WK3CCCH4

1. 1. 4 Basic Rapport Building, Goal Setting, and Implementation
   2. CHAPTER OBJECTIVES

After reading this chapter, you will be able to:

• 1. Understand the importance of the therapeutic alliance.

• 2. Know the different skills necessary for the formation of a positive therapeutic alliance (practical and interpersonal).

• 3. Understand the need for problem identification.

• 4. Identify various types of coping techniques.

• 5. Be familiar with the process of goal setting and implementation as well as the termination of the counseling relationship.

1. 1. PART ONE: THE THERAPEUTIC ALLIANCE

According to various researches, the therapeutic alliance is one of the most powerful constructs, within a counseling relationship, able to produce positive changes in behavior and cognition. It is important to understand that the therapeutic alliance is largely an intellectual concept that describes both practical and interpersonal skills. And, one of the problems with intellectual concepts is that they can often be difficult to define. In fact, a working definition of a therapeutic alliance for one counselor may be wholly different from the definition provided by another counselor. This is because the therapeutic alliance is as much subjective as objective, or as much art as science.

Generally, the therapeutic alliance is a concept that describes the process of counselors and offenders collaboratively identifying goals and tasks to be accomplished within the counseling relationship. The most important component of this relationship, however, is the degree to which counselors and offenders are able to establish an interpersonal bond through which much of the healing and corrective action takes place. Bordin (1979) describes the therapeutic alliance as the vehicle through which psychotherapies are effective. In essence, it is not so much the counseling modality that is important, but rather the degree to which counselors and offenders are able to establish an affective bond that produces the necessary trust that fosters an environment in which an offender is willing to psychologically and emotionally expose himself or herself in order to heal.

O

How then do we define therapeutic alliance—a concept deemed so critical to the counseling process? One way of defining a therapeutic alliance is to again borrow from Green’s (2004) language and say that it is a positive emotional connection between a counselor and an offender. But, what is a positive emotional connection? This is where the task of defining a social science concept becomes challenging. For our purposes, we believe the following definition of a therapeutic alliance best captures the essence of how it contributes to the process of an offender enriching his or her emotional landscape leading to the reformation of cognitions and behavior that are in better alignment with societal norms.

Put in less scientific way, the therapeutic alliance is simply a genuine interest in a fellow human being and a respect for the person being in a potentially therapeutic setting. It is the first and critical step in the counseling process in which a bond is established between the counselor and offender that serves to enhance the likelihood of producing lasting, positive change.

1. 1. Creating a Therapeutic Alliance

Creating a therapeutic alliance with an offender requires both practical skills as well as interpersonal skills. Practical skills include such concepts as probing, proper use of questions, accurately paraphrasing what an offender has articulated, and providing appropriate feedback. These skills are thought to be the most teachable to new counselors. There are specific protocols and procedures that can be employed for each. Interpersonal skills such as empathy and genuineness are much more difficult to teach. A counselor’s ability to express empathy and genuineness in a therapeutic setting has more to do with personal qualities as well as their views of the specific offender. And, although more difficult to teach, it is the interpersonal skills that have been consistently found to be responsible for more of the variance in the establishment of a positive therapeutic alliance (Summers & Barber, 2003).

1. 1. Practical Skills

Therapeutic Alliance—An intellectual concept that describes the process of a real, authentic, and sincere connection between a counselor and an offender based on the attributes of professionalism, openness, honesty, and decency that provide the foundation for effectively identifying and working through psychological and emotional-based dysfunction.

Probing is a concept that describes the process of attempting to ascertain the essence of an offender’s emotional and psychological problems through the use of guided questions. The use of questions is an important component of probing, and as mentioned by Gladding (1996) usually begins with who, what, where, or how. In addition, Masters (2004) notes that probing questions 

Here the offender is making a broad statement in which the primary goal is to communicate that his or her current life circumstance is difficult to manage and troublesome. It is likely that there are a variety of events and circumstances that are contributing to the global assessment of his or her life being stressful. At this point, the possible stressors are legion and precisely why a good probing question may consist of guiding the offender to explore what he or she considers to be the most salient of the stressors. “Explore,” however, is the key word. In many circumstances the offender will not immediately identify the most pressing of the stressors. In fact, the most significant stressor may be the circumstance that triggers the most shame, which is where much of the upcoming work will take place, but also an area the offender is likely to try and avoid. Therefore, even though the counselor’s response is an attempt to uncover the most pointed stressor it is probable that the offender will provide a broad snapshot of his or her current life circumstance inadvertently providing the counselor with rich and useful information that will guide future questions.

This technique also allows the counselor to begin intellectually organizing the direction of the session through the extrapolation and exploration of what the offender deems most critical. In addition, this type of question may also serve to inform the offender of the counselor’s awareness that it is not uncommon, or surprising, that individuals often experience many different stressors at single points in time, reducing the negative psychological effects of feeling as if he or she is the only one in such dire circumstances.

As noted by Gladding (1996), most probing questions should not begin with the word why? Initiating a question with the word “why” can sometimes be interpreted as a subtle form of judgmentalism (e.g., “Why would you do such a thing?”). In addition, a probing question that begins with why will often be interpreted by the offender as a sign of disapproval which is likely to lead to defensive behaviors. Defensive behavior will undermine the counseling process via its damage to the creation of a therapeutic alliance.

Egan (1990) provides several good suggestions regarding the appropriate use of probing questions that were later adopted by Masters (2004) and specifically worded to address offenders. They include the following:

• 1. Do not assault offenders with a lot of questions.

• 2. Ask questions that serve a purpose.

• 3. Ask open-ended questions that get offenders to talk about specific experiences, behaviors, and feelings.

• 4. Keep the questions focused on the offender (Masters, 2004, p. 42).

In essence, each question should serve a purpose by attempting to identify problems that are stymieing the offender’s ability to live and function in a healthy manner. Below are additional questions that may serve as a guide:

• • What are some of the issues you think should be addressed in order to solve the problem?

• • What type of plan do you think would be most successful in reaching your goal?

• • How can others help you?

• • In your past interactions, who is responsible for causing you the most amount of pain?

O

Once a counselor has successfully initiated a probing question that elicits a response from an offender it is critical that the counselor fully understand the intended meaning of the response. Successful interpretation of the offender’s intended meaning is often accomplished through the employment of the remaining practical skills, vital to the formulation of a positive therapeutic alliance. These skills include paraphrasing, reflective listening, summarizing, and feedback. Each of these concepts describes the process of a counselor verbally responding to an offender in a method that demonstrates one of several positions:

• 1. The counselor fully understands the offender’s intended message

• 2. The counselor understands some of the offender’s intended message

• 3. The counselor completely “missed” the offender’s intended message.

