Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, June 2005; 5(2): 96
/104

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Should your lips be zipped? How therapist self-disclosure and

non-disclosure affects clients

JEAN HANSON

Abstract
Is therapist self-disclosure a therapeutic technique or a therapeutic mistake? Is it useful? Is it ethical? This study attempts to
address this controversy among therapeutic modalities by asking clients about their perceptions of self-disclosure and non-
disclosure. Eighteen people (16 women, two men), currently in therapy in two Canadian cities, generated 157 incidents of both
disclosure and non-disclosure. The incidents were first coded as helpful or unhelpful. Cross-tabulation of the results showed
that disclosures were more than twice as likely to be experienced as helpful; non-disclosures were twice as likely to be
unhelpful (x2 (3, N /157)/14.439, p 5/0.002). One-quarter of these incidents was coded by two independent raters; inter-
rater reliability was high (Pearson corr. ranged from 0.755 to 1.0, p 5/0.01). The data was then sorted, using the Constant
Comparison method, into themes, starting with, but not limited to, the themes suggested by the literature. The greatest single
effect was on the therapeutic alliance, both positive and negative. Clients perceptions of helpful disclosures and non-
disclosures generally supported therapists rationales. There was also some evidence that when clients found disclosures
unhelpful, the reasons also supported theoretical rationales against disclosing. Rather than simply supporting either position in
the controversy, this study suggests that skill, or lack of it, was the intervening variable that affected the perceptions of both
techniques. Further research on the effects of skill on both disclosure and non-disclosure are warranted. This study has
implications for both researchers and practitioners.

Keywords: Therapist self-disclosure, non-disclosure, alliance, skill

Introduction imbalance between therapist and client

(Brown, 1994; Mahalik et al., 2000).
Is therapist Is therapist self-disclosure a therapeutic
Self-disclosure has been defined in
self-disclosure a technique or a therapeutic mistake? Is it
discrepant ways. Knox et al. (1997)
therapeutic useful? Is it ethical? The orthodox
determined that the major trend boiled
technique or a psychoanalytic position is that therapists
down to: interactions in which the
therapeutic should be like a mirror to their clients,
therapist reveals personal information
mistake? conducting therapy within a strictly
about him/herself [self-revealing] and/or
neutral frame, from which any deviation, reveals reactions and responses to the
including self-disclosure, is inherently client as they arise in session [self-
incorrect and unethical (Langs, 1979; involving] (p. 275). That definition was
Rothstein, 1997). This position set the used in this study.
stage; subsequent modalities could only The literature about therapist self-
agree or disagree with it. disclosure includes theoretical articles,
Humanistic therapy contends that the case studies and analogue studies (e.g.,
presence of a real, empathic and prizing Bridges, 2001; Brown, 1994; Goldstein,
therapist may be healing per se 1997; Jacobs, 1999; Watkins, 1990). In
(Greenberg et al., 1993, p. 22). Therapist empirical studies, which asked therapists
self-disclosure is both expected and about their use of disclosure, most
desirable as a means of exhibiting therapists reported that they disclosed,
congruence (Rogers, 1961) and and gave theoretical rationales based on
transparency (Jourard, 1971). Feminist the effects they believed their disclosures
therapy recognizes the value of judicious had on their clients (Mathews, 1988; Simi
self-disclosure in reducing the power & Mahalik, 1997; Simone et al., 1998).

E-mail: [email protected]

