Is Countertransference Usually Admitted?

This is not something that applies to my therapy as far as I know, I've just recently realized that with all I've heard about how transference is actually something to learn from and, in most cases, is a tough-yet-rewarding thing to bring up in sessions, I don't really understand the standards for countertransference.

Is being honest with client about it encouraged? Or, when a therapist tries to use it for the advantage of having more perspective on the therapeutic relationship, do they mostly keep from admitting to it and disclosing to the client?

It would seem to me that transference is definitely more common; also, it seems the standard with transference is to talk about it in therapy, while with countertransference it's...what exactly? I'm sure it differs by situation, and I'd love to hear those details too if anyone has some input.

I know non-disclosure is a big part of therapy, but I feel like encouraging the client to talk about transference while not being up front with countertransference is unfair.

My T. has never admitted countertransference but I also haven't asked. I guess she is pretty good with keeping her "stuff" out of my situation. I think for most T's if they have it, they seek help from their supervisor on how to handle a situation. It might not be a good idea to mention it to the client unless the client is picking up on it. If mine mentioned it, I would start looking for it and maybe not focus on the right things.

That's a very good question , I asked my former group t a year and a half ago that , since we had a good honest relationship and since I'm so straightforward about stuff, also we were on the topic of transference .

When group was over , I asked her, and she said no, and that she would tell me. She was that kind of t. I have not asked t1 , I did ask t2 and she said, some of my c s a stuff just made her feel angry towards the people who hurt me, but it was not counter transference . I have no need to ask t3 as I hardly see her.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In my experience, they won't tell you I understand it and don't, all at once. I guess it is rather precarious since therapy needs to stay focused on the client. Nonetheless, I feel like the client has a right to know if their therapist is being affected like that.....my T had his own reactions to me that did come out in a counterproductive manner at one point. I mentioned it and he diverted. A few months later, he admitted he had to work through it. I was SO relieved because I had picked up on it and he downplayed it at the time. I have a history of dysfunctional dynamics in relationships where I pick up on the implicit but it is denied. Makes me feel crazy. I told T that....yeah, therapy is not about the T but when it starts to affect the client's therapy, I think it should be honestly admitted and explained briefly. Therapists are just human beings, not Gods. Sometimes I think they can forget that.....

I think it depends on many factors. First and foremost, would knowing have an adverse effect on the client? Then things like, did the client become aware that something was up? Is this information that could benefit the client? Would this make the therapy about the T too much? Etc... There's a lot that might go into that type of decision.

I really wish my T would talk about tranference and countertransference. It is seriously effecting my life. I doubt it is effecting his but he must see how it effects is clients including me. He can not be that blind or can he?

No I wont bring it up. I will just let it fester and turn into some other mental health symptom.

That's a really great question. I've thought about this myself and often wonder if therapists have just as much trouble with the concept of countertransference as clients do with transference. It's so much easier to identify it from an outsider's perspective no matter how insightful you are. I think therapists who are more self aware and who have a healthy enough ego to admit to countertransference will - to themselves. I don't know if many T's actually ever talk about it with clients though, since that is their own "stuff" and not the client's. Ideally they'd work it through with a supervisor or their own therapist but I'd be interested to know how many therapists actually do.

It's a complex issue in part because there are different ways of using the word. The traditional definition is unprocessed stuff from a T's life that interferes with the necessary objectivity therapy demands. This is dysfunctional and could play out in lots of different ways and should be addressed by the T in supervision. If such interference can't be resolved and would put the client or the therapy at risk, then termination is ethical.

But the traditional definition isn't used so much anymore. Counter transference is more popularly seen as any reaction a T has to a client, whether it's a momentary sense or a long standing pattern of feelings. It has nothing to do with unprocessed stuff in the T's life. It may or may not interfere with the therapy. It can also be positive for the therapy. Some Ts would see it as a valuable asset because it can be used to gain additional perspectives and insights into the client's affect or cognition. If it in any way threatens to block a T's ability to regard the client positively, or the T for any reason is unable to use the counter transference productively, then it's a matter for supervision.

Whether or not the T reveals a counter transference depends upon conditions within the therapy and for the client. Fleeting reactions may often be shared, if it would lead to insight that the client is ready to hear. A more long-standing counter transference--often related to a role--has more impact and so the timing becomes important. The assumption is that if it will help the client or the therapy, or keep the therapy or relationship from degrading to reveal it, then a good T will. If the T believes it would be unhelpful or damaging to the client, then it shouldn't be revealed. I don't think a T should ever lie about it if the client brings it up as something the client has perceived. That is an opportunity for exploration, whether the perception is accurate or not.

There was a point in my therapy when my T articulated a counter transference which complemented my own transference. He instigated the discussion, and was quite open about his feelings. His sharing of his counter transference (his fatherly feelings and inclination toward me) was the impetus to the resolution of my transference. It was a long process and some of the most valuable work we did. The time table was based upon his assessment of my readiness to engage with the work productively.

So I think it's important to distinguish what kind of counter transference is at work, and to approach it in a non-defensive manner. If a T gets defensive anyway, then that seems to me a T who either lacks understanding theoretically, or hasn't the training in handling transference.

I don't believe therapists are usually honest with clients about almost anything including countertransference. I don't actually believe that honesty is the main thrust of therapy from the therapist to the client.
It was reported by someone I know who saw the same one I do that the therapist told the client she was having countertransference towards the client. I don't know if the therapist actually used the phrase or not or if that was interpretation. It, among other weirdnesses, freaked the client out and she went to find another therapist.
I think most therapists' egos won't let them admit it, although they tend to take the stance that they are being altruistic and not telling the client because of what they deem to be in the client's best interest - a phrase I find they use to protect themselves more often than not.

