I'd describe myself as collaborative rather than directive. I don't see myself as the expert on someone else's life, I see myself as someone trained to help them access their own understanding of it, so sessions tend to feel more like a joint exploration than a prescribed process. That said, I'll be direct when it matters. If I notice a pattern repeating or see someone avoiding something important, I'll name it rather than wait for them to find their own way there. I lean more reflective than lighthearted in general, especially given the depth of what most clients bring into the room. But I'm not rigidly serious either. Humor shows up naturally when it fits, especially once trust is established, because I think being able to laugh at the absurdity of being human is sometimes part of healing, not a distraction from it. I try to read what each client needs in a given session rather than sticking to one fixed tone throughout.

My sessions tend to be more fluid and explorative than tightly structured, especially early on. I think the most useful material often surfaces when someone isn't being steered toward a predetermined agenda. That said, once we've identified what someone is working toward, whether that's processing a specific trauma, understanding a recurring pattern, or navigating a life transition, I'll bring more structure and intentionality to how we move through the material. I engage actively rather than sitting back passively. I ask questions that invite reflection, I'll offer observations about what I'm noticing in the moment, and I'm not afraid to gently challenge something if it seems useful. I see my role as holding both the space and the thread, tracking where a session started and where it's headed, even when the conversation feels meandering, so that nothing gets lost and everything eventually connects back to what matters.