[rainbow8]

I think it's been 3 times that my T has suggested we change the way we touch. She says the touch is for support, to help deactivate my nervous system. Before she became a somatic experiencing practitioner, she held my hand because that's what the child part wanted and needed. After about a year she decided it wasn't good for me, and didn't feel right for her either. We still hugged after each session but no longer held hands.

After about another year, when she learned SE, my T reintroduced touching as support. The only way I've felt comfortable is holding her hand. It satisfies me in a deep way and has nothing to do with my sometimes feeling attracted to her.

T has tried putting her hand on top of the back of my hand instead, or putting it on my upper arm and pressing. They both feel like I'm being pushed or forced. I told her that. When I put my hand in hers, I don't feel that way. It just feels good.

I asked her if it makes a difference which way we touch, and she says no, as long as it doesn't feed my transference feelings. She says she has to keep checking that the touch is helping me, not hurting.

Do you think that holding hands is too casual for therapy, whereas her putting pressure on my hand is more therapeutic? But I don't like when she tries it that way. I don't understand why every couple of months she tries to change it although I keep telling her how I like holding her hand because it feels safe and makes me feel calm.

I can't help thinking it's because my touching her hand is more reciprocal than her simply putting her hand on top of mine. But I don't think that when we're doing it. It's more like a Mommy/child safety I never felt before. My T told me that's okay, and reassured me by email that she's not taking touch away, but there is something she's not comfortable with. I even asked if that's the way they taught her in SE classes, or if she's getting uncomfortable holding my hand. She said no to both reasons, and said to trust her. I trust that she won't take touch away again, but I'm not sure if she's going to decide that holding hands isn't support. What do you think?

[growlycat]

I'm curious what your T means by this? Changing the way you hold hands? I am confused!
I wish I knew what to say to help!!

Does she talk to another T about your transference? It seems like that is the part she's not sure what to do with, and it is spilling over into the touching issue?

[ScarletPimpernel]

The fact that it doesn't satisfy you for her to touch your hand and you want her to hold your hand, shows that you want more intimacy (I don't necessarily mean sexual). So I can understand if she's wanting to prevent transference, why she would change how she's touching you. She's trying to make it less intimate, but still provide the healing benefits of touch. And the transference is probably why you want more.

[Lauliza]

I agree with SP. I think she is attempting to honor her promise not to take touch away for healing purposes, but wants to keep it less initimate. It makes sense to me but I do understand how you may not like it as much. Since it started as traditional hand holding, the change makes it seem even less intimate than it would have otherwise. I do think she changed this because of the transference - the intimate nature of handholding has a very personal edge to it that naturally stir up lots of different feelings. So even though comsciously you may not think so, I think your negative reaction is at least partially driven by transference. This new way of touch is still meant to do the same thing but it is more neutral, less personal and therefore maybe feels less sincere to you. At least that's my take on it, which could be way off.

[unaluna]

I think shes being too touchy about touch! For me, feelings wax and wane. But eventually this ocean is going to recede and leave a desert. A lovely desert but still. Sometimes i am moved to kiss my t on the cheek - it doesnt mean that the next session i will want to hump him. Its an exuberance of the moment. His acceptance of it lessens the attachment. If a child brings mom dandelions and she accepts them, his need may be satisfied and he doesnt have to rip up the whole flower garden to get her attention. I think your ts paying too much attention to it and it feels rejecting, or dry and technical.

[BayBrony]

If the touch Is less personal I can't see how it will still have the same effect. It is the personal aspect of touch that is calming. If my partner holds me it is comforting. If she decided just to put a hand on my back instead it would be weird, not comforting.
I agree with hankster.

[rainbow8]

Originally Posted by growlycat

I'm curious what your T means by this? Changing the way you hold hands? I am confused!
I wish I knew what to say to help!!

Does she talk to another T about your transference? It seems like that is the part she's not sure what to do with, and it is spilling over into the touching issue?

No, I don't think she talked to anyone about me. I think she's just being careful. I explained how she suggested changing it. She didn't say I HAVE to.

