What an interesting question, effed!

I wish my T used more jargon simply because I am a nerd at heart and I like that kind of thing. I feel weird using that kind of terminology myself if she doesn't.

There are some things, like "transference" or "super-ego" that she probably wouldn't use anyway because they aren't too much part of her theoretical framework, although I'm sure she understands them.

We do talk about attachment a lot and some other lingo we have used includes:
-regulation/dysregulation
-attunement
-resources
-dissociation

Most of these are terms I probably used before she did, but now that she has figured out that I am smart and have a pretty good knowledge of these things, she's been using a bigger vocabulary with me. The last email she sent me contained the words "loquacious" and "lugubrious" both in the same sentence!

My T tries to discourage me from using lingo or psychobabble for the reason that it removes me from my emotions. I also use intellectualizing as a defensive strategy and it numbs the emotions. So he has me rephrase things when he knows that I trying to avoid the emotions.

Now I catch myself and laugh and tell him what I'm doing and he smiles and nods.

TN

My T doesn't use any terms or lingo. She won't even venture into talking about what she would deem as my "problem" or "diagnosis". She says it doesn't matter what label may apply, because it would be treated the same - that she's treating a person not a label. Sometimes it bothers me because she won't use term about all the things I'm learning. If I bring them up she kind of shrugs them off and says it doesn't matter

The first time my T used the words 'Parentified Child', it scared the crap out of me.

I think my T understands that I like to understand the 'tangibles', and thus doesn't seem to shy away from the terms. Though, she does tell me that if she doesn't feel there's a benefit to telling me something - she won't.

And I'm totally okay with that.

My T knows that I want to know the terms and all too, but she won't. Not only to keep the focus off the labels and problems, but she thinks I over-intellectualize and doesn't want me to stay in my "head"

The only thing I can think of off-hand is "reparenting."

Hi effed,
I did a lot of reading while working with my T (he told me a few times that he would have found it threatening earlier in his career that I was reading the same books he was ) so we often discussed what I was reading. He actually read "General Theory of Love" on my recommendation and we talked about it alot. David Wallin's Attachment in Psychotherapy and Dan Seigal's works on Mindfulness were also something we discussed. So my therapist would occasionally use jargon because it was an efficient way to communicate, but we also talked a LOT about the need to experience things on an emotional level to actually heal.

But we are both fascinated by therapy and what is at the heart of healing and the research being done in neurobiology so we could wander off into pretty intense discussions sometimes (its one of the things I miss the most now that I'm not seeing him regularly).

BUT my Ts most important philosophy of practice was that you kept yourself open and attuned to the patient and went where it led. He didn't like labels or trying to fit things into a theory because he didn't want to make assumptions that would cause him to miss what was really going on with a client. We literally discussed my diagnosis once and it was clear that he used it only for insurance purposes.

So in some ways I had the best of both worlds, my T was quite open to discussing anything I wanted to and always welcomed my reading and wanting to discuss it, but he was also very focused on me getting to my feelings.

He was also very supportive of me being on this forum. He believed that he was a wounded healer, and that the only difference between us is that he was fulfilling the role of healer. But he was very humble and open to learning no matter where the knowledge came from. I really respected and appreciated that as I tend to grab stuff from everywhere and bring it into the room. So while he was quite comfortable talking about things in "technical" terms, he never used it to set himself up as an expert or having arcane knowledge I wasn't capable of understanding.

AG

Thanks everyone for your replies

It's an interesting dichotomy. I totally get the disconnect that can occur between intellectualizing and experiencing. On the other hand, I almost feel like I'm playing dumb sometimes as I listen to her talk around something, and all the while I'm thinking "oh she means, 'enactment'". For example. LOL.

It feels like I am not being completely honest, which I suppose is no big surprise. Months on, I still struggle with opening up completely.

But I do like hearing that others have brought articles, etc. and it has been welcomed. Maybe that's in the cards for me as well...


effed