1473-3145 (print)/1746-1405 (online) 2005 British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy
DOI: 10.1080/17441690500226658
 Therapist self-disclosure and non-disclosure 97
This study examined clients views of
What does this study explore? how therapist disclosure, and non-
disclosure, affected them. I expected that
. Is therapist self-disclosure useful? the participants would be more likely to
. Is it ethical? experience disclosure positively; that non-
disclosure would more likely be
However, few empirical studies have experienced negatively; and that the
asked clients how they experienced their therapists skill level in using this technique
therapists disclosures (notable exceptions may have an effect. I expected that clients
are Hill et al., 1989; Knox et al., 1997; and would view self-revealing and self-
Wells, 1994), and no studies that I am involving disclosures as similarly helpful.
aware of asked clients about the effects of
non-disclosure.
Methodology and Procedure
The use of non-disclosure has rarely
been questioned or justified. According to After passing the ethical review process, I
psychoanalytic theory, it has either been a recruited participants by posters, placed in
default position, an aspect of the the public spaces of counselling clinics,
framework in which therapy takes place medical practitioners offices and
(Langs, 1979); or defended as an ethical bookstores and distributed to therapists at
requirement, since disclosures were educational seminars; and through emails
believed to cause alliance ruptures as a sent to friends and announcements made
result of decreasing trust or safety (Gutheil in graduate-level psychology classes.
& Gabbard, 1993) or to cause clients to Twenty people from two Canadian cities
manage the relationship by becoming requested information, which included
the therapists caretaker (Meiselman, lists of broad, general terms (therapist
1990). Psychoanalytic theory suggests self-disclosure and non-disclosure) and
that clients who have information about topics to be discussed (for example,
their therapists life, or even about their general therapy experience; how the
thoughts or feelings, will be less able to participant gets along with the therapist;
project their fears and fantasies on to the whether or not the therapist discloses,
how often, what was disclosed; whether
therapist (transference); and that,
or not disclosure and non-disclosure were
therefore, therapist non-disclosure would
helpful, and why). Eighteen chose to be
facilitate clients disclosures (Wells, 1994).
interviewed.
Recently, however, some writers have
The audiotaped interviews lasted 35
/90
suggested that, in some situations, failure
minutes. I began by asking the participants
to disclose may actually be detrimental to This study
if they had a story to tell, or if they wanted
clients. Some authors suggested that examined clients
me to guide them by asking questions.
therapists should sometimes disclose, views of how
Most wanted me to guide them. I then
particularly when the therapists views asked, What has your therapy experience therapist
conflict with the clients on sensitive issues been like, generally? This led participants disclosure, and
such as religious beliefs (Hawkins & to describe their therapy, their therapists non-disclosure,
Bullock, 1995), sexual orientation and incidents of self-disclosure or non- affected them
(Mahalik et al., 2000) or abortion (Client disclosure, and the effects all of these had
Rights Project, 1998). From a feminist on them. I consulted an interview guide,
point of view, failure to disclose could be on which the main topics and sub-topics I
seen as a misuse of power (Brown, 1994; was interested in were listed, and checked
Mahalik et al., 2000). off topics as participants covered them in
Case studies have produced anecdotal their narratives. If any topic was not
evidence of the harm that can result from covered, I asked about it, until all the
refusal to disclose (e.g., Goldstein, 1994; topics I was interested in were covered,
Isay, 1996; Vamos, 1993). Empirical and the participants had said all they
studies of the therapeutic alliance found wanted to say. In particular, I was careful
that the alliance was impaired when to probe for both unhelpful and helpful
clients needs were thwarted (Coady & experiences, and for experiences of non-
Marziali, 1994), and when therapists disclosure as well as disclosure. Where
rigidly used transference interpretations possible, I allowed the participants to bring
and were unwilling to acknowledge the up the issues that were important to them
real relationship with their clients and asked unstructured follow-up
(Ackerman & Hilsenroth, 2001). questions as warranted.
98 J. Hanson
I examined the data for incidents of and the right to make informed decisions.
disclosure and non-disclosure that Some may fit more closely with certain
included enough information to modalities, and some may be more
determine the effects on the participants. generally used (see Hanson, 2003, for a
This yielded 157 incidents, 131 disclosures more complete description). A careful
and 26 non-disclosures. Each was coded watch was kept for any data that did not
as disclosure or non-disclosure and fit into pre-determined categories, thus
helpful, unhelpful, neutral or mixed. allowing for the possibility of new
The disclosure incidents were also coded categories to be created.
as self-involving or self-revealing. I also cross-tabulated clients
Two colleagues, one of whose perceptions of helpfulness/unhelpfulness
backgrounds was psychodynamic, in with disclosure/non-disclosure; and with
contrast to mine (feminist/humanist) then type of disclosures (self-involving/self-
coded about one-quarter of the incidents revealing).
(N /38), in order to establish inter-rater
reliability. My colleagues had the same list
of terms as the participants and also an
Participants
explanation of self-involving and self- The participants mean age was 38 (range
revealing disclosures. In order to ensure 24
/57). All were currently in therapy; the
that all participants were represented, as duration ranged from 2 months to 10
well as both disclosure and non-disclosure years, with a mean of 3.7 years. All had
The participants incidents, approximately every fourth had at least one other therapist. Most (16)
in this study incident for each participant was included were women; most described themselves
valued their in the reliability sample. I deliberately as white or Caucasian Canadians, though
therapists included a breach of confidentiality there was some diversity (e.g. Jewish,
disclosures incident, which my colleagues correctly Aboriginal, Persian). There was a range of
because they distinguished and I subsequently excluded social classes, therapeutic modalities and
from the analysis. Of the remaining 37 reasons for being in therapy. The names
contributed
incidents, 33 were disclosures and four used throughout the report are
towards a real
non-disclosures, a similar proportion to pseudonyms the participants chose, and
relationship the total number of incidents. care was taken to remove any identifying
Each of my colleagues codes of the information.
incidents was correlated with mine. I had
reasoned that someone with a
Results
psychodynamic background may be less
likely to rate disclosures as helpful, but this Quantitative analysis
was not the case. The degree of
The participants in this study were 2
agreement was high; Pearson correlations
times more likely to find disclosures to be
ranged from 0.755 (disagreement on two
helpful, and twice as likely to experience
items) to 1.0 (complete agreement), all
non-disclosures as unhelpful; x2 (3, N /
significant at p 5/0.01.
157) /14.439, p 5/0.002. As expected,
I then used the Constant Comparison
self-revelations were no more or less
method to analyse the data by themes.
helpful than statements of self-
This method, associated with the
involvement; x2 (3, N /131) /4.183, p 5/
Grounded Theory method of qualitative
0.242.
analysis, is particularly suited to the
development of theory. Its flexibility
allows not only for the emergence of
Qualitative analysis
categories, but also for the suggestion of
relationships between them (Glaser & Helpful disclosures. When participants
Strauss, 1967). reported disclosure as helpful, their
The data was first organised by reasons were similar to therapists
categories suggested by the literature. rationales for disclosing. This supports
These included: furthering the therapeutic both theory and empirical studies of
alliance; fostering a more egalitarian therapists beliefs about the effects of
relationship, or advancing client disclosures. The greatest effect was on the
autonomy; modelling or skills training; alliance.
validating reality; facilitating client insight The participants in this study valued
or learning; catharsis; support, their therapists disclosures because they
reinforcement and validation of the client; contributed towards a real relationship,
 Therapist self-disclosure and non-disclosure 99
Table I. Effects of helpful disclosures. The first column of figures gives the percentage of the incidents which
included the effect. The second column gives the percentage of participants who mentioned the effect.

