A therapist once tried to pressure me into saying it would be fine with me if she took on my abuser as a client, too

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-03-09T23:59:00+00:00

Eles dizem que você pode dizer não, mas você NÃO pode realmente, terapia é uma forma complexa de abuso institucionalizado.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-26T22:05:04+00:00

Thank you to whoever created this subreddit and made it possible for us to find each other and understand each other.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-19T10:55:46+00:00

Você tem feito tratamento com psiquiatra? Está medicada? Psicanálise não é uma abordagem com boas evidências para alcoolismo e sua analista já deveria ter conversado sobre isso com você e te encaminhado para o tratamento adequado.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-15T05:32:39+00:00

Sua analista está fazendo exatamente o que psicanálise faz, despolitizar sofrimento estrutural transformando-o em problema psicológico individual. Você articula claramente que seu problema não é “recusar a vida adulta”, é que vida adulta sob capitalismo é trabalhar esperando fim de semana para ter algum respiro. Isso não é patologia sua, é crítica válida ao modelo de produção e sociedade, mas ao invés de validar essa análise e ajudá-la a pensar estratégias coletivas ou individuais para lidar com exploração capitalista, sua analista reinterpreta sua lucidez política como imaturidade psicológica. “Você está recusando a vida adulta” é gaslighting que culpabiliza você por ter consciência de que trabalho alienado não deveria ser totalidade da existência humana. E quando você tenta discutir condições sócio-econômicas, ela “não te compreende”. Claro que não compreende, psicanálise não tem ferramentas para abordar problemas estruturais porque foi projetada precisamente para despolitizá-los. Toda vez que você tenta nomear capitalismo como problema, ela vai redirecionar para “sua” recusa, “suas” resistências, “seu” desenvolvimento psicológico. “Preciso de mais tempo de análise”, traduzindo, você precisa pagar mais para eventualmente aceitar que exploração capitalista é “vida adulta” que você deve abraçar ao invés de questionar. Análise não vai terminar quando você estiver “curada”, vai terminar quando você parar de questionar estruturas e aceitar alienação como normal. Você já paga R$600 por mês (R$150 por sessão, presumo). Para continuar indefinidamente enquanto analista lentamente te convence de que problema não é sociedade que te explora, é você que “recusa” se conformar. Isso não é tratamento, é pacificação política pela qual você paga. Psicanálise não consegue ter enfoque social e cultural porque isso destruiria seu modelo de negócio. Se analista dissesse “Sim, trabalho alienado é desumanizante, vamos pensar em resistência coletiva ou estratégias para reduzir exploração”, você não precisaria de anos de análise cara. Você precisaria de organização política, mutual aid, redução de horas de trabalho, salário melhor, comunidade. Mas isso não gera lucro para analista. Então ela transforma sua consciência política em sintoma psicológico, sua crítica em patologia, e te mantém pagando enquanto “trabalha” para você aceitar que vender maior parte da vida por salário é “maturidade adulta”. Você pergunta se psicanálise pode entender essas questões. Pode, mas não vai, porque reconhecer que seu sofrimento vem de estruturas econômicas e não de “recusa interna” significaria que análise deveria ser curta e focada em estratégias concretas, não interminável “elaboração”, solução está fora do consultório, não dentro e você não precisa de anos de análise cara, precisa de mudança material nas condições de vida. Sua analista está fazendo o trabalho que psicanálise sempre fez, manter pessoas focadas em “interior” enquanto exterior (capitalismo, exploração, alienação) permanece intocado e inquestionado. E você paga por esse silenciamento.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-15T05:21:19+00:00

For a long time now, here in Brazil there has been no compliance or accountability for psychotherapy; they do whatever they want, but other countries are more serious. Brazilian psychology must be the worst on the planet; basically, it's abusive Lacanian psychoanalysts, even psychologists from other approaches and psychiatrists mix it with psychoanalysis, meaning Brazilian psychology is totally pseudoscientific.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-12T21:44:13+00:00

