[Elkino]

Just wondering: if your T would see his or her job as a T only as a side-business, because their true 'calling' doesn't make enough money, would you mind?

[LesFleursDuMal]

I wouldn't see him/her. In order to be fully honest and trust someone to the point where I could talk about all my deepest issues and insecurities, I would need this person to not see me as part of a side business to make more money.

Envoyé de mon SAMSUNG-SM-G850A en utilisant Tapatalk

Not really so long as they are an effective therapist.

Some years back, my therapist was my pastor. His full-time, true calling in life was as a pastor. He didn't become a therapist (yes, he was a fully trained and licensed therapist) because he didn't make enough money as a pastor, so it isn't quite what you are asking, but his therapy work was definitely only part-time and not his first calling. He was an excellent pastor AND an excellent therapist.

Do you assume if therapy isn't their main profession or calling that they are only doing therapy work to supplement their income? Because I don't think that is always (or perhaps even usually) the case. Or, are you asking because you have seen the money motivator as a problem with your personal therapist?

I think even if money was a motivator for doing therapy part-time, that wouldn't negate their ability to be good at what they do with their clients.

[JaneTennison1]

Not again. My last T used therapy as a side business. When her "real" job distracted her then she abandoned me.

Originally Posted by JaneTennison1

Not again. My last T used therapy as a side business. When her "real" job distracted her then she abandoned me.

But in that case.. I think(/hope) my T would abandon me without much thought if her kids would "distract" her. I think her "first calling" is that of a parent. Isn't therapy a side business, in that case?

Originally Posted by Breadfish

But in that case.. I think(/hope) my T would abandon me without much thought if her kids would "distract" her. I think her "first calling" is that of a parent. Isn't therapy a side business, in that case?

I don't mean "without much thought" in that she'd do it thoughtlessly or carelessly. I just think it wouldn't be a hard decision. Or maybe it would be a hard decision, but I'd never doubt her kids would "win".

[JaneTennison1]

Originally Posted by Breadfish

But in that case.. I think(/hope) my T would abandon me without much thought if her kids would "distract" her. I think her "first calling" is that of a parent. Isn't therapy a side business, in that case?

The question is would I see someone whose therapy practice was a side business to their regular job and the answer is no I wouldn't. I have been burned before and wouldn't again.

There are multiple reasons that distract one from a business and they are all perfectly reasonable and understandable. A person who is juggling two very demanding jobs needs to be able to do it well, I would not take the risk that a person could not juggle it well and simply be discarded by the other job demands like my mental health doesn't mean anything.

Originally Posted by JaneTennison1

The question is would I see someone whose therapy practice was a side business to their regular job and the answer is no I wouldn't. I have been burned before and wouldn't again.

There are multiple reasons that distract one from a business and they are all perfectly reasonable and understandable. A person who is juggling two very demanding jobs needs to be able to do it well, I would not take the risk that a person could not juggle it well and simply be discarded by the other job demands like my mental health doesn't mean anything.

So you wouldn't "mind" being second choice to a family, but you would "mind" being second choice to a job?

I'm not trying to be obsolete (I think that's the word?), just trying to understand.

[JaneTennison1]

Life happens. The suggestion I think otherwise is ridiculous. My mental health is important to me. Do I want someone who gets distracted by their other job to the point that they cannot help me, re traumatize me because they are distracted, or discard me midway through treatment? No I don't. I will not take the risk that a person be competent enough to juggle both jobs.

The question, however, doesn't suggest anything about competence though. Many people have a second kind of sideline job that they do, yes, for financial reasons, but they ALSO enjoy it and are very good at it. I figure so long as they are good at it and take their role seriously (and I don't think money precludes dedication), then all the power to them.

[JaneTennison1]

I agree, but again would I see someone to whom therapy is a side job? No, *I* would not take the risk that the person could manage it or be competent enough. That's my answer and those are my reasons why.

[stopdog]

The second one I see has another career. She did not become a therapist until her 50s. She is a better one for me than the first (except she does not quite stay back as well). So yes I would because I do.

[AllHeart]

I think it depends on what you need to see a therapist for, and, how long you plan to be in therapy. If you know you need to be in therapy for the long-haul, I'd likely avoid. If you have attachment issues, that's an automatic hell no -- too risky. If you know you need short term therapy, or know that you might need long term therapy AND know for certain you do not have attachment issues AND are ok with the possibility of needing to find another therapist at some point down the road then I think it's all good to give this side job therapist a shot.

[stopdog]

I have been seeing the second one for about 5 years. The second one, who has another career that she is known for, is the one who encourages outside contact and is generally less rigid than the first.

