Need help explaining some things to my T

The dishonesty in my view is really in not taking responsibility and not acknowledging that it's his issues impacting on the relationship here. I'm not responding beyond that clarification because I'm not sure how helpful it is for LT.

I didn't say that him admitting to feeling uncomfortable with the client's talking about her transference is dishonest. What I said is that him not taking responsibility for the fact that HIS feelings prevent him from doing his work. It's okay for him to say that he is uncomfortable with what she is asking him to do, but it's his professional/ethical duty to acknowledge IMMEDIATELY that his feelings pose a problem for their future work together. As it was mentioned before, LT's therapy is not about her T's feelings and needs but about LT's feelings and needs that, at the moment, could not be fulfilled. If the T is uncomfortable doing what LT asks him to do, the only honest thing for him to do in this case is to flatly refuse to fulfill her request instead of playing a game of "I need to think about it". If he just refused, she wouldn't have a false hope that he might give her what she needs, which he clearly can't and won't. Then she'd at least have a choice of what to do about it.

Now, she is taking it upon herself to "fix" it. She makes it entirely her responsibility to make therapy work for her because he is not taking responsibility for his own choices.

This has nothing to do with the situation we are discussing here. Here we are talking about a professional relationship where the feelings of a professional aren't allowed the same space they are allowed in other relationships. For a therapist, there is no right to follow a "free flow" of their feelings and to allow their feelings and their needs to occupy much space in therapy as it happens in other relationships. In other relationships people don't have a duty to make the well being of the other person a priority, but in certain professions a practitioner has this duty. A therapist is supposed to base their actions on the merits of professional and ethical standards, not just on how they feel at the moment. If, at the moment, the therapist's feelings don't allow him to do the work he is supposed to do, his ethical responsibility to the client is to honestly admit that he is not able to continue the work the way she needs it to continue.

I am not going to speak for LT. I assume, she is capable of speaking for herself. And IF she needs him to tell her where he's uncomfortable and why, that's exactly what he is not doing, and that's exactly what I call dishonest.

As I said, I don't think him telling her he is uncomfortable was dishonest. What was dishonest was not to explain why he was uncomfortable and to give her a false hope that he might be able to do what she wants by promising to "think about it" instead of simply refusing to do it. This left her feel that she has some control over this situation and that if she, somehow, is able to "explain" her needs to him better, that would make him "understand", would change his feelings and he'd do what she wants him to do. As I said in my previous post, no amount of "splaining" would make the guy do what he clearly doesn't want to do, but if he continues to be dishonest, I bet LT would continue to feel responsible for how therapy goes, which she absolutely should not because she has no responsibility in this whatsoever.

And, by the way, "honesty" doesn't have to be insulting and shaming. Telling someone that their feelings are "creepy" is a genuinely shaming and hurtful comment to make, ESPECIALLY for a therapist. This has nothing to do with "honestly" but with a total lack of empathy and basic respect.

I liked his saying he "needed to think about it." This to me means, he is not going by just his gut feelings, but by what is transpiring in the room, now that he knows. He SAYS he wasnt aware of things. SHE says she thought boundaries were dropping. THEY need to use their words, both of them!

Eta - technically im just responding to the "dishonest" argument, so im still bowed out, right?

People seem very animated about this topic.

I still cant wrap my mind around, she interfered with her mc watching football. Like, thats unamerican! Even i accept that, and its really not part of my culture. Maybe i should start a poll on that.

Eta - and if i wait long enough, maybe someone else will. Im just going to embrace being a horrible person.

This is my opinion as well. I also don't think it is dishonest to first show interest in something and then realize on the go that it's not something one is comfortable with and/or has the skills, or even true interest, to do in that depth. This is how we all learn: we get interested in something new that is initially unfamiliar, try it making the assumption that it will indeed be interesting, then make more accurate action-based assessment and conclusions based on "data" (actual experience). Then adjust interest, intention and approach if necessary.

