Citation

Thomas JC, Leitner LM. Humanist. Psychol. 2005; 33(2).

Copyright

(Copyright © 2005, Division 32 of the American Psychological Association, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1207/s15473333thp3302_5

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

As the rates of suicide in America continue to rise, suicide recently has been declared to be a national public health concern. The crisis intervention model, which has dominated the treatment of suicidal individuals in America since the 1950s, is currently believed to be the most effective model for suicide intervention. This study examined this belief by taking a more complex look at professionals' responses to suicidal clients both by investigating the existence of different ways in which professionals interpret the crisis intervention model. In one interpretation (the "fight" response), the professional takes power and agency away from the client and does what is perceived to be "best" for the client. An alternate interpretation, the "ideal" response, allows for a respectful engagement with the client. Professionals also can act contrary to the model (i.e., the "flight" response). In addition, based on the humanistic notion that clients are the experts of their own experience and that their voices are a very valuable part of evaluating the treatment process, this study investigated which response style clients report to be most helpful and most desired. The results suggest that while the typical response of mental health professionals to suicidal clients is most characteristic of the "fight" response style, clients overwhelmingly report that the contrasting "ideal" response style is most helpful. The findings are discussed along with implications for practice, research, and training. © 2005, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Language: en