Effect of helpful disclosure % of 92 helpful* Participant response rate

1 Fosters alliance 66% 100%

2 Egalitarian relationships 23 72
3 Role/skills modelling 17 67
4 Client insight/learning 17 50
5 Validates reality 15 50
6 Normalises 13 56
7 Validates client 12 39
8 Validates decisions/actions 8 39
9 Transitioning 8 39
10 Establishes credibility 5 28
11 Informed choice 5 22
12 Moral solidarity 4 17

* More than one effect was mentioned for most incidents; therefore, percentages do not add up to 100.

which included: (1) a sense of connection, more egalitarian: the relationship seemed
intimacy, closeness or warmth; (2) trust, more balanced or mutual; the therapist
safety, or a decrease in alienation; (3) a appeared more human or fallible; or the
sense of being deeply understood, disclosures helped them to be more
welcomed or cared about; (4) an autonomous. June, in response to her
opportunity to identify with the therapist; therapists disclosure about an issue similar
and (5) a sense that the therapist would to hers, said, . . .he is a psychologist
take responsibility for mistakes (see himself and he has had this issue! So that
Table I). made me feel even better! . . . The other
Cardinal described how, in their first helpful part was . . . someone else is also a
session, her therapist, in response to little bit sharing!
Cardinals revelation that she was an
incest survivor, revealed briefly and Unhelpful disclosures. When participants
without details that she too shared a described unhelpful disclosures, the two
similar experience. Cardinal said she knew most often identified effects were
then that she could trust her therapist, she decreasing trust or safety, and a need to
felt safe, and knew that she would not be manage the relationship, as reported in
judged negatively. Josephine had the literature (see Table II).
described a situation in which a partner In her second session, Israela expressed
had left her, after which she felt angry her fear of divorce, especially since her
and imagined responding violently. A children were still small. In response, her
previous therapist then revealed how she therapist revealed that he was divorced
too had had similar angry, violent and had small children, so it could be
thoughts when she had been left by a done. Israela concluded that he must
lover. Josephine felt this disclosure have told her this because he wanted to
indicated her therapists profound date her. She never went back, because
understanding and empathy. she felt emotionally unsafe.
Participants appreciated disclosures that Sometimes, therapists communicated
made them feel their relationship was negative attitudes or beliefs about their

