A Therapist's Dilemma.

Last month’s ethical dilemma in Therapy today, “Therapist T suggests her supervisor S to a friend F for therapy because F’s problem matches S’s area of expertise. Fine until T falls out with F and she becomes worried what F might tell T’s supervisor S about her, which S can’t tell T about because of client confidentiality. T is thus concerned and is wondering what to do.” Ain’t life wonderful. Several therapists supplied answers all using the same magic word, ‘boundaries’, which if strictly applied would probably mean none of them would ever speak to each other again. I would like to take a different tack. What are the assumptions at play here? T was obviously initially happy to assume if her then friend F happened to mention to S what a jolly good sort she was it wouldn’t in the least affect her supervision with S. But now T, having fallen out with F, assumes F will talk dirty to S about T, which definitely will affect T’s relationship with S. T also assumes S will believe every word F says and thus consider T a bad person, probably because of the cat strangling incident. Hence T, as well as assuming her ex friend F is a two faced, flighty bitch also assumes S is a gullible dimwit. She also assumes if F does let the cat out of the bag with S, which T was so careful to disposed of in the canal, it was previously OK for her to keep all her other misdemeanours away from the light of day and the ears of here supervisor. And if T’s assumptions were correct S and F would this very moment be arranging her train ticket to Coventry. I have to say ethically that sounds like a good idea.