Not taking your meds

I don't think there can be such a fine line between caring and giving information. One has to realize that the way the information is given (such as whether it's given in a caring manner or not) will have an influence on the person, whether the person knows it and acknowledges it or not. If both the giver and the receiver are aware of this and accept it, it can allow a greater degree of honesty and autonomy, but I don't believe there's such a thing as absolute autonomy where the person isn't influenced by the "information giver

This reminds me of an episode in In Treatment where Gina (Paul's T) says "I took care of you for many years. Does that bother you?" I think allowing onesself to be taken care of, and acknowledging that one needs help sometimes, including emotional help, is part of being vulnerable and human.

I don't understand your point. The extent to which one allows oneself to be influenced by the person with information is one's own responsibility. The person with the information needs to understand they cannot control how another individual uses that information. I am not trying to stop others from being taken care of if that is what they want. I don't understand why they want to be taken care of, but they can certainly have at it if they choose. That a person may choose to seek help does not then obligate them to accept all attempts of another to help. Help may come at a too high of a price or be harmful(even if that is not the intent), or not be helpful despite how "caring" the offerer is.

Me neither. Especially since the OP came off very condesceding (taking meds = good, not taking meds = no good). If we were goodie-goodies, who never do anything irrational and stupid, we wouldn't have to be in therapy in the first place.

That does not mean a T would be another person to bully a person, abuse even, for their own good. Should a T "take care of" a client who choses to date an total asshole, because that is form of self-injury too? Should they "take care of" a person who eats crap? Or should they rather look behind reasons of those?

Stopdog: I was taught in school to walk in to an exam room and say, "Hi, my name is Lucydog and I'm here to take care of you today". To use those exact words. Studies have shown much greater patient satisfaction when the patient hears that word "care". I guess you would be the outlier of that study, huh?

Just because a t isn't a prescribing authority doesn't mean that a particular individual may not have a lot of experience or personal/professional interest in medication. They could be a valuable resource when making med choices.

I really think t that a t should do as VH said and try to explore the underlying reasons for their client's choices- that is pretty much their job description! But, in the end, they have the option to terminate treatment for any reason. Just like you can terminate if you're sick of your t bugging you about meds, diet, or choice in lovers.

If someone feels better because a stranger uses the word care, then good for them.i am not going to tell another person their idea of comfort is wrong. It is different from mine, but not wrong for them.

And it is good no one on either side is compelled to deal with another whom they find repugnant in the world of therapy. I will not be taken care of, but for those of you who seek care, I hope you find it and it helps.

I think the word care is different when it comes to physical health and emotional... I would let person "care" about my broken arm or surgery. I would not accept them to give me advice and let me do it myself.

But psychology is not exact science. I don't know. Taking care when it comes to meds... will they wrap the patient in towel and shove a pill in their throat (as we do when we "take care" of our sick pets)? Ts don't even have power to prescribe. They are not doctors. I see Ts more as teachers. They are not responsible for us and they should be able to explain and guide.

Of course they can terminate. But not "take care of" us.

My T gently brings up questions about my meds once in a while. We really don't talk about it that much. She leaves it up to me to mention to her if I so choose. She has never pushed, gave ultimatums or threatened me if I told her I was stopping a med or changing a med. All she ever does is mention that I should make sure my P-Doc knows exactly what is going on, so they can help me best. T doesn't get too involved or try to tell me what is best as far as meds are concerned.

The person with the information cannot totally control the person but neither can they avoid having at least some "control". Probably effect is a better word than control at the end of the sentence there, but it means about the same.

In any interaction, two people influence each other, and it's impossible to be completely conscious of what the influence is.

As you might point out, it's not my problem, but I think that if you try to understand a bit of why people like being taken care of, you'd be surprised, sometimes pleasantly, at what interesting and different experiences are possible.

I agree with all this. We weren't talking about accepting ALL the attempts of another to help.

Also, I wasn't talking about anywhere close to physically forcing another person to take meds, as another poster wrote about. I was talking about the therapist using forceful emotional effort to compel the client to take meds in an extreme situation where it's very clear to the therapist that the client is likely in extreme danger if they don't take the meds. Obviously, a therapist can never be 100% sure they are correct, but I think there are situations where reasonable people would agree that an individual is a danger to themself or others if they don't take meds. The client can always choose to walk away, but if they are still asking the therapist for help and ignoring the advice they are getting, I think the therapist has the ethical right, if not responsibility, to be emotionally pushy about getting the client to take their meds.

I think effect or influence are very different from control. I agree one can be influenced conciously or unconciously.

I am talking about not having to accept ANY attempts.

My reaction was to what I consider to be the forceful description by the OP. Also over the last 25 years I have represented a lot of people being held and treated involuntarily. So perhaps I have a different experience about the use of power in the health care field. And again, if others think it is useful and are willing to endure a therapist or whomever treating them in the way the OP and others have described, then I hope it is good for them.

I wonder if you agree that everyone is influenced unconsciously?

This has been a lively discussion! My opinion:

My depression began to worsen last September. My T told me I should see a pdoc to "change my meds". I told her no. I didn't want to change my medication regimen. Next session, T told me she thought therapy wasn't going to help the depression, to see a pdoc and maybe "add a med". I vehemently said no because I knew she was suggesting adding a low-dose anti-psychotic (which seems to be a trend for depression right now...and no offense to those for which this tactic works) and I did not want to go back on anti-psychotics in any form. When I started taking anti-psychotics (low dose...25 mg Seroquel), I gained 40 pounds in six months...went from a size 4 to a 14, had NO sex drive, daytime drowsiness, and lived in a mental fog. During a 3-week hiatus from therapy (T had chemo), I decided to see my GP (who manages my p-meds). He raised my Zoloft by 50 mg and it worked like a charm. T still was peeved with me because I saw my GP and not a pdoc. I assured her he knew a lot about p-meds and he did a one-year residency in a psychiatric hospital. We have not discussed meds since. It's a sore spot.

To summarize, there are many reasons to decide to take (or not to take) meds. I wouldn't call it self-injury. I wouldn't call it non-compliance (although where I work, it would be called such). There are many things to consider, not the least of which is effectiveness vs. side effects.