![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 140 to 164 of 283. Go back in thread:
Posted by Tamar on May 27, 2005, at 10:05:27
In reply to Chapter 2. Communicating feelings., posted by Dinah on May 26, 2005, at 19:13:46
> This one threw me a bit, because unlike most of the book, it was something outside my experience.
>
> When she said the relationship was the item that therapists and clients felt least comfortable discussing, except for sex, I was astonished. My therapist has always made it a perfectly ok topic. (Sex too, for that matter). Which is just as well, since it has taken up so much time. All of my issues seem to come up time and time again in the context of our relationship. All the work we're doing now is done with the backdrop of years and years of discussing our relationship in ways that these topics are already open and ready for exploration. I can't imagine a therapist being uncomfortable discussing the relationship. Or sex for that matter. I guess I'm spoiled there.Well, I don't think my T was uncomfortable about it, but we never once discussed the relationship. He probably would have been prepared to if I'd ever raised it as a subject. And indeed, I tried to a few times, but never got very far. But it was a short term therapy, and I suspect he might not have wanted to emphasise the transference thing too much. A couple of times he suggested it might be hard for me to talk to a man about certain things, but actually I feel entirely comfortable with men, so I insisted his gender didn't made a difference to me. But that wasn't really about the relationship.
> How do therapists find out what their clients' real issues are if they don't talk about their relationship? Because I lie. Well, not really lie. But I don't think I'd walk in and say I'm an endless well of need. And he certainly would never notice it when I talk of my other relationships. He'd think I was sort of schizoid. So only by focussing on my relationship was he able to see that my pathology was more borderline than schizoid. Don't other therapies get stymied by that? If the relationship between the therapist and client isn't discussed?
Yeah, I think it does cause problems. In my case it should have been pretty obvious that I would find the relationship very important, and that I'd experience lots of transference, because of the stuff I was talking about. It hurt very much not to be able to talk about it. I wished so much that he would raise it, but since he didn't I assumed we could only talk about it if I brought it up, and I was just too embarrassed.
It's the only thing that I wish we'd done differently in the work we did together. I got a lot out of therapy, but I wonder if it would have been less painful (indeed, if it would be less painful now) if we could have talked about the relationship.
Sorry, I didn't mean to rant. It's a sensitive area for me.
Posted by Tamar on May 27, 2005, at 10:19:24
In reply to Other aspects of Chapter 2, posted by Dinah on May 26, 2005, at 19:09:47
> The disproportionate importance of small things -
Oh yes. If he ever said anything that had any personal resonance at all, I remembered it – his exact words, his expression, his body language. I was even aware of a change in my tone of voice when I replied.
Actually, his body language was something I noticed a great deal. There was one session when I just didn’t know what to make of some of his body language and I spent hours trying to analyse it. And it was probably of negligible significance.
> Attachment and dependency -
It always surprises me when this comes up for me. Recently I was afraid he might leave his current job and work somewhere else – and this fear arose since I terminated! I just don’t want him to go away without telling me. Silly, perhaps, but probably inevitable.
> Therapist's Presence Brings Comfort -
Yes. Even imagining his presence brings comfort. Sometimes even now when stuff happens to trigger me I imagine reaching out my arm and taking hold of his hand. And I never held his hand in therapy; I just like to think of him as physically present.
> Child - Parent
I didn’t get much of this until right at the end, when we were talking about puberty and I suddenly felt like I was talking to a father figure. It took me completely by surprise, since I’d always had much more adult feelings for him!
> Alike and Different -
This was another surprise to me. I happen to know where he went to school, and I have a rough idea where he lives, so I compare those things to my own education and place of residence. And I compare his success in his job with my struggles. At first I was confused because I imagined it as feelings of competitiveness, and I’m not usually very competitive, but then I realised that actually I was comparing these things because I wanted to find things in common (so we could become friends and hang out in coffee shops…).
