Women Who Cheat
By Tammy Nelson
Understanding the message of the affair
Even though our ideas about sex and sexuality have greatly advanced over the last half-century, our culture still holds a double standard about infidelity. While no one is entirely surprised by the behavior of a Bill Clinton, an Elliot Spitzer, or a Tiger Woods—men will be men, after all—we still tend to pathologize women or shame them (or both) for having affairs.
In my view, far from being evidence of pathology or marital bankruptcy, a woman’s affair can be a way of expressing a desire for an entirely different self, either separate from the marriage altogether or still in it. An affair can be what I call “a can opener” for women unable to articulate for themselves why they’re unhappy in their marriages, much less empower themselves to leave or begin an honest conversation with their husbands about what they feel is wrong. In my practice, I’ve heard many women say, “I didn’t even know what I wanted until the affair was over and I realized that I really wanted to end my marriage,” or “I had no idea that I used the affair as a way to wake up our relationship.”
Many infidelity treatment approaches today are based on the idea that the unfaithful spouse is a perpetrator, someone who wronged the other person. While the pain caused by infidelity can’t and shouldn’t be denied, it generally isn’t understood well enough that many women cheat because they struggle with their self-identity in their lives and lack of empowerment in their marriages. To some extent, the affair makes up for a felt lack of an adult self. Sometimes, understanding an affair as an unconscious bid for self-empowerment, relief from bad sex, or a response to a lack of choices or personal freedom is an important first step toward a fuller, more mature selfhood.
Searching for the Bartered Self
Sarah came to therapy with her husband, Rob, for couples therapy after he caught her cheating. Married for 10 years, he felt hurt, angry, and hopeless about the marriage. He sat across from Sarah on the couch, with his head in his hands. “I have no idea how we’re going to get past this. Sarah says she wants to work this out, but I don’t know if we can put this marriage together again after what she’s done.”
Rob had read emails between Sarah and her boyfriend that explained in detail how much they were enjoying virtual sex—watching each other masturbating over a webcam—which had both shocked and devastated him. He’d thought their sex life was good, but admitted that having kids had gotten in the way of their relationship. He thought they still loved each other, and Sarah agreed. They were both unclear why the affair had happened, but said they wanted to recover their marriage, if possible.
At the end of their first joint session, Sarah asked whether she could see me individually. Rob consented, so I asked if they’d be OK with an open secrets policy: what’s said in the individual session stays in the session. They agreed that whatever Sarah said could be kept private, though she could share with Rob what she wished to from our individual sessions.
In our first individual session, Sarah asked if therapy could be a place where she could talk honestly about the affair. This led to a discussion of the difference between privacy and secrecy, both in her marriage and in her sessions with me. Keeping secrets in her marriage had given Sarah a sense of space—a secret place where she could grow her sexuality, dream her dreams, and keep a part of her that no one else had control over. Our first conversation revolved around how the space she’d created could be shifted from secret to private, and how she could keep a differentiated, individuated boundary around herself in her relationship. This could give her a healthy degree of separation from her husband without having to lie or be deceptive to stake out her space.
I then explained to Sarah that, in my view, infidelity recovery has three phases: crisis, insight, and vision. The crisis stage occurs right after disclosure or discovery, when couples are in acute distress and their lives are in chaos. At this point, the focus of therapy isn’t on whether or not they should stay together or if there’s a future for them, but on establishing safety, addressing painful feelings, and normalizing trauma symptoms.
In phase two, the insight phase, we talk about what vulnerabilities might have led to the extramarital affair. Becoming observers of the affair, we begin to tell the story of what happened. Repeating endless details of the sexual indiscretion doesn’t help, but taking a deeper look at what the unfaithful partner longed for and couldn’t find in the marriage—and so looked for outside of it—as well as finding empathy for the other, who was in the dark, can elicit a shift in how both partners see the affair and what it meant in their relationship.
