Monthly Archives: May 2019

Respecting the faith of clients and counselors

By Laurel Shaler May 20, 2019

The Association for Spiritual, Ethical and Religious Values in Counseling (ASERVIC) describes itself as “an organization of counselors and human development professionals who believe spiritual, ethical, and religious values are essential to the overall development of the person and are committed to integrating these values into the counseling process.” Although ASERVIC is a division of the American Counseling Association, and all counselors likely would agree to the importance of ethics, not all counselors share the mission of ASERVIC in its entirety.

With some counselors and counselor educators, this is related to a lack of knowledge, in particular because few counseling programs — other than those whose own missions include the integration of faith — address spirituality and religion thoroughly. Still other counselors and counselor educators perceive a value conflict between counseling and religion or spirituality. Although other spiritual, ethical and religious values should be explored, this article pertains specifically to the Christian faith because I believe this is something that is often misunderstood and overlooked by many counselors and counselor educators.

Unfortunately, many individuals in the counseling field are not comfortable addressing issues of faith. Although the majority of Americans highly value faith, the same cannot be said of mental health professionals, according to researcher Pamela Paul. If counseling students are not being trained to assess and treat from a faith-based perspective, how can they best meet the needs of clients who are seeking this?

The lack of comfort and competency in this area is reflected across presentations, publications and even Listservs such as CESNET (the Counselor Education and Supervision Network). At best, this is because of a lack of knowledge, training or understanding. At worst, it is a brushoff of the Christian faith of clients — in particular, if those clients are conservative or evangelical. Sadly, it is not just clients’ faith that is sometimes disrespected. Often, the Christian faith of the counselor is not respected by fellow counselors either.

From a personal perspective, I have seen many professional counselors put in writing disparaging remarks about conservative and evangelical Christians — including their own clients. If these counselors are making those comments publicly, how can we ensure that they are treating their clients who hold these views with authenticity and respect? I have even read where counselors attempt to persuade clients to “explore” their biblical worldviews — with a clear agenda of trying to encourage clients to change their deeply held beliefs. Much like the serpent in the Garden of Eden asks Eve in Genesis 3:1, “Did God really say you must not eat from any tree in the garden?” there are counselors who ask their clients, “Does the Bible really say … <fill in the blank>?”

There may be a place for this — such as when a Christian counselor and a Christian client are working together, based on a common belief system, to explore the truth of God’s Word about who the client is at his or her core, for example — but there is no place to try and convince clients that they are wrong about their biblical convictions.

Simply put, the faith of the client and the faith of the counselor must be respected. It is entirely possible for clients and counselors who do not share a similar faith to work together effectively. The ACA Code of Ethics applies equally to the evangelical Christian who should not force his or her beliefs on to a client as it does to the nonevangelical (Christian or otherwise) who should not attempt to force his or her beliefs on to a client.

Instead of just lamenting over the way that this population of clients and counselors is often discounted, I would like to offer three practical tips for integrating and respecting faith. Truly, this is what is expected of all counselors as they work with clients and interact with colleagues.

1) Listen: As the saying goes, listen to hear rather than to respond. If your first instinct is to prepare a rebuttal, that is a clear indication that you need to take a step back. Understand first, respond second. This is true not only in the counseling room with our clients, but also in communication with our fellow counselors. We should be willing to hear from those who are not like us without making assumptions or jumping to conclusions.

It is not our job to change anyone else’s belief system or way of thinking. While we absolutely should ensure that students and fellow counselors are upholding ethical standards, we should also recognize that we are all different; that is not only “OK,” it is good. For example, on more than one occasion I have worked in non-faith-based settings. When a potential client would come in requesting to see a counselor who was Christian, the client was often referred to me. It wasn’t that the other counselors could not work with the client effectively. Rather, we were trying to listen to the client and meet his or her needs. Instead of going to a place of defensiveness, our team was able to see the benefit of placing clients with counselors who shared similar values with them when possible.

2) Think: Put yourself in the other person’s shoes. We often call this empathy. Ask yourself how you might feel if your deeply held beliefs were brushed off or challenged in a demeaning or disrespectful way. Think through how you would want to be treated, and then treat the other person that same way. Take some time to reflect on what you are hearing before you immediately respond.

