Talk:Person-centered therapy

message: Under the Core conditions section no reference has been added and could use more information on the subject. Has anyone else found a source that would help back up the information already provided and expand on it some. 
Hoveyk (talk) 03:14, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If he indeed called it Client centered therapy, we can move and amend the article accordingly. --DanielCD 02:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is the "self-concept" what my teacher calls the "phenomenal self"? Can someone research that and edit the article accordingly? I'll head over to google to finish brushing up for my test, just pointing out a term I don't see in the article. Kuronue 15:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There hasn't been a lot of movement on this for sometime and I have some spare time to devote to this project, I am just completing a Diploma in Person Centred (Rogerian) Psychotherapy at The University of Warwick and I would like to invite all editors to make suggestions about what needs to be worked on and give that a priority. Cheers. Movellon 21:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Rogers' book on the subject is called Client-Centered Therapy. Most of the article discusses it that way. Most WP links that reflect the free will of editors without agendas are via Client-Centered Therapy. What is the rationale for calling it something else? What does the APsychA Dictionary say? Other similarly authoritative sources? DCDuring 20:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: <!--<span style="font-size: 140%">-->Improvement Suggestions<!--</span>-->

message: I believe that this article needs a rewrite still.  In my view it is unclear, lacking in references, incomplete, and fails to identify the position that Rogers has in the history of modern psychology. 
The key to Rogers approach was that it started that the client was the the only possible expert on themselves.   It is an absolutely holistic approach (as opposed to the differential diagnostic, pathological approach of the medical model that has been the orthodoxy since the beginnings of modern psychology).  While it is true that his focus is on growth, this an attribute not a key constituent.  The actual term used is "self-actualisation" and this word forms the cornerstone of his philosophy, now fully vindicated with over 50 years of research and practice. It is not growth but development that Rogers believed was possible though the "self-actualisation" drive inherent in all organisms.  The concept was to place the person/(client) at the centre of their own healing/development process. He believed that the key was to provide a totally supportive environment and to be led by the person concerned in therapeutic intervention rarher than the therapist as expert.  
Carl Rogers is a giant in modern psychology, and his position in it is not publicly recognised. He formulated the opposing pole to psychiatric, medical based psychologies. 
While I believe that I can readily correct the overall structure and understanding of the subject I would ask for others to fill in detail on practice, evolution etc.
LookingGlass (talk) 14:32, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Rogers is so important!  Why such a useless page? I say blank it.--John Bessa (talk) 01:37, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: If you want to write about Rogers, I think it helps to get the "flavor" of his approach.  Here are some talks that have been recently released.  I have been reading Rogers for years, but I think I finally got the complete picture with the talk labeled Kirkegaard.  He based his theory on philosophy (like so many others) but applied it with the familiarity of the farmer down the road.--John Bessa (talk) 01:42, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested Listening

message: please add a redirect so that a search for Rogerian Therapy brings people to this article. I don't know how to create redirects.--96.18.241.190 (talk) 22:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add redirect 

message: Substituted at 02:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: I reverted this edit by  because there are too many errors of English grammar and orthography, and the cited page numbers don't match the source. Here are some examples of such errors:  is an incomprehensible grammatical construction. The phrase  is strangely ambiguous: I know what this is trying to say because I know what Rogers did, but those who don't know what Rogers did would have no idea whether Rogers was using an electroencephalograph, seismometer, accelerometer, fluoroscope, video camera, or something else. Furthermore, there are problems with the content: This is not the place to explain Thomas Gordon's ideas on leadership. And the first sentence— [etc.]—but (leaving aside the strange capitalization of the word "Client") "taking responsibility" is only one aspect of the term "client-centered" or "person-centered"; as Rogers said in On Becoming a Person (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961, p. 87): "In various writings and researches that have been published regarding client-centered therapy there has been a stress upon the acceptance of self as one of the directions and outcomes of therapy. ... The client not only accepts himself—a phrase which may carry the connotation of a grudging and reluctant acceptance of the inevitable—he actually comes to like himself." There are also other aspects of the term; the point is that "taking responsibility" is not the only aspect of the term, and not the only reason why the term was chosen. Biogeographist (talk) 15:27, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edit, 3 January 2019 

message: It's great to see such an extensive discussion of this article. I feel it is far too simplistic to be of the standard that I expect of Wikipedia. Sadly, of course, it takes many years for some articles to be updated. My particular concern is over the definition of the core conditions.  They are the kind that you might find in the work of a 15/16yr old school pupil rather than a more informed practitioner writing for the lay-person.  For example, the definition of congruence - "Congruence: the willingness to transparently relate to clients without hiding behind a professional or personal facade." is confusing congruence, as a condition of human development, with a characteristic of the therapist's presence.  It says nothing about the alignment of ideal and real self, which is key to achieving it.
Ursus-deningeri2 (talk) 11:29, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simplicity certainly; a bit too simple, perhaps?