Quote:
Originally Posted by octoberful
. . .
This is also why a certain amount of insight is needed to do psychoanalytic therapy. If you don't have an observing ego despite everything surfacing, the client is contraindicated for the therapy. It's a known limitation.
|
I think I'm fairly insightful cognitively but probably not so much emotionally. A lot of my emotional life was dark or cut off for a long time. What responsibility does a therapist have to determine whether or not a client has an observing ego sufficient to do the work? And if the client doesn't, what therapy is appropriate? Schema therapy, maybe? Have psychologists done any research into how an observing ego might be developed in someone who doesn't have one? Seems like it could be a limitation in a lot of that person's life, so worthwhile to try to figure out ways to help, possibly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by octoberful
. . .if you have a good T who doesn't engage in your patterns or enmesh, the client can get very angry or distressed and quit, ending badly. If you have relationships that follow a certain pattern and outcome, and the T doesn't follow the usual or desired pattern, then it can be extremely disconcerting but still be outside of one's awareness. So damage can be done regardless of therapist skill, so I am acknowledging that possibility here.
|
Sounds like a pretty dangerous situation for clients.. As I've said before, I think more and better warnings and information about this should be given to clients before they consent to therapy. In addition, I think therapists should try to determine if a client is sufficiently realistic to process the information that is given to them. If they are feeling desperate for help, then their ability to process the information and come to a realistic, reasonable decision may be impaired, in addition to other deficiencies they may have. Is that a therapist's responsibility? Legally, maybe not. Ethically? Maybe a different question.