Table II. Effects of unhelpful disclosures. The first column of figures gives the percentage of the incidents which
included the effect. The second column gives the percentage of participants who mentioned the effect.

Effect of unhelpful disclosures % of 40 unhelpful* Participant response rate

1 Damages alliance 58% 93%

2 Client managed relationship 28 43
3 Invalidates client 18 29
4 Dissonance 8 21
5 Inhibits clients disclosure 8 21
6 Insufficient to repair rupture 5 14
7 Non-egalitarian 5 7
8 Inappropriately egalitarian 3 7
9 Not useful 3 7

* More than one effect was mentioned for most incidents; therefore, percentages do not add up to 100.
100 J. Hanson
Table III. Effects of helpful non-disclosures. The first column of figures gives the percentage of the incidents
which included the effect. The second column gives the percentage of participants who mentioned the effect.

Effects of helpful non-disclosures % of 10 helpful* Participant response rate

1 Free to imagine 50% 36%

2 Clients own decisions 30 21
3 Facilitates disclosures 20 14
4 Perception of neutrality 20 14
5 Focus stays on client 20 14
6 Validating 10 7
7 Safety 10 7

* More than one effect was mentioned for most incidents; therefore, percentages do not add up to 100.

clients, leaving them feeling worse about Rose, who liked to know who she was
themselves. Marys first therapist, a man talking to, had tried to ask her therapist
in his forties when she was a fatherless for information about who she was in
teenager, labelled her as promiscuous. order to establish a link, but was refused.
She said, I think I really wanted to know Rose was embarrassed to have asked, as if
that he liked and approved of me, she had committed a social blunder; she
and . . . the label of felt invalidated. She had a hard time
promiscuous . . . hurt. . .. linking with this therapist. Eventually she
just stopped seeing her.
Helpful non-disclosures. Only 10 incidents Some participants indicated that non-
of non-disclosure (eight helpful, two disclosure also inhibited their own
mixed) were experienced as helpful. Half disclosure or resulted in their managing
were helpful because the participants said the relationship with the therapist, which
they felt free to imagine what they contradicts psychoanalytic assumptions. In
wanted about their therapists. This may the example above, Rose also mentioned
provide some support for the that her therapists unwillingness to
psychoanalytic concept of transference. answer questions had triggered feelings
However, the other reasons suggested by of being unloved, which she recognised as
the literature to be important were rarely stemming from her childhood. It could
mentioned (see Table III). have been an opportunity to explore those
JJs therapist sometimes chuckled at feelings in therapy, but Rose never
something her client said, but did not brought them up in session; because her
reveal the reason for laughing. JJ therapist was so reserved, Rose had not
preferred that. She inferred that it meant felt there was an opening.
that her therapist had seen people in JJs Josephine saw her therapists
predicament before, and seen them grow unwillingness to disclose as an indication
out of it. For her, it was hopeful, and she of the therapists limitations. As a result,
didnt want to know otherwise. Josephine would control herself and
be constantly on . . . guard in order
Unhelpful non-disclosures. In accordance not to mention issues with which she
with humanist and feminist expectations, thought the therapist was
the greatest single detrimental effect of uncomfortable.
non-disclosure was to the therapeutic
alliance. Lack of connection was Disclosure skills and skills deficits. The skill
experienced as hurtful to the alliance and or lack of skill with which the techniques
destructive to trust (see Table IV). were employed played a large part in how

Table IV. Effects of unhelpful non-disclosures. The first column of figures gives the percentage of the incidents
which included the effect. The second column gives the percentage of participants who mentioned the effect.

