British existential-phenomenological therapy

Version followed: Spinelli's three-phase structural model (Practising Existential Psychotherapy/Therapy: The Relational World, 2007; 2nd ed. 2015) as the overall framework, combined with van Deurzen's clinical method (four worlds, paradoxes, values, emotional compass) as set out in van Deurzen & Adams, Skills in Existential Counselling & Psychotherapy (2nd ed. 2016) and van Deurzen's Structural Existential Analysis (SEA) chapter (2016). Laing's and Cohn's contributions are added where they give distinct procedures. These books are not drawn on in full; structure and content come from publisher contents pages, book summaries and an interview (see Sources). Treat fine detail as [uncertain] unless it is tagged with a source.

1. Introduction

This is a school or tradition, not a single manualised therapy. The "British school" of existential-phenomenological therapy grew out of R. D. Laing's work and the Philadelphia Association (founded 1965). It then grew through the Society for Existential Analysis (1988) and the training programmes Emmy van Deurzen and Ernesto Spinelli led at Regent's College and later at the New School of Psychotherapy and Counselling (NSPC). Hans W. Cohn, a Heideggerian practitioner, also shaped it. [source: Goodreads/van Deurzen blog teaser; Spinelli AHP interview 2019; history otherwise from the books cited, [uncertain] for exact dates]

The approach has no symptom protocol. The therapist and client describe, as exactly as they can, how the client lives in the world: their body, their relationships, their sense of self, and their values and meanings. They also look at how the client's "worldview" (Spinelli) fixes or distorts that lived experience. The core idea of change: problems arise when people deny or flee the basic givens and tensions of existence (uncertainty, relatedness, finitude, freedom-with-limits, anxiety) by holding rigid positions. When those positions are described and examined inside an honest relationship, the client gets clearer and can live the tensions more openly and by choice. Spinelli puts the stress on "examining rather than changing" and on staying with "what is there, in the way it is there". Van Deurzen puts it on helping clients face life's paradoxes with courage and clarify what matters to them. [source: Spinelli AHP interview 2019; EHI Spinelli workshop page; sobrief summaries of Spinelli 2007 and van Deurzen & Adams]

2. Framework

The school has no fixed session count. Typical format: weekly 50-minute individual sessions, open-ended or time-limited. Spinelli has an addendum on time-limited existential therapy, and van Deurzen says the approach "can be adapted to fit the time available". Couple, group, supervision, coaching and online formats are described. [source: Woodslane contents of Spinelli 2015 and van Deurzen & Adams 2016; sobrief van Deurzen & Adams summary]. Session counts below are [synthesis]: 6–12 sessions for focused time-limited work, open-ended for long-term work.

Spinelli's structural model (three phases) [source: Woodslane contents of Spinelli 2015; EHI page; sobrief Spinelli 2007]

Phase One: Co-creating the therapy-world (EHI workshop label: therapist as "Idiot").
- Goal: set up a reliable frame (time, place, fee, length, frequency: Spinelli's "magic feathers", which matter because both people invest them with meaning). Enter and describe the client's presenting worldview with descriptive, "un-knowing" curiosity, using the phenomenological method (epoché, description, horizontalisation).
- Therapist mostly: attunes to and reflects the client's own account of the problem without challenging it.
- Move on when [synthesis]: the frame is stable, the client can describe their experience in their own words, and both can see recurring self-, other- and world-constructs.
Phase Two: Co-habiting the therapy-world (EHI: therapist as "Fool", working "in the between").
- Goal: explore the client's worldview as it shows up in the live relationship.
- Therapist begins "asserting otherness": tentatively offering their own perspective; moving between explicit and implicit meanings; using the I-, You- and We-focus realms; working with dreams; working with intimacy and tentative self-disclosure.
- Late in the phase: bring in the "They-focus", the wider world's claim on the client's choices.
- Move on when [synthesis]: the client can recognise and own their stances, tolerate the anxiety of uncertainty without collapsing back into rigid positions, and make choices with awareness of their impact on others.
Phase Three: Closing down the therapy-world (EHI: therapist as "Executioner").
- Goal: end the co-created world, including both its possibilities and its disappointments. Endings can be planned, unplanned or abrupt; a "winding down" period offers predictability. The real task is to tolerate the uncertainty of the therapy-world dissolving.
- Post-therapy contact is possible but ethically complex.

