Jenny
13th April 2009, 03:13 PM
I remember one weekend in my Transactional Analysis training we were talking about how it's important to have this "i'm ok you're ok" belief - that unconditional positive regard - that regardless of how a person behaves it's important to retain some 'okness' (can't think of the right word) to hold them in high esteem.
Quite early on in my therapy my therapist said something about there are few reasons why she wouldn't feel able to work with me anymore, 1) that she felt i was becoming psychotic 2) her own personal circumstances changing and 3) if i was doing something harmful to others "like a driving a car without insurance"
I remember number 3 clearly because it sticks out to this day (although i didn't ask her about it at the time - typical!). I wonder if that particular example was meaningful to her, like whether she had experience of this and therefore would not feel able to work with someone if they were putting someone else in this danger. But i just wonder.. how far can a therapist truly take on the "i'm ok you're ok" belief?
What if a murderer or rapist is sitting in front of you? Can you truly, genuinely separate behaviour from the person?
On the TA course my answer was that I would be willing to work with a murderer/rapist etc AS LONG AS they were wanting to change/explore their reasons for doing it, but someone pointed out that this is conditional. In all honesty i have difficulty with it though. And maybe my therapist would have had difficulties with it also had i said that i do drive without insurance! Then what? Would she have stopped my therapy!? Or would she have continued with me 'as long as' i got insurance!?
I think it's one of those things that's easy to say but harder to do.. it's like the idea that we're not supposed to be judgemental. Sure is easy to say but it's an everyday thing - i know i do it! I guess the most important thing is to be aware of it, not let it interrupt with the clients needs and take it to supervision/own counselling.
Am waffling now :D
Quite early on in my therapy my therapist said something about there are few reasons why she wouldn't feel able to work with me anymore, 1) that she felt i was becoming psychotic 2) her own personal circumstances changing and 3) if i was doing something harmful to others "like a driving a car without insurance"
I remember number 3 clearly because it sticks out to this day (although i didn't ask her about it at the time - typical!). I wonder if that particular example was meaningful to her, like whether she had experience of this and therefore would not feel able to work with someone if they were putting someone else in this danger. But i just wonder.. how far can a therapist truly take on the "i'm ok you're ok" belief?
What if a murderer or rapist is sitting in front of you? Can you truly, genuinely separate behaviour from the person?
On the TA course my answer was that I would be willing to work with a murderer/rapist etc AS LONG AS they were wanting to change/explore their reasons for doing it, but someone pointed out that this is conditional. In all honesty i have difficulty with it though. And maybe my therapist would have had difficulties with it also had i said that i do drive without insurance! Then what? Would she have stopped my therapy!? Or would she have continued with me 'as long as' i got insurance!?
I think it's one of those things that's easy to say but harder to do.. it's like the idea that we're not supposed to be judgemental. Sure is easy to say but it's an everyday thing - i know i do it! I guess the most important thing is to be aware of it, not let it interrupt with the clients needs and take it to supervision/own counselling.
Am waffling now :D