"You'll never be a therapist"

Observing this thread makes me feel a whole load of projection going on. A need to rid oneself of their own inner doubt and self criticism.

Mouse, this subject was never a fear or concern of mine. With all my issues with my therapist, even if I went so far as to report her doing something like this would still never even cross her mind.

I find it sad that so many members have or have had therapists they think would do something like this, because I can't think of another reason they would think someone else capable of it.

It was brought up by other members, which I knew immediately was incorrect, but I double checked to make sure as I don't want to spread misinformation as others seem wont to do. My information is verified by a malpractice lawyer, so...

Still haven't seen anyone post the obscure law regarding immunity they're referring to.

No more posts about this, I shared the info. Take it or leave it, as with everything else on the internet.

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

It was difficult for me to leave my abusive therapists too for the same reasons you've described. I don't blame myself for staying in harmful situations for a long time, but I also don't refuse to take responsibility for my choice to stay. I don't equate responsibility with blame. On the contrary, I notice that those who deep down tend to blame themselves are the ones who resist responsibility the most.

Taking responsibility to me simply means that I own my choices. I understand my vulnerabilities that prevented me from making sound judgments and I have compassion for myself for having been so vulnerable and not having been able to make best decisions for myself. But those vulnerabilities are mine, no one else's and I have to own them. The choices I made when I was vulnerable are also mine, no one else's and I have to own them as well.

People often look at the concept of assigning responsibility primitively. The primitive linear vision tells them that if they are to take any responsibility in their own victimization, then this somehow would make the perpetrator's responsibility less than it should be. It's like using a primitive arithmetic: "If I am 30% responsible, then my perpetrator is 70% responsible and, I believe, he should be 100% responsible".

Life doesn't work by such arithmetic. Unlike what many people believe, responsibilities in human relationships/encounters are not "shared", they are completely separated from each other. This means that the perpetrator is ALWAYS 100% responsible for their behavior and the victim is also ALWAYS 100% responsible for choosing to stay in the harmful situation whatever the reason may be (that is provided that victim is not physically restricted from leaving and isn't blackmailed by threats).

The above vision doesn't aim to blame anyone for anything. It simply describes the reality of victimization, as I see it. But I perfectly understand that many people will see it as "victim blaming".

The funny thing is that I've been attacked by the groups on both sides. The professionals have attacked me for holding them responsible for "everything" and not recognizing how clients may play role in their traumatization. The victimized clients have attacked me for "blaming the victim". None of them heard what I was really saying. Each group heard only what they wanted to hear. Oh, well..I stick with my holistic vision of life that doesn't create polarization and that brings solutions instead of endlessly ruminating about the injustices and dividing the world into "good" and "evil".

This was a hard concept for me to grasp. But taking responsibility is a gift! Its: from this point forward, these actions are mine. Blame was something my parents tried to scare me with. When bosses say, "do it my way, ill take the responsibility if its wrong" nothing bad ever happens to them, but it does to you

What Ididitmyway said.

I get so annoyed by people who can't see that I'm taking my power back when I accept responsibility for the things I've been through. I AM responsible for my own actions. No, I'm not the person who hurt me, it's not my fault, but I am responsible for my own self.

I owe you nothing in terms of explaining the laws of my state to you or telling you where I live. I stand by my statement that if this is a concern for someone, they should check with the laws specific to their state. I am not attempting to spread misinformation to anyone. I have litigated a case that involved this issue and I am confident of my information and knowledge of this particular area of law for my state specifically.

In any event, I disagreed with you about a relatively minor point that did not involve any emotionally sensitive information. You immediately assumed you knew better than me about every single state in the nation and accused me of being "wont" to spread misinformation and tried to bully me to provide private information about my location. And that was just a minor disagreement about a point of law and not something sensitive or emotional. It appears to me that your therapist is correct and there is no way you will be able to handle the stress of dealing with clients questioning you or disagreeing with you without overreacting or trying to dominate them or humiliate them into accepting your point of view.