Effects of unhelpful non-disclosures % of 18 unhelpful* Participant response rate

1 Damages alliance 83% 71%

2 Invalidates client 61 64
3 Inhibits client disclosure 39 43
4 Client managed relationship 39 29
5 Non-egalitarian 22 21
6 Lack of moral solidarity 6 7

* More than one effect was mentioned for most incidents; therefore, percentages do not add up to 100.
 Therapist self-disclosure and non-disclosure 101
disclosures or non-disclosures were The most often cited skill deficit in
experienced. When Cardinals therapist connection with non-disclosure was
disclosed a similar stigmatised identity (see rigidity. Cardinal had a therapist who did
above), a number of elements of skill not disclose as a matter of principle. Once
came into play. The disclosure was made she asked him casually where he was
in the context of the clients material going for his vacation, and he replied that
(Knox et al., 1997); it took into account it was his policy not to disclose his
the both clients and therapists personal business for safety reasons.
membership in a stigmatised group Cardinal felt insulted that he did not take
(Hertzberg, 1990); it was brief in duration her character into account.
and contained few details, which
suggested that the therapist maintained Interaction between skill and alliance.
technical neutrality (Bridges, 2001; Skilled disclosures and non-disclosures
Goldstein, 1997; Herman, 1992; Knox tended to contribute toward the
et al., 1997); and it was appropriately development of a positive alliance, while
timed for a morally non-neutral disclosure skills deficits were likely to slow or damage
(Bernstein, 2000; Hanson, 2003). its development. However, a positive pre-
Conversely, one or more skills deficits existing alliance mitigated the effects of skills deficits
skills deficits, while a negative or non-
could usually be identified in the could usually be
disclosures that participants experienced existent alliance exacerbated the effects
and could tip the scale towards termination.
identified in the
as unhelpful. Israelas divorced therapists disclosures that
Cardinals therapist once mentioned
disclosure was mistimed, since it was not participants
her own sexual identity in passing, not in
in moral solidarity. He would have done experienced as
context with her clients material. Cardinal
better to wait until he knew his client
wondered if it meant she wanted unhelpful
better (Client Rights Project, 1998;
something from her. However, she
Mahalik et al., 2000).
already had a strong and trusting
Isabelle mentioned a therapist who,
relationship with her therapist, so she was
during the two sessions she had with her,
able to wait and see. When nothing
would recount a long story of her own,
inappropriate happened, she concluded
every time Isabelle told her something.
that her therapist had simply made an
Isabelle felt like it was her job to listen to
unskilful disclosure, and felt that no
the therapist as the therapists caretaker.
permanent harm had resulted.
Seth described an incident in which he
Josephine did not like or trust her current
criticised the people he was working for,
therapist, who usually maintained a policy
and made disparaging remarks about
of non-disclosure. Her therapist once
their profession. His therapist disclosed
refused to let her cancel an appointment
that her father had had the same
when Josephine had a conflicting
profession as Seths bosses, and said that obligation. Josephine repeatedly
her father had been a wonderful man. demanded to know why she was insisting
Seth felt chastised. His therapist had lost that the appointment be kept. Her
technical neutrality. therapist eventually admitted that she had
had several cancellations that day, and
Non-disclosure skills and skills deficits. The Josephines cancellation meant more lost
most important element of skill that income. She then apologised. Because
emerged from the few helpful non- the therapeutic alliance was already weak,
disclosures in this study was that skilled her therapists belated disclosure and
therapists would frame their refusal to apology did not salvage the situation.
answer questions compassionately, in a Neither Isabelle nor Israela had had time
way that clients could understand and to develop relationships with the therapists
accept as beneficial, even if they initially who disclosed unskilfully; both terminated.
had negative feelings. For example, Lynns
therapist would not comply when she Discussion
begged him to give his opinion about
The alliance as an aspect of attachment
decisions she was about to make.
Although she felt frustrated in the Possibly the greatest effects of disclosure
moment, he had conveyed to her that he and non-disclosure are on the alliance.
was refusing because he trusted her to Greenberg et al. (1993) suggest that
make her own decisions. Ultimately, she therapists attunement to clients parallels
felt validated by his gentle firmness. caregivers attunement to their children,
102 J. Hanson
in that both children and clients are Moral solidarity disclosures involve a skill
helped to confirm and strengthen their set (Hanson, 2003). The timing of such a
