"A Lust Issue"

I once saw a psychiatrist/therapist who listed these issues in his paperwork i was required to sign at the first visit. It included statements about drawing out intense emotion, childlike feelings, flashbacks, sexual, etc. Since these issues did not arise during my treatment with other psychiatrists or therapists in past, I glossed through them and did not ask him any questions about it.

Ironically, he is the only one who I worked with out of many who caused me major harm to me through his methods. I never recovered from it.

I haven't seen the thread you are describing, but I am surprised no one commented on the fact that it was both illegal and unethical for the therapist to seek consultation here on PC. This is a public forum where therapists can't talk about clients they are seeing. May be that's the reason the thread was taken down. There are closed private groups and separate networks for professionals where they can obtain peer consultations but PC is not a place for that.

As far as that therapist's particular concern, since I haven't read his post and the responses, I can't comment one way or another.

Oh, wait? Did someone say it was posted on Reddit, on some subreddit group for professionals? Was the subreddit private and secure? If not, it's just as illegal to discuss clients there as it'd be here. And even if it was private and secure, it's very unwise and inappropriate IMO to discuss clients on any general social media websites. There are special professional online groups for that purpose. Frankly, with such delicate and sensitive issue as erotic transference, I would only discuss the case face-to-face with the colleagues I know. And, as a client, I'd feel uncomfortable thinking that my T may be discussing me on social media. As a therapist, I have had a rule of thumb: if I wouldn't feel good about something as a client, I shouldn't do it to my clients.

I think most of us are here on this forum because we need therapy or at least have an interest in it. And most of us have issues, some serious.

Back to the topic of the OP and follow-up though, informing the new patient at start about the possibility of strong feelings and attachment developing is an interesting idea, but would knowing this prevent the experience for a patient who is predisposed to it in some way (if we believe in transference)? I would imagine it probably would not prevent the feelings and their effects, but maybe how the patient handles them internally and/or uses them in a therapeutic way... but we have only so much conscious control over emotions and often over our actions as well.

I think it could potentially prepare the client for the subsequent rejection that they'd experience. One could also argue that it could stifle the transference (I'm not entirely sure if I believe in the concept). Maybe the feelings develop just as normal but the client wouldn't ultimately feel betrayed by the therapist if there's informed consent at the start.

To me the point is to provide the client with sufficient information that they are able to make informed decisions. I do think it would help prepare people for what might happen, but more to the point for me -- it would allow people to opt out of the whole process if they choose.

And I think informed consent has to be very detailed, thorough, and honest. Not just -- you might have strong feelings and get hurt. More like -- there is risk of being traumatized, your basic functioning might be impacted by obsessive thoughts or preoccupation, you might develop emotional dependency, you are entering a significantly power imbalanced relationship, there is no science to any of this and as your therapist I am basically experimenting on you. The therapist should also give some data on their failures and successes, and give some indication of their own mental health status. And they ought to give reading recommendations or even a handout with some detail about transference, etc.

There should also be better screening up front to try to determine particularly vulnerable clients, whose past might predispose them to immense suffering in therapy if they are subjected to rejection, powerlessness, social hierarchy, abandonment, etc.

I like these ideas. I suspect though that many, especially those who were not as prediposed as you, would agree, in the face of a lack of other options in therapy. The end result could easily be similar to yours. Personally I would probably have said yes, I was willing to take the risk to solve my other problems. I feel now my original problem has been replaced with another one that will take therapy to resolve. I am depressed at times and feel constantly tormented. I am currently trying to figure out if the consequences of transference are best explore with someone else or not.

But doesn't that submerge the client into an infantile and dependent relationship from which it is very hard to break away?

I was referring more to the way feelings of desire, longing, lust are induced in the client and then dissected for therapeutic potential, while treating the resulting rejection, frustration, powerlessness, humiliation as unfortunate collateral damage on the path to some hypothetical healing. Sounds a bit crazy to me.

Interesting you say submerge - my t IS (or was) a lifeguard. So he knew for sure he could save me, if I were drowning. And I knew for sure that he had been broken about as far as a person can be, and survived. A few years ago, to continue the swimming metaphor, I tried to save someone in my apartment pool, and then needed to be saved myself. I didn't know what I was getting myself into, but I couldn't let the first person just drown. Maybe that's what happened to your t.

I guess the difference between what happened with my T and what happened in your two stories is that my T did let me drown. I think she thought she could teach me to swim and I believed it, but she couldn't swim either. She still kept the money I paid her for the "swimming lessons" though.

