Posted by Happyflower on June 16, 2008, at 13:12:23
My old T used to use this approach a lot since it was what he was primary trained in. But it always felt judgmental to me, judging HOW you say things instead of him LISTENING to WHAT I am saying. So we would spend a whole hour discussing HOW I word things, instead of working on what the problem was to begin with
With my current T (who wasn't trained primary in this) he accepts me for what and how I say something. It feels accepting to me and more sensitive to the real reasons I am in therapy, not a grammar like lesson. And guess what, the issues get worked out.
With my old T I always struggled with this because I would say, OKAY< OKAY< I will say it the "proper way", but I still FEEL the same way, dammit! So what's the point?
I know the theories behind it and all, but I think it doesn't works well with me. I like the humanistic approach way better.
poster:Happyflower
thread:834901
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20080616/msgs/834901.html