Posted by All Done on January 18, 2004, at 11:26:32
In reply to being Special » dragonfly25, posted by crushedout on January 18, 2004, at 10:05:53
> but see, that's the problem. as much as i *want* (as much as i think we all want) to be special to our therapists, one thing that i found informative/intriguing about the links joslynn posted is that we're not *supposed* to be special. if we become that to our Ts, they're actually having a problem. they're no longer objective enough.
>
> what do you guys think of this? is it b.s.? is it ok to be special, e.g., to be our T's faves (or one of them)? or is that a sign of trouble?
>
>Good questions, crushedout. I think sometimes I am in the minority around here, but I just don't understand how our therapists *couldn't* see each of us as special in one way or another. If my therapist was unable to find my "specialness" in relation to him and our relationship, I would question how effective he could be with me. I don't think it would work if he treated me exactly like he treats every other client he has. I have different issues, feelings, and responses. He has to take that into account. Obviously, they learn the "basics" and use them as a foundation for their objectivity, but they must adapt to each client's personality and situation.
As to "favorites", I always go back to the humanness of our therapists. They have plenty of thoughts and feelings as they are listening to us pour our hearts out each session. I think they are trained to put those to the side so they can use objectivity in formulating their responses to us (therefore maintaining appropriate boundaries). But how could their thoughts and feelings not lead to having favorites?
poster:All Done
thread:300720
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20040116/msgs/302306.html