Hello one and all,

Wow there is really some great thoughts and exploration and sharing going on in this thread. (In spite of some not so great, so don't mistake me for thinking it was all good.) Anyway, I just wanted to add a few things and ask a question. First, I'll start with my question. I seen an earlier post that said it was illegal for a Therapist to post about the transference situation with their client, online. Is that true? I was wondering if you could please give me some references because it was my understanding that as long as no personally identifiable information was disclosed, that a therapist, could, theoretically, share case stories for various reason. So I would love some more information about the legal side/repercussions of what the therapist did. Thank you.

Also, BudFox, your suggestions are amazing and very much in line with what I'd love to see instated as a national and mandatory practice for all mental health professionals. I don't see anything wrong with a thorough informed consent and to be brutally honest, I don't see any reason or excuse, why they shouldn't be doing that already. I don't think that it would hinder the therapeutic process, so much as just properly prepare the client. I also agree that it needs to be worded strongly, though I would probably reword parts of your example, I definitely agree that it needs to be worded strongly. Because clients should be fully prepared for the interference that the ruminating, obsessing and incessant longing for the therapist, will impose upon their normal, day to day lives.

However, I completely understand that all situations are different. It is my personal stance that referral should be discussed between therapist and client and decided upon mutually. I don't believe that a therapist should forcibly terminate a client against the clients will, so long as the client is paying and desires to stay in therapy with that particular therapist, in any but the most extreme cases. i.e. one that may pose a threat to the therapist themselves. In case that was worded badly and I didn't convey it properly, what I mean is, that termination should be viewed as a last resort unless it is strictly the clients wishes, in which case the therapist should oblige.

I side with those that believe the best solution is to try to explore these feelings and work them out with the primary therapist, if that is what the client desires. Obviously if the client is more comfortable with a different solution for their particular situation, then they need to do what they feel is most right for them. However in general, I think it's wrong for a therapist to abandon a client because the client developed feelings for them. Especially if no informed consent was given. I think it needs to be conveyed very strongly to clients, just exactly how damaging it can be, if the therapist cannot handle what you're bringing to the session.

In my personal situation, I consider myself fairly lucky. Even though I am in limbo a bit, I have been allowed to process my situation and I have been given the grace and the time to come to terms with the fact that, no matter how much I love him and how incredible our connection is, I have to appreciate how wonderful it is, in this form because it's a beautiful relationship but one that none the less, has limitations. And limitations don't necessarily make it bad, at least I had this wonderful experience. We will see if I still keep this view when my therapy is complete and I no longer have him in my life as much or at all. lol.

Well - I had to say yes when someone asked me if I needed help. Because just before that moment, I realized the drowning guy was gonna take me down. There was no helping him, no "reasoning" with him, water-wise. I said to myself, I have to save myself first, then save him. But he was not having it. I was very lucky there was another person nearby to help us. I am not exaggerating or making up any of this. She pulled him off me. I'm not clear on how he got out of the pool then. I was out of breath for a good while. I think he was showing off for his girlfriend when he first got in trouble. Neither of them belonged in the deep end.

So I disagree. I think your t was like me - well-intentioned but woefully incompetent for the situation. It would have been far far better if I had yelled for someone to throw in the life ring. A tragedy was narrowly averted. Wasn't good, could have been worse, but really was not good - but we are still alive.

I do agree that my T was well-intentioned but incompetent. I've thought that all along. But she is paid to be competent. If she's not, then it's not ethical to pretend she is and continuing seeing clients. Can't have it both ways. Either the T makes clear up front who and what they are, or they don't and then the whole thing is a fraud.

How easily they are able to slither away from these terrible messes they create. She tried her best, she is only human. One T, a supposed expert on ruptures and impasses, suggested she was probably scared and hurt, implying I ought to cut her some slack. How convenient. They use their position of authority to manipulate the client into believing whatever is necessary to preserve delusions and to keep the system humming.

And her incompetence is just the tip of the iceberg. She was also: exploiting me for cash and self-gratification, lacking awareness of the impact of the tool she was wielding, emotionally immature, psychologically unstable, highly manipulative when things ruptured, and completely unwilling or unable to take responsibility. All of this was covered up by her professional persona. Bait and switch.

And then if the client raises his or her voice one decibel point over polite, its off with their heads. Game over. Which reminds me of my getting fired at work (more than once). The bosses didnt have to be perfect, but i did.