Janelle Johnson on College Counseling

The Clinical Landscape

Lawrence Rubin: You’ve dedicated your career to college counseling, working with students who appear to experience many of the same problems clinicians encounter in outpatient clinics, crisis centers, and substance abuse facilities. Are college counseling centers microcosms for the clinical world outside of the campus?
Janelle Johnson: I would definitely say what we’re seeing at community colleges and at universities around the United States is reflective of what’s going on in the nation
LR: Can you give me some examples?
JJ: There has been a trend where colleges have been able to provide more support services so students can attend. In the past, these students were not able to attend because of a diagnosis or not having the right medication. They couldn’t perform in college. But now we see a lot of students coming that have schizophrenia or bipolar disorder and we have disability accessibility services to help them. Here at our college,
one third of the students we see are diagnosed with a mental health disability rather than a physical or learning disability
one third of the students we see are diagnosed with a mental health disability rather than a physical or learning disability.
LR: So, they come in with previously diagnosed mental health conditions which may run the gamut from adjustment and anxiety disorders all the way out to schizophrenia?
JJ: Absolutely. We see students every day that may have a lifelong diagnosis, who are able to come to college now, but they need resources around their diagnosis. Student counseling services often try to work with their outside providers because we see ourselves as providing supportive counseling. At larger universities, there is access to medical providers to help with monitoring medications. It depends on what your setting is at your school. If a college center does not have a medical provider, then we obtain a release, so we can actually work with a psychiatrist or a therapist that’s not on the campus, especially when it comes to monitoring medications for more serious diagnoses.

Emerging Adults

LR: So, these students that you’re seeing who have come with diagnoses are accustomed to being in treatment, are they open to being referred back into the community, even after they’re in a college counseling setting, or do they hope the counseling center will give them all they need?
  
JJ: That’s a very interesting question. It depends on their maturity level and how they’ve worked with medications in the past. Even with a seemingly simple diagnosis like ADHD students will often say, “I had these accommodations in high school. They sent me to a counselor.” Perhaps they had more of a medical professional do an assessment. But they come to college with the idea “well I’m in college now, I don’t need any of this.” I think most colleges experience students who come to college and try to maintain, but whatever their diagnosis is we also know that this is an age where certain mental illnesses start to show up.

Sometimes there’s an incident that brings a student like this to the counseling center where, depending upon its size, they may be able to receive an assessment. Large schools like the University of North Carolina has around 30 people on staff with psychiatrists, licensed psychologists and licensed counselors. But in a smaller private school or community college, we send them out into the community for some type of assessment or we refer them back to professionals they may have seen in the past

LR: So, a third of the students who visit the counseling center come with a previous diagnosis and may be accustomed to treatment, and they may be receptive to referrals back out into the community. What about the other two thirds? The ones who come to you and may not realize that they’re struggling or may have an emergent psychiatric disorder. How do you hook them?
JJ: What we see, especially with younger students, is emerging adulthood—that transition where they’re starting to be responsible for themselves. We try to talk to them about how they want to live their lives and how they want to express themselves as adults. In the past, when there have been mental health issues, a lot of that push either came from the parents or the school. Whereas in college, I think one of the mental health hooks that we offer them is saying, “you know, these are decisions you can make yourself. How do you want to be?” We give them some options as compared to the past where they were told what to do.

I’ve met a lot of students who were actually on medications for ADHD or who were taking antidepressants. Their parents said to them, “oh, you don’t need this anymore” and took them off. They were in that gray area of not functioning that well but having that parental oversight to get things done. And

then they come to college, and without their medications or follow up, the parents just expect them to do well, but they don’t
then they come to college, and without their medications or follow up, the parents just expect them to do well, but they don’t.
LR: So, these are emerging adults with whom you try to work developmentally around taking responsibility and seeking resources, which sometimes helps them to reach out for and effectively use treatment.
JJ: Yes, and at the community college level, we try to partner with community agencies so oftentimes, we can make those referrals right in our office with the student sitting here. We can put the student on the phone and facilitate appointments.

Getting Them Hooked

LR: So, you may actually be the frontline for these kids. Do you find that some of these students are resistant to the services that you provide? Or resistant to being referred out for more serious problems that they may not even think they have?
JJ: Yes, I think that we do see some resistance. The BITs (behavior intervention teams) or campus care teams sometimes need to intervene when students become disruptive in the classroom learning setting. We talk to them and try to engage them in counseling. Faculty and other students try to be patient, but I think when a student becomes disruptive, we try to figure out what’s going because we tell them that they are jeopardizing their ability to be on campus.
LR: It sounds like you have to be a little more heavy-handed or hope that the campus support teams can build enough of a relationship with the student and walk them over to the counseling center.
JJ: That’s absolutely true. You know, some people are very compliant. Other people are interested in finding out what’s going on with them because they may have that feeling like, “I don’t want to keep living like this. I don’t feel good.” But, then other students have a hard time recognizing that their behavior is disruptive or that there’s any issue. It really depends on how they’re supported when they’re at home and then how they’re treated. Sometimes I find students with very high intellectual functioning have their own unique mental health issues. It’s really difficult with some of those students because you can talk to them very intellectually and they can process what you’re saying, but
they feel like treatment is going to somehow interfere with their creativity or their ability to perform in school
they feel like treatment is going to somehow interfere with their creativity or their ability to perform in school.
LR: Is there a specific student that comes to mind?
JJ: A young male student I recently spoke with had a bipolar-one diagnosis and had recently received an ADHD diagnosis. He was watching his peers advancing on to their master’s degrees while he was struggling to complete school—but having this very fatalistic attitude about himself and about his ability to complete. But when you speak to him, when you look at his courses and grades, he’s got As. Schoolwork is not an issue but he lives in this sort of fatalistic place. “Why am I doing this? I’ll never amount to anything. I always fail at everything. Look what all my peers have already done.”

I think oftentimes a student feels overwhelmed on the campus and sort of wanders into our area hoping that someone will speak with them. What we usually do in that case is to obtain a release. We try to follow up to let the outside providers know that perhaps the student is in a downward spiral and perhaps he needs his medications checked.

That’s also where Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) comes in. It helps the students to look at thoughts that really aren’t helpful—the misconceptions that they have about themselves which sometimes can be very challenging. 

LR: Do you get a sense, at least on your campus, that there’s a stigma associated with going to the counseling center or being seen coming out of the counseling center? And if so, how do you address that on campus?
JJ: I have a sense of that most campuses are working really hard with different kinds of programs to remove that stigma around coming to the counseling center. We see different initiatives like the JED and Active Minds programs and peer support groups. I could give an example like suicide prevention. Some campuses do things where they lay out backpacks in the quad for how many students have been lost. And then they have a place where you can come out to honor somebody you’ve lost or write something about yourself—some kind of thing where you can participate. I feel like there is increasing recognition of mental health on campuses and getting help if you need it.

On our campus, in particular, and I think on a lot of campuses, we do classroom outreach. We appeal to students to refer other students to us. Sometimes we find that’s even better than faculty referring students. Staff bring students over. But we find sometimes if your peer, another student says to you, “Oh my gosh, you’re just going through a horrible time. You know there are counseling services here on campus? You know, let me walk you over there or let me show where that’s at.” We find that’s really beneficial. 

Challenges of Dual Enrollment

LR: Yours is a two-year college. But there are also high school students on campus. Do you find that these young people have unique clinical problems and challenges?
JJ: We’re seeing a lot of early admission, college dual-credit high schools on campuses. And at Santa Fe Community College we do have a high school right on our campus. It’s even happening at some four-year schools where there’s a high school house. They have some high school teachers and some high school curriculum, but almost immediately students are being placed into college-level classes. What you see happening is
they’re graduating from high schools one day and then receiving either a certificate or an associate’s degree the next
they’re graduating from high schools one day and then receiving either a certificate or an associate’s degree the next.

Regarding the mental health of these particular students, some are very high functioning, very motivated, but some of these students are in this fast-track program because they’ve not done well in the traditional public high school. They’ve had conduct problems or social interaction problems. The parents think, “we’ll take you over here to our college so you’ll be able to take college classes and you’ll be in this high school but it’ll be a lot more flexible for you.” But these students who haven’t performed well in the past may have an inability to follow through and can’t really manage themselves in college. One of our counselors in particular had a student with a very high level of ADHD who didn’t come to the counseling appointments on time. This sort of high school/college program can actually create more anxiety and more unmanageability and adjustment disorders for students.

LR: So, these kids may not be in an appropriate fit for college life just yet?
JJ: Perhaps, but it’s hard to say. What schools are doing with this early college high school programs are really a positive move for a lot of students because I think high school has let a lot of them down. I think high school is a really difficult time for a lot of students because of pressures around social media and bullying. So, being on a college campus really helps them be with other college students who are motivated to get a degree. But there is always the question of whether they are developmentally ready or mentally ready. And while there is a high school counselor here for those particular students, they are spending a lot of time on other things like scheduling and achievement testing.

Addressing Suicide on Campus

LR: Suicide rates are very high in the college-age demographic. How are college counseling centers set up to address that? 
JJ: I think a lot of college counseling centers are trying to address that with different kinds of programming. The JED foundation, for example, offers programming for college campuses. Active Minds is another one that offer all kinds of wellness programming for campuses that also addresses suicide prevention. Also the American Foundation on Suicide Prevention in New York.

Suicide is the second-highest cause of death for our demographic.
Suicide is the second-highest cause of death for our demographic. Even if you go up in age a little bit, which is the demographic for a lot of community colleges, then suicide is the third-highest cause of death. So, I think on most campuses we are all actively working with programming and bringing support.

At Santa Fe Community College we actually have a certified faculty member do Mental Health First Aid Training. Mental Health First Aid is a program that originally came out of Australia that has been embraced in the United States. It’s a day-long program for people in the community who are not mental health professionals. Here at Santa Fe, it would be our campus community—our faculty, staff, other students who take the training. 

LR: So, when it comes to the more serious disorders, and suicide in particular, it’s critical that college counseling centers work in conjunction with community agencies and have programs on campus so that students are never alone. And neither are college counselors alone because they’re always linked to other resources?
JJ: Right. College counselors work with these different available resources, create their own programming or belong to these organizations that provide free programming.
The idea is to eliminate the stigma, raise awareness and have people participate.
The idea is to eliminate the stigma, raise awareness and have people participate. The campus is a community and we encourage students to participate in these suicide prevention programs and to be part of a campus community that supports helping students reach out. People need to recognize the signs and to be comfortable approaching people.

Disconnected from Families

LR: On a related note, we know that LGBT youth are at particularly high risk for suicide. How do you address the needs of these students?
JJ: A lot of campuses are looking to find ways to support students who are in the process of self-identifying or have someone on their staff assigned to programming in that area who works on removing stigma. In New Mexico, which is a very Catholic state with a lot of immigrants, some of these families persist in saying to their children, “your religion doesn’t accept this. You can’t do this. If you do this, you can’t live with us.” So, we try to work on that by asking these students, “How can you speak with your family? How do you want to live your life?” These students still recognize their religious teachings but don’t want that being used against their identity.
LR: So, you try to work within their families and with the cultural issues that impact their emerging LGBT identities?
JJ: Campuses will either look for programming or design their own programming around supporting these students, and then work with them on these issues in counseling.
A lot of these students actually feel safer on campus than they do at home.
A lot of these students actually feel safer on campus than they do at home.
LR: Speaking of unique challenges, what about first-generation college students.
JJ: I do believe they have unique clinical challenges because many of them do not have a history of going to college. Additionally, many of these young people also have to help out financially in their homes. So they live at home, come to college but also work to help pay the rent, the utilities and the car payments. And then there are issues around their transition to adulthood. We help them speak to their parents about what they need to be a successful college student.

Some of them will say “my parents are making me feel like I’m crazy because I need more time to study and I can’t take care of my little brother or pick him up from school every day.” It’s an interesting dynamic that plays into their mental health because when they don’t feel supported or understood at home, they experience anxiety, depression and acting out behaviors. It’s not that families don’t support going to college—they absolutely do. But they don’t know what that means or what it looks like.

Raising Awareness

LR: There’s a lot of research into the short and long-term effects of adverse early childhood experiences and the need for trauma-informed education. The idea is that some of these kids are coming to school with such a heavy trauma burden that they can’t concentrate, can’t relate and are at high risk for drinking or self-harm. Have you seen this on your campus and how do you deal with that?
JJ: There are different kinds of trauma. Here
in New Mexico, we have a lot of Native Americans, so we talk about historical trauma
in New Mexico, we have a lot of Native Americans, so we talk about historical trauma. In addition to these historical events, some of our students come from a background of trauma in their home or in their childhoods. In the college counseling setting, we work with these students around issues of safety, peer support and collaboration—empowering the student to have a voice while they are exploring their issues. We are not dismissing what has happened to them but we’re looking at how the therapy works for them, helping them to move forward with that trauma and not to feel re-traumatized by being in our college setting.
LR: Are drinking and substance abuse significant problems on college campuses?
JJ: We’re not seeing it as much on commuter campuses like ours that do not have housing, although I do think it is a presenting problem in our counseling centers. It’s different on residential campuses, and particularly in the dorms. But we do see students coming to campus who are inebriated, or who have problems that other students are reporting. They may be coming to class and they sound like they’re drunk or other students can smell it on them.

I do think it is an issue that is hard issue to address. College counseling centers try to work with students on maintaining their sobriety. I think if they’re actively using or they can’t even function then it is critical to refer them to treatment center. Another student may binge drink only on weekends and otherwise be high functioning, but it also starts to catch up with them. They may not be getting proper nutrition, or may be having problems with sleep, hygiene or relationships. These effects of drinking begin to interfere with their functioning in the college setting. With these students, we try to talk more about responsible drinking and help them to understand how their drinking interferes with their learning and progress and help them explore how they can be more responsible. 

Serving our Veterans

LR: You had mentioned that you have a veteran’s program on campus? Are there unique clinical needs for these students?
JJ: Often college campuses have veteran support centers which provide resources for veterans and their families. These resources include counseling services. Although we are not housed with the veteran’s service center on our campus, veterans know about our counseling services. We also have a veteran’s hospital in Albuquerque, New Mexico, which is about 60 miles away and a veteran's counseling center in Santa Fe.

Our veteran’s center also brings counselors onto our campus about once a week to meet with the veterans. This is not to say that some of the veterans don’t come to our regular college counseling center. Having served first and then coming to college can be a challenge and clinical needs depend on whether or not they are a combat veteran. The

combat veterans may feel that there is a stigma around coming to the regular college counselor
combat veterans may feel that there is a stigma around coming to the regular college counselor who hasn’t experienced what they have or have a military background. Larger campuses actually hire counselors who have served in the military. This can be helpful because veterans have trauma about reintegrating. They’re used to following authority and a more established and structured day. Sometimes they have difficulty with younger students who aren’t respectful. 
LR: Or knowledgeable!
JJ: Sometimes, these younger, less sensitive or aware students don’t conduct themselves very well in class which is very troubling for veterans. And then of course, we do have veterans that have PTSD or depression; situations that require more treatment. But a lot of times, I think it is more about adjustment, depending on how long they served and the college program they’re in.

CBT and Beyond

LR: We’ve been talking about various treatment needs of college students and I know that CBT and other empirically supported treatments are the rage these days. I’m wondering if it also dominates the college counseling landscape.
JJ: I think there is a lot of support on college campuses to use research-supported therapy modalities. CBT has a lot of related therapies including DBT, solution focused and even positive psychology. The reason it works in our setting is because we’re tasked to triage students that come in. There can be a high need for services and students oftentimes wait to get in to see a counselor or a mental health provider. So, I think we want to use therapies that we know can assist with more immediate behavior change.

We don’t have the luxury for long-term care with students.
We don’t have the luxury—and I don’t know if it is a luxury—for long-term care with students. So, those kinds of therapies can really be useful. You can give the student homework and worksheets—something they can hold onto so that they can feel like they’re moving forward and like they’ve accomplished something. I’ve even had students with whom I’ve suggested a reward system to help when they were struggling with something and want to see improvement. Larger campuses can even incorporate these kinds of therapies into a group setting and can direct students to be part of therapy groups.
LR: Would you say that college counselors are pressured to use these proven methods and not encouraged to use creative-expressive modalities that incorporate art, play and music? 
JJ: We’re not forced to do that—it would depend on the counseling center and how many staff members they have. I do see the creative going on as well. In New Mexico, Southwestern College offers a master’s degree in art therapy and I’ve had interns from there on my campus who have done art therapy with our students and they’ve really liked that.

There is some room for creativity, but you have to be working to move the student forward especially because you’re working in a limited timeframe; a college semester or a college quarter and then there’s a break and they go home. I am at a community college where we are looking toward a goal-oriented type of therapy. If they bring in extreme trauma or are in an abusive relationship or are fighting an addiction, treatment is better is referred to a community partner. We use whatever modality is supportive of their counseling and helps them to meet their goals.

And for most of them, their goal is to complete college, find a career and move forward. So, we try to facilitate that. If there is a major mental illness diagnosis, we make sure that they have a community provider who may be doing something like DBT groups. I don’t feel like college counseling can replace that.

College Counseling Competencies

LR: With regard to the provision of treatment, what are some the unique competencies that a college counselor should possess?
JJ: At the university level, a lot of schools hire licensed doctoral-level clinical directors. The counseling staff is sometimes made up of licensed counselors. In New Mexico, I’m a licensed clinical mental health counselor. Some college centers hire licensed clinical social workers who are in clinical practice. That’s is the more traditional set up. Our organization, the American College Counseling Association expects that any counselors working in a college setting be licensed.

What we see in California is an interesting example where most of the universities are using doctoral level licensed psychologists in their counseling centers. In their community colleges, they are using master’s level clinicians. But they don’t have licensure at that level. It’s hard for me to talk across the board, however the American Counseling Association has been working on licensure portability along with licensure accountability.

I would say that if you’re going to work in a college setting, you should be licensed in the same manner that you would to work in a private practice or at any other clinical facility—you need the degree and the experience that comes from practicum and internship to do this work. Unless, that is, you’re in a college where they’re calling you a counselor and you’re doing academic advising or something like that. If you’re in a college mental health counseling center, you’re doing the same kind of work anybody would be doing as a mental health professional anywhere else. The scope of your practice may be limited in that you have to do more community resource referrals. But, your knowledge and ability including understanding the DSM, various diagnoses and treatment modalities fully impacts your work every day. You need to be able to do it.

LR: Do college counselors need to like teenagers and emerging adults? Wouldn’t that be a prerequisite?
JJ: I think that you want to be able to work with that population. Three years ago, I started an internship program here at Santa Fe Communi

David Jobes on Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality

Hospitalization Rarely Works

Lawrence Rubin: Thanks so much for making time today for this important interview Dr. Jobes. Let’s just dive right in: What you think are the greatest challenges for clinicians working with suicidal clients?
 
David Jobes:
we’ve got a mindset that a suicidal person belongs in the hospital
I think the greatest challenges are the ones of our culture and of our mindset about what’s most helpful to suicidal people. I think we’ve got a mindset that a suicidal person belongs in the hospital and that you help a suicidal person by treating the mental disorder. I’m a clinician/researcher so I lead with my clinical eye, but I am very much interested in things that’ve been proven to work.

I don’t think randomized control trials (RCTs) are the only way to go–I think there are many true kinds of validity. But I am partial to RCTs because they give more clarity about the causal impact of things. And there are a lot of well-intended interventions that are surprisingly unhelpful if not actually harmful.

there’s evidence that hospitalization is actually harmful for suicidal people
To that end, I think we’re now seeing a period where the use of hospitalization is under the microscope. There’s evidence that hospitalization is actually harmful for suicidal people. There’s a psychiatrist in Melbourne, Australia who talks about nosocomial suicides, which are those caused by the hospitalization. Marsha Linehan, the developer of Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) has for many years been very critical of hospitalization. I began my career in inpatient care and so while I’m not anti-hospitalization per se, I am when the treatment focus is exclusively on the mental disorder, and kind of skips the bullseye which is the suicidal thoughts and behaviors.

If you look at the literature, most of the hospitalization centers around well-focused pharmacological interventions and very brief stays of a few days. And the clinicians are not really asking important questions about the patient’s suicidality. These might include: Do you have suicidal thoughts? Can you tell me about those thoughts? Can we embrace a stabilization plan? And, there are different flavors of stabilization plans which have been proven to be more effective than no-harm contracts. We can ask questions such as: Can we talk about your access to lethal means? Can you think about the use of a lifeline and other resources? And after discharge, can the community do some psychological education that’s suicide specific and then can we institute some kind of follow up?

You know, I was thinking about this before our interview that, when I take my dog to the vet, I get a follow-up phone call the next day about how she’s doing. We don’t necessarily get that from mental health care. My dog gets a nice follow up phone call and I’m delighted to respond to those calls. But there’s evidence that different kinds of follow up, like a phone call, or a letter, or a postcard, or even texting can be helpful in changing behaviors.

we tend to think that medication is more helpful than it actually is for suicide risk. The evidence is at best, mixed
So, that’s one of my soapboxes! I’m really trying to get the focus on hospitalization shifted to suicide-specific considerations. And then in a related way, we tend to think that medication is more helpful than it actually is for suicide risk. The evidence is at best, mixed. We actually have existing treatments that are psychological in nature that most mental health people don’t know about or use routinely. 
LR: If hospitalization is a quick in-and-out and doesn’t focus on a plan upon release and follow up, then it can be as destructive as whatever the suicidal person brings in with them? 
DJ:
hospitalizing a teenager for a second time creates a more lethal trajectory of their suicidal thinking
I know for a fact that many clinicians, from the trainings that I do, are paralyzed by fear of litigation–malpractice and wrongful death tort litigation. This creates a defensive kind of approach to practice–a better safe than sorry approach. But patients get discharged very quickly from hospitals and there’s evidence that the post-discharge period is very high-risk of suicide. There’s actually a paper that was published in the Journal of Affective Disorders last year at the University of Michigan stating that hospitalizing a teenager for a second time creates a more lethal trajectory of their suicidal thinking. And it’s not that hospitalization, per se, is a bad thing. It’s just that we’re not focusing on suicidal thoughts and behaviors.
LR: So, suicidal patients are out of the hospital after this immersive experience where they have 24-hour care by a team of caring professionals. And then, boom, gone. And if there’s not some really positive powerful bridge, then they may be at even higher risk.
DJ: Well, I would even gently challenge the notion of a team of caring professionals. I think what the literature shows is that patients end up spending a lot of time watching TV in the day room, and they go to a couple psychoeducational groups that they don’t find especially helpful. And the only treatment that really exists is pharmacological. And a lot of the medicines, as you know, don’t really have a full therapeutic effect until weeks after initiation.

What we associate with hospitalization actually is not typically the case. There are of course exceptions. I don’t mean to upset people with the idea that every hospitalization experience is iatrogenic or negative. But I think there’s a fair amount of evidence that it’s not really meeting the needs of suicidal people or their families.

Clinical Conundrums

LR: How do clinicians cull through this massive literature in order to find their way to the most effective treatment?
DJ:
we have a disconnect between proving an intervention works in a randomized control trial, and then actually disseminating and implementing that treatment
That’s a great question and challenge because we have a disconnect between proving an intervention works in a randomized control trial, and then actually disseminating and implementing that treatment. One model is Marsha Linehan’s DBT and the reason that DBT is so famous is that they’ve figured out the dissemination and implementation challenge.

It’s a very labor-intensive team treatment that clinicians can’t do on their own and it’s not for everybody. But if you want to learn about it, you can go to the Behavioral Tech website where there are training programs. The two empirically-supported cognitive therapy programs have effective treatments and associated books, especially for suicide attempters, but they don’t have training programs. And that’s a conundrum. You can’t really learn to do cognitive therapy for suicide prevention that was developed by Greg Brown and Aaron Beck at Penn or brief cognitive behavioral therapy (BCBT) developed by David Rudd and Craig Bryan, at the University of Utah, because these researchers haven’t taken their positive research findings to the next level. and developed a training component that clinicians can utilize.

