I realized that in my previous comment I didn't actually give my take on UPR, I mostly talked about different kinds of judgment and when and where it could be helpful.

So, to take it further to UPR, first, I'd like to share a classic didactic teaching material about UPR often used in psychology programs.
This is one of the famous Gloria tapes that demonstrates how UPR is done in practice by the person who invented the approach - Carl Rogers.

Now, to be honest, I don't believe that what he is doing in that video can realistically be done with vast majority of people. Gloria, in my view, is a perfect client for that type of demonstration - very introspective, not visibly struggling with severe trauma of any kind, as well as poverty and other socio-economic stresses many people struggle with these days. Her problems of a middle-income, comfortably living divorcee from the 60-s cannot even closely be compared to someone who, for instance, goes from crisis to crisis, struggles with self-harming behavior, heavy additions, makes suicidal attempts, lives near or below poverty line, gets beaten up by husband or BF and all other heavy karmic stuff like that. That's why what worked for her in that tape wouldn't work for the majority of people IMO.

That's the reason I don't take UPR approach literally as it's demonstrated in the video. I have my own interpretation of it, which works for me just fine. I see UPR as respectful non-engagement in the client's choices. That is to say that I don't see it as my responsibility as a therapist to "navigate" the client towards the "right" choices. That does NOT mean that I would hesitate to say something if I see that something the client is choosing to do can get them into serious trouble. I would say it as I see it but to me it has nothing to do with "challenging" people, just giving them information to consider. But the choice is always theirs and, whatever the choice is, I respect it because my belief is that every human being deserves such respect even if I don't particularly like them as a person. This is a very short description of how I see UPR but in reality it's more complicated than just that. I just don't have time to describe it fully here.

Generally speaking, I don't like the word "challenge" when it's applied to working with people in therapy. I prefer the expression "honest feedback". "Challenging" someone implies to me that they shouldn't be doing what they are doing, and, as I said, it's not my place to make that determination for them (which is by the way part of UPR theory), but I can give my opinion on what could be the consequences of their choices.

The value of UPR idea is that it's much more important to help people come to their own understanding of why they do what they do instead of feeding them the therapist's interpretations, which may be and often are wrong, and the therapist's personal beliefs of what is and isn't healthy, which may also not be true for a particular client as well as in general. Only from that place of self-understanding that comes from within the person rather than from somebody else (the therapist) and self-compassion and self-acceptance that come as a result, the person will be able to come to their own conclusions as to what choices are best for them.