The Parts We Play

The Parts we All Play
Westley Evans
Bsc (Hons) in Counselling & Psychotherapy
The Sherwood Psychotherapy Training Institute

in partnership with
Coventry University
2014
1
14BC&P3B-1 Evans, Westley
Abstract:
This piece of work centres round the mystery of self. Much has been written
about it already; what it consists of, how it is formed and how we as individuals;
and as therapists, engage with it.
The contents are split into parts; something which one will see becomes very
relevant as the work unfolds. The first looks at my beliefs and approach as a
practitioner; the next outlines some of what exists in literature about the above;
and finally, the last ties it all together in the form of a case study.
2
Contents
Page:
4 Acknowledgements
5 Introduction
7 Rationale for Practice
14 Literature Review
25 Context of Professional Practice
41 Conclusion
43 References
54 Appendices
3
Acknowledgements
Making the decision to train as a therapist and entering onto this course, have
been two of the best decisions I have ever made; both leading to phenomenal
changes in my life.
Thank you to everyone at the Sherwood for their guidance and support; in
particular to my tutors; Dave, Debs and Catherine. I have gained so much from
their unique styles, personalities and insight.
To the group, without whom I would not have developed and grown in the ways
I have. You truly are a special bunch of people and I will never forget you. You
have given me so much.
To John; for allowing me into his world and for trusting me to be alongside him
during his journey. You possess more power and insight than you know; I hope
you continue along the path towards realising that.
To my friends and family, for being so supportive. In particular to Toni- Anne, for
her patience and belief in me; and my wonderful Mum for her encouragement.
To my Gran, the most amazing woman I have ever known. You will be missed
every day and have given me more than I could ever explain or repay…
I made it onto the wall.
4
Introduction
We are very complex creatures (Potter, 2004); each with our own individual
make up, contributed to by an endless list of factors. Not only is ‘who’ we are a
complicated notion; identity, personality, traits and mannerisms, profession and
status being just a few indicators; so too are all of the influences. To name just
a handful; our genes and DNA, family organisation, peer groups, geographical
location and educational experience all have an impact on who we are and our
‘way of being.’ As a trainee therapist, I know only too well, that one very
influential factor in all of this, is that of our early experiences and relationships.
The whole basis of my philosophy is that we are shaped by this and that any
‘issues’ a client may take to therapy, can and probably do have some kind of
origin in early interaction. As our personalities are shaped, we respond to
messages (actual and implicit) given to us within all of our experiences with
care-givers and significant others. We form expectations, relational ‘rules’ and
our ‘self’ is moulded.
This is not as straightforward as it could seem and we constantly adapt, evolve
and alter as we grow, change and have new experiences. Of course, our
experiences throughout life are varied; some positive, some not so much. We
build ‘defences’ and learn, quite often unconsciously, from all we encounter.
Everything we do, say and think is a result of this melting pot of experience,
whether we like it or not. There are aspects of ourselves that are very prominent
and obvious; to others and perhaps even us. However there are many aspects
that dip in and out of sight or even existence, with some lying dormant,
underneath the radar.
5
I have been taking a good look at my makeup; or my ‘parts’. It has been a long
and eventful journey so far; albeit at times troubling, yet wonderfully liberating. I
am slowly getting to know every aspect of myself; the parts I wasn’t aware of,
the parts I don’t like all that much and even some of the potential origins of my
many, many complexities. Not only do my history and early experiences impact
on who I am as a person, but they determine the kind of therapist I am to be. It
is crucial that I continue this work so as to be aware of what it is that I bring to
the table.
When I think about this, I am excited as far as the implications for therapy go. I
have my own melting pot of experiences; as do, quite crucially, my clients; and
together we make something beautifully unique.
What follows; is an examination of what has been written around this subject,
within the world of Counselling and Psychotherapy; and how this fits in with me
and my practise. In addition to this, I will explore its significance using a case
study; looking at my time spent with a particular client. This piece of work forms
part of my submission for the BSC in Humanistic and Integrative Counselling
and Psychotherapy; obtained at The Sherwood Institute and validated by the
University of Coventry.
6
Rationale for Practice
I live and work in East Lancashire and my placement is at a charity working to
support the community’s socio-economic needs. As part of this they offer
counselling and accept referrals too. Clients present with a wide range of issues
and I work with them alongside accessing my own personal therapy and clinical
supervision. Upon qualifying I hope to begin to develop my private practice and
slowly transition into working within this area full time; perhaps continuing to
develop, training as a supervisor and doing some teaching.
I work considering many codes, standards and professional ethics (Bond, 2004)
including the BACP Ethical Framework (2013), SPTI’s Code of Conduct (2014),
the agency’s policies and my own moral beliefs and theoretical base.
It is probably already very clear that I am fascinated about what it means to
‘be’… and although you, I and the next person do that very differently; I am a
Humanistic and Integrative practitioner and therefore hold certain fundamental
beliefs about our nature and development as human beings. I believe in the
potential for change and in the human propensity towards growth and
development; something Rogers (1961) and Maslow (1954) referred to as ‘self-
actualising tendency. Furthermore, as Whitton (2003) states, everyone is
unique and I think that should be valued. Human ‘truth’ is multifaceted; we each
create our own meaning out of our own limited experience (Spinelli, 2005) and
people are inherently neither good nor bad (Rowan, 1998); rather limited or
enhanced by the conditions they encounter. These ideas have always
resonated with me and I have always felt that we are primarily a result of the
7
people around us, the environments we experience and the relationships we
receive. However, I believe there are some important things to mention
following such statements. I reiterate again, my belief in the human potential for
change and also quite crucially two other beliefs; the importance and availability
of choice, and the power of relationship. As Cottone (1988) writes; relationships
become the primary source of knowledge in our world and I believe that, as
Erskine, Moursund and Trautman (1999) state; humans are built to be in
relationship.
As Rogers (1992) 19 propositions (Appendix 1) state; every individual reacts to
their continually changing perception of the world around them. The actualising
tendency, spurs the individual on as it moves towards satisfying this need to
grow and develop. As the individual experiences more and more, their self-
structure and value system constantly strengthen and adapt, based extensively
on introjections (Rogers, 1959); ‘shoulds’ and ‘oughts’ that rule an individual.
Zinker, (1977) explains that an individual who has introjected, has swallowed
whole other peoples’ ideas about what is right or wrong. The human need for
positive regard is so strong, especially from caregivers (Wilkins, 2010), that we
make adaptations (Erskine 1998), or creative adjustments (Perls, Hefferline &
Goodman, 1951) in order to manage. This is protective and helps us to survive;
however individuals can become comprised of many parts, configurations
(Mearns and Thorne, 1999), or ‘modes of being (Cooper, 1999). One must
know all these parts in order to know who he truly is and as Beisser (1970)
states; change occurs when one becomes what he is, not when he tries to
become what he is not. In other words, only when one knows and accepts
8
themselves for who they are, can they hope for growth and change to be
possible.
I work to facilitate this, believing that the vehicle for this change is relationship
(Whitton, 2003). Clarkson (2003) confirms and says; that it isn’t any particular
method or technique that is key, but that the therapeutic relationship is the
essence of therapeutic effectiveness. This is reinforced by many others; Yalom
(2002) states, therapy should be relationally driven, as Gerhardt, (2004)
believes difficulties formed in relationship are best healed there.
In order to first build a relationship, or a working alliance (Clarkson, 2003) with
my client, I adopt Rogers (1957) attitudinal conditions of unconditional positive
regard (UPR), congruence and empathy. Congruence means I am genuine and
being myself; making use of ‘immediacy’ (Hill & Knox, 2002) by responding from
my real ‘here and now’ experiences instead of playing a role. UPR means I
value and accept my client for who they are, remembering my belief that
behaviours are representations of needs; and finally, adopting an empathic
approach is aiming to understand the client’s world as if I were them. Buber
(1958) chose the term "I-Thou" to illustrate his attitude that the other person
was sacred. As an integrative practitioner, I draw upon certain theories and
ideas to enhance my effectiveness and understanding of the relationship. I
believe that Rogers (1957) six necessary and sufficient conditions (Appendix 2)
are indeed necessary, but aren’t sufficient. I believe that more is needed to
better understand the dynamics at play and to provide what is needed to for
change. The model of integration I work by, adopts a relational and
developmental stance.
9
Firstly, I make use of different ideas around childhood development. John
Bowlby’s (2005) Attachment theory sits perfectly with my beliefs about how self
is formed, how we develop and the human need for relationship. Bowlby
suggested that a child would form an attachment, usually with the primary
caregiver; and that the attachment figure acted as a secure base for exploring
the world. He proposes that the attachment relationship acts as a prototype for
all future social relationships. Schore (1994) refers to the attachment
relationship as the working model for future interpersonal and intrapersonal
relationships. Winnicott (1960) explains that an insecure attachment can lead to
developing a false self to manage environmental demands, whilst a secure
attachment creates ones ‘True Self’.
Often, individuals adopting a false self can feel that how they live in the world is
somehow at odds with who they feel they really are. Rogers (1959) would call
this “incongruence”.
