| Course | NU672 PMHNP Psychotherapy for Individuals, Groups, and Families Clinical |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 6 |
| Paper type | Discussion board post with two replies |
| Length | About 620 words, 3 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 discussion post |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MSN |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU672 Unit 6
"Relapse Is Part of Recovery": Feedback on a Classmate's Response to a Client Who Drank After Ninety Sober Days, Read Through Hill's Helping Skills Model
NU672 · Unit 6 Discussion Board Post
Posted by [Student Name]
The client is composite; the six-line exchange was shared by a classmate for feedback, with details bracketed.
Initial Post
Thank you for posting your exchange with Mr. [D.], a [44]-year-old electrician who told you he drank on Saturday after [90] days sober. Here is the part I am responding to:
Client: "I blew it. Ninety days and I blew it in one night." You: "Relapse is part of recovery. A lot of people slip." Client: "Yeah. I guess."
Affirmation. Your response came from a good place. You wanted to reduce his shame, and shame after a lapse can itself lead to more drinking. The relapse prevention literature supports treating a lapse as a learning event rather than a failure; Witkiewitz and Marlatt describe the abstinence violation effect, in which a person who sees a single lapse as proof of total failure is more likely to return to full relapse (Witkiewitz & Marlatt, 2004). Your instinct to interrupt that thinking was sound.
Examining the reply. Hill's model describes helping in three stages, exploration, insight and action, and it recommends staying in exploration until the client's experience is understood (Hill, 2020). Your reply jumped past exploration. "Relapse is part of recovery" is a reassurance, and a piece of information, delivered before you knew what the lapse meant to him. His "Yeah. I guess" suggests he did not feel heard. Reassurance offered before exploration tells the client how to feel, when what he needs first is to be asked how he does feel. The statement may also have sounded to him like a slogan he has heard in meetings, which can land as dismissive.
A rewritten response. Something like: "Ninety days, and then Saturday. It sounds like you're really hard on yourself right now." This is a reflection of feeling, an exploration skill in Hill's model. It lets him say more, and it keeps you close to his experience. Once he has talked about what happened and how he feels, the point you wanted to make, that a lapse does not erase ninety days, can come later and will likely land better, perhaps as a question: "What do those ninety days tell you about what you can do?"
My question for you: what did you notice in yourself when he said "I blew it"? I ask because I do the same thing when a client blames himself; I rush to reassure, and I think it is often my discomfort talking.
Reply to the Classmate's Follow-Up
You replied that you felt anxious he would stop coming if he felt too bad, and that you wanted to "fix it fast." That makes sense, and I think naming it is the first step. The lapse itself matters too: Witkiewitz and Marlatt argue that how a person responds to a lapse, and the coping resources available in the moment, shape whether it becomes a full relapse (Witkiewitz & Marlatt, 2004). Exploring the details of Saturday, where he was, who was there, what he felt before the first drink, would give him and you information for the next high-risk situation.
Reply to a Classmate Who Defended the Original Response
You argued that reassurance is exactly what a client in shame needs. I agree that he needs to hear it eventually. My point is about timing, not content. Hill's model does not reject reassurance, but it places information and advice later, after exploration (Hill, 2020). Delivered too early, the reassurance closed the conversation; delivered after he has talked, it could open a plan.
References
Hill, C. E. (2020). Helping skills: Facilitating exploration, insight, and action (5th ed.). American Psychological Association.
Witkiewitz, K., & Marlatt, G. A. (2004). Relapse prevention for alcohol and drug problems: That was Zen, this is Tao. American Psychologist, 59(4), 224-235. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.4.224
What the NU672 Unit 6 assignment asks for
The Unit 6 discussion asks you to respond to a classmate's shared therapy exchange with feedback grounded in a helping skills framework. Prompts usually ask you to affirm what worked, examine a response using a named model, offer an alternative response, and ask a question that helps the classmate reflect. The post is often around 400 to 500 words, with replies continuing the thread. Graders reward feedback that is specific, fair and supported by the framework and by evidence about the clinical issue. The tone matters: classmates who share recordings are exposing early work, so the feedback should correct one or two points clearly rather than every line of the exchange.
