Perspectives of Divorced Therapists

Can I Get It Right for Couples?

Tanya Radecker

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• eBook ISBN: 9781315283630
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Mental Health in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

Through interviews with divorced therapists from diverse cultures, philosophies, and generations, this book explores how a therapist's divorce impacts their work with clients in couples therapy. Interviewees speak of their own experiences with trauma recovery, countertransference, self-disclosure, resilience, and other issues during and after divorce. These experiences are also correlated to previous studies exploring the counseling process and variables that might affect the outcome. Through the stories of other professionals, therapists will gain insight into developing self-awareness and utilizing the person-of-the-therapist model to successfully navigate the impact of their own life crisis as they work with clients. This text will provide enlightenment and courage for divorced or divorcing therapists, as well as any therapist who lives through the experience of managing their own relationship struggles while continuing to lean in and support their clients.

CHAPTER 1
“Being” a Mental Health Professional

HISTORY OF COUNSELING

Throughout the 1900s, many professions have been established that provide mental health and/or counseling services. Each profession has different levels of education, certifications, and credentialing required in order to hang your shingle and practice as a professional. Most of the professions also have governing bodies that determine requirements for licensure. Additionally, there exists a diverse array of counseling theories and trainings leading to a counseling process that resembles a multicolored tapestry. Depending on the therapist’s educational background, theory, or framework utilized, the counseling process can look very different. In spite of all of this diversity, the overall goal of the counseling process is to help clients improve their lives through insight and change (Lambert, Bergin & Garfield, 2004).

Since the early 1800s, the field of Psychiatry has been recognized as the profession that provides treatment of mental illnesses. The field of psychology began in 1879, with the first experimental laboratory in psychology opened at the University of Leipzig in Germany by Wilhelm Wundt. This was followed by one of Wundt’s students, G. Stanley Hall, establishing the first American experimental psychology laboratory at Johns Hopkins University in 1983 (Wertheimer, 2011). In 1886, Joseph Jastrow received the first doctorate degree in psychology in the United States, and by 1892, the American Psychological Association was founded (Hull, 1944).

In the 20th century it was Dr. Sigmund Freud who began to transition psychiatry from a field of simply treating neurosis in patients into a process of providing long-term psychoanalysis for patients (Wertheimer, 2011). The classic vision of mental health therapy was a client lying on the couch, with the therapist sitting in a chair either behind or off to the side. The goal of the session was for the doctor to analyze the client’s dreams, fantasies, and/or neurosis in order to interpret for the patient the causes of the patient’s distress. This form of counseling/therapy, better known as analysis, required patients to commit to countless hours of exploration into childhood relationships and repressed sexual associations (Wertheimer, 2011).

In the early 1940s, vocational counseling services were in high demand by the government, and the profession was more widely accepted and supported. By the late 1940s, pioneers such as Maslow, Skinner, Beck, and Ellis focused research and practice from a more humanistic approach. Attention was being given to the present state of the individual. Behavioral and humanist models encouraged therapists to work from a stance of helping patients with personal growth and not dwelling solely on past experiences (Gladding, 2000).

Carl Rogers theorized that the therapist/client relationship is itself the tool to a successful outcome (Rogers, 1957). His focus was to build the relationship with the client and not simply provide vocational resources or analysis. The concept was that the therapists’ ability to be empathetic, congruent, and genuine, while showing unconditional positive regard, would facilitate the growth that clients needed to create a change (Rogers, 1957). This new concept emphasized that creating a therapeutic relationship actually supersedes the therapeutic techniques utilized; this is a concept that has been debated by other researchers (Baldwin, Wampold & Imel, 2007; Norcross & Wampold, 2011; Wosket, 1999; Zuroff & Blatt, 2006). Consequently, any personal life events experienced by the therapist have the potential to significantly impact the therapists’ ability to create and maintain a therapeutic alliance and relationship (Gerson, 1996).

Currently, what is referred to as couples counseling or couples therapy has also been referred to as pre-marital, marital, conjoint, collaborative, or family counseling (Broderick & Schrader, 1991; Sager, 1966). With an underlying foundation in systems and attachment theory, the focus of therapy tended to be on the entire system versus separating out the couple (Gurman & Fraenkel, 2002). In current society, there is a diverse population of partners who seek couples counseling; what now constitutes a couple can be any two individuals in a relationship. The diversity and variations may have a significant impact on the therapeutic relationship for both the therapist and the client (Jacobson & Addis, 1993).