Often these skills can occur simultaneously. For example, a counselor may first paraphrase an offender’s statement in order to summarize the key points and through the process of feedback provide guidance or suggestions meant to inform the offender, as well as solicit additional statements meant to explore deeper psychological and emotional issues.

Reflective listening is a skill in which a counselor demonstrates that he or she has accurately heard and understood an offender’s communication by restating its meaning. That is, you provide a guess about what the offender intended to convey and express this in a responsive statement, not a question. “Reflective listening is a way of checking rather than assuming that you know what is meant” (Miller & Rollnick, 1991, p. 75).

Reflective listening strengthens the therapeutic relationship between the counselor and the offender and encourages further exploration of problems and feelings. This form of communication is particularly appropriate in early stages of counseling. Reflective listening helps the offender by providing a synthesis of content and process. It reduces the likelihood of resistance, encourages the offender to keep talking, communicates respect, cements the therapeutic alliance, clarifies exactly what the client means, and reinforces motivation (Miller, Leckman, Delaney, & Tinkcom, 1992).

This process has a tremendous amount of flexibility, and you can use reflective listening to reinforce your offender’s positive ideas (Miller et al., 1992). The following dialogue gives some examples of counselor’s responses that illustrate effective reflective listening. Essentially, true reflective listening requires continuous alert tracking of the offender’s verbal and nonverbal responses and their possible meanings, formulation of reflections at the appropriate level of complexity, and ongoing adjustment of hypotheses.

Most counselors find it useful to periodically summarize what has occurred in a counseling session. Summarizing consists of distilling the essence of what an offender has expressed and communicating it back. “Summaries reinforce what has been said, show that you have been listening carefully, and prepare the client to move on” (Miller & Rollnick, 1991, p. 78). Summarizing also serves strategic purposes. In presenting a summary, a counselor can select what information should be included and what can be minimized or left out. Correction of a summary by the offender should be invited, and this often leads to further comments and discussion. Summarizing helps offenders consider their own responses and contemplate their own experience. It also gives the counselor and offender an opportunity to notice what might have been overlooked as well as incorrectly stated.

Throughout the literature it is clear that feedback is a necessary component to successful counseling and usually works best when it is personal and individualized to the specific offender. When providing feedback, however, the counselor must take every precaution to ensure it is provided in a respectful manner. A confrontational or judgmental approach is likely to leave the offender unreceptive (CSAT, 1999).

Not all offenders respond in the same way to feedback. One person may be alarmed to find that he or she drinks much more in a given week than comparable peers but be unconcerned about potential health risks. Another may be concerned about potential health risks at this level of drinking. Still another may not be impressed by such aspects of substance use as the amount of money spent on substances, possible impotence, or the level of impairment especially with regard to driving ability caused by even low blood alcohol concentrations. Personalized feedback can be applied to other lifestyle issues as well and can be used throughout the counseling process. Feedback about improvements is especially valuable as a method of reinforcing progress.

Masters (2004) draws on the work of Corey (2000) and provides the following suggestions meant to help correctional counselors provide effective feedback to offenders:

• 1. Global feedback should be avoided in favor of specific feedback.

• 2. Feedback should be cogent and clear-cut.

• 3. Positive feedback zeroing in on the offender’s strength is more helpful than negative feedback.

  
  

• 4. Timing is important in giving feedback. Immediate feedback is more valuable than waiting until later.

• 5. Delivering feedback in a nonjudgmental way is important to minimize defensiveness on the part of the offender.

• 6. Corrective feedback has greater probability of being accepted if it emphasizes observable behaviors.

• 7. Feedback may be easier to take if the counselor indicates to the offender how he or she has been affected by the offender’s behavior (Masters, 2004, p. 43).

1. 1. Interpersonal Skills

As mentioned above, creating and maintaining a positive therapeutic alliance requires both practical and interpersonal skills. The practical skills mentioned are much more amenable to direct instruction or training. For example, within the context of a counseling class, a student may be taught how and when to provide feedback, or how to use probing questions and then paraphrase. And, students may even be provided with handouts that can be taken into actual counseling sessions and used as guides. Interpersonal skills such as genuineness and empathy, however, are much more difficult to teach. This is because the ability to display genuineness and empathy, so vital to the establishment of a positive therapeutic alliance, has much more to do with the counselor’s own internal congruence. In other words, how comfortable is a counselor with his or her own feelings? How aware is the counselor of his or her own negative emotionality as well as the origins of such negative emotion? In this context congruence is a concept that describes “a state of wholeness and integration” within the counselor (Witty, 2007, p. 37). The first necessary step to provide genuine and empathic counseling services to offenders is the counselor’s own deep exploration into the midst of his or her own dysfunction.

According to Ormont (1999), empathy is the ability to “experience another person’s feeling or attitude while still holding on to our own attitude and outlook” (p. 145); it is the foundation counselors should operate from when relating to and interacting with offenders. The ability of a counselor to express empathy enables clients to begin to recognize and own their feelings, an essential step toward managing them and learning to empathize with the feelings of others. What often gets many offenders into trouble is their lack of ability to empathize with other human beings. Due to their own abuse and neglect, often experienced at the hands of their caregivers, many offenders have become “numb” to the harmful effects of their actions. Unfortunately, for many offenders, their first experience with genuineness and empathy will be as a result of their interaction with a correctional counselor.

Furthermore, genuine and empathic relating must be used consistently over time in order to keep a positive therapeutic alliance intact. This caveat is even more critical for offenders with co-occurring disorders, because they usually have lower motivation to address either their mental or substance abuse problems. In addition, they may have greater difficulty understanding and relating to other people and need even more understanding and support to make a major lifestyle change such as adopting a healthier lifestyle and abstinence from substance abuse and criminality in general. Support and empathy from the correctional counselor can help create and maintain the therapeutic alliance, increase offender motivation, assist with medication adherence, model behavior that can help the offender build more productive relationships, and support the offender as he or she makes a major life transition.

