chapter  7
The issue of the compatibility of using techniques in a person-centred framework is unresolved and contentious
Pages 2

Because it is seen as to con¯ict with the principle of nondirectivity (Point 5) and involve the exertion of power by the therapist (Point 6), the use of techniques within person-centred therapy is, to say the least, contentious. Certainly, there are those who argue that the use of any technique is incompatible with person-centred therapy (see, for example, Fairhurst 1993: 25±30). This is because, from a classical client-centred point of view, the therapist's sole role is to attend to the client's experience and process. To do anything else may be countertherapeutic. However, many others who adopt the label `personcentred' deviate from the classical view. For example, experiential and focusing therapists have no problems with the notion of directing clients' attention towards aspects of their experience and process while others proactively introduce activities drawing on a range of creative and expressive techniques. For example, Natalie Rogers (2007: 316±320) describes `person-centred expressive arts therapy', Silverstone (1994: 18±23) discusses person-centred art therapy and in Wilkins (1994: 14±18) I make a case for person-centred psychodrama.