If we were to expand our relationship beyond the limits of therapy, we would put the whole process in danger. There are several reasons for this. First of all, when we communicate with our therapist, we (mostly unconsciously) metaphorically “dress them up” in costumes and masks (of mother, partner, insensitive villain, ideal super person etc.) And it is an important part of the process. For this to happen, a client’s knowledge about the psychotherapist’s personal life should be limited. The less we know about someone the easier it is to attribute certain qualities to them. Secondly, for a good therapist everything that is going on in the session is significant content (how does the client enter, take off his or her coat, open/close the door etc.) I can’t pretend as though this doesn’t exist if we go to a café or an exhibition, and this kind of attention is hard work which I wouldn’t like to engage in during my spare time. Thirdly, a psychotherapist’s work is paid for with money. If we get together outside the office, some other process of exchange will begin: for example I might feel I owe you some special attention (because our relationship became different, special). This will disturb the clarity of my perception: instead of paying attention on what actually happens in the session, I might try too hard to be a great therapist for you, and obsess about a technique that I should have used 15 minutes ago.
Limitation of so-called “multiple relationships” is a standard and belongs to the ethical code of most professional associations (for example, American Psychotherapy Association). Following such a code is obligatory. At the same time the degree of the therapist’s disclosure depends on their approach. Personally, I think it is possible (and useful) to share personal information (stories, examples) with a client only in specific circumstances, when it is required by the psychotherapy process. Otherwise it can have a negative effect.
Comments are disabled