sessions |
| Safety plan | Safety question at the start of every session; either partner can call a 20-minute pause and return to finish; the therapist meets either partner alone if anything changes |
Stage 1. Cycle de-escalation
| Goal | Measurable objective | Interventions | Measure | Target |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fewer escalating fights | From about four a week to one or fewer | Tracking the cycle; pause agreement; reframing | Weekly count at each session | Session 12 |
| The cycle becomes the shared problem | Marcus and Lena each describe the cycle, including their own part, without blaming the other | Tracking and reflecting the cycle; reframing | Session notes | Session 10 |
| The emotions underneath come forward | Lena names her fear of failing Marcus, and Marcus names his fear of losing Lena, to each other in session | Evocative questions; empathic conjecture; heightening; enactments | Session notes | Session 10 |
Stage 2. Restructuring interactions
| Goal | Measurable objective | Interventions | Measure | Target |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lena steps in | Lena tells Marcus what she needs when she feels she has failed, and stays in the conversation when his voice rises | Heightening; empathic conjecture; enactments | Session notes; both partners' report | Session 16 |
| Marcus softens | Marcus asks Lena for reassurance from his fear of losing her rather than with criticism, and Lena responds | Heightening; enactments; processing the encounter | Session notes; both partners' report | Session 18 |
| The night of the stroke is repaired | Marcus describes what that night meant to him; Lena acknowledges the hurt, expresses regret and comforts him; the night stops coming up in fights | Enactments; heightening; validation | Session notes; both partners' report | Session 18 |
Stage 3. Consolidation and integration
| Goal | Measurable objective | Interventions | Measure | Target |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| New solutions to old problems | They agree on how to stay in touch during Lena's shift weeks and how to spend the two evenings, without the cycle taking over | Reflecting and validating new patterns | Both partners' report | Session 20 |
| The new pattern holds | They tell the story of the old cycle and of what they do now, and plan what to do if it returns | Reframing; validating the new story | Session notes; relationship satisfaction measure | Session 20 |
Measures and review
| Item | Example entry |
|---|---|
| Relationship satisfaction measure | Couples Satisfaction Index, 16-item form (CSI-16), at session 1: Marcus 34, Lena 41, both below the published distress cut score of 51.5. Repeat at each review; aim for both partners above 51.5 at the end. |
| Plan reviewed on | Scheduled for sessions 11 and 17 |
| Signatures | Marcus, Lena and D.M., dated after session 5 |
Stages and Steps Quick Reference
The quick reference lists the three stages and nine steps of EFCT, the signs that each step is complete and the interventions used most at each, with a tracker for the change events. The stages and steps page has the PDF and explains the change events.
These are some items to consider when you track where a couple is in emotionally focused couples therapy. Use what fits the couple and your setting. It is not an official form, just some helpful ideas from the Sentio MFT program.
Download the PDFMake an editable copy
| Stage | Step | Signs the step is complete | Interventions used most |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stage 1. Cycle de-escalation | 1. Assess the relationship, build an alliance with each partner, and name the core conflicts from an attachment point of view | Both partners feel understood by the therapist; the main conflicts are named | Reflection, validation, alliance building with each partner |
| 2. Identify the negative cycle that keeps the conflict going and leaves both partners insecure | Both partners can describe a recent fight as a sequence of moves | Tracking and reflecting the cycle | |
| 3. Reach the unacknowledged emotions that drive each partner's position in the cycle | Each partner names an emotion underneath the reactive one, such as fear, hurt, shame or loneliness | Evocative questions, empathic conjecture, heightening | |
| 4. Reframe the problem as the cycle, driven by the underlying emotions and attachment needs | The couple sees the cycle, not each other, as the problem; reactions are less intense and more flexible (de-escalation) | Reframing in terms of the cycle and attachment | |
| Stage 2. Restructuring interactions | 5. Help each partner own needs and parts of the self that have been pushed aside, and bring them into the relationship | The withdrawing partner states fears and needs directly; the pursuing partner shows the vulnerability under the anger | Heightening, empathic conjecture, enactments |
| 6. Help each partner accept the other's new way of experiencing and responding | The listening partner responds to the new expression with acceptance rather than doubt or attack | Validation, reflecting the listening partner's reaction, processing enactments | |
| 7. Help each partner state specific needs and wants, and create moments of emotional engagement | Withdrawer re-engagement and blamer softening: the pursuing partner asks for comfort from a vulnerable place and the other responds | Enactments, heightening, processing the encounter | |
| Stage 3. Consolidation and integration | 8. Help the couple find new solutions to old problems | The couple solves practical problems without the old cycle taking over | Reflecting and validating new patterns, enactments |
| 9. Consolidate the new positions and the new cycles of connection | The couple can tell the story of the old cycle and the new one, and say what they will do if the old cycle returns | Reframing, validating the new story |
The five moves within a session (the EFT Tango)
- Mirror present process: reflect the cycle and each partner's experience as it happens in the room.
