Surprised you would say that. I completely disagree. The T relationship is like no other. It is set up to be hugely disproportionate. It's part of the basic model, defined as such in the literature. And its basic nature evokes all sorts of infant-caretaker dynamics and patterns, which is pretty unique and potentially explosive and risky and destabizling. I have no problem with Ts being human and responding in sometimes imperfect ways. It's when they fail to acknowledge it and deflect back to the client reflexively that it begins to look dishonest.

Probably so. Depends on your level of self awareness and self honesty. I can see how my neuroses distorted my perceptions but I can still see with sufficient objectivity to know my last T failed quite badly. She claimed otherwise for a while, I figured out the truth, and then she indirectly acknowledged it later on the phone in brief moments of weakness or guilt.

I have tried not to use the world blame. The point for me is accountability. The paid professional and person entrusted with the client's vulnerability needs to be prepared to admit mistakes and facilitate repair, or they should find another line of work. True lots of people can fail you, but as someone write therapy relationships can be paradigmatic and the outcome can have long term consequences. And sometimes people show up in therapy in a fairly desperate place where betrayal or exploitation might just exceed their ability to cope.