One of the biggest proponents of employing an empathic style of relating within the counseling process is Carl Rogers. In fact, Rogers (1957) person-centered style of therapy is predicated on the idea that change is possible if the right climate of facilitative conditions is present. Rogers 

When trying to create the foundation on which a positive therapeutic alliance can be cultivated, a very important concept must be discussed. This concept is called judgmentalism. Judgmentalism has been discussed in various places throughout this book due to its profound ability to disrupt relationships. Judgmentalism is a concept that describes the process of displaying condemning or critical reactions to the thoughts, statements, or actions of another. Appreciate that judgmentalism can be displayed through both verbal and nonverbal means of communication. A counselor’s rolling of the eyes may display a judgmental reaction to an offender’s statement. Additionally, a counselor’s question, “Why would you commit such a ridiculous act?” can significantly “zing” an offender and substantially harm or destroy a positive therapeutic alliance.

1. 1. Threats to the Therapeutic Alliance

One of the greatest threats to the successful formation of a positive therapeutic alliance is attempting to work with offenders who are either reluctant or resistant to treatment. The reluctance and/or resistance may manifest itself in various ways. Some offenders will play “mind” games with the counselor; some offenders may just simply respond with lethargy or a lack of interest; some offenders may inappropriately disclose important information just as the session is ending, knowing there is not enough time to address the disclosure. These actions are usually an attempt to avoid the difficult process of exploring deep psychological pain and trauma necessary for healing. Before delving into the psychodynamics of resistance and reluctance, however, it is important to note the difference between the two and appreciate that both reluctant and resistant offenders challenge the counselor’s ability to foster a positive therapeutic alliance.

A reluctant offender is the offender who has been referred to counseling by a third party. And, this is often the case in correctional counseling. Usually, counseling will be initiated as a result of a judge’s mandate stipulating that the offender attend counseling in lieu of being incarcerated, or as part of his or her incarceration. The main issue with reluctant clients is the fact that they often do not believe that they need counseling and view it as a process to be tolerated until adjudication is complete (Gladding, 1996).

A resistant offender is the person who seeks out the counseling process and willingly attends but is unwilling to change. In essence, the resistant offender has not yet committed to the necessary work change demands. Often times, the resistant offender will initiate counseling to stave off painful internal recognitions that change is necessary but is not yet able to engage the often grueling process. Sack (1988) mentions “that one of the most common forms of resistance is the simple statement ‘I don't know’” (p. 180). Such responses often make it very difficult for counselors to proceed primarily because of the offender’s unwillingness to explore feeling and emotion as opposed to “surfacy” thoughts (Gladding, 1996).

Gladding (1996) cites several different authors who provide suggestions on how to deal with reluctant and resistant offenders. Elliot and Elliot (2006) suggest that one way to deal with reluctance is by asking the offender, “What did you feel when you found out you had to come to counseling?” Here the counselor’s most important function is to make sure the response provided by the offender is one grounded in feeling or emotion as opposed to just a thought. An example of an offender answering the question with a thought as opposed to a feeling may be, “Oh nothing really—just something I have to tolerate to get out of this trouble.” Not much a counselor can do with this type of a response. The offender must be guided into exploring his or her emotion. A feeling- or emotion-based response would consist of an answer that may 

Additional threats to the therapeutic alliance may come in the form of various defense mechanisms commonly enacted by offenders. Common defenses displayed by offenders include denial, projection, rationalization, displacement, reaction formation, regression, and sublimation. Before exploring each of these mechanisms it is important to understand that, similar to both reluctance and resistance, these defense mechanisms must be confronted by the counselor because they “involve denials or distortions of reality” (Schultz & Shultz, 2005, p. 58). The only way the counselor will get to the offender’s emotion is by first removing the armor constructed of these defense mechanisms. The offender’s employment of these mechanisms must be confronted; however, the confrontation must take place in the spirit of empathy and understanding. Trying and appreciating that defense mechanisms are primarily a response aimed at reducing anxiety will help counselors to proceed with this difficult task. The counseling process may be very scary to many offenders, and the idea of disclosing personal and painful information is likely to produce disturbing levels of anxiety. Therefore, the counselor must be vigilant in remaining cognizant of the fact that these behaviors are normal and should not be taken personally. The following description of each defense mechanism is borrowed in large part from the work of Schultz and Schultz (2005).

• Denial—is a concept that describes the process of repressing troubling thoughts usually related to some threat(s) or traumatic event(s). It is the offender’s way of avoiding anxiety likely to be experienced in the event his or her true feelings are exposed. For example, some offenders may adamantly deny their feelings of fear in the presence of certain stimuli because of their belief that the expression of fear shows weakness that can be exploited by others. Projection—is a concept that describes the process of attributing disturbing thoughts or impulses onto another in an attempt to alleviate their threatening nature. An offender accused of rape may deny his need to control in favor of a less threatening thought such as, “She wanted to have sex; I could tell by the way she was dressed.” Rationalization—is a concept that describes the process of an offender reframing one’s behavior so that it becomes less threatening and more acceptable. The offender who beats his wife may rationalize his actions by saying, “She knows better than to look at another man—what else am I suppose to do?” Displacement—is a concept that describes the process of shifting one’s impulses from an unavailable object to one that is available. For example, an offender may feel helpless in his ability to stand up to his condescending boss who routinely treats him with a lack of respect. In stead of confronting his boss, however, the offender redirects his anger toward his family in a misguided attempt to reduce his tension and stress. Reaction formation—is a concept that describes the process of an offender actively displaying a feeling or impulse that is opposite of what is truly being felt or experienced. For example, an offender who feels threatened by his impulse toward violence against women may repress these feelings and attempt to replace them with more acceptable behaviors like actively advocating for stiffer sanctions against men who batter their wives. 

  
  Regression—is a concept that describes the process of an offender cognitively retreating to a time in life where there was less anxiety and frustration. An example of regression may be where the offender simply wants the counselor to tell him what to do as opposed to exploring the pain of past events. Sublimation—is a concept that describes the process of altering one’s impulses. It is important to note that sublimation is a form of displacement. It is a compromise. An example of sublimation could be where an offender diverts uncomfortable sexual energy into some type of artistically creative endeavor. The essence of sublimation is that it is an attempt to alleviate anxiety caused by socially unacceptable impulses by engaging in activities that are socially acceptable and maybe even admirable.

Each of these defense mechanisms poses a serious threat to a positive therapeutic alliance, as well as to the offender’s ability to experience meaningful change. These mechanisms work to reduce the offender’s level of anxiety but are not capable of producing real satisfaction or happiness. These defenses, at best, are only able to disguise human flaws; they are not able to resolve them. The truth about oneself is always present. And, because of their inability to resolve deep-seated psychological and emotional issues the prolonged use of these defense mechanisms will often lead to a massive buildup of tension. Unfortunately, when this tension is finally discharged, usually in the presence of multiple stressors, it is often by way of a violent criminal act. The best way for a counselor to begin the process of reducing an offender’s reliance on these defense mechanisms is by first identifying when they are being used and then responding with empathic and understanding guidance in an attempt to build trust through which the offender is more likely to explore the revelation of true feeling and emotion.

