This week's case study required you to understand the Rogerian concept of congruence. If you want, pause here and try to define it as a little pop quiz....
Carl Rogers - who we shout out a lot in our field - really emphasized congruence as an important quality in a therapist. This can also be described as genuineness or authenticity. Does the therapist walk the talk? Do their actions align with what they say to the client? Are they consistent?
The correct answer to this week's case study was C. This is because choice C, "maintain open body posture and consistent eye contact," was congruent or in alignment with with the how the therapist showed up with the client. The therapist had been expressing strong empathy and concern for the client. Listening so actively and staying physically attuned with the client is consistent with that empathetic stance.
The other answers each demonstrated some sort of disconnect within the therapist. Assigning a homework worksheet to the client ignores his feelings of burnout and overwhelm. Jumping right into psychoeducation on how to engage in more activities similarly misses the crux of the client's pain. Finally, the client's issue is primarily burnout. The burnout is impacting his relationship, not the other way around. A couples' counseling referral wouldn't be too appropriate, considering.
What gets in the way of you practicing congruence with your clients?