students
[ Home ]

Student's page

- or, the Frequently Asked Questions Page.

I often get e-mails from students asking for information:

INDEX

Australia
BACP
basic theory
Brief therapy
Case study - writing a  Person/Client centred one
CBT CBT(more)
Childhood experiences
competent to work with the client
conditions of worth and conditions of worth (more)
Criticisms of the PCA
Drink
Drugs
Eating disorders
Erotic transference
Existential
Feelings for another student
Group work
Limited number of sessions - is it kosher?
Joining BACP
My clients keep repeating themselves!
No patients (with clients)
"Person Centred Planning"
Personal philosophy also see basic theory
Psycho-Sexual Therapy
Sex Therapy
Rogers 19 propositions
Stages of Counselling
Special Needs
Suicide
Trauma and Critical Incident Debrief.
Treatment - what do you actually do?
Time limited
Unconditional Positive Regard
Writing a Case Study
Writings on specificality in Client-Centred Therapy

Q. British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy web site.

I am a counsellor presently living in Cyprus and am eligible for membership of the BACP. I am wondering if you could inform me if the BACP has a web page? YT Cyprus.

A. Yes BACP does have a web site. If you return to my page & follow "Links - Others" there is a hyperlink & the address. It is www.bacp.co.uk or www.counselling.co.uk 

Allan

Q. I am a student in a counseling program. . I am a student in a counseling program. I am doing a project where I need to run a group session using the client-centered approach. I have had difficulty finding some information though. I hope you can help. I know that it is an unstructured, unplanned approach but I was wondering if any techniques are used to introduce the group or to end the sessions. I have found limited material on Rogerian group therapy. Are any wrap-up exercises used? I hope that you can give me some ideas of where to look or let me know what techniques you think that I should use.

LG. New Jersey. USA

A. I don't know what books to point you at, so I'll try to answer your question myself.

There are no techniques. Be yourself. Start by setting out whatever boundaries there are - usually time, you may need to not make too much noise, or not break things. Only talk about such things if they are real issues.

On no account use exercises. Simply explain the function of the group and say that you will do all you can to facilitate the group. Try to use the core conditions as much as you can, but don't fall into the trap of over playing them. Listen as hard as you can to what people are saying. Try to understand them as much as you can. Don't fall into the trap of making it look like a demonstration of the Person Centred Approach. People will probably know that you understand them if you look at them and nod, it's ok not to say anything.

If you really don't understand what is going on, ask. Don't forget that the group members can offer each other the core conditions, you don't have to do it all. In fact the less you APPEAR to do the better.

As the time for ending approaches say that "we will be ending in ** minutes", so that people can know that. As you get near the end time, wrap it up by thanking people. Be flexible, if you finish a few minutes early that's ok. If things over run a little that's ok too - but don't let then go on too long. If something really heavy and emotional things are going on when you should be ending say something like "we must end very soon, and I am sorry to stop things which are obviously important, but I want to stay close to the boundaries set.". Keep it real, if you are sad say so.

Another mistake people make is to say too much, or not to let silence be. Having set out your basic parameters at the beginning be quiet. There may be a silence for a few minutes, some times 5 or 10 minutes. Don't panic - it is not your job to fill it. This time belong to the group. If they are silent it is because no member has chosen to speak. That's ok. If it goes on too long, say 15 or 20 minutes, it may get hard for any one to speak. In this case say that, but explain that the time belongs to the members of the group and you respect people's right to be silent. If the whole thing feels frightening, or what ever it feels, says that.

Wow, I didn't plan to say that much.

Allan

Reply from LG

Allan-

Thanks so much for getting back to me so soon. Everything that you wrote helped do much. I have had such a hard time finding specifics - I guess I was missing the whole point by looking for guidelines that aren't there.

LG

Q

I am an occupational therapy student in Australia and I am currently doing a unit and assignment in which I must determine my own personal philosophy of life and the philosophy of counselling and therapy which I relate closest with. I have chosen client-centred therapy as the philosophy which I relate closest with and found your site in search for theory and literature on the web related to client-centred therapy.

The biggest difficulties that I am having is finding anything which gives the basics of the approach rather than how to implement it in specific situations. I am writing to you in the hope that you can help me out here.

J. Australia

A I am an Assessor of Accreditation for the British Association for Counselling.* We ask candidates who wish to be Accredited to, (among other things), write their personal philosophy of counselling. In the guidance notes we suggest that the candidate may be helped by addressing herself to certain questions.

Below I list these questions and my personal answers to them. I hope this may point you in the right direction. These are not perfect answers but I think they point in the right direction.

* I was an Assessor of Accreditation when I wrote, am not now. Also BAC is now BACP. 

My Philosophy of Counselling

What are people like?

I believe that people are essentially constructive and motivated to seek their own truth. I assumed that a person is doing their best to preserve themselves and to emotionally grow, notwithstanding their own personal internal and environmental circumstances, which may frustrate their direction.

