Persona Theory

August 5th, 2013

     Persona psychotherapy came about when I thought about what shaped me.  I think that we an all agree that other people are huge shapers of what we think.  Moreover, they don't just change what comes to mind, such as our political leanings or speech patterns, but also the very fabric of who we are.
     This theory is obviously very nurture (as opposed to nature) based.  While I think that nature has its place in the argument, I believe that nurture is a greater force to be reckoned with.  Genetics can be micro-manipulated by the self in certain ways (weight gain, resistances, etc.).  But nurture is where the real lifelong change comes into play.  Whether or not we believe it, communication has both report and command components.  These sometimes subtle variations in behavior can signal life-long observable changes in an individual, especially if they are repeated for years.
     It's all about the people.  When we think who were the most important figures in our lives, we have to think in a broad scope or spectrum.  Obviously our parents were huge in our lives, but it's more than that.  We should be including co-workers, friends, media figures (actors, characters (in books and TV/movies), etc.) and societal norms.  All of these are "personas."  They all have the effect on us of proclaiming what is right, decent, or ideal (and very often what is wrong, indecent, and flawed) in our nature and in society.  I think that everyone's ideal is different.  For men, the ideal man could be younger Arnold Schwarzenegger or Clint Eastwood or perhaps some new charismatic media persona.
     As mentioned, cultural and over-arching time-sensitive norms are important here as well.  A persona consists of both of these.  A man is made up of many things, including the time period in which he or she lives.  A good example is Freud.  Though at this point in the future we scowl at the very name and poo poo his accomplishments and his at-that-time genuinely novel ideas, his ideas were celebrated because they were acceptable at that time.  The odd thing about the current age (especially as compared to pre-printing press days) is that we can choose to change ourselves based on past idea and persona due to the proliferation of media on the internet and in books.

_________________________________________________________________________________

August 10th, 2013

     One of my points in a previous entry was to ensure that I write about similarities and differences between this budding one and current psychotherapies.  I don't think that I will spend a separate entry detailing such things.  These will most likely be introduced piece-meal-style throughout this writing.
     As mentioned, persona psychotherapy is all about people.  There is a postmodernist feel here because our ideas about people (and how we integrate this figure into our own behaviors) is based, more or less, in our culture and upbringing.
     While these other figures or personas are important, we must understand the reason that we are integrating their behaviors into our own.  We saw or experience something in their actions that we aspire to.  Perhaps a behavior was expressed, like self-confidence, that brought about a date or pay raise.  We, on the outside, would see this behavior and attempt to mirror it on our own.  WE do this because we see a deficit of such behavior in our heretofore collected bag of expressions.
     But what is the goal here?  The goal is to gain all the correct behaviors so that any problem can be surmounted.  Similar to Maslow's theory, we are striving for a self-actualized persona.  I don't think, though, that self-enhancement by way of integration ever stops.  Just because one finds that most problems are solve with his or her current behaviors, there is always much more out there to react to.  I'd really rather call this unattainable (or shortly-attainable) goal the ideal self after Rogers.
     Akin to the idea that one see usable behaviors and integrates them into self, just like building a house from many bricks, it seems that the selection of behaviors has also to do with the matching of behaviors from someone who presents himself or herself as similar to that ideal self image.  I think that this might be one way that negative behaviors are integrated.
     As mentioned in a previous entry, a whole generation (or two) of America saw Clint Eastwood (his characters, really) as an ideal image of what it is/was to be a man.  In their attempt to adapt his "positive" mannerisms, such as his deep, scratchy voice or confident, yet haughty glare, they might adapt a characteristic stubbornness that goes with Eastwood's characters.  Another possibility, other than accidentally sweeping up an unwanted behavior, is that the unwanted mannerism was a stepping stone to, or building block of, the wanted behavior.  In order to attain the desired manliness of Clint Eastwood, a level of stubbornness must be attained.