Reviewing the history of couples counseling, there does not seem to be a consensus on when the field originated (Gurman & Fraenkel, 2002; Sager, 1966). Regardless of the actual origination of the therapy for couples, currently approximately one half of married couples in the United States are experiencing distress in their relationship, and approximately one third of those in distress will seek couples counseling (Doss et al., 2016). Gottman, Johnson, Hendrix, and many more—there are several different theoretical approaches that have been researched for effectiveness and are utilized by therapists working with couples (Baucom, Atkins, Rowe, Doss & Christensen, 2015; Busby & Holman, 2009; Byrne, Carr & Clark, 2004; Christensen, Atkins, Baucom & Yi, 2010; Cookerly, 1980; Efron & Bradley, 2007; Greenberg & Johnson, 1986; Gottman & Krokoff, 1989; Jacobson, Christensen, Prince, Cordova & Eldridge, 2000; Snyder, Mangrum & Wills, 1993). By examining the outcome or success in utilizing these methods in counseling, research shows that the field of couples counseling does have a positive impact on relieving distress and promoting a healthier relationship for the couple (Baucom & Hoffman, 1986; Beckerman & Sarracco, 2002; Bray & Jouriles, 1995; Gottman & Gottman, 1999; Greenman & Johnson, 2013; Hafen & Crane, 2003; Holliman, Muro & Luquet, 2016; Johnson & Talitman, 1997; Snyder, Wills & Grady-Fletcher, 1991).

In a plenary address at the 2006 Emotionally Focused Therapy Summit, Dr. Sue Johnson cited a 2004 poll in Psychology Today that identified “difficulties with a partner” as the most stressful event in the life of an individual. Johnson (2007) notes that conflicts with a partner actually ranked higher than the stress of medical issues. Research supports that being in a healthy couples relationship impacts each individual’s overall good health and well-being (Booth & Amato, 1991; Kiecolt-Glaser & Newton, 2001; Proulx, Helms & Buehler, 2007). Additionally, it increases lifespan (Johnson, Backlund, Sorlie & Loveless, 2000) and decreases absenteeism in the workplace (Mark-ussen, Røed, Røgeberg & Gaure, 2011). The importance of couples therapy to current society is further underscored by the fact that in North America, issues with a partner are the primary reason people seek out any psychological therapy (Johnson, 2007).

THE COUNSELING PROCESS—THE RESEARCH OF GETTING IT RIGHT

The process of counseling is a shared experience through which the trained and objective mental health professional guides the client to find insight into their journey without bringing our own personal road bumps into the session. When the mental health professional is in shock or badly bruised from a marriage that has crashed and burned, what impact does it have on their ability to provide effective counseling to couples? As with other areas of counseling, working with couples in distress might trigger many of the therapists’ own wounds from their personal relationships. Once triggered, the emotional reaction has the potential to impact the therapist’s ability to counsel from a place of neutrality. Maintaining this neutrality requires therapists to be persistent in examining their own feelings and biases. Therapists have a duty to be attuned and vigilant in identifying when their own personal issues impact their work with a client (Aponte & Carlson, 2009; Aponte & Kissil, 2014; Cheon & Murphy, 2007).

The therapeutic relationship is mutual, interactive, and dynamic, with the potential to have many variables shaping the flow. Numerous studies in mental health counseling have focused on identifying variables that might influence the outcome of counseling (Lambert et al., 2004; Nelson, Heilbrun & Figley, 1993; Sanberk & Akbaş, 2015; Wampold, 2001).

Over the years, many researchers have examined the need human beings have to connect and exist in relationships: a craving to be social creatures with a tendency to attach and function as a system (Minuchin, Rosman & Baker, 1978; Nicoll, 1993; Parsons, 1951; Radcliff-Brown, 1952; Werner, Altman, Oxley & Haggard, 1987). From a systemic framework, the therapist theoretically becomes a part of the system in the counseling relationship. As part of the system, the therapist’s beliefs, values, attitudes, spirituality, social views, and culture have the potential to impact the other members in that system (Aponte & Carlsen, 2009; Gelso, 2011; McDowell & Shelton, 2002). The influence of those values depends on the weight placed on those issues. Issues such as religion, infidelity, and age of children might be valued by the therapist and hence affect the interventions and options offered to the couple (Butler, Rodriguez, Roper & Feinauer, 2010; Kalter & Rembar, 1981; Olmstead et al., 2009; Shafranske, 1996; Softas-Nall, Beadle, Newell & Helm, 2008). Keeping in mind my own biases and self-of-the-therapist work, I am cognizant of the potential influence of my own experiences with divorce and the potential influence on the system when working with clients and conducting this research.

