Comparative Models of Counselling

A treat that reflects on Person Centred Therapy and considers how this perplex could be incorporated onside the inwardness model of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy in my period Counselling Practice. I reflected on Person-centred Therapy ( part) as the comparative model because of the conflict that exists amongst this and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). The conflict is historical, governmental and from soulfulnessal incur. In therapy twenty age ago I became frustrated with my p touchers soul-centred approach. I challenged my advocate to picture me with more support and help.I in that locationfore had gestate ideas of sh ar which whitethorn be similar to stereotypical thinking of these models. It was excessively warm, whole non-directive and only reflected back to the lymph node, which I make frustrating. I understand now it was because my contend style was immaterialised and I had no obligate over external so farts, which suited a more direct counselor app roach. So, how would this bewitch my execute as a counselling? In theoretical equipment casualty and in observed formula I comprehended the benefits of shargon for its empathetic understanding and for lymph glands who strike a non-directive approach to gain wound up aw beness.Presenting homecomings that posterior be helped by PTS argon ill luck, drug and alcohol issues, depression, panic and anxiety, eating difficulties, self-harm, childhood sexual abuse (Tolan and Wilkins, 2012). I lay d admit utilize the model affectively for bereavement and sexual abuse as an poke out of a direction would study been wrong and incongruent at the time. My preconceptions of CBT were solution concentered, dispute and that offset intensity based interventions abridge the lymph nodes past. I olfactory modality competent in using accredited behavioural intervention in my practice and challenge maladaptive thinking patterns in sittings.CBT is a medical model and although we render been taught the disadvantages to diagnoses, CBT is rendern as the treatment of choice for numerous presenting problems due to the amount of empirical take the stand available. These be anxiety disorders, panic, phobias, obsessive-compulsive disorder, PTSD, binge-eating syndrome and depression as identified by NICE (NICE, 2008, Accessed online 27/06/201). This root reflects on the appropriate use of the models. Stereotypes have near element of truth, but at the homogeneous time, argon non the truths. I precious to understand the similarities and parallels while respecting the fact that, in answer, I use both models.I didnt want to do a modus operandi of each badly, but use a model in full at the appropriate time and understand my understanding for doing so (Casemore, and Tud instruction, 2012). Both part and CBT are deeply rooted in the selfsame(prenominal) philosophical underpinning of humanism, existentialism, and both are phenomenology specially to the soul ality of suffering. However, there are struggles in the understanding and interpretation of the philosophy. Both approaches raft a person as continually seeking harvest-festival and self-actualisation. There are incompatible mental pictures between the models. (Casemore, and Tudway, 2012).PCT observes that seeking growth and self-actualisation is a way of beingness and in itself healing(predicate). Rogers professed that there were six necessary givens for healing(predicate) growth that alone were sufficient to run for to a fully defecate person. The single is the own expert who earth-closet define their own journey of their existentity and corporation heal themselves with the core, being the family itself. The body anatomical structure of the self includes self-concept and introjected beliefs. PCT communicates bridal of the clients own experience and encourages then to identify alternate choices.It is a continual journey of self- awareness and knowledge, with the drive eternally towards growth (Mearns & Thorne, 2012). CBT views growth and self-actualisation as a shared goal of therapy to be reached with a set of overlyls, to be implemented in therapy. CBTs view comes from Ellis who defines a person as erroneous and demythologized. In CBT terms dysfunctional beliefs are similar to introjected beliefs and led to distortion in the self-concept. The erroneous causes distress and keen-sighted directs the someone to fully functioning. CBT primary belief is self distortion and the abut of cognitive dissonance.Interventions such(prenominal) as the ABCDE framework are used to challenge and dispute irrational thinking and are aimed at increase clients self-awareness and self-understanding. CBT sees the relationship as more collaborative and facilitates impudent encyclopaedism. An individuals construct of reality is dimensional and irrationality stops the client from changing. Therefore, a persons drive is not al shipway towards growth (Cas emore, and Tudway, 2012). A resemblance of both approaches is the understanding of self-worth and unconditional self-acceptance. The nature of suffering is seen the same. Humans are flawed, feeble and we cause our own disturbance.Both see the client as the expert in the relationship. legitimacy is of great importance to both PCT and CBT as is the healing(predicate) relationship. It is the emphasis on the process of revision, to become oneself, where the differences in devil models lie (Castonguay, & Hill, 2012). From a PCT scene a client discovers some orphic aspect of them self that they werent aware of previously and moves towards a greater stagecoach of acceptance of self by being prized by the healer (unconditional overbearing gaze), have a sense of realness (genuineness) and comprehend to them self (empathy).A client moves towards seeing rising meaning. These ex switchs are characteristic of alterative movement. The client moves along a continuum from rigid stru cture to flow which potty be seen in the seven stages of therapeutical diversity. Rogers term was organismal experiencing which was inter face-to-face in the therapeutic relationship through unconditional positive regard and intrapersonal within the client accepting a wise experience into their awareness (Castonguay, & Hill, 2012). In PCT, the process of change there are incompatible corrective experiences for a client.For me practising with a client group from a womens refuge I use PCT and Rogers condition-of-worth. The incongruence between the self-concept and authentic self is bare due to the abuse. This creation of a trumped-up(prenominal) self is corrected with unconditional positive regard, empathy and genuineness. Process Theory is where, change in the experience of feelings and the recognition that the client is the origin of their own construct occurs. The therapeutic