Old therapist talking with new therapist

As some of you may remember, the therapist moved away temporarily in the summer of 2018. However, a temporary year's move became permanent. Long story short, the therapist terminated me in one meeting in late spring 2019 after I no-showed for the first time for a therapy appointment. She thought that I was going to hurt myself to hurt her because she moved away. She terminated me in one meeting because she was afraid that she sadomasochism would spin out. I disagree with her interpretation. There's more to why I did not snow up for therapy that day, but I was not given the chance to explore it with her because she terminated me in one meeting.

The therapist offered one three-way transition meeting with the new therapist and me. She also offered to have consultations with the new therapist.

I have found a new therapist since. I'm hesitant to have the three-way meeting because the old therapist is placing a limit on it - that is, only one meeting. That adds a lot of pressure and is stressful. There are a lot of things that I want to understand and ask the old therapist to better understand my work with her and do some repairing with her - that way, I can better hold the good of her, our relationship, and our work, and carry it with me in my new therapy work and relationship, and in life in general. However, the old therapist isn't willing to do this. She is strictly limiting it only to one meeting.

The new therapist and the old therapist were going to talk today, privately. However, I received a text message from the new therapist late last night saying that it has been canceled. The old therapist wants the meeting to be a private conversation - that means, whatever is said between her and the new therapist cannot be shared with me. I find this to be a very uncomfortable and controlling. Why can't I know what is said between the new therapist and the old therapist? Does anyone on here have any thoughts or experience with this?

You do not have to give them permission to speak. If you don't like those conditions, revoke permission. End of discussion.

I have never had a therapist speak to an old therapist. I really didn't want them to. I preferred they reach their own conclusions about me as they get to know me personally. It isn't that I wouldn't have trusted them to speak about me; it's about wanting a new start with fresh eyes.

I don't know if I'm in the minority here, but that would get a big, huge, emphatic "no way" from me.

I'm struggling a little with responding, because I have strong feelings about this (obviously), and I'm not sure that my response is really what would be best for you. But here goes...

There's no way I'd ever feel good about letting them talk with a guarantee of confidentiality. Just no. You have no way to explain your side of the story if T1 says something incorrect or hurtful about you. And, it seems like she may have some skewed perceptions if her first thought to you missing a session was that you were purposefully going to hurt yourself to hurt her (I don't know your full history, or how much she should have been worried - so I'm assuming this is a bit of leap from her.)

As an example, I let my last T talk to the T before her. Older T told her that "Guilloche likes to get online and post on a forum for bad therapists!" - or some such. Ugh, no. He was referring to THIS forum (!) and it's not at all dedicated to "bad therapists" and, oh yeah, it's anonymous and I've never posted his information or left a review (good or bad) for *any* therapists.

That could have scared off a new therapist (thankfully my now-ex-T wasn't scared off, just confused, and asked me what he was talking about).

I don't know, I guess I feel like it just muddies the water. I would want my new T to form their own opinions of me, my issues, and what I need from therapy. I think having them talk *can* be useful, when you had a really great relationship with your old T, and when it's done a bit more openly, but just the fact that she's asking for it be 100% confidential, to me, says she plans to tell new T stuff that you wouldn't be happy with.

And, btw, how is that even legal? It's your care. Your history, your records. It just seems underhanded and slimy (sorry, obviously, again, this hits an issue for me!)

So, that's my take on it. Like I said, it is probably not the healthiest approach.

And, I totally see why the "just one joint meeting" feels like a lot of pressure. It might bring up more issues than it solves for you, and then there's no way to get additional answers.

Good luck with the new T, and with whatever you decide!

I agree, they don't have to speak, you are in charge and you don't have to let them. Revoke permission and deal with new T yourself. Eventually you may wish to speak but you don't have to.

I am wondering what is the standard practice? Is old and new therapists speak with each other, is the client/patient typically not supposed to know the content? Seems suspicious to me. Not to be paranoid.

I would revoke access if possible. But they might still meet anyway. I would find a new T altogether and let the other two Ts work it out. I would not trust the new T if those are the new Ts conditions. That is shady.

Okay; the new therapist just texted me to say that she wrote to the old therapist to confirm their meeting and that she would be taking notes to share with me. It was then that the old therapist said no, it must be kept private between them.

It is the OLD therapist's condition.