On the shaming issue - that is also subjective, something that sounds judgmental and shaming for one person may not feel that way at all for another or they might not mind the criticism, joking, whatever. (This is where I sometimes run into conflicts with people, for example.) Why feedback is so important. I think what is dismissive is if someone ignores and continues to judge/shame/whatever the other still after clear feedback. If a therapist does that, I think it is especially bad and not the sign of great skill or even emotional intelligence.

As for a therapist not acknowledging that their feelings/issues create a barrier or conflict - from reading this forum, that seems very common unfortunately. Of course if they are not aware of the cause of the problem, there is nothing to acknowledge and take responsibility for, but that does not make the problem go away. Probably the choices he makes on how he works and on what kind of client issues, modality etc already has that factor integrated that he avoids dealing with areas too deeply where his own issues interfere. I personally don't see that as a problem, everyone makes those kinds of career choices. But clearly promising something and then not following up or not taking responsibility for the quality and the consequences of the follow-up is poor practice and can be damaging on the other people participating. I would not consider that dishonest per se, more irresponsible. In that case, I always feel that a T terminating based on acknowledging their lack of ability/skill is more responsible than continuing to make promises, collect money, and not doing their job or doing it destructively. But that's for another discussion.

In mom speak, "I'll think about it" usually means no.

LOL! That's true

A lot of people seem quite invested in/affected by LT's approach to therapy. It's rather curious.

Yes, I'm not entirely sure what to make of it at times...

I think it's the level of detail in LT's posts and the way she so compellingly describes her feelings and her therapeutic relationships. I think a lot of us feel like we're a fly on the wall in her sessions, which seems to naturally lead to fascination and emotional investment.

I also think this current issue is a fascinating one because it isn't totally clear-cut, at least not to me. I do know what I would do in this situation (I'd be out the door at the word "creepy"), but that's based on the difference between what my therapy is like and what LT's therapy is like. I don't think she has an objectively bad therapist, but I do think there is a crucial question here of how close the "fit" needs to be for therapy to be successful. Is this exactly what she needs? Is it the exact opposite of what she needs? I can't say for sure, but I'm trying to work within her framework of not wanting to leave this T since that was what she expressed in the first post of the thread.

This is nothing about you personally, so no reason to feel special (just a joke).

People on this forum have felt strongly about many therapy stories and many posts, not just yours. That's what people do naturally. We all tend to feel strongly about certain topics/issues, that's all. Being emotionally triggered by something or having a strong opinion about something doesn't necessarily mean one is personally invested in what OP is doing.

I do feel strongly about what your T is doing and I do have a strong opinion about it. But I am not emotionally invested in your personal approach to therapy and your personal choices. I don't care what you decide to do about your therapy and your T. It's your life, not mine.

Thank you. This is a very nice and much more eloquent way to describe the situation than my crude, "straight shooter" approach. I wish I was that articulate and eloquent.

I am also staying withing the framework of her not wanting to leave this T. I never said or implied that she needed to do so. Apart from respecting her wishes, I genuinely have no idea whether she needs to do it or not. Even if she didn't ask people to refrain from advising on that, I would refrain simply because I am in no position to offer such advice. I don't attend her sessions, I don't generally read her therapy stories (sorry, it is what it is) and I don't know how her T would describe the same situation, which is to say I don't know the other side of the story. So, I have very little information to judge her T as either objectively "bad" or objectively "good".

I am only responding to the SPECIFIC information she presented in her OP. My opinion is not about the T as a professional in general, but about his SPECIFIC actions, as she described them in her OP.

I can easily imagine the same fascination by your therapist, LT. May well be why he ventured into this whole transference stuff even despite the discomfort. I can also imagine him feeling a bit intimidated at times by the depth and details of your feelings and reactions and willingness to share them.

Hm, interesting point. He has commented a few times that I seem to know more about certain therapy things than he does. And he said early on that he was concerned that I'm probably smarter than he is. He does seem a bit bewildered by my reactions to things but also almost...not sure if fascinated is the right word, but something like that. Intrigued, maybe? Like he wants to understand, but struggles to at times. The fact that he seems to be really trying to understand is a big part of why I'm continuing to work with him. He seems invested. He's said before that he gets the sense he's like a puzzle to me. I think I may be the same for him, in a way.

