needing the empathy of their counselors. Despite a counselor’s good intentions and best efforts, therapeutic relationships can experience empathic failures. Reconnecting following these experiences is part of the work of counseling. When empathic failures occur, RCT counselors sincerely express their desire to understand the client and explore the disconnection between them. The counselor follows the client’s lead and supports the timing of the client to enter into this discussion. Other times, counselors may simply see the client withdrawing and stay with the client in whatever context works for the client. Counselors do not challenge, prod, or seek connection during these times of disconnection but instead respect the emotional distance needed by the clients (Jordan & Duffey, 2020).
In those times when counselors do not track clients’ feelings or thoughts in ways that resonate with them, they can acknowledge the disconnect. Counselors enter the profession of counseling because they want to help and make a difference. However, their own validation for being an effective or relational counselors cannot come at the expense of the clients’ needs to be heard. In this respect, the counselors’ egos cannot supersede their clients’ needs. If counselors are not aware of their ego needs, they will be less likely to engage in the growth-fostering relationship that counseling requires (Jordan & Duffey, 2020). Interactions in relationships in which mutual empathy and mutual empowerment do not occur usually involve disappointment; a sense of being misunderstood; and sometimes a sense of danger, violation, or impasse.
Brief Intervention Strategies
Oakley et al. (2013) developed and evaluated the effectiveness of the brief relational-cultural therapy model (BRCTM). The BRCTM follows five principles: (a) creating equity, mutuality, and authenticity between clients and counselors; (b) intentional focusing on empowerment in a time-limited model; (c) working to promote empowerment in the client’s community and larger social context; (d) developing relational competence and empowerment; and (e) developing personal power and self-compassion. The follow-up data collected in this study demonstrated that this intervention was effective for women who indicated a wide range of concerns. A vast majority of these clients reported that the BRCTM helped them make meaningful changes in their lives.
Clients With Serious Mental Health Issues
Jordan (2018) reported that RCT-based counseling serves individuals with many serious concerns, including substance use disorders, bipolar disorder, eating disorders, and schizophrenia. However, Jordan noted that RCT might not be particularly helpful for those with sociopathic tendencies. This could be because these entrenched issues preclude people from enjoying the benefits of relational connection, and they may actively avoid the vulnerability and authenticity necessary for growth.
SUPPORTING RESEARCH AND LIMITATIONS
Overview
As we previously mentioned, the counseling profession embraced RCT as a theoretical lens for working with a variety of clients and within numerous counseling settings (Alvarez & Lazzari, 2016; E. Brown et al., 2020; Dorn‐Medeiros et al., 2020; Duffey & Haberstroh, 2020; B. Hall et al., 2018; K. Hall et al., 2018; Hitter et al., 2017; Lenz, 2016; Purgason et al., 2016; Singh et al., 2020; Singh & Moss, 2016; Stargell et al., 2020; Storlie et al., 2017). After a systematic literature review and analysis of RCT outcome studies, Lenz (2016) concluded that the literature provides “some initial support for RCT as a framework for understanding client experiences, using instruments that measure RCT constructs, and implementing associated interventions within clinical practice” (p. 423). This review of the literature and related research outcomes showed a mix of qualitative, quantitative, and research assessment instrument analyses. Given that RCT is not a manualized and procedural approach like cognitive behavior therapy, qualitative and mixed-method approaches may best serve to highlight the experiences of clients and counselors who collaborate within an RCT framework. For counseling researchers interested in using quantitative outcome measures to evaluate RCT constructs, the following instruments can aid in these types of studies: the Connection-Disconnection Scale (Tantillo & Sanftner, 2010), the Mutual Psychological Development Questionnaire (Genero et al., 1992), and the Relational Health Indices (Liang et al., 2002). Moreover, counselors can also consider these scales in counseling practice to explore RCT constructs such as mutuality, connection and disconnection, and relational health among the varied social groups to which clients belong.
Supporting Research
RCT in Varied Counseling Settings
As the counseling and related mental health professions move to support integrated, relational, multicultural, and trauma-informed approaches, researchers applied RCT to working with clients suffering from various traumas (Duffey & Haberstroh, 2020; Hitter et al., 2017; Jordan & Duffey, 2020; Kress et al., 2018). When we conceptualized trauma work in the book Introduction to Crisis and Trauma Counseling (Duffey & Haberstroh, 2020), we invited scholars and practitioners to frame crisis and trauma counseling using RCT as a foundational way to conceptualize the counseling relationship while integrating trauma-informed and trauma-specific practices. A counselor’s relational presence during times of crisis and trauma can help clients experience safety and rework traumatic disconnections. Bessel van der Kolk (2014) reiterated that a counselor’s attuned presence in trauma counseling is the most important factor in trauma recovery. Likewise, Kress et al. (2018) concluded that
relational-cultural theorists posit that isolation from others is a primary source of emotional suffering, [and] social withdrawal can prolong and compound trauma survivors’ emotional pain. RCT provides a nonpathologizing and culturally sensitive framework for counselors to use with clients who have traumatic stress disorders. (p. 111)
Given the damaging effects that arise from interpersonal, historical, and cultural traumas, RCT counselors provide the foundational relational attunement when working with people who have suffered various traumas. Other researchers integrated RCT with traditional counseling approaches, including reality therapy (Haskins & Appling, 2017), addictions counseling (Vandermause et al., 2018), career counseling (Storlie et al., 2017), college counseling (Crumb & Haskins, 2017; Lenz et al., 2016), group work (B. Hall et al., 2018), school counseling (Tuttle & Haskins, 2017), and supervision theory (Duffey & Haberstroh, 2014).
RCT and Developmental Relational Counseling and Supervision
Developmental relational counseling (DRC) is an integrative model designed to help people move from inaccurate and unproductive perspectives to perspectives that are more compassionate and realistic (Duffey & Haberstroh, 2014). On one hand, the unproductive and disconnecting perspectives people adopt about themselves and others can be seen as being self-aggrandizing and diminishing of others. On the other hand, people can disconnect from themselves and others when they adopt a self-denigrating perspective, whereby they neglect their own relational power.
Based in RCT and influenced by the enneagram personality typology, cognitive theories, and narrative theories, DRC provides a framework by which people can assess their degree of accurate self- and other-awareness, their connection to a range of perspectives that influence how they see themselves and others, and their appropriate or inappropriate use of power. (Duffey et al., 2020, p. 462)
Using a visual representation (Duffey et al., 2020), counselors work with clients to identify their connections to self-aggrandizing, self-denigrating, or clear and balanced perspectives within the varied contexts of their lives. Because DRC is RCT based, counselors explore relational images, strategies of survival, and how a client’s worldview disconnects them from meaningful relationships and mutuality (Duffey et al., 2020).
Using DRC as a framework, we designed a randomized study (Duffey et al., 2016) to evaluate the effects of supervisors who operated from self-denigrating, self-aggrandizing, and clear and balanced perspectives. Using the Relational Health Indices (Liang et al., 2002) as an outcome measure, clients rated the supervisory relationship as highly ineffective when supervisors acted in a self-aggrandizing