The Characteristics of a Person-Centered ... - Peter F. Schmid

The Characteristics of a Person-Centered Approachbetween therapist and client and the therapist’s authenticity as crucial for therapeutic success(for example: intersubjective psychoanalysis, systemic approaches, most humanistic modalitiesand even Cognitive Behavior Therapy). Nevertheless, these tendencies are still far behind theradical paradigm change of Rogers, because they all consider the therapeutic encounter as aprecondition for therapy but not as therapy itself.The controversies within the ‘family’Within the so-called ‘Rogerian family’ an increasing range of approaches and therapies havearisen. There are developments with different accents. Orientations grow that are related toRogers’ ideas, but come to dissimilar conclusions from those of the founder. A variety ofapproaches claim to be person-centered or Rogerian, even if they call themselves, for example,Experiential Therapy, Focusing-Oriented Therapy, Focusing Therapy, Process-DirectiveTherapy, Goal-Oriented Therapy or understand themselves as eclectic, ‘integrative’ therapies.The discussion intensified and came to a head when some ‘classic’ authors even suspectedthat there were tendencies to simply make use of the PCA’s good name in order to ‘sell’ one’sown ideas. For example, on the one hand a fierce protest (Prouty, 2001; Bozarth, 2002;Brodley, 2002) arose involving controversy in the Journal of Humanistic Psychology (1999,issue 39 (4). On the other hand, the principles of the Person-Centered and ExperientialWorld Association and the European Network (www.pce-world.org, www.pce-europe.org)mark a strong position to both name and discuss the differences and foster cooperation.I agree with many of my colleagues (e.g., Spielhofer, 2001; Lietaer, 2002b; van Kalmthout,2002b) that it is crucial for our approaches to be identifiable and noticeable. Beyond this, Iam convinced that the argument will be the seed for further developments of the approachesand their positioning within the realm of psychotherapy (Schmid, 2002b; c; d; e; f).Among other notables this issue was raised by Lietaer (2002a; b), van Kalmthout (2002a),Swildens (2002), Sanders (2000). It was a topic at the General Assembly of the EuropeanNetwork 2002; the Salzburg Congress 2000 (Iseli et al., 2002); the 5th InternationalConference on Client-Centered and Experiential Psychotherapy in Chicago (Watson,Goldman and Warner, 2002); the International Colloquium, ‘Advancing person-centredtheory and practice: What is essential?’, 2001; and the 3rd PCA Colloquium, ‘What isessential? Person-centered and experiential psychotherapy – perspectives and prospects’, 2002(www.personzentriert.at/pca.htm) — to name only a few. The question for all these discussionsis about the ‘face’ of PCT.The necessity for criteriaWhy is it necessary to raise the question of identity criteria? The following are some of thereasons:• clarity about one’s own identity (regarding commonality and diversity): to be unambiguousin the foundation and development of one’s own identity, to know where we stand,what we have in common and what is diverse;• identifiability and transparency in communication: to have a ‘face’ and not to be faceless,to be able to be recognized and to be chosen (by clients and therapists);106 Person-Centered and Experiential Psychotherapies, Volume 2, Number 2