Van Deurzen's process (four movements, as summarised) [source: sobrief van Deurzen & Adams summary; secondary, [uncertain] whether these are the book's own headings]

Awareness of not knowing: something is not working, but the client cannot yet say what.
Facing anxiety and complexity: contradictions come to the surface; the therapist supports the client in staying with them.
Experimenting with change: the client tries new ways of being.
Integration and vigilance: new patterns hold, with awareness of slipping back.

Van Deurzen introduces the finite nature of therapy early on and treats ending as a process. Her book's chapter sequence goes framework → person of the therapist → working phenomenologically → existential attitude → theory into practice → "what really matters to the client" → the process of therapy. [source: Woodslane contents]

Assessment / beginning [synthesis drawing on the above]: the first 1–3 sessions cover the presenting issue, current life across the four worlds, risk, and the client's expectations. Agree the frame and a review point (e.g. after 6 sessions). Also check suitability: the client is willing to reflect and talk; there is no acute psychosis or high risk needing other care first; and they consent to an exploratory rather than symptom-targeted approach.

3. Guiding principles

[source: Spinelli principles from sobrief Spinelli 2007, AHP interview 2019, EHI page; van Deurzen principles from sobrief and Taproot pages (secondary); Laing and Cohn from books cited, [uncertain]]

Relatedness (Spinelli): self, others and world arise in relation. Don't treat the client's problem as sitting inside them; always ask how it lives between them and others, including you.
Existential uncertainty (Spinelli): no account is ever final. Hold your understanding of the client as provisional, and help them do the same with their self-story.
Existential anxiety is a given, not a disorder (Spinelli; van Deurzen): don't aim to get rid of anxiety. Explore what it shows and how the client flees from it.
Worlding vs worldview (Spinelli): lived experience is a process; the worldview is a fixed structure laid over it. Look for where the client's fixed self-, other- and world-constructs clash with how they actually live.
Un-knowing: meet each client and each statement as if new. Set aside theory and "I've seen this before".
Description before explanation: ask "what" and "how" before "why". Don't interpret causes or unconscious motives.
Examine, don't steer (Spinelli): don't push the client towards a preferred way of being. Clarify the way they are being now; change, if it comes, is the client's.
Being over doing: your acceptance, curiosity and willingness to face uncertainty are the main "tools". Technique comes second.
Acceptance and curiosity (Spinelli): respect the client's right to be as they are, including their defences, and stay playfully interested.
Dialogue without control (Spinelli): neither person owns the agenda. Check for moments when you are controlling what is discussed or how.
Life as a set of paradoxes (van Deurzen): each dimension of existence holds polar tensions (e.g. life/death, belonging/isolation, freedom/responsibility). Help the client move between the poles rather than resolving them for good.
Four worlds (van Deurzen): physical, social, personal and spiritual. Make sure exploration covers all four and notices where one is neglected or in conflict with another.
Emotions as a compass of values (van Deurzen): no emotion is simply bad. Use each feeling to find what the client values and what they feel they are gaining or losing.
Authenticity as owning one's choices and limits (van Deurzen; Spinelli): the aim is not a "true self" (Spinelli rejects this) but more honest ownership of how one lives.
Self-reflective therapist (van Deurzen & Adams): your own worldview is always in the room. Use personal therapy, supervision and philosophical study.
Intelligibility of experience (Laing, 1960; Laing & Esterson, 1964): even very disturbed experience can make sense once seen in its social and family context. Look for that sense before applying a diagnosis. [uncertain in detail]
Givens and choice (Cohn, 1997, 2002): some things are "given" (thrownness, embodiment, being with others) and some are open to choice. Help the client tell them apart. [uncertain]
The relationship is the arena (all): how the client is with you shows how they are in the world. Work with it in the here and now, without the language of transference (Spinelli questions transference as a concept).

