[mindmechanic]

I am beginning to wonder, after three years of working with this therapist, whether we are fundamentally actually a right fit with each other. I feel that she may be an intellectual and not naturally an empath who will be effective in doing the therapeutic work that I am looking for and need. I'll share a few recent scenarios with you guys.

I had a dream about a therapist and I shared it with her. In the dream, we were having a session. I was depressed in that session. I asked if she was upset with me because I'm depressed. In the dream, she said yes she is unhappy with me because I'm depressed. So the dream itself explicitly stated why she was unhappy with me. The reason is that I came into the session feeling depressed and she was finding it annoying. I shared this dream with the therapist in session.

Her immediate response? Her immediate response was along the lines, "Are you worried that I'm mad at you because of the recent texting incident?" I said, "What? No. That's irrelevant. In the dream, you were upset and not happy with me because I came in depressed and you found it a burden." Her response was like, "Oh." And that was it. No acknowledgement. No empathy or mirroring. No further prompting.

I had been holding back some of my depressive feelings for a few months because I didn't want to bring it to therapy. I was afraid she'd get all paranoid and make me see a therapist in-person, which would only overstimulate me and make me withdraw further. I had also been troubled by a statement that she made last March when I was suicidal. I won't iterate it here, but it's basically a big reason why I have been holding back my depressive feelings, too.

Anyway, I felt shot down in this interaction because the therapist jumped from "A" to "Z" in her immediate response. What I was sharing was rich of information that we could explore, but she didn't attempt to prompt. She jumped right in to proposing another possible interpretation of the dream.

The next session, I told her that I need to be able to take one step and one thing at a time in our work and cited this dream sharing incident with her. She said, "I was inviting you for further self-reflection." I said, "Yeah; and I totally welcome that invitation. I'm okay and appreciate your invitation and I value your being able to bring up other possible interpretations for us to consider. But the invitation is premature often times. I need to for us to be able to work with the interpretation that I'm sharing with you first before we jump into considering other possible interpretations that you're suggesting." While I was conveying that to the therapist, she said, "Yeah, yeah. Right, right." When I finished the sentence, she said, "I'm always going to invite you to consider other interpretations as part of our work." I reiterated, "Yeah, I totally invite that. But I don't want for you to jump from "A" - what I am saying to "Z" - what you're proposing right off the bat. I need to be able to sit with "A" and explore "A" interpretation first. No further response from her.

There's no indication if she understands what I'm getting at. And it was almost as if I was more mature than her in this interaction because as the patient, I was acknowledging and validating the importance of her invitation to consider other possible interpretations. But she, on the other hand, did not express any acknowledgment for the importance of taking one step and one thing at a time to sit with and explore the interpretation that I am presenting to her before jumping to "Z" interpretation immediately in her response. Her "Yeah, yeah. Right, right" - is that an indication that I can feel safe about continuing to share with her because moving forward, she would take it one step and one thing at a time? It's not explicitly clear to me because she didn't acknowledge it like I acknowledged the importance of her invitation.

And in this dream sharing interaction, I started wondering if she may be an intellectual - more so than an empath. Because more and more, it seems that her intellect has a faster reflex than her empathic side based on the responses that she gives. Her responses tend to be questions or analysis; she doesn't seem to give room for the emotional side of things to sink in.

I'll give another example.

I said to the therapist, "I've been abusing Advil to help me fall asleep every night the past week." She responded, "Advil isn't supposed to make you sleepy unless it's Advil PM." I said, "I don't know that Ibuprofen isn't supposed to do that. But it does make me sleepy and knocks me out. Do you remember how I shared with you about my night time fear of lying in bed not able to fall asleep?" She said, "Yeah." I can't remember how the conversation continued, but there wasn't much further exploration at this point.

In the next session, I brought this up and said to her that that interaction was odd. I said, "Does it matter whether Advil is supposed to make a person sleepy or not? For all that matter, I could tell you that I have a candy bar or break dance every night to help me fall asleep. It doesn't matter whether something is supposed to make me feel sleepy or not; the point is that I am abusing Advil every night. Imagine a patient telling the therapist, 'I take xyz alcohol to help me fall asleep every night,' and the therapist responds, 'But xyz alcohol only has 0.001 percent of alcohol content and isn't supposed to make you sleepy.' Uh, we're not lab partners in a chemistry class. That's not the point. Why don't you say something therapeutic along the lines, 'Aw, sounds like you've been having trouble falling asleep?' or 'Have you been having trouble falling asleep?'"