- Assemble and deepen emotion: put the parts of an emotion together and help the partner feel it more fully.
- Choreograph an engaged encounter: ask one partner to share the deepened emotion with the other.
- Process the encounter: explore how it was to share it and how it was to hear it.
- Integrate and validate: name what changed and validate both partners.
Progress tracker
| Marker | Date first seen | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Both partners describe the cycle, not each other, as the problem | ||
| De-escalation: fights are less intense and the couple can step out of the cycle | ||
| Withdrawer re-engagement | ||
| Blamer softening | ||
| Attachment injury resolved, if there is one | ||
| New solutions to old problems | ||
| A shared story of the change |
Steps and stage labels are paraphrased from Johnson et al. (1999) and Wiebe and Johnson (2016); the five moves are paraphrased from the description of the EFT Tango in Levenson et al. (2025), and Johnson (2020, Chapter 4) sets out the Tango in full.
See the completed example for Marcus and Lena
| Marker | Date first seen | Notes after session 8 |
|---|---|---|
| Both partners describe the cycle, not each other, as the problem | Beginning (session 6) | They named it "the chase" in session 6; Marcus still says "she starts it" when he is upset |
| De-escalation: fights are less intense and the couple can step out of the cycle | Not yet | Escalating fights down from about four a week to two; they used the pause once and finished the talk |
| Withdrawer re-engagement | Not yet | First sign in session 8: Lena told Marcus she freezes because she is scared she has let him down |
| Blamer softening | Not yet | Marcus named his fear of losing Lena in session 8 but has not yet asked her for comfort from that place |
| Attachment injury resolved | Not yet | The night of his mother's stroke still comes up in fights; plan to address it in Stage 2 |
| New solutions to old problems | Not yet | |
| A shared story of the change | Not yet |
Where they are after session 8: Stage 1, steps 2 and 3. Next focus: Marcus's fear underneath the anger (step 3) and the cycle as the shared problem (step 4).
Couples Intake and Safety Screen
The intake plan covers the joint assessment sessions, a safety screen with each partner alone before joint work goes on, a decision table for when to refer instead, and the feedback session that sets goals. It follows published guidance on screening each partner alone for intimate partner violence (McCollum & Stith, 2008; Stith et al., 2012). The intake form page explains why each partner is screened alone.
These are some items to consider when you plan the first sessions with a couple and screen each partner for safety. Use what fits the couple and your setting. It is not an official form, just some helpful ideas from the Sentio MFT program.
Download the PDFMake an editable copy
1. First contact
- Who is coming, how they heard of you, and what they want help with, in a sentence or two.
- Explain the format: joint sessions first, then one session alone with each partner, then a joint session to agree on goals and a plan.
- Send the consent form and your policy on information shared in individual sessions before the first session.
- If the caller mentions violence or fear of a partner, ask whether it is safe to talk now and offer to see that partner alone first.
2. Joint sessions
| Topic | What to ask about |
|---|---|
| The problem | Each partner's view, in their own words; why now |
| Relationship history | How they met, the good times, when the distress began, major events |
| A recent fight, step by step | What set it off, what each partner did and felt, how it ended: the first look at the cycle |
| Strengths | What still works between them |
| Goals and commitment | What each wants from therapy; whether both are here to work on the relationship |
| Consent and the secrets policy | Who the client is, how information from individual sessions is handled, recordings, records |
3. Individual session with each partner: safety screen
Screen every couple, whatever brings them in. Ask each partner alone, never with the other partner present or able to overhear, including on video calls. Ask about specific behaviors rather than about "abuse" or "violence," and about both directions. A written, behaviorally specific questionnaire adds to the interview; most published screening questionnaires are copyrighted, so get one from its author or publisher. Have each partner fill it in alone, in a private setting.