Interact critically with what you are hearing. It is unlikely that someone will change their mind because someone has belittled or criticized them, but they may be willing to flex a bit in their thinking if given some time to process. For example, CESNET often becomes abuzz with emails flying back and forth rapidly. What if we took some more time (as some do) to really think through what is being stated before we respond? We talk about the value of silence in counseling. Perhaps it would be helpful if we put that into practice and spent more time thinking and less time speaking.

3) Ask: After taking the time to listen and to think, there is also a time and a place to ask questions. As every counselor learns in a basic counseling skills course, this can be done in a respectful manner. As we all know, open-ended questions typically produce richer responses that contain more depth and meaning. We should make sure that we are not attempting to lead the other person to what we perceive to be the “correct” answer.

Ask to learn rather than to teach. What do you want to know about the faith of the client? Don’t be afraid to ask about the client’s belief system, how they came to that belief system, how they are living out their belief system, and how they want to (or do not want to) integrate their belief system into their counseling sessions.

This does not mean that the counselor has to share the client’s belief system (although they very well may, and there is strength in that too). It does mean that as counselors, we should be able to respect our clients and meet their needs to the best of our abilities.

Evangelical Christian clients — as well as those who simply identify as traditional or conservative — deserve to be heard and treated with dignity and respect, even when the counselor does not agree with their points of views. I also identify as a Christian who is evangelical and conservative, but there are certainly times when I do not agree with all of these clients.

Years ago, I was working with an individual whose relative was dating someone of a different race. Because of my client’s deeply held beliefs, the client became distressed about this. When seeing the young couple together, my client became distraught, went home and attempted suicide.

Was there more going on with this client? Yes. Yet the reality was that this was the straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back. I consulted with a colleague about this case. In the process, I expressed my shock and disdain over someone reacting this way to a relative dating someone of a different race. I did not understand the client’s gross overreaction.

My fellow counselor reminded me of what I have shared in this article — that although I may not always understand my clients’ views, I should strive to empathize with them and that this situation had meaning for my client beyond what I could comprehend. My colleague was neither conservative nor Christian, but she was respectful of all clients — and of me.

Although I viewed my client’s beliefs as a distortion of the Bible, the client and I both identified as conservative evangelical Christians. Yet we have to be able to accept our clients where they are and take them where they desire to go — not based on our own agendas but on theirs. (There are limitations to this, of course, such as in the case of suicidal ideations.) I had to work hard to empathize with my client’s pain while also helping him work on his desired outcome of changing his thoughts and feelings about the situation as he grappled and struggled to accept what he could not change. With proper supervision, I was able to do this and supported this client during his time in counseling.

Likewise, we should be respectful of our fellow counselors. When we make disparaging remarks about people who are not like us — when I make disparaging remarks about people who are not like me — we are inevitably disparaging some of our colleagues. It is one thing for us to challenge one another, hold each other accountable, and even heartily debate. It is another thing entirely to expect that any group of people should change their entire belief system or else not be included in the field.

Conservative or evangelical Christians are not a rogue group or a small group. We constitute a substantial number in the field who share varying views and beliefs. We cannot all be lumped together. Neither can our clients. With so many clients seeking Christian counseling, perhaps the field should recognize the value of having counselor education programs that teach the ethical integration of Christian faith into counseling (while also recognizing that not all graduates from these programs will hang their shingles as Christian counselors). In fact, it may be time for more training programs to address spiritual assessments, religiously accommodated psychotherapy, and the impact of spirituality and religion on both the client and the counselor.

If you do not understand this perspective, I encourage you to get to know us for yourself. Listen. Think. Ask. Most importantly, get to know your clients. And respect them — and us — for who we are rather than for who you want us to be.

*****

There are many excellent resources for the integration of the Christian faith into counseling settings. These books, journal articles and videos provide the research behind and the details about the practice of being an ethical and effective Christian counselor. They make it clear that this type of treatment is not one-size-fits-all, and it can (and should) be provided at the highest competency level. If one wishes to be a Christian counselor, or if one desires to further understand the Christian faith of a client, the education is available and accessible through the works of individuals such as Tim Clinton, David Entwistle, Fernando Garzon, Ron Hawkins, Harold Koenig, Anita Knight Kuhnley, Mark McMinn, Jim Sells, Lisa Sosin, Siang-Yan Tan, John Thomas and many others.

