I handed in the essay actually having done what a good essay should do: it taught me something in the process. To summarise, a counsellor is different from a friend. To be a friend requires sympathy and a counsellor requires empathy. I also came to the conclusion that you can't be both at the same time. For the moderately interested, I've posted it below.
We then watched an assessment video from the nineties (that hair, those clothes!!) in which a real counsellor assesses the need for counselling from a trainee counsellor playing a newly separated woman in the 'client' role. It was fascinating to see how the video inspired fairly impassioned responses if not downright antipathy from the group. We nearly all felt that the counsellor started off on the back foot by telling her client how she 'must' feel. As the mother of a child with disabilities this did irritate me somewhat. Lots of perfectly well-meaning people told me how I 'must' suffer (and still do, apparently), how I 'must' have felt life was so unfair etc. Yeah right, for about twenty minutes then I moved on from that. I suppose that people are projecting their own feelings about disability onto me. Oh well. Surely a better approach for the counsellor is to ask how the client feels at the start? Just like people could ask how I felt about parenting a disabled child but then I might tell them and they might not want to hear the answer if I'm not having a good day!
But I digress, the video was shown to us in four parts with the client gradually being coaxed by the counsellor to understand that their was no magic wand to wave that would eradicate the client's unhappiness and depression but, and this seemed to be a vital ray of hope, a course of counselling and the gradual unpicking of all the issues that underlay the client's distress (low self-esteem and lack of personal fulfillment). Also that the process would be slow and that the client must learn to expect realistic amounts of help from friends/counselling then perhaps the need for the magic wand would naturally diminish. I think we all disliked the counsellor at the start (rather like the client - now who's projecting!) but I felt we all warmed up to her in the end (again just like the client). Interestingly, K came in about half-way through and as she is in therapy at the moment endorsed what the counsellor was doing during the assessment process.
Anyway here is the essay but feel free not to read it. I won't take offence.
How does a counsellor differ from a friend?
In order to answer this question I will define the terms ‘counsellor’ and ‘friend’ and place them within a metaphorical Venn diagram in which I will explore how these terms overlap and also how they are distinct and discrete from each other. I propose that the differences stem mainly from the framework and context of the counselling or friendship relationship. Also, that to be a friend requires sympathy and to be a counsellor requires empathy if the helping relationship is to be effective. I suspect that the Venn Diagram might become three-dimensional in order to fully express and illustrate the answers to the question.
The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology defines counselling as: ‘A generic term that is used to cover the several processes of interviewing, testing, guiding, advising etc. designed to help an individual solve problems.’(Reber & Reber, 2001a, 162). The Chambers 21st Century Dictionary has the following definitions for ‘friend’: ‘1. Someone whom one knows and likes and to whom one shows loyalty and affection; a close or intimate acquaintance. 2. Someone who gives support or help.’(Robinson (Ed), 1999, 532). Even just with those two definitions it is easy to see how the roles of counsellor and friend may be seen as similar. The area of ‘overlap’ being the act of helping, as it were. Interestingly, Sanders draws a very clear distinction, proposing that: ‘What Counselling is Not: Being a friend’ (2002, 10).
As these definitions float in the metaphorical Venn Diagram so the relationships of counselling or friendship reside within distinct frameworks. A counsellor has the designated time and place for such activity. The type of counselling offered may be psychodynamic, transactional, cognitive behavioural, humanistic or a combination of these. The counselling might be paid for by the client or offered on a voluntary basis, in a place of work or study or within a psychiatric or medical setting. Thus we see that the scope for help and support is contained within specific and well-delineated contexts of type of counseling and physical space, the terms of which are negotiated and contracted at the outset of the counselling relationship between client and counsellor.
