Quote:
Originally Posted by Forgetmenot07
I agree, after all it is two adults sitting in the room, and even if money is the currency its not T responsibilty to tolerate all impulses and meet unmet longings. When I read this forum I realise Ts should be better trained to recognise when the depenency or focus on them (rather than problems we bring to therapy) get too strong. Instead of leaving it till last minute, when its too late and we are 'hooked' and then cutting some sort of privilages (hugging, emails, phone calls, extra sessions etc) the should maybe gently make the patient aware of their observation or promt us to look inwardly at whats happening to us and our feelings?
|
I guess most Ts try to do this regularly in some form but it might get muddled in the rest of the experience. This is why, if you think the way you describe (it sounds similar to how I think about it), the best strategy is to take the introspection and examination into your own hands, also the boundary setting. That way it's kinda "take what works and leave the rest". Easier said than done but that is what I mean by the client's side, if you are someone who likes to take responsibility for that.
There are definitely those Ts who foster dependency and those idealistic views about the T-client relationship and they probably will not encourage limiting/regulating it directly. I think many of them also believe this approach will bring out important patterns more, to be examined. I believe that can be very true but also that it can create a parallel, mostly or totally artificial universe that can be irrelevant to our normal lives. But discriminating between the two (i.e. when it is some important pattern, transference etc and when it is merely the product of the structure of therapy) can be tricky. I also definitely got caught up in that confusion in the beginning.