Dr. Thomas Kirsch has just
written a review of my book on Amazon. A respected elder in the Jungian world,
past president of the San Francisco Institute and former longtime vice
president and president of the International Society of Jungian Analysts, Dr
Kirsch writes: I am writing a memoir myself, but it is much less personal than
this one. The author writes about her falling in love with her patient and what
she did about it. She went to a lot of therapy and supervision, and she was
still in love with the patient. She ends up marrying the patient. She is an
excellent writer, and she describes her process very well. Unfortunately, this
happens too often in depth psychotherapy work. A good read if the subject
interests one.
I am honored that Dr. Kirsch
reviewed my memoir in spite of the line “Unfortunately, this happens too often
in depth psychotherapy work.”
I rather find it unfortunate
that those who practice depth psychology are unable to openly accept and honor
the mysteries of love and the ways of the Self when that translates into an
intimate relationship conceived in analysis and born outside its boundaries.
Dr. Kirsch acknowledges this happens often. “Too often,” he says. Who knew?
It is time to ask how this
happens, and how often. And why it is never discussed.
Every trained therapist knows
about transference and the ethical mandate regarding the boundary between the
personal and the professional. Analysts work within the tension of power and
love, a tension that weaves between responsibility and compassion inside a
frame of time and fee for service. The patient’s welfare, healing and
individuation must be front, center and the essence of the work.
But what happens when that
tension breaks the analytic vessel, when the psyche of the patient and the
psyche of the analyst converge in a depth of connection that defies
professional boundaries?
I know enduring and loving
relationships can and do evolve out of every kind of psychotherapy. It would be
interesting to hear the stories of those whose fate has led them down this
road. But a seemingly impenetrable silence surrounds these stories.
Jung wrote that truth needs a
language that alters with the spirit of the times and that as our consciousness
increases we are confronted with new situations that require new ethical
attitudes.
One could argue that indeed our
greater consciousness around abuse and power has informed contemporary
collective psychological codes of ethics, but what of love and healing and the individual
experience of the archetype of the Self? What would a more finely differentiated
ethical attitude that holds the tension of those opposites look like?
It is so easy to judge where you
haven’t been.