Phase three is the vision phase, which includes seeking a deeper understanding of the meaning of the affair and moves forward the experience and resulting lessons into a new concept of marriage and, perhaps, a new future. In this phase, partners can decide to move on separately or stay together. This is where the erotic connection will be renewed (or created) and desire can be revived. In this phase, the meaning of monogamy changes from a moralistic, blanket prohibition on
outside sex to a search for deeper intimacy
inside the marriage. A vision of the relationship going forward includes negotiating a new commitment.
Establishing Safety
During early sessions in the crisis phase of treatment, Sarah’s view of the world was shifting, and she didn’t know what she wanted. She wavered about whether she wanted to stay with Rob, wondering whether she should move on and seek genuine emotional independence alone or stay and try to be both fully herself and fully married to Rob. She wasn’t sure she could trust me to understand her and didn’t trust her husband, either, even though she herself had acted in a way that wasn’t trustworthy.
Gradually, Sarah revealed that she’d felt that she had no space of her own in the marriage, literally or figuratively. Her husband had a home office, but she had no comparable space for herself. Her dependence on Rob was nearly total: he balanced the checkbook, paid the bills, earned the money, and told her when she could make ATM withdrawals. He even counted the cash in her wallet and decided how much she should spend at the hair salon. She’d never been encouraged or allowed to feel empowered and independent. As a result, she’d started rebelling against her husband like an adolescent against a too-strict father, sneaking out at night or during the day when he was at work and having clandestine sexual encounters.
Sarah’s affair consisted primarily of quick liaisons in the back of her car. Her boyfriend met sexual needs not being fulfilled at home. Although the sex was quick, furtive, and secret, he gave her orgasms and oral sex and was willing to experiment in ways she found exciting. But while buoyed by the thrill and energy of this new relationship and her long-buried ability to feel pleasure—even wondering if she might be falling in love—she also felt guilty. Frightened by the growing intimacy with her lover when they were together, she began meeting him online, masturbating with him through a webcam.
After Rob discovered the affair, he’d demanded Sarah’s email and voice mail passwords, which she gave him. Although this made her feel exposed, vulnerable, and humiliated, she thought her husband deserved the transparency—as the “innocent” party—and that she should be punished. All these thoughts conformed with many of society’s constructs about women who have affairs, but they reinforced her long-brewing resentment that her marriage wasn’t an equal partnership: she was the “bad child”; her husband, the aggrieved parent.
At this point, I reframed the affair for Sarah in a way quite different from her own perspective (and that of many therapists). I asked whether it was possible that the infidelity was less a transgression than a move toward self-respect and self-empowerment. Could she have been seeking autonomy and individuation, as well as a more mature state of sexual development? Was she trying to find her voice, maintain a stronger sense of herself, create a personal boundary that no one could cross,
and remain in her marriage? Yes, she’d betrayed her husband; this was beyond doubt, I added. And this method for finding herself was clearly not working if she wanted the marriage to survive. But perhaps she’d paradoxically
tried to sabotage the marriage as a desperate attempt to develop more emotional maturity and become a more independent and grown-up wife.
As we spoke, Sarah realized that, while her intentions in having the affair hadn’t been conscious, she did want to grow into a fuller woman and mature sexual adult. She admitted she thought she could bring that woman back into the marriage and into the relationship. This made one point crystal clear: she could no longer be satisfied with the marriage as it was.
Gaining Awareness
Having gotten a clearer portrait of Sarah’s marriage, we moved on to the insight phase of treatment. What did the affair mean about her? What did it mean about Rob? And what did it mean about their marriage?
As we explored these questions, Sarah discovered quickly that the affair had far more to do with her marriage than with her husband, whom she said she loved and with whom she wanted to stay—but only if it could become a more equal partnership. When I asked what the affair told her about Rob, she said, “I felt that
he wanted me to fill a certain kind of role; it wasn’t just about replaying my mother’s position. Rob liked being in charge, liked bossing me around and being a kind of father. I know why, too. He recently lost his job, and the only place he felt any power or control was at home. He was mad that they’d fired him and took it out on me. In a way, he’s always done that: when people reject him, he gets angry and controlling. But with us, the more he tried to control me, the more I wanted independence from him.”
