![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 29. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by happyflower on May 3, 2005, at 22:31:11
Hello! I have doing some research on types of therapy and it seem like my T uses a lot of dynamic supportive therapy on me. I am sure he does a mixture of things. I have had abuse in my past from my mother but overall I have functioned very well in spite of it all. It seems like in T we are working on the fine details of me being a better person. The EMDR is suppose to desensatize my memories and he feels I will be fine when I am able to do this. We are working a lot with goals in my life, gaining friendships, doing things to make myself happy, and bettering myself.
In supportive therapy, I have read, the power of therapist over the client isn't as much as in other therapies. The T acts like a friend and does a lot of self disclosure and uses himself as a model of good ways to deal with things. He acts like a parent with advice and guidance, but doesn't treat you like a child. Does this make any sense? lol Our relationship does feel somewhat equal.(even though, it tech. isn't). I think I am figuring all this out, so I am going to get back to reading! lol
Posted by alexandra_k on May 3, 2005, at 23:10:04
In reply to Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone?, posted by happyflower on May 3, 2005, at 22:31:11
I think the idea is 'supportive' rather than 'exploratory'. That is that they support you with your day to day issues by listening and offering more practical advice etc rather than 'digging for dirt' in your past.
It is typically 'brief supportive' to contrast with 'exploratory' which can take something like 7-10 years...
Transference is discouraged rather than encouraged.
So the 'power balance' should seem more equal. Even though they are typically more directive. Yup.
Posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 4:14:43
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » happyflower, posted by alexandra_k on May 3, 2005, at 23:10:04
> Transference is discouraged rather than encouraged.
See, this is the key to the stuff I wonder about all the time.
How do they discourage transference? How do they know if a client is experiencing transference, especially erotic transference, since it’s so difficult to confess to it, especially if therapy lasts a short time?
If a client in dynamic therapy experiences an erotic transference towards her T, does that mean he has failed to discourage transference? If she never tells him about it; does he simply not realize? I don’t understand how a T can discourage transference, unless he comes right out and says something like, “On a scale of 1 to 10, how cute do you think I am?”
I find this very confusing!
Sorry. Rant over.
Tamar
Posted by happyflower on May 4, 2005, at 9:20:56
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » alexandra_k, posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 4:14:43
> I don’t understand how a T can discourage transference, unless he comes right out and says something like, “On a scale of 1 to 10, how cute do you think I am?”
>
> > >
>
>
I am laughing so hard I cann't see straight!
Posted by gardenergirl on May 4, 2005, at 14:15:15
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » Tamar, posted by happyflower on May 4, 2005, at 9:20:56
Some ways that transference can be discouraged involve just not bringing it into the therapeutic frame. If it's not processed, it is not made important. Although that leaves the client alone to deal with it if it occurs. :(
Also, some T's continually present themselves in ways that remind the client of the parameters of the relationship. I'm not sure I can quite describe this, but there is a certain distance and strict delineation of roles that seems to discourage the development of personal feelings. Not that that always works, either.
Personally, I think the T that doesn't keep an eye peeled for transference and is not prepared to address it is missing out on something very useful for therapy.
gg
Posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 14:50:43
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone?, posted by gardenergirl on May 4, 2005, at 14:15:15
Wow! That certainly answers some of the questions I've been asking myself repeatedly for months!
I'm so glad this issue came up, because I've read all sorts of stuff about transference and different approaches to clinical practice and this is the first time I've encountered the idea of discouraging transference (although I did see stuff about not interpreting transference in short term therapy, which sounds like something slightly different).
But if transference does occur despite being discouraged, and if despite occurring it's not brought into the therapeutic frame, what happens to the client? Isn't it a source of anxiety and shame?
Posted by Dinah on May 4, 2005, at 14:57:35
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » gardenergirl, posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 14:50:43
Yes.
That's why "In Session: The Bond Between Women and Their Therapists" is so danged popular here. :)
Posted by gardenergirl on May 4, 2005, at 14:58:04
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » gardenergirl, posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 14:50:43
>> But if transference does occur despite being discouraged, and if despite occurring it's not brought into the therapeutic frame, what happens to the client? Isn't it a source of anxiety and shame?
