(This is the first time I’ve tried doing a Poll so hopefully it will come out alright.)

I’ve often wondered what type of T people here have, it’s not always apparent in the threads, so out of curiousity I’m doing a poll to see how the numbers stack up.

Any further comments about how your T works would be great too Smiler


Original Post
What about..."I have no clue...my T is just my T!" I really haven't talked to him about his background or approach, though he has commented that his strengths lie in relational and intuitive areas. I bet some of "pros" here might be able to clue me in with their guesses. Smiler
I don't mind going into more details. My t is an Attachment Psychotherapist, which is a very specific training (goggle John Bowlby Centre, UK if you want to know more). I knew a bit about this model when I first went to see t, she was also upfront about how she got into t and why she works as an Attachment Pyschotherapist. This combined with the fact it's regular sessions (twice a week in my case) for 50mins and on-going, and her having vast experience with my specific issues, and her very clear boundaries (which were laid out straightaway) meant I went for this as opposed to other types of therapy models I have tried in the past. Not sure if that helps
Last edited by pingles
Yaku, it would be interesting to know what his ‘official’ approach is – have you never wondered? Never googled him or looked him up on the therapist registers? Not that that would make any difference to how your therapy goes, I just wondered how it was you came to decide on him in the first place, if not via his approach. Maybe a referral, if I remember rightly he was initially your H’s T, or your marriage counselling T? Anyway no pressure to answer here, just me being nosey. Smiler

Debbie, that’s also interesting what you said, I was under the impression that there is no such thing as a pure attachment modality because it’s attachment theory rather than attachment therapy. I always assumed that the Bowlby Centre trains Ts in the psychoanalytic approach but with a primary grounding in attachment theory. (The one and only attachment based T in my area was Bowlby Centre trained, and he was a psychoanalytic psychotherapist.) But I do make a lot of assumptions so it’s interesting to know that there is now an actual modality of pure attachment therapy.

Interesting results in the poll so far, for some reason I thought those of us with psychoTs were few and far between, so I’m surprised at the numbers already.

Oh seeing as how I’m here and posting – I’m seeing a psychoanalytic psychotherapist, which in terms of approach really suits me (having tried therapists in every single modality on my list except DBT and Systemic/family systems therapy Roll Eyes ) I know the general consensus is that it’s the relationship between T and client that’s the important thing rather than the specific approach, but I’m going to be the lone voice in the wilderness here and say that for me at least, it’s the opposite. Lol but that could change too…

(Oh I just reread your reply properly Debbie and see that you too chose a specific approach, so maybe that's two lone voices in the wilderness eh? Smiler)

LL - I don't think you're nosy. I do wonder, but I have trouble asking him questions about psychology stuff, because I feel like I'm being "bad," which has nothing to do with any way that he has ever behaved and everything to do with my own issues. T was my H's T for his sleeping condition related stuff and I started seeing him about seven months after H had already been with him. At the time, I had no plan on actually being in therapy. T just kept telling H that there was no way I could be as OK as I seemed and I should probably be talking to someone, so H kept nagging me, but I didn't really want to and definitely wasn't interested in seeing the one T tried to refer me to (woman). I eventually caved, figuring it would be a few sessions, then maybe a few months, now I'm wondering if I can even keep it down to a few years. But, because I wasn't planning on it being a long term thing, it didn't occur to me to ask him any questions until it was too hard for me to do so. I could ask now, I guess, but it seems rather irrelevant, since all that matters is it is working for me. It is rather by luck (or divine intervention) that I ended up with a T who is nearly a perfect fit. I've never gotten so comfortable/vulnerable with another person so quickly in my life and him having hands-on experience with my sort of stuff before is a pretty random coincidence. I've always had a very meant-to-be feeling about my therapy with him (excepting when I am trying to run the hell away), so I don't really worry about the technical stuff overly much lately.
(The one and only attachment based T in my area was Bowlby Centre trained, and he was a psychoanalytic psychotherapist.) But I do make a lot of assumptions so it’s interesting to know that there is now an actual modality of pure attachment therapy.

