1. Develop a brief summary of the article in your own words. Do not copy and paste from the journal article--this is plagiarism! Simply provide a brief description in your own words of the topic under consideration in the article. If the article describes a research study, include brief statements in your own words about the hypotheses, methods, results, discussion, and implications.
2. In your own words, interact with the article. Appropriate comments for this part of the paper should include, but are not limited to, your initial response to the article; comments (in your own words) regarding the study's design or methodology (if any); insights you gained from reading the article; your reasons for being interested in this particular article; any other readings that you may plan to do based upon having read the article; and other thoughts you have that might further enhance the discussion of your article. This section should constitute approximately a third of your Journal Article Review. Again, there is no need to reference any other article.
3. The final section is how you would apply the information you have learned to a potential counseling setting. This could be in a church or clinical session. Develop this section as if you are a pastor or clinician and your parishioner or client has come to you with a problem, needing your help. You may want to pick one of the following "normal" problems for this section: depression, grief, substance abuse, spousal infidelity, unforgiveness, etc.
Welcome to BM! Please rate 5/5 for my 1000 words of notes.
Garzon's article clearly demonstrates the distinct challenges for Christian therapists when working with "appropriately religious clients" in order to tailor treatments for clients and also effectively utilize the Bible. Although the use of Scriptures can certainly apply to numerous counseling cases, clients, and contexts, I feel that his use of ""appropriately religious clients" is a bit amiss to me. Isn't God the only authority to judge one's religious appropriateness? His wording was a bit ambiguous to me in this case. How do you feel?
The article, too, offers a solid theoretical scope since it infuses many different perspectives: cognitive, psychodynamic, theoeducational, behavioral, etc.
By showing the reader that all types of Scripture interventions can be valid, it shows the versatility as well as diversity for Christian counselors.
Using the case of George, it truly models how God's word can heal if used correctly.
The article also advises how before using Scripture, it is vital to administer a client religio-cultural assessment as well as to have solid therapeutic rapport with clients. I have known people and counselors who spout off Scripture, probably to help in many cases, but the sheer power often intimidates if not done correctly and timed well. It can often, I feel, seem too preachy or too untouchable for clients to relate if not executed using Garzon's guidelines.
Although the article was well researched and diverse in its scope and coverage, it was a bit too verbose. I was lost a bit in the Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy ...
Garzon's article is clearly explicated.