[NP_Complete]

Originally Posted by LonesomeTonight

T (a few hours later):
"Goodness, [LT] - I'm so sorry that you're feeling so badly! You are being very hard on yourself, and taking a very self-critical and overly negative line of thinking. Everyone has things to work on and areas that need improvement, and for you one of those areas is with boundaries. Hopefully you can appreciate that this was not a very significant boundary to cross - to the point where I'm not even sure of how to effectively articulate how or in what way my feelings make rational sense! I appreciate your willingness to have returned the stone, and I'm sorry that the process has ended up feeling shameful. I don't see you as any of the negative words you called yourself in your email.

If you want to talk sooner, I have an opening tomorrow, Friday, in the afternoon."

I can see where some of your discomfort lies in this response. I think overall it seems reassuring and conveys that he doesn't think poorly of you. But I don't think email is a good place to tell you that he thinks you have issues with boundaries. And his comment about appreciating your willingness to return the stone seems kind of awkward to me. He was uncomfortable with you keeping that stone once he decided he knew how you were using it. Almost like Gollum with the ring.

Personally, I think I would want to take some time to think this through and not go Friday, but you seem really good at confronting things head-on. I'm sure whatever you decide will be the right thing.

[DP_2017]

Originally Posted by NP_Complete

Personally, I think I would want to take some time to think this through and not go Friday. I'm sure whatever you decide will be the right thing.

I agree with that.

I just picture another bad session and you having to sit on it until Monday, it seems better to just hold off until Monday, you can alway email if you really need to.

[LonesomeTonight]

Originally Posted by NP_Complete

I can see where some of your discomfort lies in this response. I think overall it seems reassuring and conveys that he doesn't think poorly of you. But I don't think email is a good place to tell you that he thinks you have issues with boundaries. And his comment about appreciating your willingness to return the stone seems kind of awkward to me. He was uncomfortable with you keeping that stone once he decided he knew how you were using it. Almost like Gollum with the ring.

Personally, I think I would want to take some time to think this through and not go Friday, but you seem really good at confronting things head-on. I'm sure whatever you decide will be the right thing.

Thanks, NP--those were the two things that jumped out at me too, actually. Like, why did he have to mention my willingness to give stone back? I had this stupid delusion that he'd meet with the consulting group, realize he was overreacting, then offer me the stone back. So that's sort of the opposite. And to mention the boundaries issue in the e-mail, which he also mentioned in session...

New development is that he no longer has afternoon time available but offered me 8:30 a.m., which I think is not a time he's usually there. My reaction to the other time not being available was a bit negative (not relief, like my decision had been made), so I'm thinking maybe I should go in the morning? Even though I keep thinking he might be offering that hoping I won't take it...but then he could have chosen not to offer it, right? The main thing is my mind went to some dark places this evening, which makes me feel I should talk to him...

[susannahsays]

I would go Friday and stare at the therapist with glares. Or maybe refuse to look at him, like a kid. I would find a way to hurt him!

[ruh roh]

Maybe I've got it wrong, but I think getting outside consultation usually results in something painful for the client. They aren't in the room and don;t know the person, so just have what the therapist is hung up on to go by. They are peers and colleagues. Clients are, well...not.

[DP_2017]

I personally wouldn't. I don't think it will help with the attachment issue. I also worry if it goes badly, that you have to sit on it for two days. Skipping tomorrow honestly seems like the best option. Don't go just because he has a spot. Only go if you feel there is no way you can live without this until Monday.

Bringing up the stone etc again will likely get the same type of responses out of him and the same reactions with you, so I just see it being bad all together. Your choice obviously but I think it's good idea to just wait until Monday, and email if you need to talk... or call him.

[LonesomeTonight]

Originally Posted by ruh roh

Maybe I've got it wrong, but I think getting outside consultation usually results in something painful for the client. They aren't in the room and don;t know the person, so just have what the therapist is hung up on to go by. They are peers and colleagues. Clients are, well...not.

