REGERENCE:

Stamm, B. H. (2012). ProQOL 5: Professional quality of life scale (Version 5) – English – Self-score

• Is my personal life satisfying and rewarding?

• Are my relationships what I want them to be?

• To what degree am I taking care of myself, both physically and emotionally?

• Would I be willing for other therapists I respect to know about my professional conduct and decisions?

• Am I willing to express my vulnerabilities through consultation or peer supervision?

• Am I generally consistent in my practice?

REFERENCE:

Williams, R. (2011). The importance of self-care. American School Counselor Association.

Stamm, B. H. (1999–2002). Quick-guide suggestions: Prevention/intervention with the negative effects of caregiving [Handout]. https://www.isu.edu/~bhstamm

Stamm, B. H. (2012). ProQOL 5: Professional quality of life scale (Version 5) – English – Self-score

Compassion Fatigue Awareness Project. (2022). Compassion Fatigue Awareness Project.

REFERENCE: Corey, G., Muratori, M., Austin, J. T., II, & Austin, J. A. (2023). Counselor self-care (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.(Pages 5-7).

REFERENCE:

Stamm, B. H. (2012). ProQOL 5: Professional quality of life scale (Version 5) – English – Self-score.

REFERENCE: Corey, G., Muratori, M., Austin, J. T., II, & Austin, J. A. (2023). Counselor self-care (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons..

REFERENCE:

Moriah Behavioral Health. (2024). How mental health apps can aid in recovery.

Counselor Chelsey. (2019). Self-care journal pages for Google Slides

• Licensed professional counselors provide therapy for individuals, couples, and families facing mental health issues such as anxiety, depression, and trauma. They work in community mental health centers, hospitals, and private practices, offering crisis intervention, coping strategies, and emotional support to clients in distress (Mental Health America, 2025).

• Substance abuse counselors specialize in helping individuals overcome drug and alcohol addiction. They conduct assessments, provide therapy, and develop relapse prevention plans. Often working in rehabilitation centers, correctional facilities, and community organizations, they play a crucial role in supporting long-term recovery (Mental Health America, 2025).

• Marriage and family therapists (MFTs) focus on relationship dynamics, helping couples and families navigate conflicts, divorce, parenting challenges, and domestic issues. They use therapeutic techniques to foster communication and emotional resilience in family units, often working in private practices, social service agencies, and mental health clinics (Mental Health America, 2025).

• Rehabilitation counselors assist individuals with disabilities, including physical, emotional, or cognitive impairments, in achieving personal and professional independence. Working in vocational rehabilitation centers, government agencies, and nonprofits, they help clients develop career plans, secure employment, and adapt to daily life challenges (Mental Health America, 2025).

• Grief and bereavement counselors support individuals and families coping with loss, such as the death of a loved one or a terminal illness diagnosis. They work in hospices, hospitals, religious institutions, and community centers, helping clients process their emotions and develop healthy coping mechanisms during difficult times (Mental Health America, 2025)

• Crisis counselors provide immediate psychological support to individuals experiencing trauma, such as natural disasters, violence, or personal crises. They work in crisis hotlines, emergency shelters, and disaster response teams, offering immediate stabilization and helping clients access long-term care.

• Career counselors assist students and professionals in exploring career options, developing job search strategies, and overcoming workplace challenges. Found in schools, colleges, employment agencies, and corporate settings, they guide individuals in identifying strengths, acquiring new skills, and making informed career decisions (Mental Health America, 2025)                                                                   

• Pastoral counselors integrate spiritual beliefs with psychological principles, providing faith-based counseling to individuals facing personal, relational, and ethical dilemmas. They work in religious institutions, hospitals, and counseling centers, offering guidance that aligns with clients' values and faith traditions (Mental Health America, 2025)

• Qualified Mental Health Professionals (QMHPs) are certified professionals who provide direct mental health services, including assessment, treatment planning, and therapeutic interventions. They often work in community mental health agencies, crisis intervention teams, and social service organizations, ensuring individuals receive the appropriate care and resources needed for mental well-being (Texas Health and Human Services Commission, 2018).

