[QuietCat]

I can't think of a better title for this, post.

Basically I'm wondering if I'm sabotaging my progress by researching too much into everything therapy related, and also everything about the type of avoidant personality (I'm reluctant to call it a disorder at all) that I have.

I remember when I first started with T he gave me various documents to read over regarding how he goes about treatment and a FAQ type information page. One of the things on there was about not reading too many self-help books or research online about things without talking to him about it, because a lot of things can be misinterpreted and hinder our work together.

But I NEVER tell T about all the research I do, or that I ever come here and read posts a lot. I'm sure he would disapprove of it. I only tell T if it's a book I know he will be approving of. He's very cognitive therapy oriented, so any books along those lines are usually fine with him, particularly if written by his colleagues.

What do you all think? Should a person just sort of go along with therapy and not investigate and research so much into the way and why of it? Do any of you tell your T about the stuff you find online or in books? How do they respond?

[Syra]

Originally Posted by QuietCat

I can't think of a better title for this, post.

Basically I'm wondering if I'm sabotaging my progress by researching too much into everything therapy related, and also everything about the type of avoidant personality (I'm reluctant to call it a disorder at all) that I have.

I remember when I first started with T he gave me various documents to read over regarding how he goes about treatment and a FAQ type information page. One of the things on there was about not reading too many self-help books or research online about things without talking to him about it, because a lot of things can be misinterpreted and hinder our work together.

But I NEVER tell T about all the research I do, or that I ever come here and read posts a lot. I'm sure he would disapprove of it. I only tell T if it's a book I know he will be approving of. He's very cognitive therapy oriented, so any books along those lines are usually fine with him, particularly if written by his colleagues.

What do you all think? Should a person just sort of go along with therapy and not investigate and research so much into the way and why of it? Do any of you tell your T about the stuff you find online or in books? How do they respond?

I do research on therapeutic styles and emotional development. If that's somethign you've learned will help you, even if it brings up lots of questions, then I would continue. It sounds like he was more concerned about your getting confused (which I think is not an unreasonable concern of therapists for their clients) than about you reading. I would be troubled if he totally rejected the contriubtions of other schools - which isn't to say he doesn't have opinions about the value of various contributions.

[archipelago]

For goodness sakes, it's your life and health, not his! Taking charge by doing work yourself to learn and explore is really healthy and responsible. Sure there might be times when something is misunderstood, but that can happen in therapy too! Misunderstandings are the norm, not the exception. We learn best from mistakes, not from success. It is very unfortunate that your therapist seems to want you to stop doing something that could actually be a great addition to the therapy. After all therapy is limited by time. But reading and research and posting on the internet is available all the time. If you get something out of it and find it helps, no one has the right to tell you to stop. That would be crazy. Remember we as patients are in charge, not the therapist. We hire and pay them. We are their bosses. Just because they have degrees and training does not mean that they have power over you. It doesn't even mean that they are the experts. If anyone who is a therapist pretends they are experts, they are lying to themselves. Humans are too complicated for anyone to have that kind of knowledge and power. My therapist has 35 years of experience in depth psychotherapy. He is also an analyst, which takes even more training. He was a professor at Stanford medical. And is a supervising and training analyst for others. He is also a psychiatrist so has a medical degree and is board certified in psychopharmacology. Yet he is the most humble and flexible person I've ever met. He never pretends to have definitive knowledge about anything (except meds). He never plays the expert. He rather knows that I'm the one in charge of how each session goes and it is up to me to take it in whatever direction I want. I bring up things I've read all the time. He enjoys that, sometimes disagrees, but that always leads to new things and better understanding between us. Your therapist should be proud of you for taking such interest and doing this work for yourself. There are many other approaches to psychology than the cognitive approach. All so called master therapists are open to a mixture of practices, knowing that a single approach doesn't cover everything. This is in the literature; I did research on it. Those who stick to the "manual" are just not as effective as those who are willing to depart from it. If your therapist isn't willing to let you talk about what you are reading, but you still want to do it and don't want to change therapists, then just keep doing it and use your therapist however is helpful. Not everything a therapist says or does works. And good therapists know this and can be open about it if they are comfortable with themselves enough to admit that they as human beings are limited just like everyone else.

