(previous week (July 10) — had given therapist affidavit about Akin Gump perjury and social security disability fraud.)
didn’t write letter. thought about writing, wrote notes, but didn’t write. let’s talk about what troubled me.
start off talking about first session: I was reading there are three different insecure attachment styles . . . A dismissive person would never mention loneliness.
I discuss the fact that the avoidant attachment is the equivalent of the introjective personality in Blatt’s system
fish dolphin — dolphin coming up for air. why would a fish do that? You see me as a fish, but I’m a dolphin. Then you wonder why I surface for air. Fish don’t do that. But I’m not a fish!!
walking well — dismissives not taken seriously.
discussed automatic responses: “You know I was thinking that maybe what you see in other clients is an automatic response, like wanting your feedback, wanting to have a relatiohnship with you, wanting to relinquish their identity. And you think I’m not a cooperative patient because I don’t do those things. You think other people’s responses are a result of volitional acts, as if they have made a conscious decision to be a “good patient.” But in many cases it’s not a volitional act. People are not cooperating with therapy. They simply have a personality style in which they have an automatic response. It’s like what happens in groups. People bonding in groups is not a volitional act at a psychological level — if you put people together they bond in a group automatically out of psychological needs. The failure to bond in a group is a result of psychological processes that are not volitional.
With me — it’s not that I am uncooperative or thwarting you, it’s not volitional or conscious, it’s simply the absence of an “automatic response.” You seem to think if I don’t have a relationship with you I am doing that. I’m not doing anything. It’s not a matter of doing anything. Trust is something that emerges. It’s based on feelings that emerge or don’t emerge.
You are dealing with automatic responses and you’re moralizing about automatic responses or the lack of automatic responses in me, but you can’t moralize about that because in either case these are not volitional acts that can be controlled by the patient.
You impute control to me all the time as if I have control over things. I have control over my behavior, but I don’t have control over my feelings. Writing letters is a behavior. I can control that. I can make a conscious decision to stop writing letters. But I have no control over the underlying feelings — feelings of confusion, the sense that you say things that don’t make sense to me, the feeling of being overwhelmed by you. I will continue to have those feelings whether or not I write letters. [proceed to give examples over all the feelings about which I have no control.]
square peg — round hole. “It’s like you’re trying to shove a square peg into a round hole and I’m the round hole.” (Note my self-concept as a receptacle–like an infant who feels his mother is forcing her nipple in his mouth.” Kleinian reference.
first session; loneliness and fear of rejection — sense of alienation — a dismissive wouldn’t complain about a fear of alienation. “You don’t seem to know about the basic attachment styles.”
mother died — unaffected emotionally
“I don’t mean to denigrate you but you are obsessed with relationships.”
not interested in relationship (emotionally corrective experience) interested in imaging of therapist. (Apparently confuses the therapist– whose only notion of a therapy relationship is mother-child relationship of caring and nurturing. Has no concept of transference.” “We need to look at what role I have assigned you. That’s what’s important. Not the emotionally corrective experience.”
dr. palombo never talked about relationships. SRP concerned with how I imaged relationships. not in the actual relationship. amsterdam “you don’t have to have friends.”
reported on literature that said analysis or psycho-dynamic therapy is treatment of choice.
therapist: how do you feel about being seen as different by people. “I have mixed feelings about that. I feel I need mirroring, somebody who is like me. So being different impairs my ability to relate to most people. But I get an ego boost about being different — radio America wine and cheese. legal assistant. AU wine and cheese. But then supervisor said I was homicidal — different in a bad way.
end of 20 minute soliloquy by patient:
Therapist’s first response:
why do you come to therapy? (first response of therapist was to ask question — gave no feedback on themes of self-sufficiency, autonomy, dismissive attachment style. said absolutely nothing about the important anecdote about my mother’s death. Remarkable!!). The real question is why did she accept me into therapy when I said I was introjective and dismissive?
I want somebody to talk to (wagner/freud henchman) analyzable issue. See passage in Significant Moments:
Even as a boy of seventeen, he was looking for a companion ‘to whom I could pour out my inmost being to my heart’s content, without my caring what the effect might be on him.’
Anthony Storr, Feet of Clay—Saints, Sinners, and Madmen: A Study of Gurus quoting Richard Wagner.
Could it be in reality he had had no friend at all, possessed no share in someone else’s life? He had had a companion, a listener, a yes-man, a henchman, and no more!
Hermann Hesse, Tales of Student Life.
The intensity with which . . .