Originally Posted by ScarletPimpernel

The fact that it doesn't satisfy you for her to touch your hand and you want her to hold your hand, shows that you want more intimacy (I don't necessarily mean sexual). So I can understand if she's wanting to prevent transference, why she would change how she's touching you. She's trying to make it less intimate, but still provide the healing benefits of touch. And the transference is probably why you want more.

I was afraid that holding hands is more intimate, but the other way doesn't feel good at all.

Originally Posted by Lauliza

I agree with SP. I think she is attempting to honor her promise not to take touch away for healing purposes, but wants to keep it less initimate. It makes sense to me but I do understand how you may not like it as much. Since it started as traditional hand holding, the change makes it seem even less intimate than it would have otherwise. I do think she changed this because of the transference - the intimate nature of handholding has a very personal edge to it that naturally stir up lots of different feelings. So even though comsciously you may not think so, I think your negative reaction is at least partially driven by transference. This new way of touch is still meant to do the same thing but it is more neutral, less personal and therefore maybe feels less sincere to you. At least that's my take on it, which could be way off.

Yes, the suggested new way feels less sincere. I think you hit the nail on the head! It's also neutral, but the pressure actually bothers me, makes me anxious and NOT calm!

Originally Posted by hankster

I think shes being too touchy about touch! For me, feelings wax and wane. But eventually this ocean is going to recede and leave a desert. A lovely desert but still. Sometimes i am moved to kiss my t on the cheek - it doesnt mean that the next session i will want to hump him. Its an exuberance of the moment. His acceptance of it lessens the attachment. If a child brings mom dandelions and she accepts them, his need may be satisfied and he doesnt have to rip up the whole flower garden to get her attention. I think your ts paying too much attention to it and it feels rejecting, or dry and technical.

Yes! Everything you wrote rings true!! The other touch seems dry and impersonal, and clinical. Even holding her hand is clinical now but it still feels safe and calm.

Originally Posted by BayBrony

If the touch Is less personal I can't see how it will still have the same effect. It is the personal aspect of touch that is calming. If my partner holds me it is comforting. If she decided just to put a hand on my back instead it would be weird, not comforting.
I agree with hankster.

Correct! Ts hand on my hand is irritating, not comforting! I will tell her that, and also ask if she thinks holding her hand is too intimate. Now I understand better. But the question is, is the intimacy therapeutic or not? I think so, but maybe T doesn't think so. That's what I'm worried about. She only holds my hand for a few minutes anyway, and then wants me to feel the calm on my own.

I definitely think Hankster hit the nail squarely on the head with her post. Personally, I think this is more about your therapist's own countertransference issues. She seems like a very skilled and ethical therapist, but from what you've posted in the past, I think she's struggled with her own internal reaction to your very brave and honest talk about your transference. I think it's good that she's continued to check in with you about what's happening internally in regard to touch, but it seems to me that you've come a LONG way since the beginning of your therapy--your current reaction and internalization of her touch as healing and calming has been great! If she's not talking to another therapist about her current uneasiness (not sure if uneasiness is the correct description here but I'm a bit brain dead this morning) about the hand holding vs. hand over hand touch, then maybe she should--not saying that you need to tell her to do that , but maybe she needs to realize that herself. Counter-transference is a tricky thing and sometimes we need someone other than just ourselves to sort it out. Personally, Rainbow, I think you've done some really excellent self-reflection and self-examination around this issue. I'm glad she's checking in with you because you have seemed to really been able to sort out how the "intimacy" of direct handholding is doing exactly what your therapist says she's after--calming and rewiring your nervous system.

[stopdog]

I hate having my hands held by anyone -so I don't see it as intimate particularly. Being commanded to trust one of those people would not work for me. I don't really understand what you mean.

[A Red Panda]

Originally Posted by rainbow8

Do you think that holding hands is too casual for therapy, whereas her putting pressure on my hand is more therapeutic? But I don't like when she tries it that way. I don't understand why every couple of months she tries to change it although I keep telling her how I like holding her hand because it feels safe and makes me feel calm.

Too casual?? No. The opposite - too intimate!

Then again - the only hands I would hold would be a partner, or a child.

Hand-holding to me is a very intimate thing; I would not even hold the hand of a very close friend in any situation outside of them being hospitalized.

