Posted by Amelia_in_StPaul on June 19, 2009, at 12:51:26
In reply to Re: Evidence-based practices: CBT » Amelia_in_StPaul, posted by garnet71 on June 18, 2009, at 19:24:17
Hi Garnet, that was anger and passion, not triggering. I mentioned on the med board to you that I did have a psychodynamic therapist many years ago--and he helped me with what he could. I said that we couldn't touch the PTSD, because I believe--and he believed--that that approach was not appropriate for it, and would destabilize me.
He was a wonderful person. I liked him immensely. However, I DO Get angry, and passionate, when I read how T's do things that to me screams manipulation in the name of whatever you want to call it, but usually some variant of psychoanalysis. There are clear boundaries that are set out in non-psychodynamic therapies that are less squishy than those in psychodynamic, even interpersonal, therapy.
I was angry on your behalf. You had written a desperate post that seemed to indicate that your temporary T had said some irresponsible things. I did not understand that it was you that was reading into the encounter, and I did not understand that he was not saying that you had "buried psychosis." As someone with a sister with actual psychosis, the notion of buried psychosis upsets me very yes (that's a trigger, if any existed here).
It's funny how different people can really interpret things differently. CBT is not warm fuzzy to me at all--it's very workmanlike, and I appreciate that. I dislike talking about my past, my childhood, my nightmares, etc. I don't think it helps.
The hue and cry I've received about not respecting psychoanalysis (not from you) makes no sense to me. I can believe as I see fit. I can respond from my set of beliefs, just as anyone could. There is a majority here that believes in interpersonal and psychodynamic approaches--that's fine. But that doesn't mean I am not allowed to voice my opinion, especially when someone I think highly of (you) is in so much pain.
This may surprise you, but as I've said before, academically, I like some aspects of psychodynamic approaches. Only academically. I don't think it works therapy-wise. In fact, I looked at a program in the San Francisco area that trains therapists to be psychoanalysts, so I know how intensive the training is. The thing I liked about it is that it utilized what I think are very literary, symbol-laden, concepts in psychodynamic and psychoanalytic theory, but married the concepts with FEMINISM. Sorry for the caps, I'm not shouting, just being enthusiastic. B/c that is the main problem (and the main criticism of) with psychodynamic theory, in my opinion and many others'.
However, the love I have for the literary, symbol-laden concepts, even married to feminism, so to speak, do not, I believe work to help clients learn to cope and deal with the everyday.
So I did not go to that school, did not become a psychoanalyst.
Very few people who have responded to me are actually getting the full picture, and are actually understanding what I hope you understand: I responded in the way I did because I thought you were sorely treated by the temporary T (don't have a better way to put it), the consultant. You had said some things that sounded as though HE had said them. Because those things go the heart of what I think is the problem with psychodynamics, IMO, I thought you could use therapy that would provide better boundaries and that could assure you that you were not psychotic.
It came from a place of care, d@mned what anyone else thinks of it. I care about you.
So I am not going to say anymore about your new journey into therapy, except to say, again (AGAIN, do you hear me people?), that I support your new course, and wish you all the very best. I can disagree with the larger issues of something, but support the specific incidence, the specific person. That is what I wish to communicate to you--I support you.
Hey Amelia-It's always nice talking to you. I can't help but notice you are triggered about psychoanalysis. Having PTSD myself, and still being triggered here and there, I can see it so clearly. I can almost hear the hypervigilence coming from your words-so strongly I can hear your words as a voice-and your reaction sounds so familiar to me. It's almost as if I can feel that PTSD anxiety in your words. Do you think that is accurate? I'm so sorry you have had a bad reaction from it. I can see how being in the wrong hands could be dangerious. I think that is an important issue to discuss here and anywhere.
>
> CBT never did anything for me, personally. Most of my emotions are repressed, which I believe, is the source of my behavior and neurosis. I relived some of those emotions, however, through a relationship which triggered the PTSD from childhood. I remained intact, but that was the least stable period of my life. Even after all the childhood trauma, I was stable from my teen years to almost age 30, until that relationship started. I had some dysfunction, but not depression and barely anxiety, though remember having it some times. Was very productive and seen as someone who 'had it all together'. I was not, however, in many long relationships with men; mostly casually dated. So i think that illustrates how childhood emotions need to be processed for me, in that I only became unstable after a relationship that triggered everything I had never dealt with.
>
> I can also see how the relationship with these 2 types of therapists can be very important to people. I think many people really benefit from the warm fuzziness of CBT or talk therapists, but I don't. I spent hours in offices just talking to therapists. They were my 'freind'. I don't need that warm mushy stuff. I don't need a friend - I need a healer. I want someone authoritive. It must be difficult for some to deal with the total lack of self-disclosure from some analysts, the coldness of blank state. I like it because I want to work solely with the transference to allow me to discover the sources of my behavior, t houghts, and neurosis in a very isightful way facilitated by my unconsciousness. Rarely has a CBT therapist given me much insight. And CBT seems like common sense to me, like I already instinctually do it quite often. When emotions are repressed and so buried, however, the lack of even knowing and feeling these emotions exist prevents true healing, for me, imo. With CBT, they are still going to be repressed-still an underlying source for neurosis. I guess many do not buy those theories, that's ok with me, but i do. With the emergence of these emotions can come a catharthesis-I've already felt it starting.
>
> But I'm glad you are discussing this type of therapy so others can learn. I just don't agree with the significance of that research, much like other research. For therapy, i think one has to go by their personal preferences and what's best for them, rather than what is perceived to be affective with others. I've also read about EMDR being effective for PTSD.
>
> I totally agree with what Alexandria said too. Hey, I was never interviewed by any researcher to assess my positive reaction. There are only 3000 true psychoanalysts in the US, if i read correctly. It takes 4 more years after medical school or PhD obtainment to gain this certification. That's a huge investment. Not only that, anlysists have to undergo psychoanalysis themselves for a certain time period, adding to the whole process. There is not a huge sample here to research and maybe scattered throughout the US. I don't want to see the field die out, that's for sure.
poster:Amelia_in_StPaul
thread:901682
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20090614/msgs/902055.html