1. 1. SECTION SUMMARY

Creating a therapeutic alliance is the first and most important step in the counseling process. Through the alliance the offender must feel safe to share and explore feelings and emotion. In order to develop effective alliances, counselors must be internally congruent and able to traverse a variety of threatening feelings and emotion. The process of sharing negative emotion is not natural for most people. Offenders will often exert significant effort in the attempt to disguise their true feelings. Counselors must remain cognizant of the fact that many of the defensive behaviors enacted by offenders are attempts to stave off powerful pangs of anxiety. An effective counselor will recognize this fact and not take the resistance personally. If taken personally, the alliance will be all but impossible to establish and the possibility of the offender experiencing a genuine corrective transformation is greatly diminished.

1. 1. LEARNING CHECK

1.

The interpersonal skills needed to create a therapeutic alliance are difficult to be taught to new counselors.

• a.True

• b.False

2.

Defense mechanisms are primarily employed to reduce feelings of anxiety.

• a.True

• b.False

3.

The therapeutic alliance should be created later in the counseling process.

• a.True

• b.False

4

Reflective listening is not an important component within the therapeutic alliance.

• a.True

• b.False

5.

Summarizing is meant to dictate to the client what he or she needs to do in order to change his or her behavior.

• a.True

• b.False

1. 1. PART TWO: PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

In identifying and defining the problem that an offender may report, it is important for the correctional counselor to gain an understanding of the circumstances that occurred prior to the problematic event or behavior. This is particularly true if the event or problem behavior is repetitive. One example would be the typical reference to people, places, and things, often heard among recovering addicts who discuss the factors that lead to relapse. In this example, certain places, certain people, or certain things are present that tend to lead these individuals to relapse.

Identification of the precipitating event is very important because the counselor must identify the offender’s perception of the situation. If the cognitions associated with the event are not identified properly, there will be no therapeutic interactive communication. Changing offender perceptions of these events is essential if increased functioning is desired (Kanel, 2003). It is clear that this is true for persons contending with some form of trauma or for those persons going through substance-abuse relapse. Indeed, these types of problems are well known as having triggered events that aid in the onset of lowered functioning or disruptive behavior. However, the process of addressing cognitions that result in personal distress may not be so easy with other disorders or problems, such as depression or symptoms associated with various personality disorders. The process of recognizing the precipitating event, addressing the offender’s perception of that event, identifying subjective distress, and impacting the overall functioning of the offender is best presented by an illustration from Kanel’s (2003) text. This process and the means by which offenders are aided in improving their overall functioning is illustrated in Exhibit 4.1, which provides a good schematic of the process that we are referring to.

1. 1. EXHIBIT 4.1 Perception of Precipitating Event and Its Impact on Functioning

Process Leading to Lowered Functioning

Process Leading to Increased Functioning

Source: Kanel, K. (2003). A guide to crisis intervention (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

I

Consider, for example, a bona fide gang member who is incarcerated. These offenders have likely been involved in numerous crimes and altercations, and have probably had exposure to a number of trauma-inducing incidents. In a group counseling context, these offenders will typically only address their feelings related to these experiences on a topical level due to strong disapproval among the gang culture. Further, if the counselor is not trained in gang lore and behavior, but is otherwise able to relate to that offender population, the entire process of addressing the gang member’s perception of the event will likely be fruitless. The effects of gang culture upon the individual member’s thinking are strong and all-consuming; the gang is that person’s family and it is through the gang family that the offender has his or her esteem needs met. The gang is that offender’s world and the correctional counselor must be able to operate from that world’s perspective in order to both reach the offender and to encourage him or her to change some of his or her perceptions regarding events that result in low functioning and/or criminal behaviors.

If such an offender client were in distress, he or she might never admit it and/or might genuinely not recognize the experience as distress. Indeed, if he or she were a substance abuser he or she may be masking that distress with alcohol (a common technique, albeit a dysfunctional technique) because this is acceptable within the gang culture. They may moderate the effects of anxiety with various forms of marijuana since this drug is known to most frequently produce feelings of elation and happiness. Each of these forms of coping would be condoned in most criminal groups but yet would keep the offender from addressing his or her own personal trauma, distress, or impaired functioning.

One other point to be noted in our discussion regarding the recognition of distress is that the dysfunctional forms of coping may not always be so clear and obvious as the examples just given. One primary example is the use of anger and/or violence. Often, male offenders going through states of depression and/or anxiety will resort to violent activity to mask these feelings as well. This may sound counterintuitive to the reader, and it should. Over time, many offenders have learned, either through early socialization in dysfunctional family systems, their peer groups, or through criminal subcultures, that being violent gets respect. Likewise, acting, threatening, and/or bluffing can get the same benefits. Over time, these persons may be conditioned to address their negative affects through the heightened and adrenaline-charged feelings associated with violent activities. Further, the use of such violence (or threat of violence) keeps other criminals at bay and allows their trauma, lowered esteem, and sense of anxiety to remain undiscovered among their other dangerous peers.

This can create a very difficult psychological conundrum for the correctional counselor because such negative forms of coping have been learned and reinforced over years and the reward mechanisms are so powerful. Indeed, some of these reward mechanisms might be physiological (i.e., increased serotonin levels when winning physical altercations) resulting in a physical high for that offender. Other rewards might be social in nature, such as obtaining respect from peers as reinforcement of this activity thereby meeting esteem needs of belonging and acceptance. Yet again, some rewards might achieve basic needs for security, as their violent acts work to deter other 

In the criminal subculture (and this is especially true in many larger prison systems) it is not considered “manly” to expose such feelings of vulnerability. Thus, strong external mechanisms will often undermine the counselor’s ability to address affect that is associated with the precipitating event. Given that many offenders are recycled in and out of the jail or prison and that many will return to the same communities (gang members will in many cases come from the same area and recycle together, in and out of the jail system and back-and-forth within the same neighborhood), an exportation of these prison values occurs and is thus transmitted to persons acting on the streets. In such cases, it may well be that these values are further cultivated among street offenders who may not have yet experienced long-term incarceration. This then creates a set of values that are also taught in the neighborhood and are then imported back into the prison. In addition to this, many of these members (particularly hard-core teens and youth) may have dysfunctional family systems that further contribute to this environment, and it is very easy to see why these offenders may have absolutely no incentive in recognizing their own distress and why they simply may not be willing to address their own perceptual sets that have emerged in reaction to this combination of psychological and sociological influences.