own sense of themselves (p. 20). This disclosure should be sooner rather than
studys participants wanted connection to later in the therapeutic process (Bernstein,
and comfort with their therapists. For 2000; Braaten et al., 1993; Moran, 1992)
them, being accurately perceived, deeply and may be taken out of therapists hands
understood, unconditionally accepted and by clients who screen their therapists
genuinely valued by another person may (Bernstein, 2000; Liddle, 1997). Therapists
have counteracted a multitude of past should have an awareness of their own
hurts, including previous failures of status in the stigmatised (or non-
attachment. While this may be stigmatised) group and understand or be
accomplished without disclosure, for the prepared to find out about issues faced by
participants, disclosure was an effective people in such a group (Bernstein, 2000;
way of connecting. Goldstein, 1994; Hertzberg, 1990).
Therapists should also be aware of the
Egalitarian values value and the risks for both client and
therapist, of alignment with the client
Although most of the participants did not
(Brown, 1984; Client Rights Project, 1998;
explicitly mention egalitarianism as a value,
Mahalik et al., 2000); and of valid reasons,
and some explicitly said that they did not
and risks, for both therapist and client, of
expect egalitarianism from therapists,
choosing not to disclose for reasons of
nevertheless, it was the second most
moral solidarity (Sheridan, 1997). They
reported effect for disclosures. About
should be able to communicate reasons
three-quarters of the participants, in about
for not disclosing, if necessary,
one-quarter of the incidents, described
empathically and compassionately.
positive effects which corresponded to
feminist egalitarian values.
a relationship in Although not explicit, the participants Strengths and limitations
which power may have valued egalitarianism in a
Strengths. This may be one of the first
imbalances are therapeutic relationship. This could be an
empirical studies of helpful and unhelpful
minimised can in artifact of the prevalence of women in this
effects of non-disclosure, as well as
study; or, feminist values have become
itself be disclosure. It is one of the few that have
more socially prevalent than people are
therapeutically examined clients experiences. All the
consciously aware of. But I think that a
beneficial participants had seen at least two therapists,
relationship in which power imbalances
which meant that they could compare their
are minimised can in itself be
experiences. It also meant that, though
therapeutically beneficial.
some were in relatively new relationships,
they still had had the experience of
New findings
developing long-term therapeutic
Two categories not mentioned in self- relationships. In analogue studies, by
disclosure literature were transitioning contrast, the subjects are not clients, and
and moral solidarity. Several participants their responses to the experimental
therapists would use a kind of small-talk situation are more likely to be from the
to make a transition into and/or out of perspective of consumers than clients.
sessions. Participants found that pre- The use of qualitative methodology
session transitioning that included such allowed very rich data to emerge, and the
revelations effectively put them at ease, information included a context that is
broke the ice, and reminded them that often missing from quantitative data.
the therapist was with them. Post- Also, because certain constructs were not
session transitioning allowed clients to pre-defined (such as the effects of
focus their attention outward on some disclosure, and skill), participants were
mundane aspect of the therapists life, at free to volunteer their own perspectives,
the same time giving them a sense of the which led to new categories.
therapists humanity. Although the majority of the participants
In a few incidents, therapists either described themselves as White or
disclosed or refused to disclose their status Canadian women, there was some
(stigmatised or not) in moral non- diversity. The participants were not
neutrality (Herman, 1992) or moral undergraduates. The mean age was 38,
solidarity when asked by clients with a and a variety of ethnic backgrounds was
stigmatised identity (gay; incest survivor). represented. The participants experienced
 Therapist self-disclosure and non-disclosure 103
to minimise the limitations of
What does this study tell us? retrospective data. I expected that
. Disclosures were more likely to be participants would speak about recent
experienced as helpful events, which would presumably be
. Non-disclosures were likely to be fresher in their memories. However, most
experienced as unhelpful of them compared their current therapy
. The main effect (good or bad) was experience to previous experiences, and
on the therapeutic alliance some described experiences that had
taken place 10 or more years ago. For this
a range of counselling modalities and came reason, all the reservations concerning
from a range of social class backgrounds. retrospective data apply here.

