En Attente (On Hold)

Du Chat et de la Souris (Cat and Mouse)

He would reach out to me roughly once a year, usually during the summer, to let me know that he was still thinking about the work we had embarked on a few years before and wanted to come back… one day.

I grew accustomed to his limited reappearances and almost started to expect them.

Sometimes he would get in touch by email, sometimes by text message. It would always be a cry for help from the middle of a crisis; he would sound distressed and eager to resume therapy… but each time he would postpone it until after the holidays or to the following month. And once the holidays and the crisis were over, he would find an excuse to defer again or simply vanish into the Parisian ether with no further explanation.

He was extremely well read and articulate and had a poignant, self-deprecating sense of humour, which would make him a perfect Brit, even though he was a Spaniard. His name was Pablo, but he was going by a more French-sounding Paul.

“I put myself on hold,” he would say. “You put us on hold,” I would reply.

This is the kind of frugal, WhatsApp dialogue that we produced once every six months or so instead of engaging in the one-hour, face-to-face weekly conversation that therapy usually requires.

And Paul certainly was putting me on hold.

As any therapist, I have learned to tolerate frustration, a great deal of it, but after a few years of this endless and fruitless foreplay, it was beginning to seriously unnerve me. Paused, postponed, and suspended – this is exactly how I felt, and it was not a pleasant place to be.

I tried every possible trick to get us back on track. Every time I would fail, and Paul would disappear for another year. “You should probably try to find another therapist,” I would suggest. He profusely reassured me that I was the best possible therapist for him. But was I?

I knew I had to put an end to it, but also sensed that this thin link Paul was maintaining with me was somehow important to him. I did not want to deprive him of that flimsy connection. This flimsiness became a kind of stable and reassuring buoy. He kept checking on me – are you still there? Are you still remembering me? Waiting for me? I was rattled by this game in which he made me a reluctant but nevertheless active participant. Was it his way of trying to tell me something he was not able to communicate verbally?

Au Début (In the Beginning)

Paul’s French was perfect, as he had lived most of his adult life in Paris. His relationship with his country of origin was as cold and uneventful on the outside as it was dramatic and complex on the inside. He spoke reluctantly about his childhood spent in a small coastal town of Southern Spain. From the very few clues that he had given me, I reconstructed a blurred image of a poor, ugly and hot place from which he had felt mostly alienated. He was an incredibly bright child, and all through his early years he was deprived and under-stimulated until finally, in the third grade, a new French teacher arrived at their school and made Paul discover a new language, which offered him an unexpected gift of novels and poetry.

“Pauls’ teacher was the object of his first sexual fantasies and romantic dreams”. She was tall, blonde, and, with her slim silhouette, indubitably French. Her small family arrived at this unremarkable town to follow her husband’s new position managing the local factory. With her sober but beautifully cut clothes, she stood out from the colourful crowd of local female teachers who all looked at her with suspicion and envy.

She was the one who showed him the way out of his misery and boredom. Paul knew that he was her favourite pupil; she always looked directly at him while reciting a poem or reading one of her favourite passages from Maupassant or Balzac. For the first time in his life he felt important and worthy of interest.

Compared to her, the girls of his age all looked pathetic. Fantasizing about his teacher, he missed out on the first kisses and romantic dates that all his acne-covered peers seemed to be absorbed by. For two years, Paul floated above them, binge-reading French novels and binge-watching French films in which the romantic heroines all looked very much like his teacher.

Did she know that her brilliant young pupil was desperately in love? She probably did, and he often felt that she was reciprocating silently, as her green eyes would pause on him while she recited from her favorite poets, Verlaine or Baudelaire.

Now the adult, Paul recognized that she was probably also bored in this foreign place to which she had been dragged against her will. Maybe playing with the feelings of a local boy gave her some solace and an opportunity to punish her husband (he was very manly, at least this is how he appeared to Paul during the few occasions when he had glimpsed him).

When I asked Paul about how this relationship had ended, he closed up.

The husband was dismissed from his job at the factory and her family disappeared as suddenly as they had arrived. She never said her goodbyes; the only tangible proof of her existence was a book, a Maupassant novel that she had lent him and forgot to reclaim in the fury of her departure. Why did they flee so hurriedly? Sometimes Paul thought that her husband had found out about them.

 “Was there something to find out?” I queried. No, nothing tangible really… a few notes left in the books she was lending him, a few Lorca poems that he translated for her into French. That cheap folio edition of Maupassant was still on his bookshelf.

Sa Vie Francaise (His French Life)

Now Paul was a teacher himself, a professor of modern literature at one of the Parisian universities. His current relationships with women seemed as unhappy and mostly unexamined as his relationship with his birthplace. His mother had always been depressed and exhausted by the five children she had to raise in poverty. He did not maintain contact with his sisters, who were older and remained in their native town. Now they all had lives that felt as foreign and distant to him as some old black-and-white films sometimes can.

Paul was married to very beautiful French woman, as he stressed in the very first session we had. She had experienced sexual abuse in her past, which made her wary of any intimacy. He knew this from the very beginning of their relationship but somehow accepted it as part of who she was. They had not made love in years, and he was barely allowed to touch her. They talked, though, and he loved their conversations about literature (she was a literary critic and a journalist). They had two children, and Paul loved the sense of family and security this marriage was providing him.

Somehow in his French life, which seemingly had all the attributes romanticized during his teenage years, he had managed to reproduce the very essence of his miserable childhood. Despite his perfect French and very Parisian looks, he often felt foreign, and was anxious to appear at ease at social gatherings.

Paul was frustrated by the lack of sex in his marital life but was unwilling to raise this issue with his wife. He was scared to bring up the demons of her past with his demands. At a deeper level, this situation allowed him to fantasize about other women – often his colleagues, or even his students.

His fantasy life was full of shadowy women, all very elegant and very French, mostly coming out of the movies from his childhood. He shamefully admitted that he would lock himself in the bathroom before going to bed and masturbate to the imaginary films he would silently run in his head. Paul recognized that his wife certainly knew what his long evening showers meant. Did he ever think about talking with her about it, or inviting her in, I asked. No, how could he?

I guess that by maintaining his chaste marriage and chasing unreachable and mostly imaginary women, he remained loyal to his French teacher and to his early dreams. As an adult, he felt confused about how unhappy he was despite the successful reproduction of his childhood fantasies.

Toujours en Attente (Forever on Hold)

Even though we managed to slowly and painfully shift from the initial idealization to a more appropriate anger towards his teacher, Paul was still very protective of her in our sessions. He believed that she had saved him, offering him a path to a better life. He seemed to have accepted the hurt that came with this dubious gift. Something similar was probably re-enacted in his sexless marriage: he was offered companionship and a sense of safety by the woman whom he admired but was unable or unwilling to give him the intimacy he craved.

In keeping me on hold, Paul was probably reproducing exactly what the French teacher had made him feel. She had vacated his life, leaving behind a promise of richer possibilities. For a few years after her vanishing and until he finished high school, Paul secretly hoped that she would reappear in their town. He ached and could not believe she would never return to his life. Much later, when he finally moved to Paris—her native city—he secretly hoped to spot her in some café or to bump into her in the narrow streets of the Quartier Latin. This, of course, never happened, but he kept fantasizing about it for years.

An unresolved, unsatisfying relationship with a woman was everything Paul seemed to know—his mother, the French teacher, his wife—and I was now designated by his unconscious to play a part in another variation on this sad relational refrain. But each time he disappeared, I was left feeling unable to do something differently, to create a different theme, a version that would include some stronger connection, and which would allow Paul to believe in the possibility of new relationships.

Each time he disappears, I have tried to change this pattern in vain. At least, so far…

What’s the Limit? Maintaining and Understanding Boundaries in Psychotherapy

Anita* was an experienced therapist who consulted with me about a client who consistently arrived late for sessions and refused to leave when his time was up. “I don’t usually have difficulties setting limits with clients,” she told me. “But I’ve tried everything with him, and nothing is working. In our last session, I told him that I was going to have to start charging him for the extra time. He just said, ‘okay.’ And he still didn’t leave.”

We all know that boundaries are extremely important in any psychotherapy relationship, but they are not always easy to define or to maintain. They’re also not always easy to identify.

Defining Boundaries in Psychotherapy

What is a boundary, in fact? I like what a group of physicians has said: “A boundary may be defined as the ‘edge of appropriate professional behavior, transgression of which involves the therapist stepping out of the clinical role or breaching the clinical role.” I also like what Gary and Joy Lundberg write in their book I Don’t Have to Make Everything All Better: In daily interactions with others, boundaries “are statements of what you will or won’t do, what you like and don’t like, how far you will or won’t go, how close someone can get to you or how close you will get to another person…they are your value system in action.”

These definitions apply to both therapists and clients, yet other factors also play important roles. For instance, how we set and maintain boundaries reflects not only our personal and professional values, but also respect for our clients and their boundary needs. Furthermore, boundaries reflect something important about our respect for ourselves.

In fact, this was one of the problems that Anita was struggling with. She wanted her client to respect her, and his behavior around the scheduling of sessions felt to her as though he was disrespecting her. She was having difficulties finding a way to maintain her boundaries, her self-respect, and his respect for her

Boundaries also reflect important information about a relationship between two people, whether the relationship is a personal one or a professional one. Boundaries can be ephemeral and often confusing, in part because they embody the often-unclear lines of connection and separation in a relationship. In psychotherapy, a significant amount of work is done within the relationship between therapist and client. Individuals have an opportunity to work on their relational difficulties. Boundaries, whether they have to do with office rules, payment, scheduling, electronic communication or a therapist’s personal life can become the medium for exploring, understanding and working on issues that emerge in a client’s life with others.

“Freud sometimes made house calls to do therapy with patients and often interacted with them socially”; such behavior is seen as boundary-crossing today. Yet the Internet has created dramatic changes in traditional boundaries. While some therapists refuse to communicate anything other than appointment times in electronic communication, many others conduct psychotherapy online and by telephone, even exploring the benefits of doing online psychotherapy with clients in their beds.

Boundaries Have Meaning

While both a therapist’s and a client’s boundaries need to be clarified and respected, a therapist’s curiosity about any boundary question that comes up for a client can be an important tool in the therapeutic process. In their Psychotherapy.net essay on doing therapy with clients in bed, Giré and Burgo tell us, “Therapists need to pay ongoing attention to boundaries and transference issues, of course; but if we’re mindful, we can also focus on the purpose and meaning of any boundary transgressions.”

For instance, over the years many clients have asked to hug me. Physical contact between therapist and client has long been an area of controversy, and, of course, a question of boundaries. Not only is it significant in terms of potential sexual coercion and assault, but it also raises important questions about both the therapist’s and the client’s comfort with non-sexual physical touch.

I am not a particularly physically demonstrative person and do not always find that kind of contact comfortable. Because I know that to cross my own boundary in those cases would be harmful to the therapeutic work, I have found ways to tactfully and gently refuse the request, often explaining that it is one of my own boundaries that I am careful not to override. Such an explanation often leads to a client’s apologies, and sometimes to a painful discussion of their fear that they are not only unlovable, but also so repulsive that no one would ever want to touch them.

In one instance, with a client who seemed to go out of his way to make himself as unattractive as possible, I asked if it was possible that he actually did not want to be touched. He seemed taken aback by my question, but then he began to wonder out loud. “I think I want to be touched,” he said. “It’s not that. But I think I’m afraid that I’m going to be rejected; so, I sort of set it up that I’m so disgusting that I know that it’s going to happen.” I replied that that made sense to me. I said that I thought he was trying to take control of something that he feared. “It’s better if it doesn’t come as a surprise,” he agreed. “Somehow it doesn’t hurt so much that way.” That client and I spent many years working together, and the process of trying to understand what might be going on with each of us, and within our relationship, helped us to understand some extremely important, complex and subtle aspects of many of his other relationships.