What causes them problems -- or disturbance?

From a young age external "conditions of worth" are imposed upon people. ("I will only love you if you do as I say " -- say parents.) Eventually a gap widens between the person's true-self and the self necessary to meet the external condition. Rogers called this meeting external values an external locus of evaluation.

What can help with these difficulties?

An environment which trusts the client's own judgement and does not imposed external conditions of worth.

How does counselling fit in with this?

Counselling seeks to offer the healthy psychological environment which I earlier claimed was missing (often right back from childhood ). The counselling environment I offer tries to be free of conditions of worth.

How do I have to be, what should I do as a counsellor to facilitate this?

I trust the client's ability to grow if I can offer a safe, trusting, valuing environment. I do this by offering the core conditions of Empathy, Congruence and Unconditional Positive Regard. I regard any thing else to be a condition of worth and therefore more a part of the problem than the solution.

I therefore place no restrictions or expectations upon a client, other than those necessary to preserve and ethical relationship and those which I need for me to offer the above core conditions. I do not even impose an expectation of her getting better. No suicide contracts, no homework.

Q

I would also be interested to know how it was that you came across the approach and why you chose this over all the others.

J.  Australia

A. The next half of you question is more personal. I think it was Chuck Devonshire who coined the phrase "in our business it is professional to be personal".

I discovered the approach quite by accident. I wanted to do a professional training in counselling just at the time when Dave Mearns & Brian Thorne (and two others) wanted to run their first training course. At that time (1984) I had hardly heard of the approach. When I started to learn more about it and understand it I was astonished to discover that the way I was already trying to live my life had a name – Person Centred!

My route to it was via religion and philosophy I guess. I had "converted" to Christianity in the 60’s as a teenager. By the late 70’s I was an Elder (aged about 30) in a main stream Protestant church. I was attracted to the simplicity of the reformed churches. A process of stripping away the unnecessary had begun. This process eventually led me to the Quakers. Their broad tolerance, but high principles, even to this day some Quakers will die for their principles, attracted me. Through this process almost everything was stripped away until even God & the Christ had become unnecessary. I was left with my fellow humans, a belief that "the meaning of life" was human contact, where two people engage with one another at the deepest emotional level and a belief that such deep relationships are possible with many people. There seems to me to be close links between UPR, love and the kind of respect for people I saw in the Quakers, where many would die before taking another’s life and yet they would genuinely and openly welcome serving soldiers amongst them.

Eventually even the Quakers were too cluttered for me. Too many of them could not "walk the talk" and so, after stripping almost everything away I was left with the core conditions.

I was particularly attracted to a philosophy which seemed to reject personal power, and yet tries to improve the lot of people. As a counsellor I try to make the world a better place, one person at a time. Whilst this is my desire, it is also important to me that I do not impose things on others.

I think I have the ability to persuade people and I value an approach which expects me to keep that tendency in check.

I’ll stop at that stage. Is that the kind of stuff you wanted to know?

Allan.

Q

The more I am into Rogerian, the more I find it to be extremely difficult. Listening is definitely an art and require a lot of skill. I wonder how you do that because I found recently that I have no patients. The more I listen to people the more I feel that they do not have a clear direction of where to go.

SS. USA

A If you are finding yourself impatient with your client’s this is likely to be because you are focusing on your agenda, rather than hers. Remember that from a Person Centred point of view you are trusting her ability to self actualise. It is not for you to push her forward, you must trust that the client can find that which is important for her.

Q

I am so tempted at times to use the behavioral method. I feel so lost now like I am a failure because I can't seem to use this Rogerian style effectively.

Sometimes they just seem to go on and on with their stories and no matter how much I try to validate their feeling, I don't seem to get anywhere.

SS. USA

A I always work on the assumption that my client is trying to tell me what is wrong. If she has to keep repeating the story I assume that she thinks I am not hearing her – this is almost always the explanation. If you have done all you can to get on to her wavelength, and you feel pretty confident that it is not you who is not hearing her, then asked her why she keeps telling you the same thing? Another danger in this kind of situation is that you have given the impression that you are the expert and she, therefore, will not take steps on her own because she knows that your advice will be better than hers.

conditions of worth

Q I am at present doing a person centred counselling course and want to do my next written work on conditions of worth. Can you suggest any sources for more info/background material?

B. UK

A

Q Unconditional Positive Regard

My daughter has been asked, as part of her University Course, to give a presentation on Unconditional Personal Regard/Acceptance in Counselling.  One area she has been asked to review is any changes in thinking or approaches to this in the last fifty years.

Do you know of any books or papers that might be able to help her in this respect

CN. United Kingdom

A.Your question is very open, but I can make a lot of assumption.

I assume your daughter is studying counselling &/or psychology. Since the phrase UPR has significant meaning within the Person Centred Approach & I author a web site on that subject I assume the question relates to the approach.

