[musinglizzy]

My T have been doing a little bickering back and fort this past week by Email. I planned to actually talk about it on Thursday, but she had to cancel.

Here is exactly what she said about that:
Therapy cannot work without love. How are you going to let yourself be that vulnerable without it? It's not a love that would translate into a relationship beyond the therapy one, but if it isn't there, it's a lost cause. Most people find that they fall a little bit in love with their therapists at some time during the work, but that as they begin to heal and put themselves back together again, that feeling shifts toward affection and connection. It's magical and lovely.

I made a point to tell her I am NOT in love with her, or anyone else for that matter. I don't think love is something to mess around with. Pay a person for love? Love a person you pay?

Stopdog, I would definitely be interested in hearing from YOU. Its quite clear you find NO love in your therapy, but you see two. It works for you, right? Or you wouldn't go.

I don't believe therapy without love is a lost cause. Yes, I know many of us here feel love for our therapists.... but I myself fight it. I will say I find it hard not to feel some sort of attachment (maybe not love, maybe attachment is the right word) with a T, considering you are telling them things you wouldn't tell most. But what are peoples' thoughts on my T's words? Thoughts, anyone?

[JaneC]

I don't agree that therapy without love is a lost cause. I think that therapy needs to be whatever the client wants it to be at the moment they are in. And this can shift. And the therapist needs to be able to shift with these needs.

I fought the attachment, I did not want to feel that close and vulnerable. But now, I think it is in the being there that I am making progress.

I think a type of therapy 'love' (not romantic) is what is in my therapeutic relationship, it feels somewhat like it to me......but hell, I could also be way off as my recognition of love has not been always accurate or real. Maybe this is part of my work.........

Like you, I would never use the word love to express how I feel about my therapist though, not to him. Not ever.

[musinglizzy]

I just think the statement that it's a lost cause without love is NOT correct.

I'm getting to the point where you are Jane, fighting the attachment because I don't want to feel so vulnerable. Funny you mention your recognition of love. I thought, perhaps, I need to ask her to define LOVE.

I know of four loves perhaps more but 4 that I understand. Definitions of Greeks Words for Love:

Agapeo: Unconditional love; the love of God in the renewed mind in manifestation.
Phileo: Love between friends I've heard it called brotherly love like Philadelphia
Eros: The sense of being in love; romantic love, erotic love
Storge: Love of family; Parent/child, siblings, cousins, etc. In a very close family, agape is felt as well.
maybe it fits into something akin to those somewhere. It bring caring, vulnerability and connection. I like attachment.

[JaneC]

It is something that I flagged in my first month of therapy....2 years ago. That I wanted to be able to know the difference between love and something else. I couldn't clarify what I meant by "something else" to my therapist back then.....I barely knew him!

We still need to get to this topic..... but it is very scary for me. What is love? How the heck do I know, not having been shown it...

And as for the love in therapy...I think it exists. I would think maybe a deep sense of care, compassion, some affection for(as in towards personality) and a sense of responsibility??

I agree that her statement is not good...feels too black and white to me. (My therapist would be so proud of me saying that! lol)

[musinglizzy]

The thought of paying a person for love, or paying to love a person, just doesn't sit right with me. Especially when you're just setting yourself up for losing it when therapy ends. That's basically conditional love, and I don't like it. Can you tell I'm really fighting it right now? LOL

[JaneC]

I can see that lizzy! lol

I don't think I am paying for love....maybe it is in the way you look at it? I would balk at the thought of that too!! So I can imagine what you are feeling.

I told my therapist earlier this week......the therapy relationship is soo flawed! You do everything you can to promote an attachment from your clients, from me....but it's not real, it ends and then the pain can be worse. I think that upset him, but he acknowledged it. (I am in the process of termination though, soo....)

ahhh therapy!!

[CantExplain]

Originally Posted by JaneC

And the therapist needs to be able to shift with these needs.

That would be nice. But not all therapists are that flexible.

[brillskep]

I agree with your therapist to some extent. I don't think therapy is possible (at least not fully) without love - but I don't think that has to involve any falling in love. I think that sense of affection and connection is enough. Although falling in love as clients is quite common - not the kind of falling that would lead to a relationship, but rather a sort of really having one's focus on the therapeutic relationship and becoming very attached. Would therapy work without that? I don't know to be honest. But in my experience and what I've seen in others, it does tend to happen.

When I read the first part of your therapist's email though, I thought that was intended to mean love on the part of the therapist for the client. I don't think therapy is possible without some amount of love from a therapist to a client - definitely NOT romantic love, but a kind of feeling connected and caring to help and finding something likeable about the other person, getting a sense of their inner resources even when they can't see it.

I don't think that's paid love. I read this idea somewhere online and my therapist also said it and I feel it too - the payment is for the therapist's time and expertise, for the office space, etc. The love is free. You could pay any amount of money but that won't make anyone love you any more or any less. Or you could stop paying the therapist and, if they feel any love for you, that won't go away - even if they need to stop therapy because of it since they are humans too and this is their job.

