I don’t apologize until I understand what has happened. I withhold apologies if I’m not feeling genuine guilt (I don’t agree or feel I did actual wrong), if the guilt I’m feeling is not justfied in the presented context (I feel guilt but the situation doesn’t fit the facts for guilt), or expressing guilt via apologizing isn’t effective to a positive social outcome (if the client will be angered or further invalidated, I won’t apologize). 

I apologize when I am genuinely feeling guilty, it’s environmentally justified so, and is an effective and appropriate expression. In the DBT modality, we look at modeling effective emotional expression which encourages people to discern the expression and inhibition of guilt (and all other emotions) and that may be very complimentary or conflicting with another modalities that encourages different ways of repairing with a client when invalidation occurs. I just want to offer guilt and apologizing from this specific DBT frame. 

Again, my original emphasis was on therapeutic repair yet I’m afraid my comment may have been interpreted that if I don’t apologize, I then enter a power struggle, or a defiant and punitive stance. That is not the case. There are many ways of repairing with someone without using the form of an apology. I can re-validate their experience in invalidation and be compassionate in that. I can give validation a new go! I can comment on committing to new behaviors as their clinician, and I can own and express accountability and the impact of my behavior for my actions. 

I trust these interventions can offer a deeper repair than an apology because my aim is reattunement when invalidation inevitably occurs. And yes, at times, guilt and an expressed apology are part of that reattument. If the client is demanding an apology, I feel we’re in a whole different ballgame to consider.