[3velniai]

I sometimes wonder about the exactly same thing. I don't do much research and don't read any self help books, just hang out here on PC, but still, it kind of forms an opinion of what is normal in therapy and how things should be. I remember once I was really frustrated with the whole therapy process and I said to T: you need to give me a therapy 101 crash course because I seriously have no idea on how and what should I be doing here. And she said: thank god you haven't got a clue, this is the perfect situation then. And anytime I ask why or how something works or is supposed to work, she says something along the lines of: so you say it works, this is good. And then changes the topic.

[optimize990h]

I suppose 3-4 opinions, maybe more, on whether research on the ' net would have no effect on your therapy with T.

The next point would be perhaps your T. might mean that research on the 'net might take up too much of therapy time discussing the research.

And it could not make your therapy with your T. the most effective and efficient way.

If your focus is not on his therapy with you, it may not help as quickly. Your energy could be not all on his therapy, but spread among your research.

Research on his therapy and from like minded therapists might be considered as reinforcing your T.'s therapy with you, so I don't why the Internet research would be prohibited.

That is all the feedback I can give.

[stopdog]

I think clients should be as informed as possible. A therapist telling me anything about it being the therapist's therapy or his focus or the therapist having any opinion at all on what I research would send me running in the opposite direction of that particular therapist. I don't read self help books as such but I have read quite a few textbooks on various things about therapy. I have told the woman I see about all the books I have read, the other therapists I see, and the neuropsych people I have spoken to. Not to discuss it with her, but because she has told me she is unable (I believe unwilling) to explain things so I go to other people who will try.

[Anne2.0]

I'm sure that as with most things, it depends. Perhaps those that run along the obsessive side of things can read too much and it can make them confused or upset. But in general, it wouldn't go over too well with me for a T to tell me I couldn't read about therapy, or really do anything-- I don't do well with people telling me what to do. However, if I was spending tons of time in T talking about what I read instead of working on my issues, or raging about how this or that book says to do X and why isn't he doing that, maybe it would be reasonable for him to say something.

I don't do a lot of reading about therapy except for things that are very research based, like what's effective in therapy kind of stuff. I have worked with many psychiatrists and psychologists and occasionally other mental health professionals in the work that I do, and I think I understand more about assessment and evaluation than the average person, but not so much about therapy itself. I'm not even sure there is much to know for sure about therapy, in the way that we understand psychology more broadly, because it is somewhat untestable and otherwise so variable from person to person and therapist to therapist as to make broad generalizations difficult.

[Syra]

Originally Posted by 3velniai

I sometimes wonder about the exactly same thing. I don't do much research and don't read any self help books, just hang out here on PC, but still, it kind of forms an opinion of what is normal in therapy and how things should be. I remember once I was really frustrated with the whole therapy process and I said to T: you need to give me a therapy 101 crash course because I seriously have no idea on how and what should I be doing here. And she said: thank god you haven't got a clue, this is the perfect situation then. And anytime I ask why or how something works or is supposed to work, she says something along the lines of: so you say it works, this is good. And then changes the topic.

This would drive me crazy, and feel like she was discounting my concerns. Is it like that? Or do it make you feel reassured. I imagine my response isn't the only, or even a typical response. I can be a bit of a control freak.

[Fixated]

I have similar concerns lately. It's like once you know how the magic trick is done, you can always see it happening. Like if I weren't aware of transference, would its occurrence be more beneficial. Would I go deeper into the transference and possibly better heal the wound?

[3velniai]

Originally Posted by Syra

This would drive me crazy, and feel like she was discounting my concerns. Is it like that? Or do it make you feel reassured. I imagine my response isn't the only, or even a typical response. I can be a bit of a control freak.

I hope I'm not hijacking this thread. Just to make it more clear:
I just have to follow all the rules. If she told me how to do therapy I would see it as a rule and try to follow it all the time, so in my case the less you know the better is probably a good approach. This was about the process itself. She always explains everything about dx or specific terms she uses. Even suggests books to read, but those usually are not exactly about therapy.

