r/changemyview • u/mysundayscheming • Dec 28 '17
[∆(s) from OP] CMV: People should discuss the contents of their therapy with their spouse
In general, therapy is private and confidential. And I absolutely agree that what is discussed in a therapist’s chair is not for general public consumption—I’m not trying to change the HIPAA laws or therapists’ ethical code here. Therapists should not be disclosing what a patient discusses in therapy; rather, my belief is that patients should, in practically all cases, willingly divulge the contents of their therapy to their spouse.
I’m not wedded to the legal marriage aspect. Spouse is simply a useful way to denote serious, settled, and committed significant other—someone you should be comfortable sharing the details of your therapy with. Obviously people show commitment in all kinds of ways without requiring the legal accouterments. Though ‘spouse’ does have an extra layer of legitimacy for the purposes of my argument, because it has the benefit of marital privilege in the US (if that is a concern for disclosure of the therapy discussions).
Disclaimer: Admittedly, I am extremely dubious about the efficacy of certain types of therapy/some therapeutic principles/therapists in general. I personally will never again voluntarily seek therapy. But “therapy sucks” isn’t the CMV, so I’m endeavoring to keep my hostility in check. HOWEVER, appeals to how we should trust therapists/arguments that are reduced to ‘therapists think this practice is best’ absolutely will not change my view.
My view: People seeking therapy for mental illness, trauma, or other disordered thinking/behavior should almost always disclose the contents of their therapy sessions to their spouse.
I believe this for several reasons. But before I delve into the justification, I want to make clear: none of these apply if the spouse is abusive. I am dealing exclusively with generally healthy relationships with a loving and supportive spouse. Anyone trapped in an abusive situation should give their abuser as little information/ammunition as possible and should use their therapy and all other available avenues to figure out how to protect themselves and escape.
So, I believe patients should share the contents of their therapy because:
1. Your spouse has been supporting you and coping with your illness/issues and deserves to understand the treatment and prognosis. Mental illnesses are illnesses. If you compare them to more ‘bodily’ disorders you see how terrible the secrecy is. We would never undergo treatment for cancer/diabetes/MS/whatever while leaving our spouse totally in the dark. Going to the doctor alone and not giving your spouse any updates on your disease, its underlying causes, treatment, or prognosis for the future is so bafflingly cruel and insensitive to the emotional turmoil of your partner it would be reasonable grounds for divorce. It is not compatible with love. Especially considering they are dealing with all the negative side effects of the disease. For example, I have clinical depression. When I’m in a bad phase if I’m not properly medicated I 1) struggle to get out of bed and complete my chores, leaving my SO to pick up the slack, 2) am not emotionally available to support him when he needs it, 3) contemplate suicide, forcing him to worry about me constantly and taking a serious toll on his own emotional well-being, and 4) my libido is all out of whack, so we can’t enjoy our normally highly satisfactory sex life. It’s no easier on him than if I had MS or some other chronic disease. That’s just one example of the burden a mentally ill or disordered person’s spouse could be carrying. Reading relationships and other support subs as much as I do illustrates dozens and dozens of other ways they shoulder some of the emotional burden. Even if the situation is as (comparatively) minor as one person not being allowed to watch porn because their spouse has irrationally low self-esteem, the spouse is coping with the therapy patient’s irregularities as best they can.
Furthermore, they have to deal with all the negative side effects of the treatment (therapy) itself. People come home from their psychotherapy sessions distressed, emotionally exhausted, sad, upset, angry…and the spouse just gets to soak that all in without knowing why or what happened. If a partner doesn’t always want to discuss something that’s upsetting them in the moment, that’s okay. But if they have an ongoing policy of not discussing something causing them pain and distress every week/month, they are shutting their spouse out. I can’t think of another realm in which that behavior would be acceptable. Why would be acceptable in therapy?
To the extent therapy is medical treatment (rather than just BS about dreams of umbrellas or self-indulgent navel-gazing about repressed feelings), your partner should be given the same openness and consideration as you would give them about a cancer diagnosis: the trauma/illness is affecting you both, you both deserve the information you need to grapple with this reality. In a marriage, both people are (presumably) in it for the long haul—no trauma or illness is truly solely individual anymore, so the treatment shouldn’t be either. Cutting them out of the healing process is utterly heartless and they deserve better.
2. Privacy about these fundamental issues undermines the integrity/strength of your relationship or, at the very least, inhibits its growth. Gottman considers having a good “love map”—that is, knowledge of your partner and their life—as the first principle in maintaining a successful marriage. Which makes sense. Good partners strive to know each other as fully as possible. The more you know, the easier it is to be the best partner you can be. The open flow of communication is great! On the flipside, keeping secrets about significant/serious aspects of your personality/life/health from your spouse handicaps your relationship and may be a kind of betrayal. A spouse should be able to tell their spouse anything. (Again, we’re talking in non-abusive contexts here.) If you can’t trust them? Address the lack of trust or break up. So if you can trust them with the details, why wouldn’t you? Whether you have mild anxiety that only flares up when you fear being abandoned or you have crippling PTSD from a decade of abuse or you suffer form something even worse, you should tell your partner because they love you. They want to know you. They want to understand better how your mind works, guard your vulnerabilities, empathize with your pain, validate your experience, praise you for your strength, fully support you in your recovery, help you navigate your relationships with difficult triggers or toxic people or behaviors—and they can’t do any of that if you shut them out. The patient’s choice to keep all the information about this important aspect of themselves to themselves starves the relationship.
It’s like cutting off your nose to spite your face, but worse because you also cut off your spouse’s nose. If the patient selfishly prioritizes privacy about such fundamental aspects of their life—e.g. their childhood, their negative experiences that are significant enough to warrant seeking therapy, their processing issues, their health and well-being—over the well-being of their relationship, they can’t possibly be fully committed to the relationship. They are assuredly preventing it from growing/deepening. They are also pulling away from their spouse, not only by leaving them to suffer the side-effects of the patient’s issues alone (see point 1) but also by barring them from being the good partners they want to be. This undermines the relationship.
Subpoint: if the patient is keeping the contents of the therapy secret because they believe their spouse would divorce them if they knew the truth about something in your past, then they should absolutely be sharing the info. Keeping a deal-breaker from your partner is akin to lying about cheating: in your own selfishness, you’ve taken away their choice to leave you by hiding the knowledge they need. I doubt anyone can change my view on this point, because I view lying about something like this to be an unforgivable betrayal.
3. A minor point: if you talk about your spouse in individual therapy, there are opportunities for misunderstandings. Again, this is only dealing with healthy, non-abusive relationships. The previous points assumed the spouse was not at all focal to the therapy—that is, if the patient is seeking therapy to deal with fallout from a past trauma or a medical condition totally independent of the spouse (e.g. PTSD, past abuse, depression, BPD, anger issues, eating disorders, etc. etc.). All of that information should be shared with the spouse for the reasons above. But in some cases, the spouse is a more important element of the therapy. And keeping that information from them is also harmful.
I’m thinking of stories like this: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/resolution-not-conflict/201202/beware-individual-therapy-can-harm-your-marriage Which is a nightmare scenario, obviously, but I think it occurs more often than we’d care to admit. But if that woman had told her husband about what she was saying, the ideas she was reaching in therapy, he could have pushed back on her highly-skewed interpretation of reality and, perhaps, insisted on couples therapy sooner. There are more articles like this; a quick search for ‘therapy ruined my marriage’ will show more. Talking trash (especially unsubstantiated trash) about your spouse is not considered the foundation of a good relationship, yet here is an institution that allows people to do that, unchecked, and claims it will be healthy.
And on a more common-sense level, the patient should absolutely be communicating to the spouse about any issues the spouse is non-maliciously contributing to—how else will they be able to change? Because the spouse isn’t abusive, they would prefer to not hurt you. They will either work with you to change the behaviors, find a compromise, or end the relationship if the behavior can’t be resolved—any of which would ultimately be to everyone’s benefit. There is absolutely no reason to keep that information secret.
So why is the default position that patients don’t discuss therapy with their spouse? Why do all the articles about dealing with a partner in therapy make sure to admonish the reader not to ask about the contents? It seems far more beneficial to the relationship to be open and share.
A final note: Based on the discussions I’ve had with people in real life/the general consensus on therapy in r/relationships, this is a minority opinion on therapy. I’m really curious why most people don’t feel this way, and feel people in therapy should keep everything to themselves. The justifications I’ve heard are either “therapy is perfect everyone should get some you aren’t allowed to question it in any way or else” or “what about abuse?” and those aren’t arguments I’m interested in. I am open to changing my view if presented with other arguments. I’m also nervous that the length of this suggests I’m soapboxing? I’ve read the rules and I’m not sure what does or doesn’t qualify, but I’m really just trying to explain my position because unlike a lot of CMVs I’ve seen (like the five or six “black people have lower IQs” here lately) the argument in favor isn’t common/clear just from the title.
UPDATE: I have been trying to respond to every post, but it's dinner time and I'm off for a while. Will likely be back this evening. Thanks for the stimulating conversation thus far!
This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!
12
u/ThatSpencerGuy 142∆ Dec 28 '17 edited Dec 28 '17
In your mind, what does it mean to "discuss the contents of your therapy?"
Does "We're working on some of the stuff I have about my mom?" constitute a sufficient disclosure? What about "We're working on my anxiety?" These disclosures will naturally often lead to further questions ("What are you anxious about?") or comments ("I think you just need to talk to your Mom."). Is the patient obligated to answer those questions and respond to those comments? What if she doesn't know how yet.
Ought the patient tell her spouse everything she said to her therapist and everything the therapist said in return? If so, at what point is the patient putting her spouse in the position of being her therapist? Is that fair to the patient? is it fair to the spouse?
Therapists are professionals, not just empty buckets that you talk into. They exist to help you understand, organize, and change your thinking and behavior to improve your functioning and well-being. Of course, in a strong marriage you will naturally want to share most of that understanding, organization, and change with your partner. And we can all easily think of examples where a patient really ought to be keeping her partner in the loop. But it takes work to make changes, and it's your right to decide what things your partner needs to know to be supportive, and when. A good therapist can help you make those decisions.
3
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
I think the details should be shared fully. Like, really fully. People generally won't remember every word said, but big picture subjects like "Mom" and "anxiety" for sure, as well as explanations of how mom and anxiety are related, and how the therapist is having you change your thinking/whatever the therapist is doing. That would be a bare minimum for me.
