The authors explore 3 debates in other disciplines similar to counseling's identity debate in order to learn about common themes and outcomes. Conformity, distinction, and cohesion emerged as common themes. They conclude that counselors should retain their distinctive, humanistic approach rather than conforming to the dominant, medical approach.

No abstract

Humanistic counseling therapies have fallen from grace in an age of manualized care. However, the behaviorists’ embrace of key humanistic ideas may signal a revival. In this article, the author reviews 10 of these key ideas, examining what a revival of humanism could mean for counseling theory, practice, and research.

Over the last few years, counselor training has focused more on formal diagnosis, but this increased focus has been questioned. In the end, the question seems less about whether formal diagnosis will be taught and more about how it will be taught. The author argues that diagnosis should be taught from a social constructionist rather than an objectivist perspective because of the former perspective's humanistic focus.

The author argues that structuralist ideas prevail in group theory and practice. Structuralism, as applied to groups, asserts that the meaning of group dialogue must be derived from a system of contrasting elements. He urges a post-structuralist inversion that attends more directly to group member talk. Group theory and practice from this stance have been limited. The author aims to redress that limit in two ways. First, by attending to some of the major contrasts between structuralism and post-structuralism as they relate to group theory and practice; second, by offering up several post-structuralist ideas that may help propel such theory and practice. STRUCTURALISM IN GROUP THEORY AND PRACTICEEven a cursory read of group therapy writings shows that structuralist ideas prevail in theory and practice