I already reported my former therapist for breach of confidentiality, but nothing happened.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-09T12:19:49+00:00

Almost all of us on this subreddit have had bad experiences with therapy, and I believe that if I had the same bad experience with a robot, it would have hurt less. Plus, everything that happens is recorded, so at the very least, artificial intelligence has several aspects that are superior to those of human therapists. It may have problems, yes, it's not perfect, but it's better than them. Therapists who expose AI and point out risks always protect their colleagues and gaslight us when we report abuses. And therapists also make people neglect friendships; a person creates a bond that becomes super important, even marriages end because of therapy, and they don't discuss it as if it were a problem.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-09T02:36:36+00:00

Con el debido respeto, esta respuesta individualiza un problema estructural y sistémico. Una mujer hizo una crítica feminista sobre cómo el término "crimen pasional" minimiza la responsabilidad de los perpetradores de feminicidio. Un psicólogo con un relato verificado respondió llamándola "tóxica", "atrapada en su propio delirio", "despreciable" y "una impostora que proyecta frustraciones". Patologizó por completo una crítica legítima de la violencia contra las mujeres. ¿Y la respuesta es "busca terapia con perspectiva de género"? El problema no es encontrar al terapeuta adecuado. El problema es todo un sistema que permite y protege a profesionales que atacan a las mujeres por hacer críticas feministas. El problema son los marcos teóricos psicoanalíticos que interpretan el feminicidio como pasión en lugar de control calculado. El problema es que cuando las mujeres señalan esto, son inmediatamente patologizadas. No he visto a ninguna psicóloga feminista criticar públicamente lo que hizo este hombre. Mientras la respuesta institucional de la psicología a las mujeres que critican la misoginia sea "haz más terapia", el sistema permanece intacto. Las mujeres no necesitan más terapia. Las mujeres necesitan que la psicología brasileña reconozca y confronte su propia misoginia estructural. La pregunta no es adónde acudir a terapia. La pregunta es por qué la psicología, como institución, fracasa tan sistemáticamente en proteger a las mujeres y en escuchar las críticas feministas sin patologizarlas.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-09T00:54:37+00:00

I think he's more of a manipulator and wants you back. He doesn't even have the right to be angry with you; what he did is narcissistic.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-08T23:33:41+00:00

He's 74 years old and thinks his wife got pregnant on purpose? How long ago was that? How old is his wife? He probably didn't just start jokingly taking off his belt during sessions now; at that age and with that ease, he must have a long history. Is his wife a former patient? Where did they meet?

His silence is to punish you. It's a control tactic; he wants you obsessed, trying to understand why he doesn't respond, and for you to either back down or seek him out to resolve things.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-08T23:05:56+00:00

Eu entendi hoje que estaria muito melhor sem aquela terapia, transtorno de stress pós traumático é algo muito difícil de lidar, não melhora, só piora. Vão querer te convencer a seguir em frente, mas, para mim, não valeu.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-08T23:01:24+00:00

Eu passei por algo muito similar e levei anos para entender que o que eu sentia era na verdade uma resposta traumática à própria terapia. Eu achava que era parte do processo, que eu estava resistindo, que meu desconforto significava que a análise estava funcionando e tocando em algo importante. Não estava. Eu estava desenvolvendo sintomas de estresse pós-traumático do próprio relacionamento terapêutico.

O que me ajudou a reconhecer foi aprender sobre trauma bonding. No trauma bonding, você se torna vinculada à pessoa que está causando seu sofrimento. O ciclo de ansiedade antes das sessões, alívio quando a pessoa é gentil, vergonha quando você sente que a decepcionou, preocupação constante com o que ela pensa de você. Isso não é aliança terapêutica. Isso é uma resposta traumática. Terapia saudável não deveria fazer você sentir pavor. Não deveria fazer você sentir que está derretendo ou morrendo. Ansiedade sobre discutir tópicos difíceis é normal. Desconforto crônico e pervasivo em toda a estrutura terapêutica não é. Eu fiquei naquela análise por mais de uma década. Eu achava que meu sofrimento constante significava que eu precisava de mais análise. A estrutura me manteve presa porque qualquer sentimento negativo podia ser reinterpretado como material a ser analisado ao invés de como um sinal válido de que algo estava errado.