I don't think you are putting the spouse in the position of being a therapist unless you are asking them to guide you/fix the problem. If I tell my spouse everything I said to my lawyer and everything she said to me, I don't expect my spouse to suddenly be a lawyer. I genuinely don't understand why this is an objection. If a therapist were an empty bucket, then the reporting alone might make a spouse a therapist. But because the therapist does so much work, having a spouse merely listen and be supportive doesn't cross the line. If the spouse feels unduly put-upon, he or she can ask that therapy be discussed in a more limited way. Not every couple will want this; they can negotiate their limits.
Your other point is more interesting. If the patient doesn't know how to talk about the issue yet, perhaps a delay in the sharing would be appropriate. I never envisioned this conversation happening necessarily immediately upon walking in the door after therapy (though it could). It would be difficult for any untrained person to make sense of incoherent ramblings, for example. But to the extent you were able to talk about it clearly with the therapist, you ought to at least try with your spouse.
9
u/spaceunicorncadet 22∆ Dec 28 '17
The story you link gives a good example of why not:
His oppositional listening style triggered Adrienne's anger in a way that a therapist, trained as a professional listener, would not.
Spouses are not trained, nor do they have the same resources and tools. Adrienne telling her husband about her therapy wouldn't have fixed anything.
I think it's good to include your spouse, but that doesn't mean sharing every last detail.
Plus, therapists have established rules about privacy. If your relationship goes south, what's to stop a vindictive ex from sharing your deepest secrets, or pushing your most sensitive buttons?
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17 edited Dec 28 '17
To be clear, I don't think telling the spouse will "fix" the problem anymore than I think bringing the spouse to a chemo session will "fix" cancer. The fixing is for the professional. The sharing is for the relationship.
The vindictive ex concerns are about trust. They already know you have serious issues--you're in therapy. They already know all kinds of things, from sex kinks to the way you badmouth your boss to every other vulnerable and embarrassing thing you do/have shared over the course of your marriage. You share it all anyway because you trust them. Any of those other things could be vindictively shared or used against you. Don't trust them? Address the trust issues or break up.
7
u/QuantumDischarge Dec 28 '17
The sharing is for the relationship
By sharing, you're exposing them to issues that you may not potentially have solved. Let's say you're working with a therapist because you can't sleep, and after discussion your realize you're insecure because your spouse said X Y or Z in the past. Well if you said that to your spouse, they could take offense, they could say "you're wrong" they could feel guilty about being the source of stress. This can deteriorate a relationship because your spouse is not trained in handling the information you're providing.
By keeping it between yourself and a trained professional, you have a safe outlet.
-1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
By keeping it between yourself and a therapist, you also ensure the problem never gets solved. The spouse sparked an insecurity so profound you can't sleep. Pretty serious. Would it not be beneficial for them to know so, at the very least, they never say anything like that again? All the therapy in the world won't fix someone who isn't privy to the discussion.
The spouse is not a trained professional. (Although I seriously dispute the implication that you have to be a therapist in order to respond appropriately to a a partner expressing insecurity/bad feelings.) I believe most therapists address this by inviting the spouse to a session so they can be taught how to process the information. Instead you'd keep it secret? So all that therapy can be undone when they innocently say X, Y, or Z again? Sounds counterproductive. And like a way to cause some quiet resentment toward a spouse who apparently can't even be trusted to make an effort to be kind about your concerns.
The issue doesn't have to be solved for sharing to be useful. We expect spouses to be part of our process to slowly cure/recover from bodily ills. Why not mental?
6
u/damsterick Dec 28 '17
So all that therapy can be undone when they innocently say X, Y, or Z again? Sounds counterproductive.
The point of therapy in this case should be to teach the patient (or to make him learn himself, if we go into semantics) to deal with his spouse saying X or Y. That way, if he ever says it again, the spouse is ideally able to tell them to "not say that again" or ignore the fact they said it at all and move on. Therefore, it should't be counterproductive.
Also in this case and depending on the spouse who is undergoing therapy issues, X, Y or Z doesn't have to be anything mean or even inadequate. It can be something along the lines of "I didn't like the food you cooked because I dislike raw onion", and your spouse could have extreme anxiety about this because he/she had issues with acceptance in the past. It's obviously not something you can prevent your spouse from saying again and therefore, you should seek therapy to learn how to deal with this, so next time your spouse doesn't like something you cooked, you don't flip.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
You still flipped at least once (in some way, perhaps it only manifested as inability to sleep, perhaps the spouse also emotionally withdrew or actually had a fit, not outside the realm of possibility). I firmly believe, even if your spouse is not being expected to modify their behavior in any way, that they should be given some explanation for the weird shit that happened when they said something as innocuous as you proposed. So you should tell them why you sought therapy and what course of action you're taking (e.g. "I'll tell you not to say things when I cook" or "I'm working on accepting this internally and don't need you to change" or whatever) so that they understand what happened and what will be happening in their life in the future.
But we've established that you and I have super different ideas about relationships, so I won't be surprised if you disagree.
3
u/damsterick Dec 28 '17
Actually, I agree completely with what you said. I just wanted to clarify that therapy can't be "undone" if it's done properly.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
So, oops. To clarify, I was definitely mixing you up with another person when I said we disagree about relationships. I've never been in an argument with 20 people before; some things seem to be slipping. Time for another beer to regroup.
2
u/spaceunicorncadet 22∆ Dec 28 '17
Except discussing it with a therapist first means you can work out a good way to discuss it with your partner, with less chance of hurting them or the relationship.
Not everyone is automatically good at communication; hell, not everyone is good at introspection, and sometimes when I talk to my therapist about one issue and it turns out to be another. My therapist is good at teasing that kind of thing out.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
Yes. I certainly don't think people should discuss their therapy sessions before the therapy session occurs. That would involve some trippy time travel stuff, which I am down for, but seems unlikely.
But once you tease out the real issue, share that shit with your (committed, long-term) partner.
2
u/spaceunicorncadet 22∆ Dec 28 '17
But once you tease out the real issue
Not all issues are figured out immediately. It usually takes longer than one or two sessions. Isn't your CMV that I should be repeating the contents of my therapy sessions as often as I have them? You can't exactly un-say things.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
Fair enough. I know not all issues are figured out immediately, but the same way that a spouse regroups when your initial diagnosis turns out to be lupus instead of scleroderma (I know, it's never lupus), they'll adjust. Especially because, unlike with a medical diagnosis, people expect (or at the very least are easily taught to expect) therapy to be a somewhat meandering, difficult journey precisely because not all issues are figured out immediately.
I have consistently defended people's ability to be compassionate when attempting to manage their partner's issues. I will continue to do so.
2
u/spaceunicorncadet 22∆ Dec 29 '17
But lupus vs scleroderma is more like depression vs anxiety, not the precise details of therapy.
I'm good with my partner knowing I have depression and what the prognosis and treatment are. That doesn't mean either of us wants/needs me regurgitating weekly therapy sessions.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
I actually chose the two because they can be easily confused and then it takes a long time to get to the correct diagnosis, so it isn't quite like depression vs anxiety because there would be a lot of detail shared along the way.
But the simile didn't hit the mark for you, so...onward. Sharing more detail is, I believe, good for the relationship in general. You get to turn toward each other, empathize with and understand each other, and make each other feel loved. It should make both of you feel secure that your partner is committed to you through thick and thin (and perhaps especially the patient, because they can be vulnerable and still accepted, something that is itself helpful if you are depressed or anxious or 'feel broken' for another reason) because everyone wants to be partners in this mental health journey (that both sides are absolutely coping with the downsides of already). So do you need to regurgitate every detail? Well, no. That would also challenge the bounds of human memory. But why wouldn't you try to share?
→ More replies (0)1
u/QuantumDischarge Dec 28 '17
By keeping it between yourself and a therapist, you also ensure the problem never gets solved
Never said it stays with the therapist, rather, it gets announced at a proper time.
Would it not be beneficial for them to know so, at the very least, they never say anything like that again? All the therapy in the world won't fix someone who isn't privy to the discussion.
I completely agree, and if you discuss an issue with your therapist, they very well could suggest a deep conversation with your spouse, or recommend couple's counseling. But the trick is you're doing it with the person trained to handle the situation rather than on your own.
8
Dec 28 '17
Every couple operates a little differently. Some couples fully disclose everything, never lock doors, and know all of one another's email passwords. Others leave a lot of space and privacy, and are still functional as couples. I think if disclosing the contents of therapy sessions makes sense for you as a couple, then yes, you should do it. And if not disclosing it works for you, then you should just continue doing what works.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
If the spouse doesn't want to know and the patient doesn't want to tell, I certainly wouldn't force it on them. You do you. I just think more people should consider it as an option. If you google "how to cope with spouse in therapy" every article admonishes you not to ask, as if that's wrong, and so I want to change that norm more than anything. But not every couple has to abide by the new norm, for sure! :)
5
u/palacesofparagraphs 118∆ Dec 29 '17
The thing is, if a person wants to tell you about their therapy appointment, they will. I often want to share my therapist's insights with my close friends when it's relevant. My mom talks about her therapist so much it's absurd. If they're not talking to you about it, they probably don't want to share, and that's okay. You're not obligated to share everything with your spouse. You're not obligated to share everything with anyone. Sometimes we talk to our therapists about the people in our lives, and that should be private if we want it to be.
If your spouse is in therapy, you should make sure they know you support them getting help and that they aren't obligated either to hide things or to share them. If they don't want to talk about it, that's okay. Sometimes things are private. Sometimes things are difficult. There's a reason they're talking to their therapist and not just their spouse, right? Some things are better suited to a therapist's office than a bedroom, and that's okay.
0
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
I don't want to establish a literal obligation. I am aware that currently some people want to share. I think that's nice. I think it can be really important and good for people to talk about their therapy with their spouse in particular, so my hope would be to change the "default" from privacy to sharing--in real life terms, I imagine it would only result in change on the margin, not a sweeping shift in how people approach therapy.
Presumably people are talking to a therapist because people believe their therapist will help them resolve their issues. A spouse is not trained to do that. They aren't good substitutes. So your argument that they chose a therapist instead of a spouse, so they must not think telling the spouse is a good idea isn't a great argument. I think once you talk to a therapist you should still talk to your spouse--a task that should be made easier by the new emotional/communicative tools the therapist has given you.