And if you were would it make you feel special?

I think it's common on PC threads for detached--or theoretical--interest to be confused with personal investment. This can set up a paradigm within which to dismiss views one doesn't agree with as posters or Ts responding out of "their issues." I think it's a kind of defense aimed at controlling the impact of feedback more than an accurate assessment of anyone's intentions.

When a T says that he "wants to think about X" before responding, I think the most neutral response of taking the words at face value until proven otherwise can be a less complicated reaction.

Yes, intrigued is a better word I think. I think the challenge for him perhaps is not really understanding the whole thing, more participating in it directly? Which he has to, obviously.

I said earlier that I relate to some of the things he says and does and how, based on your posts, and that you two may have differences in perception, thinking and emotional style, I was also remembering how I tend to be very curious (intrigued!) about the unknown and unfamiliar. Very drawn to novelty, not always exactly in a wise way and taking big risks. There is also an element of being motivated by the challenge. Of course it can also feel scary and a reaction to that fear can be stopping to engage and avoidance, or cycles of push/pull.

Good advice for life outside of PC and therapy, too.

Also, it's the role of a T (and a client is on a similar learning curve) to be reflective--to be a participant/observer. A lag time between observation and participation is not necessarily a bad thing.

I can't recall if I ended up responding to that post, but I found it to be very helpful to get a different perspective.

Oh! Okay, i totally didnt take it that way. Its something my own t has said to me and then has gotten back to me on stuff.

Eta - i went thru the same stuff, in my past, with teachers, with previous ts, with a lot, so im reliving my own past here. I feel like im seeing my own car go thru the car wash and im watching thru the observation window. You know, where you get out of the car and watch it go thru?

My thought reading this thread LT is how hard you have work to teach this man something about attachment. Not all T's work on attachment and that's fine, but it sounds like this is a really important thing for you (as it is for me). He doesn't sound harmful or abusive but sort of lacking in skill in an area that is of key interest and importance to you.

I have 3 questions when I read this:

1) does he have amazing compensatory skills in other key areas that are really important and helpful to you?

2) is it worth your time and money to train your therapist to develop what some would consider to be basic therapy skills so that he can work with you on what clearly sounds like your main issue?

3) what is the risk of harm to you in working on such a deep issue with a therapist who is so far outside his comfort zone?

On the other hand...

As I have mentioned in other places, attachment is my hardest, most intense issue. I need a therapist who is rock solid in this area. But it sounds like you are A LOT more able to chitchat about your attachment needs and challenge your T and tell him if you feel shamed than I can. So maybe this opportunity to articulate and advocate for your needs with a willing and interested person is in itself therapeutic for you.

Maybe it's a corrective emotional experience with a person who is skilled enough to be safe but genuinely uninformed enough that you need to spell things out, and it is the spelling out that is corrective?

If that is true, then I think you DON'T actually need any help explaining this to him. I think you are doing a fantastic job and whether he ends up getting you is secondary. In my opinion, as satisfying and warm a feeling as it is to be understood, one's therapy cannot be about the pursuit of the therapist's aha! moment. Maybe your therapy is about understanding and practicing articulating your attachment needs so that you can ultimately do that in your non-therapy relationships. Yes?

That's a good question. Yes, I feel he does. I feel like I was making good progress with him--much more than with ex-T--which is what made me want to keep trying.

Also a good thing to consider...sometimes I think he should be paying me for providing him with continuing education!

Definitely a risk...but then, I think how ex-MC *is* psychodynamically trained and comfortable working with transference and...where did that get me? Yes, it was in the context of marriage counseling, so I couldn't work on it the same way, but...I could see where some of the same storyline would have played out if I'd been in individual therapy with him. Because he seemed to encourage the attachment and transference and dependence (until...suddenly he didn't). So maybe I do need a T who does NOT encourage that...