> Sory to go on for so long, and to make it so personal. But Chapter 2 resonates so much with me. And it is a very personal chapter for me. It normalizes so much of what I experience. I think that's the great power of this book.Yeah, it resonated a lot with me too. I like that normalizing feeling!
Posted by Tamar on May 27, 2005, at 10:41:09
In reply to Re: Approximate relationships » Tamar, posted by alexandra_k on May 26, 2005, at 18:51:47
> > Hmm… I think of the way I love my students, and I think I love them freely, without expecting them to reciprocate. It’s nice if they like me, and if they work hard, but I’ve had students who didn’t work hard and I still loved them. Even when one or two students haven’t liked me much I’ve usually liked them. Some of them are a pain in the *ss, but I still love them. And my students are adults; many of them are older than me.
>
> Yes. But you are like the therapist there.Yeah, that’s my point. Maybe a therapist can love freely, without hoping for reciprocation.
> Wouldn't that be an 'approximation' of love in your relationships just there?
I just don’t see that it’s approximate. Maybe I’m being dense. Feels like love, looks like love, is love. In some cases it could be approximate, like in my bigger classes when I don’t know my students very well. But in small classes I think it is love.
What I will say is that it’s not so much like love for my friends (adults) as love for my children. It’s kind of maternal.
> > Well, certainly I have more freedom to be myself with my students than a T has with clients. But I’m also somewhat limited; I wouldn’t expect to be telling them much about my private life. However, we can talk about things that aren’t too personal, and it doesn’t seem to stop me feeling love for them. And love always has limits, in all relationships, doesn’t it?
>
> Yeah. But there is a similar power imbalance in teaching relationships as there is in therapy relationsips. Thats why there is a general policy of not getting involved (ie sexually) in both cases...Absolutely. And I don’t tend to think of my students as potential sexual partners, possibly because I feel maternal towards them.
> > Yes, that is a hard question. Maybe it works through a combination of the relationship and the subject matter.
>
> I'm not sure whether it does work.
> Thats what I have been wondering...
> People get to there...
> People get to that point...
> How many people come out the other side?
> Wake up one day and say
> 'Why on earth am I paying you to listen to me and care about me when I can find that for free in the real world? Why on earth would I find more satisfaction out of an artificially contrived one sided relationship than with what I can find in a reciprocal RL relationship?'
> How many people get there?
> And how many people just get stuck...Well, I can’t answer for other people, but I didn’t feel I was ‘employing’ my T just to listen to me and care for me. I was talking to him because of his incisiveness and perception about things I found hard to talk about; things my friends didn’t know how to respond to. It was important to me to believe that he cared about me because it helped me to trust him so that I could say things I’d never dream of saying to other people. Things that didn’t show me in a very good light.
> > > Can you buy love?
> > > Can you buy the 'love' of a therapist?
> > > I would say 'no' to the first and 'yes' to the second. IMO therapy would therefore be an approximation of love.
>
> > I’m not sure I’d say yes even to the second. I’m not convinced that feeling loved by the therapist has much to do with paying a fee.
>
> Paying a fee seems to be a necessary though not sufficient condition. Nobody will work with you if you can't pay them - but even if you do pay them there is no guarantee...That’s true.
> >I’m curious about the possibility of thinking of it in terms of a petit différend (are you interested in Lyotard?)...
>
> ???
> I haven't heard that expression or that person...
> Do you want to say some more???
>
I probably can’t explain properly what I mean in one paragraph. Better people than me have tried to explain Lyotard. And I’m not a philosopher. But here goes…Lyotard’s idea of the petit différend comes from his work on Kant’s idea of the Sublime. Sometimes an idea can’t be fully expressed in language. In that case, different parties may have different ways of expressing the idea. These different ways of expressing may rest on assumptions that are so different as to be incomaprable (this situation is a différend). Other times, there may be some assumptions in common, and there can be some degree of mutual understanding, but at the borders of this mutual understanding there may be areas of incomparable assumptions. This situation is a petit différend.
