Why I Chose a Counseling Degree: Self-Reflection Essay

Motivations for Pursuing a Counseling Degree

My reasons for seeking a counseling degree begin with a lifelong desire to help others. I was myself counseled as a child by therapists who, I noticed, attempted to shape me according to their own particularistic beliefs. Wondering whether psychotherapy could ever be truly objective, I read extensively on the subject and observed practicing therapists. At the time I naively thought of counselors as wonderful figures — almost God's second-in-command. I later read that psychotherapists do project that kind of authority, which is part of what makes the profession somewhat controversial (Dawes, 1994).

Gradually it dawned on me that these practitioners were playing with people's lives. I and presumably many others were either compelled to visit these "deities of fate" or chose to do so voluntarily. It was widely assumed that such people — wise in the ways of the world — held the key to human fortune and well-being. Yet the advice I received seemed to resonate more with my therapist's personality than with my own reality. I began to wonder how I, on my own terms and without another's direction, might arrive at my own solutions. I realized that counselors were influencing clients to think as the counselors themselves thought. I wondered whether I, trained as a counselor, could instead help others find answers from within themselves. Many would argue that Rogers's person-centered model does exactly that. I am not convinced.

I am also drawn to philosophy and logic, subjects I hoped would lend objectivity to the human psychological condition and resolve my questions about "normality" and "abnormality." These constructs seem to me to be defined by the social tendencies and perspectives of any given time. This is an area in which counselors, too, play a significant role — disseminating social meaning and narrative.

Most counseling modalities fall somewhere between directive and non-directive extremes. Directive therapy, such as psychoanalysis, guides a client on the premise that the client needs help. The therapist may be professionally trained, empathic, and even helpful, yet may still be disabled from fully entering the client's reality. As Gadamer (2005) put it, "Our situation is by necessity (and definition) ontological."

Cognitive psychology's discovery that our reasoning skills are intertwined with an emotionally saturated memory (see, for instance, Leighton & Sternberg, 2004) strengthens this argument, particularly since each of us possesses a different core structure of conditioning. Hence, as Gadamer (2005) notes, "the knower's own situation is already constitutionally involved in any process of understanding."

On the other hand, non-directive approaches such as Rogerian therapy, grounded in empathy, affirm that no one can truly direct another (Rogers, 1951). But is genuine empathy possible? Is it not rather a cognitive reconstruction of the client's situation based on the therapist's own experience? Are we not as metaphysically isolated as Leibniz's monads, and therefore disabled from knowing another as they truly are? If so, should the client not access their own mind for solutions? But how can they, if a stressed mind is physiologically limited in its capacity for rational thought (Masters, 2004)? These were among the questions that drove me toward this field.

My path to counseling was therefore driven more by an interrogative, research-oriented spirit than by a simple desire to help, though that desire was genuine. I believed — and still believe — that counseling is a wondrous and influential profession: one that is almost literally capable of changing a world through practice. But I also kept asking: is the counselor helping the individual grow into more of themselves, or reshaping the individual to reflect the counselor's own image? And why is there assumed to be something wrong with the client in the first place? Might there not be something problematic about the image the counselor wishes to produce? Who sets the standards for "right" and "wrong" when those standards change so dramatically across countries and across time?

I envision my own framework as a holistic, life-spanning system in which I encourage clients to articulate their goals across all spheres of their lives. I will emphasize the communication of the client's own thoughts — not the adoption of others' — and will stress the use of clear, unambiguous language. My fundamental ethical concern has always been this: how can I help another person as though I were genuinely part of their existence, part of their life experiences and socialization, so that I address their concerns from their own perspective rather than mine? My objective is not that I change the client, but that the client changes themselves.

This approach aligns with counseling effectiveness research, which demonstrates that client empowerment in the therapeutic process is a powerful agent of change, and that therapeutic progress depends on the counselor exploring options with the client rather than imposing any particular view of the correct path forward (Duncan & Miller, 2000).

