[thesnowqueen]

My current T has been through A LOT with me over the last 2 and a half years. She has given me great support through a bereavement and a family crisis as well as shedding light on my family of origin. Here’s the thing - I am moving between cities every few months and there is no way to get to her from the other city. At first she did not want to give therapy by Skype or call but after one or two crises there she agreed to do it by audio call. That’s when things seemed to break down a bit - I found her dismissive about one of my concerns and slightly patronising over another. I discussed this with her and she said when I was away she became more directive and that she would be more aware of this in the future. 


Recently in actual session in her rooms I brought up my persistent difficulty of being blocked since the bereavement - not being able to write anymore. She suggested that this might be because I ruminate so much over certain issues, and scrutinise others, and that might be what is ‘blocking’ me.

I wasn’t too sure about that and having nothing more to say on the topic I began talking about something that had upset me recently - a friend who let me down in a particular situation. . She began talking about this and after some time I just lost interest in it - I felt we were belabouring the subject. Anxious over dwindling time I must have checked my watch even more than I usually do. So, she asked me if there was something I still wanted to discuss because I was checking the time. I replied that I didn’t think what we were discussing was so significant and that maybe what we had been discussing before WAS more important.

#Her response was something like this: ‘Well you see - you brought this up so I HAD to address it - and now you are sitting here and clock-watching, and 5 minutes before the session ends you say something else is more important.’ I was taken aback and said I didn’t think I had the skill to pre-arrange all of that. She assured me that she didn’t think I HAD done that in any way. This just left me a bit confused.

I felt chastised but perhaps I was confused about what and so I said that she seemed to have she had confirmed her original hypothesis - that I mull over negative things about others to avoid doing more important things. I pointed out that that wasn’t a very appealing portrait of me. She replied that she did not find it unappealing or bad, or disapprove and hugged me goodbye to show that (this is something we have established is ok. However, I still left feeling tense and confused.


I was too ill to attend the next session so we agreed to do it by phone. I was conscientous about NOT being ‘avoidant’ so I quickly brought up the fact that I thought she had been disapproving in the last session. Again she insisted that I was projecting that due to critical parent figures. I mentioned that the word ‘clock watching’ is very negative. Her response was to say that I was interpreting it as negative. I then said I had asked a few friends and before I could even finish she spoke over me and said ’well that is the problem because they weren’t there and don’t know the context.’ I was finding the tone of all this unpleasant so I changed the subject to other issues - like how I am dealing with being sick - but afterwards I just felt certain that I needed to change therapist. 


I'm confused at this kind of 'bickering'. I'm not sure if it is the psychodynamic paradigm which just annoys me or if she was being reactive or what. After the session I felt pretty sure I needed to terminate. What do you think?

[Rive.]

Imo she seems overly defensive. She is not hearing you. Granted, I don't know what is going on through her head but it doesn't seem like what she is doing is very 'therapeutic' but more like scoring a point.

The exchanges between the two of you read like some sort of badminton match where she seems engaged in volleying the ball away from her..

She is dismissing the impact of what she says, or of what is happening in therapy, on you. So yes, she does come across as taking your comments/feedback personally.

[thesnowqueen]

Thanks so much for reading all that Rive! I think I agree with you. It felt like I was being made to hold the ball... But also like I didn't want to insist she hold the ball, cos holding balls isn't the issue...

[SalingerEsme]

Do you think it is some kind of enactment, and she feels either abandoned or put out by you moving? If this is very atypical behavior for her, "not like her", it is probably analytic . If it is something you've seen before, passive aggressive, then maybe she is ambivalent about treating you without the normal routine?

Originally Posted by thesnowqueen

My current T has been through A LOT with me over the last 2 and a half years. She has given me great support through a bereavement and a family crisis as well as shedding light on my family of origin. Here’s the thing - I am moving between cities every few months and there is no way to get to her from the other city. At first she did not want to give therapy by Skype or call but after one or two crises there she agreed to do it by audio call. That’s when things seemed to break down a bit - I found her dismissive about one of my concerns and slightly patronising over another. I discussed this with her and she said when I was away she became more directive and that she would be more aware of this in the future. 


Recently in actual session in her rooms I brought up my persistent difficulty of being blocked since the bereavement - not being able to write anymore. She suggested that this might be because I ruminate so much over certain issues, and scrutinise others, and that might be what is ‘blocking’ me.

I wasn’t too sure about that and having nothing more to say on the topic I began talking about something that had upset me recently - a friend who let me down in a particular situation. . She began talking about this and after some time I just lost interest in it - I felt we were belabouring the subject. Anxious over dwindling time I must have checked my watch even more than I usually do. So, she asked me if there was something I still wanted to discuss because I was checking the time. I replied that I didn’t think what we were discussing was so significant and that maybe what we had been discussing before WAS more important.

#Her response was something like this: ‘Well you see - you brought this up so I HAD to address it - and now you are sitting here and clock-watching, and 5 minutes before the session ends you say something else is more important.’ I was taken aback and said I didn’t think I had the skill to pre-arrange all of that. She assured me that she didn’t think I HAD done that in any way. This just left me a bit confused.

I felt chastised but perhaps I was confused about what and so I said that she seemed to have she had confirmed her original hypothesis - that I mull over negative things about others to avoid doing more important things. I pointed out that that wasn’t a very appealing portrait of me. She replied that she did not find it unappealing or bad, or disapprove and hugged me goodbye to show that (this is something we have established is ok. However, I still left feeling tense and confused.


I was too ill to attend the next session so we agreed to do it by phone. I was conscientous about NOT being ‘avoidant’ so I quickly brought up the fact that I thought she had been disapproving in the last session. Again she insisted that I was projecting that due to critical parent figures. I mentioned that the word ‘clock watching’ is very negative. Her response was to say that I was interpreting it as negative. I then said I had asked a few friends and before I could even finish she spoke over me and said ’well that is the problem because they weren’t there and don’t know the context.’ I was finding the tone of all this unpleasant so I changed the subject to other issues - like how I am dealing with being sick - but afterwards I just felt certain that I needed to change therapist. 


I'm confused at this kind of 'bickering'. I'm not sure if it is the psychodynamic paradigm which just annoys me or if she was being reactive or what. After the session I felt pretty sure I needed to terminate. What do you think?

[thesnowqueen]

SaligerEsme - thanks for reading!

I don't know enough about her to be able to make such interpretations! And I really don't want to have to analyse my T

I do feel we MIGHT have made good friends in different circumstances and that maybe we are too similar. She tells me I rationalise too much (avoid feeling by over thinking) but I suspect she has the same tendency and we are both quite intense and share political views and values....

[thesnowqueen]

I think part of my question is whether this has to do with her using a 'psychodynamic' style. I had a T about two decades ago and things deteriorated in a similar way. Everything always seemed to come back to ME and some unhealthy attribute of mine. I feel like a lot of the terms they use, 'avoidance', 'projection', 'rationalisation' are eventually all ways of finding the client 'guilty'. And no matter how critical they may be they can always just insist the value judgement isn't from them. I had a long term CBT therapist who NEVER used any theoretical terminology - not even from CBT (lol!) and this kind of thing never happened. He just maintained an attitude of neutral curiosity throughout!

[Elio]

I don't know. It kind of reminds me of my recent rupture with my T. My T made observational comments about my behavior (interpretations). When I tried to bring up how it seemed like she was acting different and what not, I felt shot down and blocked out. It has taken some time for things to start to feel somewhat right again.

So - yeah, I think it is an intervention action in therapy that can cause some struggles depending on a large number of factors. For what it's worth, it's taken close to 10 weeks for things to start to feel good again between us. At the moment, I think it's been a good thing for me to have stuck with it. Hard to say I will feel the same way when things are eventually done with this T - I guess it will depend on where I am there on if I was able to really get through this or if I just shoved it down.

[thesnowqueen]

Yeah, it's hard to know... However, I did stay far too long with another T after this dynamic had started so I don't want to make the same mistake. Also, for what it's worth (very little), the term clock-watching IS according to basic dictionary definition inherently disapproving - it means an employee who is eager for work to come to an end and is more concerned with this than the job he is doing.

[Elio]

Since this seems to be a pattern with T's. Seems like it's something in and of itself to be curious about.

Yeah, I'd probably take the term 'clock watching' in a disapproving way even if the T didn't really mean it that way.

One of the things my T said during the period of problems was that I tend to give hints about things I want to talk about. We talked about it later and she meant it as a compliment. I still don't see it as a compliment and haven't figured out how it might be seen as one. I took as her saying that I am not completely open to her, that I hide things -- or something like that. I think I might be able to see that wasn't what she meant by it; I doubt I'll get to seeing how it was a compliment.