I’ve had former and current therapists speak and the content has always been shared with me by the current one. Even the negative content.

I'd be bothered by this as well. With my current T, I actually never gave him permission to talk to ex-T--I wanted him to get his own opinion of me, rather than potentially being biased by some things she may have shared. I did after a couple months (when I trusted him more and thought he had his own sense of me) let him talk to ex-marriage counselor, who we were still seeing at the time. But T told me (in considerable detail) what they talked about. I would not have been comfortable if he'd said it would be confidential. I wouldn't allow it. Particularly in your case, considering how you ended with your former therapist. If it was your choice to terminate and you ended on good terms, it might have been different.

The new therapist said that she messaged to old therapist to let her know that she would be taking notes. The new therapist said she did that because she wanted to be above board as she felt that the old therapist was proceeding with the understanding that it would be private between them. In other words, the new therapist was trying to be honest with the old therapist. It was then that the old therapist said that it must not be reported or shared with me.

ETA: I'm curious: What are some possible reasons that the former therapist wants the conversation be kept private and not shared with me? Any thoughts on this?

This seems very shady and i would tell your new t that it's not a good idea for them to meet. Whats even more alarming if that your old t wants everything kept private. You have every right to know what they talk about that involves you. hugs

I would ask myself what I would gain from having old T speak to new T without sharing anything with me. Is it worth it for you?

You also say you would like some sort of resolution with old T (e.g. hold the good from the relationship, do repair work etc.) but it seems unlikely from old T's one session only condition. As such, would you want to go along with this one session?

I would consider whether it would worth my while with old T imposing their conditions and being so rigid/inflexible. Your desire and/or wish seemingly won't be met. So, what is in it for you? Then I would decide.

It's possible she wants to share thoughts on you that she wouldn't want you to know. Like, maybe something that could be hard for you to hear? Which I feel is more reason to not let her talk to your new T--if she was going to tell her something that could upset or offend you if you knew what she said, I don't see how that would help you with your new T. Because it could affect how that T sees you. And I feel it's better for a new T to form their own opinion of a new client.

I don't know what to do. The new therapist said that she wants out of negotiating with the old therapist because it's a highly conflictual relationship and atmosphere for her - something that the new therapist said that she doesn't like and isn't good at handling. The current therapist said that the former therapist said to her that it is a boundary violation for her to share the content of their conversation with me. Is it a professional boundary violation in the books? Or did the former therapist mean that for her, personally, it is a boundary violation? The new therapist said that she thinks it is only "humane" to share the content of the conversation with me. She said that she have always been able to give at least a summary to patients when she would speak with former therapists. Oh how stressful, really. Sad.

I don't know the answer @mindmechanic I think for myself, I wouldn't be comfortable with it. And I would ask current T not to talk to former T. I just don't see what good would come from it. HUGS Kit

Seems clear. Simply revoke your permission for them to consult about you. They don't have to talk to each other, and since there is a clear disagreement about the terms of that conversation, the conversation just doesn't need to happen.

it doesnt sound like the conversation is even going to happen and certainly like you won't have any resolution or answer. I would revoke permission and move on. Old T doesn't seem interested in what will help you.

From reading your updates, it sounds like your boundaries are being violated by both T's!

We may not have the entire story about why you no-showed with your first T, why your first T terminated abruptly and with a referral (which might only continue the issues you had with the first T if both T's are in the same network and under similar guidelines), why your new T will not see your struggle with all this and suggest revoking the meeting due to your distress, and what possible benefit an old T that NEVER SAW YOU could possibly offer anything substantial to the new T without having even met or evaluated you (that would be unethical itself).

These are all RED FLAGS in not only the T, but the institution for which these T's work for or are trained by or are licensed by. If the T's are still under training and supervision, then they are NOT seasoned and likely to make mistakes, including ethical ones, depending on where you reside. If you're in the US, then this entire situation calls for a red flag!

It sounds as though your first T is making assumptions on you being a danger to yourself and/or others, without having even seen you in person. It also sounds like your first T is handling things wrong, is scared of you, is trying to warn your new T about something your old T doesn't even know for sure, and has unresolved issues based on the way this case is being handled.

Most are afraid not so much of you, but rather of being sued or reported to Boards, OIG, etc.

Then there's the misdiagnoses that can ensue when you're merely asserting your rights to receive fair, ethical, and non-discriminatory treatment. They may see you as "resistant" at the start, and some may infer that is indicative of some sort of conduct disorder or personality disorder, without having fully assessed you.

