[Glowworm80]

My T is usually very empathetic and understanding of my issues. There have been a few times over the past few months where I've told them a story and they seem to have identified more with the other person in the story and why they said or did what they did as opposed to how I felt or reacted to the situation. At times I've felt like they were almost acting in defence of the other person even. They weren't even stories where I was putting all the blame of the situation on the other perons but more saying we were clearly both to blame etc but they still seemed to defend the other person reaction rather than address my response to the situation. Has this happened others?

[Echos Myron redux]

Yes. Specifically when I was talking about my first therapist. It took a couple of ruptures and a lot of frustration for my therapist to fully understand what he was doing and how it impacted on me. He was apologetic when he understood it, and his approach changed.

[RaineD]

Yes, my therapist would always tell me when he thought I was wrong. But in a nice, "I'm going to teach you things" kind of way. I didn't mind. In fact, I always appreciated his honesty.

[here today]

Yes. It did not end well.

[mcl6136]

Originally Posted by Glowworm80

My T is usually very empathetic and understanding of my issues. There have been a few times over the past few months where I've told them a story and they seem to have identified more with the other person in the story and why they said or did what they did as opposed to how I felt or reacted to the situation. At times I've felt like they were almost acting in defence of the other person even. They weren't even stories where I was putting all the blame of the situation on the other perons but more saying we were clearly both to blame etc but they still seemed to defend the other person reaction rather than address my response to the situation. Has this happened others?

I totally get this one. My current (or is it old; I don't know cause she left town?) T did this, much to my distress.

She completely defended someone else's creepy behavior rather than being in my corner. When I confronted her about it, she simply said that she was a compassionate being whose job it was to be a shining example, blah blah blah.

I don't need a T to leap to my defense at every juncture. I need one who can help me pull apart the situation in which I find myself...and what actions I can take around it. I sure don't need one who can assist in my self blame. I can get that at home.

[Glowworm80]

Originally Posted by RaineD

Yes, my therapist would always tell me when he thought I was wrong. But in a nice, "I'm going to teach you things" kind of way. I didn't mind. In fact, I always appreciated his honesty.

I’ve nothing against someone nicely pointing out when I am in the wrong. It’s not usually even in that respect. It’s often I’m telling a story whereby both me and the other person are in the wrong at various points in the story and I will go as so far as to say that. For example in one story the other person was clearly in the wrong first and my T defended their actions. I had to then almost argue as to why their actions hurt me. I just found it strange . The other persons reactions were clearly wrong and caused me lots of hurt and anger and then I reacted to that albeit not in the best way but I did. Shouldn’t the T be focusing on my reaction and response and dealing with that and improving that and not the reasons for the other persons actions?
Is it just a case of a therapist overly identifying with the other person or what is it?

[weaverbeaver]

This sounds very hurtful and confusing. It hasn’t happened with my t but she did always tell me about the impact I had on her. It was never very helpful and always ended in ruptures.
I just wish she would stay present and be with me and my experiences.

[Glowworm80]

Originally Posted by Echos Myron redux

Yes. Specifically when I was talking about my first therapist. It took a couple of ruptures and a lot of frustration for my therapist to fully understand what he was doing and how it impacted on me. He was apologetic when he understood it, and his approach changed.

did he say what he bought he had been doing? Or why he had been doing it?

[nottrustin]

It has happened a couple of times in the past with T. For the most part would say something like "maybe. .". Once though I was upset about all the people around me who had mothers there to babysit, spend time with etc but they complained about their parents or even chose to not have contact. I was upset because I would never have the opportunity since my mom was dead.

T wzpalined that not everybody had healthy moms so often not having contact was for their own well being rather than living with a toxic relationship. I was NOT buying it and was upset.

Only later did I realize that T did not have a relationship with her toxic mom. Her mom was emotionally abusive

[kecanoe]

I think when they do this they are trying to get us to see things from the other perspective. I don't find that helpful, usually I can already see things from the other side. I just tell T that I understand that and move on by asking them to address whatever it is that I actually do want help with.

No. Infact whrn I've tried to see other people's side T gets cross.
I'm like Yeah but, yeah but, she's like no but, no but. Lol

[feileacan]

No, it has never happened to me. My T has always taken my side and sometimes I have argued with him about how the perspective of this other person could be valid too.

[unaluna]

Sometimes it is the other person's right to be "wrong". Obviously their reaction or attitude is right for them. Unless they are your child living in your house, you cant really set the rules for them. I think this is the distinction your t is trying to make.

Its not about taking your side in this argument, or trying to prove the other person wrong, or change their mind. Its about, given that the other person has this attitude, how are you going to live with it?