***

Laurel Shaler is a national certified counselor and licensed social worker. She is an associate professor and the director of the Master of Arts in professional counseling program at Liberty University. Contact her at doctorlaurelshaler@gmail.com.

****

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.

A script for socialization to the cognitive model

By Brandon S. Ballantyne May 14, 2019

Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) is an evidence-based treatment approach that has statistically been shown to be effective in addressing a variety of mood disorders and psychological problems. It is my belief that a key component to successful cognitive behavioral treatment is counselor-to-client socialization of theory and concept.

It is essential that clients become socialized to the cognitive model — understanding the rationale behind CBT’s effectiveness — to gain maximum benefit. For that reason, I have developed a script that counselors can use with the clients they serve. This script aims to provide a blueprint for live, in-session socialization to the cognitive model and provides a platform to transition into routine practice of cognitive behavioral technique in future sessions.

Script introduction

If I were to ask you to think of a palm tree, what do you think of? You probably just imagined a palm tree. If I were to ask you to think of your very first car, what do you think of? You probably just imagined yourself either in or next to that memorable first automobile. If I were to ask you to think of your favorite food, what do you think of? You probably just imagined your meal of choice.

Now, if I were to ask you to feel anxious, what do you have to do? Most people say they need to imagine a stressful scenario to feel the emotion of anxiety. The point is that we can instantaneously produce any thought. However, when it comes to producing an emotional state, we first need to think of something in order to feel something.

The formation of emotions is a biological process, meaning that it is impossible to shut off or terminate from human experience unless we suffer serious medical injury that leads to such complications. With that being said, there is a specific sequence of internal and external events that not only create, but contribute to, the emotional experiences of you, me and everyone else with whom we share this wonderful planet.

Situation

For an emotion to be formed, one must first encounter a situation. A situation is anything that an individual becomes aware of. It can be an external event such as a person, place, thing or activity. It can also be an internal event such as a particular thought or emotion.

Let’s say that tomorrow, I wake up, get in my car and start my drive into work. I encounter a traffic jam, which I anticipate might make me late to my destination. As I approach, I become aware of the traffic jam itself. Both the awareness of the traffic jam and the traffic jam itself become the situation at hand.

Thought

Our brain is like a thought warehouse. It has a job of producing thoughts throughout the day — every second, every minute, every hour.

What is a thought? A thought is a sentence that our brain produces about the situation at hand. Thoughts have sentence structure. Each thought has punctuation. It can also take the form of an image or movie that we experience in our mind.

On some occasions, we verbalize our thoughts out loud. Sometimes they stay silent. Regardless, they affect how we feel. If I am driving to work and become aware of the traffic jam, my brain might produce the thought of, “Oh no! I am going to be late. I am going to be behind all day, and I will get reprimanded by my boss. This happens all of the time!”

The first thoughts that our brain produces about a situation at hand are automatic. We don’t really have control over them. But as I mentioned earlier, these thoughts affect how we feel, so they are important to accept and to understand.

Emotion

Once our brain produces a thought about a situation at hand, there is the onset of some kind of emotional experience. How is an emotion different from a thought? Emotions can be categorized into mad, sad, glad and fearful. Any emotion that we have at any given time will likely fit into one of these categories of primary emotions.

There is also a subtle category that some identify as “neutral emotions.” However, we are rarely taught about what neutral emotions are. Throughout our life experiences, we are given the message that there must be a way to feel and that emotions need to be either pleasant or unpleasant. Therefore, if we aren’t particularly happy, sad, fearful or mad, we tend to say that we are feeling “nothing.”

Emotions are a biological process. And because our thoughts are automatic, we never really have an absence of emotions. So, when we are feeling “nothing,” we are actually feeling “neutral.” Descriptors such as “content” and “OK” best describe a neutral emotional state.

Now, let’s refer back to the traffic jam scenario. While sitting in the traffic jam, I am having the thought, “Oh no! I am going to be late. I am going to be behind all day, and I will get reprimanded by my boss. This happens all of the time!”