If I were you, I'd chuck both T's after all this, explain how you've felt distressed from both of them conversing without you, how you feel misunderstood, how a diagnosis or discussion of concerns about you without having even met you appears unethical to you, and how this entire scenario is unhealthy and unethical for your needs as a client. I'd basically revoke their communication and move on to a completely different institution where you can receive proper treatment and start over. Both T's are RED FLAGS! In no way will you receive the treatment you deserve, even if both T's never speak; the scenario now would be your new T would question you about why this took place, and it's too late now to start over with a new and open-minded impression from your first T.

T's are human, so their biases can easily enter the therapy room.

Can you find a new T and a new place where none of your old T's know one another? That's the safest best for you and your treatment needs.

Questions to ask yourself:

1. Do you feel you will receive adequate treatment from the new T, if the new T speaks in private with your old T?

2. Do you feel your old T is being fair in his/her assessment of you, without having even seen you in person?

3. Do you feel your no-show was valid?

4. Was your no-show and disclosure to your old T regarding you being a danger to yourself or others? If so, they may be obligated to ethically report such concerns to someone, or to refer you to someone and speak about what you had shared with the old T.

5. That said, what specifically did you say to your old T that raised alarms with that old T? Did you differentiate the difference between suicidal ideation (without a plan) versus suicidal ideation (with a plan), or self-injury (non-suicidal), or anger issues related to your thoughts about harm, without a plan or the intention to carry out a plan? --These things are sensitive and delicate issues that need further discussion to figure out the threat of harm to yourself or others, but some people suffer from the symptoms more so than actually having a plan to carry them out.

6. Only you can answer the questions above to see what may have gone wrong with your old T.

7. Regardless of your answers, many people decide to terminate with their old T's and find a new T without the old T ever knowing; your old T doesn't need to know, unless she's the one who referred you to your new T. What do you feel is best for you at this point, given all your own private answers to the above, and given all the helpful feedback that others here have provided?

8. Do you personally feel like you are a danger to yourself or others? Only you can answer this question. If the answer is yes, or if the answer is that you are unsure, you should seek treatment, but most importantly, you can call hotline numbers and/or go to your nearest ER. It is often less invasive if you go to the ER instead of someone else calling the police/EMT on you through a hotline, etc. Chances are, you can check yourself into a psychiatric unit voluntarily.

9. Are you concerned about insurance costs, etc.? What kind of insurance do you have? Are you in the US and have Medicare? If so, be aware that you only have 190 lifetime days for in-patient psychiatric care, and that if your origin of symptoms stem from any sort of trauma throughout your lifetime, you might be best served by seeking a therapist who can refer you for in-patient trauma treatment. Medicare covers that, but only if you have at least 60 days left on your 190-day lifetime in-patient psychiatric care. If you've used most of that up, unfortunately, the only options would be (here in the US) County or State psychiatric care as in-patient. They don't often disclose this information, and patients wind up getting confused. The parity sucks in this regard, because there essentially is NO PARITY when it comes to in-patient psychiatric care, unless I am wrong and they have changed the rules for 2019 or 2020.

10. There are also out-patient or semi-in-patient-out-patient treatments for trauma available, should that be what you're dealing with.

11. If you're NOT dealing with trauma issues, there are other in-patient options for those with certain addictions, impulse control disorders, paraphilic disorders, etc.

I'm sorry if my last suggestion sounded harsh; didn't mean for it to. I just wanted to ask some questions that could help with your decision-making and introspection.

Also, not only do I think your boundaries are violated from T #1, but also that T #1 violated T #2's boundaries (almost in an infantilizing way, it seems, with the "let me speak to you privately to 'caution' you about my old client/your new client"). Your new T may not be able to admit that your old T violated his/her boundaries, but it sure sounds that way to me. Hence, my reasoning for stating red flags are present.

T#2 said that T#1 wrote to her saying that she (T#1) feels that I am trying to control by wanting to know what is spoken about me. T#1 also said that based on past instances, when I try to control her, others, or situations, things turn out badly.

