[CantExplain]

I have just posted elsewhere that "therapists are in a sense a modern priesthood". In particular, I meant that their private morality is relevant to their work in that it can inspire or destroy trust. They need especially high ethical standards because so much of what they do happens behind closed doors away from public scrutiny.

What do you think?

[stopdog]

I think it is giving them way too much credit.

[JustShakey]

That's an interesting analogy. I mostly agree. I dislike the religious connotations though. Good therapy should be tailored to the individual whereas religion is more of a one-size-fits-all deal (I know people will disagree with me here so I'd just like to point out that I differentiate between religion and spirituality).
It is so important for a T to be self-aware. I mentioned (ranted) in the other thread that the T in question seemed very like my mother. My mom *thinks* she's a good and caring person, but it's just the mask she uses to hide from herself. She's a former nun, very moral and upright, but not the slightest bit self-aware, and with no real identity of her own.

They are both in positions where they can cause tremendous, irreversible damage to someone. That's how I see it.

[Leah123]

Well, my therapist views her work as sacred as do I. The work can be so powerful, transformative, and it certainly has elements of ritual.

I'm not sure I would call the institution a preisthood as there's so much diversity and quality and type varies so much, but... I wouldn't take offense to thinking of my own therapist in sort of a spiritual role, though certainly nothing at all like the Catholic priesthood or nunneries of my youth.

[Petra5ed]

I kind of agree with that. During my session today it occurred to me my therapist is a good person, and that's a major reason I like him. My life is full of selfish jerks, so it's nice to be around a nice guy I can trust. It's really great that he has the right mix of morality for me though, and is not preachy.

[Depletion]

I think that therapists are just a modern kind of healer. All cutlers have emotional healers: clergy, shaman, etc. Therapists do a similar kind of work, and for me that work is spiritual. But therapy also has the convince of being secular, and nonreligious and nonspiritual for people who do not believe in those kinds of things, or who do not want to follow a specified dogma. And I think that is the biggest difference. One not need follow any single belief system to see a therapist, but the relationship can certainly be spiritual (but maybe not religious?)

[Partless]

I've often been interested in how therapists who work for churches or therapists who are also priests, are able to balance these different ways of thinking about people and life. These people have the therapy ethical code but also the religious code (which needless to say, is more complex and all-encompassing).

[ManOfConstantSorrow]

Priests are/were part of everyone's life caring for all parts of spiritual and psychological well-being , but now priests have a shadow of their former importance (at least in secular West European countries), but therapy is something I would suggest people only turn to in periods of crisis, so no I don't think therapists are the secular priests they are sometimes called.

I think therapist need integrity. I'm not sure priest have that....

The concept bothers me quite a bit; unfortunately, I think many therapists do see themselves in this way. I was well into therapy with one who slipped in a comment about herself as a wounded healer. It explained a lot about her tendency to think highly of herself in a way that was not healthy, as though she was some sort of mystic, when really she was just a hurting person who still had/has a lot of work to do. As puzzle bug said, they can cause a lot of damage.

I know one therapist in my personal life, and I would not recommend her to anyone. In fact, I worry about the people who go to her...do they know she is an angry, passive aggressive, lazy blamer? Probably not. She presents herself as very zen and caring.

[JustShakey]

Wounded healer is a Jungian term. It can be viewed in a spiritual light, but also just as a way of being empathetic - as in we are all human and wounded. If I remember correctly the Jungian view is that we heal because we are wounded; we can understand another's pain better when we understand our own pain.

[Solepa]

For me the difference is judgment. In therapy we should not be judged and things are not black and white contrary to religion. I'm not a fan so I can be biased.

[Favorite Jeans]

Originally Posted by licketysplit

The concept bothers me quite a bit; unfortunately, I think many therapists do see themselves in this way. I was well into therapy with one who slipped in a comment about herself as a wounded healer. It explained a lot about her tendency to think highly of herself in a way that was not healthy, as though she was some sort of mystic, when really she was just a hurting person who still had/has a lot of work to do. As puzzle bug said, they can cause a lot of damage.

I know one therapist in my personal life, and I would not recommend her to anyone. In fact, I worry about the people who go to her...do they know she is an angry, passive aggressive, lazy blamer? Probably not. She presents herself as very zen and caring.

But here's the huge difference between a therapist and a priest.

You can theoretically be a pretty great therapist (zen, caring) to your clients and be a passive-aggressive, lazy, angry blamer in your private life. Ideally a good therapist, though imperfect, is not a psychological horrorshow off-duty but even if they were it wouldn't take away from their work as a therapist. Therapists generally do not hold themselves up as public examples of psychological well-being.