Because of this thought, I am most likely to be feeling anxious. Anxiety is most closely related to the primary emotion of fear. Some emotions occur parallel to physical symptoms as well. For example, if I am sitting in my car feeling anxious from the thought about being late to work, I may also notice that my hands have started to sweat. Physical symptoms help us to identify and label emotions.

So, it is important to pay attention to your patterns in your physical symptoms as you experience emotional states. In general, emotions give us information about the situation at hand. However, it is then our job to examine that information accordingly.

Behavior

Our behaviors are influenced by the emotions we experience. Behaviors can usually be observed by others. Based on the specific characteristics of the behaviors — and the specific characteristics of the reactions that the behaviors provoke in others — these behaviors can help us to get closer to our goals, push us further from our goals, or neutralize the pursuit of our goals.

What does it mean to neutralize the pursuit of our goals? Well, some behaviors neither get us closer to nor push us further from our goals. These behaviors can be referred to as “neutralizing behaviors.”

In the example of sitting in the traffic jam and feeling anxious, I may react to the intense anxiety by engaging in behaviors such as beeping my horn and yelling at other drivers.

Result

Results can be defined as a set of benefits or consequences that are produced by one particular behavior or set of behaviors. Results can be desirable, undesirable or neutral.

Desirable results are outcomes that take us closer to our goals. Undesirable results are outcomes that push us further from our goals. Neutral results neither take us closer to our goals nor push us further away.

In the traffic jam example, the behavior indicated was beeping the horn and yelling at other drivers. We can anticipate potential results that those behaviors may produce. As a reminder, the goal in that scenario is to get to work on time, or at least not too late, and safely.

One possible result of beeping my horn and yelling at other drivers is that other drivers may begin beeping their horns and yelling at me. This additional conflict may cause my anxiety to intensify further. At the same time, everyone beeping their horns and yelling at each other will not change the fact that I am sitting in the traffic jam itself. Therefore, this outcome can be categorized as an undesirable result.

Wrapping it up

The goal of this type of cognitive behavioral style work is to identify where in the process above an individual may have personal control or personal choice of changing the problematic patterns or tendencies. By examining the above scenario in that way, individuals will be able to conceptualize aspects of personal choice and change that can help them reduce intense emotional distress, engage in healthier behaviors, and achieve more desirable results — first in the above scenario and then with the real-life stressors that have brought them into treatment.

Use the following reflection questions to get started with application of this skill:

1) If you were stuck in a traffic jam similar to the one described above, what would be going through your mind? What are some of the automatic thoughts you would be having?

2) What kinds of emotions would your automatic thoughts produce? Would you be noticing any symptoms of those emotions in your body?

3) What type of automatic behaviors might you engage in based on the influence of those emotions or physical symptoms?

4) What type of outcomes or results would those behaviors likely produce? Would those results be desirable, undesirable or neutral based on your goal of getting to work on time, or not too late, and safely?

5) Is there anything else you might be able to say to yourself in the scenario about the traffic jam that would produce less intense distress? If so, what are those thoughts? Remember, thoughts come in the form of sentences or images.

6) If you were able to insert those new thoughts the next time you experience a traffic jam, what types of emotions would those thoughts likely produce? If they do not produce less intense distress or new emotions comprehensively, try identifying new thoughts (sentences) until you find one or two that either reduce the distress or produce new desirable emotions.

7) With less intense distress or new desirable emotions, what are the new behaviors that likely would be produced as a result?

8) Given the likelihood of those new behaviors, what would happen next? In other words, what would be the results of those new behaviors? Would those results be desirable, undesirable or neutral based on the goal of getting to work on time, or not too late, and safely? If those results are desirable or neutral, then you have successfully completed examination of this scenario. If the results are undesirable, repeat steps 1 through 8 until you are left with desirable or neutral results. If a neutral result does not make the situation worse, then it is desirable in itself.

9) What are some situations in your life that have caused stress?

10) What were the automatic thoughts running through your mind at the time?

11) Given those life situations, what were the undesirable results that were occurring?

12) Given those life situations, what were the behaviors that were contributing to those undesirable results?

13) Looking back, could you have said anything different to yourself in those moments to reduce the level of stress? If so, what would those coping thoughts be?

14) Given those life situations, what are examples of healthier behaviors that you want to be able to engage in?

