Devastated!!!

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

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.

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.

"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.

I have not seen any evidence that the OP has encountered such Ts. In my experience, most Ts are not like this.

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.

I've never run into a therapist as you described. Lots of neurosurgeons though, a few lawyers, some teachers, lots of business people, . . . . . Arrogance and bluster are not unique to any one group. There is plenty of that to go around, regardless of profession.

DBT is used for a variety of people in most countries. You need to understand that when people from here recommend DBT, we are used to it being available for a variety of issues. No one is making diagnoses here. They are suggesting a therapy approach that they think might work well for your needs. People are trying to offer helpful support, but you are fighting that support all the way, even from peers. Okay. Your right to do so, but perhaps this is a pattern with people.

I don´t think anyone in here knows enough about a person just by reading posts to even recommend certain treatments. You can of course talk about different kinds of therapy in a general manner but when using examples from what I wrote you also diagnose in a way. You speculate and interpret behaviours you haven´t seen for yourself.

Neither do you know how a diagnosis would look like in my country to attend for example a DBT group, perhaps it´s partially different from where you live, you don´t know.

As I´ve seen both a T and a physician and none of them ever mentioned DBT, I can´t see the validity in such recommendations from people in here who never met me.

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

The thing here is that she let me see her for three evaluation sessions and as I talked positively about her and the sessions I just counted on that she also knew she would be available if I choose to begin therapy. I´ve had the evaluation sessions during three weeks, one session a week and as she every time told me about the same available slots, I thought I could count on that.

I found her behaviour quite strange because who lets a potential client into evaluation sessions without even knowing for sure there´ll be available slots when the evaluation is over? It was just plain "luck" that the only time on Wednesdays hadn´t been scheduled, it could just as well have been and then I hadn´t even had the opportunity to choose.

The other thing was, if she noticed that she got many enquiries and she noticed there were almost no slots left for me - why didn´t she tell me? Why did she let me continue in evaluation?

I e-mailed this potential T about this, she wanted me to e-mail her, not call her and I first got the answer that she believed I should see another T. She said believed and I both e-mailed her saying that I was still interested in seeing her even if I asked her about this thing about the available sessions.

I then also called her and left her a message in her voicemail and just said I wanted to talk to her about the whole thing and I left her my phone number.

Now, just half an hour ago or so, she sends me another e-mail and says her offer about therapy is no longer available. Of course she blamed me, she talked about negative transference!

Wouldn´t every potential client who sees a potential T expect the T to have available slots if you decide to proceed into therapy? How can this be negative transference?

As we several times talked about available slots - how can this be a reason for her to deny me to continue? I don´t understand any of this. Perhaps someone here at PC understands...

I think it is possible to just want to post and get it out without wanting suggestions or advice. Sometimes just wanting acknowledgement of being heard for example. I quit making threads except for ones that were polls because I did not want to be analysed and no matter how much I tried to make that clear, no matter how directly I said that, it was ignored. I hope OP finds a therapist who works, and I don't blame her or believe I get to judge her readiness for anything.

This post is based on facts you don´t have and you know way to little about me to recommend a DBT group. I don´t know about the conditions where you live but in my country a DBT group is for people who has been diagnosed with borderline and most often those people also act out in some kind of self-destructive behaviour, food, sex, cutting themselves and so on.

The potential T I met with told that she had already had clients whom she let e-mail her between sessions and before I even asked questions in an e-mail I asked her if it was ok. If she thought it might have a basis in some kind of personality disorder she couldn´t treat do you really think she had let me e-mail her?

Do you really think my former T had let me attend therapy for three months with her (she wasn´t within psychatric care or anything similar) if I had to be treated in a DBT group?

As you seem to have read many of my posts I have also earlier on told about that referrals were sent from my physician to T:s in a more psychiatric setting and they just told I wasn´t in need of that kind of care.

I agree there are some kind of dynamics to look in to but to suggest a DBT group without knowing me in person it´s not helpful. Such posts can only make it worse for people here at PC, such posts bring only unneccesary headaches. You may disagree around the certain event with this potential T and that´s fine but when it comes to recommend different kinds of treatments, I don´t think anyone in here is qualified to do so just out of reading posts.

FKM, I usually agree with your posts, but I was shocked to have read this. I've had experiences with people who have that trait, so I tend to notice it when I see it too....but there was no evidence here of her not seeing her T as a separate individual. Nothing.

Mian, perhaps instead of "separate," I should have said "autonomous individual."

The many personal characteristics of Ts that the OP has decided makes them unacceptable, coupled with the persistent and insistent ascribing of singular interpretations onto others' words strike me as objectifying. There's no expression of meaning as negotiable. No room for a T to act autonomously.

An objectified person isn't perceived as one who can have multiple motivations, intents, emotions--and also can't do anything to earn trust in a relationship because they're not seen realistically. If you've been in the position of being objectified, I'm sure you've sensed this. Ts can only be as effective as a client will allow them to be. Some believe that if they cannot get past the objectifying persona ( what the one T I think was referring to as a negative transference) that a client imprints upon them, whether it's positive or negative, then they won't engage in therapy. Some Ts, by nature of their training and interest, are more adept at working within such a context. In general, they are Ts who specialize in personality disorders.

If I'm extremely afraid of flying , most recommend a CBT trained T as the best able to help me. When it comes to issues of attachment and relating--issues the OP has referred to as problems for her--Ts who specialize in personality disorders are often best able to help. In either case, it's not about diagnosis or recommending treatment, it's about screening Ts--the central concern of all the OP's threads.

I just can't see how any of this is relevant or helpful to the poster. We just don't have enough information to make these kinds of accusations (claiming the op is objectifying the therapist). I have read the same posts and don't see any of what you see. It's just your opinion and meaningless to the poster just as my opinion might be meaningless.

Its not just "opinion". Psychology might be a looser science than mathematics or computers, but people here arent just "making accusations". They are offering interpretations based on what they are reading and their knowledge and experience in the subject. The next step would be to refine the interpretation, together, until it does correctly reflect the op's experience. From there, a solution.

Calling it meaningless or "just opinions" is just a way of shutting down the discussion - i would ask why.