ABSTRACT
At first glance, there is not much difference between the therapist’s attempt to communicate unconditional positive regard and empathic understanding and the client’s perception of them. However, the 1959 version of the necessary and sufficient conditions is concerned with the client’s perception and this is something about which person-centred practitioners and theoreticians have been thinking and writing (see, for example, Wyatt and Sanders 2002). And there are indeed subtle differences between ‘communication’ and ‘perception’. What the therapist ‘communicates’ is not necessarily perceived. For example, there is a possibility that your empathic sensing will be ‘right’ but denied by the client. To illustrate, as a young man and client, I was ‘told’ by my therapist that I was angry. In my self-concept, anger was a sub-human emotion, beneath my dignity. I could not understand why my therapist was suggesting I might be angry. While it didn’t irreparably damage our relationship I certainly went away with a different view of her skills. Of course, she was absolutely right and had accurately communicated her empathic understanding but I didn’t realise that for years. She had gone beyond my ‘edge of awareness’ into some part of me that I could not/would not admit into awareness. I was unable to perceive my therapist’s empathic understanding. So, in effect, in this case condition six was not met. ‘However accurate it may be, will my client be able to receive it?’ is something to bear in mind when offering 238empathic understanding. This is one reason why ‘taking only what is given’ (see Grant 2010: 225) is an important guideline.