On the other hand, research supported treatments like Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and some other really well-known therapies including cognitive behavioral therapy that are not suicide-specific. But paradoxically, there are training organizations that make it possible to learn these non-suicide-specific evidence-based interventions. In order to scale up a proven treatment and disseminate it to clinicians so they may learn it, you’ve got to have money to get to the corners of the world that you really want to have use this intervention.

So, for example, in our CAMS (Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality) model and other well-disseminated models, there are books but also deep-dive online roleplay training components. Clinicians hate roleplay training even though it changes their behavior and is shown to be effective in terms of doing something different. And then a really critical element is the use of consultation calls to coach a clinician through a new treatment that they’re trying to learn.

We are in the business of training a lot of people all over the world and our CAMS model is gaining some traction, but a lot of what clinicians prefer in terms of training is not necessarily what’s going to change their behavior with suicidal clients, and that’s a real conundrum the field faces. 
LR: So, the challenge is bridging the gap between the research that proves treatment efficacy and disseminating it in a way that makes it likely that clinicians will effectively utilize it.
DJ: Right, and that’s a tough sell because a lot of us like to do what we know to do. I’m a middle-aged man, an old dog who doesn’t like new tricks, so I kind of get that. But in the case of suicide, it’s life and death. And you know, if the fallback is hospitalization or use of medication without support and there’s even the possibility that those might not be helpful, it’s incumbent upon us to do things that are effective.

clinicians need to be thoughtful about access to lethal means and having lethal means discussions with their suicidal clients
.And that doesn’t necessarily mean that clinicians working with suicidal clients have to learn adherence to intervention, but they do need to be thoughtful about safety planning and stabilization planning. Clinicians need to be thoughtful about access to lethal means and having lethal means discussions with their suicidal clients. These are examples of low-hanging fruit types of questions that any practitioner can embrace. There’s a task force that I was on that developed recommended standards of care for suicidal patients. And that’s available through the Suicide Intervention Resource Center and the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention. If clinicians just look up these organizations, they’ll see the low-hanging fruit that have an evidence-base and are relatively easy to incorporate into a standard practice.

The CAMS Program

LR: As a prelude to discussing your CAMS program, I’m interested to know how you developed an interest in suicide? Some clinicians stay away from suicide like the plague. Others run to it. You seem to have invested so much energy and resources in this topic over the years.
DJ: It was something I sort of bumped into. I was trying to get into a PhD clinical program and I wound up in a master’s program at American University here in Washington. My psychopathology professor was Lanny Burman, a leading figure in the field. I was really fascinated by his work in suicide, so he got me involved. I did my master’s thesis with him and I was of the cohort that got to meet the founders of my field–Ed Schneidman, Bob Litman, Norman Farberow and Jerome Moto.

I never felt comfortable having somebody promise they wouldn’t kill themselves
I was so blessed to meet the people that created my field, so I just stayed with it and I found out that it was my passion. Even when I was working early on in inpatient care or as a clinician, I never felt comfortable having somebody promise they wouldn’t kill themselves. That never made sense to me.] Early on, I started having some misgivings about the standard practices for suicidal cases and the seeds were planted to try to create something different that made more sense. 
LR: This leads me to your CAMS program which may not be familiar to psychotherapists in our audience who work with suicidal clients. Can you describe for those folks who might be interested in learning about and using it?
DJ: CAMS stands for Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality. It’s not the typical intervention but instead a framework, a philosophy of care. The cornerstones of CAMS are that we’re empathic of suicidal states, collaborative with the suicidal patient, honest and transparent about the rules and laws about discussing suicide with a licensed provider who has statutes to follow, and that it is suicide specific.

The essential component of CAMS is the Suicide Status form–a multipurpose assessment, treatment planning, tracking and clinical-outcome tool. It consists of assessment, treatment and stabilization planning. Its major focus is keeping a suicidal person out of the hospital, which is a novel notion. But to do so, we have to develop a thoughtful stabilization plan. That means securing lethal means and developing a list of problem-solving skills or coping strategies and resources should a suicidal person get into an acute suicidal dark moment. And then a signature feature of CAMS, which I kind of chuckle at every time I say it because it seems so obvious, is that we ask a suicidal person “what makes you want to kill yourself?”

In CAMS, we call these reasons for wanting to kill yourself “drivers.” What suicidal people say when they are genuinely asked “what puts your life in peril?” are overwhelmingly treatable problems. They say things like: my wife is leaving me, I can’t live without her; I’m going underwater with my mortgage on my house and I’m going to lose it; I can’t get a job. Or they may be experiencing trauma from combat in Iraq. People have idiosyncratic problems that we have treatments for all day long.

We make the argument with suicidal clients that they’ve got everything to gain and nothing to lose by engaging in treatment. We typically see a positive response in six to eight sessions. But if you give us 12 sessions, we can probably reach a lot of what they’re struggling with and maybe give them a different way of coping with their situation than taking their life. 
LR: The buy in.
DJ:
I also tell clients that they can always kill themselves later, which is true
I also tell clients that they can always kill themselves later, which is true. But there’s a reality, which is that as a practitioner here in Washington, DC, there are laws about clear and imminent danger, so you need to know the implications of being suicidal. We’re very transparent and clear about following the law with our clients but that we don’t have to fight over whether they can kill themselves or not. And for a lot of suicidal people, that is comforting and validating. It doesn’t feel shaming. So, there are a lot of aspects of this that sort of capture the imagination of the suicidal person.
LR: So, CAMS is s not a technique but a program that allows clinicians to use techniques from their own particular model, which you refer to as the non-denominationality.
DJ: Exactly. What we typically see is a strong therapeutic alliance because we’re not adversaries and not fighting with whether they can or can’t kill themselves. I let them know that “I’m going to follow the law, but I’d like to collaborate with you.” We literally take a side-by-side seating for certain assessment and treatment planning activities and give the patient a copy of their documents including their suicide status form and stabilization plan.

So, the tone we’re trying to set is to not be shaming, to not be invalidating, to never wag our fingers, to understand that for a person who suffers, this is a viable way of dealing with their situation. And to get our foot in the door to say, “why wouldn’t you try this out? I mean, we all get to be dead forever and I’m not debating whether you can or can’t kill yourself, but I am saying that the problems that you’re describing are treatable problems.”

And the agnostic aspect of it is that the therapist can be psychoanalytic, behavioral or humanistic, we don’t really tell people how to treat. What we’re asking of the provider is that they treat the problems that the patient says puts their life in peril. 
LR: How much of the actual implementation of therapeutic techniques would be occurring during the eight, nine, or 12 weeks? Or, do you use whatever technical skills you have that are theoretically driven during the implementation of CAMS? And then do you refer to a clinician after the CAMS period is over? What’s the timing like?
DJ:
The idea is that if you’re suicidal, we’re going to tackle that and focus on that, and talk really about nothing else except the things that put your life at risk
We’re pretty much like a dog with a bone. The idea is that if you’re suicidal, we’re going to tackle that and focus on that, and talk really about nothing else except the things that put your life at risk. And so, that’s where I think the persistence bubble sometimes rubs certain patients the wrong way. While it’s meant to be a flexible and adaptive model in which we’re not telling clinicians how to treat, we remain focused exclusively on the suicide drivers even when clients don’t want to talk about suicide but instead something like the economy. Because unless it makes you want to kill yourself, we’re not going to really focus on that because we’re trying to take suicide off the table. And that persistence, I think, pays off. A big part of this is that we aren’t looking for somebody to eliminate any vestige of a suicidal thought. But when we wrap up CAMS, they’re managing those thoughts and feelings, and they’ve got a repertoire for coping differently rather than going to suicide as their first response.

And that’s held up well in the clinical trials as our operational criterion for resolution. And then all along the way what the CAMS model has extensive documentation, which is sort of the armor for litigation. People have tried to pursue malpractice lawsuits against CAMS providers, and to my knowledge, there’s never been a successful lawsuit because of the documentation. There’s no evidence of negligence around assessment or treatment planning or the clients falling through the cracks. So, that’s served very different functions in that the patient is a coauthor of their treatment planning. They see what their treatment plan is. They’re an active participant in developing their treatment plan. And we’re working with Microsoft to develop an electronic version of the Suicide Status Form (SSF) that mimics what we do by hand on our hardcopy because, of course, we have to work with electronic medical records. And we’ve got a prototype that will be fully developed in the spring that we’re testing at two medical centers to see if it interfaces with electronic records. So, we’re still working on it, and we still have clinical trials, and we’re learning about it as we go.
LR: What’s the evidence that CAMS is effective?
DJ: The big thing in science is correlational studies that are replicated. We have eight correlational published studies that have been replicated with basically the same findings. But that doesn’t really ring the bell. It’s randomized controlled trials that look at a causal impact. So, there are three published randomized controlled trials all supporting the intervention. There are two unpublished trials that are in review that have very supportive data. And there are three trials that are currently underway.

So, there’s a lot of replicated data showing that CAMS quickly reduces suicidal ideation, overall symptom distress, increases hope and decreases hopelessness. Patients like it and clinicians find it valuable. So, the data is actually quite robust. But as a clinician, it makes sense. At a lot of the trainings I’ve done over the years, people say, “you know, this just makes so much sense.” “You know, I’ve kind of been doing CAMS without realizing it.” And so, that’s always the greatest validation when a thoughtful clinician that says that CAMS worked with a particular client. So, it’s not just the research, it’s also clinical utility, a lot of which has been shaped by feedback from clinicians. 

Countertransference and Paralysis

LR: You write about countertransference with suicidal patients and how clinicians have referred to the experience of malice and hate along with fear and impotence. Can you say a little bit about some of the countertransference experiences that you’ve noticed and how clinicians who work with suicidal clients can effectively deal with these experiences?
DJ: I was dynamically trained and worked with a luminary in the field, John Maltsberger, who was at Harvard, and wrote the definitive and seminal work in countertransference back in 1974. It was a very famous paper about countertransferential hate and the suicidal patient. He didn’t waffle around and instead said that clinicians can hate these patients. And, what I think about that upon reflection is that you know they are threatening. For a lot of providers, it’s really scary to work with somebody who’s at the precipice and thinking about ending their life. It can be scary and anxiety provoking and a lot of providers are afraid of being sued if there’s a fatal outcome.

there’s a kind of head-in-the-sand mentality among clinicians around suicidality
But I also think there’s some data that backs up the idea that there’s a kind of head-in-the-sand mentality among clinicians around suicidality. They may think, I’m gonna kick this patient over to the real doctors who are the psychiatrists who see a lot more suicidal people than psychologists, social workers and counselors–it’s too much for me if I’m just a psychologist or just a counselor, and it’s over my head or I’m not competent. And my feeling is the ubiquity of the presentation requires some level of competence.

To me, it’s like an internist or a family primary care doctor saying, you know, I’ll give you a thorough exam, but I don’t do the heart thing. I mean, trust me on my competence, but I don’t really know about hearts. Because suicide and suicide presentations are very common, I don’t really see how a thoughtful and responsible clinician who aspires to be ethical and competent can say, “I don’t do this.” But the fear is significant. And it’s out there, and I get why people are afraid. It’s not like I relish these tough cases, but I feel like there’s a need to at least be knowledgeable about what’s effective and what we can do, which is actually a lot. 
LR: You mentioned the notion of paralysis that clinicians often experience along with anxiety surrounding work with suicidal clients. What do you mean by this paralysis, how does it manifest, and how can we help clinicians out there who experience it?
DJ: I think it’s a straightforward situation where the reality of malpractice tort litigation is important to understand. People think it happens a lot more than it does and that they’re a sitting duck if there’s a completed suicide. It’s a legal action where the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that there was negligence in subsequent treatment and/or follow through. Both sides then hire experts. It’s a very unpleasant process, and I’ve been involved on both sides. But the reality is that if you’re doing thoughtful work and it’s well-documented, most plaintiff’s attorneys won’t take on the case because the documentation is so critical for these cases. And so, the plaintiff’s attorneys pretty much only take the cases on contingency, so they don’t get the big payoffs until they win or settle.

It doesn’t make the clinician bulletproof, but it decreases the likelihood of being successfully sued for malpractice for wrongful death. And then the other part, which is more up my alley, is the idea that there actually are treatments proven to work that have excellent evidence but are not widely used. These include dialectical behavior therapy and two forms of cognitive therapy that contain suicide-specific interventions. Each of these are highly effective and proof of their use, along with documentation, would greatly reduce the possibility of being found guilty of malpractice. 

Empathic Fortitude

LR: You said earlier that your back had been hurt by years of running and martial arts. I’m curious- do you see a connection between the strength that you have needed over your life to progress through martial arts and the strength that is needed to work with suicidal clients?
What I’m wondering is how have you brought your black belt qualities into this anxiety-eliciting and litigious clinical arena? 
DJ: I guess I don’t think of it that way. I guess there’s a courageous aspect to working with suicide, but I also think there’s just a commonsense-ness to it. When we see a suicidal person as a threat versus being empathic of the struggle, we’re already creating an adversarial dynamic. One of the things that I guess I have found in my experience is that when you tell a suicidal person DC mental health laws and rules regarding my obligation, I can simply say “this is what the law says.”

And when I say to somebody, “I can’t ultimately stop you from killing yourself and of course, this is something that you can do but I would hope that you don’t”, I essentially give them the playbook and put my cards on the table face up and let go of my illusion of control and power over this suicidal person. What I have found paradoxically is that it gives me much more credibility, influence and persuasive ability to offer this person a chance to find their way out of suicidal hell.

So, I appreciate the reference to courage but I think it takes a certain kind of empathic fortitude. I wrote a chapter with Maltsberger years ago that talked about empathic dread versus empathic fortitude. I thought of these dramatic kinds of notions of how out of empathic dread we would avoid working with suicidal clients or countertransference would take over. We’d get rid of these patients by hospitalizing them or transferring to another provider.

So, I do believe that there is a need for empathic fortitude I suppose. But at the same time, when you give the patient the playbook and say, “this is the deal; if you’re going to kill yourself today, I’ve got to call the police. I don’t want to do that, but I will.” You’re working with motivation. You’re working with paradox. You’re looking at counter-projection. And when you do it properly and thoughtfully and with a genuine heart and concern, most suicidal people in your office are relieved.
LR: I understand.
DJ: And they are suddenly less at risk. And, so I guess I discovered that empathic fortitude or courage helps, but being forthright and honest about the situation as it is decreases the tension in the therapeutic relationship dyad and can actually create motivation in the client.

Tailoring Suicide Treatment

LR: As I was watching your CAMS video, you referred to some clients having a love affair with suicide. What do you mean by this and how can a clinician identify it and address it?
DJ:
clients who have been suicidal for a long time are at the point where being suicidal becomes a way of life–it becomes ego syntonic and comforting
What I mean by that is clients who have been suicidal for a long time are at the point where being suicidal becomes a way of life–it becomes ego syntonic and comforting. It’s like surrounding yourself in a warm blanket and snuggling in. I don’t mean that pejoratively or cynically, I mean it descriptively. And we’ve all seen clients like this for whom it’s comforting because they can control their crazy life by having something to hold onto. It’s become a part of who they are and becomes deeply internalized as a comforting thought.

That’s very different than people for whom it’s ego dystonic. They’re fighting the thoughts and they’re anxious. It feels like a hot potato they want to get rid of it, but they don’t know who to throw it to. And those are very distinctly different kinds of suicidal people. Our intervention responds to those people in different ways. And the thing I really want to emphasize is that not all suicidal people are the same. We’ve got relatively good data now of ways to stratify different kinds of suicidal states, and we’re getting into the research now where we can match different treatments to different states.
LR: Can you say a little bit more about this stratification of suicidal patients?
DJ: Yes, this is like the heart of the research we’re doing right now, which is looking at people who are upstream ideators. They’re relatively new to thinking about suicide. It’s kind of a hot potato, ego dystonic kind of experience. They don’t like being suicidal. It makes them anxious or it’s frightening. Or, people who are a little bit further downstream who are kind of on a teeter-totter of thinking, “well, you know, I don’t want to kill myself because I hate what that would do to my kids. But, I would love to flip off my girlfriend.” There’s an ambivalence in place that’s well documented in literature. And then there’s the final group that we’ve got reliable data on, who are chronically suicidal with multiple attempts, who are highly dysregulated and have this ego syntonic relationship with suicide.

The first two groups are pretty treatable quickly. That’s what we’ve seen in our trials. The suicidal types who are mostly attached to living, or the ambivalent types respond quickly to CAMS and other treatments. It’s not that the latter group don’t respond, it just takes more than six to eight sessions. In that latter group there are multiple attempters, or borderline personality disordered clients, or chronically suicidal people with a lot of dysregulation. This group is sort of the sweet spot for DBT. We’re doing trials right now looking at differences between CAMS and DBT for different kinds of suicidal states. We’ve got some promising, exciting data about those different states and then matching different treatments to different states.
LR: In my ethics class a few weeks back, I was discussing informed consent and its various components. The CAMS consent is very different from the traditional ones endorsed by the ACA or APA.  
DJ: Well, I teach ethics and I’m married to a lawyer, so I think a lot about medical, legal, and ethical considerations. And of course, in ethics, informed consent is a huge consideration which has been a dynamic area in the field of ethics in more recent years. What I say to a suicidal person is some version of "you can always kill yourself, and that’s always an option to you, but you’ve got everything to gain and nothing to lose by engaging in treatment.

if you are going to kill yourself in the next 24 hours, I may be compelled to hospitalize you, even against your will
But there are laws that say that if you are going to kill yourself in the next 24 hours, I may be compelled to hospitalize you, even against your will. And I don’t want to do that, I’d rather not go there. I’d rather not fight with you about this. So, wouldn’t it be comforting to know if you do kill yourself, that you’ve done everything in your power and within your control to make this life livable? I’m suggesting that this treatment would be in your best interest and may help you decide whether your life is indeed livable. You can always kill yourself later. But, if you’re going to kill yourself while you’re in the treatment, I’ll have to stop you.”

When I say that in a training, a lot of clinicians are shocked, but then I ask them to take the role of a suicidal person. When they put themselves in the place of a suicidal person, they say “wow, that’s actually really comforting and validating and reassuring. It makes me curious about why you’re saying this to me and what your real agenda is.” And I’m very clear with suicidal clients that my agenda is to find a way to save their life and to make it worth living.

What’s fascinating about it is that everything I said is 100 percent true–it’s the playbook. And to me, it’s the cards faceup on the table. I think it is life and death, and when we give up the illusion of power, we have much more influence and credibility with the client.

The Setback Session

LR: In the training video you demonstrate what I thought was a masterful example of a setback session as you call it. What do you mean by a setback session and can clinicians expect to have those and if so, how can they be constructive or useful moving forward?
DJ: We shot that training video in two days without a script. A clinical psychologist who had been in graduate school and worked in my lab picked a patient he had worked with during his internship and channeled him. And he was not a very easy patient as you probably saw. I want very strongly as a trainer for everything to go perfectly and never make mistakes. However, I am not a miracle worker so feel it is very important to model a setback.

So, when we shot this scene, we were kind of nervous because the client got upset with me and I got upset back. I usually try to be calm, cool, and collected but I kind of lost my cool. I was, however, able to regroup, recover and reassert the model. Contrary to our fears, that setback video, which was session nine, is wildly popular with the thousands of people that have done this training.

I had a guy come to me last week at a training and say, “I really liked the setback session. It was real, I could see myself, you know, in you. And I appreciate your honesty.” So, contrary to our fear that it would be me acting out or my countertransference getting the best of me, it was an example of not doing it perfectly, but then using it as an opportunity to regroup and to reassert the model. And in the final session when we get the outcome disposition, I ask the client what was the turning point, and he said, “well it was that session where I came in here, you know, ready to tear your head off and you got mad at me, but then we kind of coalesced around what didn’t happen. And that was the pivot point.” I don’t like getting upset but, you know, it was a real thing that we shot, and it’s turned out to be really a popular part of the training. 
LR: So, while it was not a real client in the training video, the setback session was helpful to clinicians?
DJ: In my trainings, a lot of people ask if he was a real client because it’s so intense and it’s so realistic. And when we do our roleplay trainings, we’ll go into a group of 50 or 70 clinicians and say, “who wants to play a client?” And then we will demonstrate sections of the CAMS intervention with somebody who comes out of the audience, where obviously it’s not pre-canned or scripted.

I think that’s why people like our training, because we practice what we preach and sometimes people play impossible cases and kind of act out a little bit. So, those are tricky. But for the most part, it’s pretty convincing if I’m demonstrating to you something that isn’t perfectly scripted out. And that’s how we do our training, all of our trainers will basically recruit somebody from the audience to play somebody they’re working with. And it’s a very convincing way to say yeah, you know, we’re taking the risk here to be successful or to fail at the model, but we’re going to assert the model and then you can see what you think, as a provider, that if this is something that you want to try to do. 

Suicide in the Rearview Mirror

LR: You had mentioned earlier that successful outcome is determined by three successive sessions in which the suicide risk on the Suicide Status Form is low. When does a client really turn the corner on suicide so that a clinician can have a greater assurance that they will not end their life.
DJ: That’s a great question because it’s always idiosyncratic. I’ll give you a case example that really kind of nails it. It was a soldier who was in the army and deployed in Iraq–an extremely unstable, traumatized service member. I watched his early videos which was one of our clinical trials. I would lie in bed awake at night thinking “this man’s going to kill himself and he may take out a few people in his unit along the way.”

He was a scary guy. But he got traction and we identified his drivers and we determined that he really needed to leave the military. We started working on his VA benefits, but he was having legal troubles and he had PTSD that we were able to treat as part of the CAMS model. What he later described to me was a perfect metaphor. He said, “when I first came in here, I was in the Humvee and driving towards suicide with no other place to go.” Later, he said, “I was driving towards suicide and kind of pulled up alongside of it, and then I passed it, and now it’s in my rearview mirror. I can still see it, but I’m driving away from it. And now I’m going to turn the corner and leave it behind.” And that, to me, just nailed it and captured what we’re looking for in our resolution session. It’s not somebody who doesn’t see it in the rearview mirror, but who’s determined to leave it behind and turn the corner.

that is what we’re after: somebody who says “killing myself is not the number one way to get my needs met
Metaphorically and literally, that is what we’re after: somebody who says “killing myself is not the number one way to get my needs met. I’ve got these coping strategies. I’ve got this support now that I didn’t have. I’ve got treatment for things that made me want to kill myself that are now approved. And I don’t have to do this most desperate thing a person can do, which is end my biological existence forever. I can press on and pursue a life worth living because I’ve seen that this is not my only option.” 

Closing Reflections

LR: I’ll ask you a question that you can choose to answer or not answer.
DJ: I’ll certainly answer.
LR: Has suicide impacted you personally in your life?
DJ: Oh yeah, I have had many suicidal patients. I had a patient as an intern at the VA Medical Center where I interned who I gave a Rorschach to who killed himself the next week which was devastating. I spent two hours with this man and he laid down in front of a bus in front of the hospital. I mean, it has hugely impacted me. I’ve had colleagues that’ve taken their lives. I haven’t had a psychotherapy case, but I don’t think I’m immune.

So, absolutely it’s touched me and touched people that I care about. And we’ve had three suicides in two different clinical trials. That’s devastating because we’re watching videos of these patients that we’re trying to save. And one in particular last fall was extremely painful. But we’re not going to not do this because the overwhelming flipside to that is that we’re in the lifesaving business. We get cards and letters from clients, and clinicians thanking us. There are hundreds of examples of both clinicians and patients who’ve said, you know, “this saved my life.”

