dual relationships

i think a few of us here have mentioned at various times that they have known their T in a capacity other than as their therapist. i am wondering how that has worked for you.

Austin-T is currently seeing me pro bono. i mentioned today how i used to be the webmaster for my workplace (still am, technically, just haven't worked since april) and he suggested working out some sort of bartering agreement where i could develop his website for him in return.

to be honest, i'm a little bit apprehensive about the idea. i'm a bit like... hmm... i thought Ts were meant to avoid dual relationships wherever possible. but then maybe that's because they just need to be mindful that they aren't exploiting their clients. and i know Austin T wouldn't do that. so i dont know why i'm anxious, exactly. maybe it's just an additional thing to think about at a time when i want to be thinking about nothing.

edit: maybe also the feeling that i must offer to help, that i can't say no. it feels a bit power imbalancey, but that's probably just in my head.

If I was in your shoes I would totally do the work. If I didn't have to worry about coming up with the money to pay for therapy that would just be a load off my mind.

Although I don't know how closely you'd have to work with T to do this particular kind of work. Is it something that he kinda gives you ideas that he has for the website and then you just work on it, say at home or something?

Can this possibly get you additional work? Side jobs or something?

he said he doesn't want to look at it until next year, so we didn't really go into details. chances are i won't be skilled enough to do what he's after anyway, so i guess there's no harm in talking. web design isnt really my area, i just picked it up because our dept needed a site makeover.

i'm a bit stressed about it because i dropped my old job because i couldn't keep it up anymore. so i don't really want to start doing something else. (if i do go back to work, my old place has kept my position open and it was good pay for a student so i'd definitely return there).

the thing is i don't know why we went pro bono anyway. i had always intended to pay the full fee ($206) but he gave me a discount to $100. then last week he gave me $50 back and said to go do something nice for myself. and then after the next session (i saw him twice last week) he said we'd go pro bono from now on.

i know i'm not exactly rolling in money but certainly i have saved enough to pay for this without having to worry right now. i have tried to pay him but he's been refusing, and i feel a bit odd about it. i get that he is being nice, i just feel awkward accepting it when i'm sure someone else could use it more.

Deli,
I thought you said you were financially strapped and couldn't afford to move out of your current living situation? But here you say that you intended to pay the whole $200 fee? How could you do that? I was thinking that perhaps austin-T was trying to help you be able to move out of your current living situation by making sure that therapy was not a barrier to being able to afford to make the changes. If you have enough saved for therapy, and you don't have to pay for therapy, then you would have money to pay for something else.

I don't know about the dual relationship. I don't think i would feel comfortable working for my T in exchange for sessions. Maybe it could work, but the dual relationship does seem awkward and might interfere with your therapy.

Wow, what a hard situation to be in. First he is going probono so that feels weird because if it was me I would feel like I would owe something and it doesnt' sound like this was discussed too much, it is like he just decided to do it..
Then he asks for you to do something, that isn't therapy related for you. That would make me feel uncomfortable for sure.

I wouldn't do it because it already feels uncomfortable on many levels. If you did you would have to worry if he was happy with the work, if he says he was happy with the work, you would have to wonder if he is just being nice because you are a client. Nope, T's should avoid dual relationships when they can for many reasons.

It sounds weird to me; I would feel uncomfortable. It sounds like an inappropriate dual-relationship. I wouldn't do it; no way. I think, however, he has good intentions. I agree with what someone said that he's trying to help you financially and that he wants to do it to help you be able to afford moving out.

I'd start off telling him "It makes me feel uncomfortable. It expands our relationship into a non-therapy realm; it becomes a two-level dimension situation. I'm very concerned about it harming the therapy we're doing, which is my highest priority.”

Then I'm sure you'll get into what his thinking behind it is

I think the first statement is probably stronger than reflects current guidelines, but the second statement is usually stated in ethical guidelines. I've reviewed the ethical guidelines of half a dozen different therapist, psychologist, and counselor professional organizations, and none of them forbids non-romantic/sexual dual relationships. But they strongly caution the therapist to proceed with care and caution and not to have the dual relationship if there is danger of any harm to or exploitation of the client. One of the organizations states that dual relationships can sometimes be beneficial to the client. So it really comes down to judgment on the therapist's part. In the last decade or so, the thinking on non-romantic/non-sexual dual relationships has softened a bit. I am not familiar with earlier versions of the guidelines, but from some comments I've heard, I think they may have been stricter and more absolutist before. Now, the therapist is given more leeway to judge each particular situation and its nuances.

So if you are worried that doing website work for your T is absolutely forbidden by therapist guidelines, the answer is probably no (although guidelines in your own country might be different...). But your T and you would need to consider if there is potential for harm to you, exploitation by T, or damage to your therapeutic relationship. Perhaps Austin T has considered all of that. It would be good if you could talk about this with him and he could share his decision and any concerns and you could share yours.

