Therapeutic Approach For REBT

Consequences are often the driving force for many individuals, to seek some sort of help or comfort in times of trouble. These consequences are expressed by emotional responses and when they are traced to a source, it is often associated to an event in life. This humanistic approach to problem solving can seem logical but also provides an avenue to repeated emotional responses based on triggered events. Within this equation there is a fundamental product that multiplies problems, yet is illogically avoided, and this is how an individual perceives an event or a basic belief system. A person’s belief about an event leads to emotional and behavioral reactivity and is a common cognitive-behavioral philosophy shared across various approaches (Turner,
The A-B-C model of personality postulates that individuals have goals that are either supported or opposed by activating events (A) that react consciously or unconsciously with a belief system (B) in which responds to the activating event and produces an emotional or behavioral consequence (C) of the activating event (Sharf, 2012). Any of these three points can adversely affect the others, but often it is the existence of an irrational belief that is the key to producing disturbances. An unrealistic expectation concerning an activating event will produce a dysfunctional consequence. This A-B-C model that produces human disturbances is followed, in REBT, with disputing (D) of irrational beliefs as an individual feel and acts in a self-defeating manner until they arrive at a new effect (E), a set of more rational beliefs (Ellis, n.d.). As the client may hold tightly to a belief system, the emotional response to an event is often justified and sometimes further exasperates the event, creating a cyclonic effect of similar disturbances. Challenging the client’s belief system works in the same manner as it changes the consequences and ultimately can affect the activating event or at least in the essence of perception toward the
In this case study, Sharf (2012) exemplifies riding a train as the activating event (A) where Ted’s perfectionism to overcome fear or accept anxiety is irrationally processed (B) and this causes increased anxiety with physical impairment as a consequence (C). As Ellis continues to work with Ted in this session, it becomes clear that the anxiety exponentially adds to the event in a manner that the client becomes anxious about his own anxiety. According to David (2014) current REBT theory shows that the impact of an activating life event (A) on various psychological consequences (C) is mediated by information processing (B) and once generated a “C” can become a new “A” creating a secondary consequence. Though Ellis challenged Ted to change thoughts from “must” statement to “I’d like to”, the disputing of irrational beliefs continued on to challenge the belief that panic attack would not harm him and therefore was nothing to become increasingly anxious about. Through this process, Ellis was able to guide Ted to an acceptance that feeling anxious, though inconvenient, would not harm him and that by moving away from the fear of anxiety or control over it decreased the over-all