Bully you? Sorry I don't recall that but I simply asked for more information. Perhaps my recall is incorrect, but I don't think you were the one who brought it up, you commented later...so not sure why you're taking it personally and ascribing it solely to yourself now, and lashing out at ME as my comment wasn't directed towards any one person.

I just would prefer if information provided is backed up with some sort of concrete foundation-a law, an ethics code-something for those of us who would like to fact check. Otherwise it's just an opinion, which, of course, is respected as such.

my information is factual about MY state as I don't know where you live. I did not try to bully or humiliate you, and it's unfortunate that you have taken offense.

I can only concretely speak on my state. And it's not true here. My apologies that you've found yourself offended.

edit: I'm not saying there's no law stipulating a mandate to report-for everyone BUT a licensees therapist. I'm saying that in cases of client-therapist, that law/code is nullified by client confidentiality taking precedence. A therapist may not report on their client unless they feel like subjecting their license to discipline for violation of confidentiality.

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

I don't really think this issue is pertinent as it doesn't get at the heart of what the thread is about. But, out of curiosity, can you provide the factual information that you say you have about your (or any) state? Saying that you asked your professors isn't any more concrete than what others have said who hold the opposite opinion. I'd be curious if anyone can provide any link to any actual law in any state.

The threads been off topic for awhile, so ::shrug::

It isn't a law here, it's just the ethics code re: confidentiality. My professors couldn't find anything in the law or ethics code citing immunity for a case like this. My ethics professor even had me ask the question in class for the benefit of the other students.

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

Why see a T who is in opposition to your goals anyways?

Just a quick search showed that Arizona had a provision where any licensed therapist is required to report to the licensing board if he or she has reason to believe a licensee or proposed licensee is mentally or physically incapable of acting as a mental health professional or has committed an unethical act. http://azbbhe.us/pdfs/statute%202010.pdf

"Any person may, and a licensee and any entity licensed by the office of behavioral health licensure shall, report to the board any information that would cause a reasonable licensee to believe that another licensee is guilty of unprofessional conduct or is physically or mentally unable to provide behavioral health services competently or safely. Any person or entity that reports or provides information to the board in good faith is not subject to an action for civil damages. "

Here is the Oregon state law:

(5) A licensee files a complaint with the Board when the licensee has reason to believe that another licensee is or has been engaged in conduct that violates law or rules adopted by the Board. This requirement to file a complaint does not apply when the belief is based on information obtained in the course of a professional relationship with a client who is the other counselor or therapist. In that case, the client-therapist confidentiality supersedes the licensee’s requirement to report the other therapist. However, this does not relieve a licensee from the duty to file any reports required by law concerning abuse of children or vulnerable adults. Licensees do not initiate, participate in, or encourage the filing of ethics complaints that are unwarranted or intended to harm a counselor/therapist rather than to protect clients or the public.

Page 19 of the arizona document you just linked to states that none of that applies to client-therapist situations:

D. This section and any other law that makes communications between a licensee and the licensee's client a privileged communication do not apply to investigations or proceedings conducted pursuant to this chapter. The board and a credentialing committee and the board's and committee's employees, agents and representatives shall keep in confidence the names of any clients whose records are reviewed during the course of investigations and proceedings pursuant to this chapter.

and later clarified to only be permissible to breach confidentiality in cases of imminent physical danger to self or others (children, elders):

C. The behavioral health professional-client
privilege does not extend to cases in which the
behavioral health professional has a duty to:


1. Inform victims and appropriate authorities that a client's
condition indicates a clear and imminent danger to the client or others pursuant to this chapter.
2. Report information as required by law.

I maintain that I believe most states (if not all) do not allow therapists to violate confidentiality except in tarasoff-like cases where there is a reasonable belief of physical threat to self or others, or existing child or elder abuse.

The community support team has decided to close this thread at this time - thanks