_________________________________________________________________________________

October 25th, 2013

     Going back to my ideas on persona theory, I think that many of our anxieties in life occur when we don't have the necessary skills to deal with them.  Also, our affliction with the other characters in our lives is important.  I have already discussed that we mirror successful behavior (or unsuccessful behavior) from people we look up to.  But what if the relationship with that person degrades?  What does that mean for our current behaviors?
     Most people would choose to either A) continue their behavior because it is successful to them, or B) discontinue its use due to its negative association with that individual.  Their new stance on that person has changed their skill set.
     I think that every person in our lives occupies three levels (or more) in our mind.  The first is the real level.  This level is an accurate, relatively non-subjective view of this character.  The real level, especially if this person has recently become a "skill-setter," can take place in the past, before the skill has been absorbed.  Best said, the real level is a past-verified view of a person that is relatively well-believed across a sample.
     The next level is the ideal level.  This level denotes the rosy-eyed view of the individual.  At this level, one normally starts adopting behaviors and testing them out before absorbing them completely into themselves.
     The last level is the fall level.  This level occurs normally after the individual engages in some kind of behavior that brings their identity into question.  Oddly, the action could be anything - that's why people become stuck so often.
     These levels are important, because they really do note the level of favor and the chance in mood toward them when actions change.  It's a big drop from ideal to fall.  We do a lot of intra-personal work in building people up in our mind to get them to the level of ideal.  The fall consists not only of the general lack of favor and its disparity as compared to the ideal level, but in the acknowledgement of the need for the deconstruction of that foundation.  This is a painful process.
     It's important to remember that people aren't just searching for these new skills and to become unstuck, they are also looking for help to learn to re-trust.  Counselors are tasked with re-teaching, or perhaps better said, re-allowing clients to trust appropriate people.

_________________________________________________________________________________

October 29th, 2013

     There has to be someone who doesn't fit this theory, right?  Someone must exist who hasn't been "imprinted," right?  I'm not so sure.  The more I think about it, the more I come to believe that common man, who has developed in the company of others, can't have progressed without the guidance of those coming before.  When we hear of such untainted individuals, they are the wild man and woman of antiquity.
     Using the word untainted pushes me to talk about Ellis.  I remember that he talks a lot about younger individuals adopting the behaviors and rules of their parents.  He was a real advocate of a person identifying "correct" behaviors for themselves.  I don't disagree with his motivations, that is, to rid the self of inaccurate or outright incorrect thoughts and behaviors that are based on the teachings or examples of parents.  I agree with him that people have to learn to choose and expel behaviors based on their utility.

_________________________________________________________________________________

March 15, 2014

     I've come to the conclusion that this Personal Theory has a lot of influence from social-learning theory, but that it also has elements of a bunch of other theories.
     Let's talk about conflict for a second.  If a child or even an adult experience two viable yet opposed viewpoints, how does he or she choose which one to follow?  This is the heart of decision-making.  The subject must first review all biopsychosocial rules that they follow.  They would have to ask: "Would my parents agree with this?"; "Is this illegal?"; "Would my socioeconomic status decrease or increase due to this decision?"; et cetera.  I think that people then try out the behavior.  I would hope that the attempt at each would start on a small scale, but maturity and self-control might take a role in that specific instance.  After these testing results are yielding positive effects, the practice increases in intensity possibly being integrated into main parts of life.  The last step to that integration would be to add it into the personality schema.
     I'm trying to re-understand the levels that I wrote about prior to this.  I delineated three levels: Reality, Ideal, and Fall.  I think that it is hard to quantify these.  Better said, creating a hierarchal view of which one of these levels (or which a figure of significance may be on) is difficult.  Which one is better?  I think that each have their own positives and negatives.  Let's review them.
     Reality: Positive - Knowing a figure totally and understanding the real connotations and situation is an invaluable skill to have.
     Reality: Negative - If this real, "objective" view of this person is locked - and taking into account that that figure is under our expectations - there is a certain depression that might come from this failure.
     Ideal: Positive - If an ideal figure embraces characteristics that are positive and constructive, the follower would then aspire to these ideals and learn to adopt them.
     Ideal: Negative - I think that it is possible for subjects to adopt negative behaviors from a positive ideal figure.  If this figure was honored to the point of worship, then the negative behaviors shown would have just as much of an ability to be integrated as the positive ones.
     Fall: Positive - I think that the Fall is a part of the process.  One definite positive to this is coming to the realization that the figure has faults (and, even deeper, that the subject has faults) and that there is a learning process in life.  The identification of negative behaviors is also a positive learning experience.
     Fall: Negative - The change from Ideal to Fall can be a huge one . . . I think that this might lead a person to a minor depressive episode, depending on how glorified the figure was in the subject's mind.
     Let me try to tackle the non-hierarchal nature of this now.  At an earlier age, I think (and this is a gross generalization) that we tend to idealize both easily and often.  Children tend to be impressed with others easily.  So, it follows that the ideal level is the first.
     It is almost inevitable that we see through the ideal figures in our lives.  A good general example is our parents.  When it comes to gender-stereotyped behavior, boys idealize their fathers and girls idealize their mothers.  When a child reaches adolescence and the lines between parent-leader and parent-helper start to blur, the Fall level is reached.  There is some doubt as to some/all adopted characteristics from that person.  Much introspection is done and then, hopefully, a youth comes to create their own ideas about their actions.
     For me, a big fall (other than the normal parental one) came in the form of Carl Rogers.  In my education, Rogers was always portrayed as the ideal counselor and theorist.  I exalted him above all others.  Then two things happened.  1) My continuing education propelled me on to other interesting areas in psychotherapy and 2) I found out that he was an alcoholic.  For whatever reason, his me-created facade of constant angel-like calmness was gone.  Quickly his words meant less and less.
     The next step, after a figure has reached the apex of the Ideal and the trough of the Fall, is to become real in the eyes of the subject.  I think it is at this point when both faults and positive qualities can be weighed more objectively.