And the reward of that far, far washes away the pain of the individual losses and tragedies that I
I’ve personally experienced, or that my team’s experienced. It is not everybody’s cup of tea, I get that. But my lab is a big group of students, and we are excited about our work and it’s not a morbid topic for us because we’re in the lifesaving business. And what we do translates into people finding a different way to live.

One of my favorite cases was a woman in Oklahoma who’d been suicidal for 20 years in. She got 43 sessions of CAMS, which is a lot of care from a really adherent provider. And when she reached the resolution session after 20 years of being suicidal, she gave the clinician a card and said something to the effect of, “thank you for believing in me. Thank you for persevering. I now think before I act. I’ve changed how I feel about myself and about suicide because CAMS spoiled the milk I used to drink.”
LR: CAMS spoiled the milk I used to drink. What did that mean for you?
DJ: I just love that because this was a way of life for her that’s now been taken away, but in the best possible sense because it means that she’s a mother to her children. She’s a grandmother to her grandchildren, and she is in the world and finding her way. She’s not perfect, but after 20 years of being attached to suicide, she decided to leave it behind.

That’s just an “N of 1.” But when I get that kind of feedback, it makes all the pain, or the fear, or the anxiety sort of wash away because what we’re doing is so helpful and redemptive in the best possible sense.
LR: You know, empirically-oriented clinicians look at an N of 1 and say, okay, great, go out and find me another 17 and we’ll consider it. But when you had an N of 1 such as this woman who was so impactful, that has so much meaning.
DJ: I embrace both the nomothetic and the idiographic, and I am a clinician-researcher versus a research clinician. So, the N of 1 idiographic approach and those testimonials mean a great deal to me. But I also believe in the power of data. And both I think are valid windows into what’s true in the world of clinical practice, and in this case, what is central to the business of trying to save lives.
LR: One final question I would ask is for our readers who are new to the field. What advice would you offer to those who might be interested in working in the area of suicide treatment?
DJ: That’s a great final question. I would say, to the best of your ability, you shouldn’t try to avoid these patients. You don’t have to become a specialist. But there are proven interventions and techniques that you can learn about from the National Action Alliance or from the Suicide Prevention Resource Center that are not a bridge too far. You can learn about stabilization planning. You can learn about how to ask about suicidal risk. You can learn about lethal means safety.

I would also say to them, you can learn about care and contact and follow up, and about the National Lifeline. And every clinician should be conversant with those ideas. And then there’s dialectical behavior therapy, two forms of cognitive therapy, CAMS, and several other interventions that have been proven to work in randomized control trials that need replication. There are treatments that are effective. And I always talk about all the treatments, not just my own, because I believe in the power of data.

there’s more than one way to be in the lifesaving business
I believe in things that are effective and that no one holds a corner on truth. And so, I’m always talking about the other treatments in some ways as much, or more so than my own treatment because I don’t think that there’s one way to do anything. There’s more than one way to be in the lifesaving business.
LR: Thanks, so much David.
DJ: You bet.

The Not-So-Great Gatsby: An Illustrative Look at the Use of Literature in a Therapy Session

 The intake form says “the fifteen-year old Caucasian female ingested 100+ Tylenol tablets,” an apparent suicide attempt. The referral for outpatient family therapy was from MacLean Hospital, a premiere mental-health facility in the Boston area. ” The intake form says nothing about the circumstances of this suicidal gesture, no storyline specifying cause and effect”, no reference to “triggers” or family dysfunctions, really nothing at all useful. And so it most certainly says nothing to warn me that when Dana Cantrell smiles a certain smile, a smile dripping with supercilious insincerity, it stings. Even with her perfect teeth.

I have the intake form in one hand when I step across the threshold, the other hand holding the door open, and call out her name. She doesn’t bother to look up. I know it is her on the sofa, as she is the only adolescent in the waiting room. And I know she heard me. I decide to watch her silently, marveling at how hypnotic a cell phone can be. An elderly man sitting at the other end of the couch notices me looking and smiles. “Young lady,” he says to Dana, “you’re being summoned.”

She looks up at the man but doesn’t acknowledge him. She grips the cell phone like it is a sword handle before pushing herself off the chair. She walks towards me, head bent forward, airy, bouncy hair, like a patch of glowing wheat yielding to a gentle wind, covering her face. She jets through the doorway without a word and strides down the hallway as if she knows where she is going and then abruptly twists her head around and says, “So, you going to tell me what room?”

“How you doing?” I ask, soon after I situate myself in a chair, a few feet from Dana, who is on the couch. She is wearing an immaculate white fleece pullover sweater and lavender sweatpants. Her thighs are hiked up against her chest and her chin rests on her knees.

“Fine.” Her response is sharp, like a thrown dart. “My mom will be up in a minute.”

She is studying her phone. I let her be. Her mother enters, dressed in business attire, bluish-black pinstripe, and wearing tan sneakers, stylish Vans, the kind my daughter loves. She sits in a chair to the left of mine, leaving Dana alone on the couch. She sits primly, like a Downton Abbey character, with both feet planted and her hands clasped and resting on her thighs. She is trim, attractive, with deep blue eyes and boyish short hair parted on the side.

The three of us fumble through the usual therapy dance. Typically, I ask questions to elicit the client’s point of view about why we’re here together and the client explains how life hurts. Sometimes a client will even say why it hurts. But Dana stonewalls. She mumbles something.

“What did you say, sweetie?” Mom asks.

“I’m saying this, this whatever you call it, therapy, this therapy isn’t important.” She lifts herself from a slouch and spreads out her hands, palms down, and waves them, a kind of magician-like maneuver, the kind that serves as a prelude to astonishing the audience by making something either appear or disappear.

“My understanding is that you tried to kill yourself,” I say.

“Who cares.”

“You mean, no one cares?”

“No, I don’t mean that. I mean it isn’t important.”

“Trying to kill yourself isn’t something important to discuss?” I say.

“Not anymore.”

“Not anymore because, what?”

“Because it just isn’t,” she says. “It’s wasting my time. I’ve got homework. I’m busy. I already told you, I’m fine.”

“She’s been hospitalized, I guess you know that,” Mom says. “She took some Tylenol.” She reaches for the tissue box on the table in front of her.

“Get over it, Mom,” Dana says.

“I don’t know why in the world she’d do that,” Mom says. “Really, I don’t.”

I believe that to be the truth.

A Session at Dana’s Dad’s House

I notice The Great Gatsby on a table next to the front door of her father’s house, a small Cape-Cod style structure near an ocean bay, an apparent haven for seagulls. Dana’s parents had undergone a bitter divorce—an experience familiar to me—and it would have been folly to bring them both into a session together. But I wanted to round out the family picture so I arranged to meet with Dana at her father’s home, where she spends about a third of her time.

Her father, a mildly affable man with a reddish, leathery face, thinning brown hair, and solid build, ushers me in and asks if I’d like something to drink. He’s wearing pale-blue wrinkled shorts that go down to the knee caps and a faded light-purple t-shirt that says “Life is Good”. I see Dana lying on the couch, one bare leg hiked up so the ankle is hooked onto the couch back. She’s studying her phone. She doesn’t acknowledge my entry into the home. I signal to her father to go into the kitchen. I pick up the book without a clear idea why and follow him. He pours me iced tea.

“Thanks for letting me meet the two of you here,” I say.

Her father resumes slicing zucchini and some leafy green vegetable. “Well, I’m glad you could come,” he says. Then he says, “I’m sorry.”

“About what?”

He slices and without looking up he says, “It’s just that I forgot about the session. I had the impression it was tomorrow. I spent the day working on my boat.” He stops slicing and retrieves something from the refrigerator, a vegetable I don’t recognize. “So I’m quite disheveled, as you can see. You caught me in the middle of preparing dinner.”

“Probably should have texted or called, I guess.”

“Not at all. My bad.” He chuckles. “Jesus, did I just say that? I’m sounding like my son. But seriously—glad you’re here.”

“Is she?” I say.

He looks up, as if he could see Dana through the wall. “Dana? What kid enjoys therapy?”

He’s right. Therapy is for people who find themselves sufficiently unsatisfied with how it feels to be alive that they’ll bracket time to seek out a stranger to talk to. Not many teens find that appealing.

“How is she managing?” I say.

“Should I be worried that I’m not worried?”

“Depends on your level of attentiveness, I suppose.”

“Meaning?” he asks.

“I mean, if you’re not worried but you haven’t been paying attention to what’s happening with Dana, then maybe you should be worried that you’re not worried.”

“I’m observing. I’m asking questions. So I don’t think that’s an issue. The kid’s doing great, from the looks of it.”

“That’s good,” I say. “We want our kids to do great.”

“Yeah, but I thought she was doing great a few months ago. And look what happened."

True to form, Dana is still outstretched on the couch looking at her phone. She’s wearing gym shorts and what is clearly her Dad’s shirt, a light blue sweatshirt with “Martha’s Vineyard” written on it. It makes her head look small, her features more childlike. I place The Great Gatsby on the glass coffee table and retrieve a dining-room chair. This time, unlike at our previous session, I position it some distance away. I intend for there to be a chasm between us. I intend for the communication today to require vocal effort. She pretends to ignore me; she seems determined to stare at her phone. I reach for the book and examine the cover, making a show of it, hoping to get a reaction from her; it is a promotional issue, with “Now a Major Motion Picture” written across the top and Leonardo DiCaprio looking directly at the reader. Serendipity, I think to myself, has delivered this book, at this moment, with this girl outstretched on a couch, throw-blanket covering one leg, the other bare leg still stretched upward at a forty-five degree angle, this girl pretending she’s on the other end of the planet.

” I often use movies and literature as a gateway into therapeutic matters, and sometimes the results are profound” (results hinging on the client’s capacity and willingness to go deep), so I rarely bypass an opportunity that presents itself. But I never know how things will go.I don’t wait for eye contact. I ask Dana if she’s already read the book. She nods, still absorbed in her phone. “And?” I ask. She tells me it was boring, pointless, and the movie version “sucked.” She still hasn’t looked at me. I’m undaunted by her negative review and ask her what she thinks of Gatsby himself. She says he was rich, filthy rich. “And?” I ask again. She mumbles something about the fact that he still couldn’t get what he wanted.

“Meaning Daisy?” I say.

Finally, she looks my way. “Obviously.”

I tell her it isn’t so obvious. “Daisy might be a stand-in for something else.”

“Like what?” she asks. I’m surprised. I detect a tone of genuine sincerity.

“That’s what I’d like to know. Something more vital than Daisy—maybe that’s what he’s after.”

“He was rich,” she repeats.

“So?” I say.

“What else does he need? Makes no sense, that book. He died because he couldn’t get what he wanted. Makes no sense.”

“How so?” I ask.

“What do you mean, how so?”

“I mean, how did that happen, you know, Gatsby dying because he couldn’t get what he wanted. I mean, I know the plot really well, so I’m not asking about that. I was wondering about your view of how the two things—death and wanting-and-not-getting—are connected.”

“I don’t know,” she answers swiftly. “Who cares anyway? I thought this was therapy, not a literature class.”

I tell her that I like talking about books, that great novels are the best way to understand human psychology, definitely better than psychology textbooks. She is unmoved.

“Why was Gatsby so persistent? Why did he obsess over winning Daisy back?”

“Boys are like that,” Dana says.

“But he’s filthy rich, like you say. He’s handsome.”

Dana mulls that over and mutters that guys get obsessed over girls and the whole thing is stupid. “Guys are stupid.”

“But I’m wondering what you think about this: Do you think something was missing in Gatsby’s life? Did he think Daisy could fulfill him in some way?”

“Look, Gatsby’s a rich guy. Rich guys are used to getting what they want. End of story.”

“No, Dana. Not the end of the story. Not by a long shot.”

“Yeah. End of story.”

Dana’s Marvelous Plan

Dana likes to say she’s “back on track.” I had asked her what that means and she looked at me in astonishment. Then she said, “Well, you do this for a living, so I suppose you wouldn’t understand.” She presumes to know me, so she thinks I don’t get it.

Her Marvelous Plan—I understand it well: Ivy League college as a segue to a fancy grad school, medical research, professional recognition, big money, big home, big trips to exotic places with lodging in big fancy hotels. Life lived on a big canvas with a reliable, high-achieving husband with unbounded aspirations and gorgeous, high-vocabulary children inheriting more of the same unbounded aspirations. The world always bending to your will. The world, this life, under your control.

If only she knew of the poster on my dorm-room wall, the one with big italicized print, saying “Living Well is the Best Revenge.” The picture on which this line was superimposed put a particular materialistic gloss on the notion of “living well.” A vivid photograph of a juiced-up, vibrantly-colored sports car, with a scantily clad blonde woman contorting her sculpted body over the hood, as if to say, “I’m your reward.” “Success” as a kind of retaliation. You’ll get what’s coming to you—thrills, pleasure—if you just bear down with grim determination. The poster was a kind of beckoning—get to that point in my life where I can say, ”I prevailed, I fucking prevailed.”

“What about the Tylenol?” I had asked her.

I’m thinking: “What about your Marvelous Plan?”

“What about it?”

“What led up to it?”

“Who cares? Typical shit—ooh, sorry. I’m not supposed to curse, am I?”

“What sort of shit?”

“Typical shit,” she said. “You know, my BFF broke up with her boyfriend and he starts hitting on me and . . . . Why am I telling you this? Who cares, come on, really—who cares?”

“Typical teenage shit, you got this future all planned out, because you’re going to be Ms. Hotshot someday, and you down a hundred Tylenol pills.”

“While my mom was watching Netflix in her room. Yup.”

Lessons from Literature

I know what I’d like to do, in terms of where to take the discussion, but I don’t know how. I want to discuss the relationship between life and the way we experience this ineffable thing, this illusion we call the self.

“There are things we can say about who Gatsby is on the inside by looking at the externals of his life. Do you agree with that?”

“He’s a rich guy,” Dana says. “I guess that means he’s driven. Motivated.”

“And that’s a good thing, as you see it.”

“I’m not into losers,” she says.

Her phone dings. A text alert. She pulls it out from the couch cushion, taps out a response.” She looks at me. “Sorry.”

“Back to Gatsby,” I say.

“Seriously?” she says. She leans her head back, exposing her white throat. “Dad!” she yells out. “I thought this was supposed to be therapy!” Dad steps into the doorframe of the kitchen and tells her to focus.

I wonder if he’s going to join us. “I’m curious, Dana. Actually I’m a little confused.”

“About what?” she says.

“You say Gatsby’s rich—and he does have a lot of money . . . .”

“Which makes him rich, so don’t play games with me, okay?”

“No doubt. He’s rich, and that makes him a winner.”

“Right,” she says.

“So it’s easy to tell the difference between winners and losers?”

“Not always,” she says. “He dies at the end, right? So that complicates things.”

“Are you saying he’s a loser because he allowed himself to be destroyed by his demons?”

“A person could be both. I’m right, right?”

“You tell me,” I say.

“He got caught up in bullshit. Drama, as you like to say.”

“Yeah, definitely drama. But at least at the outset, Gatsby’s outer situation—his wealthy lifestyle—reflected who he was on the inside. You believe that.”

Dana becomes more tentative, warier, if not defensive. And yet, most importantly, I sense from her wrinkled brow she is intrigued by the colloquy. “I guess so,” she says. “Being rich does say something positive about you. Come on. I’m right, right?”

“But that’s incomplete, isn’t it? I mean, that’s the point when it comes to Jay Gatsby, right? That’s why you can’t tag him definitively as a winner or a loser.”

“What I remember is that he lies about his past. He’s ashamed of it. I’m right, right?” I nod to validate her memory. “So he’s living a lie. People in my class talked about how he was living a lie.”

“You mean he’s lost his grip on reality? He lives in an illusion?”

Dana thinks for a minute. “I’d say he had false hopes. Are false hopes illusions?”

I tell her they are. I don’t tell her that maybe the whole enterprise of hoping rests on illusions. Maybe, as Buddhist teacher Pema Chodron says, “we’re addicted to hope.” I take her to mean that, in this culture, we have lost the ability to find contentment in the present, and thus we have become dependent on, grasp at, some hoped-for future outcome to fulfill us.

Dana says, “Then that’s what did him in.”

“I agree. Illusions end up leading to harm.” As does grasping, clinging, the relentless pursuit of something “better” within one’s advantage-seeking scheme. I’m hoping she will say something about Gatsby’s pursuit of riches as a stratagem to get what he thinks he really wants, which is Daisy’s love, but that his actual quest is for something beyond Daisy. ” I’m hoping that I can use that literary analysis as leverage to get Dana to consider what her achievement-oriented mindset is really about.”

The simplest lesson to draw from The Great Gatsby—simplest in terms of most obvious, as it superficially relates to Dana’s psychological profile—is Gatsby’s foolish mental model that things of value in this life can be purchased. If I was inclined to moralize with Dana, I might well push the point that American consumerism corrodes the soul, breeds psychological dysfunction, and generates emotional discontent. But I’m interested in something a bit more recondite. Fundamentally, Gatsby feels inadequate and his pursuit of extraordinary wealth is a palliative for, as well as a defense against, that feeling. I suspect something like that is true for Dana. The fact that Dana is like the vast majority of Americans, equating purchasing power with value, commodifying all of life, is no doubt important to address, if she is to achieve meaningful growth.

“So then you think he’s a loser in the end,” Dana says.

“Do we have to lump people into categories like that?”

“Why not? Makes things easier.” She lowers her raised leg, slides it under the throw-blanket. She scoots down the couch slightly so as to be in a fully reclining position. She’s indicating that she’s losing interest.

“Are you open to the possibility, Dana, that often it isn’t helpful to lump and divide people and experiences into simple categories because it often gets in our way of seeing things clearly.”
Dana shrugs. She pulls out her phone from the couch cushion, peeks at it, and puts it on her stomach. “Are we done yet?” she asks.

I ignore the question. I had her plugged in for a while, but no longer. If I keep going, which I so much want to do, I fear I will be satisfying my needs and not attending to hers. Which is why, when she pulls out her phone, I say nothing. I rise, as if in defeat, and walk over to a side window, long and narrow, to see if I can see the bay. A fence blocks the view. I stand by the window, nonetheless. I look over my shoulder and see that the phone has thoroughly arrested Dana’s attention. I’m not so much seeing Dana with a phone in her hand as I’m perceiving what life has turned into. It’s a sad sight. Very sad.

I return to the chair, heavy-hearted, near tears, thinking I’ll give the session one more push. “I’m wondering,” I plead to Dana, “if we can forget about evaluating Gatsby and just explore whether his struggles might speak to your struggles.” I can’t rid myself of the feeling that I need this girl to talk to me. As if I see the sorrow up ahead for her and I’m the only one to warn her.
She lowers the phone and glares at me, as if I’ve just insulted her. “I don’t have struggles,” she declaims in a low register. She lifts the device to her face once again, obliterating me from her world. “Not anymore. Things are fine now.”

Reflections on Literature in Therapy

Gratifying therapy, as I experience it, is like reading high-brow modernist literature, books by writers like Joyce, Faulkner, Woolf, books that demand the reader’s collaboration, books where the first read is only preparation for the second read, which allows for you to then read the book for the first time. Things unseen, hidden within ambiguities that once seemed so transparent, become visible, sometimes even shocking, with that third-first read. As with therapist and client, the reader must work collaboratively with the writer to construct a version of truth, in contrast to the run-of-the-mill novelist who spoon-feeds plot to the passive entertainment-seeking reader. The former experience, the more arduous one, is truer to life because life itself does not deliver us experiences with ready-made interpretations; our life experiences come to us in fragments, their connections to other fragments opaque, hidden, ambiguous. ” Our lives, and especially our falls and failings, our sorrows and frustrations, are like literary texts, awaiting second- and third-read interpretations.” Much therapy and counseling, however, is of the latter variety, all plot and quick judgments. With the most gratifying therapy experiences, the first swipe through the “presenting problem” is only preparatory for the second swipe. And then finally, deep into the process, the client and I can finally look at the whole life-drama as if for the first time, a thick and rich drama that resists synopsis and boiled-down diagnoses, a drama that, absurdly, was once distilled as a “presenting problem” in insurance paperwork.

It’s in that spirit that I use quality literature and film in a therapy session. It’s a device for collaborating with the client to “read” their own life-story multiple times, with each read penetrating deeper into the “text,” because one’s life experiences are exactly that—texts to be read. It’s a high-wire act because, as can be seen in my experience with Dana, you just don’t know if the whole thing is going to go kaput. I guess I’m saying it takes a bit of moxie to do it. Easier, for sure, to stick to a CBT script. But the chances of professional burnout diminish, because sometimes magic can happen, because this kind of therapy can be fun, adventurous. I intentionally provided this vignette, where nothing momentous happened, where the effort to engage with Dana was met with resistance, to provide something realistic. I dislike the usual emphasis on heroic success stories that make the rest of us feel inadequate.

Dana graduated high school with honors, scored high on the SAT exam, and got into an elite college, which means she’s off and running in pursuit of her Marvelous Plan to be rich and envied. She sent me an invitation to her graduation. I sent her a card, thanking her but declining the invitation. She is doing what we all endeavor to do in those tender years: construct ourselves into a Somebody. But what happens when our Somebody-ness project goes awry? What happens when things fall apart (when, not if)? Maybe in that moment of trying to cope with whatever shock and tribulation hits her, Dana will have a flashing recollection of her adolescent self and this odd man talking in her father’s living room about The Great Gatsby.

If You Kill Yourself, Don’t Make a Mess: Paradoxical Intention with a Suicidal Client

"Maybe I was happy for like a day or two”

Marcus once told me he has no memory of what it feels like to not suffer. You’re exaggerating, I told him. He insisted he wasn’t. You are, I fought back. Everyone has such a memory, at least one. Marcus concedes little.

“Well, maybe I was happy for like a day or two.”

“That’s it?”

I’m visiting Marcus in a psychiatric stabilization unit. My task this morning is straightforward but not easy: confirm that he won’t harm himself when he leaves this place, and that he’ll take his medication. “You mean, not think about it?” he blubbers, in response to my direct question whether he’ll kill himself once he’s released. “I think about it all the time.” Coughs. “It don’t mean I will. And it don’t mean I won’t. So that’s that.”

Marcus is rotund and bald, with a noticeable stoop when he stands and a limp when he walks, as if he were an octogenarian trudging through the day under the invincible weight of his age. But he’s not yet even forty.

I walk over to the large window and open the blinds. “Is this okay?” I ask.

So thorough is Marcus’s lethargy that it would take supreme effort to imagine him at any point in his life gamboling joyously while soaking in the sunshine. The way he slouches, the way he mumbles and mutters, the way the sagging flesh on his face seems to collect around his neck, the way his drooping eyes make him look like a human bloodhound, the way he wears his bedraggled clothing, draped tent-like over his fatness—all of it, from his unlaced Converse sneakers to the labor of his breathing, speaks to the torments inflicted upon him as a child and the torments he inflicts upon himself ever since because that past is no mere residue of memory but instead exists within the corpuscles playing bumper cars in his veins. Marcus’s past is vastly alive inside him.

“Knock yourself out,” Marcus says. “I like it dark but it’s fine.”

I can see it more clearly now, with the sunlight drenching the room. The discolored bandage on his neck, the one that covers the stitched-up gash. It is puffy and loose. Like a cloud stained by urine. I ask if I can see the wound.

“For what?”

“For fun,” I say, winking.

Marcus tugs gently on the urine-cloud bandage. All the while he is mute, tongue sliding through soft lips, not unlike a narcotized snake. His tai-chi pull reveals the inch-long railroad track a little off-center on his pink, fleshy neck, the entire slow-motion divulgence giving the unveiling the feel that something ceremonial—no, something intimate—is happening.