Limitations. Even though there was a

Conclusions and implications for
relatively large number of incidents, the
practice
number of people who generated them
was relatively small. In addition, most of I believe therapy is at least as much an art
the participants were female and as a science. The art of listening and
described themselves as White/Caucasian hearing and empathising with anothers
or Canadian. The participants would not experience, the art of understanding
necessarily represent people from other deeply, the art of making a genuine
cultures or locations. connection with another human being in
All participants seemed to be order to facilitate that persons healing
/
functioning relatively well. The these things cannot be reduced to a
generalisability of this study to clients who manual or compressed into a pill.
are functioning less well may be limited. Therapist self-disclosure definitely has a
It is possible that the study attracted place in the therapeutic repertoire. The most
those who found self-disclosure to be of basic stance regarding disclosures must be
particular significance. Indeed, the attitudes one of scrupulousness
/ that is therapists
of the participants towards self-disclosure should choose to use this technique with
were mostly positive. On the other hand, deliberation and in the service of the client,
four participants began their narratives and conversely should monitor their
with unhelpful or negative experiences. intentions and actions in order to avoid even
The participants were asked to describe the appearance of exploitation. However,
helpful or unhelpful incidents of self- simply to avoid disclosure in order to avoid
disclosure or non-disclosure used as a the possibility of exploitation risks doing a Clients
therapeutic technique. Although self- disservice to clients. experienced
disclosure can be used to exploit clients, In this study, disclosures greatest effect enhanced
none of the participants mentioned abuse was on the alliance. Clients experienced relationships
of this kind. Though some of the incidents enhanced relationships when therapists when therapists
sounded questionable, on further disclosed information about themselves, disclosed
probing, those participants said, though and/or about their responses to their information
they found the incidents unhelpful, they clients, judiciously and with some about
did not feel exploited or abused. It is attention to basic elements of skill. In
themselves, and/
possible that the parameters of the study addition, therapists who disclosed
or about their
excluded exploitative disclosures. unskilfully ran the risk of damaging the
The possibility of researcher bias is a alliance with their clients, as did therapists responses to their
concern, especially in qualitative research. who maintained a rigid policy of non- clients, judiciously
My own beliefs about therapist self- disclosure. The results here are and with some
disclosure are closer to the feminist/ preliminary; further research on the attention to basic
humanist theoretical position. I was aware effects of skill on both disclosure and non- elements of skill
of this, and was careful to ask for disclosure is warranted.
experiences that reflected a range of Therapists should be aware of the skills
effects, both positive and negative, for both involved when they employ either
disclosure and non-disclosure. Further, I disclosure or non-disclosure as a
tried to address this potential limitation by therapeutic technique. However, any
having a portion of the disclosure incidents therapist might have a lapse in skill,
rated by two colleagues who had different depending on the circumstances. This
training and theoretical backgrounds. could still become an opportunity to
One reason for seeking participants acknowledge and develop the real
who were currently in therapy was to try relationship between therapist and client.
104 J. Hanson
Clients appreciate humanness (including Hertzberg, J. F. (1990). Feminist psychotherapy and
diversity: Treatment considerations from a Self
human failings) in therapists; most do not
Psychology perspective. In L. Brown & M. Root
expect therapists to be people who never (Eds.), Diversity and complexity in feminist therapy
make mistakes. A therapists ability to (pp. 275
/297). New York: Harrington Park Press.
recognise the error, and follow up with the Hill, C. E., Mahalik, J. R., & Thompson, B. J. (1989).
client by taking responsibility for it (without Therapist self-disclosure. Psychology, 26, 290
/
295.
becoming mired in shame or other
Isay, R. A. (1996). Becoming gay: the journey to self-
negative feelings) could go far towards acceptance. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
mending possible alliance ruptures. At Jacobs, T. (1999). On the question of self-disclosure
least, it would model honesty, openness, by the analyst: Error or advance in technique?
respect and consideration in dealing with Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 48, 159
/183.
Jourard, S. M. (1971). Self-disclosure: An