She responded, "Yeah. I asked that question because I didn't know that you were not aware that Advil isn't supposed to make you sleepy."

Umm, okay. But why does it matter whether I know or do not know that Ibuprofen isn't supposed to make me sleepy? It's like a therapist responding, "Break dancing isn't supposed to make you sleepy unless you're dancing to a a soothing instrumental music." Wtf??

Talking and sharing with this therapist has been feeling so... exhausting and rigorous. I often find myself having to justify myself to her, which is very stressful and untherapeutic. I confided in a friend and a coworker who is a clinical social worker. And they said that a therapeutic response should be to find out whether I'm having trouble falling asleep. "Are you having trouble falling asleep?" "Sounds like you're having a difficult time going to bed?" They said that the therapist sounds like an intellectual and not an empath. They also said that she may not actually be a right fit for me because the therapist was trained and worked as a physician - MD, general internist all her life. She only started practicing therapy in 2008 and she didn't have a formal education at a counseling or clinical school. She was trained at a psychoanalytic institute.

I don't want to question the therapist's skills. She is a highly educated woman who has written tons of research papers and is well-respected in academia. But the few people who I've confided in said that it doesn't mean she makes a good therapist or is a natural empath. And that worries me a great deal.

I value the therapist's insight and ability to consider other possibilities. But she feels overly analytical and intellectual to me at times. And I would really like for there to be more balance with the emotional, right brain side of things. We're doing psychodynamic therapy, not strictly psychoanalysis. I wonder if maybe she is more suited to be a psychoanalyst rather than a psychodynamic therapist?? I wonder if maybe her intellect has a quicker reflex than her right brain??

I said to her that I need for there to be more empathy, mirroring, paraphrasing, emotional feedback, acknowledgement, and validation in our work. She wanted to analyze my need for that. I said, "I don't think that the degree of my need for it is pathological. It's basic communication and therapeutic skills. If you want someone to engage in analysis or think about interpretations that you are inviting them to consider, you have to first show them they you're on the same page as them - that you understand what they just said and where they're coming from. It's basic." She didn't seem to appreciate this. She didn't acknowledge the importance of this in therapy and communication in general.

I feel like I am at wits end. Because even while trying to fix all this with her, we can't even seem to communicate effectively with each other.

The first year into our working together, I gave the therapist a feedback, "You tend to give these textbooky psychoanalytic explanations, but I don't get it because you don't connect it back to me." She said, "Yeah, you have a point. I do have that tendency." Back then, she was mindful of it and actually connected her explanations to me in future interactions. I have a feeling that if I gave her that feedback now that we're three years into our working together, she would probably respond, "Some of those explanations are hard to hear. Maybe that's why you've trouble understanding them."

I say this because I feel that when I give her feedback on what works best for me and what doesn't, she puts it back on me and analyzes it or questions it. Look, I know that I am the patient in the relationship, so technically, I am the defective one. But it doesn't mean that anything and everything that I share is pathological and comes from within me and that there isn't actually anything concretely going on in the way therapy is conducted.

Whew. Thoughts?

[atisketatasket]

All of this sounds to me like she's not very intelligent (different from intellectual), at least not at therapy. You don't have to be intelligent to get degrees or be respected in academia (and I am in academia). So she may be an intellectual, but I'm not sure that's the problem.

I have no idea if this is true for you, but the kind of stuff you get back from her--turning to questions, parsing words, textbook psychoanalysis, missing opportunities--I get from therapists when they either don't know what they're doing, so they fall back on mindless technique, or they more specifically don't know what to do with me. (And yeah, talking to them is exhausting.) The best therapist I had had her scripted moments, but was also able to think outside the box.

[mindmechanic]

@atisketatasket: Oh she is an intelligent person, alright. She has been invited to be a guest speaker at major conferences. The research papers that she write are well-received.

I have another hypothesis. See, this hasn't really been a problem in our work until about one year and a half into working together. A possible theory is that in the first year and a half, I didn't share much about myself. So she was probably more inclined to give empathic responses, acknowledge, and validate. But now that she knows a lot about me, her immediate response is to jump into interpretation or analysis, connecting the dots.