I have learned to share this information about myself with clients in a way that often leads to our finding other ways that they can feel soothed and comforted by me and close to me without touching. In many instances, the process of talking about our different needs has also opened areas in which they struggle with similar issues in their personal lives.

Role Modeling and Boundaries

How we look at and work with boundaries can also serve as a role model for clients, whether it is in the service of protecting their own or respecting the boundaries of others.

For example, there are times when I am comfortable hugging a client. I am not always sure exactly what makes me feel comfortable with the contact, but I have learned to respect my internal communications – the same way that I encourage clients to pay attention to their own wishes not to always do what someone else wants them to do.

Not too long ago, two separate clients who were struggling with painful realities in their lives brought up the issue of hugs. Both had been in therapy with me for some time. One shyly asked if it would be okay if she hugged me. The other told me that I was not to hug her and was not even to look at her sympathetically. In both cases, I agreed to the request. I also asked if we could talk about what their requests were about – what they were hoping for and what they were hoping to avoid. And finally, I asked if they could talk to me about their responses to my response.

I was willing to accept and respond to what they needed, but I also maintained my curiosity about what was going on beneath the surface – what either the hug or the restrictions meant in terms of the larger picture of their lives. In part I was able to provide this kind of approach because of my awareness and respect for my clients’ boundaries and for my own.

Exploring, Understanding and Maintaining Boundaries

To return to Anita: as we attempted to understand her client’s refusal to accept her boundaries, we began to see that the dynamic between them was complicated not only by each of their personal dynamics, but also by social and cultural factors. “I feel like he’s being sadistic,” she said. “By refusing to accept limits that I set, he’s setting up a ‘MeToo’ situation. He’s being an aggressive male and putting me in the position of being a compliant victim. And I refuse to be in that position.”

In his book Attachment in Psychotherapy, David Wallin explores some of the links between a client’s behavior, a clinician’s reactions, and unarticulated, often unknown attachment issues. Because I thought that her client’s behavior might be related to some unspoken, maybe inaccessible relational dynamics, I asked Anita if she could imagine talking about her dilemma with her client. At first she doubted that it would be useful. “Why would I make myself vulnerable in that way?” she asked.

I told her that I thought by sharing some of her dilemma, she might also be putting into words some feelings and relational issues that her client was enacting with her. I said that I thought he might even be relieved that she was able to articulate something that he felt but could not talk or even think about. I said that I also was hoping that by putting her dilemma into words, she would be altering the power struggle between them. She decided that there was really nothing to lose. “I’ve tried everything else I can come up with,” she said.

When he arrived late for his next appointment, Anita brought up the combination of his late arrival and refusal to leave on time. She said, “I’ve been thinking about what’s going on here, and, although I’m not sure you’re going to like them, I’d like to share my thoughts with you. Would that be okay with you?” He nodded, but she said he looked uncomfortable. She then told him what she had told me.

The client seemed deeply moved by her comments. After sitting quietly for a few minutes, he said, “”Wow. I’ve been feeling resentful that you have all the power in this relationship. And you’ve been feeling assaulted by me”. I think you might have just solved a puzzle I’ve been unable to solve for a long time. I haven’t even had a way to think about until now.”

He went on to explain that he often seemed to get into similar kinds of power struggles at work and in his personal relationships with women. “I’ve always felt like I was the one who was being forced to do things against my will,” he said slowly. “But maybe other people feel like you do—like I’m the one who’s pushing them around. That’s really weird. But it kind of explains why people get so mad at me when I’m feeling like I’m just trying to protect myself.”

This insight did not change the power struggle completely, nor did it magically shift the client’s difficulties with other people. In fact, they had to repeatedly revisit the same dynamics both in their relationship and as they discussed his interactions with other people in his life. The client began arriving closer to the proper time for his appointment, but he continued to have difficulty leaving. But now they were able to look at some of the reasons for both behaviors, not as a power struggle, but as an attempt to control both the connection to and the separation from his therapist. Exploration revealed that he found separation extremely painful, but that he was embarrassed to admit how much it hurt him to have to leave—or to be left by—someone he felt close to.

Theirs was a long and productive therapeutic relationship, and the early struggle over the end of sessions became an experience that the two of them referred to over and over again as a template for understanding what was going on when the client began testing boundaries and acting (and feeling) like a rebellious teenager.

Conclusion

Boundaries are crucial to any relationship, including a relationship between a therapist and a client. Yet these often unclear, ephemeral lines between connection and separation and self and other can become the means by which we can understand a client’s self and relational struggles. A clear and consistent frame protects the work of therapy. But that work can be greatly enhanced through the process of exploring, understanding and reflecting on those boundaries.

*names and identifying information changed to protect privacy  

The Performing Art of Therapy: Acting Insights and Techniques for Clinicians

“Where does the actor acquire the understanding that for the doctor takes years of study?"
-Theater Director, Peter Brook

Act I: Therapists as Performers

Therapist, you are a performing artist, whether you realize it or not!

The moment a client enters your office, you are on stage, face-to-face with an audience, a scene partner, and a variety of characters you do not yet know how to play (after all, our clients both become and cast us in all of these roles faster than we can say, “How can I help you?”). And every move you make—or don’t make—influences the treatment, the play, the story you tell together.

“Like actors, as therapists our appearance, aura, voice, and relational responsiveness often leave stronger impressions on clients than the words we say or the techniques we use”. This is not to say that our clinical training is of no use; of course it is. But effective technique is less about what we do—less about reading a script by rote—and more about how we do it, how we use ourselves, how we perform our interventions.

When you watch actors performing in movies or plays, do you think about their techniques?—whether they used Strasberg, Adler, or Meisner? Probably not. You are more likely moved by the performers themselves—their ineffable presence, their use of self. Likewise, our clients are more affected by us than by our schools of thought—whether we studied psychoanalysis, CBT, or family systems.

No matter what kind of therapist you are, if you approach your work like an actor—or better yet, like a performing artist in your own right—I promise you will become more awake, alive, and engaged with your clients, while also having a greater capacity to care for yourself. I offer this promise as a psychotherapist who has used my experience as a trained, professional actor every day.

The skeptical reader may think that the words “perform” and “act” don’t belong in the therapy office. When I tell people that I use my training and experience as an actor more than any other resource as a therapist, they often take me to mean either that I’m “fake” with my clients, or that I deploy literal dramatic exercises in session. I’m not (or at least I try not to be) fake with my clients, and I rarely, if ever, use theatrical interventions in session, unless I believe they might be useful for a specific client in a specific moment. However, when I simply think about my clients the way actors think about their characters and scene partners, I enhance my capacity to dive into the deep end of their stories, beyond the words they speak—their “scripts”—even when I do nothing more than listen to them compassionately.

I may not end up doing anything radically different in session from what any other clinician might do instinctively. But by thinking of myself as a performing artist, as opposed to just a clinician, I find creative ways to join my clients in their emotional subjectivity, relate to them like a character who can help them grow, and allow myself to expand personally in the process.

Again, to be clear: “Acting” does not mean being fake, it means finding truth within a given set of circumstances. So, in that sense, “as therapists we are all actors: we use our selves (our primary instrument) to help bring other people’s authentic selves to life”.

Below is a pair of vignettes, each including a significant learning moment for me as an actor, and a corresponding revelation as a therapist. These dramatic/therapeutic narratives, illustrate how my use of self helped me to pursue the three main objectives that apply to the creative process of both artforms:

  1. To create a treatment frame in which our scene partners feel safe, oriented to the nature and purpose of our work, and free to participate in it.
  2. To join our clients in their emotional subjectivity, like actors embody their characters.
  3. To relate to our scene partners as a character who can help them to heal and to grow.

Act II: Using My Self as an Actor

I was 20 when I was cast as the gun-obsessed Quigley in Hyperactive, an edgy play about teen angst by Olga Humphrey. Quigley was described as a “masculine, hard-edged” adolescent, whose favorite magazine was Soldier of Fortune. I was an effeminate, soft-natured man, whose favorite magazine was Entertainment Weekly—in other words, nothing like Quigley. But I was also an actor, and as an actor’s my job is to find diverse characters within myself, even if they seem very different from me on the surface.

Other than having a teenager’s build, the only quality I seemed to share with Quigley was the determination to prove my worth. In my case, proving myself not only meant getting hired, which I did, but also finding some genuine version of this unlikely role within me. My greatest challenge was to make an empathic connection with Quigley’s bullish personality, his gratuitous language, and (most difficult of all) his obsessive, violent fantasies. All these qualities—or symptoms, if you will—made me extremely uncomfortable and seemed to alienate me from him, rather than to invite me into his emotional world.

My first task was to create a framework for my rehearsal process, within which I would have room to discover and explore who this person was, through trial and error—ideally without judging him. Rather than begin with preconceived acting choices for Quigley—much like therapists are often tempted to impose treatment interventions onto new clients—I needed to find a way to let him speak to me on his own terms. And since my head could not make sense of this boy, I had to find a way to access him viscerally—using my body, voice, and imagination.

As I began reading his crude and aggressive lines aloud at our first rehearsal, I imagined I was one of the bullies from my own high school past. I widened my legs, puffed out my chest, and spoke with an affected tough-guy bellow, straining to produce the intimidating, nasty persona adopted by so many males from my youth.

The result was what the kids call a “fail!” “My performance was cartoonish and over the top”; I’d created a caricature, not a human being. “Um, that’s a bit much,” my director said, with a penetrating squint of disdain in her eyes. Humiliation flooded my body and shut down my spirit. My effortful impersonation seemed to expose my limitations as both an actor and a man. I wouldn’t need to try so hard if I was actually talented or masculine enough, I thought to myself, further shamed by my inner critic.

But in the same moment, a window opened for me into Quigley’s inner, subjective life. I had unwittingly, but effectively, joined him in his debilitating self-consciousness, vulnerability, fear, loneliness—and self-hatred. His core intention wasn’t to intimidate and destroy other people, I realized. Those behaviors were secondary to his primary objective: to protect himself, validate himself, survive.

With those visceral motivations living in my body and mind, I could commit to Quigley’s macho expressions while maintaining an underlying sense of vulnerable truth. And as I played with this duality—grounded in my own fear of failure, and my instinct to overcompensate for it—I increasingly understood how he/I was motivated by a desperate need to be validated by other people. I could now bring a genuine version of him (and me) into the rehearsal studio with my scene partners, supported by the technical breathing and vocal exercises, as well as mind/body practices I had developed in drama school. (Again: the creative use of oneself is not a replacement for technique, but rather it informs the performer of what specific moves we need to make at any given moment in our scene work.)

By the time the production was on its feet, I was able to embody Quigley without extraneous effort: from his brusque introduction to his cathartic end, in which his mother and best friend hold him in their arms and thwart him from carrying out a violent attack on his classmates. Actors often try to force emotion and tears in high-stakes moments like this—not unlike therapists when we impose heavy-handed clinical interventions onto challenging clients we want to “fix.” As my actor friends say, we often try to “play the end of the scene” too hastily, rather than allow ourselves to be present in every step of the journey.

But I didn’t have to strain myself to find Quigley’s deep-rooted pain for this scene. All I had to do was surrender my feelings to my scene partners, with whom I’d cultivated a great deal of safety and trust throughout our creative collaboration. As we performed the climax of the play, Quigley’s taut energy thawed from my jaw, neck, and shoulders—where it had been deployed as a shield—and it dispersed throughout my body, accessing a range of other emotions. In fact, at one point I awakened to the insight that all along Quigley had been defending against, and overcompensating for, the absence of his father. It’s an abstract clinical exercise to analyze a data point like this about a person’s life, either in a script or a psychological evaluation. “But when we make efforts to join that person in all their subjective bodily, emotional, and intrapsychic complexity, we expand our capacities for empathy”, mutual recognition and creative transformative action, both on and offstage, in and out of therapy. Best of all, we learn to relate to that other person (character or client), no longer through the trailing edge of their transference, as the recipient of their resentment, frustration and fear, but through the leading edge of their transference—as the embodiment of their generative desire, longing, and hope.

