Personal 1

Running head: PERSONAL THEORY OF HELPING

Personal Theory of Helping

Márcio Padilha

College of Southern Idaho

HUMS 105 – Christy

Fall/2010

Personal 2

Personal Theory of Helping

Operating out of a premium ideology that people should be treated with equality,

dignity and respect, I fundamentally believe that, in order to keep the helping relationship

flowing positively, the helper must be able to keep the helpee meaningfully engaged in life

within the constraints of socially acceptable behavior and legally-bound norms. Further

deeming that the continuum of the helping process must ultimately be conciliatory in

nature, I find it essential that the effective helper be able to inspire the helpee to develop

his or her own internalized component of self-evaluation so that he or she may seek, and

hopefully achieve, a more harmonious balance between his or her ideal and real selves.

Self-cognizance, in my opinion, is an underrated core human need in that knowledge and

awareness provide us with the necessary tools and strategies to navigate and discern

between life’s intricate subtleties. In addition, for the helping process to be carried out at

its premium, I find it imperative that the helper be empathetic, able to postpone

interpretations and suspend judgments while staying with the speaker, all within the

spectrum of genuine authenticity, patience and with very clear ever-present boundaries

towards the helpee.

Upon self-introspection, such stance is amply corroborated by the interlinking of my

personal sociopolitical, religious, philosophical and convictions in that all support aspects

of collectivistic behaviors which I believe to be important for the well-being of a balanced

society. With that said, and believing that one’s actions affect others’ lives and vice-versa, I

therefore concomitantly accept, and expect, human interconnectedness to be an active

integral component of this construct.

Personal 3

Drawing out of my own experience, I place family as society’s most fundamental

building block and typify a healthy family unit as one which is “consistent and stern enough

to maintain its cohesion in a socially and legally acceptable manner yet unselfishly

accommodating and accepting of individual differences in a supportive manner as to

inspire and promote self actualization.” As a result, I find family dysfunction to be socially

disruptive and, although a personally anecdotal assertion, I further believe that disruption

in this most essential building block of the social fabric will eventually, and sometimes

exponentially, permeate into all layers of society, leading to the need for most of the

person-agency relationships.

As I deeply disagree with the self-proclaimed powers of neoliberalism, I have always

felt that the need for government is legitimate and that its ensuing relationship with its

citizenry should embody a prevalent social role. Consequently, I do not expect the

person/agency, or citizen/government, relationship to be necessarily adversarial in nature,

but rather complementary. This position has, therefore, put me in much greater

philosophical alignment with the Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

which clearly states that:

“Everyone has the right to an standard of living adequate for the health

and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing,

housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to

security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood,

old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

As to one’s relationship with one’s Maker, I consider that moderate faith in a higher

power is vital as long as it functions as a generic moral compass rather than a rigid punitive

Personal 4

dictatorial watcher. Whereas moderation, flexibility and acceptance may be inspiring and

conducive to self-actualization, rigidity and punishment are likely to be detrimental in that

the believer may never be able to live up to the belief expectation. On a personal level, I

have developed a deep appreciation for Buddhism which, preaching about the importance

of volition and self-accountability, affirms that one is the reborn product of one’s previous

life actions, thereby empowering one to take mindful charge of one’s life.

Considering my previous experiences, I find that any commonality between two

persons is likely to lead to some level of immediate empathy. Therefore, sharing a common

language, national origin or any other socio-cultural element may prove beneficial to the

continuum of the helping relationship. However, I feel it is important to be mindful as to

delicate balance between empathy, transference, countertransference and power

differential in order to make sure they will act, and react, within the restraints of the non-

malfeasance tenet. Ideally, the helping relationship should be constructed in such a manner

that it will work itself through and out of the issues rather than getting stuck with them.

In my perception, change is inherent to the process and, therefore, unavoidable.

Nevertheless, the degree and intensity in which it takes place is unique to each individual

and their unique situation which may, or may not, encompass the person’s volition.

Consequently, when attributing a measurable degree of accountability to a problem, I

cannot help but believe that equating social and individual causal affects are just as

important. Whether chronic, episodic or merely transitional, issues are usually devastating

at a moment of crisis and the person in need of help must be taken seriously, within reason,

so that a downward spiral into a pathological state of being may be possibly avoided.

Personal 5

As I place “nature versus nurture” as a central element within the continuum of

human dysfunction, I believe that both the Existential and the Behavioral/Cognitive

Therapies are important models which can fundamentally help one address and process

one’s way out of one’s problems properly and expeditiously. Whereas existential therapy

techniques prompt the individual to search for the meaning attached to their life events,

behavioral/cognitive therapy techniques prompt the individual with the awareness as to

their current level of change as well as of the process of change itself. On the same token,

reflection of feelings entails providing feedback to the speaker about what they appear to

be feeling while confrontation involves providing feedback to a person about

inconsistencies between statements, speech and behavior, verbal and non-verbal messages

as well as other actions. Therefore, I would expect greater therapeutic yield out of

permeating these two therapy models and two communication skills, all of which seem to

prime for reason and coherence.

Whereas my premium operating ideology is dependent and reactive to both the

helpers’ and helpees’ individual issues as well as to greater social issues, I, nevertheless, do

not see it as contradictory, but rather as the essence of life where one will sometimes gain

and other times lose, always having to work one’s hardest on a positivistic hopeful

expectation for the best outcome possible. Under these terms, it is my assertion that

measurable success for the helper lies not only in accomplishing therapeutic help for the

helpee, but also in successfully navigating the greater bureaucratic procedural myriad in

place whereas measurable progress for the helpee is any tangible form of concrete action

towards their self-actualization.

Personal 6

In order for the helping relationship to prosper, I feel it is imperative that all willing

participants initiate the process by rejecting inertia and welcoming open-mindedness not

only in therapeutic terms, but rather as a life constant. Whereas one close-minded helper

will fail to encourage their helpee to progress along the stages of change, one close-minded

helpee will not welcome being encouraged to progress along the stages of change. In either

scenario, the process was rendered stagnant and null. Therefore, it is imperative to remain

flexible and receptive to change as means to stay healthy. No single “cookie-cutter” answer

is likely to fit a puzzle where individuality reigns.