LL - it has very much developed into a specific modality now over here although it has some history in classical pyschoanalysis. It is far more than the 'blank canvas' traditional therapy and as such can be super intense and hard to handle. BTW I changed my forum name to something a bit more hopeful - was DebbieN) It is interesting though as you say that we both seem to have picked a specific model for therapy having tried (in my case) so many others Smiler
I voted for psychodynamic and psychoanalytical. My T was trained psychoanalytically but practices the more modern form of psychodynamic therapy. No laying on the couch or blank slate T, thankfully. He is very knowledgeable in object relations theory which is related to attachment theory. He uses some of Kohut's techniques of mirroring, idealized parental imago and of course empathy. He uses some of Gill's main theory of re-experiencing. I wrote about this on the book thread where Kahn's "Between Client and Therapist: The New Relationship" describes in a nutshell what Gill's theory was about. I'll quote it here again...

"If remembering is not enough what is missing is re-experiencing. Gill believes that because the client's difficulties were acquired through experience, they must be transformed through experience. They cannot be reasoned away. While it is necessary for clients eventually to understand the roots of their difficulties, that understanding cannot be merely delivered as an explanation. It must emerge as clients re-experience certain aspects of their past. And this re-experiencing must occur within the therapeutic relationship" (1997, p. 57).

I think this is KEY. Your T just cannot tell you how to feel or how you should react to things... you have to experience the difference with them through therapy.

Well, my T reminds me a lot of TN's T at times, although with the whole Christian counseling angle thrown in, so that was helpful information on what my T's theoretical orientation might be, at least. Thanks! Wink
Even though I'm not with my T anymore, (on an extended break anyway) I checked the box for existential/phenomenological, but I think he is more Gestalt, after googling some of the modalities you listed, LL. I hate that my T would never tell me what type of therapy we were primarily engaged in. sometimes I wonder if he knew himself...
My T uses as she says an integrative mind/body psychotherapy based on cutting edge neuroscience. She specializes only in trauma (so this is her entire caseload from what I understand) and is trained in Sensorimotor Psychotherapy and EMDR. She uses the structural model of dissociation and phase oriented treatment. She is well trained in attachment issues as well.

I think in my treatment plan it says the above plus use of CBT and psychodynamic therapy as a needed, but I can't remember.
My T is pretty eclectic.
She will do just about anything she thinks will work in a wide variety of ways. Pretty untraditional stuff sometimes but its so helpful.
I don't know what we are doing!!!

After about 10 sessions - I am still talking about my issues and I still have some real "biggies" that I haven't told her about. She tried to get onto some "fixing" about 4 sessions back and I told her I wasn't done talking yet!

I suspect she will be CBT. I will ask her one day
I completely forgot about sensorimotor and body based therapies and EMDR and I can’t edit the poll without wiping all the votes out! Sorry about that.

Thanks everyone for your replies, it's really interesting to hear about the different approaches and combinations of approaches, this therapy lark can be very complex can't it?

Lol also wanted to say the poll count will now change (though it won’t show) and that there’s one less vote for psychoanalytic/psychodynamic (mine) and one instead for integrative/relational. Yes folks LL has changed Ts YET AGAIN. One day soon I’ll get around to posting an update, but I’m waiting until it’s actually definite what’s going on with me and therapy before doing that. Roll Eyes

My T is sorta eclectic... a little crazy and out of the box. We do things together like go get ice cream and go for walks and do all sorts of things, as long as she thinks it will help.
I voted integrative - but my T has a background in Psychodynamic but unusually she also has some Jung training - which I found super helpful. But I know some people don't get on with the slightly spiritual aspect of that - not me though I loved it. She also definitely works with the Bowlby attachment theories. Whatever she's doing though I don't care because it's amazing. TN - totally agree about the feeling it healing rather than any conscious brain working it out.

Add Reply

Link copied to your clipboard.