[thesnowqueen]

There have been some comments about how the structure of therapy seems designed to leave the client confused and/or uncertain about T's true feelings/attitude to - client.

However, I was thinking that in any other relationship, the other person's true feelings/attitude is just as obscure. Sure one can ask 'do you care about me?' or 'do you love me? or 'do you actually like me?' and the other person will have no professional reason to avoid answering truthfully - but there are many non-professional reasons for a person to either avoid answering or to give a false answer.

For this reason, there is actually little point in asking these questions if one is REALLY unsure - or if the other's attitude is TRULY in doubt.

If one is in doubt only two options are possible: the other person does not care - and you are picking it up OR the other person DOES care but due to attachment issues one cannot FEEL secure about this.

Or - I suppose a third option is possible - the other person cares but not AS MUCH as you want them to...

Generally my point is that perhaps its not the structure of therapy that is the problem?

[BrazenApogee]

Interesting. Thank you.

Originally Posted by thesnowqueen

There have been some comments about how the structure of therapy seems designed to leave the client confused and/or uncertain about T's true feelings/attitude to - client.

.

Agreed and I think an ethical therapist would not use this strategy as part of therapy due to the impact on the client. Granted, there may be therapeutic value to this, but as a layperson I'm unaware of any potential value. Transparency seems to be beneficial to the client, I think it fosters trust. Perhaps it is beneficial and I do not understand the reasons. I do think it should be clear that therapy is solely about the client. Therapists are employed by their clients and honesty and boundaries are intrinsic to a successful therapy, in my opinion. Fostering trust through transparency facilitates the therapeutic-bond, I think.

However, I was thinking that in any other relationship, the other person's true feelings/attitude is just as obscure. Sure one can ask 'do you care about me?' or 'do you love me? or 'do you actually like me?' and the other person will have no professional reason to avoid answering truthfully - but there are many non-professional reasons for a person to either avoid answering or to give a false answer.

I think that healthy relationships exist and part of that is honest communication. A person that is in a personal relationship can answer honestly or hide their true feelings. My experience is that honest communication is possible, fosters growth of a healthy relationship, and leads to an authentic relationship.

People deceive others daily as to their true intentions and feelings about their partner for various reasons. I feel for those that are blindsided being in such a vulnerable, confusing relationship. However, this does happen, as you state and many continue to remain the relationship.

For this reason, there is actually little point in asking these questions if one is REALLY unsure - or if the other's attitude is TRULY in doubt.

I respectfully fully disagree on this point if the relationship involves two consenting adults in a romantic partnership. I think there is a right to know where a relationship stands. Whether they receive an honest reply is their partner's choice.

If one is in doubt only two options are possible: the other person does not care - and you are picking it up OR the other person DOES care but due to attachment issues one cannot FEEL secure about this.[/QOUTE]

Interesting comment. I think healthy relationships can exist and are not limited to those two scenarios.

[QUOUTE]Or - I suppose a third option is possible - the other person cares but not AS MUCH as you want them to...

My experience is different and I feel adequately cared for in my relationship. Perhaps this is not the norm.

Generally my point is that perhaps its not the structure of therapy that is the problem?

Perhaps I missed the meaning of your post. I thought you were also venturing into personal relationships not related to therapy. I do think the dynamics of therapy are complex. What type of structure do you think is the most beneficial to the client?

[thesnowqueen]

Originally Posted by rainyday107

.

I respectfully fully disagree on this point if the relationship involves two consenting adults in a romantic partnership. I think there is a right to know where a relationship stands. Whether they receive an honest reply is their partner's choice.

My experience is different and I feel adequately cared for in my relationship. Perhaps this is not the norm.


Perhaps I missed the meaning of your post. I thought you were also venturing into personal relationships not related to therapy. I do think the dynamics of therapy are complex. What type of structure do you think is the most beneficial to the client?

"


I think my overall point has to do with the other person's attitude to oneself usually being manifest in their general behaviour and about the limitations of asking such direct questions as to how the other person feels about one. Of course one has a right to ask such questions - and I often do for reassurance, etc, but I still think there are obvious limitations to such inquiries.

It's great that you do feel adequately cared for and I hope this is the norm. Many people, however, are plagued by the question of EXACTLY how their therapist feels about them. I suspect that this concern (when its intense) has to do with past trauma and resultant attachment issues. Of course this particular issue is not everyone's issue.

This post was primarily about the therapeutic relationship, and especially those in which transference, feelings of attachment and love are prominent. I'm not a professional in the field so would not be able to say anything meaningful about what kind of structure is optimal in therapy. All I meant by 'structure' here is the fact that the client brings all their stuff to the situation, and the T should ensure his/her own stuff is kept out.

[unaluna]

Snowqueen, i think youve got it exactly right. The client is more looking at a mirror, not thru a window, when she questions a ts affection or whatever.

[stopdog]

This sounds quite a bit like blame the client to me. It is the structure as far as I can see. You are told to go in to a virtual stranger and bare all - and the exchange is not equal weaponry. The client gives the therapist all sorts of weapons to use against the client and the client is supposed to stay naked and unarmed. Whether that stranger is trustworthy or not is, I think, a giant question worthy of great consideration. And anyone who is not concerned about it is the one who I am wondering about.