_________________________________________________________________________________

March 17th, 2014

     The adoption of behaviors and assimilation into the self is what I have commented on so far in this theory.  I think that the original intent here was to understand my own use of other personas in my daily life.  That last sentences begs an example.  If I need to motivate a group of people, my mind immediately shifts to a guy I once knew named Bill who had this ability.  I try to mimic his way of speaking and acting and this seems to help me in this particular situation.  After this channelling is over, I try to grade the result.  If it is a positive one, I attempt to integrate some of the mannerisms into my own behavior set, rather than having to refer back to the character.  This has the advantage of personalizing the behavior, possibly making it more organic.

_________________________________________________________________________________

March 22nd, 2014

     As previously mentioned, sometimes people impersonate important figures in their lives.  I'm going to free associate with this and try to figure out a why and a when to this phenomenon.
     In my opinion, I think that impersonation might tend to happen with youths.  When I say youths, I do not necessarily mean children, but rather a state of being that denotes an immaturity in the functioning environment.  For example, a newly-promoted executive might impersonate his or her supervisor in order to act more professionally and integrate himself/herself into the job.
     I guess that impersonation is a phenomenon that occurs during the Ideal level.  The figure's significance to the subject at this level is so large that the adoption of specific behaviors is possible.  Impersonation does occur in the reality stage as well, but the subject's own personality is more dominant, allowing for the integration of behaviors, rather than pure adoption into a behavior system.
     So what happens when there are behaviors that conflict with one another?  Which one does the subject adopt and then integrate?  I think that this could be a main source of anxiety.  We might hear a client say, 'What do/should I do?"  It could be that two figures of similar level and dissimilar behavior are on trial in the subject's mind.
     Perhaps, on the developmental side of things, a therapist who is engaged with this type of counseling is charged with helping the client with any conflicts between figures, but also to help the client through a Fall.  This latter point includes both a Fall that occurs through the client's own thought process and one that a counselor might start.  I think that some clients hold their parents at the Ideal level a bit too long or a bit too high, increasing the likelihood that differentiation would not occur.  In this situation, very sensitive confrontational techniques could be used.  This is to say that a counselor should not slam the idea home.  Instead just a word or two of challenge might cause the client to think about the issue in a different manner.

