Congruence Marc Richelieu. Central Text Rogers Therapeutic Conditions: Evolution, Theory and Practice Gill Wyatt.

Congruence

Marc Richelieu

Central Text

Rogers Therapeutic Conditions: Evolution, Theory and Practice

Gill Wyatt

Central Message

Lack of attention to the theoretical definition of congruence, and the practice of misidentifying congruence and candour, lead to distortions in client centred therapy and in person centred group situations. In individual and other forms of client centred therapy, the distortion shows up when therapists systematically state their own reactions to, or thoughts about, clients and justify the practice as a form of living in the therapeutic attitude of congruence in the relationship. In regard to peer groups, the distortion appears when interpretations, accusations and insulting communications are justified as being congruent. It is necessary to grasp theoretical definition of congruence in order to have an accurate picture of client centred therapy.

Rogers

Can I be strong enough as a person to be separate from the other? Can I be a sturdy respect of my own feelings, and on needs, as well as his? Can a corner and if need be, express my own feelings as something belonging to me and separate from his feelings? Am I strong enough in my own separateness that I will not be downcast by his depression, frightened by his fear, not engulfed by his dependency? Is my inner self hardy enough to realise that I'm not destroyed by his anger, taken over by his need for dependents, not enslaved by his love, and I exist separate from him with feelings and rate my own? And I can feel freely strength of being a third person, and I find that I can let myself go much more deeply in understanding and accepting him because I'm not fearful of losing myself.

History

Rogers developed the theme of the genuineness in the therapist in 1951 he wrote of the need for the attitudes of the therapist to be genuinely held. He suggested that if the therapist was unable to genuinely hold notions such as the freedom of the clients to choose their own direction, be that aggression rather than growth, neuroticism rather than mental health, then it seems doubtful that therapy will be a profound experience of the client.

In 1956 continuing the theme of the authenticity and genuineness of the therapist experience towards the client. Rogers first employed term congruence itself in relation to the therapist, using it interchangeably with wholeness and genuineness.

In 1957 congruence, which Rogers also described as being genuine and integrated, was defined as meaning that within the relationship see the therapist is freely and deeply himself, with his actual experience accurately represented in his awareness of himself.

In 1959 congruence was, in part, defined as being in this particular moment of this immediate relationship with this specific person, the therapist is completely and fully himself, with his experience of the moment being accurately symbolised and integrated into the picture he holds of himself.

What it is

NOT

Rogers

congruence is not simply stating thoughts and ideas that come into the therapist head. It involves empathy and unconditional positive regard.

Rogers in his writings did not always pay equal attention to all three components. For example it in his highly influential in 1957 paper on the necessary and sufficient conditions, Rogers did not even mention the importance of the therapist communicating congruence.

Congruence does not imply that the counsellor is open about herself and her life; rather congruence is a genuinely felt response to the clients experience at that time.

Although self-disclosure can be seen as the most explicit form of transparency ….. congruence may be very dubious in some cases. A highly self-expressive therapist is not necessarily a congruent one. It is possible that he is out of touch with important layers of himself; he may be lacking ego strength or unknowingly being defensive and manipulative. Indeed says his so-called self-disclosure is not a communication of his true feelings but rather a form of acting out, detrimental to the process of the client.

What do you need to be Congruent

Congruence requires first of all that the therapist be psychologically well-developed and integrated individual, i.e. sufficiently whole or healed and in touch with himself. This includes daring to acknowledge flaws and vulnerabilities, accepting the positive and negative parts of oneself with a certain leniency, being careful of openness without defensiveness to what lives in oneself and being able to get in touch with it, having a solid identity and a strong enough sense of competence, being able to function efficaciously in personal and intimate relationships without interference of personal problems. Self-knowledge and ego strength can perhaps be seen as the two cornerstones.

In Person centred theory, the level of congruence defines psychological health.

