Therapists Breaking their own Boundaries

This is, of course, inspired by Rainbow's thread, but my intention (and hope) is to not apply this to her situation. Because it occurred to me that the issue of therapists breaking, in one way or another, their own boundaries is something I've heard come up here every once in a while and it might be worth exploring.

So I'm going to offer a hypothetical and then I'd be really interested in knowing what you guys think.

Let's say my therapist and I have agreed that I can e-mail once a week, and thus far I've been good about complying with this. However, one week, something really big comes up, and I e-mail a second time. He responds to the e-mail and doesn't say anything about our agreement, either in his response or in session.

So, what if I then go on to send an extra e-mail the following week, and maybe even the week after that (and it's not life or death stuff).

1) Am I 'justified' in continuing to send extra e-mails based on the fact that my therapist 'violated his own boundary' that one time? Is he being 'inconsistent' (thus unnecessarily confusing the patient) or did he just make a considered decision to make that exception? Is it okay for me to continue sending more than one e-mail a week because, by making that exception, the therapist was, in fact, conveying to me, that the boundary no longer exists?

2) If I send an extra e-mail the following week (and it's really not life or death) and my therapist scolds me for this (i.e. come on now, we agreed to once a week, we talked about not doing therapy by e-mail) would I be justified in responding, "But you broke the boundary yourself! You answered my e-mail and didn't say there was anything wrong with me sending it. How can you criticize me for doing it!"

This is somewhat oversimplified, I know there would normally be various factors to consider, but what do you guys think about this, on the face of it? And what other factors may come into play?

Thanks!

Interesting idea for a thread. Though I have to say I read your post slightly differently. If you email a second time, you've broken the boundary. Your T is then responding to that. I don't mean to nitpick! I just think it's worth distinguishing between a) a boundary breach that is instigated by the client and b) a T being the one to break the boundary in the first place.

In the scenario you describe, I think it's confusing if the T just changes things without actually acknowledging that this has happened. I don't think scolding is the way to deal with this - do any Ts actually do this? I think it would be better to simply and clearly re-state the boundaries. I also think one email a week seems like a problematic boundary to start with, because what if something major happens just after you send the email?

I'm probably the wrong person to answer this as my T's boundaries are limited to the basic, immoveable ones where, if he breached them, I would have to leave therapy. He doesn't have rules about things like how many emails I can send, or whether he passes the tissues, or anything where breaking the boundary would be a trivial matter.

Personally, in that situation I would be more concerned about the purpose of the boundary. Why one email? At what point in the week are you supposed to know if you're ready to decide what to email about? Why are you limited to one email? Why can't your T allow you to email without committing to reading or replying? The whole idea of it makes my head ache a bit, so I imagine the client in that situation would feel the same.

You're right about the patient having broken the boundary not the therapist, I didn't express it well, I mean that some people could interpret answering the e-mail itself as breaking the boundary (as if this way tacitly approving of it, especially if it isn't discussed in session).

Also right about 'scolding.' Not the right word. Discussing it would be more accurate.

The once a week thing, I don't know, just an example. Some therapists don't do e-mail at all, others have certain boundaries around it, whether frequency or expectation of responses or whatever.

I get that it's really perplexing!

My therapist had an absolute boundary about no emails. He eventually changed that boundary with me. Over time, the boundary has relaxed to the point where he says I can email whenever and whatever I want. However, we discussed it at each step of the way.

As part of my therapy, he thought it was important that I look at my childhood more objectively so I could see how bad it was. At one point, I wrote a story about my childhood (written from the third person perspective because I could not stand to write it as if it were actually about me). I called and told him I wrote it (phone calls are actually encouraged), and told him I thought that I would lose my nerve to give it to him in session and asked to email it. He said that would be great, and please do so.

Later, I ran across an article that address something that I knew I needed to talk about but was positive I would never be able to do so. I mentioned it to him in session, but indicated that I didn't know how to get to the point of telling him about it. He told me to email it if I got the nerve.

