Quote:
Originally Posted by NowhereUSA
I agree that it's from the past which is why I think therapists should be helping clients deal with it. I personally can't stand psychodynamic therapy so I can't speak to its efficacy. There are clearly people here who like it and benefit from it.
I do know that abandonment issues are a trait in BPD and DBT is effective in dealing with the various intense emotions. When I say "skills" I should clarify I mean like DBT skills - learning to experience an emotion, check facts, and essentially interact with the emotion in a way that is in line with one's values. It's been proven you can re-train the brain and that's essentially the core of what DBT does.
I get not everyone's a fan and it probably isn't going to be for everyone, and at the same time, I think it can be one more tool in the toolbox that Ts use.
|
I agree with this point - that when clients have abandonment issues the therapist needs to be versed in the therapy that has shown to be most useful- DBT. It is not for everyone I know, so you have to go with what feels best as a client. But it is the one approach that was designed with these very issues in mind, by a person who struggles with these issues. So it's purpose is to help build the client build skills, not to create a false sense of security in someone and make promises that any rational person knows they cannot keep. Saying "I am here for you" is appropriate. Saying "I will always be here for you" is just a non truth and a competent T should know better. Like stop dog said, it's always going to be a crap shoot, and therapists should disclose this up front. Good intentions are never an excuse for poor judgement and unrealistic promises. From what I've read, most clients who have been abandoned had therapists that acted out of "good intentions" but were not competent enough to handle the consequences of such intentions. It seems a but arrogant to me when Ts believe they can deliver on or manipulate someone with promises.