Understanding of self includes an understanding of his outstanding emotional patterns, and of his own limitations and shortcomings and therapists must have something set into his own personality. This particular qualification was intended to enable the therapist to thoroughly understand and be objective in regard to the clients problems.

Our personal difficulties may sometimes prevent others from letting the clients experience in their story, as it is. Life issues with which we have not dealt yet, personal needs which play along during therapy, personal vulnerabilities and blind spots, all may cause us to feel threatened and unable to move forward with serenity certain experiences of our client

Personal maturity, together with the basic clinical attitudes that lead to it, can thus be considered as the therapist's main instrument in client centred therapy. In this respect, we share the view of psychoanalysis. It should bus not come as a surprise that, in our training, special attention is paid to the personal development of the therapist is to be. Of course, not talking here about direct training in congruence, at a bookstore and indirect ways of personal therapy and personalised supervision.

All this leaves us with the impression that the therapist should be Superman. But this is not what Rogers and others had in mind. It is indeed so that someone who wants to become a therapist has to be prepared to go to pay sufficient attention to his own inner life and his way of relating to others. He also had to be, generally speaking, quite sturdy. This, however, does not mean that he should not have problems which at times can be quite acute. The important point here is not to avoid these problems, to scrutinise them, to remain open to critical feedback, to learn to see how one's difficulties interfere with ones therapeutic work, and to do what is needed to remedy the situation.

In a broader sense we, as therapist, should take special care of ourselves, and watch out for signs of overburdening, loneliness, alienation, and of getting stuck in personal problems. When our needs are too big, we may not have enough energy left to turn toward the client with serenity.

Congruence also requires a harmonious relationship between the therapist theological orientation and the personal style person centred therapist's way of relating to a client is not based on using interventions, techniques of skills, but arises from her congruent embodiment of the conditions and who she is as a person.

Definition

Congruence is thus theoretically defined in terms of Rogers distinction between self and experience, not in terms of the therapist behaviour. In the theory of therapy, in both the first and second published forms, Rogers 1957 and 1959 asserts that for successful therapy to take place, only the therapist conditions unconditional positive regard and empathic understanding must be perceived by the client. In neither theoretical statement is posited that the client must perceive the therapist congruence.

When an experience can be symbolised freely, without defensive denial and distortion, then it is available to awareness.

1. The therapist will be someone whose internal experiences available to, and accurately symbolised in, their awareness. This means that no part of any experience will be denied to awareness, or distorted awareness .

2. In addition, and as a consequence, the therapist experience of the external world will also be accurately symbolised in awareness.

3. The therapist's self and ideal self will match, thus further ensuring that experience is not distorted or denied.

This meant the therapist needed to be aware of their feelings as much as possible; i.e. not presenting a good attitude whilst holding a different attitude more deeply, and express their genuine attitudes and feelings.

Gendlin considers the process of therapy and therapist responses. The process of therapy is one whereby the client becomes increasingly aware of the incongruities between experiencing and self concepts and, in consequence becomes more congruent. In essence the client becomes more able to connect with, and able to symbolise the powerful felt dimension of experience that is pre-logical. Congruent responses of a person centred therapist gives conceptualisations of what the client is now experiencing but perhaps not making explicit and the therapist’s effort is to be exactly congruent with the clients uninformed emotional experience.

Wexler posits a theory of congruence based on the processing capabilities of the individual, rather than on their level of awareness of their internal experience. The congruent therapist, having a rich and complex processing ability, will put all these towards responding to the client. In essence, as a surrogate processor, the task of the therapist is to attempt to organise and articulate the meaning of the information the client is processing. The optimal empathic response is described as being a structure or group of structures that more fully captures, and better organises, the meaning of the information in the field that the client is processing than had the structures the client had generated himself. If the therapist is able to capture and organise the meaning of the client information, insofar as there is, the therapist, expression fits the information in process in him the therapist you will also be what Rogers calls congruent.

Congruence is the upper limit of the capacity for empathy.

