Identifying the ego defenses exhibited by Steve during therapy was beneficial in finally setting realistic goals to meet him at his level of readiness, thus solidifying the therapeutic alliance with an unwitting client. Steve had been isolating himself from his peers for an extended period of time. The reason for his isolation was his thoughts about other students' perceptions of special education recipients. In Goldstein (1995), “Sometimes the mechanism of isolation is called affect isolation, because there is a repression of feelings associated with a particular content or idea related to certain affects” (p. 78). . According to Woods and Hollis (2000), understanding why a client is experiencing distress allows one to find common ground with the client, thereby allowing realistic goals to be set. The causation of resistance is often discomfort associated with the client not being ready, further emphasizing the need to set mutual goals in order to achieve treatment progression and establish therapeutic alliances. The client and clinician working together in a therapeutic alliance to analyze behavior and determine how to move forward in the context of a “mindful environment,” endorse learning to experience discomfort for the benefit of treatment. Similarly, Steve adopted denial as a means of defending himself against labeling and stigma. Brandell (2010), “Defense is a term used to describe the ego's unconsciously employed struggles to protect itself from perceived danger” (p. 141). By denying his sensitivity to the feelings expressed by his peers about special education, Steve hoped to be able to ignore his classification as "sped" (special education). The increase in absences was a waste of time. Dealing with involuntary clients requires the development of a “caring holding environment” to promote client well-being. Identifying, recognizing, and using resistance that arises in a mandated therapeutic relationship to engage the client in participation in treatment is essential to helping them work through issues affecting their ability to achieve their goals, as well as 'to free oneself from oppression. . Similarly, Teitelbaum stated (1991): "The best we can do as analysts is to try particular interventions that arise from different formulations, evaluate their impact, and be flexible to modify our technique in the face of to the continuously changing dynamics presented by the patient” (p. 128). In the same spirit, meeting clients where they are ensures preparation for the proposed therapeutic approaches and solidifies the therapeutic relationship...