Posted at 10.16.2018
Considering the value of the person-centred way weighed against a psychodynamic method of counselling, although they originate from different theoretical and philosophical buildings and at first they seem to offer differing methods of treatment, there are similar features, which are normal to all effective counselling therapies, particularly ingrained in the beneficial marriage itself and in the merits and expertise of the counsellor. Concentrating about how each method views the person and their mental life, explains the issues being experienced and the assistance offered to ease mental health stress, also, considering how the client is encouraged to change, the techniques used, the expectations of your client and the role of the counsellor within each remedy. Concluding by summarising how this shows the value of the person-centred strategy within counselling.
The person-centred approach was developed by Carl Rogers, the essential components of Rogers' approach, which he referred to as counselling rather than psychotherapy, is having a special relationship with the client also to help them reach a location of comprehension that they can actually change themselves. McLeod (2008) suggests that Rogers have this by allowing your client to increase, stressing the here and today instead of days gone by. In order for the person to reach their highest potential, favourable conditions will be required, and this if they are not achieved they may not expand and develop in a good way. For example, when people are not regarded in a confident light and accepted for who they are, particularly if that regard is made conditional, they may lose touch with their inner-self and get started to develop in a manner that is not true to that self applied. Psychodynamic counselling as Jacobs (2004) state governments incorporates a variety of strategies, from Freudian psychoanalytical theory, which is usually comprehended to centre after the unaware activity of the awareness. The interior characteristics of the awareness have emerged as taking form during youth growth and compose components of the child's connection with significant people, specially the mother and father. Therefore, psychodynamic treatments tend to give consideration to "the importance of the child's early environment as promoting the foundation of later personality advantages or areas of vulnerability" Jacobs (2004, p. 9). At moments of psychological stress we can be motivated back to a far more basic, childlike, thought process, feeling and behaving in contract with our idea of those early interactions.
The similarities of the person-centred and psychodynamic solutions matching to McLeod (2008) are that, they both explore the psyche, they are both person-centred, plus they both highlight the importance of the counsellor and client being more comfortable with one another. A rapport with the client is shaped, by both person-centred and psychodynamic counsellors bearing in mind their situation and has broad-based methods, such as specialists with different viewpoints under the same methodology. Although McLeod (2008) implies that the variations are bigger than the similarities, although the person-centred approach focuses on the conscious process, it generally does not point out dreams and the therapist may divulge information about themselves, helping your client feel settled. This is different from the psychodynamic procedure, which looks at the unconscious functions; dreams are emphasised and there is absolutely no home disclosure.
McLeod (2008) also implies the person-centred therapist is friendly, aiming towards articulating feelings and views people as essentially good, this contrasts with the psychodynamic therapist who should keep a practised detachment, taking a look at important anxieties, with a view to understanding the person's feelings and can easily see people as hostile or untrustworthy. The person-centred procedure is that they centre on days gone by, present and future while the psychodynamic connects days gone by with the present. Jacobs (2004) shows that the psychodynamic approach, produces explanations for the client, can easily see reluctance as turmoil within your client, looks for what is hidden, offer's an impression, time boundaries are fixed, is inflexible to social diversity, helps bring about self-understanding and has a huge theoretical basis. Unlike in Mearns and Thorne (2007) which ultimately shows that the person-centred counsellor enables the individual to make their own examination, concur on what's to be talked about, it's a distributed decision, they have got flexibility with time and boundaries, can conform easily to ethnic variety, promote personal growth and has limited theoretical composition.
In summary, maybe it's seen that building a good person-centred restorative climate is exactly what all counsellors should be doing anyhow, but this misses the point of how difficult this is to attain consistently, in particular being truly congruent. In the psychodynamic method the therapist can often be perceived as something of an expert, fixing the client's problems to them, and leading them along. If they were to try and set up a true person centred climate, they would have to conceal their judgements about your client with a tendency to cover up behind a specialist face. This healing climate sometimes appears within the person-centred way as being enough on its own to market change, so that it follows that anybody in the client's life could create the right atmosphere and achieve change. I feel that what else the therapist brings to the stand, in conditions of themselves, is important, as surely if they're being clear with the client, the client will dsicover the therapists true do it yourself and beliefs, that i think may have an impact, not necessarily favorably, on the therapeutic relationship. Each way as its advantages and disadvantages, and each has its place within counselling, which method is usually to be used would depend on the therapist's personal choice and philosophies, and what type of person the client is, as both solutions would suit different clients. Personally i think that the psychodynamic procedure is a far more organised method than the person-centred approach, and would be well suited for clients who are comfortable with introspection, requiring a large background theory, a identification with their problems or even to analyse their psyches. With all the person-centred approach it develops an effective client-counsellor romantic relationship, it is more suitable for people who have an ability to explore themselves and their values and who value taking personal accountability, don't need a more formal strategy with the counsellor or a huge theoretical structure.