The missing opportunities shoots me down a lot. There are some things that I've been holding back from sharing with her for some time. And I finally share it. It's like a bird flying for the first time in a long time only to be shot down when she doesn't pay attention to it, give it any acknowledgement, or emotional feedback, and instead prematurely invites "Z" interpretation. Patients only try so many times only not to try anymore if they're not going to be heard.

But still, it's important to take things one step at a time instead of making a huge jump on the chessboard. And as a schizoid who bottles up my feelings and denies them, you'd think that she, as a therapist, would be proud that I'd want to connect more with my feelings. Insight and self-reflection are important. But so are the right brain side of things.

And speaking of parsing words, yes. Sometimes I feel like her interpretations are too wild, it's almost like we're engaging in a game of wordplay association. For example, in the dream sharing scenario, it's like she heard me use the word "mad" and simply associated it with our recent texting incident. Or when we were talking about money-related stuff and I said, "You're rich," the next session, she said, "Perhaps you meant that you feel that I'm rich internally and you're poor internally." What is this?? A game of wordplay association? I only blurted out "you're rich" because it costs $35 to rent the therapy room. And I wouldn't be needing to rent it if you didn't move and I didn't want to cover that cost on top of my weekly expenditures.

And speaking of best therapists, when I was in in college, I saw a psychologist at the university's counseling center for a couple of times. That dude was by far the easiest therapist to talk to. He leaned in, would nod his head and go "yeah, "yeah" while I'm talking and when I catch my breath, he would mirror me, paraphrase, acknowledge, and empathize to show that he gets it and is on the same page as me. And I would continue sharing and talking. It felt good. It felt... therapeutic.

I agree with ATAT's response above. I don't think it is a problem if a T is intellectually oriented if it matches the client's style. I think the problem can be more if she is incompatible with you and your expectations, rigid, and lacks creativity. Conventional academic intelligence and success does not require a very large amount of openness and creativity in every field but good interpersonal skills and adaptability often do. I think empathy as well, as I doubt that one person very often can just automatically feel what the other person feels - it is more often the product of imagination and experience, IMO. But if you frequently feel misunderstood or you feel that your thought processes are radically different, I imagine there is some level of incompatibility between the two of you.

[mindmechanic]

Are you suggesting that her lack of empathic responses or emotional feedback and instead jumping into questioning or analysis is because she couldn't "automatically feel what the other person feels?" I don't think one needs experience to convey empathy. A therapist who has never been married can have a patient who is presenting with issues in her marriage. A production of imagination? Yeah; it definitely takes imagination. Perhaps her mind isn't imagining anything of what I'm saying. Perhaps her mind is focused on the intellectual and analytical side of it. That's why I think she may be more suited to be a psychoanalyst rather than a psychodynamic therapist. LoL. Because while hers is a different style, no effective therapy can be done - even for a patient who is intellectually-minded - because healing comes not only from intellectual self-reflection, but also emotional insight.

What difference do you see between a psychoanalyst and a psychodynamic T in this sense? I unfortunately had psychoanalyst with a very mediocre (or less) intelligence and pretty poor analytical abilities. He claims a lot of success working with clients "emotionally" and I could see he was better at certain kinds of empathy than analysis. Unfortunately we also had radically different emotional styles, just almost no matching anywhere. My 2nd T, who claims to be eclectic, used psychodynamic approach a lot with me. He was a very smart guy, also empathetic and respectful, we had quite a lot in common. Still not a very successful therapy overall because it mostly lacked the pragmatic elements that my issues would have required and that I found elsewhere (and ultimately in myself).

Do you really think that anyone will just feel what another person feels, when they are not in the same situation? I don't know... I mean, I know some people claim to be empaths in that sort of way. I certainly am not so cannot comment. But I do know that even the people who obviously have good empathic abilities get me wrong frequently when our thinking and emotional styles and preferences are too radically different. And they can be the most academically intelligent and accomplished people - I meet these all the time as I am in academia as well. We can work great together on academic projects but won't be good friends or confidants. Therapy of course is not friendship but requires a more emotional compatibility than mere academic collaboration.

[mindmechanic]

My understanding is that in psychoanalysis, the analyst responses with questions or interpretations. Analysts definitely don't make statements like, "Aww, that sounds so _______." Or "Oh boy, that's rough." They're more like, "So, you think that ______ (insert analysis>."

