OK, gonna cut and paste a bit from the "In Session Today" thread to update this (see that thread for full session, just putting reassurance-related stuff here):

I said how I had a question about e-mailing. That sometimes I was just looking for a certain thing or answer, but I couldn't come right out and say it. MC was like, "Because you're afraid to?" I said sometimes. Like obviously, when I e-mailed him last week, what I *really* wanted to know was whether he still wanted to work with us (and thought he should keep working with us). But it was like I sent these e-mails hoping he'd read between the lines or that whatever response he gave would make me feel better. I finally said what I was worried about 4 days later.

I said sometimes when I reach out, i just want...and he said, "Reassurance? I know it's a dirty word around here, but..." and I said, "Yeah, sometimes. Or it's like I just want the connection, to know you or T are still here--especially like if I've had an intense with T, it's difficult to just walk out and then not talk for a week. So I reach out. I asked MC if I could just cut to the chase...like if I just want to know he's still there, can I just text him, "Hey, you still there?" I fully expected him to say that was fine.

Instead, he said that wasn't such a good thing. Because it could lead to dependency. (I wanted to be like, "Um, too late!" but didn't). So for my sake it's better that I don't do that. I was trying to ask if it was OK just now and then, but he said he wasn't really going to answer that. H chimed in and said that it's how I look for the rules, I want to know if it's OK to do that every x number of weeks. I said, "Yeah, we've been talking about my wanting rules thing lately..." By this point, of course I was crying. He said he knew I was unhappy with that response.

Now quoting relevant parts of response from Ruh Roh and my response.
I was confused, too. I don't see how being direct makes me more dependent. I think he just didn't want me to be like, "Are you still there? Just checking!" because that suggests dependency? But to me, to just ask a quick, direct question and, hopefully, get a relatively quick answer (because all he'd have to say is "yep, still here")...I feel like that's making progress for me because I'm being direct and asking for what I want or need. I mean, sure, ideally I wouldn't want/need any reassurance from him or T--I should be able to reassure myself and/or get it from H or other people in my "real life," like friends/family. But it seems like the step in between being afraid to ask for what I want and not asking for it at all should be, "Ask directly for what I want."

So might need to bring that up next session briefly (not in an e-mail!)

Forgot to mention this (and was already insanely long!), but in a previous session, I'd asked about wanting to check in with him. And he said that if I felt like I *needed* to do it, then it's not good to do it. But if I *wanted* to do it, then that was OK. (Maybe because that implies less dependency?) So I brought that up this time, and he seemed confused and said he must have just said that before because he was having trouble articulating what he meant.

Thoughts? I see T tomorrow and wanted to bring up the "just checking in to make sure you're there" thing with her (like, to check in with her sometimes, not with MC). But now I'm not sure if she'll just have the same reaction. Then again, part of her issue with me e-mailing was that my e-mails were getting really long. So, I'd think a one- or two-sentence one would be an improvement! Guess it wouldn't hurt to ask...