He explained his reason for the boundary initially and his reasons for relaxing it. He also asked me not to tell other clients about being allowed to email. He says he has good and valid reasons to not allow it in most cases, but it would cause resentment and hard feelings if another client knew I was allowed to email AND received almost immediately responses, when the other clients are not allowed to do so, and he does not respond to emails from them at all. He made it clear that the relaxing of the boundary was all about how I USE email, and how careful I am to respect the boundaries of the relationship overall and it's not just a special privilege because he likes me.

Ultramar,
I think that once you have broken the boundary that you and your therapist should have a discussion about it at the next session (hypothetically). I am hoping that your therapist would bring it up, or that you would, so there wouldn't be an elephant in the room.

If your therapist replied to your email, he would be reinforcing your behavior. However, he could also be using flexible boundaries to allow for the fact that you had an overwhelming week. This could easily get out of control, as you say, if it isn't addressed. If I were you, I would ask the question, "What if something big comes up?" At that point, I guess you both would have to define what "something major" means. I think the best conversation would be to get to the root of your need to contact your therapist, whatever that may be. I think how your T responds to this, whether it is to allow two emails a week, or to allow one extra once a month, or not to budge on his boundary should be decided between the two of you, keeping in mind that your T might not be willing to change this boundary for his own reasons.

I am not allowed to email my T, although he did say I could while he is on vacation. I haven't felt the need to email him, but if I started, because email is so easy to write and send, I might be grappling with what I wrote during a really down time. His vacation will be a test for me, and a time for me to learn how to choose what to do when I have x emotions.

But, imagine what it is like for a T to see people all day and to have incoming emails that they don't get paid for, some possibly threatening self harm, etc. I know that I want my job to be over when I get home. That being said, I am not being negative about anyone who emails their T, I think that it is a choice in the relationship.

I think that if the therapist choses to answer your email, that the client has a right to complain because it is therapy, and that is where you can let how you feel out, no matter if you are proud of how you feel or not. This is a perfect chance for the therapist to learn more about the patient as transference may be at play. If both parties are fine with what went on, then that is between those two people and isn't debatable within the confines of that one therapeutical relationship. Every relationship is going to be different. People who have an ambivalent attachment style are going to react differently than people who have a dismissive-avoidant attachment or a fearful-avoidant attachment. People who are ambivalent are going to try to secure a safe base generally, and people who are avoidant, generally, are going to avoid attachment not necessarily as a choice, thus reducing or completely negating a need for contact. So, given that, the therapist might respond differently to the needs of different clients.

Good question

I write to the one I see - it could be email or regular mail. The therapist's response is not my goal. In fact, I dislike it when the woman responds.

I do not email the other one I see. I have never had an urge to do so. I rarely call her even though she encourages it. I do not find it especially useful for me to talk to her. Sometimes I call and just leave a message and add not to call me back.

For me, it is usually to get something away from me, not to engage in an exchange. That is why, for me, I do not see a problem with a person sending something to a therapist. They can put it in a file or whatever, but they really do not have to respond. They can even put an automatic response back like some do with phone calls "if this is an emergency - call 911 or go to a hospital"
I actually like sending letters better than email as it has no sense of immediate response.

The idea of a therapist "scolding" anyone has me much more bothered than what they do or do not do with an email. The therapist's boundary, it seems to me, is in not responding. A client merely emailing is difficult for me to see as any sort of boundary violation unless they hunted down a personal email address and began using that. The therapist controls whether or not to respond. As long as the therapist has made their ability/practice to respond or not to respond clear, then I really do not see all the fuss about boundaries.

I'd see it as an exception- every rule has one. So would cause me no confusion whatsoever if my T let it slide for once.
However, I am pretty good at respecting others boudaries - in my mind its a precaution. Stg along the lines of if I'm gonna recpect theirs they would respect mines.
Plus my T too has very few ones- no double RS, respect the time/place/payment of the sessions, no physical violence in sessions and to call his cell only if SUI (he only switch it off while in sessions- so clients can call him nights/ weekends). When we talked about it he said that he sometimes needs to establish more strict boundaries with some clients who -how to put it- struggle to maintain them in a healthy way?

