In REBT counceling since there is tremendous use of confontation with
the client what specific violations and examples of unethical behavior
can you give me regarding religious affiliation, mental health
diagnosis, socioeconomical, sexual orientation and preference,
physicall diability and ethnitcity? |
Request for Question Clarification by
sublime1-ga
on
22 Aug 2004 15:27 PDT
gtappan...
I have seen this question, and noted your hope to
"get the same reseacher", in the rating comment on
your last question.
I have been hesitant to tackle this question for
several reasons.
I've not had sufficient free time to compose what I feel
would be a satisfactory answer for the price you've posted.
I'm very unsure as to how the specific information I could
provide with regards to unethical behavior on the part
of an REBT counselor would differ significantly from the
information I provided in response to your last question,
with regards to counseling in general:
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=388296
And, finally, I'm not certain that confrontation, even if
common among REBT therapists, is in keeping with the spirit
of the therapy, as a basis for the question.
Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy, created by Albert Ellis,
emphasizes the following points, in response to the concern
about being confrontive, on the website of the Albert Ellis
Institute:
"I've heard that REBT therapists do a lot of confronting.
This doesn't sound very empathic or supportive."
"REBT practitioners are very concerned about establishing
a helpful, supportive, and facilitative alliance with people.
They realize that not all people come to therapy ready for
action and change, and that some people?because of their
personalities and problems?require a great deal of support
and empathy before they are ready to change. At the same time,
REBT practitioners tend to take an active role with their
clients. They help provide people as quickly as possible with
the tools to help them change their beliefs leading to
disturbing emotions, thus freeing them to confront their
everyday problems with all their resources."
and
"REBT teaches what Albert Ellis calls the value of rational
self-acceptance. According to Ellis, healthy people are
usually glad to be alive and accept themselves just because
they are alive and have some capacity to enjoy themselves.
They refuse to measure their intrinsic worth by their
extrinsic accomplishments, materialistic possessions and by
what others think of them. They frankly choose to accept
themselves unconditionally; and then try to completely avoid
globally rating themselves?meaning their totality or their
"essence." They attempt to enjoy rather than prove themselves."
Much more on the page:
http://www.rebt.org/about/whatisrebt.asp
Obviously then, a therapist cannot teach "rational self-acceptance"
while practicing anything less than rational acceptance of the client.
and
"Rational emotive behavior therapists work collaboratively
with clients to clarify existing problems, and to identify
important general problems to work on together. And yes,
REBT practitioners are active in teaching clients new methods
for changing their thinking, feelings and behavior. However,
REBT does not control the client. Rather, it empowers people
to manage their own emotional problems more effectively and
to take control of their own behavior in order to try to
obtain more of what they want in life."
Here we see the emphasis on collaborating with the client in
identifying what to work on, and empowering the client, by
educating then about methods to change thinking, feelings and
behaviors.
Given the spirit of these guidelines, unethical behaviors
would consist of any situation involving the therapist
- failing to develop a rapport with the client based on
supportive and empathetic dialog, in which the client
leads the therapist in the direction which therapy will
take;
- pushing clients into realizations they have not arrived
at for themselves, and are not ready to deal with, rather
than collaborating with them in identifying areas to work
on;
- exhibiting a lack of acceptance of the client, in a way
which would jeopardize the client's ability to develop
"rational self-acceptance";
- imposing beliefs or belief systems on the client which
contradict or oppose currently cherished beliefs.
These principles would apply with regard to beliefs in any
of the areas which your question addresses, and violations
in each case would be identical to the ones I outlined in
my previous answer.
As an example, if a devout Christian has come to believe
that, as noted in the Bible: "Be ye perfect, as your Father
in Heaven is perfect", and has translated this into a belief
that one should never make a mistake, the therapist may well
know, from his own experience, and from working with numerous
clients, that this belief is crippling the client with a very
poor sense of self-esteem and self-acceptance. It may be clear
to the therapist that this client sees every mistake as an
opportunity to feel worse about themselves.
While it may be obvious to the therapist, they must work with
the client until, with an adequate rapport and trust, the
client comes to the realization that s/he is too hard on himself,
too much of a perfectionist, and that this expectation of herself
is the basis of her unreasonable expectations of others, thus
causing detriment to her relationships at work and at home.
