quote:Originally posted by ElizaJ:
The concern with sharing her personal info was more that you said she 'told you things she hadn't told other clients' -THAT is what is of major concerns or me.
When I said you cannot possibly know for sure you would connect outside the rooms let me clarify that - yes, 'chemistry' might be there; you MIGHT have 'a lot' in common but s I said above - 99% of those you "'fall in love with' or 'get to know' in a dating sense, you do have all those feelings for and yet almost always it DOESN'T work out.
It takes weeks months, years to truly know someone. And that's when you are actively dating - a lot more contact and in a huge range of situations other than the one hour once a week in therapy.
She's said she does not feel that way - you want to believe she does - you perceive there's 'chemistry' - IF a T did happen to have feelings for a client and was sexually attracted to them the right thing to do would be to terminate therapy with that person.
So either one if two things are happening here - either she does have a spark for you and is making the very unprofessional and potentially highly damaging (to you) decision to keep seeing you; OR - she really does not have any feelings for you; you just feel there is when there isn't.
I do not disagree. However, i also don't think anything is as black and white as you are painting it. Even the finest therapist on the planet has to make judgements about what to share with a client, and to share absolutely nothing would mean acting like a robot and possibly draining the process of any sort of natural give and take. How can one build a healthy therapeutic connection without the T being human? Its a fine line of course.
I think what i am resisting here and on some of the blogs and websites talking about this topic, and with some of what my T has said to me is -- a tendency for general theories and truths to be applied in an absolute way to specific cases. And, a tendency for the client to be told what their feelings mean, with the assumption that their own insights are automatically secondary.