I also view hand-holding as a form of control - which is why I would only hold the hand of a partner. My only memories of hand-holding as a child were as a form of control from my mom - I'd be trapped in her hand.

I know my view is different from most people on this thread - but it may give you a new perspective. To me, having someone's hand on my arm... while also extremely uncomfortable because I also view that as too intimate... it's at least giving me more freedom to leave that interaction - and my own hand is still free.

Hand on a shoulder, to me, is the most comforting. There is absolutely no form of control in that, there is no limiting my movement, yet it is a physical connection - the closest to a hug without being a hug. It shows that someone wants to demonstrate caring, but is leaving it open to me to control - I can end it easily and have bodily freedom. It's not as intimate, but it's also not something that someone who didn't care would do. It's much more.... respectful for me.

Originally Posted by A Red Panda

Too casual?? No. The opposite - too intimate!

Then again - the only hands I would hold would be a partner, or a child.

Hand-holding to me is a very intimate thing; I would not even hold the hand of a very close friend in any situation outside of them being hospitalized.

I also view hand-holding as a form of control - which is why I would only hold the hand of a partner. My only memories of hand-holding as a child were as a form of control from my mom - I'd be trapped in her hand.

I know my view is different from most people on this thread - but it may give you a new perspective. To me, having someone's hand on my arm... while also extremely uncomfortable because I also view that as too intimate... it's at least giving me more freedom to leave that interaction - and my own hand is still free.

Hand on a shoulder, to me, is the most comforting. There is absolutely no form of control in that, there is no limiting my movement, yet it is a physical connection - the closest to a hug without being a hug. It shows that someone wants to demonstrate caring, but is leaving it open to me to control - I can end it easily and have bodily freedom. It's not as intimate, but it's also not something that someone who didn't care would do. It's much more.... respectful for me.

I don't think, but I could be wrong, that your view is different than most people on this thread. Personally, I don't want any touch from any therapist I see! Just the other day, I was at a family gathering were a young second cousin, who I haven't seen in over ten years, kept approaching and asking for a hug from me and other family members. I complied but by the third request over the evening, I have to admit that I was feeling a bit resentful. Need to practice my boundary setting. I really have a hard time hugging people who aren't my immediate family and even with them I don't want it to be lingering or too often.

I remember when I was seeing a therapist I stayed with for three years--it was early on and I was in the waiting room and she exited her office with another client. The client turned and said, "Hug?" They hugged and I averted my eyes giving them privacy, while internally I cringed. The therapist brought it up in session, letting me know that she allowed touch in therapy but it was up to the client to initiate. I told her that she didn't need to worry about me asking because it wasn't something I found helpful. She respected that limit, and even when we parted due to my moving, we never felt the need to move to physical touch. I cared for her and felt that she cared deeply for me too. I just wasn't a person who needed touch to deepen the relationship. I do think, however, that some people need touch and benefit greatly from it in therapy, but it takes a skilled and well trained therapist to negotiate this minefield of issues it seems to inevitably raises in the relationship.

[stopdog]

I have had to have them promise never to touch me. I want them to stay back. I only touch my most intimate and closest persons. I more worry about them touching me than them not.

[A Red Panda]

I'll clarify then:

If my counsellor, or anyone who WASN'T an extremely close friend/partner... I would flinch and pull away from the contact. Hence why a hand on the shoulder is most acceptable - I can leave it much easier.

To me... any physical contact in a therapy, or any professional setting, would be vastly uncomfortable and inappropriate. Way too intimate.

I provided my outlook because it is different from a lot of people - I have a different outlook on hands on arms and shoulders than others. I was just trying to demonstrate how touch, outside of hand-holding, could still be seen as caring and respectful.

[ScarletPimpernel]

I'm somewhere in the middle with touch. I love it and hate it. It just depends on the person and timing. If someone is an acquaintance or stranger, I don't want them to touch me in anyway. I would prefer my family to not touch me, but I allow it anyways. My fiance, I enjoy touching me so long as I'm not mad at him or having a breakdown.

