[Trigger] Therapy as addiction

The problem is that therapy is too seductive and manipulative. Too much like love bombing. If the client is vulnerable, seems the risk of lapsing into obsessive or addictive impulses is rather high. Happened to me. Never again.

I agree that in a reciprocal relationship attention, validation, love, etc are healthy. In a professional relationship where these things are being delivered to every paying customer who comes through the door, and where the motivations and intentions of the therapist are obscure, yikes. I believe my therapist was exhibiting narcissistic and other troubling tendencies. I only realized this after it was over. Instead of a true picture of the women, I got a heavily filtered version that encouraged idealization, which is another factor driving obsession.

To paraphrase something I read, unless the profession can demonstrate consistent and reproducible outcomes, and transparency about methodology and risks, then it's basically experimenting with people's sanity and well-being on a wide scale.

Well the problem is that therapy might be seductive and manipulative for some. I don't think you can label all therapy as seductive and manipulative. Not everyone's therapy is love bombing. I think it's incorrect assumption based on your personal sad experience

. I understand you are speaking from place of pain but maybe you can rephrase it that "some" or "might". Your therapy ( and of course there are others in the same unfortunate situation) had too much love bombing and seduction it ended bad, but overall it's not the case for all therapy. I am not sure why you are assigning this to all therapy.

Many members of this forum states that their therapy is nothing like it so it can't be universal.

As about idealized version I agree with it. It can't be fully realistic as you aren't seeing her when she just got out of bed or is having a flu. Certainly you wouldn't get the entire picture of a t as a human being. I am not sure why you would seek to obtain realistic picture of women by attending therapy.

That's just one woman who isn't in personal relationship with you. It's one hour a week of therapy, of course it's idealized and not realistic representation of "women" in real life. I think your t failed by not doing reality check and not specify goals and just letting you fall for her based on what you see that one hour a week ( or how often) and incorrectly assuming that is a real relationship. She was blind to what's going on

She sucked in recognizing what's happening until it was too late, but certainly not all are the same

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The fact that therapy seduction and/or addiction can be a problem for some but not others is not, to my mind, a reason for not discussing it up front with people. If it's not likely to be a problem for you, then great. What would be the harm to you if it was mentioned up front, though? It doesn't have to be universal to be a valid, addressable problem for some even if it's not for you, does it?

Of course it is valid. I never said otherwise. I don't post on threads that have no value. I only post on ones that have value for me. I am certainly up to discussing or otherwise I wouldn't be on here. I am expressing my opinion that is just as valid.

As I stated before many therapists fail to recognize that clients are on a spiral of destruction until it is too late, and some are actually seduce their clients ( we have clients whose therapists seduced them sexually). It is all a huge issue! Perhaps more ts need to be reported

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am suggesting that therapy is inherently seductive and manipulative. Only the extent varies. This is based on personal experiences (plural) in therapy, on a ton of reading, and from direct accounts of others. I don't think this is even controversial to say. It's like saying advertising is inherently seductive and manipulative. Of course it is. Anyway, this same discussion crops up here all the time.

I said "women" when I meant "woman". Was a typo, my mistake. This has nothing to do with women.

None of this is accurate. It's not relevant either. The structure of the relationship was the primary problem.

I don't find it controversial at all. I don't know why you say that. I understand your suggestion that's seduction. I just don't find it so. Direct accounts of "some" others indicates it is a seduction and accounts of "some" others indicates that's not.

It's your opinion that it is based on your multiple experiences and accounts of others. My personal experience and accounts of those who were never seduced/love bombed by any therapists indicate otherwise. It's all opinions, not factual.

Structure of your relationship with your t was inherently wrong ( you aren't to be blamed), but it's not structure of every therapy for everyone who does therapy.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm trying to understand what you mean by seductive and manipulative, BudFox (I'm being genuine here). You can seduce someone and then give them exactly what they want, so the word "seductive" does not necessarily mean you have tricked someone or misled them. Do you just mean that it's extremely alluring because it offers things most people cannot turn down-- acceptance, validation, compassion?

And, manipulative-- because of the power dynamic?

Perhaps what it comes down to is this: We are offered something that feels like a real relationship and yet it is not quite. And that feels fundamentally dishonest to you (and, by the way, to me; I have a lot of problems with this in spite of having a very good relationship with my T). And that is an inherent problem with therapy, no matter how wonderful its benefits can sometimes be. Human beings did not evolve to have relationships that are non-reciprocal and asymmetric. (Reciprocity is so basic that even rats will ostracize other rats who fail to reciprocate in kind.) Pretty much the only way this can even happen to humans is when money is involved. If you consider hunter-gatherers you will not find any asymmetric or non-reciprocal relationships among the adults. It's just not natural.