This therapist is a person who I have some respect for. I just need for her to slow down, take one step and one thing at a time, not jump from A to Z, and give more therapeutic responses like in the Advil example. I'm lacking a lot of that "therapeutic" element in our work. I don't want to start all over again with another therapist. If things don't work out with this one, I'm done with therapy. And it's difficult to find a therapist who is going to be completely a 1 to 1 perfect fit. You're not going to find a therapist who fits you like a jigsaw puzzle. That's why I've been telling the therapist what works for me and what doesn't. But she expressed that I am criticizing her skills. Why you taking it personally, woman??

Sometimes when a patient is sharing something sh1tty or painful, sometimes analysis, questions, or a solution isn't what's helpful or needed at that point. Sometimes what can be so much more powerful is for the listener to just empathize and be like, "Yeah, that is tragic." Or "Oh boy, life is a real b1tch, isn't it?"

[sarahsweets]

Can someone give me a basic "what is" difference between an 'intellectual' and 'empath'? And the difference between a "psychoanaylisist" and "Psychotherapist" and "Psychologist"? I am very confused.

Originally Posted by sarahsweets

Can someone give me a basic "what is" difference between an 'intellectual' and 'empath'? And the difference between a "psychoanaylisist" and "Psychotherapist" and "Psychologist"? I am very confused.

My suggestion is that you do your own research on these terms and categories. Tons of info online that you can read and make your own understanding and interpretations that works for you, instead of relying on one person's definitions. The latter would most likely be inaccurate as these are far from hard science, strict rules or something that can be easily described using the senses. I remember you asking similar before - I imagine people are reluctant to answer because of the obscure and subjective nature of these things. Maybe the psychologist is the easiest: I think in the US it is typically someone with a degree in Psychology, for a T usually a PhD in Clinical/Counseling Psychology. But the public uses it to just describe professionals why deal with psychological issues and have training in those.

[Amyjay]

It seems that her style isn't quite what you're looking for. You would like someone who responds to you differently. I understand that you would prefer her to respond to you differently. But she is who she is. She does what she does. Her package deal is what she gives you.

We don't have the power to change anyone else, to make them do or say or act how we wish them to. Ultimately, if what she is offering - if what she is - isn't working for you, it truly might be worthwhile looking for someone who is more in tune with what you need. (I know, it is a huge hassle to find and connect with another therapist.)

[Accesshoop]

Makes me wonder:

Does "like" necessarily equal "work"?

Does "want" necessarily equal "need"?

Do comfortable preferences lead to desired change?

If our likes, wants and preferences naturally worked to meet our needs to change, would we need therapy?

Just wondering how it all fits together...

[feileacan]

The whole description sounds very familiar to me - for ca 2 years my analyst did everything wrongly (and he still sometimes does). He was stupid, he did not understand anything I said, he said the wrong things, he jumped to the wrong conclusions. I needed him to understand me on a deeper level whereas he would interpret my words and not catch the deeper meaning that I tried to convey but was unable to put into words.

Oh, I was frustrated (and I still occasionally am) because I gave him lot of feedback and he did not seem to appreciate it at all nor did he seem to learn from it. I told him one day what he was doing wrong and the next day he was still doing these wrong things! What's the point then of saying anything at all??!

Anyway, that's only one part of the story. The other part of the story is that many (most) of those things are very strong projections and it doesn't do any good for the patient (me) for the therapist to even strengthen these projections by attempting to comply.

I fully realise that when I'm in the grips of these projections then this is all I see - then the things are in fact the way I described above, similarly as they are for the OP as they described them now. But I do have my clear moments when I see things differently and I understand that this is a huge fight against a monster with many heads and my T is my most valuable and trusted ally in this fight.

You can try to change your T but that's totally beside the point. You are not there to change anyone else other than yourself. That's why it is almost irrelevant what the T is doing or saying, unless it is totally inappropriate, which I don't think is the case with your T. You want to control your T and she would do a huge disservice to you if she would comply. Learning to grasp that other people are separate subjective identities can be a very difficult task - I know it from my own experience.

[Anne2.0]

Originally Posted by feileacan

You can try to change your T but that's totally beside the point. You are not there to change anyone else other than yourself. That's why it is almost irrelevant what the T is doing or saying, unless it is totally inappropriate, which I don't think is the case with your T. You want to control your T and she would do a huge disservice to you if she would comply. Learning to grasp that other people are separate subjective identities can be a very difficult task - I know it from my own experience.

