By Sarah Stevenson & Dr Steven Barracosa
At risk and radicalised youth represent one of the most complex and consequential challenges facing contemporary CVE practice given the intersection of adolescent vulnerability, search for belonging, identity formation and exposure to extreme material and polarising online environments. The role and impact of family systems and dynamics have been identified as relevant to the process of youth radicalisation (Barracosa & Cherney, 2025). Family-centred intervention is therefore increasingly recognised as an essential component to any comprehensive youth CVE response (Stanley et al., 2026). This includes families as a central mechanism through which prevention, disengagement, and reintegration can occur (Lewis et al., 2025). However, literature guiding the implementation of structured, intensive, developmentally informed and evidence-based family interventions in the context of youth CVE practice remains underdeveloped.
The implementation of family counselling frameworks across Western CVE programmes varies considerably in quality and scope (Koehler & Ehrt, 2018). Observations from the field suggest existing family-focused CVE practice tends to concentrate on a narrow band of activities such as rapport building, general psychoeducation, and functional support. Beyond this preliminary tier of engagement, the literature detailing family interventions in the context of youth CVE becomes markedly sparse.
The field has not yet developed robust practice in relation to repairing harmful family dynamics including attachment disruptions, rebuilding parental authority and warmth, or systematically improving family communication and supervision including online. This includes a mix of directly addressing family dynamics through targeted interventions, as well as supporting and empowering families to guide change and progress themselves (Stanley et al., 2026). The result is a field that recognises the importance of family without the depth and clinical infrastructure to respond effectively in practice.
A proposed family intervention framework
The literature identifies factors such as relational issues, poor communication, inadequate supervision, abuse, neglect, and harsh or inconsistent parenting as recurring family-level considerations for the process of youth radicalisation (El-Amraoui & Ducol, 2019; Barracosa & Cherney, 2025). These dynamics are particularly relevant given family factors likely contributed to the contextual vulnerabilities present in youth who seek meaning, belonging and identity through extreme ideas, content, groups and peers. These factors need to be adequately understood and addressed within a holistic and developmentally informed youth CVE response that also targets acute risk management concerns and other intervention needs relating to extremism.
Functional Family Therapy (FFT) is a structured intervention with robust evidence base for justice-involved youth and families (Sexton et al., 2025). The theoretical model focussing on relational patterns, communication, supervision, and family functioning is closely aligned with the family-level challenges identified in youth CVE literature. Direct application of FFT to at-risk and radicalised youth is, however, constrained by practical limitations. In its standard form, FFT is resource-intensive, requires specifically trained practitioners, and is delivered across a structured sequence spanning several months. This level of intensity and specialist expertise is not readily available within many Western CVE or youth service contexts, including Australia where this contribution has been developed. Family therapy also assumes a level of family capacity which is not always the case in samples of at-risk and radicalised youth (Barracosa & Cherney, 2025). Working at the intersection of family systems, adolescent development, and youth radicalisation adds a further layer of complexity that standard FFT does not specifically address.
These constraints do not diminish the relevance of FFT’s underlying principles. The relational, systemic, and competency-building framework that FFT provides is precisely what family intervention in a youth CVE context requires. The challenge lies in translating this into tasks which are actionable in practice. Described below is a framework for youth CVE practice drawn from FFT. It is designed to address the relational, structural, and skill-based deficits (RRS Model) that the literature identifies as central to family functioning in the context of at-risk and radicalised youth.
Relational, Structural and Skill Intervention Model (RRS)
Engagement & Relationships
Build collaborative therapeutic relationships, establish respectful and reflective communications with all relevant family members. Reduce fear, shame and resistance. Bring cultural humility and make the purpose and boundaries of the youth CVE intervention explicit. Where acute distress or safety concerns are present, crisis stabilisation and family system soothing may be necessary before meaningful engagement can occur.
Insight
Enhance a collaborative, systemic and accurate understanding of the environmental dynamics and its impact on the extremist behaviours of concern. This includes online activities. Help the family understand the function and potential consequences of the behaviour(s) including factors that may be maintaining withdrawal, secrecy, tension, conflict or challenges regarding service engagement. Sensitively support families to reflect on their own role in these challenges emerging, and to access services including clinical support, to address their own needs.
Interventions and Environmental Factors
Modify family processes and environmental factors that contribute to creating, maintaining or escalating the problem. This includes permissive or punitive parenting, unhelpful communication patterns that increase conflict, and other environmental considerations such as housing instability and domestic violence. Key areas of intervention may also include communication, boundaries, supervision (including online), and emotional regulation. Clinicians must respond to the environmental conditions in which vulnerability to radicalisation has emerged.
Skills & Protective Factors
Strengthen skills that support safer decision-making, stronger connection, and greater resilience. This includes problem-solving, coping, digital literacy, proactive supervision including online, and critical thinking, alongside relational repair and the development of stable routine and structure. Strengthen engagement with the broader youth safeguarding system including educational or vocational pathways, mentoring relationships, mental health support, and prosocial peer and community connections that meet needs for identity, purpose, and belonging through non-harmful means.
Sustain Progress
Collaboratively identify what has changed and what has enabled this. Develop relapse prevention strategies, identify barriers to maintaining positive changes and engage in robust safety planning. It is imperative the family play an active role in developing and implementing family interventions, and that they build skills to independently nurture progress and change moving forward – particularly as service provision and support will likely always be time limited.
Conclusion
Achieving meaningful outcomes in youth CVE practice increasingly demands effective family intervention which complements the broader suite of interventions delivered to at-risk and radicalised youth. This includes a clearer nexus to evidence-based clinical models and sustained investment in training and reflective supervision, ensuring practitioners are equipped to navigate the relational, structural, and risk-related demands this cohort presents. A robust research agenda remains essential. Critically, no single sector can carry this work alone. Positive outcomes depend on the active and coordinated contribution of the broader youth safeguarding system, including education, health, child protection services, mental health providers, community organisations, and families themselves.
Sarah Stevenson and Dr Steve Barracosa are experienced Australian youth CVE clinicians and researchers. Sarah is a clinical psychologist. Steve is the lead consultant for PathwayX, an Australian youth extremism consultancy firm. They provide extremism, forensic and clinical supervision and support to youth CVE professionals.
Image credit: IGOR LOLATTO on Unsplash