The therapist must allow the client to come to the realization
that their beliefs about the meaning of the Bible passages are
at the root of these attitudes, and the source of his negative
self-perceptions.
The same would be true in any tradition of therapy, not just in
REBT, and the same principles hold true with regard to all of
the circumstances and corresponding beliefs arising as a result
of religious affiliation, mental health diagnosis, socioeconomical
background, sexual orientation and preferences, physical diability,
and ethnicity.
Hopefully you will understand my uncertainty with regards to how
to best answer this question. Or, perhaps I already have?
sublime1-ga
|
Clarification of Question by
gtappan-ga
on
23 Aug 2004 17:27 PDT
I have read your question. I am sorry I took so much time but I didn't
see the clarification question thingy. I think that I was looking in
the area of disclosure. I also can see where the confrontation thing
could get out of contol and the client just run over. But what do you
feel as far as diclosure and the confrontation issue. Yes I rea what
you wrote and it was great only could you elaborate for me.
|
Request for Question Clarification by
sublime1-ga
on
23 Aug 2004 19:37 PDT
gtappan...
"...what do you feel as far as disclosure and the confrontation
issue?"
Can you phrase this in another way? I'm not sure if, by disclosure,
you mean what the client chooses to disclose to the therapist in
the course of therapy, or not. If you mean, in relation to
confrontation, that the therapist is, in the course of confronting
the client, pushing them to disclose more that they choose to about
their background, history, and so on, then this could certainly
present a problem. Is this what you mean, or are you talking about
the therapist making disclosures, about the client's background and
history, to others?
The more precisely you can phrase your question, the more precisely
I can answer it.
sublime1-ga
|
Request for Question Clarification by
sublime1-ga
on
11 Sep 2004 15:14 PDT
gtappan...
Where are we in the resolution of this question?
Feedback would be very helpful.
sublime1-ga
|
Clarification of Question by
gtappan-ga
on
17 Sep 2004 20:20 PDT
I think that the first message got to you. It concerned the
confrontational area being a question of ethics itself, if wrongly
used. I think that the disclosure I was more concerned would come fome
me during a session. I am doing diagnostics now you will be hearing
from me very soon. Thank you
|
Request for Question Clarification by
sublime1-ga
on
17 Sep 2004 22:14 PDT
gtappan...
Yes, thank you. I see both the comment and the later clarification,
This does help me to understand your focus better, but still leaves
me uncertain as to whether you now wish additional input on this
question, given your indication that I will hear further from you
"soon".
This particular question is due to expire in 3 days, after which
I can neither answer it, or be reimbursed for the input I have
given thus far, since what I have provided was not placed in the
'Answer' space.
If you could precisely clarify your intentions with regard to this
resolving this specific question, it would be very helpful.
Some options are:
Assuming you derived some benefit from what I've posted here to date,
request that I post it in the answer space of this question so that
I can be reimbursed. If you believe that the posted price for this
question is greater than the value of what I have provided you, you
can use the Google Answers interface to change the price of this
question before requesting that I post the formal answer. Keep in
mind that, once I post an answer here, you can continue to ask for
additional clarification, as long as it is within a reasonable
proximity to the scope of the original question.
Or, you can allow this question to expire, at no cost to you but
the 50 cent listing fee, and open a new question with my username
in the subject line, as in "For sublime1-ga"...etc., setting the
price of the question (maximum $200) to include the value of my
work input here as well as that of your new question.
You could also allow me to post an answer to this question, at
a price you deem appropriate, and then open a new question with
a new focus.
For the sake of clarity, it would also help to clearly define the
terms we're using here. Based on your recent remarks, it would
seem that you are using 'disclosure' to refer to the act of
disclosing to the client things you perceive about them and their
situation/condition/beliefs, which they might not be ready to hear.
This is not a typical use of the word in a therapeutic setting.
Rather, it typically means what the client discloses to the
therapist, or, conversely, what the therapist may reveal *about
themselves* to the client. It can also mean what the therapist
reveals to others about the client.
The other activity is more correctly termed 'confrontation', or
confronting the client with your observations.
sublime1-ga
|