[thesnowqueen]

As I said originally:

'If one is in doubt only two options are possible: the other person does not care - and you are picking it up OR the other person DOES care but due to attachment issues one cannot FEEL secure about this.'

Either could be true. For people such as myself - the later is a very real possibility. To acknowledge that is not to 'blame myself' - it it to recognise my own history and resulting difficulties. The way the doubt recurs and is particularly charged - and the way it is patently absurd from various angles, and particularly in T's presence - makes it a more likely hypotheses.

[unaluna]

Agree. For me, "blame" is not the issue. And EVERYBODY is a stranger, imo. You say you gve birth to me? Sorry, but i dont remember! And maybe the hospital gave you the wrong baby. So it makes sense to me that psychology starts with self and other. T is usually considered an other in the work, i think.

[stopdog]

I don't see everyone as a stranger.
But perhaps the difference is that in general, in real life, I am not usually all that worried about what others think or might do to me.

[thesnowqueen]

'The client gives the therapist all sorts of weapons to use against the client and the client is supposed to stay naked and unarmed.'

I don't think the relationship devolves into a battleground IF the therapist is ethical and competent.

[unaluna]

Originally Posted by thesnowqueen

'The client gives the therapist all sorts of weapons to use against the client and the client is supposed to stay naked and unarmed.'

I don't think the relationship devolves into a battleground IF the therapist is ethical and competent.

I think the battleground is just as the client perceives it to be.

Originally Posted by thesnowqueen

'The client gives the therapist all sorts of weapons to use against the client and the client is supposed to stay naked and unarmed.'

I don't think the relationship devolves into a battleground IF the therapist is ethical and competent.

My T was very ethical. He fell short on the competence part. And, as a client, I certainly had no idea even that he wasn't competent in critical areas. Frankly, I think we may have figured out that there was a competency issue close to the same time. I'm grateful time has healed me. I think he was very troubled but relieved it was a quiet destruction of our therapy. I felt sorry for him and made him think he did a better job than he did. Sorry for sidetracking. I won't comment further. "Competency " got me thinking.

[thesnowqueen]

Originally Posted by unaluna

I think the battleground is just as the client perceives it to be.

My sense is that the therapeutic situation could very easily become combative if T is incompetent, unethical or even unexperienced. I definitely don't think this is wholly a matter of client perception.

[BudFox]

Originally Posted by thesnowqueen

However, I was thinking that in any other relationship, the other person's true feelings/attitude is just as obscure.

I have never known anyone as obscure as therapists. If therapists attempted to assert their needs, or disclose equally, or seek mutual vulnerability, they'd be accused of ethics violation. So they don't and instead they are largely opaque and their true motives and character are largely hidden. I see them as hiding in the shadows metaphorically, while the client is under one of these bright interrogation lights.

[BudFox]

Originally Posted by unaluna

Snowqueen, i think youve got it exactly right. The client is more looking at a mirror, not thru a window, when she questions a ts affection or whatever.

That is the fundamental manipulation. Feelings do not exist in a vacuum. Therapists can evade and manipulate in any way they choose by simply pinning everything on transference and projection. Puts the client perpetually on their heels, unable to trust perception.

[thesnowqueen]

Originally Posted by BudFox

I have never known anyone as obscure as therapists. If therapists attempted to assert their needs, or disclose equally, or seek mutual vulnerability, they'd be accused of ethics violation. So they don't and instead they are largely opaque and their true motives and character are largely hidden. I see them as hiding in the shadows metaphorically, while the client is under one of these bright interrogation lights.

I guess my sense is that although a T does not reveal their needs, or other facts about themselves (for professional reasons) he/she still couldn't, over a substantial period, completely conceal his/her attitude to a client.

The metaphor of hiding while a client is super-exposed is quite predatory. Given that the context is defined by T's role which is to assist the client, rather than destroy him, I'm not sure it's suitable for the context, generally speaking.

[BudFox]

Originally Posted by thesnowqueen

I guess my sense is that although a T does not reveal their needs, or other facts about themselves (for professional reasons) he/she still couldn't, over a substantial period, completely conceal his/her attitude to a client.

The metaphor of hiding while a client is super-exposed is quite predatory. Given that the context is defined by T's role which is to assist the client, rather than destroy him, I'm not sure it's suitable for the context, generally speaking.

I do think some aspects of therapy are predatory. But in this instance, with the metaphor, I was thinking of the T being in more in a position of scrutiny. Agree that outwardly the T's role is to help the client, but since Ts are also making money, and possibly gratifying their own needs or working out their own issues, I dunno what it is.

Never in my life would I have believed that a therapist would be out to destroy me, until now.
My Therapist nearly did. I don't know how I've been able to function after his manipulative game with my life and emotions has demolished most of my relationships.
Battleground it is. He has weaponry all right but so do I.

[BudFox]

Originally Posted by 0T8und3R

Never in my life would I have believed that a therapist would be out to destroy me, until now.
My Therapist nearly did. I don't know how I've been able to function after his manipulative game with my life and emotions has demolished most of my relationships.
Battleground it is. He has weaponry all right but so do I.

Sorry to hear that. Do you think it was intentional and malicious, or was it more unconscious? What are you doing to cope?