Do you experience therapy as adversarial

Powerful censor filter on this site.

you got to thinking this morning, stopdog! good question, really.....
while I was at the gym, thoughts about this were rattling through my head, too.....
I do tend to agree with those who have said that the adversarial part comes from within us, not the therapy process itself. And I think that generally, therapy is meant to be experienced as an alliance, not a battle/adversarial thing. But it's not like there won't be disagreements, debating, etc - look at the whole rupture/repair cycle that seems to happen so often in therapy. I don't really think that makes the therapy adversarial or takes away from the alliance aspect, necessarily ...... but those things could sure make it FEEL adversarial to some people or feel adversarial at certain times.
The way therapy is experienced really seems to hinge more on the person's personality, I think ..... and if there's some adversarial feelings, it could also be transference-related, something in the T drawing that out.
Some Ts probably ARE more adversarial. Neither of mine were.
And then, maybe some need the T to be sort of like an adversary, maybe not all the way through the process, but at some point in the therapy, anyway.
As for me, yeah, I can be adversarial ...... I've been described as prickly, temperamental, argumentative, contrary, aggressive by those who've gotten to know me better. The thing is, my relationships do NOT start that way ..... probably because I keep the adversarial part under wraps and people will be thinking I'm quiet, reserved, sweet, gentle etc, but when someone begins to get closer, I think that other (and really stronger) aspect of me is more apparent. I like someone I can spar with....not do combat with, mind you, but a good debate that does NOT involve conflict or them being judgmental, even if they do challenge me. I didn't experience my therapy as adversarial nor do I want it to be in the future - but I do want to be challenged on the part of me that is adversarial to work through and beyond that and not have it sabotage/damage relationships/alliances.......even if that does feel adversarial sometimes.....

Adversary is a world I understand. I am not looking to give it up. I start out with it, I would rather people get rid of me or me them right off the bat than find out later it will not work out. After I see how someone handles adversarial roles with me, then we can turn to rounding off some of the edges to get to possible alliance.

I think its interesting that some people have looked at whether they are adversarial to the process versus whether their T is adversarial in the relationship.

In my case I feel like I approach the relationship as adversarial while T does not. While I get angry and enjoy calling my T out on alot of the stuff she says, disagreeing and challenging her, she doesn't seem to want to engage with me like this. I have a suspicion she knows I just want argue and she won't feed into it. She does address my questions and challenges but does it ever so calmly not supporting the adversarial relationship.

I still find it hard to reconcile that even though I go to see T by choice that I still feel this opposition to it. I guess it might be like going to the dentist, I don't like going but I know I need to go and that it will make my teeth healthy.

Would you give it up if making that type of change would solve the problem that caused you to enter therapy?

I would be willing to modify it. I already have modified it some over the years. It could possibly be modified more if shown to be necessary. But not given up altogether. There are lines I choose not to cross.

Yes. I was once trying to look up information about Moby **** on the school server and couldn't get to it. My students got a kick out of that.

If someone gets close enough to me (which is not necessarily easy because of the careful reserve) AND I trust them enough to let the prickly show AND they are still willing to stay closer or are interested in what's beneath the prickly or don't define me/judge my character by that, THEN we're on the road to a closer friendship/alliance..... this would be why I have lots of casual acquaintances and few close friends, because I keep most of my relationships in the 1st step, low-conflict and nobody gets see/judge the darker/pricklier parts of me.....and I have long preferred it that way ...... letting most people be neither adversary nor ally, I suppose.
But no, I don't let the prickly part of me show first so much ..... although I think, as I get older, I am losing some of the reserve or what I might call presenting an unauthentic mask and just being me and thinking, if I choose to be me and someone doesn't like it, tough cookies.....but I think I am also losing a few of the prickles too.
I don't really wanna be that cranky old lady in the nursing home who terrorizes the nurses....I wanna be a gracious old lady and have I ever got a lot of work to do if THAT's gonna happen!
But you know, nobody says you have to give up your adversarial approach/style entirely, stopdog.....if it's an ingrained part of your personality, maybe it's not so possible/reasonable to look at it like that. But maybe some refining/re-tooling or something.....?? Or define yourself by a different word than adversarial.....??
And you do seem honest and authentic and practical to me, which I can respect and like too. I'd consider you a worthy adversary as well as a good potential ally.....

For me, being adversarial is a bad habit I never wanted that is part of the mother in me. I don't - can't - even hear myself do it. It's appalling to me. My tongue cuts me out of games I WANT to be in before I even realize it. How have you people gotten away with it?! You all have partners and families and stuff, I'm a lone, lorn soul... (quote from Charles ****ens).

I have experienced my therapy as being adversarial at times, although I've come to realize that most of the conflict has been due to my incorrect projections or assumptions. Once my t and I have communicated about the misunderstanding or problem, and I understand the situation, things go back to being stable and comfortable.

Well, first, because for me it is mostly a game that no one is intended to win. I need to make sure someone can handle it without truly getting mad or unable to handle it at all or capitulates or submits to me unneccessarily and so forth. A lot of it is make sure I cannot run someone over. I do not want to have to be careful all the time and I need to make sure the other person can take care of themselves. And I need to make sure I can take care of myself against them.
PErhaps adversarial lite would be a better term, although I do not think the therapist always feels it is lite.

