Therapy relationship artificial?

[Movingforward10]

Gosh, I would say my relationships with my parents is way way way more artificial than my relationship with my T.

The therapist's supervisor might just be talking crap?! Idk.

You know my feelings about my T, as we shared many similarities with that.

Yes it's a professional relationship with boundaires. But it's genuine and highly intimate. We share stuff with them that we might not share with anyone else. How can that be artificial?

What did they mean by artificial?

 

[somerandomguy]

I wouldn't call a therapeutic relationship "artificial" in any way, as it is a very real relationship. I would describe it as "unique." It's not like a naturally formed relationship, but it's definitely not fake, either. Many times it's supposed to be a model for how other relationships can be. Many times it's far too intimate to be the model for any other relationships.

 

[Rose White]

Many times it's far too intimate to be the model for any other relationships.

I have heard this said as well. Is that because of sharing of stuff we don’t share with anyone else? What else could cause it to be more intimate than *any* other relationship? My curiosity is piqued.

I think I understand intuitively what you mean but I’m curious what you mean rationally.

 

[whiteraven]

This is a really interesting discussion. I just terminated a relationship with a therapist who I would have said was genuine, caring, etc., but I have learned over decades in therapy that it is often fake. I also worked in psychiatric nursing, and I saw many of those wonderful, genuine psychologists and psychiatrists talk sh*t about patients behind their backs. Not saying they are all like that, but I recognize that everyone who sees a therapist is vulnerable to an extent, and therapists are trained to manipulate.

if the client can sense BS

I agree that many clients are excellent BS detectors! But...they are also vulnerable and often dealing with a lot of issues related to how they think, so...it may be sometimes that BS isn't what it seems OR neither is caring.

I think it’s real feelings and connections in the realm of a constructed relationship.

Maybe. Sometimes. But I think it doesn't hurt to be careful in assuming the connections.

I believe we are some of the best BS sensors and can tell if people genuinely care and are listening

I can remember lots of times, though, when I was SURE someone didn't and they actually did. Sometimes we have issues with perception.

I don't think therapy relationships are artificial, not if you've got a good therapist.

I wonder if a good therapist is just good at making everything seem genuine?

 

[Rose White]

Gosh, I would say my relationships with my parents is way way way more artificial than my relationship with my T.

I laughed when I read this because it resonates with me. I can’t explain what it means but this perspective is helpful.

so...it may be sometimes that BS isn't what it seems

I understand how my own perception of BS has changed over the years. And my perception of good and evil. Yes, it is important to remember. I think your point is that the concept of what is helpful or truthful changes as recovery progresses.

when I was SURE someone didn't and they actually did.

Interesting for you to say you were sure someone *didn’t* care but actually did. In my mind I have those reversed; I have memories when I was SURE someone cared and they actually didn’t. I like the thought exercise of figuring out who cared when I didn’t think they did. I didn’t know how to measure care other than attention or validation, from what I can remember.

 

[Rose White]

a defined service or provision, where the person is not trying to get needs met that should be met elsewhere.

I do see my T as providing a service.

I can sense in a heartbeat

I think I can too. I relate to this.

as repulsive, and reveal them to get better (aka, `show the Dr the festering wound',

I understand this perspective.

it is repulsive. But, self-compassion is difficult for me.

Important to note. That self/compassion counters the feeling of repulsion, the feeling of being corrupt, the toxic shame.

as having been through (I guess) neglect it makes more sense to actually say or expect nothing. It takes pushing through to say it.

Second-guessing your trauma leads to self-denial. Self-denial requires the action of pushing through. Is this related to intimacy?

to be intimate together I think it has to be appropriate, safe, mutual, totally trustworthy and not to be confused with professional boundaries.

Interesting that you divorce intimacy from professional boundaries.

I do not have a conclusion or counter-thought to your points. I am considering your perspective related to my own.

I think your last point which I highlighted I don’t agree with. Because I felt the intimacy with doctors before. It’s uncanny. Certain doctors. It’s intimate.

I don’t understand what you mean by, “to be intimate together…it has to not be confused with professional boundaries.”

Despite that confusion I am grateful for your position that intimacy is the antithesis of artificiality. It helps me focus on the concept with a broader perspective:

Does anyone have other propositions for the antithesis of artificial? My instinct would be to say “real” is the opposite of “artificial”. I wonder about the connection between “intimacy” and “real”.

 

[Tinyflame]

Hi @OliveJewel , I'm sorry, I read the original post again and I think we might be comparing apples to oranges, rather than apples to apples? I'm not sure (again) if this is helpful but I'll see if I can clarify what I was thinking, just in the order you posted:

Important to note. That self/compassion counters the feeling of repulsion, the feeling of being corrupt, the toxic shame.

^^ Just for me, I think self-compassion explains something I didn't think of, and/or provides a different context for me to see things or the past or myself in, and yes that reduces toxic shame for me. So does forgiveness, patience or kindness, all of which I value but are hard for me to think of for myself.

Second-guessing your trauma leads to self-denial. Self-denial requires the action of pushing through. Is this related to intimacy?

My pushing through I don't see as intimate, just required to overcome my stuff. But yes, I would choose wisely who I revealed it to as totally agree with @whiteraven 's post above.

Interesting that you divorce intimacy from professional boundaries.

Professional boundaries are divorced from intimacy. Or rather, a boundary is an expected and relayed code of conduct, limit in many cases, that allows me and the other person to accomplish what the goal is. That doesn't mean I don't like or love the person, but it acknowledges what are roles are there, what needs I'm there to fill. One obvious example is I'm not a, or their, therapist, I am not skilled to be no matter what they share with me. I am not also going to be their lover, because they are lonely. I also (without boundaries) am going to feel badly if I say 'no' to something that jeopardizes my job.. yet if they were thinking simply clearly or of my welfare they wouldn't expect me to do something that could jeopoadize it and cause me grief. Whereas those who respect boundaries truly do not expect it, go out of their way to reduce guilt or pressure.

I think your last point which I highlighted I don’t agree with. Because I felt the intimacy with doctors before. It’s uncanny. Certain doctors. It’s intimate.

I am glad you have. I never will. I have triggers with most things medical. On top of it, for example I once dated a Dr (Psych Intern, actually) who tried to trap me in a speeding car and told me I wasn't getting out as we headed for the highway (he had no handle on the inside of the passenger door). In one of the few times I stood up for myself (simply because I knew they say fight for your life if you're taken to a secondary location) , I said ~"Well get ready then because I'm going to grab the steering wheel and we're both going to crash and die'. He relented but then stalked and hounded me, until an ~aquaintance got rid of him for me. Tbh he sounded psycho and hated his mother and women, zero respect, from what he told me. I was also co-educated with many who became doctors, and I simply knew them for 'them'. On top of it, my mom worked for some of the best doctors in the world, and said they often divorce their first wife they struggled through their studies with; it very much seemes they wanted no reminder of their pre-success days. Now obviously this doesn't apply to all. But I can respect their intellect and intelligence but still know they are as different as people are different. So you see, it can be how we define it, and who (and more importantly why) we feel comfortable with certain people.

Despite that confusion I am grateful for your position that intimacy is the antithesis of artificiality.

I don't think intimacy is the antithesis of articiality. To me, intimacy is broad: people think of intimacy as sexual/ sex, often. But for a person touch aversive or traumatized physical intimacy may be proximity, or hand-holding, or a hug is a big deal. There is emotional intimacy, which really requires I think respect, loyalty, integrity. like the quote, it's Hafiz, or Rumi I think, that a friend gently sifts the chaff and grain and keeps what's best. There is intimacy in knowledge of another, welll-developed love maps that have been communicated (often only together, as they are sensitive and to be regarded as such) and acceptance, and genuinely loving the foibles and being able to drop one's guard, be authentuc. Etc.

Articiality I do not necessarily see as a negative concept. By way of analogy, when people role-play or practise a speech to decrease their anxiety, it is 'artifical' in the sense the actual speech will be with an unkown audience, different lighting, sounds or distractions. Or a wedding rehearsal, it is 'artificial', but necessary to prepare and logistically coordinate. Similarly, one pays a T for their wisdom and expertise, to enrich the client's life through their aid, suggestions, homework. To allow the person to discuss intimate (to them) details in order to do so, yes. And so in that there is some practise. But in a relationship outside a theraputic one, both people can be themselves; one does not exist simply to meet the needs of the other, or talk only about the other, or focus only on the other. In a less-artificial environment (or personal-boundaried one), people can let good and bad sides show, or will. There is also a decrease in a power differential, and less putting people on pedestals (or splitting) because we simply as people know each other better, and aren't required to tip-toe around; frankness is necessary sometimes. But also, it does not confliict with a professional boundary. For example, a T may not be able to say, "That sounds nuts/ bizarre!" , but in a relationship someone could, and often would. And that's not a bad thing. T's (or any professional) are expected to speak and act with sensitivty, decorum, integrity (their licences usually require it). Equally, the client is expected not to push a T in to making decisions that could harm them, or make it a personal issue.. Because if you've come to solve problems in therapy, the T is not the problem that needs to be fixed. If the T is the problem, you might need another T. (JMHO).

