closeness or physicalrelations. I will make personal touch with my hand as I hold the patient away from me, contact thepatient's eyes, and declare that I think the physical reaching out is positive and I welcome it, eventhough I cannot allow it. (I know at such times that I may be partly creating this positive aspect.Perhaps this reaching is more hostile, right now, than warm. But there is warmth and health in anyone's sexual or physical need, and I can recognise that as such.) Finally, we should always take care in maintaining the process sufficiently client-centred and making it a'self-revelation without imposition'. This can best be done by letting the influencing occur as openly as possible. Two 'rules of communication' should be remembered here. The first one, to use Rogers' words, is 'owning' or giving I-messages instead of you-messages: the therapist indicates clearly that he is the source of the experience and tries above all to communicate what he himself feels, rather than making evaluative statements about the client. He will, for example, not say 'How intrusive of you' but 'When you called me for the second time this week, I felt put under pressure and as if taken possession of ... The second rule ofncommunication is, in Gendlin's words, 'always checking' or 'openness to what comes next': after eachintervention - and especially after one which originated in our own frame of reference - tuning in anew to the client's experiential track and continuing from there. All these suggestions should make it clear that constructive self-revelation is far removed from acting-out. It is rather a form of 'disciplined spontaneity' which, along and together with empathy, constitutes a second line from which the client can evolve towards a 'further living' inside and outside of therapy, towards new and more satisfactory ways of dealing with himself and others. Mistakes may, of course, occur if self-revelation is used rather carelessly, but to leave out this important reservoir of relationship information could be equally detrimental: an omission which could lead to substantial reduction in quality of the therapeutic process.ReferencesBarrett-Lennard, G. T. (1962), 'Dimensions of therapist response as causal factors in therapeutic change', Psychological Monographs, 76 (43, Whole No.562).Bolten, M. P. (1990), 'Opleidingstherapie en de plaats van groepen', Tijdschrift voor Psychothera pie, 16, 60- 68.Boukydis, K. N. (1979), 'Caring and Confronting', Voices. The Art and Science of Psychotherapy, 15, 31-34.Bozarth, J. D. (1984), 'Beyond reflection: Emergent modes of empathy', in R. F. Levant and J. M. Shuen (eds.), Client-Centered Therapy and the Person-Centered Approach: new directions in theory, research and practice (pp.59-5). New York: Praeger.Buber, M., and Rogers, C. R. (1957), 'Dialogue between Martin Buber and Carl Rogers', in H. Kirschenbaum and V. L. Anderson (1989), Carl Rogers: Dialogues (pp.41-63). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Carkhuff, R. R., and Berenson, B. G. (1977), 'In search of an honest experience: confrontation in counseling and life', in R. R. Carkhuff and B. G. Berenson, Beyond Counseling and Therapy (pp. 198-213). New York:Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Cluckers, G. (1989), "'Containment" in de therapeutische relatie: de therapeut als drager en zingever', in H.Vertommen, G. Cluckers,