Assess The Pros And Cons Of Person-Centred Therapy
2489 words
Evaluate the claim that Person-Centred Therapy offers the therapist all that he/she will need to treat clients.
‘Person-centred therapy’ is a description given to the humanistic approach to counselling originally developed by Carl Rogers in the mid-twentieth century. In order to evaluate the claim that this approach offers everything a therapist needs to treat any client, it is necessary to understand both the content of Rogers’ ideas and also their context: where they came from, how they are used and what alternative approaches exist. I will assess the pros and cons of person-centred therapy and to what extent it might be successful in treating a range of psychological disorders.
Carl Rogers was an American psychologist who …show more content…
The carrot works but the stick does not.’ Sanders, 2011, p.42
Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy or CBT (or, in its early incarnation, Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy, or REBT) sought to take some of the behaviourists’ findings but re-introduce human thoughts and feelings into the mix. The proponents of CBT believed that most behaviour is actually driven by core beliefs and that with therapy, the more self-limiting of these beliefs can be ‘re-set’. CBT is far more action-oriented that the pure person-centred approach, focusing on the setting of goals, completion of ‘homework’ by the client, and so on. It is widely used today in mental health settings.
Key criticisms of the Rogerian approach have included that it is not scientific enough, that it is some way naïve / idealistic (are people really intrinsically ‘good’? Is providing the right conditions and actively listening sufficient to help with the more severe psychological disorders?) and that the therapist’s role is essentially passive. Rogers responds to this in Client-Centred Therapy, noting …show more content…
Rogers himself gives a hypothetical example in Client-Centered Therapy, of a client who has talked of suicide and suggests that it might be ‘pointless’ coming to therapy any more (pp 46-48). The therapist responds in an extremely non-directive way, indicating that he would be happy to see her again, and that it is belief that she has the ability within herself to decide on the best course of action. This is an extreme example but one that raises many questions. The response would depend on the individual therapist but many people would feel uncomfortable taking a position of complete non-interference in this
Evaluate the claim that Person-Centred Therapy offers the therapist all that he/she will need to treat clients.
‘Person-centred therapy’ is a description given to the humanistic approach to counselling originally developed by Carl Rogers in the mid-twentieth century. In order to evaluate the claim that this approach offers everything a therapist needs to treat any client, it is necessary to understand both the content of Rogers’ ideas and also their context: where they came from, how they are used and what alternative approaches exist. I will assess the pros and cons of person-centred therapy and to what extent it might be successful in treating a range of psychological disorders.
Carl Rogers was an American psychologist who …show more content…
The carrot works but the stick does not.’ Sanders, 2011, p.42
Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy or CBT (or, in its early incarnation, Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy, or REBT) sought to take some of the behaviourists’ findings but re-introduce human thoughts and feelings into the mix. The proponents of CBT believed that most behaviour is actually driven by core beliefs and that with therapy, the more self-limiting of these beliefs can be ‘re-set’. CBT is far more action-oriented that the pure person-centred approach, focusing on the setting of goals, completion of ‘homework’ by the client, and so on. It is widely used today in mental health settings.
Key criticisms of the Rogerian approach have included that it is not scientific enough, that it is some way naïve / idealistic (are people really intrinsically ‘good’? Is providing the right conditions and actively listening sufficient to help with the more severe psychological disorders?) and that the therapist’s role is essentially passive. Rogers responds to this in Client-Centred Therapy, noting …show more content…
Rogers himself gives a hypothetical example in Client-Centered Therapy, of a client who has talked of suicide and suggests that it might be ‘pointless’ coming to therapy any more (pp 46-48). The therapist responds in an extremely non-directive way, indicating that he would be happy to see her again, and that it is belief that she has the ability within herself to decide on the best course of action. This is an extreme example but one that raises many questions. The response would depend on the individual therapist but many people would feel uncomfortable taking a position of complete non-interference in this