1. 1. Blind Spots

Issues such as these may then result in corresponding blind spots among many of the offender population. For purposes of this text, blind spots refer to misperceptions that persons have regarding social realities either due to a lack of exposure, a lack of knowledge, or due to faulty perceptions that the person has developed. Blind spots are not deliberate forms of resistance but may, over time, emerge due to a series conditioning experiences that limit the perceptual view that a person may have of the world or of themselves. Egan (1994) perhaps sums up our intent in bringing up blind spots in offender therapy by stating that:

• The focus here is on the discrepancies, distortions, evasions, games, tricks, excuse making, and smoke screens that keep clients mired in their problem situations. All of us have ways of defending ourselves from ourselves, others, and the world. But our defenses are two-edged swords. Daydreaming may help me to cope with the dreariness of my everyday life, but it may also keep me from doing something to better myself. Blaming others for my misfortunes helps me save face, but it disrupts interpersonal relationships and prevents me from developing a healthy sense of self-responsibility. The purpose of helping clients challenge themselves is not to strip clients of their defenses, which in some cases could be dangerous, but to help them overcome blind spots and develop new perspectives (p. 165).

This description, as presented by Egan (1994), is precisely what we mean when we refer to blind spots in the counseling context. Further, Egan notes that “if clients are comfortable with their delusions and profit by them, they will obviously try to keep them. If they are rewarded for playing games, inside the counseling sessions or outside, they will continue a game approach to life” (1994, p. 169).

I

Further still, counselors can have their clients engage in such a dialogue but pretend as if they are themselves sitting on the chair, are talking to themselves, and are observing the dialogue from a third person point of view. This can be very effective in building introspection in the client and also tends to avoid defensiveness between the client and the therapist. This restructuring of the conversation allows the offender to both ask the questions (even though the questions are provided by the counselor) and to respond. This can deflect potential resentment and hostility and allows the offender to engage in the process on his or her own terms. This technique can be particularly useful for clients who grapple for control in their interactions. The counselor can (and should) provide simple affective reflections (reflection of feeling) while the client engages in this dialogue. Naturally, the correctional counselor should maintain the use of common attending behaviors that one would normally expect while the client engages in this exercise. The main point, however, is that counselors must let offenders complete the exercise on their own, with the counselor providing gentle (not coercive) support as they engage in the dialogue.

1. 1. Leverage Points

Lastly, this and other exercises similar to this help offenders to identify and work on problems, issues, and concerns that can change their lives. This generates what Egan (1994) refers to as leverage points. Leverage points are those points in a therapeutic alliance between the counselor and the client that are optimal for client change and that have the most probable impact on the offender’s overall future functioning. Offenders and counselors should identify those areas that are most ripe for positive gain and, in a collaborative manner, should prioritize these areas of clinical potential. If a given area of attention is important to the offender’s overall functioning and if the client is willing to work on that area, then the counselor is well advised to allow the offender to work on that specifically chosen area of focus. There is a very constructive reason for this.

First, the counselor must develop a positive therapeutic alliance and maintain that alliance with the offender. Allowing the offender to have choice in the issue of focus provides a sense of autonomy and empowerment for that offender. This also aids in maintaining motivation of the offender, thereby translating to a better likelihood that the offender will be able to successfully accomplish any goals set in regard to the chosen issue. If the offender is successful in achieving the first set of objectives (agreed upon by the client and the counselor) then this also builds confidence in the offender and provides a commonly shared success between the offender and the 

The third point that should be noted about leverage points is that the counselor must focus on the “sideline” issues. It may well be that the offender has an identified area of focus that is assigned due to their offending history. Some examples might be substance abuse, domestic abuse, or sex offending, where the offender is mandated to treatment for a specific criminal behavior. While it is important that this area of focus be addressed (indeed, it is mandated), it may work well if the counselor allow for other “sideline” issues to be the area of focus over time. These other areas are not so challenging and allow the advantages to the counseling relationship that were just discussed in the preceding paragraph. However, this may be difficult in programs that are highly structured and do not allow for flexibility in the administration of the treatment regimen. In such cases, changes in the curricular approach to client intervention may be warranted in a treatment agency to accommodate the use of therapist latitude in service delivery.

Lastly, the use of the Axis V Global Assessment of Functioning Scale, as provided in the DSM-IV-TR, is critical when prioritizing leverage points. While the client may be allowed to select lower priority issues for intervention, as a means of developing rapport and ensuring client commitment to therapy, the counselor should continue to track his or her level of functioning according to the GAF scale. The point is that counselors may have to compromise with the client as to the specific issues that are addressed. In other words, even in the correctional setting, the counselor may find it necessary to “meet the offender where they are at” rather than insisting that the offender conform to the parameters developed through assessment scales. Conversely, this is not meant to undermine the utility of these scales; if they are valid and reliable then they are just that—valid and reliable.

1. 1. Coping

As has been discussed earlier, offenders may have a multitude of methods by which they justify, rationalize, or excuse their problematic behaviors. Further, they may simply develop cognitive processes that allow them to overlook details or shift perceptions that define an event or problem in a manner that is divergent from their police report or other similar definition assigned by the criminal justice system. This is understandable and should be expected because these are common defense mechanisms that aid a person in coping with challenges to one’s sense of self.

While these mechanisms should not be allowed to excuse the behavior, it should again be noted that counselors may have to meet offenders “where they are” psychologically if they do not want the therapeutic message to be entirely shut out from the offender’s frame of reference. Rather than judging or challenging these past means of coping, the correctional counselor should encourage the offender to discuss incidents and the means by which they coped with past incidents. When doing so, the therapist is advised to use his or her active listening skills, reflecting affect and cognitive content of the offender’s message. In addition, the therapist can use probing questions to express interest and to gain understanding of the client’s perspective, particularly in regard to the external family, peer, or cultural factors that may impact the client’s perception of these events.

Factors affecting the offender’s ability to cope may result in their relapse when the client is a substance abuser. Stressors and circumstances that negatively impact the offender often result in 

Lastly, any number of internal and external issues might affect an offender’s ability to cope. Internally, the offender may have cognitive deficits or even health problems that limit his or her ability to handle stress. Indeed, consider the fact that the offender population tends to have physiological symptoms that are more advanced than their chronological age (Hanser, 2007). The ravages of the offender lifestyle, unhealthy choices, and the debilitating effects of incarceration lead to a more rapid physiological breakdown and this takes a toll on the offender’s overall functioning and ability to cope with daily challenges. External factors may also affect this, such as with institutional racism and discrimination (remember again that a large proportion of offenders in the United States are minorities) that may have created social structure stressors that the offender is unable to overcome. Other external stressors, particularly those related to basic needs (i.e., food, shelter, clothing, and safety) may exist that further deplete the offender’s resource coping ability and exacerbate his or her likelihood of relapse and/or recidivism.