We worked in sessions to identify some key areas where she could feel more autonomy and still be in relationship with Rob. She started small, choosing their television shows, making decisions on where to go to dinner, instead of saying, “I don’t care where we go. Where do you want to go?” When Rob asked her to have sex, she told him she wasn’t ready yet, but would let him know when she was. Although Rob felt he had little or no control in these situations, he did begin to appreciate signs of the new, more adult Sarah, someone equal to him, with whom he could have a conversation and negotiate choices. He realized it was a relief that he didn’t have to do it all himself, and he actually felt less lonely in the marriage.
When I asked Sarah what the affair meant about her marriage, she said, “In the affair, I felt stronger, more mature, sexier, calmer, more charming, and more alive.” We talked about whether she could integrate her sexier, more mature self into the marriage or whether the relationship was fundamentally flawed. To her, being in her marriage meant giving up a sense of personal power, while having an affair gave her a sense of independence, choice, and more control. She didn’t know how to have a grown-up relationship with her husband that encompassed safety
and desire.
Reenvisioning a Marriage
Treatment in the third phase included helping Sarah get in touch with her fantasies and reconnect with pleasure—one of her greatest challenges in therapy. She felt guilty when she thought about her own pleasure, and had compartmentalized her needs into the affair, as something separate, wrong, and forbidden. Her fantasies and desires were something she felt shame about sharing with her husband. Bringing that sexual part of her into the marriage was the beginning of erotic recovery for her and for her marriage, but she still had to learn to connect with her desires and to communicate them to Rob.
I asked her to write down some of her sexual fantasies and share what she thought the desire or longing underneath them was. For instance, if the fantasy was to have someone grab her hair and kiss her, was this spurred by a longing to be held, to be out of control, to know that she was wanted and desired, or all of the above? The goal was to normalize her sexual needs: her affair had been a breach of monogamy, not a sexual pathology.
“If you could have anything you wanted, what would you ideally expect from your sex life with your husband?”
Sarah answered shyly, “That he’d pursue me and we’d try new things in bed.”
When I asked her if she knew what the longing underneath might be, she said, “My real longing underneath is to be totally special to him.”
Sarah went on to work on a vision of a more intimate and adult sexuality. This included asking Rob to behave in ways that made her feel special and trying to make him feel special as well. By this point, she was committed to creating a mutual vision of a new monogamy with her husband, and I suggested they return for couples therapy and focus together on their erotic recovery.
Several months later, Rob and Sarah are still working on an agreement for a new, monogamous marriage together. Sarah is committed to sharing her real thoughts and feelings with Rob. In this way, her adult self and her adult needs become a priority that can be talked about and negotiated in the relationship. She feels they’re now given as much importance as Rob’s needs.
Rob’s commitment to Sarah is that he tries harder to share his feelings and work on creating a more emotionally intimate relationship. They both try to be conscious of the distant and disconnected roles learned in their childhoods, and focus instead on the emotional intimacy they really want from the relationship.
Their new monogamy includes a focus on their erotic recovery. The affair created an erotic injury to their relationship, and Rob and Sarah continue to work on this as a goal of healing. They’ve made a commitment to sharing their fantasies and talking about what’s working in their love life. When they feel distant or dissatisfied, they want to learn to talk about it and turn toward each other instead of shutting down or turning to someone else outside the marriage.
Sarah now understands that her journey to self-empowerment and freedom can happen at the same time that she’s a wife and partner. Her adult choices include staying in a mature, monogamous relationship, while creating space for working on her own self-identity. Her worth in the relationship continues to be a focus of our couples therapy. Her cheating makes sense to her now in the context of her life issues, but she has a new empathy for Rob and how it affected him.
