[objectclient]

I am currently researching a new therapist and I want to choose somebody who is competent. I have experienced maternal/paternal transference with the majority of therapists in the past which sometimes (worryingly) bordered on erotic transference. I know that sounds sick but it was as though the intimacy of the relationship and the transference was causing the ET becauseI would never have found any of them attractive or want that kind of intimacy if I had met them in real life and besides, they were all the same age group as my parents!!! Also, I'm not bisexual.

Taking my history of transference (maternal/paternal/erotic) in therapy into account, I want to make sure that this time round I choose a therapist who is competent in dealing with it. So how should a therapist deal with transference?

I understand that it's both sensible and ethical for the therapist and/or client to decide not to embark on a therapeutic relationship if there is an attraction there from the start. However, I have been reading the policies of some therapists who say that should attraction develop during the course of therapy, the client will be referred to another appropriate therapist. This suggests to me that the therapist is unwilling and unable to handle transference in the relationship, even when it arises at a later point and does not stem from a physical attraction. Is this how a therapist should practice? Surely it would be more beneficial to the client to talk about the transference and explore what it is telling them before referring them out to someone else?

It depends on the school of thought and/or individual preference.

Psychoanalysts are experts in transference and generally will work with anyone with ET as long as it takes to resolve it. Look for someone who is a certified psychoanalyst.

[objectclient]

Originally Posted by Skies

Psychoanalysts are experts in transference and generally will work with anyone with ET as long as it takes to resolve it. Look for someone who is a certified psychoanalyst.

Hmmmm......that is worrying because my previous T was psycho-dynamic and wouldn't go into the topic of transference at all. I brought it up but she played it down as something of nothing. In fact, we never discussed the dynamic between us at all which in hindsight, I thought of as odd because it was a very ambivalent relationship which could have given us a lot of material to work with. I have since found out through my own reflective writing and researching that I have a big problem with attachment that most likely accounts for my difficulties relating to others and possibly, my anxiety/depression. Damn you T

The concept of "psychodynamic" is applied so broadly now that for some therapists, it simply means talking about the past.

A therapist certified as a psychoanalyst who does psychodynamic therapy is very transference-oriented and the focus is usually on the relationship.

But one possibility is that the therapist was lying because they don't want you to think of the mechanics of transference. If that is the case, I think that's totally inappropriate.

[Lauliza]

Psychodynamic and psychoanalytic are not the same. Psychodynamic therapy is simply talk therapy and means nothing more- they don't receive special training and don't have qualifications that differ from other therapists. It's very confusing since terms like this suggest a certain expertise, but it's not the case. What it really says is they dont do CBT like so many other ts do, so it lets you know they prefer talk therapy. If someone is a true psychoanalytic therapist they will be certified through a psychoanalytic institute, so you should look for or ask about this when you meet. There are very few psychoanalytic institutes in the U.S. so keep that in mind - depending on where you live it may be very difficult to find someone trained in psychoanalysis.

Ethically it is appropriate for a T to refer out clients when attraction is an issue on both sides. If only the client is attracted, I don't think they should refer you out unless it interferes with therapy. If it does become a barrier to therapy then many Ts will refer out, and it is considered appropriate. A lot of Ts don't like to deal with transference on a deep level, probably because they are afraid of misinterpretations or hurt feelings (and they want to protect themselves). I live in Boston and psychoanalysis is a rarity here, so that says to me that transference is not a priority among a lot of therapists. It's not a subject offered in standard psych masters program, so Ts here receive no academic training on it beyond what we learned about Freud.



.

Originally Posted by Lauliza

Psychodynamic therapy is simply talk therapy and means nothing more- they don't receive special training and don't have qualifications that differ from other therapists.

Yes some therapists think that, but that's exactly what I mean when I said it's been diluted. It's a lot more than that. Here is a good description of psychodynamic therapy, which is the largely the way psychoanalysts still practice it. This definition doesn't cover everything but is a good summary:

In psychodynamic therapy, therapists help people review emotions, thoughts, early-life experiences, and beliefs to gain insight into their lives and their present-day problems and to evaluate the patterns they have developed over time. Recognizing recurring patterns helps people see the ways in which they avoid distress or develop defense mechanisms as a method of coping so that they can take steps to change those patterns.

The therapeutic relationship is central to psychodynamic therapy as it can demonstrate the manner in which the client interacts with his or her friends and loved ones. In addition, transference in therapy—the transferring of one’s feelings for a parent, for example, onto the therapist—can also help illuminate the ways that early-life relationships affect a person today. This intimate look at interpersonal relationships can help a person to see his or her part in relationship patterns and empower him or her to transform that dynamic.