ones errors. At best, it could have the
experimental analysis of the transparent self. New
effect of strengthening the alliance and York: Wiley-Interscience.
helping the client move forward. Knox, S., Hess, S. A., Petersen, D. A., & Hill, C. E.
(1997). A qualitative analysis of client perceptions
of the effects of helpful therapist self-disclosure in
References
long-term therapy. Journal of Counselling
Ackerman, S. J., & Hilsenroth, M. J. (2001). A review Psychology, 44, 274
/283.
of therapist characteristics and techniques Langs, R. (1979). The therapeutic environment. New
negatively impacting on the therapeutic alliance. York: Jason Aronson.
Psychotherapy, 38, 171
/185. Liddle, B. J. (1997). Gay and lesbian clients selection
Bernstein, A. C. (2000). Straight therapists working of therapists and utilization of therapy.
with lesbians and gays in family therapy. Journal Psychotherapy, 34, 11
/18.
of Marriage and Family Therapy, 26, 443
/454. Mahalik, J. R., van Ormer, E. A., & Simi, N. L. (2000).
Braaten, E. B., Otto, S., & Handelsman, M. M. (1993). Ethical issues in using self
/disclosure in feminist
What do people want to know about therapy. In M. M. Brabeck (Ed.), Practicing
psychotherapy? Psychotherapy, 30, 565
/570. feminist ethics in psychology (pp. 189
/201).
Bridges, N. A. (2001). Therapists self-disclosure: Washington, DC: American Psychological
expanding the comfort zone. Psychotherapy, 38, Association.
21
/30. Mathews, B. (1988). The role of therapist self-
Brown, L. S. (1994). Subversive dialogues: Theory in disclosure in psychotherapy: A survey of therapists.
feminist therapy. New York: BasicBooks. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 42, 521
/531.
Client Rights Project. (1998). Client rights in Meiselman, K. C. (1990). Resolving the trauma of
psychotherapy and counselling: A handbook of incest: Reintegration therapy with survivors. San
client rights and therapist responsibility. Toronto: Fransisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Client Rights Project. Moran, M. R. (1992). Effects of sexual orientation
Coady, N. F., & Marziali, E. (1994). The association similarity and counsellor experience level on gay
between global and specific measures of the thera- mens and lesbians perception of counsellors.
peutic relationship. Psychotherapy, 31, 17
/27. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 39, 247
/251.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discover of Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston,
grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative MA: Houghton Mifflin.
research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company. Rothstein, A. (1997). Introduction to symposium on
Goldstein, E. G. (1994). Self-disclosure in treatment: aspects of self-revelation and disclosure: Analyst
What therapists do and dont talk about. Clinical to patient. Journal of Clinical Psychoanalysis, 6,
Social Work Journal, 22, 417
/433. 349
/361.
Goldstein, E. G. (1997). To tell or not to tell: The Sheridan, P. M. (1997). Preparing to work with
disclosure of events in the therapists life to the lesbian, gay and bisexual youth. In M. Schneider
patient. Clinical Social Work Journal, 25, 41
/58. (Ed.), Pride and prejudice: Working with lesbian,
Greenberg, L. S., Rice, L. N., & Elliott, R. (1993). gay and bisexual youth (pp. 69
/82). Toronto:
Facilitating emotional change: The moment-by Central Toronto Youth Services.
moment process. New York: The Guilford Press. Simi, N. L., & Mahalik, J. R. (1997). Comparison of
Gutheil, T. G., & Gabbard, G. O. (1993). The concept feminist versus psychoanalytic/dynamic and other
of boundaries in clinical practice: Theoretical and therapists on self-disclosure. Psychology of
risk-management dimensions. American Journal Women Quarterly, 21, 465
/483.
of Psychiatry, 150, 188
/196. Simone, D. H., McCarthy, P., & Skay, C. L. (1998). An
Hanson, J. (2003). Coming out: Therapist self- investigation of client and counsellor variables that
disclosure as a therapeutic technique, with specific influence the likelihood of counsellor self-
application to sexual minority populations. Paper disclosure. Journal of Counselling and
presented on June 11, 2003 at the Critical Development, 76, 174
/182.
Multicultural Practice Conference, Toronto, Vamos, M. (1993). The bereaved therapist and her
Ontario, Canada; 2003. [about 15 pages] patients. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 47,
Available from: http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/ 296
/305.
depts/aecdcp/CMPConf/papers/Hanson.html Watkins, C. E. Jr. (1990). The effects of counsellor
Hawkins, I., & Bullock, S. L. (1995). Informed consent self-disclosure: a research review. The Counselling
and religious values: A neglected area of diversity. Psychologist, 18, 477
/500.
Psychotherapy, 32, 293
/300. Wells, T. L. (1994). Therapist self-disclosure: Its
Herman, J. L. (1992). Trauma and recovery. New effects on clients and the treatment relationship.
York: BasicBooks. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 65, 23
/41.