Ivey Confrontation: Exemplar 1

Line 1 T:As part of that (.5) of what we were talking you did (.hhh)Line 2a couple times mention uh (1.0) that (.4)Line 3I'm a little confused about this relationship with Beau uh (.hhh)Line 4(1.1) I heard you say he wasn't a factorLine 5 C:mm-hnhLine 6 T:and then I heard that ye- as part of this is I actually heard you sayLine 7you thought of going and visiting the State UniversityLine 8but the things that he said sort o (.hhh) kept you from goingLine 9an' I kinda wonder if you could (.7) (.hhh)Line 10[share that a little bit more]Line 11 C:[he kinda discouraged me] because of the s-s-security of the job I'm inLine 12and not to sort of (.6) ruin that y'know or [(.hhh)]Line 13 T:[mm-hnh]Line 14 C:and uh (.5) y'know it was kind (.) not really supportiveLine 15or en[couraging]Line 16 T:[mmm]Line 17 C:actually he thought (.hhh) maybe should do something totally differentLine 18if you want to do something different go into businessLine 19you don't have to go to graduate [scho]olLine 20 T:[mmm]Line 21 C:do something different y'know go into business or suh-< I mean [(.hhh)]Line 22 T:[mmm]Line 23 C:I don't know where he was coming fromLine 24 T:mnm-huh (.hhh) and yet (2.6) uuuh (guttural noise) an'Line 25I kinda get some mixed feelings about itLine 26I getta feeling that you rely on Beau a lot for supportLine 27 C:uh-huhLine 28 T:an' then 1hear y'on the other hand saying (.9)Line 29it kind of it kind of feels scrambled sometimes talking to himLine 30is that a fair word?Line 31 C:[(.hhh)that's right]Line 32 T:[to use uh scrambled]Line 33 C:yeah I would say uh (.8) y'knowLine 34y'know it's nice to have a supportive person but [uh (1.4)]Line 35 T:[mm-hnh]Line 36 C:in this area (.) y'know it's not thereLine 37 T:mm-hnhLine 38 C:(inaudible 'anyway'?) it feels like something I have to do on my own. (transcript ofI vey et al., 1997)

Some might wonder why so much transcription detail is used in the dialogue exemplar. What, for example, is gained by showing tenths of a second, "mm-hnhs," or vocal inflections— the performative dimension of talk-in-interaction we are analyzing? Central to CA is a view that speakers carefully package their turns at talking mindful of how they might be received. Beyond words, gestures, tones of voice, eye contact, and other potentially relevant nonverbal features (i.e., to the speakers involved) are used in how any utterance is put to another speaker. Furthermore, speakers often complete what they say based on how earlier parts of their utterance are perceptibly received-modifying, "in transit," their message. Talk, in other words, is more than already completed thoughts simply delivered. The socially constructive aspects of talk are observable as people talk in how they incorporate their sense of how their message is being received and into what they say next. More important, however, is what happens to an utterance after it is spoken, in what the recipient does with it. This is where the proceedings of the talk—its content and process—can be seen to be negotiated between speakers in ways that often escape their attention. Such microdetails show how Ivey and his client talked through this confrontation.

Getting to specifics, readers should notice how Ivey packaged his initial confrontation in lines 1 to 4. Those who have seen, read, or watched Ivey know that his communications are typically clear and straightforward. So, what then can be made of the pauses, sentence fragments, ''uhs,'' and exhalations that went into initiating this confrontation (one marked by his words "I'm a little confused")? In our view, Ivey packaged what he was saying, as he was saying it to Mary, based on how she received him and how Ivey anticipated he might be received. Said differently, how one is received in the moment influences what a speaker says while saying it. To introduce a new topic or discourse typically involves a segue, or new ways of talking, to illustrate the talk being initiated is a departure from the talk that preceded it (T. Strong, Zeman, & Foskett, 2006). This means finding a way of proposing a shift without uttering a jarring non sequitur into the prior flow of dialogue. In our view, Ivey used what is observable in lines 1 to 4 to prepare Mary for his confrontation, to package it in a way that she will take up.

