Posted by sassyfrancesca on October 30, 2008, at 7:45:15
In reply to One more thought..., posted by Wittgensteinz on October 30, 2008, at 4:56:07
> (((Witti)))
Just as an appendix to my post, this question of only sending him e-mails about 'therapeutic matters' seems bizarre to me.
It is.
Surely by definition as a client whatever you have to say to him (or write in a mail) is 'grist for the mill' - and is of your therapy.
Exactly; I write what I am feeling, or what is going on in my life.
>
> Now, if he has taken the relationship out of the domain of therapy, that was his action and his mistake.Yup, he sexualized our relationship years ago. The miracle is not that I haven't acted on my feelings, but that I haven't done so, even tho he has led me on big time.
It is only possible for the therapist to start being 'untherapeutic' and not the client! e.g. if client is 'seductive' the client is still working within the rules of therapy - it is up to the therapist to interpret why the client feels a need to seduce, what are the underlying reasons
As an article I read stated.....that this love stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum; it is usually in direct relation to the t overtly or covertly encouraging the client, and that is what he has done.
- now if the therapy falls to the temptation of his seductive client, then he is the one being untherapeutic.
>
> I think you were absolutely right to continue after the first time to write whatever you wanted in your mails. If he'd said "only mail in emergencies" then that's something different but as far as only mailing about therapeutic matters, then by definition surely you could write whatever you felt like.Yes, and I did and will!
Thankyou, (((Witti))): You are dead-on about all of it.
Love, Sassy
>
> Witti
poster:sassyfrancesca
thread:859702
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20081018/msgs/859881.html