As far as your T's comment about watching the clock, it could be lots of different things. Without talking to her about what she was trying to convey. It's very possible that it was simply a poor choice of words due to her not managing her internal feelings of pressure or something.

Why do you think you were checking the clock so frequently if you did not want to be done with whatever you were talking about? Do you typically watch the clock during your sessions or was this an unusual set of behaviors?

[snowangel17]

Originally Posted by Elio

So - yeah, I think it is an intervention action in therapy that can cause some struggles depending on a large number of factors. For what it's worth, it's taken close to 10 weeks for things to start to feel good again between us. At the moment, I think it's been a good thing for me to have stuck with it. Hard to say I will feel the same way when things are eventually done with this T - I guess it will depend on where I am there on if I was able to really get through this or if I just shoved it down.

What do you mean by an intervention action in therapy? Do you mean as in a T might do this on purpose? I ask because in my last session I had some similarities that sound like this exact dynamic. It's had to tell if it's just a one-off session where we weren't in tune or if its the start of a dynamic like this. My T did not seem as understanding as they usually would.

[Elio]

Originally Posted by snowangel17

What do you mean by an intervention action in therapy? Do you mean as in a T might do this on purpose? I ask because in my last session I had some similarities that sound like this exact dynamic. It's had to tell if it's just a one-off session where we weren't in tune or if its the start of a dynamic like this. My T did not seem as understanding as they usually would.

Yes/no in terms of the on purpose. There are a few different definitions out there for psychotherapy intervention - the most generic one I found is: Any action or inaction, including verbal and nonverbal behavior, taken by a psychotherapist with the purpose of advancing treatment.

So your T may have purposely brought up something to talk about in an attempt to bring something to awareness or get you to think about how something is impacting you, or whatever. I think I waffle on if a good therapist would do something as calculating as to incite an altercation or rupture. I'm sure they bring up topics that are sensitive and they may miss the mark on timing, word choice, or general technique in delivery. I guess I want to believe that when something goes astray with good therapists it is due to one of several different things none of them being because the T wanted to offend, upset, or purposely cause a rupture/pain. They are human; they make mistakes and have bad days; they have their own issues that may filter in regardless of their training/experience; and we have issues so likely they'll touch something that is "triggering" for us. I believe most of them are taught that it is those things that result in the ruptures and that they don't have to fabricate them. Then again, I'm not a therapist, nor have I been in any therapy training program so, it's possible that being confrontational, or somehow rocking the boat, is one of those interventions given either client temperament/needs or therapy stagnation, or ...?

As you can see from here -
The Ten Coolest Therapy Interventions: Introduction | Psychology Today

one intervention is: Head-On Collision.

This is explained as:the therapist becomes a much more active agent of change and where resistance is handled directly and firmly.

Cool Intervention #5: Head-On Collision | Psychology Today

[BudFox]

Originally Posted by thesnowqueen

I then said I had asked a few friends and before I could even finish she spoke over me and said ’well that is the problem because they weren’t there and don’t know the context.’

It's ironic, because therapists make a living presumptuously judging and interpreting things from a distance.

The whole exchange reminds of something Masson or Ferenczi said... psychoanalytic interpretation can be an act of aggression.

I could never tolerate this contrived drama again, and having to spin my wheels wondering to what extent it's fake and/or a deliberate manipulation.

[feileacan]

To me this T sounds a bit too defensive, which could be true or it could be partly due to your interpretation of your interactions.

Psychoanalytic therapy is all about meanings. To you, the statement about clock-watching has a negative meaning. Per your description you were watching clock, so it could have been also simple observation - pointing out the fact that this was actually happening. A reasonable thing to do next would be to have a discussion about the meaning of this interaction - what is the meaning you assigned to it, what was her meaning when she said it, what was the meaning of this whole interaction between you two.

Does your T really use clinical language in session? Like the words you mentioned: 'avoidance', 'projection', 'rationalisation'. If so, then you could confront her about it and tell that this is not helpful - that it feels that she is shielding herself from the true interaction with you with such words.

However, things coming back to you makes sense, because it is your therapy and not the T's. That doesn't mean that the T is perfect or has no problem in herself. But it would be totally inappropriate for her to start using your therapy time to work on her problems - that's what her own therapy and supervision is for. So, when things are turned back to you, it's not because you are "faulty" or "guilty". It's because you are in therapy assumably because you want to work with yourself and change yourself.