| Area | What to ask about | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Physical violence | Ever, and in the past year: pushing, grabbing, slapping, hitting, kicking, choking or strangling, throwing things, use of a weapon; injuries; by either partner | |
| Threats and intimidation | Threats to hurt or kill the partner, the children, pets or themselves; breaking things; blocking a door | |
| Sexual coercion | Being forced or pressured into sexual contact | |
| Control | Monitoring the phone, money or whereabouts; controlling daily activities; limiting contact with friends or family; jealousy that restricts the partner | |
| Fear and voice | Is this partner afraid of the other? Can this partner say what they think in joint sessions without paying for it later? Does this partner want joint therapy, or feel pushed into it? | |
| Danger signs | Threats to kill; strangling or choking; a weapon used or threatened; a gun in the home; violence that is getting worse or more frequent; forced sex; violence during pregnancy; stalking; a recent or planned separation, especially from a controlling partner; constant, violent jealousy; threats of suicide by the partner who uses violence | |
| Affairs | A current or past affair, and whether the other partner knows | |
| Commitment | Whether this partner has decided to leave or is deciding whether to stay | |
| Substance use | Alcohol and drugs, and whether use gets in the way of daily life or the therapy | |
| Individual health | Depression, anxiety, trauma, suicidal thoughts, current treatment and medication | |
| Attachment history | Family of origin, earlier relationships, losses and trauma | |
| Anything else | Is there anything this partner wants you to know, or does not want shared with the other partner? Remind the partner of your secrets policy before the answer. |
4. Decision before joint work continues
| Finding | What to do |
|---|---|
| No violence, no fear, no control, and both partners freely choose joint therapy | Proceed with joint sessions; ask about safety at the start of each session |
| Either partner is afraid of the other, cannot speak freely in front of the other, or does not freely choose joint therapy | Individual treatment comes first or replaces joint sessions. Talk with the partner at risk, alone, about safety and next steps before anything is said in a joint session. |
| Violence that caused an injury needing medical care, severe violence, or controlling behavior | Do not begin or continue joint sessions. Make a safety plan with the partner at risk and refer to domestic violence services and individual treatment. |
| Danger signs, or either partner in imminent danger | Treat as urgent: safety planning the same day and referral to domestic violence services. A trained assessor can use the Danger Assessment (dangerassessment.org). |
| The partner who used violence denies responsibility for it | Joint EFCT cannot go forward; refer for individual or specialized treatment |
| A gun in the home, where there has been any violence, threat or fear | Treat it as a danger sign. Joint work waits until the partner at risk is safe and the gun is out of the home. |
| An ongoing affair the involved partner will not end or disclose | Follow your secrets policy; joint work is unlikely to help while the affair continues |
| One partner has decided to leave | Discuss whether joint sessions can help with separating, or refer each partner for individual support |
| Substance use or individual mental health that gets in the way | Refer for that treatment first or alongside joint work |
| Risk to self | Assess and plan for safety with that partner; individual care comes first |
Some specialized programs treat low-to-moderate situational violence, with no injuries and no fear, in joint sessions with added safety procedures such as a private check-in with each partner at every session.
5. Joint feedback session
- Describe the cycle back to the couple in words neither partner hears as blame.
- Agree on goals, the plan, the frequency of sessions and how progress will be checked.
- Confirm the consent form, the secrets policy and the safety agreements.
In the United States, the National Domestic Violence Hotline answers 24 hours a day at 1-800-799-7233, by text (send START to 88788) and by chat at thehotline.org. For a mental health crisis, call or text 988.