50 years is an import period. In 1957 (41 years ago) Carl Rogers presented a paper in Chicago speculating that there were three core conditions necessary for therapeutic change to take place.

1. Empathy

2. Congruence 

3. Unconditional Positive Regard (UPR).

He speculated that the core conditions were necessary in any form of therapy if therapeutic change was to take place. It seems that by 1959 he was suggesting that these conditions were both necessary and sufficient.

In my view it was the suggestion that they were sufficient which marked the beginning of the Client Centred Approach as a separate approach to Psychotherapy.

The simple answer to your question therefore is that the phrase UPR had no meaning in 1948, so it has changed considerably.

I have it on good account that Rogers actually meant "love" by UPR, but thought that it sounded too unprofessional. It was a young student who actually coined the phrase. (That is the story I have been told - I have read that anywhere).

I see no real evidence to say that the meaning of the UPR has changed, as far as the Client Centred/Person Centred approach is concerned. It is true that during the last 40 years "our clothes have been stolen" by so many people that it's meaning may have become distorted by some of the thieves.

The leading book on the subject is "Client Centred Therapy" by Rogers. (I assume you live in the UK). I saw a copy in Dillons the other day. Some people love this book, others say they find the style difficult.

The leading British authors are Brian Thorne & Dave Mearns. Both have written various books about the approach. Publishes are Sage & Whurr.

Go to the Books section of my web site (address below) to get more information about books.

I have a collection of papers about the approach on my web site - address below. It is also worth you visiting the ADPCA web site at:

http://www.adpca.org

Q Australia

I have just completed my B.A. in psychology at M...... University, Australia. I plan on completing my honours in psychology next year. I am very interested in Client-Centred Therapy. I lived in England a few years ago, where I undertook a few seminars in Rogerian theory from M........., London.

If you have any information on Client-Centred/Rogerian organizations in Melbourne, Australia would you please e-mail me. Do you have a newsletter available on a regular basis?

AN

A   I'm afraid that I can't provide you with any information about Client-Centred/Rogerian organizations in Melbourne, Australia.

There are two associations you may be interested in joining - I'll give you the web site addresses for each.

British Association for the Person Centred Approach. - www.bapca.org.uk
Association for the Development of the Person Centered Approach - http://www.adpca.org

Both Associations produce quarterly newsletters & two professional journals a year. The international cost of joining is 25 pounds for the British Association & US$65 for the ADPCA. Both journal attract contributions from around the world. You will get details of how to join from the respective web sites.

  Q      Rogers 19 propositions

Hi, I am currently looking for any information on Rogers 19 propositions, do you have any info or know of a web site where I may find some? Yvonne

A        I'm not aware of them being on a web site anywhere. They are to be found in Client-Centered Therapy - Carl Rogers. ISBN 0 09 453990 1. The British Publisher is Constable. I'm afraid I do not know the American publisher.

Look in the last section - Part III. "Implications for Psychological Theory".

(PS. I now have a simplified version by Prof Dave Mearns - e-mail me if you need it)

Q. Is it possible to do brief therapy from within the person-centred approach? Given that the person-centred approach's central premise is non-directiveness (and this means that the person-centred therapist must have little by way of a "game plan" before a session but rather must start from where the client is and accompany the client) how is it possible to formulate a helpful, person-centred way of being with the client for a set number of sessions?

I ask this because I am working for one day a week in a clinic which offers the maximum of 12 weeks' counselling/therapy. For the first time I am having to deal with issues around ending when the client may not feel ready to end. This is not a problem in my private practice, because I start and work from the assumption that my clients will know when they are ready to finish and they and I contract to work together until that time. I have therefore never felt it necessary to broach the subject of ending with my private clients; I work hard to create an accepting environment where they feel able to discuss the matter without fear that they are disappointing me in any way.

SV. England.

A. The question you ask interests me very much because I do a lot of short term work and I only work in a Person Centred way.

The real point is that you must see the limitation of session as a boundary and you must be careful to ensure that this boundary is communicated to your client. Therefore, right from the first session, the client must know that she only has a maximum of, in this cases 12, sessions. I regard 12 sessions as a luxury, the shortest number I work to is 3 and the maximum allowed under the EAP Charter is 8. Therefore in the first session I tell the client that we have a MAXIMUM of 12 sessions, we don't have to use them all, but we can use them all if that is what the client would like. The scheme we are seeing each under means that we can not exceed 12 sessions.

I say words like these to new clients about 4 times a week. I have various observations which may interest you:

1. By seeing the limitation of sessions as a boundary imposed by others, not a condition imposed by me, and clearly communicating this to my client, I believe that I am very much leaving her in control of how that time is used. Therefore this not a condition of worth that I have imposed. This is very different from a "six session contract, which is reviewed and extended". I see this as totally unacceptable from a person centred point of view. I translate that to "I'll see you 6 times and if you are good I let you come a bit longer" - clearly a condition of worth and therefore more a part of the problem than the solution.