But, having had some great benefits come out of my own therapy, I'm at a loss as to how to reconcile all this. I agree with others that warning potential clients about dependence or strong transference feels kind of off-putting and presumptuous. Maybe instead the informed consent material just needs to stress that a therapy relationship is unusual in its asymmetry of power and lack of reciprocity, such that most people will experience some discomfort, possibly severe discomfort.

What my own therapy feels like to me, though, is that my T and I both care about each other and we're both trying to do our best in spite of the bizarre framework. In some ways I know he doesn't like it either (e.g. when billing issues arise with a client he cares about a lot; he mentioned that once).

Another acquaintance who's a humanist therapist says she does feel like her clients are very similar to friends, but if they all want her to set aside an hour or two a week for each of them, she's either going to be homeless or they'll need to pay her, and that's just the sad fact of the matter.

For me the nonreciprocal-ness speaks directly to a need in me. Having been the victim of much abuse and betrayal the clear rules are important. There are no hidden messages j need to decode, no drama because I didn't anticipate a need, no fear of abandonment. I pay my bill, I get my T's time and attention. Simple and clear.

I HAVE plenty of emotionally reciprocal relationships. They haven't really gotten me any closer to healing.

As for the rest of it, the things some find distasteful about therapy are exactly the things I love about time with my T. I love her focused attention, her willingness to build me up, etc.

I suppose anything can be addictive. But I think.its evident that obsession develop in many close relationships, hence the need for PPOs etc

I think entering therapy in hopes of creating real life reciprocal relationship/friendship/romance is disaster waiting to happen. It doesn't suppose to be that.

I am not blaming vulnerable client and I think in that sense maybe a disclaimer should take place. As bizarre as it sounds maybe clients need to be warned that this will be a professional alliance when client will receive services in exchange of co pay/insurance coverage or full pay. Then maybe some clients will decide not to proceed or at least will be prepared.

I might not need such disclaimer but if some people do then why not. It could also protect therapists when clients want romantic encounter with them: "you've been warned".

Although it could open doors for more abuse from some unethical therapist. I think unethical therapist will find the way around such disclaimer but good t doesn't need such thing.

In our litigation prone society I wouldn't be surprised to see such disclaimer one day regardless of the outcome

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a good point, for many who have had destructive relationships maybe the therapy sort is just what's needed. I also have quite a few good reciprocal relationships (spouse, friends, parents) yet they didn't repair the damage that had been done to me the way that therapy has.

I do think that many clients have fears of abandonment, though. I'm glad that you don't suffer with that.

This isn't about my current T, but I did have a brief chat with a different therapist, who seemed to have went into caring, sharing, attaching mode immediately. It wasn't comforting to me though, just surprised and shocking.

I had a friend who used to throw cash on the (male) ts desk as he left - he often spoke of the transaction feeling like prostitution. Does the cash involved make us feel like we are not worthy of the attentions of such a wonderful person? My immediate defense is - i would be, i just wasnt raised in that class. That class where parents paid good attention to their kids and werent insane or foreign. Otherwise, sure id be hanging around with the normal people. So maybe a poll question? Have you risen above your roots? Are you ashamed of them? Stg like that. And how does that play into your feelings of shame or seduction in therapy?

mostlylurking: Yes, seductive as in extremely alluring and enticing, especially with clients in distress. And to take it a step further, there is a predatory aspect, profiting from this vulnerability, even in the absence of malicious intent. I think one can draw a straight line connecting vulnerability/desperation ---> seduction ----> dependency/obsession.

Manipulative… more than just power dynamic. The basic nature of it. The seduction is part of it. Also clients are encouraged to replace their worldview with the therapist's. It's ostensibly for the client's benefit, but god knows what impulses for gratification are driving the therapist. I think many therapists use their clients for their own therapy, to feel better or less alone or less broken. But it's covert.

As you said, it feels fundamentally dishonest. My therapist cared about me but only because I payed her, and played by her rules, and slotted into the expected role of inferior. The pretense was that she cared in some genuine way. Not only was that a lie, there was also no way for me to reality test it, given her evasions.

As for informed consent, I don't know what the biz should do. Not my problem. I just assert that seemingly many people get caught in a web of obsession or dependency that affects basic functioning, and the biz is largely silent about it, as it is with almost all other risks and adverse outcomes. A rhetorical question -- how many clients who ended up in one of these scenarios actually saw it coming?

In all respect, why haven't you reported it?? The complaint process is pretty straightforward unless you were to end up with criminal allegations/trial. But professional.violation at least in the,US isn't that complicated and the state the complaint is made in will protect your privacy unless there are criminal proceedings.