My Rules of Counseling (or Things to Remember in Therapy)

January 12th, 2014


1.  Everyone has strengths.  Remember to ask after, and support, their strengths.
2.  Projection is huge.  Remember that people come to counseling to talk about themselves and their own problems.  Search for any meaning behind their words for they are only talking from their own frame of reference.
3.  Don't be rude; always listen and react kindly (though sometimes being firm is OK too).
4.  Resistance is not inherently negative; in fact, it can show that a client has a firm grounding in a belief structure.  No resistance ever either means 1) that you are the best therapist ever or 2) that the client has no personal belief/thought system.  Also: resistance is a call for some process counseling.
5.  When in doubt, go back to process. This is a good way to increase rapport and possibly go to other topics. Process should not always be a last-ditch intervention.
6.  One of the most important things to understand for most interventions is that they should be what the client needs.  Countertransference is fine (it actually normally isn't), but to sate it during every compulsion will not benefit the client.
7.  Physical touch can be a huge factor in therapy for good or for ill. Boundaries being what they are, a quick hand on hand action, handshake, etc. can show support on a different level than normal talk therapy.
8.  Modern therapy is fixated on the present. To a certain extent, that is good. But we cannot disregard the past.  Situations and relationships may be informed very heavily by past ones. The past is rich with background information and clues to current behavior.


_________________________________________________________________________________

March 18th, 2014

9.  Don't underestimate the value of time in therapy.  If a technique of subject-matter does not work or is not yielding good discussion, it is perfectly alright to come back to it in a session or two.  Half of the time, the conversation will make the client think more during non-session times, anyway.
10.  Nothing happens within a vacuum.  Decisions are never made due to one variable only.  Always search outside the immediate circumstance for more information.
11.  Clinical distance is one of the most difficult things to implement and keep throughout the process.  That being said, it is there for a reason and will help with termination and difficult confronting.
12.  Understand the resources around your practice for continuing care and referral.

Realms of Therapeutic Issues

     It is becoming clearer and clearer to me that a respectable counselor does not just query a client about the problem at hand.  Sure, a client may come in with a presenting concern, but is that issue their true problem?  I think that a lot of counselors would find this doubtful.  Exploring a client's whole self is of utmost importance.  What I would like to understand are all the realms of self that a counselor would and should cover.  I guess a first step in this understanding is to attempt a creation of a list of these "realms." Here we go:

• Childhood
• Family
• Current relationships (romantic)
• Work
• Friends/Other influencers
• Strengths/Weaknesses
• Fears
• Current life events/issues
• Long term event/issues
• Exercise/Diet
• Financial Issues
• Values

Steps in Therapy (Under Constant Revision)

December 4th, 2012

Steps in Therapy --> to be revised!!

1. Question:  What are you looking to gain from therapy?
2. Joining - Try to create a sense of "us" with client so that they feel more comfortable and are more willing to disclose
3. RESPECTFUL model - This will give a therapist a great look at the client's situation and their part in it
4. Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Theory Model - I think that this is somewhat similar to the RESPECTFUL model in that it shows off the environment around the client

New Step 1:  Talk about confidentiality, roles, and meeting for communicating outside the sessions (as well as Duty to Warn and other limitations on confidentiality)

New Step 1:  Introduce self.  This is amazingly important due to the fact that any first introduction paves the road for future communication.  It teaches them not only more about the therapist, but also gives them a mini lesson in how to communicate.

Last Step (per session):  Document what happened in the session

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

December 6th, 2012

Steps in Therapy

1. Introduce self
2. Discuss payment
3. Discuss confidentiality et al.
4. Ask why they are here and what they hope to accomplish
5. Joining
6. Systems models (RESPECTFUL, wellness, Bronfenbrennarian/Ecological)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 9th, 2013

     About a month ago, I wrote a more succinct progression of steps when beginning psychotherapy.  To look at some details on these steps, consider the explanations in the first log.  After seeing an abbreviate session in one of my classes, I was told - and later saw the logic in the statement - that a priority in therapy is to understand the client.  I believe that my steps attempt that, but that they lack that word choice.  I think that step six's intent is to understand the greater context of the individual.  But we also need to understand the individual.  So, rather than just ask questions and seek information about his/her environment, seeking information about the person is integral.