I think this is very elegantly put, in a way that is clear and simple and rings very true with me. I think it is a common smart-person trap to try to change others, meaning that smart people can be more confident of the their correctness and perhaps actually are more correct, in the abstract sense of how to problem solve or go about doing something. My advice to the OP would be to ask yourself whether you sometimes have conflicts outside therapy with people, especially a partner or significant other, about who's right about the best way to go about doing whatever.

The desire to control people is a complex one, and only partially fueled by a perception (correct or not) that one is better at figuring things out than other people. My H, who was a very intelligent man, had the problem solving skills of someone far less intellectually gifted, so in my experience, intellect and the ability to think through something and how to approach it are different. He would make some really dumb choices in response to conflicts at work. And I was always trying to tell him what to do and how to approach it, until I learned that my main point was to control what he did, and it really wasn't my business how he handled his business. I'll put aside the dealing with conflicts that were part of our marriage or family, as it's not so particularly relevant here.

I think anytime therapy moves into the therapy where the client is trying to change the therapist, change the way the therapist sees something, even if it's about the client, or change the way the therapist handles the therapy (outside reasonable discussions that are part of any collaboration or asking for what the client needs), or otherwise how the therapist does their business, it's likely to doom the therapy, especially with a wishy-washy therapist (as opposed to someone who is flexible in how they work with clients) or a therapist that just caters to whatever the client wants. I would never pay money to try to change the therapist, or the therapist's ideas, even about me or about how s/he perceived something that happened in therapy.

It is a pretty basic principle that two people in the same room often do not see, hear, or experience the interaction the same. When I was in Psych 100, the prof had a stranger come into the classroom and they argued briefly, and then the stranger took the prof's pen and fled. At the time the students were unaware this was a demonstration, and this was before students had laptop computers, phones, or other recording devices. The prof asked us to describe the incident, and it was eye opening in not only the basics of the "attacker" description (relevant in legal eyewitness testimony, which can be terrible), but what they argued about (some thought they were lovers and arguing about their relationship; others colleagues or even strangers I think); the stranger stole the prof's purse, chalkboard erase, etc, it went on and on.

I think what goes along with trying to give up controlling other people is a healthy skepticism about your own "truth" as it relates to other people. It is good to have a solid core understanding about yourself and your experiences, but when those experiences involve other people saying and doing things in interaction with you, I try to remember that there is room in my understanding for the other person's perception. Therapy has been a safe place for me to question this, to ask my T about whether he was angry at me, or whatever, in prior sessions. His perception is often different or he's not as tuned into what happened as I am, if I've been stewing about it for a week or longer. He never gaslights me (which is a deliberate attempt to change my perception or make me doubt my perceptions, not just a disagreement about what happened) and I can usually understand how his perception and mine connect in some way, or can see how he perceived something as real even though I originally saw it differently.

So in my experience, checking out my perception of other people in relation to me has been a good experience and kept me humble in the sense that I used to think I was good at "reading" people, but it often turns out I'm good at thinking I read people. I go back to that psych 100 experiment often in remembrance of how very little about interactions and my beliefs about other people are some sort of objective truth.

When I started giving up my desire to control people and my belief that I had some superior ability to discern the truth about others, my relationships became deeper, more connected, and had an ease I hadn't experienced before. Especially my marriage. I think giving these things up gives others more room to be themselves in a relationship with me, it makes them feel safer to tell me how they see things, and they accept our differences more readily.

I don't know if any of this long-winded explanation applies to what is going on with you and your T, but I think perhaps trying to check out your perceptions of her and her abilities with her might be more fruitful than making assumptions and conclusions without her as part of the conversation.

[mindmechanic]

Interesting. I had a session with the therapist yesterday after I posted this. She said that I was trying to control her - what she says and when she says what. See, my intention wasn't to control her. It's just that I am extremely, extremely in tune with my needs. I am a very introspective and intuitive person. I know what I need. And when I'm not getting it because the therapist gives a response that doesn't resonate with me, I would ask her why she said that and what the purpose of that statement or question was. And I would tell her what I needed her to say. Is this control? I don't see it as control; my intention isn't to control. I see it as me being very in tune with myself and knowing what I need, and conveying it to her.

