The authors reply to J. T. Hansen's (2005) call for the profession to revalue the inner subjective experiences (ISE) of clients. Hansen argued that social constructionism has influenced the decline of the counseling profession by obscuring its unique focus on ISE. The authors maintain that social constructionism is a useful framework for counseling, and they articulate a social constructionist position for counseling. Hansen's reasons for arguing that ISE must be revalued are discussed along with future directions for social constructionism and counseling.
This article is a reply to Hansen's (2012) call for the counseling profession to embrace a purely humanistic ideology for counseling. The authors suggest the relationship between humanities and science set forth by Hansen does not emphasize the both-and aspects of these ideologies.An integrative framework is considered for counseling.
Solution-focused counseling is presented as a framework for clients with religious and spiritual concerns. The theory of solution-focused counseling is described. Implications for using this model with religious and spiritual clients are considered. A case example is provided to illustrate the application of solution-focused counseling for a client dealing with religious and spiritual issues.
Social constructionism is set forth as an epistemological framework from which to establish an ethical base for the field of counseling. The development of the social constructionist movement in counseling is described. Implications of a social constructionist position are considered in relation to ethics. A case example is provided to illustrate implications of a social constructionist position.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.