The Real Nature of Suffering

Intimacy is what good talk therapists hope to achieve through this special encounter—which is why I strongly hold the view that talk therapy is a kind of artistry, for all art stems from an encounter between the artist and the subject, wherein the two become entwined in an intimate collaboration. What I mean by intimacy in this context is that a special kind of healing can occur when facades fade away, when neither person sees the other as potentially useful, which is to say the other is not a means to an end, the other is not expected to perform a function in one’s own advantage-seeking scheme, where the other is not to be used in some way (subtle or otherwise) to get some wanted outcome.

So talk therapy is something entirely different from having a rap session. An hour of heartfelt exchange without a handheld computer vitiating the experience—that right there makes it sadly unique. We might think of lovers sharing an intimate moment, but when there is the subtle (or not-so-subtle) underlying quest to keep the other close because the other serves the useful function of bringing about an inner experience that we have become attached to (meaning, we love the other’s presence because of the ability that the other has in bringing about a certain feeling within us), the intimacy is tainted thereby. Healing intimacy, I mean to suggest, and the face-to-face encounter that gives rise to it, is untainted. And it is this sort of intimacy that creates opportunities for the therapist to connect with the real nature of suffering.

The real nature of suffering—what is that? Well, I’m looking at it as I look at Marcus’s sagging face, with his eyes barely visible and his lips now sucked into his mouth. I hear it in his mumbling, the gravel, scratchy vocalizations that evoke a sense of futility about life. “No matter what Marcus says, the way he says it conveys his attitude that the whole enterprise of living is fruitless and cruel.” To Marcus’s way of thinking, life consists of events that happen to you; events are rarely neutral and they surely are not participatory; events by and large inflict suffering and there isn’t much to be done to exert control over them. All that is to be done is to take cover.

The existentialist philosopher Martin Heidegger and Doors singer Jim Morrison speak of our being “thrown into” the world, which is to say we have had no say (unless you believe in karmic reincarnation) in what our fundamental life circumstances will be. Will we be born in an affluent country or a war-ravaged one? Will our parents be wealthy or will they be drug addicts? Will they be skilled in the art of parenting or will they mutilate the child’s soul through mental torments or physical deprivations? A pile of shit or a basket of rose petals, or something in between—you don’t get to choose which you get thrown into. I’m sure Marcus has never read a word of Heidegger and I doubt he has ever grasped Morrison’s reference to “thrown-ness” when he sings, “into this world we’re thrown.” But Marcus understands thrown-ness in a way that few do. His understanding is purely experiential, and thus utterly non-conceptual. And that is why it is pointless to talk with him right now about choice and responsibility and meaning—all core concepts in my therapeutic repertoire, but useless at this moment.

His is an attitude of hopelessness, a recalcitrant, immutable belief that his emotional pain is permanent. But there is much more to it, as I see it through my own existentialist lens. Depression might be a clinical description of how Marcus experiences his life, but to restrict ourselves to that misses the deeper truth. Being depressed is, for him, a strategy, in the same way that the fox’s “sour grapes” in Aesop’s fable is a strategy, an emotion experienced to deflect something more painful. Depression is his cover. He has learned to use it—learned helplessness, one might say—to announce to the world that he is not responsible for his choices, that he cannot be blamed or held to account for his many self-sabotaging acts. In effect, helplessness and dysphoria serve as protection against the rigors of transcending his life circumstances. Depression protects him from any demands that he relate to his own life as a process of creation and the living of it as a kind of artistic endeavor.

"I'm Surprised You Used a Knife"

“Does it still hurt?” I ask.

Marcus taps on the wound with two fingers, as if to test it. “Nah,” he says. “Not if I don’t turn my head.”

“I’m surprised you used a knife,” I say.

Marcus had told me early on, repeating it often, that he envisioned himself going into the woods and shooting himself in the head. A fantasy perhaps, some aesthetic end to his particular decrepit story, as if a gun-blast obliterating the cranium in a quiet forest is the quintessential response to an ugly and alienated existence. A worthy denouement to a life of unmentionable sorrow that, though silent to the rest of us, now screams inside his head. A knife? No, I’m sure of it—he’s never mentioned that that would be a suitable instrument to effectuate his escape from the tribulations of his life. And bleed himself out on his mother’s kitchen floor like a slaughtered pig? Not the Marcus I had come to know. He had told me a gun-blast to the head in a secluded area of the woods, a spot he had already designated in his death-welcoming mind, would not leave a mess for others, as if his remains would be shoveled and disposed of with no more ceremonial fuss than the discarding of road kill.

He’s a complete mess inside and yet he has this concern for the mess he might leave when his inner mess becomes too intolerable.

Marcus and I have talked of suicide and death from day one. “Day one,” and many days thereafter, was in his a squalid single-room occupancy hotel. Existential therapy in a paint-peeling, cigarette-smelling room with a mattress on the floor, a small knee-high table abutting it—so much easier to roll cigarettes that way—and an always-on large flat-screen television five feet away. “I think about it all the time, every day, it’s how my life is.” Usually in the morning: such thoughts to be considered before he heaves himself off of the mattress to endure more inconsequential suffering. Not one session ends without him mentioning suicide.

I always make it a point to demonstrate that I’m unafraid of the subject. We’ve even laughed together over how naïve so many are to think that our so-called “survival instinct,” our presumed “will to live,” ineluctably trumps our desire for self-destruction. Self-destruction, alongside myriad habits of self-numbing, is so omnipresent in our world that it seems absurd to think that we humans actually do treasure the gift of living.

If we treasure life, really treasure it rather than just give lip-service to it, then why so much squandering of it?

“What does anyone know about living?” Marcus had said to me once. He wasn’t really asking me a question. He was declaring his own wisdom, his own hard-earned wisdom, the only kind of wisdom that’s worth a damn.

His remark reminded me of the scene in the Vietnam movie Platoon where Sgt. Barnes, the dark character competing for the soul of the Charlie Sheen character says to a group of young soldiers who are smoking pot: “Death? What y’all know about death?” Sgt. Barnes, with his scar-chiseled face and pain-knowing eyes, has undoubtedly peered into some abyss and thus has little patience for the young soldiers who seek escape and avert their eyes from the abyss through petty distractions. I don’t recall how I answered Marcus. But I do remember being impressed by the fact that he understood so well the interdependence of life and death, that to understand life one has to understand death. Not that Marcus spoke from a place of understanding death—far from it. He never spoke with any particularity about how contemplating death might bear on the artistry of living.

“I became an altar boy when I was 12,” he continued. “Did that for a few years. Father Lewis didn’t know nothin’ about living. I’ve seen psychs, therapists, energy doctors, fuckin’ you name it, and none of’em knows a goddamned thing about living.”

Not much to argue with there. I told Marcus that hardly anyone knows anything meaningful about how to live. How pathetic we are, I told him, the vast majority of us in the land of plenty, in the art of living. How can we know? After all, we lack a vocabulary for it. In this money-making, status-seeking, distraction-obsessed culture, we’ve lost the capacity to talk about it; we’ve lost the tools to even think about it in any serious way. Marcus lit a cigarette, offered me one, and as I waved him off I realized I had lapsed into preacher mode. I’ve been prone to do that.

I always refrain from talking Marcus out of suicide. He has commented on that fact a few times, usually to express gratitude for not doing what other health-care providers do—tell him that it would be best to forge ahead (best for whom?), that things will get better (how the fuck do you know things will get better?), that killing himself would only leave a legacy of pain (oh, I get it, I should suffer through life out of obligation). I never take that approach, for two reasons.

First, I think it is useful to look upon the urge to kill yourself as arising from a “self” that wants to manage the pain (which includes vanquishing it entirely). That managerial “self” must exist against another “self” that generates and experiences the pain. There is thus a polarity within the suicidal human organism: the managerial “self” who can’t stand the pain polarized against the pain-experiencing “self” who just won’t stay sequestered in some psychic locker tucked away among all the other toys in the attic. To preach at the managerial “self” about the folly of suicide, to guilt-trip the managerial “self” or appeal to that “self’s” sense of obligation, only leads to an intensified desire to commit suicide because it ignores completely the interplay of the polarities within the human organism. The polarity itself needs to be addressed.

Second, I don’t believe in the notion that living is an obligation and I don’t think it is truly therapeutic to signal such a notion to others, including those in despair. It’s an implicit mental model that generates ripples of more pain and suffering. I’m not one to promote to a desperately suffering person the brightly lit news of how wonderfully magical life can be, if only you just hang on. I do the opposite: I go towards the darkness, the pain, even the madness itself; I climb down into the pit of despair and sit with the person and ask questions like What’s holding you back now? What’s held you back in the past? Why haven’t you’ve given up already? Usually that sort of questioning arouses a spirited discussion, led by the client (a crucial fact), about what makes living worthwhile. It can often take a while to get there, but I have found that it almost always happens.

"If I Had a Gun"

I ask him again to tell me about his choice of killing implement, this time with a forward-leaning posture and a hand-slicing gesture, using my body in the way I used to do in my former life as a courtroom lawyer cross-examining witnesses. “I would have used a gun,” Marcus explains. Silence, for two beats, and then he adds, “If I had a gun.” He taps the wound again. “All I had at the moment was a knife. So I. . . .” He falters in his speech, as he often does.

“So you used it,” I say to complete Marcus’s sentence. He nods. “Small wound,” I add. “Scary, but small.” He shrugs. He tells me he doesn’t want to talk about it anymore and I tell him sure, no problem.

Do It Day

A week passes and I visit Marcus again, this time to prepare him for discharge. But first I have to make a judgment—can Marcus leave this place?

“Look, Marcus, you keep talking about killing yourself and sometimes you do stuff like—hell, you know, you cut your throat, for Christ’s sake.”

Marcus interrupts me. “Yeah, and I wouldn’t be here right now if I had a gun around. I woulda killed myself a long time ago. I woulda killed myself a lot of times.”

“Yeah,” I say, holding back a laugh. I guess I’m not too successful because Marcus asks me, with a stupefied look, what’s so funny? And I tell him nothing and he insists that he wants to know so I tell him it’s just the shit you say, Marcus, and he asks me what shit? and I tell him you just say funny shit sometimes and the fact that you don’t know that it’s funny just makes it funnier. Marcus shrugs and he smiles wanly. That’s my cue to push forward and quit the banter.

“Anyway,” I say in a low register, “I get that you always think about it. But let’s talk about doing this whole thing right.” Marcus perks up. His lips separate and form an oval. “First off, let’s set a date. No messing around. Let’s write it in your calendar.” Marcus has a paper calendar taped on the wall near his bed. We go back and forth about a suitable day to “do it” and Marcus keeps saying this is ridiculous, it’s fucking ridiculous and I keep countering no it isn’t, we need to do this right, and then he says stop messing around, Dan, and I tell him I’m very serious right now. It’s early April and we discuss Memorial Day as “Do It Day.” Marcus keeps repeating this is ridiculous, fucking ridiculous, and then—

Paradoxical Intention

Paradoxical intention is what Victor Frankl called it in his book, Man’s Search for Meaning. The fundamental idea is that of going towards, rather than away from, the peril, the darkness, the pain. Resistance and evasion prolong and intensify suffering; healing is predicated on overcoming. Still, ushering a client towards the distress is frightening, which is probably why Frankl’s paradoxical intention is most often restricted to treating garden-variety phobias. I don’t use Frankl’s technique in any formalistic way. I use it more by happenstance because it accords well with my Zen training, which in turn harmonizes with my therapeutic orientation towards existentialism. That probably explains why I am not frightened to use it with Marcus. My time in a Zen monastery was replete with exercises in paradoxical intentionality, largely invoked to lighten the practitioner’s attachment to “self.”

He relents.

“What difference does it make?” he says, clearly exhausted by the rapid banter. “Let’s make it Memorial Day then.”

I ponder that date, staring at the calendar. It’s a free calendar with a Walgreens logo and a photo of two youthful faces, white male and black female, bearing happy smiles, the cliché image of human joy and social progress. “No, not then,” I say.

“Why not?” Marcus asks.

““You should have one more summer before you call it quits. It’d be stupid to waste a summer, get what I’m saying?””

“No, I don’t.” He starts to rise off the bed. “C’mon, let’s get me signed outta here. That’s that, huh?”

“Summer! Dontcha want one more summer?”

Marcus considers my expression. I feel exuberant, like I’m proposing something wild and fun, maybe even sinister. “Yeah, you’re right,” he says gamely.

“That’s the spirit. Live it up and then do it on Labor Day.” I reach over and pull the calendar off of the wall. I find September and I write “The End” in the little box for Labor Day. Marcus is looking at me with electric eyes. “But here’s the deal, Marcus. I’m serious about this, so listen to me.” I pause, wait for the emotional gravity of the moment to hit. “You can’t back out of this. If you are feeling then what you are feeling now and like you’ve felt in the past, then you have to make Labor Day the last day of your life.”

He nods but I can tell he’s puzzled and yet interested in this therapist-led madness. I tell him we are going to designate a place for The End but that we’re not going to do that now because it’s worth thinking hard about since it’ll be a really important event and we need to treat it as such. I insist that he promise me that he will not harm himself in any way before Labor Day.

“Understand, Marcus? You need to promise me that.” I get him to promise. “But there’s one more thing, Marcus.” I say this solemnly.

“What’s that?”

“This is crucial. This is the key to the whole deal.”

“Fucking what?” Marcus is no longer slouching. He stopped slouching several minutes ago but I’m noticing it now.

“You only get to do it—it’s only The End—if you live it up this summer. You have to go to the beach, like, every day. You have to ask women out and not give a rats-ass if they say no. You have to . . . you know . . .”

“Get laid?”

“If that makes you happy. And I want you to go to the library and go on the Internet and make a reservation for a campsite in August.”
“I love camping,” he says.

“I know, Marcus. You’ve told me that before. That’s why I’m telling you now—I’m telling you, you hear?—to reserve a campsite.”

“Willya come out? To the campsite, I mean.”

“Sure,” I say hastily. I grab his knees, squeeze them together. “Listen to me, man. You have to live it up this summer and then you can do it on Labor Day. You must do it on Labor Day.” I let go of his knees and lean back in my chair. “Unless, of course, you aren’t depressed anymore like you are now.” Marcus picks up the calendar from the floor where I dropped it. He studies it. “Deal?” I say.

“Deal,” he says.

We shake on it. Then I leave the room and return with a legal pad. Marcus asks me what I’m writing and I tell him I’m writing an “Odysseus agreement.”

“What’s that?”

“It’s a thing you sign. It’s your signed promise not to harm yourself, and if you do feel like you’ll harm yourself, you’re promising here that you won’t, that instead you’ll call nine-one-one or somehow, someway, get yourself to the hospital.”
“What’d you call it?” he asks

“An Odysseus agreement is what it’s called.”

“A what?”

“Hey, Marcus, what does it matter? Let me write this and you sign it. Okay?”

“Yeah, okay. So that’s that. But what’s with the name?”

“Marcus, lemme write this,” I protest. “Sooner we do this, sooner we get you signed outta here. That’s what you want, right?”

“Yeah, but what’s this Odys thing? Never heard of that word.”

O—dyss—e—us,” I say, as I put the pad and pen on the floor. I explain to Marcus, because he really wants to know, a bit about the Homeric poem, The Odyssey—about the gore and blood-thirsty violence, about vengeance and honor, and I tell him that back then, in ancient Greece, they valued things differently than we do nowadays. Heroism, courage, unflinching acceptance of death. “Back then, to be respected and to have self-respect, you had to have conquered your fear of death.”

“Sounds like The Gladiator,” Marcus says, referring to the Russell Crowe movie.

“Yeah,” I say, “the Greeks influenced the Romans.”

“So why is this thing you’re writing called what it’s called?”

Odysseus, the hero in Homer’s classic, requested to be tied down to the ship’s mast because he couldn’t trust his ability to withstand the call of the Sirens. I explain the whole scene to Marcus and he gets it.

“Oh. So, signing this piece of paper, that’s like you tying me down to a pole on the ship.”

“Exactly.”

He laughs. Not a chuckle, but a real laugh. “Go on, then. Write it and I’ll sign it. That’s that.”

Postscript

Marcus is still alive. He discovered that “living it up” isn’t as easy as one might think. Working with Marcus reminds me how difficult being easy-going actually is. Giving oneself permission to live life with ease, free from attachments to our dramas, is something that requires patience and practice. Permission-giving has been the therapeutic project preoccupying me and Marcus, once the Labor Day moment passed, with Marcus telling me, “I’m game to keep going.” Physical challenges continue to get him down—structural damage to one knee, a bad back—but he has become more resilient, largely because he takes fewer things personally. The sessions following those described in the essay—sessions where he was encouraged to “live it up” before following through on his determination to “end it all”—led him to a realization that treating life as an obligation only intensifies suffering. Our slogan these days: Nothing matters, but everything is honored.
 

Statistics Don’t Lie…Except When They Do

As I was working on my doctorate I became interested in home stereo amplifiers. Armed with a fellow doctorate student who possessed infinite knowledge in this area I began the search for the perfect amplifier.

My interest rapidly escalated into what could arguably have been diagnosed as a full-blown obsession. I visited stereo stores near and far. I read an endless stream of articles in the stereo magazines. I spoke with salesmen, saleswomen, and manufacturer's representatives. I attended stereo conventions. But most of all, I kept my eyes on the specifications of the various units. Ah yes, the statistics. Show me the evidence! My fellow grad student warned me not to put very much stock in specifications claiming that good numbers don't always translate to superb sound, but I knew better.

Statistics told the whole story. Finally, after nearly three years of nonstop research and spending at least as much time picking out a stereo amplifier as I did on my studies (okay, maybe a hairline more), I purchased a unit with "seriously good specs." A unit with triple digit distortion of .005—so low your dog couldn't hear it.

I hooked the unit up and to my chagrin, it sounded tinny! Convinced it was my speakers, I replaced them. It still sounded thin. (Stereo talk for tinny.) I bought speaker wire that cost more than my wardrobe and cables with a thickness rivaling my wrist measurement. No improvement was noted.

On a whim I purchased a used bargain basement priced amplifier for less than a twenty dollar bill at a pawn shop. To me it sounded much better than my expensive model. I could blame it on my hearing at the time except that everybody who auditioned the two amplifiers like the old cheapie with the "crummy specs" better.

While struggling with my stereo amplifier addiction I was able to secure my doctorate and a few years later I landed a job as a program coordinator at a major metropolitan suicide prevention center.

Because suicide was the one of the top three killers of teens (it still is) and one of the top ten causes of death for all age brackets (here again, it still is) I gave lots and lots of suicide prevention speeches. I often responded to crisis situations at schools, churches, and even major corporations, and helped run a suicide survivor's group for those who lost a friend or loved one. This continued even after I left the center. I stopped counting when I had lectured to approximately 100,000 people on this life and death topic including quite a few seasoned psychotherapists.

My point is merely that my lectures and professional activities allowed me to meet literally thousands of people who in some way, shape, or form, had been touched by the act of suicide or a suicide attempt.
Now one of the key points in my lectures was to tout the benefits of a suicide prevention contract or what experts and ethical bodies would later dub a "no suicide contract."

But, enter statistics or evidence-based practice (EBP) also known as evidence-based treatment (EBT). According to the purveyors of these numerical meta-analyses, suicide prevention contracts don't work. Even some major suicide prevention organizations and top experts in the world have adopted this stance.
What? Really? You're kidding, right? Tell that to the over-the-road truck driver who approached me after a public speech to share that he was only alive today because his eighth grade shop teacher made him sign a suicide prevention contract. Tell that to the woman in one of my college classes who volunteered that she would not be in my class if it had not been for a caring high school guidance counselor who insisted she sign a no-suicide contract in her sophomore year. "I'm a woman of my word," she told me. And what about the woman in group therapy with me who pulled a no-suicide contract out of her purse to show me. The white paper was yellow inasmuch as the document was now over 25 years old. "This saved my life," she said with tears in her eyes.

These are just three of the many cases I heard over the years. I could go on, but I think the point is obvious. Even if you can show me 100 more cases, or even 1000 where contracts didn't work, I will show you the ones where these simple contracts clearly did. Science is often what works and if a contract saves a single life then it was worth it.

Now in defense of the EBT crowd who renounces these contracts, many experts do recommend a beefed up version of the document called a safety plan. Others in this camp prefer a commitment-to-treatment document. Yes, safety plans and their second cousins, commitment-to-treatment plans, are possibly superior. But in the real world there are often times when a clinician does not have the luxury of drafting a long, drawn out, document.

In such instances, a therapist or hotline worker should do his or her best to get a short verbal, or better still written, no-suicide contract. I personally think it is downright unethical not to use the old tried and true contract. And my fear is that if we teach upcoming professionals this information they may well do nothing if they don't have the time or information to draft a full-fledged safety plan when a life is on the line.
If the average shoe size is statistically an 8M and you wear a 6W would you buy the 8M? Well, would you?

Statistics don't lie . . . well, except when they do. And a life, unlike a shoe size or a brand of stereo amplifier, is too valuable to base on a few research studies that could easily be refuted in the coming years.

The British Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli once quipped, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics."

I think the Prime Minister might have been on to something.

What Remains: The Aftermath of Patient Suicide

Note: Clinical material in this article is taken across various venues and years of treatments. Identities are disguised to protect confidentiality. References used in writing this article, as well as resources for clinicians, can be found at the bottom of this page.

Silent Mourners

The memory is quite clear: several years ago, early one morning checking my voicemail, two messages in I came upon a message from my patient, Jill. The message was date-stamped the evening before. She said she would miss today’s session due to a need to find new housing; she thanked me for our work thus far (as she frequently did, sometimes out of social politeness or her fears of abandonment, other times out of sincere heartfelt gratitude, something we frequently explored). This time her gratitude sounded heartfelt in tone. Her message also left me perplexed, as we had not talked of housing, and I saved it. Another message, left moments before I checked my voicemail, was from Jill’s psychiatrist, Brian, asking me to give him a call when I got in the office. Brian and I spoke frequently of Jill, her ongoing medical decline at a relatively young age, and her persistent depression and posttraumatic stress. We followed her carefully, exchanged perspectives, and possessed mutual respect for one another’s clinical skills.

I called him immediately. “Are you in your office?” he asked, his voice ominous.

“Yes,” I replied, feeling my stomach tightening.

“Are you aware of the events related to Jill?”

“No,” my heart now pounded from my chest into my throat.

“Jill killed herself by handgun . . . “

I do not remember what he said next, just that he was still talking. I gasped, crying, while simultaneously attempting to hide my upset.

“Margaret, there was nothing, nothing you could have done to prevent this,” Brian continued, his voice clear and emphatic, speaking from his decades of experience, his knowledge of Jill, and his knowledge of our work together.

We talked for some time, and I could feel myself wanting to hang up the phone and be alone, but Brian insistently kept me on the line, wisely, for forty-five minutes. That was enough time for both of us to begin feeling the immensity of Jill’s death, and to begin the longer process of inquiry and reflection into her suicide and its after-effects. It was a process that would continue for a few months between us, and for more than a year for me.

Clinicians who lose patients to suicide are sometimes referred to as “silent mourners.” Some describe this kind of grief as disenfranchised. For me, I think of this grief as a kind of lived experience that catapults you into another environment which is foreign and therefore scary; a kind of grief that is uniquely solitary to bear and therefore devoid of larger community to bear it with you; a kind of grief that is intensely intertwined with shame; and a traumatic grief that possesses all the hallmarks of interpersonal trauma, whose impacts often continue reverberating long after the initial shattering experience has occurred. All of these facets and more underscore the particular experience of clinicians grieving suicide loss.

The differences are rather key in understanding how to be with our selves and also how to respond to colleagues who experience this kind of loss personally or professionally. My hope in writing this article is to buoy understanding, widen the circles of support for clinicians who have experienced suicide loss, and to offer some guideposts along the way of grieving. This topic and these aims are one of my life-long passions in my career. I have had the unfortunate experience of surviving two siblings’ suicides, the sudden death of a third sibling that suggested passive suicide, and the deaths of both parents from organic causes that were informed by these traumatic losses. My terrain of grief and traumatic loss was quite familiar to me by the time I met Jill, having traversed its intricacies in feeling, thought, and body using psychotherapy, meditation, long-distance hiking, body work, and writing, for many years. My experience served me well in working with Jill while she was alive, as well as holding what remained after her death. I was and am, after all, a wounded healer, meeting her suffering in life and in death.

