[stopdog]

In a book by Ann France describing her therapy experience (Consuming Psychotherapy) she makes the following statements: “I am now not at all sure that vulnerable people should be exposed to psychotherapy. This implies that … most of those who need it may not be sufficiently resilient to benefit from it, given the strain it actually causes … psychotherapy … can be harmful, without there being any very clear way of knowing in advance whether this will happen … It can merely be the replay of past traumata … which leads to nothing … The dangers in such a perilous undertaking … provided the genesis of this book … it works best with the healthy”.

The quote comes from this guy who did not have a great experience with a therapist.
Therapy Consumer Guide - A Recent Experience in Psychotherapy

[atisketatasket]

Whatever "healthy" means (poor word choice there)...it would probably help if the therapist was healthy themselves.

The therapist in the blog post does not seem healthy to me.

[stopdog]

Originally Posted by atisketatasket

Whatever "healthy" means (poor word choice there)...it would probably help if the therapist was healthy themselves.

The therapist in the blog post does not seem healthy to me.

I do not believe therapists are, in general, a healthy lot. One hopes they can act healthy for the 50 minutes or whatever that one pays for -but I think that is the best that can be expected. And some can't even manage that.

[stopdog]

I have read the book but I don't really remember that much about it - just thought it was interesting to see this quote pulled out of the book by a guy whose own therapist sounded like a giant freak.

[unaluna]

Originally Posted by atisketatasket

Whatever "healthy" means (poor word choice there)...it would probably help if the therapist was healthy themselves.

The therapist in the blog post does not seem healthy to me.

She couldnt handle the truth!

Wearing a shirt with the word passion all over it? Weird.

[koru_kiwi]

Originally Posted by stopdog

In a book by Ann France describing her therapy experience (Consuming Psychotherapy) she makes the following statements: “I am now not at all sure that vulnerable people should be exposed to psychotherapy. This implies that … most of those who need it may not be sufficiently resilient to benefit from it, given the strain it actually causes … psychotherapy … can be harmful, without there being any very clear way of knowing in advance whether this will happen … It can merely be the replay of past traumata … which leads to nothing …”.

i agree...this absolutely was my experince of therapy...overall therapy felt like a complete replay and repeat of my early childhood traumas and i was going no where with it except in circles...felt like i was always chasing my tail. i often left sessions in a state of being triggered. it wasn't until i calmed my underlying anxieties and dysregulation that i was able to get any gains from therapy. i chose to try neurofeedback to calm my anxieties, and it was quite successful for me. once i calmed my emotional dysregulation i could start to really focus and find a benefit from doing therapy (psychodynamic). 15 months after starting NFB, i was 'healthy enough' to terminate with my T of almost 6 years. i feel pretty damn good and content with life now and have no desire to ever to return to therapy.

[here today]

The topic of this thread seems very important to me.

I’m not going to take the time to try to get current quotes to back up what has been decades of reading about psychology and psychotherapy on my part. I’ll just post some thoughts of what I remember that seem relevant. Please feel free to add to or disagree with any of it.

1. Freud identified people with “character disorders”, now “personality disorders” and said they were “unanalyzable”.

2. In contrast to that, when I went into a hospital at 15 (55 years ago) for anorexia nervosa, the prevailing view was that “anything you are willing to face you can overcome”. This does not seem to have been exactly true in my case.

3. If you have dissociation, or dissociated parts, then no matter how much your “normal” self is willing to look at stuff, you may not be able to find it.

4. The dissociated stuff is frequently in a “dark”, split off state or space. When activated it very much NOT resilient. Doesn’t matter what you call it, “transference” or whatever. It is what it is and if/when therapists can’t tolerate it, it’s “doomsday” all over again.

5. As I mentioned in an earlier post, it’s kind of like I had scabs over some of that stuff but not a real “psychological skin”. Let’s say, that because of underlying trauma, similar to an infection, the skin couldn’t heal. Then in therapy the scabs get picked off, trying to let air into to the underlying pathology, but then new pathology from the therapist can get in, too. This is not just re-traumatizing, but also NEW trauma.

[skeksi]

Changed my mind about posting.

[BudFox]

Originally Posted by stopdog

In a book by Ann France describing her therapy experience (Consuming Psychotherapy) she makes the following statements: “I am now not at all sure that vulnerable people should be exposed to psychotherapy. This implies that … most of those who need it may not be sufficiently resilient to benefit from it, given the strain it actually causes … psychotherapy … can be harmful, without there being any very clear way of knowing in advance whether this will happen … It can merely be the replay of past traumata … which leads to nothing … The dangers in such a perilous undertaking … provided the genesis of this book … it works best with the healthy”.

That sums up my experience well. It provided no relief but added all kinds of strain and stress and magnified all the problems I started with, including declining health. It's an important point, that therapy itself causes huge strain. This is usually explained away as part of the "work".

And it did replay and magnify past miseries. And yes there was no way to know in advance what would happen, notwithstanding all the nonsense they vomit out about evidence-based this or that.

It was a pointless exercise that ended in a fireball.

I reject the idea that some people need it.

Never heard of the book, will try to get a copy on amazon.

[koru_kiwi]

Originally Posted by here today

As I mentioned in an earlier post, it’s kind of like I had scabs over some of that stuff but not a real “psychological skin”. Let’s say, that because of underlying trauma, similar to an infection, the skin couldn’t heal. Then in therapy the scabs get picked off, trying to let air into to the underlying pathology, but then new pathology from the therapist can get in, too. This is not just re-traumatizing, but also NEW trauma.

this is an excellent metaphor that i definilty relate too.

i went to therapy to address the effects of both the developmental trauma and childhood sexual abuse. instead of learning ways to cope and heal from those traumas, eventually the entire process/focus of therapy became all about the therapy....the relationship with my ex-T and many of his agendas. it was as if the truama from the CSA and developmental truama was 'dulled down' and almost entirely engulfed and overshadowed by this new truama of therapy it's self.

not sure if i am explaining it that well, nor am i sure one would really understand it if they have not experienced it, but when i came to realise that many of my thoughts (quite obsessive at times) were becoming about my T and therapy, i had spiraled to my lowest point ever in life and knew if i was going to survive therapy (and life for that matter) that i had to find a new way (better way) of moving forward. talk therapy was not going to provide that level of healing for me at that time.