15) Given those life situations, what emotions would be needed to make those healthier behaviors easier to achieve?

16) Given those life situations, what results would you want to be able to achieve, experience or receive?

17) With those desired results in mind, what can you say to yourself about those life situations that might help to produce healthier emotions and healthier behaviors?

18) Copy down those thoughts. Put them on an index card. This will serve as your coping cue to take with you. It will be a reminder that although we may not be able to fix a stressor at hand, we do have the opportunity to access alternative thoughts. It is those alternative thoughts that kickstart the process of reduced distress, healthier behaviors, and the satisfying experience of more desirable results. Thus, we are creating an opportunity for achievement as we assist ourselves in getting closer to our goals, even if certain stressors stay the same. With consistent practice, we teach our brains that we control our thoughts, emotions and behaviors. We give power to ourselves in knowing that we do not need situations to change in order to feel better and do better.

****

Brandon S. Ballantyne has been practicing clinical counseling for 12 years. He is a licensed professional counselor and national certified counselor who specializes in the treatment of anxiety and depression. He currently practices at a variety of different agencies in eastern Pennsylvania. Find him on the web at https://thriveworks.com/bethlehem-counseling/our-counselors/, and contact him at brandon.ballantyne@childfamilyfirst.com.

****

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.

One school counselor per 455 students: Nationwide average improves

By Bethany Bray May 10, 2019

Although America’s average student-to-school counselor ratio is improving, it is still higher than what is recommended by the American School Counselor Association (ASCA) and some states lag far behind the national mean.

Across the U.S., there is an average of one school counselor for every 455 public K-12 students. This is an improvement over last year’s average of 464-to-1 and the narrowest margin the ratio has been in three decades, according to ASCA.

However, the nationwide average remains far above ASCA’s recommended ratio of 250 students per school counselor. Individual state ratios also vary widely, ranging from 202-to-1 in Vermont to 905-to-1 in Arizona.

“Given the prevalence of school shootings, increasingly intensified natural disasters and rising suicide rates among youth, there has never been a more critical time to ensure that students have access to school counselors,” says American Counseling Association President Simone Lambert. “Our children deserve the opportunity to reach their academic potential to prepare for future careers, while attending to mental health concerns. School counselors play a vital role in supporting students who have mental health concerns, which challenge students’ daily life functioning and school success.”

ASCA compiles a report each year on student-to-school counselor ratios based on data from the federal government. The Virginia-based nonprofit’s latest report, released this week, included data from the 2016-2017 school year, which is the most recent information available.

According to the report:

States and territories with the lowest student-to-school counselor ratios include Vermont (202-to-1), U.S. Virgin Islands (213-to-1), New Hampshire (220-to-1), Hawaii (286-to-1), North Dakota (304-to-1), Montana (308-to-1), Maine (321-to-1) and Tennessee (335-to-1).

States and territories with the highest student-to-school counselor ratios include Arizona (905-to-1), Michigan (741-to-1), Illinois (686-to-1), California (663-to-1), Minnesota (659-to-1), Utah (648-to-1), Puerto Rico (571-to-1), Idaho (538-to-1), the District of Columbia (511-to-1), Washington (499-to-1), Oregon (498-to-1) and Indiana (497-to-1).

Alabama was the most improved state, adding 269 new school counselors and decreasing the student-to-school-counselor ratio 15% (to 417-to-1).

Wyoming lost more than 100 school counselors (76 secondary-level counselors and nearly 70 at the elementary level). As a result, the state’s student-to-school counselor ratio increased 52% from ASCA’s last report, from 225-to-1 to 343-to-1.

****

Access the full report with a state-by-state breakdown on the ASCA website: schoolcounselor.org

The American Counseling Association’s School Counselor Connection page: counseling.org/knowledge-center/school-counselor-connection

From the Counseling Today archives in 2017: “U.S. student-to-school counselor ratio shows slight improvement”

Statistics on mental health and American youth:

Bethany Bray is a senior writer for Counseling Today. Contact her at bbray@counseling.org

Follow Counseling Today on Twitter @ACA_CTonline and on Facebook at facebook.com/CounselingToday.

****

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.