For this reason, the correctional counselor should aid the offender in obtaining support systems that maximize coping. If family and friends are available and if they are functional, then the offender should be encouraged to reach out for their assistance. Family involvement and the use of family systems therapy might be an effective modality in such cases. (See Chapter 7 for more on family systems approaches.) Other support systems might be community groups, religious groups, and/or self-help groups. The main point is that the offender develops connections with others, particularly other persons who are not also offenders, so that the offender is not left on his or her own. Regardless of how well intentioned the counselor may be, they cannot be present at every moment and the offender should have multiple sources of human support, when necessary. Lastly, the counselor will need to aid the offender by teaching alternative coping skills. Many of these forms of coping and the specific techniques used go beyond the scope of this current chapter and will therefore be discussed in subsequent chapters. Nevertheless, clients should be given the interpersonal and interactional skills to cope with challenges, thereby providing a multifaceted approach to client welfare.

1. 1. SECTION SUMMARY

Once a positive therapeutic alliance has been established, offenders must begin the difficult work of accurately identifying events proceeding problem behaviors. Perceptions of these events are critical. Often, it is the immediate perception of some event that strongly influences resulting behavior. Therefore, events and then perceptions must be carefully investigated and reparations must begin in order to reframe the offender’s cognitive processes that foster safer and healthier responses and actions. Once cognitions are properly reframed the concept of coping becomes very important in order to maintain progress and continued positive behavior. Among the coping mechanisms covered in this section, the idea of creating a robust repertoire of coping skills is critical. Offenders need to have as many options as possible to alleviate the powerful negative emotions created by certain events and the perceptions that coincide with these events.

1. 1. L

      
      

      
      EARNING CHECK

1.

It is not important to identify the event preceding the problem behavior.

• a.True

• b.False

2.

Perceptions of certain events are very important to identify in order to reframe an offender’s cognitive processes.

• a.True

• b.False

3.

External factors have more of an impact on coping than internal factors.

• a.True

• b.False

4.

Offenders should rely on only one method of coping.

• a.True

• b.False

5.

Family and friends should never be relied upon in order to assist with coping.

• a.True

• b.False

1. 1. PART THREE: GOAL SETTING AND IMPLEMENTATION

A goal refers to a desired result, purpose, or objective. Within counseling, the process of setting goals is often described as the second phase (Egan, 2007), the first phase consisting of the formation of a positive therapeutic alliance. Once the alliance is formed, however, the proper identification of goals becomes paramount and is a very powerful component of the counseling relationship. Goals will often provide offenders with a clearer sense of direction. And, according to Egan (2007), “People with a sense of direction tend to experience the following:

• • have a sense of purpose

• • live lives that are going somewhere

• • have self-enhancing patterns of behavior in place

• • focus on results, outcomes, and accomplishments

• • avoid mistaking random actions for accomplishments

• • have a defined rather than an aimless lifestyle” (p. 251).

1. 1. Counselor/Offender Collaboration

It is important that both the counselor and offender be active participants in the process of identifying and setting goals. In essence, the counselor and offender should collaborate on the direction and focus of counseling based on the offender’s needs. This collaboration will often serve as a process through which offenders are more likely to assume ownership of their role in the counseling relationship and enhance motivation to succeed. The offender’s experience as being considered an equal in identifying goals may also serve to strengthen the therapeutic alliance. An important product of a strong therapeutic alliance, within the context of goal setting, is the greater likelihood the offender will feel comfortable enough to fully disclose threatening and personal information that need attention within the counseling relationship. Masters (2004) asserts that counselors are often in a better position to guide the process of goal setting because they are functioning from a more objective standpoint and not “blinded by the 

1. 1. Clearly Defining Goals

Through the process of collaboration, counselors and offenders should work to clearly define goals. The goals need to be operationalized in a manner in which what is expected of the offender is clear. Green (2004) states that “successful therapy requires establishing relatively clear collaborative goals with clients (a focus) and using interventions that are relevant to those therapeutic goals throughout” (p. 3). In essence, three important steps in the counseling relationship should now be clearly discernable:

• 1. The establishment of a positive therapeutic alliance

• 2. The establishment of clear goals

• 3. Establishing interventions specific to the goals.

Once the goals have been collaboratively established, and possible interventions discussed, it is important to get client’s commitment toward working to fulfill the goals. This process is often described as the contract, whereby counselors and offenders agree to work toward identified goals, in collaboration, through the counseling relationship. The contract is generally a verbal and nonformal agreement that displays the commitment of both the counselor and offender in doing everything possible to achieve the established goals. An example of entering into a contract with an offender may include the following:

Now that goals have been established and the contract is in place it is critical that counselors remain focused on the task at hand. This takes diligence and careful concentration on the part of the counselor to remain focused on directing the counseling relationship in a manner specific to the desired outcomes. Green (2004) provides a good example in which he highlights the criticalness of this point. He states, “in consultations for ‘stuck’ cases, I frequently have found that a clear sense of direction was never established at the outset of a treatment; or, once having been established, the therapy conversations meandered or avoided dealing with the main presenting problems” (p. 3). The true task of both counselor and offender is to spend as much working time as possible dealing with the offender’s feelings and emotion as they relate to various life circumstances that have historically disrupted the offender’s ability to function in a healthy manner.

1. 1. Perception Clarification Techniques and Insight Development

Often in the counseling dialogue between the offender and the counselor, there may come times where both persons may need to clarify a range of perceptions. Often, these techniques are used to add focus to the session and to give definition to a problem. This is important because it allows both the client and the counselor to gauge concepts that would otherwise be vague and perhaps unwieldy. Likewise, the counselor who uses perception clarification techniques is engaged in an 

The first clarification technique that will be discussed is called scaling. Scaling requires that the client provide the counselor with a rating, between 1 and 10, that explains the severity, importance, or degree to which an issue or concept exists, as perceived by that client. In other words, scaling provides a measure. An example, provided below, shows the use of scaling. Please note that the use of the actual scaling technique itself is placed in italics. The example is as follows:

From the example above, it is hoped that students can see that the counselor is actually using several techniques in a simultaneous fashion. First, the counselor is reflecting the client’s comments, addressing both affect (feelings of anxiety about release) and content (the client has become institutionalized, being adapted to prison life and is therefore nervous about life on the outside). In addition, while the correctional counselor does reflect the affect of the client, the counselor avoids powerful feeling words like anxiety, fearful, or worried because hardened offenders might not be willing to engage in strong affective display or dialogue (keep in mind the subculture of the prison, as has been discussed). Rather, the reflection uses a subdued feeling word—uneasy—to describe the emotions related to the client’s upcoming release.

