
"Calling clients resistant often implies the client is intentionally blocking progress, as if they alone are the reason therapy isn't working. That framing has always troubled me, because more often than not, what gets labeled "resistance" isn't a client problem at all. I've found that it's usually a relationship problem ( between client(s) and therapist or in their interactions/dynamic), and often, it's actually a therapist problem."
"When therapists reach for the word resistance, attention subtly shifts away from what's happening between two people in the room. The focus moves off the therapeutic relationship and onto what is supposedly wrong with the client. In the process, we can miss how the therapists' own approach, assumptions, urgency, training, or unresolved countertransference might be shaping the moment. Once that happens, therapy can quietly drift away from curiosity and toward correction, and growth often stalls right there."
Resistance is rarely solely a client problem; it often arises from the relational dynamics between client and therapist and can reflect therapist behaviors, assumptions, urgency, or unresolved countertransference. Labeling clients as resistant shifts attention away from the therapeutic relationship toward blaming clients, which can halt curiosity and foster corrective stances. Hesitation and avoidance frequently represent self-protective instincts and useful information rather than sabotage. Progress tends to accelerate when therapists reduce blame and labeling, cultivate safety, attend to their own contributions, and respond with curiosity to moments of hesitancy.
Read at Psychology Today
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]