Inside the NU672 Unit 6 example
The post quotes the three lines it responds to. The affirmation explains why reducing shame after a lapse is sound, citing Witkiewitz and Marlatt on the abstinence violation effect. The examination applies Hill's three stages and shows that the reply jumped to reassurance before exploring, with a highlighted sentence on why that matters. The rewrite offers a reflection of feeling and suggests how the original point could come later as a question. The post ends by asking what the classmate noticed in themselves. One reply builds on the classmate's answer by suggesting exploration of the lapse details. The other answers a defender of the original response by separating content from timing.
NU672 Unit 6 rubric: what earns full points
Peer feedback posts are usually graded on the use of a framework, specificity, supportiveness, clinical accuracy and engagement. The framework row earns full credit when a named model is applied to the exact words in the exchange. Specificity rewards feedback tied to a line of dialogue rather than general advice. Supportiveness is judged on a genuine affirmation and a tone that invites reflection. Clinical accuracy points go to correct use of evidence about the issue, here lapses and relapse. Engagement credit depends on replies that respond to what classmates actually wrote, adding a distinction or a source rather than repeating the original post. Citations should support the specific point made.
NU672 Unit 6 help: mistakes that cost points
A common mistake is correcting every line of a classmate's exchange, which overwhelms rather than teaches. Another is offering praise with no specific content. Students often rewrite a response without explaining why the new version fits the framework better. Some posts debate the client's diagnosis instead of the classmate's skills. Others treat reassurance as always wrong, when the issue is usually timing. And a closing question that asks for agreement, such as "Don't you think?", invites no reflection, while a question about what the classmate felt in the moment opens the most learning for everyone reading the thread. Keep your feedback to the length the classmate can take in at once.
Get an NU672 Unit 6 example written to your instructions
Summarize, without copying it, the exchange a classmate shared on your NU672 board, since the excerpt belongs to them, and paste in the board's prompt plus rubric. A feedback post comes back within 24-48h, free as your first sample, with credit tied to a line, one reply examined closely and an alternative written in spoken words. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More NU672 papers and MSN samples
- NU672 Unit 1: Psychotherapy Practicum Learning Goals
- NU672 Unit 2: Process Recording, IPT Session Four
- NU672 Unit 3: Supervision Note on Self-Disclosure
- NU672 Unit 4: Countertransference, Foster Care Youth
- NU672 Unit 5: Group Analysis, Bereavement Group
- NU672 Unit 7: Genogram and Formulation
- NU672 Unit 8: Treatment Plan
- NU672 Unit 9: Comparative Process Recording
- NU672 Unit 10: Termination Summary
- NU671 Unit 6: Activation vs Cognitive Therapy
- NU670 Unit 6: Dopamine Pathways and Haloperidol
- NU657 Unit 6: ICU Handoff Comparison Post
- NU656 Unit 6: Ventilator Plan for Moderate ARDS
NU672 Unit 6 questions, answered
How critical should a response to a classmate's session be?
Honest about one or two points, generous about the rest. A classmate sharing a recording is exposing early work, and feedback that corrects every line tends to discourage sharing altogether. Choose the moment where a different response could have changed the direction of the session, explain why, and offer an alternative. That level of critique helps the classmate and satisfies graders.
Which helping skills framework works best for the feedback?
Whichever your course uses. Hill's model of exploration, insight and action is common in counseling and psychotherapy training, and motivational interviewing codes suit exchanges framed that way. Applying it to a quoted line matters more than which framework it is. Naming a skill without showing where it appears, or should have appeared, adds vocabulary without adding an observation.
Can the post discuss the client's diagnosis?
Keep the focus on the exchange. The prompt is usually about the student-therapist's responses, and speculation about diagnosis shifts attention to someone who is absent from the discussion and must stay unidentifiable. If the diagnosis bears on the feedback, as when a reply overlooks something typical of the condition, mention it briefly and return to the words used.
Where can I find a free NU672 Unit 6 sample paper?
The full NU672 Unit 6 peer feedback post and both replies are shown on this page, with the affirmation, the analysis through Hill's model, the rewritten response and the closing question, plus two references. A post responding to your own classmate's exchange can be requested.
What is the abstinence violation effect in NU672 Unit 6?
It is the tendency for a person who breaks abstinence once to see the lapse as proof of total failure, which makes a full relapse more likely. Treating the lapse as a learning event, rather than a catastrophe, is meant to interrupt that thinking.