2. I have a sneaky suspicion that the number of sessions necessary to complete the work expands to fill the amount of time available.

3. I am constantly amazed by the degree to which people take enormous strides in the few sessions available, even in as few as 4 sessions sometimes. (Also there is a lot of research to suggest that most movement takes place in the first few sessions. I think this so for much counselling, but not so for deeper work with badly damaged people who may take many months to even build up trust. Added in Jan 2004.)

4. If you have a limited number of sessions available I believe that the PCA is overwhelmingly the best approach to use. By making clients very aware of the externally imposed session limitation on US I expect my client to take responsibility for choosing what subject to talk about. I do not want to waste her time going off on jaunts of my own when the client already knows what hurts and what isn't working. Contrary to the popular misunderstanding by other approaches I think the PCA is the approach of choice when time is limited - if you have the courage to trust your client.

5. Sometimes with this short term work I get the feeling that there is time for the client to explore the issues, rehearse the arguments, but I do not get the luxury and privilege of watching them do it - which I think I often do get with long terms work.

Allan. 24Jul1999  

Trauma and Critical Incident Debrief.

Q1 I am a second year student on a Diploma in Counselling course and I am trying to find any information on counselling trauma victims using the Person Centred Approach. I would appreciate any information you may know of regarding this subject. (CK - England. Oct 1999)

A1 I cannot point you at any writing on this subject but I consider my work to the Person Centred and I do get involved in post trauma counselling.  Are you talking about critical incident debriefing or counselling for someone who has been traumatised?

It is possible that your question is simply one of "is the Person Centred Approach suitable for this kind of work?" For trauma counselling I have no doubt that the answer is yes. In the strictest sense of the word, I do not think that critical incident debriefing can be described as counselling - although it is obvious that sensitivity, empathy and counselling skills are necessary.

Q2 You were right in suggesting that my question could be "is the P.C approach suitable for this kind of work?" and I shall go further and ask "is it enough?" There have been many suggestions in various books about using cognitive or behavioral interventions some of which make me shudder!

In my research so far I am beginning to discover a corollary between the behaviour of traumatised veterans and traumatised children, but lots more research to be done in that area.

A2 I feel that a critical incident  has three separate stages from a "counselling" point of view.

1 An immediate response. Immediately after an incident "counselling skills" are used. People are shocked and there is a great deal of disbelief. They have been exposed to an experience which, in the true meaning of the word, is extraordinary. They need a way to contain feelings which are overwhelming and to try to start the process of incorporating these extraordinary events into their understanding of the world. It is good for them to talk but difficult to find people who are prepared to hear their stories and who will not be harmed by them. This is where the counsellor comes in, but, by a strict definition he or she will be using "counselling skills", rather than counselling. There is no ongoing contract or (client) process.

2. The next stage is the Critical Incident Debriefing. It is recommended that this is done approximately seven days after the incident. Forty eight hours is too soon because people are still too much in shock and are unlikely to be ready to assimilate their experience. The purpose of CID is to let the person work through the emotions of the event with the intention of avoiding Post Traumatic Stress later.

Once again, I think that "counselling skills" and sensitivities are used, but I do not consider this to the counselling.

3. PTS counselling will only be necessary for some victims of a critical incident. These may be the people who have not been able to take part in Critical Incident Debriefing (either because it was not offered or they declined it) or people who have not been able to sufficiently incorporates the critical event into their understanding of the world, in spite of the Critical Incident Debriefing.

Next to the question of whether the Person Centred approach is suitable or sufficient for this kind of work. I think the question is irrelevant in the case of points one and two above because I do not think that this is counselling. I think that offering the core conditions is plainly of utmost important in all three cases above. Beyond that I think we are running into the "specificality myth". (See Jerald Bozarth - the Person Centred Approach, a revolutionary paradigm) which claims that there are specific solutions for specific problems. When Bozarth investigated these claims it turns out that there is almost no research evidence to support them. He argues that the whole of our psychology services in the Western world are based on a myth.

I am not surprised by the links between traumatised veterans and traumatised (could I say abused?) children. I think that in both cases the person's understanding of the world is overwhelmed and I would therefore expect similar consequences. Margaret Warner (Professor of counselling in Chicago) argues that a child under seven is unable to make emotional sense of abuse and disassociation frequently occurs (previously called multiple personality). Also Professor Dave Mearns describes what he calls "configurations", which I think is a similar concept.

Allan

Writings on specificality in Client-Centred Therapy

Q. Two questions which essentially have the same answer:

I am currently writing a paper on Client/Person Centered Therapy and need to include information on how the theory differentiates between clients of different ages or   developmental stages.  I'm having a very hard time finding info.  Can you help? CA England.

and

My Groups are mainly women and I have a high proportion of Black and Asian Counsellors. We are looking for papers/references/evidence of Trans- Cultural aspects of the Person Centred Approach. I would be grateful for any advice. PE Wolverhampton, England.