Note: this attempt at a single paragraph summary of Lyotard’s thought is likely to be deeply flawed and would no doubt attract derisive comments from serious philosophers!
Anyway… I think the idea of ‘the therapeutic relationship’ can be understood in terms of the Sublime. And it seems pretty clear that what therapists and clients understand is based on some different premises. It’s still possible for therapists and clients to negotiate the relationship, so it’s not a différend. But there are points at which making a judgment in favour of one side could leave the other side bereft, because the two sides of the relationship involve some boundaries of negotiation in which there are incomparable assumptions. Thus it may be a matter of a petit différend.
Again: one paragraph doesn’t really do the idea justice. And maybe it would fall down at some point. But I’m quite curious about the possibility that the therapeutic relationship involves a petit différend, because it might have interesting personal and political consequences...
Posted by Daisym on May 27, 2005, at 10:56:16
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Wanting to be special. » daisym, posted by Dinah on May 27, 2005, at 4:30:35
****After thinking it over, I'm wondering why I was so embarassed about it. In many ways it's not a big deal.
>>>>>Don't you think it is because we, as therapy-theory geeks (no offense intended), "know better"? For me, the embarrassment is that it feels sort of school-girlish and not very mature to want this. It is more than that...but I think that is the heart of it. I said I didn't want to be a cliche. I absolutely hate being predictable. And I think I have so much control over myself that if I see something like that coming, I can usually repress it. AND, not only do I want to be special, I TOLD him I want to be special. Sheesh...have I no pride left?
For me, it is an ego thing, it is a childlike thing and it is something I will struggle against because it feels really, really wrong and dangerous. But I can't deny that I feel it. I *do* want to be special.
Posted by Daisym on May 27, 2005, at 10:57:17
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Wanting to be special. » Dinah, posted by alexandra_k on May 27, 2005, at 5:40:18
My therapist rephrases this into:
"Who wouldn't want to be special?"
Posted by fallsfall on May 27, 2005, at 13:56:45
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Wanting to be special. » alexandra_k, posted by Daisym on May 27, 2005, at 10:57:17
I think there is "wanting to be special", "needing to be special", and "dying if I'm not special".
I tend to be in the "dying if I'm not special" range most of the time. And I must be special to everyone I know. It defines whether I am "good", "worthwhile". Reminds me of the phrase in the BPD definition: Frantic efforts to avoid abandonment. Frantic efforts - that's what I do to be special.
I am at a point now with my therapist where I feel like I am special to him. I don't know if I'm *more* special than his other patients, but I feel like I am special *enough*. Like it matters to him how I'm doing, whether I come (and some of that is financial, but some of it isn't), he's interested in me. I guess that helps me to feel like something drastic would have to happen to disrupt our therapy - that the normal ups and downs can be handled. So I guess I want to be special because that will ensure the relationship - if I'm not special then he might capriciously leave me.
I told him today that I had a dream that my old therapist was fired from her group. He asked if that resonnated at all with what we were talking about. I said very forcefully "No, not at all.", then more quietly "You aren't getting rid of me that easily". He got a smile on his face and said that wasn't what he was thinking - he was wondering if I was finally letting go of my old therapist - feeling like I wouldn't ever go back to her. There could be some of that going on. Moving forward instead of backwards.
Not exactly on topic with the book... I'm reading along, but having trouble thinking of things to say...
Posted by Dinah on May 27, 2005, at 15:56:38
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Wanting to be special., posted by Daisym on May 27, 2005, at 10:56:16
Therapy theory geeks. I like it! :)
That may have been true at the beginning. You know, the first nine years or so. But I've totally given up now. I just divorce myself from it on an intellectual level, and figure it's something important to me on an emotional level. I've thrown in the towel. I cannot possibly abase myself more before this man than I have already abased myself. If I haven't died of embarassment by now, I don't suppose I will. He seems to be ok with it, so he can deal with it.
Yet, I was embarassed. So maybe I'm fooling myself.