I regularly draw upon the work of Stern (1985), who developed a working
hypothesis about the infants’ experience. He said that experiences are brought
together to form the whole person, and that a healthy experience is essential for
optimal growth. Stern developed, along with four domains of relatedness, the
four senses of self; emergent, core, subjective and verbal. Each new sense of
self builds on the last, yet they all continue developing. Throughout the process
of development; the infant experiences specific interactions with a self-
regulating other; and as this keeps happening the episodes are condensed and
encoded as ‘Representations of Interactions that have been Generalized’ or
RIG. These RIG’s are a record of the past, informing the present and help the
individual to evaluate expectations.
10
Of course these experiences can be nurturing or destructive; insecure
attachments, un-met needs and underdeveloped senses of self; leading to
creative adjustments, various configurations, adaptations and incongruences.
As a therapist I am mindful of the evidence for this, being played out in the
relationship. As Yalom (2002) accurately states; everything that plays out
between us is a microcosm, giving me an indication of their internal world and
how they might relate outside of the therapy room. This leads me conveniently
into introducing the second key idea that I integrate into my work; namely that of
unconscious processes. Whilst I primarily work in the ‘here and now’ (Rowan,
1998), I keep in mind and am on the lookout for indications of the clients’ past;
or the ‘there and then’. These instances occur when clients’ emotions from a
previous experience, often childhood, are brought into our relationship. This is
an unconscious process called transference (Kahn 2001). Therapy can be used
as a safe place to explore these dynamics, promoting the clients’ understanding
of themselves and their relationships. Reeves (2013) rightly points out that the
challenge for therapists is to recognise their counter-transference. This entails
determining how much of their response is related to the dynamics of the
relationship and how much is related to their own experiences. Clarkson (2003)
says there are two types of therapist reactions or counter-transferences;
proactive (based on therapist own experience and therefore their own
transference) and reactive (a valid response to the client and relationship). I try
to always be on the lookout for such instances, paying an equal amount of
attention to my own responses and feelings, particularly in supervision. This
raises awareness of my own unfinished business, meaning I can be sure to hold
back or bracket it. (Spinelli 2005)
11
To track all of this activity being played out, I carry out some ongoing
assessments. Within the medical model, in order to assess or diagnose, there is
a tendency to categorize, differentiate and label. Traditionally, Humanists reject
diagnosis, believing the client to be expert and that, as Rogers (1959) says;
diagnosis should be a process based on the experience of the client, not the
expertise of the therapist. I agree and think that diagnosis can provide a label
which has the potential to fix someone’s position. This certainly doesn’t account
for change over time and contradicts my belief in self-actualising tendency.
I do believe however, that assessment can be useful; to avoid pitfalls, identify
potential issues or facilitate insight around competency and referral. This is
certainly important to my work and is in line with the ethical principle of
beneficence (BACP, 2013). Additionally, it gives me a language to use and
potential insight into what the client may need and how I can provide it. I am
careful, however, to ensure this is an ongoing process based on the here and
now experiences of the client. If care isn’t taken, I risk de-humanising, dis-
empowering or failing to meet the needs of the client. By assessing a clients’;
stage of process (Rogers 1961)(Appendix 3), processing style, availability for
contact and any relational patterns or unconscious processes at play; I can
ensure that I respond in the most effective way. I attempt to explore and
understand; by making use of Erskine’s (1998) Involvement, Inquiry and
Attunement. Karen (1994) concurs with this and says that attunement is central
to every aspect of an infant’s development, and is therefore important when
addressing clients’ developmental needs. Erskine (1998) talks about a task of
the therapist, being to address a clients’ relational needs (Appendix 4) as they
emerge; something I actively look for within my work, utilising phenomenological
12
enquiry (Spinelli, 2005). Casemore (2011) describes this as noticing all events,
feelings, experiences, behaviours, words, tone of voice and anything else we
see or hear; as they are in the moment. Another key task is in creating a safe
space in which the client can explore their intra-psychic and interpersonal
processes (Clarkson 2003). Yalom (2002) says that the job of therapist is to
remove obstacles and barriers, and that the rest follows on from clients’
tendency to grow. I believe it is in creating this safe relationship and space, in
which I am present and willing to be impacted by the client, that the true work is
done. By working phenomenologically in the here and now, engaging with
different parts of self and providing empathy and validation; I hope to provide a
reparative experience (Clarkson, 2004) and achieve true relational depth
(Mearns and Cooper, 2005). Others called this; an I- thou relationship (Buber
(1958), ‘moments of meeting’ (Stern, 2004) or profound moments of linking
(Rowan,1998). Miller (1986) says that mutual interchange with others is
essential for psychological growth and many others support this approach
saying that the needs a child has are not exclusive; and that adults too, have a
need to be understood and cared about (Seigel, 1999). To have another
individual simultaneously experience a state of mind similar to our own gives us
connection and meaning. Vanaerschot (1990), states that empathy results in
feeling valued and accepted, reducing alienation, building trust and learning to
accept ones’ own feelings and get in touch with experiences. Neuroscience
(Schore, 2001) is beginning to confirm these theories too, explaining how the
brain changes throughout this reparative process and that neural growth
(Cozolino, 2002) occurs in therapy, when there is a safe relationship.
1996 words
13
Literature Review:
My journey since deciding to train as a therapist, has been an eventful one; but
the notion of ‘parts’, more specifically my parts, has been pretty central. In
personal therapy, at the Sherwood and in my day to day life; thinking about and
getting to know my parts has been one of the most interesting and valuable
endeavours I have embarked upon. Proving to be massively enriching to both
my learning and my client work; in fact, the whole idea has become something
of a passion of mine. It has formed the basis of my dissertation, and as such
was the subject of my literature review. I searched for key phrases online, in an
attempt to source books, journals and articles that were of relevance. Where I
was able, I made use of the Sherwood’s extensive library and also purchased
texts too. I contacted several authors and theorists asking for their input; some
of which replied and were very helpful. What follows is an overview of what I
found on the subject of parts; specifically when searching for theorists and
literature around the concepts of self, its formation and structure; and that of
working with and ‘using’ it therapeutically.
14
The Findings:
Not surprisingly, there are many clinical phenomena that invite questions about
the self; multiple personality (or Dissociative Identity Disorder), pathological
narcissism; and self- deception to name but a few. The literature on this topic, is
rich; and in other disciplines too; such as social psychology and philosophy;
including concepts such as the ego, soul, mind and psyche.
To think that we are made up of parts; or that our self is composed of many
facets; isn’t a new idea. The notion of ‘multiplicity’ or multiple aspects of self is
evident as far back as Egyptian times (Hannah, 1981). It can be seen
represented within popular culture too, in stories such as Robert Louis
Stevenson’s ‘Strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde’; and by characters such
as Tolkien’s ‘Gollum’. In philosophy, the classical Greek philosopher Plato
makes reference to the tripartite structure of the soul (Woods, 1987), whilst
Sartre (2002) recognised self as a fluid concept, unfixed and ever- changing.
The question of “Who am I?” has long been asked and Descartes summed it up
when he wrote; ‘Cogito ergo sum’, or ‘I think, therefore I am.’ Many therapists
who think of self in a Cartesian way (as above) might question the emphasis on
self being a ‘thinking’ thing; noting that self has affective states; such as fear,
anguish or anger. I am mindful that a lot of what we ‘are’ presents itself
unconsciously too. Many, however, will agree with the notion that the self is an
‘inner agent’. That it thinks, decides and feels; and that it can be affected by
earlier experiences.
15
But what exactly do we believe self to be? Different schools of thought
presented different ideas, which developed as many theorists made
contributions.
Murphy (1947), says the self is the individual as known to the individual, whilst
Burns (1980) describes it as a set of attitudes a person holds towards himself.
The key belief here seems to be that self is what we ourselves perceive it to be.
Gross (1990) takes this further and says that when we look in the mirror, we are
both the person who is looking and that which is being looked at. Similarly,
when we think about the person we are, or something we have done – we are
the person doing the thinking and the person being thought about, you are both
subject (the thinker or looker ) and object (thing being looked at or thought
about). We use the pronoun ‘I’ to refer to us as a subject; and ‘me’ to refer to us
as an object – this represents a special relationship we have with ourselves,
namely that of self-consciousness or awareness. Dobzhansky (1967) explains
that only humans have this self-consciousness; the unique relationship in that
the person is both the subject and object, knower and known, thinker and
though about, seer and seen.
In Psychotherapy there has been a vast amount of thinking in this area. Within
the Psychodynamic school; Freud (1953 – 74) laid the groundwork, but used
the term ‘self’ sparingly and not always in the same sense. He often used the
expression ‘das es’, to refer to a persons’ whole self, but sometimes to parts of
ones’ mind. Most will be familiar with his terms of ego and id; that the ego
develops out of the id, and that they play a big role in unconscious psychic
conflicts. The self ‘closer’ in nature to that being discussed, became more
prominent in Object Relations theory and Self – Psychology. Fairbairn (1952)
16
viewed psychology as the study of relationships of an individual to his ‘objects’