Altho i think they could make that more clear. Maybe they do and i couldnt stand to hear it. Albert Ellis certainly did in his RET, and i hated his attitude.

2nd T seemed to identify with my first T at the very beginning, when I started and said a mix of neutral and negative things. I think it was just a T-T kind of solidarity. It was only a couple times and never again when he got to know me better. As for other people I talked about, I always preferred to discuss in a more unbiased way, without taking sides, and the Ts followed that line with me. I would rarely vent or b*itch about other people in therapy except the first T sometimes. Sometimes a bit about my mother but I preferred to discuss even her from multiple angles.

[Glowworm80]

Originally Posted by unaluna

Sometimes it is the other person's right to be "wrong". Obviously their reaction or attitude is right for them. Unless they are your child living in your house, you cant really set the rules for them. I think this is the distinction your t is trying to make.

Yes, of course, it is the other persons right to be 'wrong' or have their own reaction. I completely understand that. I would like to think that I am good at seeing things from others perspective! Should the other person be the person in therapy I would expect them to dissect their understanding or reasons for doing or reacting how they did but the fact is that they are not the person in therapy, I am?

Its not about taking your side in this argument, or trying to prove the other person wrong, or change their mind. Its about, given that the other person has this attitude, how are you going to live with it?

Yes, This! This is exactly part of my point! This was not discussed. The focus became all about the other person and why they did what they did? I'm not saying that at no point should we have talked about the possible reasoning behind their actions but that became the focus? I didn't entirely realise what was happening at the moment so didn't bring it up at the time. Shouldn't the focus though be more on my response? How I reacted? Why I reacted like I did? How I can improve this going forward? I have no control how they react and perhaps next time they won't even react the same. I can only control how I respond and react so surely focusing on that would be the most beneficial?

[Glowworm80]

I should clarify that it is usually the same person that my T seems to identify with and they are never major events involving just minor arguments and such. Really just trying to understand the potential reasons for this and get a better understanding of why it may be happening. Maybe it's a good thing and I am missing the point of it all? Maybe it's irrelevant and I'm making an issue out of nothing?

[Anne2.0]

Originally Posted by Glowworm80

My T is usually very empathetic and understanding of my issues. There have been a few times over the past few months where I've told them a story and they seem to have identified more with the other person in the story and why they said or did what they did as opposed to how I felt or reacted to the situation. At times I've felt like they were almost acting in defence of the other person even. They weren't even stories where I was putting all the blame of the situation on the other perons but more saying we were clearly both to blame etc but they still seemed to defend the other person reaction rather than address my response to the situation. Has this happened others?

There are times when I have felt this, but I can't recall a time when it wasn't useful for me to think about the impact I may have on others, especially when I am unkind or judgmental or too extreme in my thinking.

Sometimes what has felt like a defense of the other person is not so much a defense but a more accurate and nuanced way of looking like the situation. Understanding why someone might have __ is helpful to my own processing and tendency to see things as more negative than they really are. It can feel like a defense of the other person to encourage me to focus on the entire situation, not just on my perspective. And I'm not really fond of people just shining me on and agreeing with me because they are afraid to or because they find me intimidating. There are therapists like that who will just do and say whatever you demand, but I'm not in therapy to get someone else to agree with me. Validation can be easily overdone and can cross a line into narcissism. (I'm not saying this is what is going on).

I think it depends whether a T being able to see a situation beyond your thinking of it and being skilled at communicating that without saying "you're wrong!" or something else judgmental is helpful to you or not. Maybe you're not in therapy to learn how you may distort your perceptions of the world in ways that don't serve you, or maybe you don't want to be challenged. But that's what this sounds like to me, but I think the best way to figure it out is to have a conversation with your t about how you saw this and why it bothered you.

[Glowworm80]

Originally Posted by Anne2.0

There are times when I have felt this, but I can't recall a time when it wasn't useful for me to think about the impact I may have on others, especially when I am unkind or judgmental or too extreme in my thinking.

Sometimes what has felt like a defense of the other person is not so much a defense but a more accurate and nuanced way of looking like the situation. Understanding why someone might have __ is helpful to my own processing and tendency to see things as more negative than they really are. It can feel like a defense of the other person to encourage me to focus on the entire situation, not just on my perspective.