Core Principles of Psychodynamic Therapy Approach

[Lauliza]

I am actually a T. On a technical level, yes, this is what is meant by psychodynamic therapy. I'm in New England and the masters programs do not have training to be a psyhodynamic therapist. So regardless of what literature says, what you will get will vary. I think prospective clients should know that seeing "psychodynamic therapist" in a therapists bio doesn't describe training but rather philosophy.

[missbella]

Psychoanalysis has its own problems and, I understand, is no longer as widely accepted as effective treatment. It made me far crazier than when I went in. No offense to those who do and like it.

[Lauliza]

Originally Posted by missbella

Psychoanalysis has its own problems and, I understand, is no longer as widely accepted as effective treatment. It made me far crazier than when I went in. No offense to those who do and like it.

I very much agree. I think it can really mess with people's minds. I would not find it helpful or healthy to be so immersed in therapy.

[BrazenApogee]

Originally Posted by Skies

It depends on the school of thought and/or individual preference.

Psychoanalysts are experts in transference and generally will work with anyone with ET as long as it takes to resolve it. Look for someone who is a certified psychoanalyst.

The big issue, as other people have mentioned, is that Transference is generally not taught or if it is taught then it is only understood philosophically. There is a very good reason for this: Transference isn't taught it is experienced. What this means is that if the therapist has not had therapy with someone who understands and works with transference, then they do not have the experience and understanding to work with transference.

A therapist must have done their own work on their own transferences in therapy in order for them to be able to work with others on theirs.

When interviewing prospective therapists, ask if they have had their own therapy. Ask if they have worked with transference. This will be crucial to finding the T you need.

[CantExplain]

It depends on what school of therapy your T subscribes to, but for many, transference is the basis of therapy. It brings all your relationships into the room where they can be examined and worked through. If your T uses the "blank slate", the only justification is that it makes transference easier.

Originally Posted by Lauliza

I am actually a T. On a technical level, yes, this is what is meant by psychodynamic therapy. I'm in New England and the masters programs do not have training to be a psyhodynamic therapist. So regardless of what literature says, what you will get will vary. I think prospective clients should know that seeing "psychodynamic therapist" in a therapists bio doesn't describe training but rather philosophy.

That's what I said in my first post in this thread. And psychoanalysts training doesn't vary like that.

Originally Posted by missbella

Psychoanalysis has its own problems and, I understand, is no longer as widely accepted as effective treatment. It made me far crazier than when I went in. No offense to those who do and like it.

I didn't refer to psychoanalysis. I referred to psychodynamic therapy with a psychoanalyst. There are several here on that forum in that type of therapy, including myself. It is actually evidence-based (I say evidence-based with a grain of salt as I don't think it means much.)

Originally Posted by BrazenApogee

The big issue, as other people have mentioned, is that Transference is generally not taught or if it is taught then it is only understood philosophically. There is a very good reason for this: Transference isn't taught it is experienced. What this means is that if the therapist has not had therapy with someone who understands and works with transference, then they do not have the experience and understanding to work with transference.

A therapist must have done their own work on their own transferences in therapy in order for them to be able to work with others on theirs.

When interviewing prospective therapists, ask if they have had their own therapy. Ask if they have worked with transference. This will be crucial to finding the T you need.

Yes, that's a good point and why I mentioned seeing a psychoanalyst-they are all required to undergo he same intensive, transference-based therapies they carry out in practice. And their training includes working with transference with clients. One of the few types of programs that require this, and in their training no, it doesn't meant taking a 'transference class'. Transference is immersed throughout their training.

Anyway, I don't have a stake in this; this thread is for objectclient. I wanted you know that psychoanalysts are recognized in the field as the experts in transference and even write a lot about ET cases in their books. I've safely expressed mine in my therapies with 2 different therapists like this without worrying about how they would react. Good luck!

Originally Posted by missbella

Psychoanalysis has its own problems and, I understand, is no longer as widely accepted as effective treatment. It made me far crazier than when I went in. No offense to those who do and like it.

I don't take offense. I think due to its nature--it is very intense and can cause regression--it has the greatest potential for harm out of all therapies.

I was greatly harmed by a psychoanalyst by the way he practiced in trying to cherry pick his clients. I lost my defensive structure in one session and all of the fragmented dissociative parts came out and I was nearly psychotic after turning into a child. It was so traumatic, and I wished I reported him but never did.

But for the most part, I think they are the most trustable, solid therapists and they don't run away from the clients' feelings. Most of the termination stories I've seen here seem to be from therapists who hadn't had the kind of training analysts have, which includes years of their own therapy and working through their own transference.

[objectclient]

Should I be worried that my current Ts won't reveal anything about their training, qualification level and philosophy?

