The main strength of Carl Rogers's person-centered model is that it is based on one's own experience, which, more often than not, provides a firmer basis for knowledge and understanding.
Each individual's experiences are unique, and so by putting the patient at the center of therapy, the therapist in question is better able to get to the bottom of whatever problems the patient might be experiencing.
A further strength of the person-centered model is its universal applicability. By treating people as people, rather than according to their race, gender, or sexuality, the therapist is better able to deal with a wide range of patients.
The main weakness of person-centered therapy could be that it can...
be seen as too individualistic. In societies and cultures where the collective enjoys primacy over the individual, such an approach may not necessarily be the best. In fact, it may not even be possible.
If the identities of individual patients have been shaped to a considerable extent by society, family, and kinship groups, then it's difficult to see how it is possible, let alone feasible, to place the patient at the center of their treatment. Here it may be difficult to focus fully on the individual.
In turn, this makes a nonsense of the claim, which we examined above, that person-centered therapy is universal and can be applied to patients from different cultures and traditions.