Act III: Using My Self as a Therapist

Harry burst into my office each week like he was in a race against time; he wanted answers, and he wanted them fast. A straight, white, corporate millennial, he was used to instant gratification, and he expected no less from his therapy. He emphasized that he already understood himself “extremely well,” and that all he needed from me were “professional tips” to reduce stress in his highly successful life.

I was flattered; I’d been cast in the role of commercial guru, the kind who might dominate the American market with bestselling, confidence-inspiring catchphrases. Except I felt too slow, discursive, and insecure to play this part for Harry, more the man behind the curtain than the great and powerful Wizard of Oz. Each week, I expected him to look at me incredulously—much as I’d feared audiences would respond to me portraying a butch, gun-wielding teen—and see that my training and degrees were all a sham. I anticipated the day he’d tear back the curtain and expose me as the talentless hack I felt myself to be in his presence.

On the plus side, Harry showed up for our weekly “rehearsals” consistently, which spoke to the frame I had provided, which apparently made him feel safe enough to “play” with me. But each scene between us had a palpable yet indiscernible tension. First, he’d summarize his week, speedily and with the energetic poise of a cocky movie star—shoulders back, chest protruding forward, eyes sparkly with intense self-assurance. Then he’d present a dilemma—“I need to make more time for relaxation and balance,” for example. At this point, he’d look to me as if to indicate it was my turn to perform, and to prove I was a worthy scene partner.

I would then try to seize the spotlight, so to speak, masking my self-conscious insecurity with a commanding delivery of a line like, “I recommend yoga, three times a week. Put it in your calendar.” I was desperately trying to personify the omnipotent coach I imagined he wanted me to be. And though my “acting choice” arguably answered Harry by his own method, it felt as though I was trying way too hard to impress him—much as I had overcompensated in my bullish portrayal of Quigley, as I stumbled through my first few rehearsals of Hyperactive.

Eventually, I’d look back on these moments and realize how all these unnerving sensations could help tune me in to Harry’s complex internal world, and to join him there. But in the meantime, I felt blocked, like a superficial actor who failed to connect with his character on a deep personal level.

Over time, it became abundantly clear that Harry couldn’t be bothered with my attempted interventions. He’d wince disapprovingly at my suggestions and say things like, “Yoga never works for me. I just end up obsessing about the more productive things I could be doing with my time.” At the end of our sessions, “he’d stride out of my office with a proud posture, leaving me behind to reel in a slouch of inadequacy”. I couldn’t seem to reach him, no matter how hard I tried. I felt like the FBI agent Tom Hanks played in the movie Catch Me If You Can, endlessly chasing Leonardo DiCaprio’s slick and wily character, a master of escape.

This frustrating dynamic manifested in a number of ways between us, including our weekly schedule. Harry would frequently ask to alter our meeting times due to his ever-changing obligations, and I’d accommodate him more than I wanted. I did this because I was afraid to disappoint him. Not only did I sense he’d fire me if I didn’t manage to keep up with his demands, but more significantly, I had an inexplicable sense of dread that he’d erase me from his mind entirely if I let him down. Unwittingly, I was tuning in to Harry’s inner life. I could feel his deep ambivalence about trusting and depending on people vibrating within my own body. And as it turned out, my fears were not unfounded.

One day, after two years of working together, Harry raised the emotional stakes of our scene work. I was running behind (by about a minute), between notes and phone calls, and he had no intention of waiting; it was his time, and he’d enter my office if he wanted to. I was completely shaken off-center as he blasted through my door. Within the flicker of a second, my face flushed with a combination of shock and shame, but also disapproval and a smidge of anger.

As we made eye contact, Harry stopped in his tracks—and his reaction to me was startlingly evocative. While his body asserted its typical conviction, his eyes betrayed a doubt, fear, and deference that I’d never consciously sensed from him before. Since I was too caught off-guard to address this novel improvisation between us in the moment, Harry made a beeline for the couch and shared his latest dilemma as if nothing had happened.

The latest dilemma, it turned out, was that his long-term girlfriend, of whom he’d always spoken glowingly, had proposed to him. “It came out of nowhere!” he exclaimed wide-eyed. “I was totally thrown off my game. Shaken.” Hmm, like what just happened to me now? I thought to myself. “We’ve talked about getting engaged for a while,” he continued, “but I just thought when it happened, it’d be…different.”

“You mean you thought you would be the one who proposed?” I asked.

“Well, yeah,” he replied. “I mean, not because of gender roles and tradition and all that. It’s just…I would’ve made sure it was perfect.”

“What would you have done differently?” I asked.

His eyes squinted as he struggled for an answer. “I guess I just wish she…” he paused for a while, “seemed surer of herself?” As we talked, he realized that this proposal had surfaced an implicit contract in their relationship: that he was in charge of their major decisions as a couple. His girlfriend had gone out on a limb and broken that contract—and now Harry was struggling to understand why he didn’t feel safe following her lead.

Uncharacteristically, his body sank back into the couch as he stared blankly in silence for a while. Finally, he spoke again: “Maybe she’s not the right partner for me.” There it was, the confirmation of my underlying fear; if his long-term girlfriend was expendable, so was I.

“It’s normal to feel a range of emotions at a pivotal time like this,” I said in an effort to validate him. “I appreciate your confusion and doubt, and since your girlfriend seems willing to give you some time to reflect, I suggest we continue talking before you make any big decisions.” He seemed momentarily held by this, but as I watched him take a minute to shield himself with his typical smug poise before leaving the office, I understood deep inside that this sense of security was tenuous, for both of us.

“Harry colonized my mind for the rest of that day, much like a challenging character might consume me as an actor”. At home, I looked in the mirror and tried to emulate his self-possessed posture. As my shoulders dropped back and down, my chest expanded, and my eyes and mouth affected Harry’s cool-guy charm, I began to recall the unpleasant sensations I’d get when trying to play the part of his expert guru. The external posturing I would affect at those times didn’t feel grounded in confidence, but instead seemed to serve as a shield to my internal self-doubt and fear of rejection.

Suddenly, I understood that the same was true for him. The look on his face when he’d barged into my office earlier that day, and the months and months of tension between us, began to make more sense. And as I joined his mind/body experience of self, I realized that what he really wanted was not for me to catch up to him or project the same overcompensating confidence that he did, but to get ahead of him. He longed for me to become someone who could set boundaries with him, disagree with him, and ultimately, care for him—without getting caught up in the same debilitating self-criticism that plagued him. But how could I successfully embody these qualities in the therapy room, and become the character with whom Harry longed to relate?

I thought about the end of Catch Me If You Can, when Tom Hanks learns to approach Leonardo DiCaprio no longer as an elusive fugitive, but as a boy abandoned by his father. I thought also of Harry’s father, who’d died suddenly of a heart attack when Harry was a child. Gazing in the mirror and focusing on the sensations within, I rediscovered what I had first learned with Quigley: biographical details about clients and characters alike resonate within us much more richly when we embody them, rather than simply study or analyze them. I then shifted roles and explored ways that I could present myself to Harry that might make him feel safely held.

I drew inspiration from men, in my life and onscreen, who were both palpably strong and nurturing, including Tom Hanks, Robin Williams, and Barack Obama. I considered their physical groundedness, the clarity of their thoughts, as evidenced by the easy poise of their heads, but also, most significantly, their emotional openness, illustrated by the lack of tension and flow of energy in their chest region.

As I played with where I felt these qualities in my own body, I didn’t try to impersonate the men superficially, but to connect with the experiences in my life—like caring for my younger brothers when I was growing up and being a camp counsellor—that brought out the warmth and confidence Harry needed from me now.

“When Harry next raced into my office, I was prepared to get ahead of him, and relate to him with focus, calm, and an embodied sense of security”. As we revisited the previous session, I validated his anxieties about depending on his girlfriend (or any intimate “scene partner” in his life) and invited him to talk about the pressure he puts on himself to “be ahead” of other people, including me.

Throughout this session, there was more ease, vulnerability, and play between us than ever before. But it wasn’t what I said, so much as how I’d learned to be in the room with him, that made the difference. I was even able to recommend self-care activities like yoga, which he’d rejected in the past, in a way that he now responded to with complete openness—in theater terms, same script, better performance.

As Harry exited that day, he turned around in the doorway, took a moment, and then said through the shimmer of a tear, “Thank you.” I simply smiled in return, maintaining the combination of groundedness, strength, warmth, and vulnerability that we’d discovered together in our session.

Finale

While I waited for my next client, alone in my office, I reflected on the connection Harry and I had found, and I recalled an interview with Meryl Streep, in which she explained that in her view, her success as a performer was only as good as it was “the last time.” Thinking of our sessions ahead, I knew we could expect more tension, insecurity, fear, and doubt to manifest between us. But at the same time, I knew my acting training could help me perform on this different kind of stage, where we’d continue to explore various versions of ourselves together.

I initially felt I needed to be someone else in order to access both Quigley and Harry. Like so many actors and therapists, I am driven by the desire to please my collaborators, to be the “expert,” and to “get it right” on the first line reading. But at the same time, in order to connect with our clients, characters, and scene partners as performing artists, we must practice our craft with humility, patience, and the belief that we are enough. We must trust that if we show up to each “rehearsal” with the willingness to be fully present—along with our vulnerabilities, naivete, and deep self-reflection—we will give our creative partners what they need to be present with us as well. Especially if we engage each other in a process of imaginative, empathic play.

Through our respective play sessions, Quigley and Harry both showed me that their apparent toughness, butchness, and self-containment were part of me as well—keys existing somewhere within my instrument, even if I don’t embody them every day. But an even greater revelation for me in both cases, was that the idiosyncratic “soft” qualities that makeup my everyday self—and that I originally believed were obstacles to bringing both young men into the spotlight—turned out to be exactly what they needed to find hidden keys within their own instruments. By playing these untapped versions of ourselves—even, and perhaps especially, when we felt inadequate—each of us found a way to breathe, to integrate, and to become more fully alive.

Note: This article has been adapted from Mark O’Connell’s new book, The Performing Art of Therapy: Acting Insights and Techniques for Clinicians, and his article “Character Work: What Therapists Can Learn from Actors,” in the Psychotherapy Networker, March/April 2019 issue. 

Coping with Infidelity in Professional Couples

Couples seek therapy for many reasons, but among the thorniest issues are those involving infidelity. Of course, circumstances vary widely, so it’s difficult to isolate causes that are equally relevant for all. Given that, I’ll focus on themes that have emerged with some professional couples with whom I have worked that have been married for some time (10+ years), with demanding careers, and for whom these issues arise after having children.

Like what you are reading? For more stimulating stories, thought-provoking articles and new video announcements, sign up for our monthly newsletter.

They may have met in college or graduate school. They became fast friends first, and they never imagined that would change. Both were career-minded and imagined living a life of significance, healthier and happier than that of their parents. They recognized one another as good, bright and hard-working persons. They felt heard, understood, and supported. They shared a vision of life.

Then, as the demands of their careers pulled them into individual tracks of ambition and responsibility, and as they began to have children, their friendship suffered—intimacy too. It wasn’t fully conscious yet, but they had become rutted in role-based “necessities” of duty and obligation. A shift occurred from a vital pursuit of happiness to accountabilities to children, home, and career—life felt burdensome.

The Sources of Disenchantment

The relative ease with which life’s demands were managed in the early, pre-parental years were gone. Back then, there was more time, unpressured and less distracted opportunities to talk. Everything was easier then, even though financial resources were limited. So, what had their success really purchased?