Note the line 5 "mm-hnh," an acknowledgment token for indicating that Mary did not take issue with what Ivey had said thus far. Such mundane acknowledgments can be quite important. In research by Bavelas, Coates, and Johnson (2000), storytellers were disrupted when such listener acknowledgments were absent in tel1inga story. In Ivey's case, they extend a further five lines into finishing his initial confrontation. Yet a dialogic interaction is not complete with one party uttering something. What also matters is what Mary did with Ivey's confrontation, as shown in her elaboration between lines 11 and 23, while Ivey used acknowledgment tokens that helped to extend Mary's response. Mary had "taken up" Ivey's confrontation, shown in how she spoke from its presuppositions ("he kinda discouraged me"). This interaction apparently was not dialogically complete for Ivey as he responded in line 24 with "and yet." He packaged this further confrontation in a measured way open for Mary to contest should she wish (e.g., "I kinda get some mixed feelings"). Further talk concluded with Mary's partial uptake of Ivey's confrontation (''that's right."). Later, she indicated weak agreement with where the confrontation seemed to be heading ("it feels like something I have to do on my own").

Ivey Confrontation: Exemplar 2

Line 1 T:OK let's come back to you.Line 2How do you feel about the idea that Beau wants the focus on him (.5)Line 3as we just do that little bit of uhahLine 4just sort of Gestalt-type [of exercise]Line 5C: [It feels ki]nd of selfish an' it feels like umh (.8)Line 6that's it's not really going to work (.7)Line 7 T:mm[-hnh]Line 8 C:[y'know] that relationship isn't going to work (.4)Line 9 T:mm-hnh [(.hhh)]Line 10 C:[and um] (.9) y'[know]Line 11 T:[nmn]Line 12 C:particularly if you're can't be supportive in this areaLine 13that I trunk is importantLine 14 T:So, I hear you saying that (.4) the two ((hands move apart))Line 15of you are seeing things different that the relationship might not workLine 16and yet ((lifting right hand upward, palm up)) relationship (.)(.hhh)Line 17>on the other hand< ((ands moving back and forth in front of body))Line 18relationships are pretty important to you soLine 19 C:well that relationship won't work for meLine 20but other relationships will work (.7) ((smiling))Line 21 T:[ah-hah] ((head nods))Line 22 C:[maybe there's] somebody [else]((smiling))Line 23 T:[so] you're a little farther along in that relationshipLine 24uh with Beau than II kinda thought you were uh as I was listening to youLine 25(.hhh) some points I heard you saying that you really needed his supportLine 26((client purses her lips after smiling, tilts her head slightly toLine 27right and closes her eyes as she looks down))Line 28(.)in relationship as you moved outLine 29((client opens her eyes and looks directly at Counselor))Line 30into something new (.) an' nowLine 31((client is nodding head slightly several times))Line 32I hear you coming from a different space like (.)(.hhh)Line 33 C:[(hhh)] ((smiling and exhales as a slight laugh))Line 34 T:y' I get a little bit confused about where you are (.9)Line 35 C:Well uh (hhh) (1.0) (.hhh) urn y'know you always feel a little uhLine 36((client shifted in chair to and now look directly at counselor))Line 37change is always difficult (.6)Line 38 T:mm-hmhLine 39 C:an' um (.) to leave something that's comfortable is gonna be pretty hardLine 40but yet (.) uhmLine 41 T:mm-[hmh]Line 42 C:[if] you feel like you want to grow yourself and do something differ[ent]Line 43 T:[mm-]hmhLine 44 C:you sometimes just have to take a riskLine 45 T:mm-[hmh]Line 46 C:[an'] taking [risk]Line 47 T:[yeah]Line 48 C:is difficultLine 49 T:(.hhh) I sense uh a lot of strength (.) in yourselfLine 50((C is nodding head slightly with a slight smile))Line 51as you say that uh-I hear determinationLine 52((C gives a broader smile with head nod))Line 53that you (.hhh) you like (.) like Beau but h' but it doesn't sound likeLine 54uh it sounds like you're going to make your own decision (1.0)Line 55 C:[mmmn—I think soLine 56 T:even though occasionally it appears now and thenLine 57 C:mmn I've thought about it an' and I feel like it's time y'knowLine 58I can't do it later it's gotta be time now an'an' now's the timeLine 59mm-hmhLine 60 C:not later. (transcript of Ivey et al., 1997; for transcript symbols, see Appendix and/or Kogan, 1998, p. 251)