With respect to the scaling technique, the correctional counselor asks the client to provide a numerical value for the client’s concern. Notice that the counselor gently shifted the feeling word from “uneasy” to “concern,” a little more directive and a bit more related to the client’s feelings, but still not overladen with emotional content. In addition, when the client provides a numerical value to his or her level of concern, the counselor reflects with a comment that describes that number as “average,” perhaps an apt description when the number 5 is produced from a range of numbers between 1 and 10. As can be seen, the counselor then uses this as an 

Another clarification technique is known as the Lazarus Technique (Egan, 1994; Lazarus, 1976). Egan used this term to describe a technique that Arnold Lazarus employed in his film on multimodal approaches to therapy. In this film, Lazarus used a focusing technique where the client was asked to use just one word to describe her problem (Egan, 1994). After contemplating her situation she then provided a word. Then Lazarus asked the client to put the word in a sentence that would describe that problem in a bit more detail. Lazarus then asked the client to provide a set of phrases and or summary of the problem that emerged from the sentence that was provided. Thus, the Lazarus technique clarifies a client’s issue of focus and challenges the client to provide definition to his or her issue, and, after providing such definition, the client is then given a prompt to further explore that issue in detail. Using the prior session between the correctional counselor and the inmate client that is nearing release from prison, consider the following example:

At this point the client explained that he would need to keep his job and stay away from problem areas where he might be prone to resort to old habits. This technique is an effective method of bringing a session into focus. Indeed, Egan (1994) notes that this method of clarification can be used at any stage in the helping process. This is an important point that some counselors may overlook. This technique can even be a good summarization technique—one that brings the session to a close (as when the hour-long session is coming to its end) in a constructive manner. Further, the use of this technique requires that the offender—not the counselor—provides the summary and therefore conducts a “rehash” of the session, ensuring that the client considers the happenings throughout the session. Using our previous examples, consider this use of the Lazarus technique as a means of closing the session.

As one can see, the use of this technique not only helped to place focus on the session, but it also gave the client some introspective direction throughout the week until the next session. This is empowering for the offender, gives him or her focus throughout the next week, and ties sessions together so that he or she does not become disjointed. The Lazarus technique is a very powerful technique that is quite versatile. However, counselors should not rely on a technique repetitively or the session will become artificial and mechanical in nature. Much of the art of counseling is just that, an art, where counselors must exercise effective judgment in selecting tools and techniques by which they work their craft.

Incidentally, the counselor could have even chosen to use the scaling technique at the end of the session. Just prior to the second use of the Lazarus technique, before the session was about to draw to a close, the dialogue might have gone as follows:

T

1. 1. Termination of the Counseling Relationship

The goal of any good counselor is to get his or her client into a position where counseling is no longer necessary. That is the most laudable and ethical goal of a good correctional counselor. With that in mind, it is the responsibility of the correctional counselor to indicate that termination of the offender–counselor relationship looms in the future when it is clear that the offender has met their agreed-upon goals or when it is clear that the offender is not benefiting from the therapeutic relationship. In most cases with correctional counseling, offenders will be mandated to treatment, regardless of whether they are in a prison or a community corrections environment. However, there will come a time when offenders will finish their program requirements and/or the required number of therapeutic sessions, and correctional counselors should be prepared to process the offender through this last segment of the counseling relationship.

While conducting therapy with the offender, the counselor will have undoubtedly made contact with various custodial personnel, such as the offender’s probation and/or parole officer. This is important because the correctional counselor will typically share information regarding the offender’s progress with these individuals. Keep in mind that the offender will be aware of this, and in all cases, correctional counselors obtain release of information that demonstrates the offender’s knowledge of and consent to this sharing of information. A release of information is simply a formal and signed agreement where the client consents to the counselor’s sharing of information with another person and/or persons at another agency. The specifics of this arrangement are not necessary to discuss at this time, but the parameters of such a release must be clear, specific, and with the client’s signed consent. However, such releases are routine in the field of counseling and should not be seen as a hurdle to any process of treatment provision. The use of releases of information is so commonplace that agencies typically have numerous black forms prepared so that counselors can quickly fill in the relevant information and expedite the process of ethical information sharing. Obtaining offender compliance in the correctional setting is usually not problematic because the treatment aspect of an offender’s sentence is usually part of his or her overall sentencing requirement. Whether this seems right or wrong, such coercive elements do exist as a means of maintaining offender compliance, both from a security standpoint and a therapeutic one.

Throughout the counseling relationship, the correctional counselor will have likely provided several notes, observations, and recommendations regarding the offender to prison or community supervision officials. These are the same officials (a parole board or some such 

Once it is clear that the offender will make suitable progress to soon exit the program, the correctional counselor should make arrangements for the last session to be one for closure of the relationship. If possible, the offender should know this in advance to aid them in processing the eventual end of the relationship. Many programs may even go so far as to have ceremonies or celebrations for the offender, providing certificates of completion and such. This is definitely a kind and worthy gesture that can hold substantial meaning for the offender. However, this should not suffice for the official termination session between the offender and the counselor. Indeed, such a process does not actually address the termination of the relationship, in and of itself. It is important that, regardless of any celebrations or graduation ceremonies, the counselor ensures that an actual session is held that addresses the offender’s progress throughout the program and that addresses the offender’s feelings regarding the termination. While many clients may address this topically, it is nonetheless important. It tells the offender that the counselor cares and that the client was not simply “another number,” but was and is a human being who has completed a major milestone. If the offender was in a group counseling setting, it allows the group to say goodbye and lets the client know that they will be missed. Yet at the same time, such a session puts a sense of official closure on the relationship, thereby maintaining effective professional boundaries between the counselor and the offender.