Contradictory? Yeah. My poor therapist.
Posted by alexandra_k on May 27, 2005, at 17:04:36
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Wanting to be special. » alexandra_k, posted by Daisym on May 27, 2005, at 10:57:17
> My therapist rephrases this into:
>
> "Who wouldn't want to be special?"Yeah.
Thats great
:-)
Posted by Dinah on May 27, 2005, at 19:01:53
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Communicating feelings. » Dinah, posted by Tamar on May 27, 2005, at 10:05:27
It may have lessened the pain. It's hard to say because those conversations also increase intimacy, and that increases the possibility for pain.
Do you think that discussing your relationship would have brought up issues from your life in general that didn't get brought up because you didn't discuss your relationship?
I really think in my therapy it did. But I may have been lying to myself a lot more than is usual.
Posted by Dinah on May 29, 2005, at 9:48:25
In reply to Re: Approximate relationships, posted by Tamar on May 25, 2005, at 16:21:44
This one didn't really resonate with me. My therapist is a counselor rather than an analyst or psychologist. Maybe he sees his role a bit differently?
He's big on giving me responsibility for my own therapy. He answers appropriate questions as honestly as he can. He admits when he doesn't know something. He explains the process as best he can.
My son's play therapist gave out a "What You Need to Know About Therapy" at the first session. It included things like what feelings you might expect to have for your therapist, and other things from this chapter. It was several pages long. I thought it was a good idea. I may have mentioned it to my therapist, but I don't think he uses it. Because at one time or another I've seen most of his new client handouts in his little copier/printer, and I've never seen one.
I think I like my therapist's stance, so I think I'd agree with Ms. Lott in her recommendations in this chapter.
I'll admit that over the ten years of therapy, my therapist has done a few of the things in the third to last paragraph. And they give me a bit of insight into ways he's thinking that might not be quite what a perfect therapist might think. But he hasn't done any of those things consistently enough for me to worry about.
Except maybe defensiveness. He does tend to be that way. He says he works hard on it. I believe him. Sometimes his defensiveness is quite overt. Sometimes it's very subtle. Like I can feel him mentally saying "Ouch" and lowering some barriers.
Posted by pegasus on May 29, 2005, at 21:08:57
In reply to Chapter 3.The Therapist's Power, posted by Dinah on May 29, 2005, at 9:48:25
The power imbalance in therapy is such an interesting aspect to me. It's what makes it work a lot of the time, but it's so problematic. My ex-T definitely always took a stance as a teacher or guide, while my current T presents herself much more as a co-worker, or peer in the process. It could explain why I had so much more parental transference to him than I do to her, despite their similar theoretical orientations. I actually think I got more out of therapy with my ex-T.
I've taken classes in a counseling psych program, and in one counseling techniques class the instructor told us that the way you deal with the therapist's greater power (as the therapist) is to not identify with it. She said that that eliminates the power imbalance. Excuse me? As if it's only what's in the therapist's head that counts.
I believe that the power imbalance is there anyway, and the therapist can do a lot of things to mitigate it, if they believe that's useful. But from the client's point of view it's always going to be there to some extent. That's why the laws against sexual involvement apply to everyone, not just certain styles.
I think this is maybe an issue of which a lot of therapists are not sufficiently aware. Remember a few months back when someone started a thread about whether you would sleep with your T if you could? There were some 20 responses, and about 80% said they would. That's therapist power right there.
pegasus
Posted by daisym on May 29, 2005, at 22:57:55
In reply to Re: Chapter 3.The Therapist's Power, posted by pegasus on May 29, 2005, at 21:08:57
I think Peg is right -- the power imbalance is as much in the client's head as in the therapist's head. Lott talks about Robert Langs' writings about the first contact with the Patient in which Langs speaks of making a mental note that attributes mental health issues to wanting to understand the fee structure. Aren't we all worried about that at one time or another? We've spoken often here about needing the RULE BOOK. No one wants to present themselves in a way that could be misread, we don't want to ask questions we aren't "supposed to" and I think many of us identify with Lott when she talks about wanting to be "good patients". I think a lot of this stems from the media portrayal of therapy where every little thing is attributed to unconscious motivation. I don't think there are too many of us in therapy who trust that we aren't being driven by some unclear agenda. And I think we think that our therapists have the power to SEE what we can't see -- these unconscious motives. This gives them tons of power. It is intimidating to feel like you don't know your own mind. This chapter helped me understand why I can be so assertive in most of my life and yet not be able to bring this trait into therapy.