I would run.

Originally Posted by objectclient

Should I be worried that my current Ts won't reveal anything about their training, qualification level and philosophy?

Originally Posted by objectclient

Should I be worried that my current Ts won't reveal anything about their training, qualification level and philosophy?

I would see that as a significant red flag. There is no reason why they should omit that, it is now personal information but professional requirement. For me, it's akin to applying for a job but refusing to demonstrate qualifications and interests related to the job. We clients are the T's employers after all.

[Lauliza]

Originally Posted by Skies

That's what I said in my first post in this thread. And psychoanalysts training doesn't vary like that.


I didn't refer to psychoanalysis. I referred to psychodynamic therapy with a psychoanalyst. There are several here on that forum in that type of therapy, including myself. It is actually evidence-based (I say evidence-based with a grain of salt as I don't think it means much.)

I'm sorry, I misread your post. I was not referring to psychoanalysts, just Ts who say they practice psychodynamic therapy. You're right, psychoanalysts practice psychodynamic therapy but I was just pointing out that other Ts can say they practice it too, so long as they have a license to practice therapy in general. And you're right also that there are still plenty of psychoanalysts (some people on the forum have analysts) it's just not a style that resonates with me as a client or as a T. I know psychoanalysts don't vary, I was referring to other Ts. Non psychoanalyst Ts who practice psychodynamic therapy may not vary in philosophy, but theyvary in how they work and handle transference. So I still think the OP should keep this in mind when looking for a T.

[Lauliza]

Originally Posted by objectclient

Should I be worried that my current Ts won't reveal anything about their training, qualification level and philosophy?

Yes. There is no reason for a T to withhold that info, and as a service provider I think they owe you an answer.

[BudFox]

I find the whole notion of inducing and then "managing" transference to be quite bizarre. Plus what specifically is the methodology, what are the risks, what sort of hang-ups or wounds does the T have that might intrude, and how do you know what sort of outcomes a given therapist has had with this? Is it enough for the therapist just to say "yea I do transference" and then embark on a months- or years-long relationship where the client could wind up in any number of dangerous or painful scenarios? I've tried to ask some therapists about attachment in therapy, and mostly they talked in metaphors or vague language.

[Lauliza]

Originally Posted by BudFox

I find the whole notion of inducing and then "managing" transference to be quite bizarre. Plus what specifically is the methodology, what are the risks, what sort of hang-ups or wounds does the T have that might intrude, and how do you know what sort of outcomes a given therapist has had with this? Is it enough for the therapist just to say "yea I do transference" and then embark on a months- or years-long relationship where the client could wind up in any number of dangerous or painful scenarios? I've tried to ask some therapists about attachment in therapy, and mostly they talked in metaphors or vague language.

I agree with you here. Transference is such a vague concept for most people, not because they don't understand the definition, but because it's such a subjective experience. If a T hasn't been through it themselves, then they aren't going to understand what a client who is going through. Most T training programs in Boston don't require students to attend therapy as part of their training. I know some programs in California do, so it seems to depend on where you live. Many psych student have attended therapy, simply because the field attracts people who've had personal experience, but its not required. To me, that means that most Ts, whether masters level or Phd, don't know what they're getting into when they claim to work with transference. I think its evident given that a lot of the suffering I see in these forums is brought on by how their T handled their transference.

[BudFox]

Just to clarify, was trying to say I don't buy the basic idea that relational issues can or should be worked on in therapy, via this concept of transference. I don't see sufficient evidence nor compelling argument.

Seems therapy provokes strong responses in some people, and this is taken as evidence of some issue that must be subjected to continued therapy. But seems it could be evidence that... therapy provokes strong responses in some people. Might become a self-fulfilling prophecy. I get that real life stuff bleeds over into therapy, but how much, and what of it?

This is a bit of a tangent, but it's the main thing that occurs to me when I read OP's initial post.

[WrkNPrgress]

Originally Posted by objectclient

I am currently researching a new therapist and I want to choose somebody who is competent. I have experienced maternal/paternal transference with the majority of therapists in the past which sometimes (worryingly) bordered on erotic transference. I know that sounds sick but it was as though the intimacy of the relationship and the transference was causing the ET becauseI would never have found any of them attractive or want that kind of intimacy if I had met them in real life and besides, they were all the same age group as my parents!!! Also, I'm not bisexuaual.

Maternal transference overlapping or evolving into erotic is not unusual and doesn't make you sound 'sick' at all. You'll find a lot of people here have gone thorugh similar experiences. We are drawn to what feels familiar, our parents and the lack of attunement from them are often the model for what we are attracted to in life. No big deal. I also wouldn't question your sexuality over it.

