We watched the Roger’s video last week didn’t we? It came to me as I tried to remember anything more than the skills at the end. To that effect: I was told I did a good job of listening to [J], mostly in my opinion due to a) an attempt to genuinely understand what that would be like for her, which I did by attempting to gain an understanding of how she felt about the events and then extrapolating similar emotions to the extent which she appeared to feel them; and b) attempting to incorporate skills at available opportunities (with a further attempt to use skills in the context of bettering my understanding, which as I said, must [in my opinion] be the origin of such skills: they exist because they “must,” rather than they must be used because they exist).
My use of the word “right” was noticed (I was already aware of it but am in the midst of searching for solutions). It is so…fundamental in my personal semantics that it’s difficult to replace it. It would, in fact, be something a counsellor would have to ask me what I meant by: “I’ve got it, I understand.” Perhaps me saying “right” is thus arrogant. But one could say I meant “I think I understand,” or “what you’ve said appears to be self-consistent and I have it clear in my mind.” I’m certainly not saying that last part to a client! Maybe “I follow that,” or see I was about to say “Right, I…” whatever. Looks like it’s gonna be tough. I’ll try “I’m following you,” or something similar.
In terms of being a client…. I’m sorry that [Lda] had such a tough time of it, I had no desire to make it difficult for her. I don’t blame people, but as I’ve said, I do get tired of being singled out for being “intelligent,” “talking too fast,” or (what seems like) a hundred other things. Maybe I’m just seeing criticism where there is none, but for my part I think it’s just loneliness: every time a new individual establishes the same views of me that I’ve heard, my chances of running into people who I gel with, who understand me, diminishes.
An important related point is that, despite coming down angry, I left in a good mood. This is perhaps ironic. I didn’t feel any friction and I think I managed (as I do ever more often), to let go of the problem and rise above it. While during consideration of things I view as “issues” I get upset or angry, when I stop considering them, within a given time I re-establish my perspective and my feelings reduce appropriately. The problem is still just as bad really, but given that I have no solution, there’s no point in feeling bad about it. Thus I distract myself with other elements in my life, instead of dwelling on problems without (apparent) solutions.
The video was very good. I felt such sympathy? for the client. I know we’re not here to sympathise, or perhaps I should say we’re not here to offer sympathy, but I can’t help feeling it. His situation is one that resonates with me (not that I’d attempt to, what’s that word where we make it about us?), I know what it is to be afraid to express hurt. Ignoring hurt is so much easier than experiencing it in order to express it. This is perhaps similar to what I said about my “issues:” they hurt and thus are not often expressed. The difference perhaps is that I can express them if I wish, I just know it hurts and thus mostly don’t. Pain has its place, but I don’t enjoy it (usually).
For myself, I thought it was very interesting that, while this course at first disabused me of what I had imagined counselling to be like, the video was much more how I expected counselling to be and go. Rogers was more forthright with his insights than I would dare (given how we’re not supposed to interpret etc). This was covered in the discussion group and [L] explained it by way of “deep empathy and interpretation” having a fine line. I can totally agree with that. I suppose it’s about where the insight originates: if one is truly operating empathically without an agenda then, in theory, insights will be genuine and worthwhile.
It is an interesting thing to investigate whence came presumptions of what counselling is “supposed” to be like. Perhaps my own experience of it, perhaps more dangerously, fantasies of how I would do it as a counsellor. We bring ourselves and the part I find most valuable in myself is my ability to perceive and…put words to what I perceive others are having trouble with. For me, I do not try and relate what they say to what I’ve experienced, but to how a human being with all that entails, would experience, and then, importantly, see how that differs from their personal experience. We are all human, and we are all individual. I’d be surprised to see someone have no “human-being” reactions to certain stimuli: I feel there are some things we all share after all, but to what extent they experienced that reaction, that’s individual. Examples would be fear of threat to their health, livelihood, happiness etc; possessiveness. These are traits I feel that all human beings share.
The trick is to understand…how the individual fits into the conceptual framework. What their versions of “security,” “happiness,” “fear,” or “threat” are. Then when the “security” of their “happiness” is “threatened”, will they feel “fear”? I think so.
Perhaps it’s unwise to call it fear, but certainly I believe they will feel something. I get sad sharing how I feel sometimes. It never seems to get me anywhere, and yet to me it is so inherently valuable that I’d give up near everything for it. A tricky thing to balance. (That’s actually a whole discussion-idea I have around value and what it really means).
Tags: counselling journal, People, Personal, personal problems, theory
