Reflections of a Burgeoning Rogerian Therapist 2: Limitations to Person-Centered Therapy in Practice

As I’ve mentioned in a previous post, I’m deeply inspired by Carl Rogers’ person-centered approach to therapy. However, like anything else, it is not without its shortcomings, and as a clinician that uses this approach with clients, it’s a good idea for me to think critically about the strategies I use.

Stages of the Therapeutic Process

If we think about a course of therapy as one that is broken down into three stages: 1) exploration, 2) insight, and 3) action, I see Rogerian therapy as most effective when counselor and client are in the exploration and insight stages of therapy. During these stages of therapy, clients are uncovering the roots of their presenting problems and allowed to gain a better understanding of themselves. Person-centered therapists, with our nondirective approach to engaging with clients, seems to be a good fit here. However, I can see that this style of client engagement may become a problem when clients enter the action stage of the therapeutic process. During this stage clients may want more of a facilitative, even an explicitly educational stance on solving their problems. In this case, a feminist or solution-focused modality may be more effective.

Ideas for Combining Therapeutic Approaches

This brings me to another point. Rogers’ theoretical framework seems to pair well with feminist or multi-cultural therapeutic modalities. For example, a therapist operating from Rogers’ theory of problem development and change, would take the stance that the client experienced a break down in the early system they were born into. In Rogers’ view this early system is the family, that failed to support the needs of the child to become whole or self-actualized. In the feminist view, clients develop psychological problems because social/political systems fail to support the child’s psychological development.

In both theoretical frameworks, the therapist is to assume the role of listener, empathizer, and in the feminist perspective facilitator; recognizing that the solution is held within the client, however a new system dynamic is required for change to occur. In Rogers’ view the new system is the therapeutic relationship. In the feminist’s view the new system may require the client to make some real changes in their social environment and the therapeutic relationship is simply a model and educational ground for how to initiate that change.

Additionally, I think the combination of person-centered foundation that emphasizes both individual and collective actualization, with narrative therapy could be particularly effective in working with families in the Black community. In these clients, I believe it is most important for families to have a common understanding of the external factors (systems of oppression, racism, sexism) that have a constant and sustained impact on their mental health and well-being. In these cases, the narrative, or the life story, is critically important to name, understand, and re-write.

It’s possible would think that members of marginalized communities often adopt narratives from the dominate group that are belittling and dehumanizing to the minority group. For example, marginalized women hear the story that emotional expression is weak, Black people hear the story that their community members are stupid, criminals, and homosexuals hear the story that their group is sinful and deviant. By increasing awareness of these external factors and stories, the therapist can assist the family in externalizing the problem, while at the same time using the concept of Self and collective actualization as both a motivation and action-oriented methodology of working towards healing.

Those are my thoughts. Are you a clinician/therapist? Share your thoughts about person-centered therapy in the comments!

NOTE: I am not a licensed mental health provider or counseling psychologist (yet). I am a graduate student, and as such the information offered on my website and social media platforms are informed by research, personal and professional experience, and education, however, are not designed to provide advice (be it treatment advice or educational advice). All content is for informational and educational purposes only.