[Syra]

Originally Posted by 3velniai

I hope I'm not hijacking this thread. Just to make it more clear:
I just have to follow all the rules. If she told me how to do therapy I would see it as a rule and try to follow it all the time, so in my case the less you know the better is probably a good approach. This was about the process itself. She always explains everything about dx or specific terms she uses. Even suggests books to read, but those usually are not exactly about therapy.

Thanks for clarifying. I can totally understand - especially if you really trust your therapist. Sometimes I get tired of researching and want to be able to trust someone else. Perhaps my problem isn't so much wnating to know, as it is wanting to trust. And we each have different requirements for trust, As I write this it feels like where you are is a lovely place to be. Thanks for clarifying and sharing your experience.

[QuietCat]

Originally Posted by Fixated

I have similar concerns lately. It's like once you know how the magic trick is done, you can always see it happening. Like if I weren't aware of transference, would its occurrence be more beneficial. Would I go deeper into the transference and possibly better heal the wound?

Exactly what I mean. I think I might be too aware of the process. Too busy analyzing what is or isn't happening in therapy based on my readings, instead of on the therapy itself.

[sittingatwatersedge]

Originally Posted by stopdog

I think clients should be as informed as possible..

questoin for you SD (and also yr colleagues here on PC) - what's your experience with clients who have done some reading iin the law? Is their partial knowledge (fraction of yours after all) a help or a hindrance?

just wondering if there's a parallel here worth looking at?

[ECHOES]

Originally Posted by QuietCat

I can't think of a better title for this, post.

Basically I'm wondering if I'm sabotaging my progress by researching too much into everything therapy related, and also everything about the type of avoidant personality (I'm reluctant to call it a disorder at all) that I have.

I remember when I first started with T he gave me various documents to read over regarding how he goes about treatment and a FAQ type information page. One of the things on there was about not reading too many self-help books or research online about things without talking to him about it, because a lot of things can be misinterpreted and hinder our work together.

But I NEVER tell T about all the research I do, or that I ever come here and read posts a lot. I'm sure he would disapprove of it. I only tell T if it's a book I know he will be approving of. He's very cognitive therapy oriented, so any books along those lines are usually fine with him, particularly if written by his colleagues.

What do you all think? Should a person just sort of go along with therapy and not investigate and research so much into the way and why of it? Do any of you tell your T about the stuff you find online or in books? How do they respond?

I read psychology stuff way before therapy, but when I started the therapy I am in, I suddenly wanted to read everything. At one point I thought it was not helpful to me/my therapy. I thought it was a way to 'control' the process, or to avoid my own stuff. So I stopped reading for a while. I read some now but not often. I want my therapy to take place with my therapist and not a book, and I wanted to stop wondering if my therapist was doing "this" or "that" or what. It took away from the spontaneity that I was working hard to find.

[archipelago]

Just a comment on the issue raised by Fixated. Current views about therapy say that the patients are the ones who make the best transference (and countertransference) interventions and interpretations. If you don't know anything about transference, how are you supposed to understand this? or be able to be active in the process?

In general, just because we "know" something (about a disorder, symptoms, therapies, the process) doesn't mean that we have been able to incorporate change yet. Knowledge itself while helpful is not curative. Emotional connection to our subjective truth is what heals in most cases. So the brain work we do in terms of knowledge still doesn't translate into change. And just because we know more about the process doesn't mean we ruin it. It is not a magic trick. It shouldn't be mysterious. It should be as transparent and open as possible. Their might be a problem if things become too "self-conscious" inhibiting the interaction, but that is rather easy to address.

Though psychology does fall into the general category of health, it is not exactly the same as medicine. Reading a lot about something like MS might help you deal with it, but it's not going to have an impact on your physician's treatment. But therapy is different. It absolutely depends on the patient's interactions. Why be in the dark about what is going on when having some understanding might actually help you?

[stopdog]

Originally Posted by sittingatwatersedge

questoin for you SD (and also yr colleagues here on PC) - what's your experience with clients who have done some reading iin the law? Is their partial knowledge (fraction of yours after all) a help or a hindrance?

just wondering if there's a parallel here worth looking at?

It depends. Sometimes it is a huge help when the person understands the legal system. I do not benefit from a client who is ignorant of the law or the legal system. It is their life and their choice so having knowledge is good I think.