[stopdog]

Ryan Howes is one of those guys who I detest. He is a great one for giving himself a ton more credit than he deserves for anything.
Don’t let those guys manipulate you. Their so-called interpretations could be just as full of crap as anybody else’s. Just because the therapist says it doesn’t make it true

It sounds like it was a really crappy session.

When I began reading this, I suspected being on Skype has something to do with this dynamic, as you mentioned things went sour after starting Skype. Without the eye contact, I think opportunities for missattunement (on both ends) are much more frequent.

At first she did not want to give therapy by Skype or call but after one or two crises there she agreed to do it by audio call. That’s when things seemed to break down a bit - I found her dismissive about one of my concerns and slightly patronising over another. I discussed this with her and she said when I was away she became more directive and that she would be more aware of this in the future. 


I couldn't make much of the situation without understanding this. What does she mean by becoming more directive? Is she saying she changed her therapy style? Was she more passive before? What does being more directive look like? I am stumped.

[thesnowqueen]

[The whole exchange reminds of something Masson or Ferenczi said... psychoanalytic interpretation can be an act of aggression. .[/QUOTE]

- Budfox that totally rings the truth bell for me.

[thesnowqueen]

Hi Elio, unlike Stopdog I don't know much about the writer. The article seems like an overview of some specific therapeutic techniques. If so, I don't think they are working for me because I just feel pretty alienated. I doubt she is ill-intentioned or actually wants to do me harm - I just think such interactions are not well-considered, calm or reflective.

Octoberful, I also thought it was this that lead to the breakdown of it but I'm not sure. Being directive means the T takes more control of the process. She said that when I am away she becomes 'frustrated for me' due to some of my difficulties and that she will be careful to regulate this better. An example: I am severely without a sense of direction and so I would be asking her whether that might be due to certain experiences rather than just dyspraxia (whether my failure to observe things could be a protective mechanism). Her response was to dismiss the question ('what difference would the answer make?') and instead ask me whether I'm noting landmarks in my new city.

[Xynesthesia2]

The OP reminded me of my experience with my first T a bit. Things were going okay for a while and when I started questioning his actions and approaches, it all went downhill fast. He was completely unwilling to take responsibility for his acts and just threw everything back onto me, with ridiculous and completely unfounded interpretations and projections. I was not interested in paying for therapy about the therapy so I ended it after a bit less than a year. I found that the T and I were just very incompatible and the approach (it was psychoanalytic) was also not useful for me. So I think it may be that you are acting out some interesting and informative patterns that are helpful to understand but perhaps also that you are just frustrated about something that is not helpful and causes extra, unnecessary frustrations. Sometimes it is not easy to tell these two scenarios apart but, I think, is important. What you describe in the OP sounds quite defensive and manipulative at the minimum. That can actually happen when you probe into something they are insecure about, it is common human behavior and I don't think we can say Ts are exempt.

Originally Posted by thesnowqueen

Octoberful, I also thought it was this that lead to the breakdown of it but I'm not sure. Being directive means the T takes more control of the process. She said that when I am away she becomes 'frustrated for me' due to some of my difficulties and that she will be careful to regulate this better. An example: I am severely without a sense of direction and so I would be asking her whether that might be due to certain experiences rather than just dyspraxia (whether my failure to observe things could be a protective mechanism). Her response was to dismiss the question ('what difference would the answer make?') and instead ask me whether I'm noting landmarks in my new city.

She admits her feelings that are contributing, but I have never heard of such a thing as you described. I understand what you wrote about it, about being more directive, and the concept itself, but I can't see how she is applying that and don't understand jer her reasoning. I thought the frustration thing could be about her trying to pin it as projective identification but don't know enough to add an opinion. What difference would that make didn't seem like a helpful response.

[thesnowqueen]

Originally Posted by Xynesthesia2

So I think it may be that you are acting out some interesting and informative patterns that are helpful to understand but perhaps also that you are just frustrated about something that is not helpful and causes extra, unnecessary frustrations. Sometimes it is not easy to tell these two scenarios apart but, I think, is important. What you describe in the OP sounds quite defensive and manipulative at the minimum. That can actually happen when you probe into something they are insecure about, it is common human behavior and I don't think we can say Ts are exempt.

My objection was primarily to the way she responded when I wanted to change the subject in the session. But I think my shock at THAT got confused with my uncertainty about her theory about my creative block. She was therefore incredulous at my taking so much umbrage at a fairly innocuous interpretation! On the other hand - her refusal to look at her own word choice, or reflect back on her tone at the time, and the way she went directly into further reproof does not give me a lot of faith.

