Attractive therapist at a disadvantage?

[Chimed]

As we all know, our society puts a high value on physical attractiveness and people tend to be very enamored by seemingly beautiful people. In most jobs I would think, unfortunately, that this would be an advantage. However, what about for an attractive therapist? Do you think that this would create unnecessary issues with romantic fantasies and transference issues?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Aura5]

I've actually wondered the same thing.

 

[Ollie123]

I'd have to say, like anything, it would depend on the therapist and the client.

For some clients, yes, it would likely cause problems. Then again, for some clients, it seems like everything causes problems On the therapist side, I think alot of it depends on how they carry themselves. I have a female friend in the psychology program at my undergrad who is gorgeous, but also has one of the most professional attitudes of anyone I know so I'd be shocked if I find out she has substantially more problems than most people, though I think it depends largely on the population. An attractive female working with agressive males with poor social skills might be a recipe for disaster, but there are plenty of scenarios I can come up with where problems like that might arise completely independent of physical attractiveness.

 

[jdawgg]

As we all know, our society puts a high value on physical attractiveness and people tend to be very enamored by seemingly beautiful people. In most jobs I would think, unfortunately, that this would be an advantage. However, what about for an attractive therapist? Do you think that this would create unnecessary issues with romantic fantasies and transference issues?

Not to sound conceited (uhhhh..), but I've kind of been concerned about this myself. I don't see how it couldn't create more romantic/transferrence issues. On the upside, attractive people are seen as more intelligent and competent so perhaps it's a wash.

 

[Psychie1]

I have a friend who was working as a therapist and she suggested once to one of her female clients that it might be beneficial for the client to bring her husband to a therapy session. The woman told her that she didn't think that was a good idea because the husband would be attracted to the therapist.
Maybe she just had jealousy issues, but I thought that was interesting...

 

[Aura5]

Yeah. I'm not trying to sound concieted either. But it certainly has crossed my mind, that maybe I should dress more "down" or go without makeup, etc. I even want to work more with the offender type population - so I have wondered about this. I do know of someone who had a scary experience of this sort working at a prison - but it might have happened no matter what she looked like. Just like in a therapy scenario - a person can become fixated or have a bad reaction to any number of things that would vary with the individual, not just attractiveness, so yeah. I don't know...it's one of those questions someone might be afraid to ask...but it is a reasonable concern. So I'm glad someone on here did ask

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

As we all know, our society puts a high value on physical attractiveness and people tend to be very enamored by seemingly beautiful people. In most jobs I would think, unfortunately, that this would be an advantage. However, what about for an attractive therapist? Do you think that this would create unnecessary issues with romantic fantasies and transference issues?

Great question!

I remember this came up last year in my supervision, and we talked a lot about transference and counter-transference issues. My experience with this was overall a positive one, but it was REALLY important to have firm boundaries and be able to talk honestly with your patient about some of these possible feelings. It is just as important to talk with your supervisors about these issues too.

I was confronted with this a number of times during my training (my areas of interest have a very uneven gender split, so I dealt with mostly women), and I think it offered the opportunity for my patients to do some very important work. It is important to note that it isn't always good, and can often be a challenge to the therapeutic relationship, not so much establishing one, but establishing an appropriate one.

My being an (attractive) male offered some grist to explore paternal issues, in addition to issues with authority, misinformation about 'men' / opposite sex, and a number of other areas. When you deal in sexual trauma cases it can sometimes be a problem (with transference, especially when dealing with the conflicted sexual emotions, coupled with emotions around the trauma, re-experience, etc).

Also...people can have different ideas of 'attractiveness'. I don't want to get too Fruedian on ya'll, but I think my patients actually had more transference issues when I had a beard and had 'fatherly' attributes (particularly when issues of authority surfaced), then when I looked younger and whatnot.