As therapists, it’s important to discern what our goal is for the women we treat in infidelity therapy. Are we helping them end an affair or end their marriage? Is it our job to remind them of their vows or simply to help them heal? By viewing women’s infidelity as a possible search for a new way of being, we can help them reenvision a fully committed relationship with greater empowerment and equality.
CASE COMMENTARY
By David Treadway
While I admire the sensitive work Tammy Nelson did in rejuvenating Sarah and Rob’s marriage, both emotionally and erotically, I believe that zooming in too quickly to examine the root causes of an infidelity without addressing the emotional impact of the betrayal on both parties usually leads to incomplete healing. Although I say to couples that each partner is 50 percent responsible for what’s not working in a marriage, I always add that choosing to have a secret affair is 100 percent the responsibility of the unfaithful spouse. Most of the time, couples need a way of healing the fundamental breach of trust before being able to fully repair the relationship.
In working with couples following a secret affair, I use a four-step model based on the treatment approach of clinical psychologist Janis Abrahms Spring:
Step 1: The betrayed partners have as much time as needed to share their hurt, anger, and sense of devastation while unfaithful partners listen as nondefensively as possible without explaining or rationalizing their behavior. The therapist helps the partner who had the outside relationship to be compassionate and caring about the impact of the affair. Needless to say, this may take more than a single session.
Step 2: The unfaithful partners are then taught to write a letter in which they take full responsibility for having done harm, indicating what they’ll do to ensure it won’t happen again and what concrete steps they’ll take to make amends. In addition to agreeing never again to see the other party in the affair, other ways to make amends might include giving up drinking for a year or getting rid of the boat where the affair took place.
Step 3: The letter of amends is read in session, and the concrete actions that constitute an attempt at atonement are agreed upon by both partners.
Step 4: Only at this point is the challenge of learning how to forgive discussed, and only if betrayed partners are ready to begin to work on it. If so, they’re coached on how to write a forgiveness letter that involves accepting the attempts at atonement and expressing a willingness to let go of a sense of injury. This all takes place with the understanding that forgiveness can’t be legislated; it has to grow over time.
It’s my experience that patiently and thoroughly working through this difficult process without shaming and blaming is what allows a couple to move on to achieving a level of intimacy and trust that they typically never had before. I remember a man named Paul who’d gone on to transform his relationship with his wife after her affair and referred to their new sense of connection as his “second marriage.” In one of our last sessions, he put his arm around his wife, smiled at me conspiratorially, and said, “You know what I like best? Here I have this extraordinary woman and a brand new ‘second marriage,’ and the lawyers didn’t get a dime!”
AUTHOR'S RESPONSE
I agree with David Treadway’s observation that working with couples after an infidelity takes lots of finesse and that, of course, the feelings of the person who’s been deceived and betrayed need to taken into account and addressed. Like Treadway, I think Janis Spring’s “secrets policy” can be invaluable, offering helpful clinical guidelines for individual work when necessary.
Since this case study was told from Sarah’s point of view, it doesn’t delve into Rob’s feelings, nor do we get to see much of the couples work. Instead, the focus is on the special issues of identity and empowerment for women who have affairs. If I’d told the fuller story of the therapy with this couple, I’d have devoted more attention to the third phase of treatment—the attempt to help them develop a new vision of their marriage, which I call the “new monogamy.”
However, the most important message I hope readers take away from this case is that even after the wrenching pain of an affair, therapists still have an opportunity to help troubled couples create a new relationship with better communication, fuller intimacy, and realistic hope for a better future together.
Tammy Nelson, Ph.D., M.S., a board-certified sexologist, licensed professional counselor, certified sex therapist, and Imago therapist, is the founder and executive director of the Center for Healing. She’s the author of The New Monogamy; Getting the Sex You Want;
and What’s Eating You?