[brillskep]

By the way, if your therapist was talking about transference (rather than affection and human connection), therapy can happen even when the client feels (transference) hate or despises the therapist! But even in that scenario, I still think there needs to be that connection and trust, just enough for the client to talk about those painful feelings and not run away.

I think reading that, it could discourage a client.

[SabinaS]

It sounds as though she has her own agenda for your therapy, which is a bit odd as it's YOUR therapy. It's about how you feel, not what she thinks you should feel. She seems to be saying you have to love her to get anywhere, that's a pretty crappy (potentially triggering) thing for a T to say.

[musinglizzy]

Here's one thing I wrote in an Email to her prior to receiving that one...

It's hard to love someone though, knowing they don't HAVE to love you back, and it's only temporary. That it's all textbook crap. Love itself makes me feel vulnerable....so much it can make me sick to my stomach.

Honestly....I feel like I'm becoming attached, and I don't WANT to. Throw that L word into the mix and it just gets more complicated.... ugh. I told her recently I wish I could be like most people I know. Living their lives, not having it complicated by therapy.

Anyway....it's 5:15 am and I have not yet gone to bed. S'pose I'd better give it a go!

[catonyx]

In my case, there is no love there. I'm able to be open, honest, and vulnerable with my T. I trust her, but there is no love.

[ScarletPimpernel]

My T calls love the "L bomb" for me It throws me off every time she says it.

I do love my T. My T does love me. I love her as a person, not just because she's my T. It's not "in love", romantic, obsessive. For me, it's that I care about her, feel safe with her, enjoy talking with her, learning about her. I have a connection with her. I can read her, she can read me. There is trust and understanding. There is acceptance even for our weaknesses.

Like some others have said, there are many different definitions of love and everyone has their own definition. Maybe your definition is different than your T's?

Btw, you're not paying your T for love. You're paying for her expertise and experience. Love just comes in some relationships.

Maybe your T means that you are spending so much effort resisting your feelings of attachment, that you're inhibiting your natural process (because the feelings do exist, but you're just trying to run from them? Maybe that's preventing you from moving forward, from opening up, something similar? Idk.

I still struggle with the concept of love and my own definition. I only identify love based on a gut feeling? It's hard to describe. My T and I were discussing it at one point, but so many other things have come up since.

Recently, she told me I'm at the stage where love is what I need (based on Maslow's). It was weird to hear her say that I needed love from my Pdoc. Once again, the "L bomb" threw me off.

I think love is a difficult concept. It can be overused, underused, there are different definitions and meanings. And then it's even more confusing when people who have hurt us say that they "love" us.

I don't think love is the appropriate term for what happens in "good" therapy. I'm not sure what is the appropriate term, but it isn't love. That is kind of sick and twisted.

[stopdog]

My focus would not be on the love part, as the idea that every client loves a therapist is one I do not hold. Nor do I feel the therapists I see have any sort of love or affection at me. I am but tolerable. I most assuredly do not love either I see. At best I don't despise them. But her idea of therapy also sounds limited. I do not believe it is the only way for a client to figure out a way to make therapy useful. Perhaps my way is not what the therapist deems therapy, but as I am the one paying for it, I believe I can say whether the use I created is good enough for me or not.

I do not find the therapist or therapy to be a person or place for compassion, empathy, or caring. I don't desire those things and they do not exist in the experience I pay for. So while I might not consider them wrong if someone reported such things were in the therapy they pay for, I do not believe they are part of the job description at all.

I guess what's throwing me is that you've said you went into therapy due to marriage problems and potential divorce. That seems like a pretty well defined parameter of issues to work through.

This whole love thing between therapist/client takes it in a different direction. Frankly, seems off to me, but I also get the sense this is a diversion from your real life relationship problems and maybe you resist it, but like it at the same time. While one relationship is floundering (marriage) you've got this other person who's almost courting you.

Maybe take some time to sort out what your first priority is for therapy? And then be the one to set that course.

btw, I think a kind of love can be present in certain types of therapy, but it's different than the way your therapist has described it or demonstrated it. That's me, though.

[archipelago]

This topic has come up in several different ways and I've had a variety of responses. The latest one was to do exactly what was done here: give some alternatives by looking at Greek words for different types of love.

Now something else is coming up. I am now not so sure I understand why there is so much fuss about the word "love." I don't mean that in a dismissive way, but in a curious way. Like it is just a word. We use lots of words like "compassion," "caring," "empathy," and so on to describe the qualities that are valuable in relationships of an intimate nature, including that with a therapist. No one would argue that it is wrong or unprofessional or prostitution (being paid for feelings) to say that a therapist has the ability to feel compassion, caring and empathy. Quite the opposite. These are part of the job description. So why is "love" so off the map? I personally do not see that compassion, caring and empathy exclude love; rather they seem to stem from it. Whether we want to see this as love or not seems more about word choice, semantics, than actual content. Some people just have aversion to that particular word perhaps for very good reasons. Does it follow that the word should be avoided all together at all costs?