(internalised); and spoke of the splitting of the ego (or self). An infant relates to
external objects (usually his mother) and then divides perception of the object
into good and bad parts, internalising the latter in order to gain control of it. He
said that all of this impacted on the ego (or self).
Winnicott (1960) went on to develop ideas around ‘true’ and ‘false self’. If the
infant receives ‘good enough’ responses from mother, he develops a true or
central self; if not or if he experiences anxiety; he develops a false self. In adults
the false self exists as defences against painful stimuli, hiding the true self.
Kohut (1971) wrote about self- objects. These are representations of a person,
or a relationship with a person. He says that we can develop self-object
transferences based upon experiences of unsatisfactory responses to needs
from a parent or other. He said that a child’s needs correspond to three sectors
of the self – the grandiose, idealising and twinship sectors. Again, these unmet
needs, present themselves in adulthood.
Similarly, Nicholson (1991) referred to the development of the fragmented self;
when a person is pathologically narcissistic and has grandiose senses of
importance and entitlement; seeing others as need- gratifying objects.
Other theorists within the area talk of real self, nuclear self or bi- polar self.
Self isn’t as well represented in the Behavioural field, however; one of
Bandura’s (1995) key concepts, was that of self- efficacy belief. This was
described as ones’ belief in their own capacity for organising and executing
certain plans of action. He states that it is this belief or expectation that is
explanatory of behaviour, as opposed to Freuds’ notion of drives.
17
Within the Humanistic school of thought, there are again, differing ideas.
Gestaltists also talk about self-structures such as id, ego and personality; but
believe that there is no ‘fixed self’, only a self that is created in the process of
making contact with the environment (Mann, 2010). This means that self is not
a fixed entity that lives deep inside, but that as we experience the process of
‘selfing’, our selves emerge in an ongoing, ever changing process. “We are the
contact we make. We exist when we contact the world.” (McLeod, 1993).
Although Person- Centred theory centres round the concept of the ‘organism’,
the notion of self has importance and currency. (Wilkins, 2010). It is again,
acknowledged as a process, fluid rather than fixed.
Rogers (1959) spoke of the emerging or developing self; a fluid and changing
perception of “me”, differentiated from the organism through interaction with the
environment and others; and the self- concept, which is the view one has of
ones’ self. He says the move towards a state of full functioning is dependent on
the degree of congruence between the organism and the self- concept.
My own views about self and how it is formed, were outlined earlier in this work,
but are relevant to my overview of the literature on self and parts. To recap; I
believe that self is formed in relationship and place great importance on an
individuals’ early experiences, believing they impact greatly on its development.
As self is formed, individuals become comprised of many parts or
‘configurations’, often formed around introjects. I believe that relational needs
and configurations of self can present themselves in relationship; and during
therapy; where there is great potential for them to be discovered.
18
The ideas mentioned about past and present selves; and the belief that
encouraging dialogue or insight between them can be cathartic, make absolute
sense to me. Helping clients access deep feelings associated with different
developmental stages and past events; by addressing aspects of the self, is an
idea supported by many.
Bennett, (2005) states that self- identity needs not to be seen as an monolithic
ego structure that controls all; but a reflexive self, able to sustain and reconcile
multiple and sometimes conflicting identities. He continues, saying that the
subjectivity of the individual grows in and through relationship with others
subjects.
Erwin, (1997) outlines the reason for the interest in self, explaining that therapy
is thought of as the exploration or treatment of self. Whatever the goal, be it
autonomy, symptom relief, character change – he said the means of getting
there is by discovery of the real or true self… or integration of self. I concur, and
believe that it is through exploration of these ‘selves’ or ‘parts’ that we can hope
to integrate the self; and discover the true person.
There are so many theorists whose work or ideas, feature this very proposition;
albeit with slightly varied presentation and use of different terminology. Berne
(1961) worked with ego states, whilst Jung (1928) had archetypes. Lewin
(1936) spoke of sub- regions of the personality; and Perls (1951) wrote about
and worked with the top- dog and under- dog. The list continues; Klein (1948),
Guntrip (1971) and Fairbairn’s (1952) internal objects; Denzin (1987) and the
emotionally divided self; Winnicott (1965), Lake (1966), Janov (1970) and
Laing’s (1976) false or unreal self; Gurdjieff’s (1950) little I’s; Goffman (1974)
19
and multiple selfing; Mair’s (1977) community of self; Shapiro’s (1976)
subselves; Bogart’s (2007) personas and Satir’s (1978) sub personalities or
parts.
John Rowan (2010), a key writer on multiplicity, outlines three overall views of
self in his book ‘Personification’. Traditional, which pertains to a self of agency
and moral responsibility; Modern, outlining authenticity and choice; and Post-
modern, which he says sees the self as a linguistic construction and questions
all fixed positions; taking on the notion of the dialogical self as a dynamic
multiplicity of ‘I’ positions. Hermans (2004) presents the dialogical self as a
multiplicity of parts, voices characters and positions. He says they all have
relationships with each other and that the self functions as a society. Freedman
& Combs (1996) write about narrative therapy’s ‘I’ positions; which they say
have voices we can hear in therapy.
Interestingly, Stiles (2002) ran a research programme exploring the idea of
listening to different voices which emerge during the course of therapy. I
personally love this way of describing the process of one’s parts presenting
themselves in the therapy room. Watson et al (1998) talk of integrating gestalt
and client- centred approaches; combining relationship conditions of empathy,
prizing and congruence with more active interventions such as empty –chair
and two- chair work. Again, this fits fantastically with the way I work and what I
believe to be therapeutically useful.
As one can see, there are many, many different views on self. It is notable that
the idea of what self actually is, seems to have evolved over time; but
something that has been evident throughout, is this concept of multiplicity. What
20
I believe matters however, is how the client views their self; and their ‘make up’.
When I work, I hold onto this idea of self as a subject of one’s own experience
and I attempt to enter my client’s phenomenological world. This brings us nicely
to working with parts; and I am particularly drawn to the contemporary person-
centred theory of configurations of self. (Mearns, 1999; Mearns & Thorne, 2000)
They have written In great length about their work with parts and state that all
configurations are important; including ‘not for growth’ parts; giving examples,
such as the part that wants to curl up and do nothing, or the part that wants to
go back. They say we must ‘actively value that part of the client as well as
understand its nature and existence.’
Wilkins (2010) confirms that they are normal, not pathological - and that they
are usually protective. It is not that these parts exist, that is the cause for
therapy, but that the relationship between the parts is conflictual or
disharmonious. One can see how this bears a similarity to Rogers’ earlier
mentioned notion of incongruence. Mearns & Thorne (2000) offer four
theoretical propositions about configurations: –
1. Configurations may be established around introjections about self
2. Configurations may also established around dissonant self – experience
3. Formative configurations assimilate other consistent elements
4. Configurations interrelate and reconfigure
This means to me, that they are born out of experiences and can change or
grow as experience does. Again, mirroring my humanistic belief in the potential
for growth and change.
21
There is much support for this way of working; Polster (1995) highlights the
importance of recognising different selves, and supports the development of
dialogue between them. Schwartz (1995) says that if clients can get to know
these internal parts, honouring each ones intentions and working through their
impasses; they will come to enjoy a more balanced, harmonious ‘internal family
system’. Badenoch (2008) states that as parts of self make peace, the brain
heals itself; the prefrontal cortex becomes wired into limbic regions, vertical
integration takes place and self- regulation becomes possible.
DeYoung (2015), believes that as long as we understand why working with
parts is helpful, we can be creative and don’t need to be specific or technical
about how we do it. I agree with this and find myself casually making reference
to these ideas in session; but by using non- technical language such as; “So
there’s a part of you that…?”
Similarly, I notice that clients sometimes say things like, “On the one hand I...
but on the other I…”
I often find that when language of ‘parts’ is introduced, clients jump at the
chance to talk about themselves in this ‘protected’ way; as if they are removed
from any potential shame, by describing thoughts or beliefs as parts. Ironically,
one could suggest this removes the client from their experience; but I believe
they are enabled to learn about themselves in this way. And as written earlier,
change occurs not with efforts to be different, but with acceptance of what is.
I like the suggestion that parts have stories to tell; their background, purpose
and motive, for example. Gilbert & Orlans (2011) refer to the parts as a cast of
characters and I love this. It suggests that exploring them is like exploring a
22
story and reminds me of Berne’s (1972) scripts and stories. Scripts, he says,
are ongoing life plans which are formed in early childhood under parental
pressure. They are primarily developed in response to parents demands, but
the child also develops their understanding creatively; through books, TV shows
and games. They use these influences as a base for understanding their own
lives and in adulthood, the ‘story’ is launched. These scripts and narratives are
evident in therapy if we pay attention, and we can work with them; enabling one
to adapt the script or create new ones, should they want to.
Something important for me, has been the exploration of my own parts. I have
already alluded to the fact that they bear presence in the therapy room; so it
seemed appropriate that this area be included in my search. In an almost
sinister manner, Page (1999) takes Jungs ‘shadow’ and applies it to our work as