My T's rules are: turn up, pay, don't bring in a gun and shoot him, and that's about it. I can email if I want, but he might not have time to read or reply. However he says my emails are important and it's fine to send them.

I don't make threats in my emails, though.

My T is letting me email him over his month long vacation. Since seeing this T, I have respected his boundaries. He understands me more than xT did, he has training in DID and trauma. His approach is in getting to the root of the problem and.he.gets me and he trusts me. I don't make threats in email either. I was just thinking of some other possible complications that might arise. I do think email is good for many people, but outside of Ts vacation, it isn't a good choice for me. So, ultramar, I think that how the therapist sets his boundaries in relation to the client is important. If a therapist doesn't have the training in or understand the client's issues and how to handle them, it could escalate the client. Likewise, the client could escalate the therapist. There are so many factors involved.
I just asked my T if I have ever crossed his boundaries yet, and he said, no. I used to have these issues, and suspect I am not cured, but I have been respectful with my current T.

I think boundaries and policies in general always have to reflect the overall and current situation with an individual client. Blanket policies that apply to everyone equally seem to me to be more about the T's preferences/limitations than about supporting the therapy or the therapeutic relationship.

So in your e-mail example, if the second e-mail reflected something crucial, I think that generally would take precedence over the policy because of its impact on the therapy. I would see the T as doing the right thing to respond, and not see it as related to the on-going policy. I would suspect that it might lead to a revision of the policy, if the issue that prompted the e-mail will become a continuing concern.

But I think there's a difference between boundaries and the therapy frame though they interrelate. Boundaries usually concern isolated actions. But the frame can be affected by how boundaries are handled by both client and T. The establishment of and engaging with boundaries that don't support the therapeutic relationship and goals damage the frame, and so can undermine both the therapy and the relationship. Boundaries can come and go, but the frame needs to remain consistent.

I don't understand someone who would bulldoze thru boundaries. If therapy sets up a one email a week boundary, there is no way I would do two. Ever. No matter how bad things got. I may need to leave a voicemail, but I would not do the second email. I hate to label people, but there is a personality disorder that is known for always finding a reason to break the rules, and I believe that disorder is best treated with really firm boundaries like DBT (according to studies). I would think a t that allows a client to always break the rules wouldn't be doing their job.

I could see a T easily forgetting how many emails that week they had received from a client and responding to an important email, even if it officially broke a rule they had established with a patient. A T probably gets a ton of emails each day and if he accidentally responded to you, well, so it goes. Certainly talk to him about this if it is bothering you, is confusing, etc. Perhaps you can try harder to uphold the boundary on your end so this situation doesn't arise again? You asked if you were "justified" in now sending your T additional emails each week. I would say don't deliberately cross the boundary until you have discussed it. Respect what you have already established even though your T did respond to your extra email in a time of need. T's boundary, after all, was that you only email once a week, not that he would not respond to additional, something-really-big-came-up emails.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ultrmar would I be justified in responding, "But you broke the boundary yourself! You answered my e-mail and didn't say there was anything wrong with me sending it. How can you criticize me for doing it!"

I would say no, you are not "justified." It is interesting how you use that word again! The boundary was that you not email more than once. You broke it. Don't criticize him for not bawling you out for your transgression. You're not a child who needs punishment after disobeying. As an adult, you can take responsibility, recognize your error (instead of focusing on what your T did), and try not to repeat it. You could also apologize for breaking the boundary: "Hey, I'm sorry for the extra email last week when Big Thing happened. I really appreciate your responding even though I know you asked me to email only once." That might be a good opener to further discussion of the boundary, if you are confused about it, would like to alter it, etc. Good luck!

Hi Ultramar

Boundaries are such a big subject for so many of us aren't they - what they mean, how we feel about them, what it feels like to have boundaries, do they mean something safe or scary and so on. The way we feel has so much to do with how it was for us as little ones and how safe we were.