Yes, this rings true for me. It's a way for me to practice speaking up and advocating for my needs. And telling someone that they upset me in a "safer" environment than outside relationships. Note that I definitely was not this comfortable advocating for my needs in the past, including with ex-T and ex-MC (aside from closer to the end with him). I really think my current T is empowering me in some ways, making me feel like I do deserve certain things and to speak up for them (see: one of his strengths).

Thanks--you're right about it not just being looking for the aha moment. I guess really, it's more about the client's aha moments... I think part of why I was so attached to ex-MC was because I felt so incredibly understood by him...except then in the end it didn't seem I was so understood at all. Or at least not when it was really important. Plus he was more likely to say "Here's what I think is going on with you. This is something coming from childhood," like if I was upset with him about something. When...sometimes it was just something in the present. So he tried to explain me, which kept me from having to understand and explain myself (hope that makes sense!)

So maybe I do puzzle current T a bit (or a lot!) and maybe he's never going to fully understand me. Maybe...explaining myself to him will enable me to better understand myself and thus potentially explain myself to others? I made a comment to H last night about how at the end of yesterday's session, T was saying how he thought it went well, what did I think. I said I thought it went well, too, then I started crying. He was like, "Wait, you just said it went well, why are you crying?" I said out of relief maybe? I shared that with H, saying I know I can be confusing with stuff like that, and he agreed. So maybe by better understanding my reactions (and needs) with T, it can help me in my marriage (and other relationships).

Reposting more relevant parts of from In Session Today as an update on this thread from yesterday's session:
Part 1 of 2 (to keep this from being insanely long): I said I still felt the need to discuss some of the stuff from last week. He said OK. I started crying and pulled out an e-mail I'd written but hadn't sent. I said I wasn't sure if I should let him read it or just read parts of it to him myself. He said up to me. I said I wanted to skim it really quick. Did that and nervously handed him to read, saying the handwritten notes on the bottom probably wouldn't make any sense without my explaining them. I sat there awkwardly while he read it.

Here's what it said (will continue actual session in part 2):
"I'm still upset that I feel you've been deceitful to me over the past 8 months. That I asked you numerous times if you'd feel comfortable working with transference if it developed, and you always said yes. But now you're saying it would be "unhealthy" and expressing your lack of comfort for it. So...how will I know whether to trust you in the future? It almost feels like you just said "sure, I'll be OK with it," hoping it wouldn't develop and you wouldn't have to deal with it. Which was doing a disservice to me.

Now, if this is a case where you *thought* you would be comfortable, but now, faced with evidence of it, like the stone thing, you're less sure. In which case, tell me that.

And I'm struggling with the "try to be more comfortable" thing. I appreciate that you're trying, but I still feel like it will make me reluctant to share, which I feel defeats the purpose of therapy.

Can I ask what makes you uncomfortable? Is it a case where you feel you're doing/have done something wrong in handling me, and it's about that? Or you're concerned you won't handle it correctly going forward? In other words, more professional sort of discomfort? Or is this more on a personal level, like you just don't like the idea of anyone, aside from you family, being attached to you?

I guess...are you more concerned about it affecting me or affecting you is sort of the difference, I think?

I feel like part of why I pay you is to keep your stuff generally out of the room. Otherwise...how is this much different from me being friends with someone who happens to have a psychology degree? Where I have to worry about their feelings and comfort, too?

Yes, I get that sharing some of your reactions could help me therapeutically. But...saying you're uncomfortable when I express any sort of transference/attachment...well, that comes back to the judgment sort of thing that you don't seem to understand. I feel like you're pathologizing me. It makes me want to go back to not sharing feelings/thoughts with people. Which, yeah, OK, maybe in some cases I shouldn't, but in other cases I should.

I don't know...I'm not sure how to make all of this make sense to you. And I'm not so much asking you to agree with me on all this, just to understand, to validate me.

I just keep thinking I want to go back and never have told you about the stone. Or maybe that I'd never even asked for one, because it made me have delusions that you were OK with things when you weren't."

At the bottom, I'd handwritten (because I hadn't intended to hand it to him):
"Not romantic love"
"Keeping me from discussing things--dream"
"Feel I have to consider your 'comfort' now"

(Part 2 below)