The thing that really resonated with me was where she said that to engage in the process a woman must rely on her therapist to "watch the store." That way as clients we can push and pull and demand and step back and know that we are still safe and that the boundaries are still firm. I don't think you can do the work and hold the boundaries for your therapist simulanteously. It reminded me of the way that my therapist often tells me he will "hold down the fort" as I try to figure stuff out or I need to pull away for awhile.
Her closing paragraph that matches some therapy relationships to dysfunctional families brings home yet again the value of Babble. She says "what may empower women clients most may be sharing their therapy stories with each other." I'm so glad we are all doing cutting-edge work!
Posted by gardenergirl on May 30, 2005, at 0:58:55
In reply to Re: Approximate relationships » Tamar, posted by alexandra_k on May 25, 2005, at 23:32:22
> I worry about that sense of 'feeling loved'. One feels loved because of the nature of the therapy relationship. They are supposed to focus on you for that time. Emotionally hold you etc. But RL isn't like that... It is more reciprocal. I worry that therapy teaches us the wrong messages about the nature of love and caring and about the nature of human relationships.
I think that therapy CAN teach us the wrong messages. Or perhaps "teach" is the wrong word. I think we can get the wrong messages from therapy if we don't finish it or don't talk about our feelings (or lack of them) about the relationship. Because we form conclusions about them, and we project stuff onto the T, and if we do not get a chance to reality-check our perceptions and feelings, we may hold the wrong message==like the "T is rescuing me" or something. When really it came from within us and from the process.
>
> I worry that it fosters desires along the lines of the golden fantasy. That once those desires are fostered all you have done is made that person dependent on therapy relationships to get those desires met.When therapy is done right, the person learns that they wish the T to fulfill this fantasy, but the T does not and can not. In fact, no one can. No one but ourselves to ourselves. Now if therapy is not done well, or the T has needs of his/her own that enter into the therapy, then the T might try very hard to fulfill this fantasy, and this is doing a disservice.
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on May 30, 2005, at 1:08:14
In reply to Other aspects of Chapter 2, posted by Dinah on May 26, 2005, at 19:09:47
>
> The disproportionate importance of small things -This is funny...I never think about how a change in my appearance or the office or whatever might be jarring to the client. And I generally do not notice changes in his office, although I don't know that anything has changed. But last session I asked him if his desk always looked that clean. And he said no and laughed. :) I'm not sure if I had much reaction to it, but now that I think about it, it didn't look like "his" desk anymore.
>
>
> Attachment and dependency -This one resonated with me, too. I remember the moment I felt attached and dependent. I was shocked. I had that "oh no, not me. I won't get attached" feeling. I don't know why I thought I would be different. Arrogance, I guess. :)
Last session he said something that reinforced my attachment and made me feel good about it. (I still struggle with feeling weak or ashamed about being dependent at times.) He said "it's just you and me in this" referring to it not mattering what others' think. That felt so good to me. Just a simple comment....
>
>
> Therapist's Presence Brings Comfort -I think this is true for the most part. But then again, I have some anxiety lately, too. And the first session after the blow up was not comforting at all. Yuck. But I know I have internalized him. I tend to imagine, like the woman who imagined her T in the back of the plane, I imagine my T is somewhere nearby watching me when I am out running errands and such. I felt so embarrassed at first, but now I just take comfort. And I recently heard his voice in my head--his soft and gentle voice which he uses when I am crying really hard. It was soothing to me to be able to bring that back on demand.
>
>
> Child - ParentI'm sure there is some aspect of this present, but I think it's what I'm resisting right now. D'oh!
>
> Alike and Different -Oh, I SO assume that my T shares traits with me. Some are evident...like being late, liking the same catalog for clothes, sharing the same orientation. But I tend to assume others, and he's never really said much to confirm or deny. I think I need him to be a mirror for me in order to feel good about myself. Or maybe I need to identify with him in order to feel safe? Hmmm.
>
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on May 30, 2005, at 1:12:50
In reply to Chapter 2. Communicating feelings., posted by Dinah on May 26, 2005, at 19:13:46
I was not so surprised by this, if only because the majority of my clients never bring up the relationship. Or if they do, it's in very vague and almost rhetorical terms, like if they feel they are making progress, they sometimes attribute it to coming to see me versus any specific thing they learned.
I did have one person talk a lot about the relationship. This was when I was very green with therapy. And it was so painful for me to wait him out to hear what he was going to say. I tried to make it okay, but inside I was scared to death. And I'm sure that showed.
My T has done a foot waggle recently and acknowledged he might be nervous, too, about deepening in our sessions. I kinda feel like he is waiting for me to get there, but he assumes I will. (Hmm, I should tell him that.) I think it must be such a skill and art to convey that it's okay to discuss feelings for the T, even sexual ones, without suggesting them or assuming them, and putting off the client.
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on May 30, 2005, at 1:15:39
In reply to Chapter 2. Wanting to be special., posted by Dinah on May 26, 2005, at 19:33:57
I have this feeling. I want to be the client he most enjoys seeing. So I try to be interesting, and at the same time pleasing, etc. I don't feel this take up a lot of my feelings in the relationship, but when I feel stuck or circular, I worry that he might get bored with me. And of course, he can't get bored with ME! Not ME!
ack.
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on May 30, 2005, at 1:28:12
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Wanting to be special. » Daisym, posted by fallsfall on May 27, 2005, at 13:56:45
>
> Not exactly on topic with the book... I'm reading along, but having trouble thinking of things to say...
I'm finding I have to let things digest a bit, or percolate, before I can post about it. Otherwise I read it and I just have feelings but not much in the way of words.gg
Posted by pegasus on May 30, 2005, at 8:03:36
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Wanting to be special., posted by gardenergirl on May 30, 2005, at 1:15:39
This is so true for me also. I think probably for all of us. And I've felt such shame about wanting to stand out, and knowing that I absolutely don't. I love Daisy's T's statement that who wouldn't want to be special? So validating.
I had this great moment in my session on Friday that made me feel so special. I've not gone to therapy lately because I have a new baby, and Friday was my second session back. I was walking around in her office jiggling my baby to sleep, and talking. In the middle of whatever I was saying I suddenly remembered a dream last night that I'd wanted to tell her about, so I interrupted myself and said, "Oh! I have a dream to tell you!" She laughed and said, "I'm so glad you're back, Peg." See, that means I'm *special*! (Warm glowing)
pegasus
Posted by Dinah on May 30, 2005, at 10:09:48
In reply to Re: Chapter 3.The Therapist's Power, posted by pegasus on May 29, 2005, at 21:08:57
You aren't going to get me to disagree with that. There is a power imbalance, and those therapists who don't recognize it are dangerous. Not as dangerous as those who abuse it. But dangerous.
> I've taken classes in a counseling psych program, and in one counseling techniques class the instructor told us that the way you deal with the therapist's greater power (as the therapist) is to not identify with it. She said that that eliminates the power imbalance. Excuse me? As if it's only what's in the therapist's head that counts.
>
Sadly that sounds not untypical for a lot of therapy issues. I always tell my therapist he needs to read someplace like this board to find out what's really happening in therapy, to a fair size number of clients. He's very naive sometimes. And I think that's a reflection on the training programs.
