Question

a) A good friend of yours is asking you whether she/he should undergo psychoanalysis or client-centered therapy. Which factors would you consider before answering her/him, and what would be your final recommendation based on these factors? (write 400 words and as you are writing and what would suggest so answer properly)

b) Do you think humanistic psychology was right in taking the stance that psychology needed a 'third force' to counteract the 'dark side' of psychology (psychoanalysis)? write in-depth from your experience.

Please answer these questions by your thinking rather than copying the whole from the material you already post. Thus, make the answer by your own knowledge if you have a faculty of psychology to answer this question by their own thinking.

Answer 1

A) I would answer the approach of treatment according to goals and the treatment outcomes my friend expects from the treatment. Psychoanalysis is a long term treatment and the person who is ready to give his time uncovering deep conflicts of the mind. However, humanistic approach is centered towards client and would be short-term treatment compared to Psychoanalytic approach. Moreover, the type of treatment I will suggest will also depend on the mental health issues that my friend is facing.

However, psychoanalysis is huge investment on money and time and there may be power imbalance between the therapist and client. However, client- centered therapy may have value for any disorder, however, it does not concern specific disorder. Psychoanalysis may be helpful in anxiety disorders and depression to some extent.

Thus, the type of disorder, time, investment would decide the type of treatment my friend would be interested. Psychoanalysis takes a deep stance of an individual and humanistic approach takes a positive side of individuals. So, psychoanalysis would uncover deep aspects of individuals' childhood and humanistic would focus on client's present.

Looking at both treatments, I would suggest humanistic approach to my friend as it has short-term goals and the client is the major focus of the therapy. Moreover, it aims on resolving present situation of the individual. As, psychoanalysis is expensive in terms of money and time, moreover, it takes on the deep and past stances of individuals which would be emotionally burdening for individuals. So, from my point of view. humanistic approach would be better for short-term goals.

B) Yes, humanistic approach was necessary to counteract the deep stance of individuals in psychoanalysis because psychoanalysis focuses on deep roots of individuals and is emotionally burdening in terms of time and money. Moreover, it overemphasized the sexual aspects and pleasures of individuals undermining the will of individuals to unfold their potential.

Humanistic approach came as a counteract to psychoanalysis which does not take people's will to shape their own which was only dependent on the sexual pleasure and childhood experience of people.

Rogerian approach took a positive note of individuals and takes active role of the client to focus on ability and capabilities that they have to shape their life . For example- If I feel demotivated after losing jobs, the humanistic approach may increase the self-esteem of individuals. The approach may be helpful where the individual may have short-term goals for the treatment.

Taking my example, unfolding the past issues may be emotinally burdening of me, it may exaggerate my problems if I reflect upon the past. In such issues, the client or I would be resistant to tell my past issues. However, humanistic takes on an active approach where the problems of my past would be resolved and I would be able reflect better on my life.

Thus, humanistic approach came as a counteract to Psychoanalysis which challenged the dark side of psychology. It helped the client to take on a positive approach and responsibility towards shaping their life.