I believe that our needs are all different and varying and so will the way we view boundaries and what boundaries feel like for us. The Boundaries in the therapy room are there to be pushed and tested - it is the job of the client to do that - and the job of the therapist to hold something safe but not rigid. That is how we get a real sense of a boundary for ourselves - of knowing where we end and another begins - of feeling secure and safe in relationships and the world. If we weren't given that as children then we can be very afraid of boundaries - because we haven't a clue where they are or when we will come up against them and how we might get hurt by them. That can make us very afraid of boundaries and afraid when they change or are more flexible. All those feelings help us to understand how it was for us and experiencing safe, firm, yet kind boundaries helps us to install internal boundaries to help us have happier and safer relationships in the future.

As a therapist, and as a client, I have learned to understand the need to be flexible, to listen to, and adapt to the needs of the client as the work progresses. So sometimes it will mean me changing how it was in the beginning as I listen to what it is the client needs - much as a mother adapts to the individual needs of her different children - and what works for one may not work for another and just as with a mother - mistakes are made - ruptures occur. It is in the repair of those ruptures that healing occurs. There are times when gentle love is needed, sometimes where tougher love is needed, but always with the needs of the client in mind. If I change a boundary, I don't see it as a violation but as a flexibility, a yielding, to enable the work to progress. But any change in the frame needs to be worked with and the feelings around that understood - because it can be scary.

So, in your example, what was the boundary initially might need to evolve to be more helpful to the client - and if it feels it's getting too much for the client to manage then it can be talked about and we could try to hold a boundary that feels safe but also where a connection can be maintained between sessions, if that is needed. It's not about me being all powerful and authorative, it's about negotiation and understanding. I get furious when I hear of therapists who are rigid and unrelenting with boundaries,clearly to the detriment of the client - to me, that shows more about their struggles with boundaries than that of their clients. The boundaries are there for their benefit, most certainly not for the clients.

Apologies for getting on my soapbox but I feel very strongly about this - I will step down now!

Moon

I think there's a difference between "justified" and "therapeutic".

In the situation you outline, the T is failing to be responsible, because he is changing boundaries without saying anything about it. In the absence of an explanation, I think this is potentially confusing for a client, especially if the boundary returns.

I feel like if we all based our behavior on what's "justified", though, we'd all be in trouble. I have trouble relating to wanting to cross boundaries, because I pretty much don't. I did, however, have a close friendship with someone who would do just exactly this... she would occasionally poke at boundaries, looking for an opening to do what she wanted to do. And if it was ever the case that I or our other friends didn't push back, she'd go straight through with the "but you didn't say no last time" thing. For a while, we shared a workspace, and bit by bit, she would leave it messier and messier, to the point where she wasn't even bothering to put trash in the trash can, I kid you not. She was going through some personal stress at the time, so I let it go a couple times. But when that stressful period was over and she kept doing it, I finally confronted her and she blamed me for not telling her earlier not to leave trash everywhere. This is a really basic and straightforward example, but it was true with so many things that one by one, she lost all of her closest friends, only able to maintain friendships with those that were far away.

Now, it's true that I didn't tell her not to leave trash everywhere. But it's also true that she knew better than to leave trash everywhere. So was she justified? I don't know. But I do know that she'd have been better off just trying to be a good friend and maybe getting some practice in adult behavior (she was always really really messy). So focusing on whether or not she had successfully found some kind of friendship loophole really didn't help her get any closer to interacting with people in a healthy manner. She just got whatever temporary gratification she got by leaving trash on the floor. Maybe that's worth it to her, but it wouldn't be to me.

It's true that boundaries are a big topic in therapy -- some people push them, some people won't even come near them. However, it's THERAPY, not a free-for-all. What disturbs me about your scenario is not just that the T doesn't say anything... but that the client doesn't either. My T has sometimes changed boundaries without saying anything, but I usually ask him about it. Nowhere here does the client first say, "Hey, so I appreciate your letting me e-mail more than once a week last week. Is that ok for me to do in emergencies?" Instead, quite purposefully, the client pushes on it to see how long it will hold, rather than discussing how helpful e-mailing that extra time was, and whether it would be worth considering multiple e-mails per week. To me, there is a vast difference between crossing a boundary in a tough situation and then revisiting it, and crossing a boundary in a tough situation and then continuing to cross it as long as nobody says "no", and purposely not asking about it in order to milk that implicit "approval" for all it's worth.

