I punched a table during a session. She's won't see me anymore but I'd never hurt her

IDK, Watino. What I hear is a lot of transference and a belief in entitlement/need to control others in order to get what you want/need. You've written of a few protracted conflicts on this thread in which you demanded information, believed it was being withheld from you, and saw yourself as bullied and, at least once, with no choice but to resort to physical intimidation.

The consistent thread I see is a belief that there is something you deserve, that others punitively withhold from you, and then you use that as a rationale for behavior that is unacceptable. I just don't hear much difference between this and the many accounts I've heard from men in domestic violence situations: "I didn't really act violently, it was only a lamp that I threw and it didn't even hit her, and I only did it because she wouldn't listen to me, as I've told her a million times that I don't like X. She didn't leave me any choice; she just keeps pressing until I can't take it anymore, etc." One part of them may sincerely feel a fear that to not change the power balance at the moment by any means necessary would destroy them. But to sustain that belief, there also has to be denial and minimizing of the actions taken. The fundamental problem is the belief system and the actions are the consequence. Only you can know if you're willing to risk looking at your beliefs because focusing on the other's faults just sustains the beliefs and focusing on controlling the actions doesn't generally work long-term.

It frankly gives me pause to hear that you're in med school. How will you respond when a patient doesn't want to follow your advice, is non-compliant with meds, or asks a million understandably annoying questions? When a patient questions your competence, or files a complaint?

Was this the first time you lost your temper with her watino, or the first time you felt let down by her since you been working with her.

Could you have gone through her supervisor, instead of using intimidation and fear or threatning malpractice, Im not saying that, you shouldnt seek these things, but not by fear or intimidation. This seems to have been building up for a while, not just suddenly that day. You say you half stood up , then punched the table, thats menacing behavior , here in the usa, if i am behind a desk, and someone is angry and i am sitting down and they do this , half stand up, raise thier voice and then punch the table, of course that is threatning behavior. I would have got up, opened the door, and asked you to leave. Not because I am a wimp, but because I am not going to tolorate, the behavior that I am trying to change in my clients. How do I know what your next step was going to be.

Murphys law, you were able to control yourself, what if you werent, you dont know this, this behavior can escalate from 0 to 60 , then what, is a therapist then expected to say, oh i should expect this from my client, from a hospital bed.

Qoute: She broke the ethical code previously (refused to give me medical information that I'm entitled to, in form of a document that states diagnosis etc., only agreed to send it to my next T, even tho these are private visits by my own initiative)

Watino since you´re in Medical school can you clarify, what you mean by her breaking the ethical code?

The therapist sounds stupid and incompetent to me. You shouldn't have done what you did though. You're better off without her though. Sounds like she has no idea what she is doing like most therapists. It's snake oil science at best.

Without having been in your sessions, it is impossible for us to make a judgement call on what your therapist did or didn't do. Perhaps she was telling you and you weren't listening to understand? That happens to me - mine will say something one week and then the next week I realize that she'd already said it but I wasn't in a place to accept it at the time. We can't know her tone, we can't know her motives and we can't know her process.

What we CAN know is that you acknowledged that you used force to intimidate another person. You were wrong. You must understand. You were bullying her and that is never acceptable.

This sounds exactly like an abusive spouse trying to justify the fact that he punched a table to intimidate his wife because she deserved it. Nobody deserves it.

Your actions were grossly irresponsible. The fact that you are still trying to justify it days later tells me that she was 100% correct to not see you again.

You need to acknowledge your anger issue with a new therapist that has the resources to protect themselves from your outburst were it to escalate.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really? When a person decides to become a social worker, they don't all do it because they want to deal with violent people and hat is NOT a prerequisite skill that they must have. There are some that specialize in dealing with those clients but that doesn't mean all must.

As a high school teacher, I have broken up more fights than I can count. It isn't part if my job description, but I felt confident enough to do it. The fact that I was willing to go outside of my job responsibility and potentially open myself up to injury does not mean that all teachers must do the same as me in order to be good at their job.