Further, the counselor does not want to leave the client feeling abandoned. Though the therapeutic relationship between the offender and counselor will end, the counselor should provide at least three referral clinicians who are trustworthy and accessible, in case the offender should need such services. This is important, though in many cases where the offender works within an agency that processes offenders on a routine basis, a pre-established list of such referrals may readily exist. This ensures that sufficient follow-up resources are available once the offender is out of therapy. Lastly, when and where agency policy deems appropriate, counselors may wish to provide a brief follow-up phone call after a suitable period of time has elapsed (such as three or six month intervals). This can aid offenders in their relapse prevention and also aids in the informal evaluation process. This particular aspect of the termination cycle is followed in many private practices but may not be common practice in state- or country-run agencies. In all cases, correctional counselors will need to know and understand agency policy regarding this aspect of post-termination.

The primary task of the counselor during termination, aside from common record keeping concerns, is to ensure that the offender has a continuum of care that continues beyond the individual offender and counselor. The offender should not be exited without having sufficient knowledge of potential treatment providers in the community. Though the official counseling mandate may have ended in such cases, the requirement that counselors put offender welfare as their first and foremost concern does not. This is the obligation of an ethical correctional counselor and is also the final message that an offender will receive—the message that regardless of mandates or other displays of formality, the correctional counselor’s empathetic positive regard remains as a bastion of hope amidst a vast array of persons 

1. 1. SECTION SUMMARY

Goals must be clearly defined as early as possible in the counseling process. The clear identification of goals allows counseling sessions to be focused and guided by factors most salient to the offender. It is very important that goal setting and subsequent methods of implementation be agreed upon by the offender and counselor. Collaboration within this process is extremely important. Counselors must refrain from overtly or covertly inserting their own biases in this process and forcing upon the offender what they think would be the best. A lack of collaboration will significantly damage the therapeutic alliance. Finally, termination must occur within a continuum. Termination of the counseling process may be best viewed as the beginning of the next phase of care. And, it is critical that the offender understand that the counseling process may be reinstituted if the need arises.

1. 1. LEARNING CHECK

1.

Offenders can sometimes benefit from feelings of abandonment within the counseling process.

• a.True

• b.False

2.

The Lazarus technique is an effective method of clarifying an offender’s feelings.

• a.True

• b.False

3.

If a therapeutic alliance has been successfully created, a release of information is never required.

• a.True

• b.False

4.

When used properly, scaling can be an effective method of clarification.

• a.True

• b.False

5.

A contract is a mechanism through which offenders and counselors are able to work together toward identified goals.

• a.True

• b.False

1. 1. CONCLUSION

A positive therapeutic alliance is a critical component within the therapeutic relationship. Regardless of treatment modality, there must be a strong affective bond between the counselor and offender that produces an environment in which the offender feels safe in disclosing deep, personal, and often shameful information. The therapeutic alliance is built primarily on the counselor’s ability to display genuineness and empathy when responding to the myriad of statements and actions displayed by the offender. The positive therapeutic alliance is also the vehicle in which counselors will be able to effectively identify the offender’s true needs as well as uncover important information related to the offender’s perceptions, coping mechanisms, and future goals.

I

To sum up the essence of this chapter, Green (2004) provides three important points regarding a positive therapeutic alliance:

• 1. Give sufficient emotional support and validation to the offender

• 2. Successfully manage negative emotion within the offender

• 3. The counselor must regulate his or her own negative emotion in response to the offender.

Finally, Green (2004) states that “the very best therapists tend to be those who can easily establish and maintain positive therapeutic alliances with the widest range of clients, both in terms of clients’ cultural diversity and in terms of managing negative emotionality” (p. 2). In essence, the counselor’s ability to effectively provide lasting and quality services to an offender is in large part directly related to his or her own internal congruence.

1. 1. Essay Questions

• 1. Discuss the importance of a therapeutic alliance?

• 2. Identify and discuss two factors that threaten the establishment of a strong therapeutic alliance.

• 3. Discuss two coping techniques that you feel are most effective. What makes these techniques, in your opinion, so effective?

• 4. Discuss the idea of problem identification. Why is this so critical to the counseling process?

1. 1. Bibliography

Bordin, E. S. (1979). The generalizability of the psychoanalytic concept of the working alliance. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 16(3), 252–260.

Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. (1999). Enhancing motivation for change in substance abuse treatment. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 35. DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 99-3354. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. (2005). Substance abuse treatment for persons with co-occurring disorders. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 42. DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 05-3922. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

Corey, G. (2000). Theory and practice of group counseling (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Doyle, R. E. (1992). Essential skills and strategies in the helping process. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Egan, G. (1990). The skilled helper: A systematic approach to effective helping (4th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Egan, G. (1994). The skilled helper: A problem-management approach to helping (5th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

E

Elliot, J., & Elliot, K. (2006). Disarming the inner critic. Lafayette, LA: Anthetics Press.

Gladding, S. T. (1996). Counseling: A comprehensive profession (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Gordon, T. (1970). Parent effectiveness training: The no-lose program for raising responsible children. New York: Wyden.

Green, R. J. (2004). Therapeutic alliance, focus, and formulation: Thinking beyond the traditional therapy orientations. Pscychotherapy.net (Electronic Journal). Retrieved date: www.psychotherapy.net/articles/articlesframe.html.

Hanser, R. D. (2007). Special needs offenders in the community. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kanel, K. (2003). A guide to crisis intervention (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Lazarus, A. A. (1976). Multimodal behavior therapy. New York: Springer.

Masters, R. (2004). Counseling criminal justice offenders (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Miller, W. R., Leckman, A. L., Delaney, H. D., & Tinkcom, M. (1992). Long-term follow-up of behavioral self-control training. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 53(3), 249–261.

Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (1991). Motivational interviewing: Preparing people to change addictive behavior. New York: Guilford Press.

Ormont L. R. (1999). Establishing transient identification in the group setting. Modern Psychoanalysis. 24(2), 143–156.

Petry, N. M., & Bickel, W. K. (1999). Therapeutic alliance and psychiatric severity as predictors of completion of treatment for opioid dependence. Psychiatric Services 50(2), 219–227.

Ritchie, M. H. (1986). Counseling the involuntary client. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64,516–518.

Rogers, C. R. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 95–103.

Sack, R. T. (1988). Counseling responses when clients say ‘I don't know.’ Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 10, 179–187.

Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2005). Theories of personality (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thompson/Wadsworth.

Summers, R. F., & Barber, J. P. (2003). Therapeutic alliance as a measurable skill. Academic Psychiatry, 27(3), 160–165.

Witty, M. (2007). Client-centered therapy. In N. Kazantzis and L. L'Abate (Eds.), Handbook of homework assignments in psychotherapy research, practice, and prevention (pp. 35–50). US: Springer.