ABSTRACT
The first two positions may be represented as ‘purist’ and ‘pragmatic’ respectively and they are concerned with diagnosis. The third is different: it is concerned with assessment. In crude and simple terms, diagnosis is a process of ‘labelling’ a person as having a particular (kind of) problem while assessment is a (mutual) process by which a decision is made as to the likelihood that therapist and client can and will build an effective therapeutic relationship. Assessment may take place over time. Assessment is not inimical to person-centred theory and practice. Indeed the necessary and sufficient conditions and the seven stages of process can be seen as contributing to a person-centred scheme for assessment (see Wilkins 2005a: 141-143). Such a scheme sets aside the notion of the therapist as expert, able to reach a definitive conclusion as to the nature of the client’s difficulties and rather concentrates on the likelihood of establishing a relationship in which
highlights the potential limitations of the therapist. Personcentred therapists are ethically obliged to ask themselves if a potential client stands in need of therapy and if they can offer an effective relationship to that client. The criteria in Wilkins (2005a: 141-142) provide a system for making such a judgement (see also Point 59).
