Devastated!!!

This "dodge a bullet", I understand it´s an idiom but what does it mean? I think it had some special meaning using it here. Why was the negative transference personal in this specific matter? I ask as I have a hard time understanding this T, she acted like I was some kind of freak she wouldn´t be able to work with.

I don't find the T's behavior in this situation to be unusual or inappropriate. The purpose of evaluation sessions is for both the T and the client to evaluate one another to determine whether they are a good fit. Therefore, the T has every right to determine whether or not she thinks she can help the client-- and whether or not she wants to take on the client. I also think her comment about "negative transference" seems to fit. You've said several times that, because of what happened with your previous T, you have a rather negative perception of potential new Ts-- you've written numerous threads on this topic. You seem to find fault with just about everything the potential Ts do. So I would think the T's perception is rather astute. However, I don't think it is particularly unusual that you have negative transference-- many clients do. And most Ts have the ability to work with it. What probably tipped the scales for this T was the e-mails. You haven't shared the exact text of the e-mails so I don't know what they said-- but they probably made the T feel as though she either couldn't or didn't want to take you on as a client. Given that she is very busy, she probably already has a number of challenging clients-- or other clients who have negative transference-- and just felt that she was at her quota. Ts usually try to balance their case load and, for whatever reason, she felt that you were not the right client for her to take on at this time. I don't think you should feel offended by it-- just learn from it. As others have suggested, e-mail is probably not a good medium of communication for you to use. It seems to cause you trouble. Perhaps your e-mails come across harsher than you intend? You might do better restricting your communication to in-person contact.

Now it´s no longer a question of booking another session with her, she told me she wanted to end our contact and that led up to this post. Here, three evaluation sessions are standard but I realise this varies from country to country.

There was no kind of evaluation going on in e-mails, before I asked her some complementary questions I firstly asked her if it was ok to ask her those questions and next, I asked her if she wanted me to call her or e-mail her. What else could I´ve done.

As the next step had been scheduling a session based on the fact I´d choosen her as my T. In such a case I couldn´t meet with her and bring her questions that you ask before you even decide to proceed.

Perhaps it looks like I have a lot of demands and try to push this T in different directions but that´s not true. I´ve been careful about asking about e-mails for example, when I had to decide if entering therapy and so on.

3 Session evaluation? Never heard of it nor have of the T's I have seen did that. I think that is a way of therapist to "cherry pick" who they want to see. I think most want to fill their slots with clients who havve "easier" issues to deal with.

I understand that it's painful to be turned down by a therapist, but I look at it as a positive thing. If she freaks out like that when you ask questions or express concerns, whatever they are, you don't need her. I also wouldn't stress out about her stupid comment about your "negative transference." What she did is a reflection of her own incompetence and insecurity, it is not a reflection of you.

To "dodge a bullet" literally means to step away before a bullet from a gun hits you. Figuratively, the scheduling problems are protecting you from greater heartache later on with this therapist.

Most therapists are pretty incompetent at scheduling, I have found. It's like the calendars in their brains are broken and they don't understand the physical limitations of time and space. It's quite infuriating.

I couldn´t agree more to the thing you said about T:s wanting to fill their slots with clients who have easier issues to deal with. By that, I think many T:s shouldn´t have choosen to become T:s. Many of them seem to think it should be as easy as having "coffee and a chat". Such T:s just make people worse than they were before.

I agree to that and the pain concerning this specific event will go away much easier than the long-lasting pain from the former therapy. But what makes me very anxious now is that there are very few potential T:s left.

One who some months ago offered therapy at a reduced fee, now several months later I don´t know if she has available slots at all. Then, the older T I don´t have that much of an apprehension about and I´m hesitant because I think perhaps the stress behind not knowing when she´ll retire could be too much to handle for me.

It´s reassuring knowing her comment about negative transference in some way came out of her own insecurity. I told her several times I was very interested in psychology and I also brought some quite analytical inputs to the discussion when talking to her. Perhaps my e-mail to her in a way was what she waited for.