See the completed example for Marcus and Lena
| Step | Example entry |
|---|---|
| First contact | Marcus called after a fight in which Lena said she did not know how much longer she could do this. Explained the format; sent the consent form and secrets policy. He did not mention violence or fear. |
| Joint sessions (1 and 2) | Marcus: "We're like roommates." Lena: "Nothing I do is enough." Together 12 years, married 10, two children; distance grew after Ruby's birth and Lena's move to night shifts. Reviewed a recent fight step by step: Marcus pursues with criticism, Lena goes quiet and leaves the room. Strengths: humor, co-parenting, both want the marriage. Reviewed consent and the secrets policy; both signed. |
| Lena alone (session 3) | Marcus raises his voice when upset and keeps following her to keep talking. Not afraid of him; never hurt or threatened; free to speak in joint sessions and wants them. No sexual coercion, no monitoring of phone or money. No affair. Wants to stay married. Rarely drinks. Poor sleep in night-shift weeks; no depression or suicidal thoughts. History: exacting, critical mother; learned to stay quiet and get things right. Nothing she wants kept from Marcus. |
| Marcus alone (session 4) | Once slammed a door during a fight last spring; nothing broken, no threats. No pushing, hitting or other physical aggression by either partner. No weapons in the home. No affair. Wants to stay married. Two or three beers on weekends. No mental health concerns or suicidal thoughts. History: parents divorced when he was 10; father called less and less. Raised the night of his mother's stroke as the moment he "learned I can't count on her." |
| Danger signs | None reported by either partner; no gun in the home |
| Decision | No contraindication to joint EFCT found. Proceed with joint sessions; safety question at the start of every session; either partner can call a 20-minute pause when a fight escalates and return to finish it; the therapist will meet either partner alone if anything changes. |
| Joint feedback (session 5) | Described the cycle back: "The more Marcus pushes to reach Lena, the more she shuts down to keep the peace, and the more she shuts down, the harder he pushes." Both agreed. Goals and plan agreed; weekly sessions; progress checked every six sessions. |
Couples Therapy Consent and Secrets Policy
The consent template sets out who the client is, how information from individual sessions is handled, recordings, records and their release, with three policy options for individual disclosures and notes on California law. It applies to any couples therapy, not only EFCT. The consent and secrets policy page compares the three policies.
These are some items to consider when you write a consent form and an information policy for couples therapy. It is not legal advice; check the rules for your license and your setting. It is not an official form, just some helpful ideas from the Sentio MFT program.
Download the PDFMake an editable copy
| Section | What to write (example wording in italics) |
|---|---|
| 1. Who the client is | Say whether you treat the couple as the client, and what that means for each partner. In couples therapy my client is your relationship. I work for both of you and do not take sides. Each of you is also my client, with the rights this form describes. |
| 2. What couples therapy involves | The approach, joint sessions, any individual sessions, the usual length and what you ask of the couple between sessions. We will meet together most weeks. Early on I will meet with each of you once on your own. We will review progress every six sessions. |
| 3. Contact with one partner | How you handle an individual session, a phone call, a text or an email from one partner. If one of you contacts me between sessions, I will let the other know that we spoke, and I will follow the information policy below. |
| 4. Information from individual sessions | Choose one policy, explain it plainly, and get each partner's written agreement before any individual session. See the three options below. |
| 5. Safety | How you will handle a disclosure of violence or fear. If either of you tells me alone about violence, threats or fear, I will not share it in a way that could put anyone at risk. I will talk with that partner first about safety and next steps. |
| 6. Limits of confidentiality | What you must or may disclose without consent under the law where you practice. See the California notes below. |
| 7. Recordings | Why you would record sessions (for example, for supervision), who sees the recordings, how they are stored and when they are deleted, and whether you use any tool that records or transcribes sessions. I will record a session, or use a tool that records or transcribes it, only with the written consent of both of you. Either of you may say no or change your mind at any time. |
| 8. Records and their release | Whether the couple shares one record or each partner has a separate record, who may see it, whose signature you need to release it, and what you will do if one partner asks for a copy. I keep one record for our couples sessions. I will release it to anyone else only with the written authorization of both of you, unless the law requires otherwise. |
| 9. Sessions by video | If you offer video sessions: the platform, privacy, the risks and limits of video, where each partner will be during sessions, and what happens if the connection drops. |
| 10. If you are an associate or trainee | That you are not yet licensed, who employs you, who supervises you, and that you discuss cases in supervision. I am a registered associate marriage and family therapist, not yet licensed. My registration number is [number]. I am employed by [employer] and supervised by [supervisor], a licensed marriage and family therapist. I discuss our work with my supervisor. |
| 11. Emergencies | I am not available for emergencies. If you are in danger, call 911. For a mental health crisis, call or text 988. |
| 12. Fees, cancellations and ending | Fees, cancellation terms, and what happens if one partner stops coming or the couple decides to separate. If our couples work ends, I will not become either partner's individual therapist, so that I stay fair to you both. |
| 13. Notice to clients | In California, the Board of Behavioral Sciences notice described below, as a separate page or inside the form. |
| Signatures | Each partner and the therapist, with dates |
Three policies for information from individual sessions
| Policy | What it says | Example wording |
|---|---|---|
| No secrets | Information either partner shares alone may be brought into joint sessions when it bears on the therapy | I do not keep secrets between you that would get in the way of our work, such as an affair that is still going on. If you tell me something like that, I will help you find a way to tell your partner yourself and give you time to do it. |
| Limited secrets | The therapist decides case by case what must come into joint sessions and tells the couple in advance how that decision is made | I will keep most of what you tell me alone private. If you tell me something that I believe makes it impossible to help you as a couple, I will ask you to share it, and I may end our couples work if you choose not to. |
| Confidential individual sessions | What either partner says alone stays between that partner and the therapist unless that partner agrees otherwise | What you tell me alone stays between us unless you agree to share it, or the law requires me to disclose it. |
Whichever policy you choose, put it in writing and get each partner's signature before any individual session. The AAMFT Code of Ethics says that in couple, family or group treatment, a marriage and family therapist must not reveal one person's confidences to others in the client unit without that person's prior written permission (Standard 2.2).