The couple was left feeling that life had somehow gotten away from them. They were overwhelmed and learning that feelings are a complex and nuanced form of meaning, confusing enough to experience let alone to articulate. It was easier when there was more breathing space, when they could get away for a weekend of hiking or big-city stimulation. Sometimes that alone, without talk was enough.

Taking on work-related duties, struggling to realize career aspirations, life became more serious. Then, with kids and parenting added to the mix, along with the financial demands of mortgage, child care, and interruption to a second income; it all added up to a loss of the enchanted vision of life they had in the beginning. Exchanges became strained. Soon they decided it just wasn’t worth the effort to argue.
They began wondering “is this all there is?” Exhausted by work strain, stressed by unrelenting demands, and lacking the friendship they once provided one another, they began to foreclose on the possibility of making things better. But settling is not very satisfying is it? Thus, arises the restless yearning.

Desperate Delusions

For these couples there is seldom a desire to abandon one’s partner. Very few had seriously considered divorce even as they began to look elsewhere for affection. Intact bonds remained that coexisted with urgent needs for emotional intimacy. They could not see a way to reconnect within the marriage. It’s a cognitive, emotional, and moral quandary that they’re unable to resolve, it looks impossible.
That’s where the desperation comes in. It may be equally felt by both members of the couple. But neither is able to frame the issues, broach the conversation, and make them “discussable.” They’ve learned (come to believe) that contentious tones, demanding voices and fault-finding quickly follows. So, they conclude, “I can’t meet my needs here; the situation won’t allow it.”

What they believe they cannot achieve in reality, they seek to address through fantasy and delusion, or perhaps more benignly framed—wishful thinking. Yes, there’s also the sense that they deserve something more and better given how hard they’re working. So, they seek “justice” through a kind of “let’s pretend.” They want to believe that there’ll be no harm as long as no one finds out. Sometimes drinking helps contain the cognitive dissonance. It’s regression in service of play, to invoke Freud, and a symptom of arrested development in the marriage.

The Bubble Bursts, Work Begins

When the truth comes out, a period of crisis ensues. Soon it becomes clear that the act of infidelity only ruptured a relationship that was already suffering from deep, long-standing strains. Upon reflection, both knew things were not going the way they wanted them to. In some cases, partners had even taken separate bedrooms, started vacationing separately, becoming more roommate than spouse.
But the initial disclosure brings jolting pain. Anger, embarrassment, and betrayal are only a few of the emotions that should be expected. It’s not a victimless act. The aggrieved party is deeply hurt. And the unfaithful party frequently suffers a different shame and loss of self-respect that he or she must endure without much sympathy while seeking redemption and forgiveness.

The saving grace for many of these couples is that they usually have reason enough to at least attempt reconciliation and repair. And if they seek help soon enough, before acting out their emotions in ways that make their problem even more difficult to address, their odds improve immensely. Because they are bright and hard-working, they may be able to use that ethic to persevere with the task at hand in some or all of the following ways.

Containment. The couple must have a safe place to process their feelings, and therapy must help them learn how to do even more of this outside the consulting room. Initially, they’ll struggle with managing the intensity of their exchanges outside of therapy.

Learning. The couple must now acquire the interpersonal communications skills to navigate emotionally charged conversations that they had earlier concluded were not possible. They will learn that doing good in their relationship requires knowing how to do good.

Forgiveness. Learning that infidelity is at least partly attributable to arrested development as a couple, a lack of insight, knowledge, skill, and hope concerning what was missing and how to correct it, helps both find a way to forgive.

Forgiveness is something we do for ourselves as much as for our partner. When we lose our capacity for the love, openness, and honesty to discuss the divide that is growing between us, it is not because we willfully intend to do harm to one another. We fail due to our fears and ignorance, our desperation and loss of hope. We lose the ability to focus more on coulds than shoulds.

This is what they learn in therapy.  

Let’s Meet in the Middle

We all want our feelings to be understood. But even if we have a significant other with whom we feel understood, we may find that we become misaligned as career and family life evolve and change. Nowhere is this more true than with professional couples and dual-career families as they take on new role-based challenges.

Recent research¹ indicates that the dynamics affecting the quality of a couple’s relationship stem from differences in motivation (approach/avoidance orientations) and patterns of interpersonal behavior. I look at both factors in the case of Meg and Paul, two highly educated professionals, each with histories of neglect in childhood. What I also consider is a style of engagement that seems well-matched to the experience and expectations of professional couples.

Couples Issues

By the time strain and conflict have become chronic, partners have often done a good deal of blaming and fault-finding with one another. It doesn’t help, but it’s almost unavoidable, as people lose their capacity to see things as they really are. Only later, after bumping up against the reality that they are stuck and that it's probably not entirely their or their partner’s fault, might they conclude that outside help, objectivity and perspective are needed.

I believe we can learn a great deal from working through our issues—their causes, course, and resolution—as couples. Doing so not only makes us happier in our couples, it makes us smarter managers, leaders and collaborators in the workplace. But of course, these truths can seem rather remote when we are in the throes of relational conflict and cannot yet see a pathway forward.

Even with awareness of our need for help, we retain the need to protect ourselves against being found lacking. We may privately hope that a therapist will take our side and that we’ll be vindicated. Couples are often ambivalent, wanting perspective but simultaneously maintaining defenses. Disarming them is about eliminating threats to emotional safety and ensuring that each person has the chance to be heard. To satisfy these conditions, we must be an empathic and assertive mediating presence.

Being heard, in this context, is more than an auditory task, and it involves more than an exchange between therapist and patient. When therapists listen actively, they provide a hearing for all three persons in the room. As the therapist and couple together reflect upon this active listening process, the couple notices how different it is than what normally happens in their exchanges at home. Thus, safety and learning depend upon how the therapist facilitates, moderates and contains the listening process.

Individual or Couples Therapy

There are times when individual therapy prior to or in addition to conjoint therapy may be indicated. When either or both members of the couple suffer from an acute mood disorder or chronic mental health problems, their capacity to participate in couples therapy may be limited. And sometimes they just can’t believe that something different and good can come from discussing their issues with their partner, not yet. But I’ve found that they’re likely to underestimate their readiness to participate in couples therapy.

In my practice, I work mostly with professional couples, the same demographic I’ve served for over 25 years in my executive coaching practice. When it comes to helping relationships, they seem to welcome an active, norm-setting agent who is willing to reign in behaviors that threaten conditions of safety and openness, or that derail productive engagement. Their basic ego strength is usually adequate. They tend to default to a practical sense of urgency to “fix” things. While their impatience and an action bias can impede progress, initially I find it helpful to leverage these attitudes to generate motivation.

They may be more skeptical and scared than they’re willing to admit, but they know they need help. They haven’t found a way to do it themselves. So, the therapist must find ways to intervene early, to validate their decision to seek therapy, and to change the way they communicate and interact. When we can model a tolerance for conflict and an ability to notice and discuss how their polarized attitudes and behaviors operate reciprocally to sustain conflict, we earn credibility. And that’s critical. Professional couples more than others will be looking for evidence that we’re competent.

Meg and Paul

When I met Paul, he was presenting with anxiety stemming from work and marriage. He was on an SSRI for anxiety and on Ritalin for ADHD. He reported a childhood replete with dysfunction and less than good-enough parenting. Raised in a small town in Alabama, he adapted by retreating to a rich imagination and creative talents, later attending a top art school in the Northeast and then settling in Brooklyn. I didn’t have to tell him his family of origin was dysfunctional. He knew it and ran as fast as he could to escape it.

Soon, it became clear that adapting at work (from artist to manager) was not nearly as challenging as making things work at home with Meg. Like Paul, Meg had a history of insecure attachment, growing up in a pastor’s home in rural Connecticut. After a failed marriage that produced two boys, she met and married Paul, who hadn’t had much success in dating or sexual intimacy. She, too, was bright and won a scholarship to an Ivy League college, but she had responded differently to childhood issues.

Meg was a fighter with an excitable temperament and a penchant for order and control. Both had suffered neglect, but Paul had taken a route of pathological accommodation and escape, while Meg had gone the way of rebellion and escape. Neither had healed the wounds of neglect. As their lives became more complicated by a third child, increased financial demands, chronic patterns of conflict and naïve hopes gave way to long-standing vulnerabilities, and each sought individual therapy.

The Circumplex Emerges

When Meg and Paul came in for their intake interview, the tension was almost immediately manifest. Sitting at either end of my six-foot sofa, they made no attempt to conceal the distance that had grown between them. I asked them to tell me what caused them to seek therapy at this time and suggested that Paul, the meeker of the two, talk first. He spoke carefully, haltingly at times, always rounding if not blunting the point of the issues he raised. I conjured an image of one navigating a minefield.

Meg sat stern-faced with arms crossed as he spoke, casting dismissive glances his way as he struggled to express himself. There was eye-rolling too, which caused me to wonder how far he got in speaking his mind at home. It was all she could do to limit her dissent to nonverbal communications as Paul spoke. Then, when it was her turn, Meg’s voice rose in angry criticism. Her first aim was to correct Paul. As she flushed with anger, Paul went pale with fear.

Her fault-finding with Paul was peppered with global accusations prefaced by “you never” and “you always.” She painted a picture of his inconsiderateness, broken promises and selfishness. Neglected as a child, she suffered it again in her marriage to Paul. Her voice rose well above the norms for my office–yes, I have such norms. So, I intervened. With a hand gesture signaling a timeout, I said, “Meg, do you have any idea how overwhelming your energy is right now?” She halted and I continued, “You’ll have to turn it down a bit if we are to communicate.”

She was taken aback and flushed from red to rose as a sudden pause prevailed. Paul sat quietly, still pale, anxiously awaiting the next steps. I can imagine the reader might wonder about the force of my presence and the effects of my behavior. Most of my clients (consulting practice) and patients (clinical practice) describe me as down-to-earth, caring, sincere and constructive. Even in my most direct moments I believe they recognize a positive intent in my face, words, and actions.

I expressed a grounded confidence. I assured them that they need not accept nor reject anything I said too quickly. I encouraged them to simply consider how it might be relevant for them. My tone with Meg and Paul was neither harsh nor timid. It was not aggressive; it was assertive. It was not out of control; it was tempered and composed. My first intervention was to invoke norms of propriety in the consulting room. This atmosphere of civility became the defining quality of dyadic communication in the therapy.

After the “flareup” was extinguished, discussion resumed. I asked how representative this episode was of the problems they’d been experiencing. They admitted that it was all too common. The difference was that at home Paul would usually not get the initial words out. Rather, Meg would define the violation Paul had committed (being late or forgetting an errand), and he would go quiet, retreat for a while, and then later try to explain himself and perhaps become defensive.

Meg would later remark on how being with Paul was like having another child. Paul didn’t agree with this characterization, but fighting it only meant extending the quarrel. So, he usually quit at this point, believing it was not worth the pain and wouldn’t change the outcome anyway. The more she played the role of his parent, the more he was cast in the role of a child.

We used the interpersonal circumplex² to consider this chronic pattern. I have found this model quite useful with couples. It plots interpersonal behavior in two-dimensional space using two axes, Dominant/Submissive and Friendly/Hostile. Using the model, we’re able to see how our expressed behavior is likely to “pull” a style of behavior from others. On the one hand, a dominant expression tends to pull a submissive response, and a submissive expressive style pulls a dominant response. On the other hand, friendly and hostile expressions seem to invite others to respond in suit. So, how did this apply to Meg and Paul?

They had been interacting in the hostile side of the circumplex, Paul from the submissive area (passive style) and Meg from the dominant area (aggressive style). We also observed that my intervention came from the friendly dominant area (assertive style). Finally, we noticed that the pause arose from the “neutral” space in the middle of the circumplex as a pause for reflection on communication style. Thus, the title of this article and my suggestion to couples that when they notice tension building, and before it becomes entrenched conflict, they tell themselves that it may be time to “meet in the middle.”