Phyllis Grosskurth, The Secret Ring: Freud’s Inner Circle and the Politics of Psychoanalysis.
. . . later in life . . .
Charles Darwin, Origin of Species.
. . . he entered into his largely epistolary friendship with Wilhelm Fliess must have been a reflection of his disappointment with reality and his need to seek an idealized friend who existed only as a projection of his own needs. For Freud the ideal friend had to be an extension of himself.
Phyllis Grosskurth, The Secret Ring: Freud’s Inner Circle and the Politics of Psychoanalysis.
therapist erupted in anger; why don’t you just talk to a wall. you don’t need a therapist. you might as well just talk to a wall. ” I need to give feed back!” (Who’s stopping you lady?) (but her first response was not feedback; it was a question!). “Even dynamic therapy focuses on the relationship. You say you don’t want a relationship with me, but at other times you talk about having a relationship with me.” “You don’t seem to know what you want.” (projection–instead of writing letter, talk — does she know what she wants?)
questions why I am seeing her at all. note her response was like a borderline (“Why are you in therapy?”). “You hurt my feelings. Leave! I hate you! I never want to see you again.” And not: “let’s talk about your feelings about therapy. let’s talk about your feelings about me.”
“No other therapist would stand for this. I won’t react angrily because that wouldn’t establish trust.” (She is superior to other therapists.)
therapist response of rage–humiliation–indignation. (As if she were thinking, “How dare you say this about me?”) Assault on her idealized self-concept as nurturing, empathic, caring. I questioned her role of mother who feeds infant. As if, “you won’t accept my breast. you have a duty to accept my breast. I feed you. You don’t feed me. You are the infant. Infants don’t feed the mother. Patients don’t lecture the therapist on her technique — I will not allow you to force your nipple into me!” (Does she see my as both the bad mother/bad child fused imago?)
“Are you saying I am a difficult patient? Dr. Palombo said . . .” (sparked her envy)
(cuts me off angrily). I am not saying you are a difficult patient.
end of session
emergence of depressive anxiety by therapist. (undoing) kindly gesture. “It’s raining. You can wait here for a while till the rain stops.” — “No I have an umbrella.” “I want you have a nice vacation.”
Note how the therapist totally missed the schizoid conflicts relating to “feeding” and the “intrusive nipple” :
I have heard a number of schizoid individuals describe their mothers as both cold and intrusive. For the mother, the coldness may be experienced as coming from the baby. Several self-diagnosed schizoid people have told me their mothers said that they rejected the breast as newborns or complained that when they were held and cuddled, they pulled away as if overstimulated. A friend confided to me that his internal metaphor for nursing is “colonization,” a term that conjures up the exploitation of the innocent by the intrusive imperial power. Related to this image is the pervasive concern with poisoning, bad milk, and toxic nourishment that commonly characterizes schizoid individuals. One of my more schizoid friends once asked me as we were having lunch in a diner, “What is it about straws? Why do people like to drink through straws?” “You get to suck,” I suggested. “Yucch!” she shuddered.
–Nancy McWilliams, Some Thoughts about Schizoid Dynamics.
Basically, the therapist is moralizing about my disorder. She basically is saying I am a bad patient because I don’t accept her feedback. A competent therapist would ask, “What does my feedback mean to you? Do you associate “feedback” with feeding in any way?” SHE IS FREAKING INCOMPETENT, DAVID!!!
Note also the hints of dynamics relating to my perception of the intrusive mother and the absent idealized other as a defense against the intrusive mother:
“Subject’s object hunger, his idealizing merger needs are fixations on archaic pre-oedipal forms deriving from deficits emerging out of his relationship with an engulfing mother who used subject for her own selfobject needs and in his frustrating relationship with a father unavailable for idealization. Cowan, J. “Blutbruderschaft and Self Psychology in D.H. Lawrence’s Women in Love in Self and Sexuality” (2002). Subject’s idealization of males is a defense against being swallowed up by a woman. See Shengold, L. Soul Murder: The Effects of Childhood Deprivation and Abuse (see especially the chapter, “The Parent as Sphinx”). Subject’s psychology parallels Kohut’s analysand Mr. U who, turning away from the unreliable empathy of his mother, tried to gain confirmation of his self through an idealizing relationship with his father. The self absorbed father, however, unable to respond appropriately, rebuffed his son’s attempt to be close to him, depriving him of the needed merger with the idealized self-object and, hence, of the opportunity for gradually recognizing the self-object’s shortcomings. Cowan, Self and Sexuality at 59 quoting Kohut.”