If I may speak for myself, however, while it seems like control on the surface, I'm doing it to keep myself safe. While I think that there are some wisdom and knowledge T#1 could pass on to T#2, I don't think that T#1 is necessarily accurate in all her conceptualization of me. Additionally, I really want to understand/learn how T#1 understood me and conceptualized my case. After all, it was three years and six months of deep, committed work. I am not trying to control T#1, T#2, or the situation by wanting their conversations to be shared with me.

Also, if someone tells you to promise them something before s/he tells you what that something is, would you be able to promise them? In other words, I think it's also possibly difficult for T#2 to agree to T#1's terms about keeping the content of the conversation private without even knowing what T#1 would share with her.

T#2 also said that she thinks it is only "humane" for me to know what is said about me. T#2 said that she has always been able to give her patients a summary of what is said between her and patients' former therapists.

It is unclear what T#2 meant when she said that it is a violation of boundary. It is unclear whether she meant that it is a violation of professional boundary or a violation of her personal boundary.

T#1 did say to me that whatever she shares with T#2 is out of support for my work and relationship with T#2, not to hurt it.

I'm so sorry you are dealing with all this.

From my perspective on the outside looking in, T#1 violated T#2's boundaries (both professionally and personally) because T#2 can handle his/her work by him-/herself; that's what they're trained and licensed to do. The "control" issue or any other mental health issue that does NOT involve a danger to yourself or others is a confidential manner, which your new T does NOT need to know about, especially if you are seeking a second opinion.

Also, if these were NOT T's and were instead peers in your life, I'd say that this sounded like "drama" and was "toxic." The blanket statement, "I'm doing this for your best interests" or some derivative thereof may not be honest or intentional in this case.

The damage of their violating boundaries of trust only makes your treatment with T#2 compromised.

If it were me, I'd explain to both parties that T#1's violation of boundaries and triangulation of the relationship between client and T#2 has caused a toxic environment that is NOT beneficial to your treatment. Therefore, based on your rights as a client, you are seeking treatment elsewhere.

But that's just me.

If you are required to stay there, then assert your boundaries and explain that "control issues" or "impulse issues" or whatever other issues are not the same as a danger to self or others, and are NOT required disclosures to new therapists.

And even if you had control issues, their example of taking control of your choices and violating boundaries with you and your second T only demonstrates an example of the same behavior they are claiming you have, which does NOT benefit you at all, no matter what they say or what their intentions are.

This upsets me dearly because you are not getting the proper treatment.

But, what you can do is make a choice for yourself and not feel intrigued to stay, or too helpless to make a decision. You are smart and intelligent enough to make a decision that is best for you, despite your symptoms - whatever those may be. You can decide for a healthier treatment plan. And I hope you do.

Meanwhile, my sympathies go out to you and T#2. I also hope that T#1 learns about triangulation and how that can create a toxic environment. I also hope that T#2 and YOU understand, as well, that triangulation is not the answer, and is often detrimental to treatment, especially when T#1 is NOT the ONLY one who is triangulating this; sometimes all parties are influenced to triangulate the situation, regardless of who started it. It sounds like a toxic situation for you.

Back to step 1, please, speaking of boundaries. Whose idea was it to have the two ts meet or talk, to begin with? Not that it matters who, but that seems unusual to me to begin with. Ive never had prev t meet next t. Pdoc and t talk, maybe.

Eta - its like trying to jump out of two airplanes at once. Nope. You leave one, then you can jump from the other. The safety in the endeavor is not improved by hooking yourself to both? Nor the ultimate achievement.

What are some positive - not negative - reasons why T#1 wants her conversation with T#2 kept private between them? Any ideas? I asked T#2, but she said that she doesn't know.

I had to look up the term triangulation. I don't like that. It's one of the reasons why I had been pushing for a series of conversations based on an agenda. However, T#1 is set on her giving us only one three-way meeting while the content of any consultations/conversations between her and T#2 cannot be reported to or shared with me. I do agree that there's something about this set up that feels toxic. I would also hate for it to get in the way of my work and relationship with T#2 because I feel some bit of a connection with T#2 - something that doesn't come easy for me.

All I want is for some repairing to be done between T#1 and me, for her to pass on her knowledge and understanding of me to T#2, and for her to help me understand what I achieved with her in three years and six months of work. She listed some things to me in email when we terminated, however, I don't feel that I achieved all of what she listed, and for the things that I agree with her that I achieved, I want to understand how we/I got there. That's all. After that, I want to move forward in my therapy work and relationship with T#2.