With Ts though, I'm weird. I love touch from Ts or counselors once I have a deep connection with them. Hugs are the most important, but I enjoy hand holding, touch of the shoulder, arm, or leg. However, I still consider anything other than a hug to be intimate, so I understand when a person prefers not to touch in those ways. Those ways do increase my attachment and of course are more comforting. But if you're having issues with your attachment and/or transference, then I can see why your T doesn't want to hold hands anymore

[ruh roh]

If your therapist isn't uncomfortable with it, then she might be sensing that it's not having the lasting effect (outside of the therapy hour) that it's intended to have, making therapy all about the therapy relationship and that it could be edging toward an obsession?

Personally, I find hand holding to be very intimate. I think of hands as vulnerable body parts. And, as someone mentioned above, they're used to control. But it doesn't seem that your therapist is feeling this way so much as she might be wondering if it's becoming a thing itself for you and not a tool for your own growth and well being beyond the therapy relationship.

[JaneTennison1]

I don't doubt the benefits of SE for some people, I also don't doubt that this is what she is trying to accomplish with you but I wonder if rather than feeling it theraputically you feel it more in a comforting way. rather than help healing it may just be 10 minutes of the week where you get to feel warm and connected (note that I;m not against that either btw) The problem being that she is trying to achieve something in a theraputic way and you are just trying to feel connection for 10 minutes. The difference in goals is what may end this in a negative way.

SE is meant to carry through leaving you feeling released of tension and calm in the world. Is this what this does for you? 2 days later do you still feel it? How long has she been holding your hand? Do you feel mentally improved from when she first started doing this?

I hope your T can keep the promise of not taking touch away.

Touch and hand holding is very interesting to me. Growing up my family were not huggers or hand holders and it just feels wierd w them like when I'm visiting and my brother wants us to hold hands and he says grace. I don't like it and feel wierd. But saturday at my reiki attunement class-thing, we began by standing in a circle holding hands and not talking just letting the energy flow and it did not feel uncomfortable at all was very soothing actually. I've never held t's hand (well i shook her hand once when we first met) but i imagine i would feel comfortable with it just like her hugs. Reiki healing at one level is done hands-on and i didn't feel wierd about that either but strangely or maybe not i can't fathom the notion of sharing it with my foo. Wish i had something useful to say.

Sent from my LG-H345 using Tapatalk

[Lauliza]

I don't doubt that touch in therapy is healing when done in a therapeutic. Personally, I think hand holding, hugs or any touch along those line is too intimate for therapy most of the time. Of course there are exceptions, but I think in general it can end up too confusing.

I think a lot of clients who want touch from their Ts are lacking sufficient human connection in their lives and therapy seems like a logical place to find it for some people. And obviously some people find it helpful. My biggest concern is about what happens when you leave your T's office. The hand holding or other touch might help in the moment, but that's temporary. Nothing is happening that addresses the larger issue - how can the client find this connection in other areas of their life? Therapy is often the only place where a client feels safe and comforted, so Im not saying it's wrong to ask for touch or for Ts to provide it. I do think different options should be considered very carefully though, so a longer lasting effect takes place.

[musinglizzy]

Originally Posted by hankster

I think shes being too touchy about touch! For me, feelings wax and wane. But eventually this ocean is going to recede and leave a desert. A lovely desert but still. Sometimes i am moved to kiss my t on the cheek - it doesnt mean that the next session i will want to hump him. Its an exuberance of the moment. His acceptance of it lessens the attachment. If a child brings mom dandelions and she accepts them, his need may be satisfied and he doesnt have to rip up the whole flower garden to get her attention. I think your ts paying too much attention to it and it feels rejecting, or dry and technical.

I have kissed my T on the cheek a couple times. Both times I thought "EEK! WTF!" after I did it, but she never said anything. I really am a kisser. I kiss everyone I care a great deal about on the cheek, it's as normal to me as hugging. So actually it was out of habit, and I wasn't thinking....but I've made a point to try to remember who this is I'm hugging, and not give a little peck on the cheek before I leave. This is my T after all, not a dear friend. I'm thankful she didn't react to my doing that....it's only happened twice, quite some time ago, and I made sure not to do it again.

