Posted by Dinah on November 7, 2006, at 14:42:07
In reply to possible neg. of babble on the ther. relationhip, posted by SatinDoll on November 7, 2006, at 14:16:58
I think it's a huge possibility.
One reason I studied therapy extensively, even before I found Babble, is that I didn't want him messing about with my mind in ways I didn't understand. If he was manipulating me, I wanted to know how. (Can we say trust issues?)
I don't know if it harmed my therapy or not. It certainly changed it.
I can't say it did away with the shaman effect. It didn't. I still find therapy magical. But I suppose that it could in some cases.
I think some therapists mind. Mine doesn't. He's kind of amused. But he does some supervision, and he's therapist to therapists, so it's not something he can't handle and he's not easily threatened by information I have or that others have. Sometimes I know more about one thing or another than he does, and he is anxious to hear about it. But of course what he has is experience, and seeing people with similar issues over and over again, and knowing what generally helps and what doesn't. (Except with me of course. I'm a new adventure.)
And actually he seems to think that the insight I get here, coming from a wider range of minds, is superior to the insights he might give me on some occasion or another.
So maybe it depends on both the therapist and the client and how the client uses the information?
Some therapists strongly believe that it dilutes the intensity of the therapy if you process stuff with others instead of them. They want clients to keep their emotions for the therapy room. I can see that viewpoint.
As a voracious devourer of information, I find it hard to believe you can ever know too much about anything. But that's me. I have more sympathy for the viewpoint that you can expend too much emotional capital outside therapy, and end up just reporting the results inside therapy.
poster:Dinah
thread:701287
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20061026/msgs/701292.html