David Treadway, Ph.D., is director of the Treadway Training Institute. He’s the author of Home Before Dark: First Year with Cancer
and Intimacy, Change, and Other Therapeutic Mysteries: Stories of Clinicians and Clients.
US and UK terminology might not match. A full FT training in the UK is held over 4 years of fairly part time but therefore demanding academic and practice work. But it is designed with a National Health Service Child and Adolescent Mental Health work setting in mind. There is hardly any mention of couples required. The assumption seems to be that you just apply to couples what you do with families. Yes, I know. That's why we are campaigning right now.
In the US is a "class" (when you mention it above) just one 1 hour thing on its own, or a half day workshop, or an hour a week for a term/semester? Is there any requirement of trainee MFTs to work with couples at all? Or is it all left to post-MFT qualification?
I had presumed the M in MFT meant that couples were more substantially covered in the core MFT training. And that that helped explain the much bigger profile and creativity of Couple Therapy in the US.
Best wishes
Nick
Edinburgh Scotland
Nick Child
Edinburgh, Scotland
Many thanks for your extensive response here. I think I used the word "love" too loosely since I would agree with what you say.
"Bolshy" is short for Bolshevik, so it would probably have even stronger weight in the US given that facebook doesn't even allow the choice of "socialism" as one's political colour!
Best wishes
Nick
Maybe it's just a technical hitch for me, but for the regular webinars in this series when I've eventually watched them and come to the comment board, there's a whole lot more discussion to read and learn from. Am I so late that they've all been taken down!!
Anyway, as ever, I am bowled over by this extra webinar, by what I just did not know, by what seems so essential in our field of couple and family therapy but just does not get promoted in the UK.
I am amazed again by how generous and skillful our presenters have been in their hour of webinar presentation - here John got through a lifetime's work and several books of his and others so that we across the world need only watch this hour a few dozen times, and it feels like we can turn the teaching into practice where we are.
The marriage of scientist-practitioner has also been an inspiration where our professional and academic and government systems in the UK seem to tie most of us in the UK all up forever in red tape and high flown ideas and inappropriate medical modes of evidence.
I am inspired by the energy and productivity of the American culture. From within what I believe is an integrated field (thanks perhaps to Psychotherapy Networker?) and training in MFT, there is this can-do culture. With ease, individuals build ideas, practice and research and set up shop with institutions that carry their own name! The competition of the market place seems to breed healthy relationships (rather than the miserable ones you might predict), with celebration, respect and collaboration between leaders in the field. . . Or maybe PN has just been really good at lining them up like this!
No . . all the presenters talk of the links with each other's ideas and work. And John mentioned a dozen more names that are waiting in the wings for us to learn from.
So, I have to say that - whatever the strengths may be of the very separated UK fields of Couple Counselling and of Family Therapy - these webinars in Couple Therapy are a wake-up call to us to broaden our learning and our courses.
And the webinars themselves are a cheap and effective way to make a start on that catching up to where we need to.
Many thanks for the series and this extra webinar too.
Nick Child
Family Therapist,
Edinburgh, Scotland
It might not seem it
Nick
One question: He suggested that brief psychotherapy is not going to make deeper changes (by which I guess we now mean brain image visible, not just psychological depth!). He talked mainly of individual psychotherapy - ie one-to-one rather than couple or family therapy. Imago therapy most explicitly talks of the clients and their relationship being each other's therapist. As a family therapist, I feel that real short cuts are possible because you are working with a continuing relationship in your room - and certainly Imago and EFT describe the deep changes happening between the clients, not mainly with the therapist.
Hope someone reads this and replies . . . !!
