A central ingredient in traditional addiction therapy has been the completion of an inventory followed by the sharing of that inventory with another individual. Part of the rationale for sharing an inventory is to spotlight painful and negative associated memories of an active addiction. The thinking is that if one shares or discloses the negative feelings sustained by years of substance abuse, one can then more easily come to terms with a painful past. This overall process is thought to prevent past memories and/or secrets from distracting clients from their ongoing recovery.

Disclosure also can benefit the client by allowing the person to discover who he/she is, and what he/she become. The assumption is that when continually practiced, individuals will be more open to the world and, certainly, more in touch with the unknown part of themselves (Hobson, 1988).

The overarching paradigm for disclosure probably rests in the sentiment that confession (disclosure) is good for the soul. Telling, revealing, and opening of one’s past are thought to have certain cleansing properties that can be beneficial to a recovery process. While this is a common sense paradigm, little applied research has been completed on the subject, and what has been written on the subject mostly appears from the analytic and religious perspective.

A very brief history of disclosure
Arguably the most in-depth discussion of disclosure, as it applies to counseling, can be found in the work of Jourard (1971). Jourard maintained that sharing lends itself to inner exploration, which lends itself to insight and eventual change. To foster these ends, Jourard felt that under certain circumstances professional detachment is set aside, and counselors disclose parts of themselves in order to demonstrate an emotional involvement or meet some therapeutic need. Jourard further argued that this can be one of the most powerful tools at the therapist’s disposal because it encourages further sharing from the client.

The human chronicle of old masters who teach young pilgrims is replete with disclosure stories. In order for the master (monk or teacher) to illustrate a vital point, the master often resorted to self-disclosure. Telling the pilgrim how they (the master) traversed or carried on through difficulties was intended to engender hope, foster connectedness, and even served as a role model for pilgrims to emulate. More often than not, it compelled the pilgrim to greater levels of self-exploration.

Disclosure and genuineness
An underlying theme for exploration and insight is directed at the addiction recovery goal of achieving a genuine encounter between the client and counselor. Consider that if one can be genuine with a counselor, then the client’s inner exploration, insight and eventual change can be made easier. Plus, the client would then have a “genuine” template to use with others. If the genuineness exists in the counseling process, disclosure can then follow more easily. Under extraordinary circumstances, that process can allow for deep disclosure and the communication of not just facts, but of private if not existential information about another human (Kottler, 1991).

Counselor disclosure
The discussion thus far has been on clients’ disclosure. What about counselors’ disclosure? As noted, some authors have expressed support for counselors to do it (see Jourard).

Yet, research summations have indicated cautions on counselor disclosure (Sexton, Whiston, Bleuer & Walz, 1997). The conclusions generally indicate that counselor self-disclosure is rarely associated with counseling outcomes, and when it was, the influence was often negative. However, a fine distinction has been made between disclosing (information that is associated with a counselor’s past) versus self-involvement, which is associated with the current counseling situation (e.g. how you, the counselor, feel the counseling is proceeding; and your feelings about the client and process). The latter is associated more with positive outcomes, and rates higher with clients.

In terms of strict counselor disclosure, it would appear that too much is not a good idea. If repeatedly used as a mainstay of counseling, the client may begin to think, “Who has the problems here?” Yet, utilizing self-involved statements may bring about benefits of rapport and warmth.

Kottler (1991) outlined the following questions for the counselor to consider prior to any disclosure:

• What will this accomplish?
• Is there another way to make my point?
• Is the timing right?
• Am I trying to meet some of my own needs?
• How can the client personalize and use what I share?

Recent data
While seemingly valid, the above information is mostly anecdotal. There is little research on the effectiveness of disclosure in treatment. However, in a recent survey of 21 clients who were engaged in long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (Farber, Berano & Capobianco, 2004), the clients were asked their perceptions regarding benefits, difficulties, and consequences of self-disclosure. While the sample was small, and the issues addressed were not directly related to substance abuse, the results were interesting. Most clients felt that therapy was a good place to disclose personal issues.

This finding seems more valid because of the good feelings generated from the therapeutic relationship. And while disclosing initially felt uncomfortable, shameful, and was loaded with anxiety, ultimately, the disclosure engendered feeling of safety, pride, and authenticity. Keeping secrets was seen as inhibiting the work of therapy, and the disclosures eventually generated relief from emotional tensions, with an added benefit of physical relief. The overall finding was that therapists should actively pursue disclosure.

Try it
This Try It section is directed at those counselors who do not feel the client disclosure process is important, or normally do not encourage disclosure from clients. It is also meant for those who wish to refresh their outlook on the subject.

On the one hand, encouraging disclosure is a remarkably straightforward process. One simply supports and encourages the process for the reasons listed above. On the other hand, merely saying to a client, “I want you to disclose yourself, because it will be good for you,” may be a bit abrupt, if not ill-advised.

Keep in mind that disclosure is not a panacea to recovery. Some clients may do better without it. Also, issues of timing and how much needs to be disclosed may complicate things. However, an important condition for a true disclosure is the sense of safety the client feels toward the professional relationship. If that isn’t established, then don’t expect clients to be forthcoming with deep disclosure.

Research you can do
If you are interested in conducting a limited, but potentially useful research project on the subject, a fairly simple survey can be performed by using a few key factors outlined in the Farber, Berano & Capobianco (2004) article. For example, the article notes two distinct variable classifications. The first was the benefits variables, and the second were the stressors associated with disclosure.

You could easily create a set of Likert-style questions on a client survey form that lists benefits to be had following the general act of disclosing. A sample question might be: “Following your treatment, were you able to experience feelings of safety following acts of disclosing? Rate yourself on a scale of 1-2-3-4-5 (1=not helpful, 3 = no opinion, 5 = very helpful).” Rating yourself on the same scale, another question might be: “Following your treatment, were you able to experience feelings of authenticity following acts of disclosing?” The same kind of questions could easily be created for the stressors associated with disclosure.

Collect your data at the end of treatment, and average the numbered scores for all questions. You will get a profile, albeit an imperfect one, of what your clients think and feel about disclosure.

In addition, you could apply the same process on how clients felt about counselor disclosure. That is, create a few Likert-type questions for clients, and measure whether they felt a counselor’s disclosure was or was not helpful to their outcome.

With the help of research professionals, you might even want to explore correlations of your client’s positive or negative disclosure data with actual clinical outcomes.

Either set of results would be interesting to examine.

Mike Taleff is an instructor at the University of Hawai’i M?noa, West Oahu, and National University – Hawai’i Branch campuses. He can be contacted at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

References
Farber, B.A., Berano, K.C. & Capobianco, JA. (2004). Client’s perceptions of the process and consequences of self-disclosure in psychotherapy. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 3, 340-346.
Hobson, R.F. (1988). Forms of feeling: The heart of psychotherapy. New York: Travistock Publications.
Kottler, J.A. (1991). On being a therapist. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jourard, S.M. (1971). The transparent self. New York: D.Van Nostrand.
Sexton, T.L.,Whiston, S.C., Bleuer, J.C., & Walz, G.R.(1997). Integrating outcome research into counseling practice and training. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

This article is published in Counselor,The Magazine for Addiction Professionals, April 2006, v.7, n.2, pp.36-37.

No one has commented on this article.

Please keep your comments brief and on topic, and remember that this is not a discussion thread.
Name :
Comment(s) :

J! Reactions 1.09.00 • Professional Site License
Copyright © 2006 S. A. DeCaro

---