Thus, we deal here with interventions where the therapist starts from his own frame of reference, as is also the case in interpretations, confrontations and proposals for the use of particular techniques, for instance. Gradually, the expression of personal feelings became no longer restricted to being a 'help in need', i.e. used in cases where the therapist could no longer genuinely accept and empathise, but it became thought of as having positive potential for deepening the therapeutic process. What the therapist experiences in contact with his client is now considered as important material and potentially useful for the client in his exploration of himself and his relationship patterns (for a thorough analysis of Rogers' evolution in this regard, see Van Balen, 1990). And Rogers attributes, in a more general way, a modelling function to the transparency of the therapist as well.It is not easy for a client, or for any human being, to entrust his most deeply shrouded feelings to another person. It is even more difficult for a disturbed person to share his deepest and most troubling feelings with a therapist. The genuineness of the therapist is one of the elements in the relationship that make the risk of sharing easier and less fraught with dangers.Three factors seem to have played a role in this evolution. First of all there was the study with schizophrenics which Rogers and his colleagues carried out between 1958 and 1964. With this very withdrawn group of patients, the 'classical' type of intervention - reflection of feelings - fell short: there was often very little to reflect. In their attempts at establishing contact, the client-centred therapists learned to use an alternative source of help, their own here-and-now feelings:When the client offers no self-expression, the therapist's momentary experiencing is not empty. At every moment there occur a great many feelings and events in the therapist. Most of these concern the client and the present moment. The therapist need not wait passively till the client expressessomething intimate or therapeutically relevant. Instead, he can draw on his own momentary experiencing and find there an ever-present reservoir from which he can draw, and with which he can initiate, deepen, and carry on therapeutic interaction even with an unmotivated, silent, or externalised person. There was, moreover, the contact with a number of existential therapists, such as Rollo May and Carl Whitaker, who criticised them for effacing themselves too much in the therapeutic relationship for standing too much behind the client as an alter ego and too little as a real other person with an own personal identity.Thus Whitaker gave the following comments on a number of excerpts from client-centred therapies with schizophrenics:It is as though the two were existing in some kind of common microcosm or isolation chamber or like twins in utero. These interviews are intensely personal for both of these individuals but only the patient's life is under discussion. This is so distinct that one sometimes feels there is only one self present and that self is the patient. It is as though the therapist makes himself artificially miniature.Sometimes