So I guess what I'm saying is the 'artificiallity' is in that therapy is one-sided, and everyone is to act with decorum. Wherein relationships are usually somewhat messy; people both have needs and desires they are required to negotiate and should intend on making a priority to meet for each other, and the role of the other person is not only to exist for the other's benefit. One could say, "I hate doing this", versus I am obligated to do this because of my professional responsibilty. Etc. But, still good practise!

Hope that makes sense! I am very tired. Disregard if not helpful!

 

[Freddyt]

Edit: I've just re-read what you've said and I think I understand what you're getting at.

When I first talked to my T about it I just described it as putting on my salesman suit. She knew exactly what I meant right away. What I feel is artificial are all the things you do physically to make people feel at ease. Because I didn't want to sell to them that day, I wanted to make a personal connection with them and have them turn into returning customers.

Walking into the therapists office is like waking into a grocery store. You are manipulated by how and where and they put product. By color and proximity. By having to go to the far back corner for milk and eggs. And your T's office. Same thing. The chair, the couch, the colors, how the furniture is arranged, where your T sits, how your T sits. It all seems normal after a couple visits but is it normal or normal for your T?

It's all done to help you connect with and trust your T and make that personal connection that allows you to tell them anything and everything. That's the artificial part, the construct that gets you to that point. But the artificial part works, because its for the right reasons.

 

[Friday]

Artificial = Created deliberately for a specific purpose.

Yep.

 

[Survivor3]

When I first talked to my T about it I just described it as putting on my salesman suit. She knew exactly what I meant right away. What I feel is artificial are all the things you do physically to make people feel at ease. Because I didn't want to sell to them that day, I wanted to make a personal connection with them and have them turn into returning customers.

Walking into the therapists office is like waking into a grocery store. You are manipulated by how and where and they put product. By color and proximity. By having to go to the far back corner for milk and eggs. And your T's office. Same thing. The chair, the couch, the colors, how the furniture is arranged, where your T sits, how your T sits. It all seems normal after a couple visits but is it normal or normal for your T?

It's all done to help you connect with and trust your T and make that personal connection that allows you to tell them anything and everything. That's the artificial part, the construct that gets you to that point. But the artificial part works, because its for the right reasons.

Nope, sorry I still don't really get your point. In that sense everything is artificial and I feel like your just over analysing everything. I don't feel like my counselors room, where the chair is placed, the way he sits or what he says is artificial or manipulated to get me to do anything.

For me and my counselor it's just normal.

 

[somerandomguy]

I get Friday's definition, and it makes sense, yet I feel that OP meant artificial as in "fake." There's nothing fake about a therapeutic relationship. That's why it can be so powerful.

I have heard this said as well. Is that because of sharing of stuff we don’t share with anyone else? What else could cause it to be more intimate than *any* other relationship? My curiosity is piqued.

I think I understand intuitively what you mean but I’m curious what you mean rationally.

Intimate in the sense that, in theory, we can share anything with our T without fear of judgment or reprisal. I have told my T many, many things that I would never tell my wife, for example. I would never tell anyone else the things I've told my T. And because my T and I have such an intimate relationship, I can do it (many times) without hesitation. In fact, if there is some hesitation to tell my T something, that tells me it's very important.

 

[Tinyflame]

@somerandomguy and @Survivor3 , maybe you are both right? Maybe some T's are very skilled in orchestrating or setting up the environment, reading their clients, etc. to maximize disclosure, whereas for others their 'secret sauce' is candor, or pivoting, etc? I would think it's related to personality, experience, style and what they are comfortable with, what has worked for them. Or more likely, a combination of both. But in both cases their intent can be the same, and good. (Just a thought.)

@Freddyt I could never disclose to a T what I would to a spouse, or (just for me) consider it as intimate- would be more like a weather report. But I wouldn't want to burden a spouse or shame myself, either, if I am honest. I suppose, in a nutshell for me, intimacy is my heart, I would never let myself be that vulnerable otherwise, versus a T who is paid and a great (hopefully) professional with a working relationship together. A T might even be the type to p*ss me off, but that could still be a good match.

Maybe there's another part to the question @OliveJewel ? Not sure what (you will discover if there is), but perhaps something like, is self disclosure equal to intimacy? Or is intimacy what you desire? Or, are there only 2 choices, artificial (with a connotation of 'fake') or real? (i.e. bl-and-white thinking). Or a kazillion other possibilities. i.e., the 'why' of what about this matters, and exactly what 'does' matter? (And the great thing is there are no 'wrong' answers. )

Best wishes as you process it.