T's with emotional problems

Mmm... I can't see how anyone can practice as a psychologist if you had major psychological problems. I do think you can if you have dealt with most of the issues. I have had a heap load of therapy in the past but I don't think therapists should or can practice if they have major issues.

You see, I work for the authorities, now if I had major issues they would pick up on that. They will not employ someone who is likely to take a lot of time off work, you have to prove you can deal with a great deal of stress. I have to have 'supervision' as all do here, this is every 4 to 6 weeks but it is not the same as being in therapy.

I'm not sure how it is for those that practice independently though, who keeps an eye on those to make sure that they are psychologically fit to do the work?

As a client, I won't work with a T who talks about or admits to having any major psych issues. I want a therapist who is "someone I want to be like" not someone who is empathetic because "they have been there." Although I am trying to learn to be a little more tolerant of people's pasts, I need my T to be emotionally stable and NOT talk about his or her psych history. If the issues are unresolved that sounds like a recipe for disaster. I mean there are all sorts of ways that a T could use his or her "power and authority" to intentionally or unintentionally abuse those who are emotionally vulnerable (as most T clients are).

As I see it, it depends on how self-aware a T is, how aware of any problems they may have. Some I have known I think were not really aware, or would deny any errors, but if one is aware, if one is transparent about it, at least with oneself, I think a T could still be effective even if all problems are not solved. (How many of us are certain that ALL our problems are completely solved? )

It's not a matter of whether their problems are completely solved or not. Whose are? It's a matter of how much their personal problems bleed over into their ability to work with their clients. I'm with Popskid on this one. I don't want or need a t who is going to tell me about their personal problems and "empathize" with me. I've had that happen and it was creepy and unproductive to the point that I refused to go back. There is such a thing as too much information. It reeks of weakness to me and I want a strong t. I don't care if they are in therapy or dealing with their own stuff. We all are. Just don't bring it into my sessions. That's just wrong.

And then there's the matter of simple competence, which may or may not overlap with "issues."

Of my multiple attempts at therapy, I would say that I ran into at least 1/3 really poor therapists, including:

1. the guy who, when I couldn't talk, only cried, through the entire first session, gave me a prescription and told me "come back in a month when you're feeling better."

2. the woman who came late, with stains on her clothes, and slept through session.

3. the woman who showed me her appointment book (with other clients' names) to prove that she didn't have an appointment at a time I had thought she did.

4. the marriage counselor, who kept saying "unless there's an alcohol or drug problem, I think each person is equally to blame," just assuming that there was not an alcohol problem, even though there was. (My husband's.) (He presented very well, especially at therapy, and had a successful career, with a senior position at a large company.) (But she would say that each time, and then after each session, he would not come home, but go out and get drunk and come home screaming and cursing at 2 in the morning.) (But I could not tell her because he would just have gotten angrier at me.) (So she never knew any of this, and is probably out there still making things worse for her unfortunate clients.)

And then there were a bunch of mediocre ones, who I did not manage to connect with.

And two good ones.

And so it goes.

All of the therapists that I saw were trained and licensed and so on -- some psychiatrists, some psychologists, some social workers. They were mostly in private practice. I have no idea whether or not they had unresolved emotional issues.

(So, if my experience is in any way typical, I would say that about 1/3 of the therapists out there are seriously incompetent, regardless of any other concerns.)

-Far

Which tells you, if this is so, that the training and licensing process does not provide a secure assurance of competence.

First of all, I agree with the people who have said that T's who are aware of their issues, and don't allow these issues to bleed into their work, can be effective T's even if their issues are partially unresolved. At my job, I work with a psychologist who is a fantastic therapist, who clearly still meets criteria for an anxiety disorder. He's scared of doctors, and funerals, and germs, and vomit, and blood, and lots of different things, and he does everything he can to avoid the things he's scared of. But he admits to his issues, laughs it off, does his best, and never lets it affect his work. He is the most empathic and caring T, and he is a razor-sharp clinician. He wouldn't tell a client that he has anxiety unless it would be helpful to them.

My T has very bad social anxiety sometimes - when she's anxious, she blushes terribly and gets very blotchy, and she considers it very embarrassing. She admitted it to me because I tend to feel ashamed of having any issues at all, and I tend to pathologize my own behavior even when it's kind of normal. I was a client who needed an imperfect T, so my T chose to reveal her imperfections.

When I am a T, I will be the same way. I am working HARD to resolve my issues, but I'll never erase a lifetime of trauma. I'll always have some anxiety, at the very least, I'm sure. And I think I'm okay with that. But I have no need to share this information with people who would not benefit from hearing it. I figure, I will be alright as a T, even if I have some lingering issues, if:

- I always seek help when things come up in my daily life.
- I continue to seek self-awareness and admit to myself if I am struggling.
- I don't allow my issues to color my work. If I have blind spots, I admit them to myself and move forward.
- I seek supervision if I am unsure if my own problems are affecting the work I do.

to play devil's advocate a bit...

what if i was the client who was terrified of those same issues? what if best practice, graded exposure therapy, required i discuss these things or - heaven forbid - actually touched some of this stuff? i wouldn't trust this particular T to be an effective T for me because clearly his issues would affect his competence in this regard. i'd also be upset had i been seeing him for 2years or so, had built a relationship, only to find that this was one of his "no go" zones. i dont think a T can ever claim that unresolved issues never affects their work. i think to do so is self-deception.

this isn't meant to pick on you, jex, or your wording or anything. just at the many Ts do claim that their highly skilled at managing their own issues & ensuring it never affects their work (i'm not sure if the person you described is one or not, this isn't meant to single anyone out), and i call bs on that.

my main concern with Ts who have unresolved issues (e.g., trauma, divorce, phobias, or even simple burn out) or mental illnesses (e.g., schizophrenia, bipolar, melancholic depression) is that i don't think there are effective safeguards for the public at monitoring Ts and making sure they aren't stuffing up. it's up to the T to be honest with themselves, and when you have many factors for wanting to stay in the job i don't think that many Ts are responsible enough to know when to step back or to follow through when they recognise this. in australia, you only get deregistered for gross negligence/incompetence/abuse e.g., sex with client, financial favours etc. it means that people like my old-T (who i'm sure would have been a good therapist at one point in his career) get to continue practicing, even when they clearly need a break and/or some supervision. i am fairly sure his was just a case of burn out (coupled with a healthy dose of misogyny). and i dont think peers are great for "dobbing in" their colleagues either. it's just like the medical profession - a case of "protect your own" and turn a blind eye.

i'm not saying this to be all doomsday and certainly ive never been to a T who has had major problems. old-T was just a bit of a **** but he was helpful at least initially. but i think the profession likes to kid itself about how much it really does to protect the public, and i don't think leaving it as the responsibility of the practitioner is good enough. this isn't to take away from the many many many therapists who ARE wonderfully responsible and manage their issues as much as can be expected, it's just a matter of it not being fair to anyone to leave it as the practitioner's responsibility.