Our Privileged Intimacy, Our Private Mourning

By its very nature, psychotherapy is a privileged space. The therapeutic relationship is characterized by a unique emotional intimacy with each patient. As therapists we are honored by our patients’ presence, the trust that is hard won, and the growing capacities through the course of psychotherapy we witness. We accompany and guide, inquire and curiously explore in a most particular way with each patient. With each patient, a slightly different relationship forms. We are slightly different therapists with each patient we encounter.

The extent to which we as therapists may deny the singular relationship with and presence of our patients in our lives contributes to the complications of grieving their departure in any form—from treatment termination to physical death. In her article, “Necessary and unnecessary losses: the analyst’s mourning” (2000) Sandra Buechler reflects that, because our work asks us to cultivate objectivity, and objectivity is often (over) emphasized in the work (and in training), it becomes a norm without critical thinking or reflection. This clinical cultural norm may also encourage a sense that we can (or should, perhaps) simply “move-on” when a patient departs. A therapist’s stance of distance may additionally complicate the grieving picture, especially in the case of loss by suicide. That stance may feed defenses of denial, encourage guilt, and amplify feelings of shame.

The great Jungian, James Hillman, stated that the suicide of patients is a “wrenching agony of therapeutic practice.” It is also a reality of practice that we fantasize will not touch us, despite the statistics. Depending upon the research reviewed, approximately fifty per cent of psychiatrists and thirty per cent of psychologists experience patient suicide. The statistics are incomplete and varied, often reflective of response rates to inquiry. Further, we do not, to my knowledge, have statistics on the numbers of mental health professionals who have experienced suicide loss within their personal circles of close family-friend relations, but it is fair to consider the percentages may be slightly higher if these were included.

For clinicians, suicide challenges every value we place in the therapeutic endeavor. It can raise fears of litigation, cloud clinical decision-making, and spark feelings of professional isolation. Suicide of a patient can challenge personal and professional identities, career trajectory, and sense of professional security. In its wake, patient suicide can leave posttraumatic stress symptoms behind as well as complicated grief. Interestingly, in my work with therapists who have experienced suicide loss of family or other close relations, they experience similar dilemmas. The sense that as a clinician he or she did not serve their family member or friend well, the questioning of clinical acumen, the guilt of feeling as though he or she should have done something to be of help and more, are common. As clinicians, suicide loss in any arena of our lives is experienced through the lens of our clinical knowledge, expertise, and experience.

There is little personal discussion on how therapists weather such a loss. Lay survivors of suicide are in an unknown country, inhabiting a strange landscape. Therapists surviving the suicide of a patient are in a similar land and yet there are important differences: there is no institutionalized ritual, no community of mourners, no one, really, who knew the patient as the clinician knew the patient. There is no one who witnessed first-hand (as best anyone can) the relationship between a certain patient and a certain therapist, yet the specific dyadic relationship is never to be experienced again. It is never to be remembered by anyone else but the therapist. In specific ways, we are the only one who holds our patient in mind. Even in the case of Jill, Brian held one particular relationship with her, and I another. Although Jill sometimes spoke of us to one another, the bulk of our memories of her are solitary, and the texture of our relationship with her singular.

Therapists are usually left alone with what remains in the aftermath of patient suicide. These remnants include all that was unsaid, unprocessed within the therapeutic relationship—both the regrets of what was not named and processed that are possibly linked to the suicide, and certainly all that had no chance to be felt and spoken of together that more time would have provided. Additionally, all that the therapist retains of his or her patient remains inside the therapist’s memory.

Further, who the therapist was with this particular patient is lost. This leaves open the question of who we are as therapist now. The process of mourning for therapist-survivors asks that we delve into the question of who we are now that our patient has left in this self-destructive way. And who are we, as therapist, the one here to facilitate healing—to engender life, if we have that kind of perspective—in the face of chosen death?

It can be alluring as the therapist-survivor for all these reasons to move far from the confusing thicket of feelings left by patient suicide. The cultural context and identity as therapist can encourage this moving away from honest reflection and processing too. Yet as we know with our patients, moving away from the real experience of the here and now can lead to a dulling of living, a numbing. In our work, moving away from our feelings can feed psychotherapeutic cynicism, burnout, and depression. It can also lead to problematic clinical decision-making and ethical lapses in judgment.

Our willingness to open, receive, and make contact with our patients within the therapeutic work is an offering toward healing—if we choose to risk it. From a relational perspective, certainly, our willingness in these ways is a vital vehicle in the process of transformation found within the therapeutic endeavor. Upon the suicide of a patient, it is tempting to shut down in response to profound relational loss and loss of the therapeutic framework upon which we rely.

Being with Groundlessness

“The dead leave us starving with mouths full of love,” the poet Anne Michaels writes. Jill left me starving and full. Her message to me left me full. The timing of her departure left me starving, questioning. She left me loving her, yes, but also left me with a myriad of other feelings including meaninglessness, impotence, frustration, and raw sadness. I was, because of my life experiences, immediately aware that I needed to take seriously the particular kind of loss I was experiencing—the loss of an incomplete, torn-apart relationship, the loss of who Jill was to me, a loss of clinical voice, and the loss of who I was as a psychotherapist with Jill.

There is ineffability—an unspoken quality— in this kind of traumatic loss. Psychoanalyst Ghislaine Boulanger distinguishes between child and adult onset trauma, noting how core self experience and self-in-relation experiences are undermined. Adult onset trauma shatters illusions of omnipotent control, ever-shaking the normative expectation of personal agency and healthful denial of omnipresent mortality. The suicide of a patient shatters illusions of therapist omnipotence, shaking expectations of potential positive influence upon patients, and calls into question core identity as well as identity-in-relationship to other patients and colleagues.

Western psychology rests within a worldview of personal agency. It is a worldview imbued with Euro-American, individualistic, educated, and moneyed values—all of which are crushed in the face of adult onset trauma. It is the very nature of this kind of traumatic loss that it rocks our assumptive world as therapists: questioning whether our endeavors are life giving, whether our efforts possess meaning and influence; and whether our chosen profession is worthwhile.

There was Todd, a patient-therapist in my practice who came to me after his long-term patient completed suicide. Todd had fifteen years of clinical experience and before that eight as a university professor. He was well versed in suicide prevention and intervention. “After his patient’s death, he refused to ever work with a patient again who even mentioned suicidal feeling states; he would refer them.” His stance is maintained to this day, six years later. His way of coping is not unusual among therapist-patients in my practice or across the profession. Whenever I present a paper on this topic, I hear stories of mental health professionals at all levels responding similarly. So understandably haunted, they desire to avoid any chance of experiencing a suicide loss again; some believe they can no longer objectively assess risk; and others feel traumatized, unable to clinically engage with a patient experiencing suicidal ideation or self-harm.

There are some other common coping approaches among therapist-survivors. They include all the ways we may become vigilant in our practice: taking numerous, even if repetitive, trainings on ethics and suicide prevention; developing a rigid stance in responding to patients expressing suicidal thoughts or intent; and intervening in overly-conservative ways that communicate anxiety to the patient rather than clinical engagement. In her essay for the collection, The Therapist in Mourning: From the Faraway Nearby (2013), Catherine Anderson describes these kinds of responses as part of the working through process with “a desperate need to understand what had happened and a magical wish to protect [oneself] against any future vulnerability.”

Another common response is to avoid examining clinical missed opportunities and errors, to defend against the pain, shame, and perhaps guilt that are simmering. Gina, a patient-clinician of mine, experienced a patient suicide after two sessions. When the patient did not show to the third session, Gina called. Subsequently, the patient’s father contacted Gina. He told her his son killed himself the day after the second session. It was excruciating for Gina to slowly begin to examine her state of mind during the sessions. She came to realize that she was, due to many factors, defending against making genuine a connection with this patient, and was more distant than usual. Her past clinical experience told her that when she has that kind of response, she hesitates exploring avenues that would be productive, and that she overlooks what later, when less defensive, was there all along. That was her missed opportunity. Of course, there is no telling if Gina had been less defended if that would have made a difference—given her a vital piece of clinical information that she could capitalize upon to then help the patient. It was crucially important, however, to Gina’s healing process to bring into consciousness what she already actually knew about herself in her brief work with the patient.

The ground of my being was continually moving beneath me after Jill’s suicide. Because of my life history and my working with it in therapeutic ways, I knew my footing could be regained, but I questioned when that would happen. I returned to writings that reminded me about how vulnerable groundlessness really is and how inevitable it is as well. Pema Chodron, in When Things Fall Apart, writes:

“[T]hings don’t really get solved. They come together and they fall apart. Then they come together again and fall apart again. It's just like that. The healing comes from letting there be room for all of this to happen: room for grief, for relief, for misery, for joy."

Her perspective, for me, reflects what I believe and practice in my private and professional life, but can easily forget in times of great tumult. It is a kind of perspective that provides me refuge.

I knew from my history that if I refused to directly experience what was present within me I would only harden my heart. Cutting myself off by armoring my heart would negatively impact my relationships with other patients, let alone the relationships in my personal circle and my relationship to life itself.

The practice of mindfulness meditation is one way I engage my direct experience, and it had been a practice of mine for many years before I began my clinical work. I returned to intensive practice after sustaining the many family deaths in quick succession aforementioned; I spent a month on a silent meditation retreat as well. The amount of silence offered was an integral experience for my body, heart, and mind to begin having room to feel through those traumatic losses. With Jill’s death, I returned to steady meditation practice again, in order to create room inside myself for the range of feelings I was experiencing. It sounds, perhaps, so simple, so easy, and yet it is not. Silently meditating twice daily confronted me with every vulnerability, every feeling, body sensation, and thought I possessed. Profound shame, futility, anger, banality, and sorrow as well as heartache and headache were some of the many storms I weathered sitting quietly on my meditation cushion. Yet it was the silence and the generous observing accompaniment to myself that were central in my finding footing again.

Ritual as Scaffolding

James Hillman suggests that in the face of patient suicide the clinician go into the context of the death—not to stay on the surface. His advice speaks to delving into our interior world, and grieving, but also something more. He suggests lending all of our knowledge of our patient to the endeavor as well, exploring as thoroughly as possible nuances of our patient’s suicide.

With Jill, intuitively I knew I needed rituals as a frame in my quest to deeply understand her suicide to the best of my abilities, as well as to mourn her death and all of the losses accompanying it. One ritual that was obvious was the therapy itself. There are the set days and times of sessions; the usual pattern of entering and exiting sessions with some of their inevitable variability; the parameters of the relationship.

Keenly aware of how groundless I felt, I longed for grounding in the ritual of my sessions with Jill. “I could not fathom scheduling another patient in Jill’s session times. I realized what I wanted was to keep my appointment with Jill. So I did just that: I kept my appointments with Jill for one year.” Sometimes I went to a meditation space near my office for the appointment; sometimes I was in a natural setting. Other times, I spent it in my office. Wherever I chose to spend the sessions, I also was with Jill. Sometimes reading a book of poetry that evoked Jill, or intentionally recollecting parts of sessions.

By the second week of appointments with Jill, I began writing during the time. I used poetry as a companion. Sometimes I wrote to Jill, sometimes extemporaneously to the Reader with a capital R. An excerpt follows of one of my writings:

I reviewed notes on Jill I came across; process notes. Notes when Brian spoke with me several weeks ago. There is much that remains unsolved in my heart. And it’s in my heart, especially, that time takes its own rhythm, a time that doesn’t match up with the clocks and the calendars.

It’s sorrow or poignancy, both, being touched by Jill—I’m feeling right now. Knowing I’m not alone, really, in such an experience ultimately—like anyone grieving anything how universal and connected to the everyday human experience this actually is. Paradoxically how alone and singular I feel. Alien among colleagues who have not experienced such a violent loss. A lone mourner.

Jill suffered in body and mind, physical and emotional pain. Her physicality used to be a route to survival as a child and a young adult. Her physicality was already failing her. The grief she felt was so layered and frequently linked to all the losses felt trans-generationally across her family history. And even this doesn’t say all she felt and lived with.

I can and do write circles of theory or case formulation but that is not what I’m desiring here. I feel almost desperate to continue delving into this process with her in this kind of way, unsure of where it is leading.

Strange, I guess, to feel the shock, still, that she is dead. I just know the only way to move with this, through this, to be with it all, is to do what I’m doing. Let it come in words or feelings. Let it come through me, in silence.

Of course, the questions remaining in the aftermath of suicide usually cannot be fully answered, but answering all the questions is not the point of such a process. If there is an aim, it is the recognition that the clinician continues in relationship without her (or his) partner in the dyad. Feeling and thinking alongside that recognition is the heart of the process. Psychologist Robert Gaines would call this the stitching together of continuity our relationship to the dead. Finding a relational home once again. Finding one’s clinical and human voice again.

Other rituals also occurred to me related to mourning, whether a formal memorial or an informal honoring, as well as creating continuity. By the end of the second week of appointments with the spirit of Jill, I realized I needed two additional things: to visit where she died, and to create some kind of memorial. There was no funeral service for Jill; she had no family or close community. Something of our process together needed representation. Something of her treasured symbols shared with me needed representation. And something of our relationship needed representation too.

Brian drew me a virtual map in verbal description as to where she died. Over the next four appointments with the spirit of Jill, I developed a memorial. A colleague accompanied me on the day that I set, and we drove to the place close to where Brian described. We walked the remainder of the way. Although Jill chose a place where she surely would be discovered, it was not an overly exposed public place. When I got there, I wept. I wept not because of her death in that moment but because of the purposefulness of the place. I recognized it, immediately, based on our work together. Based on what Jill shared with me. I could see how Jill, with her particular perspective, felt beauty in this place. The place fit into the story of her life, the story she shared with me. The story we made sense of together. The place symbolized what she would frequently discuss and feel, the existentials of existence, and the evolution of her life.

The ritual included flowers, some writing I read to commemorate Jill, and a prayer combined with poetry I put together to reflect our relationship. My colleague and I sat in silence afterward, listening to the sounds around us. I felt close to Jill in the moment. Through the scaffolding of this ritual, as well as the ritual of appointments with her, I began to understand some meanings in her death, and I regained my voice once again.

Jill genuinely affected me—her life as well as her death. Destruction, and particularly self-destruction, surrounded her in the history of her life yet she developed into a highly deliberate, aesthetically-minded, symbolically-attuned woman who struggled with looming thoughts that dragged her into familiar mire she was accustomed to escaping by vigorously and creatively using her body, no longer available to her. Her suicide was equally aesthetically minded—if you forgive the stretch of the word in this context but rather feel into the contour of its meaning. I noticed this in numerous ways from the evidence she left behind, the chosen place of her death, the timing of her death, to her message left for me.

I was acutely aware in working with Jill of my family standing with me, for they are there, always, in the background of my mind and heart, like a luminous shawl. How the experience of their tragic, violent, and sorrowful deaths created, initially, a nuclear-sized crater within me that since healed—and continues to evolve in healing—with scarred but incredibly strong layers. Layers of capacity and depth for ambiguity, curiosity, and love in the face of enormous challenge, rejection, and destruction. I never revealed to Jill my personal history, yet I felt it was these very experiences and my working with them, through them, that enabled me to meet Jill in the dark and light of her psyche without collapsing. All of these details and their meaning that I came to understand over time enabled me to continue to serve fully in my life in all ways professionally and personally with openness.

Relational Home for One Another

Clinician-survivors come in contact with the real attachment felt for the person who died in the process of mourning. Regardless of theoretical orientation or therapeutic stance, there was (and is) a relationship. The basis of the relationship is connection, care, and likely love. Therapists may have difficulty admitting they love their patients; some secretly do so with shame as if caring were untoward. When working in my practice with therapists mourning a suicide, moving through the shame of caring to the healing and human quality of caring is vital.

Clinician-survivors ask me to be their therapist initially because they find my contact information from the American Association of Suicidology’s website. There, among numerous resources, is a link to resources for clinician-survivors. Clinicians who contact me often gingerly express their desire for support, understandably fearing an amplification of shame they already are carrying. Shame demolishes a person’s sense of self. Shame isolates and evicts us from our relational home.

Some studies have explored the ubiquitousness with which clinician-survivors are met with judgment and shaming from colleagues. It has been found that clinicians who have not experienced a suicide loss professionally or personally are more likely to assume that there must have been something the treating clinician had done wrong. One way to understand this is to consider the nature of trauma. People involved in the traumatic event, either directly or indirectly (hearing of it, etc.), hold parts of the experience and defend against the emotional enormity of it. Blame, shame, grandiosity, omnipotence, and guilt are often convoluted in the mix. Unbearable feelings are projected or disavowed. Most of us “know” this, but when we are in the midst of it ourselves we can forget.

Before I entered my contact information on the clinician-survivor network, I carefully considered this act—a public acknowledgment of an aspect of my history. Before I agreed to write this article, which is drawn from a public presentation I gave to two different professional organizations, I considered how my history in print felt quite different than speaking it. I sensed the risk I felt in both instances. For me the risk is primarily located in relationship to colleagues unfamiliar with suicide loss. My feeling of risk among the professional community is not singular—it is cited repeatedly as a way that therapists feel shame for their grief in relation to patients generally, and most especially the shame felt when a patient completes suicide.

Coming out, so to speak, on the website and in this article are acts of advocacy for other therapists in a direct way, and ultimately also, I believe, advocacy for patients. Coming out in these ways are antidotes to shame as well, although revealing oneself carries with it a chance of being judged or shamed. Hiding when feeling shame, after all, is a protective solution to those risks—albeit risks that are generalized. Two anecdotes may elucidate.

When a psychologist-colleague found out that I publicly acknowledged my identity as a suicide survivor, he questioned me. He wondered if I were exposing something that “should” be hidden. His sense of hiding was initially justified by the importance of neutral stance and limited self-disclosure. With further exploration between us, however, my colleague came to realize that he felt anxious and even dissociated when hearing about my experiences. His shaming reaction toward me was a coping mechanism for his anxieties.

Another colleague responded quite differently to finding out about my public acknowledgment as a suicide survivor. Her response: There but before the grace of God go I. She too felt anxious hearing my experience, but she remained in communion with me. She shared her anxiety and her wishful fantasy that she would never experience this kind of trauma. Through our discussion, we created a relational home for one another.

In therapy, we create, with our patients, a relational home. While this home is focused on the patient’s needs, it is irrevocably the particular home we live in with our patient. That home continues to live inside of the therapist-survivor after the patient dies. In Trauma and Human Existence: Autobiographical, Psychoanalytic, and Philosophical Reflections (2007), Robert Stolorow writes, “The mangling and the darkness can be enduringly borne, not in solitude, but in relational contexts of deep emotional attunement and understanding.” The loss of a patient or a loved one by suicide is unfathomable, though we know it happens. It is nothing short of a cataclysmic trauma, one that is enormous to digest. The impact of it on clinicians has been compared to the traumatic loss of a parent. It is a leveling experience for it takes us out of our protected role as therapist and throws us into the most humble, bare experience of our own humanity.

Brian, the psychiatrist, only learned of my family history after Jill’s death. He wondered, “Perhaps there is some unconscious way Jill knew you could make meaning of and bear her death.” It is curious whatever Jill may have implicitly known of me—but ultimately that is something I will never know. Importantly, it was not lost on me, her therapist, the relevance of the place she chose to die. What it meant to her, what she communicated to me in her final message, and what she communicated in her choice of place. It was not lost on me, her therapist, the layered meanings in the timing of death. The curious exploration of these among other unspoken aspects of our work together was what I gave voice to in my year of kept appointments. A year of rediscovering meaning. A year of regaining clarity, ground, and clinical voice. A year of examining the soul of the process between us, and what lived on within me.

***

Following is a list of readings and resources for clinicians and clinician-survivors who wish to learn more about, and seek support for, the grief of losing a client to suicide.

The clinician-survivor network of the American Association of Suicidiology provides consultation, resources, support, and education to mental health professionals in the aftermath of suicide loss, personally and/or professionally. The website includes nationwide clinicians available as resources, as well as an extensive bibliography.

Anderson, C. (2013). "When what we have to offer isn’t enough" in Malawista, K. and Adelmari, A., Eds. The therapist in mourning: from the faraway nearby. New York: Columbia University.

Boulanger, G. (2002). Wounded by Reality: understanding and treating adult onset trauma. New Jersey: Analytic Press.

Buechler, S. (2000). "Necessary and unnecessary losses: the analyst’s mourning." Contemporary Psychoanalysis 36: 77-90.

Chodron, P. (2000). When things fall apart: heart advice for difficult times. Boston: Shambhala Publications.

DeYoung, P., (2015). Understanding and treating chronic shame: a relational/neurobiological approach. New York: Routledge.

Gaines, R. (1997). "Detachment and continuity: the two tasks of mourning." Contemporary Psychoanalysis 33(4): 549-571.

Hillman, J. (1997). Suicide and the soul. Connecticut: Spring Publications.

Michaels, A. (1997). Memoriam in The Weight of Oranges / Miner’s Pond. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart.

Plakun, E. & Tillman, J. (2005). "Responding to clinicians after loss of a patient to suicide." Retrieved December 2013 from http://www.austenriggs.org.

Stolorow, R. (2011). "Portkeys, eternal recurrence, and the phenomenology of traumatic temporality." International Journal of Psychoanalytic Self Psychology, 6:433-436.

Stolorow, R. (2007). Trauma and human existence: autobiographical, psychoanalytic, and philosophical reflections. New York: Routledge.

Tillman, J. (2006). "When a patient commits suicide: an empirical study of psychoanalytic clinicians." The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 87(1), 159-177.

 

Lynn Ponton on the Challenges and Joys of Working with Teens

A Delicate Balance

Rachel Zoffness: Lynn Ponton, you are a practicing psychiatrist and psychoanalyst who has been working with teens for over thirty years, and are author of the books, The Romance of Risk: Why Teenagers Do the Things They Do and The Sex Lives of Teenagers: Revealing the Secret World of Adolescent Boys and Girls. Let’s start with some of the salient issues that come up when you’re working with children and teenagers. I find that confidentiality when working with kids and teens is often a tricky subject because teenagers have rights as clients and they want to maintain their privacy, which is critical to the alliance. But at the same time parents want to know what’s going on with their children. How do you maintain this delicate balance?
Lynn Ponton: I think it begins with the first session, and even before, when you talk with the parents on the phone—you have to alert them about how you run your therapy practice and your work with kids. I almost always say that I try to encourage privacy with the teens so that they feel open to talk with me, and I will tell their child during the first session that I’m going to try to keep things confidential, but that there will be some exceptions, and I let parents know that right away on the phone. In general, I meet the teen with the parents before I even start and I alert everybody to the parameters and the boundaries around confidentiality.
RZ: So that both the teenager and the parent are on the same page and know exactly where you stand.
LP: Exactly. The kinds of things I would need to share with parents, which I’m clear about right from that first session, would be drug use that was risky or risky behavior that would result in serious self-harm. And sometimes other things—abuse when it’s disclosed has to be shared with the parents for a variety of reasons, and because I’m a mandated reporter.

It’s often hard for a teenager to tell their parents these things directly, so I’ll offer to meet with them and their parents and we’ll work together to help them disclose this material. Collaboration with the young person assures them that even if they do tell me something, it’s not going to be reported over the telephone to their parents. They’re not going to find out about it by surprise. Instead, we’re going to collaborate together as a team to make sure that parents know this.

Of course there are times when this doesn’t always work perfectly. Having worked with kids for more than 35 years, there have been exceptions where I’ve found out quickly that a teenager is suicidal and I have to let the parents know. Maybe we have to work toward a hospitalization period or something like that, but I try as much as I can to have the teenager be part of this process and be involved with it.