Remembering Martin Buber and the I–Thou in counseling

By Matthew Martin and Eric W. Cowan May 8, 2019

Counseling research designed to measure therapeutic efficacy has increasingly focused on empirically validated methods and interventions. On the other hand, counselors have long understood the therapeutic relationship to be the most powerful meta-intervention for fostering client change and transformation. Carl Rogers’ No. 1 rule — that the counselor and client must be in psychological contact — is the precondition for all therapeutic movement. As counselors, we must “be someone with” rather than “do something to” the client.

However, the interpersonal process that occurs between counselor and client is difficult to quantify because it possesses intangible qualities that slip through the fingers of measurement and scientific scrutiny. The relationship between counselor and client seems to transcend any particular intervention strategy. The maxim “it is the relationship itself that heals” is an organizing principle to which most counselors subscribe and yet still sometimes forget. In the search for empirically validated methods, are we in danger of losing touch with what matters most in counseling?

Another consideration is the cultural shift that has altered how people communicate, with interpersonal contact becoming increasingly digitized, objectified and packaged in virtual platforms. Will the next generation of counselors still give primacy to the sense of “presence” in the therapeutic relationship that is the heart of counseling? From our perspective, it seems that a counselor’s enhanced capacity for meaningful interpersonal contact is more important than ever.

Philosopher Martin Buber detailed the qualities that characterize a real “encounter,” or I–Thou meeting, between two people. His ideas remain as relevant today as when they helped to shape the humanistic movement in psychology and counseling.

The I-Thou encounter

According to Buber, an interpersonal encounter contains wonderful potential that far exceeds two separate people in conversation. This potential becomes apparent when two people actively and authentically engage each other in the here and now and truly “show up” to one another. In this encounter, a new relational dimension that Buber termed “the between” becomes manifest. When this between dimension exists, the relationship becomes greater than the individual contributions of those involved. This type of meeting is what Buber described as an I–Thou relationship.

The I–Thou relationship is characterized by mutuality, directness, presentness, intensity and ineffability. Buber described the between as a bold leap into the experience of the other while simultaneously being transparent, present and accessible. He used the term “inclusion” to describe this heightened form of empathy. It is a far cry from the now-familiar scene of a group of friends sitting around a table at a restaurant, all gazing into their smartphones.

Buber saw the meeting between I and Thou as the most important aspect of human experience because it is in relationship that we become fully human. When one meets another as Thou, the uniqueness and separateness of the other is acknowledged without obscuring the relatedness or common humanness that is shared. Buber contrasted this I–Thou relationship with an I–It relationship, in which the other person is experienced as an object to be influenced or used — a means to an end. Regrettably, the I–It relationship requires little explanation for anyone living in a cultural frame of absent-mindedness and technological materialism.

The world of I–It can be coherent and ordered — even efficient — but it lacks the essential elements of human connection and wholeness that characterize the I–Thou encounter. The I–It attitude is increasingly depersonalizing and alienating as it becomes structuralized in human institutions. When an extreme I–It attitude becomes embedded in cultural patterns and human interactions, the result is greater objectification of others, exploitation of people and resources, and forms of prejudice that obscure the common humanity that unites us.

Although Buber saw the I–It as an essential pole of human existence, he thought humanity was losing its ability to orient toward the Thou. He emphasized the important balance required between the two poles if humanity was to survive the dangers inherent in the possibility of mutual destruction.

Counselors view the client–counselor relationship as the foundation of all therapeutic growth because it is fundamentally affirming of human connection, validation and participation. In our own small sphere of influence, we are a force for promoting a more compassionate and humanized world. Counselors should keep this in mind even as we strive toward greater technical organization and efficiency within a mental health “service delivery system” that is not entirely compatible with our broader aims.

To exist is to be in relation

Buber rightly understood that human development occurs in a relational context. Human beings are highly social creatures who need love and care from others to survive through infancy and beyond. An absence of these relational needs almost always leads to psychological injury.

Buber called this deep participation with, and acceptance of, another’s essential being “confirmation.” He believed that one’s innate capacity to confirm others, and to be confirmed in one’s own uniqueness by others, is the source of our humanity. The innate subjectivity that unfolds within every human being can begin to be actualized only when it is accurately mirrored in the eyes of another. Confirmation is at the heart of the I–Thou meeting, of human flourishing and of counseling.

