Quote:
Originally Posted by BudFox
Everyone knows that therapists disclose little while waiting expectantly for you to reveal all, watching, scrutinizing. Some might find this helpful, others harmful, but how can you deny this is a warping of normal boundaries?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BudFox
Therapists are said to have good boundaries if they avoid things like excessive self-disclosure, dual relationships, inappropriate touch, and too much contact outside sessions.
But therapists trample other boundaries and nobody blinks. Examples: expecting trust without earning it, failing to explain risks before rummaging thru your psyche, pushing you to expose yourself while they observe voyeuristically, collecting your intimate disclosures and secrets while keeping theirs largely hidden, interpreting your thoughts and behaviors sometimes aggressively, giving life advice, behaving ambiguously, withholding important information.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BudFox
Not seeing the point of the medical exam analogy. Therapy is not medicine. Not really even close. More like faith healing. A medical exam is carried out for a specific purpose. Both parties are presumably clear why it is taking place. It is of short duration. The professional has known expertise in anatomy and physiology that justifies it. I can't say this about any therapy "exam" I've had.
|
I gave the example of a physician performing a physical exam because it's a situation where boundaries are non-typical but not necessarily harmful or immoral; an example of how in some situations, for the work to be done, some boundaries have to be removed and others have to be set in place (e.g. you tell me about your sexual partners so I can figure out what's going on with you, but I don't tell you who I'm banging because it's not relevant to the problem at hand... and if I tell anyone else about any of this, you can sue me). I guess I'm trying to make the point that un-equal or non-typical boundary arrangements do not always equal exploitation.
I think an important difference between our stances on this issue is that I come from the assumption that good therapists (rare as they are) have both the intention and capacity to be of help if they have enough data. It doesn't appear that you believe that, though, 'cause you're talking about voyeurism and aggressive interpretations and therapy as faith healing, not to mention therapist in stark contrast to the physician with "known expertise." I also believe that psychotherapy is a fundamentally good practice that is often taken up by idiots, rather than a pathological one that has to be warped into functionality by its practicioners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BudFox
Therapy is unique in its potential to cause deep and lasting psychological harm. If one cares to look, the evidence is out there. Most people don't care to look.
|
That said, I do agree with you above, and agree that there are many many many therapists who are incompetent and/or exploitative. I think those people should rot in hell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BudFox
Hurting?
|
Ah, that was my error. At the beginning of the thread you mentioned you had a therapist with a crappy approach to boundaries; I assumed that this would cause you pain. I must have been wrong, though, for you to write the above. My apologies for the assumption.