I lay a lot of responsibility at the T's feet to keep everything on a therapeutic track. However, if a client is doing the "not no means yes" thing in order to cross what used to be an explicit boundary... whether it's justified or not, they must be aware that they are pushing their luck, otherwise they would just ask about the boundary (or not push at all, of course). Only a superficial level of self-examination is required to see that this is probably not a productive behavior.

My T did change the boundaries around email for me and it did hurt a little, even though i know why she did it. We never had an actual conversation where she said i could or could not email- it was on her business card she gave me. Acter a year or two she told me that she didnt think me emailing ber was a good idea bc i used it to tell her stuff and avoid it in session.

If it were me, I'd be thankful that T accepted and responded to my email and resume what we've agreed on - one email a week.

I wouldn't start pushing boundaries about something that has already been agreed upon. If it was really important to email more, then that is something that needs to be discussed face to face in a session.

The whole keep-emailing-because-he-gave-in-once seems rude and inconsiderate. JMHO.

Sally brown, I think your post is the first day of the rest of my therapy! As I was reading it, I was like, omg, do I know her? Did I do that? Wasn't that me?? Then this huge sense of the other person not caring, not being there, not seeing me - and yes, me asking, well why didn't you SAY something? Because I've heard myself ask that - why didn't you say something? And the other person just kind of sputters and doesn't answer - like, if you don't know, I can't tell you, or I'm not gonna tell you. But as you say, sally - why isn't the offender more responsible? Because invisible people don't have to be responsible, that's why. It's totally passive aggressive, no doubt - but as stopdog posted elsewhere very recently, you just end up screwing up your own life, throwing away your own opportunities. You take your neglect and turn it into self-destruction. Good thread.

It is possible that for some people, violating (or trying to violate) rules is a good thing. There are any number of people, I imagine, who would be benefitted from breaking a rule and realizing the world did not end. The therapist was not destroyed and did not punish for doing so.

Also, everyone has their own path to get to where they want to be. I think I was taken a bit out of context above, my point was not that people are screwing up their lives and throwing away opportunities - sometimes a choice means a missed opportunity, because my point was that people make choices and, I believe most of the time, people are making the choices they can at any given point in time. Sometimes people have to do what they are going to do for awhile even if to the rest of the world it seems not the best thing. There are consequences to those choices, but the consequences are not necessarily going to make a person change, nor should they alone, in my opinion, be the sole deciding factor. Sometimes it is a weighing thing. If I do X to get Y then Z will also happen. Is Y more important to me than Z matters? If I email the therapist twice instead of once, the therapist might say they cannot work with me. Is it more important to me to email twice or to placate the therapist to keep that one and not have to find a new one?

I totally get the feeling invisible when you want someone to intervene and they don't. It manifests differently for me, but I definitely struggle with it.

ETA: Actually... I think I do almost the exact opposite. I withdraw. I don't push in and wait for someone to push back, I pull away and wait for someone to pull back. Huh. Good group session!

Yipes - I should have explained - that's how I took what stopdog said about students etc, and that is what I did with my own neglect, was turn it into holding myself back, doing it to myself before anybody else could. As a friend of mine once termed it, self-defecating humor.

I pull away and wait for someone to reach for me so that I can step on their fingers. This is a totally healthy way to go about life.

OK, well, now I'm completely confused, but that's not an unusual scenario.

Maybe this is clear, but just to make sure, this is hypothetical, not the situation with me/my therapist -he's flexible, no 'scolding', etc. I was just curious about what people think of these scenerios.

Thanks for your comments, Antimatter!

I wasn't sure how this would work, being hypothetical and all, but it turned out to be very useful. Thanks for starting it.

Thank you for saying what I couldn't write. I was worried about offending someone, but I was thinking the exact same thing.