Posted by dragonfly25 on January 18, 2004, at 10:45:53
In reply to being Special » dragonfly25, posted by crushedout on January 18, 2004, at 10:05:53
ok, i can't read all the posts now cause im running out the door soon (so if i sound ignorant to them, im sorry)but.... yes i think some of boundry issues are bs. and i posted on another thread about how important i think boudries are. i do! i think they are critical. i have had a boundry violation with a therappist.
i think the patient knows when a boundry has been violated, and i don't think karen did until she started reading about all those boundries. actually im not sure she even thinks a boundry was violated???
when i referred to 'special' ididn't mean "special" i meant that it was a solid grounded relationship where you are completely comfortable with the therapist and they are completely comfortable with you. because a therapist can't always be comfortable with patients- we can all be pretty screwed up at times. but after awile you build an understanding kind of. i am having a really hard time explaining what i am trying to say. i think there are critical boundries that should not be crossed. actually i would be interested in knowing if karen is on a first name basis with her therapist. (not saying that it critical, but i think it is important to keep that boundry clear). um i have to think about this...
> but see, that's the problem. as much as i *want* (as much as i think we all want) to be special to our therapists, one thing that i found informative/intriguing about the links joslynn posted is that we're not *supposed* to be special. if we become that to our Ts, they're actually having a problem. they're no longer objective enough.
>
> what do you guys think of this? is it b.s.? is it ok to be special, e.g., to be our T's faves (or one of them)? or is that a sign of trouble?
>
poster:dragonfly25
thread:300720
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20040116/msgs/302291.html