to play devil's advocate a bit...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jexa
At my job, I work with a psychologist who is a fantastic therapist, who clearly still meets criteria for an anxiety disorder. He's scared of doctors, and funerals, and germs, and vomit, and blood, and lots of different things, and he does everything he can to avoid the things he's scared of. But he admits to his issues, laughs it off, does his best, and never lets it affect his work.
|
what if i was the client who was terrified of those same issues? what if best practice, graded exposure therapy, required i discuss these things or - heaven forbid - actually touched some of this stuff? i wouldn't trust this particular T to be an effective T for me because clearly his issues would affect his competence in this regard. i'd also be upset had i been seeing him for 2years or so, had built a relationship, only to find that this was one of his "no go" zones. i dont think a T can ever claim that unresolved issues never affects their work. i think to do so is self-deception.
this isn't meant to pick on you, jex, or your wording or anything. just at the many Ts do claim that their highly skilled at managing their own issues & ensuring it never affects their work (i'm not sure if the person you described is one or not, this isn't meant to single anyone out), and i call bs on that.
my main concern with Ts who have unresolved issues (e.g., trauma, divorce, phobias, or even simple burn out) or mental illnesses (e.g., schizophrenia, bipolar, melancholic depression) is that i don't think there are effective safeguards for the public at monitoring Ts and making sure they aren't stuffing up. it's up to the T to be honest with themselves, and when you have many factors for wanting to stay in the job i don't think that many Ts are responsible enough to know when to step back or to follow through when they recognise this. in australia, you only get deregistered for gross negligence/incompetence/abuse e.g., sex with client, financial favours etc. it means that people like my old-T (who i'm sure would have been a good therapist at one point in his career) get to continue practicing, even when they clearly need a break and/or some supervision. i am fairly sure his was just a case of burn out (coupled with a healthy dose of misogyny). and i dont think peers are great for "dobbing in" their colleagues either. it's just like the medical profession - a case of "protect your own" and turn a blind eye.
i'm not saying this to be all doomsday and certainly ive never been to a T who has had major problems. old-T was just a bit of a **** but he was helpful at least initially. but i think the profession likes to kid itself about how much it really does to protect the public, and i don't think leaving it as the responsibility of the practitioner is good enough. this isn't to take away from the many many many therapists who ARE wonderfully responsible and manage their issues as much as can be expected, it's just a matter of it not being fair to anyone to leave it as the practitioner's responsibility.