>


You think doctors who see entire families just share everyone's medical history with everyone else?

No. In the same way that a mechanic works. This is a specialist using the information of one to help other though, which I think is wildly different.

Or just a basic understanding of how therapy works. If you can't trust that your therapist isn't going to violate their requirement to not share what you tell them, you shouldn't be in therapy.

The line between "sharing" and "using" makes me feel uneasy. I think it's easy to suspect that the psychologist is influenced by specific things the other people have said, and they clearly do too, they accept this. If this is unethical I'm not so sure, so !delta for that one.

Also, you might want to look up what "inhumane" means, because while I'm assuming you mean "beyond what is humanely possible," that's very far from what it means.

Also thanks for this, edited.

That's not how therapy works. People might be in anger management so they don't beat their family members. They might be in therapy to have a healthier relationship. They might be in therapy because they're an unruly child. There are countless reasons why someone might go to therapy to directly benefit someone else.

Yes but in every case the objective is to benefit the patient and never a third party. The therapist only has obligations towards the patient. That's the agreement.
The agreement can also be something else, whether others are healthy or not is a different matter.

So how is he keeping an informal relationship with them? It's like claiming someone is your friend because you invite him to all of your parties but he never shows.

Because as a therapist you are in charge of establishing the boundaries of the relationship. He is keeping an informal relationship as long as he enables them thinking of him as a buddy, even if he doesn't cross that boundary.
As a matter of fact, even if he hadn't ever done anything to cause that kind of relationship, it would still be his responsibility to ensure that's not how they see him.
/u/Levitz (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards >

I don't mean to be rude but I feel you're operating on a bit of TV based version of therapy.
You're right that there is such a thing as a conflict of interest in psychology that prevents psychologists from working with certain clients. However, it isn't like in TV where this is to somehow shroud them from the context of your life. 
Generally speaking, friends don't fall into that description for several reasons. They simply do not have the kind of impact on your formative experiences, traumas, etc, for them to be the focus of therapy or for their relationships to be that relevant. A psychologist is unlikely to even know that various patients who aren't couples or families know each other at all. 
With couples and even family, the reality is that the job of a psychologist is not to comfort you or validate your perceptions. In fact, psychologists may ask you to have friends or family fill out questions on you, such as in assessing ADHD or various other issues that your self perceptions may not be completely accurate on, it is an assessment tool. 
In psychology, external context on your behavior is not a bad thing. Sometimes, what you need is literally to know that you are in fact in the wrong, or if you're not that in fact it's time to call it quits with the relationship. So you're right that it is impossible to remain unbiased as a psychologist, you are wrong in that has not been the objective. Psychologists don't form personal relationships with clients because liking the person in fact can shield them from negative perceptions, and because the person can begin to put their relationship into the perspective of the therapist. >

This is basically what I came here to say. I'm having trouble understanding OP's point. They seem to be under the impression that the therapist's job is to mitigate disputes, when it's really to help each person process their own understanding of the situation. If, for some reason, other members of the friend group come up in therapy repeatedly (and that seems like a bad sign), the therapist isn't there to make sure they're still all friends at the end of the day. The therapist is there for the patient, not the drama, and it's extraordinarily easy not to get wrapped up in the drama of a friend group you're not friends with. >

Yeah, I think their perspective of therapy seems to be to make you feel better. But it's not always that. If you're overcoming narcissism you're going to have a different experience than if you're a battered spouse. The therapists job is going to be to make the first person face hard truths and hold themselves accountable, and it's going to be to help the other person leave their situation and realize their value. If those two people are a couple, knowing the other partners perspective isn't bias, it's revelatory. >


First. It would take an inhumane effort to be able to keep himself neutral in this scenario.

Or just an iota of professionalism. You think doctors who see entire families just share everyone's medical history with everyone else? Think lawyers who know their clients are guilty are incapable of defending them? 

It would also take an inhumane effort to feel confident not to hide anything from your psychologist as a patient,

Or just a basic understanding of how therapy works. If you can't trust that your therapist isn't going to violate their requirement to not share what you tell them, you shouldn't be in therapy. Also, you might want to look up what "inhumane" means, because while I'm assuming you mean "beyond what is humanely possible," that's very far from what it means.

No others should directly benefit from it 

That's not how therapy works. People might be in anger management so they don't beat their family members. They might be in therapy to have a healthier relationship. They might be in therapy because they're an unruly child. There are countless reasons why someone might go to therapy to directly benefit someone else.

the damage is done

There's no damage.

This psychologist also seems to keep a rather informal relationship with them.
he has, thankfully, never showed up to these events

So how is he keeping an informal relationship with them? It's like claiming someone is your friend because you invite him to all of your parties but he never shows.