California notes
| Topic | The rule |
|---|---|
| Who the client is | The CAMFT Code of Ethics asks marriage and family therapists to clarify, at the start of treatment and throughout, which people are clients and the relationship the therapist will have with each person in the treatment (Standard 3.9). |
| Releasing couples records | California's Confidentiality of Medical Information Act generally requires a written authorization before a provider discloses a patient's medical information (Cal. Civ. Code § 56.10). When someone asks for information about couple or family treatment, the CAMFT Code asks for the signed authorization of each member of the unit before the therapist discloses information received from any of them (Standard 2.2). |
| Recordings | Recording a confidential communication without the consent of all parties is a crime in California (Cal. Penal Code § 632). The CAMFT Code asks for written informed consent before recording or allowing third-party observation (Standard 3.5), and before using technology, including AI tools, to record treatment (Standard 6.6). Get each partner's written consent before you record. |
| Access to records | An adult patient may inspect their records within five working days of a request and receive copies within 15 days (Cal. Health & Safety Code § 123110). A provider may decline access to mental health records when access would create a substantial risk of significant adverse or detrimental consequences to the patient; the provider then records the reason and must let a licensed professional the patient designates inspect or receive copies of the records (§ 123115). |
| Keeping records | A marriage and family therapist keeps a client's records for at least seven years after therapy ends, or for a minor, at least seven years after the client turns 18 (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 4980.49). Other license types have their own rules. |
| Child abuse | Licensed marriage and family therapists, clinical social workers, professional clinical counselors and psychologists are mandated reporters, as are associate marriage and family therapists and MFT trainees (Cal. Penal Code § 11165.7). A report goes by phone immediately or as soon as practicably possible, with a written follow-up report within 36 hours of receiving the information (§ 11166). |
| Elder and dependent adult abuse | Health practitioners, a group that includes marriage and family therapists, associates and trainees, are mandated reporters of elder and dependent adult abuse (Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15630; § 15610.37). A report goes by phone or through the confidential internet reporting tool immediately or as soon as practicably possible; a phone report is followed by a written or internet report within two working days. Different steps apply when the abuse happened in a long-term care facility. |
| Threats of violence | When a client communicates a serious threat of physical violence against a reasonably identifiable victim, the therapist discharges the duty to protect by making reasonable efforts to communicate the threat to the victim and to a law enforcement agency (Cal. Civ. Code § 43.92). There is no psychotherapist-patient privilege when the therapist has reasonable cause to believe the client is dangerous to self or to another person or their property and that disclosure is necessary to prevent the danger (Cal. Evid. Code § 1024). |
| Sessions by video | Before providing care by telehealth, inform the clients, get their verbal or written consent, and document it (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 2290.5). Board of Behavioral Sciences regulations add steps when telehealth services begin (explain the risks and limits of telehealth, give your license or registration number and type, and document your efforts to find emergency resources near the clients) and at the start of each session (ask each client for their full name and the address where they are, and document both) (16 CCR § 1815.5). Sentio's guide to California telehealth rules covers these in more detail. |
| Associates and trainees | Through December 31, 2026, an associate marriage and family therapist tells each client, before any services, that they are an unlicensed registered associate, gives their registration number and their employer's name, and says what type of licensed professional supervises them (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 4980.44); a trainee gives the same information without a registration number (§ 4980.48). From January 1, 2027, under AB 1598, associates and trainees tell each client that they are unlicensed and under the supervision of a licensed professional, and give the name of their employer or of the entity they volunteer for. The example wording in section 10 meets both versions of the rule. |
| Notice to clients | Before psychotherapy begins, or as soon as practicably possible afterward, licensees and registrants give each client a written notice, in at least 12-point type, in wording the statute prescribes: that the Board of Behavioral Sciences receives and responds to complaints about services within the scope of practice of marriage and family therapists, and how to contact the Board. Since July 1, 2025 the notice also gives the therapist's full name as filed with the Board, the license or registration number and type, and its expiration date. Document that you gave it (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 4980.32). Clinical social workers and professional clinical counselors have parallel sections (§§ 4996.75 and 4999.71). |
