I dont think my last post explained things so good, so I highlighted your patterns I was referring to. Rationalizing is a defense to avoid feelings. I listed your pattern of using rationalizing in bold. Red is your feelings, which is the content of this type of therapy and how you work through this. You keep trying to understandto rationalizethe email, which prevents you from processing the feelingsthe red--and moving forward.
Your words show a lot of conflict, too, and pressure from your superego, which impacts how this plays out.
Its not a bad thing at all-its just part of the process. Its just sooo slow. You dont want your defenses to just disappear overnight. I wouldnt worry about rushing it, but if being stuck here bothers you, you could try to discuss more of the red both in and out of session (but especially in session) and not focus so much on the bold.
I would imagine you did this growing up in terms of your parents and how they treated you, trying to 'figure it out' rather than feel the emotional pain of not mattering.
Quote:
But the closeness that evolves in therapy is confusing to me.
Last week we brought up his non-response to my emails again which, as some of you may know, has been a topic for quite a while. In my opinion he seems to give a different reason each time I ask why he doesnt respond and none of them really make sense to me. This time he said, because I wont always be there. I obviously know this already and am not sure what that has to do with his not replying to my emails. Given my history, Id think that occasionally sending a brief reply might be a good thing. I tend not to ask for much. I understand not wanting to conduct therapy via email, and I understand that hes not always available to reply, but sending a brief response to a bid for connection seems like it might be therapeutic. I dont really even know that I need anything from him, but I think it might be nice. Is that so wrong? I guess I feel disappointed by his blanket statement that he wont reply at all. I told him I thought his decision was a cop out and he was super nice about it which makes it hard to be mad at him. In my ideal world Id like him to make the effort and take the risk of deciding when it would be useful to send a brief reply now and then. I fully understand that this could be complex and nuanced and difficult for him and that its easier not to do it at all. I also told him that at this point I dont even want to convince him to change his mind because getting a reply wouldnt be satisfying for me if I got it by strong-arming him into changing his mind.
Despite the fact that I dont particularly like his decision to no longer respond to my emails, it doesnt feel like a dealbreaker to me, but I do find myself coming back to this topic over and over again. In general I think hes a good therapist, but Im confused about this and am trying to process my disappointment. I guess part of it is that I cant help but interpret it as him pushing me away a bit or thinking im not worth the effort. Im already good at being distant all on my own, so it feels counterproductive and just like a big bummer.
Not sure what Im looking for from PC, just trying to figure it out as usual.
He fully welcomes and reads my emails (I can tell that he has because he references specific details in them), but he wont reply. He has clearly said so. I agree that his reasons dont make sense though. Is that BS or blowing smoke? Or does he have the right to draw the line somewhere based on his comfort level? I believe he does have that right, but it disappoints me and Im not sure what to do with that, especially because I think hes a good T in many other ways.
Yes, he replied for a year and then stopped replying last October. I think one of the many reasons he has given includes what youve said about the reply feeling good in the moment but not helping long term. Im just not sure that I agree.
I have many more conversations about the email saga on PC than I do in person with my T, I think because I find it embarrassing and it sort of feels like were beating a dead horse. I dont want to make him uncomfortable. So, I respond a bit to his replies about it in session, then tell myself it should be enough, but later on I end up stewing about it on my own. It bothers me that its an issue that keeps popping up. I just wish I understood why.
I had also come to the conclusion that his decision to no longer reply is based more on his gut feeling rather than logic which is maybe why his reasons dont make sense and why his reasons seem to change. He is good in other ways and has shown me that hes there for me in other ways so Im not sure why it feels like this matters so much.
Its interesting that some on PC have said that because this topic keeps coming up, there may be something important there and I should talk to him about it, yet others have said it seems like a distraction and I should move away from it. They both make sense to me. I wonder which it is?
|