The whole thing about how there is money involved is really misleading. There is a contradiction set up by saying if money is involved, then nothing is legitimate or authentic. That is just false. There is no inherent contradiction.

And what we pay for is not necessarily expertise. I don't. In fact I find the whole idea that a therapist thinks they are an expert repugnant, arrogant, and counterproductive. It's a power trip that has no place in therapy for me and for lots of others, including many whole schools of therapy.

What the therapist quoted said about love is not an original personal idea. That is a view promoted by many figures in the history of psychology and psychotherapy. It's like a little sound bite common in the field. People may not choose to use that sound bite but there is nothing inherently weird or unusual about it. Maybe I'm just not getting it.

Except that this therapist is very physical in her expression--head stroking, holding, sitting next to, hugging. It seems to be fine with this OP, so I'm not making a judgment on it, just saying that this therapist seems to be pretty involved with her definition and demonstration of love.

[alchemy63]

Hi : )

Hopefully I can be forgiven for interjecting myself here, I know none of you know of me personally because I have not posted in this forum before, but I found this topic to be of particular interest.

I am not certain in your case (to the OP) what type of loving your therapist was referring to in his/her email to you, but, I do feel, from my own experience, that loving is very much a big part of therapy, and, speaking only for myself, perhaps it has been the most important concept for me to understand.

From the beginning I think it's critical to understand specifically what kind of love is being mentioned.

As I see it, it has been not the presence, but the absence, of love in my life which has caused me the greatest degree of confusion. Thinking back to the time I was a child and my parents divorced, it was the absence of love between them which made a pathway to seperation possible. Following that came doubt and distrust about love.

A few years later, I felt it was an absence of love from my step-parent which made it easier for her to give me abuse, instead of the love I needed.

Entering my young adult years, my understanding of love was compromised. I confused it with lust and companionship. I had difficulty creating and maintaining friendships. I made several attempts at establishing one on one romantic connections but there was a persistent distrust that ulitmately led to breakups and sadness. I blamed the other person for their inability to love me as I believed I should be loved.

Looking back, I can now see, my shared contribution to all that heartache. I, as much as anyone, had failed to love.

Love for me now has a different kind of meaning that it has in my past. It is something that is not only romantic, but has a much broader meaning. When I read the news about domestic violence, terrorism, hate crimes, bullying, or just about anything involving the harming of others, what stands out to me is not that someone might be an addict, have the wrong religion, or some type of mental illness. What stands out to me is the absence of love, because, if a person understands love and truly loves those that surround him, it would be an impossibility for that person to harm another.

I would say now that learning this understanding about love has been the single most important step I have taken in my personal therapy process. Through this I have learned to maintain my own level of anger about all the chaos, confusion, and misunderstanding I see happening in the world today. It is not that people are weak or selfish or egotistical or greedy. It is, the way I see it, simply that they have, thus far, failed to learn about love.

It has been a challenge to me to seperate myself away from the fray, to not buy into the wave of angry, bitter, cycle of harm, but, having made those first steps, nothing in my therapy has been more rewarding.

[archipelago]

The use of touch is still controversial to some. To others, especially all the fields of holistic and alternative therapies, touch is a vital part of treatment. It is of course up to the client to make that choice. A therapist should not touch anyone without explicit or very clear implicit consent. And even if a client wants touch does not mean that the therapist thinks it is appropriate, even if they use touch with other clients. It depends.

I guess I just resist the tendency to make overarching rules instead of being flexible and context specific. Yes, there are general guidelines of course, but what actually happens depends on so many factors that I just don't see how one simple steadfast approach can be sustainable.

[archipelago]

I was thinking about how one of the things that is so crucial to health and growth is healthy narcissism, or in other words, the capacity for self-love. Much suffering stems from problems in that specific area, whether a complete lack of the capacity or distortions in it. And one thing a therapist does tend to do is model healthy narcissism, which just by being presented continually to the client has the possibility of being internalized. This is an indirect form of love, but there are some therapists that are aware that this is part of what they are doing, whether they label it or describe it in these terms or not.

Here is what I came across just scanning:

"Whatever complaints the patient may have," says Fromm, "whatever symptoms he may present are rooted in his inability to love, if we mean by love a capacity for the experience of concern, responsibility, respect, and understanding of another person and the intense desire for that other person's growth. . . . Analytic therapy is essentially an attempt to help the patient gain or regain his capacity for love" (Psychoanalysis and Religion).

[stopdog]

Perhaps for some, but I do not believe it is universal that every client has problems which stem from an inability to love unless one is defining love in such a over encompassing way as to render the word meaningless.

[archipelago]

I did not mean to suggest that it is universal though the statement by Fromm implies that. I meant only to provide an example of how people in the field view love as part of therapy, to suggest in other words that this is a rather commonplace view.