frequently fails to facilitate thin

frequently fails to facilitate thinking and choosing on the part of
clients who are non-speaking through physical disability or unintelligible
through intellectual impairment. Few counselling models
accommodate potential clients such as muddled older people, those
with no speech at all, and those whose thoughts are influenced by
‘voices’, although narrative approaches have developed to meet these
clients’ needs (see, for example, White, 1995; Milner and O’Byrne,
2002). Iveson (2001) suggests a simple way round the problem for the
counsellor faced with a client who has difficulty communicating. He
simply asks the family to select one member to speak by asking ‘if [the
client] could speak and I were to ask her to choose someone to speak
for her at this meeting, who would she choose?’ and when a person
has been selected, he asks ‘can you answer as if you were [the client]?’
This assumes that the client without a voice is capable of thought,
choice and expression, in other words, human (pp. 80–2).
The group of clients most likely to be identified as vulnerable to
adultism are children and young people, but counselling has a long
tradition of adapting conversations to young people’s developmental
progress, ensuring that power differences are minimised. Counsellors
are skilled in talking with children but not always consistent in their
efforts – the child who sexually abuses tends to be adultised in terms
of treatment models, and child-centred models have only been developed
relatively recently for these clients (see, for example, Cameron et
al., 2001).
The most problematic area for counselling children is when to
breach confidentiality; the notion of Gillick competence is not
always easy to apply in complex child-protection situations, especially
where the counselling organisation has a policy requiring counsellors
to report instances of abuse (Hamilton, 2001).We return to this issue
in Chapter 11 where we consider risk generally.The central question
for counsellors working with clients who are considerably older,
young or more disabled than ourselves is to remember that the client
is addressed as a specific individual with the capacity to make use of
counselling if the model is adapted to the needs of that specific individual.
Sexuality
Counselling has a long history of insensitivity towards lesbian, gay and
bisexual (LGB) clients, stemming from explicit and implicit homophobia.
To a large extent this is due to the tendency of psychology
38 Assessment in Counselling

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

frequently fails to facilitate thinking and choosing on the part ofclients who are non-speaking through physical disability or unintelligiblethrough intellectual impairment. Few counselling modelsaccommodate potential clients such as muddled older people, thosewith no speech at all, and those whose thoughts are influenced by‘voices’, although narrative approaches have developed to meet theseclients’ needs (see, for example, White, 1995; Milner and O’Byrne,2002). Iveson (2001) suggests a simple way round the problem for thecounsellor faced with a client who has difficulty communicating. Hesimply asks the family to select one member to speak by asking ‘if [theclient] could speak and I were to ask her to choose someone to speakfor her at this meeting, who would she choose?’ and when a personhas been selected, he asks ‘can you answer as if you were [the client]?’This assumes that the client without a voice is capable of thought,choice and expression, in other words, human (pp. 80–2).The group of clients most likely to be identified as vulnerable toadultism are children and young people, but counselling has a longtradition of adapting conversations to young people’s developmentalprogress, ensuring that power differences are minimised. Counsellorsare skilled in talking with children but not always consistent in theirefforts – the child who sexually abuses tends to be adultised in termsperawatan model, dan model anak-berpusat hanya telah dikembangkanrelatif baru saja untuk klien ini (Lihat, misalnya, Cameron etAl., 2001).Daerah yang paling bermasalah untuk konseling anak adalah saat untukpelanggaran kerahasiaan; gagasan Gillick kompetensi adalah tidakselalu mudah untuk diterapkan dalam situasi perlindungan anak yang kompleks, terutamamana organisasi konseling memiliki suatu kebijakan yang mengharuskan konseloruntuk contoh laporan penyalahgunaan (Hamilton, 2001).Kita kembali ke masalah inidalam bab 11 mana kita mempertimbangkan risiko umumnya.Pertanyaan pusatuntuk bekerja dengan klien yang lebih tua, konselormuda atau lebih adalah cacat dari diri kita untuk mengingat bahwa klienditujukan sebagai individu tertentu dengan kapasitas untuk membuat penggunaankonseling jika model ini disesuaikan dengan kebutuhan individu tertentu.SeksualitasKonseling memiliki sejarah panjang ketidaksensitifan terhadap lesbian, gay danbiseksual (LGB) klien, berasal dari homofobia eksplisit dan implisit.Untuk sebagian besar ini adalah karena kecenderungan psikologi38 penilaian dalam konseling