My t mentioned his countertranceference once..I don't remember the exact words with he used the word in regards to my situation and needing to make a decision. That was it though.. Hasn't said anything more about it. T tends to be as honest as possible with me it seems. So, I think if there was more, or it was really causing issues he would bring it up.

I don't know how many actually discuss it. I would assume especially in long term therapy relationships it would be hard for a therapist to at some point have some counter transference.

While we never discussed it. I am pretty sure my therapist had some issues with counter transference. It was shortly after the death of my dad who died fairly young (early 60's) and very unexpectedly. We hadn't had any contact in years (totally his choice). I was angry because my mom had died really young (50) and we had a wonderful relationship. My dad also died pretty young and with that any hopes of ever having some type of relationship. I told my therapist I was angry because so many people still have their parent at much older age and how they take it for granted. They still have time to work it out. I know it isn't that simple but at the place I was that was where my head was. I can't explain it but my therapist acted different during that session. She mentioned that not every relationship between parent and child is healthy and should be repaired.

Eventually over time I realized that she had been extremely close to her dad but he died very young. Since she never mentioned mom I assumed she was deceased. Then one day I realized her mom is alive and living in another state. They don't have contact as the relationship is to toxic for her.

We didn't use that terminology, but my t said that she feels drawn to look after me, and needs to watch that in herself, and that she would take it to her supervision.

My T has acknowledged the concepts of transference and counter transference as a common aspect of therapy. I don't know about counter transference with my T, but I know I have affected my T. And she does tell me when I do. She has been sad (a few times on the verge of tears), frustrated... She worries a lot about me and I know part of that is me affecting her and another part is her own anxiety issues. She has also told me before that I bring out the innocent child-like joy in her. And she has mentioned numerous times that she has to be careful not to mother me in any way (which is primarily so I don't develop a maternal transference.)

Those could be taken as counter transference if you were to analyze why I have affected her in those ways. I appreciate that she tells me how I affect her. It helps me be aware of how I might affect other people and how to respond appropriately. I just feel that if I'm going to talk to a person, I expect there to be emotions involved from the other person as well. Otherwise, I might as well talk to a wall (I tell my T this all the time )

You bring up a good point, gwheatcubs. For the most part, I agree with what you and most of the others have said in this thread. I think of it less about being "unfair" and more about some therapists , by nature, apply the one size fits all approach and, unfortunately, that isn't always the case.

From personal experience, I believe honesty is always the BEST approach. For those of us who entered therapy with trust issues, later finding out a T was anything less than honest can cause further harm. Often times, as in my case, those messages are further internalized by the client.

Suppose that T had revealed her feelings, and these circumstances, to you at the time. What would have been the effect of that on your therapy?

I wonder if that is what happened in my old therapy and he just couldn't deal with it in a healthy way. I don't think it is something therapists bring up and I am not sure they should. I think they should get help with another professional to deal with it.

I know it would not have been therapeutic at the time. I know I would have felt horrible for her and shut down the conversation. Not knowing allowed me to deal with the grief and pain I was in. When I found out about her parents I felt horrible for those times I verbalized it all. However, I realized how professional and great my therapist is as not only did she hide her feelings but she was able to help me look at my situation differently.

I do not want to offend but I think the business about transference's are a load of old barney. Specially the one where they swear they love us too.

I asked this once and she was honest and said "no ".

I actually kind of agree. Seems to be a one size fits all label for things better described in more words

I don't think a therapist's decision to not address countertransference is necessarily being dishonest. It can be the same as in other relationships where we might have a reaction to someone based on another experience that has nothing to do with them. Sometimes it is something that needs to be discussed immediately and sometimes not, depending on the circumstances. Personal relationships are reciprocal with both people sharing on an equal level, and even then it's a good idea to know the reason for disclosing some things before doing it. Because therapy isn't reciprocal a T needs to consider the "why" behind disclosing certain feelings even more carefully, since therapy is all about the client. If knowing we brought out feelings in a T would be stressful or confusing, then it's probably more harmful than helpful.

I wish therapy were all about the client. Unfortunately, that hasn't always been my experience.

I do believe honesty is the best approach. If a client asks a T a question relating about their response(s) (possible countertransference) in conversations and a T fails to answer them honestly, then how is that helpful to the client or the therapy?

I don't necessarily believe a T needs to disclose countertransference if it has NOT been brought up in a conversation, but if it has, and the T fails to answer questions honestly, how can that T be considered trustworthy?

I think back to a recent conversation I had with my T where he became very defensive. If he hadn't acknowledged his own defensive response once I brought it up, and I knew it was defensive, I'm not sure how it would make me feel?

I don't think there is any reason for a T to admit a 'contained' countertransference, unless the T feels that it would be therapeutic. However, if it's not contained I think there should be an explanation and an apology. Not an easy thing to do I know. Previous T admitted to countertransference but would not explain and offered no apology. It seemed to me that it was hard for her even to admit it, but that's just not acceptable IMNSHO. I so wish I had had the chance to work through that one properly with her... Ah well...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

my t has never said either word (transference or countertransference). the closest she's ever come to talking about either is when she has said on occasion "Maybe this is my stuff but..."

Agree.

I have had a few T's who reacted in what I would describe as possible countertransferential ways. Current T has been the only one to acknowledge when he has reacted/responded in this manner. It has been SO incredibly helpful/healing for me! I didn't need to know the details as to WHY he was responding the way he did, I just needed to know it was not because of anything I did.

Before, I just thought I was crazy….Now, I know I am not! He said it took a lot of courage for me to even bring it up to him…Oddly, I thought it took a lot of courage for him to acknowledge and apologize. It was a grace-filled moment.