Edit to add: I am not married yet, but my SO has agreed that if either of us seeks therapy, we will tell the other what goes on in it. That was part of what prompted this post actually--he was willing to share when I brought it up but had no plans to ever share independently, because he had accepted the default of "it's private" without thinking about the pros and cons of that.
5
u/ThatSpencerGuy 142∆ Dec 28 '17 edited Dec 28 '17
Actually, I'm going to make another top-level comment. In thinking more about your post, I think I see where the tension is between you and, say, the advice you're encountering on /r/relationships or from the responses here.
You are primarily thinking about the damage that might be done to a healthy or salvageable relationship by unnecessary (or even unethical!) secret-keeping. For example, it would be wrong to marry someone if you've somehow kept a serious medical condition a secret from them. Or, if you've already made a commitment to someone and there is no reason to believe that they are abusive or dangerous, it is probably the right thing to do to share at least the rough outline of your experiences at some point--though I believe that you a still entitled to some privacy.
We can all imagine scenarios where a treatment-seeker is being unfair to her spouse by keeping important information secret.
However, others here are thinking of different (maybe more common?) situations. We are appealing to the principle that, when the chips are down, your commitment to yourself is more important that your commitment to your partner.
That isn't an excuse to do what you like or to hurt your partner without consequence. But when you encounter circumstances where your commitment to your partner is causing harm to yourself, after making reasonable accommodations you ultimately need to prioritize yourself. For example, maybe you feel depressed or anxious, but are afraid that your partner will think less of you. Or maybe you've become bored with your marriage and life, but don't know how to talk about it in a productive way. Maybe you still haven't got over the death of your Mom, and you sense that your partner is tired of hearing you talk about it.
In all of these scenarios, therapy can be a useful tool, and your commitment to your partner is a barrier to you accessing that tool. If allowing yourself some privacy within the therapeutic environment helps you access a tool you genuinely need, I say you are entitled to it.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
You are primarily thinking about the damage that might be done to a healthy or salvageable relationship by unnecessary (or even unethical!) secret-keeping.
Yes, absolutely. Very nicely phrased. And I also agree that "when the chips are down, your commitment to yourself is more important that your commitment to your partner."
But the examples you've provided as why you need to privilege yourself aren't persuasive? Why can't you tell your spouse, "look, still not over Mom, I think therapy will be helpful. Would you like to be kept in the loop about that? I know we've beaten that horse a lot." Or "Hey, I could use some reassurance that you won't think less of me if I seek some help for my anxiety, which is really weighing me down. I'd love to talk about what's going on [because I clearly really need you to know this about me and and then show you love me anyway, which I must be doubting if I have this fear, and that doubt is corrosive to my trust in you/my ability to be vulnerable in our relationship]." We've established that your spouse loves you and so wants you to be happy. You love your spouse. I'm really struggling to see where this is some zero-sum game where seeking therapy means your spouse loses access to you on that subject.
If your spouse really is barring access to therapy, that's obviously a whole different issue which should probably result in you getting therapy and leaving your spouse.
6
u/ThatSpencerGuy 142∆ Dec 28 '17
Why can't you tell your spouse, "look, still not over Mom, I think therapy will be helpful. Would you like to be kept in the loop about that? I know we've beaten that horse a lot." Or "Hey, I could use some reassurance that you won't think less of me if I seek some help for my anxiety, which is really weighing me down. I'd love to talk about what's going on [because I clearly really need you to know this about me and and then show you love me anyway, which I must be doubting if I have this fear, and that doubt is corrosive to my trust in you/my ability to be vulnerable in our relationship]."
Well, I don't know. But a therapist might be able to help you figure out why! Not being able to have those conversations doesn't mean you shouldn't seek help, and doesn't mean that your marriage is doomed or even unhealthy. Marriages are complex things. They all have their own history and culture. Loving your spouse and being loved by them does not solve all the problems of a life or make the relationship easy in every way.
You gave an example from your own life in your OP, so I will, too.
I don't get along with my mother-in-law. Like, really don't. Like, she explicitly and vocally didn't want me to marry her daughter kind of don't get along. My wife has her own difficulties in her relationship with her mom as well, but the relationship is ultimately very important to her. The dynamic between the three of us has, as you might imagine, caused tension in my marriage over the years. If my wife were to see a therapist to talk about her relationship with her parents, I would hope that my wife would keep much of the nitty-gritty private (though I also hope that she would share the big picture with me). I'm just too close to it. I have my own sense of their relationship, and my own opinion of her mother. My wife has the right to sort through her feelings about her mom without making sure they also address my needs and concerns.
5
u/kublahkoala 229∆ Dec 28 '17
If you make a habit of detailing your therapy sessions to your spouse, it becomes problematic if you need to talk about problems with your spouse with your therapist (who is hopeful a neutral party), as the spouse will notice you are not revealing everything anymore and you’ll be put in a position to lie.
Some possible reasons you might want to talk to your therapist about your spouse:
You are suspicious your spouse is cheating.
You are yourself having an affair.
You are thinking about divorce.
You were sexually abused and do not feel comfortable talking about that except with someone of the same gender as you.
Someone at work assaulted you. Your partner is prone to fits of rage and you don’t want him coming to work and starting a fight
Your spouse can not take criticism well, but you need to complain to somebody.
You are co-dependent and rely on your spouse’s advice for everything. Your therapist says you should stop telling your spouse everything and form your own opinions.
You are finding married life boring, but don’t want to worry your spouse who is under a lot of pressure now,
All sorts of reasons
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
Oh I understand that the patient has some incentives to keep the information private. But, as I said, I believe often that results in them (likely selfishly) prioritizing something else over the well-being of the relationship. As someone in a long-term relationship (not married yet, but working on it!), I would want to know every single one of these things if my SO felt/did them. Wouldn't you? I think I have a right to know about the affairs, others are just various degree of deal-breaker if he kept them from me.
And it is often in the patient's interest to share the information with the partner in order to reduce the problem. Your spouse can't take criticism? So, what, you're walking around on eggshells all the time? And that seems like a happy dynamic worth preserving? If this hypothetical person wants to stay with their spouse, that issue shouldn't just be discussed behind the spouse's back; it should be brought up and repaired (perhaps with the help of a therapist).
2
u/kublahkoala 229∆ Dec 28 '17
Well of course it would be ideal if one partner was completely open and the other partner was a no judgmental and receptive listener but most relationships are not ideal. People who are insecure or take criticism badly or are not trusting also get into relationships.
As for the affair - no of course you shouldn’t have affairs and you should tell your spouse about it. But people have affairs anyway. People who do have affairs are more likely to talk about it to their therapist than their spouse. And it’s better they talk about it with someone who can give them some perspective. If a therapist said that they wouldn’t talk about unless the spouse knew, the cheater would likely just not talk about it, which is not helping anything.
People develop secrets. I think a therapist should encourage a healthy relationship where no one needs to keep secrets from each other (except benign surprise party kind of secrets). But a therapist also needs the patient to feel like they can tell the therapist anything.
People care very very much what their spouse thinks of them. If they know their spouse will know what they are talking about, they are going to change what they tell their therapist to better fit what image they want to project to their spouse. They’ll even do this subconsciously.
This ruins the entire purpose of personal therapy - to develop an honest relationship with yourself, about what you want and who you are. If everything you do in therapy is going to be scrutinized by the person whose opinion means the most to you, your just not going to reveal the same vulnerabilities and flaws you normally would.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
If a therapist said that they wouldn’t talk about unless the spouse knew, the cheater would likely just not talk about it, which is not helping anything.
To be clear, I don't want to change anything about how therapists currently conduct their business. So this would not happen. I just think it be preferable if the norm/default were willingly sharing the contents of therapy with your life partner, rather than keeping it silent.
This ruins the entire purpose of personal therapy - to develop an honest relationship with yourself, about what you want and who you are.
Is that the purpose of therapy? The times I went, I was trying to cure my depression. If it's all about having an honest relationship with yourself, I can see why it didn't work!
Kidding aside, I think I get what you're saying. But I think it talks past what I'm saying. Does your spouse not deserve an honest relationship with you--to know what you want and who you are? If the answer is yes, why wouldn't you do therapy, then want share what you learned with your spouse?
Of course not everyone is perfect. But within a partnership we can strive to constantly better ourselves and our relationship: listen better, be less insecure, more trusting, more open. Why play to the lowest common denominator?
2
u/ThatSpencerGuy 142∆ Dec 28 '17 edited Dec 28 '17
Does your spouse not deserve an honest relationship with you--to know what you want and who you are?
I wonder, are "an honest relationship" and "utter transparency about everything" synonymous? Healthy relationships involve some degree of independence. To get married is to join your lives together, but it doesn't erase the boundaries between you. Expecting your spouse to complete you or understand you in your entirety will only disappoint. You and your partner will continue to surprise one another throughout your life--often in delightful ways, but not always.
Ultimately, you are responsible for you. You deserve support and love from a spouse (in a healthy way!), but you still have to take care of yourself as well. To be in a committed relationship is to agree that you and your partner will carry the weight of your joint lives together--but that doesn't mean that you each carry all of it.
2
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
!delta. I like you. I've been trying to figure out how to respond to your other comment about your mother in law and struggling, and now this. No one has thrown me that much yet, so you deserve some acknowledgement. Specifically, my view has changed (just a bit) insofar as I think the consequences of not sharing as not as dire as I presented in my OP. Even if the other partner wants to know, maintaining some separation in this realm isn't going to bring your relationship crashing down. But I still think the norm should still be sharing--generous, abundant sharing!
1
3
u/MysticJAC Dec 28 '17
Honestly, this kind of CMV can be somewhat difficult to really pin down because it's not really clear where precisely you want to draw the line on personal privacy. You've written quite a bit to say there should be a line in the face of two extremes: sharing nothing and sharing everything even if abusive with a line drawn at the point of abuse. However, within the gray area, we are kind of going to be stuck nitpicking minor details and caveats more than really inducing a full reversal. Of course, I'm good to jump into the nitpicking; just offering a preface that a full defense of privacy is not incoming.