The second exemplar shows [vey initiating another phase of confronting Mary with the discourse marker "OK," the phrase "let's come back to you," followed by a specific question about Mary's views. Rhetorically, questions can be seen as invitations to respond in a particular manner to the counselor (e.g., Tomm, 1988), an invitation Mary took up between lines 5 and 13. Worth noting is her emphasized "isn't" in line 8 when talking about whether her relationship would work; there is awkwardness or delicacy between Mary and Ivey in the halting, soft-spoken things Mary says, and Ivey's supportive acknowledgments as Mary elaborates her answer. Such delicate interactions were featured in Silverman's (2004) analyses of discussions between counselors and clients on the topic of clients' sexual activities. Silverman described such interactions as "constructing delicate objects" (p. 119), the objects being morally implicating utterances about the client that counselors and clients elaborated together. In Mary's case, such moral delicacies might be inferred from her line 5 comment about being "kind of selfish" and from the talk that followed. Such consideration of moral delicacies also fits Goffman's (1967) "face-work" (p. 12) interactions, where speakers talk so as to manage the moral stakes or impressions others might make of them as these arise in their dialogues.

Line 14 shows Ivey taking up what Mary has said, highlighting a dilemma she faces in choosing between what "Beau" wants and what she wants. Mary's response in lines 19 and 20 indicates "well that relation hip won't work for me but other relationships will work." Ivey reframed Mary's disclosure ("you're a little farther along ...") as a possible new narrative, confronting her conclusion and earlier talk that seemed at odds with this disclosure. A delicate exchange develops after Ivey's line 30 "an' now," which builds to his line 34 "I get a little bit confused" utterance. This can be especially noted in how Mary responded with what Silverman (2004) described as a "turbulent delivery" (p. 125), a tentative way of balancing one's communications for how they might be received. Yet, by line 58, Mary has taken up the implications of Ivey's proposed narrative as it emerged in the confrontation sequence ("now's the time").

Discussion

When there is no access to one's own personal "ultimate" word, then every thought, feeling, experience must be refracted through ... someone else's discourse, someone else's style, someone else's manner, with which it cannot immediately be merged without reservation, without distance, without refraction. (Bakhtin, 1984, p. 202)

We have suggested that counselors consider confrontation in terms of a completed dialogic interaction. For a counselor's helping intentions to be realized in the dialogues of counseling, what matters is not what they say, alone, but what clients do with what they say. The dialogic perspective we have shared and used in our analysis suggests that confrontation is a conversational activity involving both counselor and client. This is a point Ivey and his colleague also emphasized—that confrontation involves not only "the pointing out of (client) discrepancies between or among attitudes, thoughts or behaviors" (Ivey et al., 1997, p. 50 [from accompanying training manual)) but also a need to use other core listening skills.

Confronting in counseling is clearly different from people arguing, such as when one professional insists the client adopt his or her views. From a CA perspective, confronting involves practical interpretive activities—how people observably make sense of each other—and a rhetorical endeavor in which clients and counselors manage the stakes of their dialogues. Thus, Ivey's confrontations are packaged as invitations instead of directives, offering his views in ways that were observably contestable instead of authoritatively irrefutable. Other counselors might have approached the interaction more asymmetrically, as expert dialogues where counselors' ways of talking and meanings are focal, that is, where the counselor's discourse or meanings are primary to how the interview proceeds, such as at times of making interpretations or delivering directives. This concerns critical discourse analysts who see counseling as a context in which clients can be held to the professional discourses of the counselor (e.g., Parker, 1999).

Confronting can bring with it breaches not only in the flow of conversation but also in the rapport established in the counseling relationship. With these breaches come needs to conversationally repair (Sacks, Schegloff, & Jefferson, 1974), but preferably not at the cost of the counselor's intentions in confronting the client. What comes after a confrontation is, for us, analytically, a very interesting and often artful rhetorical improvisation by client and counselor as they talk through where to go thereafter. It is where they can coordinate intentions in a shared language (see Anderson, 1997) or fail at this and, thus, the conversation pushes on. Yet, during a confrontation, client and counselor use words and other conversational aspects to do the kinds of "refracting" (Bakhtin, 1984, p. 202), described earlier, as they talk. Bakhtin is an interesting theorist to invoke here. For him, the word in any dialogue was not exclusively that of the utterer; the listener and prior users of the word all have claims to the word as well. As this relate to confronting, what the counselor says in her or his confrontation needs to be claimed, "refracted," and (from the counselor's standpoint) preferably taken up by the client. Clients need to "people" ("populate," in Russian; Bakhtin, 1981, p. 293) what counselors tell them with their own intentions and understandings. How this is done is observable matter and quite instructive as to the workings of actual conversation, when contrasted with the often idealized use of skills depicted in many counseling textbooks. We are curious about Garfinkel's (2002)" hop floor" when counselors confront clients.

