Sideways.

For a conflict to be resolved through mediation certain factors need to be present. If both parties care enough about the relationship, if the power difference can be levelled out so that both parties feel safe enough, and if both parties feel as if they have some control over the process, mediation will probably be of a considerable help.

The therapist and I? 

A good mediation would not make!

I left his room for the last time feeling that he was glad to see the back of me. And as far as I can tell he has no intention of ever addressing what went wrong.

There is also a problem created by therapy culture. The complaint 'formulation' is in itself a bad start. It isn't focused on reparation.

So, what am I saying?

Clients can find that therapy makes their mental state worse. They feel that something was wrong, so if they make a complaint and if the therapist is working for a charity for instance, the manager investigates, and works with the complainant to get some kind of resolution. When the therapist is in private practice though, the client has to complain first to them, and then to their Ethical Body (EB) who use their ethical frameworks to decide what was OK, or not - and some frameworks are are better drafted than others. 

So where does this leave a client who is sure that their distress has been caused by a therapist in private practice? Fact is, you as the client, really need evidence.

So I think I'm saying that therapists in private practice should be asked to prove how they have tried to resolve a conflict. This is more important than identifying malpractice. If a client leaves therapy feeling that therapy has added to their suffering, this must be taken seriously. 

I don't have much experience of making a complaint, but possibly a bit more now than most clients? And it seems to me that things could be less conflicting and kinder if the ethical bodies added conflict resolution to their codes. Beginning with a requirement that a therapist subject to a complaint must explain why they have not resolved the issue with the client. This could be a letter from their supervisor explaining the therapist's problem, and a letter from the therapist describing how they will avoid similar problems in the future.

Meanwhile the client has been left to drown in whatever went wrong. 

So the ethical body should contact a therapist local to the client - and this therapist must practice non-pathologizing collaborative therapy - to create either a repairing session, or a preliminary mediation session. If the situation isn't resolved by mediation then and only then should the ethical body make a judgement. I have learnt so far that the procedure for complaining isn't easy for upset clients. 

Worst of all, as far as I can tell it was something about the complaint procedure that badly affected the therapist whose sessions are recorded here. This experience made him unable to see beyond panic.

Anyway.

The complaint form as designed by the therapist's Ethical Body is very likely to create the dynamic a mediator does her best to sidestep. The complaint procedure risks turning a bewildering mess of guilt , fear, shame into a drama triangle, with the EB playing the role of persecutor and rescuer, while client and therapist take it in turns to be victim or persecutor...no one hearing anyone else, or understanding what's going on. 

I think you can see from what I've said here, I don't see any point in me attempting to move this complaint against the therapist, forward.

Instead I will use the knowledge I've gained, and see where it takes me!