I am having trouble understanding how reparenting is different from the general approach of any of the relational or humanistic therapies. For example, the core conditions of person centred therapy (congruence, empathy and unconditional positive regard) seem to be key aspects of what people are describing here as "reparenting." Much of my work is around my inability to trust and to accept comfort; to accept that I have needs; and to allow myself to be vulnerable. Key elements which I should have been taught in childhood, but wasn't. I expect these are very common areas of work for clients - many clients are in therapy because of unmet childhood needs or residual conflicts/tensions from childhood. Are most of us being reparented? It seems unlikely to me. It seems far more likely that the basic aspects of relational therapy are being labelled as "reparenting".

From The Schema Therapy Society:

Just as the process of parenting takes widely different forms, limited reparenting may involve warmth and nurturance, firmness, self-disclosure, confrontation, playfulness, and setting limits amongst other things. It takes the form of simultaneous tenderness and firmness through what is called “empathic confrontation”. It will also vary depending upon the phase of treatment. For this reason, schema therapy cannot be typified by a particular stance such as neutrality, firmness or nurturance. It is best typified by the broad range of responses and inclinations on the part of the therapist it incorporates, its flexibility, and the organization of these responses around the core needs of the patient.

Isn't this a description of therapy in general (excluding cognitive and short term therapies)? Are there specific elements of reparenting which I am missing and which set it apart as a distinct approach?