In session yesterday, she said that instead of telling her what to say, a better way for me to phrase it would be to tell her how I felt like what she said wasn't empathizing with me. And she would explain how her response was actually empathic and in tune with what I was saying. I don't get it. I think that this has been what I was doing all this while??

And, isn't this her trying to control me and what I say?? She's telling me how I should phrase myself. Isn't she doing the very thing she's telling me not to do??

And I do not and have never said to her, "You need to say ________." I have never phrased it in that way to her. I usually ask her why she said what she said and I would say to her, "You saying, '________' would've been better." I don't see what's so wrong about voicing what I needed to hear. My primary intention isn't to control her; my intention is to get what I needed in that moment, in therapy.

How's it going in for say a massage, and telling the person to focus more on your shoulders? It's not controlling the massage therapist; it's voicing what you need.

[feileacan]

Originally Posted by mindmechanic

Interesting. I had a session with the therapist yesterday after I posted this. She said that I was trying to control her - what she says and when she says what. See, my intention wasn't to control her. It's just that I am extremely, extremely in tune with my needs. I am a very introspective and intuitive person. I know what I need. And when I'm not getting it because the therapist gives a response that doesn't resonate with me, I would ask her why she said that and what the purpose of that statement or question was.

Am I being shown a mirror right now? I remember all the same discussions with my T. Because you know, I am incredibly intuitive as well and when what T says something that does not resonate with me then I start asking him to explain fully what he meant by what he said.

But you know, you may not believe it but it is almost like a psychotic state. You have constructed a world by yourself and there is no way you would let the reality to take part in shaping that world. Unfortunately or rather fortunately, it is your T's job make sure that you don't stay stuck into that psychotic state forever. I fully understand though that you don't like it. Who would?

[mindmechanic]

Originally Posted by feileacan

But you know, you may not believe it but it is almost like a psychotic state. You have constructed a world by yourself and there is no way you would let the reality to take part in shaping that world. Unfortunately or rather fortunately, it is your T's job make sure that you don't stay stuck into that psychotic state forever. I fully understand though that you don't like it. Who would?

I don't understand this part at all. For me, it's that simple: I'm in tune with my needs. The therapist says something that doesn't resonate with me. I ask her to explain the purpose of it. She does it. And I tell her what I needed most at that moment.

[susannahsays]

Originally Posted by mindmechanic

And speaking of best therapists, when I was in in college, I saw a psychologist at the university's counseling center for a couple of times. That dude was by far the easiest therapist to talk to. He leaned in, would nod his head and go "yeah, "yeah" while I'm talking and when I catch my breath, he would mirror me, paraphrase, acknowledge, and empathize to show that he gets it and is on the same page as me. And I would continue sharing and talking. It felt good. It felt... therapeutic.

But see, what feels good to one person doesn't always feel good to another. I would be weirded out by a therapist like the one you describe. Tbh, I feel most comfortable with a therapist who doesn't constantly empathize with me and who doesn't feel the need to smother me with unconditional positive regard. There is no one size fits all therapy. You've made some comments indicating that there is only one way a therapist should act or respond, and that insinuates that all clients have the same needs.

I know you've said that if it doesn't work with this therapist, you're done with therapy, but I'm even more puzzled by this now that I know you've had an experience that felt better. Am I forgetting something? Why is it so important to stay with this therapist? I think the changes you want are too much in conflict with how she practices, and I don't think you are ever going to be able to force her into the mold of your ideal therapist. You can't change her fundamental way of doing therapy.

[feileacan]

Originally Posted by mindmechanic

I don't understand this part at all. For me, it's that simple: I'm in tune with my needs. The therapist says something that doesn't resonate with me. I ask her to explain the purpose of it. She does it. And I tell her what I needed most at that moment.

Yes, it may feel that simple. But in reality you live in a closed system, created by yourself and no disagreement or negotiation is possible in that system (which is evident from this thread, the skype/HIPAA thread and from all of your previous threads).

Also, if it would be as simple as you say then that system would work. But it doesn't, does it? It works when you are all alone and do not let anyone in but breaks down a bit when you need to interact with someone, the T for instance, who for some reason is not fully complying to your system. This isolation of the system is what makes it psychotic (not in diagnostic or DSM sense but in principle).

I think that sometimes a T can forget about being empathic, and it can be helpful if we tell them that that is what we need. I don't see it as trying to control the T, I see it as a client stating their needs and feelings. I think that a good T should be refelective and adaptive to feedback like that.