Maria and Alex – Maria is a 24-year-old, second-generation Argentinian woman living in Canada who came out as a lesbian last year. Her parents are devout Catholics and opposed to homosexuality, and she feels they have not fully absorbed her sexual orientation—they see it as a “phase”. She feels they are very gradually adjusting, but is concerned that announcing the plan to move in with her partner Lisa would disturb the current peaceful equilibrium in their relationship. Maria is getting pressure from Lisa, but is concerned that moving in would be extremely upsetting to her parents, and she is stuck as to how to go forward.

David and Jason – Jason’s story is roughly parallel to Pierre’s—he has recently returned to the workforce after a prolonged absence due to anxiety. Jason’s sessions were performed live in front of a class of graduate students, and in this version of the Pierre story, Jason is a straight man married to Mary.

David and Diana – Diana is the 30-year-old mother of Benny, a grade 9 student who is not getting the grades she expects of him in his English class. David here plays Benny’s teacher.

David and Darren – Darren is a 35-year-old man referred to counselling from his workplace. A condition of his continued employment is that he should participate in counseling for what they describe as drinking problems.

Gaya and Sophie – Sophie is 27 years old, married with two young children. A year ago, her husband had a routine surgery that went wrong and he has been unable to work since that time. Sophie has had to step into the primary breadwinner role. She is feeling overwhelmed, worried about finances, taking care of the children and her husband, and is sleeping poorly.

David and Christy – Christy is the 26-year-old mother of a 2-year-old daughter, Cristelle. She returned to her work as an employee assistance plan counselor 4 months ago after being off on a maternity leave. One month after returning to work she separated from her husband John. She has recently moved in with her parents, who she says are caring grandparents but have many opinions about parenting that sometimes cause stresses. Christy says she is not feeling much empathy for clients at work and not getting along with workmates.

Here, in an example featured as Rejecting a suggestion nonverbally in Chapter 5, Alex “pitches” Maria on the notion that she should simply declare her plans to her parents and not be concerned about how they will respond. How responsive is he to Maria’s verbals and nonverbals as he does this? What do you see in her body language that gives you indications about what she feels about his idea? What aspects of this practice might you have done similarly/differently?

Analysis

Straight-up advice giving is rarely helpful. It underestimates the client’s ability to reflect on their own situation and can promote an oppositional response. This does not suggest counsellors should never bring their ideas to clients; it’s in how they are brought and offered that the difference lies. Here, Alex feels strongly about what he thinks Maria should do; but does she agree? Better to either spend more time eliciting a rich account from Maria of her point of view, or place his idea on the table more tentatively for Maria to mull over and respond to.

In this example, Alex has the same idea as the one he offered in the “Offering direct advice” scenario. But he brings it forward differently. What do you notice is different about how he brings his point of view to the conversation? What is different about how Maria takes it up? How does the outcome of this exchange differ? What might the implications be for the therapeutic relationship? What aspects of this practice might you have done similarly/differently?

Analysis

While it is generally more productive for counselors to elicit clients’ ideas than to pitch their own, there are times when a counselor may have a strong impression that a particular way forward would be useful. Handled clumsily, this turns into direct advice giving, which frequently gets met with a push-back. Here Alex has an idea about how Maria might deal with her impasse. But he offers it in a manner that invites Maria to critique, which she does with a clear account of why Alex’s idea does not fit for her cultural context. The exchange moves them both into examining more realistic alternatives.

When clients seem unwilling to discuss or explore certain topics, they are providing useful information to counselors. In this sense, they are “cooperating”, as Steve de Shazer has said. What do you see in Maria’s response when Alex inquires about how guilt plays out in her relationship with her partner Lisa? What has she “told” Alex here about her comfort discussing guilt in connection to Lisa? If you were Maria’s counselor, what might you do in response to her response?

Analysis

Alex is working on the notion that the guilt that Maria refers to likely applies not only to her parents but also to Lisa. Maria has not explicitly said this, though, and when Alex raises the notion, Maria seems visibly uncomfortable. Her discomfort is not necessarily a problem; it all depends on how Alex works with it. If he is insensitive to it and prevails without giving Maria a chance to share her discomfort and give permission to explore this area further, there could be a deterioration in the working relationship. If Alex makes space for Maria to name her concerns and unpack her discomfort, they may both enrich the conversation and move it forward.

In this follow-up to an initial session with Jason, David introduces a Miracle Question as a stylized way to render a detailed account what a day without the problem would look like for him. How does David prepare Jason for hearing this unusual question and the methodical process it involves? The Miracle Question has sometimes been criticized because it could inadvertently suggest that clients don’t have to “do” anything to deal with their problems, which a miracle will take care of it. What does the David say to avert giving this impression? What are examples of questions that invite forward a highly detailed account of this day? What possibilities for goal setting with Jason emerge from the exchange? What aspects of this practice might you have done similarly/differently?

Analysis

The Miracle Question requires some care when introducing it to ensure the client is on board. Notice that David acknowledges that he “has an unusual question his back pocket”. Notice also that he methodically sets the scenario of the inexplicable event in the middle of the night. In order to counteract the risk of conveying the notion that Jason’s challenges might go away on their own, he makes reference to the “work” that lies ahead. The questions used are intended to identify the minutiae of everyday lie that changes when problems are not central. David ask questions about what Jason “does” to ensure this is an account of him as an agent in his life, making choices and taking steps—including using self talk and breathing—to moderate his anxiety. The exchange generates a number of ideas for goal setting—steps that Jason can take in the days ahead to move towards the preferred outcome.