4. Intervention inventory

The tradition says interventions come out of the therapist's stance; they are not stand-alone techniques. Items 4.1–4.13 follow Spinelli [source: sobrief Spinelli 2007; EHI page; Woodslane contents]. Items 4.14–4.21 follow van Deurzen [source: van Deurzen & Adams summary; SEA chapter abstract (sdm.ophen.org); Routledge SEA contents; Taproot page]. Items 4.22–4.24 follow Laing and Cohn [books cited, [uncertain]]. All step sequences are written in my own words. Where a source names only an element, the steps are [synthesis].

4.1 Co-creating the frame ("magic feathers")

Purpose / when: first session onwards. A reliable, agreed frame gives a relational stability the client may lack elsewhere. What matters is that you keep to it, more than what the terms are.
Steps: (1) Agree session length, frequency, fee, place or platform, cancellation, contact between sessions, confidentiality and its limits, and a review point. (2) Say these are agreements the two of you are making, not rules handed down. (3) Keep them consistently. (4) When the client tests or breaks the frame (lateness, requests for extra time), explore what that act means for them before re-stating the agreement. [steps 1 and 4 partly synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "These arrangements are ours. We've made them, and I'll keep to them, so that this hour stays the same whatever else changes."
Watch for: you bending the frame to please the client; the client reading your consistency as coldness (talk about it). Working: the client starts to rely on the hour and to notice their own reactions to its limits.

4.2 Epoché (bracketing)

Purpose / when: all through therapy. Set aside your theories, diagnoses, values and expectations so the client's experience can show itself.
Steps: (1) Before the session, note what you already "know" about the client (diagnosis, referral story, your hunches). (2) In session, when an explanation or judgement comes to mind, notice it and park it. (3) Ask a descriptive question instead. (4) Afterwards, write down which assumptions came up. Bracketing is never complete; aim to notice, not to erase.
Example language (illustrative): "I realise I was assuming 'alone' meant lonely. What is being alone like for you?"
Watch for: fake neutrality (going blank); bracketing used to avoid ever having a view. Working: the client corrects your assumptions and brings in more of their own detail.

4.3 Description ("what" and "how", not "why")

Purpose / when: whenever the client explains, theorises or speaks in generalities. Description brings back the lived detail.
Steps: (1) Pick out a concrete episode. (2) Ask what happened, how it was, where in the body, what was seen, said and felt, in sequence. (3) Hold back "why" questions. When the client asks "why", go back to "how". (4) Reflect the description back in the client's own words.
Example language (illustrative): "Take me to the moment you walked into the kitchen. What did you notice first?"
Watch for: the client's frustration at not getting explanations (explain the method). Working: new detail appears and fixed explanations loosen.

4.4 Horizontalisation (equalisation)

Purpose / when: when the client or therapist has already decided which part of the story matters. Give every element equal weight for the time being.
Steps: (1) Notice which items are being stressed and which skipped. (2) Ask about the "minor" items as seriously as the "major" ones. (3) Hold back any ranking until a fuller picture is there.
Example language (illustrative): "You mentioned the rain almost in passing. Can we stay with that for a moment?"
Watch for: losing focus completely. Horizontalisation is temporary. Working: unexpected links appear.

4.5 Un-knowing inquiry

Purpose / when: especially in Phase One. Meet the client's account as unique, with "descriptively-attuned" curiosity (EHI page).
Steps: (1) Ask questions you really don't know the answer to. (2) Use the client's own words. (3) Check your understanding ("Have I got that right?") and accept correction. (4) Tolerate not understanding yet.
Example language (illustrative): "I don't yet understand what 'failing' means for you. Could you show me an example?"
Watch for: questions that are really interpretations in disguise. Working: the client starts to explore their own words with curiosity.