Thanks for explaining this, now I understand. I try to think of it this way but at the same time I regret mentioning the scheduling issue to her. But at the same time, honesty have to be a great part of therapy, not hiding and pretending everything is fine.

Well, we can't have everything we want. There are always going to be some downsides in each situation. We either accept the situation as a whole and try to work within its limits or we don't accept it and do nothing. That's really the only choice we have, like it or not.

When I first decided to start therapy I called around to find a place that would take me. I didn't know that I could interview them so I let them interview me and didn't ask any questions. One place asked me a ton of very personal questions. I put it all out there and answered all of them. The therapist who was interviewing me then said, "I'm sorry we can't help you." UMMMM WHAT???

That freaked me out. It took me MONTHS to try again. I had answered all of her questions honestly and I was totally and completely rejected.

Luckily I did try again and I found the therapist I have now. I've been with him for five years and I have a great relationship with him.

It's hard but keep trying. You will find someone who is good for you.
W

I totally feel for what you're going through, Paula. I understand that you're hurt and feeling rejected, and you have a right to feel that way. But I do think that the kind of thinking you're using above is faulty and will end up hurting you in the end in your search for a therapist. It's a bit judgmental and I know that you are personally hurt by the judgment of the therapists who have chosen not to work with you. It is the right of everyone to decide what career he/she goes into. If the therapist is licensed, then he/she has done the course work and jumped through the hoops to stay certified. No license translates into meaning that person is a fantastic therapist. As in any profession, there are people at the top who are exceptional, people in the middle who are adequate and people at the bottom who are pretty bad. It's hard weeding out the good from the bad but it can happen and I've seen it from posters here on Psych. Central. As a client, I get to interview the different therapists I'm interested in, I get to try out a few sessions and stay or leave based on how the sessions went. The therapist gets to do the same with me. Just because I walk through the door doesn't mean that that therapist has to work with me and if they chose not to it doesn't have to mean that they are just looking for an easy client. There are a lot of reasons I chose not to work with a therapist and I'm sure there are a lot of reasons why they might not chose to work with me. Sure I'd be hurt and rejected if one of them said, "No, I don't think we're a good match." I've said that to therapists I've interviewed more than a few times. They have the same right.

Maybe as someone mentioned, she had a lot of high need clients and felt that your needs were going to be intense and she didn't think she could work effectively with you. Maybe she's a crack pot and thought your questions were inappropriate and challenging. . . you admit that you like to challenge and that isn't a bad thing! But some therapists don't like to be challenged, they like to sit in their tower of knowledge and be right That isn't the right therapist for you, right? So count yourself lucky that this woman said it wasn't going to work out.

I do agree with many of the other posters on here that you really need to not email back and forth with the next therapist if you do decide to do a bit more searching. Go to the appointment and ask the question face-to-face. If you don't understand what the therapist is saying, ask for clarification, don't go home and stew about the answer and try to glean what he/she was saying. Ask in person until you understand! I really wish you luck in whatever you decide.

Was she saying you had negative transference toward her? Or was she saying she had negative transference toward you?

Can't believe she brushed you off with a negative transference label like that! I think you should go ahead and just count your blessings that you didn't invest one more second or dollar on her. You aren't the problem here.

To "dodge a bullet" means you managed to escape a bad situation. I think the countertransference comment was odd because typically transference/countertransference is something that develops during the course of therapy. You hasn't even started therapy yet so it was a strange thing to say. She may have meant she didn't think she could help you, which is fine. It just irks me when Ts use psychobabble to dance around what they really mean and end up leaving client confused.

This confused me too. I googled nt and it said it meant not having a good working relationship. But mostly it means the clients transference towards the t. The t towards the client is called countertransference.

Screw her...

*please* don't take this the wrong way - you might have better luck seeking out someone who says they specialize in personality disorders (regardless of your diagnoses). That can just mean that they feel competent and are interested in treating patients with more complex issues such as attachment issues.

