Quote:
Originally Posted by atisketatasket
I think any relationship into which one party enters with the presumption that something is wrong with them and the other party will fix it is adversarial.
I would be worried to hear about a therapeutic relationship that has no opposition. Opposition in the right dose causes a relationship to grow and a person to develop. (Think teenagers and their parents.) The presence of collaboration does not exclude the presence of opposition.
I think the OP's definition of opposition was not meant to be taken as the therapist is your enemy. (Some are, of course.)
|
I think this is a really interesting idea, because it's so different from my experience. I don't see opposition in my therapy. I am not sure what we would be opposing in each other? I feel like we tend to be on the same page regarding where I want to go, and if he were opposing me in this I wouldn't see it as helpful to me. He's kind of a big ball of mush as far as what I should be doing- neither of us see it as his role to drive me in a particular direction.
But I'm curious as to how you see it! What kinds of ways do you see therapists usefully opposing people, and vice versa?
Actually, now that I think about it, I remember reading something he wrote once about ways to reduce conflict in therapy, that had something to do with therapists holding on to everything very lightly- their own interpretations and thoughts, for example. He seems really deliberately non-oppositional to me, in the service of allowing me as much space as I need for whatever.