Then at least it would be a reported statistic/outcome plus the professional could receive sanction which might provide some closure.

If enough people reported adverse consequences, no matter how big the cover up or powerful the organization it will eventually come out. Look at the way the sex abuse issue us finally being exposed in the catholic church. Of course change is coming too late for many victims but the fact that they came forward with their experiences was what led to the exposure of the huge sex abuse cover up.

I'm all for reporting bad therapeutic experiences, but the problem is that so many of them are he-said-she-said situations. Therapists get disciplined for stuff that leaves a paper/electronic trail and/or has witnesses or multiple complainants. The Catholic Church scandal had internal documents proving a cover-up.

I think Bud's talking more about insidious harm - harm that no court of law or disciplinary board would want to touch. For example - sexually abusing a client is one thing. Seducing them is another.

There are levels of discipline though. There are criminal complaints like sexual abuse but at least in my state through the health department /bureau of licensing and regulatory affairs you can challenge any licensed health professional as failing in professional standards , causing harm, etc. Without it rising to the level.of criminal or professional malpractice. These cases are all investigated by the state. We recently had a psychologist here cited for false advertising,. They advertised they specialized in something they had no specialist qualifications or post degree training in.
So those cases DO get looked at and in medicine the LACK of a paper trail is generally an automatic violation.

Seducing a client falling in the same category as sexual abuse and it would be harder to prove of course , but maybe is worth trying to report?

I kind of don't understand. If a person was seduced by a therapist why not try going after that therapist rather than telling people that their therapy is seductive when it's not. Their therapy unfortunately was.

I don't get it. I think seducing vulnerable client is just as bad as abusing them. Telling people on the internet that their therapy is manipulation and seduction ( when it isn't) it's not going to stop real abusers from abusing their clients. Unless people start reporting.

That t who flirted with bud fox IMHO needs to be reported so at least it might be brought to attention even if she doesn't get truly punished. Trying to convince people that they are being abused by their therapists ( when they aren't) isn't going to stop real abusers. That flirting t is maybe after her next client while we are going in circular discussion about same things

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seduction without overt sexual relations would fall under professional misconduct. If overt sexual relations occur it becomes a criminal act,( clients are presumed to lack consent due to the relationship) not just a regulatory one. So they are quite different in that respect.

If I flirted with my students and tried to seduce them and someone filed a complaint it would be certainly investigated. Heck even if I didn't do it but someone filed a complaint, it would be investigated. I don't see how it's ok for a therapist go around flirt with clients. At least if she knows there is investigation in place, she'll think twice before doing it again ( referring to t who tried to seduce bud fox)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree but being reprimanded for professional misconduct is better than nothing. I meant it's the same from a moral stand point not legally

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not saying its OK, just that they would be different sorts of investigations.
Some people fear a criminal accusation will expose THEM and those victims don't report.
However a professional misconduct/license investigation is undertaken by the state and the complainant retains anonymity.
That makes that option seem less scary to some victims.

I should say at least in my state this is true

Totally agree

False advertising still has a paper trail. It could be proven that a) the psychologist was not qualified to say whatever, and b) that he said whatever regardless.

I would bet money that if Bud - and others here in similar situations - brought a complaint, it would be dismissed. Not even professional misconduct. Scarlett's case was dismissed even though she had evidence like emails. So a client should risk more harm to themselves as well as humiliation and be told what they think happened to them is nonsense?

I've read lots of complaints against therapists and board decisions in state databases for my own education and so far there is always a paper trail or witnesses in the cases of those disciplined or reprimanded. I can't see the cases that were dismissed, but I imagine many are of the he-said-she-said variety.

The onus should not be on a client to make a complaint in order to be allowed to criticize therapy and we shouldn't criticize anyone if they choose not to do so.

Yes it's same in my state

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh of course everyone can complain, I am not saying one shouldn't. I understand not wanting to report.

I once had a horrible internist whose neglect and dishonesty caused me some health problems. My parents wanted me to sue but I just didn't want to bother. He ended up being charged for something else (it was on the news but for anonymity reasons I can't say what that was, I couldn't believe it at the time!!!) so he got what he deserved. I did feel stupid that I didn't file a complaint or maybe even sue but it's on me.

I advised people to be careful reading test results themselves rather than relying on what someone reads to you and often recommend seek second opinion (which I thankfully did) but id never tell people their medical care is bogus or a sham or that doctors are out there to get them. It would look silly and pointless to me.

I would recommend people to be careful and pay attention. That's what I recommend with therapy as well. One needs to be careful so they don't end up with bad t or bad doctor or bad whoever else they hire

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk