One thing that stuck out to me in the Bromfield reading from "Teens in Therapy" was the idea that the therapists insights matter relatively little, and probably don't deserve to be articulated out loud to the client. Often, the therapist's first goal is to disarm the client, who is often unhappy to be there in the first place after a referral for some kind of misbehavior. This can be done by meeting some of the unmet needs of the client, namely in validating their feelings and creating a holding environment in which they can express some of the emotion that is often met with discomfort. Any sort of insight should emerge from the client themselves, with the therapist only asking clarifying, and perhaps, subtly leading questions as to whether or not the client feels their responses and actions serve their own best interests and goals.
I'm curious about Bromfield's assertion that it is a deeply satisfying experience to feel that one is deeply understood by another person. It resonates with me, but it also sounds a little vague. Can you ever be wholly understood by another? Would the extent to which you feel understood depend on factors such as how much time you spend with another, and the quality of that time? I wonder if you can attain the feeling of being understood merely by explaining yourself in a journal, and if perhaps what we seek isn't the other person, but the sense of knowing yourself.