[musinglizzy]

Well most of you have seen my posts and know that I am a believer that touch is helpful to me in therapy.... but I, myself, wouldn't be comfortable sitting and holding my T's hand. I think, for ME, that's just too intimate for my taste. I think I would feel really self conscious, really childish, if I sat there and held my T's hand. But she'd never do that...we shook hands on my very first visit and that's the only time I came remotely close to holding her hand. I greatly appreciated her putting her hand on my back or on my leg to help keep me grounded, or putting her arm around me for a short time when I was upset...and for some reason that stuff was ok and I valued it, but hand holding....nah....that's not for me. I'm afraid I'd feel too much like a child. Of course, some people would think the things that WERE offered to me would feel that way to them, too. It's all about the client and the T and how they feel about it. If her holding your hand is not comfortable for her, and she wants to do it another way that's not comfortable to YOU, perhaps you can find something else that is comfortable for both of you. Unless your T is, of course, easily persuaded to do what you want her to do.... which mine is not. My T was concerned her actions would cause regression. It didn't happen, but she thought it would eventually. Does your T say anything about that? Do you feel more childlike and vulnerable (yet comforted) when your T holds your hand the way you want her to? My T wants me to embrace and love my "inner child," yet she treats me as an adult, and won't nurture those needs an inner child may have. I don't accept mine....so that's something I either need to work on, or work around. I beat the hell out of my "inner child" whenever my T tries to bring "her" up.

A Red Panda, I apologize if my post came across as argumentative toward your response. It was not my intention. I truly just wanted to say that I think people in therapy need different things but can be supportive of each other's opposite needs. Hope I didn't come across as offensive.

This is a complicated issue and to demonstrate just how complicated it can get, another poster stated that she couldn't tolerate hand holding in therapy because it is too intimate for her, but she feels perfectly fine with a touch from her therapist on her leg. That comment made me really cringe because to ME a touch on my leg is waaaaaay more intimate than hand holding. But it shows just how different we all react to touch--what is intimate to me, isn't that big of a deal to someone else. I guess it's something that has to be negotiated in therapy with the therapist. And it's a two way street because if the therapist doesn't agree with what the client wants, then he/she has the right to set a limit to meet their own needs/boundaries. The problem seems to be when a therapist isn't clear what their own personal boundaries are and he/she allows a certain touch and then gets uncomfortable and withdraws it without careful examination of the reason from backtracking.

[musinglizzy]

Originally Posted by Jaybird57

This is a complicated issue and to demonstrate just how complicated it can get, another poster stated that she couldn't tolerate hand holding in therapy because it is too intimate for her, but she feels perfectly fine with a touch from her therapist on her leg. That comment made me really cringe because to ME a touch on my leg is waaaaaay more intimate than hand holding. But it shows just how different we all react to touch--what is intimate to me, isn't that big of a deal to someone else. I guess it's something that has to be negotiated in therapy with the therapist. And it's a two way street because if the therapist doesn't agree with what the client wants, then he/she has the right to set a limit to meet their own needs/boundaries. The problem seems to be when a therapist isn't clear what their own personal boundaries are and he/she allows a certain touch and then gets uncomfortable and withdraws it without careful examination of the reason from backtracking.

Yes, THAT'S what's hard.... Rainbow doesn't always know what to expect from her therapist.... just like mine provided, then took away things as well. It gets confusing when they can't maintain consistent boundaries. I guess if a client expected certain things at every session, I could see why the T might back off. But if it was a once in awhile thing, when the situation seemed appropriate for the comfort, I don't see what the big deal is. I don't know if Rainbow is wanting her T to hold her hand at every session, but if so, perhaps the T is thinking she's getting too dependent on it. I really wish Ts would just say what they think, but some don't.

[ruh roh]

I think the difference is that rainbow's therapist seems to really have her interests at heart and is openly discussing the effect that touch is having. It seems like a good approach to check in and try variations of touch to gauge whether or not it's having a lasting therapeutic effect beyond the therapy relationship.

[A Red Panda]

Jaybird: No worries! I just wanted to clarify myself, because if you read my post one way then I am sure others did

Rainbow: Perhaps your T is trying to see how you can handle change? Change and variety are good things a lot of the time, and maybe she's trying to help you expand on your one physical connection. Because as others have said - if hand-holding with her is a way to just feel connected to her.... how do you comfort yourself outside of that room when holding her hand isn't an option? While it will always be your preference, learning how to accept things in new ways is a way that you can grow.