Feeling Heard in Therapy

For me, the central question is not whether a therapist can be perfectly composed. It is whether the relationship can remain honest when something difficult happens. Chantelle returns to the responsibility of noticing our impact, especially when it differs from what we intended.

That theme reaches beyond the therapy room. Being understood is not the same as being agreed with, and caring about someone does not remove the need to listen when they say we have missed something.

Chantelle describes an early interest in other people’s emotions and the family experiences that influenced her career. She also reflects on moving between South African, Canadian and Californian contexts, and on the ways culture shapes what feels familiar or difficult to discuss.

Her account is a reminder that a professional does not enter a relationship without a history. The relevant question is how that history is understood and managed, rather than assuming qualifications remove personal blind spots.

We spend time on the difference between acknowledging harm and explaining why it was not intended. Chantelle describes how Harriet Lerner’s work on apologies encouraged her to stay with another person’s experience instead of moving too quickly into self-defense.

The distinction matters: an apology can sound reassuring while still asking the hurt person to understand the speaker first. In this discussion, accountability means being willing to hear more, acknowledge what was missed and consider what needs to change.

Chantelle questions the performance of a detached, flawless professional persona. She describes wanting a therapeutic relationship in which warmth and honesty are real, rather than simply a particular tone of voice.

We also discuss the tension between openness and responsibility. The client should not be expected to look after the therapist’s emotions. Being human within a professional role still involves appropriate limits, attention to power and a focus on the person seeking care.

One practical part of the conversation concerns how a whole team responds when someone raises a concern. Chantelle describes encouraging staff not to automatically defend a colleague or the program before understanding the client’s experience.

Listening does not require instantly deciding who is right. It means making room for the concern, examining what happened and responding responsibly. She also discusses how behavior labeled resistant may be protective, inviting curiosity without removing necessary boundaries.

Chantelle explains how participation in clinical research influenced her attention to preparation, consent and the therapeutic relationship. When describing ketamine-assisted work in residential care, she emphasizes selection, existing trust and continuing support rather than using a substance to force an emotional opening.

A particularly important qualification comes later: she says her clinic’s follow-up information had not yet been formally analyzed and describes limitations in comparison and follow-up. Her positive observations are not a controlled demonstration of effectiveness, a success rate or a guarantee of safety.

When speaking about her own experience, Chantelle describes the importance of feeling understood during the integration that followed a research session. The emphasis is not on one experience magically resolving everything, but on what becomes possible within an ongoing relationship.

I return to the same question that runs through the episode: can we make room for the person, not only the problem? This is an invitation to reflect on listening and accountability, not a recommendation to pursue a particular medicine or attempt treatment without qualified care.