4.6 Clarifying the worldview (self-, other-, world-constructs)

Purpose / when: Phases One and Two. Make visible the beliefs that structure how the client lives ("I am…", "others are…", "the world is…"), and where they clash with lived experience (worlding).
Steps: (1) Listen for repeated "I am / they always / life is" statements. (2) Describe them back as the client's stances, not as truths or errors. (3) Explore what each stance protects and what it costs. (4) Point out moments where the client's experience doesn't fit the construct. (5) Explore what it would mean to hold the construct less rigidly, without proposing a new one. [steps 1–5 synthesis based on Spinelli's concepts]
Example language (illustrative): "You've said several times that people always leave. Last week, though, you described your sister staying. How does that fit?"
Watch for: the client hearing this as being proved wrong (go back to acceptance). Working: the client says "I tell myself that…" instead of "That's how it is."

4.7 Moving between explicit and implicit, particular and general

Purpose / when: Phase Two. Surface unstated meanings and stances.
Steps: (1) Take a particular statement and ask what it implies more generally ("what does that say about how you see yourself?"). (2) Take a general claim and ask for a particular instance. (3) Offer the implicit meaning you hear, tentatively, for the client to accept or reject.
Example language (illustrative): "When you say 'it's fine' about the promotion, I hear something else underneath, maybe that wanting it wasn't allowed. Does that fit at all?"
Watch for: imposing meanings. Working: the client puts their own implicit meanings into words.

4.8 Inter-relational realms: I-focus, You-focus, We-focus

Purpose / when: Phase Two. Explore the client's way of being as it happens between you, right now.
Steps: (1) I-focus: ask what the client is experiencing about being themselves right now with you. (2) You-focus: ask what they experience of you, and how they think you experience them. (3) We-focus: ask what it is like to be "us" right now. (4) You can model each one with tentative statements of your own. (5) Link back to how the same pattern shows up outside. [order synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): I: "What's happening for you as you tell me this?" You: "How do you imagine I'm hearing it?" We: "What's it like between us right now?"
Watch for: the client experiencing these questions as intrusive or as a test. Pace them, and explain why you're asking. Working: the client can talk openly about the relationship and spots the same stance in other relationships.

4.9 They-focus (the claim of the world)

Purpose / when: later Phase Two, when the client is weighing decisions. Bring in the wider world: how their choices affect significant others, those others' relations with each other, and the wider world.
Steps: (1) When a choice is taking shape, ask who else it touches. (2) Explore the impact on those others' sense of themselves and their relationships. (3) Make sure this is acknowledged, without blocking the decision or moralising. Spinelli describes a move from consoling the client "against the world" to putting the world's claim to them.
Example language (illustrative): "If you leave, what might change for your children, and between them and their father?"
Watch for: rupture if this is done abruptly after long attunement. Prepare the ground. Working: decisions become owned, with their costs in view.

4.10 Asserting otherness (tentative challenge and perspective-offering)

Purpose / when: Phase Two, once attunement is established. You become a distinct other with your own view, so the client meets something different from their own construct.
Steps: (1) Mark your view as yours and as provisional. (2) Offer it briefly. (3) Invite disagreement. (4) Explore the client's reaction to being met by a different view.
Example language (illustrative): "I see this a bit differently, and I may be wrong: it sounds to me less like laziness and more like exhaustion."
Watch for: the client complying or feeling betrayed. Working: the client can disagree with you and stay in contact.

4.11 Phenomenological dream work (Spinelli)

Purpose / when: when the client brings a dream. Treat it as lived experience, not as symbols to decode.
Steps: (1) The client recounts the dream in their own words. (2) Contextualise: setting, time, objects, and what the dreamer was doing. (3) The client re-tells it in the present tense, with you mirroring back. (4) Explore the relations and stances in the dream (how the dreamer is with others and the world), and how these echo waking life. Do not translate symbols.
Example language (illustrative): "Tell it again as if it's happening now: 'I am standing…'" / "How are you with the stranger in the dream?"
Watch for: the client wanting a decoding (explain the approach). Working: the client sees their dream stance as a way of being they recognise.

4.12 Working with intimacy and therapist self-disclosure

Purpose / when: when attraction, affection or strong feeling comes up in the relationship. Acknowledge it rather than pathologise it. Disclosure can clarify the worldview, support We-focused talk and model acceptance.
Steps: (1) Name the feeling in the room without alarm. (2) Explore what it means for the client. (3) Disclose your own experience only briefly and tentatively, and only when it serves the client's exploration. (4) Re-state boundaries clearly. Never act on attraction. Take it to supervision.
Example language (illustrative): "It sounds as if feeling close to me is both welcome and frightening. Can we look at that together?"
Watch for: disclosure that meets your own needs; boundary drift. Working: the client can talk about closeness safely.

4.13 Closing down the therapy-world (endings)

Purpose / when: Phase Three, and any time an ending is coming, planned or not.
Steps: (1) Mention from the start that therapy is finite (van Deurzen). (2) Agree a winding-down period where possible. (3) Explore what the ending means: gains, disappointments, what is left undone. (4) Accept that therapy is only "enough for the time being". (5) Discuss post-therapy contact honestly: a new therapy would need a fresh start, and friendship may close off future therapy.
Example language (illustrative): "We have four sessions left. What do you want from them, and what's it like to know we're ending?"
Watch for: abrupt endings repeating earlier losses; your own reluctance to end. Working: the client can name both what they got and what they didn't.

4.14 Four-worlds exploration (van Deurzen)

Purpose / when: assessment and throughout. Map how the client lives in each dimension: physical (Umwelt: body, health, nature, material world, mortality); social (Mitwelt: relationships, belonging, roles, culture); personal (Eigenwelt: identity, inner life, freedom, responsibility); spiritual (Überwelt: values, beliefs, meaning, purpose). Distress often comes from a neglected world or a conflict between worlds. [source: van Deurzen & Adams summary; Taproot page]
Steps: (1) Ask open questions about each world in turn, or follow the client's material and note which world it belongs to. (2) Notice which worlds are crowded with concern and which are hardly mentioned. (3) Explore tensions between worlds (e.g. a personal value that clashes with social belonging). (4) Return to under-explored worlds over the course of therapy. A four-quadrant sketch made together is optional. [steps synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "We've talked a lot about work and people. How are you in your body these days? And what do you live for at the moment?"
Watch for: turning the worlds into a checklist. Keep it conversational. Working: the client sees their difficulty in a wider frame, and links appear across worlds.

4.15 Working with paradoxes and dilemmas

Purpose / when: when the client is stuck in an either/or, or fleeing one pole of a basic tension (e.g. freedom/responsibility, connection/isolation, certainty/uncertainty, life/death). Van Deurzen sees symptoms as often arising from avoiding such dilemmas, and solutions as often lying beyond the first either/or.
Steps: (1) Name the two poles in the client's own terms. (2) Explore each pole fully: what it offers, what it costs, what it is like to live there. (3) Notice which pole the client avoids, and explore what they fear there. (4) Look dialectically for a third way or a different relationship to the tension, without forcing a resolution. (5) Normalise the tension as part of being human, not a personal failing.
Example language (illustrative): "Part of you wants to be completely free of them, and part can't bear being outside the family. Could we look at each, before deciding one has to win?"
Watch for: premature compromise; therapist preference for one pole. Working: the client can hold both sides with less panic and makes a choice they can own.

4.16 Values clarification

Purpose / when: when the client is confused about direction, in a values conflict, or living by others' codes. Values are treated as personal codes to explore, question and sometimes revise, never imposed. [source: van Deurzen & Adams summary]
Steps: (1) Collect values from what the client cares about, protests against, admires or feels guilty about. (2) Put the implicit values into words with the client. (3) Explore where each came from, and whether it is chosen or taken over from others. (4) Look at conflicts between values. (5) Aim for a coherent but flexible set the client recognises as their own.
Example language (illustrative): "Your anger at your manager seems to protect something. What matters to you that was trampled there?"
Watch for: your own values leaking in; the client hunting for the "right" values. Working: decisions start to rest on values the client can name.

