Pitfalls: Boundaries Between Healers & Clients
(This is an excerpt from a University Of Metaphysical Sciences course at www.umsonline.org, please feel free to visit the school website)
It
ought to be evident from the preceding sections that a healer (or metaphysical
therapist) must exhaust all other reasonable options before seeking intervention
of any kind on behalf of a client. Such intervention, when invoked, ought
to be as minimal as possible. Peers, the client’s family members,
and other “volunteers” can often be of sufficient assistance
to the therapist who must deal with a difficult client. Legal proceedings
should be avoided if possible, and criminal accusations on the part of
clients must not be allowed to sway the judgment of the therapist without
corroborative evidence and testimony provided by independent parties. David
Sakheimcautions us in Out Of Darkness (1992) that, “The
level of proof for taking action on allegations of criminal acts must be
more than simply that someone alleged it and it is possible.” On
the other hand, the healer must not appear to disbelieve the stories told
by a client. Remember, those who have been traumatized need a sympathetic
person to talk to, or they wouldn’t seek healing therapy in the first
place. Professional detachment must be tempered by empathy. David Sakheim
also has some valuable insights on this point, in spite of the author’s
naive use of loaded psychiatric metaphors like “PTSD:” “Once
it has been ascertained that a patient has been traumatized, there is less
need for a therapist to focus on the specific details than to understand
that this is a person in severe pain with extreme PTSD who can only begin
to heal by remembering as best they can the traumatic events that led to
the creation of their symptoms. To hold a patient to rules of evidence
will only inhibit the process of recovery. This is especially true since
so much of the treatment is geared toward helping the patient deal with
his or her own skepticism and denial.” In more metaphysical terms,
the healer ought to encourage the client to talk about any and all traumatic
experiences, without being too concerned about whether or not the stories
told about these events are objectively true.
Some
healers will inevitably be faced with the difficult choice of whether
or not to allow sexual or other physical relations to develop between
themselves and their clients. David Sakheim in Out Of Darkness (1992)
offers some common sense advice on this delicate subject: “Physical contact
between a therapist and patient is traditionally considered taboo. Although
this taboo has served a useful function in protecting some patients and
therapists from acting out sexually, it too is not a universal rule. Most
therapists who work with severely abused patients know that some patients
can benefit from physical contact, but that just as it can be nurturing,
grounding, or supportive, it can also feel frightening and hurtful. As
with all such boundary issues, analyzing the costs and benefits of the
specific situation is needed.” In analyzing specific situations,
the same book tells us that “One must be guided by the patient’s
lead, the point in treatment, and the feelings and needs involved.” Keep
in mind that, though the client may truly benefit from physical contact
of some kind with the healer like a simple hug or holding the clients hand, “acting
out” in the form of sexual intercourse will not affect a “cure” for
the client’s problems, even if those problems stem from sexual
repression.
As we read
in psychologist Wilhelm Reich’s book Genitality (1980),
most acting out cannot completely eliminate repression since “the
ego defense also relies on powerful psychic controls which may be encompassed
by the term ‘morals’ in its popular sense.” Reich explains
how repression can be seen as a trained dissociative reflex that society
imposes on its members, thereby turning them into “neurotics:” “It
is characteristic of neurotic personalities that the moral ego has neither
the courage to tolerate drive satisfaction nor the strength to condemn
or subdue the drive demands in some appropriate manner. This is due to
a lack of consciousness of the drive impulses. The ego is startled by the
slightest indication of an ‘immoral’ impulse and purges it
through ‘repression.’ This process can assume various forms,
from a simple refusal to acknowledge the impulse, or a disregarding of
it through emphasizing the opposite of the tabooed drive, to utter exclusion
of the idea from consciousness (hysterical amnesia) and the interdiction
of any motor release of the corresponding degree of effect.” Put
more simply, repressed people cannot make themselves fully aware
of their unconscious desires, and so they cannot completely fulfill
those desires.
Awareness
of unconscious drives can be cultivated by meditation, and repressed “personalities” associated
with these drives can be integrated into conscious awareness with the proper
methods. Such methods can be studied in Reich’s larger body
of work, which includes the controversial and mind-blowing book entitled Children
Of The Future. Interested students may also wish to explore the Reichian
inspired field of neuro-psychology as introduced by Robert Anton Wilson
in the book entitled Prometheus Rising. Failure to integrate
the energies and release the tension produced by repression of desires
can lead to “split personality” episodes or losses of control that
the repressed individual may not even remember. Reich tells us that in
spite of the ego’s apparent success in repressing unconscious urges, “The
impact of the repressed drive demand...is by no means weakened. On the
contrary, it is intensified by the ‘stasis’ of unreleased drive
energy. The danger now lies in the impulse being no longer under the control
of conscious thought.” (i.e., “The Devil made me do it.”)
The ego can be equated with the right hand and the unconscious drives with
the left hand in order to apply the old adage that “the right hand
doesn’t know what the left hand is doing” to the Jekyll
and Hyde effect that results from repression.
Since our
definition of recovery or healing includes the idea of being fully
present with all aspects of our being in the moment, healing therapy
must include the conscious integration of hidden desires and impulses,
whether or not these desires are ”acted out.” With these thoughts
in mind, let us conclude our “Pitfalls” section with
a last bit of advice on boundaries from David Sakheim in Out Of Darkness (1992): “The
art of therapy is being able to balance all of the factors involved in
a way that ultimately proves helpful to the patient. A therapist’s
staying in touch with his or her own feelings, getting supervision or peer
consultation, while trying to stay open to the patient’s feelings
is essential.” Jamie Sams in Dancing The Dream (1999)
strikes the same kind of chord by noting that, “Patient observation of the
authentic behavior of others, before we rush into situations that we do
not fully see, is a precise skill.” When exercising your healing
powers on another person, get some advice from friends, do some critical
thinking by yourself, and let your heart be your guide.