Much counselor training focuses on discretely learnable skills such as those found in Ivey's microskills approach. Having learned such discrete skills, counseling students can presumably later integrate them into their own unique combination of skill required in the immediacies of actual counseling dialogues, for example, when a confrontation might require the use of follow-up skills such as paraphrases, open questions, and so on. Yet a microskills focus breaks up dialogue into parts in ways we believe idealizes how conversations occur in everyday life. Here, people talk with intention in mind and tend to work these out in how they complete or fail to complete them with each other.

It can be helpful to shift attention from counselors' use of discrete conversational microskill , such as confrontation. This obscures what clients do with such microskills and what counselors do with such client responses. We suggest, instead, focusing on dialogic sequences where confrontations are initiated and, over as many conversational turns as are needed, are brought to a sense of mutual completion between counselor and client. Discrete skills would continue to be used, but their deployment would relate to effort to realizing intentions in a process of collaborating on client goals. A our analyses point out, a mundane element of communication tends to be taken for granted when using these skills, which we believe is central to their use. What can at fir t seem like sloppy and less than straightforward communication could otherwise point to artful, in-the-moment way a counselor packages her or hi talk for the client for example, in ways that lead to client uptake of their communication as they talk. The key is in how a counselor complete an intended interaction with a client, which is something we believe is quite observable from the ways we have shown.

Ivey's microskills undeniably help in conducting professional dialogue. Counseling also require responsive, improvisational skill by counselors to avoid making monologues out of dialogues with clients. Counselors constantly and collaboratively negotiate with clients: goals, particular question and answer sequences, agreements on interventions, intended reformulations of client meaning, or client homework. Careful scrutiny (using CA transcripts or videotapes) of such negotiations can be useful in training or self-supervision (T. Strong, 2003), especially with how the client and counselor coordinate nonverbal aspects of their dialogues in completing such negotiations. We ha e shown how Ivey, a well-known counselor educator, initiated confrontations he talked through to dialogic completion, using his microskilLS and much more.

We’ve briefly discussed some of the underpinnings of human behaviour and the characteristics which define an effective counsellor. The importance of understanding such concepts is that, on many occasions, self-disclosure requires counsellors to act in a paradoxical manner – that is, communicate a common message in a tailored way, with a different objective, and an external focus. Self-disclosure can be a challenging technique because it defies our natural ‘self-centred’ dialogue.

Self-disclosure is defined as “a conscious, intentional technique in which clinicians share information about their lives outside the counseling relationship” (Simone, McCarthy, & Skay, 1998, p.174). The role of this process is to “facilitate client disclosure through modeling and the establishment of trust” (the dyadic effect; Jourard, 1968). In other words, the counsellor discloses information about him/herself in order to establish a connection with the client, thus creating rapport, trust and improving interpersonal communication.

Self-disclosure is a useful strategy used by the majority of counsellors, regardless of theoretical orientation. In many instances this process is almost a requirement to obtain valuable information from a client in order to help them see through a situation. It is often perceived as an ethical and valuable technique.

• Home

• Case Studies

• Communication

• Counselling Theory & Practice

• Mental Health Issues

• Life Coping Skills

• Study Options

Counselling Microskills

  prevnext  

Self-Disclosure – Concepts and Applications

October 16, 2009

Are you a very important person? Sure you are. The reason for this answer is the same for almost everyone: we like talking about ourselves, we enjoy being listened to, we praise our achievements, and we are very much into introspection. Although we are ultimately social beings, most humans are both consciously and subconsciously determined to improve themselves, and to derive meaning to their existence.

In this context, we are faced with the everyday challenge of balancing our own needs for fulfilment and recognition with the need to co-relate with others, to promote altruism and to help people in need. This paradox takes centre stage in counselling sessions in the form of self-disclosure – as a counsellor, how much of yourself should you reveal to your clients?

