|
I thought I heard that you suggest that the OP should not ask and should instead work on why they want to know.
Well, that would be a goal. Of course, if it's an issue for the client, they're probably going to first become aware by enacting it, rather than articulating it. When the time was right, a good T would try to refocus the client on the deeper issue of the need to know.
But when the pattern is well-established, and the obsession has been discussed pretty clearly in therapy, and boundaries have been articulated, then I guess I do think the client should try to adjust the behavior. At the very least, rather than persist in asking the personal questions, talk about feeling the need to ask--deal with it as a therapy issue. This may be impossible, if it's a true obsession (much like an addiction)--but then the T should be addressing it.
In this case, I think the T made an error by answering. She acted inconsistently about an on-going issue in the therapy. It sounds like she was taken aback and a bit thrown at the time. Understandable.
But now the focus has moved to discomfort and doubts about the T's worth. Whether or not to apologize. Everything but the issue that drove the questioning in the first place. Absolutely, the T should be bringing this to the client's attention so that it can be worked out in the room. And I hope she will.
Triangulation is just what you think it is: bringing a third entity into a relationship. This T set up clear boundaries about seeking info about her husband. Then she answered a question that very much involved her husband. I don't see that as a change of mind as much as a corruption of the therapy frame because allowing that boundary to be violated has created harm. Now it's an issue between T and client, damaging the frame, which creates distance in the therapeutic relationship.
That's an armchair analysis, FWIW. I hope it works out.
|