Cutting

RZ: You mentioned a very hot button and interesting topic, cutting, which to me seems to have become almost a contagious and trendy behavior among teenagers. What’s your thought about that?
LP: Well, self-mutilation in all of its forms is something that therapists have to learn to feel comfortable with working with teenagers. It’s a big part of our work to connect with them, to know about it, to seem comfortable with it and not put off by it when we hear about it in a session. I first saw it about 30 years ago and wrote a paper on it in the ‘80s, which talked about self-mutilation as a communication. As you point out, it’s a contagious risk-taking behavior. In a group of teenagers, one will do it and the others will copy. They’ll think, “I’ll try it and see what I can learn from it.” That’s how that process really starts. In the ‘80s there were big concerns about self-mutilation because of sharing of implements and a lack of understanding around HIV risk, so we had to be very careful about that until we better understood it.

I think it’s often scariest for parents. So how do you work with teens around the cutting for parents? How do you help a teenager who is cutting really find other ways to cope with some of their feelings and to develop identity in a healthier way? In general I try to educate teens about cutting. I often employ them to get involved in it, to look online, look up articles about cutting. We’ll have conversations about it so that it’s really an educational process with them.

Some teens don’t want to engage in that process.
They may tell you they’re cutting, but they don’t want to learn about it, they want to do it.
They may tell you they’re cutting, but they don’t want to learn about it, they want to do it. This is something private that they’re going to do to help themselves feel better, so I’ll respect that, but I’ll still engage in conversations with them about it. I want to make sure that if they are cutting that it is safe in other ways. There’s significant risk of scarring, of infection—there’s a whole lot of risks that are associated with it.

Many teens cut because they say they feel better afterwards. A number of papers point to the beta endorphin release with cutting—the focus then becomes the physical cut and not the emotional pain that they’re feeling. So it accomplishes a lot for teenagers, but it is an unhealthy coping strategy and risk-taking behavior that you have to work with teens to limit. There are many different ways to do that.
RZ: The way you talk about cutting, it sounds like it might serve an important function for the teenagers who are doing it. What would you say to people who say that it’s just an attention-seeking strategy?
LP: Your question is well placed because I think a lot of times therapists who work with teenagers are faced either by teachers or parents or even other therapists who say, “I don’t want to work with those teens. They’re engaged in a lot of attention-seeking behaviors. How do you handle that?”

I think many behaviors in life are attention-seeking, and often we’re seeking greater attention from ourselves, that we pay attention to our own pain. Teens usually cut because they’re in pain and they don’t necessarily understand their own emotional pain but when they cut, it allows them to at least understand that it’s a painful thing that they’re dealing with. So, yes, it is attention-seeking, and adults will often be drawn in to it. Teachers at school are shocked when they find out about it and they’re worried other kids will cut.

But I think there are a lot of other factors that play in to cutting besides seeking attention. I’m also interested in questions about molestation with cutting. Were they ever hurt? Did they ever suffer abuse? Are they using that in the context of cutting? Has it become very ingrained, so it’s a behavior that they use as a coping strategy that they may have done thousands of times and they find themselves unable to stop? How does it fit in with their family?

Does their family know much about it?
There are many, many reasons why young people cut, and attention-seeking is only one of them.
One of the cases that I worked on for a long time, a girl cut because her father was a surgeon. He talked about cutting all the time, a different kind of cutting, but she imitated him in a kind of identification with her father. It took a long time to unravel, as it wasn’t obvious at the beginning of her treatment. There are many, many reasons why young people cut, and attention-seeking is only one of them. And it’s not often the major one. You have to address the complexity of the behavior and also the feelings that go with them.

Five Perspectives

RZ: I think some professionals are concerned that giving too much time and attention to cutting might be positively reinforcing. So it seems to me that as a clinician addressing it you want to find a balance between over-reacting and under-reacting.
LP: I think that’s more of a strict cognitive behavioral model way of looking at it, and it gets to the question of models and how they affect our work. Cutting is a behavior, but it’s attached to many other perspectives that we look at when we’re engaged in therapy. I try to look at things from at least five perspectives.

One is the more dynamic-relational, where you engage and are looking at aspects of the relationship—how it affects you, the parents, the cutting behavior, all of that. How disclosure plays a role in that. Attachment. Therapeutic alliance. Then there’s the behavioral model. A lot of therapists don’t use that model, but I think it helps to focus on the behavior. I often have kids keep a timesheet or a workbook on their cutting behavior and have them draw their feelings at the time that they’re cutting in addition to recording the number of times they cut. It’s a kind of cutting journal that we look at from a behavioral perspective. We also look at their thoughts that are occurring at the time that they’re cutting, so we can target really negative thoughts.

Then there is the family system. Cutting is usually very much connected with parents in some way or another—they’re worried about the parent’s reactions; they’re worried about feelings they have that they feel the parents can’t help them with. A lot of our kids have trouble with self-soothing, so they’ll cut to self-soothe. The parents might like to learn how to help soothe their teen, or help their teen gain self-soothing mechanisms, but they don’t even know the cutting is going on so they can’t focus on that area with them. Or they, themselves, may be unable to self-soothe and not know that it’s an important skill that you need for raising teenagers.

Carl Whitaker always said, "You lose the parents, you lose the family, you lose the case."
And then there’s the aspect of meaning for the teenager. What does cutting mean to them? Do they think about suicide? Some cutting is related to suicide. Self-harm that is related to suicide is very important to pay attention to, not just for our board tests but in our office with our kids.

Lastly there’s the biological perspective. With some kids that I work with, they carry biological conditions which may lead to increased cutting behavior. Prader-Willi Syndrome is one of those that has some increased cutting and self-harm. You want to be thinking about underlying conditions that might contribute to this behavior.

All of those things are going through my mind, so I’m not thinking, “if I pay attention to this behavior I will reinforce it.” Instead I’m working on all of these levels if I can. I didn’t start with this in the first year or two of being a therapist working with kids, but the longer I’ve worked with kids, the more I’ve been able to see the complexity of so-called simple behaviors.
RZ: I really appreciate that more systemic approach to working with families because when you work with children and teenagers you’re never just working with a child. You’re always working with the family and the larger system.
LP: One of my greatest teachers was Carl Whittaker, a well-known family therapist I worked with as a young medical student therapist in Wisconsin. He always said, “you lose the parents, you lose the family, you lose the case, Lynn.” I kept that in mind and it’s really helped me with all of these cases.

Manualized Treatments

RZ: Apropos of what you just said, I was trained in manualized treatments and I do see a use for them. But a lot of therapists think they’re mumbo jumbo and that they don’t address and can’t respond to the spontaneity of what happens in treatment face to face with clients. How would you make a case for manualized treatments, if at all, or what would you say to people who don’t believe in them?
LP: Well, there are now manualized treatments in dynamic relational work. There are over 400 manualized treatments that I know of in working with children and adolescents from a behavioral modality. Family therapy, too, has manualized treatments. I don’t think there are any in the more existential perspective, because it kind of runs counter to manualization. In biological therapies they have always had manualized treatments for how you evaluate symptoms and work with things.

When I work with young therapists—and I supervise a lot of residents, fellows, psychologists, psychiatrists who are at all stages of training—I really encourage them to pick one or two manualized treatments and really learn them—go away for a day or a weekend, learn the strategy, practice it, and try to become familiar with it. Even if you’re going to be a strict psychoanalyst or family therapist, I think they’re valuable because they teach you how to focus on specific things, how to evaluate. Often manualized treatments have an evaluative component built in, so you have to look at your actions and evaluate how they’re working at the end. That’s a very important part of all therapy.
RZ: Measuring one’s progress?
LP: Exactly. That’s the key, I think, in mastering some of our work. Now, which ones would I recommend? I think one of the best ones to know about is the basic cognitive behavioral therapy approach as developed by Aaron Beck at Pennsylvania. He was my supervisor when I trained there as a resident, and it’s a very successful modality to use. It helps us understand the impact of negative thinking. Another supervisor of mine was Joe Weiss, who worked on Control Mastery theory—which is about negative thoughts and ideas and the power of unconscious beliefs. I admire Marsha Linehan a great deal and the Dialectical Behavioral Therapy model. I’ve had some wonderful conversations with her about her work with adolescents and I think she really grasps what it’s like to work with high-risk adolescents. I would encourage almost anyone to look at her book on working with high-risk adolescents. It’s a wonderful model and it adds much to the work we do with young people. A third area that I think people should look into is trauma. We work so much with trauma as child and adolescent therapists. There is a trauma focused interview that we can do with kids that I use all the time. It’s very useful in diagnosis and at looking at symptom category.

I think learning a little bit about any one of these models helps any child and adolescent therapist function in a more complete way.
RZ: So it sounds like what you would advocate for is an understanding and knowledge of these manualized treatments because it gives you, as a clinician, more tools in your tool belt to pull out for individual clients as they come to you with their individual differences.
LP: It’s one of the reasons the tool belt concept is helpful. But it also makes you feel more comfortable as a therapist, knowing that you have some grasp of these different ideas. Knowing that you’re not following one dogma, but are open to new ideas, because I think ultimately as therapists we end up constructing our own way of working. The theories that we use to support our work, the collection of tasks and techniques that we define and use—these form the basis of our work . It’s very valuable to look at other people’s constructions, integrate them into our own work and say, “hey, this is useful for me. It works with these patients. I can really take this and run with it.” I mentioned five perspectives that I’ve accrued over maybe 35, 40 years of work, but I anticipate over the next 40 years there are going to be others that will greatly benefit our work as child and adolescent therapists.
RZ: There are therapists and other mental health practitioners who would say that defining yourself as eclectic dilutes your work. Do you believe that that’s true? How do you define your theoretical orientation when asked?
LP: I remember that same question from 35 years ago in residency. I think having multiple perspectives strengthens our work, and there are multiple perspectives within each of these theories, so it’s not like people who belong to one model are necessarily doing some ossified therapy that was created by some individual or group of individuals. In my work, I want to stay open and patients open me up.

One reason I like adolescent work, even though I feel like I’m getting older, is that it keeps me young. It keeps me open to new ideas. My patients actually taught me how to text on my cell phone; my patients are coded in by their first name so that they can call me and have a relationship with me.
My patients actually taught me how to text on my cell phone.
I remember one of my other supervisors, Hilda Brook, who worked a lot with eating disorders, was working with teens into her 70s and early 80s in a wheelchair, and she had greater facility with them than even I have today in my 60s. We can continue to grow in our work with teens if we stay young in other ways.

Texting

RZ: You bring up a very important and hot button issue when working with teenagers, which is texting. And I think doing therapy with teenagers and kids today is a whole new world because teenagers and kids are used to communicating through their technology. What are the upsides and downsides of deciding to be a clinician who texts with your clients as you are?
LP: I think it’s important to be aware of some of the legal parameters around texting. Many of us work with large organizations, and it’s important to be aware of HIPAA regulations and such. HIPAA doesn’t regulate all therapists, only certain therapists who are involved with electronic billing, which you might be if you work in a large institution and you bill electronically. In that case you are HIPAA regulated and with regard to texting, HIPAA states that you cannot be sending clinical decisions through a texting modality or an unsupervised modality. You have to have some regulations around it.

When I worked at UCSF for 35 years, I was in a large system that was HIPAA regulated. My texts, which I did with teenagers for 10 years during that period, dealt with scheduling, and if they texted me about an issue that I was clinically concerned about, I’d have them come in so that we could then talk about it and then work on it in person.

But the texting connection I think is very, very important with teens and therapists. Not all therapists can do it for a variety of reasons. Not everyone feels comfortable with it and not all teens have phones. I’ve done a lot of work with homeless teens, who usually don’t have phones, so you have to figure out other ways to communicate with them.

But the bulk of teens out there today do have access to texting and they will communicate that way, often just to check in with you. They may just want to know you’re there and I think that sets up a relationship with them. I don’t always respond to those texts, but they know that I’m receiving and reading them.

But let’s say you’re not HIPAA regulated, so you can put anything on text. I would still say if you’ve got a big clinical concern with a teen—let’s say they text you, “I’m cutting, I think it’s out of control, I’m feeling really anxious”—I’m going to call them immediately rather than text, and most likely try to get them in to see me if I can. So it’s not that I’m sending long texts back and forth about that type of behavior. I’m really using it as a way to communicate to stay in touch.

Other ways that teens will keep me informed, they’ll often text me, “Saw an article you should be reading, doc,” or “thought you’d like this.” Those things are important because it is a reciprocal relationship. I’m largely involved in educating young people, but they help me a lot, too, and I get a lot from them.
RZ: For therapists in private or group practice who don’t work for large organizations, is there a downside to texting? For example, what if you lose your phone?
LP: I think that gets back to just have their first name, maybe an initial afterwards, but no way that they could really be identified. And if they’re very sensitive texts you can also erase them, although we all know that things are out in the cloud forever. So be aware that that information is out there.

This is also one of the things that you should discuss in the first session. I often discuss with my patients my availability, how they can get a hold of me, so they know that I will have their first name on the cell phone, and their phone number, and that I’m fairly easily accessible. I believe one of the reasons I’ve been so successful with teenagers and their parents is because I have very good accessibility. I take my cell phone all over the world when I travel. I do have somebody on call to cover, but I’m available in that way. But let’s say that cell phone is lost, and I’ve never lost my cell phone, though I fear it all the time, Rachel. I’m looking around for it and I worry about memory loss and loss of cell phone. But if it’s lost I think you have to alert the patients, especially those that you’re texting with, that there is a risk and the cell phone was lost. Most of them are not that concerned about it because their whole name is not out there. There’s not a lot of information out there. But I think it’s important to do that. But I also know from forensic cases that you can actually remove data from a distance off of a cell phone, which might actually be required if you work for a university or large organization.

Sexting

RZ: Technology and internet use seems to be a primary source of conflict between parents and kids. Do you see this a lot in your practice? And how do you go about addressing it both with the parents and with the children?
LP: Very young kids, 9, 10, 11, 12 are using the internet or videogames or other media for large periods of time, and parents are often seeing symptoms—kids are struggling with school, their concentration is impaired, and they’re not engaged in other activities or relationships.
Some boys are being prosecuted for texting sexual photos and parents of boys are very concerned about this.
I think that that’s a very important area to be aware of. Parents need education around the signs to be looking out for when kids are struggling. We need to think about their media profiles, how much time are they on TV, how much time they are playing videogames, how much time are they on internet, and what different modalities they’re involved with.

When families come in, I’ll have both the kid and the parents keep a journal and write their feelings down about what’s happening when there’s a confrontation at home regarding this behavior. And all of that comes back into the session. I often will use the family modality to meet at that point and we’ll talk about what’s going on in that type of interaction.

The other area that comes up frequently with teenagers is sexting—texting sexual material. During the past five years I would estimate I’ve had 50 teenagers referred to me who have been involved in sexting activities.

In general, the girls are involved in sexting pictures, nude photos of themselves that have caused some great difficulty. These are often selfies where the girls will hold the camera out in front of themselves, often in their bedroom or bathroom, sometimes partially clothed, sometimes not, and then they’ll text the photo to a friend or friends, and then it gets texted everywhere. That type of interaction is very important to pay attention to and I’ll generally work with the teenage girl alone and talk with her about what happened. The feelings around sexual development are very private and tender, and it’s deeply shocking that this is suddenly exposed to a large group of people. I work with the family around this behavior, too, and sometimes will meet with parents alone to help them understand why this behavior might have taken place.

I would say a smaller number of the sexting cases, roughly 20%, are boys texting nude photos of themselves, but they’re mostly texting nude photos of girls. There are also laws involved with this and I’ve been involved with the FBI and other law enforcement officials around how to handle these cases. There’s awareness in high schools now that they have to report these cases when they discover that boys are texting sexual photos of girls. Some boys are being prosecuted for texting sexual photos and parents of boys are very concerned about this.
RZ: How do you handle those cases when they come in?
LP: First be aware of the legal ramifications. Second, encourage them to get legal advice, because we as therapists can’t provide all of that. Third, I often will meet with the boy individually and try to get a sense of what happened and work with them around that. Many boys are shocked that this has happened. They may have thought they were doing what the other guys at school were doing, that it was cool, they were getting more status. But I’ve also seen boys who’ve had long-standing problems and the texting of the sexual photos is connected to other sexual difficulties that they’ve been struggling with. They may have been molested. They may have molested another person. So to be aware of that, to be open to hearing about that is very important.

Parents of boys are often very angry about this process. They feel that the boy is at a disadvantage because though he sexted the photos, it was the girl who originally sent the photos out so it should be her responsibility. Helping the parents see that we have to take a deeper look at what’s going on with their son under these circumstances is really, really important and not easy to do. You have to stay open to their feelings about their boys being scapegoated, but at the same time point out this is something we have to pay attention to.

The intersection of online work and sexuality is really a key area to focus on, to get as much help as you can as a therapist. Sometimes if I have a question, even today I’ll go to another therapist that I think has more expertise in this area and get supervision.
RZ: Are there particular resources for therapists who want to learn more about how they can be better clinicians when addressing something like sexting?
LP: Yes. I’m not going to toot my own horn about this, but I’ve written an article that’s online about sexting and working with clinicians that I think is very helpful. It has a literature review of a couple of cases and ten guidelines for parents and therapists around this area. There are not recent and current books because it’s a fairly new topic, but I think it’s something we’re going to see more of in textbooks and articles. A lot of young psychologists’ dissertations have been done on sexting, and those are valuable if you can get a copy and read them.

Learn to Like Kids

RZ: What advice do you have for beginning clinicians treating kids and teens?
LP: The most important thing about doing this work is that you have to be knowledgeable about your own childhood and adolescence. You have to have thought about it, its impact on your own development, the issues that you might bring to the work, questions and preconceptions about it, etc. I encourage almost all therapists to have their own experience in therapy and to explore some of these issues.

Second, what helps the most in this work is really loving children and adolescents. Having a strong love for that age group or working toward it. Let’s say you don’t love it, you’re kind of afraid of it, maybe you’re going to work toward a passion in that area. You’re going to learn why you’re afraid of that age group and you’re going to try it out and get supervision with somebody who is really very good at it. It is a group that is fun to work with, is very challenging, and can really be a growth opportunity for you as a therapist. But I’d say try to develop a passion for it. Learn to like kids. Learn a lot about child and adolescent development. I think either being a parent or playing a role with your nieces and your nephews and other kids is really important.

Third, you’ve got to be able to work with parents. When I was younger and starting out one of my mistakes was that I thought I knew what it was like to be a parent long before I was a parent, and I was often angry with how parents treated kids. By now I’ve gone through decades, I’ve had my own kids and I see it differently. I see myself as a valuable resource to parents and I have great empathy for them.

Sometimes I have to do very difficult things with parents.
Once I had to climb through a glass window when a young mother was holding her new baby and was psychotic and trying to do something to the baby.
Once I had to climb through a glass window when a young mother was holding her new baby and was psychotic and trying to do something to the baby. The police were there and there was obviously a lot involved with this, but we had to save the baby and rip the baby out of the mother’s arms. So there are things that you often have to do in this work that are not very easy with parents and I think I’ve learned how to do those with concern and empathy as I’ve grown older and become an older therapist. But at the beginning I would say stay open to the work with parents. Keep your eyes open. Realize you don’t know everything.

Fourth, Don’t just accept a dogma. Try to integrate and construct your own idea of how to do the work. I talked earlier about the five perspectives I use but think about those that work best for you, yourself, as a therapist, and with the patients you’re working with.

Lastly I’d focus on the first session and developing a good alliance with kids relatively quickly. That first session is really important—how you connect to your passion, staying open, not being judgmental. Watching tapes of other therapists do first sessions can be really helpful, or being in a study group where you share information about your sessions with kids. Or even observing preschool teachers, who are often very good with kids, welcome kids into the classroom, integrate them, and get them playing and involved in activities. All of that adds to our abilities in that area.
RZ: What do you think has helped you become a better clinician?
LP: Years of experience have helped a lot. Reading widely has helped a lot. Having my own children has helped a lot. I have four—two step sons and two daughters—and I’ve learned from all of them. It’s not been easy.

Supervising younger therapists has also been really helpful, because I’ve listened to their problems and I really try to figure out what they’re going through, which keeps me more in touch with what it’s like to start this work. This is not easy work. There’s a lot to learn. We make a lot of mistakes in it, but we do a lot of good.

Maybe the last thing I’d say about it is I’ve been so impressed over all the years of working with adolescents how many return. They bring their own kids back for treatment. That keeps me in it more than anything—having the kids come back with their own children, and seeing that they’ve shared things I said to them. This is not everybody, of course, because I’ve had over the course of my career two adolescents who killed themselves. I’ve gone through a lot of difficult experiences, as have my patients, but I am impressed with this type of work and how much we can help kids if we stick with it.

It’s wonderful work that makes you feel very good about your life’s work at the end of it. I don’t see myself at the end of it, but I have talked with others, like James Anthony, a role model of mine who was a wonderful child therapist who worked with Anna Freud. When I was a very young student I had the opportunity of working with him in London. He loved the work and he still continues to teach me things—and he’s in his late ‘90s. He talks about having patients come back and treating the grandchildren of the children he saw. That is an amazing thing. It’s a chance to be very connected with others in life really.

Suicide

RZ: It sounds incredibly powerful to have had such a positive impact on someone as a teenager that they want to bring their own teenagers to you once they have had children. It also sounds incredibly powerful to have lost an adolescent client to suicide and I’m wondering if you feel comfortable talking about that a little bit.
LP: It’s a reason that a lot of therapists seek out supervision.
RZ: It’s admittedly my worst fear.
LP: I think it is for all of us. It’s not just the legal aspects of it. We all carry liability insurance and we’re worried about that part of it—but it’s also just the connection. I will say that I really remember these patients and their treatment very, very well because of going through this and thinking about it a lot. The first was a young man who killed himself when I was the director of the adolescent unit at UCSF.
RZ: How old was he?
LP: He was 19 and he had very severe bipolar disorder. He stopped his medicines when I went on vacation and then went into the woods and shot himself. I had arranged for somebody to cover me during this period of time. It was a short vacation, but still enough for this to happen. I’ve thought about it a great deal, of course. It’s changed the way I take vacations. I still take them, but I’m very alert, thinking about coverage and concern about these teenagers and children when I leave.

I spent several months working with his family. They had anticipated it more than I had and that surprised me. I went to the service and worked with them in a collaborative mode, which I did not charge them for, and they were very grateful. I’ve stayed in touch with them in some ways, though that happened I’d say roughly about 30 years ago now.

The other suicide was about 20 years ago and was a patient I’d worked with for years. She had a chronic psychotic condition. She was a very bright young woman and I had spent a lot of time with her. She had promised me that she would not harm herself until she was 30 years old, and then she killed herself not long after her 30th birthday. So she stayed alive working with me for years I think to try to get better, and we tried everything. Family therapy, medications—and it was clear that she was going to be living with a chronic psychotic illness that was incredibly painful for her.

