[BudFox]

Therapy is variously compared to medicine, art, religion, cults, prostitution. But I think the closest analog might be drug pushing.

I can imagine few things that rival the addictive potential of therapy -- lavishing of attention and empathy, unconditional acceptance and validation, sometimes even love (!) openly declared, possibly physical touch, the soothing of wounds.

Some clients are almost certain to become addicts very quickly.

It's also a rather cruel and dangerous addiction because of the dosing. A very small dose is given (hour or two), then it's withheld for the rest of the week, thus ensuring a sort of recurring withdrawal syndrome… to say nothing of the withdrawal nightmare when the thing ends completely. In my experience, this forced withdrawal threatens both bodily health and mental health.

Shouldn't therapists warn clients of this addictive potential? Doctors at least give a passing warning before drugging the patient.

[atisketatasket]

I did a totally unscientific poll on this a few months back: Is therapy addictive?

What struck me is that a majority said they found therapy addictive for one reason or another, and a plurality of those said it was because of their therapist.

See, here's the thing: drug pushers don't warn drug users of the dangers of drugs, for obvious reasons. Why should therapists not serve their own self-interest and advertise their products without a surgeon general's warning? You're a) arguing that therapy is dangerous and cruel, and then b) you ask shouldn't therapists warn clients? But b does not logically follow a. The same people who take advantage of a will not also do b unless forced.

I think any such warning would have to be imposed by an outside force: the government or economic self-interest (enough lawsuits will ensure that therapists be forced to carry malpractice insurance). And most of what goes on in a therapy session, barring physical or sexual or other legally prohibited misbehavior, is much too ambiguous, vague, and he-said-she-said to be of much use in a lawsuit.

[rainbow8]

I agree with you this time, BudFox. I always thought of myself as addicted to my Ts. I've never been a drinker or a drug user, but the feelings I've gotten from therapy seem to me on a par with what a "high" would feel like. I keep going back for my fix every week. I do think Ts should explain that this may happen at a client's first session, or maybe before. Once I felt that connection to my first T, I was hooked, and it's been going on for me over 20 years.

On the other hand, I know that therapy is not an addiction for everyone. I think it happens mostly with clients who have attachment problems to begin with, and maybe most who have BPD. I'm not sure how to set up a poll but has anyone done one, comparing diagnosis to feeling addicted or overly attached to their T?

I became addicted to unavailable people before I ever began therapy so I've been trying to discover why, and what to do something about it. So it's not surprising that it happened in therapy too. I have worked on other problems in my life in spite of the addiction aspect, and I know I have changed for the better. It's not black or white. When I'm doing productive things in my life, and feel like I have a secure connection to my T, I don't feel like I'm just going for my "fix." But there is a lot of validity, unfortunately, in your post, if I am to be honest about it.

[BudFox]

ATAT: Never saw your poll. I definitely would have participated. I will check it out.

I don't disagree with your logic. It's part of the larger conflict of interest around informed consent. Anything a therapist says about adverse effects might be bad for business. I can understand why a therapist might avoid such disclosures, out of self-interest, but that means they are forgoing fundamental ethical practice in favor of profit.

With drug pushers there is no pretense to reputable or ethical behavior. Therapists, however, claim to be paragons of ethical behavior. If they are concealing things like the addictive potential of their service, seems quite the deception.

[clairelisbeth]

But what is a therapist supposed to say? "Nice to meet you. By the way, you might get addicted to me?" I'm not someone who feels addicted to their therapist (although I do have some level of healthy attachment and love to her and for her), so maybe I don't fully understand, but if my therapist said something like that right off the bat, I would have thought she was being pretty presumptuous. I wouldn't have stayed, but not because I would have been afraid of getting addicted-because I would have thought she was a conceited d*ck.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SkyscraperMeow]

Given that attachment and dependence are frequent therapy outcomes (and are actually not only encouraged, but engineered in a lot of therapy) I think a therapist should be able to give an even handed warning of that.

Would he or she have to say something as ridiculous and strawmannish as "You might get addicted to me?" No.

But saying "part of the work involves emotional attachment and sometimes, feelings of dependence. Some clients find these feelings difficult to sit with," would be reasonable fair warning, and a good place to start a discussion on such matters.

(I've also seen 'healthy' attachment turn into a complete nightmare on this board way too many times to take any kind of attachment to a therapist as a healthy thing.)

