In "Love" With My Therapist

That's totally not true. What you have described are a large number of inappropriate self-disclosures and grossly inappropriate comments that are, within themselves, pretty severe ethical violations, and actionable on their own.

Alone, they would not be enough to get his licensed yanked, but it would probably get him on license probation, and require additional ethical training and clinical supervision for a year or two.

 

Well now you're creating a totally false scenario, where he is literally the only person in the world that can make you happy, and you'll be single and depressed the rest of your life. That's bullshit.

But to answer your question, yes, recognizing the inappropriateness of what you're asking would be the correct response, and then he (if he were acting in the highest and most ethical way) would terminate therapy and refer you to another therapist, since the damage to the therapeutic relationship is probably already very close to irreparable.

You could end therapy with him and then WAIT 2 to 5 years (depending on your state and the particular licensing board's ethical regulations) before approaching him to date. In that circumstance, he would not be violating his ethical obligation.

There is no appropriate way to date him without the waiting period. None. No shortcuts or workarounds. And most ethical therapists won't date clients *regardless* of the amount of time that has passed, simply because they realize the inherent issues with it, and why it is generally a terrible idea.

 

Let's see... from your own posts above...

(1) Telling you he's married and for how long.
(2) uttering plenty of innuendos that didn't have anything to do with anything other than to be flirting
(3) Telling you he's going camping
(4) Telling you he loved watching Malcolm in the Middle
(5) A reference to your butt
(6) A coffee reference about concentrate on how the warmth it would feel going down my throat.
and arguably
(7) that he "loves and values committed relationships" (though arguably that's most anyone emotionally healthy, so not really personal)

The first five are unquestionably what's known as inappropriate self-disclosure, which is, in itself, both very poor professional practice AND a significant ethical violation. It is also a reflection of extremely poor personal boundaries, which are a huge red flag for ethical violations.

The only reason a therapist should ever self-disclose anything to a client is if (all of these must apply) (1) there is a specific, therapeutic reason for the disclosure which benefits the client; (2) making the disclosure is unlikely to have any negative effect (such as fueling projection or transference); (3) the disclosure, and the reason for making it is documented in the notes of the file. I seriously doubt that he notated in his case notes that he complimented your butt, that he disclosed his marital status, or that he told you he was going camping, or any of the others.

I don't see how the above statements can be projections. Your interpretation of what they mean might be, and God can only hope they are, complete fantasies and projection. But even if your interpretations are competely off the mark, the statements themselves are inappropriate self-disclosures, which are ethical violations. He seriously needs to work with a good clinical supervisor, and get into personal therapy, or get out of the profession.

 

Yes, it matters, because without the 2 to 5 year waiting period, it violates the ethical standards he swore to uphold, and in most states, the law. Loss of license and possible incarceration matters to most mental health professionals.

If that happens to a therapist with a client, the therapist should not be a therapist, period. That is made very clear to *every* student in their first year of undergraduate ethics, and is reinforced multiple times as the student continues his or her schooling. My ethics professor put it very succinctly: If you, as a helping professional, are seeking out to fulfill your own needs with your clients, then you haven't done your work, and you should not be practicing. You will harm the client, and you will violate the ethical standards of your profession, and likely lose your license. Lots of therapists feel something for their clients, but they recognize it and either dismiss it, seek clinical supervision, or if it is something that goes beyond what they think they can manage, they terminate therapy with the client (and don't see him/her afterwards) and refer him elsewhere. There's no qualification or equivocation on that point.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with it. This isn't a "consenting adult" issue; it's the law and the standards of practice, which for whatever reason you seem absolutely incapable of comprehending.

From what you've described in this thread, I can say with a pretty high degree of confidence that this is probably not the case.

 

Funny how now that I've mentioned that it's close to mandatory report territory... and that the Internet isn't as private as people think... that all these things above that you absolutely insisted and reiterated several times as support for his being attracted to you, and were so certain of, are suddenly things you made up and interpreted and projected, which you absolutely, positively insisted previously was not the case.

Sorry, I'm not buying the BS you're selling, and you're a lousy liar because you're totally contradicting and tapdancing... and not doing it well. As the same ethics professor said, "If you're going to lie, better keep a lie journal, because you're bound to contradict yourself." And you've already done that. (No, I won't tell you where.)

I suspect that what you said in the first place was correct, and now you're trying to cover your ass and keep your boyfriend-in-waiting from being reported for ethical violations.

The comment wasn't intended to be rude, only factual. I'm not judging, I'm just saying... what you've described in this thread, both about yourself, your interpretation of events (which seems to be changing 180 degrees, which is in itself problematic), and your utter lack of any concerns for anyone other than yourself point to someone with some significant issues that need to be addressed. That's not intended to be rude or hurtful, just factual... lots of people have significant issues. But there are also plenty of people who go to therapy for very minor issues.

What I was trying to get across was that you implied that you were probably the least troubled person he's seen. From what you've described, and the way you've handled this discussion... unless his population is unusual, I would say, with a pretty high degree of reliability, that you are probably not the least troubled client he's seen. That's all.

 

Nice attempt to cover your tracks.

I agree completely with DayByDay. As I said above, the 180 degree turn has contradictions and clearly is intended to discourage people from reporting what is pretty clearly a therapist with egregiously poor boundaries who is likely causing harm to multiple clients.

I also agree that you need to terminate with this therapist... though more than likely, you'll do as you originally planned, and hit on him, with no cares for the impact it will have if he responds... and basically royally fuck up his life (as the information *will* come out.)

I don't know what legal action there would be, as there's no basis for any claim. On the contrary, for licensed professionals, *not* reporting a professional who is potentially harming clients is criminally actionable, and so any report, if made by a licensed professional, would take precedence over any privacy concerns.

 

Umhmm. Sure.

Looking into medical records would be a HIPAA violation. Identifying a practitioner that is harming clients and taking appropriate steps so that authorities can investigate and take necessary action would not be any sort of privacy violation.

By the way, I'm in no way saying that I or anyone in particular is going to do this, only that it is well within the bounds of appropriate action, in much the same way that abused spouses, when confronted, will often absolutely deny that there's any abuse in order to protect the abuser.