     I also think that step five should not be a step in and of itself, but rather the title "joining" hould consist of multiple steps/phases.  I'm not exactly sure what these should be at this time.  I think that the steps should be revised to look like this:

Steps in Therapy

1. Introduce self
2. Discuss payment
3. Discuss ethical considerations in therapy
4. Ask purpose of visit and prospective achievements
5. Discuss number of appointments and method of therapy
6. Rogerian interviewing to understand client
7. Systems models

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 10th, 2013

     Because I am in my program's ethics course right now, I am sure that some of my future writings will introduce concepts taught or thought up in class.  This is one such entry.  I've been attempting to create steps in the beginning of a successful psychotherapy and I think I've thought of a new step one.  The first step, before formally introducing oneself with credentials and so forth after sitting down in the chairs, would be to give the client pertinent sign-able documents.  These papers would include confidentiality rules and regulations as it pertains to the ACA (or whatever ethical organization is important).  So the steps now are:

1. Disperse and collect paperwork pertaining to ethical and legal issues
2. Introduce self and explain relevant education and licenses
3. Discuss payment
4. Discuss ethical considerations in therapy
5. Ask purpose of visit and prospective therapeutic achievement
6. Discuss number of appointments and method of therapy
7. Commence therapy starting with Rogerian interviewing to understand client
8. Systems models
9. Remember to console client with universality (if applicable)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 14th, 2013

     Going off of my previous steps in counseling, I have come to realize more steps and a change in the overall model.  The steps to add include 1) an explanation of counseling, 2) an assertion of more to come, 3) a discussion on client-centered variables in counseling, and 4) the agenda for the first meeting.  Let me elaborate a bit more on each one.

     The first idea stems from misunderstandings in what counseling is and what it entails.  Clients think that counseling is a "quick fix," one that takes a session or two and . . . done!  Instead, it takes work and the ability to change.  This is important for both a resistant client and a client who has been forced into therapy.  Better said, if they don't want to change, therapy will do nothing for them.  

     The second idea is both a phrase meant for comfort and a business practice.  It is very important, first of all, to ensure that a client does not despair in his or her first meeting with the therapist.  The first session is an information-gathering one and can therefore, due to lack of therapeutic merit, be very disconcerting to the client.  To avoid this feeling, it is important to make sure the client realizes that more therapy will commence when information is gathered.

     The third item here is about clients.  A lot depends on the client:  willingness (as previously mentioned), attitude, skills, etc.  Honestly, I jumped the gun on the first point.  Change should have been in this paragraph.

     The last item is talking about the agenda for the first meeting.  This is designed to make sure that the client knows what's in store for the session.  This can alleviate anxiety and the possible feelign of being jipped.

     Moving on, I think that putting these steps into "steps" might be a bad idea.  I think to set these into such a format might give them some kind of permanence as a list.  Rather, I think that they are better used as suggestions or points of discussion.  Also . . . I don't want to hampered by so many formal steps.

     I think that some of these points of discussion could be cleared up in a pre-therapy discussion or a pre-therapy paperwork.  Information about ethical and legal issues could be disseminated this way, but should be followed up.  Payment can be easily outlined via paper and may cause the therapist to avoid such a sensitive matter.

     It is possible that some of the other information can be explained via paper, as well.  Information regarding agenda for the first meeting, self information about education, and number of appointments can be presented in a document also, but should be followed-up as well.  

     Let me try to portray this new model again with all the other information:

Pre-therapy documents

• Ethical paperwork
• Payment information
• First meeting agenda
• Short biography including schooling and license(s)
• Policy for number of appointments
• Short description about method

Points of discussion

• Follow-ups
• Ethics paperwork
• Payment information
• Method description
• First meeting agenda
• Self introduction
• Purpose of visit and prospective goals

Beginning of therapy

• Rogerian interviewing and systems models
• these are used in order to understand the client from their point of view and in their context

     It is probably important to cite on-going techniques of merit in therapy also . . .  At this time, I will forego this, but will put it in my agenda for future writings.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 28th, 2013

     More points of discussion to add.  They are:

• themes and values in life/family
• developmental thought process location
• introduction of self outside of therapy

     The first point is very much an existential/psychodynamic one (and systems, obviously).  It mentions the important or underlying points in an individual's life.  Through asking the client about their own thoughts about family, life, etc., the therapist might glean at least a small amount of information about the client without their own resistances coming forth.