I still think about her all the time. I think she helped me in many ways to understand that sometimes we work with individuals who are suffering so much that from their perspective, their life is really not worth living.
Sometimes we work with individuals who are suffering so much that from their perspective, their life is really not worth living.
We can discuss that with them, we can work to help them, many different things can be done, but there are limits to the work that we do. She left me a number of drawings she drew and painted. I think a lot about her family. I worked in much the same way that I described with the earlier boy. I met with her family and had contact with them for a long period of time. I still think about her all the time.
RZ: I bet. I think this is particularly important to talk about for young therapists who are, as you mentioned before, maybe put off entirely by cutting because they’re so scared of it, or don’t want to work with suicidal clients because they’re so afraid of losing a patient. It’s really valuable for me as a young therapist to hear you talk about having gone through this worst fear with a couple of your clients and not only did you get through it, but it made you a stronger clinician ultimately.
LP: I think ultimately it did. Of course, a big part of this was questioning what I had done with them and if I had made the right decisions.
RZ: Of course.
LP: Had I done something wrong?
RZ: That’s natural.
LP: I think any therapist who has had a patient suicide question their work. Families question their interactions with their children after suicide. We all think about it. I work with many teenagers, especially here in the Bay Area, who have had friends suicide, and the young teens question what they could have done to help their friend. It’s not only us as a group of therapists who question ourselves, but it’s really the world that comes forward to question itself around suicides.
RZ: It seems like that’s the first question people ask friends, family, and therapists alike: What could I have done? Could I have done something different or better? And I think that is a real challenge.
LP: It’s natural and appropriate to ask those questions and explore them, but it’s also important to really understand that there are limits in life to what we can do. It’s important in this line of work to talk about this aspect of it.
RZ: That’s a very realistic and compassionate perspective. Thank you for your time and for your wisdom.
LP: And thank you for your good questions, Rachel.

Psychotherapy with Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Clients

The Unbearable Otherness of Being

Imagine making your way in a world where your physical appearance makes others uncomfortable, anxious, confused, or uncertain about themselves. Your very presence may be perceived as a threat to another individual’s sense of self or sexual orientation. Everywhere you go, people stare at you—sometimes discreetly, often blatantly—leaving you very little room to walk unselfconsciously through life. The reactions you experience from others, while the result of ignorance and sometimes mere “curiosity,” do nonetheless harm you, for you are perceived as “Other.” At times, people’s reactions are more hostile, the result of conscious and unconscious fears about what it means to deviate from gender norms, and you may be verbally or physically assaulted just for being you.

This is what it’s like to be a gender nonconforming or transgender individual in today’s world. Though there is increasing awareness and tolerance around gender issues in certain small segments of American culture, the truth is, the level of misunderstanding, ignorance and prejudice that surrounds gender nonconforming people as they go about their lives has created a mental health crisis in our society. To illustrate the epidemic nature of this crisis, here are a few statistics from the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention’s 2014 Report, “Suicide Attempts among Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming Adults.”

In a pool of 6,000 self-identified transgender respondents:

  • 41% had attempted suicide
  • 60% were denied health care and/or refused treatment by their doctors.
  • 57% had been rejected by their families and were not in contact with them.
  • 69% had experienced homelessness.
  • 60-70% had experienced physical or sexual harassment by law enforcement officers.
  • 65% had experienced physical or sexual harassment at work.
  • 78% had experienced physical or sexual harassment in school.

For gender nonconforming individuals, the very nature of their sense of “self” lies in marked conflict to society’s gender identity “ideals” and social scripts. The resulting prejudice (transphobia and homophobia), whether explicit or covert, often manifests in forms of denial, invisibility, harassment, bullying or, in more extreme cases, assault and murder. As if this weren't enough, gender nonconforming and transgender persons may be further marginalized by their ethnic and racial identity, economic status, physical abilities, and age.

More subtle forms of discrimination exist, many occurring within the helping professions, including mental and medical health, nonprofit support services, legal and government institutions and public schools. Overpathologizing, misdiagnosing, maltreatment (including refusal of services), neglect and demonization are just some of the ways transgender individuals are routinely discriminated against within systems whose mission is to support and serve. These discriminatory practices are carried out by providers who fail to become educated and respect, protect, or provide treatment that is appropriate, impartial, and equal to the care given to other clients. Following, I will attempt to provide the nuts and bolts necessary for aspiring clinicians who wish to work in a culturally competent manner with their gender nonconforming and transgender clients.

Gender and Language

I often remind my colleagues, students and clients that we all have a gender identity and diverse manners in which we choose to engage in self-expression. As a cisgender female (i.e., I identify with the gender I was assigned at birth—female), I am conscious of the great extent to which I can embrace the everyday conveniences of being privileged. I am not ostracized for my gendered self, and no one questions my choice in using a public restroom. For gender nonconforming and transgender clients, this problem is known as the “bathroom issue.”

We practitioners need to become fluent and speak the same language as our gender nonconforming and transgender clients. In doing so, we demonstrate the intention of promoting respectful communication that expresses an intricate set of thoughts, ideas, and feelings associated with sex, gender, sexuality and identity. The language used among this diverse community is multifaceted because finding words to articulate complex notions of identity is arduous. In fact, the youth in my office frequently inform me, a gender specialist, how some of the language and concepts I use are now outdated. Nonetheless, staying current with the language being used within the gender nonconforming community is an important part of being not only a culturally competent therapist, but an empathically attuned therapist. Such language literacy also enables mental health professionals to understand concepts, organize thoughts, foster discussion, exchange ideas, and support the community in the least confusing, shameful, and harmful way. Familiarity with the community’s positive expressions of self and identity not only helps clients feel understood, but ensures that therapists don’t rely on clients to educate them—an all-too-familiar experience for cultural minorities.

The following list presents a very general overview of how we come to understand the meaning of sex, gender/gender identity, gender roles, and sexuality for our gender diverse clients and ourselves. It’s important to remember that these terms are constantly evolving within the gender nonconforming, transgender, queer or transsexual communities, as well as by the practitioners who intend to help them. Gender nonconforming and transgender identities include but are not limited to: Transgender (TG), female-to-male (FTM), male-to-female (MTF), transgirl or transboy, girl/woman (natal boy), boy/man (natal girl), they/them, bigender, gender fluid, agender, drag king or queen, gender queer, transqueer, queer, two-spirit, cross-dresser, androgynous. The terms FTM (female-to-male) and MTF (male-to-female) encompass a spectrum or continuum from those who identify as primarily female or male, to those who identify somewhere in the middle or both (e.g., queer). Between these two posts or “extremes” (female and male) lie most gender nonconforming individuals.

The sexual orientation of gender nonconforming and transgender clients is a separate identity and should never be presumed or assumed. It refers to the gender one is typically romantically and sexuality attracted to (e.g., homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual/pansexual, polysexual, asexual etc).

Becoming Gendered

It’s important to think about how we become “gendered.” In part we do this by the way we organize and construct language. Most of the English language is “gendered,” constructed in a way that makes it difficult to deviate from strictly binary conceptions of male and female. We tend to acknowledge and refer to one another through pronouns, and consequently become gendered in our relational experiences. For example, when we frequent our local coffee shop, “Excuse me, Sir…Mam…May I have a large coffee?” Here is a simple example of how we have already ascribed gender to a complete stranger.

As clinicians, we need to learn to ask and address our clients appropriately. More importantly, we need to develop the capacity to become conscious of our own gendered ways. Specifically, we need to ask all our clients about their gender identity and development as well as their gender pronoun preferences. The youth that show up in my office often challenge this binary model most of us are so accustomed to, and request to be referred to as: ze, hir, one, or the plural “they” “their,” “them.” Interestingly, I often find myself arguing with my cisgender colleagues, who get caught up in grammar policing, about the importance of honoring the self-identification of these clients. The English language is constantly evolving, after all, and human and civil rights struggles play an important part in its evolution. At the same time, it’s important to not make any assumptions about people’s identification preferences. Plenty of gender nonconforming or transgender clients prefer to be referenced by conventional pronouns such as “him” or “her” because it feels congruent with their internal identity.

People tend to be preoccupied with gender long before a child is born. “Do you know your baby’s sex?” is a constant question for pregnant parents. Sex, in this case, refers strictly to the external genitalia of the child rather than their potential internal gendered self. “Gender is assigned prenatally and from that moment it determines—and severely limits—acceptable gender expressions and desires.” Our early training begins with our parents’ color selection for our nurseries, the names we are given, and the activities we are encouraged to enjoy, and because we want their love and approval, we emulate what is desired of us. We internalize the societal roles, behaviors and beliefs ascribed to us by the culture around us (including that of our family) and may not know that any other way of being is possible. Boys get blue items, are given toy trucks and guns, and are prompted to be assertive and confident. Girls wear pink, are given dolls to play with, and are encouraged to be empathic and compromising. These behaviors, beliefs and customs are socially constructed—situated in the context of historical time, social class, ethnicity, culture, power, politics, physiology, and psychology—but they are deeply entrenched in our psyches and ways of being.

Clinical Practice

As the presence and experience of transgender people has entered both public consciousness and mental health facilities, clinicians are now beginning to think about transgender/gender issues. However most clinicians are not trained to identify clinical themes prevalent for transgender and gender nonconforming individuals, and consequently misunderstand their mental health and their global treatment needs. Our traditional training fails to address gender and sexuality development for transgender persons from a nonpathological perspective. In addition, negative countertransference from providers and institutions is common and lends itself to discriminatory practices or, worse yet, thoughtless analysis of clients’ needs that may lead to irreversible medical interventions. Common feelings and attitudes for inexperienced clinicians toward these clients may include anxiety, fear, disgust, anger, confusion, morbid curiosity, and rejection, all of which can severely compromise the therapeutic relationship, our ability to help, and an individual’s identity development and transition process.

The journey of self-discovery for gender nonconforming and transgender individuals is laborious and often lonely because, simply put, the desire to become more congruent with their “True-Self” in body and mind may require a shift in physical identity. Children tend to be the most disadvantaged in this phase of life as they may be required to repress their desires to play with “cross” gendered toys and are left feeling ashamed to admit their favorite colors and activities (e.g., the boy who is prohibited from playing with dolls and having a pink bedroom).

As gender nonconforming individuals become more psychologically distressed they often feel the need to have a more congruent experience of their internal and external selves. They may need to first embrace a social transition—choosing an alternative name that reinforces their internal identified gender, dressing in a stereotypical fashion that supports their gender identification and engaging in “cross” gendered behaviors. In my clinical experience, when given the permission and support, gender nonconforming children and adults tend to become less anxious, depressed and gender dysphoric as a result.

However, some gender nonconforming and transgender individuals have a persistent need to modify or transition the physical attributes of their body to the opposite of their ascribed birth gender. This process is often too confusing for most people to comprehend, and is especially difficult because one’s gender expression and behaviors are typically the initial identifying marker for organizing one’s relational experiences among others. The clients with whom I work often desire bodily change not only to feel more congruent with their internal self, but with the hope of being experienced relationally as they truly are. For example, my transgender FTM clients use heavy-duty binders to flatten and contain their breasts so that they will not be mis-recognized as tomboys or lesbians. This experience of congruence tends to reduce gender dysphoric intrapersonal and interpersonal experiences. Our transgender clients need additional support around the use of physical and medical interventions, so it’s all the more important that we be well-educated and sensitive to these issues.

Gender Dysphoria

The new addition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V), released in May of 2013, has removed the diagnosis of Gender Identity Disorder and has re-classified Gender Dysphoria as a clinical condition that gender nonconforming, transgender and transsexual clients may experience. Gender dysphoric symptoms arise when one’s self-concept and expressed gender in relation to their ascribed gender is “incongruent.” The psychological distress that results from these internal and external conflicts can lead to dysphoria, depression and a host of other conditions commonly experienced by transgender or gender nonconforming individuals. This turmoil is often created by internalizing the “gaze” of the world around them, i.e., they experience a great deal of psychological discomfort due to being publicly misgendered. Yet, it is also important to note that many gender nonconforming and transgender clients do not experience Gender Dsyphoria. They tend not to make it to our consulting rooms.

What of the clients who do end up in our offices? If a gender nonconforming or a transgender client and his or her family seek our support, are we available to console them, educate and advocate on their behalf, and offer culturally informed and sensitive treatment to the client and the family without getting caught up in our own agendas? How do we determine whether a child is an appropriate candidate for social transition, hormone blockers or even cross-hormone interventions? How do we determine whether the child is an appropriate candidate for genital reassignment surgery, which is often irreversible? How do we think about their fertility options and future family plans? How do we help a transgender child assigned female at birth who is in distress after his first menstrual period? Some of these interventions may seem radical, but if we fail to educate and train ourselves adequately around these issues, we can actively cause harm to our clients. Self-harm (body mutilation), substance abuse, homelessness, suicidal ideation or even suicide attempts can result.

A number of other conditions emerge in gender nonconforming children, particularly when their families aren’t able to provide the support and unconditional love that is necessary for them to thrive. These include adjustment issues, depression and anxiety disorders, trauma, substance dependency, and characterological pathology. Clinicians must be aware that families, too, must be educated about transgender issues, learn skills for coping with the child’s gender change, and be able to mourn and seek social and emotional support for themselves. And, of course, many clients may have co-occurring conditions, such as Autism spectrum disorders, that are beyond the scope of this article.

When treating a client with a gender nonconforming or transgender identity, clinicians may find themselves involved in a few situations unique to these clients. They may be asked to assess and substantiate a client’s preparedness for various biomedical interventions—usually involving the Real-Life Test/ Real Life Experience or a Gender Readiness Assessment—which involves encouraging a gender nonconforming client to begin living in their self-determined gender role and then assessing the impact of that experience. For example, some clients might experience a reduction in gender dysphoric distress, while others—say those whose family or community context is hostile to their nonconformity—may experience an increase in symptoms. Though this assessment is no longer required by the Standards of Care for the Health of Transsexual, Transgender, and Gender Nonconforming People published by The World Professional Association for Transgender Health, many medical providers and insurance agencies require it for coverage.

Bridging the Gap

A transgender or gender nonconforming individual’s psyche and the issues they face are very complex—and at times, convoluted—with complications in the psychological, medical, legal, and social realms. Because of this complexity, and the severity of their suffering, it should not be left solely in the hands of clients to educate their clinicians, nor should these clients be put in the vulnerable position of relying on their clinician’s empathy to determine whether they will receive the care they require. An ignorant clinician who responds negatively to such clients—even if only at an unconscious level—can cause untold harm and make it that much more difficult for clients to seek the help they so desperately need. We need to take responsibility for becoming educated and seek guidance from gender specialists—trained providers who can inform clinicians about transgender history and integrate traditional psychoanalytic and psychodynamic perspectives with queer theory.

Diane Ehrensaft, PhD, director of Mental Health at the Child and Adolescent Gender Center in San Francisco, and her colleagues are doing groundbreaking work in this area, bridging the gap between developmental, biological, queer and psychoanalytic theory using what she calls a “Gender Affirmative Model.” She draws upon Winnicott’s ideas of “true gender self” and “false gender self” in formulating her notion of gender creativity to better understand gender nonconforming and transgender children and adults. Turning prevailing wisdom on its head, she argues against labeling gender nonconforming invidividuals as dysphoric and instead views their varied gender expressions as fluid, dynamically intertwined between biology, development, socialization, and cultural context in time. Gender is not binary and may change over lifespan.

Understanding the issues that gender nonconforming clients face creates the possibility of an authentic and empathically attuned treatment that can be a true corrective emotional experience. Having the competence and confidence to administer a Real-Life/Gender Readiness Assessment can make all the difference in our patients’ lives, allowing them to socially transition and integrate their gender identity with other aspects of themselves. Thinking of the client as whole is instrumental to their overall well-being.

Not until we as clinicians grapple with our own gender identity, behaviors, and attitudes can we begin to utilize our assessment skills in developing diagnostic impressions, identify and observe our countertransference feelings, and implement treatment interventions that will lead to a balanced internal and external sense of self that improves a client’s overall quality of life. I encourage all my fellow colleagues to become more cognizant of the their own identities, values, and beliefs, and particularly to confront their fears and prejudices when working with transgender individuals. We must become mindful of what we ask—and do not ask—in our clinical interviews.

We also mustn’t assume that gender nonconforming clients are coming to us because of their gender or sexual identity and be open in creating our hypthotheses about our clients’ needs and desires. Let us accurately reflect the true clinical condition with which our client’s struggle. As I noted at the beginning of this article: imagine making your way in the world where your very sense of being makes others anxious, confused, and uncertain of themselves. By becoming culturally competent, we will be better able to provide an empathic approach to treatment that considers a range of gender nonconforming expressions and behaviors as healthy, as an authentic gender identity and bodily presentation, albeit variant from societal expectations. Gender deviation is not pathological, and if you think it is, you’ve got some work to do. On the other hand, it’s important to not be reflexively “progressive” and mindlessly support a transition that is not first deeply understood clinically.

Reflections on the theory of gender development, diagnostic conditions, and clinical treatment implications must include the role of the clinician as a gatekeeper to another’s self-determined gendered body, heart, and mind. The exploration of the transference-countertransference relationship is paramount, regardless of whether you are a case manager, a medical doctor, or a psychotherapist. Let us play with gender, and in our journey, discover the kaleidoscope of possibilities for clients as well as for ourselves. As providers, it is our social responsibility to change the role of the clinician from a gatekeeper to one who can form a therapeutic relationship that offers a way for clients to integrate their sense of self in relationship to the other that can hopefully be emulated in the outside world. A solid sense of self is likely to build confidence and self-esteem that will foster healthier relationships and diminish uncertainty and fear, decreasing the risk of self-harm and—hopefully—violence toward gender nonconforming and transgendered individuals.

Recommendations for Clinical Practice

  • Ask your clients about their gender identity and preferred pronoun. Explore their internal experience and how it impacts them interpersonally.
  • Foster multiple and integrated identity development: race, ethnicity, gender, class, sexuality, profession etc.
  • Educate parents about the importance of not pathologizing the gender expression of their children.
  • Treatment interventions should include allowing children the space to explore their gender expression, family education and support, as well as parental support to mourn the loss of their fantasies about their birth child's ascribed gender.
  • Collaborate treatment efforts with the providers involved, e.g., social workers, endocrinologist for hormone blockers and hormone treatment, family therapist, and treatment team staff.
  • Remember: Gender nonconformity is a natural expression of human development and experience.
  • Do No Harm: Seek consultation from a gender specialist. Monitor countertransference and refer out if you are not able to act fully in the best interest of your client.

Clinical Resources

  1. Report of the APA Task Force on Gender Identity and Gender Variance.
  2. Standards of Care for the Health of Transsexual, Transgender and Gender Nonconforming People, Version 7.
  3. Achieving Optimal Gender Identity Integration For Transgender Female-to-Male Adult Patients: An Unconventional Psychoanalytic Guide For Treatment (2008), Karisa Barrow.
  4. Gender Born, Gender Made: Raising Healthy Gender-nonconforming Children (2011), Diane Ehrensaft.
  5. The Transgender Child: A Handbook for Families and Professionals (2008), Stephanie Brill & Rachel Pepper.

Deconstructing Gender: Self-Exploration Exercise

  • What is your own gender identity?
  • How old were you when realized you were a “girl” or a “boy?”
  • Who and what made this clear to you?
  • Did you agree with your parents clothing choices for you as a child?
  • What activities did/do you enjoy?
  • Have you expressed your own gender identity differently over the course of your life?
  • How do you feel about your body? Your genitalia?
  • What messages have you received about your gender and from whom (e.g. parents, media, religion etc.)? Were you “policed” by others around your identity, gender roles and social practices or body?
  • How has your gender shaped your beliefs, social engagements and practices?
  • What have you been allowed/encouraged to do because of your gender identity and what limitations have you faced (e.g. social sanctions/promotions)?

Paradise Lost: When Clients Commit Suicide

Becky

“May I speak to Becky, please?” I asked the female voice that had answered the phone.

“Who’s calling?”

“Dr. Joyce,” I replied.

“Her therapist?” she asked. I knew I had to protect my client’s confidentiality, so I couldn’t answer that question. I began to feel uneasy.

“I’m sorry," she said softly. "Becky killed herself last night.”

I felt as though underwater, my voice garbled, when I finally managed to say, “Okay, thanks for telling me.”

Becky’s gone? My patient committed suicide? I wandered into my living room, dazed. I stared out the picture window into the courtyard where the heavenly bamboo were growing. I hadn’t noticed how they had reddened, with berries forming, signaling the start of winter. The liquid amber tree was bare, dried leaves cluttering the bed. I need to clean up those dead leaves, I thought.

I looked at the clock. It was 9:45 and I was to meet my husband at our new house at 11:00. On my way over, I began to reflect on my last therapy session with Becky, a mere six days earlier. She had been struggling with depression, but she did not seem more deeply depressed than before, nor did she mention suicide. The only clue I had was a casual comment made towards the end of the session.

“I really don’t know what I’m going to do now. I thought about the Peace Corps,” Becky said. “But I need to be close to a therapist and psychiatrist.”

“Yes. And I wonder if being far away from Matt would also be hard,” I said. Becky was having difficulty recovering from a breakup with Matt.

“Well, that too,” she said. Then she changed the subject.

“I like having more time now that school is over,” she said. “I’ve been reading The Inferno.” I didn’t follow up on her comment and she moved on to a new topic.

At the end of the session, I escorted her to the door and, for some reason, I felt compelled to do “doorknob therapy,” unusual for me. As I opened the door, I said, “Maybe you might try reading something less…less intense than the Inferno?“

“And that is when she beamed that smile, forever imprinted on my psyche, as last looks must always be.”

“Less intense? You mean, like, Paradise Lost?” A wide, brilliant smile. Then she exited down the hallway.

As I later found out, four days later she walked in on Matt with another woman and then drove herself to the emergency room because she was feeling suicidal. Six hours later, she was discharged and ten hours later she was dead. I’ll bet she flashed that same smile to the hospital staff before they let her go.

My husband, Joe, was already at the 1911 arts and crafts house that we had bought three weeks earlier. We were full of optimism and hope for rescuing this gem from neglect, but we hadn’t yet moved in.

“Marian, where do you want to put the bathroom sink? If we put it here,” Joe said, pointing to the back, “there’ll be more room for the closet. Glynn needs to know.” Glynn was our contractor.

I found myself pondering the ideal location of the sink. I imagined all the alternatives and finally settled on placing the sink towards the back.

Then Joe and Glynn were at it again, arguing about where to put the dishwasher. I tuned them out as I thought about the subtext of Becky’s Inferno/Paradise Lost comments. Had she tried to tell me: “I am bad, a sinner. I want to die and I will probably burn in hell”? How had I missed that reference?

Some people think that being a therapist is easy. “All you do is just sit there and listen,” they often say. But sometimes the client’s thoughts swim deep underwater, like fish that surface only briefly. Blink and you will have missed the sighting. Fortunately, clients will find creative ways to draw my attention to what they want me to hear until I finally “get it.” But I wouldn’t have that opportunity with Becky. I was left with so many unanswered questions: Should I have detected something that last session? Was there something I could have done? Why did she do it?

The 1:00 Spot

The next day I opened my planner and saw Becky’s name in the 1:00 spot. I stared at it for a moment. When I wrote that in, Becky was sitting in the room with me. And now she is gone. What was I supposed to do with her name? Crossing it off seemed disrespectful. I decided to leave it alone.

My 10:00 appointment was Sherry, a woman who had been going through a particularly rough patch lately. At 10:10 when she still hadn’t arrived, I began to panic. Where is she? I could feel my heart pounding. I frantically flipped through my planner to find her phone number.

“Hello,” she said. I sighed with relief.

“Hi, Sherry. It’s Dr. Joyce,” I tried to sound calm. “I had you down for a 10:00. Is everything okay?”

“Yeah, I’m on my way. My mother called just as I was leaving and I couldn’t get her off the phone. I’ll be right there.”

After our session, I hurried out of the office to make my appointment with a seasoned psychologist I had sought out to help me with my cases before Becky’s suicide.

“Well, a lot has happened since I made the appointment,” I said.

“Oh really?” she replied. Then she got out of her chair and stood up. “You don’t mind if I stand while we talk, do you? I have a bad back.”

I didn’t know whether to stand up with her, which felt awkward, or remain seated, which made me feel like I was a child. I chose the latter, and proceeded to look up at her intense gaze and recount the story of my patient’s suicide. “I felt shame as I described Becky’s case, her depression, my treatment plan, her ultimate giving up. I waited for her to offer some words of concern or encouragement.”