Communication Styles Chart

 Figure 2 Communication Styles (Penberthy, 2016)
 


About Motivation

Of the many ways to characterize motivation, a fundamental way of conceptualizing it is through the approach/avoidance paradigm. It’s been around since Neo-Freudian thinkers like Karen Horney, Erik Erikson and Harry Stack Sullivan, and builds upon the interpersonal point of view. It gained even more support from the observational studies of mother-infant attachment. Its central thesis is that we are essentially social beings with needs for connection and intimacy. As adults, these needs manifest in our intimate relationships with others, and also in our interdependency in the workplace.

“What we learn early in life from caregiver relationships shapes our beliefs and expectations about what is possible and probable”. When our caregivers are attentive and available, and as we and they learn how to jointly navigate nonverbally and pre-cognitively in ways that satisfy our needs, we develop a sense of trust: “I can rely on others to care, to read my behaviors, and when they fail, they don’t abandon me. No, they persist until my needs or insecurities are resolved.”

Such successes in adaptive learning and development promote an approach orientation. This includes beliefs that most problems can be solved with help, and that those with whom we share our lives at home and at work are usually willing and able to be helpful. We act from a benevolent hypothesis about others’ motivations and with optimistic beliefs about what we can do with their help. But absent this positive early-life experience, we may approach relationships with less trust and positivity, with more suspicion or doubt, and often with fears of abandonment.

Patterns of Avoidance

In the case of Meg and Paul, we observed histories of maltreatment that would understandably lead to lower expectations of what might be possible in relationships. They might look for (project) evidence of the betrayal and mistrust they experienced early in life in the contemporary behaviors of those they hoped would be there for them.

For Meg, it was an ostensibly kind and service-oriented father (pastor) who seemed to have little time and interest for her needs. He turned his attentions elsewhere, perhaps in ways that won him esteem in the eyes of those he helped. And her hopes of finding enduring love with her first husband failed. Like her father, he was “selfish.” And now, as life’s demands on Paul increased, she saw him too as neglecting her out self-interest. It was reinforced daily when he arrived home late or forgot to stop at the market.

Meg had been on alert for signs of neglect since she was a little girl, all to guard against more rejection, and she found them in her adult relationships with men. We could describe this motivational orientation as avoidance. She might ask Paul to do things, but her expectations of his delivering on these requests were very low. She was fully armed to express her anger and mistrust of him every time he fell short. In her eyes, he was breaking a promise, and she wasn’t taking it anymore. She increasingly threatened divorce in her moments of peak anger and frustration.

Paul’s mode of avoidance was more obvious. It was based on his fear of conflict learned as a child. Meg’s stern look and voice tone signaled a threat to which he reacted with an impulse to retreat. Neither he nor Meg could readily identify in the moment the fears and vulnerabilities they were replaying from childhood. They were both caught up in self-protective (defensive) routines intended to distance them from harm. That is, until in session we would enter the neutral zone represented on the circumplex model.

Noticing and suspending the visceral grip of legacy, avoidance-based emotions and motivations, adaptive approach-oriented motivations, goals, and behaviors became available. This pause simply hastened access to the approach-based responses that had been activated in Paul after Meg finally collapsed in emotional exhaustion and despair from her angry outbursts. Meg’s approach behavior was activated as she finally welcomed Paul’s concern, support, and sympathy when her aggressive energies had quieted. They both took roundabout routes to dialogue.

These, then, were the dispositional tendencies of motivation that energized their chronic patterns of conflict. The avoidance-based mindset had governed behavior with increasing frequency. I noticed that the approach-based resolution strategies were not working as often or as well. They were both feeling exhausted and discouraged. Both, especially Meg, were losing hope that things could change. Their differences in personality and behavior seemed unchanging, perhaps unchangeable.

It took concrete behavioral analysis of specific situations to shift their focus to variables that they could realistically influence or control. We had to do a great deal of situation analysis in our therapy sessions to acquire a basis of trust and positive expectations for change. We had to recognize the way they were both setting unrealistic and unattainable goals, and how they were neglecting adequate attention to the positive thoughts and behaviors that could interrupt their old routines.

Finally, we had to notice how different the results of our in-session problem solving were from their out-of-session efforts, and to ask ourselves why they were different. They recognized that there was little they were not able to do behaviorally if they approached it deliberately and thoughtfully. They had to own the responsibility for doing this work, and they had to recognize the payoff in doing the work, individually and as a couple.

Getting to the Point

The advantage of couples therapy for Meg and Paul was that it made them more responsible and accountable sooner. Their contributions to the problems were noticed and called out in real time. Faster-acting avenues of change became available. My observations were grounded in specific situations. It’s an approach that safeguarded them both and returned our focus to salient themes of reciprocal interaction that underlies their conflicts. Concrete "do’s and don’ts” emerged as takeaways.

They internalized a capacity for assertive problem solving that extended beyond the consulting room and their relationship, and into the workplace. Meg reported less ruminating, guilt and resentment. Paul described a growing sense of confidence and ease in his interactions with Meg. They regressed on occasion and learned how to grow from the experience. They deepened their insight and skills in the process of repairing one or two significant ruptures along the way.

“Disposition does not mean “chipped in stone.”” Their differences in temperament (Paul more laid back and Meg more intense) remained. However, both discovered a greater sense of freedom from the automatic expression of their avoidant motivations. They learned that their reactive tendencies from early life were important to notice (somatically, emotionally, cognitively, relationally). These tendencies were not to be dismissed, denied, or taken as fact; rather, they became valued as warning signs.

I accommodated their sense of practical urgency by anchoring change efforts in concrete behaviors and specific situations. In this way, they were able to more readily see the behaviors that help and hinder realization of their change goals. They learned to appraise and re-appraise their expectations for change against standards of what was realistic and achievable. In the process, they noticed how slowing down for a reflective pause could speed things up. They found reason for hope in these skilled practices.

Concluding Reflections

Each couple is unique, and the helping strategies of their therapists will vary in approach, length of treatment, and frequency and duration of sessions. Having said that, I usually tell couples that it will take us 4-6 weeks to determine if couples therapy is working for them. By then, we’ll have a good idea of what the core issues are and what is required to address them. And we’ll do that by actively engaging the couple in the process, which means they’ll be more able to make informed decisions.

Through early steps of progress in session and practical guidance for change between sessions, they acquire skills and build trust and confidence in the therapist and in each other. Guidance may be more directive in the early phase of therapy, but it becomes more non-directive as positive norms of attitude and behavior take effect. As an easier, less defensive quality of exchange becomes possible, the role of the therapist becomes more that of consultant and coach.

Couples’ gains are sometimes achieved in waves over longer periods of time (6 months or more). For others, significant change, for example restructuring relational dynamics and communications, might occur in 6-8 weeks. And when does it stop? That too varies, but insofar as our work is goal-focused, we are better able to jointly assess how they are doing, what they’ve learned, and when termination or transition to a maintenance schedule might be advisable.

My approach to helping others as a coach and therapist has always been assessment-based and goal-oriented. Goals in this sense represent purposive aims that give meaning to our actions and accomplishments. These are considerations that weigh heavily in the hearts and minds of most professionals. When these “stakes” are called out in terms of the people they want to be and what’s required to realize these aims, I’ve usually gotten their attention. And after a good deal of experimentation with new skills at home and at work, their attention is firmly planted in interpersonal space, knowing more than ever that success at home and at work is about relationships.

I have found that goals and commitments are most robust when they’re grounded in the personal truth we can only obtain from rigorous assessment. That’s why our assessment must be a joint process. Couples must play an active role in interpreting the data that I help them collect, including the patterns of behavior that I help them surface in our sessions. Couples must personally discover the power of meeting in the middle, in that neutral zone of reflection. It is there that defenses melt away and the consequential costs and benefits of change can be seen. In that way, we soon acquire a call to action—“Let’s meet in the middle”—which can give us reason to halt the cycle of escalating conflict and see things as they really are.

References

1. See for example Kuster, M., Bernecker, K., Bradbury, T. N., Nussbeck, F.W., Martin, M., Sutter-Stikel, D., & Bodenmann, G. (2015). Avoidance orientation and the escalation of negative communications in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 262-275

2. Thanks to Kim Penberthy for permission to use her version of the circumplex model: Penberthy, J. Kim (2016). Effective Treatment for Persistent Depression in Patients with Trauma Histories: Cognitive Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy (CBASP). Paper presented at the meeting of Anxiety and Depression Association of America (ADAA) Conference, Philadelphia, PA.

For further information on the circumplex model, it’s history and use, see Horowitz, L., Wilson, K.R., Turan, B., Zolotsev, P., Constantino, M., & Nenderson, L. (2006). How interpersonal motives clarify the meaning of interpersonal behavior: A revised circumplex model. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 67-86. 

Where You

Aimee (an amalgam of several of my patients), came into session, plopped onto the couch and said, “It happened again. Just like I knew it would.” Aimee was a 35-year old woman who came into therapy over a year ago, describing a series of failed relationships with men. She wanted to understand why it never worked out.

It can be a quandary for therapists to distinguish between outside, uncontrollable circumstances, and the patient’s participation in creating the opposite of what they consciously want. There are no absolutes. We have to understand each individual story and the patient’s unique psychology.

Like what you are reading? For more stimulating stories, thought-provoking articles and new video announcements, sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Intimacy is scary. Letting someone see behind the walls we use in everyday life is scary. Sometimes people protect themselves by continuing to choose relationships that are destined to fail over and over–different bodies, same problems.
Aimee went on, “He gave me another excuse as to why he couldn’t see me this weekend. I knew he was blowing me off, so I asked him what was going on and he said, ‘I don’t think this is going anywhere. It’s the same sentence the last five guys have said to me. What’s wrong with me?” She buried her head in her hands.

Let’s face it, relationships are complicated. It’s hard to meet people who we want to be with, and who also want to be with us. Some parts of this we have no control over. What we do have control over is removing our own obstacles to finding the love, the commitment and the relationship we want.

Having seen this dynamic so many times in therapy, I decided to write a novel exploring this very theme. I began the story, as I do with all of my fiction writing, with a question. In this book called, Where You’ll Land, the question was: Can we choose who we love?

Alex Daily, my protagonist and a psychology graduate student, meets Will. The relationship is filled with passion but is quite tumultuous; the angst from both characters, as well as some of the secondary characters, forces them all to look at the obstacles that are in their respective ways.

As psychotherapists, we all know that we don’t see things about ourselves until we are ready. It can be a nail biter to sit with a patient, observe their conflict and self-sabotage, and know that the patient is in their own way, while also knowing they are not ready to garner the awareness that leads to change.

Timing of interpretive comments is vital for insight. We have to respect patients’ defenses and we can only guide them toward the awareness they are ready to have. Our job is often clearing out the weeds (defenses) so that the flowers can be seen, while watering the flowers (fostering innate strengths) so that the patient can grow into who they really are.

Toward the latter part of the book Alex has an insight, “She kept making the same mistake over and over until she realized that if she wanted a different ending, she had to have a different beginning.” This was also my client Aimee’s dilemma.

There is an irresistible draw toward the familiar, even when we say we want to change. If we hope for a different ending, sometimes we have to rework the beginning.

But where is the beginning? For Aimee, it began with not feeling her needs were met as a child. Whenever I explored how she didn’t feel taken care of in her relationships with the men she dated, she associated that to similar dynamics in her family. She’d choose men who reconfirmed that her needs were either too much or that she wasn’t good enough.

I redirected the session. “Maybe we can talk about what Jake wasn’t giving you throughout the relationship. What you don’t get from each of these men.”

“I feel like they could leave at any moment. I’m always anxious. I want someone who will be there.”