therapists. He comments on the possible reasons for becoming a therapist;
saying that there are less than noble reasons too, such as; the need to be
needed; a curiosity that borders on voyeurism; or the enjoyment of being
‘important’ to our clients. Interestingly, he also suggests that therapists can
develop a persona for their work, which he likens to the ‘false self’. This is an
idea I touch upon later in this very piece of work, as I write of my struggles of
how to ‘be’ with a client.
Shadley (1987) carried out a study and concluded that the way in which
therapists made use of themselves in therapy, had less to do with theoretical
stance; but with personal realities, such as; gender, developmental stage and
personal attitudes. There is confirmation too, that the professional self is a
constantly evolving system, changed by the conscious and unconscious
interplay affecting the clinician. He acknowledged too; that therapists from all
23
orientations, found genuineness to be most important quality for effective use of
self.
Little (1951) believes that more experience takes us past over cautiousness and
that we can drop the mask; a suggestion that gives me hope. Friedenberg
(1973) states that therapist needs to also find their true self, in order to enable a
client to find theirs. Satir (1987) confirms this, writing that nothing changes until
the deepest self of the therapist and the deepest self of the person meet... what
a wonderful statement.
Baldwin (1999) advises that the therapist needs to recognise very clearly that
he or she is an imperfect person with flaws that make him vulnerable. He
stated, that some people who call themselves therapists, are actually too busy
defending themselves. I am trying to get to know my parts, how they impact on
my work and therefore am trying to be totally in the situation; in body, emotions,
in relating, in thoughts; in every way. (Bugental, 1978)
As Sullivan (1989) quite candidly puts it; “only by accepting and facing our own
madness can we hope to help our patients face theirs”.
2960 words
24
Context of Professional Practice
I work with the client written about here, at an independent charity. As
mentioned, it offers many services aiming to help people cope; providing
emotional and social support to residents in the borough and surrounding areas.
As part of this, they offer a free and confidential counselling service which
clients are able to access through other parts of the charity, via partnering
organisations or by referral from local G.P.’s. They are assessed and allocated
to a counsellor by the service manager, who determines best fit based on
counsellor personality, experience and expertise. Consideration is given also, to
client preference of therapists’ sex, nature of presenting issues and complexity
of need. Once my clients’ are allocated; I make initial contact and arrange our
first meeting. In order to ensure I work safely, ethically and in line with BACP
requirements; I attend supervision fortnightly, taking all of my clients and
working with recordings. I make reference to some of the work done in
supervision regarding this client, later in this case study; as this has been
something of great value to me whilst working with him, and throughout my
journey so far. It has enabled me to realise processes that may have been
taking place and to ensure that my therapeutic intent has been constantly
developing, remaining in the interest of the client.
25
Client Overview
My client is male and in his early 40’s. In the interest of confidentiality and
anonymity, I shall refer to him using the pseudonym ‘John’. John self- referred
and described himself as being depressed, desperate to make positive changes
in his life. He disclosed that he drank quite regularly in the evenings and told me
of things currently going on in his life. A life which, for him, was quite chaotic at
the time of starting therapy. John was dealing with a recent relationship
breakdown, an imminent court case regarding an allegation made by an ex-
partner and struggling to run a business whilst having no fixed abode. He had a
lot to contend with before even considering any emotional issues he may have
wanted to explore.
It is fair to say that I felt warmly towards John right from the start. I noticed that I
felt at ease during the first session and that time spent contracting was natural
and informal. Over a number of months leading up to our meeting, I had noticed
my style developing; and that increasingly, I would become less fixed and rigid
when addressing the points in my contracts (Appendices 5 & 6); discussing
them naturally whilst allowing the client to talk of their previous experiences
and/ or expectations of therapy. This was even more noticeable with John.
He presented as quite ‘laddish’, dismissing the impact of his situation and
seemed to lack the vocabulary to speak about his feelings. He spoke of needing
the therapy to ‘feel right’, informing me that he had tried “a few sessions of
26
counselling” before, but that something didn’t feel right and that he wasn’t into
the “awkward silences.”
We spoke about what he wanted from our time together and he said that he
was convinced he was “doing something wrong”, that his life was a mess and
that he wanted to make changes. He gave a brief overview of the past few
years, sharing stories of an ‘off the rails’ teenager, recent failed relationships
and his current struggle to get by and feel good about himself. He didn’t speak
of any specific goals per se, but repeatedly insisted he had to make some
changes; speaking as if this was his last chance.
27
The work:
During our earlier sessions it became very clear to me that John so desperately
wanted to get things right. He constantly seemed to want to ensure what he was
doing was okay and seemed to look to me for approval. I wondered about his
self-esteem. This alerted me to Stern’s (1985) notion of self- agency and that
perhaps some work was required with John, to develop his. Part of my
therapeutic intent became to look for opportunities to provide validation, until
came a point that it was appropriate to slowly withdraw it, as his self- agency
was restored. This is akin to Erskine’s (1998) aforementioned relational needs;
in particular, the need for validation within a relationship. Continuing in the same
vein; that of forming therapeutic intent and assessment; there was a strong
sense early on of his needs having not been met; and he also shared that he
drank quite regularly in the evenings, usually to “switch off.” I wondered about
his attachment style and remembered that Main (1990) emphasised importance
of narrative and how a story is told. John didn’t seem to display much affect as
he spoke about things that he said bothered him; and often seemed dismissive
of feelings. I wondered if he had, at that time, an avoidant attachment style
(Ainsworth et al, 1978). I specify “at the time”, because as (Bowlby, 1988)
maintains; ones’ attachment style can change through self-reflection and
experiences of corrective relationships.
He would speak about past relationships with what seemed a hint of anger, yet
would be resistant to name that as his feeling or even that he was feeling
28
anything at all. As he described things or made statements about events; he
spoke very much in black and white terms and was fixed in his outlook. These
are clinical aspects of an insecure attachment style (Holmes, 1999) and mean
that my first task became to create a safe space for him to feel comfortable to
explore, with a view to eventually being able to make contact with his anger or
emotion. I hoped that his experience of the attitudinal conditions I offered, would
help to facilitate this. My internal supervisor (Casement 1985) led me to
consider my own attachment style, which I believe to also be, at times,
avoidant. I was aware that this could lead to my being easily drawn into content
and narrative, or to indulge in intellectualisation. This is something I kept in mind
and was sure to explore in supervision. When thinking about Roger’s Stages of
Process, I determined John to be at stage three upon entering therapy. There
was some expression of feelings (not in the moment), but little acceptance of
them. It was clear that he felt they were something bad or shameful. Rogers
(1961) said that during this stage, self is a reflected object, existing primarily in
others. This means that his self-structure was dependent on others, or that he
had an ‘external locus of evaluation’. Tolan (2003) too, talks about stages of
process and suggests that we can think about the stages of process as a
spectrum. For example; from rigidity to fluidity. He goes on to explain that it is
the general direction of movement that is important, rather than the specific
position of the client. In the case of John, I was aiming to enable him to move
from fearing feelings towards accepting them; from living to others’ judgements
toward living according to his own values and experience; and from not
believing he can change, to welcoming it.
29
As therapy progressed I learned about some of his earlier experiences as he
slowly shared them with me. It became very clear that he had received a lot of
messages throughout his life telling him he was wrong. I learned that he would
often be ‘wound up’ as a child and then scorned if he was to eventually react in
anger or frustration. Subsequently, he was extremely self- critical, thus alerting
me to his potential shame process (Tomkins 1961, 1962 & DeYoung, 2015). I
was beginning to understand why he might want to distance himself from
feelings of anger; it seemed an expected or fair response, given the conditions
he had experienced so frequently. His difficulty in accessing feelings; and his
history of being defined by others are typical indications of an underdeveloped
‘core self’ (Stern, 1985). This thought allowed me to build on my initial intent,
and I started to think about working to develop this aspect of his self- structure.
There was a clear impact from these childhood experiences and a strong
message of “I shouldn’t be angry” being received. I wanted to gently challenge
this introjection (Rogers, 1961), encouraging John to chew over ideas, coming
to his own conclusions (MacKewn, 1997).
Our journey continued, as we spent time settling in and gently exploring his
feelings in response to what was going on currently, and to his relationship with
his ex- partner. I became aware very quickly that he saw me as ‘the expert
healer’; despite me having made it very clear that we were working alongside
one another and that he possessed all he needed to grow and change. He
would often ask, “How do I do that?” or “Is that the way it should be?”
As I think about the ‘parts’ mentioned earlier, during this beginning phase of
therapy, I could clearly see some different parts that were particularly
prominent. A part that was apparently worthless and always wrong, and a part
30
that was desperate and wanted something different. The problem was; that this
part didn’t know how to achieve this and felt he needed someone to show him. I
continued to attempt to allow John to feel comfortable and safe, intending to