I have been reading the policies of some therapists who say that should attraction develop during the course of therapy, the client will be referred to another appropriate therapist. This suggests to me that the therapist is unwilling and unable to handle transference in the relationship, even when it arises at a later point and does not stem from a physical attraction. Is this how a therapist should practice??

Is that an actual POLICY somewhere, like written down in a manual or something?

I dont' think that kind of 'baby with the bathwater idea' should be a hard-coded rule by any means and you're right it should be talked out with the therapist before any kind of decision is made. The therapist is responsible for dealing with a patience transference in a healthy and respectful manner. No matter WHAT it stems from, physical or not. A patient should never be shamed for their feelings, period. the idea that a therapist immediately opt for termination, would be very shaming to the client.

The ONLY time transference should lead to the client being referred out, IMO, is if after some discssion and time to 'work through' the client's feelings, the issue is still a barrier to therapy and causes the patient, or the process of communication to fail. (i.e., the client is too hung on their feelings for the T to process anything else or they mistrust the Therapist because of jealousy, etc. )

Sometimes that happens. It can be informative and helpful for a client to see another therapist at that point and get an alternate perspective.

A good therapist should know how to handle most cases. However, if either the patient can't handle it and chooses to get some distance, OR the patient is unhappy with out the Therapist handles it, then they might be referred out.

[objectclient]

Originally Posted by WrkNPrgress

Is that an actual POLICY somewhere, like written down in a manual or something?

Yes, it's written down on a handout you receive prior to the first appointment and says you will be referred should any attraction develop during the course of therapy.

[Lauliza]

Originally Posted by BudFox

Just to clarify, was trying to say I don't buy the basic idea that relational issues can or should be worked on in therapy, via this concept of transference. I don't see sufficient evidence nor compelling argument.

Seems therapy provokes strong responses in some people, and this is taken as evidence of some issue that must be subjected to continued therapy. But seems it could be evidence that... therapy provokes strong responses in some people. Might become a self-fulfilling prophecy. I get that real life stuff bleeds over into therapy, but how much, and what of it?

This is a bit of a tangent, but it's the main thing that occurs to me when I read OP's initial post.

I agree with much of this and think this how and when therapy messes with people's minds. It's not considered an evidence based practice for this reason - progress is often not measurable and no one knows how many people are harmed.

[UglyDucky]

Originally Posted by objectclient

I am currently researching a new therapist and I want to choose somebody who is competent. I have experienced maternal/paternal transference with the majority of therapists in the past which sometimes (worryingly) bordered on erotic transference. I know that sounds sick but it was as though the intimacy of the relationship and the transference was causing the ET becauseI would never have found any of them attractive or want that kind of intimacy if I had met them in real life and besides, they were all the same age group as my parents!!! Also, I'm not bisexual.

Taking my history of transference (maternal/paternal/erotic) in therapy into account, I want to make sure that this time round I choose a therapist who is competent in dealing with it. So how should a therapist deal with transference?

I understand that it's both sensible and ethical for the therapist and/or client to decide not to embark on a therapeutic relationship if there is an attraction there from the start. However, I have been reading the policies of some therapists who say that should attraction develop during the course of therapy, the client will be referred to another appropriate therapist. This suggests to me that the therapist is unwilling and unable to handle transference in the relationship, even when it arises at a later point and does not stem from a physical attraction. Is this how a therapist should practice? Surely it would be more beneficial to the client to talk about the transference and explore what it is telling them before referring them out to someone else?

I'm a year into therapy w/my T. Fairly early on, I developed paternal transference that was incredibly intense. My T dealt w/it as it came up. However, because my transference was so upsetting for me, T later made small changes to how he related to me in session, which he explained as not wanting to trigger my transference because it was so anxiety-provoking for me. Oddly enough, objectclient, your post has possibly answered a troubling question for my T and me, so I thank you (even if my theory doesn't work out...food for thought and all that, you know). I've been so anxious in therapy lately, suicidal when T is out of town, even though I don't miss my appt. time. We've been talking quite a lot about my birth mother and adoptive mother and how I can't recall the first seven years of my life. The question in therapy has been, until now, what happened during those seven years that might have had bearing on my insecure/avoidant attachment style...? Now, thinking of your post, I'm looking at my behavior in therapy as a possible maternal transference. If so, my T will work w/it. (T is in private practice w/34+ years of experience and has gone through psychotherapy or psychoanalysis, if this helps at all. I didn't ask if he had experience in transference.)

Is it possible that your Ts don't want to deal with the erotic transference, not necessarily transference in general? I view erotic transference as a very different process. A lot of Ts maybe don't want to get started on what could be a slippery slope?

I wish you luck in your search. And thanks, again, for posting.