Here's a concern I might have. Let's say you do web work for Austin T. From time to time you might need to speak with him about the work--what design elements and functionality he wants, the color scheme, interactive elements, etc. When will you have these discussions? Will it be during your therapy hour? Or will it be outside of therapy? If you do talk about it during therapy, how would that make you feel? Would you feel it was eating away at your time to do therapy? Would you feel able to tell Austin T no, let's not talk about "business" during therapy? Or would that be hard to say since he is giving you sessions pro bono? It's not like you could say, "hey I'm not paying you to talk about websites with me, I'm paying you to be my therapist," because you aren't paying! I think the pro bono fact adds a layer of complexity to this dual relationship. I think if you do decide to do the website work for Austin T, you two will need to establish good boundaries around the work to keep it from impinging on your therapy.

Overall, it was a positive experience for me and the pluses outweighed the minuses. We had a dual relationship for about 2 years, during which my ex-husband and I paid T for his services as a divorce coach. This involved seeing T regularly outside of therapy in a very different role, paying him a different fee, and having the second role affect some of the "rules" surrounding our therapy relationship. The latter was the hardest for me, and this required a lot of trust on my part. I did worry at first that I would not handle well seeing T outside of therapy. I can get very emotional with T in session, and have learned to grieve and cry there. I worried if I saw T in another role, he would be like a trigger for me, and I would be too emotional and vulnerable, when I did not want to be these things. But it was not a problem. I was able to see T outside of therapy and act perfectly normally. I liked being able to see T function in a different role too--it gave me more insight into who he is.

We are done with this dual role now, and T is back to being just my T. Recently, we did discuss whether to begin a different dual role, not one that is fee for service, but more of an outside collaboration. T decided we should not do this. I think he felt it had potential to harm our relationship as we might get into disagreements or conflicts that collaborators sometimes have, and this could harm therapy (and thus harm me). I had thought he might say we could do one relationship or the other, and I might have to choose (that would have been a really hard choice). Why I envisioned this scenario, I do not know. I shared that with him and he said he would never put me in the position of having to make that choice. He said it is his role to be the guardian of our therapeutic relationship and that having to make this choice would be harmful to me and potentially to our relationship (it might force it's premature end). I felt good about that--like he was looking out for me and for "us", and guarding this really special and valuble jewel--our relationship in therapy.

As you can tell, I'm really fascinated by the whole topic of dual relationships. Every situation is unique so my experience probably isn't going to be that relevant to you, Deli. My one piece of advice would be that if you do have a dual relationship, to keep the two relationships as separate as possible. Don't talk business during therapy sessions. When you meet outside for business discussions, do it on neutral turf and don't discuss therapy topics. Keep it professional. If possible, don't have your web services be payment for Austin T's therapy services. Have them be 2 separate transactions and not linked.

Recently, I floated the idea that I might like to interview T for an article on a topic related to his coaching. (I would interview him as an "expert", not as a therapist.) As I mentioned this, I saw doubt flicker over T's face and that was fascinating to me! I knew immediately he was considering possible problems with this. He said that would be a dual relationship (even just a one time interview), and he wasn't sure he could do that--he would have to think about it. He said, maybe it would be OK if it took place in the context of therapy. We didn't really discuss this, but when he said that, my ethical hackles stood up. As a writer, I cannot interview someone and then be expected to pay them, and if I interviewed T during my therapy session, I would be paying him for his interview. This would be unethical, by a writer's code (at least for the sort of article this would be). I was really fascinated that these two ethical codes might recommend different things!

Good luck, Deli.

I think ExoticFlower made an important point here.
He is already working with you probono - so it wouldn't really be a fair trade. It is not like you are paying him in $$ and if you made this agreement you would simply start paying him in services.

He made the decision to work with you probono, right? And now he is asking for payment in services......but the original agreement was that there would be no payment. I feel it is inappropriate at this time for him to ask for ANY kind of payment whether it be in $$ or services.