| Fees | Tell clients the fee, or the basis on which it is computed, before treatment begins (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 4982, subdivision (n)). |
See the completed example for Marcus and Lena
| Section | Example entry: D.M.'s form for Marcus and Lena |
|---|---|
| 1. Who the client is | The template wording, read aloud and discussed at session 1 |
| 2. What couples therapy involves | Weekly 50-minute joint sessions in person; one individual session with each partner in the first month (sessions 3 and 4), then a joint feedback session; progress reviewed every six sessions |
| 3. Contact with one partner | Texts and calls between sessions are for scheduling only; if either partner raises anything else, D.M. tells the other partner that they spoke and brings the topic to the next joint session |
| 4. Information from individual sessions | No secrets, with the safety exception in section 5; both partners signed it at session 1, before the individual sessions |
| 5. Safety | The template wording, plus: "I will ask about safety at the start of each session, and either of you can ask to meet with me alone." |
| 6. Limits of confidentiality | Child abuse, elder and dependent adult abuse, and serious threats of violence, each explained in plain words; both partners initialed the section |
| 7. Recordings | Both partners consented in writing to video recording for supervision with R.S.; recordings kept on the practice's encrypted drive and deleted after review; no transcription tools |
| 8. Records and their release | One shared record for the couples sessions; released to anyone else only with both partners' written authorization, unless the law requires otherwise |
| 9. Sessions by video | Not used; in person only |
| 10. If you are an associate or trainee | The template wording, with D.M.'s registration number, the practice as employer and R.S., LMFT, as supervisor |
| 11. Emergencies | The template wording |
| 12. Fees, cancellations and ending | The practice's fee and its 24-hour cancellation policy; if either partner stops coming, one joint session to decide next steps; the template sentence on not becoming either partner's individual therapist |
| 13. Notice to clients | The Board of Behavioral Sciences notice, with D.M.'s full name, registration number, registration type and expiration date, given to each partner at session 1 and noted in the record |
| Signatures | Marcus, Lena and D.M., at session 1; reviewed with the couple again at session 5, before the treatment plan |
Learn and Practice EFCT
The templates lay out the work; the skills they call for come from practice with feedback. These resources from the Sentio MFT program pair with them.
Free webinar
Deliberate Practice in EFCT
Sam Jinich and Hanna Levenson demonstrate EFCT skills to rehearse with a peer or a supervisor.
Free course
Introduction to EFCT
A crash course on the attachment frame, the negative cycle, primary and secondary emotion, and the three stages.
Book
Deliberate Practice in Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy
The APA book by Hanna Levenson, Sam Jinich, Alexandre Vaz and Tony Rousmaniere: fourteen deliberate practice exercises for EFCT skills, from evocative inquiry to mock sessions.
Free webinar
Case Formulation and Treatment Planning
Alexandre Vaz on turning an assessment into a formulation and a plan, the work behind the case conceptualization and treatment plan templates.
Free exercises
Deliberate Practice Exercise Library
Recorded client prompts for rehearsing skills such as rupture and repair, boundary setting and multicultural responsiveness.
Free videos
Practice Time
Live demonstrations with structured practice. For couples work, start with Systemic De-escalation.
Ongoing group
DP Consultation Group
Ongoing peer consultation for supervisors and trainers building deliberate practice into their work.
Graduate training
The Sentio MFT Program
A California MFT degree built on deliberate practice, with EFCT among the therapy models in its curriculum.
For Supervisors and Faculty
Supervisors can use the recording review form below to rate observable EFCT behaviors on a short segment of a supervisee's recorded session and choose one skill to rehearse next. The free clinical supervision toolkit holds the general supervision paperwork, including session notes, a log, goals and evaluation forms, and the Sentio MFT program's clinical supervisor training teaches deliberate practice supervision.
Recording Review Form
The review form lists observable therapist behaviors to rate on a five-to-ten-minute recorded segment and ends with one skill to rehearse next. The recording review page explains how to turn a review into practice.
These are some items to consider when you review a recording of a supervisee's EFCT session. Use what fits the supervisee and your setting. It is not an official form, just some helpful ideas from the Sentio MFT program.