Since this concept is liable to misunderstanding, let me state that it does not mean that the therapist burdens his client with overexpression of all his feelings, nor does it mean that the therapist discloses his total self to his client. It does mean, however, that the therapist denies to himself none of the feelings he is experiencing and that he is willing to experience transparently any persistent feelings that exist in relationship and let those be known to his client.

How to do Congruence

When the therapist feelings are interrupting the current conditions ... Rogers writes …. if you have other feelings, other than empathy, then congruence takes precedence over anything else.

In therapy practice, momentary distractions or momentary judgemental thoughts and reactions, if accurately symbolised in awareness, can be recognised and accepted by the therapist who gives priority to his own congruence. There are simply moments during which one of the therapeutic attitudinal conditions are not experienced.

The therapist becomes aware of being distracted, accepts the lapse and refocus attention empathically towards the client.

In communicating congruence the therapist needs to ask two questions does our self revelation serve the client growth process and can our client use and integrate this information.

It requires the therapist not to present himself as a blank screen but apart from, and in addition to, his empathic interventions deal in a transparent way at the right moment, with what lives in the interaction between the two of them, and hereby to express his version of the interaction.

As will be clear from what I said before self revelation has seldom anything to do with the therapists personal past or present life. But what can the therapist then reveal? The answer is obvious: his feelings towards the client in the here and now, towards what happens in the session between both of them. Here too, the therapist remained sober. Only persisting feelings count and besides, the therapist has to ask himself if the moment is appropriate.

When you give the client feedback about behaviour which irritates us, we tried to get in touch with the needs and positive intentions behind it, and include these in your discussion.

The aim in communicating would be to correct for an appearance of ambiguity that might have confused or disturbed the client.

When person centred therapists say that they express themselves genuinely, they mean they are being transparent in a disciplined manner. In order to do this, therapists need first to be aware of their deepest level of experience, and this may take time and reflection. Next they need to be clear in their intention of sharing the experience, that this is for the client or the relationship and not themselves. It is always important for the therapist to be sensitive to the timing of disclosure, sensing whether clients are open to, or too vulnerable to receive what one has to offer. Discipline thus involves not blurting out whatever the therapist is feeling and making sure that what is expressed is a core or primary feeling rather than a secondary.

A turning away of the whole self to the other, not just attending to the other but are turning away from preoccupation with self and offering ones whole being to the other. This involves viewing the other in his or her uniqueness and acceptance that this is a different and unique person, where no other concern is paramount.

However ……..

The individual cannot be aware of their incongruence because the incongruent experience is denied or distorted: in the therapeutic relationship the therapist cannot know if they are congruent or incongruent ……… Rodgers dead end !!!!!

Examples

My words are giving one message, but I am also in subtle ways communicating for example the annoyance I feel and this confuses the other person and makes him distrustful, though he too may be unaware of what is causing the difficulty.

He was telling me about his skills as a designer and I was wondering if there was a contrast between how he presents itself to me as a skilled designer and to what extent he may be unreal. I was wondering if his perception matches with reality. Part of what I was thinking was: can I trust you? You believe you? Is that true fantasy? But when he showed me his design work afterwards, it was really good stuff. I was not banned, because I was actually pressing my honest his honesty, I was questioning his degree of self-knowledge. My transparency was available and I hope that it didn't show because it could have been very unhelpful, offensive and destructive thing.

A responsible business executives speaking, and we certainly have the fantasy of a small boy he is carrying around within himself, the small boy that he was, shy, inadequate, fearful, a child he endeavours to do deny, with whom he is ashamed. And I'm wishing that you could love and cherish this youngster. To voice this fantasy, not as something true, but has a fantasy in me. Often this brings a surprising depth of reaction and profound insights.

Example Rogers describes how a therapist can communicate boredom

but my feeling exists in the context of a complex and changing flow, which also needs to be communicated. And would like to share with him my distress at feeling bored and my discomfort and expressing it. As I do, I find that my boredom arises from my sense of remoteness from him and that I would like to be in closer touch with him; even as I tried to express the feelings the change.