More than likely yes. And I would guess it's one of the reasons clients terminate early.
gg
Posted by alexandra_k on May 4, 2005, at 15:47:14
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » Tamar, posted by gardenergirl on May 4, 2005, at 14:58:04
Hmm.
In psychoanalysis (traditionally anyway) the therapist wasn't supposed to be directive at all. Just say things like 'mmm hmm' and 'I see' to keep the client talking.That is supposed to result in transference because you attribute to the therapist all sorts of qualities - because there is so much left to the imagination because they don't really show you very much of themselves or their reactions or responses at all.
In directive therapy the client directs things more by asking particular questions and saying things with informational purposes. Telling you about the relationship between thoughts and feelings or whatever.
Because more of them is there there is supposed to be less room for the client to interpret the therapist in a certain way according to their issues and pathology.
So by being 'more there' there is supposed to be less transference. Does that make sense?
I don't think it can get rid of it altogether. But it isn't supposed to come up on the agenda either.
I don't know. Maybe I am just rambelling...
Posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 15:57:18
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone?, posted by alexandra_k on May 4, 2005, at 15:47:14
Y’know – and sorry to keep banging on about this – but I find this idea of discouraging transference deeply unsettling. I mean, it’s one thing if a patient chooses not to tell her T about her transference-related feelings, and even for a T to feel uncomfortable about hearing a client’s transference feelings, but it seems like quite another matter for a T to set out from the beginning to exclude transference from the therapeutic frame. I suppose that’s fine if no transference ensues, but what if it just happens despite the discouragement? And then it’s not supposed to be talked about? That just seems fundamentally dishonest. But maybe I’m over-reacting.
Looking forward to reading In Session!
Posted by happyflower on May 4, 2005, at 16:37:29
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone?, posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 15:57:18
Why do we really need transference in therapy anyways? Is feelings about our t ALWAYS transference or is it just because we are in therapy? Can't it be just what we feel about them? Does any other relationship say, you feel this not because you really feel this about me, it is something else? Why can't we let what we are feeling just be what it is? Why not let the relationship be what it is , between two people who have same goals, instead of labeling our feeling? Clear as mud?
Posted by happyflower on May 4, 2005, at 17:02:13
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone?, posted by happyflower on May 4, 2005, at 16:37:29
Posted by Dinah on May 4, 2005, at 17:59:15
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone?, posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 15:57:18
Someone here once quoted a therapist who said they avoided clients who dripped transference potential, or something along those lines.
I know that single statement would tell me an awful lot about a therapist, and most of it would tell me I didn't want a therapist who didn't ooze even a bit of compassion.
And the real kicker is that no one on earth would have pegged me as someone who oozed transference potential. And my therapist did nothing to encourage it.
Posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 19:15:24
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » Tamar, posted by Dinah on May 4, 2005, at 17:59:15
> Someone here once quoted a therapist who said they avoided clients who dripped transference potential, or something along those lines.
I think I read that once while googling the term ‘transference’. Wasn't the term 'oozing with transference potential'? If I recall, it sent me into something approaching panic! I tracked it down again just now and read the inimitable line (from the same piece): ‘Please don’t kill yourself or anyone because of some transference from your childhood.’ If I write what I think of that, I’ll get my first pbc. Might get one anyway…
> I know that single statement would tell me an awful lot about a therapist, and most of it would tell me I didn't want a therapist who didn't ooze even a bit of compassion.
Too right!
> And the real kicker is that no one on earth would have pegged me as someone who oozed transference potential. And my therapist did nothing to encourage it.
Well, at least it sounds as if he didn’t actually *dis*courage it. I’m still inclined to think it’s dishonest to discourage it. I think setting out with the expectation that transference can be discouraged is on a par with trying to fly to Neptune in a bathtub with an outboard motor. It’s somewhat unrealistic. Not that I feel strongly about it, or anything :)
Apologies to happyflower; I seem to hijacked this thread. I didn’t mean to; it set me off for some reason (well, for *obvious* reasons).
Posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 19:16:19
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » Dinah, posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 19:15:24
Posted by pinkeye on May 4, 2005, at 21:29:16
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » Dinah, posted by Tamar on May 4, 2005, at 19:15:24
I didn't read the full part of this thread but my current T doesn't encourage any sort of transference whatsoever. I don't know if what I am posting is even relevant to what the discussions are about.
She doesn't act as a friend, or a mentor. And she never reveals anything about her. Not even her age. And I don't think she is of the type to allow the patient to fully bond and then grow by leaning on her etc. She gives very good logical insights, but emotionally she is not very warm or caring. And she told me that she won't be that way, because she thinks it is harmful for me to develop an attachment to her.
And I think right now, it is what I need. I am having a hard time getting over my ex T, and I don't want to bond with someone else now. So that is working out well for me right now.
But I do think, if my current therapist is more affectionate, maybe it will help in minimizing the loss feeling that I have with my ex T. If she was not so closed to transference, maybe I could have a more warm relationship with her. Maybe that would have helped my loss.
Just wanted to say, that many therapists probably don't like transference, and clients like me are ok with it.
Posted by pinkeye on May 4, 2005, at 21:38:19
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » Tamar, posted by pinkeye on May 4, 2005, at 21:29:16
And I am also one of the clients oozing with transference potential :-)
Posted by alexandra_k on May 4, 2005, at 23:43:10
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone? » pinkeye, posted by pinkeye on May 4, 2005, at 21:38:19
I think discouraging transference isn't supposed to be about discouraging talking about it so much as discouraging those feelings to start with.
If the feelings aren't there then there isn't anything to talk about.
That is to be contrasted with varieties of therapy that actively try and encourage transference feelings because it is believed that you have to have those feelings and work through (and talk about) those feelings in order to make progress.
But some people develop transference feelings despite the therapist trying to prevent those.
Then I guess they need to decide whether to help the client deal with them not not.
Posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2005, at 0:04:22
In reply to Re: Dynamic Supportive Therapy, anyone?, posted by alexandra_k on May 4, 2005, at 23:43:10
I'm not sure if this is just my confusion or what...
I'm thinking about transference and projection.
So projection is when...?
You project feelings / thoughts that you have that you are afraid of?
Is that it?
Whereas transference is when you see someone as being like someone from your past?
Does that seem right?When you get lots of 'mmm hmms' and 'I sees' then is that supposed to facilitate both transference and projection?
E.g.,
If you are afraid t is judging you negatively... Then you could project that so that you come to believe that t is judging you negatively.
You could believe that t is judging you negatively because someone significant has done this in the past (transference)
So can they both operate at the same time?
Can a certain thing (belief that one is being judged negatively by t) be both the result of projection and transference? At the same time? Or is one of the terms more fitting?
Or would one of the terms be more fitting in any particular case?????
Posted by happyflower on May 5, 2005, at 0:27:17
In reply to Re: Something that interests me., posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2005, at 0:04:22
What I don't get is why does our feelings have to be either transference or projection? Why can't they just be what we really feel for real about T? Is T a ghost that really isn't a person? Personally I think the idea of transference is a load of do do. I think it is just a way for a t to emotionally protect himself so he can remain neutrual with us. If he can label are feelings as something else that is real, he is more comfortable with it then if he thought the feelings are really for him. JMHO
Posted by littleone on May 5, 2005, at 1:00:15
In reply to Re: Something that interests me., posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2005, at 0:04:22
I could be way off base here, but I thought projection was where you projected what you were actually feeling on to someone else.
eg if I was feeling strongly disapproving towards my T, then if I'm projecting, I'm assuming that he is feeling strongly disapproving towards me.
I also thought that you aren't always aware of projecting, so in the above example, I may not realise that I'm disapproving first. I may think I'm disapproving of him *because* he is supposedly disapproving of me. Hope that made sense.
Whereas transference is where if my dad was always disapproving of me, I might *feel* this being re-enacted with my T, whether it is actually happening or not.
They look kind of similar there, but I think there is a distinct difference between the two.
Posted by Dinah on May 5, 2005, at 2:47:13
In reply to Re: Something that interests me., posted by alexandra_k on May 5, 2005, at 0:04:22
My therapist suggests projection to me a lot of times. He rarely suggests transference, except with regard to abandonment issues sometimes.