meet some his immediate needs of consistency, validation and encouragement.
I hoped that this would enable him to perhaps reach a point where he was
comfortable enough to show me more, to trust me… and himself.
Something that started to become evident in supervision was that there was a
lack of depth in the work, or rather that we would skim the surface and then
seem to move away. Almost like we were dipping in and out… or ‘dancing
around the edge’ of the issues. I wondered about John’s ‘window of tolerance’
(Schore 1994) and whether he was, at times, moving into a fragile processing
style of relating (Warner, 2005); namely that of hypo- arousal, in which a ‘freeze’
type response is typical. I wondered if John could have been experiencing a
numbing of his emotions and disabled cognition, due to great difficulty in coping
with his feelings. Clients can often readily give up on the idea that their
experiences are significant during this process and John would often say, “It’s
right, I’ve been worse,” or “I’m just being daft!” When this happens for clients,
there is a strong need to be affirmed and validated in their experience; which is
in fitting with the therapeutic intent I had formed. I decided that this was all quite
possible and it confirmed that I needed to continue validating him and working
on developing the relationship. Notable at this point also, is that during this
period of our time together, my supervisor noticed a flatness in my responses
whilst listening to a recording; and I began to wonder about counter-
transferences or parallel processes at play. This confirmed to me the
31
importance of supervision, as I may not have been aware that this was going
on, had it not been pointed out or suggested to me.
I began to wonder more about what was happening for me and thought about
my relationships with other clients I was seeing at the same time. I realised that
there were times I didn’t feel like I was responding as instinctively as I could
with some other clients. It was as if it was sometimes more difficult to respond
naturally and I puzzled for a while, as to why this was. I felt warmly towards him
and empathised with his situation, which was indeed a horrible one; but there
was something going on that meant I could find it difficult to respond. I kept this
awareness in the fore- front of my mind and work continued at a steady pace,
the relationship developing positively. I continued my efforts to maintain the
power balance in the relationship, resisting John’s attempts to place me in the
position of expert. I wanted him to see that he possessed all the solutions to his
problems, encouraging his autonomy (BACP, 2013). I feel that Yalom (2002)
described it brilliantly, when he explained that he wanted the client to see that it
was them who was the ‘magician’, who had really helped themselves. I love this
way of putting it.
John was starting to develop his vocabulary for feelings and this was a positive
sign that his verbal self (Stern, 1985) was developing. However, he seemed to
have trouble reflecting and identifying with them in the moment. Subsequently,
we spent what turned out to be quite a key session, looking at John’s feelings
and paying particular attention to the physical sensations he was feeling at that
time. I wrote earlier that I had considered the possibility that he was
experiencing hypo- arousal and that this could disconnect him from his feelings,
or cause him to dissociate (Mann, 2010). Quite fittingly, it is common for affect
32
to be held physically when disassociation takes place and (Schore, 1994) also
suggests that this can be the case for implicit memory; physically held
memories of events from a pre-verbal age. John described what he was feeling,
as a ball in his stomach and we began to look at it, examining how it felt; it’s
texture, colour, size and such. I did this tentatively, as he appeared a little self-
conscious initially, admitting that it felt “a bit weird” talking about a ball inside
him. However, to his credit he trusted me and continued, describing the ball as
fuzzy with the potential to grow if he started to feel worse. At times he would
feel it growing as he spoke about it, and he would say “it feels bad”, when asked
about the emotions. Later, he began to name some of the feelings that were
incorporated into it, describing it as being a ball of ‘negativity’; full of worry, fear
and anger. It seemed that this intervention had helped him to gradually connect
with the unnamed emotions at the edge of his awareness (Gendlin, 1981). I
empathised with him as he told me how horrible this ball felt; letting him know
that I could understand why he would want to keep this ball as small as
possible. This session allowed John to connect with, and name his feelings for
the first time; and in turn presented the opportunity for me to give him empathy,
validation and safety in doing so. This was to be a slow process though, and I
noticed that he particularly didn’t want to feel the anger. He spoke of being
scared that the anger would take over, and held a genuinely fearful expression
as he told me, “...things would be bad if that happened.” (If the feelings of anger
were fully expressed).
In supervision and upon reflecting upon our work, I considered the emotions he
had now identified. The fear and worry indicated a strong presence of anxiety.
When we are anxious, I believe there is a great need for a calming other; to
33
soothe, normalise and support. If we are left alone to deal with this; feelings
escalate and over time; present physically and are triggered easily. It was clear
to me that John would benefit from a safe and holding environment, in which he
could explore his feelings with calm and accepting other. Therefore, I was
mindful of the need for me to be rhythmically attuned (Erskine et al, 1999),
managing pace and taking care not to rush or pressure him.
He had also mentioned that anger was within the mix of feelings inside the
fuzzy ball. He was very resistant to stay with this feeling however, and said that
he hated getting angry. He pretty much skimmed over this emotion entirely and
this turned out to be quite significant...
It had felt like a positive journey so far; John was thriving and making progress
as he was increasingly able to talk about his feelings. I felt extremely warm
towards him and we had encountered some real moments of connection. I felt
pleased that it was starting to seem like John valued the space; and that a
strong alliance had been formed. He would say that he had been looking
forward to coming and he attended consistently. Clarkson (2003) said an
alliance has been established when these things are evident; and when the
relationship can withstand a rupture. I have thought about what happened next
quite a bit, wondering whether it fits this last criterion.
John had long needed connection and empathy; and I have remarked a few
times earlier that I had hoped he could make contact with his feelings and show
me more of himself. John arrived one evening and I immediately noticed his
demeanour was different from usual and his mood seemed low. As we spoke,
he seemed quiet and his responses were minimal. I enquired about his feelings
34
and he started to make comments about his ex- partner. I could hear a hurt in
his voice, which gradually turned into what sounded to me, like a bitterness. The
session continued and whilst it seemed difficult for him to stay with his feelings,
I made good use of self, which helped maintain connection. John then began to
question the therapy and the process we were going through. “I’ve been
wondering what were supposed to be doing?” and “What’s the point of this”, he
asked. I think his questions caught me off guard and I stumbled in my
responses. I asked what he meant and what followed was a conversation about
the past month or so and his experiences with me. He began to question the
work done, asking why we were always talking about feelings; and as he spoke,
I could almost hear an impatience or frustration in his voice. I could see him
seeming to hold it back though, and he began to think carefully about what he
was saying; changing his statements into more tentative questions as opposed
to what were previously bordering on challenges. “I’m just wondering what I’m
supposed to be doing… what I need to do to move forward.” As we continued, it
became clear that he was still desperately looking for ‘results’, and perhaps
quick solutions. Many things passed through my mind; I wondered how to
respond and could feel a temptation to justify the therapy or explain the
process; I also felt sad, as it illustrated the desperate place he was in; and I was
reminded again, of his need for my ‘expert’ opinion. For the first time; I
experienced some difficulty responding and I recall listening to the recording in
supervision, second guessing my interventions. Part of me wanted to justify
what we had been doing, explaining that things take time; which almost felt like I
was making ‘excuses’ for him not ‘seeing results’. Another part was curious
about his frustration and wanted to stay with this, as it was often avoided.
35
Meanwhile, another part of me began to feel slightly unnerved and didn’t know
what to do. In the end; I think a mixture of the above is what actually took place.
John slowly quietened with ‘half of an explanation’ and what I imagine to be
guilty feelings for having ‘questioned’ me.
I spent some time in supervision trying to unpick what happened… for me, and
for John. What I realised is that this was progress; John had flirted with the idea
of challenging another, questioning something and voicing his frustration. We
didn’t quite get there, but I felt we were moving in the right direction; perhaps
from rigidity towards fluidity. I was also aware that something went on for me;
different parts of me wanted to respond in different ways. A little more time
passed and John’s ability to access and recognise feelings continued to
develop, leading up to another key session in which John tried again. It is only
upon listening back to the session, (something which I have done many, many
times) that I realised that this was like a re- run or ‘another go’ at the session I
just mentioned. John came in presenting as low and distant, until he spoke of
things that angered him; at which point he began to question me again.
Similarly, I was aware of the same processes at play too. My hesitance and
caution in responding; my worry about getting it ‘wrong’. I genuinely found the
session to be really difficult, questioning every intervention made and feeling
very challenged. This was an unfamiliar feeling, as I think John is the first client
I have experienced such a situation with. I found myself, even in the moment,
struggling to decide the ‘best way’ to answer his questions, or satisfy his need
for insight in the process he was going through. I am reminded about how there
are many factors that influence the way I work; codes and ethics, theoretical
grounding, personal beliefs and philosophy; all of which were almost hanging
36
over me as I tried to decide whether to explain, justify, challenge or question.