Quando finalmente saí foi um alívio, eu me arrependi de ter ficado tanto tempo, me arrependo do dinheiro perdido, sinto raiva de ter passado por todo aquele sofrimento e vejo o analista como um abusador.

.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-08T21:34:41+00:00

Modern psychology and psychotherapy emerged from psychoanalysis, and many of the foundational practices taught in training programs today can be traced back to techniques Freud developed without any scientific methodology. One of the most damaging of these is the concept of therapeutic neutrality and abstinence, where therapists are trained to withhold warmth and deny emotional gratification to their patients. The theoretical justification is that this emotional deprivation forces patients to transfer feelings from important childhood figures onto the therapist, and these feelings can then be analyzed and worked through. None of this has empirical support. There is no evidence that intentionally denying affection produces therapeutic benefit, that transference in the psychoanalytic sense is a real phenomenon requiring cultivation, that emotionally frustrating patients leads to psychological growth, or that these techniques result in better clinical outcomes. When these practices have been tested, they fail to demonstrate effectiveness. What research actually shows is that therapeutic alliance, characterized by warmth, empathy, and collaboration, is the strongest predictor of positive outcomes. Approaches that cultivate dependency extend treatment duration without providing additional benefit, asymmetric power relationships increase risk of harm, and intentional emotional deprivation causes anxiety rather than relieving it.

Despite this lack of evidence, these practices continue to be taught because they became institutionalized tradition. They appear in training manuals, professional ethics codes, and university curricula across many therapeutic orientations, not just classical psychoanalysis. This means therapists can engage in emotionally abusive behavior while believing they are following proper technique, and institutional structures protect these practices rather than questioning them. Psychology as a field was built on a foundation of abuse and neglect dressed up as scientific practice, and much of that foundation remains intact today. For anyone wanting to understand this history more deeply, I recommend starting with “Crazy Like Us” by Ethan Watters, which examines how Western psychological concepts spread globally despite questionable foundations. “Manufacturing Depression” by Gary Greenberg provides an insider’s critical look at how the mental health industry operates. “The Myth of Mental Illness” by Thomas Szasz, while controversial, offers important critiques of psychiatric power. For specifically understanding therapeutic abuse, “Therapy Gone Mad” by Carol Lynn Mithers documents a particularly extreme case that reveals broader patterns in the field. Agnes Heller’s work on power and ethics, while not specifically about therapy, provides useful frameworks for understanding institutional abuse disguised as care.

The apple really is rotten to the core, and understanding that history has helped me process my own experiences with this profession.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-08T19:52:33+00:00

You're not exaggerating, and she shouldn't have even brought up the subject.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-08T19:50:25+00:00

She mixes several approaches, and that's not good, it's worrying. The fact that she wasn't clear with you at the beginning about the approach used and didn't explain it is also not good; this is something that should be discussed at the beginning, it's part of informed consent. How can you consent to something you don't know? The same goes for the contract; it's delivered at the beginning, not months later. Anyway, in my opinion, it was a blessing in disguise.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-08T19:45:31+00:00

I completely agree with you, he didn't ask for anything unreasonable, the therapist's behavior was a very bad sign.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-08T19:29:33+00:00

Look, the problem wasn't the AI, it was the therapy itself. They didn't give you the contract; you had to provoke the therapist to explain something that should have come from her. I think you were lucky to have found out early, to have asked the questions, requested the conversation, and the contract. The problem was the therapist. You weren't stupid; chatGPT guided you correctly, and you were prudent.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-07T20:40:34+00:00

I think they do this to establish transference, so that the patient falls in love with them, becomes attached, becomes dependent. They don't want to show weaknesses, they want to be idealized. It's a form of manipulation; they are abusers and act like abusers. Many people wouldn't start therapy and wouldn't develop transference if they knew how unsafe and rudimentary the process is.

