Proper education is not enough for being a qualified human service worker. Working with people implies the development of such skills as problem-solving, the ability to create positive relationships, and many others. The most important part of this kind of work is the way a worker can respond to the needs of the people. The human factor plays a significant role as they need to feel that they are understood. Numerous approaches are ensuring a better understanding between a human service worker and the person who needs help. One of the concepts regulating communication is the five ways of responding, and they all have particular difficulties in practice. The quality of help provided by a human service worker can be described with the help of five modes of response, implying different goals. The first mode is advice, which is helpful in situations when the client needs to know what to do (France & Weikel, 2014). This type of assistance is a useful tool in some cases, but should be treated with caution as the direct approach is not necessarily a good option. Such drawbacks as the possible harm to the client’s self-esteem and his ability to make decisions without any help make the method questionable. I believe that the use of advice is appropriate only for the first communication with a client, and only if he or she is unable to cope with the situation without primary assistance. Therefore, advice can be a tool complementing other methods dealing with the cause, not the effect of a problem. The second way of responding to a client’s needs is the analysis of the problem and discussion of the reasons for its emergence. This response tends to substitute the opinion of a client with the judgment of a human service worker and thereby influences the ability to cope with the issue (France & Weikel, 2014). Such a response is similar to the first one in the way it compromises one’s independence, which is vital for making further decisions. Just like advice, it is appropriate only for initial conversations. The third way to support the client is to show sympathy and reassurance. These two concepts allow demonstrating that a human service worker feels the same about the issue and is confident in his knowledge of dealing with the situation (France & Weikel, 2014). In my opinion, this method is more valuable in the context of problem-solving. Still, certain limits for emotions should be set as the client already feels the situation, but cannot think clearly of the ways to change it. Therefore, it is better to express limited emotions and focus more on instilling confidence. The fourth way of responding is an interrogation, which is used when you need to get more information about the client’s problem. Despite the obvious benefits of this method in gathering information, it might harm the client’s sense of understanding (France & Weikel, 2014). Hence, it is better to connect the questions to the person’s feelings to eliminate the negative effect of interrogation. The fifth way of responding is reflection, and it complements the fourth one in such a way that a client becomes aware of the human service worker’s involvement in his problems. This last way of responding