Yeah...part of what was painful in session for me today was his saying he had to give some background on me to the group. He said he'd told them how I had boundary and attachment issues and stuff. So, God only knows what the group members thought of me at that point... Probably thought I was hiding in his bushes or something.

[DP_2017]

Originally Posted by LonesomeTonight

Yeah...part of what was painful in session for me today was his saying he had to give some background on me to the group. He said he'd told them how I had boundary and attachment issues and stuff. So, God only knows what the group members thought of me at that point... Probably thought I was hiding in his bushes or something.

Yikes, ya I don't like the idea of them having to consult with peers. I remember the rupture in May and how my T for the first time went to someone else and no idea what he said but the guy had told him to terminate me. My T said he just shook his head but told me he would never do that, after all the time it took me to build the trust.

I hate wondering what he would say to others about me, good or bad? Would I sound nuts? Thankfully he really doesn't regularly consult.

[ruh roh]

Originally Posted by LonesomeTonight

Yeah...part of what was painful in session for me today was his saying he had to give some background on me to the group. He said he'd told them how I had boundary and attachment issues and stuff. So, God only knows what the group members thought of me at that point... Probably thought I was hiding in his bushes or something.

Right. It just doesn't give an accurate picture of who you are because he was zeroing in on the part that bothered him.

Also, exactly what the truck does it matter if you have a trucking stone from his office and it brings you comfort? You are not getting his name tattooed on your body or asking your husband to dress like him or changing your last name to his (my parent did that, unofficially, when she deluded herself into thinking she'd married her doctor).

[DP_2017]

Originally Posted by ruh roh

You are not getting his name tattooed on your body or asking your husband to dress like him or changing your last name to his.

Sorry I had to laugh, those images cracked me up. THAT I could understand spooking most anyone.

I agree with you though, it's silly but this is also why I don't tell my T what I have related to him that brings me comfort. although he has actually told me to look at his photo when I am down, I still feel like, if I told him for instance, I listen to his favorite song OFTEN, would that creep him out? maybe. so I just don't say anything.

It's weird how some T's embrace things so easily and others are spooked but they are still human I guess there is a part of that human side always showing no matter how hard they may try to hide it. Sigh...

[fille_folle]

Originally Posted by ruh roh

Right. It just doesn't give an accurate picture of who you are because he was zeroing in on the part that bothered him.

Also, exactly what the truck does it matter if you have a trucking stone from his office and it brings you comfort? You are not getting his name tattooed on your body or asking your husband to dress like him or changing your last name to his (my parent did that, unofficially, when she deluded herself into thinking she'd married her doctor).

Meh, I think it matters to report that LT has boundary and attachment issues. That has everything to do with it - if she didn't, she wouldn't have been interested in the stone in the first place. He really never should have given her the stone at all. I hope they told him that. It just intensified all the feelings that can never be fulfilled in a therapy relationship.

[ruh roh]

People who want stones have boundary issues?

[DP_2017]

^ the stone part is probably more an attachment issue but is it bad? No. Many clients go through that and want something like that.

Is it ONLY those reasons to want something though? Not for sure. Think about the amount of kids who may want something from a favorite teacher when the years ends, sometimes, just having a reminder there, is calming or helpful. You don't feel alone and in your own way, you keep them with you. Also similar for how some people deal with loss.... wanting something isn't an issue but I do agree he should have never given it if he had issues with what it might mean to her, what did he think she wanted it for? Of course he had an idea. It was just wrong because it ended up hurting her more by having to return it and now going through this part of it.... he knew all along he would be uncomfortable with such feelings.

[fille_folle]

People who want stones likely have attachment issues. For the record, I would want a stone, so I'm certainly not judging. As for the boundary issues, it is relevant because boundaries are a necessary part of healthy attachments. Jmo.

[stopdog]

I think the therapist is right - he does not need to explain why something makes him uncomfortable. No one needs to explain to another why they do or do not like something. A client need not, if they do not want, explain to a therapist either. In the therapy situation, the therapist explaining is making it about him and his reasons - there is no, to my mind, benefit to a client knowing whatever weirdo reasons the therapist might have. The reason I do not see the refusal to lead to mind reading is that the therapist has clearly said - no I won't do X because it makes me uncomfortable. One is not guessing. The reason the therapist is uncomfortable is irrelevant. The point of boundaries is not that someone will never bump into them, it is backing off when one does - accepting it is there and going on. The therapist is not withholding insight about the client and the therapist's reasons would not lead to insight on the part of the client. His discomfort is about him - not the client. The insight for the client, as I see it, is why, when someone tells them no that makes me uncomfortable so I am not going to do it, do they keep pressing the issue? In some ways demanding there be a justification of the stated discomfort.

[velcro003]

LT: I am waiting to hear your write up of your session from today. My initial thought in his response to your e-mail isn't exactly positive. Not bad, per se...but I don't know.

But, I am reserving my judgement until I get more info. Hope you are doing okay.

[unaluna]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/boundar...nsference/amp/

http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-05657-005

Remember boundary ninja? She had some pretty good posts about this stuff. I think we might be getting into figuring out exactly when the original (what they call genetic) injury happened, ie at what stage of development - that figures into what it takes to repair / reparent, if you go psychodynamically. The second article abstract above summarizes that.

[velcro003]

Originally Posted by unaluna

https://www.google.com/amp/s/boundar...nsference/amp/

http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-05657-005

Remember boundary ninja? She had some pretty good posts about this stuff. I think we might be getting into figuring out exactly when the original (what they call genetic) injury happened, ie at what stage of development - that figures into what it takes to repair / reparent, if you go psychodynamically. The second article abstract above summarizes that.

Oh man, I haven't read her blog in years!

[SummerTime12]

I don’t think that wanting a stone means you have attachment issues. I think it just means you want to feel attached to the person you’re disclosing your life to, which is normal and healthy and human. Wanting to feel closeness with another human is not a problem unless the actions we take to get there cross lines — which for what it’s worth, I don’t feel yours did. You literally just held the stone while thinking of him/therapy with him. Sure, he’s allowed to feel however he feels about it, but that says more about him than you in my opinion.
A partial hospitalization program for eating disorders that I went to last year had something that they called a “rock ceremony” whenever a patient completed the program. Basically, the patients and staff would all write (on the rock) a word that reminded them of the patient who was leaving. The patient would then keep the rock with all of the words on it as a reminder of the program and everyone there. I still have my rock and look at it every once in a while when I need encouragement/comfort.
I guess the point of this story is to show that the concept is not all that unusual or bizarre, and your Ts discomfort seems more out of the norm to me. That’s not to say he’s a bad T or wrong for his feelings, but hopefully he realizes that him being uncomfortable doesn’t automatically equal you doing something wrong. I also don’t think it’s fair that he prefaced his story of the stone to the group by saying that you have attachment/boundary issues. I kind of thought the whole point of getting an outside opinion would be to describe the situation objectively and let the group decide, based on the facts, if they would interpret wanting a stone (eta and holding it while thinking of him) as a boundary crossing or not. I hope you can figure out and do whatever is best for you! Sorry this got long lol I always read your posts about your T but don’t usually feel I have good input so I just lurk 😂

[feileacan]

I must say that I personally don't like this T very much. He seems very ... cognitive (for the lack of a better word) and I guess I don't have much faith in dealing with deep attachment and trust issues using such a cognitive style. Whether this is something that suits you and something that you need is up to you LT. I did like this T in the beginning because he sounded very fresh and crisp in comparison to old T and MC. However, over time it has come out that he really has no clue how to work with attachment and transference and I'm afraid it is going to be one helluva painful teaching process for you.