-t

 

[Aura5]

Right...your response makes sense, T4. Any number of triggers or things could mean something weird to someone, depending on their experiences. For example, I fit the profile for Ted Bundy's victims...(just random something I noticed before lol)...but, just as an example, clearly wouldn't fit for John Wayne Gacy's. Weird example I know but, yeah. My point - a different look/gender/anything could be "it" for someone else, and nothing to another.

So, like you said, it is something that should be talked about/discussed openly. I'm encouraged to hear that advice, that people would take that sort of thing seriously. (supervisors, etc)

 

[JockNerd]

I think it's important to remember that those other than us really really ridiculously good-looking people can run into issues in therapy. Since therapy involve sharing deep secrets and personal truths with another person, even homely therapists will encounter PLENTY of people who are attracted to them in therapy. Think abut it; during prac you have, really, mostly young women who just moved to a new city and don't know anyone. You're the first person they open up to. Although the exchange is one-sided, my suspicion is that far more than the number who express attraction in some way are feeling it.

(I hope the humor in that paragraph is self-evident!)

I actually think that balances things out. I actually asked a few people in my program if their clients ever hit on them, and the results were about the same no matter how good-looking I personally thought the person was.

Offhand, I'd think that having an attractive therapist might boost retention a little bit, maybe. Since we ascribe good traits to good-looking people, I think being attractive (to the particular client, since what's beautiful varies to much between people) might lead to increased confidence in the therapist, but it might also lead to the client striving to please the therapist or self-monitoring to such an extent as to make therapy difficult.

I'm sure it works the other way, too. Do hot people make poor clients? I actually mentioned to RD in conversation that I'm not looking forward to my first hot male client. I get somewhat distracted and more allied with them than I should be. Without the need to discuss anything specific, did anyone else experience this?

Neat topic! There must be a literature on this.... Anyone know?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Do hot people make poor clients?

Sometimes. I think what can be challenging with someone who is an attractive client has less to do with counter-transference, as it does with how that person relates to you and the world. In general, the research suggests that the more attractive a person identifies themselves, the more likely they are to be dependent on their looks, since many have gotten by on looks and/or have been repeatedly reinforced that looks is how they are evaluated, and not in intellectual ability, etc. This can bring up all sorts of issues, in addition to being a challenge during the initial rapport building phase.

I use to have some good references on this stuff (body image was an area of research for me during my undergrad), I'll have to poke around this weekend to see if I can dig up the research. I know I have some research on homosexual male body image, though the initial research I am thinking of has to do with heterosexual women.

-t

 

[wdd]

Look at it this way: from what I've seen on some of these threads, once they find out how much we make, they shouldn't be too much of a problem

Anyway, JockNerd stole the words out of my mouth: the halo effect might engender some extra trust in the therapist. But, like Derek Zoolander, there might be such a thing as ... too ... good-looking, which might breed resentment in some patients ... just a thought, nothing I have to worry about. I'm no McDreamy, just a McMyWifeThinksI'mHot.

 

[toby jones]

I think transference has the power to turn average into absolutely amazing. I'm typically attracted to people who are average looking because they typically aren't so egotistical compared with people who think that they are amazing. Those average looking people start to look much more amazing than the supposedly objectively wonderful people once you get to know their personalities.

I think that being attractive is a bonus as a clinician similarly to how it is a bonus in the rest of life. That being said, there is a difference between pleasant looking and amazing looking. Amazing looking might be a bit of a disadvantage really, especially if you want to be taken seriously as a person...

 

[Aura5]

I think that being attractive is a bonus as a clinician similarly to how it is a bonus in the rest of life. That being said, there is a difference between pleasant looking and amazing looking. Amazing looking might be a bit of a disadvantage really, especially if you want to be taken seriously as a person...

lol...all right, don't have to worry about that then

And I agree about more "average" looking people being a whole lot more attractive (looks and everything) due to personalities.

 

[Chimed]

I'm so glad this was taken seriously! It's a question that I've been wondering, but have been a little apprehensive to ask about.... I would have put it on the psychiatry forum, but who knows what kind of strange responses the topic would have provoked. (BTW, I'm not saying I'm attractive...)

I'm new to therapy (i've just started my psychiatry training), but I would agree with Ollie123 that a lot would depend on how you carry yourself and how professional you are. I also think that T4C brought up an excellent point about using any of those transference/countertransference issues as a point of therapy. However, I would think unless the therapist is very comfortable with being the object of the patient's romantic thoughts by maintaining a high degree of professional objectivity, that this could be a very sticky area to delve into.

Here's another question regarding this: Does any of this really matter if one's orientation is something like CBT? I don't remember where I saw this, but I remember reading somewhere that transference/countertransference was not that important in many of the short-term therapies such as IPT. Any thoughts?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I think transference / counter transference is ALWAYS a consideration, but certain orientations pay more attention to it than others. Depending on how much time/attention to pay to rapport building can be a contributing factor. For instance, someone who is doing short-term psycho-educational training probably won't pay it much mind....but someone who is going to do more in-depth work will probably need to address those issues. I think it can really effect the therapuetic relationship, so on some level every person (regardless of orientation) would need to address it.

With that being said, I think each orientation would go about it differently. I think CBT'ers would identify the transference issues as distorted cognitions/schemas, and challenge those with more realistic thoughts, though I'm not sure how likely they would be to go down the path of relational exploration as it pertains to early childhood development, parental attachments, etc. My reasoning is that (as I think someone mentioned above), CBT'ers would probably focus more on the "how to fix this" instead of "why?" I've done a lot more CBT work this year and I found myself trending back to the "why", as a means to better understand the situation and identify the root causes, while the patient often just wanted to 'fix it'. I think this can often be short-sighted, but we were usually able to come to a compromise, and ultimately the patient was able to benefit from not rushing forward without knowing what they were trying to really address. I think the challenge is often needing to resist that feeling to 'produce', and instead trust in the work, and that it will bring about change when it is appropriate.

A psychodynamic person would probably just jump on in with the transference. I don't have a very confrontational approach, though this is something I would definitely bring up if the patient was unwilling to address the elephant in the room.

-t

 

[Chimed]

It is important to note that it isn't always good, and can often be a challenge to the therapeutic relationship, not so much establishing one, but establishing an appropriate one.

Just curious, did you ever have to refer a patient to another therapist because of this?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Just curious, did you ever have to refer a patient to another therapist because of this?

It is important to note that it isn't always good, and can often be a challenge to the therapeutic relationship, not so much establishing one, but establishing an appropriate one.

Yes, it happens from time to time. I think it is better safe than sorry in those kind of cases. I think what happens more often is the patient wanting to sustain the relationship after termination. Requests for personal e-mail/phone number, inquiries about how I spend my time outside of work, etc. Even though all of the boundaries were firmly established, the sudden push to violate the boundaries were typically in response to feelings of relational loss. This is why I tend to start the termination process a couple sessions before the last session, it offers time to have proper closure and transition for the patient.

-t

 

[michalita]

Here's another question regarding this: Does any of this really matter if one's orientation is something like CBT? I don't remember where I saw this, but I remember reading somewhere that transference/countertransference was not that important in many of the short-term therapies such as IPT. Any thoughts?

I wholeheartedly disagree. The therapeutic relationship is still an extremely important part of therapy, even if it is short-term and focused on CBT techniques. Granted, with longer term therapy you're bound to have a different kind of therapeutic relationship between client and clinician. However, long-term or short-term, I think clinics with poor boundary policies or clinicians who are not aware of the consequences of possible transference/counter-transference are headed for disaster.

And don't get me started on DBT and boundaries...

 

[GiantSteps]

Looks as if we have many SDNer's with narcissistic personalities and delusions of grandeur! You guys never cease to amuse me!

What about the opposite - an attractive client/ patient? Not that it happens much since so many people with psychological/ psychiatric problems let themselves go physically. I always thought the most ridiculous thing in the movie A Beautiful Mind was Russell Crowe playing the part of the schizophrenic nobel laureate math professor. How many schizophrenics (let alone math professors) are muscularly ripped with a 20 inch bicept?

Actually, now that I think about it. One of Freud's major reasons for having psychoanalysts being analyzed themselves was to prevent countertransference from occuring. One who is that in touch with him/ herself would be on guard against such things. But of course, everyone dismisses him as no longer relevant. "Dismiss me by day and dream about me by night." - Herr (that's German) Freud. "No man who speaks German could be evil." - a Simpson's episode.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

And don't get me started on DBT and boundaries...

DBT.....yuck.

I had to cover a group for a few weeks that focused on DBT work, it definitely wasn't my cup of tea.


-t

 

[psychwanabe]

What about the opposite - an attractive client/ patient?

Or what about an unattractive/overweight therapist?

 

[biogirl215]

T4C,
Why? Just curious...

On the topic of the thread, what about a physically disabled clinician? Would someone using a walker or wheelchair be at a "disadvantage," in your opinion?

 

[JockNerd]

T4C,
Why? Just curious...

On the topic of the thread, what about a physically disabled clinician? Would someone using a walker or wheelchair be at a "disadvantage," in your opinion?

Yes. The level of discomfort that most non-disabled people have around the disabled is incredibly intense. Clients would be confused about how to react and what's "okay" to say or not, and I think this would inhibit therapy in the first few sessions, at least. The therapist would ideally include talking about his or her disability in the first session, but I don't think that would overcome many clients' fears.

Of course, with a client with a comparable disability, a disabled therapist would have an extra bit of credibility.

 

[biogirl215]

Really? Having a very obvious physical disability myself (Cerebral palsy), I really haven't noticed THAT degree of discomfort in interacting with other (able-bodied) people outside of young children and sorority recruitment on the recruitment side (but then again, there really isn't anything that ISN'T awkward about recruitment from the member side!), not well working as a undergrad TA or lab worker.

Do you really think it would such a handicap--no pun intended--to the degree that such a person shouldn't become a therapist? Honesty appreciated...

 

[JockNerd]

Really? Having a very obvious physical disability myself (Cerebral palsy), I really haven't noticed THAT degree of discomfort in interacting with other (able-bodied) people outside of young children and sorority recruitment on the recruitment side (but then again, there really isn't anything that ISN'T awkward about recruitment from the member side!), not well working as a undergrad TA or lab worker.

Do you really think it would such a handicap--no pun intended--to the degree that such a person shouldn't become a therapist? Honesty appreciated...

Oh, no, not at all. Actually I know several therapists with physical disabilities (including one with CP)--that's how I was informed about the reactions of many clients. I think clients have problems with therapists all the time for lots of reasons (sexism, racism, ageism, sizeism, homophobia) that would cause trouble in developing a therapeutic relationship. However, the visibility of some physical disabilities coupled with fear of people with disabilities might be particularly challenging. So, you asked would the therapist be at a *disadvantage*, and I'd say certainly, in many cases. But definitely not insurmountable difficulties or even necessarily particularly troubling.

 

[biogirl215]

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for clarifying. I agree that people can find the wierdest and most varied reasons not to connect with someone.

Just out of curosity, have the clinicians you know with physical disabilities done well (in the professional, therapeutic, financial, etc, etc. sense) after overcoming that initial barrier?

Thanks. Sorry to bother you!

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

T4C,
Why? Just curious...

Far too behaviorally based for my comfort. I like behavioral work with small children or for specific things, but I'm not a fan outside of that niche. For borderline patients, I prefer a psychodynamic approach, and then working from there.

On the topic of the thread, what about a physically disabled clinician? Would someone using a walker or wheelchair be at a "disadvantage," in your opinion?

Interesting question. A friend of mine has a physical disability, though I haven't really talked with them about it. I'm curious to see if anyone has had experience with this.