In Swanson’s 2004 dissertation, he focused on the experience of divorce in a population of young men. The participants’ divorce experiences were identified as a “crucible” in their development. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2017) defines crucible as a “difficult test or challenge” and a “place or situation that forces people to change or make difficult decisions.” I believe that my research sought to examine the possible forced changes that might occur for divorced therapists who are committed to working with couples and families and to explore the mental health professionals’ own personal experience with divorce and how this life crisis might ultimately influence the interventions and direction of their work with couples.

Some researchers have focused on the impact of the professional training experience itself, both the personal and professional life of the therapist (Montagno, Svatovic & Levenson, 2011; Niño, Kissil & Apolinar-Claudio, 2015; Wetzler, Frame & Litzinger, 2011). Others have focused on the counseling process and exploring the reasons and techniques necessary for achieving a successful outcome (Gelso & Hayes, 2002; Gelso & Hayes, 2007; Sharma & Fowler, 2016; Waller-stein, 1990). Additional research has examined a variety of issues for therapists in their work with clients: self-disclosure, gender, attitudes towards divorce, therapists’ perspectives on alliance, and therapists in crisis (Aponte & Carlsen, 2009; Kooperman, 2013; Mathews, 1988; Nissen-Lie, Havik, Høglend, Rønnestad, & Monsen, 2014).

A quantitative study by Ostroff (2012) reported that a majority of the divorced therapists were able to identify more positive effects than negative effects in their life. The data also identified that therapists experienced an increase in strength, compassion, empathy, and sensitivity from their own divorce experience. Additionally, therapists reported that they noticed an increased interest in their counseling work for months after their divorce. Other issues discussed in the research were countertransference, empathy, values, and beliefs when working with clients that might have been influenced by their own experience of divorce in their family.

There is an abundance of research examining client-therapist interactions and the factors that influence the therapeutic relationship. However, there are differing opinions as to whether it is the client or the therapist that most impacts the relationship (Berry et al., 2015; Hadžiahmetović, Alispahić, Tuce & Hasanbegović-Anić, 2016). Recent research examining clients with depression discussed the concept of the patient-therapist or client-therapist relationship as being bi-directional (Ahola et al., 2011; Aponte & Kissil, 2014). Research has identified clients’ factors that contributed to success in the counseling process. A study by Sanberk and Akbaş (2015) found that clients’ behaviors such as emotional disclosure, cooperation, participation in the process, and ability to express change contributed to therapists reporting a more successful counseling experience. If the therapist and client have differing personal beliefs regarding divorce, does that impact the ability of the therapist to show empathy and supportive behaviors to the client? Furthermore, if the client experiences a difference in beliefs around divorce, does this inhibit the client’s ability to feel safe enough to disclose emotions and feelings?

Overall, the number one factor shown to influence the outcome of therapy is the alliance between the client and therapist (Bartle-Haring et al., 2016; Blow et al., 2007; Brown & O’Leary, 2000; Gellhaus Thomas et al., 2005). This alliance relies heavily on the clinicians’ ability to be emotionally attuned, genuine, and present with clients (Johnson, 2007; Montagno et al., 2011; Rogers, 1957). Other elements of counseling that have been examined to impact the alliance are being present, maintaining attunement, and monitoring disclosure with clients during a session (Aponte & Kissil, 2014; Counselman & Alonso, 1993; Kooperman, 2013; Sharma & Fowler, 2016). Hence, therapists who are experiencing their own personal life crises might experience difficulties with a variety of those critical elements in working with clients.

The therapeutic alliance has been researched extensively as a key factor in predicting a successful outcome in therapy (Bartle-Haring et al., 2016; Blow et al., 2007; Brown & O’Leary, 2000; Gellhaus Thomas et al., 2005; Kim, Wampold & Bolt, 2006; Mamodhoussen, Wright, Tremblay & Poitras-Wright, 2005; Martin, Garske & Davis, 2000). Results of the research indicated that the use of different therapy methods has a significantly lesser effect on the clients’ experience of the counseling and outcome versus the aspects of the individual clinician and the quality of the alliance (Benish, Imel & Wampold, 2008; Blatt, Zuroff, & Pilkonis, 1996; Kim et al., 2006; Safran, Muran & Proskurov, 2008). One study suggested that when working with couples, the alliance between client and therapist is perceived differently by males and females, and is also directly correlated to the alliance between the partners (Anker, Owen, Duncan & Sparks, 2010).