Posted by Dinah on May 30, 2005, at 10:12:42
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Wanting to be special., posted by pegasus on May 30, 2005, at 8:03:36
You're right. It does!
:-)
I'm glad you're special to your therapist, Pegasus.
I'm impressed that you bring your baby. I only did that once, when I couldn't make other arrangements. I knew he couldn't understand what was being said, of course. But I was still as stiff as if any other third person was in the room. Silly I was. :)
Posted by happyflower on May 30, 2005, at 13:46:35
In reply to Re: Chapter 2. Wanting to be special. » pegasus, posted by Dinah on May 30, 2005, at 10:12:42
Hey, I know I am late, but I am going to start reading the book tommorrow. Tons of people have recomended this book to me ( I wonder why, hmmm.)lol :)
Posted by Dinah on May 30, 2005, at 16:17:50
In reply to can I join the reading party?., posted by happyflower on May 30, 2005, at 13:46:35
Posted by pegasus on May 30, 2005, at 17:29:50
In reply to Re: Chapter 3.The Therapist's Power Daisy and » pegasus, posted by Dinah on May 30, 2005, at 10:09:48
> I always tell my therapist he needs to read someplace like this board to find out what's really happening in therapy, to a fair size number of clients. He's very naive sometimes.Or, he could read this book! I think every therapist should read this book.
pegasus
Posted by messadivoce on May 30, 2005, at 17:58:51
In reply to Re: Chapter 3.The Therapist's Power Daisy and » pegasus, posted by Dinah on May 30, 2005, at 10:09:48
I've been reading along but haven't posted yet because I didn't really have anything to add to the discussion that hasn't already been said.
But in chapter 3, Ms. Lott talks about questioning your T about their therapetic approaches, and quotes two T's who have psychodymanic and CBT approaches on how they would explain their orientation to a client.
I think this is SO important to find out. I first was in therapy when I was 16, and my T was a woman in her fifties who now I can identify as a CBT therapist. She told me that we were going to "reframe" my view of the world. I ended up making lots of lists about things that sucked, and then re-writing them to make them better. She told me I was finished about 4 months into the game, and although I felt better short-term, it really didn't work well. I had no tools to work with after therapy. I think that she was probably not the greatest CBT therapist, because I know there are people who swear by CBT therapy.
My second T was the man I write about so much. He didn't explain the process until we were deep into therapy, and I didn't think to ask him. He did a lot of listening in the first 8 or so sessions, and then started challenging the destructive things I was saying about myself. So that is kind of a CBT thing, but he did tell me after about 2 months that "the kind of therapy I do, works with the relationship between the therapist and client."
I wish I would have had a clue what I was in for--attachment, dependency, pain, longing, lust, love, anger, fear, attraction. Psychodynamic therapy should be thoroughly explained before it begins. It's just so risky to develop a relationship with a client and use that therapeutically without discussing the potential ramifications and consequences first. I think that practitioners view it FAR too clinically. For us it feels and hurts and seems like it's real (back to the approximate relationship thing again). If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.......
I just wish I had known what I was in for, potentially.
Posted by alexandra_k on May 30, 2005, at 18:36:50
In reply to Re: Approximate relationships » alexandra_k, posted by gardenergirl on May 30, 2005, at 0:58:55
> I think we can get the wrong messages from therapy if we don't finish it or don't talk about our feelings (or lack of them) about the relationship.
Yeah. But how many people 'finish'? And how many people get 'stuck'? I mean stuck in the golden fantasy stuff with the t meeting (sort of sort of) those desires and... well... just kind of staying there.
> When therapy is done right, the person learns that they wish the T to fulfill this fantasy, but the T does not and can not. In fact, no one can. No one but ourselves to ourselves.
Sure. But the t focus solely on the clients stuff for the time they are together. The t isn't supposed to talk about or act from their needs or desires - it is supposed to be all about the client. Isn't that something along the lines of golden fantasy fulfillment right there?
I don't know...
I have been thinking about this a lot...I'm not sure.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.