“Could you be confusing anxiety for attraction? Maybe the anxiety has to do with knowing they can’t meet your needs, the way you felt sometimes when you were younger.”

She contemplated. “That makes sense, intellectually. But it doesn’t feel that way. I can’t make myself be attracted to the guys I’m not attracted to.”

When it comes to feeling those emotional sparks – chemistry – understanding these conflicts is a dense conundrum. We have to create curiosity. We have to ask different questions.

“True. But I think we have to start asking what you’re actually attracted to, since you’re choosing men who make you feel on edge. How is that attractive?”

She flitted her hands around. “I – It’s not.”

“Let’s try looking at the anxiety as a sign that something’s wrong, not that something’s right.”

“OK,” she said.

We spent many sessions discussing how when there was anxiety, it was usually a sign that her needs were not being met. And we talked about her right to have needs and to allow someone who wanted to meet them, close.

I don’t believe we can control physical attraction entirely, but we can change some of what we are drawn to and we can control the decisions we make regarding who we allow ourselves to open our hearts to. If we are being open to people who continually disappoint and frustrate us, who perpetuate narratives from our life that are painful, then we need to ask why we are deciding to fall for the same type of relationship. And as therapists, we need to guide our patients to be curious about these questions. Because as Alex comes to understand in her story and as Aimee came to understand after a few more failed relationships:

Maybe we can’t decide who we fall for, but we can decide who we want to be with when we land. 

Hotel Room Therapy

As I offer therapy online, many highly mobile and displaced individuals naturally drift into my practice. “We meet in a couchless space unattached to any physical location”, or rather suspended in between the two places—my office perched below the Parisian rooftops and the often-fluid, ever-changing locations of my fidgety clients.

Sometimes they connect for our sessions from a hotel room. I always pay attention to my client’s surrounding—and when an unfamiliar background sparks my curiosity, I naturally inquire into this new place, and we spend some time locating ourselves. The client might tell me about the country or town they are currently in, about this particular hotel or the area.

These “hotel sessions” tend to bring up “a sense of discomfort that resembles lostness—a feeling of displacement, of not-quite-being there,” in the striking words of a wandering writer Anna Badkhen. As a displaced person myself (I grew up in Russia but now live in France), I can easily relate to this feeling, and every time I notice an anonymous hotel room behind my client’s back, my heart sinks in recognition.

Lorraine

One day I stumbled on an essay by Suzanne Joinson dedicated to “hotel melancholia”, and the author’s experience reminded me of so many of my mobile and displaced clients; especially, Lorraine.

“Lorraine’s consultancy work made her travel constantly”. She would usually spend a four-month period in a country, only to then move to the next assignment, always located in a different country, often on a different continent. I cannot remember ever seeing her connecting from any other place than a hotel—she was my quintessential ‘hotel room client.’

Lorraine was in her mid-30s, bright, successful, and extremely lonely. After a few sessions, I finally asked about whether she had a “base.” Lorraine marked a short silence—her beautiful pale face rarely showed any emotion: she did not. Her very few belongings were stored at her parents’ basement in Canada. She had given up on having a home years ago. She travelled light; just a big suitcase and a laptop.

Lorraine lived in hotels, usually big chains—comfortable, impersonal and exactly as Suzanne Joinson describes “it was fun, for a few years, until suddenly it wasn’t.” I came into the picture when the fun had gone. However, Lorraine never complained—it was “not too bad”, and, after all, every couple of months she would be allowed a break to spend a few days elsewhere. These short trips would be just enough to keep her sanity.

In our co-created placeless bubble, we communicated in English—a second language for both of us. We also had French in common, but Lorraine had unequivocally chosen English from our very first email exchange. She confided that she felt more comfortable in this language that she acquired as a teenager when her family relocated to Canada.

“Lorraine was a Third Culture Kid”—brought up by a biracial family in a country that was neither of her parents’ original home. She was half-Korean, half-French.

Why was she in therapy? Sometimes I wondered, as she seemed rather content with her transient life. Talking with her often created a strange cognitive dissonance—I sensed her distinct unhappiness, but she would never verbalize it, never express any deep dissatisfaction or nostalgia for a home or a relationship.

She had friends of course—mostly dispersed all around the globe. She would visit them during her breaks, sometimes for an adventurous holiday, sometimes in their homes in case they were freshly settled and building a family. Strangely, after these trips Lorraine would not express any more desire to settle or to attach than usual. “It was nice,” she would comment.

Lorraine seemed attached to her itinerant lifestyle more than to anybody or anything else. She did not seem to miss her parents. Their presence in her adult life seemed to create more hassle than anything, as they got used to asking her for help in doing their paperwork, relying on their daughter’s indisputable competence. In her constant relocating from one place to another, being able to deal with paperwork efficiently was a question of survival. Efficiency was something Lorraine valued highly. I learned that in her vocabulary “being inefficient,” meant many other things too; like being overwhelmed, exhausted, or emotional.

When she was a child, her family moved a few times for her father’s professional assignments. I never really got a sense of how it was to grow up in her family. She was an incredibly docile child and later a very capable adolescent, never creating problems for her parents. She simply did what she was supposed to do and did it well. She worked hard at school, gained a commendable degree and went on to take a lucrative job. It seems that in her family everything was about efficiency. Her Korean mother was a perfectionist and would get very upset if something was not done exactly how it should be, whilst her French father was hard on people who did not live up to his expectations.

Emotions had little or no place in this family. For somebody as well educated as Lorraine, she had little awareness of her emotions and struggled to name her feelings, usually using the words “bored” or “frustrated” to cover up other emotional experiences.

In therapy, she was hard work for me.

Holidays and Homes

Of course, occasionally she would travel back to Canada to spend Christmas or Easter with her parents. Every time I offered to maintain our session during those holidays, she would decline—too busy with playing catch-ups with family and friends. So, I never had an opportunity to have a glimpse of her childhood home, and my attempts to suggest that such session ‘from home’ would be interesting, never produced results. This house in Canada that she never really described felt ghostly to me, and I wondered if she had the same feelings about it.

Interestingly enough, when her parents retired and decided to sell their family house, Lorraine seemed indifferent. They bought an apartment in the South of France, in the village they used to visit during their European holidays. Wasn’t she sad about her childhood home which contained her memories, her things in the basement, disappearing forever? No, she was not. After all, she always knew her family would never settle there forever. Almost all of her friends from that place had already left and had either settled elsewhere or were travelling around the globe.

Would I feel the same numbness if I was to lose connection with my original town? This thought only fills me with sadness. Even after living all my adult life abroad, I still feel attached to my native Saint Petersburg, where all my childhood memories reside. Lorraine’s displacement was of a different nature; she grew up out of place, with no deep roots in any of the cultures she was surrounded by. The Korean world was only barely familiar to her; she identified herself as French, but even that belonging had some clear limits.

This state of things was going on for quite a while. Lorraine moved from one country to another a few times, and I grew more and more frustrated with the lack of depth that our work was presenting.

Occasionally, I would be travelling too, and also connect for our sessions from a hotel room. The first time this happened, Lorraine looked strangely annoyed. She was even less talkative than usual, and I could sense that something was going on, but as usual she resisted my questions.

“Would your bad mood be linked to my being elsewhere than in my office?” I asked.

She paused, seemingly perplexed. “Maybe.” She was used to seeing on her screen my now familiar background, filled with bookshelves and artwork. The consistency of place that our sessions offered her was actually something that meant a lot to her. That ‘double hotel session’ was not a breakthrough in any spectacular way, but something had shifted, allowing more awareness into her displaced condition.

Several weeks after that session, Lorraine passed through Paris, and we were finally able to meet in person. I always feel a mixture of excitement and apprehension when an online client of mine visits my city, and we plan for an in-person session. Not having a screen between us breaks the settled frame; with some clients it feels like a welcomed change, with others less so. In Lorraine’s case, I was hoping that the encounter could bring some interesting grist to the mill.

Facetime

She sat in front of me; composed, pale as usual and much smaller than I had ever realized—a not unusual surprise of screen relationships. All the semblance of closeness we were able to build online seemed to dissipate. Lorraine was back to her shell.

She was between two assignments, but not for long, and seemed ready, almost eager, to move into the new hotel located somewhere in the Southeastern Asia that was soon to become her “home” for the next four months. She had already checked its situation—it was one of her favorite chains and was equipped with a decent size gym and a swimming pool. She seemed a bit lost, homeless for real, without the hotel room that usually would contain, at least temporarily, her belongings and her life. She made no comments about the area of my office, or about the room that she had seen only on her screen before.

“How do you feel about us being in the same room?”

“Not much, maybe a little uncomfortable.”

She was not used to sharing her room with anybody; she actually never had. Her childhood family home was big enough for everybody to have their own bedroom. They rarely spent time together downstairs, as both parents had their own office space. When she would come home from school, she would usually grab something from the fridge and retreat upstairs, directly to her bedroom.

This was actually the first time Lorraine was sharing some tangible details about her childhood. As she spoke, I could finally picture this big, perfectly organized house surrounded by snow. Her mother loved white lacquered furniture and was always preoccupied about keeping everything in perfect order and maintaining all the surfaces spotless. This was probably the reason why Lorraine was never allowed to invite friends to her house; and none of her birthday parties took place at her home. Her home had always felt like a hotel to her—it was comfortable, clean and temporary. Since a very young age, Lorraine knew that she would leave and go elsewhere. Her childhood was about waiting for this to happen, and now that it had finally happened she did not really know how to live any differently.

Now, as an adult, she had to learn how to develop an attachment, to a place, to a person. Our shared online space was a tentative model; a little relational bubble in which this process hopefully could begin. At this point Lorraine was not ready to fully grasp that the life she had built was as dysfunctional as her childhood. The defensive walls that she had built in the past were still in place, protecting her from the terror of her attachment-less reality.

I chose not to accompany her there, not yet. 