Throughout this process, I at times simply reflected some of my experience or
feelings; “This really emphasises to me how desperate you must be for change,
John”; and, “...that makes me feel sad.” I realised afterwards, that it was those
kinds of responses that seemed to be most effective. The session did finish
positively; and actually John was able to wrestle with what it was he was really
‘pissed off’ about; the fact that he saw his life being so different to the way it
was now. He spoke about his feelings directly, owning them; and was even able
to admit feeling frustration with me and the therapy; stating that he wanted to
see ‘results’ and that exploring feelings just seemed to be important to me.
Although I had experienced some moments of great difficulty; I felt so pleased
afterwards!
We had spent time building the relationship and I had focused on validating
John, in an attempt to build his self- confidence and belief, so that maybe he
could start to work on accessing and owning his feelings. In this session, John
fully allowed a very real part of himself to emerge; and although I had ‘struggled’
during the process; I accepted and valued this part, communicating to him that it
was okay. His expression of anger is part of Rogers (1961) view of an optimal
therapy; in that the client experiences things that have past been denied. He
feels his anger, he is his anger, he realises he’s discovered an aspect of
himself. I hoped that his behaviour and similar experiences; would lead to
constructive change, that he would no longer fear the feelings, but welcome
them as a part of his evolving and developing self. I believe, like any other
emotion; that we have a need to know our anger and to express and accept it; a
notion confirmed by Stern’s (1985) self- affectivity. John was enabled to feel;
37
and to know that it is ok. That he can be in control of it; something he didn’t
believe to be the case before, as he was terrified of being overcome. His
expression of emotion was met by the required reciprocal response (Erskine &
Moursand, 2004); in this case, one of respect, openness to be impacted and
taking his anger seriously.
This proved to be a major milestone in our journey and a difference in John’s
mood and demeanour was noticeable thereafter. After a few more sessions,
John came in one evening; at first quiet and almost low in mood; and then was
suddenly filled with energy. He began to reject the idea that he was ‘always
wrong’, or that other people’s input even mattered. It was almost like a
rebellious part had emerged and he was filled with motivation to make changes.
He didn’t actually say it; but it was as if he was yelling a big “Up yours!” to all
that had got him down or mistreated him. It was exciting! He was even open to
see the progress that he had made and the session changed, as we found
ourselves looking at the journey so far and likening it to a garden. John said “I
feel ready to grow.” The metaphor continued and we compared the work done,
to that of laying the foundations of a garden and preparing the ‘flower bed.’ I
was conscious of being realistic, because this felt like the beginning so to
speak; but I couldn’t help but share his enthusiasm, feeling happy and proud.
John had entered the session initially feeling pretty flat and unenthusiastic,
adding even more value to what followed. It gave it a sense of being genuine,
real… and organic. We finished the session feeling positive, connected and
filled with hope.
It had been quite a ride already; and there was much more to do. I am still
working with John; and although recent developments in external events have
38
‘rocked the boat’ a little bit, I am hopeful that we will continue to move steadily in
the right direction. I will continue trying to provide cathartic interventions (Heron,
1975); that is those that facilitate feeling. I have learned some valuable lessons
with John; about therapy, the way I work; and myself. I have thought a lot about
my struggle at times in our work, especially about my process in relation to it. I
wondered if just as he wanted to get therapy right, so too, did I. I felt so
positively about the emergence of his anger, after all I had been working to
enable him to get there. Was there then a pressure to respond appropriately so
as not to ‘undo’ what had been achieved, or to ‘scare him’ back into his shell? I
wondered if deep down I sensed a fragile part of him and was scared to
damage him; receiving the meta- communication (Safran & Muran, 2003), “Be
careful, I can’t handle it.”
I have wondered which of my ‘parts’ came into play in the therapy room; and
actually, which parts make up the therapist ‘version’ of me. I strive to be fully
present and all of myself in the room, but would be ignorant to deny that
unconscious processes and relational triggers effect who I ‘am’ and where I
respond from. Take, for instance, Cashdan’s (1988) projective identification of
dependency. Projective Identification occurs when a person inserts his/her own
parts into ‘the other’, inducing them to act in accordance with what is projected.
In supervision I have thought about the line between validation and rescue.
Could John’s constant placement of expert status, have allowed him to
unconsciously adopt a stance of helplessness; and in kind, encouraged an urge
in me to help and fix?
It could be argued that the very fact I want to be ‘fully myself’, in order to ‘do it
right’, says something about my parts anyway. As I agonised over how to
39
respond when I felt challenged, I am now aware that a grapple was taking place
between the parts of my still forming therapist. “What would my training tell me
to do?” “Is this humanistic?” “How would my tutor respond?”, “What feels
right…?”
I am discovering that actually, what is taking place for me is a slow integration of
my personal and professional self. Although I have a clear philosophy, which is
outlined in this very piece of work; the nuances of what I truly believe about
therapy and how I work, are being shaped all the time. What’s becoming clear is
that my interventions are most successful when I respond from a real and
genuine place; when I can drop the tendency to want to get it right, or provide a
‘therapist’ response. This doesn’t mean that every part of me spills out into the
room; just that all of me is acknowledged. Some parts are bracketed and some
are used in the interest of the work and the relationship. I can accept all of who I
am… as opposed to ignoring or denying parts in a quest to ‘do it right’; just as I
wish that for my clients. As Yalom (2002) states; therapist disclosure begets
client disclosure. Our ‘I’, invites theirs (Buber, 1958).
I continue to work on getting to know my own parts in therapy and have named
several of them; ‘the good man’, ‘the entertainer’, ‘the critical one’, ‘the teacher’
and ‘the angry insecure one’ are all regular characters in my story. I am
continuing to consider the implications of these characters and their presence in
the therapy room. This is something I feel I need to do for myself; but also for
my work and my clients; I am better for it.
4803 words
40
Conclusion:
As seen; our parts really are the driving force in all we do. They are shaped and
formed by our ongoing experiences and each come into play in different
situations. Some helpful, some not; but all protective. The work we can do as
therapists in enabling clients to meet and understand all of their parts, is
invaluable. Theorists and researchers too; see the benefit; and there have been
vast amounts written about what exactly these parts are, and how they are
formed. One thing that is agreed upon though, is that there is much to gain from
working with them. In doing so, a client can learn so much about themselves
and be enabled to connect; with themselves and with others. They can exist in a
much more integrated way, living with choice about who they are and what they
do. John was able to accept his angry part; allowing more of himself to emerge,
leading to real moments of connection between us… moments I will never
forget.
Of course, the therapist is made up of his/ her own parts and the mix created by
client and counsellor is one to watch. John certainly called on some of my
insecure parts; and I had trouble knowing how to ‘be’. What I learned was that
actually, I needed to be simply myself; and respond from a genuine or
congruent place; remembering that this means keeping light of your true self,
whilst acknowledging that it is shaped by social constructs and personal
experiences.
Karter (2002) says the fear of ‘getting it right’, is a powerful inhibitor for students
and that we all go through a rite of passage; getting to the other side and feeling
41
free to drop the mask and be our true selves. I hope to continue to drop mine;
so I can fully use myself for the benefit of my work and clients. That single thing
has been recognised as the most important factor in developing a therapeutic
relationship (Andolfi, Ellenwood & Wendt, 1993; Baldwin, 1999)
I feel privileged to do the work I am able to do, and am excited for what lays
ahead. It has been an eventful and challenging journey so far; one full of rich
learning and harsh truths. As I come to the end of my degree, I can’t help but
think this was only the prologue; and that there will be many more parts to play,
in the next chapter.
The show must go on…
42
References:
Ainsworth, M.D.S., Blehar, M.C., Waters, E., and Wall, S. (1978) Patterns of
Attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum
Andolfi, M., Ellenwood, A. E. & Wendt, R. N. (1993) The creation of the fourth
planet: Beginning therapist and supervisors inducing change in families. The
American Journal of Family Therapy, 21 (4), pp 301 – 312.
BACP (2013) Ethical Framework for Good Practice in Counselling &
Psychotherapy. [online] available from
<http://www.bacp.co.uk/admin/structure/files/pdf/9479_ethical%20framework%2
0jan2013.pdf> [22nd April 2015]
Badenoch, B. (2008) Being a Brain- Wise Therapist; A Practical Guide to
Interpersonal Neurobiology. New York: Norton
Baldwin, M. (1999) The Use of Self in Therapy. London: Routledge
Bandura, A. (1995) ‘Exercise of Personal and Collective Efficacy in Changing
Societies’, in A. Bandura (ed.), Self- Efficacy in Changing Societies. New York:
Cambridge University Press. pp. 1- 45
Bennett, M. (2005) The Purpose of Counselling and Psychotherapy, Hampshire:
Palgrave Macmillan
43
Berne, E. (1961) Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy, London: Evergreen
Books
Berne, E. (1972) What Do You Say After Hello. London: Corgi
Beisser, A. (1970) The Paradoxical Theory of Change [online] available from <
http://www.gestalt.org/arnie.htm> [22nd April 2015]
Bogart, V. (2007) Explore the Undiscovered You: Three Paths to Self-
Discovery and Empowerment, Walnut Creek, CA: Baskin Publishing.
Bond, T. (2004). Standards and Ethics for Counselling in Action, London: Sage.
Bowlby, J. (1988) A Secure Base, New York: Basic Books
Bowlby, J. (2005) A Secure Base. Clinical Applications of Attachment Theory.
London: Routledge
Buber, M. (1958). I and Thou. (R. G. Smith, Trans.), New York: Axribner
