I've been wondering about therapy and self-disclosure about the therapist.

There is the old school blank slate approach based on the belief that the therapist's personal feelings, experiences, and biases could potentially interfere with the therapeutic process. By remaining neutral and not revealing anything about themselves, therapists could create a space where the focus was solely on the client's experiences and emotions.

I get that this approach was to encourage clients to project their feelings and thoughts onto the therapist, which brought awareness to unconscious conflicts and dynamics. The therapist's apparent "blankness" was meant to mirror the "blank canvas" that the client could project their thoughts and emotions upon, thus revealing hidden aspects of their psyche.

I know this approach is rarely utilized anymore and now most therapist are much more relational and do disclose when and if appropriate. I get that when making
the decision to self-disclose it is meant to be in service of the client. e.g if it will help the client in some way, not harm them or at the very least not take away from the the therapeutic process or the clients time.

It confuses me then when therapists hold seemingly innocuous facts back as a way of 'holding a boundary around self-disclosure' E.g not sharing where they are going on holiday.

To me it is understandable that this in fact would have a negative impact on the client and may even cause unnecessary preoccupation and anxiety around it especially if a client has a more anxious/pre occupied attachment style. I mean I get why the therapist isn't going to share the name of the resort or specifics but to not be willing to share the city or country they will be in seems so counterintuitive. I don't know to me it just feels like a bad excuse or bad therapy and I read so many examples of it online.