Counseling

Ethical and Philosophical Foundations for Counseling in general and PCA in particular

This section serves to address 5 considerations. The first one concerns those specifically relating to PCA. The next 4 concern those that draw the contours of the "Counseling" practice that I have made my own, i.e. a practice which relies predominantly on PCA but which also brings a series of "Collaborative" nuances into play. Accordingly, the following considerations will successively be examined: PCA Pillars, Actualizations, Expertise, Multiple voices and Ethical Commitments.

• PCA Pillars

Whilst the theoretical and methodological aspects that define the Person-Centered Approach are developed in greater detail under a sub-section of the "Listening Nuances" section (entitled “PCA foundations I thought it important that in this section which introduces the very concept of Counseling I take the time to highlight 4 of the fundamental ways in which PCA distinguishes itself from other forms of therapeutic relationships, namely: what it seeks to promote, the roles it attributes to the Counselor and to his client, the fundamental premise around which it articulates its endeavors, and finally, the way in which it considers the Counseling process itself.

The progressions which PCA seeks to promote

Those things that the PCA Counselor seeks to promote in his clients include an increased self-esteem and openness to experience. He endevors to help his clients lead lives endowed with greater self-understanding and diminished defensiveness, guilt, and insecurity. He also endeavors to help his clients cultivate personal relationships that are more positive and comfortable, helping them acquire increased capacities to experience and express their feelings.

The roles that PCA attributes to the Counselor and his client

PCA Counseling is a counseling approach that encourages the client to actively take charge of his therapeutic journey, the Counselor’s primary role being that of providing his client with an atmosphere of trust which will facilitate his wanting to take on such an active role. In PCA Counseling, it is much more the client who determines the course and direction of such a journey. The Counselor, on the other hand, endeavors above all to highlight his client’s discourse, setting his sights on promoting in the latter a greater capacity to connect with his inner world.

The fundamental premise around which PCA structures itself

The starting point of the Rogerian approach to Counseling and psychotherapy is best stated by Rogers himself (1986):

It is that the individual has within himself or herself vast resources for self-understanding, for altering his or her self-concept, attitudes and self-directed behavior - and that these resources can be tapped if only a definable climate of facilitative psychological attitudes can be provided.

 

The Counseling process as seen from the PCA viewpoint

As the name implies, the Person Centered Approach emphasizes the person as a subject, rather than an object. The Client-Counselor relationship is not one where the Counselor's role is to cure or change the person. Rather, the Counselor's role is to create a positive relationship that the client may use as a means for personal growth.

• Actualizations

In an article published in their book The Therapeutic Relationship, Bozarth and Motomasa (2008) highlight two major ways of looking at the nature of the therapeutic process as follows:

The Actualizing Paradigm

This therapeutic paradigm presumes that the individual is inhabited by an innate constructive tendency to bring about psychological healing (Rogers, 1959). Rogers (1957) postulated that through the implementation of a (therapeutic) relationship characterized by a number of necessary and sufficient conditions (regardless of the therapeutic approach used) this healing process could be facilitated. In this context, the Counselor strives to adopt attitudes and behaviors that enable clients to perceive their relationship with their therapist as having the said necessary and sufficient (facilitating) conditions .

The Reactive Paradigm

This therapeutic paradigm considers that human beings are reactive either to external stimuli that condition behavior or to internal stimuli that condition psychic motivations (as is conceived in psychoanalysis, for example). Cognitive-Behavioral theories, among others, refer to both external and internal stimuli. In this context, the practitioner strives to guide his client towards (more appropriate) means to deal with these "stimuli".

That which PCA facilitation strives to provide

Among the Counseling models that base themselves upon the actualizing paradigm, PCA Counseling (at least in its "orthodox" version) distinguishes itself from other Counseling models by advocating a rather radical relational posture. According to this orthodox view, the Counselor should never claim any expertise whatsoever, except for possibly a minimal amount of expertise in establishing the climate of trust necessary and sufficient for a therapeutic movement to occur, in other words, the skill of knowing how to manifest the so called "facilitating” conditions “often enough”. It should be emphasized here that the PCA Counselor insists that it behooves him to remain humble on this front, acknowledging the fact that even that particular skill is never definitely acquired once and for all – such a skill is totally dependent upon the degree of “person-centeredness” the Counselor can inhabit and tender to his client at given moment in time.

The PCA Counselor’s thus advocates that he is firstly and foremostly a person and that it is by succeeding in positioning himself as such with respect to his client, steeped in facilitating attitudes, that he stands to be able to contribute something that is likely to prove useful (i.e. conducive of a therapeutic movement) to his client.

That which Collaborative facilitation strives to provide

Among the Counseling models based on the actualizing paradigm in a way not quite so radical as the "orthodox" PCA one is the model advocated by Harlène Anderson, one she names "Collaborative Therapy". This model primarily revolves around a way of being in relation with the other through dialogue.