This excerpt follows on the heels of the Miracle question exchange also featured in this chapter. Having laid out a picture of what a day would look like if the problem were absent, or not longer a “problem” per se, David and Jason set out to determine what steps Jason might take now to help him move towards that preferred outcome. What does David say to elicit specific and concrete steps? How does he deal with answers that sound overly vague or doubtful in their achievability? What does David do to ensure that Jason has “bought in” to the plan to take active steps? How do Jason and David make plans to carry these possibilities forward into the week? What aspects of this practice might you have done similarly/differently?

Analysis

Questions like the Miracle Question and others that help to generate a picture of a preferred outcome provide an excellent foundation for setting concrete goals. Notice here how David begins by reminding Jason of his picture of what a morning would look like on a day when the problem is not “a problem”. He immediately asks what Jason would do to achieve this. The exchange continues in this vein with David pressing Jason for specifics when his responses seem vague. He also plays devil’s advocate, to ensure that Jason critically examines goals that sound unrealistic and adjusts them to make them more achievable. At the end, David invites Jason to “research” his experience of putting some of these steps into action, which will provide material for making adjustments when David and Jason next meet.

Diana is meeting her son Benny’s teacher—played here by David—in a parent-teacher interview. Diana is concerned that Benny is not doing well in David’s English class, although he typically gets good grades. What does David say to ensure Diana feels hear and understood? How does David introduce Diana to some of the challenges associated with Benny’s behavior? How does he draw on her expertise as they collaboratively devise some strategies for supporting Benny? What aspects of this practice might you have done similarly/differently?

Analysis

Parents understandably advocate for their children more often than not when meeting with a counselor or teacher in situations where their children are struggling. Here, Diana is initially more interested in learning about the teacher’s shortcomings than in working with the teacher to find new ways to support her son Benny. Among other things, the notion that Benny may not be an ideal student may be out of sync with her own complimentary view of her son. It might also reflect badly on her parenting. David avoids adopting a defensive posture here, which would put himself against Diana rather than inviting collaboration. Instead, he capitalizes on Diana’s intimate knowledge of her own son to turn this into a constructive conversation in which the two of them can brainstorm possibilities for working slightly differently with Benny both at home and at school.

In this video, featured in Chapter 9 as Keeping the client centred when defining a problem, Darren has been given the thumbnail sketch of what his employer (who referred him for counseling) said about his performance at work. The employer attributes Darren’s uneven productivity to a drinking problem. Based on Darren’s response here, what would you say his position is on this claim? To what degree does David push up against Darren’s position; to what degree does he adapt to it in order to continue the conversation? How does he speak about the issue at hand in a manner that ensures Darren’s continued engagement? In what way can Darren be seen as “collaborating” here by providing David with a clear view of where he stands on the issue at hand? Are David and Darren avoiding the “real issue”, or is it more a case of having a conversation about what Darren currently thinks is problematic en route to other conversations that may encompass a wider landscape of Darren’s experience? What aspects of this practice might you have done similarly/differently?

Analysis

It’s impossible to collaborate with a client if they see “the problem” as one thing and the counselor sees it as another. In this case, the employer has named what they think the problem is and David keeps that in mind as he explores the situation with Darren, while not imposing this assumption on Darren. One way to understand Darren’s contributions to the conversation here is that he is “cooperating” with David by clearly indicating his position (he disagrees) on the issue of what his employer refers to as excessive drinking. Rather than treating this as “resistance” or “denial” that must be confronted, David adjusts his questioning in line with what Darren presents. For Darren—at least initially—drinking is not “the problem”; however he does acknowledge that “low productivity” is causing problems at work and could lose to his being laid off. David perceives a relationship between the two and does not let go of his impressions in this regard, but proceeds by asking a series of questions to consolidate a view of the impact of low productivity for Darren. He also scaffolds an inquiry into the connection between low productivity and drinking, helping Darren to evaluate the connection himself. By the end of the conversation, David and Darren agree to keep on talking about the problem of his lowered productivity. It seems likely, though not assured, that the conversation will gradually identity the role of drinking in the low productivity; to insist on this connection now would likely diminish Darren’s engagement in the work.

Here, Gaya has some thoughts about what would be helpful to Sophie. Rather than keep this to herself, what does she do instead? What do you notice in her verbals and nonverbals that conveys an invitation to Sophie to critically evaluate the suggestion she brings it into the conversation? How does the exchange play out? What aspects of the counselor’s practice might you have done similarly/differently?

Analysis

It’s usually more effective to draw ideas out of clients through skilful questions than to pitch ideas directly at them—for reasons that by now should be fairly evident. But once a working relationship is established, a counselor can gauge whether the client is likely to critically evaluate suggestions, and these can be offered in a tentative manner that telegraphs that invitation to critique. Here this is what Gaya does both through her nonverbals and verbals. The result is that Sophie does make a discernment about what fits for her. 

David is reviewing some of the progress Christy has made over the months they have worked together. Pay attention to the questions he asks. What does he say that helps to prepare Christy to evaluate the steps she has taken? How does he link the content to support Christy in making connections between events she may not previously have seen as related? How likely is it that Christy would arrive at the various conclusions she comes to here if David merely asked “What have you learned over the past few months?”. What aspects of the counselor’s practice might you have done similarly/differently?

Analysis

Scaffolding is a very active process on the part of the counselor, but is also highly de-centred, in that it aims to ensure the client—not the counselor—does the work in evaluating the topic at hand. In this instance, the topic is a look-back on the changes Christy has made over the past months. David is aware from their many conversations of certain domains where Christy has taken initiatives that are reaping rewards for her. He is deliberate in bringing these to Christy’s attention, while at the same time he is careful not to come to conclusions on her behalf.