“Well, why don’t we go over your case session by session so we can find out what went wrong?” she said instead.

All I heard was “wrong.” Did she mean to say that if I had done things differently, Becky would still be alive? The thought of putting the entire year and a half that I treated Becky under the microscope terrified me.

“We could do that,” I said, but I knew I would never perform that “psychological autopsy” with her.

A few weeks later, some colleagues and I went out for a drink at a rooftop terrace overlooking San Diego bay. I began to relax for the first time in weeks as I watched the planes float by at practically eye level. This respite was suddenly interrupted by an emergency call from a client. I found a private corner and spent a few minutes calming her down.

“Sorry, client in crisis,” I said, returning to the table. “Seems like I’ve had a tough caseload lately.”

“You know, Marian,” Gita said, “that’s why we screen our clients and choose them carefully.” Gita knew about my client’s recent suicide.

“I guess I’m not very good at predicting that stuff,” I finally said.

Afterwards, I stopped by one of my colleague’s offices to get a book she was lending me. I found myself studying an abstract painting on her wall that I had never really looked at before.

“That looks like a nasty dragon,” I said. “I never noticed that before.”

She gave me a very concerned look and said, ““Marian, I think this suicide has traumatized you. You are seeing dragons and danger everywhere.”” At first I sighed—she is a classical psychoanalyst and injects meaning into everything—but I could see her point.

“It’s just that I keep blaming myself and I can’t stop visualizing my client’s last moments. I can’t let it go.”

“This is not your fault. You couldn’t have known she was going to do that. We can’t stop someone from killing themselves if they really want to,“ she said.

But I had a hard time believing this. Can’t we stop them? Shouldn’t we know how to do this? Isn’t that just an excuse therapists use to get themselves off the hook?

I was very careful about revealing Becky’s suicide to others. Thinking back on the entire experience, that isolation was the most pernicious aspect of the ordeal. I now realize that most people could not fathom how wounding it is to lose a patient. The slightest nuance or tone of blame from an esteemed colleague could ruin my day.

I had shared my experience with a friend from graduate school whom I thought would be understanding. He responded flippantly, “What did you do wrong now, Marian?” I knew his sense of humor. He didn't mean that, but there it was again… my fault.

The Lawsuit

Shortly after the suicide, I contacted my professional liability insurance company to inform them of the suicide. They asked me a few questions regarding Becky’s case: age, employment status, relationship with parents and so on.

At the end, the person said, “It’s very likely the parents will sue you for wrongful death. Given what you have told me, they will need someone to blame. Please write up a summary of the incident and let us know if you are contacted regarding a lawsuit.”

Most therapists I know live in fear of being sued. I was no exception. And, of course, that is exactly what happened. Approximately three months later I received a request for medical records from an attorney representing the family.

“You must release these records, Dr. Joyce,” she said when I called her.

“I will be happy to as soon as I receive a release from the representative of the deceased’s estate,” I replied, referring to the notes from my conversation with the insurance company.

“You know that her parents can get these records. Your refusal is just causing additional emotional distress,” she said. “I had been warned that the attorney would attempt to control me through intimidation. I thought I was ready for this, but I noticed my hand was shaking.”

“Are you giving me legal advice then, about who holds the privilege?” I said as firmly as I could under the circumstances.

“Alright, then, I will have the parents send you a release,” she finally conceded.

I received the release a day before I was about to leave for vacation, so I wrote to the attorney to say that I would respond to her request when I returned.

When I got back, I was welcomed by more correspondence from the attorney’s office threatening to lodge a complaint with the Board of Psychology. I am able to smile now at my naïveté then, to think that the friendly letter I wrote her before vacation would keep the pit bull from biting.

My insurance company assigned me an attorney before the lawsuit was even filed in order to intercept the badgering correspondence. My attorney arranged to come to my office to meet me in person, dressed very casually in jeans and cowboy boots. It was Friday, but his attire did not inspire confidence.

“So, how long have you been in this office?" he asked me. "I love this part of San Diego.”

"Oh, I've been here for seven years. Yeah, it's great to be so close to the park." He did not seem concerned, which worried me immensely. Perhaps he was trying to set me at ease, but his nonchalant approach was far from reassuring to me.

"Do you want to go over the details of the case?" I said. Why did I feel like the only one ready to work? Don’t you see the danger I am in, I thought. Don’t you understand what is at stake?

"We've got time," he said, "This is sort of a get-to-know you meeting. I already read the report you sent to the insurance company and I think we have a great case. Nothing to worry about."

About a month later, I received a letter, a “90 Day Notice Intent to Sue a Health Care Provider.” My attorney had warned me it was coming, but I was unprepared for the false allegations justifying the lawsuit, written up in a short paragraph, all set in boldface. It didn’t look like a carefully crafted legal document, more like a rushed memo by an employee who would later regret having written it. Like all of the attorney’s previous correspondence, it lacked proper punctuation and spacing—no period after Dr., no comma after however, no spacing between paragraphs. She doesn’t follow the rules, I thought. She doesn’t care about them. This frightened me.

A 90-day waiting period. So I have the summer off, I thought. No more letters in white or gray envelopes or upsetting voicemails from attorneys. It sounded heavenly. I can get a lot of house projects done in 90 days.

I eagerly returned to my current project painting the upstairs bedroom. I opened the can of Benjamin Moore Philadelphia Cream paint and stirred it until smooth and blended. I turned on the radio and the Westerfield trial was on. In February, David Westerfield, a 50-something single man, sexually brutalized and murdered Danielle Van Damm, a 7-year old girl who lived next door to him.

The defense attorney was cross examining Brenda Van Damm, the mother, who had been at a local bar with her friends, drinking, dancing, and smoking marijuana the night of the murder, returning home at 2 am.

“All of the doors were a little bit open,” Brenda said, describing the children’s rooms and then explained that she closed them that night when she returned home.

“Did you look inside?”

“No,” she said quietly.

“Why not?” What is the correct answer to that accusatory question, I thought. It’s going to come out defensive. He’s making her look negligent and wanton, obviously his intent.

“Because when I got—when I went upstairs to tell Damon,” she said, referring to her husband, “that I was home, I asked him how…how the tuck-in went, how everything went that night, if anyone asked for me, and he said that everything had gone fine, that they all had brushed their teeth and been read to and no one asked for me.”

As the defense attorney continued grilling her about her alcohol consumption that night, I felt my stomach tightening, my anger forming. Even if she had been too lax, she wasn’t responsible for her child’s murder. Her husband was home with her daughter. A mother is allowed a night out once in awhile.

I then imagined myself on the stand for the wrongful death of my client:

“Well, Dr. Joyce, did you ask your client if she was suicidal the session before she killed herself?”

“No.”

“And why not?”

“Because she didn’t appear to be more distressed than usual.”

“Than usual? What was her usual distress?”

“She was depressed.”

“And you didn’t think depression was cause enough to inquire about her suicidal thoughts?”

There really was no way to answer these questions. If I said I didn’t detect her distress, I appeared incompetent, but if I said I recognized her distress and did nothing, I was negligent. I’m screwed, I thought. I got down off the step ladder, set the paint brush down, and turned the radio off.

How was I supposed to live with all this uncertainty? I realized that I was deluding myself about a “summer off.” I decided to call my attorney, hoping he could help.

“Did you get the 90-day intent to sue letter?” he asked.

“Yes. It’s a bunch of lies. Where is she getting this stuff?”

“Don’t worry,” he said. “It’s always like this. I told you, you are low on the totem pole of people to sue in this case. It is what it is.” Once again, his cavalier approach was not reassuring

“Hey, have you been watching the Van Dam trial?” I said, changing the subject. “I had to turn it off. I don’t think I can get on the stand like that,” I said.

He laughed. “Relax, Marian. It’s not going to be anything like that. ” I thought of my dentist, needle poised over my gaping mouth: “This won’t hurt a bit.”

That phone call didn’t help, I thought after I hung up the phone. So instead, I popped in a U2 CD, turned up the volume, and went back to cutting in.

The “summons,” an official version of the “intent to sue” letter, arrived in September. I knew that all the allegations were false, but I didn’t trust that the truth would be sufficient. By then, six months into my dealings with the legal world, I was beginning to understand that the lawsuit was solely about money, how much the plaintiff’s attorney could get for her clients, how little the insurance company could pay on my behalf. “My attorney” was really working for the liability insurance company, not for me.

My attorney planned a lengthy phone appointment to prepare me for my deposition. As usual, he was his upbeat self.

“You just need to answer the questions,” he instructed me. “Don’t offer any information that the attorney doesn’t ask for,” he said.

“What if she asks me something way off-base? Will you make an objection?” I was already feeling tense. I found myself drawing spirals on my notepad.

“I can object, but you still have to answer the question. It’s not like in court, because there’s no judge,” he explained. “Don’t worry, Marian. She’s not going to ask you anything you can’t answer.”

I felt dread after our conversation. I went out to get the mail and I brightened when I saw the envelope from Bradbury and Bradbury, a company that makes exact reproductions of arts and crafts wallpaper. I spread the samples out and compared them. I liked the one with a delicate leaf pattern, and the accompanying border with vines and red berries. I called and ordered ten rolls for the dining room, and then impulsively added three of the rose pattern for the powder room.

When people ask me today how I survived a wrongful death lawsuit, I tell them that I threw myself into the renovation of my home. I wanted desperately to bring this house back to life because I could not resuscitate my client.

At the deposition, I finally saw the pit bull in person. She was a stout middle-aged woman with two inch grey roots on her dyed red hair. The attorneys for the hospital, psychiatrist, and emergency room doctor were there as well, dressed in dark suits. We sat around an oval table. I was at the far end seated in front of the plaintiff’s attorney and the court reporter was to my right.

“The plaintiff’s attorney grilled me regarding my credentials for thirty minutes. Then she worked her way line-by-line through the treatment notes.” After four hours, we took a lunch break and then she fired off detailed questions about the week of the suicide.

Afterwards, I met my husband for drinks at the Torrey Pines Lodge, a sprawling, gorgeous building in the Arts and Crafts style of architecture, like our house. I gravitated to the fire in the lobby bar.

“I love the wood tones in this trim,” I said, referring to the honey-colored wood on the fireplace. “It’s so warm, not like our dark mahogany.”

“Hey,” Joe said. I knew that “hey” meant he was coming up with an idea, which usually meant more work. “Let’s take down our wainscoting and trim and plane it. Then we can stain it a lighter, warmer tone.”

Normally I would have dissuaded Joe from such a time-consuming project. But I liked the idea of transforming the dark and dirty into something fresh and light.

“Great idea,” I said. “Let’s do it. It’ll make such a difference.”

That project involved sanding, staining and shellacking yards of wood, a project that outlasted the lawsuit.

After much haggling, the attorneys finally agreed on a settlement amount, which was shared among the defendants. Because it was a settlement, there was no admission of guilt by anyone. That should have set my mind at ease, but by then I knew the case was only about the money.

Grief and Healing

About five months later, I attended a course on clinical hypnosis given by a UCLA professor. He was demonstrating a particular projective device in which clients project unconscious material onto an imagined screen.

"I want you to get comfortable and close your eyes," he said in a soothing voice. I opened one eye to see if everyone was following instructions. They were, so I decided to give this a try.

He began to take us down a spiral staircase and count backwards from ten. When he made the suggestion my arm might lift up, it did. Once established that we were in a hypnotic state, he described the screen where my movie would play out.

“You are sitting in a dark movie theatre facing the screen. Let yourself go and watch the movie that unfolds on the screen.”

It took a minute to see anything on my screen. But then cartoon characters started dancing on a stage and then my sister appeared. The next movie was of my husband calling me from a train and then dancing with me once I boarded. Both movies were joyful.

I suppose I could analyze these for deeper meaning, but what happened next took me by surprise. I began to sob. I knew it was about Becky. I hadn’t yet cried like that about her death, about losing my client. I could finally let myself feel sad that she would never get that rewarding job she desired, or be free of her attachment to Matt to find the love of her life, or even be able to bury her parents.

It was only after that pivotal moment under hypnosis, when I wasn’t looking for it, really, that I was at last able to move past the feelings of guilt, blame, shame, and anger at the lawsuit.

The lawsuit settled, the house renovations finished, Joe and I decided to celebrate with a housewarming party.

Guests gushed over the house as they filed in.

“I can’t believe what you did with this house! Wow! How did you get rid of that dark stain?” a friend asked.

Joe and I looked at each other and smiled.

“It was a big job,” Joe said. “I wouldn’t recommend it for everyone.” I thought back to the evening after the deposition in front of the Torrey Pines fire. I guess we would have never done it if I hadn’t had the lawsuit, I thought. Then it struck me: I was beginning to gain some distance and perspective.

The friend from graduate school whose remark months earlier had so unsettled me came up to me.

“I meant to ask you about your lawsuit. Did it work out okay?” he said.

“Yes, it’s all settled. There shouldn’t be any repercussions,” I said.

“I’m really glad to hear that. I often wondered how you were doing. And I don’t think I ever told you I was sorry that you lost your client. I think I was a little afraid of the whole thing, to tell you the truth.”

“Thanks for that.” I said.

Regarding my work, I have once again recovered my enthusiasm, but it is tempered. I now know that anyone is capable of losing hope at times and even though I listen carefully to the subtle messages my clients share with me, sometimes they choose to keep parts of themselves completely concealed. I know my limitations and that I can’t predict or know what a person will do. And I have to live with that uncertainty and with the consequences that may ensue.
 

 ———————
 

If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call or text 988 or chat 988lifeline.org

Encounters with Suicide: A Psychotherapist Remembers Not to Forget

Forgetting Begins

Back when phones had cords and I was sixteen, my mother’s friend called our house one afternoon and told me that she had a shotgun across her lap and asked me if I could give her one good reason why she shouldn’t blow her head off with it. I was alone in the house because I had not joined my family that year on our annual summer vacation in Maine. Instead, I was flirting with an eating disorder by trying to live on iceberg lettuce with low-fat blue cheese dressing and getting up each morning at 4:30 to ride my bike two miles to the Holiday Inn just outside town where I was working as a waitress on the breakfast shift. So there I was, all by myself, trying really hard to think of the right good reason. Already I was imagining the explosion roaring through the headset, the result of my inadequate and faulty answer.

I am quite certain that I did not give her one good reason, but I must have said something that furthered the conversation, because I remember her saying, “Do you know what it is like to live with a man who hasn’t touched you in years?”

Well, no.

I think we talked for a while. I tried to imagine what a compassionate adult would say to her, and tried saying it. I offered her my mother’s phone number in Maine. There was not a telephone in the cabin, but the owners could deliver a message. My mother’s friend refused. “Oh no, I couldn’t bother her on vacation.” I was thinking that bothering my mother on vacation was the best possible idea under the circumstances, but clearly it was not going to happen. My mother’s friend told me that she was feeling desperately lonely now that her youngest child had gone to college. She told me her husband of thirty years was having an affair with a woman in her twenties. I did not want to know any of this, at least not first hand.

Gradually she came out of herself and seemed to remember that I was the kid her daughter used to babysit for. “I shouldn’t be saying all this to you,” she said. I couldn’t disagree. I made her promise that she would not shoot herself.

“You don’t need to worry,” she reassured me. “I’ll be fine. It has been a really bad couple of weeks, but I’ll be fine. My neighbor will be home from work soon. I’ll go see her.” I felt a lack of sincerity in this. “It is quite a distance from blowing your head off to visiting a neighbor, and I was quite sure our conversation had not traversed it.” But there was nothing I could do, so I said, “I’ll tell my mother to call you when she gets home.”

“Don’t call her,” she said. “Don’t bother your mother. I’ll be fine.”

I hung up the phone and put this conversation so thoroughly out of my mind that I nearly forgot to mention it to my mother when she returned from vacation, and when I did tell her I found myself experiencing a sort of delicacy and shame that precluded any mention of the shotgun. I suspect I did not even mention the threat of suicide. I can’t quite remember, but I imagine myself saying that her friend seemed unhappy.

Forgetting Returns

I remembered this incident only recently when I was sitting in session with a client who was telling me about how she was going to buy a gun in order to shoot herself. This client, now in midlife, has been suicidal to varying degrees since she was sixteen, so her thoughts were not new, but the method she was proposing was far more likely to be lethal than anything she had considered before. At one level, I was working hard to assess her immediate safety and devise a plan. At another I was aware that I was feeling oddly wooden, disconnected, and ashamed. I knew I was irritated with her, as well as anxious. She is coy, deceitful, challenging—there is a way in which she teases me with the drama of her death, a drama she has been crafting with loving care for decades, a narrative in which her final explosive act of rage sears all of us who know her. It is a story she caresses like a beloved, spoiled pet, but also one that frightens her, and I have found over the years that she is readily diverted by small gestures of empathy on my part, or that she inserts her own delaying tactics, such as the need for a pretty death dress, or her plan to be honest on the permit application for the gun regarding the purpose of her purchase.

What she will not do is explore how this story serves her, what its purposes are in her life, what it helps her to avoid. I struggle to find some way toward this conversation, but as often happens, my own thinking is muddled by anger, anxiety, and that odd sense of shame. The only question I seem to be able to articulate clearly to myself is, “Will she kill herself now?” I believe she would not, and extract a promise to that effect. The promise comes easily, almost too easily, and prompts a new discomfort: I worry she is lying because, after many years of experience, she knows what would happen if she acknowledges an active plan. In the end, we contact her husband together, and afterward I let her leave.

And when she leaves, I forget completely—not about her, but about her thoughts of suicide. At our next session, fortunately before I have a chance to reveal my forgetfulness, she reminds me, but I forget again anyway. Or maybe forgetting is not quite the right word. It just seems to fall out of my mind. I start having defensive little conversations with myself about this forgetfulness. Maybe, I tell myself, it is because I am not really worried. After all, I am as confident as I can be when she leaves that she will not kill herself. She has been doing this for over 30 years. She can’t live in a hospital. But then I worry that I should be more worried. And then it falls out of my mind again, until our next session.

Of course it is hard for all of us who are clinicians to think about suicidal clients. It is frightening. It is a sad, hostile, violent act, in which we stand to lose a great deal at many levels: most importantly our client, but also self-esteem, self-trust, and professional reputation. We fear losing our livelihood if we fail these clients. We fear blame from ourselves and others. We choose not to think about it in many ways, including by resorting immediately to hospitalization as a way of ensuring not only our client’s physical safety but our own emotional safety. We insist on safety contracts before exploring deeply with the client. We find excuses and the means to get rid of them. “We rush to make repairs before we have the courage to examine the injury, slapping bandages on wounds so deep we are afraid to see them.” We increase medications, we loosen boundaries, we are afraid to ask questions, we demand answers we want to hear. With those who make chronic threats, we can become impatient and irritated. Some of these actions are of course sometimes necessary and desirable. But often what we are feeling first and foremost is a need to put a lot of distance between ourselves and the thought of a client’s suicide. These intense feelings and avoidances are common in one way or another at one time or another to all of us as clinicians, and certainly in this case they were part of mine, but I was beginning to suspect that for me, there might be something else coming up as well.

The Roots of Forgetting

On the surface, it seemed obvious. My father’s family worked very hard to forget my grandfather’s suicide. This dramatic issue, however, seemed so far from my direct experience I wasn’t sure if I could legitimately connect it in any way to what I was noticing about my feelings and behavior with my client. On the other hand, it seemed risky to assume my own even indirect personal experience with suicide was irrelevant, so I gave it some thought.

“My grandfather hanged himself when my father was four, and my grandmother did all she could to erase every memory of him.” I know a couple of things about my grandfather that I am pretty sure are true. He was a rumrunner in Pennsylvania during Prohibition, and he brought big bands like the Dorsey brothers to local hotels and night clubs. I have seen only one photograph. He is a broad-shouldered, dark-haired man standing next to a three-year-old version of my father on a merry-go-round horse. Once after my grandmother died I went on a search of her house for evidence of his life. I thought I had hit the jackpot with a pile of photo albums in the closet of an extra bedroom. It turned out that in each of the scalloped-edged photos from the 1930s, every one held carefully in place with little black corner pockets glued to the page, she had ripped out the images of my grandfather, leaving the others standing and laughing and smiling in front of buildings and cars, unaware of the torn edges framing the emptiness where he had been.

My grandmother lied about her husband’s death for more than 30 years, claiming he had died of a variety of unlikely ailments, including back problems. Nonetheless, her feelings of abandonment, rage, and shame were palpable to everyone who knew her. Even once she had admitted the real cause of his death, her explanations were dislocated and strange, and for me, always at least secondhand. In one version my grandfather was in a mental hospital and had what we now call bipolar disorder. In another, less likely but still my preferred version, he was also in a hospital, but possibly hiding from mob associates who murdered him.

There is no one left now who knows what really happened to my grandfather, or who can really even guess why. Like in the children’s game of telephone, the stories I have heard are probably distorted beyond recognition from their original source as they have been whispered down an almost century’s long lane. Even my own memory is confused by odd and inexplicable distortions and images. I remember with crystal clarity, for example, driving with my father and hearing him tell me that my grandfather probably had an affair with one of my grandmother’s many older sisters. I remember seeing the colors out the passenger side window, rural New York in the fall: the fields yellowing, bark darkened with rain, leaves brown and drifting, hints of lavender and red, the steady green of conifers. There was only a little gray in my father’s beard. I remember not just envisioning but knowing, remembering, the dark-haired older sister I never met, more settled than the younger, more beautiful red-haired one my grandfather married. I imagined her specifically. I could see her hanging laundry on a warm day in her flower-patterned dress. I could see the intense sexiness of the seam of her stockings drawn along her slim calves from the fall of her skirt to her square-heeled shoes.

But my father is bewildered by my memory of this conversation and has no recollection of any such affair. Why have I imagined it? Why has he forgotten? I am reminded of another children’s game, where one child draws a head and folds the paper over so the drawing can’t be seen, another draws the arms and folds her part in turn, another the legs, another the feet. Once unfolded, a figure is revealed, a crazy patchwork of imaginings. This is my portrait of my grandfather.

He is for me essentially fictional, his only reality in my life the shadow he cast on those he chose to leave behind. There is no pain in his release of any claim on me, although the long, slow-burning coals of the suppressed rage that were his legacy have in their way come down to me. Yet I think that in these odd moments—with my mother’s friend, with my client—I become aware of something else my grandfather has left with me. He lives with me in my unreasonable, inherited loyalty to my cranky little gnome of a grandmother, who demanded that my father never remember, never even try to remember, his father. He lives with me when my client’s words obediently fall out of my mind. In my father’s family, it is an act of loyalty to erase my memory and bury my anger and fear. Even though he died 20 years before I was born, my own memory of my grandfather is in its way constant and precise: “I remember him by forgetting.”

Awareness and Remembering

As so often happens in therapy, it is hard to be certain that this subtle, internal shift in awareness that I experienced thinking about my inability to hold my client’s suicidality in mind produced a change in my client. The role of therapist self-knowledge and self-awareness in the course of therapy is really immeasurable, in both senses of the word—certainly not readily quantified, but equally certainly a source of lasting, profound growth for ourselves and for our clients. I know it has become easier to get past my anger, fear, and denial when my client is suicidal, and this has created a change in the quality of our conversations about it. We are less focused on management and more focused on meaning. Usually by the time we wrap up with a safety plan it has become unnecessary, more of an addendum than a centerpiece of our conversation. Between sessions, I do not forget how she has been feeling. I know I will feel deeply angry, sad, betrayed and, yes, guilty, if she kills herself one day, but whatever happens, it will not be because I have allowed that possibility to fall out of my mind. She still holds on to her fantasy of killing herself, but for some time now speaks of it not as a plan, but as a feeling. “I am feeling suicidal” for her is no longer a threat of immediate action, but a description of despair. Like partners in a dance, we have both taken steps away from the concrete and into the symbolic, for I have replaced the concrete act of forgetting with engagement and curiosity.