In the ancient Greek civilization, the word dialogue related to dia ("through") and logos ("word"). This notion entailed social exchange and the generation of meaning. Harlène Anderson uses the word "dialogue" in a similar sense when referring to a type of conversation: talking to or conversing with someone (or yourself) while seeking meaning or understanding. She insists that it implies an action that is done with participants around a dialogue that engage itself in a process of mutual and shared research: the participants think together, observe together, question together and reflect together ... Through this dialogic approach, meanings and understandings are constantly being reinterpreted and clarified, revisited and recreated. The result is a new construction: a new meaning, a new understanding. More importantly, there are new possibilities for thought, feelings, emotions, expression and action.

Dialogic conversation is a two-way conversation. It is a back and forth, give and take, "we-are-together" process. The Collaborative Counselor has no intention other than to promote dialogue. The Counselor's primary intention is simply to invite, facilitate and maintain dialogue. This intention is based on the notion that, in order to better cope with the difficulties that are his, the client needs to learn something. What the client really needs to learn, the Counselor does not know and is not overly concerned about. The Counselor's task is simply to engage his patient so that he can put himself in a position of co-learning - through mutual research and dialogue.

A conversational partnership requires the Counselor to open up and honor multiple voices. It is important that the Counselor appreciate the richness of the different possibilities that are expressed through these voices. It is by successfully accommodating these multiple voices that the Counselor can invite the other to become a full partner within a collaborative conversation. As this other begins to feel really involved in a true partnership his momentum for participation and shared responsibility increases exponentially. This momentum for participation and shared responsibility is the key therapeutic factor that the collaborative dialogue process aims to nurture.

The Collaborative Counselor’s aim is thus to strive to achieve something in some sense is quite similar to what the PCA Counselor strives to achieve. On the other hand, it is nevertheless something quite different, namely in respect to the fact that the Collaborative Counselor seeks to position himself primarily as a facilitator, as much as possible bent on opening himself up to multiple voices; this is the means through which he endeavors to contribute to his client becoming more able to attain an enhanced momentum of participation and shared responsibility.

• Expertise

Although the PCA and the Collaborative approaches quite clearly both position themselves within the above referenced Actualizing Paradigm, one may wonder whether or not they are in fact on the exact same wavelength. Do they really seek to promote something similar?

This is indeed an interesting question, one to which a definite answer may be quite difficult to provide. Whatever the case may be, all I can say at this point is that in as much my aim as a Counselor is to promote “self actualization” I do not see why I should not draw on both models, particularly in view of the fact that they appear to be extremely complementary. On this basis I would say that I would to start with strive to provide PCA facilitation, and, as time went by and if so warranted, move on to strive to accessorily provide Collaborative type facilitation.

There is in my opinion nothing quite so powerful for a client than the fact of feeling himself being accompanied by someone providing PCA facilitating attitudes. It is therefore always towards the enactment of PCA facilitation that I will first proceed. This being so, one may wonder what could possible be the factors move me to additionally wish to include a "Collaborative" type of facilitation?

I believe that the factors at work derive from a deeply rooted conviction, one which moves me to proceed on the understanding that in order for me to be the fully actualized Counselor that I am capable of being two skills are of paramount importance, i.e. the skill in enacting PCA attitudes on one hand, and the skill in hearing and passing on "multiple voices" via a dialogical process.

As far as PCA facilitation is concerned, it is under the heading "Listening Nuances" under the sub-section entitled "PCA Fundamentals" that I will take the time to further clarify that which this 1^st type of facilitation strives to provide. And as far as "Collaborative" facilitation is concerned, it is in under the caption "Multiple Voices" in a few paragraphs immediately below that I will take the time to further clarify that which this 2^nd type of facilitation strives to provide.

• Multiple Voices

When Anderson states that if a Counselor truly wishes to promote a conversational partnership between his client and himself, it bohooves him to open himself up to and honor multiple voices, what is it that she is referring to exactly?

At the most fundamental level, she is referring to the key concerns that most commonly her clients find themselves confronted with, namely, his level of personal well-being and / or his level of self-confidence, the quality of his interpersonal relationships , the level of satisfaction he experiences in relation to his professional activities, etc. Each of these key concerns is reflected in the client's discourse and thus constitutes "a voice". And because the client is surrounded by a variety of key concerns, it follows that there are multiple voices for the Counselor to listen to and honor.

On the understanding that there is no reason one should not be able to practice a “multi-referential" type of Counseling, one capable of successfully articulating both PCA and Collaborative approaches, this is precisely what I intend to do. This being said, I remain well aware of the necessity for me to careful take the following 2 considerations into account:

Consideration # 1: Amidst Counseling approaches, the PCA and the Collaborative Approaches both represent Counseling approaches that are particularly desirous of listening to and honoring multiple voices.

Consideration # 2: Among the many Counseling approaches that exist, one quite often encounters approaches that have become rather specific in what they aim to achieve, i.e. they seek to help their clients become increasingly more aware as to where they stand in respect to very specific issues. This reality has led to the emergence of ways of listening that differ from each other, prompting Counselors to progressively begin to favor clearly identifiable “Listening Nuances”. In saying this, I am simply saying that a given model possesses specificities that allow it to address certain issues with greater confidence and comfort than others.

