Posted by pegasus on June 22, 2004, at 16:47:35
In reply to contact with former clients » Miss Honeychurch, posted by gardenergirl on June 22, 2004, at 16:17:34
I have trouble with this idea that it might be unethical for a T to respond to their ex-client. I know I've heard it before in my own program as well, but it just doesn't ring true for me. Unethical, in my book, is leaving someone hanging when you have previously encouraged them to open up and attach to you. Talk about confusing mixed messages.
Maybe the trick is that it depends on the context. My old T replies to my emails, and thank god he does. It helps me know that he still cares, and that all of that trusting and caring wasn't just a convenience for the therapy in that moment. I think that's a big lesson that I needed to learn. And if he hadn't ever replied, then I'd feel very much more afraid to be trying therapy again now.
But that was a context where *he* left *me*, without a lot of lead time, and for his own personal reasons. So I had no say in how or when my therapy with him ended. And I was nowhere near ready to terminate. I think he's stayed in touch because he doesn't want me to feel abandoned by him.
But he also says that sometimes he might forget to reply, because he's busy and not a good email correspondent. And it's true that often he doesn't write back, or writes back weeks later. Which hurts a little, but is generally fine with me. It keeps me from writing too often (since I know he won't reply often). And it allows him to reply only when he wants to or has time. So it relieves the potentially burdensome nature of an ongoing correspondence from both of us somewhat.
Just had to throw that out there. I think I will invite ex-clients to contact me in some cases, but let them know that I don't have lots of time to devote to a correspondence. It seems like a good compromise to me.
pegasus
poster:pegasus
thread:358715
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20040614/msgs/359176.html