[rainbow8]

Originally Posted by clairelisbeth

But what is a therapist supposed to say? "Nice to meet you. By the way, you might get addicted to me?" I'm not someone who feels addicted to their therapist (although I do have some level of healthy attachment and love to her and for her), so maybe I don't fully understand, but if my therapist said something like that right off the bat, I would have thought she was being pretty presumptuous. I wouldn't have stayed, but not because I would have been afraid of getting addicted-because I would have thought she was a conceited d*ck.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're right about that! I suppose it could be in a paper, the kind you get with meds, that tells you every side effect imaginable. At least there would be a warning, except most people don't read the small print.

[koru_kiwi]

Originally Posted by unaluna

Some people are addicted to housecleaning. Or running.

I think its called personal responsibility. Get help.

if there were ever a 12 step program for 'getting over your T and therapy', sign me up!

Hmmm:

"the state of being enslaved to a habit or practice or to something that is psychologically or physically habit-forming, as narcotics, to such an extent that its cessation causes severe trauma."

Seems to fit for some, maybe a lot of people.

[Petra5ed]

I don't think I would call it addictive, although my therapist did say I was treating him like a drug. Here's my argument though:

- What kind of addiction involves an activity you only do for one or two hours a week at most?
- Seeking connection is a fundamental part of human nature, those of us who are "hooked" on our therapists are normally seeking just that. Can we really call human nature "addiction"?

[BudFox]

Originally Posted by clairelisbeth

But what is a therapist supposed to say? "Nice to meet you. By the way, you might get addicted to me?" I'm not someone who feels addicted to their therapist (although I do have some level of healthy attachment and love to her and for her), so maybe I don't fully understand, but if my therapist said something like that right off the bat, I would have thought she was being pretty presumptuous. I wouldn't have stayed, but not because I would have been afraid of getting addicted-because I would have thought she was a conceited d*ck.

How about: "Because the therapist is playing the role of selfless and empathic and intensely attuned caregiver, you might find that therapy provokes deep and powerful needs. As a result you might develop strong attachment impulses that could even cross over into dependency or addictive clinging or preoccupation."

Anyway, I'm not expecting therapists to say this. My point is that therapy is an addictive process but is never acknowledged as such. And therapists are analogous to drug pushers in some ways, in that their behavior draws people into dependency from which it can be hard to escape, and for which they must pay.

[Argonautomobile]

I actually think it's as apt an analogy as any other I've read. Still, the hardcore junkie in me almost wants to laugh.

I've never wanted to go to therapy as badly as I've craved a line, never had post-therapy blues worse than a coke comedown, never bankrupted myself paying for therapy, or showed up at my T's door offering sexual favors for an extra session.

Therapy was never nearly sufficiently rewarding to be worth all that, for me. I literally can't imagine a therapeutic encounter better than an amphetamine high. Is it possible for other people to make you feel that good? With their words and their love and their empathy?

Sounds like a ****ing nightmare. Like hell.

[BudFox]

Originally Posted by Petra5ed

- What kind of addiction involves an activity you only do for one or two hours a week at most?

A cruel one, as I said. I gather that many clients, given the opportunity, would up their dosage.

Originally Posted by Petra5ed

- Seeking connection is a fundamental part of human nature, those of us who are "hooked" on our therapists are normally seeking just that. Can we really call human nature "addiction"?

I don't fault the seeking. I did it too. I'm just suggesting that what results looks and feels a lot like addiction to me, with all that that implies.

The trouble with addiction is it's too a thing. You avoid relationships with people. Therapy could be said to be the cure for addiction. But I'm only only an ole ex addict that has no idea what she's taking about....

[stopdog]

I think therapists should give more information and warnings about how therapy works and its pitfalls. I do think they should warn that some people get seemingly addicted or painfully (or whatever word works for you here) to the therapist or the therapy experience and that it can result in harm. I think informed consent is grossly underplayed by therapists.

As for addiction - I think for some people it can have an aspect of it. I would not go so far as to say I think it is built in.

I remember when I first went to T2 and I described therapy with T1 as addictive. He seemed concerned that I found it that way. It certainly hasn't developed into an addiction with T2. While I have become somewhat attached, I don't want more sessions than I have and I don't feel I'd fall apart if I had to stop seeing him (though I would seek further therapy as I'm not done yet).
So in my experience, the difference between addictive and non-addictive therapy seems to be the competence of the therapist.

[Waterbear]

Maybe not just the competence but the dynamics of the relationship? I only say this because I believe my old T to be very competent and yet I still had the same thoughts as you describe. I craved her. I wasn't in it long enough to tell but I do think that it could still have worked or maybe it would have gone horribly wrong. Who knows. I think the competence comes in to it when the T can see what is happening and, for the benefit of the client, says that enough is enough, but then that is seen as abandonment and the T gets slammed for it. Maybe that is because it isn't handled well enough.