4.17 Emotional compass

Purpose / when: whenever strong or mixed emotion comes up. Emotions are signals of what the client values and of where they stand with it. No emotion is intrinsically positive or negative. [source: van Deurzen & Adams summary; SEA chapter abstract names the "emotional compass"]
Steps: (1) Name the emotion precisely and widen the client's vocabulary for it. (2) Ask what value or object it is about. (3) Locate the client's position relative to that value: moving towards it, having it, feeling it threatened, or losing it. Van Deurzen arranges emotions around a cycle of gaining and losing what we value; the exact placement of each emotion on the compass is not verified, so the diagram itself is [uncertain]. (4) Explore mixed or contradictory emotions as signs of more than one value at stake. (5) Help the client use the emotion as information for a choice.
Example language (illustrative): "That jealousy tells us something you value feels under threat. What is it?"
Watch for: intellectualising the emotion away; using the compass to label people. Working: the client trusts feelings as guides and acts on them more deliberately.

4.18 Socratic questioning / dialogue

Purpose / when: when assumptions about life, self or others go unexamined. Curious, open questions bring them into the light. Dialogue means "openness to alternatives" not yet considered (van Deurzen & Adams, as quoted in summary).
Steps: (1) Ask what the client means by a key word ("normal", "success"). (2) Ask for examples and counter-examples. (3) Follow implications ("if that is true, then…?"). (4) Let the client reach their own conclusions. Don't lead to a set answer.
Example language (illustrative): "What would count as 'enough' for you? Who decided that?"
Watch for: turning it into a debate or cognitive disputation. Working: the client starts questioning their own assumptions between sessions.

4.19 Timeline (SEA)

Purpose / when: to place the problem in the client's lived time: past, present, and anticipated future. The element is named in the SEA chapter abstract and a TIME filter appears in the SEA book; the procedure below is [synthesis] [uncertain].
Steps: (1) Invite the client to describe or sketch the key turning points of their life. (2) Explore how past events are carried into the present, and which future the client is living towards or avoiding. (3) Include finitude: how awareness of time running out shapes current choices.
Example language (illustrative): "If you draw your life as a line, where are the bends? And where does the line go from here?"
Watch for: sliding into causal history-taking (keep it descriptive). Working: the client sees the present as one moment in a project they can shape.

4.20 The three reductions (SEA): phenomenological, eidetic, transcendental

Purpose / when: a deeper phenomenological sequence van Deurzen describes in the SEA chapter as often overlooked. The abstract names the three reductions; the steps below are my paraphrase of the Husserlian moves and are [uncertain].
Steps: (1) Phenomenological reduction: bracket assumptions and describe exactly how the experience appears. (2) Eidetic reduction: look across instances for what is essential and constant in this experience for the client (e.g. what every episode of "humiliation" has in common). (3) Transcendental reduction: turn to the one doing the experiencing: how the client's own stance and intentions shape what appears.
Example language (illustrative): "Across these three episodes, what is always there?" / "And who are you, in the way you look at it?"
Watch for: abstract talk too far from experience. Working: the client moves from incidents to a recognisable core pattern and their own part in it.

4.21 Working with the person of the therapist (self-reflection)

Purpose / when: ongoing. The therapist's worldview is always part of the encounter. Van Deurzen & Adams devote a chapter to it; SEA includes a structured self-reflection ("SOAR", details [uncertain]).
Steps: (1) After sessions, note your reactions, assumptions and any pull to steer. (2) Bring recurring reactions to supervision or personal therapy. (3) Use what you learn to sharpen your bracketing next session.
Watch for: defensive certainty; over-involvement. Working: you can tell your material apart from the client's.

4.22 Making experience intelligible (Laing)

Purpose / when: with clients whose experience seems "mad", bizarre or senseless, including psychotic experience. Seek the sense it makes in the person's relational and family situation. [Laing 1960; Laing & Esterson 1964; [uncertain]]
Steps: (1) Listen for the person's own experience of self and others (Laing describes fears of being engulfed, invaded or petrified in "ontological insecurity"). (2) Explore the family and social situation in which this experience arose, including contradictory messages. (3) Reflect back how the experience is an understandable response to that situation. (4) Work alongside appropriate psychiatric care; this is not a replacement for it [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "When you say you have to stay invisible, it sounds as if being seen has felt dangerous. Can you tell me when that started?"
Watch for: romanticising psychosis; undermining needed medication or crisis care. Working: the client feels understood and less alienated.