Download the PDFMake an editable copy
| Item | Entry |
|---|---|
| Supervisee, supervisor and date of review | |
| Session number and date; stage and step | |
| Segment reviewed | Start and end time stamps, five to ten minutes |
| Why the supervisee chose this segment | The supervisee's question for supervision |
| Written consent to record | On file for each partner: Yes / No |
Rating: NO, not observed in this segment; 1, beginning; 2, developing; 3, consistent.
| Therapist behavior | What it looks like on the recording | Rating | Time stamps and notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tracking and reflecting the cycle | Names the sequence of moves as it happens, in the couple's words, without blaming either partner | ||
| Validating both partners | Conveys that each partner's reaction makes sense; the alliance stays balanced | ||
| Evocative questions | Open questions that invite the emotion underneath the position | ||
| Heightening | Slows down and repeats key words or images so an emerging emotion stays in focus | ||
| Empathic conjecture | Offers a tentative guess at an emotion just beyond what the partner has said, and checks it with the partner | ||
| Reframing | Describes the problem in terms of the cycle and attachment needs | ||
| Setting up an enactment | Asks one partner to turn to the other and share an emotion or a need | ||
| Processing the enactment | Asks the speaker how it was to say it and the listener how it was to hear it | ||
| Managing escalation | Slows or blocks an escalating exchange and restores safety for both partners | ||
| Pacing and voice | Slow, soft, simple words; uses the partner's own words and images |
| Summary | Entry |
|---|---|
| Strengths in this segment | |
| Moments to replay together | Time stamps |
| One skill to rehearse next | |
| Practice plan | The exercise, the number of rehearsals and who plays the partners |
| Follow-up | The next recording to review and when |
For formal fidelity rating in research or training, use the published EFT Therapist Fidelity Scale (Denton et al., 2009).
See the completed example for Marcus and Lena
| Item | Example entry |
|---|---|
| Supervisee, supervisor and date of review | D.M., AMFT; R.S., LMFT; two days after the session |
| Session number and date; stage and step | Session 8, October 27, 2026; Stage 1, steps 2 and 3 |
| Segment reviewed | 18:40 to 26:10 |
| Why the supervisee chose this segment | "Lena cried and I wasn't sure whether to stay with her or bring Marcus in." |
| Written consent to record | On file for both partners: Yes |
| Therapist behavior | Rating | Time stamps and notes |
|---|---|---|
| Tracking and reflecting the cycle | 3 | 18:52: "You texted, she didn't answer, she went upstairs, you followed." Clear, in their words, no blame. |
| Validating both partners | 2 | 20:10: validated Lena's going quiet; Marcus's frustration went unacknowledged and he looked away. |
| Evocative questions | 3 | 21:05: "What happens inside you when he follows you up the stairs?" |
| Heightening | 2 | 22:30: repeated "already failed him," then moved on within one exchange after Lena began to cry. |
| Empathic conjecture | 3 | 21:40: "Maybe part of you is sure you've already failed him?" Tentative, and checked with Lena. |
| Reframing | 1 | Not yet expected at this step; one brief attempt at 25:50. |
| Setting up an enactment | 3 | 23:15: asked Lena to turn to Marcus and tell him what she had found. Good timing. |
| Processing the enactment | 2 | 25:20: asked Marcus how it was to hear it; did not ask Lena how it was to say it. |
| Managing escalation | NO | No escalation in this segment. |
| Pacing and voice | 2 | Soft voice throughout; slowed down when Lena cried (22:30), then sped up again as the focus moved on (23:00). |
| Summary | Example entry |
|---|---|
| Strengths in this segment | Clear tracking; a well-timed conjecture; the enactment came at the right moment and Marcus responded |
| Moments to replay together | 20:10 (Marcus left out), 22:30 (moving on from Lena's tears), 25:20 (processing with one partner only) |
| One skill to rehearse next | Heightening: stay with an emerging emotion for three or four more exchanges, slowly, before moving on |
| Practice plan | Exercise 2, Evocative Reflection: Eliciting and Heightening Emotional Experience, from Deliberate Practice in Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy; five rehearsals with R.S. playing Lena; then Exercise 3, Validating Partners' Experiences and Tracking Dysfunctional Patterns, for Marcus's frustration |
| Follow-up | Review the session 10 recording at the next supervision meeting |
Measures
A relationship satisfaction measure at intake and at each review shows whether the couple is moving.
