APA article: "Termination and abandonment: A key ethical distinction"

I don't really have a horse in this race. Just throwing out ideas. I thought it was an interesting article.

This is just plain mean. Way to lose an argument, start name-calling. You learn that at Trump University?.

It is not mean or name calling -it is an analogy. I did not call any posters nor did I imply name calling at any posters here.

Paying women 59 cents to the male dollar is too much.
Therapists need protecting from those scary female clients.

I do believe some therapists (and in general the whole profession's attitude) utilize assholic ways of interacting with clients. I do not sympathize with therapists. They, for whatever reason, chose to go into the profession and one would hope even therapists have some training in dealing with clients who are not goody two shoes - therefore I do not sympathize when a client is not all submissive and kowtowing to a therapist and it upsets or hurts the therapist's ego.

I find it interesting because I think people (especially women in my opinion, who are constantly told to "be nice"" be good", "don't upset anyone", "don't take up space", "make the professional feel better about themselves" etc) are taught and trained to sympathize with the bullying professional and blame themselves and each other when being abused or gaslighted or bullied by professionals. It has to be the person's fault because we need to believe the profession is there to protect us and if it is the profession's fault - then no one is safe. And I don't think it is true. I don't think clients, particularly women, need worry about playing nicely with therapists, especially male therapists.
And the attitude in the article was that of condescension and bullying - in my opinion. And I do not wish to collude with those guys in their attempts at doing that to clients.

I'm not really surprised anymore by the bull that people believe about therapy.

Seems like better initial assessments would weed out the lowly "misfits" therapists can't "handle." I guess that's asking too much though.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

Theres an odd synchrony between this pic and my avatar, no?

Know this:

I wouldn't argue about the right to terminate without client consent...but surely clients have a right not to be terminated like they've been struck by a hit-and-run driver.

(This isn't in reference to the article. It's just that many nonconsensual terminations you hear about seem to be conducted by the therapist in the worst way possible for the client.)

And surely ts have the right not to be attacked by some disgruntled client who has shown a pattern of not taking responsibility for their actions. Not BLAME - responsibility; two different things. I learned that in t.

I'm beginning to think (rather belatedly, I know) that all of this is closely related to the expectations that one has about therapy / therapists.

At times, I've had expectations of my therapist that were along the lines of her going a bit beyond her therapist persona (for lack of a better term) and really trying to understand me -- to me, the question around how to terminate in a way that feels okay to the client will fall into that realm.

But, I've realized that it's kinda pointless to go down that road -- not because she's awful or anything but that's simply her limitation (I can't parse out how much of it is her personality versus training versus the profession's strictures etc).

So, at this point, I've boiled down my expectations to the following -- she shows up when she says she does + she at least appears to make an attempt to change what she says out loud when I correct her understanding of whatever it is that I'm trying to explain (I don't care if she believes me or not -- I just need her to verbalize the correct thing).

Beyond that, if things get truly messy -- E.g. I really question her competence etc -- I'm pretty sure she'd have no compunctions whatsoever in cutting me loose in the quickest and most efficient way (to serve her needs) possible. And, I'm pretty sure this will be the case even if I see her for years on end.

I don't see that as ethical or unethical -- it's just the way the world works as far as I'm concerned (cynical, yes). So, I don't see therapy or therapists as adhering to some higher standard than the rest of the population despite their claims to the contrary -- I mean of course they have to make it sound like they're heaven's gift to the human species just like every used car salesman will try to convince you that the car they're selling will change your life.

I've found this to be at least partially true with even the best therapists I've seen.

Therapists do have to follow professional standards as all other professionals do but they aren't omnipotent creatures or Gods who must put their life in danger for the sake of the client. Therapists are humans not some god like creatures.

If I show up to my dentist and get aggressive she'll call 911 and rightly so. But if I start acting like this in t office she can't even suggest I need different treatment, she is supposed to be ok with whatever I do. Not even allowed to refer etc nobody says that it's persons fault she is aggressive if she is unwell, but if she gets aggressive in other settings shed get arrested but somehow it's ok to get like this in therapist office.

I have never heard in real life that therapists supposed to adhere to higher standards than other professionals. I only see it on this board: expecting therapists to be above everyone else.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What does "above everyone else" mean?

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

Why did he not call 911 the first time she overturned furniture if she was so dangerous?

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

If therapists don't want to be seen as saviors or omnipotent or above everyone else, they should not present themselves as such. And many clearly do. Not all, sure, but I don't think there's any question of where the idea of high expectations for therapists/therapy comes from: themselves.

(Also, no one is saying that a client who threatens a therapist's safety should not be removed as a client. Unless I missed it, even the therapist in the article doesn't express concern for his own safety.)

Exactly. A problem that I see is that those guys try to have it both (or more) ways. They want to be godlike saviors until it is shown they are not -then they get pissed at the client who has exposed their all too human foibles.

As far as I am concerned if I am throwing somebodie's furniture I am a danger to myself or others, am damaging property, and should be admitted, not just given a reference.

I am glad you said not all Ts present themselves in that way because mine has openly admitted in the past that she can't see a way to help me and in another session that she is human, using an example of having said something she shouldn't have to her daughters but explaining that it is how she dealt with this afterwards that mattered.

Her admitting that she didn't know how best to help me opened the door to me telling her how I saw this and what I believed would help.

I don't think showing some temper at a therapist's office is a big deal. I have been around students, clients, other attorneys and even other academics who have thrown furniture or knocked chairs over and I never took it as a threat or them being a danger to themselves or others. Just a wee upset.

My therapist had a blanket clause in the contract that she had me sign early on that if she suspected I was a danger to anyone, she'd call the authorities (and I think it mentioned institutionalization as well but I don't recall the details).

So yeah, I do think it's a fair clause -- but, it isn't something the dude in this case seems to have utilized.

Good point. And, as far as we know, this "case study" might complete fiction. The furniture tipping episodes are mentioned almost in passing; the core of the story is how "incompetent and ineffective" poor Dr. Berman feels.

So we don't know if this tale is poorly written fiction -- get thee to the Iowa Workshop-- or a true example. I'd find it difficult to capsize the seating pieces I've seen in therapists' offices. Lamps and accent pieces would be easier to toss, but the story says furniture.

It does make for a dramatic story. I'd guess it is fiction.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

Meh, it's written by T for T so of course it's that angle.

Yeah, I'd agree with that.

Wait a minute-aren't they supposed to "sit with" their feelings and know that these feelings won't last forever?

This is sometimes referred to counter-transference. Some Ts are trained to manage these feelings. Glad my T is one of them.

Case studies are used for learning and training--all the more reason to include more about the client's feelings and POV in the article. Especially articles about ethics..

I was thinking the same thing. I also think leaving out the feelings and POV of the client because it is a case study for professionals is really strange and makes me even more suspicious of therapy. Apparently those things aren't very important to them? Shows me the client really isn't seen as important.