4.23 Therapeutic household / "being with" in crisis (Philadelphia Association tradition)

Purpose / when: a community procedure, not office therapy. People in crisis live in a supportive household with others, with minimal hierarchy, rather than being admitted to hospital. Kingsley Hall (1965–1970) was the best-known example. [Laing; PA history from books cited, [uncertain]. Whether PA households still run today was not verified.]
Steps (for a clinician working in or adapting such settings) [synthesis]: offer a safe living environment with others; let the person go through the crisis with company rather than suppression; hold regular house meetings; keep medical and risk backup in place.
Watch for: under-recognised risk, exhaustion of residents and staff, and regression without containment. Working: the person comes through the crisis with their own understanding of it.

4.24 Distinguishing givens from choices (Cohn)

Purpose / when: when the client either blames themselves for what is given or treats what is chosen as fate. Cohn (1997, 2002), drawing on Heidegger, distinguishes the givens of existence (being thrown into a situation, embodiment, being-with-others, finitude) from how one responds to them. [uncertain]
Steps [synthesis]: (1) Sort the problem's elements into what the client could not choose and what is open to response. (2) Explore the client's stance towards the givens. (3) Explore choices still available within the givens.
Example language (illustrative): "You didn't choose to be born into that family. How you stand towards it now is still being decided."
Watch for: implying the client "chose" trauma or illness. Working: less self-blame and more ownership of what's possible.

Formats (not detailed here, [uncertain]): Spinelli's addenda describe couple, group and time-limited existential therapy and existential supervision. Van Deurzen & Adams cover supervision, coaching and NHS work. Apply the same procedures, adapted to the format.

5. Handling problems

The sources give only a few explicit difficulty guidelines: dogmatism, avoiding uncertainty, over-involvement, intimacy, and endings [source: sobrief Spinelli 2007; van Deurzen & Adams summary]. Everything else here is marked [synthesis].

Client wants answers, techniques or a diagnosis ("just tell me what to do"). Treat the request itself as material: what is it like to not know? Explain the descriptive method plainly at the start and agree the approach. If the client really needs skills-based help (e.g. panic management), offer a referral or a clearly framed adjunct. [synthesis]
Stuck / circular sessions. (1) Go back to description of one concrete recent episode (4.3). (2) Horizontalise: ask about what is being skipped (4.4). (3) Check the four worlds for one never mentioned (4.14). (4) Name the stuckness in the We-focus: "We seem to circle here; what's that like for you?" (4.8). (5) Review the frame and agreed aims. [synthesis]
"Resistance." The tradition doesn't treat avoidance as pathology. It is part of the client's way of being and protects something. Describe it, explore what it secures, and respect the client's right to keep it (Spinelli's acceptance). Never push to break it down. [synthesis based on Spinelli's acceptance principle]
Dogmatism (client or therapist). Spinelli warns that "Nothing is more dangerous than a dogmatic worldview" (as quoted in summary). With a rigid client, treat certainty as a stance to explore (4.6), not to argue with. If you notice your own certainty, bracket it, take it to supervision, and hold your existential framework itself lightly. [source: sobrief Spinelli]
Overwhelm / anxiety flooding when givens are faced (death, meaninglessness, isolation). Slow down. Come back to concrete present experience and the body (physical world). Let the steadiness of the frame and the relationship carry some of the weight. Space out heavy themes. Remember that van Deurzen's process expects a phase of anxiety and complexity; support the client in staying with it at a tolerable pace. If the client is dissociating or panicking, use grounding in the here-and-now ("what do you notice in the room?") before going on. [synthesis]
Suicidal thoughts or despair about meaning. Explore the meaning of the wish to die (that is in keeping with the approach), but carry out a standard risk assessment as well: ask directly about thoughts, plans, intent, history, protective factors and access to means. Make a collaborative safety plan, do lethal-means counselling (safe storage or removal), and involve crisis services or the GP when risk is high. A phenomenological stance never replaces risk management. [synthesis; standard practice]
Psychosis, severe depression or high-risk presentations. Laingian intelligibility work (4.22) should support psychiatric care, not replace it. Don't encourage stopping medication. Coordinate with the treating team. [synthesis]
Ruptures. These happen especially when you move from attunement to asserting otherness (4.10) or to the They-focus (4.9). Spinelli flags the risk of moving from consoling the client "against the world" to putting the world's claim to them. Response: name the rupture in the We-focus, own your part, ask what the client experienced, and go back to attunement before trying again. [source: sobrief Spinelli; repair steps synthesis]
Frame breaches (lateness, missed sessions, requests for contact). Keep the agreed frame consistently, and explore what the breach means rather than penalising or quietly giving way (4.1). Re-agree the frame explicitly if needed. [synthesis]
Non-engagement between sessions. There is no homework to adhere to. If the client says nothing changes outside, explore how they live the week, and whether they treat therapy as a separate world. Optional reflective tasks (noticing emotions as compass readings, a timeline sketch) can be offered, but not required. [synthesis]
Erotic or intense attachment. Acknowledge it rather than pathologise it. Explore its meaning. Disclose only tentatively. Keep boundaries absolute and take it to supervision (4.12). [source: sobrief Spinelli]
Over-involvement / rescuing. Notice when you side with the client against everyone else or want them to make a particular choice. Bring back the They-focus and bracket your preference. [source: sobrief Spinelli; synthesis]
Therapist imposing existential themes ("you're avoiding death"). Themes must come from the client's material. If you notice you are lecturing on philosophy, go back to description. [synthesis]
Philosophical language alienating the client. Use everyday words ("what matters to you", "the part you can't change"). Van Deurzen & Adams write for readers without a philosophical background. [source: Woodslane description; synthesis]
Time-limited settings (e.g. NHS, EAP). Name the ending from session one. Agree a focus, often one central dilemma or paradox. Use four-worlds mapping early. Leave a closing-down phase of at least 1–2 sessions. Spinelli and van Deurzen both describe time-limited adaptations; details [uncertain].
Unplanned or abrupt endings. Spinelli treats these as one form endings take. If possible, offer a closing session or letter. Reflect on the ending in supervision. Leave the door open for a fresh start. [source: sobrief Spinelli; letter suggestion synthesis]
Cultural or religious meaning systems. Explore the client's spiritual world on its own terms. Don't treat faith as avoidance, and don't impose secular existentialism. [synthesis]

Sources

Sources

Further reading (not drawn on): the SAGE page for Spinelli 2015; van Deurzen slides on SlideShare; emmyvandeurzen.com and the full Evstigneeva PDF.

Further reading (not drawn on)

Spinelli, E. (2007; 2nd ed. 2015). Practising Existential Psychotherapy / Practising Existential Therapy: The Relational World. London: Sage.
Spinelli, E. (1989; 2nd ed. 2005). The Interpreted World: An Introduction to Phenomenological Psychology. London: Sage.
Spinelli, E. (1997). Tales of Un-knowing: Therapeutic Encounters from an Existential Perspective. London: Duckworth.
van Deurzen, E. & Adams, M. (2011; 2nd ed. 2016). Skills in Existential Counselling & Psychotherapy. London: Sage.
van Deurzen, E. (1988; 3rd ed. 2012). Existential Counselling & Psychotherapy in Practice. London: Sage.
van Deurzen, E. (2016). Structural existential analysis (SEA). In S. E. Schulenberg (ed.), Clarifying and Furthering Existential Psychotherapy. Springer.
van Deurzen, E. & Arnold-Baker, C. (eds.) (2023). Structural Existential Analysis: An Existential-Phenomenological Method for Researching Life. Routledge. [year [uncertain]]
Laing, R. D. (1960). The Divided Self. London: Tavistock.
Laing, R. D. & Esterson, A. (1964). Sanity, Madness and the Family. London: Tavistock.
Cohn, H. W. (1997). Existential Thought and Therapeutic Practice. London: Sage.
Cohn, H. W. (2002). Heidegger and the Roots of Existential Therapy. London: Continuum.

← Previous · III-074Yalom's existential psychotherapy Next · III-076 →Phenomenological psychiatry