I would like to think that if it had continued with old T, if I had become addicted and not seen any improvement, then she would have explained to me what was happening between us, why it may not be helpful for me and would have helped me to find someone who could have better helped me. I don't know, its all irrelevant really anyway. Sorry, incoherent thoughts and contradictions in my head.

Therapy is indeed a strange beast and I am sure that it doesn't always help.

[atisketatasket]

Originally Posted by Petra5ed

- What kind of addiction involves an activity you only do for one or two hours a week at most?
- Seeking connection is a fundamental part of human nature, those of us who are "hooked" on our therapists are normally seeking just that. Can we really call human nature "addiction"?

- I think it's more like some clients think about their therapists a lot outside of session and yearn for closeness or more sessions or whatever. It's like maybe you can only afford to gamble once a week, but if the rest if the week builds up to that and you think about it and anticipate it all the time, you're still addicted to gambling. The anticipation is more a sign of addiction than attending sessions themselves.
- I think the addictive nature comes in because a client wants more connection to this one specific person.

Originally Posted by Waterbear

Maybe not just the competence but the dynamics of the relationship? I only say this because I believe my old T to be very competent and yet I still had the same thoughts as you describe. I craved her. I wasn't in it long enough to tell but I do think that it could still have worked or maybe it would have gone horribly wrong. Who knows. I think the competence comes in to it when the T can see what is happening and, for the benefit of the client, says that enough is enough, but then that is seen as abandonment and the T gets slammed for it. Maybe that is because it isn't handled well enough.

I would like to think that if it had continued with old T, if I had become addicted and not seen any improvement, then she would have explained to me what was happening between us, why it may not be helpful for me and would have helped me to find someone who could have better helped me. I don't know, its all irrelevant really anyway. Sorry, incoherent thoughts and contradictions in my head.

Therapy is indeed a strange beast and I am sure that it doesn't always help.

I think that could very well be true, Waterbear. All human relationships have the potential to develop in an intense way, and this can be magnified in the therapeutic relationship. In my case I suppose you might say his incompetence didn't necessarily cause the addictive feelings, but perhaps his inability to contain them was where the additivity became harmful.

I commented on another thread on the addictive nature of therapy, saying that I did not find it addictive. That was quite superficial based on my experiences, actually, and I would not say the same now. I believe that most human beings develop at least one addiction throughout life, it's inherent to human nature and how our brains are wired. I also believe that if we have to have one, in many cases therapy (or reading/talking about therapy) is a better option than, say, drugs or alcohol... although this is not absolute. I've struggled with substance addiction pretty seriously. One reason why I sought therapy in the first place and it's been only moderately helpful with that particular problem; I think that the way therapy works with it's frequency and availability is just not enough to battle a serious addiction for most people. It can be one helpful element though for some people, including that sometimes we trade the more harmful addiction with therapy or the relationship.

But going back to the original question, the major defining characteristic of addiction is compulsive engagement despite adverse consequences. Another one is denial at least initially. In this context, I would say that if someone gets so obsessed with therapy or thoughts about therapy that it interferes with other important components of life in a negative way and cannot get out of the cycle, then it reaches the criterion of an addiction. I would say the same goes for reading/talking about it. For example, if one is so preoccupied with the topic that they spend more time than what's good and balanced here on PC, for example, to discuss it, then the preoccupation is probably addictive whether we actually like the whole institution of therapy itself or not. I definitely had problems getting addicted to online message boards myself... ironically, one was an addiction forum. It took me a long and hard time to finally detach from it and did not succeed at first effort. I believe that almost anything can become addictive if done in excess and therapy definitely has that potential in many ways for many people.

I sometimes can tell those who are addicted or too dependent can't really see the damage.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

What's really creepy to me is how some who are addicted begin to think they are therapists themselves. Lol.

[BlessedRhiannon]

Originally Posted by SkyscraperMeow

But saying "part of the work involves emotional attachment and sometimes, feelings of dependence. Some clients find these feelings difficult to sit with," would be reasonable fair warning, and a good place to start a discussion on such matters.

Actually, my T has something very similar to what you suggested in her informed consent statement that she has all clients sign before they begin seeing her.

[here today]

I think it definitely could apply to me. Support groups IRL and online have helped me to quit, maybe. Provided support and some "resocialization", which is what I felt I needed more than "reparenting".

In other areas of my life I had a lot of "personal responsibility". People are in a world with other people, though, I didn't manage that so well, knew that I didn't, but also didn't know how to do any better - despite taking the personal responsibility to look for "help", read self-help books, spiritual approaches, etc.

[here today]

One thing good that my current, or maybe "last", T did was to help with psychological fragmentation that made it impossible for me to take adult responsibility for disconnected parts. If you haven't had that experience then maybe you can't understand that.