A priest (and most other kinds of clergy) is supposed to be a public example of moral rectitude. Few loud religious leaders talk mainly about not judging and most are quick to make pronouncement about sin etc. So they're a little more open to accusations of hypocrisy etc

[stopdog]

Originally Posted by Favorite Jeans

. Therapists generally do not hold themselves up as public examples of psychological well-being.

How does this reconcile with those (both therapist and client) who view the therapist as a role model? I don't of course, but some seem to both like it and believe it.

Originally Posted by stopdog

How does this reconcile with those (both therapist and client) who view the therapist as a role model? I don't of course, but some seem to both like it and believe it.

I don't think the two ideas need to be mutually exclusive. In my case, my T has allowed some of his vulnerabilities to be seen. I know some of his past mental health issues and also I know he makes mistakes in therapy which he would readily admit to. But, in some ways he is a bit of a role model. He was once in a similar place to me in terms of outlook and also had some similar issues (PTSD) but he is now in a place where he is ok with himself and the wider world. I admire that and strive to achieve it. We may have differing paths to get there, but even when he frustrates me, annoys me and isn't the perfect model of wellbeing, I still respect him and find him inspirational (but not superhuman )

Originally Posted by JustShakey

Wounded healer is a Jungian term. It can be viewed in a spiritual light, but also just as a way of being empathetic - as in we are all human and wounded. If I remember correctly the Jungian view is that we heal because we are wounded; we can understand another's pain better when we understand our own pain.

I am familiar with Jungian theory. I studied it in undergrad and was in analysis for a brief period of time. It's a sign of ego inflation to identify with an archetype. In this case, the proof was in the pudding. She infused my therapy with her own issues. I believe I know more about her family than she knew about mine.

My point about it is that the therapist needs to have her issues worked out. A Jungian analyst, for examples, spends several years as an analysand. It shows. The person I know who is a therapist is going to bring her passive aggressive tendency into therapy unless she gets this straight herself. To my knowledge (and experience of her), she has not.

People in this profession can (and do) cause a great deal of harm.

[RTerroni]

I can see how people can see them in the same way

[Partless]

Originally Posted by licketysplit

The concept bothers me quite a bit; unfortunately, I think many therapists do see themselves in this way. I was well into therapy with one who slipped in a comment about herself as a wounded healer.

I wonder if that's true of most therapists. Don't a lot of people who were hurt emotionally and psychologically, decide to become therapists? It's certainly an unusual profession in some ways and I like to know people's motivations for going into it.

[Favorite Jeans]

Originally Posted by stopdog

How does this reconcile with those (both therapist and client) who view the therapist as a role model? I don't of course, but some seem to both like it and believe it.

I don't on the whole see my therapist as a role model, partly because I don't like role models and partly because I really don't know her IRL. But there have been times when I've felt that she's responded to me so nicely and so deftly, in a way that no one ever has before and that has really stayed with me. I guess she is modelling that I could respond to my own inner dialogue or to people around me with curiosity, compassion and calm. So the modelling isn't so much about what she does in her own life or her personal relationships but just in the way she interacts with me in session.

[feralkittymom]

Therapists generally do not hold themselves up as public examples of psychological well-being.

Actually, there's quite a bit in the ethics codes that either implies, or directly states, that Ts are expected to conduct themselves publicly in such a way as to reflect well upon the profession. It extends into public comments, ways of treating others in the workplace, etc. And the stated responsibility to seek help for their own issues. Of course, not all do so, and until there's some sort of complaint or incident, who knows?

[JustShakey]

Originally Posted by stopdog

How does this reconcile with those (both therapist and client) who view the therapist as a role model? I don't of course, but some seem to both like it and believe it.

Complicated, but I sort of view the person I imagine previous T to be as a role model. The person I wish she was, not the person she is, because well, I don't know much about her at all and what I do know is mostly just confusing.
When I really think about it it's kind of how I wish I was. So it's sort of like putting my dreams and wishes on an external model to better understand what it is I want.
With T it's a little different, mainly because he's a guy. I do find myself wanting to get closer to men who remind me of him, not necessarily attracted to them, but interested.
It's not hugely important to me who they are in real life. Their real life is not the model they are showing me. They are showing me myself, and my own potential.
I'm finding this one very hard to explain... But it is definitely not real-world based.

[Favorite Jeans]

Originally Posted by feralkittymom

Therapists generally do not hold themselves up as public examples of psychological well-being.

Actually, there's quite a bit in the ethics codes that either implies, or directly states, that Ts are expected to conduct themselves publicly in such a way as to reflect well upon the profession. It extends into public comments, ways of treating others in the workplace, etc. And the stated responsibility to seek help for their own issues. Of course, not all do so, and until there's some sort of complaint or incident, who knows?

Yeah, I just meant they don't stand on a pulpit and suggest that they are closer to the Truth than others.

[lunatic soul]

I was talking to priest about my T asking questions about priest's life because I found it similar. Not the same but there is something similar.