The Black Box.

Back in the library at dinner time. VNV Nation on my headphones. Short cut.  Condense everything to a very short, easy to understand paragraph. Go! I believe that the therapist understood 'therapy' as  a process of separation; child strategies from adult knowledge. Child reality, written in the mind in response to less than perfect parents. In the therapist's understanding these feelings and beliefs are the problem. They created the filter through which the world appears - distorted . Remedy, again I stress that this is simply a model, comes through a dialogue that leads to understanding the filter. New understanding is the basis for separating the self from old beliefs to ways to see and feel.  Method? The nurturing parent in the therapist meets the Child in the client, and the Child feels understood and secure in that relationship. The security enables to therapist and client to speak Adult to Adult. And? And I don't agree. I don't disagree either, but for goodne...

My Substack post is a reflection on my previous blog entry, centering on the problem with the 'reparative' relationship.  Over here... [+] Meanwhile, here is a  Link  to a podcast which explores an extreme example of reparative therapy gone wrong! It was liberating for me to hear that the 'therapist' at the centre of this podcast also uses the police - accusing the people trying to get answers, of harassment ! Opening up the question once again, about how to safely communicate complaint to a therapist (my future domain).  I found this podcast helpful because it describes the process a client goes through, of bewilderment leading to dependency, this podcast helps me to understand how compelling the theory of childhood abuse and neglect can be in determining how therapy proceeds regardless of the client's facts, narrative and needs. Now I didn't really buy into the therapist's belief system. Understanding my childhood is a journey I've already taken and I...

The therapist contaminates your session with their prejudice. Unfortunately I didn't record any of our sessions until after the great rupture  had occurred - the infamous 'Brian Thorne session' - so there are no records from the beginning of therapy.  This means that the recorded dialogues are mostly but not entirely about therapy, rather than therapy.  This post is specifically about my first weeks of sessions, when I'd come to therapy weeks after my husband suddenly left; and I had come to therapy with the hope of being less panicky and more clear headed about my way forward.  But what I encountered in those first sessions, was more like a battle. The therapist took a position on what had happened to me - and demonstrated in how he spoke, and in what he said that I should view my husband as  no good. Underneath this, the therapist diagnosed me as holding on to a fantasy out of fear of letting go . In truth I was holding on despite my very reasonable fear...

The question I wish to answer through writing this blog post is: where am I now in all of this? What do I feel, think, want. What do I know, what do I want to know... And where do I even begin! OK, well I'm beginning to enjoy? Is that the right word - I'm beginning to value my position as someone who will tell the truth. My experience of therapy abuse isn't the one most people instantly think of. This makes it important that I tell my story. By crossing through the fire-wall I describe instead the other truth - my lived experience. Let's begin: I was a client, and I fell in love with the man and not the therapist. I thought that he was a rubbish therapist - not because of his lack of skill, I can't comment on that. I simply don't agree with the basic assumptions that underlie his version of therapy. And this must have been obvious to him as soon as he asked me a standard set of questions about my childhood. At that time, June 2020, I was drowning in absolute a...

 LINK

It is February - and I always get the urge to do something about what happened in February. Doing something is dangerous. The intuition that I was 'standing on thin ice '  when I sent him my victim statement proved true. My vow to make the narrative and information freeware, wrong term - but it fits - continues. Next step is to get the story published. Why? Because whistle blowers get a very raw deal, and people prefer not to complain. A stoic, just get on with it mentality is seen as noble. We are socialised into displaying humility, saying 'I don't know the whole story, perhaps I'm wrong? I don't want to do anyone any harm'. So abusers get away with it. And it feels very wrong to say that psychotherapy could be harmful. Though of course, this is why my training took so long, and why I'm going back to university. But I want it understood here and now that psychotherapy isn't scientific, most of what we are taught is a set of interlocking concepts. ...

The application for university has been sent, so I wait. Meanwhile here I am again in the library thinking things through. Rather like criticising the theories that underpin why mental health services failed our family, criticising the theories that underpin how the therapist re-traumatized me is simple. What happened isn't difficult to understand. And I think that this signifies a deeper problem. The obvious answers don't work. Theories are only theories, and the people who made up the mental health team - working with my son - and the therapist who I saw, did not set out to cause harm, quite the opposite! This leaves a more complicated idea to be thought about. Is it bad practice when a good therapist uses bad theories, or is bad practice something else? I'm clear in my own mind that someone who chooses to apply a theory that isn't working, needs to be clear on what working looks like, and reassess their theory.  For example, remembering how terrible it was to feel ...