Bugental, J. (1978) Psychotherapy and Process: The Fundamentals of an
Existential- Humanistic Approach. New York: McGraw- Hill
Burns, R. B. (1980) Essential Psychology, MTP Press
Casement, P. (1985) On Learning From The Patient. New York: Routledge
Casemore, R. (2011) Person Centred Counselling in a Nutshell. London: Sage
Cashdan, S. (1988) Object relations Theory: Using the Relationship. London:
W. W. Norton & Company
44
Clarkson, P. (2003) The Therapeutic Relationship. Second Edition. London:
Whurr Publishers Limited
Clarkson, P. (2004) Gestalt Counselling in Action. London: Sage
Cooper, M. (1999) If You Can’t Be Jekyll Be Hyde: An Existential
Phenomenological Exploration on Lived- Plurality. In J. Rowan & M. Cooper
(eds.) The Plural Self: Multiplicity in Everyday Life. London: Sage
Cottone, R. (1988) Epistemological and Ontological Issues in Counselling:
Implications of Social Systems Theory. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 1 (4),
357 – 65
Cozolino, L. (2002) The Neuroscience of Psychotherapy. New York, Norton.
Denzin, N. K. (1987) “A Phenomenology of the Emotionally Divided Self”, in K.
Yardley & T. Hones (eds.) Self and Identity, Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
DeYoung, P.A. (2015) Understanding and Treating Chronic Shame: A
Relational/Neurobiological Approach. London: Routledge
Dobzhansky, T.G. (1967) The Biology of Ultimate Concern (Perspectives in
Humanism) New American Library
Erskine, R. (1998) Attunement and Involvement: therapeutic responses to
relational needs. International Journal of Psychotherapy.
Erskine, R. & Mursand, J. (2004) Integrative Psychotherapy: the Art and
Science of Relationship. London: Wadsworth
45
Erskine, R., Moursund, J.P., and Trautmann, R.L. (1999) Beyond Empathy. A
Therapy of Contact-in-Relationship. Abingdon: Routledge
Erwin, E. (1997) Philosophy and Psychotherapy, London: Sage
Fairbairn, W. R. D. (1952) Psychoanalytic Studies of the Personality, London:
Tavistock.
Freedman, J. & Combs, G. (1996) Narrative Therapy: The Social Construction
of Preferred Realities, New York: W. W. Norton
Freud, S. (1953- 1974) The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological
Works of Sigmund Freud (se), 24 vols. tr. J. Strachey. London: Hogarth Press
Friedenberg, E.Z. (1973) R.D. Laing. New York: Viking Press
Gendlin, E.T. (1981) The Focussing-Oriented Psychotherapy: A Manual of the
Experiential Method (Practicing Professional). New York: Guildford Press
Gerhardt, S. (2004) Why Love Matters. How Affection Shapes a Baby’s Brain.
London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group
Gilbert, M. & Orlans, V. (2011) Integrative Therapy: 100 Key Points and
Techniques, London: Routledge
Goffman, E. (1974) Frame Analysis, New York: Harper & Row.
Gross, R. D. (1990) Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour, London:
Hodder and Stoughton
Guntrip, H. (1971) Psychoanalytic Theory; Therapy and the Self, New York:
Basic Books
46
Gurdjieff, G. (1950) Meetings with Remarkable Men, London: Routledge.
Hannah, B (1981) Encounters with the soul: Active imagination as developed by
C G Jung Boston: Sigo Press
Hermans, H. J. M. (2004) “The Dialogical Self: Between Exchange and Power”,
in H .J. M. Angus & J. McLeod (eds.) (2004) The Handbook of Narrative and
Psychotherapy: Practice, Theory and Research, London: Sage
Heron, J. (1975) Six-category Intervention Analysis: The Human Potential
Research Project. Guildford: University of Surrey, Centre for Adult Education.
Hill, C. E. & Knox, S. (2002) ‘Self- Disclosure’, in J. C. Norcross (ed),
Psychotherapy Relationships That Work: Therapists Contributions and
Responsiveness to Patients. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 37- 69
Holmes, J. (1999) John Bowlby & Attachment Theory. London: Routledge
Janov, S. (1970) The Primal Scream, New York: Putnam.
Jung, C. G. (1928) “The Structure of the Psyche”, in Collected Works Vol. 8,
London: Routledge
Kahn, M. (2001) Between Therapist and Client. The New Relationship. New
York, USA: Henry Holt and Company
Karen, R. (1994) Becoming Attached. New York, Warner Books.
Klein, M. (1948) Contributions to Psychoanalysis, London: Hogarth Press
Kohut, H. (1971) The Analysis of the Self. New York: International Universities
Press.
47
Laing, R. D. (1976) The Facts of Life, Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
Lake, F. (1966) Clinical Theology, London: Darton, Longman & Todd.
Lewin, K. (1936) Topological Psychology, New York: McGraw- Hill.
Little, M. (1951) Countertransference and the Patients Response To It.
International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 32, 32- 40.
MacKewn, J. (1997) Developing Gestalt Counselling. London: Sage
Main, M. (1990) Cross- Cultural Attitudes of Attachment Organisation: Recent
Studies, Changing Methodologies and the Concept of Conditional Strategies.
Human Development, 33, pp 48- 61.
Mair, M. (1977) “The Community of Self”, in D. Bannister (ed.) New
Perspectives in Personal Construct Theory, London: Academic Press.
Mann, D. (2010) Gestalt Therapy: 100 Key Points and Techniques. London:
Routledge
Maslow, A. (1954) Motivation and personality. New York: Harper
McLeod, l. (1993) ‘The Self in Gestalt Therapy Theory’, British Gestalt Journal,
2 (1): 25- 40
Miller, J.B. (1986) “What do we mean by Relationships?” Work in Progress,
Stone Center Working Paper Series No. 22. Wellesley, Mass.: Stone Center.
Mearns, D. (1999) Person- Centred Therapy with Configurations of Self.
Counselling 10 (2) 125- 130
48
Mearns, D & Cooper, M (2005) Working at Relational Depth in Counselling and
Psychotherapy. London: Sage
Mearns, D. and Thorne, B. (1999) Person-Centred Counselling in Action. Fourth
Edition. London: SAGE Publications Ltd
Mearns, D. & Thorne, B. (2000) Person Centred Therapy Today: New Frontiers
in Theory and Practice. London: Sage
Murphy, G. (1947). A Biosocial Approach to Personality: Origins and Structure.
Harper & Row Publishers
Nicholson, B. (1991) ‘Narcissism’, in H. Jackson (ed.), Using Self- Psychology
in Psychotherapy. London: Jason Aronson, inc.. pp. 27- 47.
Page, S. (1999) The Shadow and the Counsellor; Working With Darker Aspects
of the Person, Role and Profession, London: Routledge
Perls, F. S. (1951) Gestalt Therapy, New York: Dell.
Perls, F., Hefferline, R. and Goodman, P. (1951) Gestalt Therapy: Excitement
and Growth
Polster, E. (1995) A Population of Selves. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass
Reeves, A. (2013) An Introduction to Counselling and Psychotherapy. London:
Sage
Rogers, C. (1957) ‘The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic
Personality Change.’ Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 95-103
49
Rogers, C. (1959) ‘A Theory of Therapy, Personality, and Interpersonal
Relationships, As Developed in the Client- Centered Framework’. In (1989) The
Carl Rogers Reader ed. By Kirschenbaum, H. and Land Henderson, V. London:
Constable & Co. Ltd, 236- 257
Rogers, C. (1961) On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View of
Psychotherapy. London: Constable
Rogers, C. (1992) The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic
Personality Change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60 (6), 827-
832
Rowan, J. (1998) The Reality Game. A Guide to Humanistic Counselling and
Psychotherapy. Second Edition. East Sussex: Routledge
Rowan, J. (2010) Personification, London: Routledge
Sartre, Jean-Paul, “The Transcendence of the Ego” The Phenomenology
Reader, eds. Dermot Moran and Timothy Mooney (London: Routledge, 2002),
386
Satir, V. (1978) Your Many Faces, Berkeley, CA: Celestial Arts
Satir, V. (1987). The therapist story. Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family,
3(1), 17–25.
Schore, A. (1994) Affect Regulation and the Origins of the Self: The
Neurobiology of Emotional Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
50
Schore, A. N. (2001) Minds in the Making: Attachment, the Self-Organising
Brain, and Developmentally-Oriented Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy. British
Journal of Psychotherapy 17 (3) 229-328
Schwartz, R. C. (1995) Internal Family Systems Therapy, Guilford Press
Shadley, M. A. (1987) Are all Therapists Alike? Use of Self in Family Therapy: A
Multi- Dimensional Perspective. Journal of Psychotherapy in the Family, 3, 1,
127 - 137
Shapiro, S. B. (1976) The Selves Inside You, Berkeley, CA: Explorations
Institute.
Siegel, D.J. (1999) The Developing Mind. New York: Guildford Press
Spinelli, E. (2005) The Interpreted World: An Introduction to Phenomenological
Psychology. Second Edition. London: SAGE Publications Limited
SPTI (2014) SPTI Code of Ethics & Professional Practice. [online] available
from
<http://www.spti.net/Downloads/documents/SPTI%20Code%20of%20Ethics%2
0&%20Professional%20Practice.pdf> [22nd April 2015]
Stern, D. (1985) The Interpersonal World of The Infant: A view From
Psychoanalysis and Developmental Psychology. New York: Basic Books
Stern, D. (2004) The Present Moment in Psychotherapy and Everyday Life.
London: W. W. Norton & Company
Stevenson, R. L. (1886) Strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. London:
Longmans, Green & Co.
51
Stiles, W. & Glick, M. (2002) “Client- Centred Therapy with Multi- Voiced
Clients: Empathy with Whom?”, in J. C. Watson, R. N. Goldman & M. S. Warner
(eds.) Client- Centred and Experiential Psychotherapy in the 21st Century:
Advances in Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 406- 414), Llangarron, UK:
PCCS Books.
Sullivan, B. S. (1989) Psychotherapy Grounded in the Feminine Principle.
Wilmette: Chiron
Tolan, J. (2003) Skills in Person Centred Counselling and Psychotherapy.
London: Sage
Tolkien, J. R. R. (1937) The Hobbit, or there and back again. London: George
Allen & Unwin
Tomkins, S. (1961) Affect/Imagery/Consciousness: Vol. 1 The Positive Affects.
New York: Springer
Tomkins, S. (1962) Affect/Imagery/Consciousness: Vol. 1 The Negative Affects.
New York: Springer
Vanaerschot, G. (1990) The Process of Empathy: Holding and Letting Go. In G. Litear,
J. Rombouts & R. Van Balens (eds.) Client Centred and Experiential Psychotherapy in
the Nineties (p205- 224) Leuven, Belgium.
Watson, J. C., Greenberg, I. S. & Lietaer, G. (1998) “The Experiential Paradigm
Unfolding: Relationship and Experiencing in Therapy”, in l. S. Greenberg, J. C.
Watson & G. Lietaer (eds.) Handbook of Experiential Psychotherapy, New York:
Guilford Press.
52
Whitton, E. (2003) Humanistic Approach to Psychotherapy. London: Whurr
Publishers Ltd
Wilkins, P. (2010) Person Centred Therapy: 100 Key Points. London: Routledge
Winnicott, D. (1960) The theory of the parent-child relationship, International
Journal of Psychoanalysis, 41:585-595
Winnicott, D. W. (1965) The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating
Environment, London: Hogarth Press
Woods, M., 1987, “Plato's Division of the Soul”, Proceedings of the British
Academy, 73: 23–47
Yalom, I. D. (2002) The Gift of Therapy. London: Piatkus
Zinker, J. (1978) Creative Process in Gestalt Therapy. London: Vintage Books
53
Appendix 1:
Rogers’ 19 Propositions:
1. Every individual exists in a continually changing world of experience of which

