1
Article Summary and Critique: Person-Centered Counselling: The Culture Within
by
Jaime Silk, HBA, MACP (Candidate)
Faculty of Behavioral Sciences,
Yorkville University
2
Three major components will compile the following summary and critique of the article
Person-Centered Counselling: The Culture Within by Glauser and Bozarth (2001). Our
discussion will summarize the main points; provide a critique of its content, methodology and
style including strengths and weaknesses; and, lastly discuss the implications for counsellors.
The article introduces the discussion of person-centered counselling in addressing the
difference of ‘being a counsellor’ and ‘doing counselling’. This difference is discussed in the
context of what constitutes multicultural counselling if each person is unique in their cultural
differences. Some referenced researchers than argue that all counselling is multicultural and that
term does not deviate in essence from the meaning and use of ‘individual differences’. Glauser
and Bozarth (2001) site Patterson (1996) in his expressions discussing that all counselling is
multicultural counselling and that it is not techniques that make a counsellor effective but rather
their ability to cultivate an effective therapeutic relationship. Further discussions on not putting
counselling techniques before the counselling relationship continue throughout the article.
The important elements stressed in the article pertaining to therapeutic success are the
client-counsellor relationship and the client’s internal and external resources (known as
extratherapeutic variables). This point made is discussed through personal expressions from one
of the authors (Glauser) who sought out counselling herself only to find herself “devalued and
misunderstood” (Glauser & Bozarth, 2001, p.144). She had this feeling as a result of the
counsellor making recommendations based on people in similar situations or people ‘like her’.
Glauser individually highlights that the counsellor saw her through a fixed perception based on
assumptions.
There are strengths and weaknesses that can be indentified in the article. Some of the
strengths include that the authors really formulated the three main principles that are well argued
3
which are the successes of counselling rely on: the relationship of the client and the counselor;
the identification of the extratherapeutic variables primarily through the client’s frame of
reference; and, the intentional use of the client’s frame of reference for action implementation.
Author Glauser uses her work with a client to exemplify the use of these three important
components as well as theoretical support. This combination of personal and professional
support for the author’s argument really provides a general and specific scope on the issue. The
examples provided allow for the theory to demonstrate its execution in practice.
Some of the weaknesses that could be considered in the same notion include the fact that
simply providing a therapeutic example does not then automatically make an argument valid.
Although Glauser highlights these professional reflections and they offer a theoretical point of
connection, the article does not offer an alternative example where using such techniques may
have been beneficial. Using an example, in one scenario Glauser was attempting to apply
culturally sensitive understanding and ended up making cultural assumptions that did not help
the client or the therapeutic process. She outlines the example where she saw an African client
who grew up in various Caucasian dominated environments; expressions of feeling oppressed
were assumed to be racial when in reality the oppression was a result of religious differences.
Glauser expressed that as the counsellor she did not see beyond her cultural stereotypes,
however, in another example using this scope may have provided help to the client which, again,
is not considered.
Now that the articles main points, including some strengths and weaknesses, have been
summarized, some notes on the methodology, content and style will be outlined. This article
does not conduct a study as other literature articles do, but rather, it conducts a critical review of
how person-centered counselling can offer a central focus that can encompass multicultural
4
perspectives. I found the dialogue of the content to be well communicated and effectively
organized. In a sequential manner, the authors addressed the importance of the main variables
for successful counselling (therapeutic relationship and client resources) using historical research
accounts and theoretical expressions. The methodology of addressing their point was effectively
made through these theoretical connections; however, in terms of validity and style, the author
(Glauser) integrating personal examples of counselling processes were effective if considered in
context. Examples from the author - being the client and being the counsellor - were used to
exemplify the point that using only multicultural techniques can lead to the counsellor making
assumptions and applying biases based on using specific interventions for a specific cultural
group. This specificity also applied to individual differences or situations, such as, when
someone is grieving are they grieving in the same way as others? It was exemplified through the
style of the article that it is not necessarily the case and assuming this to be true is not focusing
on being a counsellor but doing grief counselling.
To complete our article summary and critique, I will conclude with the implications the
article outlines for counsellors. Throughout the discussion it has been stressed that the most
important variables for success in counselling are the client-counsellor relationship and drawing
on the clients internal or external resources or extratherapeutic variables. The article outlines that
counsellors need to focus on client centered approaches that are not hindered by assumptions and
biases. Furthermore, using specific interventions based on cultural or issue specific groupings
can be harmful and limiting. Authenticity is important and a focus on the uniqueness of each
client’s distinctive situation and perspective is vital to avoid misunderstandings and clients
feeling unheard.
5
References
Glauser A., S. and Bozarth, J., D. (2001). Person-Centered Counseling: The Culture Within.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 79, 142-147