I agree with Imapatient as well and I like the suggestion of how to approach the topic with your T.

thank you for all of your replies!!

tay - yes, i think you're right re: austin-T going pro bono so i can use the money for moving out instead. basically i am on a pension so i have enough to pay Austin-T, but i don't have that much more to buy food, pay bills, buy train tickets etc. getting therapy does take up a disproportionate amount of my income, but it's also been the one thing keeping me alive so it hasn't really been an optional extra for the past few years. when i first started seeing pdoc, i would earn $180 a week, and he used to charge $160 a session. that remaining $20 went towards my train ticket to uni each week (=$12.50) and my monday morning coffee ($2.50). the remaining $5 would be pooled across the month so i could buy my meds, and anything remaining would be saved so that i could go out with my friends when i had enough to afford to join in.

the situation isn't quite as desperate now, but i do still worry about meeting the essentials. after rent/basic bills/food/meds, i will still need to travel to uni, have an internet connection, print articles etc. i know that if anyone can live on a tiny budget it would be me, but i'm still trying to figure out how to make it all work. Austin-T going pro bono helps immensely, but i think all of that will go straight into rent. it's stressing me out. but i keep telling myself at least i will lose a bit of weight .

exotic - yes, i think a big concern of mine is that he might have very high expectations. he mentioned having briefly worked with someone this year but then leaving things half undone and my impression was that he hadn't been satisfied with that person's work. so i'm a bit scared to find out where the bar is set. i guess i can just be very upfront about my abilities & limitations and let him decide whether he'd like to try with someone who will be less than ideal. the one thing that could work in my favour is that i am as pedantic as he is, so he will probably not get upset when i take a long time because i am trying to make things perfect.

impy - i agree that i think he has good intentions. he has always surprised me a bit because he is rather... unconventional, sometimes bordering unethical. e.g., when he disclosed about his other client (whom he wanted me to meet so i could move in with her) and me being a good fit because she has OCD also. the thing is, he really does have good intentions. i feel like whacking him on the head for being so daft.

i like your wording for how to bring it up with him. i will memorise & blurt it out the next time he brings this up (hopefully not until next year... maybe he will forget?).

the thing that gets me is that i know he has good intentions. he has already offered to supervise & pay me should i need someone when i become an intern psychologist. that is possibly the most generous offer anyone can make (paid internships are few & far between: most interns need to volunteer these days, and some even need to pay their supervisor for the priviledge of doing work ). he's already been upfront & said if it wasn't an intern he'd have to pay double for a fully qualified psych, so at least i know what he gets out of the deal. but seriously, i know ppl in my class who would pay him a fortune to have him be their supervisor. of course, i don't know if i would accept when the time comes (maybe i will be lucky enough to get a postgrad offer?) and he might also have changed his mind. but it makes me think a little bit more seriously about whether to do this web development thing with him, just so i can get a sense of how he is to work with.

sunny - thanks for all your info re: ethical guidelines. now that you mention it, i do recall reading somewhere that bartering services would be an appropriate alternative should the client not be able to pay for therapy in full. so i can stop panicking about that .

re: when all of this stuff would take place. i would expect that we kept the therapy hour separate and met at a different time for the website stuff. he has a proper office set up at pdoc's hospital (where his computer lives) and then he works privately in a different suburb (where i usually see him). i think maybe seeing him in one place for therapy and then seeing him in another place for the website could work out ok. even if there is some other sort of arrangement that takes place, i really do trust him to keep things separate. that's the way his head works, and it's also the way i think too. we use it a lot together in therapy - actually draw boxes around my issues and assign a time for each one to be dealt with. i am sure if he knew this thread existed he would come down on me like a tonne of bricks, because this is meant to be a "next year" discussion topic.

sunny, i'm wondering what you meant by the "rules" surrounding your therapy relationship changing & how it meant you needed to trust him more?

i am intrigued as to why your T thought the interview would be 'ok' within the therapy hour? i'd be up in a huff, too ~ you're not paying him to give him publicity!! i wonder how his ethics thought it would be ok - i would have thought the reverse would have been a lot more appropriate, especially since you were interviewing him about a different role.

ktgirl - yes, i did feel a bit funny that one minute it was pro bono and the next i was expected to pay in services. i kind of feel like if it was that much of a problem to see me pro bono he should have discussed this with me earlier (rather than just sending a txt after a session letting me know). but the other thing is that he knows i am very uncomfortable even accepting the discounted rate from him, so i actually would prefer to do something rather than accept his services for free. he had offered to see me pro bono when medicare ran out (back in august) but i told him i would rather terminate than accept his services for free - it goes against my ethic. i have only seen him once (last week) where i didnt pay anything and it felt very weird. i dont like it. but i thought it would be better to wait until i see him next (he's gone off to a conference - again ) because maybe by then he would be more receptive to letting me pay again. i'd tried to protest the week prior when he only charged me $50, but he got a bit rude about it so i complied. hmph. doing a website probably would make me feel a bit happier if he won't allow me to pay in cash.

This is very interesting...

With my EX T, I was so scared to say good-bye and I was talking to him on the phone. and he said this to me " Yeah, you don't have to say good-bye to me, you can always e-mail me and ask questions"

Is that Dual relationship too??? emailing each other and chatting on line???
I mean after the termination...