I guess this is largely a response to what I wrote.

My regression indeed impacted my ability to work quite negatively. I was faking work for about a year. Or at least that's how I felt. Anyway, I was successful in faking because somehow I managed to write up my PhD dissertation at that time. However, if I compare my ability to work during that period with my ability to work previously, when working was one of my defences then there was a huge difference. Now when this deep regression is over I can work much more productively again but this time it is not because of defences anymore. Now I am able to enjoy my work much more and my thinking is much more free and although going through this regression was extremely difficult I appreciate it. I gave up something in order to get something better. For me it was totally worth it.

For me someone being a good T means quite simple things: the first criterion for me is that the T must be a psychoanalyst because this title comes with a high probability that the T knows his own sh... I would never see just a random psychologist or counsellor who has not successfully gone through their own deep therapy. Secondly, I have to have a good feeling about the T just right from the start. It's a gut feeling and hard to define exactly but I'm quite sure that most people are able to tell, even if it is very vague, whether there is something bothering with that person or not, even though when on the surface everything looks ok. I would not see a T about whom I wouldn't have a good feeling or there would be something that bothers me about this person. I personally would not compromise - either everything feels good or I would fire this person.

These are my two criteria. I have chosen two T-s according to them and both of those Ts have been excellent.