Human Behaviour and Effective Counselling

It is undeniable that many people are more interested in themselves than things happening with others. Generally, people like to talk about themselves (thus listening is such an important part in interpersonal communication), to listen to topics which have relevance to their lives, to participate in groups they can derive benefit from, and to be part of a system which values them. It is the basic need for belonging that drives people to behave in this way.

Most people also strongly defend their opinions and perspectives. We like to make sure that once we believe in something, we are able to reasonably explain that way of thinking, and possibly prove to the other person that we are correct in our opinions. Think about it: who likes to be incorrect? So when we talk about ourselves or about issues which are pertinent to our lives, we like to explain each aspect of that topic and by doing so, validate our opinion or experience. Self-denial occurs when we give up that right in order to focus the attention to someone else’s problem, issue or situation. The capacity for self-denial is one of the most important characteristics of a good counsellor.

Curiosity, comfort with conversation, empathy and understanding play a major role in creating a safe environment which allows a client’s emotional expression. Emotional insightfulness, introspection, tolerance of intimacy and comfort with power are characteristics which help the counsellor maintain a clear perspective of the situation and at the same time, not prejudice the relationship by being judgemental or condescending. Energy, flexibility and self-awareness facilitate the counsellor’s drive and focus in the relationship’s objectives and outcomes.

Self-disclosure can be as helpful as it can be damaging if not properly conducted. Why? Primarily because the act of self-disclosure exposes the counsellor and it could undermine the balance of power in the relationship with a client. If the client sees vulnerability in the counsellor, the trust could fall apart. At the same time, this vulnerability could improve the relationship between the counsellor and client by creating more intimacy as the client ‘sees’ the counsellor in the ‘same level’ of him or her.

Therefore, the outcomes of using self-disclosure as a strategy to build trust and rapport will depend on the counsellor’s actions and how those actions will reflect from the client’s perspective (based on the client’s personality variables). It is important for counselling professionals to observe these issues and adjust their approach accordingly.

The benefits or advantages of self-disclosure include: helping the client to not feel alone, decreasing client anxiety, improving the client’s awareness to different viewpoints, and increasing counsellor genuineness. Some disadvantages of applying self-disclosure include: moving focus from the client, taking too much counselling time (and thus reducing client disclosure), creating role confusion (who is helping who?), possibly trivialising the client’s issue by implying everyone goes through it, and interfering with transference.

According to Gladding (2006) there are some guidelines which can help counsellors to effectively implement self-disclosure strategies. Such guidelines are basically communication skills which can be used to avoid common pitfalls of this process, such as losing rapport or focus in the situation.

Primarily, the counsellor should be direct, brief, focused and relevant. This will ensure the self-disclosure process does not lead to time wastage and loss of focus in the client’s situation. Self-disclosure should also not be used frequently (more self-disclosure is not necessarily better) and should not add to the client’s problems and negative outcomes in a situation.

In essence, the purpose of self-disclosure should be clear to both counsellor and client and the process should only be used after considering other options, envisaging that there is a risk of miscommunication and an effect on the balance of power. But as stated before: if used in an effective manner, self-disclosure can be a useful strategy and a common process in the counselling setting.

A young man wishes to move out of his family home and seeks a counsellor for help. The young man is very distressed by the possible change and the effect it could have on both his parent’s and his own life. In the counselling setting, he briefly describes his motives for moving out; however, he attests that he does not want to cause emotional strife to his parents. In that context, he asks the counsellor to help him come up with a way to tell his parents without hurting them. A solution to that situation would relieve the young man from his personal anxiety.

The counsellor and the client explored all available options and at the end of the counselling session, the young man is still very emotionally affected by his decision and its possible outcomes. At that point, self-disclosure was used as a strategy to help the client move into a positive frame of reference. The counsellor disclosed that her son left the family home only last year, and even though it was a very emotional situation for the family, they understood his decision and moved forward.

Nowadays, they regularly meet and have a very positive relationship. At the end of the counselling relationship, the client felt comfortable with the knowledge that a similar situation had ended with a positive outcome, and was able to move forward with his decision without distress.

This example showed the effective use of self-disclosure and how this technique can be beneficial to clients. It was observable that in that scenario, the following benefits were achieved: helping the client to not feel alone, decreasing client anxiety and increasing counsellor genuineness.

How to Lead: 6 Leadership Styles and Frameworks