Cloudy1′s Blog
Just another WordPress.com weblogHarlene Anderson’s Article – 5th April 2009
Anderson stated that the article was not to be dissected, so I have ignored that and made my own opinions on what was written.
Before that I want to quote another article I read on how Rogers’ described personal growth; he remembers how potatoes produce sprouts, growing towards the light, even though all the other conditions are unfavourable. Similarly to these sprouts clients “are striving, in the only ways that they perceive as available to them, to move toward growth, toward becoming”.
And this description is one that I think works well. I can totally associate with the image and can see that people will always try to gain a way of growing even if others feel it’s not worthwhile or that their chosen paths are not favourable.
Anderson states that Rogers believes that “if a person is fully accepted, they cannot help but change” but what about those who are not accepted, do they just stay in a static position in the world and not grow? Maybe in this world acceptance is a huge part of life and therefore not being accepted could lead to someone changing in themselves in order to achieve this acceptance? Being accepted by a therapist/counsellor seems to be a given, otherwise they wouldn’t be in the job, the real acceptance comes from our immediate social groups; families, friends; work colleagues etc.
There is mention of the therapist being congruent at all times but coupled with the understanding that the client will be incongruent and already the power of balance has shifted from the client to the therapist!
This linked with my previous blog on active listening give me doubts about the therapies being truly client centred.
Clients will come in with an idea of what they want to discuss, however this can change within the session and the therapist has to make sure they don’t focus on the topics they first came in with.. I think in some of our career guidance interviews it is all too easy to hook onto a need for an action plan when there is no real need for it. Why do we need to have an action plan taken at the end of a session, why does this make us feel that the session was a success?
“Roger’s believed that “diagnosis risked placing emphasis on problems and problem resolution rather than on the person”
I don’t believe a therapist should be influencing a client in their chosen path but that all too often when a client is asked specific questions by an ill trained but well meaning counsellor it can seem influenced.
Being public – Anderson believes that a counsellor should make their “silent thoughts” heard by the client – Why? Anderson thinks it will allow the client might find it “useful or interesting” but this will just take the power away again. The client will not come up with their own narrative and these “silent thoughts” could influence the client to take a different turn in their choice than they would have come up with.
I do agree with Anderson when discussing neutrality – stating “it is impossible to be neutral as biases are always present”. We are all brought up with different influences on our lives, whether we are aware of them or not and these shape our thoughts and hopes and therefore are difficult to ignore as they are part of our being.
I really like the statement that there is “no therapy cookbook”. I find the idea of there being a recipe for the perfect therapist amusing: –
Add equal amounts of:
Empathy;
Genuineness and
Unconditional positive regard
Add a pinch of active listening and bake in an hour session!
However, all those people who create theories are trying to get us to do exactly that. This is what you should and shouldn’t do to be a successful guidance counsellor. However if this was the case there would be a recipe for each different client we will see, for each different situation – and that would be one heck of a never ending cookbook!
People – even counsellors – become comfortable with certain theories and tend to use them in their sessions with clients; however they may not be the best fit. Anderson admits to using clients as co-researchers for deciding why a certain therapy works or doesn’t work. I don’t know about you but if I knew I was there to give in depth feedback about how well the therapist was in my session I would be feeling like the 2nd class citizen in my own session. How would I know what worked and didn’t if I had never been in counselling before. I understand we have to use the theories in practice based situations to see if they work, but maybe it could be less intrusive.
Anderson wonders if Rogers would have adapted his theory to work in “family therapy” and I think it wouldn’t work. Not one individual in the group would be able to tell their view of their reality for fear of offending others, or becoming vulnerable to the group. The only advantage would be for the group to hear each other’s views on situations which may in turn help them to understand each other’s viewpoints, put this could be done equally by asking the client to put themselves in the other persons shoes and describe the situation again and could actually be more powerful. It becomes about the group and the multiple pressures they will feel and not about the individual and how they can be grow, which in turn will eventually impact the group.
It reminds me of the ripples in a pond when a stone is thrown in to it or the case of when a butterfly flaps its wings and it can be felt around the other side of the world, so too does one persons decisions. If someone chooses to change then that will impact more than just themselves, for better or worse.