A I think that the reason why you can't find anything is that there isn't anything. It is a "fit all" theory.

John Shlien, a close associate of Rogers says "But client-centered therapy has only one treatment for all cases". (Shlien, J.M (1989) Boy's person-centered perspective on psychodiagnosis. Person-Centered Review, 4(2), p161)

If you have time, an excellent book, which I think may surprise you in many ways, is Person-Centred Therapy: A Revolutionary Paradigm - Jerold Bozarth. ISBN 1 898059 22 5. PCCS Books. Phone 01 989 770 707, with credit card to hand. They will mail order it to you.

A summary of basic theory

Q. I'm trying to understand the process of change from this theory model.  There are many questions going through my mind.  What are people like?  How does change take place?  How does change get complicated?  What is the role of the counselor to assist in this change process?  And where does the counselors role end in this process?  FW South Dekota. USA.

A. I am going to be a little bit lazy in replying to you in that I will cut and paste stuff I have previously written, but I think it is close enough to your questions to give you the information you are looking for.

The first part comes from a workshop I ran on Accreditation. In Britain we have to name the theoretical bases we are working from and then demonstrate that we are doing what we said we were going to do. The next section is an example of how an Accreditation candidate may approach the "philosophy" part. (they would need to be more detailed than this, but it helped people to think in the right direction.)

"I believe that people are essentially constructive and that they are motivated to seek the truth. I assume that a person is doing their best to preserve themselves and to emotionally grow, not with standing their personal internal and environmental circumstances."

What causes them problems or disturbance?

From a young age external conditions of worth are put on them. (I will only love you if you do as I say.) Eventually a gap widens between the person’s true self and the self necessary to meet the external conditions.

I trust the clients ability to grow if I can offer a safe, trusting, valuing environment. I do this by offering the core conditions of empathy, congruence and unconditional positive regard. I regard anything else to be a condition of worth and therefore more a part of the problem than the solution.

The next section is longer and was written for a "time limited" workshop - I do a lot of work for agencies who only allow a few (typically 6) sessions. In this section I try to describe the basics of Client Centred therapy. (It is often called the Person Centred Approach in this country - thus reference to PCA)

The bold bits are simply there for my guidance when I'm giving a lecture - I leave them in because they may help you to find things.

Basic Client Centred theory - the Actualising Tendency. What makes people tick?

What happens in practice?

How can Client Centred Therapy help?

What it isn't.

 Q. Drink drugs and suicide

I'm currently doing a study on drug issues and suicide and how it relates to a client centred setting. I would be grateful if you could send me any information that you might have on Carl Rogers concept of suicide idealogy, suicide contracts, impact of drug issues on therapy, etc. PR. Eire

A.

Central to client centred work is the concept of not imposing any conditions WHAT SO EVER on clients. I do not feel able to speak for Carl Rogers, but I can speak for myself. I would never dream of using a suicide contract, it is a condition of worth and therefore more a part of the problem that the solution.

In many situations I see suicide as logical and rational. If I thought that I was utterly alone in the world and that not a soul understood me I thing I would want to leave this world. My options would be to go mad or commit suicide. I think my own preference would be suicide.

When my client comes to me and tells me that he or she is considering suicide I attempt to enter her world. To understand the hopelessness which has brought her to this point. If I can succeed in truly doing that, and convey my knowing of the client's world to her, then I think it unlikely that she will commit suicide. I attempt nothing else - just that. It is hard and enough.

Importance of Childhood experiences

Q  To Allan

I have been ask to discuss the relevance of childhood experience in forming adult personality and describe the significance attached to this by the counsellor.

Carl Rogers didn't seem to say much about childhood, and I'm finding it difficult to understand the significance attached by the counsellor.

am I right in thinking, this is (what the counsellor needs to be aware of). Little confused about the statement.

Could you help as I would really appreciate this.

S. (England)

A 

Dear S,

I suspect that the real problem here is confusion between theories.  The Client Centred approach claims that the cause of disturbance in a client is ‘external conditions of worth’ – and not subconscious processes, which are favoured by the Analytical, Psychodynamic schools.  Childhood is not seen to be especially important within CCT  and thus you have not been able to find much written by Rogers (or more recent British authors) about it. I bet you are doing a duel theory, or integrative course, where such confusion is common.

Assuming that you are trying to view this from a Client/Person Centred perspective the answer is that we do not attach a great deal of significance to childhood experiences – unless the client does! Obviously it may evolve that the external conditions of worth, which we claims have caused so much damage,  are very important to the client and thus they will become important to a CCT counsellor too. I suppose that, from that point of view, it could be argues that childhood experiences are important in forming personality, but I suspect that your questioner was looking for some more direct cause and effect.