Confirmation is similar to the concept of not imposing “conditions of worth” in the relationship. However, confirmation goes a step further by acknowledging the person’s potentialities — what one may become. For example, a child experiences the tension between growth and fear along each step of the developmental path. The parent can either accept the child’s reluctance in the moment or encourage the child to take the leap. At all ages, human thriving is found in these continual moments of confirmation of potentiality from person to person. As a client struggles with making the “growth choice” or the “fear choice,” the counselor invites the client to greater participation, yet expects to bump into the old fears that make such participation fraught for the client.

Unfortunately, we aren’t always as mindful and present as we’d like to be with others, and we ourselves have not been affirmed in the eyes of others as often as we would like. Even the best of us can fall into an I–It orientation with the world, failing to see the other person at all. Buber believed that these “missed meetings” were the ultimate failure of human relationships and resulted in us losing a part of ourselves.

We all desire to be confirmed in our uniqueness, but when we realize that confirmation is not going to happen, we seem to sacrifice true confirmation for mere approval in hopes of preserving our attachment to others. We cultivate the ability to “seem” a certain way to others to elicit approval, but such approval does nothing to nourish our “being.” A person would rather be confirmed in that which he or she is not than chance the possibility of not being accepted at all.

Unfortunately, this “seeming” mask tends to get stuck, and as one hides one’s being in fear, the possibility of an I–Thou relationship is lost. As Buber cautioned, “To yield to seeming is man’s essential cowardice, to resist it is his essential courage.” When the I of the I–Thou relationship is sacrificed for the It orientation of abstracted relation, authentic human growth and connection are lost, and the I begins to wither away.

Healing through meeting

How can we as counselors foster and model I–Thou relationships with our clients and help them avoid the temptation of “seeming” like someone they are not? Buber thought the answer could be found in a process of active imagination that he termed “inclusion.” In this process, the barriers and constrictions that prevent one from being fully present to an I–Thou encounter indicate where the work is to be done. In what ways must the client stay hidden from others and protect his or her own inner thoughts, feelings and fantasies?

In inclusion, one imagines what another person is feeling, thinking and experiencing while standing in relation to them as a Thou. Rogers’ concept of empathy and Buber’s concept of inclusion are similar (in fact, the two of them debated about it). However, inclusion places greater emphasis on the unique subjectivity of the person attempting to understand the other.

The attempt at understanding the subjective inner world of the person is not a one-way street because the counselor must account for his or her own influence upon the client as both participants come into psychological contact. The I–Thou is a relational event that is co-created; it does not fully reside in one participant or the other. The counselor’s ability to mine the riches of the present encounter and wonder “what is happening between us in the immediate moment” expresses Buber’s notion of inclusion.

We as counselors have the ability to confirm our clients through the process of inclusion, providing them with a relationship that can heal the wounds of their past missed meetings. We must stand in relation to our clients as an I to a Thou to successfully inspire them to move from a “seeming” stance to one of greater authentic participation and “being.”

Although empirical methods and interventions are critical in guiding our understanding of best practices, we must not forget that the single most predictive variable in whether counseling is effective is the client’s experience of the counseling relationship itself. Clients deserve to be seen as a Thou. As Buber once said, “In spite of all similarities, every living situation has, like a newborn child, a new face that has never been before and will never come again. It demands of you a reaction that cannot be prepared beforehand. It demands nothing of what is past. It demands presence, responsibility; it demands you.”

Every moment is an opportunity for “healing through meeting.”

****

Matthew Martin is a graduate of James Madison University’s clinical mental health counseling master’s program. He is currently completing his residency in counseling at the university’s counseling center. Contact him at matthewmartin.rva@gmail.com.

Eric W. Cowan is a professor in the Department of Counseling and Graduate Psychology at James Madison University. He is the author of Ariadne’s Thread: Case Studies in the Therapeutic Relationship. Contact him at cowanwe@jmu.edu.

Letters to the editor: ct@counseling.org

Counseling Today reviews unsolicited articles written by American Counseling Association members. To access writing guidelines and tips for having an article accepted for publication, go to ct.counseling.org/feedback.

****

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.

Voice of Experience: Invisible people, Part 2: The incarcerated

By Gregory K. Moffatt May 6, 2019

In the 1980s, the head of the department of corrections in my home state removed the exercise equipment from the state prisons. “They aren’t here on holiday,” he proclaimed in his no-nonsense tone.

