Comparing MI, CBT, REBT, Reality, and Solution-Focused Approaches.

Posted: December 6th, 2022

Comparing MI, CBT, REBT, Reality, and Solution-Focused Approaches.

Discussion – Comparing MI, CBT, REBT, Reality, and Solution-Focused Approaches. You will analyze and apply what you have learned about Motivational Interviewing, Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy, Reality Therapy, and Solutions-Focused Therapy. Choose and view any three of these five videos below: Motivational Interviewing with Addiction Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy with Addictions Cognitive Behavior Therapy with Addictions – Reality Therapy with Addictions Solution Focused Therapy: Addressing a Client’s Relationship with Drinking. Then write a detailed discussion post in which you: First specifically identify what each of the three therapists did to build rapport and a working relationship with each individual? Briefly describe at least 2 specific counseling techniques used in each of the three videos you have chosen; Compare and contrast the counseling techniques; and Explain why each technique could be useful when applied to patients with substance use disorders Which of these 3 counseling approaches did you prefer, if you liked two equally explain what you preferred about each? Explain your rationale.Comparing MI, CBT, REBT, Reality, and Solution-Focused Approaches.

ORDER NOW.                    

The three selected therapy approaches are Motivational Interviewing (MI), Cognitive-Behavior Therapy (CBT), and Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT). The three approaches saw the therapists applying unique strategies to build a rapport with the clients. Firstly, they applied active listening skills to understand the issues affecting the client before attempting an intervention. Secondly, the speed of intimacy was moderated and was dependent on the clients’ personality, background and culture. This was useful in assessing the trust level, specifically the content that the clients’ shared and body language as indicators of intimacy (what the client was ready to share). Thirdly, they treated the clients with respect through addressing them politely, dressing professionally, being attentive and adjusting behavior accordingly. Fourthly, they matched the clients’ communication rhythm and style, being in tune with the clients and getting them to come closer to normalcy. Finally, being competent and forthright in what the session entails and soliciting the clients’ opinions when making decisions (Sperry, 2016).Comparing MI, CBT, REBT, Reality, and Solution-Focused Approaches.

The three therapy sessions applied three counseling techniques. The first counseling technique was observing and listening that involved attending to the clients with eye contact, actively listening to them, and verbal listening to them through verbal cues such as repetitions and paraphrasing. The second counseling technique was asking questions with a focus on setting the tone and learning more about the client through the use of open and closed questions. The third counseling technique was reflection that was used to describe the clients’ states based on the verbal and non-verbal cues. It includes affirmation (encouragement to affirm life choices and behavior), rephrasing (restating), and feelings reflection (Cautin & Lilienfeld, 2015).Comparing MI, CBT, REBT, Reality, and Solution-Focused Approaches.

MI was applied with a view to moving the client away from a state of uncertainty and indecision and towards finding the drive to accomplish established goals and make positive decisions. First introduced by William Miller and Stephen Rollnick in the late 1980s, the approach focuses on pushing persons with low motivation towards achieving the desired change through the principles of autonomy, evocation and collaboration. It is particularly useful in addressing substance use disorders since it applies a collaborative and non-confrontational relationship between the counselor/therapist and client who is typically defensive, sparking the motivation to initiate and carry on change. Instead of being combative (aggressive), the approach engages the client and helps in finding motivation to change (Sperry, 2016).

CBT was applied with the intention of addressing the negative and destructive thoughts that the client exhibited. It works on the premise that failing to address the negative thoughts is harmful for the client. It helps the client to recognize the capacity for positive thought while regulating harmful behavior and distressing emotions. It views negative thoughts as the obstacle to achieving change. Overall, CBT offers a goal-directed, problem-focused and present-oriented approach that benefits the client through changing negative thoughts into positive ones, augmented with activities outside the session, offers practical strategies, and formulates coping strategies (Sperry, 2016).Comparing MI, CBT, REBT, Reality, and Solution-Focused Approaches.

REBT was applied in teaching the clients how to dispute irrational beliefs with the intention of increasing positive feelings. In fact, this approach helps clients to recognize that they have limitations as individuals but can choose how to efficiently address the limitations and realistically address what is possible. Also, it helps clients in finding ways to realistically respond to situations while ignoring irrational thoughts (Sperry, 2016).

Of the three approaches, MI and CBT would be preferable. That is because they address common issues in the management of substance use disorders. MI addresses the uncertainty and indecision that clients face over whether or not seeking treatment to halt the substance use is the right decision. Through settling on a decision, the client is able to be more receptive towards changing. CBT focuses on addressing the negative thoughts that deny the client the confidence to proceed with treatment and halt the substance use (Sperry, 2016). As a result, MI and CBT are appropriate for addressing substance use disorder.Comparing MI, CBT, REBT, Reality, and Solution-Focused Approaches.