I give you credit for your persistence in pursuing the treatment you need. Good luck Paula.

To "dodge a bullet" means you managed to escape a bad situation. I think the countertransference comment was odd because typically transference/countertransference is something that develops during the course of therapy. You hasn't even started therapy yet so it was a strange thing to say. She may have meant she didn't think she could help you, which is fine. It just irks me when Ts use psychobabble to dance around what they want to say confuse clients.

"The T experiencing negative transference seem to be a bit of a clue to all heartbroken people here at PC. I now talk about posts about being abandoned in some way or another, a too common problem as it seems. How is it even possible that a T can´t receive this? Isn´t it a part of the healing process of the client? I think I know that much that I´m sure it´s the way it should be.'

No, it isn't a part of the healing process. If a transference is sufficiently negative to undermine developing a working alliance, the T ethically should end the therapy, or not begin it.

There's a difference between projecting negative feelings about a person in the past onto a T within the process of working the feelings out (all competent Ts should be able to work with this); and projecting a holistic negative perspective of a T that excludes the possibility of the client experiencing the T as an independent participant in a relationship. There has to be enough space in the client's perspective of the T and the therapy process to allow for the possibility of a working alliance to develop. In its absence, therapy cannot succeed, and it would be unethical for a T to pursue therapy under such a condition.

Given the sorts of concerns you've raised in your threads, and the twisting and parsing of their responses in order to make them fit your preconceived ideas of their meaning, I don't see a recognition of the T in the room as a separate individual. I suspect Ts are seeing much the same thing. I can't help noticing the same pattern in your responses on your threads: you only "see" responses in the ways that reflect your opinions. I have to assume this is also true in your interactions with the Ts, and maybe others in your life. I think the recommendation to look for a T who treats personality disorders might be helpful. Not because of the specific diagnosis, but because it would screen for Ts who have the expertise and willingness to work with the broader pattern of relating that may be causing these preemptive ruptures. But your challenge if you want to pursue therapy will be to choose a T based upon their credentials and record of experience, rather than your personal reactions to them.

Excellent advice. Spot on.

This is what I think you misunderstand. The questions you have for her ARE the therapy. They are not to be asked before you decide to proceed with therapy, but rather they are the content of the therapy itself.

There is a reason you are sending her repeated emails with these questions. The questions themselves aren't as important as the fact that you are sending them. You had three evaluation sessions yet you still want more. You say you weren't attempting to continue the evaluation via email, but you were. If the email was about anything other than scheduling, it belongs in the T's office. Behind those emails are dynamics that should be addressed in order for your therapy to succeed, but you have to make an appointment to do that.

I think a DBT group would be great for you, and a T who specializes in personality disorders.

There is a lot of judging and "diagnosing" going on in this thread that is NOT supportive and not helpful and kind of disturbing. Paula, we are not allowed to give diagnosis or imply someone might have a personality disorder. Also you are not obligated to take anyone's advice here. Many posters get triggered by their own issues and respond based on that and it may or may not have anything to do with you. We know very little about your real life and how you are in person and how you are in therapy. It's very, very disturbing to me that people are so quick to judge and diagnose others here. Just keep in mind we're not allowed to diagnose people here.

It seems therapy training is an education in name-calling, and I often see therapists use diagnosis and clinic jargon as weaponry.

Now, instead of a 3-year-old sticking out her tongue, saying nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah, it's ALL YOUR FAULT, the grown up can accuse you of "negative transference," as she's the moral authority who incidentally has superhero powers to read minds. Wooooooooo.

I've found the more authoritarian the affection, the more frightened the coward under the protective shell.

I actually have not seen anyone making a diagnosis. What I have seen are people saying find a therapist who specializes in personality disorders will probably be the type of therapist who will have better skills in working with a client who displays her difficulties with trust and attachment and relationships, moreso than a therapist without that kind of focus.

"Having difficulty" is a sane response to therapists who've abandoned their professional responsibility to behave like vindictive, angry children.