Seeking help from a friend is by its definition a more nebulous and flexible phenomenon. There is not necessarily a set time or place beyond the convenience of the people involved. The setting is more likely to be within the domestic sphere in a more informal atmosphere. There are not necessarily any constraints on the time spent in the helping activity. As Gray says in ‘The Frame’: ‘When friends tell us about distressing experiences it is likely that we will take their side, offer advice, put our arms around them should they cry. This is right and proper; it is what friendship is all about’ ( 2002a, 15). Thus we see that help and comfort lies in a direct physical and emotional reaction to the plight of the friend. This degree of intimacy and prior knowledge is not within the counsellor-client relationship which, in order to be effective must maintain a set of rules that enforces a kind of emotional distance. This facilitates a space whereby the client can better explore the issues thrown up by their distress. As Gray goes on to say, ‘if we can believe that we are on our client’s side, not in the sense of comforting them or telling them how right they are but in bearing their feelings, then we provide them with an opportunity to experience emotions that have hitherto had to be suppressed’ (2002b, 15). Clearly then, it can be seen that the same distress can have different depths of resonance and resolution depending on whom, the friend or counsellor, one calls. I believe it is the difference between expressing sympathy, as one would as a friend and expressing empathy, as one would as a counsellor. The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology defines sympathy as, ‘the sharing in the feelings of another.’ (Reber & Reber, 2001b, 731). Cozolino defines empathy thus:
…as often confused with sympathy, compassion and emotional resonance. Although these are all important aspects of intimate relationships, empathy is somewhat different. Empathy is a hypothesis or educated guess concerning your client’s internal state. It is a method of observation that relies on your interpersonal skills, combined with your capacity to think about what you are feeling. You dip into another’s experience as best you can using your emotions and imagination, then subject your experiences to conscious consideration in light of your knowledge and training (2004,135-136).
Recently a good friend of mine, currently undergoing a difficult divorce, left her own house in some distress. She had recently been on a short break and had a wonderful time. She returned to her own house to find that her ex-partner had removed an item from her bedroom and that her adult children had had done some clearing out in the house and subsequently my friend could not locate several things that were important to her. The friend in me obviously wanted to sympathise and take take her side as she was very upset and overwhelmed. Before I started on the Introductory Course In Counselling, I would have done just that. Rather to my own surprise (but with a hunch that it might be more useful), I offered to put my counselling ‘hat‘ on and maybe give a less emotionally charged response to her unhappiness. Having given my friend a choice in the matter, she was agreeable. I then asked if she felt that any of her family were respectful of the boundaries she took for granted. She was obliged to admit that they weren’t: her ex-partner entered the room he no longer shared with her to remove the item while she wasn’t there. Her children threw away things she would have kept (had she been asked). To compound her unhappiness, her protests were dismissed which led her to leave the house. In a sense, another boundary transgressed. The subtext of our subsequent discussion was how to re-establish the boundaries in a calm negotiated way that meant that all parties concerned could be in no doubt as to where their responsibilities lay and also that my friend, notwithstanding the divorce, felt strong enough to speak up for herself and make her voice heard without unduly hurting the feelings of anyone else during a difficult time.
Familial discourse is a fluid awkward thing, a kind of ramshackle intimacy in which conscious and unconscious dynamics operate. I was deeply sympathetic to my friend. We are a similar age, our children are roughly the same age and grew up together and we have been married to our respective partners for a similar amount of years. It is not difficult therefore to see how I might identify with my friend’s situation given my intimacy with her. Which leads me to reflect why and how individuals might seek help from a person of, broadly speaking, similar cultural background with the perception that their distress might be better understood. I felt that I could capitalise on our shared values to ask a question that dug deeper and might help my friend at a more profound level. It was as though I had to forget she was my friend (albeit momentarily) and consider her distress in more dispassionate terms, which I feel is essentially the difference between sympathy and empathy. If I started by sympathising with my friend I tried to help by empathising with her and asking a question of her in a relatively detached manner that, devoid of overt emotionalism, might throw light upon her shifting family dynamic and its implications for the future. To me, this is the central difference between being a counsellor and a friend. The empathy can only be brought to bear within the framework I have described when it is negotiated, set up and agreed upon between counsellor and client. Interestingly, it felt, even momentarily, that we were able to put aside the fact of our friendship in order to have a brief counselling discourse. In this respect, I agree with Sander’s assertion that a counsellor is not a friend.