Thanks for your input. Given me some food for thought. I do appreciate how it can be helpful to look at the exchange/situation in its entirety and not just my own perspective in isolation. From reading back on my post and had I not known the situations I am referring to it may have sounded a bit like a little child saying 'What about me?' 'Focus on me..' 'It's all about me' which is not at all how it was or is. It wasn't even that there was some focus on the other person as yes I agree that is helpful to look at the overall interaction and how we are both contributing to what is happening or has happened but more the fact it became ALL about the other person and their experience. It just made me wonder more about the possible reasons for a therapist doing this. I don't think it's really anything to do with who is right or wrong but more like in that moment they were identifying more with that person.

And I'm not really fond of people just shining me on and agreeing with me because they are afraid to or because they find me intimidating. There are therapists like that who will just do and say whatever you demand, but I'm not in therapy to get someone else to agree with me. Validation can be easily overdone and can cross a line into narcissism. (I'm not saying this is what is going on).

I also agree with this. I don't want my T to just agree with everything I say as I don't think that would be helpful at all and also they are then being completely inauthentic which is something that would being counterproductive for me. I do think you can validate someone's feelings no matter what they are however without leading them down a path to narcissism. The conversation doesn't need to stop at validation.

I think it depends whether a T being able to see a situation beyond your thinking of it and being skilled at communicating that without saying "you're wrong!" or something else judgmental is helpful to you or not. Maybe you're not in therapy to learn how you may distort your perceptions of the world in ways that don't serve you, or maybe you don't want to be challenged. But that's what this sounds like to me, but I think the best way to figure it out is to have a conversation with your t about how you saw this and why it bothered you.

I am not in therapy to learn how I may distort my perceptions of the world in ways that don't serve me but I don't think it's something that I or anyone else wouldn't benefit from looking at and am very open to delving further in that respect. In fact, there are some very obvious areas that I do perhaps do this and the longer I am in therapy the more I discover when this might be happening. I just don't think that is the situation here...
Yes, I do plan to bring it up with my T. I also just wanted some other thoughts and experiences from here. It is an interesting dynamic and I am trying to explore more why it has happened at various points throughout the relationship.
Thanks for your input it has challenged me to dig a bit deeper.

Validation with explanation
T says - no but, no but, then adds why she says that.

[coolibrarian]

My T does this occasionally. But I have been seeing her for years. She didn't start doing it until the last year, or two. If she had done it earlier, we may have had some serious problems.

[Glowworm80]

Originally Posted by coolibrarian

My T does this occasionally. But I have been seeing her for years. She didn't start doing it until the last year, or two. If she had done it earlier, we may have had some serious problems.

Have you brought this up with her?

[coolibrarian]

Originally Posted by Glowworm80

Have you brought this up with her?

I have brought it up with her. Sometimes she apologizes.

[Fuzzybear]

Yes... it didn’t go well..

[Ididitmyway]

It never happened to me in therapy, actually..not that I can remember. I was hurt in therapy in various ways, but not in this way.

I never, actually, needed a T to be on "my side" so to speak. I didn't think it was their role to be my defender. I needed them to acknowledge abusive actions towards me for what they were, which they did for the most part. Other than that I saw their role as someone who can help me understand my own responses, desires, motivations and needs in relationships with other people. I was in therapy to understand myself better, not to get a paid friend who'd be "on my side" or an advocate.

I did need empathy but that is not the same as "taking sides" or identifying with anyone in my stories, myself included. Empathy is a deep understanding of someone else's subjective experience and perspective. As such, it is also different from support. Support is more like "I feel for you..I approve your choices..I have the same perspective on such and such issue". It may feel like someone's being on your side, but it's not exactly the same..

When people take sides, they forgo objectivity, which is not necessarily a bad thing in close relationships, but not in therapy. When I felt supported by my therapists, it didn't feel like they were taking my side or identified with me. It felt like my perspective on the situation was valid to them and that my choice, in their opinion, were the right choice to make in that situation. It didn't feel like they were "against" the other person in my story. The other person just didn't matter that much because therapy was about me and what I do in my relationships with others, not about what others do to me.

Conversely, my Ts never took the "side" of the other person, because, again, the other person was not the focus of therapy and, in that sense, they didn't matter. Sometimes, they did tell me what the other person's perspective might have been, but it didn't feel at all like they were defending them. It was, actually, more for the purpose of letting me know that I didn't need to take their behavior personally because they were acting out their own issues, as opposed to doing something "to me".

So, no, I was fortunate to have Ts, who acted professionally in that area..except maybe the last one..He was, as I remember now, trying to be my "knight on the white horse" who eagerly wanted to defend me from the whole world. It felt good on some level, but it also felt wrong, so I'd often let him know politely that I wasn't interested in wasting my sessions time on trashing other people, even those who hurt me a lot. I wanted to focus on my own emotions and to learn how to manage them better.