Uncovering and Intervening in the Narcissistic Abuse Cycle

“You’re an #@^ liar! I can’t believe I married such an insecure person! I deserve better,” my client, Jared, stood up screaming at his spouse Margret after she confronted him. Then, Jared stormed out of session only to return a few minutes prior to the end of our time. “Well, have you learned?” he sarcastically asked Margret. “Did she tell you how wrong you were and how you hurt my feelings?” Much to my surprise, Margret apologized to Jared. Then he sat down and gave me a look like the cat who ate the canary. They left much as they came in. Nothing that was discussed with Margret in Jared’s absence seemed to have sunk in. He still was dominating, manipulative and controlling. She was passive, voiceless and exhausted. Our hour seemed wasted. What did I witness? It felt all too familiar since narcissism was the crazy glue that held my own family tree together. That moment was a turning point for me both personally and professionally. It changed how I dealt with my family and, more importantly, opened up a career opportunity. I now specialize in personality disorders with a heavy concentration on narcissistic, borderline and antisocial individuals and their partners. Jared and Margaret are my typical clients. So, what did I observe? The typical cycle of abuse is comprised of tension building, acting-out, reconciliation/honeymoon, followed by a period of calm before the cycle begins again. However, when the abuser is also a narcissist, this downward spiral looks different. True to their personality style, the narcissist is compelled to up the ante. Narcissism changes the back end of the cycle because the narcissist, perpetually self-centered, is unwilling or perhaps incapable of admitting fault. Their need to be superior, correct and/or in charge limits the possibility of any genuine reconciliation. Instead, it is frequently the abused partner who desperately utilizes apology and appeasement while the narcissist switches into the role of victim. This switchback tactic emboldens the narcissist’s behavior even more, further convincing them of their faultlessness. Any threat to their authority repeats the cycle. This describes what I have now witnessed hundreds of times. By teaching my non-narcissistic clients this cycle, they are better able to stop it and have greater control of the downward spiral. Here are the stages in the narcissist’s cycle of abuse I have witnessed in my practice: Feels Threatened. An upsetting event occurs in which the narcissist feels threatened. It could be the rejection of sex, disapproval at work, embarrassment in a social setting, jealousy of another’s success or feelings of abandonment, neglect, or disrespect. The abused partner, aware of the potential threat, becomes nervous. They know something is about to happen and begin to walk on eggshells around the narcissist. Most narcissists repeatedly get upset over the same underlying issue whether it is real or imagined. They also tend to obsess over any perceived threat. Abuses Others. The narcissist engages in some sort of abusive behavior which can be physical, mental, verbal, sexual, financial, spiritual or emotional. The abuse is customized to intimidate the abused partner in an area of weakness, especially if that area is one of strength for the narcissist. The abuse can last for a few minutes or as long as several hours. Becomes the Victim. This is when the switchback occurs. The narcissist uses the abused partner’s reactive behavior as further evidence that they themselves are the ones being abused. The narcissist believes their referential victimization by bringing up past defensive behaviors perpetrated by the abused partner—as if it were the cause of the conflict. Because the abused partner has feelings of remorse and guilt, they accept this warped perception and try to rescue the narcissist. This might include giving in to what the narcissist wants, accepting unnecessary responsibility, placating the narcissist to keep the peace and/or acting as if the narcissist’s lies are the truth. Feels Empowered. Once the abused partner has given in or up, the narcissist once again feels empowered. This is all the justification the narcissist needs to prove that they were right in the first place. The abused has unknowingly stoked the narcissist’s already fiery ego. But every narcissist has an Achilles heel and the power they have temporarily re-claimed only lasts until the next threat. Once the narcissistic cycle of abuse is understood by the abused partner, the therapist can intervene at any point. This may include developing strategies for future confrontations, understanding how much abuse the recipient is willing and able to tolerate in the relationship, or developing an escape plan. The next time Jared exploded, Margaret immediately defused the situation through the use of diversion which stopped the cycle—at least for that moment. Recognizing and effectively intervening around the narcissistic elements of the cycle of abuse changed my practice. I transitioned from mismanaging conflict to de-escalating the tension while maintaining complete control. Couples embroiled in the cycle of narcissism benefitted in that some could remain together while others could not. Empowerment is as important for therapists as it is for the clients, particularly the ones caught up in this cycle.

Superiority and Contempt

The following is an excerpt taken from Shame: Free Yourself, Find Joy, and Build True Self-Esteem, by Joseph Burgo, published by St. Martin’s Press © 2018 and reprinted with permission of the publisher.

Failure Happens

When therapists present their cases in professional papers to their colleagues, or in books like this one intended for a larger audience, they usually describe their success stories, putting their work forward in its best light. “Therapy often falls short, of course, and more often than we like to admit”. Sometimes we fail to form an emotional connection with our clients, or the limits in our understanding prevent us from helping them. Sometimes we make significant mistakes. And sometimes a client’s defenses actively thwart the insights and emotional support we offer them.

     I think the case I describe in this chapter reflects all those failures. At the same time it illustrates the challenges involved in working with clients who massively deny shame. I never found Caleb endearing in the way I did Anna (chapter 11). His arrogance and contempt were off-putting at times, and he rejected his own vulnerability so decisively that I struggled to connect with him on a deeper level. As a result I sometimes intervened too early or made interpretations that were too assertive, probably colored by my own wish to counteract his devaluation of me. At that point in my career I didn’t understand how core shame drives the narcissistic defenses.

        I was trained in the object relations school of psychoanalytic thought, which locates the root of most mental health problems in the early maternal-infant relationship. It focuses primarily on how it feels to be utterly helpless and dependent upon another person for everything you need. “Good enough” caregivers inspire confidence that, when you need other people, you can depend upon them to give you what you need, at least most of the time. When that early experience of need and dependency goes badly awry, however, according to object relations theory you will develop defenses against the awareness of such need.

     Denial: I don’t need anyone.

     Projection: You’re the needy one, not me.

     You may take flight into a grandiose fantasy of having everything you need within yourself or try to possess and assert control over those you depend upon so you don’t have to feel helpless.

     In my work today I focus less on defenses against need and more on the defenses against shame that lie at the heart of narcissism. The narcissistic defense reflects a complete denial that the person has any reason to feel shame. It does not arise from a self-aware choice but from the unconscious and lifelong rejection of a self that is felt to be defective, ugly, inferior, and unworthy of love. The haughty, I’m-better-than-you personality that the narcissist presents to the world masks profound shame, concealing it from himself and from everyone else. Unlike the shame experienced by clients whom I discussed in earlier chapters, Caleb’s shame was almost entirely invisible.

Introducing Caleb

Caleb, who was in his late twenties, was a therapist in training, working at a community mental health clinic whose interns I occasionally supervised. While personal therapy was not a requirement of his degree program or his internship, the clinic strongly recommended that its students enter therapy. For fledgling therapists, their first encounters with clients usually stir up so many strong feelings, tapping into their own emotional struggles, that therapy ought to be a requirement for anyone entering the field. Before he worked with me, Caleb had never seen a therapist. When the director of the clinic suggested he enter therapy, he resisted for many months and agreed only when she insisted.

     In a personal communication before Caleb called, the director told me “he was universally disliked by other interns at the clinic”. During staff meetings and group supervision he condescended to his peers, criticized their work, and continually tried to demonstrate superior insight. In group and individual supervision interns trained in psychodynamic psychotherapy present line-by-line accounts of their sessions, which they have usually transcribed from memory rather than audio recordings. When other interns in his group read their notes, Caleb often highlighted what he thought they had missed and showed them what he thought they should have said—and not in a way that felt particularly helpful. He competed with the group supervisor for prominence. After numerous complaints from other interns as well as his group supervisor, the director gave him a list of several therapists he might contact.

     No therapist wants to believe he was chosen for his lack of experience, of course; it has taken me decades (and some lessons in humility) to see that Caleb probably chose me because I was the youngest therapist on that list, without the professional stature of the others. I was only seven or eight years his senior. A highly competitive young man, he probably would have chosen a therapist whose level of experience he could more easily challenge and whom he had a good chance of defeating. From the beginning of our work together, “Caleb’s desire to render me useless, with nothing of value to offer, felt clear”.

     Most of us form quick impressions based on our first encounters with a stranger; therapists are no different, even if we’re more conscious of the observations we make and what we deduce from them. The clinic director’s description of Caleb had already colored my expectations. When I opened the door to my waiting room that first day, he was reading a magazine, a copy of The New Republic I kept there with some other reading material for my clients. He didn’t immediately glance up as I opened the door, as other clients typically do. With his gaze fixed on the page, he hesitated a few seconds, as if finishing that particular paragraph were of paramount importance. When he finally looked up, he smiled faintly.

     “Dr. Burgo,” he said, rising from the chair. In some ineffable way, the way he said my name felt condescending or ironic.

First Encounter

     Tall and well built, with broad shoulders, Caleb wore khaki pants, a starched white shirt, and a tie with deep blue lines against a vivid red background. His closely cropped blond hair gave him a vaguely military look, accentuated by his erect posture. (He had served in the army, I learned later in that session.) He cut an imposing, and subtly intimidating, figure.

     When he shook the hand I offered him, he barely took hold, gripping and soon letting go. He walked past me into my office, glanced around him in a leisurely way, as if assessing my furniture and wall art, then settled into the client chair opposite mine. He placed his right ankle over his left knee and gave me a look of mild expectation.

     “So tell me about why you’re here,” I said.

With a sober expression Caleb nodded. “Of course. Dr. Lewis suggested some personal therapy would help in my work.”

     “What about you? Do you think it will be helpful?”

     “I’m willing to give it a try.” Again the faint smile.

     Like Dean (a patient described in an earlier chapter), Caleb hadn’t come for therapy of his own volition, at least not entirely. I had similar doubts regarding the success of our work together.

     I asked about his family background. He willingly answered my questions but with minimal detail, in terse summary fashion, and almost as if he were doing me a favor. This impression became clear only much later. At the moment, “inexperienced in dealing with the subtle devaluation of clients like Caleb, I felt mildly ill at ease, not quite able to connect with him”.

     Caleb had grown up in the rural South, part of a large dysfunctional clan he described with clear disdain. Drug addicts and losers living on disability benefits—aunts and uncles, cousins, siblings—most of them unemployed and unemployable. Teen pregnancies, spousal abuse, and serial divorce were the norm. He was one of five children from his mother’s several marriages and had always felt like an outsider. Unlike everyone else in his family, he did well in school and took part in the ROTC program as a teenager. He spent four years in the military and later went to college on scholarship.

     The armed services provide stability and routine for many enlistees who come from chaotic family backgrounds. Sometimes it saves their lives. It also helps them to build pride through achievement, recognition, and a sense of belonging to a group whose values they respect and adopt. I believe the army had rescued Caleb from the horrible dysfunction of his family, but based on the few details he gave me, I gathered that he’d never made it a home the way many recruits do. He’d felt like an outsider in the army, too, never quite able to feel that he belonged. He made no close friends and formed no lasting bonds.

     “What about romantic relationships?” I asked.

     The military, college, and now graduate school had left him little time for such involvements, he told me, at least until recently. His current girlfriend, Katia, had been born in El Salvador and came to the United States with her parents when she was a small child. “She works as a property manager but goes to school at nights,” he said. “She won’t be satisfied to stay where she is. She’s ambitious. We wouldn’t be together if she weren’t.”

     Caleb’s words inspired a number of impressions I could sort out only later, after the session had ended. He seemed embarrassed that Katia was of Hispanic descent and worked at a job he clearly viewed as beneath her. He was quick to justify it as temporary, to align himself with a partner who shared his ambitions. As I grew accustomed to Caleb’s contempt and superiority, I began to feel sorry for Katia. He clearly viewed her as inferior; I suspected that those ambitions for her future were his and not hers.

Origins of Shame

     “How did you decide to become a therapist?” I asked. It seemed an unlikely choice of profession.

     “I’ve always wanted to help people,” he said. “Nobody ever helped me find a way. I had to do it all on my own, as crazy as it was. If I can make the struggle easier for other people, that’s got to be good.” He intended to work with inner-city kids eventually, he told me; he’d already begun to outline the type of program he wanted to establish. He couldn’t see himself fitting into the existing social services network operated by federal, state, and local government, which he dismissed with vague contempt. Funded by “forward-thinking philanthropies,” he wanted to found a private network of community centers integrating individual and group therapy in their offerings.

     I’m sure Caleb consciously believed what he said; on another level “a kind of grandiosity fueled this vision of his future”. Just as he fought against being “just one” of the interns at the clinic, he could never envision himself as a mere “cog in the wheel,” as he once put it. He couldn’t accept being part of an existing system and therefore planned to found his own network.

     “You see yourself as a leader and not a follower,” I said.

     “Exactly.”

     “Has it always been that way?”

     “What do you mean?”

     “How did that go in the army? I’ve never served, but I gather there’s an emphasis on hierarchy and following orders. What was that like for you as a new recruit?”

     “I understood my duty. I did what I was told.”

     “Any problems with authority?

     Caleb visibly stiffened. He didn’t like the question. “No.”

     At that point, based on what I’d heard from the clinic director and reinforced by what Caleb had told me himself, I made my first intervention. In retrospect it was probably premature. I no doubt wanted to demonstrate that I had something to offer and assert the authority I unconsciously felt him subverting.

     “It sounds to me like you have a hard time being young and inexperienced. Given your childhood, being small and dependent can’t have been easy. I wonder if you wanted to grow up all at once so you wouldn’t have to feel small.”

     Even if accurate, this wasn’t a particularly good interpretation. In the school of thought in which I trained, therapists are encouraged to provide insight before clients grasp it themselves, to shed light on the unconscious aspects of their communications that we hear and they don’t. Given that Caleb was a therapist in training, I also assumed that need and dependency issues would be familiar to him, a part of his own theoretical toolbox.