     The second point is from something I learned from one of my professors.  He talked about thought across the lifespan.  In particular, three of conventional thought (going from moral thought).  The first stage is pre-conventional thought.  It is a stage when a person is mainly concerned with the self.  From a Freudian personality component theoretical model the pre-conventional thought stage is closely related to the id.  The second stage in the model is conventional thought.  In this stage, closely related to the superego, the person harnesses externally-based thought.  While this is an attractive notion, it means that the client thinks of himself/herself in terms of other people's opinion.  This can be potentially harmful.  The third step is post-conventional thought.  It represents the integration of abstract thought into life.  Abstract thought allows the client to form unique ideas and identify both pre-conventional and conventional thought.  This stage is most closely related to the Freudian ego.

     The third point is critical if the therapist might have contact with the client.  If the therapist lives in a small town, the probability of seeing any number of previous or current clients is higher than living in a large city.  It is important to determine means of introduction, complete with proper salutation (Mr., Dr., etc.).  Since multiple relationships are not healthy for the client-therapist relationship, knowing how to act in these situations is important.

     With this line of thought comes obvious paperwork designed to pry information from the client.  I think at least one good piece to have is information about family and friends.  Let's recap the process:

Pre-therapy documents

• Ethical paperwork
• Payment information
• First meeting agenda
• Short biography including schooling and license(s)
• Policy for number of appointments
• Short description about method
• Family/friend information (w/ addresses, contact information, etc.)

Points of discussion

• Follow-ups
• Ethics paperwork
• Payment information
• Method description
• First meeting agenda
• Beginning of therapy
• Rogerian interviewing
• Systems models
• Depth themes
• Lifespan thought process model

_________________________________________________________________________________

January 27th, 2014

Pre-therapy documents

• Ethical paperwork (consents/confidentiality)
• Payment information (include insurance information)
• First meeting agenda (include demographic and basic information)
• Short biography including schooling and credentials
• Introductory policy as far as number of visits
• Method description
• Family systems information

First Session Points of Discussion

• Brief repeat of:
• Ethics paperwork
• Payment information
• Method description
• First meeting agenda
• Self
• Questions
• Goals of Therapy
• Reasons for entering therapy (what is client's definition of wellness?)
• Mental Status Exam
• Ask about room structure/formation
• Previous therapy experience
• Medication?
• Post-counseling dual relationships

Multi-Faceted Learning

     I'm not sure if I've talked about this before, but I think that mentioning my thoughts about a broader education-style might be pertinent.  I really think that understanding, or at least literacy in, some other academic area is a way to innovate in the realm of psychology/psychotherapy/counseling. This other education could be anything - economics, modern languages, literature, biology, mathematics, etc.
     For lack of a better metaphor, this kind of education is like a reinforced rope - rather than just having one strand that can only rely on itself, this rope wraps itself or weaves itself in other layers, allowing for more support.
     I think that therapists have to make the effort to me more broadly-educated in general.  Clients come in from differing ethnic, cultural, religious, and educational backgrounds.  This means that their myriad experiences should be open to inclusion in the session at hand.  A good therapist in this situation is one that can talk to a bunch of these interests and past situations.  This means reading up on different religions, knowing a bit about classical literature and philosophy, and possibly having another language tucked in your back pocket.
     In the end, more broad education - even if it's self-education - can only help the professional.  He or she will feel more competent in their craft and the client will feel more related to.

Required Seminal Reading

     It's my opinion that every counselor worth their salt should read and understand the seminal work (especially in their favorite theory).  While some counselors only subscribe to certain theories (I'll most likely post about counseling learning models later), I think a more general view is better.  Without getting too much into the weeds as to why I think that a more differentiated seminal theory education is better, here is my list of books every competent counselor should read:

Behaviorism

1. Behaviorism by John Watson
2. About Behaviorism by B. F. Skinner
3. Walden Two by B. F. Skinner

Humanism

1. Client-Centered Therapy by Carl Rogers
2. The Farther Reaches of Human Nature by Abraham Maslow

Cognitive-Behavioral

1. A Guide to Rational Living by Albert Ellis (there is a newer book called The Essential Albert Ellis: Seminal Writings on Psychotherapy that could be useful)
2. Cognitive Theory of Depression by Aaron Beck