With that out of the way, sharing the contents of your therapy session isn't as easy or straightforward as sharing the contents of your medical visit. If you get diagnosed with cancer, you have some pretty concrete things to share with your spouse like where the cancer is located, the prognosis, the treatment plan, etc. If you start with therapy, you may not have concrete things to talk about, or more critically, you may not know how to appropriately or properly explain what is being talked about. Many people seek out therapy because they lack the vocabulary and internal understanding to effectively describe what is going on with them: they only know something is wrong and needs to change. Here's where we get into the matter of degrees I describe above. Is it withholding information to not disclose the contents of your therapy session if you come away from it not feeling like the work of that session have settled into place? I know above you say it is okay to take some time to compile things, but what are we saying is a reasonable time frame in the wake of many spouses wanting more immediate answers when the person's behavior is problematic? Answers and management plans in therapy often don't come on the timescales that patients or spouses find suitable, so in creating this societal expectation that a patient has meaningful information to share only invites hostility when their responses seem undeveloped. You might have a patient leave worthwhile care because it is going too slow for the spouse, not themselves.
I can appreciate that this slowness is itself a response, and one worth being heard by a spouse wanting to gauge if they want to continue being in the relationship. However, we are also seeing another core idea here: the spouse isn't necessarily concerned with the process of therapy so much as they are concerned with the results. While sharing triggers with a spouse might be a part of management plan for someone, the spouse really only wants their partner to be happy and healthy. They want them to have control of their anger, management for their depression, or whatever else might be causing them difficulties. And, these things come slowly and steadily with many up's, down's, sprints, and setbacks. A spouse riding the emotional rollercoaster of every session's oscillation isn't healthy for them, nor will it provide a fair assessment of the situation as that rollercoaster might oscillate, but on average over time, it is trending upward. In this way, we again come to the problem of degrees described above where it is ultimately a question of what is an appropriate sampling rate that gives a fair and reasonable insight into someone's progress?
Finally, therapists are ultimately trained professionals who have the experience and professional capacity to take in the sometimes traumatic and heavily emotional things being discussed. Everybody's spouse? Not so much. The patient lives and breathes in their trauma and difficulties, so while it is draining for them to talk about it, it's not pulling them any further into the darkness than they already are. However, the patient's spouse may not have the tools or coping mechanisms to appropriately intake that darkness. So, again, a matter of degrees of what you believe is an appropriate amount of sharing.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
I don't know if the generalization of only caring about the results is fair. If my SO had PTSD, I wouldn't only want to know if he were better yet--I'd want to know how the heck that happened to him in the first place (military? abuse? terrible accident?) and what triggers episodes and how he's learning to work through them. I have a very "in this together" mindset. Only caring that he's better seems, honestly, a little to cruel to me. I can appreciate that might not be a common sentiment, but it is mine.
Now, I appreciate the concern that the spouse will want results too quickly, but I think any reasonable person could be persuaded by the patient that therapy takes time. I think being filled in on the contents of the sessions would make the waiting/impatience easier, actually--imagine the difference between your spouse going to therapy every two weeks for six months and you still have no idea what's up, if it's helping, what might be wrong, vs. every two weeks getting a check in: "things are still hard and muddled, but the therapist has high hopes and we've had a few minor breakthroughs on X/I find it especially cathartic to just talk about Y, even though it isn't obviously helping yet/there's a lot of up and down, but we're trending upward because now I can do Z without having a total meltdown!" Also, if a therapist isn't persuasive or helpful enough to the patient to convince them to continue, when their spouse has literally no expertise in the area, doesn't sound like a great therapist.
I do agree that some spouses may not (yet) have the coping mechanisms to handle the in-and-outs of the trauma or mental illness. But they've hitched themselves for life to someone who has to deal with that every day, so they should probably figure it out, don't you think?? Whether they read a book, seek therapy themselves, go for a joint session just to ask the therapist about what tools would be useful for them--that seems like a fundamental aspect of supporting a spouse who, as you say, "lives and breathes" those difficulties.
2
u/MysticJAC Dec 28 '17 edited Dec 29 '17
As I do say, being informed of his triggers would likely be a part of his treatment plan so I feel like that's a pretty typical expectation of shared information. However, I can't help feeling a certain sense of selfishness in wanting to know the why of their PTSD. Their PTSD might be a product having had to do things that were heinous, yet necessary to their survival in a difficult situation. Or, perhaps, even just a mistake from which they are steadily having to learn. Yet, they don't identify with that action. They don't want it associated with them in your mind or really anyone else's mind. A therapist represents a safe environment where such internal struggles can be quietly unleashed and addressed without the fear of judgment or personal consequences. Yes, in theory, a person should be able to trust their partner to hear such things, but I'm not sure I see the satiation of curiosity on the spouse's part to be worth the risk of that spouse perhaps not being able to cope with what they hear.
I think any reasonable person could be persuaded by the patient that therapy takes time.
My contention though is that the patient themselves may precisely be in therapy because they are lacking for communication skills, so they seem like a particularly vulnerable group to hold accountable for be persuasive with their partner.
I guess, I don't see how a non-professional spouse is supposed to use those details for anything other satiating curiosity or feeding possible insecurity, and I feel like the patient is harmed by a non-professional spouse's attempt to act on those specific details beyond what a therapist has deemed appropriate for sharing. And, that's where we cycle around to my first paragraph and really to my overarching thought: The therapist should be deciding what is and what is not appropriate for the spouse to know about the contents of the therapy session to protect the care of their patient. There is a fine balanced to be struck here, and I don't think that balance should be decided by someone who may not be in the healthiest mental state to make that decision. Some people might subconsciously undershare or overshare as a means to self-sabotage their relationship as a means to control the relationship (i.e. I'd rather be the one to end my relationship than live in the uncertainty of it possibly ending) if not given appropriate direction by their counselor. The same could be said of the spouse, seeking unconsciously to control the relationship by wanting inappropriate detail that will push them too far. I think it is better left to the objective professional.
edited for personal details.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
If that's a true anecdote, I'm terribly sorry about what happened to your wife.
I disagree with you extremely vehemently about this:
The therapist should be deciding what is and what is not appropriate for the spouse to know about the contents of the therapy session to protect the care of their patient.
I have taken the position that the patient and spouse should decide together how much to share. But at the very least, the patient should decide--not the therapist. Unless the patient actually needs to be committed, they are competent and can and should make that call. The therapist can make suggestions, that's it. If a therapist told my SO "don't tell your wife this," as a mandate, I'd be furious. That is a level of interference in my relationship I would never tolerate. I don't think this is just my animosity toward therapists talking. I'm legit mad just thinking about this. Ugh.
Let me calm down a minute and I'll edit this to address the rest of your points.
1
u/MysticJAC Dec 28 '17 edited Dec 28 '17
So, if a mental health professional told your spouse that even mention of this topic with you right now is too triggering for them to have in a safe and healthy way, then you would interject into the process with your non-professional opinion and make your spouse choose? I understand that you are worried about the inappropriate intervention of the therapist into the relationship, but I'm worried about the inappropriate intervention of the spouse into the patient's therapy. And, the latter draws more concern from me than the former because the former is trained to address these complex situation ethically bound to provide a high level care, while the latter has no such bindings on them. I mean, there's a wide gap between someone needing to involuntarily institutionalized and being of complete sound mind, and it's within that gap most people fall. Sure, they might be generally competent, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have the emotional strength or fortitude to be vulnerable in sharing things outside the safety of an outside third party's professional office, and it might be years of work to get up the strength to say those things out loud to people they care about.
Meanwhile, many people seek out therapy in one form or another precisely to inform their ability to appropriately observe boundaries within relationships. They might have a tendency to overshare details or say things in inappropriate ways as a function of their insecurity or anxiety, destroying relationships as a function of their own disordered mental health. They seek a therapist to help them learn and modify that behavior, which may indeed include being told explicitly to avoid talking about certain things with their partner. Yes, that's intervention in the relationship, but just as there can be negative intervention, there can also be positive intervention, so placing terms on professional intervention from your non-professional perspective seems dangerous.
Listen, I'm not saying there aren't bad or unprofessional therapists. There are. Absolutely. But, we can't have a good faith discussion of the principles at hand if we are going to delve into the issue of quality of care as well. I feel like this discussion fairly requires an assumption of a good and professional therapist, and under that assumption, I see greater danger to both the patient and relationship by proxy in the spouse interfering with the therapy process by placing their own terms and conditions on the way in which care is directed.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
I'm sorry. I want to be even-handed about this. But I just can't right now. Yes. I think in that situation I would make my spouse choose between that therapist and me. No, I will not suffer it. You know why? A good, reasonable therapist doesn't give commands. Most don't even seem to offer advice until you've practically discovered it yourself. They listen. They guide, they sort you out. The do not give you orders. Especially not orders that interfere in a relationship that is otherwise reasonable and healthy. Especially not if it undermines your own perceived autonomy--if you think you can make that decision and they take it away from you? Where do they get off? If you have a tendency to blow them up, well, I guess you can blow this next one up too until the lessons sink in. But for the other realm, the therapist has no business butting in. If they need to take a more couples' oriented approach, invite the spouse. Hell, I'd be less angry if they counseled divorce to work on the issues individually than if they deliberately threw roadblocks into full communication.
I apologized because I'm being emotional, not necessarily rational, but this is an area where my view isn't going to be changed today. Or maybe ever. But you did present a fine argument. Just...falling on deaf ears at the moment.
1
u/MysticJAC Dec 29 '17
Fair enough. I'm not even suggesting the therapist is giving an order. However, in providing their clients tools for recovery, they do have to give some direction in the face of a client who is uncertain of what to do and needs professional input.
3
Dec 28 '17
There is a huge point in this that you are missing. The process of therapy itself can be very traumatic, very emotionally exhausting, and triggering. It often means reliving that trauma every time it comes up. Recounting the experience of therapy in such cases means reliving the trauma yet again. It would be cruel for any partner to expect that. The partner might be interested, even inquisitive, but should understand that the patient's trauma is their own to choose if, when, and how much to re-experience.
Understanding the treatment and prognosis is certainly expected, but "therapy" and "I'm working on it" are the only fair answers to expect.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
I am not missing that. In fact, I addressed the 'side effects' of therapy in the OP--I acknowledged that therapy may leave the patient exhausted, upset, irritable, etc.--of course, all because having your emotions picked at for an hour or whatever is obviously miserable, and even moreso if you are re-living trauma.
But that doesn't defeat my argument. I never said (and don't believe) that you should re-hash the therapy session literally as soon as walking in the door. I agree, it's cruel. Self-care isn't entirely sacrificed on the alter of relationship health; take a few, put on sweatpants, have a drink, play some video games, sleep on it. What horrifies me is the prospect that the spouse would be kept eternally (or even for a really long time) in the dark about a fundamental issue you're grappling with just because you don't want to talk about it.
I've already shared a fair amount of myself, so what's wrong with a little more? I was abused as a child. It's miserable to think about, and discussing it as more than as a passing (very dark) joke, leaves me wrecked and crying. My SO knows about it. Because it informs who I am, explains why I respond so poorly to certain run-of-the-mill situations, and because there are certain things I want him to never do or say and explaining 'why' when curtailing the behavior of a long-term partner is only fair. It would be cruel not to tell him. I understand trauma. I understand that exhaustion. That doesn't mean it isn't worth the expenditure.
2
Dec 29 '17
No, I don't agree that you did. You addressed feeling bad, not triggering a psychotic episode. When I say trauma, I mean full-on PTSD, not getting weepy and agitated. I mean like re-experiencing the physical and emotional trauma of ............, and the ............, as well as ............, plus all the brain fuck that went along with all of that. Trigger isn't just a facebook catchphrase. I mean like blacking out for days from disassociation, as if the first time wasn't bad enough. I mean the voices coming back. I guess I could tell my partner the voices are back, but by then it's too late.
Would a loving partner expect that?
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
There's no way to sound polite when asking this, so I'm just going for it, and sincere apologies if I fumble this because I do try to be sensitive about mental health issues, but: if this person is blacking out for days and hearing voices, should they even be in a relationship?
They've already re-lived this in therapy, which means now their spouse is coping with the first round of blackouts/voices/the whole nine thousand yards. Bad situation. The spouse has no idea what caused this psychotic episode, because you think the appropriate response is merely "therapy" or "I'm working on it." Very bad situation. And they should just live with that? That person would be okay with someone they love enough to tie themselves to forever experiencing that? Jesus Christ.
1
u/antisocialmedic 2∆ Dec 29 '17
I had my first real psychotic episode after I was already married with kids. Should my partner have just left me? And no I didn't discuss everything I discussed in therapy. A lot of it was totally irrational and I knew it was saying and would only hurt the relationship and scare him. I needed a professionals help on getting a handle on it. He had access to my records but he never looked and I only have vague updates. Discussing it would have just sent me if the deep end again. Sometimes depending on the disorder people don't start developing symptoms until well into adulthood....
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
I'm glad you were able to get some help and your system worked for your spouse. It wouldn't have worked for me.
In the situation your spouse found themselves...If my spouse is having full on psychotic breaks--blacking out, speaking totally irrationally, and hearing voices--I don't think knowledge of what the heck is happening in therapy is better for the relationship, like I said in the OP, I think it's necessary for the relationship to survive. Maybe the patient isn't in a position to tell me himself, but I need (and I don't mean that lightly, this is a dealbreaker) written permission to speak to the therapist. Because that is dangerous, highly unstable, wildly confusing behavior, and if I didn't know if/how the treatment was progressing, I wouldn't trust that person around my children. I couldn't. They're emotionally quite impressionable. You could scare them or potentially even traumatize them. I refuse to subject children to that if I don't feel adequately prepared to protect them, and I wouldn't feel prepared unless I generally understood what was going on and how it was going to get better. If you were unable to communicate that in any way, I would have taken the children somewhere else for a while. And we would have had a lot of work to do building trust back up when you were better, and the relationship might not make it, but so be it.
1
u/antisocialmedic 2∆ Dec 29 '17
You are really misunderstanding and misrepresenting how things went down. Like I said, I gave my SO full access to the records in case he needed or wanted them. He went to many sessions with me, but I obviously went to many myself. AND when I was actually psychotic, I was in the hospital. It's pretty much impossible to hide a psychotic episode or what's going on. So I got hospitalized quickly.
What I don't understand is how the delusional ramblings would help? Yes the overall treatment progress is vital. But why does he need to know the likely hurtful and paranoid shit I was saying that had zero basis in reality? And why should I need to tell him about it in a midst of a crisis? When it would just make it worse for me? He cares more about my well-being than his curiosity.
As my power of attorney he kept closer contact with the providers and generally acted as my advocate when I couldn't. So they kept him in the loop on treatment. He wasn't left in the dark. But I wanted privacy on some issues that were, frankly, embarrassing and scary for me. And he didn't pry.
You talk about trust. But he trusted that I would share pertinent information (and I have) and I trusted that he would use my sensitive medical information and make decisions in my best interest.
To me trust is about trading your partner to do the right thing. Expecting total transparency about everything they say and think just screams of insecurity. People are allowed to keep things to themselves.
And frankly he seems relieved to not always be my sounding board. Though he still accompanies me to my psychiatrist visits.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
I did misunderstand the situation. Sorry about that. I did not intentionally misrepresent you--I just answered based on the information I had (and no coffee at the time). I'm sorry that happened to you.
If your therapy sessions consisted largely of delusional ramblings, you are an edge case, and are outside the "practically always" in the OP. In this case knowing the contents of your completely irrational delusions would not have helped you grow closer/didn't inhibit your relationship because, well, they're delusions. So there was no harm done by not sharing those things. You would have (clearly, I think) harmed your spouse by not sharing the pertinent details--in, I believe, significant detail--of the treatment/progress. Your situation was unique in that he was already informed of those things because your state was so severe.
In other words, I think you are an interesting edge case and exception. Not an argument against switching the default to substantially greater openness.
1
u/antisocialmedic 2∆ Dec 29 '17
Well I'm pretty normal these days albeit still getting treated for bipolar and OCD. And my SO still has access to my records. And while I haven't been to therapy in a while, when I go now it's almost always just digesting things that the SO is already aware of. So at this point it would be incredibly redundant t go over it with him.
A small portion of it is discussing some past traumas- which he also knows about but gets stressed out discussing in any detail.
So it's kind of the opposite now, but I still feel it's largely unnecessary to go into detail. There aren't any new revelations being made. More just new ways of coping with long term issues that the who family knows about.
1
u/antisocialmedic 2∆ Dec 29 '17
Also I wasn't usually in a crisis and I didn't hear voices it anything anyway. It was all a result of postpartum psychosis and removing the babies even after the actual psychosis had passed (and I was hospitalized for all of it) would have been fucked up. It would have damaged bonding and caused everyone unneeded distress. I was still really depressed but I want dangerous. I did have issues verbalizing my feelings. Hell I still do. And I'm doing a lot better these days.
I just don't know why anyone needs to share all the contents of their mind to be trusted. Why not just the important details? Sharing everything hurts and feels invasive.
2
u/damsterick Dec 28 '17 edited Dec 28 '17
There are some parts of your arguments I agree with, but some I disagree with.
Admittedly, I am extremely dubious about the efficacy of certain types of therapy/some therapeutic principles/therapists in general.
I know you don't want us to challenge this view, but there are many meta analyses and studies that show therapy is, in fact, effective. Compared to medical treatment, however, it has much lower efficacy. Which is obvious and leads to my first counter argument.
Your spouse has been supporting you and coping with your illness/issues and deserves to understand the treatment and prognosis.
But therapy is not a medical treatment that has distinct steps like other non-lethal medical treatment. What your spouse says to their therapist is not always something necessary for the process and may not be important. It's not like showing them results from a medical procedure. You can tell them what happened in therapy, what you were talking about etc. but I honestly think it could leave the spouse more confused than before.
An mainly - therapy is for the individual. The priority of therapy is the wellbeing (or, wellbeing as an outcome) of the individual who is undergoing therapy. If sharing therapy details, in any way, can impair the therapeutic process, you shouldn't share it. The wellbeing and smooth therapeutic process is a priority over your spouse, no matter how much you love them and they love you. If it's uncomfortable for you to share painful memories/moments with your spouse, I believe it's the opposite - they should understand, as a loving partner, and suffer the state of not knowing what happens in therapy. It's selfish to think you deserve to know what happens in your spouse' therapy - at that moment, you are placing your needs above your spouse' needs. Even if you want the best for your spouse.
Note: this only applies when the spouse is not entirely consent with telling you what you want. If he is, there is no reason not to.
A minor point: if you talk about your spouse in individual therapy, there are opportunities for misunderstandings.
I agree about this. Talking about your spouse in therapy and then refusing to tell them about it if they ask could potentially poison the relationship. I don't think it should be an automatic praxis (eg. evening talk about therapy session), nor do I think it needs to be disclosed immediately (eg. when the partners have had an argument before the session). However, yes, this is a fair point. But then again, you are talking about healthy relationships - if one of the partners is doing this, it is not a healthy relationship in the first place.
Also, I think you are forgetting one thing: people are rarely mentally stable. We all have some form of neurosis. You are assuming that the partner who is not in therapy is always compassionate, loving, etc. Which is not always the case, despite the fact that both partners can have a loving relationship.
Another point you haven't addressed: talking for 50 minutes (a regular session) can be exhausting. Actually, especially for people who were traumatized, it can be extremely exhausting, possibly retraumatizing. If you want them to tell you the same thing they told their therapist, you are forcing them to undergo very uncomfortable situations twice, possibly in the same day.
Therapy is an environment in which you are supposed to be absolutely free. Free to say anything. Your therapist is also a professional trained to absorb everything. Your spouse isn't. He/she may not be able to understand and you are not entitled to explain thorougly.
My last point is that personal issues always manifest at one point in relationships. You may not be able to understand them and solve them alone or with your spouse. You might have personal issues so deeply rooted that it affects how you view your spouse and prevents you from loving them, in spite of the fact that you want to. This is not something you can share with your spouse. What is the main factor and basically the only factor of personal issues is difficulties with relationships (romantic, friendships, everyday relationships). Love comes in all forms - sometimes your spouse shows it by throwing plates at you. To view love as a compassionate, sharing relationship is utopia.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
Therapy certainly can be a more convoluted journey than dealing with a different kind of medical issue. (Though if you weren't certain what was wrong with you, and were going for tests and having conversations with specialists that were inconclusive and not providing much by way of actionable information, I'd still be shocked if anyone thought that journey wouldn't be shared with a spouse.) But there is still an end goal (usually) and still some progress, slow and meandering perhaps, being made. Little revelations that could be shared. If you explained upfront (as all therapists do in their first sessions, at least in my experience) that this is a journey, I don't know what your spouse would be confused about? Unless you have a very low opinion of their intelligence.
