In conversations with colleagues, clients, friends...well, every first learned that practicing unconditional acceptance to the client, considers it his duty to ask the question that needs to ruin my view of life

AND RAPISTS/MURDERERS/KNACKER YOU ALSO SAY THAT THEY rock???

whoa-Whoa, palehche! Apparently, it is time to separate these concepts, to avoid such a distorted vision of the situation (and that I do not wanted to beat fisiologia. At least on this occasion).

ACCEPTANCE - for myself, I define it as "existential right of every person to be happy". I am convinced that whatever deeds not committed by the person, it continues to be a valuable person. I believe that everyone has the opportunity to change their lives. I know everyone wants to talk to him on equal terms, without condemnation, regardless of his past. This is a decision.

But as a professional I cannot endorse a number of actions, priority - violence against the person. If a person gave another person or animal moral or physical suffering - he will not meet approval. I won't say "Hey, cool, baby! Now Samadhi that puppy!". Never say.

But I will not turn away from him, and with the words "get thee hence, Satan" is not expelled from office. I'm going to work with him, because everyone deserves happiness.

This is my acceptance of the client, which for me the default is good.

Clients who chose me, will not find condemnation, moralizing, and personal attacks. Full personal safety - that's the environment that I create. Feelings, thoughts and actions - that is what I am working with.

Hopefully, now provocative questions will become less and understanding more.

And remember, everyone has the right to be happy. Each.

sincerely yours, Sergei Maximov.
Psychologist.

P. S. Seriously, this Fig will select a picture to this lovely thread! The hugs, the hands on the heart, it is just the definition of the slides. Well, okay! Then put a picture of a person directly related to the adoption. Who can guess this person, and colleagues?)