Existential

1. Existential Psychotherapy by Irvin Yalom
2. Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl
3. Love and Will by Rollo May

Psychoanalysis/Analysis/Psychodynamics

1. The Interpretation of Dreams by Sigmund Freud (there are a couple of newer books that could be chosen based on the interest of the reader - they are The Basic Writings of Sigmund Freud and Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud)

Family/Developmental

1. Family and Family Therapy by Salvador Minuchin
2. Family Evaluation by Michael Kerr and Murray Bowen (there is probably a better choice out there . . . I just couldn't find it)
3. Attachment by John Bowlby

Reality

1. Reality Therapy: A New Approach to Psychiatry by William Glasser
2. Control Theory: An Explanation of How We Control Our Lives by William Glasser
3. Choice Theory: A New Psychology of Personal Freedom by William Glasser

Group Practice

1. The Theory of Group Psychotherapy by Irvin Yalom

     These are just a few titles to get a good prospective therapist started.  I will update this post when I think of another worthy seminal book.

A New Model of Counseling Education

August 27th, 2013

     I've had a thought about another article that I could write that has to do with a different way to go about counselor education than the current model.  At first, this thought was hatched when I figured that every student of psychotherapy should have to write a seminal theory paper.  I later realized that this might not be wholly feasible.  At the least, it is worth it to at least think about their own method of therapy in an in-depth manner.
     My method looks like a cupcake.  The main base of my method is a classical knowledge of psychotherapy by way of the seminal literature on the topic.  This should be required of the student by the professors and administration, but also be the responsibility (mainly) of the student.  I've written about some of the more seminal articles before.  Some include (but are not limited to):
     - Irvin Yalom's Existential Psychotherapy
     - Sigmund Freud's psychoanalysis (many different readings)
     - Glasser's Reality Therapy
     - Rogers's Client-Centered Therapy
     - Beck's Cognitive Behavior Therapy: Basics and Beyond
     - Ellis's A Guide to Rational Living
     - Skinner's On Behaviorism
These are some of the foundation books that describe the very roots of therapy.
     These texts not only give prospective therapists the knowledge they need in order to be competent therapists, they also provide a rich historical view on the subject.  I think that, though most people spurn him and his ideas (which were wholly appropriate for his time period), Freud and his followers (which are all of us, really) need to be understood as to their connections with one another ant heir link to that-day culture.

     Classical literature learning should really be in the hands of the student.  I think that this must be tempered in some way by a professor.  Who knows that wild conclusions a new student would come to without the correction of a competent professional!  At the same time, it might be good to have unguided learning in abstract theory.      Professors/professionals really come back into the equation when we talk about venues.  I take venues to mean avenues to apply the theoretical knowledge learned in the previously-read books.  the above figure shows these venues.  I think that my way of going about things would allow students to learn more about specific venues per the time they spend in class.  These venues include (but, again, are not limited to):
     1. Crisis
     2. Multicultural counseling
     3. Ethics/Policy
     4. Entrepreneurship/Billing/Healthcare
     5. Marriage and Family
     6. Drug and Alcohol
     7. Group Therapy
     8. Developmental/Lifespan
     9. Grief/Loss
     10. Interviewing techniques and postmodernism
These could also be seen as specialties, but I hesitate to call them such because that word makes me think that they should be off-shoot "majors" or programs, which they very well might be able to be.  They are simply more specific avenues through which a practitioner can apply their theory. 
_________________________________________________________________________________

August 28th, 2013

     It seems to me that Counselor Education programs are under-respected when compared to other Master's or even PhD programs.  I'm trying to figure out why this is.  Could it be the accreditation process yield a curriculum that does not produce enough graduates of proper scholastic mind?  Could it be that the students are not ready or even qualified or disciplined enough to gain the amount of knowledge that is expected of them and is relational to other institutions?  There are definitely other reasons for this, including lack of research and availability of the professor/student.
     To a degree, I posit a degree for students who are there to do the work.  When I look around the classroom, I do not see movers and shakers.  I see middle-of-the-heap quasi-professionals.  To a degree, I understand that not every school can have programs that raise a student to the highest level.  But should not all schools aspire to a higher plane of academia?
     I posit that we create more barriers to entry for incoming students.  I don't think that students of questionable academic merit should even be accepted (this would also lead to lesser attrition down the road) into the program.  Counselor Education programs, in my opinion, should include both research and experiential learning.  As an added factor, some kind of thesis or end-of-term project should be required.  The amount of research that this model prescribes is prohibitive to the lazy student.