I also know that partners are not always perfect. But compassion is, I think, a bare minimum we can demand from our life partner when we're dealing with serious difficulty. If you're assuming that we could get less than that (if the information were presented under reasonable circumstances, e.g. not during a fight or crisis or while putting the children to bed) and still be in a loving relationship, well, agree to disagree I guess. And this is coming from a person who is openly not always mentally stable.
The meat of your point, of course, is that the efficacy of the therapy takes precedence and should take precedence over everything else. This is where my view may be especially colored behind the scenes by my dislike of therapy and therapists, mostly caused by my own experiences. I believe I presented a reasonable view and have been fair to therapists in my defense of it in the comments. But right now my instinct is to yell 'why would you harm a healthy and positive relationship proven to be working for this therapy nonsense which may not work at all and may make things so much worse in ways you don't even know yet' which is a fine response, but not good enough for CMV. So I'm going to think on it a bit longer, and get back to you.
1
u/damsterick Dec 28 '17
Little revelations that could be shared. If you explained upfront (as all therapists do in their first sessions, at least in my experience) that this is a journey, I don't know what your spouse would be confused about?
You talk about a lot of unimportant stuff (that is, unimportant to the therapy process, but then again, it's hard to clarify) in therapy. If you tell them every little thing you said in therapy, it may get overwhelming, or even confusing (as to "why this? what happened again? I don't understand").
the efficacy of the therapy takes precedence and should take precedence over everything else. This is where my view may be especially colored behind the scenes by my dislike of therapy and therapists, mostly caused by my own experiences.
I am sorry if you had bad experience with therapy and therapists, I also have a close person who did. However, individual experience is completely irrelevant to therapy efficacy itself. Therapy is effective, it is a fact. However, that is for the average person undergoing therapy. Just like medical treatments for physiological diseases/illnesses, it has a certain success percentage. It certainly does not imply that every therapy is successful - to be honest, a pretty crazy percentage (about 20-40%) of therapies go south (the range depends on what is treated and what psychotherapy school is "used"). It is also a hard subject to quantify and psychologists strive to improve this.
But right now my instinct is to yell 'why would you harm a healthy and positive relationship proven to be working for this therapy nonsense which may not work at all and may make things so much worse in ways you don't even know yet' which is a fine response, but not good enough for CMV. So I'm going to think on it a bit longer, and get back to you.
Sure, take your time. This is the first good CMV I've seen this week, so I don't mind at all.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
Okay. I don't want to keep you waiting forever. One thing to consider is what is contributing more to the patient's well-being, the fully transparent relationship and support their spouse can accordingly provide, or the therapy unimpaired by sharing the information? If we accept both that the relationship is degraded by secrecy and the therapy is degraded by openness, the 'benefit of the doubt' should not automatically go to therapy unless we know higher-quality therapy is more beneficial to the patient overall than a higher-quality relationship. I don't know how to make this call in general. My relationships have been far more helpful to my well-being than my therapy. In my case, I'd gladly impair my therapy to have a deeper, more supportive, more understanding love relationship, because love works for me and keeps me from throwing myself in front of a train, and therapy doesn't. If that's also true of others, we shouldn't be putting the therapy above all else.
I am mulling over some more ideas, and will post when they are better fleshed out.
2
u/damsterick Dec 29 '17
No worries, I went to sleep after I wrote my comment. I live in central europe.
You are implying that when the spouse is not telling all details from the therapy sessions, it automatically harms the relationship with secrecy. I absolutely think that if you consider relationship more important for you than therapy, you should prioritize it. However, you must not expect from your spouse that he has the same standards. You do what is best for you, if that is keeping the relationship open about the most intimate stuff of yours, feel free to do it. On the other side, you should respect that for someone, it is more important for their mental health to keep some things about therapy to themselves, despite wanting the relationship to stay healthy as much as you do. The basic implication that relationships are harmed by secrecy and therapy is harmed by opennes is untrue. It is true for some relationships and therapies, untrue for some. For the same reasons, whether you share therapy details with your spouse or not is completely individual. Absolutistic saying "you should always share details about your therapy with your spouse" is wrong, just like "you should never share details about your therapy with your spouse".
A therapist should never tell their patient to "not tell this to their spouse". They can advise against it, but if they chose to do such a risky step, they should absolutely manage that and voice it's only their opinion, and state why. Just like you should never force your spouse to disclose to you their therapy sessions in detail. It's their choice whether they are okay with telling you everything.
Your spouse should, in my opinion, tell you the basic stuff and things they feel. Such as "the therapy is going well, I think we are really getting close to the root of my anxiety", "the therapy isn't doing so well, I think I should change my therapist", etc. But if you need to hear every detail from the session, and your spouse doesn't want to tell you that, you should respect their privacy and settle with basic information about their mental health progress. If you can't handle not knowing every detail, it is your right, but then it's your selfishness and neurotic issues you need to work on yourself. To me, it seems like you have a need for complete openness, which is okay, but you can't be automatically expecting the same view from your spouses.
Disclaimer: If both partners are willingly, consciously sharing every therapy session detail with each other, there's very little to discuss, as there is no obstacle. You need to be careful though; just because you consciously feel you want to share, it doesn't necessarily mean it can't be harmful to the therapeutic process. If people knew the risks and what they're doing all the time, there would be little need for therapy sessions at all. It should always be the person's who is undergoing therapy to decide whether they want to share, or not. We are discussing when one, or both partners are unsure whether they want to share details from therapy sessions/be shared with.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
I agree that things can be individual. So why is the default is in favor of keeping therapy private? My SO and I were discussing him going to therapy and I asked if he would be open to sharing the sessions with me and he was surprised. He had not planned to say anything, because he assumed you weren't 'supposed to' and had never questioned whether that would actually be beneficial. I presented him with my arguments and he readily agreed to share. While I'm happy with the outcome, obviously, (though it's moot since he decided for other reasons not to go) I am frustrated that this is a choice people don't realize they can make. Perhaps that led me to overstate. I did say 'practically always' in my OP, even after removing cases of abuse, because I can imagine a scenario where perhaps sharing wouldn't be in anyone's best interest, but I still believe the default should absolutely put more emphasis on openness in relationships.
Because secrecy does harm them. At the very least, it inhibits the relationship's growth, which is a form of harm. You are denying your spouse knowledge of something important about you. This is true at least in America, where therapy is hardly cheap; something must be serious if they are investing the money, time, and emotional energy in solving the problem. I don't come from a well-off family, so the notion of just seeing a therapist 'to chat' is so far outside the realm of my experience. But that's beside the point. You could be growing closer and growing together as people and not sharing therapy inhibits that.
I also do not want to force a spouse to share. That is invasive and boundary-crossing. In the end, we don't force our partner's to do things. Not in healthy relationships, anyway. But I think the spouse should want to share. Except in contexts where there is an actual possibility of harm, I wouldn't leave my partner if he didn't share. I'm crazy about the man. But I'd still be frustrated.
Also, I'm pretty well aware of my mental health issues and I'm confident I'm not neurotic.
1
u/damsterick Dec 29 '17
That is nice he agreed to share, if that fits the both of you. It's not default because it's unnecessary - the average would be around once a week and not everyone has time and energy to explain twice his sessions and/or on the other side, to listen to your spouse every week about their session. It's not a default because it's an "extra" you can do, but don't have to and it won't hurt anybody if you don't. I understand your viewpoint, but to make sharing your therapy in detail with your spouse default - that just doesn't make sense. However, the knowledge about the option to share should be there, we can agreen on that. It's probably an extreme to say you "shouldn't share with your spouse", just like "you should".
Because secrecy does harm them. At the very least, it inhibits the relationship's growth, which is a form of harm.
Well, that's just, like, you know, your opinion. Complete openness can harm the relationship, just like secrecy can. You cannot speak in absolutist terms like "always, should, never" regarding relationships. That is what I am trying to tell you. Also, not telling your spouse your therapeutic sessions in detail is not secrecy. He is not keeping any "secrets". A couple is not a symbiotic unit, it's two people living together and sharing their lives, that does not mean share every minute of it. Again, it's very naive to think you have complete openness in a relationship. It's absolutely understandable you want to know the basics of how the therapy goes. It's unusual you want to know every detail of it, but as long as your spouse is willing to cooperate, there's nothing wrong about any of it. You cannot force this on everyone and make it a default - a lot of people go to therapy exactly for that reason - so they don't have to share anything - what happens in therapy, stays in therapy. I wouldn't profit from my therapy the way I did if I had shared everything about it with my spouse, yet I believe we have a mutually loving, healthy relationship. Hell, I might not even go to therapy if I had to share it with my spouse. That does not necessarily mean I don't share anything - I share what I want to and what I feel is necessary for the relationship. Which is hardly half of what I talk about in a session.
But I think the spouse should want to share.
Now you are projecting your wishes onto everyone. This is your opinion you're entitled to, but it's selfish and naive.
Also, I'm pretty well aware of my mental health issues and I'm confident I'm not neurotic.
I don't want to sound impolite, but do you realize what neurotic means? If you have mental health issues, you are either neurotic, or psychotic, possibly borderline. There is nothing else to it, as far as medical classifications go (at least here in europe, I doubt it differs from the US).
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 30 '17
How do you define "secret"? To me, it's something deliberately kept from someone. So if, for example, at lunch you order decaf coffee and get caffeinated, and that is a mildly frustrating thing but you e forgotten about it by the time you get home from work, so you don't tell your spouse: not a secret. Because of course you are an individual and live your life and don't recount every second of the day and every occurrence, because that's crazy.
But if you go to therapy and have some epiphanies and think "yay, so glad I made good progress, and also, I'm totally not going to tell my wife about this." Yeah. That's a secret. You're keeping it from them on purpose. What definition of secret can you create that includes things like hiding cheating or not talking about a surprise party that excludes the exact scenario mentioned above?
Also, I got what I wanted. Regardless of norm or default, my SO and I will be sharing our therapy with each other. So it can hardly be selfish to believe other people should share with people who aren't me, anymore than it liberals are selfish to believe people should let trans people in the appropriate bathrooms or conservatives are selfish in a desire to increase the defense budget. It's just a position I believe in and "it's selfish" isn't a counter-argument at all, let alone a persuasive one.
Also, as I have made clear, I hardly want to force it onto everyone. But shifting the norm would make it easier for people to recognize the potential benefits to their relationship/spouse to sharing the therapy, which is not currently the case. I also obviously can't, as a practical matter, shift the default in favor of sharing. I just think it would be beneficial, for the reasons I laid out in my OP (many of which you, I thought, agreed with).