| Measure | What it measures | Terms and where to get it |
|---|---|---|
| Couples Satisfaction Index (CSI; Funk & Rogge, 2007) | Relationship satisfaction, in 32-, 16-, 8- and 4-item forms. Published distress cut scores: below 104.5 on the CSI-32, below 51.5 on the CSI-16 and below 13.5 on the CSI-4. | The authors state that the scales are freely available for clinical and research use, with no further permission needed. Rogge lab measures page |
| Positive-Negative Relationship Quality scale (PN-RQ; Rogge et al., 2017) | The positive and the negative qualities of the relationship, assessed separately | Covered by the same free-use statement. Rogge lab measures page |
| PHQ-9 and GAD-7 | Each partner's symptoms of depression and anxiety | No permission is required to reproduce, translate, display or distribute them. phqscreeners.com |
Frequently Asked Questions
Are these ICEEFT forms or EFT certification materials?
No. The Sentio MFT program wrote them in its own words, following the stages and steps Susan Johnson described in her books. For EFT training and certification, see the International Centre for Excellence in Emotionally Focused Therapy (ICEEFT).
Do I need to be certified in EFT to use them?
No. Any couples therapist can use them, including associates and trainees under supervision. Using them well depends on training in EFCT, and certification is offered through ICEEFT.
Are Marcus and Lena a real couple?
No. They are invented, and the same couple appears in every completed example, so you can follow one case from the first phone call to the eighth session.
What should I do if a partner discloses violence in an individual session?
Pause joint work until you have assessed it with that partner alone. Make a safety plan with that partner, and do not raise the disclosure in a joint session or with the other partner without that partner's agreement. Violence that caused an injury needing medical care, severe violence or controlling behavior rules out joint sessions, and fear of the other partner means individual treatment comes first; refer to domestic violence services and individual treatment as needed. The intake and safety screen sets out the steps.
Can I change the templates?
Yes. Change anything to fit the couple, your setting and your employer's rules. Each template has an editable copy.
Is there a cost or a sign-up?
No. Every template is free to read, copy and use, with no email required.
About These Templates
Prepared by Tony Rousmaniere, PsyD, and Alexandre Vaz, PhD, for the Sentio MFT program's free therapist training, from papers by Susan Johnson and her colleagues (Johnson et al., 1999; Wiebe & Johnson, 2016) and the APA book Deliberate Practice in Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy (Levenson et al., 2025). Corrections and suggestions: mabundez@sentio.org.
References
American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. (2026). AAMFT code of ethics. https://www.aamft.org/common/Uploaded%20files/Legal%20Ethics/AAMFT%20Code%20of%20Ethics.pdf
California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists. (2025). CAMFT code of ethics. https://www.camft.org/ethicscode
Denton, W. H., Johnson, S. M., & Burleson, B. R. (2009). Emotion-Focused Therapy–Therapist Fidelity Scale (EFT-TFS): Conceptual development and content validity. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 8(3), 226–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332690903048820
Funk, J. L., & Rogge, R. D. (2007). Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the Couples Satisfaction Index. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(4), 572–583. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.572
Johnson, S. M. (2020). The practice of emotionally focused couple therapy: Creating connection (3rd ed.). Routledge. ISBN 978-0-8153-4801-6. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351168366
Johnson, S. M., Hunsley, J., Greenberg, L., & Schindler, D. (1999). Emotionally focused couples therapy: Status and challenges. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 6(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.6.1.67
Levenson, H., Jinich, S., Vaz, A., & Rousmaniere, T. (2025). Deliberate practice in emotionally focused couple therapy. American Psychological Association. ISBN 978-1-4338-4296-2. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000436-000
McCollum, E. E., & Stith, S. M. (2008). Couples treatment for interpersonal violence: A review of outcome research literature and current clinical practices. Violence and Victims, 23(2), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.23.2.187
Rogge, R. D., Fincham, F. D., Crasta, D., & Maniaci, M. R. (2017). Positive and negative evaluation of relationships: Development and validation of the Positive–Negative Relationship Quality (PN-RQ) scale. Psychological Assessment, 29(8), 1028–1043. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000392
Stith, S. M., McCollum, E. E., Amanor-Boadu, Y., & Smith, D. (2012). Systemic perspectives on intimate partner violence treatment. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 38(1), 220–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2011.00245.x
Wiebe, S. A., & Johnson, S. M. (2016). A review of the research in emotionally focused therapy for couples. Family Process, 55(3), 390–407. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12229