-----

     Going off my previous discussion about required classical reading, I forgot to mention a very valuable resource.  The American Psychological Association has a very comprehensive monograph collection of different theories.  While these are not seminal articles from the theorist who originally thought of it, the authors tend to be modern experts in those fields.  I am unsure of the number of these monographs.

-----

     Moving on, after the classical literature understanding is delved into (which could be one class really . . . maybe one semester . . . worth 6-9 credits?), and on the post about venues, experiential learning is the next key portion of the model I am writing about.  Whereas the classical literature portion is more student-based (though the class would most likely discuss the theories read at home, which involves a professor) and the venues portion of the academic projection involves a professor-led educational experience, the experiential section is student-led, but professor-observed.  I think that supervision is an amazing and integral part of the education experience.  It allows experienced or practiced professionals to share their knowledge in a hands-on environment.  Supervision is obviously done during practicum/internship.  I would actually suggest one of two things (or both) when it comes to these.  The first is more time spent in the field.  It is hard to argue, I think, against more time participating in the craft.  The second is to spend time in more varied sites.  While classical literature is a good way to point oneself in the direction of a specific type of therapy that a student might be interested in (actually, the venues portion is even more appropriate here) the experiential portion really allows a student to figure out their "specialty," I think that they will eventually be better therapists for it.

     The normal (or current) method to complete experiential learning is one practicum and one internship.  As I said before, I think more is better than less.  At some point in this writing, I will write out a semester by semester schedule for this self-designed program.

_________________________________________________________________________________

August 29th, 2013

     Here is a very preliminary schedule for 60 credits in my model:

Semester #	Course(s) and credit	Total credit #
1	Classical Literature (6) / Interviewing and Postmodernism (3)	9
2	Multicultural (3) / Ethics (3) / Developmental (3)	9
3	Crisis (3) / Grief and Loss (3) / Drug and Alcohol (3)	9
4	Group (3) / Marriage and Family (3) / School (3)	9
5	Practicum (3) / Internship 1 (3) / Research (3)	9
6	Internship 2 (3) / Internship 3 (3) / Research (3)	9
7	Thesis (6)	6

     This schedule really pushes that "theorist scholar practitioner" model that I believe I mentioned before.  Normally, three classes per semester would be a good idea.  I think that it wouldn't be too much or too little.  I've split the education (which would take seven semesters or two years and a semester) into three sections to allow faculty and supervisors to cut as needed.  I believe that professors are the gatekeeper and should very closely guard students.

     The first level here is very much like candidacy in other programs.  If a student can't hack it through understanding the classical literature and basic interviewing, it is my opinion that they should not continue the program.  I can see the argument that this model starts out pretty quickly.  Classic literature can be quite daunting (especially if the graduate student does not have a background in a psychological studies discipline).  So, with that in mind, I could see a possible switch between semester one and two on this list.  Semester two is very introductive and could (and I stress could, not should) switch with the semester marked one.  I will assume, for the rest of this, that classical literature and interviewing skills/postmodern theories will be done in the first semester.  While my current program (in university) has introductory courses in the things like community mental health, marriage and family therapy, and school counseling (these are actually covered, to a degree (except for the first one) in my model). 

     The second level expands on the first and really outlines the venues that I mentioned before.  These are curricular-based and allows the student to investigate these specific areas both for concentration purposes and applied core knowledge areas as well as eventual internship opportunities.

     The third level is all about experiential learning and research.  This is the time for students to really figure out what they want to do.  The table also mentions that the thesis is a requirement.  It is hard to stress enough that students interested in a degree (and a CACREP-approved final degree) should include not only experiential but academic work.