If I feel ashamed of something, and then perceive that my therapist is judging me negatively about it, he might suggest that I'm the one who is upset about it, not him. Or if I'm angry at any given therapeutic moment, I might assume he is angry, even if he isn't really. Or be afraid he is angry and ask a million times.
While I admit I occasionally fall victim to transference. I don't think it's a major factor in our therapy. But when, for example, he suddenly tells me that he'll be gone the next week, or more especially when he doesn't know if he'll be there next week and he'll let me know, I get a distinct set of feelings. It feels very much like when I was in kindergarten in the days before schools were so careful. And my mother taught school a distance away. She was always late picking me up, but I'd never know *how* late. It could be fifteen minutes or a half hour, or it could be two hours. I hung around the schoolyard and waited. There was a high school kid who'd hang out with me sometimes, and my vice principal would sometimes let me in his office and talk to me. But mostly I'd be very angry, very uncertain, and a bit scared that this time she wouldn't come.
Those same feelings come up in therapy sometimes. We're getting a lot better at recognizing them and discussing them at the moment.
Posted by Dinah on May 5, 2005, at 2:59:25
In reply to Re: Something that interests me., posted by happyflower on May 5, 2005, at 0:27:17
I don't think all feelings are transference or projection. If your therapist double books you and you have to leave without seeing him and you're darned mad, for that therapist to suggest that you're experiencing transference or projection would be an unconcionable avoidance of his responsibilities.
I think transference and projection might get a bad name because they're used mostly in therapy. In truth, we transfer and project everywhere we go. Some of us more than others, but all of us at times. And it probably never does any of us any good, which is why we address them in therapy.
If you feel yourself having a reaction that seems way out of proportion, you might want to think transference. In any relationship.
If you think your therapist has one nice rear, and he really does, that's not transference. But if you think your therapist is the one perfect person with whom you have a mystical connection, two souls who deeply recognize each other, on the basis of hourly or even three times a week one hour sessions where he wears his therapist hat, you might want to at least consider transference. Because it's his job to understand you, he puts aside his own concerns to do so, and chances are as good that he's an insensitive lout outside the therapy room as that he's a saint. At the very least, he's probably as annoying as any other man on the planet.
But that's probably true in lots of situations. Transference and projection take part in all our relationships. We just recognize them a bit more quickly after therapy.
Which is not to say that *all* our experiences with or feelings for our therapists are transference.
I think I remember reading once, and I'm probably mangling it, that there are three marriages. The one the husband is experiencing, the one the wife is experiencing, and the one that actually exists.
Posted by happyflower on May 5, 2005, at 8:02:30
In reply to Re: Something that interests me. » happyflower, posted by Dinah on May 5, 2005, at 2:59:25
Wow Diana! I think you should be a T! Everything you said makes so much sense! I feel better now! Thanks! By the way, my T has a nice rear! lol HEEHEE! Just kidding, not really!
Posted by pinkeye on May 5, 2005, at 13:44:49
In reply to Re: Something that interests me., posted by happyflower on May 5, 2005, at 0:27:17
I used to think like that too. That is all real and all this talk of transference is all bull.
But now I think it is actually part of both. Some transference, and some real. Just because you don't know the person fully - the therapist knows you fully, but you don't know anything about the therapist.. So you tend to make stuff out of the person as you wish. It is like a blind person trying to figure out an elephant - heard that story? It is precisely like that. All those features are probably part of the therapist - the caring, and sensitive side, which is what gets exposed to us during the sessions. But the therapist could have other personalities that you probably don't like.
It is actually kind of the same thing that happens in real world also - we don't get exposed to all of a person's personalties at one shot, and usually one person has more control over the relationship than the other. And real life involves a lot of projections as well. But just that it is magnified 1000 times in thearpeutic relationship.
I am a person who fairly knew a good deal about my ex T. Because in my country, therapists don't remain like blank slate, and he disclosed a fair portion of himself to me.. but I knew from other sources also - like my fahter knew who his mother was etc. But even then, I think what I know of him is fairly limited. I do know he is a person with lot of integrity and goodness, but I really don't know what is he like in day to day life. And that is important to know for a real feeling.
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.