he is the centre.
2. The organism reacts to the field as it is experienced and perceived. This

perceptual; field is, for the individual, reality.
3. The organism reacts as a whole to this phenomenal field.
4. The organism has one basic tendency and striving - to actualize, maintain,
and enhance the experiencing organism.
5. Behaviour is basically the goal-directed attempt of the organism to satisfy its

needs as experience, in the field as perceived.
6. Emotion accompanies and in general facilitates such goal directed behaviour,

the kind of emotion being related to the socking versus the consummatory
aspects of the behaviour, and the intensity of the emotion being related to the
perceived significance of the behaviour for the maintenance and enhancement
of the organism.
7. The best vantage point for understanding behaviour is from the internal frame
of reference for the individual himself.
8. A portion of the total perceptual field gradually becomes differentiated as the

self.
9. As a result of interaction with the environment, and particularly as a result of

evaluational interaction with others, the structure of self is formed - an
organized, fluid, but consistent conceptual pattern of perceptions of
characteristics and relationships of the “I” or the “me” together with values
attached to these concepts.
10. The values attach themselves to experiences, and the values which are a
54
part of the self structure, in some instances are values experienced directly by
the organism, and in some instances are values introjected or taken over from
others, but perceived in distorted fashion, as if they had been experienced
directly.
11. As experiences occur in the life of the individual, they are either (a)
symbolised, perceived, and organized into some relationship to the self, (b)
ignored because there is no perceived relationship to the self - structure, (c)
denied symbolisation or given a distorted symbolization because the experience
is inconsistent with the structure of the self.
12. Most of the ways of behaving which are adopted by the organism are those
which are inconsistent with the concept of self.
13. Behaviour may, in some instances, be brought about by organic experiences

and needs which have not been symbolized. Such behaviour may be
inconsistent with the structure of the self, but in such instances the behaviour is
not “owned” by the individual.
14. Psychological maladjustment exists when the organism denies to

awareness significant sensory and visceral experiences, which consequently
are not symbolised and organized into the gestalt of the self-structure. When
this situation exists, there is a basic or potential psychological tension.
15. Psychological adjustment exists when the concept of the self is such that all
the sensory and visceral experiences of the organism are, or may be,
assimilated on a symbolic level into a consistent relationship with the concept of
self.
16. Any experience which is inconsistent with the organization or structure of

self may be perceived as a threat and the more of these perceptions there are,
the more rigidly the self-structure is organized to maintain itself.
17. Under certain conditions, involving primarily complete absence of any threat
to the self structure, experiences which are inconsistent with it may be
perceived, and examined, and the structure of self revised to assimilate and
include such experiences.
18. When the individual perceives and accepts into one consistent and
integrated system all his sensory and visceral experiences, then he is
necessarily more understanding of others and is more accepting of others as
separate individuals.
55
19. As the individual perceives and accepts into his self-structure more of his
organic experiences, he finds that he is replacing his present value system -
based so largely upon introjections which have been distortedly symbolized -
with a continuing organismic valuing process.
56
Appendix 2:
Rogers’ Six Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Change:
1. Two persons are in psychological contact
2. The first, whom we shall term the client, is in a state of incongruence,
being vulnerable or anxious
3. The second person, whom we shall term the therapist, is congruent or
integrated in relationship
4. The therapist experiences unconditional positive regard for the client
5. The therapist experiences an empathic understanding of the client’s
internal frame of reference and endeavours to communicate this
experience to the client
6. The communication to the client of the therapists empathic
understanding and unconditional positive regard is to a minimal degree
achieved
57
Appendix 3:
Rogers’ Seven Stages of Process:
Stage One: client is very defensive and resistant to change.
Stage Two: client becomes slightly less rigid and will talk about external events
or other people.
Stage Three: client talks about theirself, but as an object & avoids discussion of
present events.
Stage Four: client begins to talk about deep feelings and develops a
relationship with the counsellor.
Stage Five: client can express present emotions and is beginning to rely more
on their own decision-making abilities and increasingly accepts more
responsibility for their actions.
Stage Six: client shows rapid growth towards congruence and begins to
develop unconditional positive regard for others. This stage signals the end of
the need for formal therapy.
Stage Seven: client is a fully-functioning, self-actualised individual who is
empathic and shows unconditional positive regard for others. This individual can
relate their previous therapy to present day, real-life situations.
58
Appendix 4:
Erskines Eight Relational Needs
The need for:
1. Security
2. Validation, affirmation and significance within a relationship
3. Acceptance by a stable, dependable, and protective other
4. The confirmation of personal experience
5. Self – definition
6. Having an impact on the other person
7. Having the other initiate
8. Expressing love
59
Appendix 5: Counselling Contract
This is a mutual agreement negotiated between the Counsellor and the Client prior to
the commencement of counselling. It articulates the responsibilities of the Counsellor
towards the Client, and also the Client's responsibilities in the counselling relationship
Confidentiality:
Everything that we discuss in the counselling session is kept in the strictest
confidence. As a Member of the BACP, I am required to have regular supervision and I
will need to discuss our work with my supervisor from time to time
If there is convincing evidence that you intend to harm yourself or others, I will need to
break confidentiality by informing your doctor, or in serious cases the police, again this
would only take place with your prior knowledge.
Occasionally I might want to make an audio recording of our session for the purpose of
monitoring my work, but this would only occur with your prior knowledge and
permission. Again these data are securely stored and destroyed after use.
Sessions:
Last for around 50 minutes, and we will usually meet once a week, at the same time
and day each week, though this is also negotiable. The whole session time belongs to
you, whether you choose to attend or not, and I will be present for the entire time of the
session. If you arrive part way through your allotted time, I will see you for the
remainder of the time. I will give you as much notice as possible if I am unable to make
a session and just ask that you do the same. Repeated failure to attend may result in
loss of your place.
Endings:
Sometimes you may feel that the counselling is not helping you. In these
circumstances it is best if you can come and discuss the difficulties rather than abruptly
ending the counselling. Many of us have experienced difficult and sudden losses and if
this happens in counselling, these losses do not have the opportunity to be understood
and resolved. I ask that you give some notice before finishing so that we have the
chance to discuss your decision, but there will be no pressure on you to continue with
counselling. You will normally know when you are ready to finish counselling and we
can address this issue within a session.
Occasionally it may be necessary for me to refer you back to the placement agency for
referral onward to another health care professional, this could be for a number of reasons
such as:
 We don’t seem to have gelled and are therefore not working well together.
 Your needs could be better met elsewhere.
 Our situation changes making the contract untenable.
Counsellor:
Client Name: Signature:
Date:
60
Appendix 6:
CONSENT FOR AUDIO RECORDING OF SESSIONS
I would like to audio record our counselling sessions in order to facilitate my

clinical
Supervision and assist my personal and educational development.
All recordings of our sessions will be securely stored and identified using an
anonymous code to protect your identity.
Recordings will be used only for the above purposes and will be deleted after
completion of my course.
You can withdraw their permission to record sessions at any time.
I agree to the recording of my sessions. I understand that confidentiality will be

maintained and that professional ethical standards will be observed. I also
understand that I can withdraw my permission at any time.
Client Signature:
Counsellor Signature:
Date:
61

The Parts We Play

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Parts We Play

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Parts We Play

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Parts we All Play

The Sherwood Psychotherapy Training Institute

and as therapists, engage with it.

7 Rationale for Practice

25 Context of Professional Practice

their unique styles, personalities and insight.

have given me so much.

you continue along the path towards realising that.

I made it onto the wall.

complicated notion; identity, personality, traits and mannerisms, profession and

origin in early interaction. As our personalities are shaped, we respond to

care-givers and significant others. We form expectations, relational ‘rules’ and

our ‘self’ is moulded.

This is not as straightforward as it could seem and we constantly adapt, evolve

underneath the radar.

on who I am as a person, but they determine the kind of therapist I am to be. It

is crucial that I continue this work so as to be aware of what it is that I bring to

together we make something beautifully unique.

part of my submission for the BSC in Humanistic and Integrative Counselling

and Psychotherapy; obtained at The Sherwood Institute and validated by the

I live and work in East Lancashire and my placement is at a charity working to

support the community’s socio-economic needs. As part of this they offer

supervision. Upon qualifying I hope to begin to develop my private practice and

develop, training as a supervisor and doing some teaching.

It is probably already very clear that I am fascinated about what it means to

Humanistic and Integrative practitioner and therefore hold certain fundamental

development; something Rogers (1961) and Maslow (1954) referred to as ‘self-

actualising tendency. Furthermore, as Whitton (2003) states, everyone is

enhanced by the conditions they encounter. These ideas have always

receive. However, I believe there are some important things to mention

of choice, and the power of relationship. As Cottone (1988) writes; relationships

Erskine, Moursund and Trautman (1999) state; humans are built to be in

As Rogers (1992) 19 propositions (Appendix 1) state; every individual reacts to

tendency, spurs the individual on as it moves towards satisfying this need to

on introjections (Rogers, 1959); ‘shoulds’ and ‘oughts’ that rule an individual.

positive regard is so strong, especially from caregivers (Wilkins, 2010), that we

make adaptations (Erskine 1998), or creative adjustments (Perls, Hefferline &

Goodman, 1951) in order to manage. This is protective and helps us to survive;

however individuals can become comprised of many parts, configurations

essence of therapeutic effectiveness. This is reinforced by many others; Yalom

(2002) states, therapy should be relationally driven, as Gerhardt, (2004)

believes difficulties formed in relationship are best healed there.

In order to first build a relationship, or a working alliance (Clarkson, 2003) with

my client, I adopt Rogers (1957) attitudinal conditions of unconditional positive

regard (UPR), congruence and empathy. Congruence means I am genuine and

behaviours are representations of needs; and finally, adopting an empathic

approach is aiming to understand the client’s world as if I were them. Buber

was sacred. As an integrative practitioner, I draw upon certain theories and

ideas to enhance my effectiveness and understanding of the relationship. I

change. The model of integration I work by, adopts a relational and

all future social relationships. Schore (1994) refers to the attachment

relationship as the working model for future interpersonal and intrapersonal

relationships. Winnicott (1960) explains that an insecure attachment can lead to

developing a false self to manage environmental demands, whilst a secure

attachment creates ones ‘True Self’.

of development; the infant experiences specific interactions with a self-

encoded as ‘Representations of Interactions that have been Generalized’ or

individual to evaluate expectations.

attachments, un-met needs and underdeveloped senses of self; leading to

creative adjustments, various configurations, adaptations and incongruences.