Riddle me this...

Why do therapists think that withholding love is therapeutic?

I've never had a therapist withhold love. What are you defining as withholding love exactly?

I don't know why a therapist would think of themselves, love and me in the same sentence ever.

Therapists need to love their clients, or it won't work.......

I don't think this is universally true. I doubt they even need to like a client. It may be so for some, but I hope I have found those for whom it is not. I don't want them thinking they love me in any sense of the word. God knows I don't love them.

That sounds like a generalization ...I don't know what to answer you. I don't think withholding love is therapeutic, nor do therapists I know seem to think that. Even the worst therapist I've ever met doesn't seem to think that. But I think it depends on perspective. I mean, I think there is a big difference between withholding love and keeping healthy boundaries so the therapist doesn't burn out. I believe there needs to be a measure of love in therapy, but it's unethical for a therapist to extend and act out all their love for clients ... there are bound to be clients a therapist will like more than others, clients a therapist would like to help more than others. It's just a human thing. But it's unethical to make differences like that, offer special treatment to some clients and not make the same efforts for others just because of subjective standards and personal feelings. So these boundaries are there to protect both therapist and client.

Not necessarily. Caring genuinely about a client's welfare is probably enough on their end. I suspect it is the clients that get hung up on the "love" aspect, not the therapists for the most part. Love may be a bit of a strong term to be used as an absolute "must" or "it won't work". I do think people in caring professions actually need to care, but that may come short of actual "love" feelings (and no, I'm not talking about romantic feelings).

Both day and night are therapeutic. You cannot have one without the other. Or, as one of my favorite quotes puts it, an Arabian proverb: All sun makes a desert.

I never knew love was required , I know they care about the clients best interest , that's enough for me. I don't think I would believe a t if they tell me they loved me.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe i'm in the minority here, but it wouldn't be the first time...I don't think it's withholding love; it's withholding enmeshment, which to many of us, might seem like withholding love. An easy way to explain this is--if your therapist were to give you what you needed, she'd be sort of 'people pleasing', rather than being a separate person from you.

Attachment is one-sided, child/immature love. Mature love involves being separate from another (but connected/bonded). So to answer your question: when a therapist withholds enmeshment, it helps us construct psychological boundaries, which provides us with the framework needed for mature love.

A therapist giving us or becoming what we want/need is not love. A therapist's unconditional acceptance, compassion, support, validation, etc., is love.

What do you mean with "attachment is one sided, child/immature love"?

That is meant to distinguish attachment vs. adult relationship. There is a concept of adult attachment, but generally, I think attachment is often referred to in the context of how it's described here:

http://www.bcmj.org/article/attachme...l-perspectives

So, it's much like the therapist-client relationship rather than a mutual, adult relationship. We are a diverse group, so people here might use the term in different ways that I would.

I hope this helps clarify things.

I want my Ts to care about me and I know they do. I don't expect them to love me anymore than they love society in general.

I think love is something we cultivate in our lives, not in our therapy. I didn't go to therapist to buy love. I went there to get some help.

That help has opened the door to love in my "real" life.

It's complicated, but I am so grateful that my therapist had enough training and professionalism to NOT love me back. It made me look at myself. Sometimes I really didn't like what I saw.

But worth it. So very worth it.

Growing up in catholic school, they threw the word love around a LOT. God loves you, this sacrifice was made out of love, all his children are loved, etc etc etc. It was pretty constant. You joined the Peace Corps out of love for your fellow man, not for how it looked on your college application or your resume. As JFK said, Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. I think for me, its that kind of love, rather than romantic or committed. More like beer commercial i love you guys. Beatles all you need is love love.

Leaving love out of the equation, unless my T specifically states something, is it up to me to know[what they think], without asking?

Did your T specifically state, they are withholding love from you, as part of your therapy?

Sent from my LGMS323 using Tapatalk

Because some of them are sadists.

My t doesn't withhold love. But she sorta defines that "love" at the same time by saying something like this "There are different kinds of love, and there is a kind of love in therapy, don't you think?" This was when I was still saying "I love you." Strangely, I don't feel the need to do that anymore. Not strange really I guess, it happened at the same time I forgave my mom.....

You could argue that this is about semantics. Authentic caring feelings come under an umbrella of 'love' as far as I am concerned.

Philanthropic love = genuinely caring for the client. Just phrased differently. Love is a broad church and we all do it differently, but this is my take on it.

I haven't quite seen it explained like this before.

Yes, but I think this is the more objective and clinically correct meaning in context of psychotherapy. Attachment and transference are applied very broadly here; they are also mixed up or transposed. It's normal to do this, but it does change the meaning in many ways. So it's not just a issue of semantics.

I don't think that therapists have to Love their clients....after a long period of time, they often care/love about them deeply.

I recently read a book about young T's in training. this one dude was having trouble even "liking" his client...and therapy was not progressing. In his session/review with supervisor...the supervisor gently taught him how to empathize with the patient and sort of see the world through her eyes...Then, and only then could therapy really progress.

Thus "withholding" love may be an assumption on your part, may be helpful in setting boundaries, goes against the T's own personal boundaries and capabilities, or is too "new" to learn to control and tamper emotions down to truly focus on you...

Hope maybe that just gives you a bit different way of seeing things..

wb

Well that just summed up what's wrong with me. Mind. Blown.

As adults, we don't get to define for, nor demand from, others the forms taken of emotions extended to us. The "path of yes" is, in part, a recognition of this reality.

What exactly is the path of yes?