For over 15 years, I've heard therapists describe clients as resistant. I’ve heard it when a client doesn’t complete homework, avoids a topic, pushes back on a recommendation, cancels sessions, or disagrees with a treatment plan. I’ve become increasingly concerned about how quietly harmful that can be. Calling clients resistant often implies the client is intentionally blocking progress, as if they alone are the reason therapy isn’t working. That framing has always troubled me, because more often than not, what gets labeled “resistance” isn’t a client problem at all. I've found that it’s usually a relationship problem (between client(s) and therapist or in their interactions/dynamic), and often, it’s actually a therapist problem.

When therapists reach for the word resistance, attention subtly shifts away from what’s happening between two people in the room. The focus moves off the therapeutic relationship and onto what is supposedly wrong with the client. In the process, we can miss how the therapists' own approach, assumptions, urgency, training, or unresolved countertransference might be shaping the moment. Once that happens, therapy can quietly drift away from curiosity and toward correction, and growth often stalls right there.

The idea of resistance comes from early

© Psychology Today