There is
nothing left to say, new to say, useful to say, about police killing blacks,
about the terrible president, about the sociopathic Republican party. See the
obvious truth of that – everything’s been said billions of times – then apply
logic. Countless serious thinkers talking and writing fail. Protests fail. Riots
fail. Laws fail. Remedial education fails. Mass enlightenment fails. Decent individuals’
caring hearts fail. Adults fail. The logic says there is nothing that the big world can do,
or all the little worlds. Nothing. What is left? The individual. The individual
at the beginning. Children. Children who don’t grow up starved and bent, angry
and lost, who aren’t robbed of their childhood, becoming empty adults who cover
up their past then live from their buried self. There is no other
answer. You can’t train adults to care when young they were invisible. You can’t
inspire their anger away when anger is the only force that makes them feel alive, feel like
a person. The world of people thinks big books, big ideas, art, wide culture,
beautiful speeches have meaning. They have none. They move no one beyond a moment or two of inspired sensation. Meaning comes from one’s internal engine, formed in the past. It is feeling that lived, or suffocated.
"Our troubles come from the mind having to move on." My purpose is to present original, non-conventional therapy ideas. While "pessimistic" may seem a provocative or sabotaging quality, it is actually a facet of optimism. Just as a physician would do harm by ignoring injury, and helps the best by facing the worst, so must a therapist know that we grow from roots bent by psychic injuries in our childhood. Optimism must be based in this reality, not in wishful thinking.
Sunday, May 31, 2020
Wednesday, May 27, 2020
Clients who can't be helped #2
🔆 I learned that when Muzak died, it replaced its
elevator music with subliminal lectures on proctology, economics and psychology.
This makes sense because people want to avoid important truths, want to just live, believe the surface is
the content, and not have to worry about the underpinnings of their lives. Psychotherapy,
when it’s done right, brings the scum and magma to the surface, and encourages you
to invite them to dinner.
🔆 I had on schedule today three nineteen-to-twenty-two-year-old
sociopaths. Two of them no-showed. The third hung up on me (teletherapy) at the
fifty-ninth minute of the session. Troubled and Aspergery though she was, I
could not let pass – “everything is an excuse” – the personality disorder that
bathed in immaturity and justified all failure to try anything.
🔆 I am considering writing a “Teams” message
request to the Director, not to send me any more early-twenties amoral autists
and psychotics who cannot possibly profit from therapy now, and possibly later.
🔆 I am clearly a weather vane, no rock. As a
principle, I will find sly ways to encourage dependent women to question their ties
to toxic parents. Today I saw a transfer client who said her counselor had pushed
her too hard to separate from her mother. Goodness! I said. That’s not right!
While I did suggest that my job is, as I see it, to help people grow stronger
not weaker, I would not push any agenda. Saved by my appeasement and hypocrisy!
🔆 The old and behind-closed-doors wisdom in our
field is that many clients do not change, do not get better with therapy. A collateral
insight is that in success, “the relationship” matters most while the
particular therapy paradigm matters not at all: No approach is better than
another. I guarantee you that is ridiculous. The relationship and a
depth approach are what bring improvement. However, I do agree with the
observation that many clients do not change, though from a different angle:
Many cannot be helped at all. We can imagine the personality with its roots as spiritual
strings anchored in the core of the person, extending outward to all the points
of the universe. It is our life, and our meaning. To think we facilely change meaning
by techniques is as presumptuous as President Trump is delusional. Only those
who want progress, almost as a religious holy grail, as a crusade of self care,
will profit from our special offerings.
Friday, May 22, 2020
Dear Diary
I am softly
certain that the strong majority of my clients appreciate my offerings. They
tell me so, are invariably friendly, though maybe some are just courteous. One
would think that the general tone of my work – drastic, history-focused and
feeling-centered – would create a serious and sober therapy culture. But
this is rarely the case. The reason is that from the beginning, I establish with
everyone a casually intimate friendship-type relationship. It often starts off with
an invitation to contact me, text or email, about “anything” of
concern. I will then respond to the questions, requests, observations,
complaints or even cartoons in a concerned, warm, sometimes humorous and re-inviting way. And from there on, I am underwater. My clients now see me through their slightly
compartmentalized mind: serious therapist, spontaneous and easygoing confidant.
Why is this a
self-screwing? Because the clients will inevitably produce a reason, possibly legitimate, to miss that day’s session, then “ask” if they can “reschedule” for the
following week.
Why “ask” is
in quotation marks.
When a client asks, like a friend, if it’s all right to cancel and pick up next week, what can I possibly say
but “It’s all right”? Can I reply, “No, it’s not OK. I am an Independent Contractor, not on salary, and this is my sole income.”? Can I say – “Wouldn’t you want to reschedule for later in the day,
or tomorrow?”? No, as that would be begging, and worse, it would be begging them to be what
they are apparently not: needing therapy that critically. I have to
assume that their decision, frivolous as it may be, is where they are at the time, and therefore valid.
Why “reschedule”
is in quotation marks.
This one is easy. To “reschedule” for the following week is simply to miss a
week. Please: Don’t euphemize with me.
I am left with
this thought assumption: Being casual and more giving, I lose professional
respect that I would naturally have had by virtue of the work. Clients blandly squish me. Being less intimate, more boundaried
and formal, I maintain their respect. Is this true? Should I distance myself from my clients, be more coat-and-tie 9 to 5? Would that make them less likely
to hand themselves walking papers?
What I will do
is cut back. Fewer offers to “be there” as late as 11 p.m. or Sundays. No more clever jokes. No more psychoeducational email essays or twenty-line text-message empathy and suggestions. No more responding to free-floating head-pat-seeking plaints like: “I’m getting tired
of going to doctors.” No more.
Addendum, next day. Then again, maybe nothing will change.
Addendum, next day. Then again, maybe nothing will change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)