Carl Rogers and Milton Erickson

(This is the first of a series of articles comparing and contrasting two great therapies)

For the past few years I have been fascinated by Milton Erickson’s work and became more intrigued when I read somewhere that Erickson’s method was ‘the most non-directive therapy in the world’. This was not what I had seen of Erickson’s method. In fact he directs people but indirectly. What I mean is he does not ‘force’ people to act differently though does suggest it to them indirectly.

I would concede that in this sense he is not directive. To understand this better let us look at the underlying rationale of the two men. Carl Rogers believed that each person was their own expert in their situation and that what they needed was the ideal conditions under which they could achieve this. These conditions are fulfilled by the person centred therapist namely – unconditional positive regard, non-possessive warmth, total acceptance, accurate empathy and congruence. Through a relationship with a therapist who embodies these attributes the client begins to accept themselves as they are because they are first so accepted by the therapist. S/he discovers the resources present in them which they always had but were unable to utilise.

It is enthralling to find how facets of Rogers’ theory is borne out by later therapists. One of the Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) famed presuppositions is, ‘Everyone already has all the resources they need or the ability to get them.’ (Incidentally the reason I got into study of Erickson is because I came across him while studying NLP).

Erickson had great respect for the person who came to him for help. It is the most outstanding aspect of his method of therapy. Like Rogers he believed that the person had the resources to change. The difference is that Erickson did not leave it to the client to change at their own pace but actively aided the process by way of suggestions. While Erickson was a mainline hypnotherapist he also developed his method which is called Indirect Hypnosis or Conversational hypnosis. In time he became better known for his conversational hypnotic method.

What I find common to the two men then is their intense respect for the person. If someone came to Rogers and said she was convinced she was going to be abducted by aliens he would enter her world totally and reflect to her what she must be going through as a result of this belief. If the same person had come to Erickson he would never have contradicted her and would be totally empathic to her situation. The difference in the two would be in how they dealt with this further.     Roger believed that getting well was the task of the client and so he would never take her by the scruff of her neck and lead her to change. Erickson, on the other hand, while respecting the client also considered that he had the means whereby to help the client get over this delusionary belief that was obvious to everyone but the client.

The hallmark of Rogers’ method is total acceptance, unconditional positive regard, empathy and congruence. As a result the client was change on their own – a phenomenon documented in his On Becoming a Person which is such a moving and beautiful book.

The hallmark of Erickson’s method is utilisation. Let me mention the case of the man who came to him with his total conviction that he was going to be abducted by aliens (Uncommon Therapy by J. Haley). Erickson did not try to disabuse him of the idea. Instead he went with it. The man was also complaining of insomnia. He told the man that since he was going to be abducted anyway he might as well get it over and done with faster. So he advised him to go to a higher place where such abduction would be easier. He advised camping in the mountains and going on long treks daily. With such a rugged life the man was soon eating and sleeping well. A few weeks later he phoned Erickson with the news that his sister in California had arranged a job for him and should he go? Erickson told him to do so. That was it.

Erickson’s utilisation is something like judo where the judoka uses the force of the other person to bring them down. An incident from his childhood is worth mentioning. He grew up on a farm and one day his father was pulling a calf by a rope into the barn with the calf resisting like anything. Milton found it highly amusing and was almost rolling on the floor with laughter. His annoyed father asked if he could do any better and Milton said (I would say, quite cheekily) that he could. He then told his father to hold the rope and pull while Milton went behind the calf and pulled its tail. The calf was in the barn in no time. Utilisation!

There is no doubt about it. Erickson often gave his client specific instructions. But there were also times that he would give them no instructions at all. He would merely suggest something. Perhaps the most celebrated (and shortest – almost miraculous) of such cases is the following (see (http://www.steveandreas.com/Articles/embedding_the_message.html)

In the late 1950s, when Erickson was a guest speaker at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Palo Alto, California, a psychiatrist took one of his toughest clients—a young man who had committed a wide variety of violent offenses—to see Erickson. The young man waited in the hall with his psychiatrist, watching other patients enter and leave Erickson’s office, many of them still clearly in trance. When the two men finally went in, Erickson asked the psychiatrist, “Why have you brought this boy to me?” After the psychiatrist listed the many offences his client had committed, Erickson said to the psychiatrist, “Go sit down.” Erickson then turned to the client, gazed intently into his eyes, and said, “How surprised will you be when all your behaviour changes completely next week?” The young man looked startled and said, “I’ll be very surprised!” Erickson then turned to the psychiatrist and said, “Take this boy away.” The psychiatrist thought that Erickson had decided not to work with him. However, a week later all the client’s destructive behaviour did, in fact, change completely.

 – Clifford DeSilva

P.S. It would be nice if you responded to this – on any level : emotional, psychological, rational. Ask questions, make comments or add your own experience or study.