[Merecat]

I'm in the UK and most therapists I know have more than one job, either they do some private work along with being employed somewhere or have a number of different things they're involved in eg training, development work etc. Yes for some there's a financial incentive but also for a lot of them seeing clients full time is too much, they would say that for them to stay fresh, not get overwhelmed and really be able to be with their clients, there needs to be a balance. Their other job may not be as demanding and could be easily manageable. My current T is semi retired and works part time but I know she still looks for balance in her work and I like that she takes care of herself.

My first T had a completely different line of work which caused him to travel and I found myself sidelined and not prioritised more than once which was hurtful.
My current T does several roles within the field of psychotherapy, so he writes, he conducts workshops, he supervises, he coaches etc etc. He also travels a lot but he always makes sure to be available for me and/or give me months of advance warning if he's not going to make our appointment. I don't know if it's so much about the job as about who he is as a person. He sees the importance of consistency for me and makes sure to provide it.

[brillskep]

As long as the therapist is good, I don't mind his/her having other jobs too. In my country it is very common for therapists to start out this way until they can make decent money as therapists - it's not materialism but a part of life.

On the other hand, I don't think I'd feel comfortable with a therapist who saw psychotherapy as a side-job. I think this is a profession that needs to be the main focus in orer to work, and the other stuff can be on the side. That's my view on it.

[Sarah1985]

No, I would feel like they would quit at any time

[ruh roh]

If it's because their true calling doesn't make enough income, then I would have a problem because I don't think they make a ton of money as therapists (judging by the state of disrepair some of their offices have been in that I've seen). I think the real money in mental health is in the prescribers, so if I ran into a new therapist whose preferred (other) career was flagging, I'd suggesting becoming a nurse practitioner and avoid the pdoc schooling. I think it takes a lot more work to look interested in people than it does to write scripts.

BUT, if they just had a counseling practice as a second job because they liked the combination of careers, then I would not mind.

[Pennster]

One of the things I like about my current therapist is how dedicated he is to his job. He trains other therapists and has written several books on his style of therapy. I find him unusually good at what he does, and his style of working is innovative and suits me very well. I really appreciate his devotion to his career and to being an excellent therapist. That's why I wouldn't want to be seeing a therapist who was doing it as a second gig. But at the same time, if I was seeing a therapist for something different, I think it might be ok to see someone with a different level of devotion.

[divine1966]

A lot of people work more than one job. People can be good at several different things. It wouldn't bother me. People on this forum report having awful therapists yet they all usually work one job. It doesn't mean anything



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Elkino]

Originally Posted by JaneTennison1

Not again. My last T used therapy as a side business. When her "real" job distracted her then she abandoned me.

Yeah, that's what I would fear too...

[Elkino]

Originally Posted by lolagrace

The question, however, doesn't suggest anything about competence though. Many people have a second kind of sideline job that they do, yes, for financial reasons, but they ALSO enjoy it and are very good at it. I figure so long as they are good at it and take their role seriously (and I don't think money precludes dedication), then all the power to them.

True, that would make it hard for me to decide whether or not I'd go for it.
Although I think that feeling like a second option would be the main thought and I'd go find another therapist.

[Elkino]

I'll try to explain where that question comes from...

I'm seeing a therapist who seems very dedicated, but when I started a conversation about my job and how I don't want to be seen as 'my profession' (because it's absolutely not my passion), my T mentioned that she is more than that too. She does have another passion. And that's what she mentions in profiles online, not the therapy.

And maybe the careers are equal, I don't know. I actually didn't find out about it until I was working with her. So this makes it very complicated. Now I feel as if I'm just there for the money or something. As if, if she wouldn't need this to survive, she wouldn't be there for me. It's clear that the other passion comes first. And probably this is a very bad interpretation, I know she loves her job as a therapist, but if she had a choice... I don't think we'd be speaking.

And then I could imagine... if I would have been more talented and had the opportunity to be a famous athlete or writer or whatever... I'd probably put my hopes on that too. Doesn't make me a worse employee today though.

And another thought... just like a family, and which has been mentioned in this thread too,... those always come first too, so what's the difference between a kid or a husband and a passion?

Still, drives me crazy...

I guess my response is why is a person only allowed one passion in life? Why does having one passion somehow negate a person's other passions in your eyes? Why do you assume she would drop therapy as a profession like a hot potato if she wasn't making money from it? Or maybe, why do you assume she would drop YOU if she had a choice? Or maybe, is this about not feeling like YOU are your therapist's passion?