     “Interesting,” he said, with an interest that felt feigned. “How would I know if that’s true?”

     The question took me aback. “What do you mean?”

     “You say I don’t like feeling small and needy. That doesn’t fit with my experience of myself. But you may have greater insight than me. So how do I know if you’re right and I’m just missing something?”

     “If it doesn’t feel true, then it’s not helpful. It’s your experience and it’s ultimately up to you to decide. I can only tell you what I think might be true.”

     “But you have more experience than I do and you might see things that I don’t. Maybe I’m just being defensive.”

     “Possibly.”

     “So how can I tell if I am?”

     This particular interaction encapsulates my work with Caleb throughout the several months we worked together. When I made an observation, he often would wonder aloud how he was to know whether it was accurate. Sometimes he would offer an alternative hypothesis: “Couldn’t that just as easily be true?” he’d say. On one level he seemed cooperative and engaged, conceding that my experience as a therapist might enable me to observe things he couldn’t see; at the same time “he usually insisted that my interventions didn’t “feel true,”” sometimes offering an alternative hypothesis as if we were cotherapists.

Attempted Inroads

     Eventually I began remarking on the nature of those interactions. In psychodynamic psychotherapy the relationship between therapist and client sometimes becomes a focus: clients bring their emotional issues and styles of relating into the consulting room, interacting with their therapists in ways that shed useful light on their other relationships. Caleb’s view of himself as visionary leader, his condescension toward the other interns, his competition with his supervisor, and the way he reacted to my interventions felt all of a piece.

     “I think it’s hard for you to let yourself be a client,” I said more than once. “You’d rather be my peer than turn to me for help.”

     “I suppose that’s possible.” Caleb never contradicted me directly but instead raised doubts in a reasonable tone. “How would I know for sure that I’m doing that?” He appeared cooperative, willing to consider anything I might have to say, even if he never accepted any of it. His attitude toward me felt vaguely patronizing, as if I were his inferior and not terribly bright. The person who relies on narcissistic defenses against unconscious shame often offloads or projects his shame into other people around him, forcing them to feel it.

     “That sounds familiar,” he once said in response to my comment. “We were reading [Melanie] Klein’s paper on that subject in class last week. I think it’s “Envy and Gratitude.” She says something very similar to one of her own clients.”

     Caleb frequently shifted the focus from personal to intellectual. If I pointed out the subtle ways he dismissed and devalued me, he’d relate it to some theoretical paper he’d read. If I suggested that he found it humiliating to admit he needed help, he’d say how interesting he found the idea, then relate it to one of his own clients from the clinic. Over the years many of my clients have been therapists, and now and then they bring to our session their feelings of anguish or concern about their own clients. Caleb regularly discussed his clients in our sessions but never with any implicit bid for help. He recounted his fascinating insights and told me how much his clients felt helped by him.

     “Seems like you want to show me what a good therapist you are, rather than turning to me as your own therapist.”

     “Don’t other therapists you see talk about their cases? Dr. Lewis told me personal therapy would be a good place to talk about these things.”

     Such interactions made me feel useless and ineffective. “Nothing I said seemed helpful. I had no doubt that Caleb was devaluing and competing with me”, but I couldn’t find a way to help him see it. Because I was aware that he made me feel competitive in return, I was more cautious than I might have been in confronting him.

     He talked about one particular case more than the others. Celine, a young and apparently beautiful actress, formerly featured on a soap opera that filmed in New York, had recently moved to Los Angeles after being written out of the plotline. She was currently working part time as a cocktail waitress and chose the clinic for therapy because it charged clients on a sliding scale according to what they could afford. As the on-call therapist that week, Caleb had spoken to her on the phone and accepted her as a client.

     When he discussed Celine during our sessions, he seemed enchanted by her. Smart, well educated, lively, open and willing to do the hard work of psychotherapy. She readily accepted his insights and made good use of them during the time between their sessions. She often told Caleb how much she appreciated his help and considered herself fortunate to have wound up with such an excellent therapist, even if he was still in training. According to Caleb, she considered him brilliant.

     On the one hand this description of his sessions with Celine continued the pattern of one-upsmanship in our work together: He was brilliant and insightful, I was ineffective. On the other, I worried that this client was unconsciously playing to his narcissism because of her own needs and issues. For complex reasons some clients idealize their therapist during the early phases of treatment; they may feel a kind of elation at having found a savior. Especially for beginners in the profession eager to feel proficient, the experience of being worshipped by a client can be quite seductive. For Caleb it seemed like a kind of drug, confirming his idealized view of himself.

     I couldn’t speak with authority about Celine’s issues, of course, but in addition to his competitive feelings I did try to address Caleb’s wish to be idealized. I mentioned the anxiety and inevitable confusion that comes with being a fledgling therapist and how good it can feel to work with a client who reveres you. I talked about idealization as the flip side of hatred, a description I’d heard from my own supervisors. Caleb found this idea deeply interesting.

     “Klein writes about that,” he told me. “Splitting and idealization as a means of coping with ambivalence. Of course, that assumes she’s actually idealizing me.”
What I didn’t yet understand in my career was the role of unconscious shame in fueling this wish to be idealized. Hidden feelings of defect, ugliness, and inferiority may drive you into the arms of someone willing to agree that you are perfect.

An Abrupt Ending

     “It should come as no surprise that Caleb abruptly terminated his therapy without notice”. He left a phone message on my machine, telling me how much he appreciated my efforts but that he’d decided to seek help from someone “more senior.” He wished me the best of luck in my career.

     Because we worked in the same profession and he was an intern at a clinic where I occasionally supervised, I heard about Caleb from time to time. According to the clinic director, he waited months to mention that he had stopped treatment, and when it finally came out, he refused to pursue further therapy. He continued to be an irritant to staff and the other interns. Everyone looked forward to his departure from the clinic at the conclusion of his internship.

     Toward the end of his tenure one of his clients (I had no doubt it was Celine) filed an ethics charge against him for unprofessional behavior. According to the affidavit she filed with the board, Caleb had suggested they discontinue treatment and pursue a romantic relationship. He left the clinic not long after that, and I never heard from or about him again.

     Although some predatory therapists deliberately exploit their position of influence to take sexual advantage of their clients, others unwittingly succumb to the kind of idealization Caleb found so intoxicating. Based on their own emotional issues and needs, some clients unconsciously attempt to seduce their therapists; others idealize the person who helps them because of a deep longing to be rescued. When an idealizing client encounters a therapist in flight from shame, the results can be traumatic for the client and professionally ruinous for the therapist.

I Dont Know How To Be Sorry

In my last blog post, I wrote about shame-proneness, the propensity to experience shame in response to ambiguous situations that elicit self-evaluation. For example, if Patrick failed a test and he thought “damn, I didn’t study hard enough; I’ll study more for the next one,” this would suggest that he felt guilt. But if he thought “damn, you really are a loser; you’ll never be able to do this,” this would suggest that he felt shame. When internal narratives of shame are not transient; when feeling small, worthless and insignificant permeate all experience, this is shame-proneness, which has long term adverse consequences.

When Mark and Claire came into session, I felt the tension immediately. I gave them each an opportunity to share why they had come in. Both described a history of explosive arguments and interpersonal volatility followed by calm reconciliations, then a rise in tension, then another eruption filled with angry tirades and verbal assaults.

“When he says he’s sorry I always want to believe him. He seems so sincere, but it never sticks. And I never know when things will explode again. Coming to couple’s therapy is our last chance.”

Like what you are reading? For more stimulating stories, thought-provoking articles and new video announcements, sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Mark looked down the whole time Claire spoke, then with his face tight he said, “What do you want me to say. I tell you I’m sorry and it’s never enough. Nothing is ever enough and it’s your fault too. This isn’t all me.”

As I listened to their interaction, and assessed their interpersonal dynamic, I heard statements of blame thrown back and forth, which is common early in couple’s therapy, but I also heard Mark’s failure to empathize.

The ability to follow through on “I’m sorrys” implies guilt, because genuine guilt indicates the desire for reparation. In emotionally abusive relationships, such as Mark and Claire’s, what looks like contrition (which implies guilt) is really the voice of shame. If Mark had truly been able to experience Claire’s feelings (empathy), he’d feel guilty. He’d be able to tolerate the painful introspections that often lead to repair.

But their cycle continued, over and over, even after Mark said he was sorry. When this happens, it means that shame is masquerading as guilt. Shame undermines the ability to empathize with another’s emotions. Empathy requires transcending the interpersonal boundary and experiencing the emotions of another. Because shame is so painful, it disallows this from happening and instead, when the self-evaluative discomfort comes, it gets projected back onto the other; so, instead of seeing the other as the victim, they are seen as the perpetrator and hence the cycle continues.

While studying the relationship between shame, guilt and empathy, I found that there were two categories of empathy. Shame-empathy, which looks like empathy, but isn’t, because it’s not motivated by the pain of hurting someone else, but rather by the distress and fear of losing the other. It’s a self-focused experience, not an interpersonal one. Guilt-empathy, (what we think of when we think of empathy), on the other hand, leads to feeling the others pain and not wanting to do it again.

I heard Mark projecting blame. I watched his discomfort when Claire voiced her concerns. I noticed that he quickly retaliated for the smallest slight. I knew then that this was going to be a huge challenge. Empathy is fundamental to healthy relationships. When I work with couples where one has underlying shame, I know the only way it will heal is if empathy can be garnered, which means the shame needs to be processed. That type of examination is a slippery slope, because any introspection can cause more shame and more defensiveness.

I asked Mark, “What are feeling right before you respond to Claire?”

“I – I. Angry.”

“Can you say more?”

“Angry that she says those things to me. What does she want from me. If she’s going to blame me for everything, why are we even here.”

“I didn’t hear her blame you for everything.”

He folded his arms. “You’re taking her side.”

“There are no sides. My job is look at what’s happening and help you both communicate better. I have a feeling that the things Claire says make you feel bad about yourself.”

“That’s right. She’s always making me feel bad about myself.”

“I don’t mean to do that,” Claire said. “I have to be able to tell you how I feel and whenever I do, you get angry.”

“That’s not true,” Mark raised his voice. “You don’t tell me how you feel. You tell me about all of the shitty things I’ve done. What about all of the good things I do for you.”

“What do you imagine Claire is feeling right now?” I asked Mark.

“Satisfied that she got me to show you my angry side.”

“She looks like she’s about to cry. Do you see that.”

“She does that to make me feel bad.”

“You can’t see that she’s also hurting?”

“That’s because she always makes everything about her. I’m so sick of it.”

Tears rolled down Claire’s cheeks.

“Stop it,” he said. “You’re making me feel bad.”

I let this go on for a few more minutes and then I explained that I needed both of them to enter individual therapy and offered referrals.

Mark insisted that there was nothing wrong with him and that therapy took up too much time. I told them both that we weren’t going to be able to move forward in couples work unless they dealt with their individual issues.

Mark looked furious.

With some trepidation, I said, “I’m thinking that people have said things that made you feel bad as a kid. That’s not your fault, but it’s making everything you hear Claire say feel like the same harsh words. And Claire, without intending, the constant focus on what’s wrong with Mark is emasculating and evoking shame. I want you both to speak with your own therapists, otherwise this is never going to stop.”

They both conceded.

We agreed to continue our couple’s therapy, which I knew would be a difficult journey. It’s hard to get to the shame, but without doing so, empathy will remain compromised. The more Mark understood his shame, the greater his ability would be to recognize and experience Claire’s emotions within the context of their relationship. And the more he could empathize, the more Claire would feel her emotions were heard and valid. The more she felt that she had a right to her feelings the less likely she would be dissatisfied.

* Claire and Mark are amalgamates created to show the relationship between shame, guilt and empathy.