Nick Child
Scotland
Actually on this occasion I thought Rich - despite the overlaps and interruptions (perhaps also caused by some technical thing) - was more in tune with his guest than in some webinars! Despite these irritations, I have come to always admire Rich's steady, cheerful, intelligent management of the webinar event - acting on our behalf (the listener) to slow down and punctuate and repeat and ask for relevance, a kind of "every-person" character. When irritated by his slowing it down, I remind myself how it would be if we got 60 minutes solid from one talking head piling into the short time their lifetime's work!! I'm sure there are other ways to run a webinar, but I've become quite attached to Rich's way!
Nick Child
Scotland
But to hold his line and build a career and an institute means that he is not just a bolshy rebel intent on differentiating himself and his ways unconstructively from everyone else as most of us rebels are! He must be engaging and integrating and collaborative with clients and colleagues alike - attached at least to the efficacy and belief in his ideas and skills.
Over many years I could see my development and continuing learning being a way to hold but moderate my too straight-talking side, to find ways to speak to truth without returning to "cotton wool". Having watched David's challenging contribution to this webinar "debate" I guess that if we saw him at work with clients, we would see more of his real care and commitment to his clients that must hold them safely when he sets out to confront them with the truth he sees. They must sense, as children do with silent or powerful parents, that underneath he loves them and wants the best for them.
I worry that 4 hour sessions of anything can lead to brain washing, but presumably clients would have told the world about that long ago if it happened with his therapy.
I guess my thought is: Are there a number of ways to talk straight about the truth, some of them not as plainly blunt and confronting as David's? If so, then the truth of "differentiation therapy" may be at least as powerful even though less "in your face".
As a child psychiatrist in a welfare state NHS system (less ruled by DSM or who is paying me), I would often give unusually straight opinions - eg about unloved or rejected children, children in care and going down hill steadily despite the "caring" agencies - to them and in front of family and other agency workers involved at case conferences etc. It seemed to me that the pseudo-care from all quarters (which is what everyone expected - would have complained about if anyone didn't do it) was the main cause of the problems!
Now I think about it, there were all kinds of other ways that I "called a spade a spade" - apologies if that is now non-PC, but there you go! Or at least didn't call it DSM Category F123 and took the flack for not doing what people wanted me to.
So this is me trying to identify and remind myself and take back on a core truth of David's approach, while allowing that there may be a range of ways to carry it out.
Nick Child
Now a Family Therapist
Scotland
But most overwhelming was this: I was a medic and a psychiatrist and a child psychiatrist - now retired to being a family therapist. As a medic you learn - and some of us try very hard to get away from - a biological model of mind and brain and disorder. Crude and less crude medical ways to "help" people we questioned and rebelled against - neurosurgery, pills etc. And we rebelled against the typical medic's stance - "I diagnose X, and I recommend I prescribe Y to cure you; you need to follow the treatment through for the (biological) benefits to happen"
Now, here we have all that come right back into the psychotherapy room!!! Forgive me for taking a day or two to take it in! Dan was effectively saying "I diagnose that you've got X and, if you agree to go along with me, I can grow you more neural connection and integration and myelin sheaths; I can show it happening on this screen here - all without touching you!!"
Absolutely amazing stuff really! But I need to go and lie down before I can decide whether I can learn and do and speak like that to my clients now!!
Nick Child
Scotland
Nick Child, Scotland
My thoughts were contrasting ones. I like the relational imago theory because it relates so well to older theories from psychoanalysis to "object relations" to attachment theory. Yet the actual practice of imago therapy is about as modern and "solution focused" as you could get! Steven Covey starts with "Have the end in mind", and this is a good example of that. So that's quite an achievement to put together all that in one package. And the global vision at the end is wonderful.
Again, I will not expect to be able to do imago therapy after one webinar, but it is great to have yet another strong model of ideas and therapy to be adding to my repertoire, and to be talking about with UK colleagues locally and nationally as we look for a way to meld couple and family therapies here.
I gather that British solution focus therapists find that British clients really feel short-changed if they don't get a bit of a chance to moan about their problems in the first session, so I imagine that British couples might not like their therapist to go straight to their dream solution! Any tips for clients like that?