So you don't mind angry outbursts and threats to your safety. That's fine if it works for you. But that doesn't mean that others must operate the same way to be effective.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the t is halting treatment because the client threatened to sue. He took advantage of her trying to repair the rupture by "admitting her mistake" - in which she was taking partial responsibility for the misunderstanding as hers, hoping he would follow her example and then see his part in the misunderstanding, as he somewhat seems to have here - and instead he becomes the bullying parent, wanting to join forces with the supervisor against the t. The supervisor is an extra pair of eyes and ears, not a judge or warden. And definitely not a punitive parent.

So between the threat to sue, wanting to call the supervisor, and pounding the table, the client pretty much guaranteed he wont have to feel dependent again anytime soon. I agree with stopdog, the t should butch up and call him on his b.s. Otherwise she is just playing into his defenses. Or maybe thats why he picked s female t, he wanted one he could intimidate. If he is truly interested in continuing, he needs to remember where he is now, this feeling of being bullied and bullying back in response, in response to a "mistake", and start up with a new t there, one who is gentle but who wont be intimidated.

Watino,

I hope you find a new therapist to work through these issues with you and then move forward.

She doesn't seem like a good fit for you, so my guess is that this is a good outcome. Someday, I think, you'll look back on this and be glad she terminated the relationship.

Of course your behavior wasn't her fault. I just think she is not a very skilled therapist, and certainly not a good match for you.

Take care.

If I minded - I would not be a criminal defense attorney/practice the types of law I do. I would be doing something else that did not scare me - not just any particular client - but as a mindset of am I afraid of clients. If a therapist, whether social worker or other degree, gets scared because some client hits a table, I would suggest that person do something else for a living too.

Wow, getting off topic here stopdog, I want to congratulate you on being a criminal defense attorney, that takes alot of mindset, anyway just wanted to say that, keep safe.

You go on the premise that clients regularly behave aggressively in session. I'd guess it is actually fairly unusual behavior.

I teach. On rare occasions a student becomes aggressive, and I am not at all comfortable when that happens. I will have that student removed. Does that mean I should do something else as a living too because I become scared if that kind of aggression is displayed by a student? Your logic just doesn't work here because you assume this is regular behavior.

Psychotherapists is a profession that requires a licence (unless one is in training to obtain such a licence). Once it's awarded it allows one to practice the profession, provided that the ethical code established by the awarding organization is followed. Failure to comply could mean investigation by the disciplinary committee and suspension or withdrawal of the licence.
For physicians the rules are quite different and more strict, for example certain aspects are regulated by criminal law.

Art. 20:

The psychologist will give information to persons undergoing psychologist diagnoses and therapy on the methods used and results achieved, being guided by the good of these persons. The psychologist will avoid procedures which could offend the client's convictions and also the chance of erroneous interpretation of information given. In doubtful cases the psychologist will ensure that this information is correctly understood.

Urgh, this thread has disgusted me.

If I was the therapist in this equation, I would have terminated too. Not because I scare easily - far from it - but men who are violent towards women make me physically sick. I just could not hold you in positive regard as my client, perhaps this therapist feels similar. We are all human and all allowed to have areas that we do not want to work with. Stopdog is being reductionist when she says it is simply a matter of 'butching up' imo.

OP you need therapy and lots of it but NOT from the person that you frightened - that can never work, in the same way that they never, ever recommend couples counselling for relationships where one half is being violent towards the other.

Although I know you are not in North America, I'd be sure to check that there isn't another clause in this article. In Canada, it says the same basic thing, but down the list a little, it says that this information can be withheld if it would be a detriment to the client to know the information.

I'm really surprised about the variety of opinions on the situation. Seeing how the OP admitted to choosing to intimidate through an action, I don't see how anyone can see this as the T's fault. If this T was an anger management T, then maybe there might be a bit of credence to the T being partially responsible, but even then, no one has to submit to violence - NO ONE.

No one can guess how they will respond when they fear for their safety.

I totatlly agree, understand watino, was sorry after the fact, but the damage was done, the therapist, said the buck stops here, and again, we dont know everything, or how long the intimidation lasted, how close was the op in space to the t ? I know for a fact that in such a confrontation with a police officer if a cop felt threathened they would arrest a person. I have seen it.

I teach too. I have had aggressive students who acted out. I have never felt the need to have a student removed or anything else. I did once check on a new prof (who had been a public defender with me before moving into teaching so maybe that is why we are not as twitchy as some others) who was teaching at night when I was also teaching a night class and I heard a student yelling and hitting a wall at her. But the other prof. said she was fine and and I waited for her and we walked out together - she said the student did not worry her. I do believe students and clients act out sometimes and I do believe it is rather regular in my experience ( I work with a lot of people being held against their will by the mental health people). I believe a therapist who is scared by a client hitting a table should find something else to do. But it is just my belief - clearly others have different beliefs on this subject.

Why not quote the whole thing and not just the part where you feel YOU were entitled and she was being " unethical"?

This depends on what kind of teacher, lawyer, or therapist one is. If one is specifically going into criminal defense law, teaching at an inner city high school, or specializing in anger management therapy, then yes, this type of behavior will be routine and the professional should be trained in how to deal with these kinds of situations.

However, not all lawyers, teachers, therapists, and other "professionals" should not be expected to tolerate threatening behavior. It is not good for them OR their clients. Clients need to learn that intimidation and violence are NOT acceptable and there are consequences for their actions.

Moreover, there are so many types of therapy, law, and education. My therapist, for instance, specializes in working with women, LGBT clients and eating disorders. In her line of work, she does not treat (and does not accept clients) who have problems with violence. It's not her area of specialty. Similarly, both my father and sister are lawyers. My father does corporate/ employment law and my sister does immigration law. Neither of them have ever been physically threatened and, if they were, I can assure you that they would have the client escorted out by security and terminated. That simply isn't their branch of law. I work as a professor. I teach gender studies, cultural studies, and film at a very selective University. Personally, I have never been threatened or intimidated by a student. If I were, I would call security. It's not my job to deal with behavioral problems. It would diminish the education of all of my other students if I allowed that kind of behavior in my classroom; my students are all adults and are paying very high tuition in order to receive a quality education. Behavioral problems are not tolerated at my university. Period.

Finally, as someone who has written and published a book on stalkers and workplace violence (and was trained by the LAPD in how to handle these situations), I can tell you that allowing the behavior, accepting the excuses, and not taking the violence/intimidation seriously is the WORST thing you can do. It encourages the behavior, allows the situation to escalate, and prevents the supervisors/authorities from learning of and managing the situation safely. I cannot tell you, while doing research for my book, how many (usually female) professionals I interviewed who said "I thought it wasn't a big deal. I thought I could handle it. I didn't want others at work to think I was weak. It was my job to be in charge." They tried to "butch up" and tolerate the threatening behavior. Unfortunately, so many of these situations escalated--- it began with verbal threats, physical intimidation, and punching inanimate objects-- and then, all of a sudden-- it turned into physical violence. In fact, the ones i was able to interview were the lucky ones. The not as lucky ones are dead.

This doesn't just happen to "other people." It also happened to a co-worker of mine at the University. She had a male student who began stalking her. She said she could handle it. She said it wasn't a big deal; he just wanted to drive by her house or follow her into the office. He only ever yelled at her and hit the table. She said he was harmless; he would never actually hurt her. She said she wanted to handle it herself. After I saw this guy lurking around our offices, I spotted so many of the warning signs (which are in my book)-- and I chose to report him to our department and the police (against her wishes). When the police caught him, guess what? He was carrying a loaded gun and a suicide note that indicated he was planning to kill her and then himself. You can tell professionals to "butch up"-- but, by doing so, you may be signing their death certificates.

My co-worker is a brilliant professor and excellent at her job. Her job simply does not include tolerating abuse and threats by students. That is a job for the police, criminal defense attorneys, anger management therapists, and others who have been trained to do so. It's not the job of those trained in comparative literature, eating disorder therapy, or high school history.

