Skip to main content
  • 98 Accesses

Abstract

A young woman has been coming to see me for a few weeks. She is in her twenties, good-looking, rather wan and shy. On the occasion that I am writing about she looked at me with her usual directness as I opened the door, gave me a quiet smile and came in. Then she said: “May I use your loo?” “Yes. Of course,” I replied. The hesitancy with which she asked the question prompted me to emphasize my answer: “Yes. Of course.” I felt I needed to convey to her: “You do not need to ask with such hesitancy. You are welcome to use the loo. I do not regard your request as unusual or disturbing in any way.” I could, when the session began, have made what is commonly called an interpretation. I could, for instance, have said: “I notice that during sessions, you are at pains not to be a nuisance to me. You never show any aggression, you speak little and quietly, you try to be ‘good’. May it be that in going to the loo just before the session you try to get rid of the messy, dirty, unacceptable bits of yourself in case they emerge in some form during the session” This would have been, I think, quite a legitimate response. It makes sense, provided that one can accept the resemblance between the excretion of physical waste products and the expression of feelings, thoughts and attitudes which may be unacceptable to another person: and it may, in this case, have been relevant. However, I made no comment. This was not a conscious decision on my part and I can only guess at my reasons for the silence on the matter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bohn, D., 1983, Wholeness and the Implicate Order, Ark, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlain, J., 1978, On Our Own: Patient-Controlled Alternatives to the Mental Health System, Hawthorn, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, P., 1975, Against Method, New Left Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lomas, P., 1981, The Case for a Personal Psychotherapy, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1987 Plenum Press, New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lomas, P. (1987). What is a Therapeutic Response?. In: Karas, E. (eds) Current Issues in Clinical Psychology. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6778-3_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6778-3_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4615-6780-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-6778-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics