I can tell you, from experience, that SOME boundaries are put aside at festivals like Burning Man and some are NOT. For example, laws are not put aside. In my state, in the US, a therapist could lose her license for doing certain, typical Burning Man activities with her clients. A therapist would certainly lose professional respect (and probably some of her other clients) if it were widely known that she "hung out" with clients at something like Burning Man.

You also have to consider that therapists must have boundaries that are somewhat consistent across the board. Of course there are some differences depending on the client's needs but, largely, therapists have consistent boundaries in order to protect themselves and all of their clients. If a T had such boundaries that she socialized with clients at festivals, it would probably make a lot of her clients feel very unsafe and it would make others very jealous if they knew T socialized with "other" clients but not with them. It would also create a HUGE problem for clients with attachment issues/obsessive tendencies. It could certainly invite/enable an obsessive client to perform intrusive behaviors. And, on the other end of the spectrum, it could terrify a client with a history of abuse and boundary violations by authority figures. You may think "oh, other clients won't find out about what T does with others"-- but they do. I can tell you first hand that word of mouth is a powerful thing-- things get around. If I discovered that my T hung out with another client at something like Burning Man, I would probably stop seeing my T because her lack of boundaries would make me feel unsafe. I think a lot of other clients would feel the same way. In order to do good therapy with the majority of her clients, a T has to keep certain boundaries in check for both her safety and her clients' safety.

What several posters have asked you directly-- but you have not responded to-- is the following question: "What if your T simply does not want to socialize with you?" Take the ethical question out of it for a minute. What if your T simply says "I don't enjoy having conversations with clients outside of the office. If I see you at an event, I do not want to say more than "hi." Doing so would be taking my time away from the event and from the people I am there to see; I'm simply not interested in having those conversations." What would your response be? Can you understand and respect that a T may not want to talk to you socially? Does it make a difference when it's about ethical questions or "shoulds" and when it's about a T's own preferences/enjoyment? If your T does not want to socialize with you if she happens to see you at these events, do you think she should do so anyway because YOU want her to? Or do you agree that if she doesn't want to, then she shouldn't? If boundaries are 2-way streets, then doesn't your T's opinion matter? Think about it like this: In order for two people to have sex, BOTH people have to consent. One person wanting it does not obligate the other person to do it. There can be no negotiation if one person isn't interested. That's how it is with boundaries. If a T says "no socializing out of the office; that's my boundary"-- then that has to be respected. In order to socialize outside of the office, BOTH of you would have to want it. So unless she ALSO wants that kind of contact, then it isn't up for negotiation. Of course, you can talk about your feelings around it, your desires, your views, etc-- but you can't actually have the contact.