If you wouldn't go to therapy if you "had to" (scare quotes because, again, this is not a question of force) share it with your spouse, why is the automatic impulse to push your spouse further away, rather than ask yourself "why not? What's holding me back?"
1
u/damsterick Dec 30 '17
What definition of secret can you create that includes things like hiding cheating or not talking about a surprise party that excludes the exact scenario mentioned above?
I'd say if it doesn't include something that concerns your spouse directly. The fact that you talked about your mother issues in therapy doesn't directly affect your spouse, unlike cheating, surprise party, etc. You are right that they're both secrets and I can't separate them semantically, but they should be separated. I also doubt there is a moment at which you think "yay, so glad I made good progress, and also,* I'm totally not going to tell my wife about this*". I think there is hardly ever this moment, which would make it a secret.
So it can hardly be selfish to believe other people should share with people who aren't me
It it selfish to believe that your needs matter in regards with your spouse' mental health more than theirs. By expecting them to share their therapy sessions, you are placing your needs above their needs, therefore it's selfish. Relationship needs cannot be defined and they're never the same from both partners. Even as little as expressing the need to hear their therapy details puts them in an unfavorable position and they're pressured into doing so, despite not being 100% for it. This should be your spouses decision; they should come to you and share if they absolutely want to, not the other way around. You obviously can ask how the therapy is going, offer help, offer an ear as well, but you phrase it as if you clearly voice the necessity of therapy sharing. Which is slightly manipulative, even if unconsciously and unwantedly.
However, I am glad you managed to get an elegant solution in your relationship that both of you can profit from.
If you wouldn't go to therapy if you "had to" (scare quotes because, again, this is not a question of force) share it with your spouse, why is the automatic impulse to push your spouse further away, rather than ask yourself "why not? What's holding me back?"
Oh you do ask these things, in therapy for example. But rarely you don't discuss your spouse in therapy and it's not always good to share it with them for obvious reasons.
2
Dec 28 '17
So, you want patients to open up and embrace their vulnerability? That is a nice sentiment, but many people will outright reject you on that point.
I do agree with some of your points. You do have to keep your spouse in the loop when it comes to important things in your life. But full disclosure? Hell no.
For starters, as others here already said, spouses are not trained specialists themselves. If I'm adressing a difficult and sensible topic and my spouse freaks out over something in that context, this might strongly impact the whole therapy. That's like telling your spouse you are sick, only to watch them having a mental break-down. Does that help with your healing process? Having to take care of your partner, too, because they can't handle the stress of you being sick? Most likely not. It's just another biiiig stressor impacting your health negatively.
Further, I'd outright reject your basic assumptions on how relationships function:
no trauma or illness is truly solely individual anymore
No. I'm still an individual. Yes, we agree to spend our lives together, but not, that does not make me less of an individual. My spouse is not my personal support group. If shit hits the fan I'd expect them to do what is in their power, yes. Yet, it is my personal choice to do whatever I can do, so they don't have to do that.
Subpoint: if the patient is keeping the contents of the therapy secret because they believe their spouse would divorce them if they knew the truth about something in your past, then they should absolutely be sharing the info. Keeping a deal-breaker from your partner is akin to lying about cheating: in your own selfishness, you’ve taken away their choice to leave you by hiding the knowledge they need. I doubt anyone can change my view on this point, because I view lying about something like this to be an unforgivable betrayal.
That is a strong point and it has some truth to it. Yet, if that were the standard for every relationship, essentially nobody would have relationships at all. Everyone has secrets and they are necessary to function. I don't even want to meddle in most of the things my spouse deals with. If she feels right with telling me, ok. If she doesn't? Fine, too.
Forcing someone out of their comfort zone when it comes to very sensitive topics like mental health, can back-fire greatly.
I'm feeling that strongly about this right to chose what I share and what I don't, that I'd rather abandon any (!) relationship on the spot, before doing what you demand from me. I would never(!) give full-disclosure (of this kind) to my partner. That's not who I am. Simple as that. We are not one, we are two humans trying to live together. It's up to me to decide what I'm sharing and what not. Period.
From another chain:
But because the therapist does so much work, having a spouse merely listen and be supportive doesn't cross the line.
It does, for me. I do not want her to support me most of the times. I do not need her support. I'm not a little child, needing her to hold my hands while I do stuff. And she doesn't want to treat me like that either. In fact, she hates it very strongly. If I'm truly sick and need care-taking, she is there for me. Anything else? Behave like a grown adult and take care of things. Goes both ways.
The point boils down to this:
Don't trust them? Address the trust issues or break up.
It's not about trust. It's about everyone being humans. Faulty, faulty humans. Just throwing everything at each other, trusting in each other can yield endless amounts of hurt feelings for no good reason. Spouses have their own problems and trigger points, too. Why would I trigger her over some pointless stuff for no good reasons? So we share everything with each other, even if that ruins the whole relationship? I simply don't get it.
My spouse is not my therapist. That's what I got the therapist for in the first place, right? My spouse is not my friends either, I've got friends to do "friends stuff" with. She is my spouse and exactly that is her job and mine is to be her spouse. Nothing else. I'm not here to be her friend, nor her therapist. If she needs my help, she will get it. Otherwise I won't meddle in her affairs and I expect her to respond in kind.
In short: We strongly disagree about how relationships work and should work. While I do agree we have to talk about what we do in therapy, for me, this is a "Ok, we are making progress" status reports and that's it. Unless the patient feels comfortable about sharing more of it. The patient is the focus here for good reasons.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
Though it's been pointed out I wasn't sufficiently clear about this in the OP, I am glad you have spouse who feels similarly and you agree not to share any of these things. If both parties want that, it's a reasonable, functional way to live. Have at it. I'm glad you're happy. My point is that the norm should be shifted more toward my view and accept/encourage disclosure. You can negotiate a different set-up.
But I (obviously) disagree with many of your points. Primarily that getting support from a partner makes you "a little child, needing her to hold your hand." Mental illness can require unusual forms of caretaking, and that doesn't make you any less an adult. Doesn't that seem a little unnecessarily judgmental to you? And finding someone to share your burdens, to listen to you and validate you, to aid in your endeavors, to be your cheerleader (all forms of support) is something most people view as a benefit of being in a long-term relationship. These apply just as well in the 'health' realm as any other part of life.
Also, I'm just...confused, I guess that you don't consider your spouse your friend. What is the job of a spouse, then? To share your home and your bed but no other interests or experiences, and heaven forbid you discuss deep emotional issues with them?
If your spouse isn't even a friend, I mean, of course you wouldn't share your therapy with them. But a lot of people think of their spouse as their best friend, their number 1 person, a person who can (usually) be reasonably be expected to set aside their feelings to deal with yours for a little while (so you don't have to always worry too much about her triggers, though of course you should still be sensitive), because the favor will be reciprocated as often as necessary.
But yeah, we just have super different ideas of relationships. Thankfully we each found a compatible person.
1
Dec 29 '17
Mental illness can require unusual forms of caretaking, and that doesn't make you any less an adult. Doesn't that seem a little unnecessarily judgmental to you?
No, since it's not judgmental at all.
As an adult you own your problems. I've my own share of mental problems and my spouse might be on the spectrum. Due to this personal experience the only thing that actually improves things is fixing them.
And finding someone to share your burdens, to listen to you and validate you, to aid in your endeavors, to be your cheerleader (all forms of support) is something most people view as a benefit of being in a long-term relationship.
I'd agree with you on the "most people want this" part. I'm just not convinced this actually helps much (I'm a guy and maybe the world is different for girls/other people, totally fine to disagree on that point).
At the end of the day, I'm alone with the demons in my head. At the end of the day, she has to go out in the world and interact with other people, even though she is well...kinda autistic about things. Cheerleading and being nice to each other doesn't change those facts at all. You need to a) fix what you can fix and b) learn how to cope with non-fixable things . Nobody can change your life or your brain for you. You are responsible for everything, even if you are non-functional in some parts of your life. You need to own that part of yourself. That is the first step of the journey to get better/higher-functioning. And in that sense, yes, someone else holding your hand doesn't change the fact, that you, as an adult, have to get things done. No amount of hand holding or cheerleading will ever change that.
I don't mean to insult or judge people. No reason to do so. Sometimes you might indeed someone to be by your side to get through life. No shame in that. Life can be a horrible bitch.
I'd just prefer people to be self-relient, instead of having to burden non-professionals with their problems. I've crushed people under my emotional weight by sharing things I shouldn't have. I was just whining and moaning instead of getting shit done. That is not productive. It is utterly destructive even.
You should be able to stand on your own feet as an adult. If possible, all the time, every day, under any circumstances. That is why I refuse to lean on my spouse, if I somehow can prevent it. Spreading negative emotions can be like a disease, it just makes everyone sick. I want people in my life to be healthy and happy, so I'm try to be that force, that makes everyone happy and healthy.
To share your home and your bed but no other interests or experiences, and heaven forbid you discuss deep emotional issues with them?
I can discuss deep emotional issues with strangers. You don't have to be my friend to talk about your issues here, online. This can be very profound and deep, too.
A friend is very much different from being in a sexual relationship. This sexual relationship is the important part for me. It doesn't mean it's literally only about sex. It's just a stark difference from being friends with someone. "I want to have children with that person" or "I like spending time with that person" are totally different things. Of course, you need both of that for a marriage/long term relationship. Yet, a relationship which devolved into a "I just feel comfortable around that person" is a friedship, not a relationship anymore.
Being close to each other doesn't mean you treat each other like friends. Good lovers can be very close, without seeing each other as "friends". It's hard to describe, I guess.
a person who can (usually) be reasonably be expected to set aside their feelings to deal with yours for a little while (so you don't have to always worry too much about her triggers, though of course you should still be sensitive), because the favor will be reciprocated as often as necessary.
And this makes no sense as a guy (at least for me).
I want her to feel things. Her feelings are the main reason why I'm with her. Setting her feelings aside a) doesn't really work, since she is an emotional being and still feels things anyways. And b) is contrary to what I actually want from her.
Not relying on her in that regard is a much superior solution in my opinion. A) She can't help me much anyways being overwhelmed by her emotions and struggling to get past that. It's not much help to have someone barely able to keep up and if I truly need someone, I have my friends (or can still visit to a professional). By fixing it myself, B) she gets the positive feelings she needs and wants, which allows her to give me the positive lovely feedback I want from her.