In FT we learnt that the (mainly US) master therapists had advantages that the more ordinary beings in their audiences did not. It is likely to be the same yet, and for the leading names presented on this webinar series. As a therapist becomes more sure and skilled and famous, the more their clients will be actively seeking what they know they are going to get from a particular therapist or method, and more ready to do what they're asked (if not told!). The rest of us have to find our own kinds of competence and confidence with a wider range of clients who are less prepared and motivated for anything in particular. What we need is a paradox - a webinar by a leading therapist on the question of "how to be eclectic"!
Oh, and it's so impressive to see someone at ease with talking about their own personal history and problems and struggle, as well as making the neuro-psycho-physiological and behavioural aspects such an integral part of the skill and work.
Nick Child, Family Therapist, Edinburgh, Scotland
The bold energetic determined open and intelligent development of "schools" of thought and practice in the US is a great inspiration and model for our more tentative and welfare state based ways in the UK. As an innovative child and family psychiatrist in the NHS one also needed to be bold energetic etc, so it is great to be reminded and "allowed" to be those things again - that is, in contrast to the moderation of the original "master" family therapists that has rightly been the direction of the field of family therapy.
But I can hold onto both the inspiration and encouragement to be bold and directive again, as well as reflect that maybe some couples or some client groups and the therapists they get drawn to and even some cultures might not be ready for or fit a particular model of couple therapy. So I'm enjoying expanding my already broad repertoire of therapeutic theory and practice here. And I know that being eclectic means I'll never be particularly good at any of them!!
Nick Child, Family Therapist, Edinburgh Scotland.
But it's not just that FT brings a systems understanding; I think FT brings a whole range of helpful ideas and interventions that (in psychodyanmic UK) would not be allowed. But then FT (in UK if not US) has gone all reflective for its own reasons now!!
It would be too much of a distraction here that would be full of generalisation and uncertain understandings of words, but I'd love someone who knew or researched the US scene and the UK scene to give a comparative snap shot of what the trainings, the models and practices of CC/Therapy and FT are. Anyone done that?
I don't know even the UK much. I presumed that the combined AMFT in the US meant integrated Couple and Family Therapy trainings unlike the UK. I gather that in UK there is a strong psychodynamic approach - and that would tend to go with "How not to do a first session" wouldn't it?! But then, surely (as you and others have described) counsellors would simply have had to do something more proactive in practice with their couple clients than nod their heads analytically?
Nick
PS I'm enjoying the In Treatment series on DVD. Unusually gripping entertainment if not good therapy. I was wondering if it (or the like in film etc) maybe a good source of publicly available data to base a comparative discussion on!
I've just started on this transatlantic journey! The Networker webinar idea in general and Bill's in particular, are just great stuff. Many thanks. I wish I'd caught the Ethics one too - we've been using remote involvement with clients and supervisors and need to get sharper with our ethics and permissions.
It would take a book to explain how well-meaningly disparate the UK scene of relationship help remains. Our culture is still more of a welfare state provision and mentality (taxpayer and government pay, not clients and insurance companies). And Scotland is a different country and government to England as well. Couple Counselling and Family Therapy are two very different fields that damned well should be "married" as they are in the US and elsewhere. FT training assumes it equips FTists to do couple therapy, but how can it if FTists aren't the main place that couples go?
Our small FT team is uniquely based in a CC voluntary agency. Yet we still don't really know what how our CCer colleagues think and practice. Bill's presentation is a wonderful bridge to confirm and help clarify.
What he describes is very much in tune with my approach and ways based on long experience (as an NHS child and family psychiatrist) and various FT approaches. But I've never before been taught it; so that's a complete delight now, and to be more able to begin to have conversations with CCers across the UK that begin "Do you know Bill Docherty's work in the US / Have you seen the Networker webinars . . . What do you think? Is that how your first session looks like? If not, how does it work?"