Fieldnotes User 4

Sessions on short notice are sometimes available. Check the online calendar.

Signed in as:

filler@godaddy.com

Account

Psychotherapy and Counselling in Singapore

A couples therapy case with Ming, Anna, and Leo

Context

Ming is a couples therapist working with Anna and Leo, a couple on the brink of separation.

They have been together for many years. The decision to seek therapy came late, after repeated ruptures, emotional exhaustion, and mutual resentment.

Their sessions follow a recognisable rhythm:

· Anna expresses hurt, longing, and fear of losing the relationship.

· She attempts repair — apologising, softening her tone, making emotional gestures.

· Leo initially responds with restraint, sometimes even warmth.

· The room settles. Tension eases.

By the end of the session, things seem better.

Yet between sessions:

· Leo withdraws.

· He becomes silent, unreachable, emotionally absent.

· Anna pursues, pleads, or collapses.

· The cycle repeats.

Each week, the same pattern returns.

The Therapist’s Inner Struggle

Ming is competent, thoughtful, and relationally attuned.

Yet he is increasingly troubled.

He notices:

· a sense of dread before sessions,

· an urge to “do something better,”

· a quiet self-accusation: Am I failing them?

He wonders:

· Are my interventions too soft?

· Am I missing something crucial?

· Should I be more directive?

· Should I confront Leo more strongly?

At times, Ming feels something he rarely admits:

There may be very little hope here.

And yet, he feels ethically constrained:

· He cannot collapse into pessimism.

· He cannot rescue Anna.

· He cannot force Leo into engagement.

The repetition weighs on him.

Turning to FieldNotes

After one particularly difficult session, Ming uses FieldNotes.

He writes honestly:

· about the repairs that “work” in the room but dissolve outside,

· about Leo’s emotional disappearance,

· about Anna’s desperation,

· about his own tightening chest and sense of futility.

He generates:

· the full clinical structure,

· and a deep reflection output.

What FieldNotes Reflected Back

1. Repetition as Stability, Not Failure

Rather than framing the repetition as therapeutic failure, the reflection names something unexpected:

The repetition is holding the system together.

· Anna’s repair attempts prevent total rupture.

· Leo’s withdrawal prevents confrontation or decision.

· The cycle allows the couple to remain together without truly meeting.

This reframing lands strongly for Ming.

The repetition is not “going nowhere.”
It is doing something.

2. The Illusion of Repair

FieldNotes gently points out that what appears as repair in-session may function as temporary tension reduction, not relational repair.

In the room:

· Anna regulates Leo.

· Ming helps slow the process.

· Calm returns.

Outside the room:

· the deeper conflict reasserts itself,

· because nothing essential has shifted.

This helps Ming stop blaming himself.

His interventions are not ineffective — they are simply not meant to resolve what the couple may not be able to resolve.

3. Ming’s Role in the Field

The reflection includes Ming — not as a problem, but as a participant.

It notes:

· his wish to save the relationship,

· his fear of being the therapist who “fails” a couple,

· his unspoken grief as he senses an ending.

FieldNotes does not push him to act.

Instead, it invites him to stay.

The Key Shift: From Repair to Witnessing

The most important insight for Ming is this:

His task may not be to change the cycle —
but to witness it clearly, without illusion.

This is not resignation.
It is ethical acceptance.

FieldNotes helps Ming recognise that:

· some couples come not to be fixed,

· but to be accompanied at the edge of an ending,

· to have their struggle seen, named, and honoured.

How Ming Changes His Therapeutic Stance

Ming does not announce this insight to the couple.

He changes how he holds the space.

In the Next Sessions

When Anna attempts repair and the room softens, Ming gently names the pattern:

“I notice how relief comes into the room when you reach for repair — and I’m also aware of how this same relief doesn’t seem to last outside our sessions. I wonder what it’s like for each of you to hear that.”

He does not push for hope.
He does not force decision.

He allows:

· sadness,

· helplessness,

· truth.

Leo speaks less — but more honestly.
Anna cries — but stops pleading.

Something shifts:
not toward reunion,
but toward clarity.

What FieldNotes Gave Ming

FieldNotes did not give Ming a better technique.

It gave him:

· permission to stop rescuing,

· language for his own ethical grief,

· a way to remain present without false hope,

· a frame in which repetition is not pathology.

Most importantly, it helped him trust that witnessing is also an intervention.

Why This Case Contrasts with the Previous One

In Dan’s case:

· repetition pointed toward avoided contact,

· movement was possible through therapist shift.

In Ming’s case:

· repetition points toward a structural limit,

· movement is toward truth, not repair.

FieldNotes supports both realities.

Closing Reflection

Some repetitions ask to be interrupted.
Others ask to be held.

FieldNotes does not decide which is which.

It helps the therapist:

· tolerate not-knowing,

· recognise their own longings and fears,

· and stay ethically present when resolution is not available.

In couples therapy especially, this may be one of the most difficult — and most human — tasks of all.

Psychotherapy and Counselling in Singapore

FieldNotes by NikHelbig User Manual -Part 4 Case Study 2

A couples therapy case with Ming, Anna, and Leo

This website uses cookies.