-t

 

[Aura5]

Far too behaviorally based for my comfort. I like behavioral work with small children or for specific things, but I'm not a fan outside of that niche. For borderline patients, I prefer a psychodynamic approach, and then working from there.

The fact you're psychodynamic makes me glad. Lol. Because I've always leaned towards that type of thinking, but I thought it was more outdated or looked down on nowadays. So I'm glad to see it isn't at least by some

Anyway. This thread is interesting. Is there any possibility that a disability could make the therapist seem less-threatening, thus an advantage in those instances? Just a thought...

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The fact you're psychodynamic makes me glad. Lol. Because I've always leaned towards that type of thinking, but I thought it was more outdated or looked down on nowadays. So I'm glad to see it isn't at least by some

It is still popular, though not nearly as popular as CBT and other orientations. It obviously doesn't fit for everything, but I think conceptualizing in this orientation can really be beneficial.

-t

 

[JockNerd]

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for clarifying. I agree that people can find the wierdest and most varied reasons not to connect with someone.

Just out of curosity, have the clinicians you know with physical disabilities done well (in the professional, therapeutic, financial, etc, etc. sense) after overcoming that initial barrier?

Thanks. Sorry to bother you!

Why would you be bothering me?

I know clinicians who were born with physical disabilities and others who acquired their disability. Generally, what I've heard from them is that clinicians born with their disability do fine, except with particularly resistant clients, and those who acquired their disability also do fine once they get past their own issues with the disability (which can take far, far less time than one would imagine, interestingly). They all work in university settings. They do well, but I have no idea how representative that is of those in, say, private practice.

 

[VancouverBoy]

I believe therapists think far more about the role of their physical attractiveness than clients do (consciously or otherwise). After all, it's hardly a coinidence that so many people who go into the mental health professions are highly self-conscious and have body image issues of some sort or another (oh where is Alfred Adler when we need him?). Stay focussed on the client and looks won't be nearly as much of an issue as you think they are.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I believe therapists think far more about the role of their physical attractiveness than clients do (consciously or otherwise). After all, it's hardly a coinidence that so many people who go into the mental health professions are highly self-conscious and have body image issues of some sort or another (oh where is Alfred Adler when we need him?). Stay focussed on the client and looks won't be nearly as much of an issue as you think they are.

Citation?



-t

 

[JockNerd]

I believe therapists think far more about the role of their physical attractiveness than clients do (consciously or otherwise).[...]

Right, I think. Ergo, the problem. The therapist can equip him- or herself to deal with attraction issues (more or less competently). The client just thinks he or she is falling in love because this is the first time in their life they've been able to open up. More attractive (whatever that means to particular clients, apparently T4C's all had daddy issues) clinicians would be at a bit of a disadvantage in that area, then.

 

[deleted176373]

Really? Having a very obvious physical disability myself (Cerebral palsy), I really haven't noticed THAT degree of discomfort in interacting with other (able-bodied) people outside of young children and sorority recruitment on the recruitment side (but then again, there really isn't anything that ISN'T awkward about recruitment from the member side!), not well working as a undergrad TA or lab worker.

Do you really think it would such a handicap--no pun intended--to the degree that such a person shouldn't become a therapist? Honesty appreciated...

People are not a function of their handicaps (at least the non-cognitive ones.) Obviously the autistic may not be suited for careers in Psychology, but other handicaps are far less limiting. I think of people like Stephen Hawking, Josh Blue, and even Al Gore. All of which have overcome their obvious handicaps to be successful in their chosen fields.

If you allow your deficits to define you, well then you shouldn't do a lot of things.

Back to the attractiveness question, while I am certainly not a "hot" looking guy, I know how attractive I can become through listening and bonding with people who are receptive to it. Even as a first year student I get comments about being good at establishing rapport and being perceived as non-threatening and non-judgmental. I have a good game face and it's a powerful tool in a number of ways. You can be extremely average looking but become very attractive in the environment that therapy is conducted. This is not a problem just for the pretty people.

Mark