[Trigger] Therapy as addiction

This was never the message that I got from my T. She always empowered me and encouraged my independence. I'm sorry that you had a bad experience, but you're really generalizing here.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I also found therapy extremely infantilizing. The mere act of me, an adult, seeking validation and encouragement from ascribed strong, wise authority figures was highly regressive. Their encouragement was performed and boilerplate as were the entire contrived relationships. These folks certainly were no more perceptive, intelligent or strong than me, yet here I was deferring to them. Yes, they said their treacly, practiced praise, but the overriding structure was regressive.

**This was my individual response, and I'm not speaking for anyone else. **

I agree. There are not a lot of attempts at understanding and compassion here. Just defending the profession which is really invalidating. I THOUGHT I had a good, decent therapist but it turned out very badly and damaged me in ways I would never have believed I could be damaged. It wasn't something i could see when I was in therapy. Only after. And therapy for bad therapy? Good luck with that. GOod luck with other therapists even believing you. Like here you get blamed for the "therapy failure." Honestly that turns me off therapy more than anything.

I will never view therapy as something mostly helpful. That is MY opinion.

I also think the damage can't often be seen until you're out of it.

I find therapy to be the opposite of infantilizing. For me it is (in part) about figuring out how my feelings and behaviors stem from childhood experience, so that I can make choices as an adult going forward.

And there is nothing infantilizing about admitting you've got a problem and trying to find a way to deal with it.

I've never heard that message stated explicitly either. It was just understood that there were roles to be played. This was true in every therapy relationship I've had. Even the briefest or most seemingly benign of these contained this kernel of dysfunction, and encouraged compliance and deferral to external authority, with dependency a likely next step in the progression.

The whole idea that the therapist can grant autonomy or empowerment seems to me a sign that, in fact, they hold all the power and the client is in a dependent state. That's been my experience and it's my take after consuming a bunch of material on the subject.

My therapists all masqueraded as powerful wizards with the expertise to know what they never witnessed and the precognition to explain the origins of what could never really be explained. And yes, they assumed "authority" over me, granting me praise, approval and answers, like it was theirs to gift me, in limited quantities of course. Unfortunately, I bought into what I now see is their carnival acts. At the time I was in awe.
**This is my experience. I can't speak for anyone else.**

I agree. TO ME it seems when someone says the therapist made them feel powerful or gave them power or allowed them power is just proof of where the true power lies: with the therapist. AND some therapists might not use this power harmfully, but many do. They do.

DISCLAIMER: EVERYTHING I SAY IS MY OPINION. LOL.

Isn't this a bit of an oxymoron though? The therapist is giving autonomy (aka independence) to the client yet you're saying the client is dependent on the therapist? And the therapist empowers (aka to have strength and control over) the client yet the therapist holds all the power?

Even if your idea holds true, wouldn't that be considered a good thing? If a client gains a sense of autonomy and empowerment from their therapist, it seems to me that would be a positive outcome for most people.

I sought help from therapy in a time of need and crisis. The result was a less happy life, and more misery and despair. After that I sought more help from therapists, in an even greater state of distress. Result...more misery still.

Fair? I find this ironic. People who've been harmed by incompetent or unstable therapists (or just therapy in general) seemingly have to walk on eggshells, lest they upset those for whom therapy has been an apparent success (also have to walk on eggshells with therapists, lest they get upset). Boggles the mind. I think those who've been screwed over by therapy, especially if it has been a repeating pattern, have every right to assert well-reasoned generalizations.

I guess what I'm saying is that this concept doesn't make any sense (to me) to begin with. How can some bestow autonomy on another? Seems to me once you've accepted that your autonomy or self esteem must be given by the therapist, you have entered into in a dependent state from which it will be difficult to escape.

Is there evidence of positive outcomes from this kind of process? And I wonder how often this works out well, versus how often it results in interminable therapy, with the therapist consolidating power.

In reality they can't, but psychologically I suppose it's possible. If a client goes to a T looking for help with this a T should say "I can't make you independent but I can help you take steps to become independent" or something like that. A lot of what is happening is about how the client perceives things, not necessarily how they really are.

Informed consent is already a professional component of practice. You asked what it would look like. Here is one resource for therapists; recommended examples are included:

(However, these statements really only offer basic information, but they also serve as a talking point to open the door for further discussion and can serve as a basis for clients' questions.)

http: //kspope.com/consent/

"Therapy also has potential emotional risks. Approaching feelings or thoughts that you have tried not to think about for a long time may be painful. Making changes in your beliefs or behaviors can be scary, and sometimes disruptive to the relationships you already have. You may find your relationship with me to be a source of strong feelings, some of them painful at times. It is important that you consider carefully whether these risks are worth the benefits to you of changing. Most people who take these risks find that therapy is helpful."

That is a cartoon version of informed consent. Little substance, mostly platitudes. Specific risks need to be elaborated. Maybe give actual or hypothetical examples. At least mention the risk of dependency.

I agree. And I think it would be weird to say "most people who take these risks find that therapy is helpful." How could a therapist know they're helpful to MOST people?

I agree, the "informed consent" doesn't begin to skim the risks. Powerful feelings? In my case, distorted thinking was more like it:
. Seeing the therapist as a parent/powerful wizard, all wise sage
.Seeing myself as sick, defective and beholden to an arbitrary authority.
. Seeing myself as a special, entitled victim whom the world should cater to because of my suffering.
.Complete disregard for others.
. Hypersensitivity to wounding and unfairness.
.Therapy becoming a substitute for life.
.Belief in magical rituals and otherworldly transformation.
. Seeing myself as more evolved and perceptive than those not in therapy.
.Seeing myself on a golden path to emotional cleansing and enlightenment.
.Being so caught in the process I practically was hallucinating.

And that's off the top of my head.

Absolutely. If you leave angry, then it doesn't register with the therapist. Ego threat! It's the client's fault. Situation dismissed. And certainly there is no possibility that therapy could have made a pre-existing condition worse.

If you leave quietly because you feel it isn't working and the T doesn't get it, then the T still doesn't know. Maybe some people get follow-up questionnaires but I never have.