If you are trying to answer this question from a Psychodynamic perspective you are likely to say that a person’s childhood experiences have greatly influenced the sub-conscious and there wish to pay great attention to them.

These are the reasons why the respective approaches take such different views on the importance of childhood experiences to a client.

Allan

Q. Personal development essay

I am in my final year of my advanced diploma in person-centred counselling and I have been asked to write a personal development essay and I don't have any idea where to start.

Can You help

EB (UK)

A. Dear E

I’m surprised that this essay has come so late in your course, it is a favourite “first” essay. I guess one good way to describe it would be a sort of “This is Your Life”, but focused at counselling. For me, I discovered that I was enormously interested in people & personal issues through listening to late night phone-in’s to local radio stations and training to be a counsellor became an outlet for that. However I realised that I don’t like controlling people so an approach to counselling which didn’t seek to do that was very attractive to me. I thought I was interested in sex therapy but soon discovered that it was far to directive for my taste. I realise that my own dyslexia and having a child with special needs has been an important influence on my development as a counsellor. A stable marriage for many years has also been very important.

That’s just a few examples, but it may start to point you in the right direction.  Good luck.

  Allan  

Q Feeling about another student

Hi Allan,

I am a student in the first year of the Diploma Course and seeking your help.
I have scoured the books and cannot find any information that I am desperate to find.
I am married with young children. I have developed feelings towards another course member and the feeling is mutual. We are at present considering our feelings but are finding it difficult as they seem to be getting stronger.

Please can you tell me if this is typical of these courses and if there will be disasters ahead if we follow our feelings. Also can you please suggest a book or web page that can help me. Can you be kind enough to e-mail me on this one.

S - UK (Jan 2002)

A

Dear S

I can’t think of any reference documents to refer you to. The psychodynamics would probably call this “erotic transference” if that helps.

I think that such experiences are common. Many counselling courses result in participants engaging deep feelings within themselves and becoming aware of parts of themselves they were scarcely aware of before. This is often an important part of the training because you are likely to encounter many deep feelings, when working with clients; both those of your clients and your own.

I guess the ideal way to try to “be” with your feelings is to discuss them with your fellow student, but not to act upon them. Things like this will happen to you when you are a counsellor – any experienced counsellor will be able to tell you about the first client they fell in love with and the first one who loved them. We have to be able to survive such experiences and maintain the necessary boundaries. To not hold such a boundary would be both unethical and likely to be harmful to your client. In a way you can see this as a dry run.

You have told me that you are married with children, so there is a plain indication that you are worried about the future for your family and I think you are very right to have these concerns in your mind.

You have not said whether the other person is male or female. If female this may be introducing even more complicated feeling for you.

Good luck, Allan.

PS The other student was male -  

Q1 Person Centred Planning

I am a first year diploma student studying at Tile Hill College, Coventry. 

I work within a residential care home for adults with physical and sometimes learning disabilities. As an organisation, it is felt that we must strive to become more person centred, particularly as we attempt to comply to the new Government national required standards.

As you can probably imagine, I whooped with delight until I was asked to put forward recommendations on how best we could implement this!!! The only source of reference I could find was Marlis Pörtner's "Trust and Understanding" which proved incredibly useful as a starting point. (see book page for more details)

As I see things, the starting point for me would be to look at residents' care plans. I therefore write to ask if you know of any resources or organisations that may have or be striving to work with residents/clients in a person centred way, particularly with respect to care plans?

Any information you may have would be more than gratefully received.

L. Coventry, England.

A1 

Dear L

The present government seems to be introducing something called "Person Centred Planning", which sounds great. However, as far as I can tell, it seems to have been an accidental coincidence of name and no one anywhere near the government has the slightest idea what the Person Centred Approach is.

The point I am making here is that our theory says that the core conditions are necessary and SUFFICIENT. There is no understanding of this concept in what the government has in mind. So this is not PCA as we know it. ("Life, but not as we know it Jim." - Bones in Star Trek 1)

Having said that, let's not be pessimistic, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. As far as I understand it there is some genuine attempt to understand the client's needs and to listen to the client, and this is progress. Having said that, I think you will find that, in truth, those doing the planning will still think they are the experts - so there is no real trust of the client.

The dilemma with someone who has learning or physical disabilities is that they genuinely need help in various areas. With physical disabilities it is often possible to ask clients - i.e. genuinely treat them as clients, instead of just paying lip service to the concept. The concept becomes much more challenging with learning difficulties because the person may have great difficulties in communicating their needs. Surely the person centred bit is to work hard to learn what the client really wants. Marlis has loads of practical examples of this her book.

I am not aware of any other books on the subject in English, but you may try e-mailing Jan Hawkins - jan@thefdp.demon.co.uk. I think I have a link to her web site on mine. She runs workshops. Check my book list for her name too.

Allan

Q2.1 Hi!

I am considering doing a Phd in the area of person-centered planning. I am a PCP facilitator myself and so have a pretty good working knowledge, however, I would appreciate any advice on specific issues where there is a lack of research, or further research is needed.

Thanks!

A2 

I don't think I can help you. When the UK government came up with the phrase Person Centred Planning I don't think they had the slightest idea that there was a long established approach to Psychotherapy called the Person Centred Approach. The Person Centred Approach has nothing to do with Person Centred Planning.

More

Thank you for replying,

I think that the term 'Person-Centered Planning' originates from North America, not the UK - in fact, it is only vaguely mentioned by the UK government who do not seem to understand the real meaning of the term.

The relationship between PCP and Person Centered Approaches seems to be confusing and controversial.

Michael Smull and Susie Burke Harrison (who are from Maryland), have done a great deal of work with PCP, as has John O'Brien and Connie Lyle O'Brien. If you are interested, you might like to read the following article that explains the origins of PCP, written by John O'Brien.

Q. Psycho-Sexual Therapy

Dear Allan,

Would you be prepared to say, in brief terms, whether you think the person centred approach can be a suitable vehicle for PST?  (Psycho-Sexual Therapy) I am having a debate with a counsellor about this and would appreciate your view.

MC. England 20 Jan 2002

A. 

Dear M

I think it depends on what you mean by Psycho-Sexual Therapy. If you mean the sort of programme often favoured in sex therapy where the therapist takes control – no sexual contact in week one, light petting in week two, heavy petting in week three, etc, I answer no. It seems to me that in such cases the therapist is controlling things. The locus of evaluation is external from the client – the therapist says what to do & what not to do, irrespective of the client’s wishes.

Having said that, I do a lot of work in the area of sex with clients. In my experience it is almost always the case that sexual problems are simply evidence of some other problem. Poor communication, earlier sexual abuse, unexpressed anger and resentment are all typical examples – there are many others. In my experience the sexual difficulties clear up spontaneously if the REAL problem is addressed. By offering the core conditions I find that sufficient safety is created for these other important difficulties to be addressed by the client at his or her own safe pace.

Clients have often reported significant improvements in their sex life as a consequence of counselling even though we have seldom talked about sex.

Does that answer your question?

Allan

Q A visitor to my website asks for "actual treatment techniques for client-centered treatment.". CC. MI. USA. Sep 2002.

A

There are not treatment techniques as such. When a client arrives I try to welcome them, but avoid saying anything which will suggest what they should talk about, so in a first session I might ask "What brings you here?". I don't even want to suggest that they have a "problem", that is a judgement I don't feel able to make. In later sessions I will specifically say that I don't want to say anything that will suggest a direction the client should take but I will try to understand as deeply as possible, and from their frame of reference, whatever they would like me to know. I don't mind if there is silence and will not attempt to fill it unless I think that the client is uncomfortable. If they are I will say that I don't want to deliberately make them unaffordable but I also don't want to suggest what they want to talk about. I genuinely believe that their wisdom about themselves is greater than mine. The client is therefore far more likely to know what is important than me.

Q. "Eating disorders"

A I think you will find that Dave Mearns and Brian Thorne wrote on this subject in their first book – Person Centred Counselling in Action. (See my books section). I think they did talk about beginnings, middles and ends. I also recall that Rogers wrote about it in a much more complicated way – probably in Client Centered Therapy. He had a 7 step model. (It's actually in On Becoming a Person, Chapter 7 - and describes a continuum of change)

 Q. Criticisms of the Person Centred Approach

I have merged questions and answers together here in addressing a correspondent's criticism of the PCA

Dear C

This is an interesting subject although I’m not sure how much time I have to debate it. Never the less I’ll add a few comments in your text.  

Hi Allan,

Thanks so much for writing back to me, much appreciated.  Yes, I was in agreement with you regarding Rogerian counselling, that was up until a few years ago. When I was approaching my finish stop of my Diploma studies, I came across some research, which looked at the PCA.  I am writing a brief but which I hope to be a concise review of the criticisms levelled at it.

First of all, McConnaughty (1987) has reviewed much of the data regarding the PCA and argues that there is more variability among therapists within one technique, than there is among the techniques themselves. Hence, it appears to be the therapist not the technique, that is important for improvement. 

I agree with this, but do not see it as a criticism of CCT (Client Centred Therapy – everyone and their uncle claims to be PCA with little or no understanding of it’s theory). CCT is NOT a technique, it is a way of being with clients. When the concept of variability is applies to CCT the point is that some therapists are good at it and some are not. I have been practicing CCT for almost 20 years and my knowledge and ability is still improving. CCT theory is relatively simple to express but it’s application is a life long quest.

 Garfield and Bergin (1971) found that therapists low in emotional disturbance themselves were more effective at lowering depression and defensiveness in clients. 

Yes, that is consistent with my experience. I don’t think the concept has to be limited to depression. It is a blinding glimpse of the obvious. You can not take a client to a place you are unable to visit yourself.

 Whilst LaCrosse (1980) found characteristics such as attractiveness and expertness were essential ingredients in client well-being.

Not certain what attractiveness means. The CCT tries to move away from the superficial falseness of expertness. It is the refuse of those who do not have the courage to genuinely engage a client’s condition.

Other research conducted by Silfe and Williams (1995) point out that humanistic principles cannot avoid the issue of determinism completely.  A person's inborn potential is seen as exerting considerable influence over the way he or she acts.  If this potential is based on our biology, Slife and Williams argue, there is not much we can do about it.  Therefore, in the sense that this potential lies outside of our control, yet exerts an influence on our behaviour.  Thus, the humanistic approach must be seen to a certain extent, as being deterministic.

From my experience as a therapist and in life generally it is obvious that peoples personalities are influenced by genetic factors. I assume that I can not influence these and so I do not see them as a relevant variable when considering different approaches. I think that conditions within the autism spectrum are particularly challenging to CCT. I still suspect that the basic concepts are valid, but I wonder if they need adaptation here.

Another criticism that Slife and Williams make is the morality of a person's behaviour.  If, they argue, we are the only ones who know what is right for us, then we are the only ones able to judge the rightness or wrongness of our behaviour.  If we must pursue our own needs, then we can only be held accountable for whether or not we are acting according to those needs.  This introduces a moral position known as 'moral relativism' in that what is right or wrong can only be judged  in terms of what is right or wrong for that particular person.  According to this perspective, there can be no universal standards of right or wrong behaviour, with morality being regarded as unique to each individual and determined by their own unique needs.  As each person is different, and we are denied knowledge of the unique potential and needs of any other, this is a further problem when applying humanistic principles to the explanation of intimate relations. 

I agree with all of this except the conclusion. To claim that each person is unique and is thus subject to moral relativism is pure Rogers. Ironically I see this as a criticism of PCA theory which I sometimes find too Western, and particularly too American. It seems to me that there are universal human rights that must take precedence over individual moral positions if they come into conflict. To be controversial in my position I see the concept of a State that exercises the death sentence as being in breach of universal human rights, which must take precedence. It is obvious that I cannot claim that killing you is morally acceptable to me and therefore it is ok.  Having said that, I do not see it as being a criticism of the therapeutic approaches spectrum.

Another important finding and probably the one that has many implications for anyone interested in explaining human behaviour is that many different schools of thoughts have explanations of the same event.  Thus, when trying to theorise as to why someone is doing something, i.e., taking illegal substances, we can look at such behaviour using Theology, Sociology, Social Psychology, Human Biology, PCA... perspectives.  The problem for many students is finding which one fits.  That is where the problem is.  This is because each one is right in its own way.  Personally, this is where a lot of students (PCA's in particular) tend to go wrong.  I have found that with nearly all the students I've met on PCA courses, they get so hung up on explaining things the 'Rogerian way' that they develop a 'mindset.'  Other forms of thinking then become either a threat due to the dissonance produce onto themselves (no one really likes to be wrong, especially if one has invested so much of themselves into something) or they just downplay the facts.  I find this quite sad.

I agree with that. I don’t see it as a criticism of the basic concept of PCA theory, but it is try that many PCA people can get narrow in their thinking.

The thing is this, Rogers was brilliant.  He had many great ideas and I've always seen his model as an excellent way of providing insight for the client.  

Remember that the concept of offering insight is NOT a CCT one, it is psychodynamic and analytical.

His ideas have been enormously influential in the work of the brilliant scientist William Ickes, whose book entitled 'Everyday Mind Reading' shows how Rogers work can be used as a base for other studies looking at empathy.  But he was not right about a lot of things. 

Unfortunately you have not yet said what he was wrong about.  The latest area I am looking at is Trauma recovery. My experience is that CCT is extremely valuable with traumatised clients but CCT theory does not make sense. Put simply, the problems suffered by traumatised clients were not caused by “conditions of worth”. The approach appears to be working, and very certainly is not causing damage, but I am far from convinced that our theory explains what we are doing.   

Anyway, I must go now, I'm sure you've read enough of my letter.  Thanks again Allan, for taking time out to write back.  I hope the information that I've provided will help you see my point of view.  Even if you do not agree with it, I hope you'll be able to understand where I coming from.

Yours sincerely,

CM (Manchester UK)

Q. I am a student in pcc i hope you can help me. When i review client work am i assessing whether the organismic valuing process is taking control, or does the client review their own work. Thus lets me know what is working for them, or do i use the seven stage model that Roger's wrote to gauge where the client is , with regard to the client owning his/her feelings.

A.

I believe that all information on this page is correct but do not accept liability if it is not.   Allan Turner's Person Centred Web Site.