I remember feeling a sense satisfaction at those words. “Yeah!” I thought to myself. “They deserve to be miserable. It’s prison, not a health club.”

In the years since, I’ve been inside prisons many times in the course of my work, and I now realize how thoughtless I was. Beyond my work, I have visited prison most often to see a friend. His incarceration was an experience that taught me the most about this invisible population.

Any politician running on a platform of prison reform would risk the accusation of being soft on crime. Although chain gangs and hard labor camps are, thankfully, part of history, for the most part, people don’t really care about what happens to prisoners. Like Native Americans (see the first article in my three-part series on “invisible people”), prisoners are often simply ignored.

In my experience as an investigator, a friend and a counselor of prisoners, most prisoners want to mind their own business, serve their time and get on with their lives following release. Many of these individuals are good men and women who readily admit their mistakes and are trying to put their lives back together.

I once wrote a similar thought in a newspaper column and received angry responses from readers. “My mother was killed. … Prisoners should be punished.” You get the idea.

I am not denying that there are some very bad people in prison. In fact, whenever I leave a prison, I’m glad that those iron doors lock behind me. Certain people need to be there, and they need to be there for a very long time. But just as there are many people in the general population who should be in prison — they just haven’t been caught yet — there are many individuals in prison who are very good people. Many of the men I’ve counseled could have been let out the front doors at any point and the community wouldn’t have been in any greater jeopardy whatsoever. People make mistakes, and sometimes those mistakes land people in the judicial system.

It is hard to describe the public humiliation of being arrested, tried, and sent to prison. And that humiliation is shared by family members. If someone asks where your father/son/brother is and you say “prison,” there will almost certainly be an awkward silence.

Once in the system, no matter how humane, prisoners are treated more like animals than like people. They are told what to wear, where to stand, when to eat and when to sleep. They are locked in crowded cages, and events they look forward to all week — visitation, a welding class, an appointment with the prison counselor — are often snatched away from them without notice because of the behavior of others. It can be total lockdown because of one guy doing something stupid.

Prisoners can be transferred without warning. Loved ones might travel four or five hours to see them only to discover that they have been moved, and it may take days or weeks to find out where they are. In such cases, the fragile lives that inmates have built in their prison world are erased, and they have to start over.

They are numbers in a system, not names. And they are identified by their crimes by probation officers, future potential employers and others. I would hate to be identified by my mistakes rather than by my character.

One inmate told me just after sentencing, “I know that no matter how many good things I’ve done in life, I’ll only be remembered for this one thing.” I couldn’t tell him he was wrong.

People entering the system can’t trust their fellow inmates — not because they are necessarily unworthy of trust, but because these new inmates just don’t know who they can trust. It is literally every man for himself. Sadly, neither can they trust the police, their lawyers or judges. I’m not suggesting at all that these people are unethical. I’m only stating the fact that at the end of the day, none of them see the accused as their friend. They see the person in relation to the charge and the process. If you don’t believe me, you’ve never been exposed to the system.

The consequences of the near-sighted policy of the former director of prisons in my home state were easily foreseen. Instead of occupying their time with exercise, inmates had little to do. Consequently, they filled their time with disruptive behaviors. The equipment was eventually returned — as it should have been.

If you want to experience real cultural diversity as a counselor, volunteer to work with prisoners in the system. It will open your eyes to what you (like me in my earlier days) have probably been unable to see.

*****

For a more detailed perspective of the prison system, see the book I co-authored with W.A. Murphy, Handcuffed: A Friendship of Endurance.

****

Gregory K. Moffatt is a veteran counselor of more than 30 years. His monthly Voice of Experience column for CT Online seeks to share theory, ethics and practice lessons learned from his diverse career, as well as inspiration for today’s counseling professionals, whether they are just starting out or have been practicing for many years. His experience includes three decades of work with children, trauma and abuse, as well as a variety of other experiences, including work with schools, businesses and law enforcement. Contact him at Greg.Moffatt@point.edu.

****

Opinions expressed and statements made in articles appearing on CT Online should not be assumed to represent the opinions of the editors or policies of the American Counseling Association.