There are many other aspects of the helping relationship that must be considered whether one is counsellor or friend. Firstly, confidentiality: the individual must rest assured that their business will not be discussed with a third party without their consent. Within a counselling framework, the ethical guidelines set up to protect the client such as non-maleficence (doing no harm) and beneficence (well-being) must be established. Equally If my friend comes to me for help in a state of vulnerability she must be confident that I will not use that information in such a way as to cause her harm. An ethical framework established by the relevant body is one thing but a set of assumptions and social conventions surrounding the ethics of friendship (which may be unspoken), again, by definition is a more nebulous phenomenon but one in which predetermined factors such as trust and intimacy are already well established. As friends we may take these assumptions for granted but as counsellor and client we must establish the boundaries of trust at the outset, to create, as it were, a similar framework that echoes the relationship of friendship but clearly defines it. If the dynamics that govern friendship are often unspoken they may well be unconscious. It is the purpose of counseling discourse to make these concerns fully conscious. To reiterate Gray, ‘… the more we begin to understand the motives underlying behaviour the more we understand the action.’ (2002c, 8)
To summarise then: to be a counsellor or a friend means that one has the desire to help. This help can be given in a sympathetic way, in which the friend is reassured, comforted and supported in their distress. But if the help is to be given in an empathetic way then more searching questions may be asked that reach below the distress in order to help ascertain the underlying cause of distress. In the metaphorical Venn Diagram the area of overlap is the word ‘help’, but as I have just described, the word ‘help’ has two similar meanings in terms of its broad purpose but in expression has discrete meanings. That is to say, if I had just sympathized with my friend by taking her side, she might have left comforted but, in a sense, be back at square one. By helping her in a counselling way, using empathy, a subtle shift in understanding may have taken place in which she might consider a different approach to understanding her distress. The same could be said of the ethical framework or contexts for helping in a counselling way or as a friend. That is: friendship presupposes trust, confidentiality, warmth and caring. Counselling cannot take these assumptions for granted but must establish them at the start of the process in order that resolution of the distress may be made in full awareness of the process. Distinction is important in that a certain emotional distance may be useful in illuminating the underlying causes of distress.
In conclusion, I think the main difference between being a counsellor and a friend is a matter of depth. Counselling can reach deeper than friendship in order to alleviate distress and to effect meaningful change in the person seeking help. A friend, broadly speaking will agree. A counsellor, broadly speaking, will ask pertinent questions and listen.
To return to the Venn Diagram, I believe it can be expressed in three-dimensional terms. That is to say that the part of the diagram relating to ‘friend’ exists more on the surface. The ‘counsellor’ part is more rounded and has greater depth due to its interrogative and discursive elements.
1949 words
REFERENCES
Cozolino, L. (2004), The Making Of A Therapist, Norton, pp.135-136.
Gray, A (2002a & b), Chapter 1: ‘The Frame’, An Introduction To The Therapeutic Frame, London, Brunner Routledge, p. 15.
Gray, A (2002c), Chapter1: ‘The Frame’, An Introduction To The Therapeutic Frame, London, Brunner Routledge, p. 8.
Reber, Arthur S., & Reber, Emily (2001a), The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology USA, Penguin, p. 162.
Reber, Arthur S., & Reber, Emily (2001b), The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology, USA, Penguin, p. 731.
Robinson, M (Ed) (1999), Chambers 21st Century Dictionary, Edinburgh, Chambers Harrap, p. 532.
Sanders, Pete (2002), First steps in Counselling: A Students’ Companion For Basic Introductory Courses, third edition, Ross-on-Wye, PCCS books, p. 11.
READING
De Board, R (1997), Counselling For Toads: A Psychological Adventure, UK, Routledge.
Yalom, I (1991), Love’s Executioner And Other Tales Of Psychotherapy, USA, Penguin.
No comments:
Post a Comment