Challenge Your Exam Readiness With Our Free ADC Practice Questions

Person-centered, evidence-based care meets clients where they are. For ambivalence or reduction goals, motivational interviewing (MI) supports autonomy, elicits change talk, and collaboratively establishes harm-reduction targets (e.g., reducing frequency, avoiding use before work, tracking triggers). Personalized feedback—such as comparing current use to normative data or highlighting functional impacts—can enhance discrepancy while maintaining rapport. Confrontation (Option A) tends to increase resistance and is inconsistent with MI principles. Requiring abstinence as a precondition (Option C) risks disengagement and does not reflect stepped-care or harm-reduction frameworks commonly used in SUD treatment. Thought records (Option D) can be helpful within CBT, but without MI engagement and concrete harm-reduction planning, they may not address readiness. By aligning goals with the client’s stage of change, clinicians can build momentum toward healthier behaviors, monitor outcomes, and pivot to abstinence-focused work if and when the client’s motivation increases, thereby improving retention and clinical effectiveness.