Personality Characteristics Compared to Ideal Counselor Traits

Counselors must be in constant pursuit of self-improvement. I have a persistent desire to improve myself and, to that end, possess substantial self-knowledge of my own behavior and thought patterns. Other counseling requirements, however, include active listening and sustained attention to the client. These present more of a challenge for me, since my mind tends to race and I am prone to interrupting. As Freud described in a different context, psychotherapy is like riding a train that races past station after station through a myriad of different scenes. My mind can feel that way: difficult to hold still and fix with focused attention on the client. On the occasions when I have practiced active listening, however, I have found it tremendously energizing — rewarding both to the client and to myself. I also find the concept of empathy philosophically challenging for the reasons described above.

On the positive side, I am by nature non-judgmental, which is a significant asset in counseling. Although I believe we cannot achieve total objectivity in a phenomenological sense — since we are inescapably shaped by our situation and socialization — I think Hide (1994) may be correct that we can, to some extent, detach ourselves from our schemas and engage in more reflective thinking. I believe that capacity is within me.

I regard it as a privilege to be a counselor. Yet in order to be as effective as possible and to build rather than damage lives, I would be well-advised to structure my practice according to the American Psychological Association's ethical code and the ethical guidelines of my local counseling institution, while continually striving to be non-arrogant and gentle in my approach.

The need for counseling is greater and more diverse than I once appreciated, and there are countless issues requiring awareness. To be as successful as possible — for the benefit of others, not for my own monetary or status advancement — I will need to engage in ongoing research. No single counselor can address every issue; the spectrum ranges from substance abuse to school settings, from marriage counseling to work with adolescents and foster children, and everything in between. To be effective, I must carefully select my population, remain aware of the cultural factors involved, stay open and flexible to change, and maintain a continuous learning curve with the intent of progressively developing my skills.

How Personality Will Shape Counseling Approach and Style

This gap between the "real" and the "ideal" can be productively addressed through the model of the Johari Window, also used in counseling: the idea that others perceive aspects of us that we do not, and that their perspective can illuminate our real self and help us develop it toward our ideal. This in turn equips me to counsel clients facing the same dynamic. In the counseling session, the counselor provides insights that remain concealed or overlooked by the client (Nelson-Jones, 1983).

I think of myself as original and innovative. Applied to the counseling field, I see my strengths as lying in research and in using that research to expand my own skills and to contribute to the field more broadly. Counselors are indeed advised to continuously upgrade and develop their knowledge and skills. The downside of my originality and dynamism is that I tend to resist authority and restraint, and counselors are often required to work in team formats and to share findings and communications with colleagues. This is especially important if I work as part of an organization rather than as an independent practitioner.

I have also traveled extensively and enjoy interacting with different cultures and communities, which is a genuine asset for a counselor. Working with specific ethnic populations can be challenging, and characteristics that have been repeatedly correlated with barriers to effective psychotherapy for immigrant clients include cultural barriers (such as stigma and loss of face, where counseling may be seen as an embarrassment within one's culture), difficulties of communication (including lack of language match and poor cross-cultural understanding), and immigrants' limited awareness of available services. I believe I can address all of these factors by acknowledging the existence of such barriers, tailoring my services accordingly, and engaging with clients within the context of their particular cultural background. My genuine interest in and appreciation for people from different backgrounds is a particularly valuable asset within the counseling framework.

With respect to active listening, I believe I am a better listener now than I once was. I find it helpful to imagine communication as a ball being thrown between two people — from client to counselor and back. The client is trying to convey a message, and I must "catch" it in all its nuances. Listening is an effortful task: to catch that ball, I must quiet my own thoughts and focus, with laser-like precision, on the other person's words and actions. I have also come to appreciate that this is a reciprocal act. I must throw the ball back to the client and ensure they receive it as intended — which means speaking and acting on the client's own level.

Confidentiality presents no difficulty for me; it is logical and makes sense. I also understand and appreciate the boundaries inherent in the counseling relationship. The counselor is present to counsel, and a degree of objectivity and professional distance is necessary to do so effectively.

I enjoy writing. Writing requires self-reflection and acute psychological attentiveness to others, and its connection to counseling is evident. The aspects of my personality most congruent with the demands of counseling are my ability to keep up with relevant research, to reflect deeply, to ask probing questions, and to tenaciously pursue themes that puzzle or interest me.