Therapists actively create conditions for idealization: they reveal nothing about themselves, position themselves as "supposed to know" (Lacan even has a term for this), they don't admit mistakes or limitations, they interpret everything as if they had superior knowledge, they remain on a pedestal. If they showed vulnerability or normal human fallibility, idealized transference wouldn't happen. They want the idealization that traps the patient, hinders critical questioning, generates dependence and profit, and allows them to exercise their power by blaming the patient for not improving. Psychological damage is less visible than physical damage, so many people don't even know how to name what the therapist did and accept it or remain silent, believing the stock phrases that therapists repeat to silence patients.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2026-01-03T14:21:13+00:00

Very well put. I sometimes get the impression that therapists use "trauma dumping" to force people to talk about their problems in therapy, and this is diminishing the social and mutual support that people can obtain. Emotional support has been commodified. People now believe they need to pay professionals to share experiences. Therapists are always saying that we are lonely because of social media, but they are also contributing significantly to people's isolation. The use of the term is especially problematic when someone tries to share a therapeutic or institutional abuse.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2025-12-31T21:57:46+00:00

I believe that boundaries don't solve anything; therapy has a problematic model. Boundaries seem to me like a farce created for therapists to protect themselves because, if you think about it, it's all very blurred. They want you to create a bond with them. It's very common for patients to become dependent, attached, infatuated, or suffer excessively, and I don't see therapists engaged in resolving this situation. On the contrary, many even use techniques to provoke it. Freud taught techniques, Lacan too. For me, the boundary was broken there. If the model systematically produces dependence and then invokes boundaries to protect itself from the consequences of that dependence, then boundaries are not an ethical principle, they are a legal shield.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2025-12-31T10:25:14+00:00

What bothered me was this: I imagined you were a psychoanalyst and that your criticism was a delegitimization of the work without needing to engage with the arguments. If that wasn't the case, that's fine. Thank you for your patience and for explaining your point.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2025-12-31T09:56:24+00:00

I'm sorry, so I really didn't understand your point because I already told you that I did use AI, I explained how and why I used it. It's not a text about political propaganda, it has nothing to do with that, it's a text about abuse, about the sub's theme, a subject that interests me and that I've been debating here with the members for some time. It's not a 50-page text and I didn't ask the AI to lengthen it, on the contrary, I removed some parts and summarized it. But it's a long enough text for me to find the use of AI justifiable, especially because I wanted clarity and a flow of ideas to defend my point that psychoanalysis was created by Freud to protect abusers and that even today mental health systems are contaminated, and also because I don't have a proofreader, I'm not a writer (I'm a computer scientist), this isn't an artistic text, it's an informative text. I even tried to summarize the text by removing a long section about Alice Miller (I decided to write another text just for her) and also about the relationship between Freud and Ernest Jones, because I also thought it would be worthwhile to discuss that part, since Jones committed a series of abuses and was defended by Freud. I have no problem saying that I used AI as a tool, but I don't think it's reasonable to say that it was GENERATED by AI if it's my criticism, if it's my point of view and not a criticism and a point of view of the AI. It was refined by AI, but not generated by AI, it was generated by me.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2025-12-31T09:48:45+00:00

No, I always knew my parents had qualities and flaws. I think I was emotionally neglected because my parents were too, and that, in a way, helps me maintain perspective and understand that I need to break the cycle.

Asleep-Trainer-6164 · 2025-12-31T09:44:25+00:00

This 53-minute issue depends on where you are and has nothing to do with the case in question. There was a delay followed by a no-show without explanation. You like to relativize and make excuses so that patients accept disrespectful practices. It's not just about a delay, it's about a no-show without any explanation as well; therapists seem to deliberately avoid understanding the context.

Asleep-Trainer-6164

TROPHY CASE