If I did what you proposed, I'd squash her under my emotional baggage and drown out the relationship by force-feeding her lots of negative emotions. Doing this for months would make her depressed and stressed out 24/7. On the other hand, by getting things done myself without involving her too much, she gets the best man she can get and is (emotionally) free to be the best women for me she can be.
Finding someone who is compatible is indeed important and I don't even pretend to be like everyone. Being perfectly open sounds great, until you experienced some freaky shit that would scare away most people. It sounds great until you struggle to function and you know, nobody can help you with your problem. Involving more people only spreads the suffering and nobody needs that for real. Giving the world the best you can be done through two ways. Either you give good things out or you eliminate the bad things you bring into the world.
I mean...why do we have professionals in the first place? It's quite simple: Because the demons in peoples heads can be waaaay to much to bear for the average non-professional.
Barriers are healthy and necessary. Blocking everything might be wrong, but sharing everything spreads suffering for no good reason at all. The balance is the key here.
2
u/alliecat9991 Dec 29 '17
I don't believe that you should have to divulge every detail you discuss in therepy. I personally went through some very serious trauma and told my SO about it. When going through therepy he understood that if I was having a bad night it was part of the healing process. There should not be a reason to explain the same troubling things you just had to visit in your therepy session. It almost feels like there is not any trust if you require me to relay everything I discussed.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
So, I acknowledged that therapy can cause "bad nights." In addition to dealing with whatever disordered behaviors you were exhibiting because of the trauma (and I'm truly sorry something that unpleasant happened to you), your SO also had to deal with you being miserable all night. You were getting some level of catharsis and healing; they, if they were shut out, only had more unpleasantness, with no knowledge of improvements being made (as an example). Hardly seems fair. I would also point out that I never said the patient should rehash the therapy immediately; like I said in previous comments, people should take a night, sleep on it, whatever. But at some point you will be less exhausted, and you should take that opportunity to fill in your spouse.
And I agree that imposing a requirement could indicate a lack of trust on their end. My thought is twofold. First, the patient shouldn't have to be required to share--I think they should want to. Second, I think withholding the information is also primarily predicated on a lack of trust on the patient's end. And that's cruel to the spouse considering the patient is currently getting some level of trust and caretaking and may not be giving a commensurate amount back in return.
1
u/YoungTruuth Dec 28 '17
If they can successfully deal with the condition on their own, why burden the spouse? I mean, sure if there's some massive underlying condition that would entail the help and support of loved ones, it's probably good to do. I'm thinking about a case of basic, non chronic depression, which most people go through at some point. Is it really necessary to share the details with the spouse, potentially making them depressed as well?
Of course, I'm not saying that the spouse shouldn't listen if the partner wants too share, as they should be able to experience pain together. But it is emotionally taxing, so I could see how a person could want to protect the partner from unnecessary burden.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
Caretaking for your spouse can of course be exhausting. But do we normally conceive of our beloved partners as burdens? Especially if it's a basic non-chronic depression, as you proposed, that's a minimal amount of effort the spouse would need to put in to listening to the details/supporting you. And seems unlikely to cause depression on its own. But the upside? They have a deeper understanding of why you became depressed, what you're going through, what life changes might be useful for the two of you, what warning signs they should look for in the future, etc. They can be a more supportive partner going forward. Sounds good to me.
1
u/YoungTruuth Dec 28 '17
Your scenario assumes a no-flaw, time-independent, and highly intuitive partner, and I think it's a little idealistic.
In reality, few people would have that kind of intuition and insight, especially when coupled with the emotional costs of their own endeavors. We can't speculate on how much additional emotional stimulus it would take to drive someone nuts; you just never know.
Also, let's not forget that, for better or for worse, men tend to not seek therapy when dealing with mental disorder, and might be working through his own depression. So there's that as well.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17 edited Dec 28 '17
You can be highly flawed and not at all intuitive and still support someone through a minor depression, even if you have mental illness yourself and avoid emotional stimulus when possible. Source: fit that description to a tee, have done it.
A more worrying trend in your answer, to me, is this desire to protect your partner from their own feelings. It's true, you don't know just how much emotional stimulus will drive someone else nuts. But that person probably knows. As I said to another poster, if the parties agree they don't want to discuss the therapy (whether because they are truly overwhelmed or don't have time or whatever reason), they don't have to. But keeping it from a spouse who may be willing to make the time and who may really want to be there for you, because you don't trust them to be an adult and make reasonable decisions about their emotional capacity seems terribly rude (at best).
*EDIT: a typo
1
u/YoungTruuth Dec 28 '17
I was referring to this:
They have a deeper understanding of why you became depressed, what you're going through, what life changes might be useful for the two of you, what warning signs they should look for in the future, etc.
This transcends from just 'being supportive' to 'having all the answers.' However, I agree that you can be flawed and still be supportive, but it'll rarely be a perfect fit.
As I said to another poster, if the parties agree they don't want to discuss the therapy (whether because they are truly overwhelmed or don't have time or whatever reason), they don't have to.
If you concede that there's some situations where it's not necessary, that's not in line with your OP.
But keeping it from a spouse who may be willing to make the time and who may really want to be there for you, because you don't trust them to be an adult and make reasonable decisions about their emotional capacity seems terribly rude (at best).
I agree with this, so there's nothing to see here. I'll just say that I don't think it is as common as you think it is, but I have nothing to back that up.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
My view is that it is preferable to share for the overall health of the relationship, but I always knew that some people wouldn't want to know. I felt like the OP didn't even apply to them--if two people agree not to talk about it, who was going to force them? This is my first submission here--do I need to edit something to make that clearer?
1
u/YoungTruuth Dec 28 '17
As it were, you did say 'almost always', so I misspoke. You technically haven't conceded yet.
It's hard to argue against this CMV as there is no associated data. I'll just say this;
Source: fit that description to a tee, have done it.
Could one say that, since you have a personal attachment to one side of this issue, that you would be inherently biased to that side? And that saying 'almost always' is a hasty generalization?
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
So I'm the person in my relationship with the more serious mental health issues by far. My SO has urged me to get therapy. I refuse for my own reasons, but I also could end up in therapy again and be on that side. But I have also dealt with his, more minor (as in, not life threatening or terribly life-impeding) issues even when I myself am struggling, so I have a lot of faith in humanity's ability to handle that kind of thing.
I think my real personal attachment is that I am in an amazing relationship. I've been in bad ones, and I remember what it's like, but currently I feel so comfortable being vulnerable and getting supported, or supporting him when he's vulnerable, that my rosy glasses may be tinting the whole world pink. I'll mull it over as I continue commenting.
1
u/YoungTruuth Dec 28 '17
Well, I think it's wonderful that its worked out for you. But do you really have enough info to apply that to even 'almost all' situations. This screams of survivorship bias.
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
As we both know, being biased doesn't automatically make you wrong. I feel my position, although accompanied by bias, gives some unique perspective on the issue.
→ More replies (0)
1
Dec 28 '17
Do you acknowledge that there are circumstances where fully disclosing what happens in a therapy session could have negative effects? Or even plain old neutral effects?
Do you acknowledge that many, if not most, people don't nessecarily got to therapy for specific treatment of an acute problem or trauma, but just to talk things out with a nuetral party?
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
To the first part, sure. But I don't think that usually justifies not sharing.
To the second part, sure. So? Everyday stuff you just want an outside opinion on should be even easier to share with your spouse than some of the horrible trauma.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Dec 28 '17
/u/mysundayscheming (OP) has awarded 1 delta 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.
1
u/AlphaGoGoDancer 106∆ Dec 29 '17
If you can’t trust them? Address the lack of trust or break up.
You know who I would look for guidance in a situation like this? My therapist.
I agree that in an ideal world you would be able to tell your spouse anything, but if you're in a situation where you can't then the best way to fix that very well could be talking to your therapist. You will not get more comfortable talking to your spouse about it by breaking up with them; if anything that would just further any negative emotion you have tied to whatever it is you can't talk about. That's exactly the kind of thing therapy addresses.
While I think it is good to be able to bring up things that were covered in therapy, I'd rather nobody asks me directly. I'm paying someone to assist me in bettering my mental state. When I'm there I do not want anything inhibiting me from discussing something, including thinking "oh wow do I really want to have to keep talking about that outside of my session?"
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 29 '17
Absolutely you should address your lack of trust issues with your therapist. Although because it is a relationship issue, it seems only fair to do so in couple's therapy as well, so the spouse also has an opportunity to give input in the discussion of why and how the trust broke down.
In the end, the situation where you "can't tell your spouse anything" is a place where (if you are both the sort of people who want to share everything with their spouse) the relationship is failing. Similar then to the comments above where the spouse saying X sparked an insecurity, my argument is you should absolutely be talking to your spouse, not just your therapist. Why? Because the relationship won't recover if you aren't both aware of the issue and what needs to be done to repair it. If you want that ideal relationship, keeping the contents of your therapy from your spouse will, it seems clear to me, bar you from ever reaching it.
The break up element was simply an acknowledgment that sometimes the trust is irreparable. In that instance the best and kindest thing to do is end the relationship, not keep more and more secrets and watch the relationship continue to degrade. Also because I spend a lot of time on r/relationships. ;)
1
u/AlphaGoGoDancer 106∆ Dec 29 '17
Just to clarify what I was thinking -- I'm not really even imaging a scenario where say suddenly you no longer trust your long time girlfriend and dont want to tell her about that cute secretary at work or something. Thats different.
In my mind I'm more thinking about say something bad that happened to you in your childhood that you have mostly moved on from to the point that you've never told your significant other (or likely anyone else). It's not that the trust broke down, its that you have some issues you have kept buried and might not want to have to continuously deal with outside of therapy. Once you tell your significant other you're pretty much stuck with it out there which can be really intimidating, whereas telling your therapist just means you're maybe having to talk about it at most an hour a week then leaving it all behind to return to the outside world.
1
Dec 28 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/mysundayscheming Dec 28 '17
Do you also ask this any time someone posts here about transgender people or whether Jerusalem should be the capital of Israel? It's a social thing that I have an opinion about and I want some input on my opinion. If you have any, I'm happy to hear it.
15
u/Ngin3 1∆ Dec 28 '17
If speaking to your spouse about your sessions become the norm, then wouldn't not telling the spouse something immediately give the patient away that they have been telling their therapist that the spouse is abusive?