change has a developmental sequence.There is a change in the clients musical mode of experiencing feelings and recognition of being the creator of their own constructs, accepting responsibility and in relating to others openly and freely. This is compatible with the condition of worth. A person moves with acceptance to a fully functioning person. The persons overall way of being is changed. Relating to a congruent healer, the client learns to be open and congruent themselves (Castonguay, & Hill, 2012). Unblocking or Focusing is where the self-correcting, self-healing process of the organism is blocked.The person tooshiet refer inwardly, focus on feelings or articulate meaning. They have a rigid self-concept. Empathic earshot within the therapeutic relationship opens the issue to re-examination and unblocks the person self-healing process. There is an interaction between the feeling and the attention the client brings to pee-pee a new meaning. This is Gendlins snarl sense, an unexpected feeling of flow. The client becomes an mobile self-healer who has been felt heard and und erstood (Castonguay, & Hill, 2012).In practice building Meaning Bridges new understanding which identifying introjects enforce by others who oblige external systems of value has been paramount because of the external pressure that have be imposed through a close relationship. innate opposing voices tidy sum be accepted, examined and decided through compromise and collaborative solution. Until now, I saw this as CBT but can now see this as PCT with Rogerss necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic change all that is needed for the process of change and this change occurs without engaging in cognitive process, but in the split second (Castonguay, & Hill, 2012).I am able to draw personal parallels from watching Rogers session with Gloria. Gloria wanted an solvent from Rogers. In the session she found it for herself, even though she actively interpreted that he had helped her to the decision even though he hadnt. She makes the decision of honesty for herself. Although non -directive, Rogerss session had a centre, this was of self-healing and self-direction. Refuting the belief that the person-centred way is only to reflect back to the client. The warmth from the counsellor is also part of the process of condition of worth.This helps me challenge my preconceived ideas and understand what is misfortune in practice. In practise, I am aware from a CBT perspective the therapeutic approach can teach clients new skills. The therapist is regarded as more of a coach. The client benefits from new skills and perspectives which facilitate the learning and have a sense of efficacy. I have used CBT to look at specific problem behaviours and conceptualise them as having cognitive, affective, behavioural and physiological elements each of which can have a legitimate hind end for intervention and can be bind for validity (Castonguay, & Hill, 2012).The process of change occurs in practice as old ways are challenged through exposure exercise, behavioural experiment s and cognitive restructuring techniques. Change occurs in the therapeutic setting or outside in a person everyday life. It may require repetition to produce a lasting effect and reduce maladapted patterns. This is where CBT and PCT are similar as this requires a strong therapeutic alliance, but CBT writings takes this as a given and may be a reason it is criticised. Clients are taught emotional regulation and basic functioning skills, such as problem-solving skills, breathing residual and active coping.Specific interventions are then used to motivate and foster the therapeutic relationship, such as cost benefit analysis, routine thought records, and in vivo exposure. Aligning clients goals with interventions in a preparation develops the therapeutic alliance and collaborates with the client, with hypothesis-testing strategies used to sustain the process of change Casemore, and Tudway, 2012). CBT is focused on corrective experiences and facilitates through interventions rather than challenging a client.It respects the importance of the therapeutic relationship and uses Rogers core conditions but does not see the conditions as sufficient. In-depth schema focused CBT takes the therapy to a deeper level and deals with past issues, than the low intensity offered by the NHS. Again my preconceptions are challenged for the benefit of my practice. I can see how the two models are not rivals, as Roger Casemore and Jeremy Tudway suggest in their book Person-centred Therapy and CBT, and that sibling as a metaphor plant well (Casemore, and Tudway, 2012).For me, the therapeutic relationship and the advanced empathy required in PCT are important in my practise along with the core conditions in order to induce change. Rogers believes interventions as wrong, from a philosophical guide of view, as the client always having to lead the therapy. This is because Rogers sees a person as having unfathomable potential. For me, CBT in offering intervention and pleasant co aching helps a client on their journey to self-healing and a seed can be planted and therapeutic change can happen outside the counselling session.I support the views not all public have the same drive and there is an unconscious element to being rational or irrational. It is a more real idea and not as rosy as Rogers. It is observation of this therapeutic change and this idea that supports the use of CBT in my practise (Casemore, and Tudway, 2012). The BACP ethical framework has been written with Rogers core conditions in oral sex. Therefore, PCT offers the client and the therapist the need to fulfil the principles of self-care, of being honest and providing autonomy.As to the personal moral qualities the PCT requires the therapist to have advanced empathy. CBT has been criticised for focusing too much on the intervention and not being of beneficence. In CBT extra competency in the implementation of the intervention is required, so the criticism of the technique becoming the th erapy cannot be applied . In writing this report and in my practise, I feel the difference are enough not to comply the models, but that each model can go into the same toolkit and used apiece in the same session with a client.With the collaborative element in mind and further reading I am interested in the approach by Mick Cooper and John McLeod. The pluralistic perspective which believes individual clients would benefit from assorted therapeutic methods used at different points in time. Therapist would work collaboratively with clients. Help them identify what they want from therapy and how this can be achieved. It leaves the question of the process of therapy integrating in practice open for debate. (Cooper, and McLeod, 2010, Assessed Online26/06/13).