I agree about the defensive but what part of the action did you find manipulative? I think, like you, I do not find this form of psychoanalysis helpful though.

[thesnowqueen]

xynesthesia2, under a different topic you say:

'I would have wanted my Ts to call me out on my BS and to ask me probing questions and share observations and insights that provide a different perspective and potentially more useful tools to work on my issues. No such luck and it greatly contributed to why I gave up on therapy in the end. Looking more at the different types, I now think that a life coach or occupational therapist that focus on practical solutions and function might have been more useful for me.'

Do you think it likely that she is doing this? My last T was MUCH more mellow! In a comment above I mentioned how she wanted to insist on practical actions like noting landmarks and that this remark of hers actually annoyed me! (If it was that simple I would have been taking landmarks all my damn life.)

[thesnowqueen]

Originally Posted by octoberful

She admits her feelings that are contributing, but I have never heard of such a thing as you described. I understand what you wrote about it, about being more directive, and the concept itself, but I can't see how she is applying that and don't understand jer her reasoning. I thought the frustration thing could be about her trying to pin it as projective identification but don't know enough to add an opinion. What difference would that make didn't seem like a helpful response.

So, instead of allowing me to explore the different factors contributing to my dysgeographica she started asserting practical steps I could take to assist. This felt patronising and dismissive to me. Her explanation is that she felt 'frustrated on my behalf.' As a result she wanted to go direct to practical steps i could take to somehow resolve it.

I did wonder whether she was trying to soften the fact that she was frustrated BY me - but I let it go...

Ok, I got it now. She seems to have quit doing psychoanalytic therapy, which is more exploratory in nature, and she doesn't seem to good at what she's doing now.

Odd she completely changed her approach, I'm assuming without having a conversation with you about changing the way you work together. I would not be happy at all and would not be ok with that change without a discussion. I have heard of Ts changing the approach when the client decompensates or regresses too much.

[Xynesthesia2]

Originally Posted by thesnowqueen

xynesthesia2, under a different topic you say:

'I would have wanted my Ts to call me out on my BS and to ask me probing questions and share observations and insights that provide a different perspective and potentially more useful tools to work on my issues. No such luck and it greatly contributed to why I gave up on therapy in the end. Looking more at the different types, I now think that a life coach or occupational therapist that focus on practical solutions and function might have been more useful for me.'

Do you think it likely that she is doing this? My last T was MUCH more mellow! In a comment above I mentioned how she wanted to insist on practical actions like noting landmarks and that this remark of hers actually annoyed me! (If it was that simple I would have been taking landmarks all my damn life.)

Of course it is possible but, as I said, it is not always easy to know if it is that or just defensiveness. The way I knew about mine was that he was generally very sloppy and dogmatic and the apparent "challenge" was very misaligned with me, what he said just did not strike a chord with me and my issues at all. Irrelevant and it was often clear that he was projecting his stuff (I knew that because he has a ton of info on him on the public web). I don't think anyone on an anonymous forum can tell you with certainty what's going on, I just pointed out what I see as two possibilities to consider. There are people here on PC and elsewhere who apparently engage in months (or even years) of "bickering" with their Ts and get something meaningful out of it. For me, that was just not of interest. Plus, that T was also not very sophisticated intellectually, so there wasn't even the possibility of truly insightful, deeper debates and competition, just not the level I am willing to engage (it may sound condescending but was the truth for me). We were also extremely different in every sense almost, no surprise it ended up full of misunderstandings.

With my second T the intellectual part was a much better match and we never had any conflicts really. What I experienced with the first T was definitely not a meaningful pattern of mine although I do sometimes run into similar with people who have similar personalities to him, I know it is not a compatible pairing and I understand why, so not much usefulness in dissecting further.

I think the best use of comments on this forum is to consider the content if it sounds interesting but, ultimately, go with your own instinct.

[thesnowqueen]

Thanks, Xynes! Yes, I do use this forum in the way you suggest. There are some similarities with the dynamic you had - for instance her 'hypothesis' really seems neither here nor there. And while I am fairly retarded in some areas (eg.spatial intelligence), I am fairly gifted in another (verbal) and there might be some mismatch here. Personality wise and regarding values though we resonate quite strongly, so it's less clear-cut than it was with yours!

I would totally understand if you have had enough of this conversation but I am curious about what you found manipulative in her interactions...