Posted by Dinah on August 22, 2005, at 19:05:15
In reply to Re: Need and attachment » Dinah, posted by Tamar on August 21, 2005, at 17:55:40
Agh. The babble monster ate my first reply.
> I’m trying to work out if I’ve understood you right. When you talk about wanting to need your therapist, do you mean it’s the intensity of the need you want?
I guess it's actually the intensity of connection I need. I just don't know any other way to get it than through need.
>
> Could a different kind of intensity work for you? Like, for example, if you fell in love with him (it’s just an example; I know you can’t imagine falling in love with him).Yes, that would probably work, although it would also be very painful and embarassing. But I'd put up with that if I could keep the connection. Unfortunately, it isn't going to happen.
> I was interested when you said:
> > The way I see it, need and fear of loss are to a therapeutic relationship what passion is to a romantic relationship. It's the glue to the attachment. It binds you closer to the other person, gives an intensity to the relationship.
>
> … because I don’t remember feeling that I *needed* my therapist. I mean, I knew I needed therapy in order to get healthier. But the intensity of my feelings sprung from wanting rather than needing. I *wanted* him. (I’m not talking about sex, just for once; although of course I wanted him in that way too.) I wanted to be in session with him; I wanted to look at his face, to hear his voice, to talk to him, to be understood by him. For me it was all about desire (not just the sexual kind). I wonder if that indicates a difference in the sorts of things we’ve been working on… for me it was about working on what I wanted; for you perhaps it’s about working on need and fear of loss. I know that I hate the thought of no longer wanting him, though after all these months I’m wanting him a little less. But I think you’re right that the thing that’s missing is the intensity of feeling.I don't know if I *can* purely want someone enough to keep the level of connection at that level. I don't know if I'm capable of it.
> > Growing up also comes to mind, but my therapist prefers that I avoid that term because I have such negative feelings about it.
>
> Well, if that term comes to mind, maybe that’s the best term to use, and maybe it’s something you need to talk about.We've had no real luck coming to the root of my absolutel horror at the very idea. I think it probably has to do with sex. But it may also have to do with responsibility...
> > The difference is that, ideally, when the passion ebbs from a committed romantic relationship, there are other things that bind two people close together. A shared life, shared love for children, memories, goals.
>
> Yes… and I hope also some love for the other person, even if it’s not the passion it once was. Can it be similar in therapy? Can you experience love for each other, shared memories and shared therapeutic goals, with a little less intensity, and still enjoy your relationship?I don't think so. I don't want to insult my therapist. I'm sure he has many fine and useful qualities. And I love him dearly for the safety and security and commitment he has brought to my life. But I'm not sure I really enjoy spending time with him as a person. It isn't a meeting of the two like minds or anything. He's made a wonderful therapist/mommy to me for reasons I don't quite understand but probably have something to do with his very essence. His steadiness and calming demeanor. But I'm not sure he'd make a good therapist/friend. There's more mutuality involved in that. And if mutuality is needed, we'd be a bust. It's really astonishing how well the therapeutic relationship met my needs considering how really little we have in common.
> > He knows that in order to climb a ladder you have to give up the rung you're on to reach for the next rung. But he doesn't *know* that the next rung is worthless to me if I lose the rung I had. And I just can't seem to explain it to him.
>
> I think the thing about a ladder is that it’s useless if the lower rungs fall off as you climb. You need the lower rungs to stay there so you can climb back down when you need to. And there will almost inevitably be times when you need to go down again. Perhaps internalizing him should guarantee that the lower rungs are securely attached to the ladder so that you can climb up a little, knowing as you climb that you can return to the ground if you need to. Perhaps you’re no longer standing on the lower rungs, but they’re still there if you need to use them again. I think that’s what you need to be sure of before you can move up the ladder. And you can climb very slowly if you like; you can keep checking the lower rungs are there. But nevertheless, you need the whole ladder, because your hands are on the upper rungs, keeping your feet secure on the lower rungs.I sure hope so. I don't know what I'll do otherwise.
poster:Dinah
thread:544714
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20050813/msgs/545304.html