When I think about the things he has told you or asked you in session I shudder. I know I couldn't tolerate it because at least some of his questions sound not invitations to explore but rather hidden judgements. Also, I would think that the goal of a supervision/intervision group should be to help the T to better understand his own reactions and emotions with the goal of better adjusting to the patient's needs. Although you haven't written about what happened yet, it seems that this was not what happened in that supervision group.

Peer consultation groups can be hit and miss.

With my ex therapist (Ex T) who did regular short term CBT, one of the group members is my current therapist (with trauma training and patients with abuse histories, some of whom have "personality disorders") who encouraged her to be flexible with me, and to demonstrate warmth and acceptance, as well as suggested trauma informed tools and methods as they realised I have an abuse history which I was deep in ignorance and then denial about.

T was OK with transitional objects. I learned that much later...

Ex T then went to her clinical Supervisor... Who vetoed transitional objects and told Ex T to go BACK to a rigid frame. So no more flexibility like extra time. I had wanted Ex T to charge a marble I owned.

Eventually T suggested ex T learn schema therapy to help me and she was willing...but then her clinical supervisor AGAIN...

Ex T eventually went on maternity leave. Before she did, she placed me with T.

[SalingerEsme]

Agree. Yearbooks are transitional objects.

Originally Posted by DP_2017

^ the stone part is probably more an attachment issue but is it bad? No. Many clients go through that and want something like that.

Is it ONLY those reasons to want something though? Not for sure. Think about the amount of kids who may want something from a favorite teacher when the years ends, sometimes, just having a reminder there, is calming or helpful. You don't feel alone and in your own way, you keep them with you. Also similar for how some people deal with loss.... wanting something isn't an issue but I do agree he should have never given it if he had issues with what it might mean to her, what did he think she wanted it for? Of course he had an idea. It was just wrong because it ended up hurting her more by having to return it and now going through this part of it.... he knew all along he would be uncomfortable with such feelings.

[SalingerEsme]

Originally Posted by LonesomeTonight

Yeah...part of what was painful in session for me today was his saying he had to give some background on me to the group. He said he'd told them how I had boundary and attachment issues and stuff. So, God only knows what the group members thought of me at that point... Probably thought I was hiding in his bushes or something.

I got really protective of you right here. Even if he had to do that, he shouldn't tell you he did in that way. He seems, for the first time, manipulative, and using a bullying tactic to quell your feelings and squash your voice.

Once he sets up the group to give him them answer he wants in the first place, it is like a contaminated experiment. Also, he likely consults with sports psychologists and guys guys( I know that isn't fair! I am mad at him on your behalf!!)

I think he handled this poorly. I am uncomfortable, and I am not even involved. If you feel shame, it is bc he is shaming you.

If he can't work with anxious attachment without stigmatizing it, he should be ashamed.

I DO like your T, but I don't think he has enough training, respect, or commitment to attachment theory to help you feel less anxious about attachments.

[SalingerEsme]

Originally Posted by velcro003

LT: I am waiting to hear your write up of your session from today. My initial thought in his response to your e-mail isn't exactly positive. Not bad, per se...but I don't know.

But, I am reserving my judgement until I get more info. Hope you are doing okay.

Me too. I hope the whole session went a bit better than the slices here, and if it didn't we are right here.

[SalingerEsme]

Last comment until the write up of the whole session. I agree with the people who say, if you can contain the anxiety feelings, don't go to the session. Lean out instead of lean in. Demonstrate aloofness and independence.

An old part of attachment theory gives a kind of law of nature- if one person over functions, the other person will under function. You can end up doing 3/4ths of the work in a relationship while the other person only has to do 1/4th but gets credit for 50/50.

If someone has autism, they "unqerfuction" in relationship, and I find it to be something in play or relevant that both you and your T have relationships in which you simply must give a ton in order to parent well.

I think skipping the session and coming in with calm cool goals- Like I have anxious attachment, and I want to feel less scared of abandonment a year from now - might be good?