There is one field of concern about which I wish to make myself absolutely clear: under no circumstances do I intend to slip into some form of syncretism. My foremost intention will be to unequivocally position myself as a "Person-Centered" Counselor committed to the best possible application of a PCA Methodology. However, if and / or when my client chooses to venture into certain specific areas of concern, I intend to additionally give myself the freedom to incorporate a few "other voices" into the process. In other words, when my client chooses to begin exploring fields upon which I feel that it would stand him well to there linger a while longer, at that moment, I can choose to adopt a more "collaborative" posture, somewhat more actively inviting my Client to pursue with me a thorough dialogue whose aim would be to pursue greater awareness within a stated field.

The fields I intend to touch upon in a more “Collaborative” way

Because these are discussed in greater detail in the 4 subsections of the "Listening Nuances" section, I will hereunder give just a very brief overview of the different nuances that I intend to bring to the Counseling process if and when my client broaches one or the other of 4 fundamental fields, namely:

1. The “Experiencing” field: we stand here on the ACP's field of predilection. This field covers all the feelings that a person may experience, the global experience that is his and the meanings he attributes to it. When this field is broached, clearly, the PCA Counseling process is self-sufficient: no other voices need to be summoned. This topic will be discussed in detail under the "PCA Foundations" sub-section.

 

2. The field of Existential Constraints and Potentialities: we stand here on the field of predilection of existential philosophers and sages of the Vedic tradition of Knowledge. When this field is broached, I believe that it is appropriate to summon the voices of these philosophers and sages, the idea being that bringing these voices into the Counseling process will necessarily contribute to such Counseling process becoming more dialogical. This topic will be discussed in detail under the "Existential Plinths" sub-section.

 

3. The field of Attempted Solutions that prove unsuccessful: we stand here on the field of predilection of systemic therapists, therapists who are more specifically interested in the perception-reaction aspects of the difficulties a person is encountering. When this field is broached, I believe that it is appropriate to summon the voices of these therapists and systems theory experts, the idea being that bringing these voices into the Counseling process will necessarily contribute to such Counseling process becoming more dialogical. This topic will be discussed in detail under the "Palo-Alto Lights" sub-section.

 

4. The field of the Innate Potentialities with which we are naturally endowed: we stand here on the field of predilection of Steven Rudolph, designer of the «Multiple Natures» tool. When this field is broached, I believe that it is appropriate to summon the voices of the Multiple Nature family, the idea being that bringing these voices into the Counseling process will necessarily contribute to such Counseling process becoming more dialogical. This topic will be discussed in detail under the "MN Contributions" sub-section.

 

• Ethical Commitments

The ethical framework for good Practice in Counseling not only serves to protect the Counselor and/or his client ; it also serves to enhance the interaction between the two. In particular, having an ethical framework of the kind I will describe hereafter creates a kind of transparency that is conducive to creating a sense of equality and reciprocity between the Counselor and his client. This is particularly important in respect to Person-Centered Counseling which endeavors to distinguish itself on this issue from the many other forms of Counseling that continue presuming that all or most of the expertise belongs to the Counselor, whilst concurrently placing the client in a position of being dependent upon the presumed expertise so attributed to the Counselor.

Given that it is upon the fundamental values which belong to Carl Rogers’ PCA that I articulate all the services I intend to make available, it follows that it is of the utmost importance that I clearly delineate as precisely as possible what those fundamental values in fact are. These have been particularly well summarized by the British Association for Counseling & Psychotherapy (BACP), summary that (with its permission) I am reproducing hereunder.

From a PCA standpoint, each client needs to be able to freely participate in the counseling process he engages with his Counselor in view of progressing towards his desired goal. This requires clients to be able to trust their practitioner with their wellbeing and sensitive personal information. I therefore take being trustworthy as a serious ethical commitment. In this sense I commit myself to:

• Put clients first by:

1. Making clients our primary concern while we are working with them

• Work to professional standards by:

1. Working within our competence
2. Keeping our skills and knowledge up to date
3. Collaborating with colleagues to improve the quality of what is being offered to clients
4. Ensuring that our wellbeing is sufficient to sustain the quality of the work
5. Keeping accurate and appropriate records

• Show respect by:

1. Valuing each client as a unique person
2. Protecting client confidentiality and privacy
3. Agreeing with clients on how we will work together
4. Working in partnership with clients

• Build an appropriate relationship with clients by:

1. Communicating clearly what clients have a right to expect from us
2. Communicating any benefits, costs and commitments that clients may reasonably expect
3. Respecting the boundaries between our work with clients and what lies outside that work
4. Not exploiting or abusing clients
5. Listening out for how clients experience our working together
    

• Maintain integrity by:

1. Being honest about the work
2. Communicating qualifications, experience and working methods accurately
3. Working ethically and with careful consideration of the law

• Demonstrate accountability and candor by:

1. Being willing to discuss with clients any known risks involved in the work and how best to work towards our client’s desired outcomes
2. Ensuring that clients are promptly informed about anything important that has gone wrong in our work together, whether or not clients are aware of it, and quickly taking action to limit or repair any harm as far as possible
3. Reviewing our work with clients in supervision
4. Monitoring how clients experience our work together and the effects of our work with them