I experience my t as adversarial sometimes. Whenever I experience it I think about why and question whether I'm doing something wrong. Hmm, does that show I have fearful avoidant attachment style? It is funny how if you think about it enough, you can interpret almost anything to reflect on the client or on the t.

Just because a t thinks through snag points doesn't mean the t is being adversarial. They are supposed to be thinking through the snag points to help.

(On another topic, I thought the whole point of the quote was that it was self centered of that writer to say the most important part of the work is within the therapist.)

I often think I wouldn't like to have you as a professor and this quote is an example of why. I assume you have a way to avoid battling with every student, since one probably wouldn't have a job if one did that. But I would be afraid (and angry that I was forced into such an awful situation) if the only way to communicate closely with my professor was to have to have a stressful battle. Well, likely I'm misinterpreting how you actually interact with your students, idk, but if the preferences for you describe here are not modified a lot, I'd think it would be really unfair to treat people that way.

Is it acceptable to say something like that on a therapy forum? I wouldn't, and wouldn't want to, say something like that in very many situations or to very many people. (Although I did get pretty blatantly rude once with a professor whose style of interacting with students really lead me to dislike and disrespect him.) Since this is a therapy forum, I guess we're all inherently here working on ourselves, so it seems more okay to say critical stuff without meaning dislike. I like you on the forum, but I wonder if it would be too scary/unpleasant for me to get to know the qualities I like about you irl. idk.

I am very different with students and according to anon evals they do like me. And remember, I am working with law students. Adversarial should be something they can work with.

It is okay with me if you say that.

I believe you that your students like you.

Do you think many people on PC would get to know you if they met you in real life? I don't think we exactly seem like a very adversarial bunch .

Also you are warm and smart and funny.

Every time I have had therapy it has ended up adversarial (except the first two times, when I was 8 and 16). It starts off all nice and gushy but then when they realise how I really am, it becomes adversarial. I am one of those people who doesn't beat around the bush - I tell it like it is, no sugar coating. I am logical and practical and I challenge things in order to understand. As soon as they realise this is how I am, suddenly it becomes an adversarial thing. It goes from "how do you feel about this?" to "you are just saying that because you are lazy. Care to prove me wrong?". Happens every time.

I get this from my T. "That answer was too quick, too neat, too self-serving." And sometimes she is right. My head gives an answer before my heart has even heard the question.

Case in point. I gave an noble and intellectual reason for wanting to see her tattoo, when in truth I probably just want to see her bum.

I read that quote as "therapy is not here to make it easier for you to continue to do what you've been doing."

I would think - or hope at least, that is the case.

Of course I haven't read the entire book so I don't know what the author has to say about the therapist as the adversary. I'm pretty sure though that if he's writing a book about it, that he casts himself in that role.

For me, the first years of therapy were a street fight - talk about Don Quixote's windmills - jeez.

But then again, those were some ferocious looking windmills.

That was my interpretation also. Most therapists who speak of therapy as being adversarial are referring to the fact that the goal is behavior change, and even when we want to feel better, humans tend to be resistant to change, so therapy is adversarial in that it is designed to take us out of our comfort zone. Some of us are so resistant to making changes in ourselves that we spend years trying to get our therapists to change their behavior toward us instead, which makes the process feel even more adversarial. But in most cases, therapists themselves aren't intentionally engaging in an adversarial relationship with us -- they are truly our allies. It is we who are our own worst enemies.

I disagree that this is true. But it seems to be the usual stance. They are completely intentionally being adversarial, they just don't admit it. The allies thing becomes less and less comprehensible to me. Or why one would want them to be such.
I understand why they would be adversarial. I just don' know why it is so hard to get them to admit it. I don't understand what good it does to have one running around claiming to be an ally. What am I supposed to do with that?

The allies thing actually became more and more comprehensible to me when I finally stopped fighting against myself and I began to make some of the changes my therapist had been encouraging me to make. That's when I realized I was never really doing battle with him at all -- the conflict was actually within me.

I am glad it worked for you.

Yeah I get this a lot too. But that is how I talk. Quick, meaningful and to the point. I don't believe in wasting time dancing about a topic, about something I could say fully in 3 or 4 or 5 words.

I can sort of understand it in a way - some people need someone to shock them into action, or challenge them in such a way. It just irritates me because I always tell them up front that this is not appropriate for me because I am an aggressive person and by challenging me in such a manner, it is going to make me angry. And I am not pretty when I am angry. And nothing gets done, lol. But.... they always do it anyways. I try not to take it so personally when it happens. I told them and they decided not to listen so.... oh well!

My relationship with my t is sometimes adversarial. When I make an incorrect statement or observation she is quick to point these out without any sugar coating. This works for our relationship since I'm not looking for a loving, feel-good relationship. I just need to be presented with ways to heal from many years of denial.
Bluemountains

Adversarial is not the same as direct or not gentle.