I do not see the two as comparable really.
The thing is therapists don't actually do anything (it is the clients who do the work etc - this both my experience of them(the therapist does nothing) -and they say this too in any number of blogs and books and speeches), and they cannot or will not often explain what therapy is or is not or how it works, or what the process entails or even define the word process and so forth. I think it behooves a client to gather all the information they can, regardless of what a therapist thinks about it.

Lawyers actually are the ones doing the legal work and we explain to clients what is happening and they decide how they want to proceed after we explain and lay out the pros and cons as we see them.

[tinyrabbit]

I worried I might sabotage therapy by knowing too much, but I knew all about transference and still didn't see it coming. I think it's good to be informed so long as you aren't trying to
somehow cheat the process if that makes sense.

[tinyrabbit]

Also, therapists who do their own therapy are informed...

[Syra]

The more I tihnk about this, I'm thinking that if the person feels a need to research, they shoudl research. If it seems to interfere with therapy, then maybe the T could address what might be missing, why the cl is researching so much etc. Stopping the research on general principles wouldn't address the underlying issue causing the research - which may or may not be healthy. But stopping wtihout addressing the need doesn't seem healthy.

[Permanent Pajamas]

I don't think you can ever have too much information about an illness that affects you.

[sittingatwatersedge]

Originally Posted by ECHOES

I stopped reading for a while. I read some now but not often. I want my therapy to take place with my therapist and not a book, and I wanted to stop wondering if my therapist was doing "this" or "that" or what. It took away from the spontaneity that I was working hard to find.

omiGOSH twinnie..................................................

[sittingatwatersedge]

Originally Posted by iota

Current views about therapy say that the patients are the ones who make the best transference (and countertransference) interventions and interpretations.

not that I doubt you but when I read this I was like

[sittingatwatersedge]

stopdog >> It depends. Sometimes it is a huge help when the person understands the legal system. I do not benefit from a client who is ignorant of the law or the legal system. It is their life and their choice so having knowledge is good I think.
thank you

>> I do not see the two as comparable really.
The thing is therapists don't actually do anything (it is the clients who do the work)

oh, imho there is PLENTY for the client to do, but the T is ESSENTIAL in gauging (and saying) whether the Client is way off track,
in offering observations from an outside pair of eyes (from someone who is not judging, mind).
and lots more.

>> Lawyers actually are the ones doing the legal work and we explain to clients what is happening and they decide how they want to proceed

exactly! Thanks so much SD!

If I may dare........................

[archipelago]

Psychoanalysis has made a lot of substantial changes, throwing out a lot of junk from the old classical model. It makes sense if you think about it. Having the therapist provide you with a packaged "interpretation" really doesn't do much. But you as the patient, able to understand how you might be reliving something from your past or detecting something in the therapist's reactions to you, is a sign of true understanding, growth and change.

Again I emphasize that any therapist who believes or leads you to believe they are experts are lying to themselves. Human behavior and emotional states are too complex, not to mention the brain, for anyone to claim that they have this position. And everyone is so different that what works in one case may be terrible in another. Therapists with true understanding are willing to admit that they don't really know; they have training and experience to draw from. That's why you pay them, or one reason, but to believe you are a mini-god with the power to cure all by yourself is just ridiculous.

[stopdog]

Originally Posted by sittingatwatersedge

[I][COLOR=blue]

oh, imho there is PLENTY for the client to do, but the T is ESSENTIAL in gauging (and saying) whether the Client is way off track,
in offering observations from an outside pair of eyes (from someone who is not judging, mind).
and lots more.

I know that many people report having this experience of a therapist. I simply have not. I am unable to say the therapist is essential and the observations the therapist has told me about are either ones I have already stated/admitted or so incomprehensible I am often uncertain if the woman was listening to me or remembering someone else. Her observations have not, thus far, proven useful or insightful or anything beneficial to me - so un-useful in fact that we are now at a place where she has agreed to stop making them or at least talking to me about them. I keep trying to see how having another human around is useful.

I do not mean to deny anyone else's experience wherein the therapist talking or observing or whatever has proven a useful thing. If someone else reports the one they see is useful - then great.