CHARACTERISTICS AND CLINICAL PRACTICES OF RURAL MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPISTS James Morris Texas Tech University This report presents a subset of data collected from the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT) Practice Research Network project conducted in 2002. A sample of 47 clinical members of AAMFT who indicated they practiced in a rural commu- nity provided descriptive information on demographic characteristics, training, clinical prac- tices, and treatment of substance abuse disorders. Similarities and differences with the demographic characteristics and practice patterns of the overall sample of 285 are discussed. Little is known about the practice patterns of marriage and family therapists (MFTs) who work in rural settings (Weigel & Baker, 2002). There is a small but growing body of research about the practice patterns of MFTs (e.g., Doherty & Simmons, 1996; Nelson & Palmer, 2001; Northey, 2002, 2005); however, little research has focused specifically on rural MFTs (Morris, 2006). MFTs are present in 38% of all rural counties in the United States (Bergman, 2004). Further, MFTs are present in almost 22% of the most rural of counties (known as frontier counties), in contrast to psychiatrists, who are present in only about 10% of frontier counties (Bergman). As rural counties account for nearly 75% of all U.S. counties, there is a need to know more about the characteristics of rural MFTs. In an effort to address the lack of research about MFTs, the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment in partnership with the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (AAMFT) developed a plan to collect data from a representative sample of MFTs from the clinical membership of AAMFT. Three waves of data have been collected during the years 2000, 2002, and 2004. Northey (2002) reported the results from the first wave of data and the findings from the second and third waves of data have been summarized in reports that are available at the AAMFT web site (http://www.aamft.org). METHOD Sample and Procedures The participants were 750 clinical members of the AAMFT randomly selected from the AAMFT member database and further randomly divided into three groups, one of which was given a telephone survey, one a mail survey, and one a web survey. Those members assigned to the telephone and mail groups were sent letters explaining the project and received a copy of the survey. Those assigned to the web group were contacted either by e-mail, fax, or mail, based on information available in the AAMFT membership database. That is, those members with an e-mail address on file were sent an e-mail explaining the project and instructions on how to access the survey on the Internet; those members with a fax number on file were sent the information via fax; and those members with only a mailing address were sent the informa- tion via the U.S. Postal Service. In all, 135 respondents participated in the telephone survey (out of 216 for a response rate of 63%), 124 completed mail surveys (out of 225 for a response rate of 55%), and 66 participated in the web survey (out of 203 for a response rate of 33%). James Morris, PhD, Department of Applied and Professional Studies, Texas Tech University. The author expresses his appreciation to William Northey and David Bergman. Address correspondence to James Morris, Marriage and Family Therapy Program, c ⁄ o 102 E. San Antonio, #D, Fredericksburg, TX 78624; E-mail: james.morris@ttu.edu Journal of Marital and Family Therapy October 2007, Vol. 33, No. 4, 439–442 October 2007 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY 439