Research also indicates that the creation of the alliance is more dependent on the therapists’ personal characteristics and quality of life than the therapists’ professional qualifications and model of therapy utilized with clients (Benish et al., 2008; Blatt, Sanislow, Zuroff & Pilkonis, 1996; Bohart, Elliott, Greenberg & Watson, 2002; Nissen-Lie, Havik, Høglend, Monsen & Rønnestad, 2013; Rogers, 1957; Safran et al., 2008; Sanberk & Akbaş, 2015; Simon, 2012). When the therapist’s personal experiences are stressful or painful enough to interfere with the activities of daily living or quality of life, there is a possibility that the event can easily influence that therapeutic relationship. In research by Nissen-Lie et al. (2013), findings indicated that the therapists’ quality of life is a significant factor in creating and maintaining the working alliance between a client and therapist. With this in mind, the therapist should take into consideration whether a break is necessary for recovery from the crisis. Does the crisis result in a trauma response that impacts their quality of life and ability to be fully present and effective in a therapy session?

A study examining theoretical approach and the alliance suggested that the framework or approach may in fact impact the therapeutic alliance (Stevens, Muran, Safran, Gorman & Winston, 2007). According to Sanberk and Akbaş (2015), the behaviors of therapists and clients mutually affect each other during the counseling process. Therapists’ behaviors are heavily influenced by their choice of a therapeutic framework. This framework, usually chosen during the training process, is integral in relation to the counseling process. If the process of counseling is a mutual exchange of information and emotions, it is valuable to explore whether the variable of framework and/or training affects the exchange.

Two factors that have been researched in establishing a therapeutic alliance are collaboration and having an empathetic engagement in the therapeutic process (Castonguay & Beutler, 2006; Karson & Fox, 2010). The therapist’s emotional connection with the client and engagement in the process were shown to substantially activate the emotional connection by the client (Friedlander, Lambert, Valentín & Cragun, 2008). Furthermore, when clients displayed behaviors that would not be considered collaborative, the therapist tended to utilize interventions that did not promote a connection. This resulted in blocks in building alliances during a session. Other research indicated that if the therapist is uncomfortable with a client’s behaviors or responses, the therapist forgoes attunement with the client, and focuses more on tasks in the treatment plan. This can lead to issues around countertransference as well power and control of sessions (Sharma & Fowler, 2016).

The concept of person-of-the-therapist or self-of-the-therapist has been researched in an effort to gain understanding of how the variable of the therapist as a human being influences the creation of the therapeutic alliance and ultimately the outcome of the therapy (Aponte & Carlsen, 2009; Aponte & Kissil, 2014; Baldwin, 2000; Blow et al., 2007; Cheon & Murphy, 2007; Nelson et al., 1993). Often, therapists are experiencing many of the same life events as their clients. As mental health professionals examine the impact of crises on the life of the client, it is crucial to also explore the impact of their own crisis in order to gain understanding of how these life events might influence the therapists’ work with a client (Butler et al., 2010; Cheon & Murphy, 2007; Kooperman, 2013; Rober, 2011; Shane, 2002).

Aponte and Carlsen (2009) proposed that everyone has underlying core needs that create signature themes in their lives. These themes identify each person’s unique lifelong struggles and are referred to as “signature themes.” These struggles are responsible for shaping the relationship the individual has with the self and with others. It is proposed that these themes are so universal that they allow therapists to empathize and connect with clients enough to provide effective counseling (Aponte & Kissil, 2014; Stone, 2008).

A meta-analysis of therapeutic outcome studies revealed that the person-of-the-therapist and the therapeutic alliance are the two main components that contribute to client satisfaction with counseling (Wampold, 2001). As human beings, we all face each day with wounds of our past relationships; mental health professionals are no different than non-professionals. Previous research has nicknamed those in the arena of counseling as “wounded healers” (Aponte & Kissil, 2014; Martin, 2011; Miller & Baldwin, 2013; Stone, 2008). How clinicians utilize their wounds, or core issues, in a therapy session is a critical element that extends beyond the techniques and skills learned in the classroom (Aponte & Kissil, 2014; Martin, 2011; Rober, 2011). Successful therapists achieve a level of competency in identifying and acknowledging emotions and reactions surrounding their wounds, while maintaining the ability to utilize these experiences in order to empathize with clients. Some researchers consider therapists’ wounds to be the element that provides them with a sense of humanity that opens the door to empathy (Ma...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• CONTENTS
• Acknowledgments
• Preface
• Introduction
• 1 “Being” a Mental Health Professional
• 2 Our Stories
• 3 Exploring Previous Views of Divorce: Impact of Our FOO
• 4 Working on Self-Awareness and Recovery
• 5 Is My Own “Stuff” Getting in the Way?
• 6 Do I Have Wisdom to Share? Am I Credible?
• 7 To Tell or Not to Tell
• 8 Am I More Likely to Encourage Disconnection?
• 9 Moving Forward
• References
• Index