I have a different set of experiences and beliefs than some others who teach/practice law do. Certainly how I view the mental health field seems a bit different than many people here - again different experiences and personalities. (My university also has high standards, students pay what seems a lot of money to me in tuition, my partner teaches in the English and Women's studies department and I am old - perhaps that is why we are just not so worried about it and don't over-react to everything)(I am also disgusted with the "Patriot" Act, zero tolerance policies of any sort because they are completely stupid, the over-reaction and jumping on a bandwagon to call everything bullying and abuse, all sorts of political correctness and other such molly coddling sorts of things, I am against all marriage and would abolish the institution all together rather than be for gay marriage, and I pay absolutely no attention to food expiration dates. I doubt I agree with many people on this site about most things of this sort).
It is all good - having different viewpoints is a good thing I think.

The thing is that everyone gets to make their own call in this kind of situation. If you feel comfortable handling someone who pounds walls or tables at times and you don't feel threatened or intimidated--good for you. If not, feel free to have the person escorted away by security and not see them again. Your threshold for difficult behaviours is enough. I don't think we can judge each other on this one and research notwithstanding I don't think there's always an objective way to know when a tantrum is likely to lead to violence.

We each bring a different history, temperament, physical presence and skill set to interactions with angry and aggressive individuals. That's important.

I am a big believer in the gut feeling, the sense of threat or danger that can be hard to define or quantify. Sometimes I'm with a person who is acting out and I know I'm safe, other times much subtler behaviours make me want to put a lot of distance between us and avoid future interaction. Listening to those feelings has generally stood me in good stead. The OP's therapist was well within her rights to terminate (but retains the duty to refer) even if another therapist facing the same behaviour may have simply said "You're upset. Tell me about your anger."

The op said they where trying to intimidate to express 'I will not be bullied' implies they felt bullied/wronged by the therapist and where very angry and punched a table. Not saying that is a good way to handle it but sometimes when one has mental problems it can be very difficult to be 100% in control all of the time...some therapists are not cut out for people with serious mental issues and would probably do better with clients who are just looking for extra support in their life or some guidance but don't have a serious mental issue per say...aside from that I think therapists should be prepared that sometimes people can lose control, especially since depending on ones issues certain things can be brought up in therapy that can trigger dangerous behavior...though not sure punching a table is the most aggressive thing it usually hurts the person more than the table.

Not so sure anyone here is saying its a good thing to go punching tables...just trying to point out the OP came here for support not to find out how guilty they should feel for punching a table, obviously they know it wasn't a good thing.

maybe i'm misunderstanding here but were you asking her if her behavior constituted malpractice? if so, that seems a bit silly to expect her to tell you that. you consult a lawyer or the licensing group she belongs to if you want to know if a T has violated the law.

as i said before this isn't info you are privy to.

this is something YOU had to decide. you can't outsource this decision. you also don't get to bully others into doing what you want.

here's how adults deal with life: they each take responsibility for their own part. they do not blame others for their own actions. no one but you is responsible for your trying to intimidate this T and punching the table. she is responsible for probably not being a very competent T. (we're only hearing your side so we can't really know all that happened.) by the way her not giving you info is not in any way bullying. that is withholding behavior. your behavior was bullying. your T was under no obligation to keep seeing you if she felt threatened. that is a personal & case by case decision and there are no hard and fast rules about it. it makes no difference if another T would have handled your punching the table differently. whether or not to keep you on as client after that incident was her call entirely because she felt threatened.

you might want to check out the power and control wheel and see how your behavior stacks up and why a T would feel it wise to terminate therapy with you (click on the image to enlarge it):

" />

The therapist has this right too ... She minds, so she doesn't practice the type if therapy that deals with clients who exhibit violence in session. She's allowed to do that without the implication that she is too weak to be an effective therapist.

The OP admitted he was using the display to intimidate her into giving the answers he wanted. If he had said to her "I know where you live" or some other threatening remark, would you be saying that it's "just words" and every therapist should be able to handle words? The hitting of the table isn't the issue - it is the motive behind it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think she should not be a therapist - just my opinion. And I would be saying it is just words. I disagree about it being the motive behind it.

Wow. Just wow.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk